13.06.2013 Views

Volume 19, 2007 - Brown University

Volume 19, 2007 - Brown University

Volume 19, 2007 - Brown University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

“Meting Out” 1 the Bones of<br />

Heroes in Ancient Greece<br />

Amanda Earl<br />

Those who won the worship of the ancient Greeks can be as enigmatic and difficult<br />

to study as the events of Greek history itself. There is much debate surrounding<br />

the dates and circumstances of the establishment of ancestor and hero<br />

cults and the transferal of heroic bones in ancient Greece. Some scholars have<br />

argued that the claim to or appropriation of a mythological or epic hero by a<br />

region in the seventh or sixth century B.C.E. served primarily geopolitical or<br />

propagandistic purposes. Others have challenged this analysis by pointing out<br />

the “internal” circumstances and collective identity of the city-state at the time<br />

of the appropriation (De Polignac, <strong>19</strong>95). Despite this debate, the involvement<br />

of heroes of various types in the telling of history aids one’s understanding of<br />

the emergence of the archaic Greek city-state if viewed from a more<br />

comprehensive viewpoint that takes into account both the political and<br />

psychological changes of the Greeks during the 6 th century B.C.E. By examining<br />

the context of heroic bone transferals in Herodotus and Plutarch, it can be<br />

surmised that such “cult warfare” in places like Sikyon, Sparta, and Athens<br />

occurred as city-states tried to cope with the changing power dynamics of this<br />

period. By “meting out” a particular currency of power, namely the bones of<br />

heroes, powerful city-states were able to justify themselves both politically and<br />

religiously.<br />

Based on archaeological evidence Carla Antonaccio has concluded that<br />

contrary to the bias Homeric epic spreads, early cults were not necessarily hero<br />

based but rather tomb based, more kinship or family-oriented, and shorter in<br />

duration (49). This distinction provides a new perspective on the establishment<br />

of hero-cult because it points to the development of archaic Greek society as a<br />

whole. Whereas in the Bronze Age and into the Iron Age “tomb cult” and<br />

certain burial practices such as tomb reuse represented the reverence of the<br />

family for their own dead individual or ancestor, with the emergence of the citystate<br />

and political consolidation in archaic Greece, respect for individual<br />

families produced tension and gave way to a need for a more communal form of<br />

worship (Antonaccio, <strong>19</strong>93: 49-50; De Polignac, <strong>19</strong>95: 132-133).<br />

Heroes are different from leaders of a community, though often founders<br />

of a city (archegetai) and extremely popular political figures are compared or<br />

1 Hdt. (1.67, 35).<br />

55

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!