Life after death
Extracts from chapter 20 of "Primitive Materialism".
Fear of the dead. There arises the error that a new Greek fear of the dead arose in the context of the rise of the hero cult after the C8. Sarah Iles Johnston’s Restless Dead promulgates this thesis. Her work in the main supports my perceptions, and I am rather grateful for it; she aims to debunk the foolish.[1] However, I dispute her theory of a new fear of the dead arising in the early classical period.[2] (a) She fails to observe the continuity in the belief in the dead with Bronze Age, Neolithic and Palaeolithic cognition. (b) She misreads Homer.
Regarding the first of these criticisms, she has a bibliography citing about 500 works, but Frazer is not among them. Harrison is mentioned, but despite an epigraph, the discussion is light. The question of continuity is not raised in her work. The essence of all the rituals of the festivals is to calm the dead by the sacrifice of living animals.
Regarding the second criticism, her comment on the Nekyia of the Odyssey is that “in the long run, the dead were capable of very little interaction with the living.”[3] She observes that the dead are in a twilight state (aphradeis), needing to be revived by blood, and that Odysseus cannot embrace his mother. She concludes, “There is no indication that these ghosts can return to the land of the living.”[4] This is a misreading of the Nekyia. This episode must belong to the deepest layer of the myth of Odysseus; it must be very old in origin. While the character of Odysseus appears to be a late invention, his name is pre-Greek in formation, and his visit to the Underworld must belong to the archaic substratum of his myth, onto which all the other elements are grafted. Odysseus of Homer’s story visits the dead on the instructions of Circe to obtain specific information concerning his return journey. This wrapper is already concluded when Teiresias informs him that he must by no means kill the cattle of the sun-god, and that if he does he will return alone, will have to murder the suitors and expiate Poseidon by planting a ship’s oar in a place which has never known the sea. After that, Odysseus becomes a tourist in the land of the dead – questioning this or that dead soul out of curiosity or for moral instruction. One wonders whether the expedition was worth all the trouble for Circe later provides him with a much more detailed plan of his journey home. Homer’s rationalisation of the invocation of the dead is superficial and constructed to justify the inclusion of the older motif.
Contrary to the theory that the Greeks have no fear of the dead, the whole episode, which is a precise description of an ancient ritual for the invocation of the dead, is fraught with extreme danger. That is why Odysseus must abide by strict rules for managing the dead. The dead are placated by blood, and one is safe only in so far as one offers them blood, in accordance with strict procedures. What happens if one departs from those rituals? Whose blood will they drain otherwise?
[1] Sarah Iles Johnston, Restless Dead, University of California Press, 1999. She criticises A.D Nock, who seems to have stated that ‘The Greeks were not dominated by any fear of ghosts’, which is absurd. Martin P. Nilsson, when discussing Greek culture, is quoted as stating: ‘Superstition is very seldom mentioned in the literature of the period simply because great writers found such base things not worth mentioning.’ Included in the collection of works of scholars are Burkert’s Greek Religion and Bremmer’s The Early Greek Concept of the Soul. She remarks critically that “Christopher Rowe, merely mentions that by the fifth century, the concept that the soul might survive death was well established.” The Greeks feared the dead; they always feared them.
[2] Ibid, p.31: “In narrative sources from the early classical period, we begin to see evidence for two new beliefs. First, the dead themselves can be a threat … Second, the dead can be called back into action by the living in a variety of ways…”.
[3] Ibid., p.7
[4] Ibid., p.8.
Regarding the first of these criticisms, she has a bibliography citing about 500 works, but Frazer is not among them. Harrison is mentioned, but despite an epigraph, the discussion is light. The question of continuity is not raised in her work. The essence of all the rituals of the festivals is to calm the dead by the sacrifice of living animals.
Regarding the second criticism, her comment on the Nekyia of the Odyssey is that “in the long run, the dead were capable of very little interaction with the living.”[3] She observes that the dead are in a twilight state (aphradeis), needing to be revived by blood, and that Odysseus cannot embrace his mother. She concludes, “There is no indication that these ghosts can return to the land of the living.”[4] This is a misreading of the Nekyia. This episode must belong to the deepest layer of the myth of Odysseus; it must be very old in origin. While the character of Odysseus appears to be a late invention, his name is pre-Greek in formation, and his visit to the Underworld must belong to the archaic substratum of his myth, onto which all the other elements are grafted. Odysseus of Homer’s story visits the dead on the instructions of Circe to obtain specific information concerning his return journey. This wrapper is already concluded when Teiresias informs him that he must by no means kill the cattle of the sun-god, and that if he does he will return alone, will have to murder the suitors and expiate Poseidon by planting a ship’s oar in a place which has never known the sea. After that, Odysseus becomes a tourist in the land of the dead – questioning this or that dead soul out of curiosity or for moral instruction. One wonders whether the expedition was worth all the trouble for Circe later provides him with a much more detailed plan of his journey home. Homer’s rationalisation of the invocation of the dead is superficial and constructed to justify the inclusion of the older motif.
Contrary to the theory that the Greeks have no fear of the dead, the whole episode, which is a precise description of an ancient ritual for the invocation of the dead, is fraught with extreme danger. That is why Odysseus must abide by strict rules for managing the dead. The dead are placated by blood, and one is safe only in so far as one offers them blood, in accordance with strict procedures. What happens if one departs from those rituals? Whose blood will they drain otherwise?
[1] Sarah Iles Johnston, Restless Dead, University of California Press, 1999. She criticises A.D Nock, who seems to have stated that ‘The Greeks were not dominated by any fear of ghosts’, which is absurd. Martin P. Nilsson, when discussing Greek culture, is quoted as stating: ‘Superstition is very seldom mentioned in the literature of the period simply because great writers found such base things not worth mentioning.’ Included in the collection of works of scholars are Burkert’s Greek Religion and Bremmer’s The Early Greek Concept of the Soul. She remarks critically that “Christopher Rowe, merely mentions that by the fifth century, the concept that the soul might survive death was well established.” The Greeks feared the dead; they always feared them.
[2] Ibid, p.31: “In narrative sources from the early classical period, we begin to see evidence for two new beliefs. First, the dead themselves can be a threat … Second, the dead can be called back into action by the living in a variety of ways…”.
[3] Ibid., p.7
[4] Ibid., p.8.
Questions
1. Has Sarah Iles Johnsone failed (a) to grasp the nature of archaic beliefs about the dead, (b) misread the Nekyia?
2. Do scholars such as Nock, Burkert, Bremmer and Rowe join her in making related errors?
3. Is fear of the dead rooted in the human psyche, and what is its origin?
2. Do scholars such as Nock, Burkert, Bremmer and Rowe join her in making related errors?
3. Is fear of the dead rooted in the human psyche, and what is its origin?
Second extract
Homer’s work also reflects another revolution in religious sentiment that occurred in the preceding dark age. This is the change from inhumation to cremation. The funeral of Patroclus in Book XXIII of the Iliad is by cremation. In Homeric epic cremation “is the only burial form acknowledged.”[1] But this is a backwards projection by Homer, because in Mycenaean culture the dead are buried in chamber tombs, and after 1200, in the wake of the turmoil of the onset of the Dark Age, there was “the spread of single burial and cremation.” In those areas that remained Mycenaean in culture for longest, Crete and Cyprus, “existing vaulted and chamber tombs continue to be used.”[2] Crete was eventually overtaken by the Dorians. The chamber tomb was even introduced on Rhodes, a place which following the dislocation of the Bronze Age collapse[3] first came into contact with Cyprus and was overtaken by the Dorians as late as C8. Cremation in Bronze Age Greece was “practically unknown”.[4] Cremation appears in the C12 in Attica at the Perati cemetery. From the Proto-Geometric (c.C10) it predominates, and by C9 at the Kerameikos cemetery at Athens it is “the only form”; but after C9 at this cemetery inhumations increase again to thirty percent of all burials. We then witness a separation of settlement and grave precincts: “the dead must be carried out; hence graves accumulate along the main routes out of the city.” Burial within the city becomes an “honorific exception”. The quantity and value of funerary gifts becomes small in comparison to the Mycenaean age. The custom of placing a small coin, the ferrying fee for Charon, is adopted. Destructive sacrifices in which weapons and tools are broken, and the marking of a grave by a stone (sema) are introduced. By the C8 “the carefully worked grave stele” with an inscription and relief becomes normal. The stelae are washed, anointed and wound with fillets at the festivals of the dead; for example, at the Nekysia, the days of the dead, and at the Genesia,[5] the days of the forefathers. At these festivals offerings were made to the dead: “it is said that the dead come up and go about the city.”[6]
[1] The quotations in this paragraph are from Burkert, Religion, Op. cit., chapter IV. I. Burial and the Cult of the Dead.
[2] Burkert’s information is scanty and not dated. It appears that in Crete the burial chamber only survived as the normal form until C10.
[3] The Bronze Age Collapse refers to the period between c.1200 and 1150 BCE when almost every city in the Near East was destroyed. The Mycenaean kingdom, the Kassite kingdom of Babylonia, the Hittite Empire all collapsed.
[4] It was practised by the Hittites and at Troy VI/VIIA – and Troy VIIA is the most likely candidate for the Troy that was destroyed in the Trojan war.
[5] The Nemeseia or Genesia was a festival held at Athens to avert the nemesis of the dead. However, it would take a lot of effort to follow the trail of references left by Burkert to these two festivals.
[6] Burkert refers to the theory of Erwin Rohde of “a spiritual revolution in which the power of the dead was broken, with the souls being banished from the realm of the living.” He states that scholars are sceptical regarding this theory, which is contradicted by the above discussion.
[1] The quotations in this paragraph are from Burkert, Religion, Op. cit., chapter IV. I. Burial and the Cult of the Dead.
[2] Burkert’s information is scanty and not dated. It appears that in Crete the burial chamber only survived as the normal form until C10.
[3] The Bronze Age Collapse refers to the period between c.1200 and 1150 BCE when almost every city in the Near East was destroyed. The Mycenaean kingdom, the Kassite kingdom of Babylonia, the Hittite Empire all collapsed.
[4] It was practised by the Hittites and at Troy VI/VIIA – and Troy VIIA is the most likely candidate for the Troy that was destroyed in the Trojan war.
[5] The Nemeseia or Genesia was a festival held at Athens to avert the nemesis of the dead. However, it would take a lot of effort to follow the trail of references left by Burkert to these two festivals.
[6] Burkert refers to the theory of Erwin Rohde of “a spiritual revolution in which the power of the dead was broken, with the souls being banished from the realm of the living.” He states that scholars are sceptical regarding this theory, which is contradicted by the above discussion.
Questions
1. What do the changes in brial custom during the Greek archaic period, 1200 - 800 BCE, tell us about changes in religious ideation during this period?
2. Could the Bronze Age Collapse, 1200 - 1150 BCE, be attributable in part or whole to religious wars between matriarchy and patriarchy. How does the Bronze Age Collapse correlated with changes in religious practice, particular, the revolution against the practice of ritual human sacrifice?
3. Are scholars such as Erwin Rohde guilty of writing nonsense and obfusticating history?
2. Could the Bronze Age Collapse, 1200 - 1150 BCE, be attributable in part or whole to religious wars between matriarchy and patriarchy. How does the Bronze Age Collapse correlated with changes in religious practice, particular, the revolution against the practice of ritual human sacrifice?
3. Are scholars such as Erwin Rohde guilty of writing nonsense and obfusticating history?