Final Draft - Preview Matter - Florida State University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

A. Lang and J.G. Frazer. Both of these scholars now suffer from a degree of notoriety, and their theories are sometimes dismissed by current scholarship as learned but extreme. This notoriety stems from their adherence to the theory that myth and ritual are one and the same, and the inadequacy of proposing such an equation as a universal explanation for the entirety of Greek myth. 65 While the work of Frazer and Lang will not be wholly accepted in this dissertation, in my opinion, it is relevant to the myths and cults of theriomorphic and therianthropic gods since understanding rituals may help us understand the nature of a deity. Lang was a proponent of the notion that these gods were leftovers of an early stratum of ancient religion, and that they were eventually replaced by more advanced and civilized anthropomorphic deities. 66 Frazer proposes a similar idea in The Golden Bough, when he deals with the regenerative “corn spirit.” After cataloguing many of the guises the corn-spirit could take throughout Europe, 67 Frazer proceeds to discuss the various animal forms gods took in antiquity. 68 The gods he covers include Dionysos, Pan, Demeter, Persephone, Adonis, Attis, and Osiris. His conclusion is that the animal embodiments of each of these gods and goddesses is representative of the shift from an early conception of the god in theriomorphic form to a later conception of the god in anthropomorphic form. 69 He attempts to support this idea with the assumption that each god was once incarnated as the animal that was sacrificed to him or her; he goes so far as to suggest that since pigs were sacrificed to both Demeter and Persephone during the ritual of the Thesmophoria and, because pigs are associated with the corn-spirit in European folklore, these two goddesses must once have been conceived of as sacred pigs. 70 Certainly, the sacrifice of an animal represents an extreme act of devotion on the part of the worshipper. One is offering up a valuable possession to the god, and, in the case of some animals, one that guarantees the continued prosperity of a household or community. (This action is by necessity 65 Kirk 1974, 67. 66 Lang 1968, 118. 67 Frazer 1922, 466-74. 68 Frazer 1922, 475-97. 69 Along these lines, one issue which must be dealt with is totemism. Theriomorphic and therianthropic deities are often assumed to be part of a primitive tendency of man to worship a totem animal. Since not all of the theriomorphic and therianthropic deities conform to the tenets of totemism outlined by Frazer, I shall briefly treat totemism in Chapter Six during my discussion of the god Picus, whom Frazer thought was the best possibility for identifying totemism in ancient Italy. 70 Frazer 1922, 484. Bevan (1986, 69) states the following in relation to this theory, “A myth in which Demeter or Persephone were transformed into swine would lend support to Frazer’s idea; but as far as I know none survives.” 17
paradoxical, as the loss of a valuable resource is meant to secure that same resource. 71 ) But such a sacrifice need not mean that a god or goddess was believed to take the form of the sacrificial animal. 72 The example of Aesculapius, who was often conceived of in the form of a snake, serves to refute Frazer’s hypothesis. While the snake was key to Aesculapius’ cult, there are no examples of snakes being sacrificed to him. There are also numerous other instances of animals sacred to but not sacrificed to classical deities. For example, both the woodpecker and the wolf were sacred to the Roman god of war, Mars, yet these two animals are never sacrificed to the god. There are also no instances in which Mars is ever depicted as a wolf, wearing a wolf-skin, or in the form of a woodpecker. In fact, the appearance as a wolf is associated with chthonic deities such as the Etruscan Aita or sylvan deities such as Faunus. If Mars were to take the form of animals sacrificed to him, then we would also expect to see him in the form of a horse, since the horse was the victim of an important sacrifice to the deity. 73 Thus we can see that the equating of deity with sacrificial animal often does not hold true. Frazer also proposes the idea that an animal that injures a deity in a myth was once a representation of the deity. It is by confusion of the ritual, which the myth attempts to explain by using the animal as an enemy of the deity, that the animal becomes vilified. His theory is that there is a shift in which the animals are sacrificed as the god, then to the god for their actions. He bases this idea on various myths associated with the gods Attis, Adonis, and Osiris, and then further applies them to Athena and Virbius. 74 Again, I believe that Frazer is inferring too much from these myths and is ungrounded in his assumptions. It is too much to ask that since a boar is 71 Rice (1998, 42) outlines the theory of sacrifice described in the body of this chapter (pgs. 17-18) in reference to the practices of the ancients, a model based on the concept of “do ut des.” A different approach to the paradoxical nature of sacrifice is explored by R. Brightman in his text Grateful Prey: Rock Cree Human-Animal Relationships. Brightman (1993, 224-6) defines sacrifice as a gift exchange instead of a commodity exchange. This model posits a world in which the gods show great favor to mortals who offer them small gifts. The sacrificial animal also participates in this mode of gift exchange by offering its flesh to the men and women who consume it during the ceremonial feast. Godelier (1999, 186) posits a similar view that sacrifice is gift exchange between the gods and man but further specifies that man is incapable of giving gifts equal to those that the gods give to man. 72 Kirk (1970, 4) sums up the problem with much of Frazer’s work when he states that “…Frazer tossed in catalogues of vague similarities drawn from a dozen different cultures in apparent support of highly dubious theories…” 73 On March 15, a chariot race was held in the Field of Mars. The right-hand horse of the victorious team was then sacrificed to Mars. This was done as a way to insure the fertility of crops and livestock. Frazer sees this horse as an embodiment of his corn-spirit. 74 Frazer 1922, 486-95. 18
Page 1 and 2: THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEG
Page 3 and 4: This work is dedicated to my loving
Page 5 and 6: TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures v
Page 7 and 8: Fig. II.8. Rear Wall of the Tomb of
Page 9 and 10: Fig. III.13. Etruscan Bronze Ash Ur
Page 11 and 12: Fig. V.7. Etruscan Bronze Mirror De
Page 13 and 14: ABSTRACT This dissertation is an in
Page 15 and 16: physiognomy was discovered at Hohle
Page 17 and 18: or for the death of someone else, w
Page 19 and 20: left with an incomplete appraisal o
Page 21 and 22: presentation of the Battle of Actiu
Page 23 and 24: are more distinct mirrors by the na
Page 25 and 26: its prerogatives and its essence ar
Page 27 and 28: Given the importance of the cult of
Page 29: In general, theriomorphic and theri
Page 33 and 34: metaphor that could be used by man
Page 35 and 36: students of comparative religion in
Page 37 and 38: there is not a wealth of literary n
Page 39 and 40: Faunus and Silvanus are also associ
Page 41 and 42: CHAPTER 2: THE SERPENT The serpent
Page 43 and 44: Corinthian vase painting.) In this
Page 45 and 46: used as decorative support elements
Page 47 and 48: Phersipnai, but these heads are bad
Page 49 and 50: creature of the earth, and even his
Page 51 and 52: of Aesculapius’ birth, a goat nur
Page 53 and 54: II.11). On this medallion, a person
Page 55 and 56: serpent chooses both the time and p
Page 57 and 58: household divinities such as the Pe
Page 59 and 60: Vergil’s statement that Aeneas wa
Page 61 and 62: CHAPTER 3: THE WOLF AND CANINES Dow
Page 63 and 64: P. Defosse proposes that the connec
Page 65 and 66: are not alone on this vessel, and o
Page 67 and 68: y reference to his barking, 253 and
Page 69 and 70: Finally seizing the moment, Arruns
Page 71 and 72: the shape of a man, from that of a
Page 73 and 74: passage, 280 which would accord wit
Page 75 and 76: history of the Lupercalia and the w
Page 77 and 78: Period in Rome as can be seen in ar
Page 79 and 80: Pan or Faunus, 327 but Inuus seems
Page 81 and 82:
had been devastated at the time whe
Page 83 and 84:
Ovid takes place at a water source
Page 85 and 86:
figure has been identified as a wol
Page 87 and 88:
suggestion is plausible, but due to
Page 89 and 90:
narrative and alternative iconograp
Page 91 and 92:
eproduction of animals. 376 These a
Page 93 and 94:
Mars in line nine. Similarly, Turca
Page 95 and 96:
anch, 397 objects that likely stres
Page 97 and 98:
appear as Juno Sospita, clad in a g
Page 99 and 100:
Lanuvium, and indeed there is one l
Page 101 and 102:
SISPITE and demonstrates the variat
Page 103 and 104:
that it may be Greek. 433 Gordon st
Page 105 and 106:
the etymology of her name indicates
Page 107 and 108:
of Faunus in poetry and art, which
Page 109 and 110:
probably derives from Sumerian mode
Page 111 and 112:
A bull therianthrope identified as
Page 113 and 114:
efers to the bull-headed man as Dio
Page 115 and 116:
ecent discussion of the perception
Page 117 and 118:
The rites of Bacchic cult practice
Page 119 and 120:
was likely difficult even for the a
Page 121 and 122:
Layed me out in the deep sand. That
Page 123 and 124:
Perhaps we are meant to interpret t
Page 125 and 126:
CHAPTER 6: AVIANS Gods and birds sh
Page 127 and 128:
for the Romans, and it may be that
Page 129 and 130:
When we speak of totemism we actual
Page 131 and 132:
One curious example of an avian the
Page 133 and 134:
votive 592 (Fig. VI.7) and decorati
Page 135 and 136:
hyta. 611 On the other hand, the sw
Page 137 and 138:
of a lost Apulian drinking cup form
Page 139 and 140:
labeled, These, the Etruscan Theseu
Page 141 and 142:
image was also used as an indicator
Page 143 and 144:
The imagery used to represent hybri
Page 145 and 146:
god or goddess or the popularity of
Page 147 and 148:
Fig. I.2. Roman Fresco Depicting a
Page 149 and 150:
Fig. II.2. Sculpture of the so-call
Page 151 and 152:
Fig. II.4. Etruscan Black Figure Hy
Page 153 and 154:
Fig. II.6. Detail of an Etruscan Fr
Page 155 and 156:
Fig. II.8. Rear Wall of the Tomb of
Page 157 and 158:
Fig. II.10. Roman Marble Statue of
Page 159 and 160:
Fig. II.12. Detail of a Roman Marbl
Page 161 and 162:
Fig. II.14. Drawing of a Roman Fres
Page 163 and 164:
Fig. III.2. Reconstruction of an Et
Page 165 and 166:
Fig. III.4. Detail of an Etruscan P
Page 167 and 168:
Fig. III.6. Etruscan Bucchero Oinoc
Page 169 and 170:
Fig. III.8. Etruscan Painted Terrac
Page 171 and 172:
Fig. III.10. Line Drawing of an Etr
Page 173 and 174:
Fig. III.12. Etruscan Terracotta Ci
Page 175 and 176:
Fig. III.14. Pontic Plate by the Ti
Page 177 and 178:
Fig. III.16. Etruscan Bronze Statue
Page 179 and 180:
Fig. IV.2. Roman Bronze Statuette o
Page 181 and 182:
Fig. IV.4. Latin Painted Terracotta
Page 183 and 184:
Fig. IV.6. Etruscan Bronze Mirror C
Page 185 and 186:
Fig. IV.8. Imperial Roman Bronze Co
Page 187 and 188:
Fig. IV.10. Etruscan Bronze Statuet
Page 189 and 190:
Fig. V.1. Etruscan Engraved Bronze
Page 191 and 192:
Fig. V.3. Etruscan Red-Figure Plate
Page 193 and 194:
Fig. V.5. Roman Terracotta Revetmen
Page 195 and 196:
Fig. V.7. Etruscan Bronze Mirror De
Page 197 and 198:
Fig. V.9. Etruscan Gold Pendant Rep
Page 199 and 200:
Fig. V.11. Etruscan Bucchero Oinoch
Page 201 and 202:
Fig. VI.2. Line Drawing of an Engra
Page 203 and 204:
Fig. VI.4. Terracotta Antefix from
Page 205 and 206:
Fig. VI.6. Monumental Stone Relief
Page 207 and 208:
Fig. VI.8. Etruscan Bronze Statuett
Page 209 and 210:
Fig. VI.10. Line Drawing of the Ton
Page 211 and 212:
Fig. VI.12. Water Color Rendition o
Page 213 and 214:
Serv. Ad. Aen. VII, 761. 37 Val. Ma
Page 215 and 216:
Bare, C.P. 2001. “The Iconography
Page 217 and 218:
Buxton, R. 1994. “The Wolf and We
Page 219 and 220:
_____. 2000b. “Mirrors and Mantei
Page 221 and 222:
Felton, D. 1999. Haunted Greece and
Page 223 and 224:
Harrington, F.H. and C.S. Asa. 2003
Page 225 and 226:
Kirk, G.S. 1970. Myth: Its Meaning
Page 227 and 228:
Mannhardt, W. 1884. Mythologische F
Page 229 and 230:
_____. 1975. The Etruscans. Transla
Page 231 and 232:
_____. 1982. “A Mirror in the Duk
Page 233 and 234:
Simon, E. 1973. “Die Tomba dei To
Page 235 and 236:
_____. 2000. The Etruscans. Trans.
Page 237 and 238:
Winter, N. 2006. “Gorgons, Minota
show all

Final Draft - Preview Matter - Florida State University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?