Arête and the tenets of Solon

Ethics are at the very core of Hellenismos, and they support the heart of human life: arête, the act of living up to one's full potential. When one lives the way of arête, they live their life ethically, consciously, and in happiness. That is the true potential of arête: a life of happiness.

Living up to arête is not easy: it challenges up to be our best mentally, physically, and spiritually. It means taking control of our life, to become an active participant in it. To place blame only on yourself when things go wrong, and to keep trying to reach your goals, no matter what setbacks you suffer. Arête should become a way of life, and in that way of life, an ethical framework is essential. Ethics give you the tools to create internal order and consistent action. Both are necessary for happiness. Ethics will remove doubt, fears and regrets from your life, as you know exactly what you should and should not do to become the best you can be. 

The ancient Hellenes had many guidelines for this ethical framework. As such, Hellenismos is known for its highly developed ethical system, derived from ancient scripture like the Delphic Maxims I keep going on about as well as scholarly works like the Homeric Hymns, the Tenets of Solon, the Ethics of Aristotle (1,2), the Golden Verses of Pythagoras, the Philosophy of Epicurus, the Stoics, Works and Days by Hesiod and many, many others.

Today, I want to look into Solon and his tenets. Solon (Σόλων) was an Athenian statesman, lawmaker, and poet, who lived from 638 BC to 558 BC. He spend most of his adult life trying to legislate against political, economic, and moral decline in archaic Athens. His ideologies are often credited with having laid the foundations for Athenian democracy.

As a statesman, Solon put principles before expediency. In a time when Athens was struggling under the burden of civil war, his reforms strove to bridge the gap between the rich an the poor. He cancelled all debts, and purchased the freedom of all slaves, allowing everyone to start with a clean slate. This caused a massive financial crisis, for which new reforms were necessary, including new trade ties, and an halt in the export of all foodstuffs but olive oil, of which there was plenty. Solon did not stop there, however. Once he was given full legislative powers, he abolished political distinctions of birth in politics. Instead, he created four new groups:

• Thetes, the lowest group, who paid no taxes, provided no equipment city state or its army, and who were not eligible to hold an office of any kind.
• Zeugitae, the second lowest group, who paid tax at the lowest rate, provided body armor to the Athenian army, and who were eligible to hold office.
• Hippeus, the second highest group, who paid higher taxes at the middle rate, provided their own war horse when they served in the army, and they were eligible for higher offices.
• Pentacosiomedimni, the top class of citizens, who paid the highest amount of taxes, and were eligible for all top positions of government in Athens. Archons were chosen from this class.

Further political reforms brought stability to the political landscape, and eventually to the economic climate as well. From Diogénes Laértios (Διογένης Λαέρτιος), a Hellenic biographer, in his 'Lives of Eminent Philosophers':

"He was the first person also who assembled the nine archons together to deliver their opinions, as Apollodorus tells us in the second book of his Treatise on Lawgivers. And once, when there was a sedition in the city, he took part neither with the citizens, nor with the inhabitants of the plain, nor with the men of the sea-coast."

He gave the following advice, as is recorded by Apollodorus in his Treatise on the Sects of Philosophers (as written down by Laértios):

(1) Consider your honour, as a gentleman, of more weight than an oath.

(2) Never speak falsely.

(3) Pay attention to matters of importance.

(4) Be not hasty in making friends; and do not cast off those whom you have made.

(5) Rule, after you have first learnt to submit to rule.

(6) Advise not what is most agreeable, but what is best.

(7) Make reason your guide.

(8) Do not associate with the wicked.

(9) Honour the gods;

(10) respect your parents. 

Pausanias, in his 'Description of Greece', lists Solon as one of the seven sages whose aphorisms adorned Apollo's temple in Delphi (XXIV), and so it is not odd that many of Solon's tenets have a Delphinian counterpart in the maxims. These are common themes, reflected in most of the ethical teachings listed above. Common themes are honor, honesty, intelligent decision making, and family. Coincidentally--or perhaps not so much--these are also at the base of arête. 

• Monday, October 18, 2021
  ancient Hellenic culture Appollodorus arete Delphic Maxims Diogénes Laértios ethics Ethike Arete Hellenismos 101 Pausanias politics slavery slaves Solon

Gift-giving in ancient Hellas

It's the season of gift-giving! Even while socially distanced, this is possible, and of course encouraged. Who doesn't like gifts? And spreading some joy? Order online and have it delivered, or drop gifts off at the door. Why not buy someone a subscription to a service they might enjoy? Options galore! But where does the practice come from and is it important in Hellenism?

Giving gifts to friends, family members, or even acquaintances and complete strangers is a long standing tradition. It existed long before ancient Hellas, but was, indeed, a vital part of its culture. It was tied to both kharis and xenia. Gifts were exchanged between monarchs of city-states to create good will, and were thus an important part of diplomacy. All votives, thank-offerings, and pinakes were gifts from mortals to Theoi. Athletic competitions always concluded with a price--a gift--awarded to the winner. Gifts were given to the submissive partner in a pederastic relationship, and to favored prostitutes and serfs. Gifts played a much more significant role in ancient Hellenic society as a whole than they do in ours today. The giving of gifts in ancient Hellas was not just a social event, however. There was far more to the practice than one might assume, and today, we will look at the tradition of gift giving in greater detail.

I have spoken of the importance of gifts in xenia before. A gift given as part of ritual hospitality was called a xenion (ξεινήιον). This xenion was expected to be expensive, and was presented to the guest upon departure. Needless to say, this practice was mostly executed by nobility, or at least the elite, and happened mostly when a man of equal social standing from another nation or city-state came to visit. In the Odysseia, Telemachos, son of Odysseus, receives from Menelaus a cup made by Hēphaistos Himself:

"But stay here in the palace, till the eleventh or the twelfth day, and I will send you off with honours, and fine gifts, a shining chariot with a trio of horses, and a glorious cup with which to pour libations to the deathless gods, while remembering me all your days."

The practice of gift giving to someone of another nation whom you might never see again, might seem counter-intuitive, but it's actually quite the opposite. By presenting a foreign equal with a great gift, not only do you establish kharis between the two of you, you also indebt the other person to you: they can not repay your kindness at this time, but they will compensate you for it when you visit, or when you are in need. On top of that, the recieving party will go home with tales of your hospitality, and your wealth, providing a boost in stature to the family and the land. It increases the honor of both, something very important to the ancient Hellenes. Gifts, in this context, functioned as a means of communication, legitimization, and mediation between benefactors and cities.

Beyond the elite, gift-giving was still very important, especially between men. The practice was a feature of the symposion, where it was displayed between men in a pederastic relationship, as well as between men of equal standing. Pederasty was where a mature male would take a young boy as his pupil and lover. The relationship was not about love: it was a social construct that allowed to boy time to get to know influential men, and to work himself up into their ranks. Because of this, there were many ritual acts connected to the practice, amongst which the giving of gifts, from mentor to pupil. Three gifts were traditional: military attire, an ox, and a drinking cup, but the youth most certainly received more expensive gifts.

One of the places the young lover would have been taken was the symposion. By allowing the young boy into the symposion it enabled the adults to prepare them for adult life and war in particular. Once the boys grew up, they became one of the men, taking young boys as lovers themselves, and teaching them the ropes of adult malehood. Gift giving in this context allows for a community to become closer, and for a young boy to prepare for his life as a man. Giving gifts--to their young lovers, as well as to those of equal age and standing--allowed men to teach the importance of equal distribution and redistribution of wealth, which was a founding factor of (mostly Athenian) society. It was also a status symbol: if one had time to visit the symposia, and give expensive gifts, they were not only citizens, but wealthy citizens, a clear mark that they were fit for greater responsibility within the political landscape of the city.

Most of these examples are from wealthy city-states like Athens, but there is evidence of gift-giving in other city-states as well. Sparta, for example, greatly frowned upon the flaunting of wealth, but they, too, gave gifts. These, however, were mostly practical in nature between the citizens themselves--fresh game, honey, perhaps a hunting dog--and were honors bestowed upon the person in the case of big events, or an a-symmetrical relationship. A Spartan winner of important sporting events, for example, would be allowed a place in the royal guard of the King, where Athenian winners would be set up for life, including food, housing, and status.

Another form of gift-giving was from a wealthy citizen to the community. This practice was dubbed 'Euergetism', from the Hellenic 'εὐεργετέω': 'I do good things'. While the money spent this way was, indeed a voluntary action on the part of the citizen, he was socially obligated to participate in the practice. Many roads and public buildings were funded this way, and thus bore the name of the citizen that had donated the funds--something we find archeological evidence for to this day.

Gift giving was of vital importance in the Archaic and Early Classical times, most notably in a social, ethical, economic, and political context. In the Classical period--which witnessed the development of elaborate monetary and law systems--the giving of gifts, and the associated benefits, became less prominent in economic and political contexts, though it did remain central in social and religious systems. Gift-giving and reciprocity did return to the Athenian stage, however, in the Hellenistic age, when much of the previously described took place.

Gift giving was of unparalleled important to the ancient Hellenes, but has lost much of its standing today. For those who reconstruct the ancient Hellenic religion, it might be a good exercise to examine these practices, and implement a symbolic exchange. Lavish gifts would not be necessary, but a parting gift by the host on days then the group comes together might make a nice, ritualistic, reminder that the contributions of the group were welcomed, and the effort to travel to the meeting place recognized--after the pandemic, of course!

This Christmas, we'll do door drop-offs with the family and then we're all meeting on Zoom from the safety of our own homes to unwrap the gifts we've gotten and read the poems we write along with them out loud to one another. You make do in a pandemic! 

Stay safe this season and stay smart. It's just one Christmas, the risks are not worth it.

Image taken from: Sparta Reconsidered

• Tuesday, December 15, 2020
  ancient Hellenic culture current affairs Hellenismos 101 Hēphaistos kharis Menelaus Odysseia Odysseus Pagan Blog Project pederasty personal slavery slaves symposion Telemachos Xenia

Classification of slaves in ancient Hellas

I have talked about slavery in ancient Hellas quite a bit on my blog. You an read the masterpost, if you will, here. The word 'slave' wasn't known in ancient Hellas, in fact, the first mention of the word dates back to the seventh century C.E.. A Hellenic slave was called a doûlos (δούλος), which would translate best as a 'servant' or 'serf'.  In ancient Hellas, doûlos were the working class. They were teachers, farmers, shop owners, herders, doctors, city militia, cleaners, etc. 

In democratic city states, the doûlos were protected by law and their masters were urged to care for them and treat them as fellow human beings. If a serf felt they were being mistreated by their master, they could seek asylum in a temple and request a new master. Murdering a doûlos was an equally severe crime as the murder of a free man. No servant could be executed on a whim; a court ruling was required. For a serf to be executed there should be a special reason imposed to the court. Any slave could buy his freedom for a certain amount of money and the state itself sometimes freed its serfs on their own accord. 

Of course, this all sounds a bit too positive. These conditions were prevalent in democratic city states but outside of those, life was hard for serfs. In Sparta, for example, serfs could be executed at will and were worked hard. Revolts happened on occasion. Punishment was prevalent, even in the democratic city states, and lashings were common place. Even if that wasn't the case, a huge portion of serfs were 'barbarian' men, women and children who had been kidnapped from their homes in non-Hellenic territories or who had lived for centuries on the land that the Hellens overtook.

Still, slavery was an ideal condition for some people in ancient Hellas. Poverty and diseases were so prevalent in those days that people preferred to be slaves to wealthy people so that they could survive those hardships. This gave them a level of economic security in that poverty-stricken world. Were all the slaves treated in the same manner? Here are three classifications of slaves.

Domestic Slaves

Domestic slaves in ancient Hellas would do everything around the house, including cooking, gardening, cleaning, washing, reading, writing, taking care of babies, and the sick. They also escorted their masters, carried and delivered messages, acted as travel companions, and did pretty much anything that has to be done at home. Since the slaves were regarded as a breathing piece of property, the quality of their lives just depended on their luck. If they were lucky enough to be acquired by a kind and humane master or mistress, they would perhaps be treated as a family member, of course, with strict limits. The slave would be incorporated into the family through a special ceremony. It was similar to the ceremony for a newborn baby to be incorporated into the family. These domestic slaves were likely to strengthen their ties with their masters or mistresses. If the slave took care of the children as a female nurse or a male paidagôgos, they were more likely to develop such ties. Interestingly, the words pedagogue and pedagogy come from the Greek word paidagôgos, which means a slave working as a tutor.

One such close relationship is portrayed in the Odyssey. We see this in the relationship between Odysseus and his nurse, Eurycleia. They were so close that when Odysseus returned from Ithaca disguised as a beggar, she notices the scar on his thigh. She is particularly trusted by Odysseus and his family because she was a freeborn, and was captured and sold by pirates.

Although there were many cases in which the masters were not totally satisfied with the services of their slaves, they were likely to win the hearts of their masters or mistresses. This was especially true if they had been with them from childhood as their nurses or tutors. Another sign that indicated the slaves were parts of the family was that they were buried in the family plots.

Despite all these close relationships, the owner was free to abuse his slave physically or sexually. Also, if the slave was too old or weak to fulfill their duties, the owner was at liberty to throw them out. At the time of economic crisis or famine, slaves would lose their rations, but otherwise, domestic servants were mostly paid well and their livelihood was secured.

Agricultural Slaves

The size of this slave workforce is much disputed. In Athens, the number depended on the number of peasant proprietors and large landowners. Peasant farmers were more likely to hire seasonal workers than having slaves for the job because the former were considerably cheaper.

The status, comfort, and security of the agricultural slaves were not the same as that of the domestic slaves. That’s because the agricultural slaves had limited contact with their master and couldn’t develop personal relationships with them. If they fell sick, they could be killed because they were not worthy anymore. Although there are no clear clues, it is speculated that the agricultural slaves were restrained in leg irons at night, like those who worked for the Romans.

Other Types of Slaves

In addition to domestic and agricultural slaves, there was a class of slaves called chôris oikountes, or those living separately. They did not live with their masters and worked as managers of shops and factories, bankers, captains of trading ships, bailiffs, artisans, and so on. This class of slaves existed because the Greeks did not like to work for other people. These slaves were considerably free and independent and worked on behalf of their masters on commission.

The dêmosioi, or the public ones, was another class of slaves in ancient Hellas. These slaves were owned by the state. Notaries, coin testers, jury clerks, and public executioners belonged to this class of slaves. Their jobs were generally considered demeaning. Road menders or masons also belonged to this group.

The industrial workers in ancient Hellas were also slaves. Their condition was the worst of the lot. They worked in mines or quarries, like Egyptian slaves. The working conditions were so adverse that some of them died because they had to work 24/7 non-stop.

• Wednesday, August 12, 2020
  ancient Hellenic culture Mythology 101 Odysseia slavery slaves

Arête and the tenets of Solon

Ethics are at the very core of Hellenismos, and they support the heart of human life: arête, the act of living up to one's full potential. When one lives the way of arête, they live their life ethically, consciously, and in happiness. That is the true potential of arête: a life of happiness.

Living up to arête is not easy: it challenges up to be our best mentally, physically, and spiritually. It means taking control of our life, to become an active participant in it. To place blame only on yourself when things go wrong, and to keep trying to reach your goals, no matter what setbacks you suffer. Arête should become a way of life, and in that way of life, an ethical framework is essential. Ethics give you the tools to create internal order and consistent action. Both are necessary for happiness. Ethics will remove doubt, fears and regrets from your life, as you know exactly what you should and should not do to become the best you can be. 

The ancient Hellenes had many guidelines for this ethical framework. As such, Hellenismos is known for its highly developed ethical system, derived from ancient scripture like the Delphic Maxims I keep going on about as well as scholarly works like the Homeric Hymns, the Tenets of Solon, the Ethics of Aristotle (1,2), the Golden Verses of Pythagoras, the Philosophy of Epicurus, the Stoics, Works and Days by Hesiod and many, many others.

Today, I want to look into Solon and his tenets. Solon (Σόλων) was an Athenian statesman, lawmaker, and poet, who lived from 638 BC to 558 BC. He spend most of his adult life trying to legislate against political, economic, and moral decline in archaic Athens. His ideologies are often credited with having laid the foundations for Athenian democracy.

As a statesman, Solon put principles before expediency. In a time when Athens was struggling under the burden of civil war, his reforms strove to bridge the gap between the rich an the poor. He cancelled all debts, and purchased the freedom of all slaves, allowing everyone to start with a clean slate. This caused a massive financial crisis, for which new reforms were necessary, including new trade ties, and an halt in the export of all foodstuffs but olive oil, of which there was plenty. Solon did not stop there, however. Once he was given full legislative powers, he abolished political distinctions of birth in politics. Instead, he created four new groups:

• Thetes, the lowest group, who paid no taxes, provided no equipment city state or its army, and who were not eligible to hold an office of any kind.
• Zeugitae, the second lowest group, who paid tax at the lowest rate, provided body armor to the Athenian army, and who were eligible to hold office.
• Hippeus, the second highest group, who paid higher taxes at the middle rate, provided their own war horse when they served in the army, and they were eligible for higher offices.
• Pentacosiomedimni, the top class of citizens, who paid the highest amount of taxes, and were eligible for all top positions of government in Athens. Archons were chosen from this class.

Further political reforms brought stability to the political landscape, and eventually to the economic climate as well. From Diogénes Laértios (Διογένης Λαέρτιος), a Hellenic biographer, in his 'Lives of Eminent Philosophers':

"He was the first person also who assembled the nine archons together to deliver their opinions, as Apollodorus tells us in the second book of his Treatise on Lawgivers. And once, when there was a sedition in the city, he took part neither with the citizens, nor with the inhabitants of the plain, nor with the men of the sea-coast."

He gave the following advice, as is recorded by Apollodorus in his Treatise on the Sects of Philosophers (as written down by Laértios):

(1) Consider your honour, as a gentleman, of more weight than an oath.

(2) Never speak falsely.

(3) Pay attention to matters of importance.

(4) Be not hasty in making friends; and do not cast off those whom you have made.

(5) Rule, after you have first learnt to submit to rule.

(6) Advise not what is most agreeable, but what is best.

(7) Make reason your guide.

(8) Do not associate with the wicked.

(9) Honour the gods;

(10) respect your parents. 

Pausanias, in his 'Description of Greece', lists Solon as one of the seven sages whose aphorisms adorned Apollo's temple in Delphi (XXIV), and so it is not odd that many of Solon's tenets have a Delphinian counterpart in the maxims. These are common themes, reflected in most of the ethical teachings listed above. Common themes are honor, honesty, intelligent decision making, and family. Coincidentally--or perhaps not so much--these are also at the base of arête. 

• Monday, July 8, 2019
  ancient Hellenic culture Appollodorus arete Delphic Maxims Diogénes Laértios ethics Ethike Arete Hellenismos 101 Pausanias politics slavery slaves Solon

If you are a stranger, act like one (Ξνος ων ισθι)

'If you are a stranger, act like one' is a Delphic Maxim that can be interpreted in many, many ways. I'm going to try to cover all the angles, but I am sure your interpretation of this maxim will be slightly different than mine, regardless. 

Traveling in ancient Hellas was not done on a whim. Most people stayed at home, or at least near their city or village, unless work or emergency called them away. The road could be a treacherous place, and the sea even more so. Family tended to stay close together, so people rarely had to travel out to visit parents or other loved ones. While there were mot certainly reasons to visit or move to other city states, a lot of people in ancient Hellas never had to, so why the maxim?

As I have written before, 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. Métoikos were citizens of other Hellenic cities and beyond who came to Athens because of the unique opportunities the metropolis offered.

In ancient 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.

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. 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.

While citizens, métiokos and doûlos were indistinguishable in appearance and behavior, society functioned largely on their separation. Only Corinth and Athens had large populations of métoikos, but all city states had rules concerning their legal, religious, and societal status. Athens had the most lenient ones, but it was still easy for a métoikos to step out of line, and that could easily lead to a life of slavery. As such, knowing to 'act like a stranger' was a vital piece of knowledge for anyone choosing to visit or live in a city that was not the one he was born in. As such, the maxim in this regard does not so much allude to attitude, but awareness: a constant sense of knowing your place, even if you lived in a city for many years. You, as a métoikos, had a role to fulfill, and clear lines which not to cross. As such, specific behavior was asked of you, and you had to be familiar with these rules.

A second interpretation is related to xenia. Hospitality in ancient Hellenic was a complicated ritual within both the host and the guest has certain roles to fill and tasks to perform. Especially when someone unknown to the host came to the door, the ritual held great value. The host has many tasks in his process, but the guest has an important part to play as well: the guest is expected to be courteous and not be a burden to the host. The house was a sanctuary in ancient Hellas with a lot of social rules attached to it. Guests could not enter certain parts of the house, and male guests were kept away from women at all times. Long term guests had a slightly different statues, as they became part of the oikos, but they were still subject to restrictions when it came to social an religious behavior. Again, the maxim would have reminded guests to be mindful of their hosts and to be grateful to be included in the oikos of another.

The last point from ancient Hellas I want to make is religious. Métoikos and houseguests were almost always passive participants of religious rites. In the oikos, the kurios performed the rites, and in state festivals, Archons and priests performed that function. Métoikos were barred from attending a number of festivals. That said, the way Hellenic ritual structure worked, meant that even visitors of a city would recognize what was going on, and they would be able to partake of the rite fairly easily. There were undoubtedly differences between city states, but the basics were always there. This meant that rituals did not have to be adjusted for métoikos, and kharis would be preserved. In this spirit, I still call for standardization of practices within modern Hellenismos.

In a modern context, acting like a stranger, when you are one, means to be an attentive guest, to not overstay your welcome, to follow the rules of the house you are in and to ask for clarification if you are not sure what the host expects of you. It means investing time and energy into getting to know the place and people you are visiting, and to observe that this place and these people are not there to serve you: you are a guest, and as such, it is your place to follow their lead. To me, this maxim calls for modesty and attentiveness, and those are not bad virtues to foster within yourself. 

• Sunday, May 12, 2019
  ancient Hellenic culture Delphic Maxims Hellenismos 101 métoikos slavery slaves Xenia

Repost: Would you wash a stranger's feet?

Today's post is a repost of a blog I posted near the start of Baring the Aegis. I do this occasionally when I think the post deserves to be read by more people, like this one. It's about the practice of the washing of feet within the context of xenia. It's something I have been curious about ever since I first read the Odysseia. 

When I first read the Odysseia, I was struck by a two of the later passages, where Odysseus is home, but in disguise, waiting to take his revenge on the suiters of his wife Penelope. During these passages, Penelope offers xenia to Odysseus, disguised as beggar.

"But, come, my maids, wash the strangers’ feet and make his bed, with blankets and bright rugs over the bedstead, so he may rest till golden-throned Dawn in warmth and comfort. In the morning early, bathe and oil him, so he is ready to breakfast in the hall, sitting by Telemachus’ side. And if any man vexes him and pains his spirit, so much the worse for that man’s prospects: he’ll gain nothing here, rage as he might."

A little later on, Odysseus has refused the washing of his feet by anyone but Eurykleia, his nursemaid whom is still alive, and living at the house. Penelope agrees to have the old woman wash Odysseus' feet, which she does while she laments the fate of Odysseus:

"Perhaps the women of some great house mocked at him in a far-off foreign land, just as these shameless hussies here mock you, sir.  You will not let them wash your feet, for fear of their insults, but wise Penelope, Icarius’ daughter, knowing my willingness, has asked me to wash them. So I shall wash your feet for Penelope’s sake and yours, while my heart is stirred with sadness. But listen to one thing I must say. Many a long-suffering traveller have we welcomed here, but never a man resembling another as you resemble Odysseus in looks and voice – even your feet.’

Then resourceful Odysseus answered her, saying: ‘That is what everyone says who has met us both, old woman, that we are very alike, as you remark.’

With this, the old woman, preparing to wash his feet, poured cold water into the shining basin then added hot. Odysseus swiftly sat down by the hearth, and turned towards the shadows, though he had a sudden premonition that as she handled him she would notice his scar and the truth would be out. As she approached and began to wash him, so it was: she immediately knew the scar Odysseus had received from a white-tusked boar, while hunting on Parnassus, when visiting his mother’s father, noble Autolycus, the greatest of all in thievery and oath-making.

[...]

It was this scar the old woman felt as she passed her hands over his leg, and recognising it she let his leg fall. The bronze rang as his foot struck the basin, upsetting it, and spilling the water on the ground. Joy and pain filled her heart at the same moment, her eyes filled with tears and her voice caught in her throat. She touched Odysseus’ face and said: ‘It is Odysseus, it must be. Child, I did not know you, until my hands had touched my master’s limbs."

Ancient evidence suggests there were three major contexts in which foot-washing was important: body hygiene, xenia, and religion. The first is easy to grasp: the ancient Hellenes rarely wore shoes. They tended to travel barefoot, or with light, open sandals. Boots were only for the rich. As roads were unpaved, and often dusty in the dry and hot climate, a traveler's feet tended to get dusty and dirty. Upon arrival at their destination, it was customary--and part of xenia--to offer the traveler a chance to wash their feet. Those with female serfs could offer the service of one of them to have their guest wash the guest's feet for them. In cases where no serfs were present, in case of very special guests--especially those above the host in standing--or between great friends, the host could offer to wash the feet of his guest for them.

Foot-washing was often the chore of female serfs, and was considered lowly work. For the ancient Hellenes, honor was very important. To wash the feet of those below themselves in standing was a breach of societal rules and would most likely be looked upon negatively, or even outright refused. I have found no ancient texts to support this, but I suspect that washing the feet of one of equal standing would be done only between dear friends, perhaps between those who had fought together and saved each other's lives. I suspect that, if this is true, this would extend also to the son(s) of one of the men: the son of the deceased host would extend these honors to the family guest to whom the father was indebted.

At home, washing the feet of elderly family members was considered a form of respect. Aristophanes, in The Wasps (Sphēkes/Σφῆκες ), mentions the pride and joy felt by a rich man when his daughter washes and anoints his feet upon his return from a day of hard work:

"But I am forgetting the most pleasing thing of all. When I return home with my pay, everyone runs to greet me because of my money. First my daughter bathes me, anoints my feet, stoops to kiss me and, while she is calling me "her dearest father," fishes out my triobolus with her tongue; then my little wife comes to wheedle me and brings a nice light cake; she sits beside me and entreats me in a thousand ways, "Do take this now; do have some more." All this delights me hugely." 

Women rarely traveled--if at all--so as far as I can tell, no record of the washing of feet of women, or between women, has survived. I also suspect that this has to do with modesty: in an age where women often went around baring one or two breasts, the ankles and feet were almost always covered up. To bare one's feet--to a man--might have been a sign of seduction. In the rare event of a woman traveling, she would travel with her husband, father, brothers, and/or female serfs. Once arriving at her destination, she would undoubtedly have been allowed and encouraged to wash up and change her clothing. If she had serfs, she would be assisted by them. Else, serfs of the hosting household might have lend a hand, or even the wife of the host. I do wonder if they would ever was the feet of one another.

It seems it was also considered unclean and disrespectful to the Theoi to enter a temple with unwashed feet. Some temples, therefor, offered special basins which a traveler could make use of. It's difficult to find proper information about this, however, because the washing of feet in a religious context is now considered a near-solely Abrahamic thing, and bible quotes are far easier to find than ancient Hellenic texts on the subject. I'm still picking apart Christian and Jewish writings for clues about the Hellenic practice.

I am not sure why this subject interests me so. There is something so very intimate and humbling in the practice; it speaks to me in a way that goes beyond the intellectual. I imagine that having your feet washed upon arrival would make you feel both welcome and respected--as that was what it was, a sign of respect. I would also imagine it would be wonderful to bestow a honor like this to a valued guest. If shared between host and guest--or simply very good friends, or even lovers--it would strengthen the bond between them, and be a wonderful way to practice strong xenia. I think it's a beautiful practice, although not very applicable in modern Hellenismos. Agreements could be made about this, though, like the giving of gifts--another vital part of xenia.

• Friday, January 18, 2019
  ancient Hellenic culture daily practice Eurykleia Hellenismos 101 Odysseia Odysseus Penelope slavery slaves Xenia

Would you wash a stranger's feet?

Today we will look into the little talked about practice of the washing of feet within the context of xenia. It's something I have been curious about ever since I first read the Odysseia. 

When I first read the Odysseia, I was struck by a two of the later passages, where Odysseus is home, but in disguise, waiting to take his revenge on the suiters of his wife Penelope. During these passages, Penelope offers xenia to Odysseus, disguised as beggar.

"But, come, my maids, wash the strangers’ feet and make his bed, with blankets and bright rugs over the bedstead, so he may rest till golden-throned Dawn in warmth and comfort. In the morning early, bathe and oil him, so he is ready to breakfast in the hall, sitting by Telemachus’ side. And if any man vexes him and pains his spirit, so much the worse for that man’s prospects: he’ll gain nothing here, rage as he might."

A little later on, Odysseus has refused the washing of his feet by anyone but Eurykleia, his nursemaid whom is still alive, and living at the house. Penelope agrees to have the old woman wash Odysseus' feet, which she does while she laments the fate of Odysseus:

"Perhaps the women of some great house mocked at him in a far-off foreign land, just as these shameless hussies here mock you, sir.  You will not let them wash your feet, for fear of their insults, but wise Penelope, Icarius’ daughter, knowing my willingness, has asked me to wash them. So I shall wash your feet for Penelope’s sake and yours, while my heart is stirred with sadness. But listen to one thing I must say. Many a long-suffering traveller have we welcomed here, but never a man resembling another as you resemble Odysseus in looks and voice – even your feet.’

Then resourceful Odysseus answered her, saying: ‘That is what everyone says who has met us both, old woman, that we are very alike, as you remark.’

With this, the old woman, preparing to wash his feet, poured cold water into the shining basin then added hot. Odysseus swiftly sat down by the hearth, and turned towards the shadows, though he had a sudden premonition that as she handled him she would notice his scar and the truth would be out. As she approached and began to wash him, so it was: she immediately knew the scar Odysseus had received from a white-tusked boar, while hunting on Parnassus, when visiting his mother’s father, noble Autolycus, the greatest of all in thievery and oath-making.

[...]

It was this scar the old woman felt as she passed her hands over his leg, and recognising it she let his leg fall. The bronze rang as his foot struck the basin, upsetting it, and spilling the water on the ground. Joy and pain filled her heart at the same moment, her eyes filled with tears and her voice caught in her throat. She touched Odysseus’ face and said: ‘It is Odysseus, it must be. Child, I did not know you, until my hands had touched my master’s limbs."

Acient evidence suggests there were three major contexts in which foot-washing was important: body hygiene, xenia, and religion. The first is easy to grasp: the ancient Hellenes rarely wore shoes. They tended to travel barefoot, or with light, open sandals. Boots were only for the rich. As roads were unpaved, and often dusty in the dry and hot climate, a traveler's feet tended to get dusty and dirty. Upon arrival at their destination, it was customary--and part of xenia--to offer the traveler a chance to wash their feet. Those with female serfs could offer the service of one of them to have their guest wash the guest's feet for them. In cases where no serfs were precent, in case of very special guests--especially those above the host in standing--or between great friends, the host could offer to wash the feet of his guest for them.

Foot-washing was often the chore of female serfs, and was considered lowly work. For the ancient Hellenes, honor was very important. To wash the feet of those below themselves in standing was a breach of societal rules and would most likely be looked upon negatively, or even outright refused. I have found no ancient texts to support this, but I suspect that washing the feet of one of equal standing would be done only between dear friends, perhaps between those who had fought together and saved each other's lives. I suspect that, if this is true, this would extend also to the son(s) of one of the men: the son of the deceased host would extend these honors to the family guest to whom the father was indebted.

At home, washing the feet of elderly family members was considered a form of respect. Aristophanes, in The Wasps (Sphēkes/Σφῆκες ), mentions the pride and joy felt by a rich man when his daughter washes and anoints his feet upon his return from a day of hard work:

"But I am forgetting the most pleasing thing of all. When I return home with my pay, everyone runs to greet me because of my money. First my daughter bathes me, anoints my feet, stoops to kiss me and, while she is calling me "her dearest father," fishes out my triobolus with her tongue; then my little wife comes to wheedle me and brings a nice light cake; she sits beside me and entreats me in a thousand ways, "Do take this now; do have some more." All this delights me hugely." 

Women rarely traveled--if at all--so as far as I can tell, no record of the washing of feet of women, or between women, has survived. I also suspect that this has to do with modesty: in an age where women often went around baring one or two breasts, the ankles and feet were almost always covered up. To bare one's feet--to a man--might have been a sign of seduction. In the rare event of a woman traveling, she would travel with her husband, father, brothers, and/or female serfs. Once arriving at her destination, she would undoubtedly have been allowed and encouraged to wash up and change her clothing. If she had serfs, she would be assisted by them. Else, serfs of the hosting household might have lend a hand, or even the wife of the host. I do wonder if they would ever was the feet of one another.

It seems it was also considered unclean and disrespectful to the Theoi to enter a temple with unwashed feet. Some temples, therefor, offered special basins which a traveler could make use of. It's difficult to find proper information about this, however, because the washing of feet in a religious context is now considered a near-solely Abrahamic thing, and bible quotes are far easier to find than ancient Hellenic texts on the subject. I'm still picking apart Christian and Jewish writings for clues about the Hellenic practice.

I am not sure why this subject interests me so. There is something so very intimate and humbling in the practice; it speaks to me in a way that goes beyond the intellectual. I imagine that having your feet washed upon arrival would make you feel both welcome and respected--as that was what it was, a sign of respect. I would also imagine it would be wonderful to bestow a honor like this to a valued guest. If shared between host and guest--or simply very good friends, or even lovers--it would strengthen the bond between them, and be a wonderful way to practice strong xenia. I think it's a beautiful practice, although not very applicable in modern Hellenismos. Agreements could be made about this, though, like the giving of gifts--another vital part of xenia.

• Friday, November 16, 2018
  ancient Hellenic culture daily practice Eurykleia Hellenismos 101 Odysseia Odysseus Penelope slavery slaves Xenia