Let's retire Bronze Age Mediterranean phonology for a while and talk about Etruscans and their deities again. On page 57 of The religion of the Etruscans (2006), Erika Simon explains to us that Etruscan Artume ~ Aritimi, the goddess of hunt and lady of the moon reknowned for her superior archery, is directly taken from Greek Artemis (Άρτεμις) and that the cult extends back to the Neolithic. This description of her origin is ridiculously brief and, to add, ridiculously vague as it oversteps many millennia and distinct cultures in a single sentence. It doesn't seem to trouble her that the vowels have changed radically (eg. Greek epsilon to Etruscan u) since she doesn't explain any of it at all. That vowel change is a rather unavoidable detail if she wishes to make her published words stand the test of time. Down the rabbit hole we go, Alice...
I'll get straight to the chase and solve one riddle that obscures the problem above. I've come to realize that the purported Artume ~ Aritimi alternation in Etruscan is one of many modern myths created by idle theorists. Artume is sufficiently attested as the one and only Artemis in ET AH S.4 and ET Vs S.6. Her name appears to have been carelessly confused with that of a separate etymon however, an Etrurian city which the Etruscans called Aritim and which in Latin is called Arretium. Despite this knowledge, we've hardly solved the vowel change riddle yet.
If we only assess the problem from within the specialized bubble of the narrow Etruscan field, internal -u- before bilabial m can easily be explained away as a reduced form of original *-e-. This happens many times in Etruscan and so it would seem the problem is solved, right?
On a Minoan Linear A artifact (HT Wc 3024.a), John Younger transcribes the symbols as A-RA-TU-ME replete with a picture of an archer. To confirm, Raison & Pope on page 150 in Corpus transnuméré du linéaire A explains further: "Sept impressions de sceau sur le pourtour, dont une, semble-t-il, oblitérée délibérément (archer de profil gauche faisant la génuflexion, 112 de Levi)." Translated into English, it reads: "Seven seal impressions on the perimeter, where one, it seems, obliterated deliberately (archer facing left bending at the knees, 112 of Levi)."
If Younger's transcription is sound, I can't help but wonder now about Artemis and the Keftian connection.
I don't think this will wash.
ReplyDeleteThere are two examples (now HT Wc 3016, 3017) of Minoan roundels stamped by the archer seal. First, the archer is decidedly male, so not Artemis. Second, on Wc 3017, the inscription can be read [per Eric Hallager, The Minoan Roundel, 1996]reads QA-KU-RE DI *306. The equivalent inscription on Wc 3016 is KA-KU-PA A630?.
Judith Weingarten: "First, the archer is decidedly male, so not Artemis."
ReplyDeleteArtemis' twin brother, Apollo, was an archer too. Also, we can't rule out whether it's the goddess being represented here or a devout hunter who honours her.
"Second, on Wc 3017, the inscription can be read [per Eric Hallager, The Minoan Roundel, 1996]reads QA-KU-RE DI *306. The equivalent inscription on Wc 3016 is KA-KU-PA A630?.
This hardly matters if you're unable to explain what qa-ku-re and ka-ku-pa mean. Even if you are able, how does the mere presence of these words/names next to an archer in other contexts negate the possibility of a divine name in a-ra-tu-me?
The Haghia Triada seals show many pressed images of "archers", "talismanic flies", "talismanic fish", "bird-women", "running lions", and "girls at shines". It's impossible to deny the religious aspect of these objects.
It is entirely possible to deny the religious aspects of those (and many other) Ayia Triada seals. You might want to read some of my articles on them in Kadmos.
ReplyDeleteI would emphasize that the archer seal occurs on two roundels, which are every-day receipts of simple administrative types. Even if a-ra-tu-me is a correct reading (very unsure), it refers to goods in/out of storage. One could imagine it means to/from a putative temple of Artemis but that would be an admin oddity; that plus a seal of her archer 'brother' is really really stretching it.
"It is entirely possible to deny the religious aspects of those (and many other) Ayia Triada seals."
ReplyDeleteI understand this to mean that while the source of the scenes stamped on the clay are obviously religious in origin, you would deny a connection between these religious scenes and the nature of the text. Fair enough.
"Even if a-ra-tu-me is a correct reading (very unsure), it refers to goods in/out of storage."
Yes, this is what I do in fact read out of ka-ku-pa, another kind of good, so I admit that it would be a little more probable that a-ra-tu-me is likewise a good of some sort rather than a divine name. Considering that it's a hapax (unless related to ZA 7.a.2-3 a-re-tu-mi[), it's not vital to me that this item be assigned the value of a divine name. It was worth a shot.
I still need to look up the source of the Artemis cult though and I can't imagine how the Minoans could have avoided adopting the name in some form, even if not present in this particular inscription. If the name is *Artemis in Mycenaean, then one would still expect something similar in Minoan.
I'm afraid I am also denying the religious origin of many of the scenes stamped on the clay sealings. Some are, some aren't. Sorry.
ReplyDeleteJudith Weingarten: "I'm afraid I am also denying the religious origin of many of the scenes stamped on the clay sealings. Some are, some aren't."
ReplyDeleteAlright, now you've successfully amazed me by the extent of your denial.
Could you please specify which scenes on these seals are provably non-religious and how you arrived at such self-assured conclusions.
Provably non-religious? Let's not be silly. How would we prove a negative?
ReplyDeleteThat there is no reason to believe that most are religious in intent is quite another matter Please read my two articles in Kadmos before discussing further.
Judith Weingarten,
ReplyDeleteIt is you being silly now since you've clearly asserted above, "I'm afraid I am also denying the religious origin of many of the scenes stamped on the clay sealings."
I asked you to validate that claim since I'm skeptical of "secular" Minoan art.
You then stated, "How would we prove a negative?" which demonstrates that you're unable to prove your statement, whether here or in your Kadmos articles.
So back to sanity, the scenes can only have a religious origin like all art in the Minoan world. Your unreasonable secularization of Minoan art may relate to Donald Haggis' observation of Minoan studies in From Minoan farmers to Roman traders: Sidelights on the economy of ancient Crete (1999): "This situation is worsened by our analytical tendency to separate religious and secular spheres and components of Minoan society - a condition no more viable for the Bronze Age than for the Classical Aegean."
I objected to your asking me to 'prove' a negative. And still do.
ReplyDeleteIf you don't want to read further, you may go on thinking that I am splitting Minoan art into two distinct categories. It's more complicated than that, of course, but there's no reason to continue a discussion with someone who already knows the answers.
Judith Weingarten: "It's more complicated than that, of course, but there's no reason to continue a discussion with someone who already knows the answers."
ReplyDeleteAd hominem fallacy. I've clearly admitted to the implausibility of my own suspicions regarding A-RA-TU-ME above. I've already met you half-way so your statement is petty and defamatory.
If I "knew the answers", I evidently wouldn't bother to respect your views enough to question them. Questioning is not insolence; it's active listening.
Judith Weingarten: "I objected to your asking me to 'prove' a negative. And still do."
"Shifting burden of proof" fallacy. Your assertion above is evidently POSITIVE, not negative (ie. "There EXIST clay seal scenes of non-religious origin distinguishable from religious ones."). If we replace "non-religious" with the term "secular" we can full well see how the "negative" you perceive to be above proof is a semantic delusion of your own making that violates Occam's Razor.
Any objections you have to my questioning then are meaningless and distractive.
Nonetheless, these are minor details in the grand scheme of things and I was more interested in the topic of the Artemis cult in Minoan religion, not on whether unparsimonious distinctions in clay seal scenes constitute a violation of Logic or not.