Showing posts with label sacrifice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sacrifice. Show all posts
Let's do a refresher course in some key terms of Hellenismos and Hellenic sacrifice: holókautein versus thyesthai. Some definitions first: worship in ancient Hellas typically consisted of sacrificing at the altar with hymn and prayer. Holokautein (ὁλοκαυτεῖν) were sacrifices in which the sacrifice--domestic animal, fruits, cakes, wine, etc.--was utterly destroyed and burnt up, as opposed to thyesthai (θύεσθαι), in which the sacrifice was shared with the Gods in question and one's fellow worshippers. In the case of a latter animal sacrifice, the edible parts of the sacrificed animal were roasted or boiled and distributed for festive celebration, whereas the inedible parts were burned or placed on the altar, those being the Gods' share.

Let me now say that there is no list; well, I could probably make one but that would be highly impracticle and I would most likely forget two thirds of divinities and others who recieve(d) sacrifice. I can make a general working formula for you though: Ouranic deities (so any deity (!) who lives on the Earth, on Olympos, or in the sea) were honored with thyesthai. The Khthonic, or Underworld, deities, malign deities, heroes, the dead, ghosts and nymphs and their ilk recieved holókautein.

This distinction is very black and white, but there were variations, especially between city-states, but sometimes even within a single city-state. Context was important, but as a working model, the distinction above is useful. So, why this divide?

Sacrifices to the Ouranic deities were given to establish kharis: the act of giving to the Gods so They might give something in return. It's religious reciprocity. It is important to realize that even a sacrifice where the worshippers share in the sacrifice is essentially a holókaustos: the entire sacrifice is given to the Gods in question, but as part of kharis, the Gods do not take all of it, but give part of it back to Their worshippers to sustain them and reward them for their worship. So the entire sacrifice is property of the Gods as soon as it is dedicated to Them (a procession to the altar is sufficient for that, but hymns and prayers aid this proccess), but They share it with us. This way, kharis is established right away: I give to You, You give to me, and so we sustain and honor each other.

For holókautein, I am going to disregard the nymphs for a bit and come back to them later. Kharis need not be established with Khthonic deities: for us humans, we will go to the Underworld regardless of good standing. As with Ouranic sacrifices, the entire sacrifice belongs to the intended force as soon as it is dedicated to them, be it Underworld Gods, or the dead in any form (heroes, after all, are dead as well). As humans, we try not to get in contact with the Underworld, as it brings miasma with it: miasma describes the lingering aura of uncleanliness in regards to a person or space through which contact is made with the Gods. Miasma occurs whenever the space or person comes into contact with death, sickness, birth, sex, excessive negative emotions and bodily fluids. It also comes from a lack of contact with the Hellenic Gods. Not the actual acts of dying, sex and birth cause miasma but the opening up of the way to the Underworld (with births and deaths) as well as contact with sweat, blood, semen, menstrual blood and urine pollutes us.

If we were to partake from food that belongs to the Underworld (because we gave it to its deities), we would take something of the underworld inside of us, and as the myth of Persephone clearly states, this means you would become part of the Underworld itself. In my opinion, this is the main reason why we give holókautein to the Underworld deities and the dead.

As for the nymphs: they are a story unto themselves. We have very little factual information on the worship of nymphs. We know it took place, we know they receive libations (mostly of honey and water), and we know they had sactuaries which were sometimes tended to full time by self-appointed priests. There are, however, many forms of the nature spirits we call nymphs. Some are Ouranic in character, some Khthonic, so it varies what kind of sacrifice they got and get. Even more so, some source material (including Oedipus at Colonus by Sophocles) features libations of water and honey to non-specified nymphs, but which seem to have an Ouranic character. As such, I tend to give holocaustal sacrifices to the nymphs, just to be on the safe side.

I hope this generalized list helps in deciding how to sacrifice to which force and furthers your understanding of ancient Hellenic sacrificial practices. 

LEt's do a refresher course in some key terms of Hellenismos and Hellenic sacrifice: holókautein versus thyesthai. Some definitions first: worship in ancient Hellas typically consisted of sacrificing at the altar with hymn and prayer. Holokautein (ὁλοκαυτεῖν) were sacrifices in which the sacrifice--domestic animal, fruits, cakes, wine, etc.--was utterly destroyed and burnt up, as opposed to thyesthai (θύεσθαι), in which the sacrifice was shared with the Gods in question and one's fellow worshippers. In the case of a latter animal sacrifice, the edible parts of the sacrificed animal were roasted or boiled and distributed for festive celebration, whereas the inedible parts were burned or placed on the altar, those being the Gods' share.

Let me now say that there is no list; well, I could probably make one but that would be highly impracticle and I would most likely forget two thirds of divinities and others who recieve(d) sacrifice. I can make a general working formula for you though: Ouranic deities (so any deity (!) who lives on the Earth, on Olympos, or in the sea) were honored with thyesthai. The Khthonic, or Underworld, deities, malign deities, heroes, the dead, ghosts and nymphs and their ilk recieved holókautein.

This distinction is very black and white, but there were variations, especially between city-states, but sometimes even within a single city-state. Context was important, but as a working model, the distinction above is useful. So, why this divide?

Sacrifices to the Ouranic deities were given to establish kharis: the act of giving to the Gods so They might give something in return. It's religious reciprocity. It is important to realize that even a sacrifice where the worshippers share in the sacrifice is essentially a holókaustos: the entire sacrifice is given to the Gods in question, but as part of kharis, the Gods do not take all of it, but give part of it back to Their worshippers to sustain them and reward them for their worship. So the entire sacrifice is property of the Gods as soon as it is dedicated to Them (a procession to the altar is sufficient for that, but hymns and prayers aid this proccess), but They share it with us. This way, kharis is established right away: I give to You, You give to me, and so we sustain and honor each other.

For holókautein, I am going to disregard the nymphs for a bit and come back to them later. Kharis need not be established with Khthonic deities: for us humans, we will go to the Underworld regardless of good standing. As with Ouranic sacrifices, the entire sacrifice belongs to the intended force as soon as it is dedicated to them, be it Underworld Gods, or the dead in any form (heroes, after all, are dead as well). As humans, we try not to get in contact with the Underworld, as it brings miasma with it: miasma describes the lingering aura of uncleanliness in regards to a person or space through which contact is made with the Gods. Miasma occurs whenever the space or person comes into contact with death, sickness, birth, sex, excessive negative emotions and bodily fluids. It also comes from a lack of contact with the Hellenic Gods. Not the actual acts of dying, sex and birth cause miasma but the opening up of the way to the Underworld (with births and deaths) as well as contact with sweat, blood, semen, menstrual blood and urine pollutes us.

If we were to partake from food that belongs to the Underworld (because we gave it to its deities), we would take something of the underworld inside of us, and as the myth of Persephone clearly states, this means you would become part of the Underworld itself. In my opinion, this is the main reason why we give holókautein to the Underworld deities and the dead.

As for the nymphs: they are a story unto themselves. We have very little factual information on the worship of nymphs. We know it took place, we know they receive libations (mostly of honey and water), and we know they had sactuaries which were sometimes tended to full time by self-appointed priests. There are, however, many forms of the nature spirits we call nymphs. Some are Ouranic in character, some Khthonic, so it varies what kind of sacrifice they got and get. Even more so, some source material (including Oedipus at Colonus by Sophocles) features libations of water and honey to non-specified nymphs, but which seem to have an Ouranic character. As such, I tend to give holocaustal sacrifices to the nymphs, just to be on the safe side.

I hope this generalized list helps in deciding how to sacrifice to which force and furthers your understanding of ancient Hellenic sacrificial practices.
"There is this video on youtube about a woman named Elizabeth Vandiver, who is a professor in mythology and she says, that the gods could care less about us humans, and what they truly want from us is sacrifices. Now, I wanted to know what you thought about this lecture (if you have the time to see it, it's about half an hour long and covers subjects such as Pandora and Prometheus) because I feel like, whenever I pray my prayers goes unheard, and this professor may have a point, even if it's moot. She's really convincing, because she knows her stuff, and that's why I'm pondering whether she's right or if this is just the view of someone outside Hellenismos. So if you have the time to see this, I would love to hear your response because you are a strong believer and you might just convince me otherwise."


In Hellenic mythology, when our pre-human ancestors no longer gave the Gods sacrifice, Zeus wiped them all off the face of the planet with a huge flood and started over. In the myth of Baukis and Philemon, every villager who had turned the disguised Gods Zeus and Hermes away were drowned by another flood. This, however, has to do with respect and the just order of things--which is wholly Zeus's domain.

I agree with Vandiver when she says that humans are useful to the Gods and that's basically the only reason They keep us around, but she doesn't go into the very important concept of kharis. Hellenic animal sacrifice was done for a multitude of reasons. It was an act of devotion, an act to establish hierarchy--the Theoi are higher than mankind, but mankind is higher than animals, who are equal to each other--a social bonding affair, a nutritious necessity and tradition. First and foremost, sacrifice of any kind was given out of piety, out of a desire to please or appease the Theoi. Any sacrifice establishes kharis.

When we, in Hellenismos, petition the Gods for aid, we always do so with an offering. This offering can be incense, a libation, a food offering or anything else. It must be something tangible. Good thoughts and intentions don't count. This offering is given freely, joyfully, with pleasure, out of respect and love for the Gods. We ask what we feel we need--sometimes that's a new job, sometimes just a vague sentiment like honor and prosperity to the household--and never expect to be granted this request. Petitions aren't bribery. We give to the Gods and should They feel inclined to grand us our request, we thank Them by offering to them again, to which the Gods might respond, to which we will sacrifice, and so on. This circular practice of voluntary giving is called kharis. As long as we show respect and establish kharis, we are useful to the Gods. Disrespect the Gods and you become expendable.

We tend to resist this view in modern times. I consider that an especially Christian influence: God should be/is a benevolent entity (Islam and Judaism are less firm on a benevolent God), as well as a sign of the times. The ancient Hellenes, nor any of their contemporaries, believed the Gods to be anything but feared, appeased, and respected. The reason for this is logical: they were hard times to live in. The ancient Hellenes were subject to natural influence much more than we are. When a harvest fails, it doesn't automatically mean famine anymore. When we travel by ship, the odds of dying on it are slim. Not so in ancient Hellas. It were exactly these natural influences that the Gods had (and have) domain over, ergo: the Gods became beings to fear. They still are.

In essence: regular and grandiose worship through sacrifice raises your status with the Gods from an easily squashed nobody to someone who is useful and perhaps worthy of some protection and aid.

Having an almost personal, loving, and safe relationship with the Gods is a modern invention. It came to a rise with the revival of Paganism in the form of Wicca and Witchcraft. It makes absolutely no sense in an Hellenistic context because it goes against the hierarchy: Gods, then humans, then animals. As humans, we tend to reason from ourselves outwards, which basically would make the hierarchy: humans, Gods/animals. That's hubris. That's the opposite of piety. Piety, in large part, is accepting that we, as humans, are not at the top of this chain and that the Gods look at us like we look at animals: cute, but expendable once their purpose is served. It's a hard truth to face, and I get a lot of backlash for putting it out there, but that's the way the ancient Hellenes viewed their Gods, and it's how I view Them as well.
Today's topic for the 'Beginner's guide to Hellenismos' is sacrifice, the 'offering of food, objects or the lives of animals to a higher purpose, in particular divine beings, as an act of propitiation or worship'. It is one of the--if not the--cornerstones of the modern Hellenistic faith, and was most definitely the cornerstone of the ancient Hellenic faith.

A sacrifice to the Gods is a way of bonding, of kharis. It's a way of showing our devotion to the Gods and bringing Them, actively, into our homes and lives. It's a way of acknowledging Their greatness and recognizing our loyalty to Them. Practically, this means that whatever the sacrifice, it should be given with this kharis in mind. It should be given with love, dedication and with respect to the bond between immortal and mortal.

Kharis is an important word. It means everything from beauty to joy, delight, kindness, good will, grace, favour, benefit, boon, charm, attraction, appeal, elegance, gracefulness, pleasure, cheerfulness, wit, gratitude, thankfulness and gratification. It's the name of a Goddess as well; the Goddess of Grace and Beauty. When we give sacrifice, we give it freely, joyfully, with pleasure, out of respect and love for the Gods. We ask what we feel we need in prayer and never expect to be granted this request. Petitions aren't bribery. We give to the Gods and should They feel inclined to grand us our request, we thank Them by offering to Them again, to which the Gods might respond, to which we will sacrifice, and so on. This circular practice of voluntary giving is kharis.

Closely linked to sacrifice are the rituals they were conducted at, so we will discuss those as well. Ritual has a purpose: it is 'a stereotyped sequence of activities involving gestures, words, and objects, performed in a sequestered place, and designed to influence preternatural entities or forces on behalf of the actors' goals and interests'. In short, it is a way to take oneself out of the every day world and into the sacred. There are five steps to proper, Hellenistic, ritual: procession, purification, hymns and prayers, sacrifice/offerings, prayers of supplication and thanks, usually followed by a feast and/or theatre and sporting events.

Sacrifice was and is the highlight of Hellenic ritual. In ancient Hellas, communal sacrifices almost always included animal sacrifice. Worshippers processed to the ritual site, consciously leaving the mundane behind. The scent of incense would have filled the air, and hymns would have been sung. The ritual that took place took the celebrants out of the regular world and the animals they brought with them stepped out with them. They cleansed themselves with lustral water (named khernips) and sprinkled the area and altar with it. The mood would have been tense: a death was about to occur and they were about to receive a huge boost of kharis from it. Hymns would have continued, building the tension. Water was dripped on the head of the animal, trying to get it to say 'yes' to being sacrificed and purifying it in the process.

All participants threw barley groats onto the animal, the ground and the altar to sow good fortune. The barley came from a single basket and by the time everyone had had a handful to throw, the ritual knife would have been displayed at the bottom of the basket. Meanwhile, libations would have been made in or around the fire. As Hellenics, we have two general types of libations at our disposal; a sponde (Σπονδή) or a khoe (χοαί). Both are poured sacrifices, libations, but the practice differs, as does the goal. A sponde is a libation given, partly, to the Deity or Deities offered to, and partly drunken by those given the libation. A general sponde is a measure of wine, oil, honey, milk or even water.

A sponde, no matter to whom, is poured in a specific manner. After the procession, cleansing, hymns and prayers, the Spondophoroi (Σπονδοφοροί), the vessel which holds the sponde, is held up in the right hand, and presented to the Gods. It is dedicated to the Deity or Deities who will receive it. Then, the Spondophoroi is transfered to the left hand and a sponde is poured to Hestia first, then to whomever the sponde was intended for.

A khoe is a type of libation which is reserved for Khthonic Theoi and other Underworld beings, like spirits or ghosts, as well as earth deities. It consists of a measure of honey, milk and dark-red wine. The major difference with the sponde is that in a khoe, the entire content is poured out; the practitioner drinks nothing of it, like with a holókaustos. A khou is poured from a khoi, a large vessel which is tipped over or slowly emptied while (most often) remaining in contact with the ground.

After the libation, the person who would kill the animal would have taken the knife and cut a lock of the animal's hair. Swiftly, the lock would be tossed into the fire as a warning of the impending sacrifice. The tension would have reached its height at this time and with a swift motion, the animal's throat would have been cut. All of its blood was collected and later dripped onto the fire or--in case of a smaller animal--dripped onto the fire directly. Women would scream, possibly to cover up the dying sounds of the animal, and then the tension would have most likely been broken and the ominous mood turned festive: while the entire animal belonged to the Gods, They saw fit to give much of it to Their followers for rare meat consumption. Then, Hestia receives the last sponde.

After the sacrifice, the meat was boiled or roasted and divided amongst the people celebrating. There were other dishes as well, which were eaten in a communal meal. Afterwards, depending on the festival, there would have been sporting events, or myths were recited. There could have been plays performed or any type of other entertainment until the festival was over. And the Theoi would have been invited to enjoy all of these activities as well.

Modern worship is organized somewhat the same way as ancient sacrifice was: we start with a procession (no matter how short) towards the altar, where we purify ourselves and the space around us with khernips. We also sow barley groats. This is not only a form of purification, it was the start of the process of kharis where the strewing of barley groats on and around the altar of the Theoi is like a spiritual sowing to reap the benefits of later (asked for through prayer later on in the rite). As such, the barley that we use is whole form, just like it is for actual sowing of the crop.

During the procession, songs are sung, and once purification is performed, a hymn is sung or proclaimed. Hymns are sung to please, to bring forth. It is a way to celebrate the deity in question, but also to make Him or Her more inclined to grant the following request. Hymns were accompanied with music and dancing; they were true celebrations in that regard. They are performed to proclaim existing kharis and built upon it by showing respect and knowledge of the lives of the Gods.

Prayers are next on the agenda. Prayers are attempts by men and women to communicate with Gods by means of the voice. A prayer is carefully formulated to convey a message as persuasively as possible to the God, and was thus often spoken. The idea is not to please, but to request. They make use of the established and just now strengthened kharis to petition the Gods for aid. Where the hymn is an offering to go along with material sacrifice, the prayer is not an offering at all. To soften the request, prayers are often accompanied by the sacrifice--the main event of the rite.

Modern worship rarely includes animal sacrifice, although meat sacrifices are more common. There were sacrifices in ancient Hellas that did not include the death of an animal, especially in later years. Some were just libations, other included the offering of (dried) fruits, called a 'pankarpia'. Another staple for a variety of festivals was the panspermia (a mixture of seeds and lentils). According to legend, as mentioned by Plutarch, this was the votive offering Theseus and his crew made to Apollo when they returned to Hellas on this day, for it was all that was left of their provisions.

First Fruit offerings were especially sacred. First Fruits were any fruit, vegetable, fish or hunted animal that was the first of the season. Just like the Theoi are granted the first portion of the sacrificed animal, the First Fruit sacrifice extended the same privilege with any other type of sacrificial type as well.

Especially for poorer families, it was acceptable to sacrifice a cake in the shape of an animal instead of animals themselves. When you read the ancient and scholarly texts having to do with ancient Hellas, you will often come upon references to 'honey cakes' or 'cakes' in general. We might be tempted to interpret these to mean modern day cakes, but the ancient Hellenes would have most likely used flat cracker-type 'cakes', made from barley meal and honey.

Sacrifice and ritual are important. Even more important is regular sacrifice and ritual. It maintains and builds the kharis that keeps safe and blessed not only us as worshippers but our loved ones as well. Learning how to conduct ritual properly and to ingrain these practices into your life are the most important lessons any Hellenist will ever learn, and mostly you will have to learn them on your own. We can base our practices off of the ways of the ancients, but household worship is intimate, personal, and routine. That routine you will find yourself, and it will change through the years. What matters most is that it follows the basic steps of ritual, and that it's conducted with the beauty and greatness of the Gods in mind.
Its been a while since I wrote about animal sacrifice on this blog. It was a favoured subject for a while because I find the concept so intriguing, but you know, there is only so long you can talk about theoretically killing and butchering animals before it gets weird. That said, I was tagged in a Facebook discussion about the subject yesterday, and the question is such a good one, I am reviving the subject on Baring the Aegis.

"Does anyone have a list of what animals the Gods preferred for their sacrifices? I know Artemis preferred wild game but I can't find a list for the rest of them."

First a little background on the practice: The principal kind of Greek sacrifice was called 'thysia' and consisted of the killing of a domestic animal, usually cattle, sheep, goats or pigs. It was followed by the division of the meat between the divine recipient and the human participants. This practice was most definitely the cornerstone of the ancient Hellenic faith. It included animals for a reason: the act of killing, of taking the life of an animal, is a difficult one. It brings us closer to our own mortality and must have given many of the men flashbacks of combat situations. Many ancient Hellenic households killed animals for meat, but there is something special about killing in sacrifice, I wager.

Sacrifice was the highlight of ancient Hellenic ritual. Like me, the ancient Hellenes sometimes fasted or otherwise abstained before ritual. They processed to the ritual site, leaving the mundane behind. Incense would have filled the air, and hymns would have been sung. The ritual that took place took the celebrants out of the regular world and the animals they brought with them stepped out with them. When they came upon the altar, the mood would have been tense: a death was about to occur. We are supposed to feel friction with our emotions when we take a life, animal or otherwise. Our instinct to preserve life is one of the strongest we have. Hymns would have continued, building the tension. Water was dripped on the head of the animal, trying to get it to say 'yes' to being sacrificed and purifying it in the process.

All participants threw barley groats onto the animal, the ground and the altar--perhaps roughly, like an attack, or perhaps softly, like a blessing. The barley came from a single basket and by the time everyone had had a handful to throw, the ritual knife would have been displayed at the bottom of the basket. The person who would kill the animal would have taken the knife and cut a lock of the animal's hair. Swiftly, the lock would be tossed into the fire as a warning of the impending sacrifice. The tension would have reached its height at this time and with a swift motion, the animal's throat would have been cut. All of its blood was collected and later dripped onto the fire or--in case of a smaller animal--dripped onto the fire directly. Women would scream, possibly to cover up the dying sounds of the animal, and then the tension would have most likely been broken and the ominous mood turned festive: while the entire animal belonged to the Gods, They saw fit to give much of it to Their followers for rare meat consumption.

There are two types of sacrifice, be they of animals or some other (food) item. Holokautein (ὁλοκαυτεῖν) were sacrifices in which the sacrifice--domestic animal, fruits, cakes, wine, etc.--was utterly destroyed and burnt up, as opposed to thyesthai (θύεσθαι), in which the sacrifice was shared with the Gods in question and one's fellow worshippers. In the case of a latter animal sacrifice, the edible parts of the sacrificed animal were roasted or boiled and distributed for festive celebration, whereas the inedible parts were burned or placed on the altar, those being the Gods' share. There is no list of which deity got which type of sacrifice, because the lines blurred quite often. That said, I can make a general working formula for you: Ouranic deities (so any deity (!) who lives on the Earth, on Olympos, or in the sea) were honoured with thyesthai. The Khthonic, or Underworld, deities, malign deities, heroes, the dead, ghosts and nymphs and their ilk received holókautein.

While we associate animal sacrifice with large-scale festivals, many sacrifices were family affairs, conducted in times of need. If someone was sick, for example, one or two chickens might be sacrificed around the family altar while the entire family attended. After the portion for the Gods was cut and sacrificed, the chickens were cooked for dinner.
 
Other sacrifices were larger; a chicken really was the smallest animal one could sacrifice in good conscience. A swine/pig came after, followed in desirability by sheep, goats, and oxen/cows. For home sacrifices, it would have been rare for any of the latter to take place: the sacrifice of a pig, sheep, or goat would have been shared with a whole residential block or maybe your very extended family. An ox was usually enough to satisfy an entire village. Meat could be stored, saved or sold, but especially in smaller towns, it was customary for all the meat to be eaten on the spot.

So which deity was offered which animal? There are a few generalized rules I can give you that seem to hold up through the city-states, but there were undoubtedly instances where these 'rules' did not apply. Like I said before, nothing smaller than a chicken; male animals were gifted to male deities, female animals for female deities; and black animals were given to khthonic deities, while white animals were given to Ouranic deities. The most complete information on the exact animals comes from Attica (and mostly Erkhia), but I think money was usually the defining factor for the exact animal, along with the need for the prayer to be honoured. In general, the more important the occasion, the more expensive and large the animal. We have a few examples (oxen for Athena at Athens, for example, and pigs to Demeter at Eleusis), but in other city-states, or even within the city-state, this is turned up-side-down again: at Erkhia, both regularly got sheep. Aphrodite is another exception, as she often received doves in sacrifice, and many other Gods have 'quirks' like these. Doves, by the way, were an acceptable offering of the poor, but were greatly down looked upon unless in connection to Aphrodite.

A factor seems to be the promise made to the deity at hand, as that promise was honoured above all else. Especially in situations of war, generals of armies made large boasts of sacrifice to come if only the Gods would help them be victorious. Afterwards, arrangements were made to actually perform said sacrifices. These promises were sometimes so outlandish that they were only accomplished with great difficulty. The Kharisteria is a festival that takes place on the sixth of the month of Boedromion and commemorates the battle of Marathon which took place in 490 BC. During the battle of Marathon, around 11,000 Hellenes stood their ground against a Persian force between 30.000 and 100.000 men. 203 Hellenes fell, opposite 6,400 Persians. That was quite a victory--especially if you consider that the Hellenes were the attacking side. The casualty numbers are known because the Hellenes set up a memorial for their fallen comrades. The Persian dead were counted for a very specific reason: the Hellenes had promised to the Theoi a sacrifice of one goat for every Persian killed. In the end, they discovered they'd killed so many Persians that they couldn't find enough goats. A payment plan of sorts was devised, and over the course of thirteen years, roughly 500 goats per year were sacrificed. The choice of a goat sounds a practical one to me: they probably knew the death count would be high, so offering oxen was going to be impossible, but they also did not want to undercut themselves and loose the battle because Artemis felt short-changed. A goat is a nice 'in-between' offering.

I feel that the Gods don't prefer any type of sacrifice; what they are looking for is sacrifice, period. It's up to the giver to decided what to give, and that depends on a multitude of factors, most of which I have tried to go into here. In the end, the ancient Hellenes gave the maximum they could spare, and that would be a good measure for us as well.
Remember a little while ago when I chose Lucius over actually voicing my opinion? Well, part of that opinion is still rattling around in my brain but I hope by now I can manage to put it to paper without offending anyone. However my opinion may come across, it is not meant to target a specific person or event. It is a sentiment I see reflected a lot in the modern Hellenistic movement and it's starting to get on my nerves.

Today's topic is sacrifice, the 'offering of food, objects or the lives of animals to a higher purpose, in particular divine beings, as an act of propitiation or worship'. It is one of the--if not the--cornerstones of the modern Hellenistic faith, and was most definitely the cornerstone of the ancient Hellenic faith. Sacrifice in ancient Hellas often included animals, but not always. It included animals for a reason: the act of killing, of taking the life of an animal, is a difficult one. It brings us closer to our own mortality and must have given many of the men flashbacks of combat situations. Many ancient Hellenic households killed animals for meat, but there is something special about killing in sacrifice, I wager.

Let me sidestep for a bit. Ritual has a purpose: it is 'a stereotyped sequence of activities involving gestures, words, and objects, performed in a sequestered place, and designed to influence preternatural entities or forces on behalf of the actors' goals and interests'. In short, it is a way to take onself out of the every day world and into the sacred. When I got my first degree initiation into Eclectic Witchcraft, I was asked to fast for three days. I then dressed for ritual, was laid upon a bed blindfolded and asked to wait and meditate--something stupendously easy when you haven't eaten for three days--and then brought to the circle. There, I was presented with challenges, the scent of incense, and the power of my Priestess. By that time, I was so out of it that I functioned solely on instinct and raw emotion. All my senses became hightened (save for my sight as I was still blindfolded) and every touch, every word, every motion reverberated into the very core of my being. It was a profound experience and I knew that many had come before me who had experienced the exact same things as I was experiencing--including the women who were initiating me. I knew that I was in someone's livingroom, with yesterday's dishes in the sink and the husband of my Priestess upstairs in the TV-room, but that didn't matter. My experiences became elevated beyond the regular, beyond the worldly, and into the divine.

Sacrifice was the highlight of ancient Hellenic ritual. Like me, the ancient Hellenes sometimes fasted or otherwise abstained before ritual. They processed to the ritual site, leaving the mundane behind. Incense would have filled the air, and hymns would have been sung. The ritual that took place took the celebrants out of the regular world and the animals they brought with them stepped out with them. When they came upon the altar, the mood would have been tense: a death was about to occur. We are supposed to feel friction with our emotions when we take a life, animal or otherwise. Our instinct to preserve life is one of the strongest we have. Hymns would have continued, building the tension. Water was dripped on the head of the animal, trying to get it to say 'yes' to being sacrificed and purifying it in the process.

All participants threw barley groats onto the animal, the ground and the altar--perhaps roughly, like an attack, or perhaps softly, like a blessing. The barley came from a single basket and by the time everyone had had a handful to throw, the ritual knife would have been displayed at the bottom of the basket. The person who would kill the animal would have taken the knife and cut a lock of the animal's hair. Swiftly, the lock would be tossed into the fire as a warning of the impending sacrifice. The tension would have reached its height at this time and with a swift motion, the animal's throat would have been cut. All of its blood was collected and later dripped onto the fire or--in case of a smaller animal--dripped onto the fire directly. Women would scream, possibly to cover up the dying sounds of the animal, and then the tension would have most likely been broken and the omnious mood turned festive: while the entire animal belonged to the Gods, They saw fit to give much of it to Their followers for rare meat consumption.

I am sure you can imagine that cows fashioned out of honey cakes and sacrifices of fruit did not have the same build-up of tension, so the experiences would have been less memorable, less dramatic, and therefor less 'sacred', in a way. Because state sacrifices were often animal sacrifices, however, the mood from those sacrifices would have carried over to non-animal sacrifices and household worship where libations of wine and sacrifices of fruits were common unless something extraordinary happened.

I am going to go out on a generalization limb here and say that in ancient Hellas, only those who did not eat meat at all were opposed and excluded from animal sacrifice. There are records of vegetarian athletes, for example, who got to sacrifice honey cake instead of an animal, and the Pythagorians abstained from both meat and sacrifice as well. We tend to forget that the major source of meat the ancient Hellenes ate came from sacrifice. Sacrifice had many, many purposes, and all of them tied into each other to make the experience worth while.

So now we return to the present and my frustration, because I am getting incredibly tired of two things: one, equating 'sacrifice' with 'animal sacrifice', and two, the negative gasp of ethical disaproval whenever animal sacrifice comes up as a topic within the community. Personal opinion alert: to me that feels like you are negatively judging the religious practices of a people whose Gods you revere. It also signifies a huge disconnect between those practices and the modern ones where there should not be.

I am not advocating animal sacrifice. It is illigal in many places, it is not feasable for many, and I doubt many people feel the need to come together for a nice evening and bring along a piglet to slaughter for the heck of it. The fact that we don't perform animal sacrifice (generalizing here) has nothing to do with condeming the practices of the ancients. Out of convenience--and perhaps ethics--we choose to reconstruct bloodless sacrifice instead. That is a choice made up of many factors.

Those of us who did not grow up on a farm where animals were slaughtered for food might forget that the steak you buy at the grocery store comes from an actual animal who was once alive. We can't grow meat yet that has not been alive first--not commercially anyway. To me, eating meat but frowning upon animal sacrifice is the height of disconnect and hypocrisy. Again, this doesn't mean you have to perform animal sacrifice if you do eat meat; it's the attitude that I am debating today.

Sacrifices are not supposed to be pleasant: they either confront you with your own mortality and ethics, or they cost you dearly. They are investments of time and effort, and often times money, in name of a deity who will reward you handsomely afterwards by way of kharis. Without animal sacrifice, much of this tension is gone. We preserve the act of giving, however, and recieving in return. We perform the rituals, and give sacrifice, and build kharis. But it is not the same.

Supermarkets have made it easy to forget that there are farmers raising crops and animals, that there are people who cut and kill and process, that there are people in the chain who fabricate containers for the finished products, and that people transport these items to shops. Supermarkets make it easy to forget where things come from. They make it easy to forget that actual fresh products end up on your plate in minutes, not weeks. That real food does not need conservatives and added sugar and salt, and water. That sulphur and other toxins have no place in food. There is a honesty to animal sacrifice and its subsequent meat consumption that is lost in our 'supermarket-era'. Yes, it isn't pretty, and it is confrontational, but it is also healthy and sacred.

To be completely truthful, hearing/reading someone demonize animal sacrifice makes me want to bang my head against the wall and scream 'you are missing the point! Of your own religion!' but I don't, because this is my personal opinion and everyone is entitled to their own. So take this post as exactly that: my personal opinion, expressed on my personal blog. If you agree, then I will admit it makes me happy to hear. If you don't then so be it. We all practice in our own way, and understand things in our own way. I don't engage in animal sacrifice and most likely, you do not either. It's just the reasoning behind it that might differ, and that's alright. We worship the same Gods, and that is what matters to me.
The term 'Traditional Hellenismos' is one I frequently use on this blog, as it is the way I identify religiously. It is also the way this blog is written, so for the long explination of the term, please review the contents of this blog or even just its tags; it will tell you everything you need to know about the term. that said, I would like to dedicate a post to it that I can refer to to in the future, because there seems to be a lot of confusion surrounding the term.

I have tried to define Traditional Hellenismos before, but mostly in relation to Reformed Hellenismos, and while the terminology works, I have since become more aware of the way the term should be used. To quote from the original blog post:

"Two branches of Hellenismos are emerging: Traditional Hellenismos and Reformed Hellenismos. Traditional Hellenismos refers to those who strictly adhere to the ancient ways. This means animal sacrifice when appropriate, out-door sacrifices, and communal worship. Those who can't--or will not--practice Hellenismos this way, but who reconstruct everything else, practice Reformed Hellenismos."

The definition is correct, but far too generalized. An attempt at a better definition of Traditional Hellenismos:

"Traditional Hellenismos is a manner of Reconstructionism, where the practices of the ancient Hellenic peoples are understood and applied as much as possible in the modern day setting. This method of Reconstructionism requires knowledge of the ancient ways, but even more so, an understanding of it, so any modern adaption can be undertaken in the spirit of the ancient Hellenic practice."

Better, at least as far as I am concerned, but it requires more of an explination. I believe that those who practice Traditional Hellenismos have an obligation to learn as much about ancient Hellas and its religious practices as possible. They need to be aware of the full meaning of core principles like 'miasma', 'kharis', 'arate' and 'xenia', and appy these in their daily and religious life. By fostering this understanding of ancient Hellas, it becomes possible to judge modern influences on their ability to be integrated into a Traditional approach to Hellenismos, and find creative solutions to modern day difficulties in reconstructing the ancient ways.

Take animal sacrifice mentioned above. In a Traditional practice, I still feel animal sacrifice has a place. If I raised animals for meat, they would most certainly be sacrificed to the Gods when they came to the end of their lifespans. That said, I live in a moderately urban area; all I have is a lawn and a bunch of housemates who will undoubtedly disagree with me slaughtering an animal, and even if I could, I am not legally allowed to. This part of the ancient practice, I cannot reconstruct. That said, especially near therise of the Roman empire, more and more ancient Hellenes opted for non-animal sacrifices for celebration and honoring. They offered cakes, a pancarpia, or panspermia. All of these, we can reconstruct without breaking the rules of Traditional Hellenismos.

Traditional Hellenismos is about learning and understanding the past so you can design your future. A large part of that is the ancient hellenic culture and this is also the reason why I go on and on about ancient Hellas. These people lived by strict societal rules that were interwoven with their religious views and we can gain a very valuable understanding of Hellenismos by studying these ancient ways. So we study mythology for the message these stories convey, we study modern scholarly work so we can improve out understanding, we study the art the ancient Hellenes left behind, read the works of their philosophers and poets to compare their views, and practice in the most traditional way we can, because experience is often the best teaching tool.

By practicing you go from abstract knowledge to internalized wisdom. You learn to feel miasma on you, better yourself as a human being by practicing arate, develop socially by practicing xenia, and establish a bond with the Gods by practicing kharis.

I am a Traditional Hellenist. This is how I chose--or was chosen--to worship; others are not drawn to this, and that is perfectly fine with me. Traditional practice works for me, but may be too constricting or irrelevant to others. In general, I relate better with other Traditionalists, but that it is not a nessecity by far to share practice, knowledge and pleasant conversation. What I care about is if you honnor the Theoi, and if I at least recognise something of my practice in yours; do you practice katharmos? Do you honor the Theoi with libations and other sacrifices? Do you live an honest life? These are the things I care about. If you fill these in in a Reformed or even Neo-Pagan way, I can look beyond that, and we can at least talk.

Traditional worship is not dogmatic, it is not unchangeable; in fact, because we reconstruct in the spirit of the ancient Hellenes, we have a plethora of options at our disposal, which allowes us to adapt well to the present. That said, I will not take part in meditations to the Underworld or 'working with' the Hellenic Gods in a circle sealed by watchtowers. For me, that breaks kharis, and it would be a breach of arete, and in that way, we are most certainly not Neo-Pagan/Wiccanish.

A Traditional approach needs to become part of your person so you become aware subconciously of the right thing to do in any given circumstance, according to the ancient Hellenic rules of society and religion. It takes commitment, time, and the will to learn. It is also very rewarding, and that is why I do it. It gives me structure, helps me build lasting kharis with the Theoi, allowes me to teach others in a structured and wholesome manner, and has generally enriched my life. This is why I am a Traditionalist, and why I promote it on my blog: it has helped me so much; to become a better person, to live a concious and conscientious life, and to relate to others. That is what being a Traditionalist means to me.
Yesterday I got an interesting question from a reader named Wendy, who has allowed me to print part of her e-mail and my response to her so as to accomodate others who might be struggling with this question. It went as follows:

"Hi Elani, I read your blog a lot and saw that you wrote that sometimes sacrifices were burned fully, and sometimes they were only partly sacrificed and partly eaten. I think the difference is in who the sacrifice is to, but I have trouble deciding who should get what type of offering. Is there a list or something I can use? Thanks! Wendy."

Some definitions first: worship in ancient Hellas typically consisted of sacrificing at the altar with hymn and prayer. Holokautein (ὁλοκαυτεῖν) were sacrifices in which the sacrifice--domestic animal, fruits, cakes, wine, etc.--was utterly destroyed and burnt up, as opposed to thyesthai (θύεσθαι), in which the sacrifice was shared with the Gods in question and one's fellow worshippers. In the case of a latter animal sacrifice, the edible parts of the sacrificed animal were roasted or boiled and distributed for festive celebration, whereas the inedible parts were burned or placed on the altar, those being the Gods' share.

Let me now say that there is no list; well, I could probably make one but that would be highly impracticle and I would most likely forget two thirds of divinities and others who recieve(d) sacrifice. I can make a general working formula for you though: Ouranic deities (so any deity (!) who lives on the Earth, on Olympos, or in the sea) were honored with thyesthai. The Khthonic, or Underworld, deities, malign deities, heroes, the dead, ghosts and nymphs and their ilk recieved holókautein.

This distinction is very black and white, but there were variations, especially between city-states, but sometimes even within a single city-state. Context was important, but as a working model, the distinction above is useful. So, why this divide?

Sacrifices to the Ouranic deities were given to establish kharis: the act of giving to the Gods so They might give something in return. It's religious reciprocity. It is important to realize that even a sacrifice where the worshippers share in the sacrifice is essentially a holókaustos: the entire sacrifice is given to the Gods in question, but as part of kharis, the Gods do not take all of it, but give part of it back to Their worshippers to sustain them and reward them for their worship. So the entire sacrifice is property of the Gods as soon as it is dedicated to Them (a procession to the altar is sufficient for that, but hymns and prayers aid this proccess), but They share it with us. This way, kharis is established right away: I give to You, You give to me, and so we sustain and honor each other.

For holókautein, I am going to disregard the nymphs for a bit and come back to them later. Kharis need not be established with Khthonic deities: for us humans, we will go to the Underworld regardless of good standing. As with Ouranic sacrifices, the entire sacrifice belongs to the intended force as soon as it is dedicated to them, be it Underworld Gods, or the dead in any form (heroes, after all, are dead as well). As humans, we try not to get in contact with the Underworld, as it brings miasma with it: miasma describes the lingering aura of uncleanliness in regards to a person or space through which contact is made with the Gods. Miasma occurs whenever the space or person comes into contact with death, sickness, birth, sex, excessive negative emotions and bodily fluids. It also comes from a lack of contact with the Hellenic Gods. Not the actual acts of dying, sex and birth cause miasma but the opening up of the way to the Underworld (with births and deaths) as well as contact with sweat, blood, semen, menstrual blood and urine pollutes us.

If we were to partake from food that belongs to the Underworld (because we gave it to its deities), we would take something of the underworld inside of us, and as the myth of Persephone clearly states, this means you would become part of the Underworld itself. In my opinion, this is the main reason why we give holókautein to the Underworld deities and the dead.

As for the nymphs: they are a story unto themselves. We have very little factual information on the worship of nymphs. We know it took place, we know they receive libations (mostly of honey and water), and we know they had sactuaries which were sometimes tended to full time by self-appointed priests. There are, however, many forms of the nature spirits we call nymphs. Some are Ouranic in character, some Khthonic, so it varies what kind of sacrifice they got and get. Even more so, some source material (including Oedipus at Colonus by Sophocles) features libations of water and honey to non-specified nymphs, but which seem to have an Ouranic character. As such, I tend to give holocaustal sacrifices to the nymphs, just to be on the safe side.

I hope this generalized list helps in deciding how to sacrifice to which force and furthers your understanding of ancient Hellenic sacrificial practices. If you have a question you would like to ask, you can always contact me through Facebook or e-mail at baring.the.aegis at gmail dot com. I greatly enjoy answering questions so don't hesitate if you are struggling with something.
Many Hellenists live by the circular practice of kharis: religious reciprocity between God and man. Reciprocity might hint at a symmetrical relationship, but even the ancient Hellenes knew our connection to the Theoi is fundamentally asymmetrical--we can never hope to repay the many gifts bestowed upon us by the Gods. That said, if we assume our relationship to the Theoi to be asymmetrical, then the word and practice of kharis takes on new meaning: not just to reciprocate, but to give thanks.

In general, I think it is fair to say that the ancient Hellenes performed rituals and sacrifices for three reasons: they could be offered to propitiate the Gods, to ask for something, or for thanksgiving. I would even say that these three followed one after the other in a circular patters where the Gods were propitiated, petitioned for aid, and then thanked afterwards, when the gift was granted. Sometimes there would also be rituals simply to thank for the many gifts bestowed upon a person--especially those gifts that were never explicitly requested. Xenophon has a beautiful example of this in Cyropaedia:

"Zeus, god of my fathers, and thou, O Sun, and all ye gods, accept this sacrifice, my offering for many a noble enterprise, and suffer me to thank you for the grace ye have shown me, telling me all my life, by victims and by signs from heaven, by birds and by the voices of men, what things I ought to do and what I ought to refrain from doing. Deep is my thankfulness that I was able to recognize your care, and never lifted up my heart too high even in my prosperity. I beseech you now to bless my children also, and my wife, and my friends, and my fatherland; and for myself, may my death be as my life has been." [VIII.C7]

There are many ways to show gratitude to the Theoi. The giving of gifts is one way. Many votives and thank-offerings were left at temples and sanctuaries. The sanctuaries and temples themselves could be considered gifts. Votives were gifts promised to a Theos or Theia in advance--so in relation to a vow made to a Theos or Theia--while thank-offerings were given in relation to an unexpected event, or as a sign of long-term devotion. Sacrifices--be they of animals, fruit, or cakes--were also considered gifts and just before the quote from Xenophon above it is mentioned that:

"Straightway he took victims and offered sacrifice to Zeus, the god of his fathers, and to the Sun, and all the other gods, on the high places where the Persians sacrifice, and then he made this prayer."

There is no reason to assume that gifts are only physical. The actual prayer, as well as hymns that were performed, and music that was played, and dances that were danced, were just as much gifts as votives, wine, and meat. Anything given or spoken aloud within the boundaries of standard ritual practice would have most likely been considered a gift.

A while ago, I had a chance to perform a ritual of thanksgiving for blessings I had not noticed at the time, but which added up to a great blessing, indeed. Yesterday, I was lucky enough to feel the need to give one again, alongside a great friend of mine. I want to share part of a prayer with you today, in the hope that it will inspire you to look over your life and see if there is anything there that you have not yet given thanks to the Theoi for. I feel there is no kharis without gratitude, and that there are few things more fulfilling than thanking those who have blessed you so.

"Blessed Zeus, King of the Gods, accept our prayers and the kharis with them, and if it was not to You we should address our prayers, carry these words forth unto snowy Olympos, and let not our prayers and sacrifice fall upon deaf ears. 

Almighty Zeus: Councilor, Fulfiller, Savior; may you accept the kharis and words of your supplicants and our offerings in gratitude and as a token of our love for Thee and all the Theoi: 
To You we direct these words of humble gratitude: You who saw fit to bestow so many blessings upon your mortal supplicants. We offer you sweet wine and incense of blessed mien, for time has opened our eyes to all you have granted us as we take up and continue Your worship, but also before when we questioned and searched. You have led us to the worship of the Blessed Theoi and guided us in honoring Them, whom we were meant to serve from birth. You molded our fate so we would meet as kindred spirits of one mind and one heart who prays to You, son of Kronos, King of the Gods. You have granted us love, acceptance, and knowledge, in so many ways. You who have placed us, always, although we do not always see, onto the path of greatness and accomplishment, accept this humble sacrifice. These offerings would never measure against all You and Yours have given us, yet, these offerings are given with love, and in pious dedication. With our eternal gratitude, and in the deep knowledge of the Blessed Divine."
The Elaion Facebook group is still going strong. A few days ago, a question came up that I did not have a detailed answer for: if you raise animals for meat as a modern Hellenist, how do you go about killing them? And can you store the meat? I wanted to answer the question when it came up but alas, time and lack of sleep prevented that from happening, so here is my (now researched) answer.

We often hear that the meat of sacrificial animals was consumed right away--and right on the spot--and often this was the case. It seems that the only available quantitative information on the amount of meat consumed by the average Athenian comes from 4th-century Athens, where epigraphic records show that a citizen had the opportunity to acquire meat from public sacrifices at least once every eight or nine days. With the amount of festivals that required animal sacrifice at this time, that would add up to roughly 40 to 45 times a year.

The principal kind of Greek sacrifice was called 'thysia' and consisted of the killing of a domestic animal, usually cattle, sheep, goats or pigs, followed by its division and sharing between the divine recipient and the human participants. The ritual steps to follow were strict, and while exceptions have been found both in literature and art, these ritual steps were very often observed:
  • Consecration if the animal to the God or Gods in question by a number of initial rituals at the altar. This often included 'prettying up'  the animal in some way. It could be washed, have its horns gilded and/or be 'decorated' with a wreath. As part of the consecration, a lock of hair was sacrificed in the fire.
  • Animals that resisted the procession towards the altar were not sacrificed. Watr was sprinkled on their heads before being killed, so they would nod their head 'yes', as a form of consent to the sacrifice.
  • The animal was killed by a blow to the head or the slitting of the throat.
  • If the throat was not slid before, it was done so now, and the blood was collected. Some blood was sprinkled on the front of the altar and poured into the fire.
  • The ololygē was practiced by women.
  • The victim was opened up so that the internal organs could be inspected, especially the liver. This would help identify if the meat was good enough to be offered and eaten.
  • The mēria was cut from the animal; the preferred sections were the thigh bones (femora) and the tail (caudal), vertebrae and the sacrum (the back part of the basin). These bones constituted the gods’ part of the sacrifice and Gods enjoyed their share by inhaling the thick, fatty smoke--'knise'--rising from the burning bones.
  • When the gods’ portion had been consumed in the fire, the animal’s body was butchered and the meat divided and distributed. The viscera were always cooked and eaten on the spot and consumed by the core group of participants who sponsored the sacrifice. The priests received some of the best parts of the animal as honorary shares, as did city officials and victorious athletes. The remaining meat was cut into pieces of more or less the same size and distributed to the population.
  • A thysia sacrifice was concluded by a meal of the meat, either in the sanctuary or the home, though on some occasions the meat was sold. What mattered was the sharing.
It appears that the meat was distributed either raw or cooked. It is unclear what the standard practice was, as everyone knew it at the time and it was subsequently rarely recorded. In the few cases where the condition of the meat is specified, Athenian decrees call for the distribution of raw meat, indication it was most likely not eaten on the spot. When the meat was distributed cooked, it was most likely distributed boiled. It appears that, in some instances, meat distribution was separated from the slaughtering by as much as two days, further evidence that meat (beyond the viscera) was not necessarily consumed right away. A two day waiting period would have allowed the meat to age and become tender, and it may also have made it easier to accommodate large crowds at the site of distribution.

The meat distributed to the public was cut into more or less equal portions, which means they were probably not equal in terms of quality. Status might have played a factor in determining who got which portion. It is generally accepted that the meat produced in large-scale state sacrifices was distributed to the male citizens of Athens, who in turn shared it with their families.

As a modern practitioner, the bare bones of the sacrifice (consecration - killing - blood sacrifice - ololegē - inspection - mēria - eating of viscera - distribution and/or preparation) can be observed easily enough if you are in the legal position to do so. Note that the sacrifice would have been practiced within the regular ritual structure (procession - purification - prayers/hymns - sacrifice - prayers of supplication and thanks - (feast)). The sacrifice would have been dedicated to one or more deities, and was done for a reason, even if it was to thank the Gods for the meat of the sacrifice.

Now, for the second part of that question: can meat be stored? Yes. There is evidence that meat was stored. Now I must nuance this. Sacrificial meat was not the only meat consumed by the ancient Hellenes. Even if we don't count fish, the ancient Hellenes ate meat from animals that had been killed at hunts, from species which were considered unfit for sacrifice and from animals that had died from natural causes. It is thus theoretically possible that the only meat stored were of this type. That said, ancient written sources do not uniformly describe meat as sacred, and raw meat could be taken home from a sacrifice. It would stand to reason that some of it was saved for later consumption.
 
At slaughter in family contexts to obtain meat for the dinner table as well as by butchers in the market would have most likely been accompanied by a more scaled-down version of the sacrificial structure presented above. Outside the sphere of proper sacrifice and simplified rituals there is evidence that animals could be killed and the meat eaten, though the Hellenes tried to avoid this meat. The fact remains that ancient Greek does not seem to have a term for slaughtering in a purely 'secular' context; all animals worthy of being sacrificed were sacrificed to the Theoi before the meat was distributed, sold or eaten, even at home, and even in the market square. It seems 'secular' in this case alludes to more or less ritualistic, not non-ritualistic.
 
Whom the household sacrifice was made to most likely depended on the reason for the sacrifice. Perhaps the household deities were the recipients if the sacrifice was conducted for no other reason than to put meat on the table. Perhaps it was Zeus, as King of the Gods. Perhaps, it was the God responsible for overlooking to profession of the male head of the household, so the family would continue to enjoy financial stability. In modern context, this should be no different; a sacrifice is made to ask for a blessing, or to thank for a blessing--whomever is responsible for that blessing varies.
Today at dust, the 23th of Hekatombaion starts, which is traditionally the first night in a week long series of events that make up the Panathenaia festival. Last year, I celebrated the event with a wake. I am still contemplating if I'm going to do it again, but it was quite the wonderful experience; I just don't feel like doing it alone--or better, that doing it alone removes much of the function of the pannychos--as the ancient Hellenes called the all-night series of events. Elaion is planning two events come tonight and tomorrow that I do intend to join.


I wrote about the Panathenaia before, and will be copying some of that post here, but I also want to provide more information--largely with help from Robert Clark, who has done excellent research on the Panathenaia. The Panathenaia was an Athenian festival celebrated every June in honor of the Goddess Athena. The Lesser Panathenaia (Panathenaia ta mikra) was an annual event, while the Greater (Panathenaia ta megala) was held every four years and assimilated the practices of the Panathenaia ta mikra into itself. The set date for the festival was from the 23rd to the 29th of Hekatombaion and the festival was similar, in practice, to the Olympic Games but it had its own unique elements as well. In short, The Panathenaia was the 'birthday of the city' and referred to Athens. The actual practice was very involved but usually included:
  • A procession from outside of the city walls to the Acropolis
  • The hanging of a new (and elaborately woven) garment on the shoulders of the statue of Athena inside the Parthenon, named a Peplos.
  • A torch race
  • An all-night service called the Pannychos
  • A large offering (and ritual slaughter) of a hundred cows in honor of Athena
  • A meat meal for everyone at the city's expense
  • During the Panathenaia ta megala, wrestling competitions, athletic competitions, chariot races and many other horse-based games were also held. The Panathenaia was known for its boat races.
The athletic contests included foot races, wrestling, boxing, pankration (a combination of wrestling and boxing), pentathlon (five-event contest: stade race, javelin-throw, discus throw, long jump, and wrestling), four-horse chariot and two-horse chariot races, horseback race, javelin-throw from horseback, apobatês race, pyrrhic dancing, euandria (physical fitness or beauty contest), torch relay race, and boat race.  All these events, except for the torch and boat races, were held in each of three age categories: boys (12-16), ageneios (16-20), and men (20+) and took place in the Agora until 330 BCE when a stadium was built in the outskirts of Athens.

Boat races were not typically part of Greek athletic festivals, but they may have found a place in the Panathenaic festival because of Athena's connection with boat-building. Pyrrhic dancing, physical fitness, torch relay race, and boat races were tribal competitions restricted to Athenian citizens, whereas even non-Athenians took part in the track and field and equestrian events.  Except for the four last-named contests, the prizes (for first and second place only) were varying numbers of amphoras filled with olive oil. The olive tree and its fruit were sacred to Athena and the oil was a very valuable commodity in the ancient world used for cooking, as soap, and as fuel for lamps.  The winning athletes normally sold their prize oil for cash. Besides the everyday usefulness mentioned above, olive oil was in great demand by administrators of the numerous athletic festivals throughout the Greek world. Athletes rubbed themselves with olive oil before competition and scraped it off afterwards with a metal device called a stlengis.

As an indication of value, in the fourth century B.C. the prize for the victor in the stade race (a 600 ft. long foot race) in the men's category was 100 amphoras of olive oil. In terms of today's dollar, the olive oil would be worth at a minimum $39,000 and the amphoras, which held the oil, about $1600.  Greeks from other cities were allowed to compete in all the athletic contests among individuals.  The competitions among tribes were limited to Athenians.

The two-mile torch relay race with four runners from each of the ten Athenian tribes was run from the altar of Eros outside the Dipylon gate to the Acropolis. The object was to win the race without causing the torch to go out.  The winning tribe received a bull and 100 drachmas. The fire of the winning torch was used to light the sacrificial fire on the great altar of Athena on the Acropolis. The torch race was part of an all-night (pannychos) celebration also involving music and dancing on the night before the most important day of the festival when the procession and sacrifice took place. The apobatês race and the boat race closed out the festival contests.

Three musical contests involved singers accompanying themselves on kithara (kitharôidos), singers accompanied by an aulos (a reed wind instrument similar to a clarinet or oboe), and aulos players.  The prizes for these contests were crowns (for first place winners only) and cash. For example, the first prize for the kithara-singer was an olive crown in gold worth 1,000 drachmas (at least $32,000 and 500 silver drachmas (at least $16,000).

Reciters called rhapsodes (literally, 'stitchers of song') competed at public festivals in the recitation of epic poetry, in particular the Homeric poems and other poems belonging to the Epic Cycle. They performed without musical accompaniment. Prizes are unknown.

The great procession the Panathenaia was known for assembled before dawn in the following order:
  • four little girls carrying a peplos for the life-size statue of Athena Polias 
  • priestesses of Athena and Athenian women carrying gifts 
  • sacrificial animals (bulls and sheep) for the communal meals of thanksgiving
  • metics (resident aliens), wearing purple robes and carrying trays with cakes and honeycombs for offerings 
  • musicians playing the aulos and the kithara
  • a colossal peplos (for Athena Parthenos) hung on the mast of a ship on wheels 
  • old men carrying olive branches
  • four-horse chariots with a charioteer and fully armed man (apobatês) 
  • craftswomen (ergastinai - weavers of the peplos) 
  • infantry andcavalry 
  • victors in the games 
  • ordinary Athenians arranged by deme
The procession made its way on the Panathenaic Way through the Agora towards the Acropolis.  Some sacrifices were offered on the Areopagus and in front of the temple of Athena Nikê next to the Propylaea (Gateway). Only Athenian citizens were allowed to pass through the Propylaea and enter the Acropolis. The procession passed the Parthenon and stopped at the great altar of Athena in front of the Erechtheum. Each year a newly woven peplos (robe) was taken by the craftswomen (ergastinai) into the Erechtheum and placed on a life-size old wooden statue of Athena Polias ('Guardian of the City'), while every four years in the Great Panathenaea, an enormous peplos was taken to the Acropolis for Athena Parthenos (Athena the Virgin) in the Parthenon. This peplos was so large that it was carried on the mast of a ship on wheels (like a float in a modern parade). The connection between the ship and Athena is unknown, but the use of a ship to carry the peplos must have seem appropriate in the fifth century after Athens had built the great fleet with which it dominated a large part of the Aegean world. This was followed by a huge animal sacrifice at the Athena's altar and representatives from each deme in Attica, chosen by lot, enjoyed a meat banquet along with bread and cakes.

Now, unfortunately, it's often not possible to rouse an entire city and re-create these practices. I suggest having your own torch-lit procession, pouring libations of oil and wine to Athena. Butchering a cow is a bit much so I would stick with cake offerings in the shape of bulls, or if you feel the need to offer meat, a nice bit of beef. Partake of the meal as well, as the celebration did not call for a holókaustos of the ritual offering. Study the history of Athens, read the myths of Athena and perhaps read into the history of your own city as well, as most of us don't live in Athens at this time. If you are crafty enough, and you possess a statue of Athena, make a garment for Athena and hang it around a statue of Her. Partaking in any other kind of craft are also encouraged, as Athena is the patron Goddess of crafts.
Vacation time tends to turn my brain into mush when it comes to which day of the week it is. I had no idea yesterday was Friday and it was time for another Pagan Blog Project post. So, here we are, a day late. Sorry!

As a woman, I tend to pay extra special attention to things that were 'female only' in ancient Hellas. It makes me feel closer to the Theoi somehow to apply the gender roles They were so familiar with to my daily life and my worship. As the gender balance was very clear in ancient Hellas and not so much today, and mostly because I live in a two-women household, there is not that much gender role tradition I can incorporate into my daily practice. Although I am the kurios for our household--a traditionally male role--I try to at least be very female in appearance when I come to the Theoi, and for that purpose, try to wear skirts. I also wear my hair up as a sign of devotion, and as a sign that I am married by the Gods (although my legal statues does not reflect this yet. Only the woman I love gets to see my hair undone, and although she is not a Hellenist and thinks all the 'restrictions' I place on myself are silly, she does appreciate the gesture of loyalty and devotion to her.

I am straying from the point of this post, however. Today I wanted to take some time to talk about the ololygē (ὀλολῡγή); the ritual scream women made, usually when an animal was sacrificed, but also at other sacred times. Of course, this is something I will not be needed in the regard of animal sacrifice, but it is interesting to come to the roots of this practice to see if it can be salvaged for modern use.

 Within animal sacrifice, the cry would have been uttered after the animal's throat was slit and the sacrifice accepted; I pose that this cry was thus delayed until some of the blood was poured into the fire and it crackled, popped, and most likely leaped up as a divine sign. At this point, the women cried out in the ololygē. The ololygē was thus a sign of the sacred, a cry of joy, not--as earlier scholars posed--cry of distress and relief of tension that was released the moment the blade cut into the neck of the animal. In fact, later scholarship finds very little excitement--either positive or negative--about the actual death of the animal; it is the Gods' acceptance that counts.

The view that the ololygē was a sacred cry of joy is reflected further by the fact that the same word was often used in plays. Here, the cry was sometimes shared between men and those who played women, and occurred when something especially divine took place. It also comes back in poetry, especially that which was performed as a kind of play, like in the Dithyrambs by Bacchylides (Βακχυλίδης), a 5th century BC lyrical poet:

"Theseus appeared beside the ship with its slender stern. Oh, from what thoughts did he stop the war-lord of Knossos, when he emerged unwetted from the sea, a marvel to all, and the gifts of the gods shone on his body. The splendid-throned maidens cried out with new-founded joy, and the sea resounded."

It seems that the ololygē was a way to mark a moment of divine presence; a way to put emphasis on the sacred. In this light, the ololygē is not outdated at all, but it is, however, vague. What follows is completely inferred by yours truly as a likely scenario after reading the precious little information about this cry. I pose that the women uttering this cry had their hands raised to the Theoi--as was customary when addressing and acknowledging the Theoi in any way. I think that the cry itself was not so much the horror-filled scream we're used to seeing in movies, but more a loiud utterance of praise on behalf of the Theoi. In fact, I think it might have been fairly close in feel to the praise gospel choirs give to their God: the exuberant exclamation of 'Halleluiah, praise the Lord!' that the ancient Hellene would have felt for the Theoi as well. I also doubt all women screamed out the same thing; it might have been quite the cacophony. Of course, this is speculation of the highest degree, and if you have any further information, I would love to hear it. As a note, I think wailing for the dead was done in much the same way, but with the hands cast down towards the earth, and utterances of praise to the deceased, as well as prayers to the Khthonic Gods.

Especially in group ritual, women could fulfill the ololygē easily; at home, I, for example, already give praise to the Theoi in a similar manner. Especially in group ritual, the ololygē would give female participants an extra way to feel included, an strengthen kharis with the Theoi in question. It would also look and sound quite captivating, I would think. Do you have experience with the ololygē? I would love to hear about it!

 Image source: here.
Tonight, the 12th of Hekatombion marks the start of the ancient Hellenic Kronia festival. I have written about this festival last year, but didn't go into detail about how the festival was celebrated in ancient Hellas. To recap last year's post: the Kronia honors Kronos, Zeus' father, not to be confused with Khronos; creator of the Gods and Lord of Time. For more on His mythology, see last year's post.

In Athens, Kronos and Rhea--His wife and sister--shared a temple. They represented an age before the Theoi took to rule; a time when societal rules did not exist yet, and there was no hierarchy. As such, on the day Kronos was worshipped, the fixed order of society was suspended, and slaves joined--and even ruled over--a banquet given by their masters; they ran through the streets screaming and hollering. On Krete, they could whip their masters. As much fun as this was, the day served as a reminder that for a society to function, societal rules were necessary, and as such, it was also necessary for Zeus to overthrow His father and assume the throne.

Besides a banquette, the Kronia must have been celebrated with an official sacrifice as well, in the temple to Him and Rhea, as the Kronia was a harvest festival of sorts. Unlike many rites to Demeter, the Kronia focused on the harvest--most likely of cereals--that was completed around this time. It was the end of a hectic period where slaves were worked hard, and their masters as well. A communal meal and a little bit of payback on the side of the serfs was most likely at the root of this festival, along with gratitude for the successful harvest; the Hellenic summers were too hot to grow much of anything, so the food eaten in this barren season ahead needed to be taken in and thrashed (where needed) prior to the swell of summer heat. The Kronia was a good mark for this.

There is a little bit of evidence that human sacrifice--in the form of 'scapegoat' rituals was performed on or around the date of the Kronia in the very distant past, but by the time Hellas--and especially Athens--became civilized in the way we speak of today, this practice was long outdated. It seems that a criminal condemned to death was taken outside of the city gates for a reason now lost to us, possibly fed copious amounts of wine, and then killed in honor (or placation) of Kronos. Needless to say, there is no reason to bring this practice back.

What one can bring back is a sacrifice to Kronos and a communal meal. We don't have serfs any more, but a family meal is always a good Hellenistic tradition. What kind of offering Kronos received is lost to us, but I suspect it was an animal sacrifice. Of course there are many alternatives today, and libations of wine, offerings of 'first fruits' in the form of grains, or cakes come to mind. here is an Orphic hymn to Kronos, which one can recite with fumigations of Storax:

"Etherial father, mighty Titan, hear, great fire of Gods and men, whom all revere: Endu'd with various council, pure and strong, to whom perfection and decrease belong. Consum'd by thee all forms that hourly die, by thee restor'd, their former place supply; The world immense in everlasting chains, strong and ineffable thy pow'r contains. Father of vast eternity, divine, O mighty Saturn [Kronos], various speech is thine: Blossom of earth and of the starry skies, husband of Rhea, and Prometheus wife. Obstetric Nature, venerable root, from which the various forms of being shoot; No parts peculiar can thy pow'r enclose, diffus'd thro' all, from which the world arose, O, best of beings, of a subtle mind, propitious hear to holy pray'rs inclin'd; The sacred rites benevolent attend, and grant a blameless life, a blessed end." [XII]


Image source: Kronos