FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222  
223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   >>   >|  
s human sacrifice, Petron., 141; and for the Thargelia, Tsetzes, Chiliads, v. 736; Hellad. in Photius, p. 1590 f. and Harpoc. s. v. The institution of human sacrifice, then, whether the offering be regarded as food, or as a gift to the god of what is dearest to man (as in the case of Jephtha's daughter), or whether the victim be supposed to carry on his head the sins of the people, does not necessarily date from the period of savagery. Indeed, sacrifice flourishes most, not among savages, but among advancing barbarians. It would probably be impossible to find any examples of human sacrifices of an expiatory or piacular character, any sacrifices at all, among Australians, or Andamanese, or Fuegians. The notion of presenting food to the supernatural powers, whether ghosts or gods, is relatively rare among savages.(1) The terrible Aztec banquets of which the gods were partakers are the most noted examples of human sacrifices with a purely cannibal origin. Now there is good reason to guess that human sacrifices with no other origin than cannibalism survived even in ancient Greece. "It may be conjectured," writes Professor Robertson Smith,(2) "that the human sacrifices offered to the Wolf Zeus (Lycaeus) in Arcadia were originally cannibal feasts of a Wolf tribe. The first participants in the rite were, according to later legend, changed into wolves; and in later times(3) at least one fragment of the human flesh was placed among the sacrificial portions derived from other victims, and the man who ate it was believed to become a were-wolf."(4) It is the almost universal rule with cannibals not to eat members of their own stock, just as they do not eat their own totem. Thus, as Professor Robertson Smith says, when the human victim is a captive or other foreigner, the human sacrifice may be regarded as a survival of cannibalism. Where, on the other hand, the victim is a fellow tribesman, the sacrifice is expiatory or piacular. (1) Jevons, Introduction to the Science of Religion, pp. 161, 199. (2) Encyc. Brit., s. v. "Sacrifice". (3) Plato, Rep., viii. 565, D. (4) Paus., viii. 2. Among Greek cannibal gods we cannot fail to reckon the so-called "Cannibal Dionysus," and probably the Zeus of Orchomenos, Zeus Laphystius, who is explained by Suidas as "the Glutton Zeus". The cognate verb ((Greek text omitted)) means "to eat with mangling and rending," "to devour gluttonously". By Zeus Laphystius, then, men's flesh
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222  
223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
sacrifices
 

sacrifice

 

cannibal

 

victim

 

expiatory

 

savages

 

examples

 

piacular

 

Robertson

 
Professor

origin

 

cannibalism

 

Laphystius

 

regarded

 

believed

 

Suidas

 

victims

 
cognate
 
Glutton
 
cannibals

Sacrifice

 

universal

 

explained

 

derived

 

fragment

 

gluttonously

 

wolves

 

devour

 
omitted
 

portions


mangling
 
sacrificial
 

rending

 
Orchomenos
 
Introduction
 
Jevons
 

fellow

 

tribesman

 
reckon
 
Science

Religion
 

members

 

Dionysus

 
Cannibal
 
called
 

captive

 

foreigner

 

survival

 

people

 

necessarily