Erebos
April 24th, 2010, 07:27 PM
I've been reading this wonderful book called Religions of the Ancient Greeks by Simon Price (Cambridge University Press, 1999), and he makes quite a few statements in the book that I think would benefit modern practitioners and how they view ancient Greek religion.
The introductory paragraph to chapter 5, "Girls and boys, women and men", contains many of these statements, such as:
"The modern Christian services for birth, marriage, and death have no exact ancient equivalent. Furthermore, it is unhelpful to search for 'the religion of the Greek household' as the prime locus of Greek religiosity... And the literary evidence, by its silence on the subject, also suggests strongly that the family is not the basic ideological unit of Greek religion." (Page 89.)
He goes on to say that the individual is the basic operating unit of Greek religion within the frameworks of public and private worship. I've seen Hellenic polytheism called a "household religion" online, which I think is inaccurate because ancient Greek religion was meant to function in both public and private spheres. The family did have its religious importance but it wasn't the main unit of religiosity, which, as Price states, was actually the individual. That's good news for modern practitioners, as many of us practice individually. Public worship isn't really an option anymore, but it's worth noting that Greek religion has a communal function, not just a private one in the household.
I think the above passage sums up ancient Greek religion nicely in comparison to modern Christianity, describing how ancient Greek rites of passage did not function the same way as Christians ones. Discussions on ancient Greek marriage often get heated when it comes to the same-sex marriage issue, as some groups like to claim homosexual couples do not fit into the context of "religious marriages". What they don't realize, is what Price also states:
"At the subsequent wedding, there was no marriage service, no one religious ritual that sanctified the occasion." (Page 96.) He discusses how many rituals called on various gods at different points of the betrothal period and actual marriage, sacrificing to appropriate gods at certain times, but no single marriage ritual declaring the couple as husband and wife. Marriages were primarily contracts between the bride's father and husband, where the girl was given for the purpose of producing children for her husband's family line, with a dowry included as part of the deal. It wasn't a celebration of love by any means, and though minor religious customs accompanied preparing for marriage, the wedding itself was not a religious service. When it comes to ancient Greek marriages, it's more of a question of legal versus non-legal marriages (concubinage), not religious versus non-religious, as no marriages were religious.
I highly recommend the book, as it is very helpful in that it describes how ancient practices differ from Christian practices and ideas, so that the reader gets a more accurate understanding of ancient religion. It also discusses festivals, myths and their local variations, elective cults, temples and their functions, and philosophers. I also like how Price discusses problematic elements, such as the interpretation of festivals and their meanings/functions, and problems with the translations of certain words. It just shows that scholars don't know as much as people who only read secondary material (like this book) think they do. It's also a much lighter read than Burkert, though it deals with material that is just as substantial. It doesn't go into much detail about the practical side of worship (which Burkert is the best for, anyway), but it's a great book to get an overall understanding of ancient Greek religiosity. I also like how "Religions" is plural in the title, showing that ancient Greek religion was not a singular tradition, but a cultural system with many local variants and a wide range of influences.
The introductory paragraph to chapter 5, "Girls and boys, women and men", contains many of these statements, such as:
"The modern Christian services for birth, marriage, and death have no exact ancient equivalent. Furthermore, it is unhelpful to search for 'the religion of the Greek household' as the prime locus of Greek religiosity... And the literary evidence, by its silence on the subject, also suggests strongly that the family is not the basic ideological unit of Greek religion." (Page 89.)
He goes on to say that the individual is the basic operating unit of Greek religion within the frameworks of public and private worship. I've seen Hellenic polytheism called a "household religion" online, which I think is inaccurate because ancient Greek religion was meant to function in both public and private spheres. The family did have its religious importance but it wasn't the main unit of religiosity, which, as Price states, was actually the individual. That's good news for modern practitioners, as many of us practice individually. Public worship isn't really an option anymore, but it's worth noting that Greek religion has a communal function, not just a private one in the household.
I think the above passage sums up ancient Greek religion nicely in comparison to modern Christianity, describing how ancient Greek rites of passage did not function the same way as Christians ones. Discussions on ancient Greek marriage often get heated when it comes to the same-sex marriage issue, as some groups like to claim homosexual couples do not fit into the context of "religious marriages". What they don't realize, is what Price also states:
"At the subsequent wedding, there was no marriage service, no one religious ritual that sanctified the occasion." (Page 96.) He discusses how many rituals called on various gods at different points of the betrothal period and actual marriage, sacrificing to appropriate gods at certain times, but no single marriage ritual declaring the couple as husband and wife. Marriages were primarily contracts between the bride's father and husband, where the girl was given for the purpose of producing children for her husband's family line, with a dowry included as part of the deal. It wasn't a celebration of love by any means, and though minor religious customs accompanied preparing for marriage, the wedding itself was not a religious service. When it comes to ancient Greek marriages, it's more of a question of legal versus non-legal marriages (concubinage), not religious versus non-religious, as no marriages were religious.
I highly recommend the book, as it is very helpful in that it describes how ancient practices differ from Christian practices and ideas, so that the reader gets a more accurate understanding of ancient religion. It also discusses festivals, myths and their local variations, elective cults, temples and their functions, and philosophers. I also like how Price discusses problematic elements, such as the interpretation of festivals and their meanings/functions, and problems with the translations of certain words. It just shows that scholars don't know as much as people who only read secondary material (like this book) think they do. It's also a much lighter read than Burkert, though it deals with material that is just as substantial. It doesn't go into much detail about the practical side of worship (which Burkert is the best for, anyway), but it's a great book to get an overall understanding of ancient Greek religiosity. I also like how "Religions" is plural in the title, showing that ancient Greek religion was not a singular tradition, but a cultural system with many local variants and a wide range of influences.