Bibliography

·         Bremmer, J.N and Erskine A (2010) 'The Gods of Ancient Greece: Identities and Transformations' Edinburgh University Press

·         Dowden, K (2005) 'Zeus: Gods and Heroes of Mythology' Routledge

·         Farnell, L.R (2010) 'The Cults of the Greek states: Vol.1' Cambridge University Press

·         Parker, R (2011) 'On Greek Religion' Cornell Studies in Classical Philosophy

·         Pettazzoni, R 'Essays on the History of Religions' E.J Breill, Leiden

·         Scullion, S ‘Bones, Behaviour, and Belief: The Osteological Evidence as a Source for Greek Ritual Practice’ Oxford University Press

·         Shapiro, H.A (2009) 'A Cambridge companion to archaic Greece' Cambridge University Press

·         Zaidman, L.B (1989) 'Religion in the Ancient Greek City' Translated by Paul Cartledge, Cambridge University Press

·         Zatta, C (2010) 'Making history mythical: The golden age of Peisistratus' Arethusa, Vol.43

Peisistratos incident: tyrant third time lucky

One of the main influences that religion has had is to affect politics throughout history. This week we focused on how this is true of religion as well and used the model of Pesistratos to examine how he used deities to help him win power not only once but three times. The main story of Pesistratos can be looked at on www.thelatinlibrary.com/historians/notes/Pisistratus.html.
The reason we examined Pesistratos this week was to understand the relationship between politics and religion, Pesistratos demonstrates how these two key areas of Greek thinking are intertwined. It was during the battle to decide whether he would claim the throne for a third time that Peisistratos rode into battle with a large woman dressed as Athena, the appearnce of a Athena is a very strong symbol of dominance over his enemy. The line drawing that is contained in this blog is a rough sketch of the battle where Athena appears. The fact that he is on a chariot with Athena shows him as a strong regal figure and suggests his belief in his own ability. The influence that this had on Pesistratos politics was of great importance, as a tyrant it showed the people of Athens that there central deity was supporting their enemy and was possibly very demoralising for their armies.
 In an essay by Claudia Zatta on the golden age of Peisistratos her view is "Peisistratos was brought back by an eidolon of Athena. According to a plan to deceive the Athenians." (Zatta: p.16) this was a strong symbol for Greeks due to the influence that religious ideology had on Greek thinking of the way the universe worked. Nevertheless, from a Christian persepective,a figure of religious importance appearing would change the way the battle was played;however, I believe it would still not lead to them allowing a tyrant to rule. The modern day Christian would not belive that God could appear in the form of a man as he is not within this cosmos and the only option for God's will to be present would be through a prophet. The Greek's lack of reasoning here is looked at by Zatta when she examines the way Peisistratos not only uses the Greeks religious fears to his advantage but also the way he deceives them to create a political tyranny based around their fear of upsetting their chief deity.
However, on the contrary to this image of Peisistratos as a tyrant who uses despicable means to acheive his goals, he has also been acclaimed as creating 'Golden Age.' It is thought by scholars such as Shapiro who shows how Peisistratos was only interested in creating a better Athens and expanded the religous cults of many deities, "like most other tyrants Peistratus (and his son) carried out large building projects: a temple of Olympian Zeus." (Shapiro; pg.30) What Shapiro is alluding to here is the nature of Peisistratus was of a tyrant; however, this was not necessarily a terrible thing for a Greek state who needed someone to govern them and structure the system.

Zatta, C (2010) 'Making history mythical: The golden age of Peisistratus' Arethusa, Vol.43 p.16
Shapiro, H.A (2009) 'A Cambridge companion to archaic Greece' Cambridge university press, pg.29-30 

A State of play: Olympians vs. Chthonians

When I first looked at the two columns on my page labelled Olympians and Chthonian's the decisions seemed relatively simple. However, when the columns went up for discussion and ideas of exclusivity were challenged the picture is less clear than one may at first perceive.The main idea that seems to come across from a binary outlook of Olympians and chthonian it came across that Olympians come out as superior, including some of the characteristics and values that Greeks instil in their mythologies such as masculinity, advancement and rationale  The image presented is a demonstration of a renaissance work which looks at the status of Olympians and chthonian deities using Manichean symbolism of light and darkness to demonstrate the difference between the two categories. It seems from this work that the divide is simple with the Olympians resting atop the cloud and chthonian deities along the bottom of the portraiture. However,where this portrait suggests that the differentiation of the gods can be looked at through binary methodology, Parker suggests differently in his assessment of the Greek cult "what is at issue is the whole shape of the divine world as seen by the Greeks."(Parker: pg.32) What issue Parker tries to dissect here and becomes clearer throughout his book on Greek cults, is the overlapping nature of Greek religion.
When we looked at characteristics for an Olympian and a Chthonian deity it became obvious that some can carry both . For example Hermes is a god who is considered an Olympian for his music but he is also a pseudo pompos (conveyer of souls to the underworld). The messiness that Parker tries to allude to is the characteristics that scholars try to attribute to gods and it is difficult following the mythology of gods to differentiate between what characteristics make a god a chthonian or an Olympian?
Often it is considered that are 12 Olympians and the rest of the deities are given different functions and labelled as being made to look like chtonians. However, if we try to make this decision based on the order of the pantheon the decision harder as the order of the pantheon is just as unclear as the differentiation between chthonian and Olympian. As has been examined when looking at the sovereignty of Zeus . Nevertheless, is it possible to see gods as only chthonian or Olympian? The only example that is possible to see of a completely Olympic deity is Apollo who is the God of the Sun and therefore could not be linked with death or night. Whilst it is possible to say that Apollo does present a case of a sole Olympic deity, Scullion suggests that even though "the existence of difficult and mixed cases does not mean that one should toss away the categories" (Scullion: pg.35)  However, this thought is not carried by other scholars like Parker who suggest that the characteristics that make up the divides of an Olympian and a chtonian need to be readjusted, "chtonian sacrifice as a single type has vanished" (Parker: pg.84)

Parker, R (2011) 'On Greek Religion' Cornell Studies in Classical Philosophy pg.32
Parker, R (2011) 'On Greek Religion' Cornell Studies in Classical Philosophy pg.84
Scullion, S (2006) ‘Bones, Behaviour, and Belief: The Osteological Evidence as a Source for Greek Ritual Practice’  Oxford University Press pg.35

Is there a sovereign deity?

When discussing the term sovereignty amongst the Olympians it is commonly thought that Zeus is the king of the Gods. However, in our lecture we examined the ways that this may not be the case, questions such as what are the characteristics that supposedly make Zeus the sovereign deity? Were examined is it his power over weather or pantheon order as there are many gods with claims to characteristics of importance with influence on the world. One of the main reasons that Zeus has been seen to be the sovereign deity over other Olympians is his power over weather. Ken Dowden examines this in his article on Zeus and the weather "sovereign ruler of the universe, controller of the weather, all seeing father of gods and men." (Dowden: p.1) Dowden looks at the extent to which Zeus is the most sovereign deity through his place in the pantheon and the ways that weather most importantly lightning has made him the father figure. However, when we discuss the mythology of other gods such as Athena and Dionysos we can claim these two have been closely linked with usurping the sovereignty of Zeus.
The use of weather is a strong case for Zeus being the most powerful of the deities, however, Dowden's arguments for the Zeus being at the head of the pantheon are not as sound. The stories of Athena being born through Zeus due to his fear of an immortal being born to overthrow him, does not suggest a paternal figure. Also, the image of Zeus being a deflowerer of women does not suggest a god who is faithful to Olympus and is in control of all the other deities. The picture seems a lot more unclear than Dowden would suggest and it is possible to see from a Christianised view that he does not represent a patriarchal figure in Olympus. The constant battles for sovereignty with other gods and the betrayals such as Hera in Heracles labours an fears of usurpation show him as less than almighty. Therefore, it is not possible to claim that Zeus represented a true sovereignty as Dowden would claim and it is more likely that he has been placed by mythology as the sovereign deity due to his initial overthrowing of his father and claiming of Olympus.
There are other sides to Zeus that have been claimed to be just as important as his use of weather and order in the pantheon as sovereign deity. The epiphet of Zeus as xenios (god of hospitality and guests)  has been suggested as another role that pushes Zeus as a sovereign deity. "Chronados the Sicilian legislator, insists on the duty of receiving stranger reverently 'because the worship of Zeus Xenios is common to all nations'" (Farnell: pg.74). However, it is a juxtaposing epiphet to his common indecencies throughout his mythology which suggests that Zeus is a much disguised God, which is often discussed by scholars through his anthropomorphic nature like his tendencies to appear in the mortal world in the guise of a bull, swan or oak.

Dowden K (2005) 'Zeus: Gods and Heroes of Mythology' Routledge p.1-2
Farnell, L.R (2010) 'The Cults of the Greek states: Vol.1' Cambridge University Press p.74-5

Anthropomorphism: looking at gods in other forms

When exploring the topic of anthropomorphism, it is important to assess the extent to which animals or indeed symbols related to specific gods affects the cult of a deity. When scholars debate the identity of a god they often relate it to the way gods are portrayed anthropomorphically, as often appears in Greek works such as vases. The seperate Greek cults for deities has been discussed as only being possible due to the anthropomorphic nature of Greek religion, the use of mortals being able to visualise and interact with representations of the Olympians. Bremmer and Erskine's edited edition of the gods of ancient Greece deals with the idea of ephiphets only coming from the correlation between the gods and anthropomorphic representations. "Without the anthropomorphic gods, the Greek ephiphanic experience would be very different; indeed, it might not exist at all. The numerous accounts of visual encounters between mortals and gods illustrate how a divine quality-anthropomorphism-can result in powerful modes of interaction" (Bremmer and Erskine: pg.33). The reasoning behind this theory is that if epiphany and anthropomorphism are linked it is possible for the Greeks to link cults with divinity without the Gods having to manifest their true identity; moreover, it is a way for the gods to increase their cult following by using symbols such as Aphrodite's rock.
The renaissance style image of Leda and Zeus as a swan is one example of how Zeus is often portrayed anthropomorphically.The story from the above portraiture of Leda nd Zeus appearing as a swan can be found at this web address http://www.pantheon.org/articles/l/leda.html. The swan is a juxtaposing image of how Zeus is often behaving in his mythology, in this seen he seems submissive where he is often raping his partner. This image of Zeus is a contrary image of what you would expect of the king of the gods, as it is a more modern conception of a Greek mythology (renaissance) it is harder to interpret the extent to which this is an exact portrayal of the myth. The anthropomorphic nature of Greek mythology is essential to analysing the way that we look at it through a modern Christianised view. The use of symbols and animals for gods to interact in the mortal world seems to be a normal method from a religious perspective; however, in terms of actually transforming into an animal is strange from a Christian point of view. The reason it may be interpreted for a Christian as strange is due to the gods actually being visible in our world and as earlier discussed in the clash between monotheism and polytheism as Zaidman claims Christians believe in a deity outside our cosmos. Examples of God appearing before mortals have been demonstrated in the old testament such as the burning bush to Moses, was simply a method of communication for God and not a ephiphany for the mortals.

Bremmer, J.N and Erskine A (2010) 'The Gods of Ancient Greece: Identities and Transformations' Edinburgh Press University p.33

A Cultural clash: monotheism and Greek religion

When discussing the relationship between monotheism and greek religion it is best started with asking questions about what the idea of "religion" evokes. It became clear that there was a multitude of figures, ideologies and practices concerning the topic of religion. These ideas where then turned into examining the way they are used in Greek religion and it seems that all these features were central to the way that Greek citizens lived their lives. The most important differentiation between Greek religion and Catholicism (monotheistic religion) is the extent to which it influences daily routine. Using the example of Poseidon we can see that to cross a sea the Greeks would have rituals or pay tribute at a temple before voyaging. Whereas, praying for safe travels is not seen as important in Catholicism, followers do not believe God would punish you with natural disasters if you did not pay him favour. The influence that religion had over the Greeks everyday activities appears to be massive compared with that of a monotheistic religion from a modern day conception. The idea of Greek religion not pervading anything in ancient Greece is what seperates monotheism and Greek religion especially in fields such as politics and the private home. Many scholars have suggested that the two concepts of religion are difficult to identify with each other due to cultural estrangement.
The theory that has been put forward by Zaidman is "for 'us' the divine (in the form of a transcendent God) is external to the world...For 'them', the Greeks the gods were not external to the world." (Zaidman: pg.3). So when we try to adopt a lens to examine Greek religion when should examine the gods as being constantly watching everything mortals do within the same world. Futher analysis of Zaidman's view comes about from the looking at the cultural estrangement between us and them, which shows that Zaidman believes it is not a simple task for a modern scholar to change their outlook when a christianised view has been adopted for so long.
The cartoon sketch that has been used for this blog entry is a comic sketch of the disscussion as it shows Zeus suggesting that moving towards monotheism as downsizing, presumably due to the amount it affects the everyday life of a citizen. However, it is has been suggested by Scholars such as Pettazzoni "Christainity again could not but deny the old gods of Greek and Roman polytheism, yet it did not deny that they existed" (Pettazzoni: pg.7) The theory that Pettazzoni suggests Christianity had on Greek religion was that the gods of Greek religion were not omnipotent enough to be recognised as deities and therefore, were not true gods with a capital 'G', these immortal beings are recognised by christian followers as beings with longevity, but, not having the capabilities of a true monotheistic God.


Zaidman, L.B (1989) 'Religion in the Ancient Greek City' Translated by Paul Cartledge, Cambridge University Press pg.3-4
Pettazzoni, R 'Essays on the the History of Religions' E.J Breill, Leiden pg.7-9

Approaching Greek Religion

Whilst looking at approaching the topic of Greek religion, I felt it would be appropriate to look at an example of a famous work relating to two of the most famous Greek gods. Pictured (right) Poseidon and (left) Athena it is possible to distinguish these deities by their created charaterstics. The two of these deities are often pictured together, their relationship is formed around a rivalry of the once unnamed city in Attica (more recntly known as Athens). The vase painting is one illustrating a disscussion between the two over the rivalry of Athens. When exploring this topic of the rivalry we can see the origin of Greek religion, what attributes the Greek people were looking for in a God to represent and worship. In this instance -Athena becomes the god who is chosen to represent the main city in Attica, henceforth Athens, it is possible to see the full story at this website http://151.12.58.141/virtualexhibition/contest.html. The contest to decide was one of gift giving on which Poseidon produces a spring of sea water against Athena's olive tree. We can see on the vase painting how this contest is portrayed through the Greeks use of certain characteristics (vines of the olive tree and Poseidon's trident). This is one way of assessing the Greeks methods of recognising an Olympian in their religious practices. When approaching this module I considered the ways that I should approach the topic, the introductory session highlighted some of the main ways we recognise the Greek's looked at religion. It was in Parker's ideas that I felt best summed up the way we should approach the study of Greek religion
"We know too much, and too little. The materials that bear on it far outreach an individual's capacity to assimilate: so many casual allusions in so many literary texts over more than a millennium, so many direct or indirect references in so many inscriptions from so many places in the Greek world, such an overwhelming abundance of physical remains." (Parker:4)
Parker is alluding to the reality of the quest to ascertain knowledge of Greek religion. Suggesting thus, the scholarly debate surrounding the studies are well informed by evidence, nevertheless it has such an abundance of evidence that it is hard to grasp the true nature of the importance of Greek religion. This sums up the way I felt when leaving the introductory session that the study of Greek religion is more muddied than I felt at first having pre conceptual ideas. This is also evident in examples such as the vase painting of Poseidon and Athena, when we look at the numerous ways of interpreting the source. The blogs following this approach to Greek religion will look at the main links that have come about through the study, looking in to the influences it has had on Greek life and the ways in which the Greek cults have been expanded. However, it is hard to draw hypothesise on the extent to which Greek religion had on the people as we are assessing it through mainly modern Christianised eyes.


Parker, R (2011) 'On Greek Religion' Cornell Studies in Classical Philosophy pg.4-5
Story on Athena and Poseidon 'http://151.12.58.141/virtualexhibition/contest.html'