The Orientalizing Revolution: Near Eastern Influence on Greek Culture in the Early Archaic Age

Revealing Antiquity

by Walter Burkert, Margaret E. Pinder (Translator)

The splendid culture of the ancient Greeks has often been described as emerging like a miracle from a genius of its own, owing practically nothing to its neighbors. Walter Burkert offers a decisive argument against that distorted view, pointing toward a balanced picture of the archaic period “in which, under the influence of the Semitic East—from writers, craftsmen, merchants, healers—Greek culture began its unique flowering, soon to assume cultural hegemony in the Mediterranean.”

Genres: History, Greece, Ancient History, Classics, Nonfiction, Humanities, Archaeology

225 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1984

About the author

Walter Burkert was a German scholar of Greek mythology and cult. Professor Emeritus of Classics, University of Zurich, Switzerland, he taught in the UK and the US.

Reviews

[Mesoscope · Rating 2 out of 5]

In this short volume, Walter Burkert sifts through literary and linguistic evidence with a fine-tooth comb, searching for Mesopotamian, Anatolian and Levantine influences on Archaic Greek culture, especially the writings of Hesiod and Homer.

Burkert introduces the book with a historical account of the migrant culture of soothsayers, skilled craftsmen and poets from the Near East who traveled the Mediterranean. He then puts numerous cases of arts of letters under his microscope, establishing modest but persuasive parallels between motifs. Gilgamesh and Enuma Elish receive extensive comparison with the Iliad and Odyssey, and he makes many other salient comparisons besides.

In his conclusion, he refers to the preceding matter as "a long and often torturous investigation," and he is not wrong. I was disappointed but not surprised that he wrote this book in his usual tone-deaf style, giving the impression of an active hostility toward elegance or beauty, as though such qualities would spoil the science of the enterprise.

I was frequently genuinely baffled by the great effort he expended to analyze incidental tropes or symbols, while ignoring some of the most persuasive and well-established evidence. The obvious Mesopotamian influence on figure sculpture receives scarcely a single notice (!), nor does the clear similarities evidenced by Enuma Elish and Hesiod's Theogony. He passes the myths and icons of Heracles by in silence; material of which he himself observed "Oriental motifs have obviously entered this complex," in his Greek Religion.

The book was at times illuminating but was studiously unconcerned with making a larger point about the significance of historical interplay between Greece and the Near East. Burkert's intellect is ever alive to minutiae, but his heart seems strangely dead in the face of splendid images of great vitality and significance. I can't comprehend how one could apply one's intellect so coldly to this splendid body of material, or why one would want to.

[Not Well Read · Rating 4 out of 5]

Burkert covers his breadth of evidence intelligently and thoroughly; the chosen subjects are pertinent to the field, and the connections made with the 'East' generally very compelling. His methodology, however, no matter how precise, frequently over-emphasises linguistic connections (finding out he was a philologist made a lot of sense) at the expense of the archaeological parallels, even when the latter form of evidence provides much more confident links than the former. It reminded me at times of Boardman's rather cutting remark that historians will find themselves 'horrified' by the lack of textual evidence for archaic 'orientalising'; I suspect the philological evidence provides something satisfyingly 'concrete' that simple comparison of objects lacks. I can understand the appeal of a 'scientific' approach over a more ambiguous one, and in places the parallels are very compelling but elsewhere, as soon as he admits that the morphologies aren't compatible, all you're really left with is two words that look somewhat similar - perhaps not so 'scientific' after all.

The other primary shortcoming of the survey is focus: many will find it surprising that Egypt is not included in this definition of the 'East', despite the clear connections between their artistic legacy and religious impact working in conjunction with Mesopotamian evidence (which is really the main concern of this book), not to mention the overlap in the trade links demonstrated though pottery finds. It would be helpful to see some kind of Egyptological supplement that corroborates the items the book does cover, with a focus on connecting the different forms of evidence Burkert includes (since the evidence presented often has clear 'bigger picture' commonalities, particularly the purification rituals and illness 'remedies' and their links to eastern ideas about pollution of evil spirits, among other apparent religious links that can be supplied with literary parallels in archaic hexameter poetry). Needless to say, a lot of this is still taking Burkert's approach on face value: someone more willing to touch the subject of the problematic elements of 'orientalising' would easily take a harsher view of this book (the most telling detail to me being that nobody, then or now, would describe themselves as oriental), but since 'orientalising' could just as easily be termed 'Mesopotamian-ising' I don't see it as a major issue here.

Despite all this I still feel the need to judge the book primarily on what it is included, not what is lacking. Not all studies should have to be wholly comprehensive, and Burkert could probably have benefited from a brief note stating what the book actually concerns (perhaps for a future edition?). Nevertheless his survey raises a lot of highly persuasive parallel cases, many of which seem almost certain to have some shared ideation and/or to provide evidence of travelling seers and the like (though I would maintain this cultural exchange could easily be mutual, not just 'east to west') and this could be extremely powerful if a greater attempt at a cohesive judgement were included.

[Bogdan Raț · Rating 4 out of 5]

Illuminating. Presenting hard to grasp concepts in a clear way that only a man of culture and erudition such as Walter Burkert could present. The third chapter, "Or Also a Godly Singer", dealing with Akkadian and Early Greek Literature, is particularly fascinating.

From the Conclusions section:

"Culture is not a plant sprouting from its seed in isolation; it is a continuous process of learning guided by curiosity along with practical needs and interests. It grows especially through a willingness to learn from what is "other," what is strange and foreign. A revolutionary period such as the orientalizing epoch provided this very opportunity for cultural development. The "miracle of Greece" is not merely the result of a unique talent. It also owes its existence to the simple phenomenon that the Greeks are the most easterly of the Westerners. Under the special circumstances of the eighth century, they could participate in every development at the time without falling victim to the concomitant military devastations, as did their neighbors in Syria and southern Anatolia."

[Aykut Karabay · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kitap adından da anlaşılacağı üzere dünyaya hakim olan mevcut batı kültürünün doğulu kökenlerini araştırıp ortaya koyuyor.

8. Yüzyılda, askeri genişleme ve büyüyen ekonomik aktivitelerle bağlantılı olarak, Yakın Doğu’dan Batı’ya, bütün Akdeniz’e okuryazarlık dahil kültürel bir yol açılıyor. Kitapta Doğu’nın bir süre kültürel liderliği elinde tutması ancak Yunan’ların doğudan aldıklarını hemen kendilerine adapte etmeleri, dönüştürmeleri ve böylece kendilerine has bir kültür geliştirmeleri anlatılıyor. Ve böylece yunan dünyasının Akdeniz uygarlığının liderliğini eline geçirdiği vurgulanıyor .

Babil’den - Kilikya, Kıbrıs üzerinden Yunan tüccarları ve askeri yayılmalar, göçmen kahin ve rahipler sayesinde alfabe, yazı teknikleri, kitap formatları ile yazılı kültür batıya yayılıyor. Edebi alanda doğudan ödünç alınanların etkisi Homeros başta olmak üzere edebi yapıtlardan örneklerle ispat ediliyor.

Kitapta aslında kültürün çevreden izole halde gelişemeyeceği; merak, ihtiyaç ve ilgi ile kesintisiz bir öğrenme süreci olduğu, özellikle “öteki” olandan, yabancıdan öğrenme isteği sayesinde büyüyüp geliştiği vurgulanıyor. “Yunan mucizesi” nin katiyen eşsiz bir yetenek olmadığı, Doğu etkisi sayesinde doğma ve ilerleme şansı yakaladığı ortaya konuyor. Bunu “”Yunanlar, en doğudaki batılılardı” ifadesi ile özetliyor. Yunanistan’ın 8. Yüzyılda, Suriye ve Güney Anadolu’daki komşularının aksine askeri istilalara maruz kalmadan gelişme imkanı buldukları ortaya konuyor.

Batı aydınlanmasının doğulu kökenlerinin örneklerle, alıntı ve ispatlarla ortaya konduğu başarılı bir çalışma. Tavsiye ederim.

[Ryan Schaller · Rating 4 out of 5]

Walter Burkert was a German Classicist known for two things: (1) his extremely comprehensive book “Greek Religion”, and (2) his work exploring the influence of Near Eastern art, culture, and myth on the early Greeks. This short book is about the latter. Along with England’s Martin L. West, Burkert was one of the early champions of exploring these connections.

As a preliminary note about language, Classicists and Historians use the word “Orient” and “Orientalizing” in a specific way. That term is sometimes now used unfortunately in the west as an ethnic label. In the context of Classics, the Orient refers to the Near East. Burkert (as well as Martin West and others) uses the term to refer to the historical Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Arameans, Persians, Phoenicians, and various peoples of Asia Minor. That train of Agatha Christie and Graham Greene fame, “The Orient Express” ended at Istanbul, the gateway from Europe to the Near East. That area was what the Orient originally applied to.

Burkert is an academic writer, so there’s a presumption that the reader will already be familiar with Homer and other aspects of Greek culture. On the other hand, he does provide more background and context for the Near East examples he cite to—making this an approachable book for people familiar with archaic and classical Greek culture.

The suggestion that the Near East influenced Homer and other aspects of Greek culture is not in and of itself that controversial. As early as the fifth century, Herodotus was claiming that the Greeks got the names of some of their gods from Egypt, such as Dionysos from Osiris, and the Greek alphabet is obviously based on the Phoenician alphabet. In Hesiod, the story of Kronos castrating Ouranos, the Ages of Men, and Deucalion’s Flood all have earlier Near Eastern parallels. In Homer, the examples include Diomedes wounding Aphrodite and her subsequent crying to Zeus, Hera borrowing Aphrodite’s girdle to seduce Zeus, and Odysseus’ trip to the underworld. These examples are covered by other writers, but Burkert made an argument that I haven’t seen before. It will take some background to explain.

The scene in the Iliad where Aphrodite cries to Zeus is where we get the alternative version of her parentage. Usually we see her as Boticelli portrayed her, born from the sea foam created when Ouranos’ severed genitals splash into the sea, arriving to land for the first time on a seashell. It’s this episode in the Iliad where she’s instead portrayed as the daughter of Zeus and an otherwise mostly unknown goddess Dione instead of the more common born from the sea version. This scene corresponds to when Gilgamesh insults Inanna/Ishtar and she runs to her father in heaven with her mother standing by. Secondly, in the girdle scene of the Iliad, Hera references Oceanus and Tethys as the parents of all the gods. Oceanus does show up in other contexts, but the idea that all of the Olympians ultimately descend from Oceanus and Tethys doesn’t line up with what we see elsewhere in Greek mythology, but it does parallel the Mesopotamian pair of water deities – Tiamat and Apsu – who ultimately generated all life in the Enuma Elish. (Important note: Tethys, the spouse of Oceanos in this scene in the Iliad is distinct and separate from the confusingly similarly named Thetis, mother of Achilles). Took a bit longer to explain all that, but the point I find fascinating is that two scenes that introduce variants from what we think of as the standard genealogies told by Hesiod and repeated by so many later writers, could both be explained as being details copied over as part of the assimilation of a Near Eastern scene or motif into a Greek epic.

If you accept that Greek culture was influenced by the Near East, then the next question is to ask exactly how the influence happened. (As an aside, I personally do accept this premise. I am particularly fascinated by the ways in which ideas travel and how people adapt or repurpose already existing motifs or narratives to new purposes). A lot of people agree that the influence exists, but they disagree on the how. Burkert’s hypothesis is that the Near East influenced the Greeks by (1) migrations/movement of skilled craftsmen; (2) movement of seers, healers, and charismatics from east to west; and (3) traveling bards who brought myths and stories with them. While I do believe that there was a clear Near Eastern influence, I don’t think I’m anywhere near knowledgeable enough to judge whose theories are closest to being correct. That being said, I think Burkert does offer some compelling evidence. One example that can be offered quickly is that we know that rulers would request skilled craftsmen and physicians be sent to one another from the letters between various Bronze Age rulers that are preserved in cuneiform tablets.

Burkert’s writing is well organized and stays on point. If you’re familiar with archaic/pre-classical Greek culture and know a little about the major Near Eastern myths, then you won’t struggle with. Of the various books I’ve read on the topic, this is probably the most efficient and best-known read. Unless you have a library with a copy, Martin West’s book is out of print and hard to find. I enjoyed Mary Bachvarova’s “From Hittite to Homer” but it’s about 4x the length of this and will be a considerably longer time investment. I’d also add that I’ve read Burket’s other book on this topic, “Babylon, Memphis, and Persepolis: Eastern Contexts of Greek Culture” (which is a collection of lectures) and there is very little overlap between the two books. Thematically, they’re both about Near Eastern influence on the Greeks, but each book primarily covers different examples and questions.

As a final note since this is the internet and people exist to argue, I want to be clear, I love the literary and cultural products of the ancient Greek world. I don't mean or think these claims to take away from the achievements of the Greeks. It's not my intent to offend or anger anyone with this book review. As another example, I believe Shakespeare was influenced by and took ideas from Plutarch, Chaucer, and Geoffrey of Monmouth. I'm not taking anything away from the greatness of Shakespeare by making that statement. He's still Shakespeare and his writing is still great. Likewise, Homer, Hesiod, and the rest of the Greek canon don't lose any credit or prestige in my mind just because I'm making the observation that they were influenced by stories that came before. It's not a zero-sum game.

[Kevin Fitzpatrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Famed Classicist Walter Burkert's "The Orientalizing Revolution: Near Eastern Influence on Greek Culture in the Early Archaic Age" is a fine introduction for new readers to the world of Near Eastern and Archaic Greek Worlds; it is also suitable for more sophisticated purveyors of the subject, for the book supplements its formal content with a large bibliography that completely surveys the subject. The book itself is divided into three subsections: I. "Who Are Public Workers": The Migrant Craftsmen; II. "A Seer or a Healer"; Magic and Medicine; and III. "Or Also a Godly Singer"; Akkadian and Early Greek Literature. The book also includes eight illustrations and/or photos, which add a helpful visual addition to the vivid descriptions found in the text. The first segment, on Migrant Craftsman, explores in short order the historical background of the field, Oriental Products in Greece, Writing and Literature in the Eighth Century, and the problem of loan words. Each section found in this part of the book is filled with copious, well-documented data and theories which unite the archaeological, philological, and literary record with Dr. Burkert's own theories about Oriental influence in this time period. The second section of the book concerns magic and medicine, and here the author explicates the record concerning purification, spirits of black magic, and the Babylonian demon Lamashtu and their impact on the archaic Greek world. Here the use of illustrations of the demon Lamashtu and the Greek Gorgon really convince the reader of the wisdom of seeing the Near East's world impact on the Greek world. Additionally, allusions to Aeschylus's "Oriestia," and the purification rituals found in that masterpiece, round out an extremely essential exploration of this fascinating subject. Finally, there is the exploration of the literature of both worlds: "Atrahasis," the deception of Zeus, Ishtar and Aphrodite, and Animal Fables all come under the lens of Dr. Burkert's analyzing microscope. Once again, the details are many, well-documented, and singularly convincing. As stated, "The Orientalizing Revolution" is a book that is both entertaining and convincingly instructive; it is to be recommended to both neophytes to the field and well-worn hands familiar with the subject matter. For this reason the book is essential to an understanding of the subject matter, whose cross-currents and tides and eddies promise to expand our understanding of Greek and Near Eastern thought, and, by implication, the connection of all human thought in the mix that is world mythology. This subject, its implications and its details, offers profound insights and knowledge that is the legacy of all men, no matter what there culture, and thus must be disseminated to all if we are to appreciate the ties that bind all men together. Thus, to read Burkert is to take a step to better understanding and appreciation of all men's worlds and culture, a truly fine goal!

[Joey Mopsink · Rating 3 out of 5]

Burkert provides plenty of fantastic insight into how Archaic Greece was tied into the cultural web of the Near East. This challenges the anti-Semitic perception of Greek culture as uniquely Indo-European and spontaneous. That being said, God this was dense.

[Serdar Serbest · Rating 3 out of 5]

İsminden anlaşıldığı gibi Anadolu'nun Yunan sanatına olan etkilerinden bahseden ve aslında temelde antik kültürlerin birbiriyle nasıl etkileşim içinde olduklarını gösteren bir kaynak kitap.

[Charles]

Burkert's text explains something people forget when discussing ancient Greek culture or literature, etc. The Greeks borrowed much from their eastern neighbours, before making it, the influences and traditions of their neighbours, their own and finally producing uniquely Greek art and culture in the "Classical" age (510-323 BC).

Very informative, well-written, but more suited to an academic or enthusiast of ancient Greek culture.