Showing posts with label Xenophon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Xenophon. Show all posts
The Gods have proclaimed laws; ethical guidelines at least. They can be followed to a tee and if one does, one might expect the Gods to reward that person. I think we all expect that, deep down. Euripides, after all, in 'Elektra' had Castor proclaim the following at the very end:
"As we go through the plains of the air,
we do not come to the aid of those who are polluted;
but we save and release from severe hardships
those who love piety and justice in their ways of life.
And so, let no one wish to act unjustly,
or set sail with perjurers; as a god,
I give this address to mortals." [1341]

And yet, some of the Gods' most loyal followers seem unable to ever catch a break. They struggle with health, money, friendships, love... and along the way, they begin to doubt. They might doubt themselves at first--question if they are, indeed, practicing right, if they are, indeed, pleasing the Gods--and then the Gods. They might question their fairness, Their judgement... and perhaps Their very existence. It is, after all, the age old question: why do the Gods take care of some but not of others? We are not the first to ponder this. Xenophon, in 'Oeconomicos' wrote:'

"I seem to realise that, while the gods have made it im-
possible for men to prosper without knowing and
attending to the things they ought to do, to some of
the wise and careful they grant prosperity, and to
some deny it." [11.8]

No one has a clear cut answer. Even the ancient Hellenes accepted this faith as was. Xenophon goes on to say:

"...and therefore I begin by worshipping
the gods, and try to conduct myself in such a way
that I may have health and strength in answer to
my prayers, the respect of my fellow-citizens, the
affection of my friends, safety with honour in war,
and wealth increased by honest means." [11.8]

So why do we do it? Why do we foollow proper practice? Why do we sacrifice and labour like Xenophon wrote? Antiphon, in his 'On the Choreutes' says it best, I feel:

"Most of the life of man rests upon hope;
and by defying the gods
and committing transgressions against them,
he would rob himself even of hope,
the greatest of human blessings." [5]
The Gods have proclaimed laws; ethical guidelines at least. They can be followed to a tee and if one does, one might expect the Gods to reward that person. I think we all expect that, deep down. Euripides, after all, in 'Elektra' had Castor proclaim the following at the very end:
 
"As we go through the plains of the air,
we do not come to the aid of those who are polluted;
but we save and release from severe hardships
those who love piety and justice in their ways of life.
And so, let no one wish to act unjustly,
or set sail with perjurers; as a god,
I give this address to mortals." [1341]

And yet, some of the Gods' most loyal followers seem unable to ever catch a break. They struggle with health, money, friendships, love... and along the way, they begin to doubt. They might doubt themselves at first--question if they are, indeed, practicing right, if they are, indeed, pleasing the Gods--and then the Gods. They might question their fairness, Their judgement... and perhaps Their very existence. It is, after all, the age old question: why do the Gods take care of some but not of others? We are not the first to ponder this. Xenophon, in 'Oeconomicos' wrote:'

"I seem to realise that, while the gods have made it im-
possible for men to prosper without knowing and
attending to the things they ought to do, to some of
the wise and careful they grant prosperity, and to
some deny it." [11.8]

No one has a clear cut answer. Even the ancient Hellenes accepted this faith as was. Xenophon goes on to say:

"...and therefore I begin by worshipping
the gods, and try to conduct myself in such a way
that I may have health and strength in answer to
my prayers, the respect of my fellow-citizens, the
affection of my friends, safety with honour in war,
and wealth increased by honest means." [11.8]

So why do we do it? Why do we foollow proper practice? Why do we sacrifice and labour like Xenophon wrote? Antiphon, in his 'On the Choreutes' says it best, I feel:

"Most of the life of man rests upon hope;
and by defying the gods
and committing transgressions against them,
he would rob himself even of hope,
the greatest of human blessings." [5]
Ancient Hellenic society was notoriously strict about who was part of it and who was not. If you were not a citizen, you were either a doûlos--slave--or a métoikos, more commonly referred to as 'metic'. All three classes had their parts to play in Classical Hellas. In Athens, about half of the population were doûlos and métoikos. Métoikos were citizens of other Hellenic cities and beyond who came to Athens because of the unique opportunities the metropolis offered. Doûlos who bought their freedom also became métoikos. Because of their skill sets, métoikos were welcomed with open arms in Athens, but they very rarely became neutralized citizens; the best they could hope for was to become an isoteleia. As an isoteleia, they were freed from the liabilities the métoikos had. Former slaves never received either status; isoteleia or citizen.

Many famous contributors to Athenian culture and Hellenic history--like the philosopher Aristotle and the painter Polygnotos--were not Athenian citizens. Many builders of temples, as well as some of the richest businessmen and women weren't Athenian citizens. Egyptians, Cypriots and Phoenicians, all came to Athens and founded their own districts, with temples in which they could pray to their own Gods. Xenophon, in the Constitution of the Athenians, states:

"For this reason we have set up equality between slaves and free men, and between metics and citizens. The city needs metics in view of the many different trades and the fleet. Accordingly, then, we have reasonably set up a similar equality also for the metics."

Outside of Athens, métiokos were not treated as equally. Of all the poleis, only Corinth had a decently seized population of métiokos. Their legal status is unknown, however. In Sparta and Crete, foreigners were hardly ever allowed to stay.

Back in Athens, métiokos, while welcomed, were disadvantaged from the get-go. They had to register their status within a month of arrival. They had no political influence, were not entitled to governmental aid in case of emergencies, the could own no farm land or real estate unless they were given special permission by the government, and they were not allowed to procure a contract with the government to work the mines. They were, however, expected to enter the army, and pay taxes if they were wealth enough, like citizens. On top of that, they also had to pay a métoikos poll tax--the metoikon--which was twelve drachmas ($ 720,-) a year for men and six for women, as well as another special tax--xenikon telos--if they wanted to set up a stall in the market place.

Like doûlos, métiokos did have access to the judicial system; they could both prosecute others and be prosecuted themselves. Unlike citizens and very much like slaves, métiokos were not allowed to represent themselves; they needed a citizen to vouch for them--a sponsor, called prostates. For a freed slave the sponsor was automatically his former owner. Métiokos were entitled to take part in religious ceremony. Like slaves but unlike citizens, métiokos could be made to undergo judicial torture. The penalties for killing a métiokos were not as severe as for killing a citizen. Although doûlos could become métiokos, it was fairly easy for métiokos to become doûlos; a failure to pay the metoikon tax, not finding a citizen sponsor, causing trouble, marrying a citizen or claiming to be a citizen themselves could all cost them their status.

The term 'métiokos' began to lose its distinctive legal status in fourth century BC, when métiokos were allowed to act in the court without a prostates, and came to an end in Athens, when the purchase of citizenship became very frequent. Until that time, citizenship was a guarded treasure. While citizens, métiokos and doûlos were indistinguishable in appearance and behavior, society functioned largely on their separation.

Xenophobia is a dislike or fear of people from other countries or of that which is foreign or strange. While it may seem that the ancient Hellens weren't xenophobic, they did have an extreme urge to merge the foreign with the local. While doing that, they kept the locals firmly protected in a privileged bracket of society. Xenia was a sacred duty, as well as a sacred right, and it applied to citizens, doûlos and métiokos alike. Politics, protection and judicial rights, however, were entirely different matters, and if you weren't born into citizenship, attaining these rights was virtually impossible.
Two days now, I have tackled very heavy subjects in general, as well as for me personal. It becomes wearisome to write about such topics, so today, I'm writing about puppies. Well, hunting dog, but they were puppies once, so it counts. Also, as this is a Pagan Blog Project post, I should explain that there are no words starting with 'Q' in Greek because the letter does not exist in the language. 'Quarry' is the closest I'm getting so it will have to do.


Dogs had a very special and particular place in ancient Hellenic society. The Hellenic word for 'dog' is 'kuón' (κύων), and there were a couple of breeds that were favored. First and foremost, the Molossus, a now extinct species of dog related most to the mastiffs of current times, enjoyed great prestige. Another favorite was the Laconian, which was especially popular in Sparta. The Molossus was most often used as a guard dog, while the Laconian was the go-to hunting dog of the time. Also known were the Cretan, a Laconia probably crossed with the Molossian; and the Melitan, a small long-haired, short-legged lap dog.

Even back then, hunting dogs had to be purebred, which made buying a hunting pack an incredibly costly affair which came with a lot of prestige. Quarries for the Laconian hunting dogs were often wild goats, deer, and hares. For the more dangerous animals like boars and even humans, the Molossus breed was chosen.

Dogs used for the hunt had to have very different qualities than those needed to guard a house, herd, field or person. There are no existing Hellenic sources of traits looked for in either type of dog, but Marcus Nemesianus, a Roman poet, has the following to say about breeding good, strong, dogs which almost certainly applied to Hellens as well:

"... you must choose a bitch obedient to speed forward, obedient to come to heel, native to either the Spartan or the Molossian country-side, and of good pedigree. She must stand high on straight legs; with a comely slope let her carry, under a broad breast, where the ribs end, a width of keel that gradually again contracts in a lean belly: she must be big enough with strong loins, spread at the hips, and with the silkiest of ears floating in air as she runs. Give her a male to match, everywhere similarly well-sized, while strength holds sway, while bodily youth is in its joyous flower and blood abounds in the veins of early life. For burdensome diseases creep on and sluggish age, and they will produce unhealthy offspring without steadfast strength. But for breeding a difference of age in the parents is more suitable: you should release the male, keen for mating, when he has already completed forty months: and let the female be two full years old. Such is the best arrangement in their coupling. Presently when Phoebe has completed the round of two full moons since the birth-giving womb fertilised by the male began to swell, the pregnancy in its due time reveals the fruitful offspring, and straightway you see all round an abundant noisy litter."

For hunting dogs, swiftness was paramount and for guard and shepherding dogs, Marcus Varro, a notable Roman scholar and writer, advised the following: a large head, drooping ears, thick shoulders and neck, wide paws, thick tail, a deep bark, and be white in color so as to be more easily recognized in the dark, were important.

Of course, only the best in the litter were good enough to become hunting or guarding dogs. As such, the first litter of any bitch was done away completely while the second litter was (at least) halved so only the strong survived. After this, Nemesianus advices any breeder or buyer the following:

"You will be able to examine the strength of a puppy by its weight and by the heaviness of each body know in advance which will be light in running. Furthermore, you should get a series of flames made in a wide circuit with the smoke of the fire to mark a convenient round space, so that you may stand unharmed in the middle of the circle: to this all the puppies, to this the whole crowd as yet unseparated must be brought: the mother will provide the test of her progeny, saving the valuable young ones by her selection and from their alarming peril. For when she sees her offspring shut in by flames, at once with a leap she clears the blazing boundaries of the fire-zone, snatches the first in her jaws and carries it to the kennel; next another, next another in turn: so does the intelligent mother distinguish her nobler progeny by her love of merit." 

It sounds a bit harsh but I'm pretty sure no puppies (or their mothers) were harmed in this process. When the proper dog is selected, there is still the matter of naming them, and there was a definite science behind this process. Xenophon, a historian, soldier, mercenary and philosopher who lived in ancient Hellas, advices the following:

"Give the hounds short names, so as to be able to call to them easily. The names are significant of the colour, strength, spirit, sagacity or behaviour of the hounds. Hebe and Psyche are still in the list of bitches' names, and modern equivalents of several of the other names are in use, e.g. Lance (Lonché), Sentinel (Phylax), Ecstasy (Chara), Blueskin (Oenas), Crafty (Medas), Hasty (Sperchon), Vigorous (Thallon), Impetus (Hormé), Counsellor (Noës), Bustler (dog) or Hasty (bitch)."

When you have aptly named your dog, they still need to eat. As they didn't have Pedigree, the ancient Hellens had to improvise. Ordinary pups recieved barley bread softened with cow’s milk or whey, but more valuable puppies eat bread soaked in sheep or goat milk. Puppies who would grow up to hunt game recieved a little blood from the type of animal the pup was supposed to hunt. Grease stained bread, other table scaps and meat broth were also dog food favorites. After a sacrefice, dogs got special treats in the form of roasted ox liver coated in barley meal. Of course, a bit of the meat from any hunted animal was given to the dog who helped hunt it.

There are actually a lot of myths featuring dogs. The most famous are probably Atalanta and her hunting dog Aura (Breeze), Odysseus and his hunting dog Argos (who, after waiting for his master for twenty years, dies after seeing him return home) and Actaeon, who is hunted and killed by his own hunting pack after being transformed into a stag upon seeing Artemis bathe.

Artemis is associated with a lot of dog-related mythology. As the Goddess of the hunt, she is often depicted amongst her own hunting pack. Another Goddess associated with dogs is Hekate. She is often described as being of dog-shape or tended to by dog. The dog was also her favored sacrificial animal and the meat of the dog was eaten solemnly. That it was eaten at all is a testament to Hekate's rule extending even beyond the Underworld, as Khthonic (Underworld) Deities often received their sacrificial offerings in a holókaustos. A famous Underworld dog is, of course, the three-headed Kerberos who guards the entrance gates.

Dogs aren't a requirement for the modern practice of Hellenismos, but they are a nice throw-back to life in ancient Hellas. Modern Hellenists take in a dog for any reason a non-Hellenist might; companionship, guard duty, hunting, education or simply because they are so very, very cute.