Greek Seers and Israelite-Jewish Prophets

Greek Seers and Israelite-Jewish Prophets
Author(s): Armin Lange

Source: Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 57, Fasc. 4 (2007), pp. 461-482
Published by: Brill
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20504277
Accessed: 08-01-2019 11:45 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/20504277?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Vetus
Testamentum
This content downloaded from 137.204.24.180 on Tue, 08 Jan 2019 11:45:11 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Vetus
?* /6 8 5 S Testamentum
B RI L L Vetus Testament
Greek Seers and Isr
Armin Lange
Vienna
Abstract
Ancient Greek seers (manteis) and Ancient Near Eastern prophets have often been compared
with each other. Although in rare cases Greek seers communicate a divine message to a wider
audience and are thus comparable to Ancient Near Eastern prophets and Israelite-Jewish prophets
in particular, Greek seers are distinctly different from Ancient Near Eastern prophets. In most
cases Greek seers employ forms of deductive divination while the use of deductive divination is
the exception with Israelite-Jewish prophets. If Greek seers use intuitive divination they do not
rely on divine revelations but have special ability to perceive more than normal human beings.
Although Ancient Near Eastern prophets and Greek manteis do thus not equate, the comparison
of the two sheds better light on the characteristics of both. On the one hand, the Ancient Near
Eastern understanding of the prophet emphasizes heavily his reliance on divine revelation. This
is especially true for Israelite and Jewish prophets. On the other hand, the Greek mantis acts
mostly as a diviner in his own right. His special insights and knowledge go back to his abilities.
Keywords
prophecy, seers, divination, Greece
Except those whom they say Apollo inspired of old none of the seers uttered
oracles, but they were good at explaining dreams and interpreting the flights of
birds and the entrails of victims. (Pausanias, Description of Greece 1.34.4)1
This quote from Pausanias claims that except for mythical times Greek seers did
not practice intuitive divination but relied on different forms of deductive
divination, such as oneiromancy, augury, and extispacy. To some extent, Pausanias'
claim seems to be confirmed by what is preserved of pre-classical and classical
Greek literature (see below, pp. 9-20). The only prominent exception to Pausanias'
l) Translation according to W. H. S. Jones, Pausanias L: Description of Greece Books I and II (LCL 93;
Cambridge, MA, 1998), p. 187.
C Armin Lange, 2007 DOI: 10.1 163/156853307X222899
462 A. Lange / Vetus Testamentum 57 (2007) 461-482
rule seems to be the use of intuitive divination in some of the Greek oracles,2
although often oracles like the famous oracle of Delphi seem to have relied on
deductive forms of divination, too.
In the last decades, scholars compared the ancient Greek seer or mantis
with Ancient Near Eastern prophets. The mantis is therefore of great impor
tance when it comes to the question of prophecy in Greece and the Ancient
Near East. The word mantis is often translated as "prophet"3 or is described as
a prophet.4 Some scholars think that the mantis developed out of the Ancient
Near Eastern prophet5 while others see Israelite prophets influenced by Greek
seers.6 For a better understanding of the relationship between Ancient Near
Eastern prophecy and Greek divination it is therefore vital to carefully com
pare Ancient Near Eastern prophets and Greek manteis with each other.
To achieve this goal, I will first ask what prophecy is. In the second part of
my essay, I will give a few examples for Ancient Near Eastern prophecy in
general and Israelite-Jewish prophecy in particular. Afterwards I will ask if
Greek manteis used intuitive divination in archaic times and by way of the
example of Teiresias will describe how the manteis of mythical times were
employed in classical Greek tragedy. In a conclusion, I will compare the Greek
manteis with Ancient Near Eastern and Israelite-Jewish prophets.
2) A comprehensive description of Greek oracles can be found in J. Fontenrose, The Delphic

Oracle: Its Responses and Operations (Berkeley, CA, 1978), pp. 1-239; V. Rosenberger, Griechische
Orakel: Eine Kulturgeschichte (Darmstadt, 2001).
3) See e.g. H. G. Liddell, R. Scott, H. S. Jones, A Greek-English Lexicon (9th ed. with revised
supplement; Oxford, 1996), p. 1080; cf. G. Luck, Arcana Mundi: Magic and the Occult in the
Greek and Roman Worlds: A Collection of Ancient Texts: Translated, Annotated, and Introduced
(2nd ed. Baltimore, MD, 2006), p. 285.
4) E.g. G. Nagy, "Ancient Greek Poetry, Prophecy, and Concepts of Theory", in J. L. Kugel (ed.),
Poetry and Prophecy: The Beginnings of a Literary Tradition (Myth and Poetics; Ithaca, NY, 1990),
pp. 56-64, esp. 56-57, 61,64.
5) Famous examples for this position are W. Burkert, The Orientalizing Revolution: Near Eastern
Influence on Greek Culture in the Early Archaic Age (trans. M. E. Pinder and W Burkert; Cam
bridge, MA, 1992), pp. 42, 52-53; M. L. West, The East Face of Helicon: West Asiatic Elements in
Greek Poetry and Myth (Oxford, 1997), pp. 49-50; cf. also E. R. Dodds, The Greeks and the Irra
tional (Sather Classical Lectures 25; Berkeley, CA, 1951), pp. 69-70; W Burkert, "Itinerant
Diviners and Magicians: A Neglected Element in Cultural Contacts", in R. H?gg (ed.), The Greek
Renaissance of the Eighth Century B.C.: Tradition and Innovation: Proceedings of the 2nd Interna
tional Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 1-5 June 1981 (Acta Instituti Atheniensis
Regni Sueciae 4.30; Stockholm, 1983), pp. 115-119.
6) J. P. Brown, "The Mediterranean See and Shamanism", ZAW93 (1981), pp. 374-400; idem,
Israel and Hellas 2: Sacred Institutions with Roman Counterparts (BZAW 276; Berlin, 2000),
pp. 154-198.
A. Lange / Vetus Testamentum 57 (2007) 461-482 463
What Is Prophecy?
To compare Greek manteis with Ancient Near Eastern and Israelite-Jewish

prophets involves three different scholarly disciplines which are dedicated to
ancient Greek literature, the Hebrew Bible, and Ancient Near Eastern litera
ture respectively. Each discipline employs its own definition of prophecy. In
classics, the term prophecy is often used as a main category under which the
whole range of divinatory methods are subsumed.7 Biblical exegetes are mostly
guided by the collection of the latter prophets in their understanding of
prophecy. This understanding has in turn influenced Ancient Near Eastern
studies.
In principle, two types of divination can be distinguished: deductive and
intuitive (or inspired) divination.8 Deductive divination tries to divine the
transcendent and/or the future by way of analyzing material means which can
easily be manipulated by the divine to communicate its intentions. Examples
are extispacy (i.e. divining the future by way of analyzing the intestines of
sacrificial animals), lecanomancy (i.e. divination by way of analyzing patterns
created by oil when cast into water), and the oracle of the lot (i.e. divining by
way of casting devices which provide yes or no answers). Intuitive divination
does not use material means but relies solely on different types of visions and/
or auditions.
Prophecy communicates directly with the divine and does not rely on mate
rial means (see the below examples for Ancient Near Eastern and Israelite
Jewish prophecy); hence it must be classified as a type of intuitive divination.9
Like intuitive divination as such, prophecy is not proper to Israel but can be
found in most Ancient Near Eastern cultures. Therefore, a definition of proph
ecy needs to include non-Israelite prophecy as well. For this purpose, I rely on
the definition of Ancient Near Eastern prophecy provided by M. Weippert:
7) Cf. e.g. the studies of M. S. Kaufman, Prophecy in Archaic Greek Epic (Ph.D., State University
of New York, Buffalo, NY, 1979) and A. Karp, "Prophecy and Divination in Archaic Greek
Literature", in R. M. Berchman (ed.), Mediators of the Divine: Horizons of Prophecy, Divination,
Dreams and Theurgy in Mediterranean Antiquity (South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism
163; Atlanta, GA, 1998), pp. 9-44.
8) For the distinction between deductive and intuitive (inspired) divination, see e.g. J. Bott?ro,
Mesopotamia: Writing, Reasoning, and the Gods (trans. Z. Bahrani and M. Van De Mieroop;
Chicago, IL, 1992), pp. 105-107; idem, Religion in Ancient Mesopotamia (trans. R. Lavender
Fagan; Chicago, IL, 2001), pp. 92, 170-185.
9) For the classification of prophecy as a type of divination, see e.g. M. Nissinen, References to
Prophecy in Neo-Assyrian Sources (SAAS 7; Helsinki, 1998), pp. 6, 167-169.
Religious revelatory speech can be described as prophecy, if (a) in a cognitive

experience (vision, audition, audiovisual experience, dream etc.), a person encoun
ters the revelation of one or more deities and if (b) this person perceives herself/
himself as being ordered to transmit what was revealed in either verbal (prophecy,
prophetic word) or non-verbal communication (symbolic act).'0
Weippert's definition describes prophecy as communicative process. The

prophet receives a divine message and communicates it to his/her audience.
Although prophecy is mostly aural in character, in many cases, the communi
cation of the message to the audience is achieved in written form.1'
Mostly, we know about prophets and prophecy through the written com
munication of prophetic messages. Prose texts are rare. Examples are the pro
phetic legends in the Deuteronomistic history (see for an example below,
p. 468), the itinerary of the Egyptian official Wen Amun (see below, p. 466),
or Ancient Near Eastern royal inscriptions. Written communication of pro
phetic messages divide into written reports of prophecies to an individual such
as a king (written prophecy) and prophetic books addressed to present and
future generations (literary prophecy).'2 Examples for written prophecy are
the so-called Assyrian prophecies while the latter prophets of the Hebrew
Bible fall into the category of literary prophecy.
Due to their character the preserved sources do not allow for an easy under
standing of Ancient Near Eastern prophecy. Written prophecies might have
been influenced by e.g. a royal addressee and what he wanted to hear. Texts
falling into the category of literary prophecy often underwent several redac
tions and it is usually more than difficult to identify the original prophecies in
them. Other written sources for Ancient Near Eastern and Israelite-Jewish
10) M. Weippert, "Proph?tie im Alten Orient", in Neues Bibel Lexikon 3 (2001), pp. 196-200,
197; my translation of Weippert's definition is somewhat paraphrastic. Similar definitions have
been given by K. van der Toorn, "From the Oral to the Written: The Case of Old Babylonian
Prophecy", in E. Ben Zvi and M. H. Floyd (eds.), Writings and Speech in Israelite and Ancient
Near Eastern Prophecy (SBLSymS 10; Atlanta, GA, 2000), pp. 219-234, 219; and by Nissinen,
1998, pp. 6-9; idem, "Spoken, Written, Quoted, and Invented: Orality and Writtenness in
Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy", in Writings and Speech in Israelite and Ancient Near Eastern
Prophecy, pp. 235-271, 239-240.
n) See Nissinen, 2000, pp. 240-242.
12) See A. Lange, "Literary Prophecy and Oracle Collection: A Comparison between Judah and
Greece in Persian Times", in M. H. Floyd and R. D. Haak (eds.), Prophets, Prophecy, and Pro
phetic Texts in Second Temple Judaism (Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 427;
New York, NY, 2006), pp. 248-275.
prophecy are even more difficult to use as they are legendary in character (such
as the prophetic stories in the Deuteronomistic History) or employ prophetic
messages for purposes of political propaganda (such as the Ancient Near East
ern royal inscriptions).
Similarly, the understanding of Greek prophecy has to cope with the lack
of evidence from the archaic period. Further obstacles are the problematic
transmission history of archaic texts like the Iliad and the Odyssey, the highly
subjective appreciation of prophecy in archaic and classical sources as well as a
disregard of practiced prophecy in classical times (Plato, Republic 364b-e; cf.
Laws 909b).13
Ancient Near Eastern and Israelite-Jewish Prophets
Prophecy is not the most prominent form of divination in the Ancient Near
East but widespread nevertheless. From the reign of the Neo-Assyrian king
Esarhaddon a collection of Assyrian prophecies is preserved which fall into the
category of written prophecy. A good example is an utterance of the prophet
ess Bayd.
Fear not, Esarhaddon!

I am Bel. (Even as) I speak to you. I watch over the beams of your heart.
When your mother gave birth to you, sixty great gods stood with me and pro
tected you. Sin was at your right side, Samas at your left; sixty great gods were
standing around you and girded your loins.
Do not trust in man. Lift up your eyes, look to me! I am lstar of Arbela; I reconciled
Aisur with you. When you were small, I took you to me. Do not fear; praise me!
What enemy has attacked you while I remained silent? The future shall be like the
past. I am Nabu, lord of the stylus. Praise me!
By mouth of the woman Baya "son" (!) of Arbela. (Assyrian Prophecies 1.4.16-4O)14
In this written report about Bayd's prophecy, the prophetess receives the mes
sages of several deities addressed to the Assyrian king Esarhaddon. Bayd
receives these messages directly and does not interpret any divinatory means.
Therefore, her prophecy falls into the category of intuitive divination. In
13) For the critical attitude towards various forms of divination in classical Greece, see e.g.
J. N. Bremmer, "Divination, Greek", Brills New Pauly 4 (2004), pp. 569-574, 572-574.
14) Translation according to S. Parp?la, Assyrian Prophecies (SAA 9; Helsinki, 1997), p. 6.
Bayd's prophecy, not the prophetess herself is in the center of interest but the
messages of several deities, which the prophetess communicates. Bayd is not a
diviner in her own right but a channel through which the gods articulate
themselves. Therefore she is mentioned only in a brief ascription at the end of
her utterance as "by mouth of the woman Bayd".
In his 11th cent. BCE travel report, the Egyptian official Wen Amun
describes a Phoenician prophet.
Now while he was making offering to his gods, the gods seized one of his youths
and made him possessed. And he said to him: "Bring up [the] god! Bring the mes
senger who is carrying him! Amon is the one who sent him out! He is the one who
made him come! And while the possessed (youth) was having his frenzy on this
night, I had (already) found a ship and headed for Egypt and had loaded every
thing that I had into it."'5
Wen Amun leaves no doubt. The young man was seized by the gods. When he
spoke his prophecy not a Phoenician boy spoke to prince Zakar Baal of Byblos
but the gods themselves. As the Assyrian prophetess Bayd the young Phoeni
cian prophet of Wen Amun's travel report practices intuitive divination and
does not employ any divinatory means. And as the Assyrian prophetess Bayd,
the unnamed Phoenician prophet does not speak as a diviner in his own right
but is merely a channel through which the Phoenician gods speak to the prince
of Byblos.
A similar understanding of prophecy can be found in preexilic Israel and
Judah. A good example is Amos' conflict with Amaziah, the priest of Bethel,
as reported in Amos vii 12-17.
12 And Amazi'ah said to Amos, "O seer, go, flee away to the land of Judah, and
eat bread there, and prophesy there; 13 but never again prophesy at Bethel, for it
is the king's sanctuary, and it is a temple of the kingdom." 14 Then Amos answered
Amazi'ah, "I am no prophet, nor a prophet's son; but I am a herdsman, and a
dresser of sycamore trees, 15 and the LORD took me from following the flock,
and the LORD said to me, 'Go, prophesy to my people Israel.' 16 Now therefore
hear the word of the LORD. You say, 'Do not prophesy against Israel, and do not
preach against the house of Isaac.' 17 Therefore thus says the LORD: 'Your wife
shall be a harlot in the city, and your sons and your daughters shall fall by the
15) Translation according to J. A. Wilson, "Egyptian Myths, Tales, and Mortuary Texts", in
J. B. Pritchard (ed.), Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament (3rd ed. Princeton,
NJ, 1969), pp. 3-36, 26.
sword, and your land shall be parceled out by line; you yourself shall die in an
unclean land, and Israel shall surely go into exile away from its land."' 16
Amaziah argues that in his criticism of king Jeroboam Amos would attack the
hand that is feeding him. Amos responds twofold. He is a man of his own
means and does not need the bread of the king. The Lord took him away from
being a farmer and a shepherd. He took him away to prophesy against Israel.
It is YHWH who speaks through him not the bread of the king. As the
Assyrian prophetess Bayd and as the unnamed Phoenician prophet of Wen
Amun's travel report, the prophet Amos does not prophesy in his own right
but God speaks through him. Amos speaks the word of YHWH (dbryhwh).
TIherefore he introduces his prophecies with the messenger formula, "thus says
the Lord" (e.g. Amos vii 17). And as the Assyrian prophetess Bayd and as the
unnamed Phoenician prophet of Wen Amun's travel report, Amos does not
employ any deductive means to communicate with his god. His prophecy is
also to be classified as intuitive divination.
My perception of the self-conception of Ancient Near Eastern prophecy in
general and Israelite-Jewish prophecy in particular as a communicative act in
which the prophet serves merely as a communicative means to the divine is
confirmed by Jer. xx 7-10. It is exceptional as it narrates how a prophet
describes his prophetic experience. According to Jer. xx 7-10 Jeremiah experi
ences his prophesying as being overpowered and forced to communicate god's
message against his own will:
7 0 Lord, you have enticed me, and I was enticed; you have overpowered me, and
you have prevailed. I have become a laughing-stock all day long; everyone mocks
me. 8 For whenever I speak, I must cry out, I must shout, 'Violence and destruc
tion!' For the word of the Lord has become for me a reproach and derision all day
long. 9 If I say, 'I will not mention him, or speak any more in his name', then
within me there is something like a burning fire shut up in my bones; I am weary
with holding it in, and I cannot. 10 For I hear many whispering: 'Terror is all
around! Denounce him! Let us denounce him!' All my close friends are watching
for me to stumble. 'Perhaps he can be enticed, and we can prevail against him,
and take our revenge on him.'17
16) Translation according to the Revised Standard Version.

17) Translation according to the New Revised Standard Version.
The four examples show that in the Ancient Near Eastern cultures prophecy
was a form of intuitive divination and prophets were understood as an instru
ment through which the gods articulated themselves. Neither the prophet nor
his prophetic ability was important but only his message. The prophet is a
communicative device without any special divinatory abilities of his own. As
such a communicative device, he communicates the message which he received
from the gods to a wider audience.
Although the vast majority of prophetic texts from ancient Israel and Judah
attest thus to prophecy as a form of intuitive divination in which the prophets
serve as a communicative means for the divine, a few references are preserved
in Israelite-Jewish literature where prophets also employ means of deductive
divination. A good example is the report of how Samuel chose Saul as the king
of Israel in 1 Sam. x 20-24.18
20 Then Samuel brought all the tribes of Israel near, and the tribe of Benjamin
was taken by lot. 21 He brought the tribe of Benjamin near by its families, and
the family of the Matrites was taken by lot. Finally he brought the family of the
Matrites near man by man, and Saul the son of Kish was taken by lot. But when
they sought him, he could not be found. 22 So they inquired again of the Lord,
"Did the man come here?" and the Lord said, "See, he has hidden himself among
the baggage." 23 Then they ran and brought him from there. When he took his
stand among the people, he was head and shoulders taller than any of them. 24
Samuel said to all the people, "Do you see the one whom the Lord has chosen?
There is no one like him among all the people." And all the people shouted,
"Long live the king!"'9
The scarcity of evidence for deductive form of divination employed by Israelite

Jewish prophets could go back to a deuteronomistic reworking of earlier pro
phetic and non-prophetic texts. But prophets using deductive divination are
as rare in other Ancient Near Eastern cultures as they are in Israel and Judah.
Thus it seems improbable the a once common phenomenon of prophets who
employed means of deductive divination disappeared from the ancient sources
18) For this interpretation of 1 Sam. x 20-24, see e.g. W Hertzberg, Die Samuelb?cher (6th ed.;
ATD 10; G?ttingen, 1982), pp. 68-69; J. Lindblom, "Lot-Casting in the Old Testament", VT12
(1962), pp. 164-178; B. Albrektson, "Some Observations on Two Oracular Passages in 1 Sam",
ASTI (1977-1978), pp. 1-10; P. Kyle McCarter, I Samuel: A New Translation with Introduction,
Notes, and Commentary (AB 8; Garden City, NY, 1980), pp. 192-193, 195-196; C Van Dam,
Urim and Thummim: A Means of Revelation in Ancient Israel (Winona Lake, IN, 1997), p. 185.
19) Translation according to the New Revised Standard Version.
due to the overall deuteronomistic elimination of most forms of deductive

divination out of Israelite-Jewish heritage.20
Manteis as Greek Prophets?
Deductive divination was clearly the predominant form of ancient Greek

divination.21
The writings of Homer are paradigmatic. Only in rare incidents does
Homer employ intuitive divination. Otherwise he favors deductive forms of
divination. To some extent, the mantis appears to be the exception to the
rule.22 At least in the age of legends, classical and Hellenistic literature envi
sion the manteis as intuitive diviners.
Manteis and Intuitive Divination in Archaic Times
The manteis are mostly known for employing deductive means of divination:
"The male Greek seers were technical specialists, experts on the intestines of
sacrificial victims and, especially, the flight of birds".23 The exception to the
rule could be the legendary seers of old mentioned by Pausanias, of whom
only a few names have been preserved. In alphabetic order, we know of Abaris,
Amphilytus, Bacis, Calchas, Cassandra, Glanis, Helenus, Laius, Lysistratus,
20) For the deuteronomistic rejection and elimination of deductive divination in the literature of
ancient Israel, see A. Lange, "Becherorakel und Traumdeutung: Zu zwei Formen der Divination
in der Josephsgeschichte", in A. Wenin (ed.), Studies in the Book of Genesis: Literature, Redaction
and History (BETL 155; Leuven, 2001), pp. 371-379.
21) See e.g. the surveys by W. R. Halliday, Greek Divination: A Study of Its Methods and Principals
(London, 1913); and Bremmer, 2004, passim. Instructive surveys of ancient Greek divination
can also be found in J. S. Morrison, "The Classical World", in M. Loewe and C. Blacker (eds.),
Oracles and Divination (Boulder, CO, 1981), pp. 87-114; and J. Pollard, "Divination and Ora
cles: Greece", in M. Grant and R. Kitzinger (eds.), Civilization of the Ancient Mediterranean:
Greece and Rome (New York, NY, 1988), pp. 941-950.
22) Due to space constraints, only a selection of references to manteis in archaic and classical
Greek literature can be analyzed. For a more extensive survey, see J. Dillery, "Chresmologues and
Manteis: Independent Diviners and the Problem of Authority", in S. I. Johnston and P. T. Struck
(eds.), Mantike: Studies in Ancient Divination (Religions in the Graeco-Roman World 155;
Leiden, 1995), pp. 167-231.
23) J. N. Bremmer, "The Status and Symbolic Capital of the Seer", in R. H?gg (ed.), The Role of
Religion in the Early Greek Polis: Proceedings of the Third International Seminar on Ancient Greek
Cult, Organized by the Swedish Institute at Athens, 16-18 October 1992 (Acta Instituti Atheniensis
Regni Sueciae 8.14; Stockholm, 1996), pp. 97-109, 98.
Lycus, Mopsus, Musaeus, Orpheus, the Sibyls, Teiresias, and Theoclymenus.

Several of these are mythical figures which have never existed while others like
the chresomologue Amphilytus who gave an oracle to Pisistratus, seem to have
been historical figures.
Abaris, Bacis, Glanis, Laius, Lysistratus, Lycus, Musaeus, Orpheus, and the
famous Sibyls24 are mostly known as authors of oracle books. As their respec
tive oracle books are not preserved it is difficult to compare these seers to Jew
ish prophets. The quotations of the oracle books of Musaios and Bacis in the
work of Herodotus as well as the polemics against oracle books in the come
dies of Aristophanes suggest that the utterances collected under the names of
these seers were comparable to the utterances of the Delphic oracle and might
go back to intuitive divination.25
The Cases of Helenus, 7heoclymenus, andAmphilytus
For Calchas, Cassandra, and Mopsus, no Homeric evidence of intuitive divina

tion is preserved. Both Helenus and Theoclymenus are mentioned several times
in Homer's epics. Both practice deductive as well as intuitive divination.
Homer describes Helenus on the one hand as the wisest of augurs
(oivowot6Xov do' Cp6tiT0;; Iliad 6.76), i.e. as a diviner who interprets the flight
patterns of birds. On the other hand, Homer lets Helenus claim to communi
cate directly with the gods by way of intuitive divination:
And Helenus, the dear son of Priam, understood in spirit this plan that had found
pleasure with the gods in council; and he came and stood by Hector's side, and
spake to him, saying: "Hector, son of Priam, peer of Zeus in counsel, wouldst
thou now in anywise hearken unto me? for I am thy brother. Make the Trojans to
sit down, and all the Achaeans, and do thou challenge whoso is best of the Achae
ans to do battle with the man to man in dread combat. Not yet is it thy fate to die
and meet thy doom; for thus have I heard the voice of the gods that are for ever."
(Iliad 7.44-53)26
24) For the Sibyls, see H. W Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity (ed. B. C.
McGing; Croom Helm Classical Studies; London, 1988).
25) For these oracle books, see R. Baumgarten, Heiliges Wort und Heilige Schrift bei den Griechen:
Hieroi Logoi und verwandte Erscheinungen (ScriptOralia 110; T?bingen, 1998), pp. 48-63; and
Lange, 2006, pp. 261-273.
26) Translation according to A. T. Murray, Homer: The Iliad I(LCL 170; Cambridge, MA, 1988),
pp. 305, 307.
Similar, the seer Theoclymenus employs both deductive and intuitive divina
tion in Homer's Odyssey: Theoclymenus predicts the return of Odysseus to his
wife Penelope by way of a bird omen:
So plain a bird of omen did I mark as I sat on the benched ship, and I declared it
to Telemachus. (Odyssey 17.160-161)27
But in Odysseus' palace the same Theoclymenus warns Penelope's suitors

about their imminent disaster without resorting to bird omens or any other
form of deductive divination.28
Then among them spoke godlike Theoclymenus: "Ah, wretched men, what evil is
this that you suffer? Shrouded in night are your heads and your faces and your
knees beneath you; kindled is the sound of wailing, bathed in tears are your
cheeks, and sprinkled with blood are the walls and the fair rafters. And full of
ghosts is the porch and full the court, of ghosts that hasten down to Erebus
beneath the darkness, and the sun has perished out of heaven and an evil mist
hovers over all." (Odyssey 20.350-357)29
In the manner of second sight, Theoclymenus sees the future of the doomed
suitors displayed on their faces and elsewhere in the room. No recourse to any
form of deductive divination is mentioned. But neither does Homer refer to
any divine revelation which Theoclymenus might have received.30
Although not part of a mythical past, Herodotus' report about an oracle
given to Pisistratus by the chresmologue Amphylitus is also of interest for my
question as it attests to the use of intuitive divination by a Greek diviner in late
archaic times. Although Herodotus labels Amphylitus not as a mantis but as a
chresmologue, this particular reference reflects more the idea of the archaic
mantis.
Pisistratus' men, in their march from Marathon towards the city, encountered the
enemy when they had reached the temple of Pallenian Athene, and encamped
face to face with them. There (by the providence of heaven) Pisistratus met
27) Translation according to A. T. Murray, Homer: The Odyssey II (LCL 105; Cambridge, MA,
1980), p. 163.
28) For Theoclymenus in the Odyssey, see Dillery, pp. 173-175.
29) Translation according to Murray, 1980, pp. 299, 301.
30) Cf. Dodds, The Greeks and the Irrational, p. 70.
Amphilytus the Acarnanian, a diviner, who came to him and prophesied as fol
lows in hexameter verses:
"Now hath the cast been thrown and the net of the fisher is outspread:
All in the moonlight clear shall the tunny-fish come for the taking."
So spoke Amphilytus, being inspired; Pisistratus understood him, and, saying
that he received the prophecy, led his army against the enemy. (Herodotus, Histo
ries 1.62-63)31
In the three examples taken out of Homer and Herodotus, the reports about
intuitive divination fit the second leg of the scholarly definition of prophecy
by Weippert (see above, pp. 463-464), i.e. communication of the vision or
audition to an audience. In all three examples described above the seer com
municates his insights to an audience, namely Helenus speaks to his brother
Hector, Theoclymenus addresses the suitors of Penelope, and Amphilytus
gives his oracle to Pisistratus.
But what about the first leg of the communicative process called prophecy?
In the Iliad, Helenus clearly states that he has the voice of the gods. Homer
thus implies that Helenus experienced an audition. In Amphilytus' case,
Herodotus claims that this chresmologue was inspired. The Greek word used
here is ?vOc&Co which can be translated verbally as "to be full of a deity."32
Although no audition or vision is explicitly reported, Herodotus implies such
an act of communication by using the rare word EvOeioCco. Hence, at least in
the cases of Helenus and Amphilytus, a communicative process can be
observed which agrees with the definition of prophecy by Weippert. The two
seers communicate a message received from the divine to their respective
audiences.
Theoclymenus on the other hand does not fit Weippert's definition of
prophecy. In the Odyssey, Homer mentions no divine cause for Theoclymenus'
vision of the impending mass-killing of Penelope's suitors. Theoclymenus
seems to use intuitive divination without relying on divine revelation. He has
the power of the second sight and is thus capable to practice intuitive divina
tion without constant recourse to divine revelation. This observation will
become important when I discuss the employment of the mantis in classical
Greek tragedy.
31) Translation according to A. D. Godley, Herodotus I: Books I-II (LCL 117; Cambridge, MA,
1999), p. 73.
32) For this meaning of ?vOe?Cco, see Pseudo-Apollodorus, Library 2.8.3.
The three cases analyzed so far could hint to a more extensive archaic tradi
tion of intuitive divination by manteis. Neither Homer nor Herodotus empha
sizes that in performing prophecy Helenus or Amphylitus would have done
something exceptional. On the contrary both authors mention it almost in
passing by. Elsewhere, Homer stresses the extraordinary ability of Helenus to
perform bird augury while his use of intuitive divination is mentioned in pass
ing by as if it goes without saying.
The Seer Teiresias in Archaic Traditions
One mythical reflection of the archaic traditions of intuitive divination is

attested more extensively, i.e. the seer Teiresias. The high age of the Teiresias
tradition is documented by its inclusion into the Odyssey. According to the
Odyssey, in Hades, Persephone grants Teiresias alone of all deceased reason and
knowledge:
To him even in death Persephone has granted reason, that he alone should have
understanding. (Odyssey 10.494-495)33
In a scene which is remarkably close to 1 Sam. xxviii, Teiresias communicates

what he received from Persephone to Odysseus (Odyssey 11.90-151).3 Homer
concludes Teiresias' detailed description of how Odysseus can find his way
home and how he can communicate with his dead mother in Hades with the
remark:35
So saying the spirit of the prince, Teiresias, went back into the house of Hades,
when he had spoken according to the divine word (bEeli KaTaO 0?cpxt' G'Xr?V).
(Odyssey 11.150-151)36
Persephone thus granted Teiresias as the only deceased the cognitive and ratio
nal ability which allowed him to receive a divine oracle37 without interpreting
33) Translation according to A. T. Murray, Homer: The Odyssey I (LCL 104; Cambridge, MA,
1984), p. 381.
34) For Teiresias in the Nekyia-episode of the Odyssey, see G. Ugolini, Untersuchungen zur Figur
des Sehers Teiresias (Classica Monacensia 12; T?bingen, 1995), pp. 81-91.
35) For the discussion about whether the Nekyia is a later insertion into the Odyssey or not, see
A. Heubeck, A Commentary on Homers Odyssey 2: Books IX-XW (Oxford, 1989), pp. 75-77.
36) Text and translation are guided by Murray, 1984, pp. 396-397.
37) For this meaning of 0?a(paxa, cf. Homer, Odyssey 11.297 and 13.172.
any deductive means and communicate it in turn to Odysseus. Hence, the

Teiresias of the Odyssey fits thus Weippert's definition of a prophet well.
However, in mythic cycles, Teiresias receives his mantic abilities as a gift
from the gods in substitution for being blinded.38 The Hellenistic author
Pseudo-Apollodorus refers to different versions of this myth in Library 3.6.7.
Pseudo-Apollodorus found the earliest version in the writings of Hesiod.39
But Hesiod says that he beheld snakes copulating on Cyllene, and that having
wounded them he was turned from a man into a woman, but that on observing
the same snakes copulating again, he became a man. Hence, when Hera and Zeus
disputed whether the pleasures of love are felt more by women or by men, they
referred to him for a decision. He said that if the pleasures of love be reckoned at
ten, men enjoy one and women nine. Wherefore Hera blinded him, but Zeus
bestowed on him the art of divination (tiiv jtavtliKiv). (Pseudo-Apollodorus,
Library 3.6.7)40
In this mythical tradition preserved by Pseudo-Apollodorus, Teiresias is ini

tially inspired by Zeus. But the gods do not reveal specific knowledge to Teire
sias. Instead, Teiresias receives his mantic abilities from a deity as an initial
gift to see beyond human perception. Pseudo-Apollodorus uses the word
q jvTI ("the divinatory art") to describe Zeus' gift. In the works of Pseudo
Apollodorus, i9 jiOvCtiic designates both deductive and intuitive forms of divi
nation. In case he refers to deductive forms of divination, Pseudo-Apollodorus
normally describes or names the specific technique of divination (see e.g.
Library 1.9.11; 3.10.2) while in the case of intuitive divination it remains
unspecified (see e.g. Library 1.4.1; 3.12.5; 3.12.6). This means that in Library
3.6.7, Pseudo-Apollodorus decribes how Zeus gives Teiresias the art of intui
tive divination. This special cognitive gift is more in the character of the sec
ond sight or a sixth sense. In the myths related by Pseudo-Apollodorus,
Teiresias is thus comparable to the Theoclymenus-character in the Odyssey.
Consequently, when Pseudo-Apollodurus or others describe a divination by
Teiresias, they mention neither a vision, nor an audition. Teiresias sees and
speaks on his own. A good example is another legend about Teiresias' blind
ness which Pseudo-Apollodorus quotes from an unnamed source. In this
38) For other versions of this legend, see Ugolini, pp. 66-78.
39) For this legend, see Ugolini, pp. 33-65.
40) Text and translation according to J. G. Frazier, Apollodorus: The Library I (LCL 121; Cam
bridge, MA, 1995), pp. 363, 365-367. Instead of "divination" Frazier translates "soothsaying".
legend Teiresias gains even Promethean characteristics by revealing forbidden

knowledge to his audience.41
Different stories are told about his blindness and his power of soothsaying. For
some say that he was blinded by the gods because he revealed their secrets to men.
(Pseudo-Apollodorus, Library 3.6.7)42
In later versions of the legend of Teiresias' blindness the divinatory gift given
to him transforms even into deductive forms of divination. A good example is
the legend told by the 5th cent. BCE mythographer Pherecydes of Athens:43
But Pherecydes says that he was blinded by Athena; for Chariclo was dear to
Athena... and Tiresias saw the goddess stark naked, and she covered his eyes with
her hands, and so rendered him sightless. And when Chariclo asked her to restore
his sight, she could not do so, but by cleansing his ears she caused him to under
stand every note of birds; and she gave him a staff of cornel-wood, wherewith he
walked like those who see. (Pseudo-Apollodorus, Library 3.6.7)44
Regardless of whether Teiresias is described as an intuitive or a deductive

diviner, none of the preserved legends speaks of a divine revelation to Teiresias
which is communicated by him to his audiences. But without such a divine
revelation, the Teiresias figure of Pseudo-Apollodorus' mythical traditions
does not fit Weippert's definition of prophecy.
The Divination Contest ofMopsus and Calchas
A comparable example is the famous divination contest between Mopsus and

Calchas. The legend is patterned according to the model of the riddle compe
tition.45 The two seers compete in understanding. But what is at stake is not
their ability to solve riddles but their ability to predict. While in other, early
traditions the two manteis rely on deductive approaches (see Homer, Iliad
1.68-100; 2.303-332; Pindar, Pythian Odes 189-192), the story of their divi
nation competition sees both Calchas and Mopsus using intuitive divination.
But different from Helenus and Amphylitus and like Theoclymenus and the
41) See Ugolini, pp. 80-81.

42) Translation according to Frazier, 1995, p. 361.
43) For Pherecydes' Teiresias legend, see Ugolini, pp. 66-68.
44) Translation according to Frazier, 1995, pp. 361, 363.
45) Cf. Dillery, p. 176.
non-Homeric Teiresias, they do not rely on a revelation from any member

of the Greek pantheon. Strabo refers to an early version of the story told by
Hesiod:
The story is told that Calchas the prophet, with Amphilochus the son of Amphi
araus, went there on foot on his return from Troy, and that having met near
Clarus a prophet superior to himself, Mopsus, the son of Manto, the daughter of
Teiresias, he died of grief. Now Hesiod revises the myth as follows, making Cal
chas propound to Mopsus this question: "I am amazed in my heart at all these figs
on this wild fig tree, small though it is; can you tell me the number?" And he
makes Mopsus reply: "They are ten thousand in number, and their measure is a
medimnus; but there is one over, which you cannot put in the measure." "Thus he
spake," Hesiod adds, "and the number the measure could hold proved true. And
then the eyes of Calchas were closed by the sleep of death." (Strabo, Geography
14.1.27)46
Hesiod-according to Strabo-does not mention any deductive means or

methods of divination in his reiteration of the legend. Hence, Mopsus prac
tices intuitive divination. Mopsus does not gain his knowledge about figs the
wild fig tree bears by way of divine revelation either. Like Theoclymenus and
46) Translation according to H. L. Jones, The Geography of Strabo VI (LCL; Cambridge, MA,
1950), pp. 233, 235. Another, extended, and probably later version of the divination contest
between Calchas and Mopsus is told by Pseudo-Apollodorus (Epitome 6.2-4): "But Amphilo
chus, and Calchas, and Leonteus, and Podalirius, and Polypoetes left: their ships in Ilium and
journeyed by land to Colophon, and there buried Calchas the diviner; for it was foretold him
that he would die if he met with a wiser diviner than himself. Well, they were lodged by the
diviner Mopsus, who was a son of Apollo and Manto, and he wrangled with Calchas about the
art of divination. A wild fig-tree grew on the spot, and when Calchas asked, "How many figs
does it bear?" Mopsus answered, "Ten thousand, and a bushel, and one fig over," and they were
found to be so. And when Mopsus asked Calchas concerning a pregnant sow, "How many pigs
has she in her womb, and when will she farrow?" Calchas answered, "Eight." But Mopsus smiled
and said, "The divination of Calchas is the reverse of exact; but I, as a son of Apollo and Manto,
am extremely rich in the sharp sight which comes of exact divination, and I divine that the
number of pigs in the womb is not eight, as Calchas says, but nine, and that they are all male and
will be farrowed without fail to-morrow at the sixth hour." So when these things turned out so,
Calchas died of a broken heart and was buried at Notium" (translation according to J.G Frazier,
Apollodorus: The Library II [LCL 122; Cambridge, MA, 1996], pp. 243, 245). As with the Hes
iod fragment quoted above, neither Calchas nor Mopsus make any recourse to deductive meth
ods and means of divination. But divine revelations are not mentioned either by
Pseudo-Apollodorus. Again Mopsus and in this case also Calchas are intuitive diviners which do
not rely on any divine revelation.
like the Teiresias of the mythical traditions, Mopsus performs intuitive divina
tion on his own without recourse to divine revelation. The point of this com
petition is not which seer has better access to divine revelation but which seer
is better able to perform intuitive divination. Mopsus wins the contest because
his capabilities in intuitive divination exceed those of Calchas. According to
Weippert's definition, neither Mopsus nor Calchas can hence be described as
prophets.
Teiresias as an Example for manteis and Intuitive Divination in Classical Greek

Tragedy
Thus, already archaic myth and literature show a tendency to understand intu
itive divination as a gift initially awarded to a seer who then performs intuitive
divination in the manner of second sight without repeated recourse to the
divine benefactor. This idea of the second-sight-mantis becomes even more
prominent in classical Greek tragedy. In the classical tragedies, mythical Greek
seers are often described as being gifted with intuitive divination and perform
ing it on their own although the same seers often employ deductive means of
divination, too. Due to constraints of space, out of the wealth of evidence, I
can only discuss the example of Teiresias in Sophocles' tragedies Antigone and
Oedipus Tyrannus.47
In classical Greek tragedy, the figure ofTeiresias is characterized by continu
ity and discontinuity to earlier legends:
Die Figur des Teiresias im Drama ist vollig anders als die Figur des Teiresias, die
in einigen Mythen einem Geschlechtswechsel unterzogen und von den G6ttern
bestraft und belohnt wird, dieser Teiresias unterscheidet sich auch vom (sic) dem
jenigen, der in der Odyssee Odysseus in Verbindung mit den Toten bringt.48
When it comes to intuitive divination there is more continuity than disconti

nuity between archaic and classical readings of Teiresias. Like Helenus and
Theoclymenus in the Iliad and the Odyssey, Teiresias functions both as an
intuitive and a deductive diviner in Sophocles' tragedies. In Antigone, Sopho
cles lets Teiresias describe how by way of augury and extispacy he reached the
terrible forecast to Kreon, the king of Thebes, that he will die soon and that
his son Haimon will die before him.
47) For a survey on the Teiresias-figure in Greek tragedy, see Ugolini, pp. 117-224.
48) Ugolini, p. 188.
You shall learn, when you hear the indications of my art! As I took my place on
my ancient seat for observing birds, where I can mark every bird of omen, I heard
a strange sound among them, since they were screeching with dire, incoherent
frenzy; and I knew that they were tearing each other with bloody claws, for there
was a whirring of wings that made it clear. At once I was alarmed, and attempted
burnt sacrifice at the altar where I kindled fire; but the fire god raised no flame
from my offerings. Over the ashes a dank slime oozed from the thigh bones,
smoked and sputtered; the gall was sprayed high into the air, and the thighs,
streaming with liquid, lay bare of the fat that had concealed them. Such was the
ruin of the prophetic rites by which I vainly sought a sign, as I learned from this
boy; for he guides me, as I guide others. (Sophocles, Antigone 998-1014)49
Similarly, Oedipus refers to Teiresias' bird augury in Oedipus Tyrannus (see

Oedipus jyrannus 305-315, 390-403). Both tragedies attest thus to an under
standing of Teiresias as a deductive diviner. This reflects well the reading of
Teiresias in reiterations of the Teiresias legends in classical times (cf. e.g. the
Pherecydes version of Teiresias' initiation into divination; see, p. 475). But as
with the Homeric diviners Helenus and Iheoclymenus, Teiresias' divination is
not restricted to deductive forms.
In Oedipus Ty'rannus, Sophocles describes how Thebes is struck by the gods

with a plague as punishment for the un-revenged murder of Laius, its former
king. When the identity of the murderer remains hidden, the mantis Teiresias
is called to reveal the culprit. In welcoming Teiresias, the chorus gives two
descriptions of his divinatory abilities:
I know that he whose sight is closest to that of the lord Phoebus is the lord Tiresias.
(Sophocles, Oedipus Tyrannus 284-285)
But here is he who shall convict him; yes already they are bringing in the godlike
prophet, in whom alone among mankind truth is implanted. (ibid., 297-299)5?
Teiresias' divination is described as an unqualified seeing-in Oedipus Tyran

nus 284, Sophocles uses a form of the verb opoei (to see). The blind mantis is
able to see. He has what we would call second sight today. And in Oedipus
Tyrannus 299, the famous tragedian alludes to the legend of Teiresias' initial
49) Translation according to H. Lloyd-Jones (ed.), Sophocles II: Antigone, The Women ofTrachis,
Philoctetes, Oedipus at Colonius (LCL 21; Cambridge, MA, 1998), pp. 95, 97.
50) Translation according to H. Lloyd-Jones (ed.), Sophocles I: Ajax, Electra, Oedipus Tyrannus
(LCL 20; Cambridge, MA, 2001), pp. 351, 353.
Begabung with intuitive divination as attested by Hesiod according to Pseudo

Apollodorus (Library 3.6.7, see above, p. 474). For Sophocles, Teiresias' divi
natory access to truth is implanted (?F_gn.oKev) into Teiresias as an initial gift.
In his divinatory abilities, Teiresias is only surpassed by Apollon. The chorus
clearly states that Teiresias was gifted with intuitive divination and performs it
so well that he competes even with Apollon, the god of divination.
That in his intuitive divination Teiresias does not rely on a prior communi
cation with a deity is also attested by a description of the seer which Sophocles
puts into the mouth of Oedipus:
Tiresias, you who dispose all things, those that can be explained and those
unspeakable, things in heaven and things that move on earth, even though you
cannot see you know the nature of the sickness that besets the city; and you are
the only champion and protector, lord, whom we can find. (Sophocles, Oedipus
Tyrannus 300-304)51
It is Teiresias who understands all things, who knows even the secrets of
heaven. And it is this special ability which gives Oedipus hope that Teiresias
might be able to name the cause of the Theban plague.
Sophocles describes Teiresias thus both as an intuitive and as a deductive
diviner. With regard to intuitive divination, Teiresias does not rely on a revela
tion from Apollon or any other deity. His intuitive divination is based on a
special perception of the world and thus in modern words can best be described
as second sight or sixth sense. Again, in classical Greek tragedy, the figure of
Teiresias is not a prophet in the sense of Weippert's definition.
That in its performance of intuitive divination, Sophocles' Teiresias figure is
not the exception but the rule is illustrated by the recharacterization of
Cassandra in classical Greek tragedy:
Perhaps in analogy to the prophetic arts of her twin brother Helenus..., the
Cypria and the post-Homeric tradition ascribed to her the same prophetic abili
ties. According to that tradition, snakes lick the ears of both siblings in the temple
of Apollo Ihymbraeus (Anticlides FGrH 140 F 17; POxy. 56.3830). Because C.
rejects the god's advances, he takes away her credibility as a prophetess (Aesch. Ag.
1203-1208; Lycoph. 348; Verg. Aen. 2,247; Apollod. 3,12,5). In the tragedy, C.
is depicted as an ecstatic seer with sibylline qualities (Aesch. Ag. 1140; Eur. Hec.
121, 676-77; Eur. Tro. 170, 341, 349, 408), but the fact that she prophesies in
51) Translation according to Lloyd-Jones, 2001, p. 353.
her own right and not Apollo through her, speaks against true ecstasy and points
to a post-Iliadic, poetic construction... 52
In classical times, the Teiresias figure of Sophocles is paradigmatic in how it

performs intuitive divination. Visions or auditions in which the mythical
mantis would communicate with a deity are not mentioned. While in archaic
times both prophetic and non-prophetic intuitive divination can be observed,
in classical times the perception of archaic intuitive divination is mostly
restricted to the non-prophetic. In exceptional cases, archaic Greek manteis
can be described as prophets but most manteis or readings of manteis in classi
cal Greek literature do not fit the definition of prophecy. The exception
confirming the rule is the chresmologue Amphilytus (Herodotus, Histories
1.62-63; see above, pp. 471-472), who, interestingly enough, is not described
as a mantis by Herodotus.
Condusion: Greek manteis and Israelite-Jewish Prophets
How do the Greek manteis compare with Ancient Near Eastern prophets in
general and with Israelite-Jewish prophets in particular?
The majority of references describe the mantis as someone who employs
deductive divination. Even if a given mantis is described as using intuitive
divination, he does not rely on a vision or audition. In the perception of the
ancient Greeks, the intuitive mantis seems to have been normally gifted with
what is called second sight today. I.e. the intuitive mantis did not communi
cate divine visions or auditions. Prophetic manteis occur only in archaic leg
end. And even there, they are the exception to the rule. The intuitive manteis
of old did also perform deductive divination in the understanding of archaic
52) J. N. Bremmer, "Cassandra", Brill's New Pauly 2 (2003), pp. 1157-1158, 1158; cf. idem,
1996, p. 103; F. Graf, Nordionische Kulte: Religionsgeschichtliche und epigraphische Untersuchungen
zu den Kulten von Chios, Erythrai, Klazomenai und Phokaia (Bibliotheca Helvetica Romana 21;
Z?rich, 1985), pp. 347-348. For the role of Cassandra as a female seer in classical Greek tragedy,
see D. Neblung, Die Gestalt der Kassandra in der antiken Literatur (Stuttgart, 1997),
pp. 21-72. For the mechanism of Cassandra's intuitive divination, see S. Mazzoldi, "Cassandra's
Prophecy between Ecstasy and Rational Mediation", Kernos 15 (2002), pp. 145-154. For an
analysis of the most important passage with regard to Cassandra's intuitive divination, i.e.
Aeschylus, Agamemnon 1070-1342, cf. B. Feichtinger, "Zur Kassandra-Szene in Aischylos' Ores
tie und ihren poetischen Funktionen", W?rzburger Jahrb?cher f?r die Altertumswissenschaft 17
(1991), pp. 49-67.
and classical Greek authors. On first glimpse, the Greek mantis compares only
to a certain extent with the Ancient Near Eastern prophet.
The exceptions to this rule are the mentions of Helenus in the Iliad (7.44
53) and Teiresias in the Odyssey (10.494-495; 11.150-151). For their forecasts,
both Helenus and Teiresias rely on an anteceding revelation by a deity. In these
early references, Helenus and Teiresias are thus comparable with Ancient Near
Eastern prophets. The same is true for the chresmologue Amphilytus, whose
forecast of Pisistratus' regaining the rule of Athens seems also to be based on a
divine revelation.
But even though some early prophetic manteis are thus comparable with
Ancient Near Eastern prophets, they are also distinctly different from them.
Different from a figure like Amos, Helenus practices not just prophecy but
also bird augury (Iliad 6.76). With Ancient Near Eastern prophets the divine
character of their messages is almost always heavily emphasized but it takes
detailed study of the Greek references to prophetic manteis to identify the
revelations which their prophecies are based on. Furthermore, the employ
ment of deductive divination by intuitive manteis seems to be quite common
while it is the exception to the prophetic rule in Israel.
Although Ancient Near Eastern prophets and Greek manteis do thus not
equate, the comparison of the two sheds better light on the characteristics of
both. On the one hand, the Ancient Near Eastern understanding of the
prophet emphasizes heavily his reliance on divine revelation. This is especially
true for Israelite and Jewish prophets. The messenger formula describes them
as mere communicators of the divine message. On the other hand, the Greek
mantis acts mostly as a diviner in his own right. His special insights and
knowledge go back to his abilities. He is able to either perform acts of deduc
tive divination or is able to see and perceive more than the average human
being by way of second sight. This might also be the reason why the combina
tion of deductive and intuitive divination is more prominent in ancient Greek
literature. Because intuitive divination is mostly understood as a form second
sight, i.e. because the diviner gains his insights without regular recourse to
divine revelation, intuitive divination and deductive divination are more
closely related in Greek culture than in Israelite-Jewish cultures. On the one
hand, in ancient Greece, both intuitive and deductive divination are skills of
the diviner. On the other hand, in Israelite-Jewish cultures, intuitive divina
tion, i.e. prophecy, relies totally on the divine. Prophecy's absolute depen
dency on the divine creates a far more significant divide: Prophecy relies on
the divine but deductive divination relies on human skills in its deductive
approach.
The rare descriptions of prophetic manteis and chresmologues allow for the
speculation, that the Greek manteis developed out of the Ancient Near Eastern
prophets during the so called "orientalizing revolution,"53 i.e. during the time
when in Ionia Greek culture was born out of a merge of Ancient Near Eastern
and Mycenean cultures. It is after all rather surprising, that with the exception
of the chresmologue Amphilytus in Herodotus' history the only references to
prophetic manteis can be found in the Homeric epics, i.e. in texts that devel
oped in Ionia and display a known preference for deductive divination.
53) For this term, see Burkert, 1992, esp. pp. 1-8, 128-129.

Greek Seers and Israelite-Jewish Prophets

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Greek Seers and Israelite-Jewish Prophets

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Greek Seers and Israelite-Jewish Prophets

Author(s): Armin Lange

Greek Seers and Isr

2) A comprehensive description of Greek oracles can be found in J. Fontenrose, The Delphic

To compare Greek manteis with Ancient Near Eastern and Israelite-Jewish

Religious revelatory speech can be described as prophecy, if (a) in a cognitive

Weippert's definition describes prophecy as communicative process. The

Ancient Near Eastern and Israelite-Jewish Prophets

Fear not, Esarhaddon!

16) Translation according to the Revised Standard Version.

The scarcity of evidence for deductive form of divination employed by Israelite

due to the overall deuteronomistic elimination of most forms of deductive

Manteis as Greek Prophets?

Deductive divination was clearly the predominant form of ancient Greek

Manteis and Intuitive Divination in Archaic Times

Lycus, Mopsus, Musaeus, Orpheus, the Sibyls, Teiresias, and Theoclymenus.

The Cases of Helenus, 7heoclymenus, andAmphilytus

For Calchas, Cassandra, and Mopsus, no Homeric evidence of intuitive divina

But in Odysseus' palace the same Theoclymenus warns Penelope's suitors

The Seer Teiresias in Archaic Traditions

One mythical reflection of the archaic traditions of intuitive divination is

In a scene which is remarkably close to 1 Sam. xxviii, Teiresias communicates

any deductive means and communicate it in turn to Odysseus. Hence, the

In this mythical tradition preserved by Pseudo-Apollodorus, Teiresias is ini

legend Teiresias gains even Promethean characteristics by revealing forbidden

Regardless of whether Teiresias is described as an intuitive or a deductive

The Divination Contest ofMopsus and Calchas

A comparable example is the famous divination contest between Mopsus and

41) See Ugolini, pp. 80-81.

non-Homeric Teiresias, they do not rely on a revelation from any member

Hesiod-according to Strabo-does not mention any deductive means or

Teiresias as an Example for manteis and Intuitive Divination in Classical Greek

When it comes to intuitive divination there is more continuity than disconti

Similarly, Oedipus refers to Teiresias' bird augury in Oedipus Tyrannus (see

In Oedipus Ty'rannus, Sophocles describes how Thebes is struck by the gods

Teiresias' divination is described as an unqualified seeing-in Oedipus Tyran

Begabung with intuitive divination as attested by Hesiod according to Pseudo

51) Translation according to Lloyd-Jones, 2001, p. 353.

In classical times, the Teiresias figure of Sophocles is paradigmatic in how it

Condusion: Greek manteis and Israelite-Jewish Prophets

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen