Probably the same confusion of thought was responsible for the
representation of the _genius_ of a church in Athens in the shape
of a cock, which is the commonest kind of victim; and possibly too
the bulls which are so frequently the guardians of churches were
originally the victims considered most suitable for the foundation of
such important edifices. This error of belief has undoubtedly been
facilitated by the use of a word which in its mediaeval meanings has
already been discussed--the verb στοιχειόνω. This, as I have pointed
out, meant strictly ‘to provide (a place or object) with a _genius_.’
But in modern usage it can take an accusative of the victim devoted
to a _genius_ no less than of the place provided with a _genius_.
In Zacynthos and Cephalonia, says Bernhard Schmidt[708], the phrase
στοιχειόνω ἀρνί, for example, meaning ‘I devote a lamb’ to the
_genius_, is in regular use; and so too in the above rendering of ‘the
Bridge of Arta,’ the phrase which I have translated ‘an ye devote not
human life’ is in the Greek ἂν δὲ στοιχειώσετ’ ἄνθρωπο. Now verbs of
this form are in both ancient and modern Greek usually causative.
The ancient δηλόω and modern δηλόνω mean ‘I make (an object) clear’
(δῆλος): the ancient χρυσόω and modern χρυσόνω mean ‘I make (an object)
gold’ (χρυσός). Similarly στοιχειόνω is readily taken to mean ‘I
make (an animal or person) the _genius_’ (στοιχεῖον) of a place. If
therefore this word continued to be applied to the rite of slaughtering
an animal at foundation-ceremonies in any place where the true purport
of the custom, as often happens, had been forgotten, language itself
would at once suggest that erroneous interpretation of the custom of
which we have seen examples; the victim would be raised to the rank of
_genius_.
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