Greece and Babylon — Key Ideas to Explore

Morphology as a Criterion

Farnell rejects the common distinction between nature religions and ethical religions as unsound, proposing instead that the degree of personality in the cult-object is a better criterion. He asserts that by the second millennium B.C., both Mesopotamian and early Greek religions were already on the plane of personal theism, though the former retained animistic and polydaimonistic elements. This morphological approach allows him to compare the two systems without assuming a linear evolutionary hierarchy. The excerpts show him applying this lens to theriomorphism: Mesopotamian religion is generally anthropomorphic but with unstable features, while Greek religion shows a strong bias toward anthropomorphism, despite some traces of theriolatry even in later periods.

The Power of the Word and Magic

Farnell devotes considerable attention to the role of the spoken word in Mesopotamian religion, citing hymns where the Word of Marduk shakes the sea and is described as a net encompassing heaven and earth. He notes that the deity’s name itself could be apotheosized, as when a temple was dedicated to Number Fifty. In contrast, he argues that early Greek religion presents a markedly different relationship between magic and religion. While magic existed in early Greece, as glimpsed in Homer and myths like that of Salmoneus, it did not occupy the central cosmic role it held in Mesopotamia. The Greek gods are not magicians; their power is exercised through personal will rather than through magical formulas or the quasi-personal Word.

Goddess Supremacy and Regional Variation

Farnell examines the predominance of the goddess in various regions, noting that in Mesopotamia and other Semitic areas the chief deity was usually male, except for Astarte at Sidon. In contrast, Phrygia and points on the Asia-Minor coast, such as Ephesos, show well-attested goddess supremacy, as does Cretan religion. He uses this geographical variation to argue against a simple diffusion of religious ideas from Mesopotamia to Greece. The excerpts do not reveal his full argument on this point, but they indicate that he treats the phenomenon as important in the history of religions and as a key differentiator between the two cultural spheres.

Farnell’s study is best approached as a series of comparative arguments rather than a comprehensive survey. Readers should note that the excerpts cover only the early chapters; later sections likely develop the evidence for Anatolian and Minoan-Mycenaean religions in more detail. The work rewards attention to Farnell’s methodological caution—he repeatedly warns against assuming direct borrowing and insists on examining each line of evidence on its own terms.

Farnell’s old volume, with its careful hands tracing how goddess cults moved between lands, always made me think of quiet borrowed light. That same patient wonder, that gentle weighing of what is claimed against what is shown, lives in Supernatural Religion, Vol. 2 (of 3) An Inquiry into the Reality of Divine Revelation — Reading Companion. They sit well together, these two, sharing a scholar’s hush.