The vase is of late style, and the artist has forgotten that the snake is
the hero; he makes him a sort of tame attributive pet, feeding out of the
wine-cup. The snake is not bearded, but he has a touch of human unreality
in that he is about to drink out of the wine-cup. These humanized snakes
are fed with human food; their natural food would be a live bird or a
rabbit. Dr Gadow kindly tells me that a snake will lap milk, but if he is
to eat his sacrificial food, the _pelanos_, it must be made _exceedingly
thin_; anything of the nature of a cake or even porridge he could not
swallow. And yet the snake on the Acropolis had for his monthly due a
‘honey cake,’ and at Lebadeia[904] in the shrine of Trophonios, where it
was a snake who gave oracles, the inhabitants of the country ‘cast into
his shrine flat cakes steeped in honey.’
Representations of the hero reclining at a feast occur very frequently
on votive reliefs of a class shortly to be discussed. They appear very
rarely on vases and only on those of late style. A good instance is
the design in fig. 104 from a late red-figured krater in the Berlin
Museum[905]. The attempt to give a name to the recumbent man is quite
fruitless: the great snake marks him as a dead hero. The woman and boy
can scarcely be said to be worshippers, though the boy brings cakes and
fruit; it is rather the feast that went on in life figured as continuing
after death.
* * * * *
It remains to examine some of the class of votive reliefs closely
analogous to the vase-painting in fig. 104, reliefs usually known as
‘Hero-Feasts’ or ‘Funeral Banquets.’ They are monuments especially
instructive for our purpose, because nowhere else is seen so clearly the
transition from hero to god, and also the gradual superposition of the
Olympians over local hero-cults.
THE ‘HERO-FEASTS.’
Plato[906] in the _Laws_ arranges the objects of divine worship in a
regular sequence: first the Olympian gods together with those who keep
the city; second the underworld gods whose share are things of unlucky
omen; third the daemons whose worship is characterized as ‘orgiastic’;
fourth the heroes; fifth ancestral gods. He concludes the list with
living parents to whom much honour should be offered. As early as
Hesiod[907] theology attempted some differentiation between heroes and
daemons; daemons being accounted divine in some higher sense. Of all
this minute departmentalism ritual knows nothing. The only recognized
distinction is that burnt offerings are the meed of the Olympians,
offerings _devoted_ (ἐναγισμοί) of the chthonic gods. Between the
chthonic gods and the whole class of dead men, heroes and daemons, the
only distinction observed is, as already noted, that certain chthonic
gods from sheer conservatism reject the service of wine, whereas it is
apparently acceptable to dead men, to heroes and to daemons not fully
divinized.
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