by-John R.
Salverda
Background:
The
early Greeks were once ruled by Israelites in addition to receiving cultural and ethnic input from the Canaanite Nations.
This is reflected in Greek Mythology.
The Israelite Tribe of Dan had early contacts with Greece and with offshoots of the Greeks in Ionia (present-day
western Turkey on the Asian side).
In the article below, John R. Salverda, analyses through Greek Legends compared to Biblical Narrative parallels to Ancient Israel.
The
The Danites were a band of rovers, they were not satisfied with the size of the
allotment which the official coalition of the Jacobites had afforded them,
around Zorah and Eshtaol, so they defied the priesthood of Phinehas, appointed a
Levitical priesthood of their own, (directly descended from Moses, not Aaron)
and set out to found new lands. First they went up north, and, with the apparent
approval, or at least the acquiescence of the Sidonians and the Upper Manassites,
they took the city of Laish, (this city was very close to the Sidonian capitol
at the time, a place called Hazor) killed all the Laishites, moved in, and
called the place Dan, after their own tribal patriarch. They also held the
seaport of Joppa, and it must have been their friendly relations with the
seafaring Sidonians that allowed them to build a fleet of ships there. Then, in
the days of Deborah, war broke out between the sons of Jacob, and the Sidonians.
Treaty obligations, agreed to by the Danites, called for a mutual non aggression
pact, with the Sidonians. (the Sidonians had already upheld their end of the
bargain when they withheld retaliation against the Danites at the taking of
Laish.) When the sons of Jacob threatened the Danites for their neutrality in
the war, in accordance with the 'Song of Deborah,' (at Judges 5:17) the Danites,
'lived in ships.' These then, were the Danaans, who 'fled' in their keeled
ships, from their brothers, the sons of 'Aegyptus,' (the Jacobite) to live with
the Inachids at Argos, in the land of, what would come to be called, 'like
Canaan' (Mica+Cana, Mycenae).
The Greeks tell a story of how the Danaans, one of the main branches of the
ancient Greek peoples, came from their Original homeland to settle with the
Inachids of Argolis. These Danaans, otherwise known as the daughters of Danaus,
were fleeing from their cousins the sons of Aegyptus. Danaus and Aegyptus were
brothers, the former having fifty daughters but no sons, and the latter having
fifty sons but no daughters. Aegyptus was intent on marrying his fifty sons to
the fifty daughters of Danaus, but Danaus and his girls wanted no part of any
such wedding. H. J. Rose in his, "A Handbook of Greek Mythology" (page 272), has
an interesting take on this wedding between cousins. He says, "This was of
course the natural thing for them to do, by Greek law, for a girl with no
brothers, ... an encumbrance on the estate, as Attic law called her, was by
universal custom married to her next of kin." This is interesting because Rose
has here shown us, that the Greeks dealt with the problem of inheritance, where
the father has had no sons but only daughters, in a way that was very similar to
the Hebrew law. For his comment cannot help but remind us of the story in the
scriptures, about the daughters of Zelophehad. Zelophehad had, not fifty, but
five daughters and no sons. None of them were married, at the time that Joshua
and the chieftains were dividing up the land of Canaan. They complained in the
presence of the high priest, that it would not be fair if the inheritance of
their father were to be divided up amongst the other tribes. It was therefore
agreed upon, so that a family might not lose its inheritance altogether, that in
the case where there were no sons but only daughters, the girls could indeed
inherit the property. Now, while the girls had gotten their inheritance, there
were those who feared that they may marry men from other tribes thereby letting
the inheritance be divided up among the other tribes anyway. In order to prevent
this possibility, a remedy was decided upon whereby the daughters would have to
agree to marry within their own clan. Then, hopefully, the girls would
eventually produce sons of their own who could pass the inheritance down through
their family line. While we are told about the girl's request to receive their
father's inheritance, the Hebrew scriptures do not inform us as to what the
daughters of Zelophehad thought about the forced marriage arrangement, this
later stipulation, would obviously not have been so favorably accepted by them
as the original judgment was. Sure enough, in keeping with the comparison
between the Greek and Hebrew stories, just as Hypermnestra and her sisters the
daughters of Danaus were married unto their father's brother's sons, so we are
told in the Hebrew scriptures at Numbers 36:11 "For Mahlah, Tirzah, and Hoglah,
and Milcah, and Noah, the daughters of Zelophehad, were married unto their
father's brother's sons."
Now, of course, the intent here is not necessarily to equate the story about the
daughters of Zelophehad with the story about the daughters of Danaus, however,
the similarities between the Hebrew and Greek laws in this regard, are certainly
worth our notice. It should furthermore be here pointed out, that the Hebrew
story takes place, chronologically speaking, in the days just prior to the
Danite apostasy. Also noteworthy, is the fact that the daughters of Zelophehad,
who are biblically referred to, at Joshua 17:6, as the daughters of Manasseh,
(they were in fact his great, great, great, granddaughters) were of the clan of
Gilead. thus, they were associated with the Danites (the Greek Danaus) in the so
called, "song of Deborah," (Judges 5:17 "Gilead abode beyond Jordan: and why did
Dan remain in ships'") as opposed to joining the sons of Jacob (the Greek
Aegyptus) in their war against Sisera. Therefore, it seems possible at least,
that the Danites who left Israel in those days, could have brought with them, as
one of the grievances justifying their departure, this story of their Gileadite
Allies, which was indeed current at that very time. In fact, the Greek law, that
parallels the Hebrew one, and which they apparently continued to follow in their
new Grecian homeland, had only recently been introduced into Hebrew law just
prior to their emigration.
The Greeks say that the Danaans came to the city of Argos and demanded their
portion of royalty there. They claimed to be descendants of Io and therefore
members of the royal family. (it does seem reasonable that, as descendants of
Abraham, they could have pressed their partial ownership of Hebron, the parent
city, as a 'legal' claim to royalty over it's colony.) They had been chased from
the land of Aegyptus, (the Jacobite) by their brothers, the sons of Aegyptus. To
accomplish this emigration, they are said to have invented the keeled ship,
which enabled them to sail over the deep seas, and make their escape to Argos.
The Greek claim that the Danaans invented the keeled ship, fits nicely with the
Biblical claim that the Danites lived in ships, they were after all in
possession of the seaport Joppa, where by all indications ship building was a
major industry. It is often said, by historians who have studied the matter,
that the Phoenicians with their access to the cedars of Lebanon, one of the few
trees which produces timbers large enough to be suitable for the task, were the
probable inventors of the keeled ship. A simple reclassification of the Hebrew
Danite, as a branch of the Phoenicians, makes this speculation fit the Greek
myth.
Neither does the Saga end here because then, in accordance with Greek mythology,
the sons of Aegyptus also went to Argolis, following after the delinquent
Danaans, to bring them back and punish them for their treachery. But it took
them a bit longer to get there, leap frogging from port to port along the
coasts, in their less seaworthy unkeeled barges. By the time the sons of
Aegyptus arrived at Argos, the Danaans were already established, with a degree
of royal power, and the Argolian army was ready to defend them. Now, the sons of
Aegyptus, a mere posse in the face of an army, could not enforce a return upon
the Danaans, and because they were told not to return empty handed, they decided
to quit their homeland back in Israel, and resolved to remain in Argos. The sons
of Aegyptus sued for their portion of the royalty at Argolis on the same basis
that the Danaans did, and they were recognized as well.
This brings us to a story that seems to reflect the circumstances that brought
about an end to the war between the northern Canaanites of Hazor and the
Jacobites, which must have been what was known to the Greeks as, "the myth of
Lynceus and Hypermnestra" or, otherwise known as, the myth of 'The Danaids.' The
Jacobites were not united in their war against the Canaanites, as we have
pointed out the Danites did not participate in this war, and they were
admonished by Deborah for their complacency, so were the people of Gilead who
also apparently sat out the hostilities. The term "Gilead" was an often used
alternative name for the phrase "upper Manasseh," which makes a plausible origin
for the name "Hypermnestra," for the Hebrews were fond of assigning a figurative
woman to represent national or tribal groups, and the word "hyper," is the usual
Greek term indicating "above" or "beyond," as in beyond a river. Also, as if
there weren't enough coincidences between these two stories already, the Greek
name "Lynceus" means the same thing in Greek, that the Hebrew name "Laish" means
in Hebrew, namely a "small lion." Therefore, as allies in opposition to the
Jacobite aggression, it is not completely unreasonable, that the tribe of "upper
Manasseh," who spared the city of "Laish," during the war against Canaan, may
have served as the origin for the Greek myth wherein Hypermnestra, refusing her
charge to kill him, spare the life of Lynceus. Perhaps they were considered
contractual partners, as if under a treaty. It is plausible, Is it not, that
such a treaty or contract, might be symbolized, in Greek mythology, as a
marriage. At least we don't have to rely exclusively on the Hebrew story of the
daughters of Zelophehad, as the origin for the Greek myth about the wedding of
Hypermnestra and Lynceus.
Those Jacobites who made up the coalition of the willing in the struggle against
Canaan, were able to win the war through the efforts of a very brave woman named
Jael. Jael was not a Jacobite instead she belonged to a race, known as the
Kenites, who were, at that time, also at peace with the Canaanites. However, the
Kenites were on friendly terms with the sons of Jacob as well, in fact, Zipporah,
the wife of Moses was a Kenite (also called Midianite and Ethiopian), and the
apostate Danite priesthood were her descendants. Jael herself was a relative who
could not have been too far removed from the Danite priesthood, for it is noted
right in the Scriptural account of the war, that her family was descended from
the house of Hobab, who is therein called the father-in-law of Moses. It may
have been this Kenite relationship to the Danite priesthood, combined with
Danite treaty obligations mentioned earlier as necessitated by the close
proximity of the Danite stronghold at Laish to Hazor the chief city of the
northern Canaanites, that gave the Canaanite General Sisera the false sense of
security that he must have had in order for him to take a nap in the tent of
Jael.
Jael deluded the weary Sisera completely and when he had fallen asleep, she took
a pin and ran him through so that he died. Now, how many stories are there in
which a man is beguiled into falling asleep by, and in the presence of, the
woman who intends to murder him, and then while the man is sleeping the
treacherous woman runs him through with a pin and kills him' I can think of only
two, one is the Scriptural account of Jael and Sisera, and the other is the
Greek myth that is known as 'The Danaids.' Furthermore, it is not only this very
particular story that coincides between the Scriptures and the myth, but also
the placement sequentially of each tale. Just as the story of Jael and Sisera
comes at the end of the war that saw a falling-out between the Jacobites and
their brothers the Danites, who 'dwelt in ships,' so to, the Greek myth of the
Danaids is the story of the subsequent reconciliation between the progeny of
Danaus, who fled in ships from their brothers the sons of Aegyptus at the time
of their quarrel.
It should be said at this juncture that, while the scriptural story makes the
female assassin Jael out to be a heroine, the Greek myth of the Danaids is
coming to us from the complete opposite point of view, for the Greek heroine
Hypermnestra is famed for not doing, exactly what Jael did do. In fact the
Greeks must have looked at the deed of Jael as an act of the most heinous kind
of treachery, for they have assigned to the other forty-nine sisters of
Hypermnestra, those who did commit the deceitful act, an extra punishment of
frustration in Hades. They are compelled to unsuccessfully fill a leaky water
jar forever. Thus the Danaids can always be recognized on pottery, coins, and
other works of art, by the fact that they were always carrying their ever
present water jugs. It is interesting to note, in this regard, that according to
the song of Deborah, the water distributors played an important role in
spreading the word that rallied the warriors who fought on the side of the
perfidious Jael, furthermore, when Sisera came to the tent of Jael, the first
thing he asked for was to be served water. At any rate, in vilifying the
treacherous Jael it does seem as though the Greeks felt the need for some
reason, perhaps the one here outlined, to defame the entire water carrying guild
as well.
Are we to conclude that these two very similar traditions, containing complete
series' of parallel motifs, each sprang up independently and without cross
contamination between these two cultures, the Greek and the Hebrew, separated
only by a well worn path across the Mediterranean sea' We know that pottery
traversed between Greece and the Levant, so why are we so reluctant to identify
the popular stories that were told in each place' This, perhaps wouldn't be so
difficult to admit in itself, but in fact I think that we shall find, that it
was more than simple cross contamination, it was a more direct contact, for the
original waves of immigration to Argolis in Greece, the forefathers of the
Mycenaean civilization, were the sons of Anak, closely followed by the Danites
and the Jacobites, but of these, predominantly the Danites, so much so, that
throughout the writings of Homer, he usually refers to the Peloponnesian Greeks,
by the general term "Danaans."
At this point, the question naturally arises; Did the Danaans come from, the
Scriptural home of the Danites in the land of Jacob, or as the Greek myth seems
to indicate, from the land of Egypt' If there is a simple answer to this
question, it is this; The Greeks had a poor knowledge of world geography.
Furthermore, our understanding of Greek geography leaves much to be desired.
While, on the one hand, it is true that we moderns now call the land of the
Nile, Egypt, and we did get this habit from the Greeks, it is not so certain, on
the other hand, that the original ancient Greek myth tellers themselves, had
this same interpretation. For the ancient myth itself, which we have culled from
Apollodorus ( 2.1.4-5), runs thusly; "Belus (the father of Aegyptus) remained in
Egypt, reigned over the country, and married Anchinoe, daughter of Nile, by whom
he had twin sons, Aegyptus and Danaus, but according to Euripides, he had also
Cepheus and Phineus. Danaus was settled by Belus in Libya, and Aegyptus in
Arabia." Here we can plainly see, that Aegyptus was not a King of Egypt, but of
some other land in Arabia. The Greek myths go on to tell us, that Aegyptus in
his Arabian land, conquered a nearby people who were known as the "Melampodes,"
and that it was this territory, that he went on to name after himself, "Egypt."
The term, "Melampodes," often interpreted as meaning "black footed," is thought
by many to be another name for the Egyptians themselves. Certainly Aegyptus
would not have had to conquer the people whom his father was ruling over.
However, if we are to look for a people who's land neighbored the land of
Arabia, and who were not already subjected to Egyptian suzerainty, then I
suggest, that we look to those ancient rebellious slaves from Egypt who lived on
the border of Arabia, the Jacobites. And since the people who lived in the land
of Jacob at that time, were the same people who once served as slaves, stomping
out the mud bricks for the Pharaoh's building projects, the term "Melampodes,"
or "black footed," could easily have been a derisive reference to them, as famed
for their muddy black feet. They had as we know, come from the land of the Nile,
so the Greek confusion between the Melampodes and the Egyptians wouldn't seem to
be so far fetched after all. (Do we call the calf god, 'of Egypt,' because of
the Greeks' Perhaps we should change that to, 'Jacob's calf god.')
Furthermore, it should be pointed out that the term "Egypt," was not the popular
nor usual name for the land of the Pharaohs. By any measure, the most popular
name was "Misir," as in its equivalent Hebrew name Mizraim. The Hittites, the
Assyrians, and the Chaldeans, like the modern Arabs all used this name, and not
the name "Egypt." In fact the Greeks were aware of this name for the land of the
Nile from a very early date as well. The ancient Greek script, called linear B,
which was used by the Danaans, and has been deciphered as the language of
Mycenaean Greek by the modern philologists, does contain the usual term, in the
form "Misirayo," which has been translated to mean, "the Egyptian." The term "Aikupitiyo,"
has also been found to occur in the same linear B script, and it has been
translated as well to mean, "the Egyptian." Of course, these modern scholars are
only following a well established usage and offer no explanation as to why the
Mycenaean Greeks should refer to the Egyptians by two different names in the
same script. Allow me to offer an explanation, The Mycenaean word, "Aikupitiyo,"
means, just as it so closely resembles "Jacobite," they were like the people of
Misir, but not exactly. This resemblance between the two words, is striking, but
this it in itself is not enough to identify them with each other, however,
combined with the similarities between the stories in the Hebrew scriptures, and
the myths of the Greeks, we may draw some more definite conclusions.
We know from the Scriptures that the Jew wandered to the land of the "Jacobite,"
but the myths have Io wandering to the land of "Aegyptus." And, while we know
that the Danites had a family quarrel with their brothers the "Jacobites" which
caused them to retreat into their ships, the myths have the Danaans fleeing by
ship from their brothers, the sons of "Aegyptus." We notice the error, but we
especially notice the consistency of it, it is apparent that the earlier myths
had it right, but the later speculation misplaced the name of Jacob on the land
of the Nile. If this last point should seem like a circular argument remember,
the evidence for identifying Io and the Danaans, with the Jew and the Danite,
are strong enough to stand on their own. Identifying Jacob with Aegyptus is a
conclusion based upon these stronger evidences, it is certainly not supposed by
me to be proof of the Io and Danaus theories.
So far we've only covered the few short generations between Joshua's expelling
of the Anakim, and Deborah's report of the Danite apostasy, many other similar
waves of Greek immigration by the descendants of Io, were to follow. For it was
about 100 years after the days of the Danite apostasy, that the sons of Perseus
immigrated to Argolis from the city of Joppa in Phoenicia, and these more recent
Danites had, in the mean time, developed their own version of the events of
Hebrew history. These sons of Perseus, those whom we will be referring to as the
Perseids, have been attributed with building the walls of Mycenae and as such,
can be placed into actual historic chronology. For these walls have been found
by archaeologists and dated in synchronization with Egyptian history. The
Perseids knew that they were related to the earlier established Danaans by race,
but as to the story of Io and Hermes they must have had their doubts. It is
apparent that they had neither the ability nor the desire to abolish the earlier
mythology, so they simply added their own version of history onto it, as if
their stories were subsequent events. They gave a son to Hypermnestra and
Lynceus whom they called "Abas," (plausibly meant to represent Abraham,) which
is the usual Hebrew word for "father," and they made this Abas to be the father
of their own mythological history, which they began at the story of a Acrisius
and Proetus. Of any story attributable to the Greek mythological character who
was known as Abas there is little to report. It was said by some that he was a
great warrior, but there is no report of his participation in any war, some say
that he invented the shield, or that he had a magic shield which one only had to
display, (a bit like the Ark of the Covenant,) and the enemy would be
miraculously disbursed. Not to discount the story of his shield, but there was a
much more important role to be played by Abas, which was that of a genealogical
connector between the earlier Danite/Inachid dynasty and the subsequent Danite/Perseid
one.
-John R. Salverda
For more articles on the Hebraic
Connections of Greek Mythology, see:
"Helleno-Yishurin. The Hebrew Origin of Greek Legends"
Join the Brit-Am Ephraimite Discussion Group
Just Send an
e-mail
with "Subscribe"
in the Subject Line
Main Page
Offerings and Publications
Return to
Question and Answer
Table of Contents