Berossus reports in the first book of his Babylonian history that he was a contemporary of Alexander , the son of Philip , and that many public records, which covered a period of over , years ago about the history of the sky and the sea, of creation, and of the kings and of their deeds, had been preserved with care. First he says that the land of the Babylonians lies between the Tigris and the Euphrates.
It produces wild barley, chickpea, and sesame, and even, in its marshlands, edible roots, called gongai. These roots are the equal of barley in nutrition. The land also produces dates, apples, and all sorts of other fruit, as well as fish and birds, field birds as well as waterfowl.
There are also in the land of the Babylonians waterless and infertile regions near Arabia , while lying opposite Arabia there are hilly and fertile areas. In Babylonia there was a large number of people of different ethnic origins who had settled Chaldaea. They lived without discipline and order, just like animals. It had the whole body of a fish, but underneath and attached to the head of the fish there was another head, human, and joined to the tail of the fish, feet, like those of a man, and it had a human voice.
Its form has been preserved in sculpture to this day. Berossus says that this monster spent its days with men, never eating anything, but teaching men the skills necessary for writing and for doing mathematics and for all sorts of knowledge: how to build cities, found temples, and make laws. It taught men how to determine borders and divide land, also how to plant seeds and then to harvest their fruits and vegetables. I: Egypt and Babylonia to B. Griechenland zwischen dem Ende des 6. Jahrhunderts v. April in Freiburg im Breisgau, Mainz , — Mastin eds. Reinink eds.
Inleiding, vertaling, commentaar, PhD Univ. Groningen Lettres et des Sciences morales et politiques 57 , — Galter Hannes D. Geburtstag am Geller Mark J. Gmirkin, Berossus and Genesis, Manetho and Exodus. Hallo William W. Lanfranchi this volume Giovanni B. Rivista di storia, ambienti e culture del Vicino Oriente Antico 5 , — Ligota Christopher R.
II, Paris , — Cum commentariis Joannis Annis Viterbensis sacrae theologiae professoris, Rome also Antwerpen , Wittenberg etc. Nanni [Annius of Viterbo, Pseudo-Berossos] Giovanni Nanni, Berosus babillonic[us] de antiquitatibus seu defloratio Berosi: Caldaica cum figuris et ipsius eleganti vita libris Geneseos perutilis, Paris Douglas ed. Rabinovitch Nachum L. Richter Johann Daniel Wilhelm Richter, Berosi Chaldaeorum Historiae quae supersunt cum com- mentatiuone prolixiori de Berosi vita et librorum eius indole, Leipzig Halle-Wittenberg ].
Babylonian literature reached the Greek world not only through 43 For detailed discussion see Madreiter, this volume. The chronicle gives an overview of Mesopotamian history, mainly by listing dynas of Rhodes 2nd half 4th c. BC in Damascius, De Prinicipiis, 1. Copies have been recovered that very likely originated from pp. Babylon and date to the time of Berossos. It is not always possible to know how Berossos dealt with his sources: did he copy them but are in fact quite exceptional. A comparison of Berossos with Greek ethnographers and accurately or adapt them freely or even fabricate stories?
The reason is twofold. On the one local historians remains difficult, as none of the works of these authors have been preserved hand, not all sources Berossos relied on have been - nor ever will be - recovered. Many in full. Mesopotamian compositions have come down to us in several versions and recensions. In the Berossos undoubtedly aimed to provide his Greek speaking audience and the new ruling cases in which Berossos deviates from the texts that are known to us, we have to allow for elite in particular with a standard work on Babylonian history based on reliable local sources.
On the other hand, the Babyloniaca At the same time he wanted to impress them by showing that Babylonia had an age-old - and was heavily abridged and transformed during the process of transmission. As a consequence, thus authoritative - culture. Moreover, he intended to place Babylonian culture in the new the transm itted text is not always reliable. Narrative elements that can not be found in the framework of the Hellenistic world, and to redefine it vis-a-vis the dominant Greek culture.
Together with his contemporary, the Egyptian priest Manetho BNJ , who composed Berossos reshaped his Babylonian material in accordance with Greek forms and con an Aegyptiaca based on native sources, Berossos was the first barbarian historian of the cepts. He modelled his work as a Greek ethnographical history, a genre which was unknown Hellenistic period to act in this new political and cultural context. The title Babyloniaca is typical in this genre. The It is possible that Berossos also had political purposes in mind: either to persuade the Babylonian scholar followed the conventional constituents o f a Greek ethnographical his Seleucids to pursue a Babylonia-friendly policy or to support the new Seleucid dynasty tory: 1 description o f land and people; 2 origin and primeval history; 3 overview of his by giving it a historically based ideological foundation.
The ethnographical works o f Hecataeus of Abdera and Megasthenes, who Babyloniaca appears to have been limited. It could never replace the fantastic stories on were contemporaries o f Berossos, possibly served him as models. The Babyloniaca expresses how a na Berossos also accommodated his native sources to Greek concepts. As such the work is unique first place. He equates Babylonian gods with Greek ones and uses Macedonian month names.
It was firmly based on native sources and traditions, which Moreover, he was acquainted with the Greek stories told about Babylonian history and he were reshaped according to Greek models. The Babyloniaca is, therefore, an emblematic even attempted to correct them, as in the case of Sennacheribs foundation o f Tarsus51 or, at product of Hellenistic literature.
Its author, Bel-reu-shunu, who transformed him self from least in my opinion, his version o f the Hanging Garden of Babylon. Berossos was possibly also acquainted with Greek popular philosophical concepts. He allegorically explains the primeval water, personified by Tiamat Babylonian: Sea , and the monsters living in it, as described in the Babylonian Epic of References Creation Enuma Elish, in terms of natural processes: water was the basic principle and living Beaulieu a beings came to life in it spontaneously BNJ F la-b.
Actes du colloque organise au College de In sum, Berossos can truly be called a Greek historian. In modern scholarship he is usu France p a r la Chaire d'histoire et civilisation du monde achem enide et de I e mpire d A lexandre ally ranked among the ethnographers. As the boundaries between ethnography and local et le Reseau international d etudes et de recherches achem enides GDR CNRS , no- history in Greek historiography are blurred and on many points arbitrary,54 Berossos could vembre Persika, 9 , Paris , G uinan et al.
Their monumental works have determ ined our view of Greek historiography,. Syncellus asserts that 50 De Breucker , and ; see also Van der Spek His dating of Manetho is very likely 51 Burstein , 24 n. Ptolemy II. Since this book is a forgery, the dedication can not be used to date Manetho and, as a con 53 For a suggestion that Berossos himself interpreted the Enuma Elish allegorically see Haubold, this volume. G raziani ed. Naples , Burstein Stanley M. Reinink eds. Festschrift fu r Joachim O elsner an- Learned Antiquity. Geburtstages am M unster , Bethesda, MD De Breucker b Philosophisch-historische Klasse.
Robert L. Fowler, Early historie and literacy, in: Nino Luraghi ed. Franz Schwartz, Berossos 4 , R E 3. G roningen Tarn, The Greeks in Bactria and India, 3rd edn. Robartus J. K uhrt M aterials for the study o f the standard o f living, in: Josef W iesehofer ed. The Interaction o f G reek a n d non-G reek Civilisation , Festschrift fu r Joachim M arincola O elsner anlafilich seines M arincola, Genre, convention and innovation in Greco-Rom an historiography, in: , M unster , C hristina S.
Kraus ed. Maul, Nos. Lambert eds. Turnhout , Van der Spek R obartus J. W ickersham, Berossos a n d Manetho. Introduced and Translated. W estenholz 2. O f the many neglected aspects of Berossos work, his account of cosmogony in Babyloniaca 1 is easily the least well understood. The outlines of the narrative are of course well known: after an ethnographic introduction, Berossos reports how the super-sage Oannes emerged from the Southern Ocean in year one of human history, and how he taught mankind the arts of civilisation.
Nothing new was discovered since that time.
Geert De Breucker
Berossos then proceeds to give a taste of Oannes teachings by recounting the history of the world and, probably, much more beside. How much more has been subject to debate. Some scholars have argued that Oannes covered astronomy in Book 1 of the Babyloniaca, and that many of our so-called astronomical fragments belong in that context. Others disagree. Berossos adheres closely to this source, which is why Book 1 has always mattered to those scholars interested in Mesopotamian literature and its reception. Unlike Book 3, it contains no historical information; and unlike Book 2 it tells us little about Mesopotamian myth and literature that we did not already know from elsewhere.
With my chapter I aim to reverse this trend. I argue that Babyloniaca Book 1 forms a crucial part of Berossos overall project, his signature piece, no less. Starting points I start with a simple question: why did Berossos see fit to open his work with the teachings of Oannes? Why have Book 1 at all? There are several ways of answering that question: we might, for example, point to the fact that Enuma Elis was a staple of Babylonian scribal culture in Hellenistic times. For full discussion see John Steeles chapter in this collection.
He claimed that what he the story o f how he gained control over the universe. Berossos, then, was bound to touch on the Enuma Elis at some point in his work. For As we have seen, Berossos did indeed use very old cuneiform material.
At the same time, however, Berossos tailored his work to the G reek way o f thinking. He w rote in G reek and used similar reasons he was also bound to mention Oannes. This combination of local traditions Berossos may have done a bit o f creative tweaking here, perhaps because Oannes - or and G reek influences is characteristic o f all the other native w riters. It can be seen as being a Adapa, as he was also known was firmly associated with the art o f legitimate kingship.
However, his statement also raises a number of questions. One royal behaviour: texts favourable to Nabonidus show him as an expert reader of O annes concerns the idea o f the Babyloniaca as propagandistic history: the very fact that modern supposed main work, the astrological omen collection Enuma Anu Ellil ,10 Hostile sources, scholars found it so difficult to agree on an overall interpretation of Berossos work sug on the other hand, allege that Nabonidus boasted to know better than Oannes and that he gests that propaganda will not capture the complexities of his culturally hybrid voice.
So, by casting native w riters. We do not usually tolerate such degrees of generalisation when studying him as an internal narrator, Berossos shows that his work is far more than merely a handbook other ancient authors: why should we tolerate them with Berossos? I also have a third worry, of Babylonian history and custom: it is meant as a Fiirstenspiegel, a full-blown introduction which is this: three lines from the end of de Breuckers quote, Berossos suffers a sudden and to the art of legitimate kingship.
So far it was Berossos who was seen to be making claims, using sources, tailoring his Babyloniaca Book 1, but they leave one question unanswered: how, if at all, did Berossos work to audience expectation.
But then, dramatically, the typical and the characteristic take cater for the tastes o f his Greek readers? Do we simply assume that he asked them to swal over, without warning, and without any indication of what is at stake. That seems prim a fa cie unlikely, given that Berossos did after all write in author. There has been much useful groundwork, and there have been plenty of good intu Greek, not in Aramaic or Akkadian or Chaldaean whatever that might mean - which itions, but scholars of Berossos have so far operated largely unencumbered by recent debates raises the question o f what his Greek readers were supposed to gain from the experience, about identity, agency and authorial voice in the A rts and Humanities.
It seems to me that and how Berossos went about selling him self and his culture to them. That, it seems to me, Berossos relationship with his Greek audience in particular needs further thought. Scholars is precisely where the cosmogony o f Book 1 becomes important. Reinhold Bichler points out in a recent essay that Berossos and his audience in the eyes of the new dynasty founded by Seleucus it must have been a tem pting idea to see Berossos claimed to transm it the ancient archives of Babylon to his Greek readers, with oneself in the tradition o f a world-wide kingship.
And once more we may take note to what little input o f his own. What exactly does it mean to say that Berossos was forced to respect the expectations of his Greek or rather Macedonian audiences? Or did he need to sell copy? These questions need to be brought Bichler, Haubold forthcoming. My 9 Pongratz-Leisten , I start by asking what Berossos readers expected of 10 Royal Chronicle P4 col. Ill, 2 - 5 ' Schaudig. This will lead me on to the broader see Lambert , 64 and II, 2- 5 and PI col.
V, Schaudig. My aim is to move away from sweeping claims that Berossos advertised his native culture; 12 BNJ F 1 1 introduces his sources; F 1 4 emphasises that nothing else was discovered since the time of Oannes; F3 12 introduces primordial commentators; while F4 dramatises the transmission of Oannes teachings and provides an aetiology of the Chaldaeans as a priestly caste entrusted with the 14 De Breucker , Instead, I want to get could also carry more positive connotations.
Indeed, we now debated in postcolonial scholarship. The first is essentialism. Essentialism, according to one know that from a Mesopotamian perspective there was no such thing as a priest of Bel in definition, is the assumption that groups, categories or classes of objects have one or sev Babylon, though there was of course a wide range of personnel associated with the main eral defining features exclusive to all members o f that category.
Rather, he masquerades as a figure from Greek oriental particularly well attested among Greek-speakers.
Berossos on Persian Religion - edoc
From the classical period onward, there ising lore so as to lodge a very specific claim to cultural authority: Babylonian priests was a powerful strand o f Greek thought that cast non-Greeks as barbarians, people who by Chaldaeans, as they were known , were not just seen as masters of time but also as sources virtue o f their language and culture were essentially inferior to Greeks.
Indeed, I argue In his account of creation, Berossos describes the universe as being created from two that Berossos him self was aware o f essentialist assumptions about Babylon, and that he main forces, Tiamat and Bel. Tiamat provides the m atter from which Bel shapes all things. She is female, he is male; she is passive, he is active; she is chaotic, dark and watery, he is This leads me to a second concept that I have found useful in rethinking Berossos, which orderly, active, bright and airy.
In Babylonian terms, this is not a bad paraphrase of Enuma is that of role play and masquerade. It has long been accepted that discourse forms a crucial Elis, though it skips over the opening genealogies and radically condenses the rest of the factor in the shaping of identity: we do not simply determine who we are - much as we might narrative. Much of this work of condensation will be down to Alexander Polyhistor, the like to think we do - but constantly negotiate who we are in view of who we are said to be, first-century BCE excerptor who had little incentive to preserve details of Berossos account might be, should be, etc.
To this, postcolonial scholarship adds the notion that subaltern that did not suit his sensationalist agenda. W hat Berossos seems to have done in Babyloniaca Book 1 is to extract two cosmic so much to inform Greek readers about Babylonian mythology and culture, but to establish a principles from the jum ble of divine characters in Enuma Elis.
The resulting account of specific authorial persona; and, on that basis, create a communicative situation which paves creation strikingly resembles Stoic physics as formulated by Berossos contemporary Zeno the way for Books 2 and 3. For Zeno too, the universe was based on two entities, matter and god. Like Bel in Berossos, Zenos god was active, male, the shaping principle that pervaded matter; and like The philosopher priest Berossos Tiamat, Stoic m atter was passive, female, waiting to be dissected and moulded.
The question may seem odd, for it suggests a choice which prima facie Berossos did not coincidence; after all, there are only so many ways one can imagine a cosmogony, and the have: was he not simply stating a fact? And yet, I shall argue that Berossos did have a choice opposition between Marduk and Tiamat was of course prefigured in Enuma Elis itself. As a Babylonian, Berossos was a barbarian in Greek Greek and M esopotamian thought: after all, these two cultures had long been part of the eyes, and broadly speaking that was not an auspicious starting point.
Yet, non-Greek cultures. Hall , Cartledge , Harrison ; more recent publications emphasise that there was in fact 24 BNJ F8a For discussion see Haubold, forthcoming. Diogenes Laertius, Lives o f the Philosophers 1. For the reception of the Schofield , Heath Chaldaeans in classical thought see Thomsen Part 6 , on 27 For Polyhistors treatment of the Babyloniaca see Schironi in this volume. A generation or so earlier, A ristotles pupil Eudemos o f Rhodes fledged mythological character in the Greek imagination.
One passage stands out in this regard. O f course, we cannot assume that Kai Aaxov, etxa au xp xr v etc xav auxoov, Kiaoapfi Kai Aaacopov, s, wv yr. Among the barbarians, the Babylonians appear to pass over the idea o f a single principle in Hes.
- Berossos and Manetho, Introduced and Translated.
- The World of Berossos.
- Account Options.
- Americas Finest Companies 2010.
- Praise / Awards;
O f his well-attested interest in the etymology of divine names. The same parents also gave rise to another just etymologizing myth was not exclusive to the Stoics. However, unlike Berossos he identifies these principles with Tiamat and Apsu, rather than Tiamat and Bel, and focuses on the opening And Zeno says that Hesiods Chaos is water, from which there developed mud through conden genealogy of the gods rather than on tablets 4 - 6 of Enuma Elis, which describe the battle sation. The mud then solidified, creating the earth. Judging by Polyhistors summary, Berossos seems to have skipped over those early genealogies; or at least to have shifted the The parallel with Berossos is striking.
I am not of course suggesting that Berossos empha main weight o f his paraphrase elsewhere. It may seem hazardous to argue from absence in a sised the role of water because Zeno read Hesiod in this way. The point is rather that he ex text as badly mutilated as the Babyloniaca. In pursuit of this goal, Berossos seems to have proceeded There is another feature o f Berossos narrative which sets him apart from Eudemos: he eclectically, one might even say, opportunistically.
His account of Tiam ats army is telling translates the names o f Babylonian deities into their Greek equivalents rather than merely transliterating them. Unlike his forerunner, Berossos was clearly interested in making his 32 Demetr. Therefore, the adverb ond reason for thinking that Berossos was quite actively modelling him self on contemporary dA.
Greek philosophers like Zeno, and that is his method of reading myth, as encapsulated in the 33 Compare the famous reversal of personification at II. Most interprets the passage as the earliest extant here has been deemed late, though Demetrius, On Style, already uses similar language, and case of allegory in Greek poetry.
We 29 E. Burkert and , West , Haubold , with varying emphasis. For the succession myth do not know who is meant, but Berossos may have interpreted the name as a combination of Akkadian which informs both Greek and Mesopotamian cosmogonic traditions see Lopez-Ruiz As expected, Berossos takes inspiration from the Enuma Elis?
The World of Berossos
Allowing ourselves to contemplate this question can tone and overall m eaning o f the original, transform ing the list o f Tiam ats monsters into a be a salutary exercise, but it need be no more than that: Berossos did not have to read piece of philosophical speculation in the vein o f Empedocles: Empedocles in order to learn about spontaneous generation.
And a hotly debated question at that: Empedocles always remained xrjt 8e yuvatKocpurj oxiepoii; r GKr p. Sim ilar to these were the creatures which in earlier times the earth itself had created out of the mud, pieced together from a jum ble of There was a time, he says, when everything was [darkness and] w ater and that in it fabulous before it had been properly solidified by the thirsty air [limbs, beings with peculiar forms came to life.
For men with two wings were born and some with four or the rays o f the parching sun w ings and tw o faces, having one body and tw o heads, male and female, and double genitalia, had elim inated sufficient moisture. Time then sorted these out by grouping [them male and female. O ther men were born, some having the legs and the horns o f goats, others into proper categories.
Sim ilarly unidentifiable were the forms which followed with the feet o f horses. Yet others had the hind parts o f horses, but the foreparts o f men, and and caused the heroes amazed astonishm ent ,. In addition to these, there were fish and reptiles and snakes which recalls Berossos emphasis on the miraculous nature of Tiamats creatures TepaicbSr , and many other marvellous creatures differing in appearance from one another.
Images of these BaDjiaaid. At a fairly basic level, this kind of thing was good box office. Yet, we have seen were also set up in the temple o f Belos. Apart from Aristotle, the Epicureans too grappled with the legacy o f Empedocles idea, accepting spontaneous 39 Enuma Elis 1. De Breucker ad ing some of its more extravagant implications. Centaur-like creatures are attested in Mesopotamian iconography, but play 44 Ar. Berossos positions him self in this debate, but that there was a philosophical debate, and that When the universe was in this chaotic state, Bel went up and split the woman in two.
O ne h a lf he joins it quite deliberately, seems to me to be beyond doubt. But this, he says, am ounts to an allegorical account o f physics, to the effect that, when everything The creation of man consisted o f m oisture, and creatures had come into existence w ithin it, that god, [. But the creatures perished because they were unable to bear the force Hellenistic philosophical debate. So far we have seen him inscribe Greek notions o f physics o f the light. W hen Bel saw an em pty and fruit-bearing tract o f land, he ordered one o f the gods into his archive o f barbarian wisdom.
Yet, Hellenistic philosophy was arguably more inter to take o ff his own head, mix earth with the blood that flowed from the wound , and form [hu ested in ethics, and here too Berossos has important things to say. Towards the end of Book 1 mans and] anim als that were able to endure the air. That, Once more, philosophical - and in practice that means again broadly Stoic tendencies - come he says, is why hum an beings are endowed with intelligence voEpoix; te E iv a i and partake in to the fore. Unfortunately, the transm itted text is faulty at this point, and we need to pause divine understanding K ai ppovf aa c; 0iaq ixexw.
Syncellus and A rm enian Eusebius describe the creation of man twice, once in com bina Starting with the animals, only those that withstand light and air need creating. M aritime tion with that o f animals, once on its own BN J F lb There are several points creatures are already in existence and, one assumes, survive the mass extinction of the o f overlap between the two passages, but they are incompatible as they stand.
Jacoby and monsters. None of this is in Enuma Elis,50 but it so happens that lack of sunlight and air others solve the problem by bracketing one o f them as a Jewish interpolation. It seems safer to assume, with Verbrugghe and that Berossos monsters too form in water but cannot bear light and air, the two elements W ickersham, that both passages are original Berossos, though the text has clearly suffered which Berossos associates with post-chaotic forms o f life. If my One possible solution might be that ch.
The Enuma Elis has nothing to say the transm itted text o f ch. Below, I offer a tentative suggestion of what Berossos might about the creation of animals, but does describe human creation in some detail.
- Research Highlights.
- The Unexpected Inheritance of Inspector Chopra (A Baby Ganesh Agency Investigation, Book 1).
- Advanced Wirebond Interconnection Technology.
- Berossus on the Creation.
Berossos have meant, if not actually written: it assumes two distinct stages in the creation process, one agrees broadly with its account o f human creation, though some details differ. I must stress that I regard this reconstruction as a heuristic Berossos claims that Bel used his own blood to create m ankind whereas in the epic Marduk experiment, no more.
It does not solve the problems o f the transm itted text, nor could it. Berossos may or may not have found this version o f events in now W hat it can achieve, I think, and what is required here, is encourage us to accept both ver lost Mesopotamian texts,54 but the question remains why he introduced it here, against the sions o f creation as genuine Berossos, however garbled they may appear at first sight. With pull o f his main source. The answer, one suspects, was once again that he was keen to cater these caveats, let us have a closer look at the creation of humans and animals as Berossos for the tastes of his Greek readers.
In Enuma Elis, as in other Mesopotamian texts, m ankind describes them: descends from a rebel against the emerging order o f the universe. Among other things, that explains why we must shoulder the gods work and lead a life of misery. K paA. Atra-hasis 1. But he did more than merely Berossos, precisely the kind of thing this author would do. Book 1 of the Babyloniaca was cut and paste what he found: in the Babyloniaca the ruling god him self gives of his intel his opportunity to shine, and he made sure he took it.
Berossos on Persian Religion
Abydenos was right to summarises ligence. That is surely with Greek, and more specifically Stoic, thought. There is much in the Babyloniaca that will remain forever lost to us. Tiffin, The P ost-colonial Studies Reader, 2nd edn. That is a fact which must be accepted. But I also hope to have shown York I have argued that Book 1 Betegh of the Babyloniaca was in many ways Berossos signature piece. It is here that he establishes G. Betegh, On Eudemus Fr. Fortenbaugh eds. Already Aristotle thought Bichler that the Chaldaeans were among those who invented philosophy,59 so for once Berossos had R.
Bichler, Some observations on the image o f the A ssyrian and Babylonian kingdom s within a positive stereotype with which to work. He embraced the project with gusto, conjuring up the Greek tradition, in: R. Gesammelte Schriften Teil I, W iesbaden , Burkert, The O rientalizing Revolution, trans. Pinder and W.
Burkert, Cambridge, MA Berossos rationalising lens. What is on display here is both age-old barbarian wisdom and Burstein S. Stoic el Clauss ements are predominant, partly because Stoicism was the best-selling brand of philosophy at J. Clauss, Cosmos without imperium: the Argonautic journey through tim e, in: M. But F. W akker eds. He shows that he can do Empedocles Above all, he throws in outrageous intellectual feats of his own, none more outrageous De Breucker G. De Breucker himself offers an important argument for retain 59 Diogenes Laertius 1. Beaulieu , and the references quoted there to Tiamat inside the moon.
D eutschen Religionsgeschichtlichen Studiengesellschaft Munster am 3. Edwards Most M. Edwards, Homer: Poet o f the Iliad, Baltimore Most, Die fruheste erhaltene griechische D ichterallegorese, Rheinisches M useum Erler , Erler, C haldaer im Platonism us, in: E. M arzahn eds. W issenskultur in Orient und Okzident, Berlin and Boston , Jahrtausend v.
Chr, Helsinki Fortenbaugh, A ristotle on slaves and w om en, in: J. Sorabji eds. Q uinn, T heory o f spontaneous generation according to the ancients, Classical Bulletin 40 Frahm , Frahm , Counter-texts, com m entaries and adaptations: politically motivated responses to the Ramelli Babylonian epic o f creation in M esopotamia, the Biblical world, and elsew here, O rient 45 , I.
Ramelli, Allegoristi d e ll eta classica. Opere efram m enti, M ilan R inggren Frahm H. Frankel Schnabel H. Frankel, Noten zu den Argonautika des Apollonios, M unich Fusillo Schofield M. Fusillo, II tempo delle Argonautiche. U na nalisi del racconto in Apollonio Rodio, Rome Schofield, Ideology and philosophy in A ristotles theory o f slavery, in: M. Garver, A ristotles natural slaves: incomplete p raxeis and incomplete hum an beings, Journal Smith o f the H istory o f Philosophy 32 : Smith, A ristotles theory of natural slavery, Phoenix 37 , Hall Streck E.
Streck, Reallexikon der A ssyriology vol. O annes, Berlin Hall Thomsen E. Hall, Recasting the barbarian, in: E. Acta Hyperborea 1 , Haubold, G reek epic: a Near Eastern genre? M esopotamia and Egypt, A nn A rbor Haubold forthcoming West J. Haubold, Berossus, in: T. Whitmarsh ed. Heath Zgoll M. Heath, A ristotle on natural slavery, Phronesis 53 , Zgoll, K onigslauf und G otterrat.
Struktur und D eutung des babylonischen N eujahrsfestes, Humphreys in: E. Lux eds. Humphreys, Classics and colonialism: towards an erotics o f the discipline, in: G. Most Wissenschaftlichen G esellschaft fu r Theologie 28 , Gutersloh , Hunter R. Hunter, The Argonautica o f Apollonius. Literary Studies, Cambridge K uhrt A.
Lam bert W. Lambert, A catalogue o f texts and authors. Journal o f Cuneiform Studies 16 , Livrea E. Livrea, Apollonii Rhodii Argonauticon liber quartus. Introduzione, testo critico, traduzione e commento, Florence Historians constantly face two closely related problems: to make new textual material available and to destroy generally accepted theories.
Otto Neugebauer2. Recent scholarship rightly portrays Berossos as a man straddling two cultural realms. On the one hand, his work suggests familiarity with the form and content of Babylonian chrono- graphic texts. Berossos position between the cultures affects not only his account of history but also his portrayal of mythic pre-history. In this chapter, I propose to look at his account of early human history and the Flood story in book 2 of the Babyloniaca. The extent to which Berrossos was familiar with cuneiform literature in general, and extant sources in particular, has been much discussed.
A close reading of Babyloniaca 2 will, I hope, go some. O f course I alone am responsible for the contents of the chapter. Schnabel , and Sterling , It should be noted, how ever, that Berossos apparently poor Greek often seems more inspired by Aramaic grammar than by Akkadian. Thus, the strings of asyndetic participles which he uses seem to owe much to the phenomenon of imposition; see Coetsem Aramaic influence could also explain the corrupt form of most of the personal and place names, since corruption is likely to increase if a text passes through more lan guages, and even more so if one deals with transcriptions of a syllabary into alphabetic writings without benefit of vowels e.
Markham Geller in an e-mail from A detailed study of Berossos language - as far as it can be reconstructed from the fragments - remains a desideratum of classical and semitistic scholarship. Komoroczy , and more recently De Breucker b, Beaulieu The issue of sources will not be forgotten, however: More specifically, Berossos connects the beginnings of humanity with the Oannes theme we shall see that some elements of Berossos narrative are certainly based on a profound from book one.
In book 2, we The structure and character of Babyloniaca 2 learn that he is only the first in a series of other such beasts F3a. Oannes, however, is Placed between two other books, Babyloniaca 2 takes on the function of a narrative pivot in clearly the most important: he is depicted as more than a mere culture hero but acts as some Berossos work. It has connections with book one and book three, by way of recapitulation thing very close to a creator god himself, shaping amorphous matter and turning mindless e.