Hercules Invectus

[Pantagathus]

So the Cult of Hercules Invectus was one of the first foreign cults to be adopted by the Romans & his first alter was within the pomerium near the Forum Boarium.

 

In Rome, much as with the Phoenician-Punic god Melqart (whom he is identified with) he was the patron to merchants who payed for most of the cult feasts & activities. Sometimes you see scholars say that Hercules' connection to merchants was just because of his altar's proximity to the Forum Boarium others because it was in fact the Phoenicians who introduced the cult to Rome.

 

Now of course there is no reason not to consider it equally as likely (if not more so) that it was the Greeks who intoduced the cult seen as how the name the Romans used was a variation of the Greek 'Herakles' and not the Phoenician 'Melqart'.

 

However, the Greeks didn't emphasize a connection to commerce with Herakles in the 6th-5th Centuries BC when Rome adopted the cult but the Phoenicians envoked his name on every commercial contract. But later, the Romans did worship in the Greek fashion.

 

So where do you think the eggs, chickens & eggs line up in this?

[M. Porcius Cato]

What is the justification for identifying Melqart with Hercules? They don't seem interchangable at all to me.

[Pantagathus]

What is the justification for identifying Melqart with Hercules? They don't seem interchangable at all to me.

 

As far as I can tell, it had an enourmous amount to do with heroic similarities, primarily dealing with the 'labors'.

 

Melqart battled the 12 signs of the zodiac. Originally, Herakles' labors where only 7 or so, but of the same basic nature; i.e man fighting the uncontrolable forces of nature. Later after finding many similarities between the two, the Greeks added a few labors to Herakles to match him up better with Melqart.

 

The Temple of Melqart in Gades was equally recognized as the Temple of Hercules and the Pillar's of Hercules are said to have originaly been Melqarts according to the ancient Geographers.

 

So in a sense, ask the ancients... They're the ones who placed them so much in equal footing.

[Primus Pilus]

Having an admitted lack of knowledge regarding the Phoenician pantheon... is is possible that the Greeks, rather than associate Herakles with Melqart due to similar achievements, instead found it unbearable to have one of their heroic figures upstaged by a Phoenician one. Therefore, the Herakles mythos was blended with Melqart, essentially eliminating the competition and assuring the pre-eminent status of their own?

 

Again forgive my noted ignorance on the subject.. We know that there are many associations with gods of different cultures, but is there evidence of Greek assimiliation of gods as the Romans did?

[Pantagathus]

is is possible that the Greeks, rather than associate Herakles with Melqart due to similar achievements, instead found it unbearable to have one of their heroic figures upstaged by a Phoenician one. Therefore, the Herakles mythos was blended with Melqart, essentially eliminating the competition and assuring the pre-eminent status of their own?

 

P-P, that is sort of how I view it.

 

Though, during the late dark ages-early heroic period, the 2 cultures seem to have been on somewhat interwoven terms from a mythic point of view (i.e. Phoenician characters factor into many early Greek myths). For example the Greek hero Cadmus was a Phoenician.

 

On the other hand, I've always seen Labor #10: The stealing of Geryon's cattle (which was one of the later additions to the labors) as a veiled stab at Phoenician dominion in Iberia. But since that labor is mentioned by Hesiod, the Greeks obviously knew of Phoenician dealings in the far west at a very early period. This supports your point in a way.

 

Regardless, I think Melqart was always a god and Herakles as we know started out as a man. From that point one can see that the Greeks through seeing the similarity to Melqart felt comfortable celebrating the deeds of mankind on par with the gods. Hence his (Herakles) eventual deification. So melding yes, assimilation, not exactly.

 

Does that make sense?

 

Anyway, this is kind of the reason I brought this topic up. I like puzzles.

Edited February 15, 2006 by Pantagathus

[M. Porcius Cato]

Having an admitted lack of knowledge regarding the Phoenician pantheon...

 

Who was in the pantheon? All I ever hear about is Baal.

[Pantagathus]

Who was in the pantheon? All I ever hear about is Baal.

 

A good few, some that come to mind are:

 

Astarte (Queen of Heaven)

Eshmun (Healing)

Yamm (sea)

Anath (kinda like Minerva)

Kothar (craftsman)

Tanit (Carthage's patron)

[Ursus]

So where do you think the eggs, chickens & eggs line up in this?

 

 

Hard to say for sure, but we are pretty sure Aphrodite is a Hellenized version of Astarte. Certainly even before Roman conquest the Mediterranean was a rich melting pot, and gods are often commodities like any other to be exchanged by trading societies.

[Skarr]

I think the ancients viewed "Gods" differently than the more modern view, which is part mystical, part philosophical and part acceptance that there are many unknown mysteries and humankind, despite their technological progress, has yet to answer many of the fundamental questions.

 

I tend to view the ancients understood that there were many mysterious, unpredictable and unknown forces that not only influenced their lives on a purely physical plane - earthquakes, storms, etc. but also subtly, in that there was a mystical link between each human and his / her favorite god or spirit. What started as a mere appreciation of the power of nature became anthropomorphized as humans began associating specific aspects of nature with the forces they believed worked unseen to produce the visible effects.

 

The Greeks were no different than other cultures in that they were themselves made up of several cultures from the Thurgans who came into the Peloponnese from Central Europe, bringing with them their myths and gods, to the all powerful Minoans or Keftians, who were a powerful sea faring nation. There were also other indigenous people settled there and the mythology is in a sense, borrowed and refined over generations as one culture blended into the next and the story of Herakles itself may have undergone several revisions or updates over time, as new cultures brought with them similar myths and feats of strength that soon become the stuff of legend. In that sense, I would agree that the "melting pot", especially in the islands that comprise a lot of Greece, must have been quite varied and intense.

 

One must also remember that the Greeks were traditionally fragmented and developed their own societies and city states and it is only in later times, when the threat from Persia became too great to ignore, that they began to see a sense of unity and saw a real advantage in allying themselves against a common foe. This is not to say that the Persians were one race either. They were also a mix of races, cultures and tribes, with each of them owing allegiance to the satraps who were like the lords or feudal barons reporting to the top dog - Darius or Xerxes etc.

 

Interestingly, after the Persian invasions (they were brief and the Greeks soon got rid of their invaders), some of the temples still survived for a time, as for example, temples dedicated to Anahita and other Persian goddesses, who were possibly based on the Babylonian gods and goddesses. I'm sure that many of these ancient gods / goddesses must have been Hellenized and absorbed over generations.

 

As any history student would know, after war comes peace and with peace comes assimilation, inter marriages and other cultural exchanges that soon loose their identity. The most classic example is the Etruscan people. Today, it is very difficult for even the most erudite scholar to truly pinpoint the differences as the Etruscans were literally "swallowed" by the Romans.

 

Today, who is an American is more a sense of what kind of person you are in terms of how you think, speak and act than which country your ancestors originally came from. Today, if you told someone in the US.. "my family was originally from Europe", you would get a slight nod / acknowledgment, that's all. I doubt anyone would bother to inquire any further and ask which specific country / region.

 

In another century or maybe more, I think we will all be citizens of Earth. Any further differentiation may become meaningless.

[Kosmo]

Difference is the source of both conflict and progress. A global society it's a great place for stagnation. As prosperous a uniform, peacefull universal culture might be usually it finds a balance that stops progress. See China, Egypt and even Rome.

[Pantagathus]

I was very happy to see this very topic surface in Gary Forsythe