Page 181 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 181 of 348 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
163
portion of the food to the domestic gods between the first and second course.274 As
Scheid has pointed out, this practice highlights the strength of the connection the Romans
observed between ritual and food in general.275
In the Roman tradition, this mutual-dining arrangement took a very explicit form
from an early date. In the lecisternium, the gods were represented at the post-sacrificial
banquets either by images or simply by the presence of empty dining couches (in the
sellisternium for female deities, empty chairs were used).276 The earliest recorded
lecisternium took place in 399 B.C.E., and the influence of the Greek “table of the god” is
clear.277
The details of the sacrificial banquets implied not only communion, however, but
also division. As Beard, North and Price note, “The clear separation of the meat between
those parts of the animal offered to the worshipers on the one hand and those offered to
274 Scheid (2005, 129-30) has noted the similarities between the formulas for ritual gestures and words used
at public banquets and at meals in the home, which he sees as signaling the fact that “there was no great
difference between public rites on the one hand and private domestic rites, at least those of a great family,
on the other” (“qu’entre rites publics et rites privés, domestiques – du moins dans une grande famille -, il
n’y avait pas de grande difference”). However, as Ando (2009, 179-80) points out, Scheid’s assertion
holds true only for normative practice within the aristocracy (Scheid’s evidence is drawn from Cato),
members of which had political reasons to point up analogies between patrician households and the state.
What Ando calls for, rather, is “a model that reaches beyond the aristocratic household in at least two
directions, to its satellites…among the recently freed, and beyond, to those existing not in legal or blood
relation, but one of cultural and social observation and mimesis.” Though the relationships between public
and private cult lie outside the bounds of the present study, it would be of interest to consider evidence for
shifts in private ritual practice over time in the actions of both the upper classes and the lower (to the extent
that such evidence has been preserved), especially in terms of potential similarities or differences in the
concept of sharing the gods’ table that might be observable between those in the highest classes of society
and those in the lower, whose experience of group dining and its symbolisms was quite different.
275 See Scheid 2007, 268. For a discussion of the tradition of mealtime hospitality toward the gods and
evidence for it in Roman art and literature, see P. Veyne 2000.
276 On the lecisternium in general, see Wissowa 1912, 422-23; for the use of chairs in the celebrations for
goddesses, Wissowa 1912, 423.
277 Beard et al. 1998 1:63. See also Veyne 2000, 12-13.
Object Description
| Title | Making sense of sacrifice: Sensory experience in Greco-Roman cult |
| Author | Weddle, Candace Cherie |
| Author email | candaceweddle@gmail.com; weddle@usc.edu |
| Degree | Doctor of Philosophy |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Art History |
| School | College of Letters, Arts and Sciences |
| Date defended/completed | 2011-03-04 |
| Date submitted | 2011 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2011-04-27 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Pollini, John |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Yasin, Ann Marie Bitel, Lisa |
| Abstract | Performing a sacrifice was one of the most sensorially full actions undertaken in the Greco-Roman world. The production and control of the correct movements, scents and sounds were prerequisites for summoning, communicating with and propitiating deities. Sacrifice was also ubiquitous, occurring on an almost continual basis as a range of sacrificial activities were celebrated publicly and privately in a variety of locations in urban areas. Cultivating a multi-sensory understanding of the full range of sensory elements that accompanied ancient cult rites – visual and auditory cues, things smelled, tasted and touched - provides a platform for achieving a more thorough knowledge of the meanings of the rites.; This dissertation examines the archaeological, literary and epigraphical evidence for the role of the senses in Greek and Roman sacrifice in order to analyze the social and ritual importance of the senses, the impact of sacrificial rituals within ancient urban spaces, and the sensory experience of the ancient worshiper. Given the ephemeral nature of much of the evidence for sensory elements of worship, as well as the subjectivity inherent in representations of sensory experience in literature and art, this dissertation argues for the necessity of crossing disciplinary boundaries in order to appreciate the sensory impact of ancient sacrifice. Therefore, in addition to utilizing traditional historical and art historical approaches, methodological tools from the field of anthropology and evidence from studies in the animal behavioral sciences and consumer sciences are employed. For example, I suggest that greater understanding of the experience of ancient sacrifice may be acquired through an autoethnographic investigation of modern religious sacrifice. To that end, I analyze my experience of the slaughter of large numbers of bovines during the Islamic Kurban Bayram sacrifices in Istanbul to make suggestions concerning certain elements of the sensory experience of ancient blood sacrifice. I focus not only on the sensory experience of humans participating in (or within range of) sacrifices, but also on that of the animal victims. Given the immense ritual importance of the behavior of sacrificial animals in antiquity, I suggest that it is possible to identify some sensory aspects of the sacrificial process that may have been intentionally manipulated in order to control the reactions of the victims as far as possible.; Particular attention is paid to mundane aspects of the process of sacrifice not often addressed in ancient literary sources or represented in art that would have resulted in notable sensory impacts on areas surrounding urban temples, for example the removal of sacrificial refuse. I conclude not only that these elements of sacrifice formed an important part of the sensory experience of Greco-Roman cult, but also that their effects were more far-reaching – in terms both of how great an area they affected and how long they lasted – than has previously been recognized. Using fresh interdisciplinary approaches to well-known examples of texts and images, this dissertation employs a more visceral approach to the study of the sensory experience of ancient sacrifice than is possible when considering textual and archaeological evidence alone. |
| Keyword | archaeology; autoethnography; cult; Greece; religion; Rome; sacrifice; senses |
| Geographic subject (city or populated place) | Rome |
| Geographic subject (country) | Italy; Greece |
| Coverage date | circa -0600/0600 |
| Coverage era | Greco Roman |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m3788 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Weddle, Candace Cherie |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Weddle-4363 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume48/etd-Weddle-4363.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 181 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 163 portion of the food to the domestic gods between the first and second course.274 As Scheid has pointed out, this practice highlights the strength of the connection the Romans observed between ritual and food in general.275 In the Roman tradition, this mutual-dining arrangement took a very explicit form from an early date. In the lecisternium, the gods were represented at the post-sacrificial banquets either by images or simply by the presence of empty dining couches (in the sellisternium for female deities, empty chairs were used).276 The earliest recorded lecisternium took place in 399 B.C.E., and the influence of the Greek “table of the god” is clear.277 The details of the sacrificial banquets implied not only communion, however, but also division. As Beard, North and Price note, “The clear separation of the meat between those parts of the animal offered to the worshipers on the one hand and those offered to 274 Scheid (2005, 129-30) has noted the similarities between the formulas for ritual gestures and words used at public banquets and at meals in the home, which he sees as signaling the fact that “there was no great difference between public rites on the one hand and private domestic rites, at least those of a great family, on the other” (“qu’entre rites publics et rites privés, domestiques – du moins dans une grande famille -, il n’y avait pas de grande difference”). However, as Ando (2009, 179-80) points out, Scheid’s assertion holds true only for normative practice within the aristocracy (Scheid’s evidence is drawn from Cato), members of which had political reasons to point up analogies between patrician households and the state. What Ando calls for, rather, is “a model that reaches beyond the aristocratic household in at least two directions, to its satellites…among the recently freed, and beyond, to those existing not in legal or blood relation, but one of cultural and social observation and mimesis.” Though the relationships between public and private cult lie outside the bounds of the present study, it would be of interest to consider evidence for shifts in private ritual practice over time in the actions of both the upper classes and the lower (to the extent that such evidence has been preserved), especially in terms of potential similarities or differences in the concept of sharing the gods’ table that might be observable between those in the highest classes of society and those in the lower, whose experience of group dining and its symbolisms was quite different. 275 See Scheid 2007, 268. For a discussion of the tradition of mealtime hospitality toward the gods and evidence for it in Roman art and literature, see P. Veyne 2000. 276 On the lecisternium in general, see Wissowa 1912, 422-23; for the use of chairs in the celebrations for goddesses, Wissowa 1912, 423. 277 Beard et al. 1998 1:63. See also Veyne 2000, 12-13. |
