Such emotion and mental attitude is consonant with the Hebraic and
with much of the modern religious temper; but entirely out of harmony
with all that we know of the Hellenic. The religious habit of the
Hellene strikes us by comparison as sober, well-tempered, often
genial, never ecstatically abject, but even--we may
say--self-respecting. Tears for sin, lamentations {193} and sighs, the
countenance bowed to the ground, the body cleaving to the pavement,
these are not part of his ritual; the wrath of God was felt as a
communal more often than as an individual misfortune, and in any case
was averted, not by emotional outpourings of the individual heart, but
by ritual acts, solemn choruses, soothing sacrifice and songs, or by
special piacular lustrations that wiped off the taint of sin. Tears
are never mentioned,[193.1] except indirectly in the fictitious
lamentations for some buried hero, annually and ceremoniously
lamented, such as Achilles. Nor can we find in earlier Hellenic ethic
the clear recognition of fear and humility among the religious
virtues,[193.2] while both are paraded in the inscriptions of the
later Babylonian kings, even in those that reveal a monstrous excess
of pride.[193.3] The Hellenic god might punish the haughty and
high-minded, he did not love the grovelling, but rather the man of
moderate life, tone, and act. Such is God for the civic religion of
the free man; while the Babylonian liturgy reflects the despotic
society. The Hellene, for instance, does not try to win for himself
the favour of the divinity by calling himself his slave. And the
common phrase found on the Greek Christian tombs, ὁ δοῦλος τοῦ Θεοῦ,
has passed into Christianity from Semitic sources.[193.4] This single
fact illustrates, perhaps better than any other, {194} the different
temper of the old Oriental and old European religions; and there is a
curious example of it in the bilingual Graeco-Phoenician inscription
found in Malta,[194.1] commemorating a dedication to Melkarth or to
Herakles Ἀρχηγέτης: the Phoenicians recommend themselves to the god as
“thy slaves,” the Greeks use neither this nor any other title of
subservient flattery. In this connection it is well to note the
significance of marking the body of the worshipper by branding,
cutting, or tattooing with some sign that consecrated him as slave or
familiar follower to the divinity. The practice, which may have been
of great antiquity, though the evidence is not earlier than the sixth
century B.C., was in vogue in Syria, Phrygia, and in early Israel, and
was adopted by some Christian enthusiasts, but no proof of it has yet
been adduced from Mesopotamia. It was essentially un-Hellenic, but was
apparently followed by some of the Dionysiac thiasoi as a Thracian
tradition.[194.2]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account