Monday, 12 December 2011

Concluding Thoughts...



Throughout this course I have seen the extent to which the Greek world was ‘full of gods’. Being a polytheistic religion, the pantheon is a key aspect of their religion that is both intriguing and difficult to examine. There is a constant risk of oversimplifying the pantheon by studying the deities separately, yet one needs to be cautious not to force them into a structure.

In focusing on the pantheon and how the deities relate, it became apparent that the key to understanding them lies in their epithets. I continued with this line of reasoning by taking a traditional approach; evaluating Artemis’ paradoxical character through her epithets. Although this allowed me to understand her in depth, I realised that my knowledge of her was limited for I did not know how her ‘savageness’ manifested in the presence of other deities. Subsequently, I took a ‘Parisian’ approach to Apollo’s study once I became intrigued by the duality in his character, except I chose to evaluate it in association with Hermes. Although there are aspects of Apollo I have been able to explore in depth, taking a structured approach has allowed me to comprehend how they interrelate within the pantheon, which ultimately was my aim during this assessment. Additionally, by focusing on the relationship between the deities, it allowed me to challenge the supremacy of Zeus in the pantheon. Aspects of his characters that have long been overlooked, such as his weakness for Aphrodite’s power of lust, suggests he is not the tyrant I originally believed him to be.

Athena Comic book by George O'Connor
The ancient Greek society will never stop being intriguing. It is over two thousands years later and the essence of their culture is very much alive in our societies, whether that is by new historians like myself being captivated by their civilization, or by the creation of books, games like “God of war” or movies such as “Immortals” or even graphic novels being based on different aspects of their culture. Although such games, movies and books are not historically accurate, what is significant is that to this day their culture stands.


Interest in the ancient Greek world will never cease to exist.





Sunday, 11 December 2011

Zeus: The Sovereign Power?




Ever since I became interested in Ancient Greek mythology, it was apparent that Zeus was the head Pantheon. He was the father of Gods and men, and ruled mount Olympus as the god of the sky, weather, thunder and various other epithets.1 Before our lecture on 'challenges to Zeus' I assumed he was the most powerful of all, a tyrant. However, there are certain aspects of his character that do not coincide with his alleged supremacy.

Out of all the deities, Zeus was the only one that was not humanised as much. He usually manifested in different forms, like animals, or through the elements i.e. rain. The thunderbolt was representative of his power and it was his main device. However, thunder was not just a representation of Zeus but it was believed that Zeus manifested as the thunderbolt, and this was also the case with the rain. Being the deity that controls the whether, it was believed that he sent the rain yet on some levels he was the rain. An example of this is when he seduces Danae and appears to her as a shower of golden rain.2 Another way he appeared was in the form of animals such as eagles, bulls and swans.3 He used it as a disguise whenever he would descend to earth to seduce a lover in order to avoid detection by Hera, which is intriguing that he would have to hide in order to do his will.

During our anthropomorphism lecture, we spoke about deities being represented in human form in order to make them accessible to the mortals, yet by making them bigger and brilliant accentuates their superiority. Personally, the fact that Zeus was often not anthropomorphised as often as the other deities, deepens the gap between the mortals and him, thus his superiority is enhanced. In regards to Zeus’ supremacy, he placed himself on top of the ‘hierarchy’ not because of a supreme power but because of his tactical choices. As I have elaborated previously on my second blog, the deities interrelate in a manner that their powers function as checks and balances to each other’s, keeping the pantheon balanced. Zeus’ power is specialised just like the other deities’ powers were, which means that like them, Zeus will never be able to be a sovereign ruler. This unsteadiness in his position is further enhanced by the fact that the Cyclopes gave him the thunderbolt after Zeus freed them from Tartarus in order to win the fight against the Titans.4 This shows that his power is somewhat conditional, just like his position as the head of Olympus.

Aphrodite is a prime example of limits to Zeus’ authority. He is well known for taking many lovers and in the Iliad he boasts about them to Hera to show off his many conquests. However, by doing so it becomes apparent that he is helpless against Aphrodite’s power; love and lust is his weakness. He is subjected and powerless when it came to Aphrodite’s influence, and the way she manipulates Zeus, suggest that perhaps she is the most powerful deity. Additionally, there has been much scholarly debate over Aphrodite’s origin, but if one considers the myth of Aphrodite Ourania,5 it would imply that she is older than Zeus, who operates outside of his authority. However, according to the ‘Homeric Hymn to Aphrodite’, Zeus limit to her power by using it against her,6 and by doing this he subjects her to him. Although he is powerless against her power, he used his cunning abilities and tricked her. Nevertheless, some scholars like Shelmerdine7 argue that even then Aphrodite is never completely shamed and subjected by falling in love with a mortal, for she is always the seducer and thus never helpless. In terms of her control, even Aphrodite has limits to her control, for there are three minds that she will never be able to influence: Artemis, Athena and Hestia.8

Zeus will always be known as the king of Olympus. However, I have come to reject the idea of him being a tyrant. It is not about supreme power that he established his central position in the Olympus, but about his cunning and strategic thinking. I was only able to see these aspects of his character by examining his relationship with Aphrodite, which exposed the limits in his power. Every deity has a weakness, which evidently is another's power, thus this prevents any deity, even the ‘most powerful’ Zeus, from becoming authoritarian.


1 for more on Zeus; Dowden, K. (2006) ‘Zeus’, for a list of epithets; http://www.theoi.com/Cult/ZeusTitles.html
4 Hard, R. 1997:29
5 More on Aphrodite’s origin; Cyrino, M. S. (2010) ‘Aphrodite’
7 Shelmerdine: S. 2000:123
8 Hymn to Aphrodite: line 35



Bibliography
- Dowden, K. (2006) ‘Zeus’ Routledge: New York
-Hard, R. (1997) 'Apollodorus: The Library of Greek Mythology' Oxford University Press: Oxford
-Larson, J. (2007) 'Ancient Greek Cults: A Guide', Routledge: New York and London
-Shelmerdine, S. (2000) 'The Homeric Hymns' Focus: Newburyport


Saturday, 10 December 2011

The Righteous vs. The Cunning



Apollo has been variously recognized as a god of light and the sun, truth, prophecy, healing, plague, music and poetry. I became interested in Apollo because, whilst doing my research for my previous blog on his sister Artemis, I could see that much of the duality in her character is also present in him, only in different forms. It was prophesized that he would be excessively violent, to the extent that many lands ‘refused’ to be the setting for his birth,1 yet he is the god of order and shape via mediating the words of Zeus. Additionally, through his bow he both protects and punishes the mortals by being the bringer and the healer of plagues.2 Nevertheless he is a deity that brings people together in harmonious and pleasurable activities through his epithets of music, poetry and sports, all symbolic with the lyre.


Due to his harmonious and leisure epithets, he was very much related to communal activities, thus scholars like Zaidman has used Dionysus as a comparison to learn more about how they differ from each since they are both related to communal deeds.3 In this case, I would like to take a ‘Parisian’ approach, which was discussed in my second blog, and compare Apollo and Hermes through their epithet of communication.

Apollo is a deity of light, truth and order. Light has always been associated with truth and honesty, and this notion is still very much integrated in our society. Expressions like to ‘enlighten’ or ‘illuminate’ someone, or even someone’s sudden realization of the truth is represented by a ‘light bulb turning on’. These examples are all associated with truth and certainty, and this is very much the connotation of light attached to Apollo, specifically Apollo Phoibos (the brilliant). His epithet of light is metaphorical for his association with truth and order, for everything that light touches has been illuminated with truth. Although there is a duality in his character, which is showed in the very fact that Phoibos loosely translates to ‘the brilliant one/who instils fear, Apollo is not an ambiguous deity. There are no ‘grey’ areas with Apollo and this is conveyed through his setting of boundaries through speech, which was used to convey the righteous words of Zeus in an oracular, rhetoric manner.


Hermes has some epithets that are very much related to Apollo; sometimes he is even portrayed as a young beardless male like Apollo, mainly due to his relation to sports. Although they share the epithet of communication, Hermes uses it in a very different way. His use of speech is very much in a cunning, persuasive manner. He is able to manipulate situations and find certain grey areas between boundaries that work in his favour. An example of this behaviour is when he gives the Apollo the lyre as an exchange for stealing his cattle, which is ultimately the way he secures his position as an Olympian deity.4 He is a deity that is often linked with thievery and exchange, which are areas that his cunning and trickster character comes to life. His persuasive and deceitful use of speech distorts the truth creating ‘grey’ areas, which is essentially where he domains, being able to do this hinders Apollo’s ‘light’ from finding the complete truth, thus putting limits to Apollo’s power. This idea of checks and balances to power was mentioned in my second blog, but will be further explored in my next blog in relation to Zeus.

I briefly mentioned the herms in my previous blog on Artemis and became intrigued by the way that is could further my comparison of Hermes and Apollo by looking at their representation in the polis.
The name Hermes derives from the word Herm that loosely translated means boundaries, further accentuating that they do not restrain Hermes, yet one of the ways he was represented was in column form. In Athens they were generally placed outside common areas. Through the representation of the herms, his epithet of movement and even his very name shows that Hermes represents boundaries by transcending them. However, statues of Apollo were also common in the polis, and were usually found by the entrances to the city and houses as a protector against intruder, usually being worshipped in cults of Apollo Agyieus (of the street), Thyraios (of the Door), Propylaios (Before the Gate) and Prostaterios (Protector). Although it does not represent boundaries to movement like the herms, Apollo becomes a barrier once he is depicted as a defender and a protector by placing boundaries to outsiders. Additionally, due to Apollo’s association with order and justice, he sets and exercises barriers in a more abstract manner when he mediates the will of Zeus (especially to the mortals), which sets forth ‘codes of conduct’ and rules that are deemed correct for mortals.

Although Apollo and Hermes share certain epithets, it is evident that their characters are entirely different. Apollo’s association with order and punishment is where we can see aspects of boundaries with him, whereas with Hermes it is in his lack of them that relates to the notion of borders. This also interrelates with their epithets of communication; Apollo using the epithet of speech to convey Zeus’ will, as well as honesty and poetry, while Hermes uses it persuasively and as manipulation. The main difficulty I faced in taking a Parisian approach to this study is the possibility of forcing them into a structure or a pattern. Nevertheless, comparing these two deities allowed me to understand both of them individually more in depth than I had in the past by studying them separately. Paradoxically, only by bringing them together one can truly individualize them


2 Larson, J. 2007:86
3 Zaidman, L. 2003:197




Bibliography
-Graf, F. (2009) 'Apollo' London: Routledge
-Larson, J. (2007) 'Ancient Greek Cults: A Guide', New York and London: Routledge.
-Shelmerdine, S. (2000) 'The Homeric Hymns' Focus: Newburyport
-Zaidman, L.B. and Schmitt Pantel, P. (1992) 'Religion in the Ancient Greek City', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wednesday, 7 December 2011

Artemis: The Delicate Savage




Artemis is a very interesting deity to explore. She is portrayed as ruthless yet nurturing, virtuous yet somehow sexualised in her maiden status. The main reason I chose to focus on Artemis is due to her antithetical character; she is a virgin who aids in childbirth, a hunter who nurtures and protects wild animals. She is the personified representation of the ideal virtuous maiden who is ripe for marriage, yet she embodies everything that has to be suppressed in order to be a suitable maiden.


The Homeric hymn 27 is addressed to Artemis and approximately dates to 585BC.1 The hymn depicts the goddess’s power and ruthlessness by addressing the hunter aspect of her character from lines 1-10, in other words, the Artemis Agrotera (of the Wilds) or Potnia Theron (Mistress of Animals). She is described as the ‘Rainer of arrows’, who from within the shadows of the mountains, aims, and ‘sends forth her painful shafts’, a remorseless killer who brings death to whoever or whatever she pleases. However, she changes epithets as she “hangs her curved bow and arrows”, and “wearing her jewellery” she becomes a delicate maiden who leads a dance with the Muses and Graces.
I chosen to include this hymn for it shows the key aspects of Artemis’ character: savageness and maidenhood. These were the basis of her other epithets, such as the goddess of marriage, childbirth, warriors, hunters, the nurturer of animals and protector.

She is one of the deities whose cult is the most widespread throughout Greece. One of her cults that struck me as particularly interesting was that of Artemis Agrotera (of the wilds). Some rituals to Artemis Agrotera was quite self explanatory, like Athens’ annual procession to Agrai, which took place outside of the city, in celebration of their victory at Marathon 490. It was supposedly where Artemis hunted for the 1st time. However, according to Xenophon,2 the Spartans would slaughter a goat to Artemis Agrotera at the first sight of the enemy in battle, only then they would charge. I found it quite intriguing for I had never associated Artemis as a warrior goddess. Her relevance with war is also depicted in the fact that in Athens, sacrifices made to Artemis Agrotera were made by a Polemarchos (a military official), and honoured with the war god Enyalios. Although she has no direct association with war, like Ares or Athena,3 perhaps it is her unsuppressed savageness or even her thirst for that links her to war.

The notion of Artemis being a bloodthirsty goddess is because human sacrifice is usually associated with her rituals, but there is no actual evidence to support this. This was strongly inferred with the worship of Artemis Tauropolos in Attica where allegedly, a bloodletting ritual would take place. Although, there is no additional evidence that human sacrifice actually occurred, the fact that they believed she demanded it is significant. Nevertheless, there are other blood related rituals that were carried out in the name of Artemis. An example of this was in Sparta where boys would undergo a series of trials to toughen them up in order to become ideal warriors. One of these trials was a test of endurance where the boys would be whipped and the last one standing would be greatly honoured as bomonikai (victor of the altar). The priestess for Artemis would be present throughout the test, holding an ancient statue. In Roman times this test gained popularity and an amphitheatre was built around the altar of Artemis Ortheia in order to accommodate the crowd.

The main reason why I chose this example is not just because it shows Artemis’ association with blood, but because of the presence of the priestess of Artemis. In my previous lecture, I was intrigued by the notion of mortals who embodied characteristics of the deities during a ritual or a ceremony. It is almost like the gap between the gods and the mortals are temporarily blurred. In this scenario, the priestess is a representation of Artemis, but on some levels she becomes Artemis, thus making her presence during the test even more significant.

Her wildness and savageness in character can also be depicted by the placement of her sanctuaries, which are usually at the borders of the city. Personally I have come to see this as representation of her position amongst the gods. Her primal instincts are never suppressed, and uncivilised behaviour marginalises her amongst the gods. Her unpredictability is what makes her so feared amongst the mortals, and the immortals for that matter. She was worshipped not simply because she was a deity to be adored, but because she was considered ‘an angry goddess who must be appeased’.4

Paradoxical to her ‘masculine’ activities and attributes, Artemis governed the female cycle. She was their protector, their nurturer from the childhood years until they were maidens ready for marriage, which then they would leave her world. Therefore it was very common for teenage girls to dance for Artemis. Such rituals displayed their readiness for marriage and the opportunity to find potentials suitors. In earning the status of a wife, the maiden would be introduced into womanhood and thus, civilisation. These rituals would normally take place at the borders of the polis, showing them as untamed, free, uncivilised maidens. An interesting example of this is the cult of Artemis Karyatis (of the nut tree), a cult eminent because of their dancing maidens, where the girls danced a traditional dance to the statue of Artemis. However, such rituals were underlined with notions of rape and abductions. According to Pausanias (3.10.7 Karyai) the Messanian General Aristomenes and his subordinates kidnapped the daughters of their Lakonian enemies from the sanctuary during this ritual. Personally I think the fact such ideas were associated with Artemis’ rituals further emphasises the nature of the goddess. The duality in her character is shown through the possibility of abductions in such peaceful scenarios. Artemis’ nature is in the wild, as a hunter, in her world is either ‘be the hunter or be hunted’, which is exactly what is shown here. The girls stepped into her world and with that came the unpredictability of it. It also shows the duality and unpredictability of female life in ancient Greek society. A woman’s most valued asset was her fertility and sexual status, but there was a constant fear of potential rival males.

Another reason why I chose the cult of Artemis Karyatis is because it inspired the caryatids, which are columns in maiden form.5 Personally this is noteworthy for it was one of the ways that Artemis was anthropomorphised. Although it is not Artemis, they are maidens who become her during her rituals, thus this are an indirect representation of Artemis. I also find it significant that it is columns. Unlike the Herms representing Hermes’ boundless character (which will be explored in my next blog), personally I see the caryatids representing boundary in a more abstract form, a boundary between maidenhood and womanhood, the savage and civilised.

Due to the antithetical nature of Artemis, I decided to take a more traditional approach and study her individually. This has helped me to concentrate solely on her epithets and how it conveys the duality in her character and how it influenced rituals addressed to her. However, in taking this approach I have not been able to see how she conveys her duality in association to other deities. Nevertheless, Artemis is a very intriguing goddess to explore. Her various epithets show her unpredictable, nurturer and ruthless character. A maiden that delights in activities considered predominantly masculine, her wild character and rejection of marriage kept her at the border of civilisation amongst the gods, yet her involvement in maiden activities which were integral for teenage girls’ passage into womanhood, and essentially civilised life made Artemis a widely worshipped goddess. She is without a doubt the delicate savage.




Bibliography
-Atsma, J. A. (2008) 'Cult of Artemis 1' at http://www.theoi.com/Cult/ArtemisCult.html last accessed 7/12/11
-Larson, J. (2007) 'Ancient Greek Cults: A Guide', New York and London: Routledge.
-Shelmerdine, S. (2000) 'The Homeric Hymns' Focus: Newburyport

Thursday, 1 December 2011

A World ‘Full of Gods’





Since the very first time I studied ancient Greece it became evident that deities are embedded in their culture. They believe that they could be found everywhere, and they played an active role in their lives, whether on a literal level e.g. through sacrifice and worship or in more abstract ways, such as through the elements like water (Zeus as the rain, Poseidon as the sea). It is reasonable to assume, and has been argued by scholars like Zaidman, that the ancient Greek world was one that was ‘full of Gods’.1


When doing some background reading for this week’s class, it become apparent to me that up until now I had severely underestimated the number of divine beings that were worshipped throughout Greece. Divine beings were divided into gods, daimones, personified abstractions and heroes. They were subcategorised and then distinguished even further by numerous epithets attached to each divinity. Each epithet represented a different aspect of their power or their character,2 such as Athena Parthenos, Polias and so on.

When having this many distinguished divine powers, how can we study them adequately?

I will be solely concentrating on the notion of the pantheon and the different approaches to study it. The pantheon is a clear example of polytheism, it consisted of 12 deities eg usually the Olympian 12.  The number of deities remained the same yet some deities varied in different localities across Greece, placing emphasis on a certain deity eg, Aphrodite in Korinth and Athena in Athens.3

The concept of the pantheon and how to approach it is an intricate matter that scholars have debated over for many years.  Scholars like Farnell and Burkert4 believed it to be correct and natural to take deities individually and study them in depth, due to the extensive epithets each deity had. One can understand why this approach would be seen as appropriate, yet Vernant very well pointed out that it reduces the pantheon to a “mere conglomeration of Gods”,5 in other words, one cannot possibly think the were just put together by chance. Additionally, R. Parker addresses that in studying them individually we may be risking overlooking the very purpose of having a polytheistic religion. We would end up with separate religions, all in isolation when the worship of numerous gods as a collective is the key.6

The ‘Paris school’ takes an approach that has been very influential. Its purpose is to understand the pantheon by studying the way the gods interrelate and associate with each other. Scholars like Vernant place emphasis on the notion that the deities have no personality or function outside of the pantheon for they only reach their function through their association or opposition to each other.7 Inspiring studies such as the comparison of Hermes and Hestia in relation to movement and space,8 which brought a whole new dimension to the study of the pantheon. It also reflect how the Greeks saw themselves, there is evidence to illustrate that they were fond of the idea of society only functioning successfully because of dichotomies: women/men, hot/cold, free/slaves and so on,9 thus it would make perfect sense if their deities were to function in the same manner.

However, the pantheon and deities grow and evolve through time, therefore the order and symmetry is not always apparent. Additionally, the ‘Parisian’ approach does not allow deities to be studied in exception and forcefully makes the deities fit to a pattern.  G. Dumezil takes this concept further by emphasising that their modus operandi holds the key to understanding the deities, and this is not just restricted to studying the pantheon but can also applied when looking at how they interrelate in myths.

It seems to me that both methods are adequate depending on your aim. If our purpose were to amplify our knowledge of a deity’ then taking them individually would be suitable. However, in terms of studying the Pantheon, a Parisian approach allows us to see how their epithets bring the deities together yet differentiates them. Additionally, by observing how each deity’s power manifested in association or opposition to each other, challenge the notion of the pantheon being a hierarchy, with Zeus being the sovereign power. An example of this ‘challenge’ is when Apollo first visits Olympus; all the gods are in awe of him yet terrified.10 This shows that all the deities are powerful in their own right and deserve recognition for it, therefore, it seems to me that the pantheon is not of a hierarchical structure but rather acts as an equilibrium, for one deity’s weakness is another deity’s power.

The nature of the pantheon has long been debated. The different approaches reflect the intricacy of the matter. However, when studying the pantheon as a whole, observing the deities through their relations, allows you to understand them in greater detail, as a conglomeration as well as individually.  The very fact that the Greeks believed it to be dangerous and offensive to the gods if they disregarded any of the deities by not acknowledging them in worship, rituals or sacrifices is significant. If we as historians want to fully understand the gods and their role in society, there is no reason why we should not take the same approach when studying them


1 Thales in Zaidman, L.B. and Schmitt Pantel, P. 1992:176
2 Zaidman, L.B. and Schmitt Pantel, P. 1992:176
3 Reading on Aphrodite (Cyrino, M. S. 2010), on Athena (Deacy, S. 2007)
4 Burkert, W. 1985 ‘Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical’
5 Zaidman, L.B. and Schmitt Pantel, P. 1992:183
6 Parker, R. 2005
7 Larson, J. 2007:3
8 For more on Hestia and Hermes http://www.pudel.uni-bremen.de/pdf/HESTIA.pdf
9 Larson, J. 2007:3
10 The Homeric Hymns ‘Hymn to Apollo’



Bibliography
-Larson, J. (2007) 'Ancient Greek Cults: A Guide', New York and London: Routledge.
-Parker, R (2005) 'Polytheism and Society at Athens', Oxford: Oxford University Press
-Zaidman, L.B. and Schmitt Pantel, P. (1992) 'Religion in the Ancient Greek City', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Thursday, 24 November 2011

Introducing Greek Religion






Welcome, this is my first blog entry which will be used as a means to express my thoughts, inquisitions and the challenges I will face whilst undertaking ‘Ancient Greek Religion’ as a module at my final year at Roehampton University in London.


This first blog is an introduction to the different areas that will be further explored throughout my course.
It is evident throughout history that religion has had such a central role in our society. It has influenced our behaviour, our choices and in some ways, has become so embedded that it can be effortless to oversee it on an everyday basis such as certain festivals and holidays…even the word holiday itself!

Every week I will concentrate on an aspect of the module that has interested me and I will use perhaps a deity, myth or a ritual to support my argument. By taking this approach I am not restricted to one deity but allowed to pick a variety in order to support my line of reasoning. However, the set back with this method is that I cannot present to you in advance the scholarship I will be engaging with since they will change on a weekly basis. Nonetheless I will always supply a bibliography further reading for the areas I have not been able to explore in depth.

Throughout my blog entries, I will be exploring questions that anyone about to embark on a journey to investigate ancient Greek religion will face some time or another. I will be tackling obstacles that, we as historians have to overcome and most importantly, learn how to overcome them correctly, in a manner that it would not oversimplify or ‘over-alienate’ ancient Greek religion in comparison to our own. Questions like: why did they worship and visualise their gods the way they did? How do we study the pantheon without undermining its purpose? How much can it tell us about the way that the Greeks saw their gods? And mainly, what can we learn about their society through their way of worship?

In other words…

“For a person who is about to embark on any serious discourse or task, it is proper to begin first with the gods” (Demosthenes, Letters 1.1) 



Bibliography:
- Dem. Letters 1.1
- Larson, J. (2007) Ancient Greek Cults: A Guide, New York and London: Routledge
- Swadding, J. (2011) 'Religion and the Games' http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/greeks/greek_olympics_gallery_02.shtml last accessed 23/11/11  (image)
- Zaidman, L.B. and Schmitt Pantel, P. (1992) Religion in the Ancient Greek City, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.