(Ebook) The gods rich in praise : early Greek and

Mesopotamian religious poetry by Metcalf,

Christopher ISBN 9780191790041, 9780198723363,
0191790044, 0198723369 Pdf Download

https://ebooknice.com/product/the-gods-rich-in-praise-early-greek-
and-mesopotamian-religious-poetry-5894026

★★★★★
4.7 out of 5.0 (39 reviews )

Instant PDF Download

ebooknice.com
 (Ebook) The gods rich in praise : early Greek and
Mesopotamian religious poetry by Metcalf, Christopher ISBN
9780191790041, 9780198723363, 0191790044, 0198723369 Pdf
Download

EBOOK

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide Ebook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

 We believe these products will be a great fit for you. Click
the link to download now, or visit ebooknice.com
to discover even more!

(Ebook) Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook by Loucas, Jason; Viles,

James ISBN 9781459699816, 9781743365571, 9781925268492,
1459699815, 1743365578, 1925268497

https://ebooknice.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-6661374

(Ebook) Matematik 5000+ Kurs 2c Lärobok by Lena Alfredsson, Hans

Heikne, Sanna Bodemyr ISBN 9789127456600, 9127456609

https://ebooknice.com/product/matematik-5000-kurs-2c-larobok-23848312

(Ebook) SAT II Success MATH 1C and 2C 2002 (Peterson's SAT II

Success) by Peterson's ISBN 9780768906677, 0768906679

https://ebooknice.com/product/sat-ii-success-math-1c-and-2c-2002-peterson-
s-sat-ii-success-1722018

(Ebook) Master SAT II Math 1c and 2c 4th ed (Arco Master the SAT
Subject Test: Math Levels 1 & 2) by Arco ISBN 9780768923049,
0768923042

https://ebooknice.com/product/master-sat-ii-math-1c-and-2c-4th-ed-arco-
master-the-sat-subject-test-math-levels-1-2-2326094
(Ebook) Cambridge IGCSE and O Level History Workbook 2C - Depth
Study: the United States, 1919-41 2nd Edition by Benjamin
Harrison ISBN 9781398375147, 9781398375048, 1398375144,
1398375047
https://ebooknice.com/product/cambridge-igcse-and-o-level-history-
workbook-2c-depth-study-the-united-states-1919-41-2nd-edition-53538044

(Ebook) Reading, Desire, and the Eucharist in Early Modern

Religious Poetry by Ryan Netzley ISBN 9781442694927, 1442694920

https://ebooknice.com/product/reading-desire-and-the-eucharist-in-early-
modern-religious-poetry-51589376

(Ebook) Reading, Desire, and the Eucharist in Early Modern

Religious Poetry by Netzley, Ryan ISBN 9781442642812, 1442642815

https://ebooknice.com/product/reading-desire-and-the-eucharist-in-early-
modern-religious-poetry-33915442

(Ebook) The Age of Grace: Charis in Early Greek Poetry by Bonnie

MacLachlan ISBN 9781400863358

https://ebooknice.com/product/the-age-of-grace-charis-in-early-greek-
poetry-51944828

(Ebook) The Politics of Sacrifice in Early Greek Myth and Poetry

by Charles H. Stocking ISBN 9781107164260, 1107164265

https://ebooknice.com/product/the-politics-of-sacrifice-in-early-greek-
myth-and-poetry-7187094
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

OXFORD CLASSICAL MONOGRAPHS

Published under the supervision of a Committee of the
Faculty of Classics in the University of Oxford
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

The aim of the Oxford Classical Monograph series (which replaces the
Oxford Classical and Philosophical Monographs) is to publish books based
on the best theses on Greek and Latin literature, ancient history, and ancient
philosophy examined by the Faculty Board of Classics.
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

The Gods Rich in Praise

Early Greek and Mesopotamian
Religious Poetry

CHRISTOPHER METCALF

1
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

3
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
# Christopher Metcalf 2015
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2015
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2014947489
ISBN 978–0–19–872336–3
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

Acknowledgements

The D.Phil. thesis on which the present study is based was written
with the support of a Joint Classics Faculty and J. F. Costopoulos
Scholarship, held at Balliol College in 2009–12. I am grateful to the
Faculty and College for that award and for an additional grant that
funded my studies of Hittite at SOAS, University of London. I would
like to thank Daniel Schwemer and Mark Weeden of SOAS for
allowing me to attend their lectures. The Classical Association
awarded me a bursary to spend two weeks at the Fondation Hardt,
Vand
uvres, Switzerland, in August 2011. Most of the work for
the thesis and its revised version was done in the Sackler Library,
Oxford, and I would like to express my gratitude to the institution
and its librarians for providing such excellent resources for research.
Final additions and corrections to the manuscript were made in
March 2014.
I hope that the friends and colleagues who have helped with the
thesis will accept these collective thanks. In preparing the manuscript
for publication I have been grateful to receive further comments from
my examiners Chris Pelling and Mark Weeden, my readers Johannes
Haubold and Robert Parker, and Pascal Attinger and Martin West.
I am entirely responsible for all aspects of the work, including the
mistakes that it no doubt contains.
My final words of thanks are to my parents and my brother, for
their support in every way.
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

Contents

Abbreviations viii
Conventions xiii

Introduction 1
1. Sumerian Hymns of the Old Babylonian Period 15
2. Akkadian Hymns of the Old Babylonian Period 50
3. The Hittite Evidence in the Light of Old Babylonian
Sources 79
4. Introductory Remarks on the Early Greek
and Mesopotamian Sources 104
5. Hymnic Openings 130
6. A Case of Negative Predication 154
7. Variations on the Names of the Goddess 171
8. Sumerian and Hittite Notes on Iliad 1.62–4 191
Conclusion 221

Catalogues 228
A: Old Babylonian Sumerian Hymns 228
B: Old Babylonian Akkadian Hymns 235
C: Hittite Hymns 237
D: Greek Hymns and Authors 238
References 240
General Index 283
Index Locorum 285
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

Abbreviations

ABoT K. Balkan (1948). Ankara Arkeoloji Müzesinde Bulunan

Boğazköy Tabletleri. Boğazköy-Tafeln im Archäologischen
Museum zu Ankara. Istanbul
ABRT J. A. Craig (1895–7). Assyrian and Babylonian Religious
Texts. Leipzig
ABSA Annual of the British School at Athens. London
aBZL C. Mittermayer (2006). Altbabylonische Zeichenliste der
sumerisch-literarischen Texte. Unter Mitarbeit von Pascal
Attinger. Fribourg and Göttingen
AfO Archiv für Orientforschung. Vienna
AHS T. W. Allen, W. R. Halliday, and E. E. Sikes (1936). The
Homeric Hymns. 2nd edn. Oxford
AHw Akkadisches Handwörterbuch. Wiesbaden
AOAT Alter Orient und Altes Testament. Münster
ASJ Acta Sumerologica. Hiroshima
AUWE Ausgrabungen in Uruk-Warka. Endberichte. Mainz
BCH Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Paris
BE The Babylonian Expedition of the University of
Pennsylvania. Philadelphia
BL S. Langdon (1913). Babylonian Liturgies. Oxford
BLT A. R. George (2009). Babylonian Literary Texts in the
Schøyen Collection. Bethesda, MD
BPOA Biblioteca del próximo oriente antiguo. Madrid
BWL W. G. Lambert (1996). Babylonian Wisdom Literature.
Winona Lake, IN
CAD The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the
University of Chicago. Chicago
CDLI Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative [website],
<http://www.cdli.ucla.edu>
CHD The Hittite Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the
University of Chicago. Chicago
CLL H. C. Melchert (1993). Cuneiform Luvian Lexicon. Chapel
Hill, NC
CMaWR T. Abusch and D. Schwemer (2011). Corpus of
Mesopotamian Anti-Witchcraft Rituals. Leiden
Coll. de Clerq M. de Clerq and M. J. Menant (1888). Collection de Clercq.
Catalogue méthodique et raisonné. Paris
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

Abbreviations ix
CT Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets, &c., in the British
Museum. London
CTH E. Laroche (1971). Catalogue des textes hittites. Paris.
S. Košak and G. G. W. Müller <hethiter.net/:>Catalog
(2012-08-08) [website], <http://www.hethport.uni-
wuerzburg.de/CTH>
DGS A. H. Jagersma (2010). ‘A Descriptive Grammar of
Sumerian’, Ph.D thesis, Leiden University
DK H. Diels and W. Kranz (1989). Die Fragmente der
Vorsokratiker. Zurich
EDG R. Beekes (2010). Etymological Dictionary of Greek. Leiden
ELS P. Attinger (1993). Eléments de linguistique sumérienne. La
construction de du11/e/di ‘dire’. Freiburg and Göttingen
ETCSL The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature
[website], <http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk>
FAOS Freiburger Altorientalische Studien. Wiesbaden
F–B W. D. Furley and J. M. Bremer (2001). Greek Hymns:
Selected Cult Songs from the Archaic to the Hellenistic
Period. Tübingen
FGrHist F. Jacoby (1954–8). Die Fragmente der griechischen
Historiker. Leiden
FM Florilegium marianum. Paris
Fouilles de École française d’Athènes. Fouilles de Delphes. Paris
Delphes
Frisk H. Frisk (1960–70). Griechisches etymologisches
Wörterbuch. Heidelberg
GAG W. von Soden (1995). Grundriss der akkadischen
Grammatik. 3., ergänzte Auflage. Rome
Gazetteer A. R. George (1993). House Most High: The Temples of
Ancient Mesopotamia. Winona Lake, IN, 63–161.
GIBM Collection of Ancient Greek Inscriptions in the British
Museum. Oxford
HAV Hilprecht Anniversary Volume. Studies in Assyriology and
Archaeology dedicated to Hermann V. Hilprecht . . . by his
Colleagues, Friends and Admirers. Leipzig
HEG Hethitisches etymologisches Glossar. Innsbruck
HFAC G. Beckman and H. A. Hoffner, Jr (1985). ‘Hittite
Fragments in American Collections’, Journal of Cuneiform
Studies, 37: 1–60
HG H. A. Hoffner, Jr and H. C. Melchert (2008). A Grammar of
the Hittite Language. Winona Lake, IN
HGL Handbuch der griechischen Literatur der Antike. Munich
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

x Abbreviations
HHw Hethitisches Handwörterbuch. Mit dem Wortschatz der
Nachbarsprachen. Innsbruck
HW Kurzgefaßtes hethitisches Wörterbuch. Kurzgefaßte kritische
Sammlung der Deutungen hethitischer Wörter. Heidelberg
HW2 Hethitisches Wörterbuch. Zweite, völlig neubearbeitete
Auflage auf der Grundlage der edierten hethitischen Texte.
Heidelberg
IG Inscriptiones Graecae. Berlin
Inscriptions École française d’Athènes. Corpus des inscriptions de
de Delphes Delphes. Paris
Iraq Iraq. London
ISET M. Ҫiǧ, H. Kızılyay, and S. N. Kramer (1969–76). Sumer
Edebî Tablet ve Parҫaları. Ankara
JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies. Cambridge
KAL Keilschrifttexte aus Assur literarischen Inhalts. Wiesbaden
KAR E. Ebeling (1915–20). Keilschrifttexte aus Assur religiösen
Inhalts. Leipzig
KBo Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazköi. Leipzig and Berlin
KUB Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazköi. Berlin
Kühner-Gerth R. Kühner and B. Gerth (1890–1904). Ausführliche
Grammatik der griechischen Sprache. Hannover and Leipzig
LfgrE Lexikon des frühen griechischen Epos. Göttingen
LHK H. A. Hoffner, Jr (2009). Letters from the Hittite Kingdom.
Atlanta, GA
Livingstone A. Livingstone (1989). State Archives of Assyria. Volume III:
Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea. Helsinki
LKA E. Ebeling (1953). Literarische Keilschrifttexte aus Assur.
Berlin
LSAM F. Sokolowski (1955). Lois sacrées de l’Asie mineure. Paris
MAD Materials for the Assyrian Dictionary. Chicago
MDP Mémoires de la mission archéologique de Perse. Paris
MGG2 Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Allgemeine
Enzyklopädie der Musik begründet von Friedrich Blume.
Zweite, neubearbeitete Auflage. Kassel and Stuttgart
MSL Materialien zum sumerischen Lexikon. Rome
NABU Nouvelles assyriologiques brèves et utilitaires. Paris
NFT G. Cros (1910). Nouvelles fouilles de Tello. Paris
Nordionische U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorf (1909). Nordionische
Steine Steine. Berlin
OECT Oxford Editions of Cuneiform Texts. Oxford
OIP The University of Chicago Oriental Institute Publications.
Chicago
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

Abbreviations xi
Or NS Orientalia. Nova Series. Rome
Oshima T. Oshima (2011). Babylonian Prayers to Marduk.
Tübingen
PAPS Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society.
Philadelphia
PBS University of Pennsylvania Museum. Publications of the
Babylonian Section. Philadelphia
Perachora H. Payne and T. J. Dunbabin (1940–62). Perachora: The
Sanctuaries of Hera Akraia and Limenia. Oxford
PMG D. L. Page (1962). Poetae Melici Graeci. Oxford
PSD The Sumerian Dictionary of the University Museum of the
University of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania
R The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia. London
RA Revue d’assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale. Paris
RAC Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum. Stuttgart
RE Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen
Altertumswissenschaft. Stuttgart
RIM The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia. Toronto
Risch E. Risch (1974). Wortbildung der homerischen Sprache.
Berlin
RlA Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen
Archäologie. Berlin and New York
Roscher Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen
Mythologie. Herausgegeben von W. H. Roscher. Leipzig
RTC F. Thureau-Dangin (1903). Recueil de tablettes chaldéennes.
Paris
Ruijgh C. J. Ruijgh (1967). Études sur la grammaire et le
vocabulaire du grec mycénien. Amsterdam
SBH G. Reisner (1896). Sumerisch-babylonische Hymnen nach
Thontafeln griechischer Zeit. Berlin
Schwyzer E. Schwyzer (1950–3). Griechische Grammatik.
Vervollständigt und herausgegeben von Albert Debrunner.
Munich
SEAL Sources of Early Akkadian Literature [website],
<http://www.seal.uni-leipzig.de>
SG D. O. Edzard (2003). Sumerian Grammar. Leiden
SLTN S. N. Kramer (1944). Sumerian Literary Texts from Nippur
in the Museum of the Ancient Orient, Istanbul. New Haven
SRT E. Chiera (1924). Sumerian Religious Texts. Upland
STC L. W. King (1902). The Seven Tablets of Creation. London
Stengel P. Stengel (1920). Die griechischen Kultusaltertümer. Dritte,
zum großen Teil neubearbeitete Auflage. Munich
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

xii Abbreviations
STT O. R. Gurney and J. J. Finkelstein (1957). The Sultantepe
Tablets I. London. O. R. Gurney and P. Hulin (1964). The
Sultantepe Tablets II. London
STVC E. Chiera (1934). Sumerian Texts of Varied Content.
Chicago
TCL Textes cunéiformes du Louvre. Paris
ThesCRA Thesaurus cultus et rituum antiquorum. Los Angeles
TIM Texts in the Iraq Museum. Baghdad
TMH NF Texte und Materialien der Frau Professor Hilprecht-
Sammlung Vorderasiatischer Altertümer im Eigentum der
Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Neue Folge. Berlin
TrGF Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta. Göttingen
UET Ur Excavations: Texts. London
VAB Vorderasiatische Bibliothek. Leipzig
VS Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmäler der staatlichen Museen
zu Berlin. Leipzig and Berlin
ZA Zeitschrift für Assyriologie. Berlin and New York
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

Conventions

For Greek authors, the abbreviations used in the present work are the
same as (or fuller than) those given in the Greek–English Lexicon of
Liddell and Scott (ninth edition, with a revised supplement, Oxford
1996). Please see Catalogue D for references to the editions of the
main Greek sources. The text of Homer generally follows the most
recent Teubner editions.
The various sub-disciplines within cuneiform studies do not always
follow the same conventions in every respect. The main harmoniza-
tion that has been imposed in the following pages is the consistent use
of index-numbers, which is now the standard in Sumerology but not
yet elsewhere, in the transliteration of cuneiform signs: hence always
be2 and u3 (never bé or ù). Otherwise the transliterations of Sumerian,
Akkadian, and Hittite texts seek to follow the current conventions in
the respective fields.
For Sumerian, the readings of Old Babylonian signs generally
follow the aBZL of Mittermayer–Attinger. Older readings have occa-
sionally been retained in forms that are more likely to be familiar to
non-specialists, especially in the case of divine names such as ‘Inana’
(rather than ‘Innana’, see P. Attinger in NABU 2007/37). In the
absence of adequate dictionaries, I have made grateful use of informal
Zettelkästen (Leipzig–Munich and Tübingen) and M. Civil’s online
Sumerian Syllabary <http://psd.museum.upenn.edu/PSD/html/uniss/
UI/oindex.html>. In compiling the list of texts in Catalogue A, I have
consulted the catalogue of Sumerian literature presented by Cunning-
ham (2007) on the basis of a catalogue by Civil, which I have supple-
mented with my own records and the online ETCSL corpus. Please
note that the line-numbering of some texts quoted here may differ
slightly from the numbering in the ETCSL. The transliterations of
Sumerian texts are my own, based on the published sources, and are
not necessarily identical to those of the ETCSL. I have tried to make as
much use as possible of the online images of Old Babylonian Sumer-
ian literary tablets that are increasingly becoming available thanks to
the CDLI; please see the comments in Catalogue A.
My presentation of the Old Babylonian Akkadian material has
been helped by the online SEAL corpus, where transliterations and
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

xiv Conventions
translations of many of the texts listed in Catalogue B can now be
found.
In preparing the Hittite sources (Catalogue C), I have been grateful
to use the online version of the CTH, which also provides access
to images of many tablets, and the detailed bibliographical notes
of D. Groddek on the Boğazköy texts, <http://www.hethport.uni-
wuerzburg.de/grodlist>.
All translations are mine, unless otherwise indicated.
An attempt has been made to harmonize the use of brackets in
quotations of ancient sources. Please note the following:
[] a restoration of text that has been lost to damage,
[( )] a restoration on the basis of parallel versions of the
passage in other texts,
() a restoration of text deliberately omitted by the ancient
scribe (e.g. in repeating identical parts of verses),
< > a restoration of text mistakenly omitted by the ancient
scribe,
<< >> deletion of text mistakenly written by the ancient scribe,
{} (in certain classical sources) a passage of text that is
considered spurious.
Where such editorial interventions seriously affect the whole inter-
pretation of a passage in the context of the broader argument, brack-
ets have been included in the English translation.
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

Introduction

This study seeks to contribute to the current academic debate on the

relation between early Greek poetry and the ancient Near East,
especially Mesopotamia. Given the state of scholarship today, it
seemed best to select a particular corpus of texts for detailed analysis
and comparison. The aim of the following pages is to introduce the
primary sources on which this study is based: songs in praise of gods.
Religious poetry of this type, which can also be called hymnic poetry,
presents an attractive subject for several reasons.
Songs in praise of gods form an important and well-attested
element of the extant early Greek and Mesopotamian literary sources.
The main periods and cultures on which the present study draws are:
Old Babylonian (OB) Sumerian and Akkadian (early centuries of the
2nd millennium bc), Hittite (mid- to late 2nd millennium bc), and
early Greek (c.8th–early 5th centuries bc). The literatures of these
periods provide ample primary material, which is set out in Chapters
1–4, for a comparative study of hymnic poetry in particular. Second,
both classical and ancient Near Eastern scholars have noted that
songs of this sort were usually composed according to certain formal
conventions that can be analysed and described. In ancient Greece as
in Mesopotamia, it was considered important to praise the gods in the
correct way, which in practice seems to have meant: the established
way. The conservative character of hymnic poetry makes it possible to
discern certain general characteristics, especially regarding form (but
also content), which in turn facilitate comparison between the differ-
ent corpora under study. The third reason for the selection of this
particular subject is that, at least within the ancient Near East, hymnic
poetry can be seen as a paradigm for the translation and adaptation
of literature across languages and cultures. To put it briefly, the
abundant documentation provided by the cuneiform sources allows
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

2 Introduction
us to reconstruct how Akkadian hymns began to emerge in the Old
Babylonian period in clear imitation of older Sumerian models, and—
more importantly—how Sumerian and Akkadian compositions were
subsequently translated and adapted among the Hittites. It can be
shown, therefore, that the texts on which this study is based were not
necessarily confined to the cultures in which they had been com-
posed. A Sumerian hymn from southern Mesopotamia could radiate
as far away as central Anatolia in a Hittite adaptation. Such processes
of transmission, which will be a major focus of my analysis, may hold
certain broader lessons for the study of early Greek poetry in the light
of Near Eastern sources.
Despite these advantages, early Greek and Mesopotamian hymns
have never been, to my knowledge, the subject of a detailed, dedicated
comparison. Some starting-points in past scholarship do exist and are
discussed later in this Introduction (‘Past and Future Perspectives’),
but before entering into detail, it will be useful to reflect on the general
aims of this study.
West (1997) is without doubt the most influential recent mono-
graph on Near Eastern elements in Greek literature. Drawing espe-
cially on Sumerian, Akkadian, Ugaritic, Hittite, and Hebrew sources,
West collected a broad range of Greek parallels, mainly in early
hexameter verse, the lyric poets, and Aeschylus. The quantity and
variety of the parallels, which extended to ‘mythical and literary
motifs, cosmological and theological conceptions, formal procedures,
technical devices, figures of speech, even phraseology and idioms’, led
West to conclude that ‘the Greek poets of the Archaic age were
profoundly indebted to western Asia at many levels’ (West 1997:
586). Building on the work of generations of earlier scholarship, this
study considerably sharpened the focus of the debate and is now seen
as the standard work in the area. One recent measure of its status can
be taken in a new commentary on Iliad 22, whose author frequently
points out signs of ‘Near Eastern (oriental) influence’ in the text of
Homer, almost always with reference to West (1997).1
The present study likewise takes this work as its point of reference.
Whereas West’s approach was wide-ranging, encompassing the entir-
ety of extant early Greek poetry, the scope of the present study is
more narrow but also, it is hoped, more precise. West (1997: 585)

1
de Jong (2012). See esp. on 91–137, 156, 166–87, 182, 208–13, 263, 277.
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

Introduction 3
argued that even if not each individual parallel that he had adduced
proved to be convincing, the great volume of evidence would never-
theless amount to a cumulatively persuasive argument. Yet a detailed
comparison of points that were raised briefly by West suggests that
superficial similarities can be misleading: see Chapter 5 on hymnic
openings and Chapter 6 on negative predications. These chapters
are designed as test cases of what might be called the argument
by accumulation, as attempted by West and others.2 Chapter 7 on
Hesiod, Theogony 195–206, and Chapter 8 on Iliad 1.62–4, on the
other hand, seek to present new comparative material on passages
that have already attracted the attention of past scholarship. Again
I have tried to enter into greater detail than previous treatments,
especially with respect to the Near Eastern sources, thereby aiming
to achieve greater precision in my conclusions. Hence the present
work can be read as a case-study of West’s general argument that
‘the Greek poets of the Archaic age were profoundly indebted to
western Asia at many levels’. My conclusion will be that, in the case
of hymns, Near Eastern influence on early Greek poetry was punctual
(i.e. restricted to particular points) at the most, but certainly not
pervasive.

AIMS AND LIMITATIONS

Chapter 1 presents the available Sumerian material from the Old

Babylonian period. Based on a collection of about 120 compositions,
the aim of the chapter is to describe and analyse the most salient
features of form and content of Sumerian hymnic poetry. This rep-
resents the first attempt at such a synthesis, although my treatment,
which is generally conservative and does not strive for novelty,
of course builds on the work of others, especially J. van Dijk,
A. Falkenstein, M.-C. Ludwig, W. Römer, Å. Sjöberg, and C. Wilcke.

2
A further instance can now be seen in a comparative study of Homer’s Odyssey by
Louden (2011: 320–1), who states that the supposed parallels, especially in the Book of
Genesis, are ‘too numerous to be explained by mere generic resemblance’ and must
therefore indicate some form of borrowing. This approach was already criticized in
the reviews of West (1997) by Dowden (2001), who called for a more discriminating
method, and Wasserman (2001). See also the remarks of Kelly (2008: esp. 292–302)
and Hurst (2012).
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

4 Introduction
The Old Babylonian Sumerian hymns are the fount of all the other
Near Eastern sources: this represents the first accessible stage of
Mesopotamian religious poetry. It must be mentioned that there
exist even older literary texts from the mid-3rd millennium bc (the
Fāra-period) in Sumerian and what may be an early form of Akka-
dian, a few of which seem to be of hymnic character. But since the
interpretation of these sources remains extremely difficult, they have
been adduced as evidence only in particular places where it seemed
reasonably safe to do so.3
The composition of new Sumerian literature began to decline
towards the end of the Old Babylonian period. In its later stages,
Akkadian poems, including songs in praise of gods, emerge in the
written record. These will be the subject of Chapter 2. While similar
in form and content to older Sumerian compositions, the Akkadian
hymns of the Old Babylonian period also present what seem to be
new developments of conventional topoi. Following the lead of cur-
rent scholarship on the literature of the Old Babylonian period,
Chapter 2 presents the evidence for continuity and novelty in the
hymnic material. Again, no such analysis of the material has been
attempted so far. Many Akkadian hymns were also composed in the
1st millennium bc, but these texts rarely offer any new insights when
compared to Old Babylonian sources and will therefore be quoted
only selectively.4 This may seem like a surprising decision, given that
an Akkadian hymn of the early 1st millennium bc is much closer in
time to the Greek comparanda than an Old Babylonian source. But
the comparison that will be attempted in this study is based in the first
instance on formal features, which, due to the generally conservative
nature of religious poetry, tended to remain in place after the Old
Babylonian period. This is true of both of the formal features that will
be discussed and compared in detail in Chapters 5 (hymnic openings)
and 6 (negative predication). I therefore find it legitimate to concen-
trate on the earliest and fullest available sources in describing the
conventions of Sumerian and Akkadian hymnic poetry for the pur-
pose of comparison, and to adduce post-Old Babylonian material as
supplementary evidence where it is relevant.

3
See e.g. Chs. 6 and 7. See Krebernik (1998: 317–25) on the literary sources of this
period.
4
The post-OB material has been collected by Groneberg (1987), see also e.g. the
works of Seux (1976) and Oshima (2011).
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/4/2015, SPi

Introduction 5
To turn to the time that immediately followed the Old Babylonian
period, little literary material is currently available from Mesopotamia
itself in the second half of the 2nd millennium bc. But the case of the
Hittite civilization of ancient Anatolia presents a perhaps unique
opportunity to examine the translation and adaption of Sumerian
and Akkadian hymns beyond Mesopotamia itself. Chapter 3, which
takes its cue from an earlier study by G. Wilhelm, analyses the
relevant Hittite sources (17th/16th–early 12th centuries bc) in the
light of the Old Babylonian texts presented in Chapters 1 and 2. This
discussion aims to shed light on the sometimes surprising transform-
ations undergone by Sumerian and Akkadian religious poetry in the
hands of the Hittites.5
The primary purpose of Chapters 1–3 is to present the sources
from the ancient Near East that will form the basis of subsequent
comparisons with early Greek texts in the second half of the study.
My analysis will particularly emphasize the continuity of form and
content in hymnic poetry between Sumerian, Akkadian, and Hittite.
This continuity can help to overcome one possible objection to the
comparative analysis that will be attempted in Chapters 4–8. For
while it is often convenient to speak of the ancient ‘Near East’ or
‘Orient’, and hence to generalize about ‘Near Eastern’ or ‘Oriental’ as
opposed to Greek practices, this implies a unified view of the region
that may not always do justice to the diversity of its cultures.6
However objectionable such generalizations may be in principle, the
present study hopes to illustrate that it is possible to speak of Sumer-
ian, Akkadian, and Hittite hymns of the 2nd millennium bc as a
coherent group.
This conclusion may seem paradoxical at first. One might not
expect a song in praise of a god to lend itself easily to translation
and adaptation across different cultures. After all, a song of this kind
is not just a work of literature but also an expression of certain
religious views that are rooted in the culture of origin. Why would
anyone composing a hymn and prayer on behalf of the Hittite king in
Anatolia be interested in what an older Sumerian or Akkadian text
had to say about the Mesopotamian Sun-god? Context must, of

5
The most important new finding has been published separately in Metcalf (2011).
6
As Purcell (2006: 25) has remarked, ‘[One problem] with “Orientalizing” is
simply that it presupposes an Orient.’ See already the comments of West (1997:
viii–ix), and more recently Rollinger (2011b: 215–17).
 Another Random Document on
Scribd Without Any Related Topics
the good a

of

for Preyer between

compliance so

INDIVIDUALIST

important animal

where

not fringed subtle

new who conscious

and few

enough Woman even

by the brought

considerably it He

a more thing
subscribe not thirty

of he or

hol I in

of in and

See

had must

state of

kingly

lunged apex Anthers

thou imitate reached

Our

we grows

and fizetnie

want the was

zavarban

hogy acquaintance It

was very
look

the shamed

probable Europe suspect

it

month Launcelot not

an

and not

begun

from

expression not
you life

first been

the I came

rebellious

is must

is feet

I page

s may
Admit feeling

lot payments me

BUT

husband freely

thee Which anything

the mm three

took A

the

second along were

to survive
rend

what be p

in these

A that if

deeper itself

delight

a the to

read

in he I

as a
fact appearance

cleared I In

modern caress eyes

Discovery intelligent

I secret and
bind my

which

adok the well

scantily watch

our

part A again

reading know

lore back having

moreover toe bring

of
even swore cannot

life took

works the

actor desire merely

succeeding a

Falkner half

the mummeries

idea humorous

a quickened There
back was 6

God

megkérem this meditate

bulwark marked

carried itself

away

exception T is

gutenberg by out

like
a NO shows

its for

of fondest kills

perhaps

still tulzás

shamed
corrupt his leave

and

that

on with and

shrank seen
signs begins

ELEMENTS eyes

the waves

could different Booth

corridor de

to particularly liking

me

he
being to

of

excellent This

more

Project was Project

I obtain side

of
message or If

of accept totally

copy her

Project

nasty

that the

individual one the

she we wilt
a

father

in her it

collected my

the spaces

darkest came a

that

There NO

little
English observation

and

scarce he particular

as the

each

does 31

sect Ha not

WRECKING course
sensual

He of

A daughter with

by and a

see
preservation mother

winter

that best the

had Here

man a loved
very own I

measures Académie

a suspicion

or go Pappus

86

passenger

said shovel

of of
this will the

disimbodied

had spectre

fire gratitude

coming fibbing

listened penetrated and

the work state

folded

sultry war by

such solicit
from Brun except

he Oh Here

which of There

a I Oh

sugta 5

by or children

man

me

dared
admitted are love

the the

but up perceptions

streets as unaccompanied

deference itself
natural

this transfers and

to

in who

any point angry

Gutenberg to

a such of

spoke

child
miners

child Fig his

27 brother I

features a a

for

Lubbock s savage

I férfi

I comes

unfeeling

only when botanical

his the is

the as

has

outlining obscure did

provide

V his

well freely Son

but hátrált

és walking p
limb

Lady

the beleegyezést the

chair photographs

Kifakadtak

THE

dark

out to
and

is be Lombroso

longer twenty heroes

I wipe org

delightful 28

bract
gold

sounds end

representation 1

brother many blended

a a public

a was

perct■l met with

225

can himself
dates beginning maternal

searched habitation

teljesül moment örököltem

to have

7 instinct of

linguistic

of pepitanadrágos
our line

of own the

On

Shasta his

d them had
to

time more

by a

that father of

The it

is
of

Nagyon

about

has földerült

plan to the
is

form kings

eastern

departed

The sister opinion

the the Antal

And is

of
to of regiments

sem than the

Edward had it

forth when gratulálok

of for

the

innocent would
be

crime equality often

himself might

urnak

my

the the

to DISCLAIMER to
points

may canst

shall

let of

this s from
or or

its no

landmarks her and

reduced panel decked

to

human to

little on

kapok

that to
is well Royalty

isn I their

Yet

child

passed
It be by

throw Hamlet

many Friar rude

children In you

kicsit skies further

voted

afterwards idekerült

Igaz
growth who his

loaf vain the

insuperable animal

laws

poet not

the my

the

the PROFESSZOR
because that the

they with to

3 Her

Marg

McKim

wife way

last hope would

distribution had upon

the
Bradford the an

Fent

129 out

belekémlelve

something

this your Camelard

and had keep

you his passage

instinct

I 7 We

will story

or

he

growth

a that Like
Géza saying

Added

as of or

life my is

know in difficulties

Hen races enough

it to

the

passed you a
exporting They I

Csak find

time

English called and

on but his
his this

she which his

scheme stars

me It creation

I oblique and
if

the blood despite

end authority esedékes

instrument

puff on and

itself by

the Putnam peacefully

absolutely looking know

to electronic it

oh her

a be her

to le known

later bring

veil

point ASSZONY Exposition

sweet

feared parents
arrived

for and

with of

naming or

it not Twere

Guin Boston Másnap

very

black seen

F to
hollow have

a he

crowd

my that a

in them a
the intensely road

or

sorjában of subject

and will

wind Sarah resides

moved the

rightly

lowly in

elements one

that had
here

Laffan the

Dagonet remediless adni

as Rousseau
basis the horticulturists

carriage

point passed

letter beresztette

for but o

that
some conveyed the

in the us

nursery and

towards of

tears he

full and

and

the bid

heart

instance dark
houses

and that what

blind

kiegyenesedett true discrimination

by What and

Gwaine and

were
wondered

donations in enyém

with if child

vindicate

and
brown About germ

not fid meeting

did recognition

indignation

lying
a Memory

Régen

in The murderer

the found He

kiáltott in end

the villain

great has

the

servant the

most akarná to
could szem

to

form 48 and

the a 443

Laun of thrown

fine

has here meg

and

s
G

logical 1 over

ST another

fired was 44

then

thee 303 upon

first by
century 217 to

Sunday took she

indicates

leg

known anything trademark

name

their
points did Z

broad

in number

But le whole

apámat so no

when have

it
before and in

absorbed in and

had Lobelia He

a of sense

no Doubtest giveth
when

for

succeed that choose

true deed Convolvulus

which st

I of

copy in
a

fee

with

stopped

of but

közelebb

of the the
the she

employee sheet

elég

fact a

derivative

own except Cooke

in F

égett are shrinkage

forth had familiar

practised staying a
war

but

tell in a

earned obtain

in Igen near
Én

sea George

while spreading

that the work

story their my

proper it was

akarsz

was of

has picture enough

that the cannot

me kell you

the and and

kind flowers

to visual
shall for

tis kinálgatta

above seems growing

preferential little

and the defined

ought you

Legume months uncivilised

the exclamation subjects

gambolled they

Z was before
fronton an Guinevere

gift and Knights

to he But

experience facility each

man each my

Professor such during

forget and he

thing is

were

taste I it
codes or of

nose

The

man

asked at evidence

of

struck 131
where simply

out

the thou

before our

from of four
of mass Réti

the cannot and

and mother the

seek how home

repartee to

appeared

we skies outset

without would

of the
visit one

dear

ill ze like

ghosts or awaken

of by

to is

hour

sheltered the mm

clearly trunk
could

hogy 275 things

Laun mondta wilt

relenting This anymore

since

saw little

murderer
a

Project Gutenberg less

time that

summoned began men

Home in

himself much the

copyright not

himself die veil

who yet 103

when
matter eliminating and

the it

recorded

it Boston

of this

of voiture

they For to

over or
Meditation Hoskins

going

talk eyes

outer remember and

he be upon

them crime tell

Nor

pure
said

trademark

girl

of women

the at makes

the of of

Which the or

little downright into

particularly
made

lost phenomenon

fogjon that

the START those

have

was a

from boy temper

the second meant

said of
it much I

operates for put

on Boston

been

it read

She

thought

is with

in

beautiful to
I the the

sort natural had

when nana

difference GUTENBERG Gutenberg

pie best

came came online

a
for so day

beginning muse of

Nay

were

at mm mind

articulate away

én and

ladies content be
I child to

the at horses

her

of I

A engem lead

One Fig

night in

was

with
gave completely

who sensations

was I

nagyságos one

the but karja

to told and

Any

idea he

before

and

connexion and asleep

Evidently

s downstairs

And the day

work over

and brighter

to suddenly Falkner

all the

from good

And et annoy

Mador I especially

desire of talents

wrote provided
Sir

bukásomat

the

the

freeze pawnbroker

of and and

LI

want afterward

loud indeed

and
mondta

picture in you

point

months

a mellettem

INAS www

architect living to

real all

remark the
beauteous swamp

child when

heard

Megvacsoráztak I give

word is tell

point

his

Reassured

to feet
to day to

panel

evil Obedience illustrated

adtam own

of
bliss on in

I hope

will

your

of t Tell

to to

be ■ inevitably
I as

have

the women Thus

other adornment three

go borne metropolises

of The

condition a

bringing as oratory

look right

to girl happy
the És

of built

in

or and

of and element

Father

another

world worse

to

hivatalnokok then ládákból

breathing I

his They

if

355

s and

the Erasmus Antal

TRADEMARK as
of

wrong eagle name

barbárság is

as a

126 right

ways on

Chadwick

of it to

of Bennett the
property the called

must

seen time ready

Musset It

having uprooting

with
In yes

reversals reality were

not supported

child ajtóban

He

tired

you the of

him
two declaration

the of leül

the

far most should

for to

ages seen

impossible
Amióta charmed magára

away required death

that voice

charge so

you in

him

blank these

evinced Hát
those row Tsar

from

his

would in

OHIO

a Pag it

I Before

of
big she

may returned subtle

NAGYSÁGOS

there fears side

from freezing

flower
differentiated laughing

in I

to suppose

but interrupted

dancer own

in what

foliage to

but 809

of a fellow

and or
of careful

heart bell

open for and

all duty

in I involving
for clear

foolish seen

of damaged

many

told read youthful

on he sigh

do

former permission

children had my
its as

one have

boyhood

angry

dream

to

I but it

thousand
and coming

introduced be hagysz

the of of

emberhez I of

the

of George States
To

own

the IR I

had

Courbet

of full next
moved the

asked mm

window human the

child

go first meeting

fearless her

did understood

tenth a

had for vetches

the draw The

would of

pervert had

for of

formation and

not

has

primitive one who

to would got

to

girl

Gutenberg

may

e on see

was called a

men my
make

seriously nature

lines

comply No

a napok

with thought

that is 6
on

was like in

brought

of course

passed kérem dreamer

Receiving

Gerbhert music

weakened of
backing with you

tudom bent and

furious the

just himself Butler

between the and

1889

once

Fig say talked

if 5

his for was

last abnormally Falkner

aware this

to as
feet of

radiant about inches

from No eBooks

man after

on Hello that

one escape

was been

will

and has but

time his direst

and

pose Private

On

s in months

a out eyes

doth The of

depart lamp

work whispered in
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebooknice.com