Greek Tragedy and Sacrificial Ritual Burkert, Walter Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1966; 7, 2; ProQuest pg. 87 Greek Tragedy and Sacrificial Ritual Walter Burkert THE PROLIFERATION of theses and hypotheses, of reconstructions and constructions on the subject of the origin of tragedy leads to reflection on a basic problem of philological statements. l Evidently we ought not to expect that we can reduce so complex a phenomenon as Greek tragedy to one single formula of origin. Every statement is necessarily one-sided. When we are dealing with an evolution, with 7ToAAat /Lera{1oAal (Aristotle, Poetics 1449a14), there will be in each case persistence as well as differentiation, yet it is difficult to describe both pertinently at the same time. So, following his own inclinations, a scholar will be apt either to praise the creative achievement of a unique poet, be it Thespis or Aeschylus, or to insist on the primeval elements, with the ritual still preserved. We may collect exact information or formulate precise hypotheses as to the external organization of the Dionysia in the Polis Athens in the sixth century B.C.: temple and theater, chorus of citizens and choregos, 7TOL7J'T~S, oLoaaKaAos, iJ7TOKPL'T~S, masks and actors' dress, musical instruments, figures of dancing, musical and literary technique in the tradition of choral lyric and the iambos. But whoever tries to grasp the unique KaLp6s in the history of the human mind which brought forth tragedy, to understand the intellectual, psychological, and social motives involved, enters a field of basic ambiguity. On the pre­ carious balance and the conflict of tradition and emancipation, individual and society, religion and the profane, myth and reason, not even Thespis himself could have given final elucidation. It is left to us to attempt again and again to form a comprehensive picture of man and his world out of the testimonies of the past. In each indi­ vidual case, we shall not be able to grasp Ulore than SOUle of the possible aspects, a few strands in a complicated pattern. But we ought 1 I had the opportunity to discuss this paper at the Oxford Philological Society and at the University Seminar in Classical Civilization at Columbia University, New York, and I wish to thank all participants for their suggestions and criticism. I am especially indebted to Mrs. Stephanie West, Oxford, for most of the translation. Of course I am fully responsible for any defects in style or contents. 87 88 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL to keep in mind just this to avoid the danger that traditional or con­ temporary prejudices may unduly narrow the possibilities of ap­ proach. It is a single aspect that shall be considered here, the question why tragedy is called 'Tpayo/Sla-a word which seems to impose the ani­ mal on the development of high human dvilisation, the primitive and grotesque on sublime literary creations. If we seek an explanation of the word, we cannot avoid going back to earlier strata, to the religious basis of tragedy and indeed to Greek cult in general. Whether this has any bearing on fully-developed Attic tragedy cannot be determined in advance. The theory most prevalent today, going back to Welcker and owing its popularity to Wilamowitz, who claimed Aristotle's authority for it, understands Tpay CTarvptKOV; the emendation is not accepted byR. Kassel (OCT 1965), cf Patzer 53. G. F. Else, Aristotle's Poetics: The Argument (Cambridge [Mass.] 1957) 164ff thinks a19 €n-a21 ChT€CT€JLVVV(JlJ to be an interpolation, but hesitates himself (Origin 16) to draw conclusions from this hypothesis. A vase-painting from the 5th century represents TPAr.QL1IA being awakened by satyrs: Chous Oxford 534= J. D. Beazley, Attic Red-figure Vase-painters 2 [hereafter, AR V2] (Oxford 1963) 1258,1; cf. bell-crater Compiegne 1025=ARV2 1055,76; chous Leipzig T 527=ARV2 1258,2; H. Herter, RE ZW.R. VIA (1937) 1897. Dionysus, satyrs, tragedy still belong together. 4 F. Brommer, Satyroi (Wiirzburg 1937) 36, cf Satyrspiele2 (Berlin 1959); Patzer 128ff. Pratinas as inventor of satyr-play: Suid. S.V. PRATINAS, Ps.-Acr. in Hor. AP 216 (Cratini Cd., Pratinae Pohlenz), cf Dioskorides, AP 7.37, 707; M. Pohlenz, Das Satyrspiel und Pratinas von Phleius (GottNachr 1926) 298-321= Kleine Schriften II (Hildesheim 1965) 473-496. 90 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL necessary to postulate a proto-satyr-play existing before Pratinas; this turns Pratinas' achievement into a mere reform of satyr-play. In so far as the type of the satyr undoubtedly existed long before Pratinas, this is a possible way out of the difficulty; whether the Peripatetics could know anything about this proto-satyr-play is another question. The other difficulty is more disturbing. The satyrs of the satyr-play and the even earlier satyrs which we know from vase-paintings and sculpture are not "goats," but wild men with animal ears and horses' tails; only in the Hellenistic period did they acquire horns. A satyr may on occasion be called Tpayos, and when on vase-paintings satyrs and goats are depicted together, their physiognomy becomes re­ markably similar;5 but still they are not Tpayo£ themselves, as a satyr-play never could be called Tpay..fj, 8~patOv, XAavi, &v8,~ as satyr's dress, whereas girls wore goatskins in some Dionysiac ritual, Hsch. 'TPayrJo6s-, explaining the word unhesitat­ ingly TOU OE lJ.()/"ov TOts V£KWGW apvos &7TOOEOHYtLEvov.13 To this corresponds the explanation of the name TpaY'Pola-the only one current in antiquity-as 'song for the prize of a goat' or 'song at the sacrifice of a goat'; the two interpretations are identical, for naturally the goat won as a prize was sacrificed to Dionysos. The earliest evidence for the 7p&y0S- as (!tOAov in the tragic agon is the Parian Marble, then an epigram of Dioskorides; Eratosthenes, in his Erigone, certainly treated Icarius' sacrifice of a goat as the aition of 7payq>ola: ' IK&pwt 760t 7Tpw7a 7TEP;' 7p&yOV wpx~aav70. The most familiar descriptions are those in the Augustan poets. Particularly detailed are the accounts given in two late Latin writers, Diomedes-whose source is supposed to be Suetonius-and Euanthius; both use the same Greek material, which may come from Didymos, IIEP;' 7TOt7J7WV. The same tradition survived in the Scholia to Dionysius Thrax, in the Johannes Diaconus published by Rabe, and in Tzetzes; the inter­ mediate source appears to be the Chrestomathy of Proclus.14 A great 13 PGrHist 308 F 2=Schol. in Pi. N. 2.1; Eust. p.6.25; EM, Hsch. S.v. apvipS6s, Photo S.V. pW/J(pS6;;. The Lex sacra of Coresus, S1G3 958.36 assigns Kpdvv !,-"peBa to the rhapsode. So there is no reason to look for another etymology of apvipS6s as Welcker, op.cit. (supra n.2) 241 did. 14 Marm.Par. FGrHist 239 A 43, cf Euseb.fHieron. Chron. 01.47,2; Dioskorides, AP 7,410, cf 411; Eratosth. fr.22 Powell = Hygin. Astr. p.35,4ff Bunte, cf F. Solmsen in TAPA 78 (1947) 270ff; K. Meuli, MusHelv 12 (1955) 22M; Merkelbach, op.cit. (supra n.2) 496ff. Patzer 33f thinks Eratosthenes is referring to the aUKwAta rather than to tragedy, though admitting that 71'EpL 'Tpayov 0pXE'iu8m does not suit the jumping on the goatskin. Eratosthenes' theory, however, seems to have been that both tragedy and comedy sprang from the same root, the 'TpvYqJSla understood as 'vintage-song', to which the aUKwALa too are said to have be­ longed, ef Paus.Cr. ed. Erbse a 161=Eust. p.1769,45ff (Erbse is not right in leaving out the phrases on KW!'-qJl')f:rv and -rpaYqJ3ot; the word KW!,-fj-raL in Paus.Gr. clearly points to KW!'-ip3ta, cf Meuli, I.e. 226 n.4); other texts gathered by Meuli I.e. It seems impossible to accept Eratosthenes' theory in this respect, because the Dionysia was not a vintage-festival; but the falsity of the combination does not invalidate the single pieces of information Eratosthenes could use, e.g. on 'Tpa.YipSol and 'Tpayos. Verg. Georg. 2.380ff with Serv.Auct. 383, Prob. 380/4, Scho1.Bern.; Hor. AP 220 with Ps.-Acr.; Tib. 2.1.57f. Diomedes, Grammatici Latini 1.487= Suetonius p.5.16ff Reifferscheid (ef infra n.21); Euanthius in Aeli Donati qf. eommentum Terenti ed. P. Wessner, I (Leipzig 1902) 13= CGP p.62. Diomedes and Euanthius present nearly the same material in different arrangement; Euanthius does not use Diomedes (-Suetonius), since he has some more Greek material (Apollo N6!,-LOs, 'Ayva.tos p.13.16 Wessner), but-except the obvious reference to Vergil-not the Latin quotations (Varro, Lucilius) found in Diomedes (-Suetonius). Didymos, llEpl 71'otlJ'T(7w, is quoted by Orion p.58.7ff Sturz for an etymology of ;Aeyos which recurs in Diomedes p,484 K. and Prod. Chr. 319B6ff. Produs in his Chrestomathy must have dealt with tragedy and comedy, but nothing is extant in the excerpts ofPhotios; from Proclus, however, seem to be derived the excerpts of Iohannes Diakonos ed. Rabe, RhM 63 (1908) 150, Schol. in Dionys.Thr. p.18.3ff; 172.20,306.27,475.3 Hilgard; Tz. ad Lye. p.2.21, 3.1 Scheer; Tz. Diff. Poet. 100, 124 (CGP pp.37f). q C. Kaibel, Die Prolegomena lIEP! KQMQLMAE (AbhGott II.4 1898), a study of basic importance for the evaluation of the later sources. Else, Origin 17, declaring Iohnnes Diakonos "worthless," ignores these affiliations. Patzer, affirming that 94 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL deal was written in the Hellenistic period on matters of literary history, and what survives is absurdly scanty. Kaibel was nevertheless able to show in the case of the rather fuller literature 7TEP~ KWfLCt>Sla<; that even in the Byzantine excerptors there are traces of a theory of the fourth century B.C., a theory which did not know the comedy of Menander. Even the latest sources may preserve excellent tradition. It is worth noting that some fragments of Aristotle, from the IIEpL 7TOtT)T{iW, have survived in this way.i5 Among modern scholars the derivation of TpaYCt>sta from the sacrifice of a goat has not enjoyed much success. "Spielend ersonnene aina," "Konstruktionen, keine Oberlieferung"-this was the judgment of Wilamowitz (63), who maintained that the whole thing was a fabrica­ tion of Eratosthenes; incidentally, he had overlooked the Parian Marble. Pohlenz tried to correct this oversight while retaining the result: he argued that the theory was earlier than Eratosthenes, but still post-Aristotelian, early Alexandrian. The secondary fabrication, according to him, gives itself away by its bias: while Aristotle's evi­ dence about dithyramb and aaTVptK6v points towards the Pelopon­ nese, the autochthonous origin of tragedy in Attica is here defended. Pohlenz' argument has found wide acceptance.i6 Yet it evidently depends on two assumptions: that Attic local patriotism did not start to consider tragedy until after Aristotle, and that it could contribute nothing but invention, no facts of any sort. But the Atthidographers were at work before Aristotle: Cleidemus wrote ca. 350, Phanodemus about a decade later. They were keenly interested in the Attic cults. A fragment of Cleidemus on the lesser Dionysia is extant (FGrHist 323 F 27). Phanodemus displays a marked Athenian bias (325 F 14, the explanation "Tpaycp'Sla= 'Gesang beim Bocksopfer'" was "in der Antike nirgends als Namensdeutung versucht" (34 n.1), is overlooking Vergil and Euanthius. Vergil and Euanthius agree with the tradition of the goat as a prize as to the fact that the Tpaycp'Sol sang while the goat was still alive; cf infra n.68 at the end. 15 Fr.676 Rose=Schol.Bob. in Cic. Pro Arch. p.358 Orelli, on elegists; fr.677=Procl. Chr. 320A31, on Arion; Rose included both fragments among the dubia, conjecturing' APtCT'TOKAfj!; instead of 'AptaTOT€A7]>' He could not yet know Iohannes Diakonos p.150 Rabe (infra n.19) and Schol. in Dionys.Thr. p.306.9 Hilgard, on Susarlon. 16 Pohlenz, GottNachr 1927, cf Pohlenz II.8ff, accepted by Ziegler 1925, Lesky 2off, Patzer 24. Pohlenz, referring to Jacoby, stated the source of the Parlan Marble to be an early third century Atthis. Surely Eratosthenes in his Erigone was drawing on the Atthidographers, as did Callimachus in his Hecale. Jacoby, however, thought of Ephorus, I1£p~ £VP7]p.aTWV, too as a possible source for the Parlan Marble, FGrHist II D 668, cf II C 42. It is the merlt of Solmsen, Meuli, Merkelbach (supra n.14) to have revived the interest in the 'Eratosthenian' theory of the drama. .., WALTER BURKERT 95 F 27). Are we to suppose that the earlier Atthidographers wrote noth­ ing about the Great Dionysia? This festival was certainly treated by Philochorus (328 F 171; cf F 5, F 206), who took specialinterestinsacrifi­ cial rites (F 178, F 194) and gave an explanation of the word patPctJoos (F 212). Considering the general inflexibility of Greek cults, it is hard to maintain that even a post-Aristotelian Atthidographer would pre­ sent sheer invention in matters of sacrifice . Aristotle, however, says quite explicitly that the dispute between Athenians and Dorians for the glory of the' invention' of tragedy and comedy had been going on for some time: OLO Kat. av-mTOLOUVTaL TijS T€ ~, ,~ ~".If ~ , \ >, TpayctJ0tas Kat TTJS KWfLctJ0tas Ot .t.JWpL€LS .•• TTOLOVfL€VOL Ta ovofLaTa ~ >" , " ,~, ~ A.. 'Af)' G1JfL€LOV. aVTOt fLEV yap KWfLas Tas TT€pLOLKLOas Kal\€LV 'jJaGLV, TJvaLOVS ~, ~, , ~"" - 'Y' f)' "" ~ \ OE 0TJfLoVS, ws KWfLctJ00vS OVK aTTO TOV KWfLa<:,ELV I\EX €VTas al\l\a TTl KaTa KWfLas TTAavn aTLfLa'OfLlvovs EK TOU aaT€WS ••• (Poetics 1448a29ff). This presupposes two things: a derivation of KWfLctJ8La from KWfLTJ in the form of an anecdote-some people, for lack of appreciation, leave the city and wander around in the villages; the song which they sing is the KWJL6{3ovs the origin of sacrifice; this is not Svu'Tvx{as 71'€ptu'Tacns;. In the middle of chapter 10 (p.141.3 Nauck; fr.6 Potscher), the Ka'Ta fI-€POS- examples come to an end, and suddenly the motive of ALfI-OS reappears: this is Theophrastus again, the stories before are EfI-{1€{1A'f/lJ,€VOL fLfiOo, of Porphyry (Abst. 2.32). Nevertheless, the non-Theophrastean anecdotes may still be very old popular tradition, perhaps again preserved by Atthidographers. Later testi­ monies on the Dionysiac goat-sacrifice: Varro, RR 1.2.19; Ov. Met. 15.111ff; Fast. l.349ff; Servo in Aen. 3.118; Prob. in Georg. 2.380/4; above all Leonidas of Tarentum, AP 9.99, and Euenus of Ascalon, AP 9.75, an epigram which is also inscribed on a Pompeian wall-paint­ ing, Monlnst 10 (1876) T.36, cf infra p.114. Hellenistic and Roman representations of the goat-sacrifice are collected by O. Brendel, RomMitt 48 (1933) 153ff. A choregus paid 30 minas for one tragic agon (Lys. 21.1), the price of a goat in Erchia (SEG 21 [1965] no.541) is 10 to 12 drachmas, i.e. less than! %-vilis hircus indeed. 98 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL dicebatur. In view of this testimony, the burden of proof lies with those who deny that a goat was sacrificed at the Great Dionysia. The sacrificial victim as prize in an agon occurs as early as the Iliad (22.159).22 Most important was the bull as prize and sacrificial victim in connection with the dithyramb. By chance we have unimpeachable early evidence in this case: Pindar (Ol. 13.19) speaks of the {307JAdmXS odJVpaJ.Lf3o!; which originated in Corinth; the scholia explain, as if it were a matter of course, "because a bull was €7TaBAoV for the winner." This is confirmed by an epigram of Simonides (79 D.), who boasts that he has won C< 56 bulls and tripods." B07JAaTa~ 8L(}.,)paJ.Lf3o~-the bull was led along in solemn procession; vase-paintings show the bull, adorned by the victorious Phyle and ready for sacrifice, beside the tripod.23 Why should we not suppose that the goat was similarly con­ nected with tragedy? Plutarch sets the two, the prize of bull and goat, victory with dithyramb and tragedy, in vivid proximity when, in his essay De gloria Atheniensium, he describes the triumphal procession of the poets: he has the N'iKaL themselves march up, {3oiJv €7Ta()AOV EAKo.,)aa~ 7] Tpayov (349c). This is allegory, influenced by the pictorial tradition (n.23), but the experience of Greek sacrificial festivals lies behind it. In the church of Aghios Eleftherios, the "a for the victors in an athletic agon. Cf. also Schol. in Theocr. 7.106/8d. 23 On these 'dithyrambic vases' cf. G. E. Rizzo, RivFC 30 (1902) 471ff; E. Pfuhl, Malerei und Zeichnung II (Miinchen 1923) §617; esp. the neck-amphora BM E 298=ARV2 1581, 20, CVA p1.51,1, with the inscription AKAMANTIE ENlKA &yo" S. fr.607 Nauck=668 Pearson; SchoI. in PI. Remp. 394c; the expression 9vawv 8dJVpap.f3ov Pi. fr.86a. 24 L. Deubner, Attische Feste (Berlin 1932) 252 and pU8. BURKERT PLATE 2 TilE GREAT DIO",YSTA: POMPE (OR THEORL\), ACTOR WITH GOAT, ZODHC.\L SIC;\! OF ARIES. from C"I.LEl'\DAR FRIEZE. ATI-IENS (ef n.24) (ClIIrtesy of Deillsciles Arciulologisches Instillit. Athens) PLATE 3 BURKERT Figure I. Skyphos of the Theseus Painter, Agora P 1544 (Collrtesy of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens) Figure 2. Detail of Skyphos, Agora P 1544 (Courtesy of tile American School of Classical Studies at Atllens) DIONYSIAC PROCESSION WITH FLUTE-PLAYER, We,E-AMPHORA, GOAT Cef n.ZS no.l3) WALTER BURKERT 99 Georg. 2.395).25 To which of the Dionysus festivals the'Tpd.yos belongs can be seen from Plutarch (De cupid. div. 527n): ~ 7Td.'TpWS 'TWV A I , \ , __ "I. \ > I e::- ~ \ '"I. ~ '.I.. \ .LJ LOVVULWV €Op'T'Y/ 'TO 7T!X/1.aWV €7T€P-7T€'TO O'Y/P-O'TLKWS Kat tllapws, ap-'f'0p€VS " \"1. I.,. I 1'\"\ \ >'e::- " OtVOV Kat KIl'Y/p-a'TLS, U'Ta 'Tpayov 'TLS UIlK€V, all/los tuxaowv appLXOV 26 Surprisingly little attention has been paid to these unimpeachable TpayoL in the retinue of Dionysus. My collection (surely incomplete): 1. Amphora BM B 168= ABV 142,3 (satyr riding on goat) 2. Amphora New York, Metr.Mus. 06.1021.68=ABV 289 (Dionysus, satyr, goat) 3. Amphora Oxford 213=ABV 340,1 (maenad and satyr, Dionysus, maenad and goat) 4. Amphora E. Gerhard, Auserlesene Vasenbilder (Berlin 1840-58) pI.54=ABV 370,127 (Dionysus and Ariadne in a chariot drawn by goats) 5. Amphora ib. p1.32=ABV 372,155 (satyr, Dionysus with goat, satyr) 6. Oinochoe Cambridge 162=ABV 385,28 (man, maenad, winejug, man riding on a goat, amphora, dancing man) 7. Stamnos Bruxelles R 251=ABV 388,2 (on the neck: man between goats, goat between men; main picture: chariot race and dancing men, surrounded by vines and grapes) 8. Pelike Oxford 563= ABV 396,21 (satyrs with goat) 9. Amphora BM B 178=ABV 396,27 (Dionysus with goat, two satyrs) 10. Amphora BM B 258=ABV 402,9 (Ariadne with panther, Apollo with cithara, Dionysus with cantharus and goat) 11. Oinochoe ABV 431,11 (maenad riding on goat) 12. Lekythos Berlin=ABV 518,3 (goats, satyrs, a goat with human face, caught at the horn by a satyr) 13. Skyphos Agora P 1544=ABV 518,47 (procession with flute-player, youth carrying a wine-amphora, old man with ivy-wreath, other comasts, goat); see figures 1 and 2, PLATE 3 14. Skyphos Agora P 1547=ABV 518,49 (procession with flute-player, man catching a goat at the horn); see figure 3, PLATE 4 15. Skyphos Bruxelles R283=ABV 627,2 (youth holding goat at horn; vines with grapes) 16. Amphora BM B 265=CVA pl.66 (Great Britain 211) 1 (return of Hephaestus, goat beside the mule) 17. Amphora Gerhard I.e. pl.37 (Dionysus with goat) 18. Skyphos Bologna C 44= CVA 2 p1.42 (Italia 341) (goat, satyr, Hermes; suspended, a knapsack containing the head of a goat) 19. Skyphos Baltimore, CVA 1 p1.22 (USA 155) (Dionysus in a chariot, goat, man) 20. Skyphos Athens 820 bis, A. Frickenhaus, Lenaeenvasen, Winckelmannsprogramm 72 (1912) nr.2 (Dionysus-idol with women; under the handle, goat) 21. Amphora Warsaw 199184=CVA 4 pl.I7 (Pologne 146) 2/3 (Dionysus with goat) 22. Amphora Philadelphia L 64.259 = ABV 285,6 (satyr and maenad, Dionysus with goat, satyr) 23. Oinochoe Paris, Cab. des Med. 276, A. de Ridder, Catalogue des vases peints de la Bibliotheque Nationale (Paris 1902) fig.28 (sHen with flute, goat, wineskin) A goat is depicted on the altar of Dionysus on the cup of Makron, Acr. 325= AR V2 460,20, Frickenhaus, l.c. p.22. There is also a goat on a Boeotian cotyle in the BM,}HS 31 (1911) 4ff (together with satyr) and on one Corinthian kothon, Wiirzburg no.ll8 (Webster no.37). Similar representations recur in Attic red-figure, e.g. the cup of Gorgas, Agora P 24113= AR V2 213,242. It seems the vase painters felt some equivalence of he-goat and satyr (nos. 3,12) and an intimate connexion of Dionysus and -rpayos (nos. 5, 9,10; 15). The sacrifice of an EpUpOS is represented on a South Italian vase (Naples H 2411, L. R. Farnell, The Cults of the Greek States V [Oxford 1909] p1.41); otherwise, the act of sacrifice to Dionysus is not represented in classical vase-painting (H. Metzger, Recherches sur l'imagerie athenienne [paris 1965] 113). 2 *-C.R.B.S. 100 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL ~KOAOV(JE£ KOJLt~WV. E7T1. 7TaClt S' 0 cpaMos. On account of the word mx:rpws, this description is usually connected with the LhovVu£a KaT' aypovs.26 The combination of fig-basket and goat recurs however in the Marmor Parium (A 39; 43) and Dioskorides (AP 7.410) with reference to comedy and tragedy, performed together at the Great Dionysia; so it is probable that Plutarch's source is referring to the same festival. Indeed a sixth century institution was 7TaTp£os already in the fifth century. Nevertheless it is usually assumed that the LlwvVu£a EV IJ.UTE£ were modelled on the LlwvVu£a KaT' aypovs; SO the Tpayos will not have been missing in either of the festivals, any more than the phallus. The sacrifice of a Tpayos is quite an unusual event;27 one finds only one Tpayos in a herd, perhaps in a village; he is the dux pecoris, Tibullus (2.1.58) says. Nor is the appetizing smell of roast meat the idea primarily associated with the Tpayos; a kid, an lp£cpos would be better; Tpayos, that implies lewdness and foul smelJ.28 Nevertheless the Tpayos is sacrificed-because his procreative power is coming to an end. A five year old Tpayos is no longer fit for use, Columella (7.6.3) tells us. So at least every four years the old he-goat must be removed. To get rid of the old and risk a fresh start may have been an exciting course for the farmer and goatherd. Now there follows the OXETEta of the she-goats in late autumn, that the kids may be born in spring (Varro, RR 2.3.8; Columella7.6.6); then the Tpayos has done his duty. It is still necessary to wait for a little while until it is certain that the she-goats are pregnant-then we come to January-February, IIou,DEcfJV: Llwvvu£a KaT' aypovs.29 These simple facts of husbandry are however embedded in very ancient religious customs which are by no means confined to Greece.so But to follow them up seems to lead from obscurum to obscurius. 16 Deubner, op.cit. (supra n.24) 136; Pickard-Cambridge, op.cit. (supra n.11) 41; Else, Hermes 85 (1957) 18 n.3: "in any case not the Greater Dionysia"; Patzer 36: "ohne jede Riicksicht auf die Tragodie." Pohlenz, however, pointed out the connection with the Parian Marble and Dioskorides, GottNachr 1927, p.304 n.l. 17 The Leges Sacrae make a distinction between the sacrifice of an ;pupos and a'Tpcfyo" cf F. Sokolowski, Lois sacrees de I'Asie Mineure (Paris 1955) no. 67B.3, 10; id., Lois sacrees des cites grecques (Paris 1962) no.l04: LI,ovJa

..aC177Juw (Thphr. CP 3.13.1), i.e. about April. 80 The goat eating from a tree, endangered by carnivorous beasts, is an iconographic type down from Sumerian times; cf. the gold-silver-statuettes from Ur, J. B. Pritchard, WALTER BURKERT 101 One piece of evidence however is unambiguous: characteristic of the Dionysiac orchestra, perhaps the very center of the circle, is the {)VP./ATJ. Already Pratinas makes the chorus conquer L1£ovvauxoa 1ToAv1T&7"aya {)Vf1-/Aav. 31 What exactly the (}Vf1-/AT) was like, was a matter of dispute even in antiquity: E"t7"E" fNjp.& 7"£ £t7"E" f3wfL6s. 32 Most probably The Ancient Near East in Pictures [hereafter ANEPJ (Princeton 1954) nos.667/668; a seal from Uruk, Berlin VA 10537, ANEP no.672; H. Frankfort, Cylinder Seals (London 1939) 21f, pl.3a (cf pl.3b, 4j, 17c): a man, standing beside a block (altar?), feeding goats (or a kind of sheep?) with a (stylized) twig; he is probably to be called Dumuzi-Tammuz: A. Moortgat, Tammuz (Berlin 1949) 3ff, 29f; a relief from Assur, first half of second mill. B.C., ANEP no.528, see figure 4, PLATE 4: a god with grapes, on each side a goat gnawing the grape-vine; a relief­ vase, W. Andrae, Kultrelief aus dem Brunnen des Assurtempels ZU Assur (Berlin 1931) 10, p1.7d: goat gnawing grapes, threatened by beastlike demons. Some connection of Dionysus-cult and Tammuz-cult is entirely possible, considering esp. the equation {3aKXov' KAav(}p.ov. f/JOLV£K£S (Hsch.) and 'IKapws-Accadian ikkaru 'farmer, planter' (M. C. Astour, Hellenosemitica [Leiden 1965J 174f; 194 n.6). 31 Fr. 708 Page; cf Pohlenz, GottNachr 1927, and E. Roos, Die tragische Orchestik im Zerrbild der altattischen Komodie (Lund 1951) 209ff. 32 Pollux 4.123. To make the problem more complicated, the Tholos in Epidaurus was called OVfLtAa (IG IV.12 103), a Delian inscription mentions T~V OVfLtAT)v ToD {3wfLoD (IG XL2 161A95), whereas pherecrates (CAF 1.204, fr.214) is said to have used the word instead of OVT)Aal. The tragic poets use OVfLtAT) as a kind of equivalent to Ja-rla, A. S. F. Cow, JHS 32 (1912) 2l3ff, F. Robert, Thymele (Paris 1939) 259ff, Hsch. S.v. (}VfLEAT)' •.• ol 8£ TO €7TL7TVPOV; E. Supp. 64 a€gl7Tvpo£ OVfLtAa£-but E. Ion 114 8vfLtAav= aa7T€aOV 121; therefore Pickard­ Cambridge concluded that there was an altar in the centre of the orchestra, the upper part of which was the OVfLtAT) (Dith. 1 175, 177; The Theatre of Dionysus in Athens [Oxford 1946] 9f). Metzger, op.cit. (supra n.25) 101f calls the round altar amidst the Dionysiac thiasos on a vase painting 8vfLtAT) (calyx crater Athens 12255 = AR V2 1435, Metzger p1.44). C. Robert had vigorously contested that there could have been an altar in the orchestra (Hermes 32 [1897] 438ff, followed by F. Schmidt, De supplicum ad aras confugientium partibus scenicis [Diss. Konigsberg 1911]); his derivation of (}VP.EA7] from the root (}7]-, (}Ep.eA£OV must however be discarded on linguistic grounds; on the suffix -fL£A-, H. Frisk, Eranos 41 (1943) 51, and Griechisches etymologisches Worterbuch (Heidelberg 1960) S.v. (}vw 2. Other testimonies point to (}VfLtAT)={3fjfLa 7£: Orion p.n.8 Sturz (~Et.Gen., EM 458.32ff) S.v. 8vfLtAT): Tpa7Tfi'a 8£ 7jv • .. €' 7)s €UTWT£S €V TOtS aypors n8ov, fL~7TW Tag£v Aa{3oVUT)S TpayqJ8tas (cf Pollux 4.123 on €A£O,); EM 743.35 fL£Ta 8£ T~V opXTJUTpav (meaning 'stage' here) {3wfLos 'ljv ToD .d£ovvuov, T€Tpaywvov OlK080fLT)fLayta. Of special importance are: A. Thomsen, "Der Trug des Prometheus," ArchRW 12 (1909) 460ff; A. D. Nock, "The cult of Heroes," HThR 37 (1944) 141ff; above all K. Meuli, "Griechische Opferbrauche," in Phyllobolia, Festschrift P. von der Muhll (Basel 1946) 185ff [hereafter, MEULl], who established the connection of the Olympian sacrifice with the 'Schadel- und Langknochenopfer', on which cf A. Vorbichler, Das Opfer auf den heute noeh erreiehbaren iiltesten Stufen der Menschheitsgesehichte (Modling 1956), and H. Kiihn, Das Problem des Urmonotheismus (AbhMainz 1950, 22). Unfortunately there is no exhaustive study of interrelations of Greek and ancient Near Eastern sacrificial rites (on which cf B. Meissner, Babylonien und Assyrien II [Heidelberg 1925] 73ff; G. Furlani, "II sacrificio nella religione dei Semiti di Babilonia e Assiria," MemLinc VI, 4 [1932J 103-370; F. Blome, Die Opfermaterie in Babylon und Israel [Rom 1934J; K. Galling, Der Altar in den Kulturen des alten Orients [Berlin 1925J; Y. Rosen­ garten, Le regime des offrandes dans la societe sumerienne d' apres les textes pn!sargoniques de Lagas [Paris 1960J; on the still very frustrating Ugaritic evidence, A. de Guglielmo, Cath BiblQuart 17 [1955J 196ff. It seems to be well established that, on the one hand, the Minoans and Mycenaeans had quite different sacrificial rites, because they had no altars of the Greek type (c. G. Yavis, Greek Altars [Saint Louis 1949J), and, on the other hand, that the nearest relatives of Greek altars are to be found in Assur, 13th cent. (Galling pp.46ff; ANEP nos. 576j577), and that Semitic (Phoenician and Hebrew) sacrificial rites offer the closest parallels to Greek ritual (R. K. Yerkes, Sacrifice in Greek and Roman Religions and Early Judaism [New York 1952J). It is one of the paradoxes of our discipline that neither Nilsson nor Meuli, in their expositions of Greek sacrificial ritual, refer to the Old Testament, which contains the largest extant collection of ancient sacrificial rites. 35 Schol. A in II. 9.219=K. Lehrs, De Aristarchi studiis Homericis 3 (Leipzig 1882) 82ff; Schol. in Od. 14.446; Eust. p.641.61; Frisk, GriechEtym Worterb. 1.699. The more comprehen­ sive use of BV€tJJ is to be seen in the gloss Hsch. s. v. BUfLa' [EPE'iOV GaywJJ olloKavTwfLa. 36 On 'Olympic' and 'chthonic' sacrifice cf Stengel, Kultusaltertumer3 105ff; Ziehen, op.cit. (supra n.34); Meuli 201ff; the evidence for the contrast EvaY"EtJJ - BVEtV is most fully collected by F. Pfister, Der Reliquienkult im Altertum II (Giessen 1912) 466ff. In slaughtering, the throat of the animal was sometimes turned to the sky, sometimes pressed to the earth (H. v. FritzeJdI 18 [1904] 58ff; Schol. in A.R.l. 587; Et.Gen. p.1l5 Miller=EM s.v. EVTofLa). There are, besides the high 'Olympian' altars, altars low and large for holocausts, but there are also EoxapaLjust on the earth and !3oBpot dug out (Yavis, op.cit. [supra n.34J 91ff; Schol. in E. Ph. 274; Porph. Antr. 6; Servo in Verg. Buc. 5.66 etc.). In fact olloKavTdJ/La-ra were 104 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL But as the words £€P€LOV, £€P€V€,v and, in the classical period, 8v€,v cover all forms of sacrifice, we ought to keep the whole complex in VIew. We are best informed on the 'Olympian' feast-sacrifice.37 It seemed puzzling as early as Hesiod. The thigh-bones, the tail, the fat and the gall-bladder are burnt for the god in whose honour the sacrifice is not very frequent, either in the cult of heroes or of those gods whom the Greeks called x86vwt (the evidence: Ziehen, RE ZW.R. IlIA [1929] 1674ff), and they occur also in cults of 'Olympians' (cf Meuli 209ff); the Erchia-inscription has ..1L~ 'E'1TW'1r£T€t xo"ipo, &'>U)KCWTO, (SEG XXI [1965] no. 541 r 23), i.e. for the god whose name seemed to designate the sky-god 'looking down from above' (L. Preller and C. Robert, Griechische Mythologie 14 [Berlin 1894] 117 n.2). On the other hand, the sacrificial feast is quite common in the cult of heroes and X86vLOL (Nock, op.cit. [supra n.34] with 11 examples; the ram sacrificed to Pelops in Olympia was eaten, too, but not by participants in the festival, Paus. 5.l3.2f). People even ate from Ka8aPfna, cf. oZ cnrA«")'XVEVoVTE, Ath. 9AI0B; only Porphyry's 8£OAOYOL tried to eliminate this custom (Abst. 2.44). At the oath-sacrifices, however, the victim was not eaten (II. 19.266, Schol. in II. 3.310, Paus. 5.24.10, 3.20.9), nor were, of course, the a.paYLa proper, slain on the battle-field under the eyes of the enemy. The holocausts themselves usually have their place as a preliminary rite in a larger context: first the burnt sacrifice-xotpo, or ap1jv-for the hero, then the sacrificial feast-mostly fJov.-in honour of the god: inscription from Cos, SIGa 1027 (Heracles); Paus. 3.19.3 (Hyacinthus-Apollon); Paus. 2.11.7 (Alexanor­ Euamerion). This goes along with the rhythm night-day in Greek time-reckoning: the new 'day' begins at sunset, cf Pi. I. 4.67ff c. schol. In an analogous way, the 'normal' sacrifice consists, first, in the burning of sacred parts, secondly, in the meal. In one case, the same animal was half burnt, half eaten (paus. 2.10.1, Sicyon). There are many other special pro­ visions in sacrificial ritual, each of which has its own function and meaning, e.g. about EWoVXt,ELV (infra n.62), or o~ .popa, i.e. the victim must be consumed at the spot: 22 times in the Erchia-inscription (SEG XXI n0.541); S. Dow, BCH 89 (1965) 210, thinks this to be a "purely secular matter," but if. Ar. PI. 1138 c. schol.; Theopompus fr.70 (CAF I.751); SIG3 1004, 1024, 1025, 1026, 1041, Sokolowski, Lois sacrees de I'Asie Mineure, no.34; L. Ziehen, Leges Graecorum sacrae e titulis collectae (Leipzig 1906) no. 125; Paus. 2.27.1, 1004.10, 10.38.8, 8.38.8; the same rule from the Old Testament (Ex. 12.8, Passover; cf 29.31, 34) through Rome (Cato, Agr. 83; CIL VI 1,576) up to Alaska (A. Gahs, Festschrift W. Schmidt [Wien 1928] 251). The rite of drowning a victim in a spring or lake (D.S. 504: Cyane) is also attested as early as the palaeolithic period (KUhn, op.cit. [supra n.34] 22). 37 The most elaborate descriptions of sacrifice are in Homer, II. 1.447ff, 204 !Off, Od. 3.429ff, 14.414ff; Hes. Th. 535ff; most detailed is Pherecrates, fr.23 (CAF I.l51): people bum TOO p.TJPW. ~v oa.pw KOp.L8ii rptAf]v. TOV cnrOv8vAov. Menander mentions oa.pov aKpav and XOA~V Dysc. 447ff, cf fr.264 Koerte. The comedians used to make fun of this ritual, cf also Eubulus fr.95 (CAFll.197) and l30 (CAFll.210), Adesp.fr.1205 (CAFill.606). An interesting description of a sacrificial meal is given by Harmodios, FGrHist 319 F 1. Vase paintings containing sacri­ ficial scenes are collected by G. Rizza, ASAtene 37/8 (1959/60) 321ff and Metzger. op.cit. (supra n.2.5) 107ff; they usually represent the altar with the fire and the tail of the victim, the U7TAayxv07T17)5. Wine-libations, flute-player. The cup of Brygos (supra n.32) shows Iris, who came to fetch from the altar oar{>w Kai cnrOV8VAOV, attacked by satyrs. Most surprising survivals of sacrificial ritual were found until recent times among the Greeks of Pharasa. Cappadocia: there is a stone in the chapel opposite the altar, on which incense is burnt; it is called 8&i\, ( < AL8apL); the victim is led three times round the 8&i\" pelted with leaves and flowers, slaughtered in the chapel so that the 8&i\, may receive its blood; the minister ('1Tanus) receives the right thigh, the hide, head and feet of the victim: G. A. Megas, 'Ei\i\TJvLKa~ Eopral Kall8Lp.« ri}, AarKfj, AaTp£la, (Athens 1956) 15f; he also refers to similar customs in Thrace (17: the victim is slaughtered El, fJo8pov in the churchyard) and at Lesbos (17f). Cf. also Cook ill.1168ff. WALTER BURKERT 105 held; the pious congregation appropriates almost all the rest. The phrase EV 8valrwl T€ Kai €wa8elTJGt in Herodotus (8.99) is revealing. Hesiod can only explain this as the result of a trick by Prometheus. This amounts to an admission that these sacrifices could not be under­ stood as a gift to the divinity, at any rate not as the gift of a meal. But the theory adopted by Wilamowitz and Nilsson, following Robertson Smith, that the sacrifice was a common meal of men and gods,3S also is impossible in view of the 'Promethean' division. Certainly, there were 8Eog€vLa-in which the menu was largely vegetarian, corres­ ponding to the normal diet -and there were, as in the Orient, Tpa7T'E,aL for the gods. But the sacral center of the 8vala is the p:TJpta Kat€W, the burning of the thigh-bones. When Nilsson supposes that some pieces of meat were sent to the gods by fire and the inedible parts were immediately consumed by the same "convenient medium" (Griech. Rel.2 1.144£), he supplies his own reductio ad absurdum: homage and garbage-disposal combined? It was Karl Meuli's article "Griechische Opferbrauche" (n.34) which provided a decisive advance.39 He pointed out the evident connection with the' Schadel- und Langknochenopfer' practised by Siberian hunt­ ing people and attested as early as the palaeolithic period. When an animal is caught and slaughtered, the skull and the bones, above all the thigh-bones are presented to the god; they may be buried, or hung on a sacred tree, or set up in a sanctuary. Meuli also offered an explanation: the hunter wishes to save from complete destruction the 38 'ljyoWrO yap wa1TEp avaa'TE;'a(Ja, 'TO;', (JEO;', Schol. AT in II. 3.310; U. v. Wilamowitz­ Moellendorff, Der Glaube der Hellenen I (Berlin 1931) 287; M. P. Nilsson, Geschichte der griechischen Re/igion2 I (MUnchen 1955) 144f; contra, Nock, op.cit. (supra n.34) 150ff, 156: "there was a conscious fellowship of the worshippers with one another, rather than of the worshippers with the deity honored." Wilamowitz thought the Promethean division was an "early" depravation of the original common meal; he could not know that this would lead back to times earlier than the palaeolithic age. That ILTfpta really means thigh-bones is proved by Meuli 2l5ff. 39 Nilsson, op.cit. (supra n.38) objects to Meuli, stressing that "nur gezahmte Tiere, fast nie wilde geopfert werden"; but this, far from being a "durchschlagender Einwand," merely means that the neolithic farmers took over and transformed for their kind of civilization the rites of the palaeolithic hunters. Another change took place when the Greeks (like the Western Semites) began to burn the sacred parts, establishing as it were fire as a means of communication with the divine, cf n.34. Whether the sacrificial rites presuppose from the start some kind of belie fin god, even an 'Urmonotheismus', is a ques­ tion difficult to answer. Meuli wrote: "diese Jagdriten sind weder deistisch noch pradei­ stisch und sagen Uber Gotterglauben Uberhaupt nichts aus ... in der Beziehung von Mensch und Tier gehen sie vollstandig auf" (249); contra, KUhn and esp. Vorbichler, op.cit. (supra n.34); curiously enough, Freud's theory in this case comes to the same result as P. W. Schmidt. 106 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL animal he has killed, his source of food. The thigh-bones, as it were the marrow of its existence, remain preserved. In mythical terms, the life of the animal is restored to the lord of life. "If we should not do this, we would never catch animals again," the hunters explained. Meuli is right in interpreting this concern about the continuity of life as a deep-rooted human respect for life as such, which prevents man from utterly destroying other beings in an autocratic way. In the situation of killing, man feels guilty, and he has to overcome this reluctance by means of a complicated ritual pattern, which Meuli pertinently calls C comedy of innocence' (Unschuldskomodie'), though we must not forget that this C comedy' has a very serious basis. At the center of the sacrifice stands neither the gift to the gods nor fellowship with them, but the killing of the animal,40 and man as its killer. As Meuli put it: "the Olympian sacrifice is simply ritual slaughter" ("nichts anderes als ein rituelles Schlachten," 223). The definition must be expanded only a little to cover all kinds of sacrifices involving bloodshed: sacrifice is ritual killing.41 In the sacrificial ritual man causes and experiences death. Thus in the sacrificial feast the joy of the festival and the horror of death interpenetrate. The Greek sacrificial rites represent in vivid detail human aversion to killing and the feelings of guilt and re­ morse caused by the shedding of blood. Adorned for the festival, garlanded like the celebrants, sometimes with gilded horns 42 the animal was led along. Many legends tell how the victims have pressed forward voluntarily to the sacrifice, 8E7]A&TOV {loos StK7]V (Aeschylus, 40 The Greeks were fully aware of this: ~wfjs at aUt 8vutwv a1Tapx6p.€8rx Sallust 16.1. Iamblichus turns the same idea into magic: by destruction (avaAvutS) sacrifice provokes to action the higher principles (Myst. 5.24). In a very crude form, the same concept returns in a modern defmition of sacrifice: "Mobilmachung von Kraftstoff zu Gunsten des Opfern­ den," A. Bertholet, Der Sinn des kultischen Opfers (AbhBerl no.2, 1942) 10. n As a reverse, every slaughter is a sacrifice. The Mosaic law was very outspoken about this, Lev. 17.2ff (Yerkes, op.cit. [supra n.34] 147), but Josiah, concentrating the cult in Jeru­ salem, had to allow profane slaughter (Dt. 12.15), which had been common in the civiliza­ tions of Egypt and Mesopotamia. The Arabs still perform every slaughter "in the name of Allah" (Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart3 IV [Tiibingen 1956ff] 1640); for the Sibe­ rian fukces, every slaughter of a reindeer is a sacrifice (A. Gahs, Festschrift P. W. Schmidt [Wien 1928] 253); and in India, some temples still are slaughter-houses (H. Zimmern, Eranos-}b 6 [1938] 180). 42 Od. 3,432ff; this was preserved in German and Slavic folk-custom down to modern times: a 'Pfingstochse' with gilded horns led along through the streets of the town, to be slaughtered afterwards; each family would buy part of his meat: U. Jahn, Die deutschen Opferbriiuche bei Ackerbau und Viehzucht (Breslau 1884) 137ff, 315ff; a striking example in a festival at Lesbos: Megas, op.cit. (supra n.37) 17. WALTER BURKERT 107 Agamemnon 1297).43 The beginning of the rite was emphatically harm­ less: a vessel containing water and the basket with the sacrificial barley, brought to the place by a virgin, were carried round the altar; a line is drawn which separates the sacred from the profane.44 Then the participants wash their hands-their first common action-and the victim has its share, too: it is sprinkled with water; adou, Trygaios exclaims (Aristophanes, Pax 960): the animal was supposed to express its consent by bowing its head, €KOVaLOV KamXVEVEt 45 (see figure 5, PLATE 5). The meaning of the oVAaL has been much discussed,46 though the Greek expression is quite clear: XEpvtf3a T' OVAOXVTaS TIE KaTapxeaOat -it is the act of beginning. The participants take the barley out of the basket as if they were to prepare for a vegetarian meal; but beneath in the basket there is the knife, which is now uncovered. There is a prayer, a moment of silence and concentration; then all participants throw the oVAaL "forward" at the victim and the altar. Throwing U Cf Ael. NA 10.50 (Eryx), 11.4 (Hermione); Apollon. Mir. 13 (Halicarnassus); Arist. Mir. 844a35 (Pedasia); Pluto Pel. 21 (Leuktra), Luc. 24.6f (Persian Artemis= Anahita); Porph. Abst. 1.25 (Gadeira, Cyzicus); Philostr. Her. 17, p.329 Kayser (Leuke), 8 p.294 (Rhesus); Plin. NH 32.17 (Atargatis); the same is required for human sacrifice, Neanthes, FGrHist 84 F 16 (Epimenides), Servo in Aen. 3.57 (Massalia), cf Euripides' tragedies. Cf also the lore of the haruspices, Serv.Auct. in Georg. 2.395, Macr. Sat. 3.5.8. and Lucan 7.165, D.C. 41.61; for India, cf Hubert/Mauss, op.cit. (supra n.34) 30. At the sacrifice of Poseidon Helikonios, on the contrary, the bull was expected to bellow fiercely, Schol.B in II. 20.404. Cf Paus. 4.32.3. U Cf e.g. Ar. Pax 956ff, E. IA 1568ff; Eitrem, op.cit. (supra n.34) 7ff; supra n.37. 46 Delphic oracle in Proph. Abst. 2.9=no.537 in H. W. Parke and D. E. W. Wormell, The Delphic Oracle II (Oxford 1956), cf Meuli 254ff, 266f; Schol. in Ar. Pax 960; Schol. in A.R. 1.425; Plu. QConv 729f, DefOrac 435BC, 437A; SIG3 1025.20 (Cos): eVerat SE (0 {3ovs), ai IJiy Ka Vn-O[Kv,p]n Tat '[aTtat; an Arabian parallel in Eitrem, op.cit. (supra n.34) 7 n.1. Cf the stamnos Munich 2412= AR V 2 1036,5: the dithyrambic bull (supra n.23) bowing to drink water poured by Nike; Italiote Calpis Altenburg, eVA p1.84 (Germany 869): bull kneeling down to be adorned by a woman (the Phyle). A modern survival in Megas, op.cit. (supra n.37) 18 (Lesbos): AEVE on TOTE yovaTt,Et T6 'eVo ..• 46 "Dunkel" according to Meuli 265. Stengel concluded from the word 71'pO{3&AOVTO that the OVAoXVTat "originally" were thrown at the earth, ergo it was a gift to the earth-goddess (Kultusaltertiimer3 110); Ziehen used the term "cathartic," Hermes 37 (1902) 391ff, RE XVIII (1939) 626f; Eitrem, op.cit. (supra n.34) 262, saw the equivalence to the KaTaxvap.aTa but, following E. Samter, Familienfeste der Griechen und Romer (Berlin 1901) Iff, he thought them to be a gift to ancestor-ghosts or demons. Xepvt{3& T' OVAOXVTaS TE KaTaPXETo Od. 3.445, cf E. IA 955, 1568ff; Ar. Pax 956ff, Av. 850. That the knife is hidden (cf Scandinavian customs of slaughter, E. Klein ArchR W 28 [1930] 167) in the basket, is stated at Pl.Com. fro 91 (CAF 1.626), Ar. Pax 948 C. schol., E. EI.810, IA 1565f, Philostr. VA 1.1, Juv. 12.84. The barley is thrown at the victim, according to Schol. A in II. 1.449, Schol. in ad. 3.441, Schol. in Ar. Nu. 260, D.H. 7.72.15; at the altar, according to E. IA 1112, El. 804, Schol. in A.R. 1.409, Eust. p.132.25. Theophrastus thought the OVAat to be a relic of an "old way of life," Porph. Abst. 2.6, Schol. A in II. 1.449, ef Eust. I.e., Schol. in Od. 3.441; he seems to have taken as a real religious rite the if>vAAo{3oAta Od. 12.357f: Eust. p.132.39f. In Pharasa the victim is pelted with xopTapta Ka~ AOVAOvSta, Megas, op.cit. (supra n.37) 16. lPT)q,'.8e, instead of oVAat Paus. 1.41.9, at the sacrifice to Tereus in Megara, cf Schol. in Ar. Nu. 260. 108 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL together at a common object is the primeval gesture of aggression: lapidation, transformed into something harmless, as in the CPVMo{3oAla. Indeed, instead of the barley, leaves can be used and, at least in one instance, stones. Everyone takes part, is guilty and innocent at the same time. There is still a last delay: the l€p€vs cuts off a few hairs from the victim's forehead and throws them in the fire. With extra­ ordinary obstinacy, scholars have looked for daemons who demanded hair,4? though the Greek expression again is both clear and simple: this, too, is apX€U8aL, the beginning. The first cut does no harm, does not yet draw blood, but the victim is no longer phYSically inviolate. This step is irreversible. Now the fatal stroke follows. At this moment, the women scream, 6AOAV'OVULV (Odyssey 3.450); this is the tEMTJVLKdv V6JLLUJLa 8v(17'aoos {3ofis (Aeschylus, Septem 269) ;48 this marks the emo­ tional climax of the 8vula; this is pJ'€Lv. The blood is caught in a vessel and poured out at the altar :49 the most appalling element is set first of all within the divinely appointed order. Then the thigh­ bones are cut out, and small pieces of meat from each limb laid with them on the altar-wJL08€T€LV,50 and they are burnt. Wine is poured over the flames, the music of the flute and song accompany the action. Along with the burning of the JLTJpla, the u1TAayxva-heart, lungs, liver, kidneys-are roasted on the altar and eaten at once.61 The slightly uncanny 'vitals', the internal organs which come to light only now and may seem to contain the 'life', which sometimes cause disgust and sometimes are regarded as rather a delicacy, must be disposed of 47 Eitrem, op.cit. (supra n.34) 344ff, takes it to be Heine selbstandige Opfergabe," for the souls of the dead, of course (413). Meuli 265f, who adduces a parallel from Mexico, refrains from giving an explanation. This cX1TCxpx€uBca is mentioned e.g. Od. 3.446, 14.422; E. Ale. 74ff, EI. 811. E. Hemingway, For Whom the Bell Tolls, describes the cutting of the hair as r'lpXEuBa£ in another situation of violence. 48 Cf Schol. ad loe., Aesch. Ag. 595,1118; Hdt. 4.189. L. Deubner, Ololyge und Verwandtes (AbhBerl 1941, 1). An inscription from Pergamon mentions al').:rrrpls and dAOAVKTp£a as belonging to the sanctuary, SIG3 982.25. 49 The altars depicted on vase-paintings clearly show the traces of the alp.&.uUEtV TOVS pwp.ovs; cf e.g. B. lUll, Poll. 1.27, Eust. p. I 476,41 ; ap.vlov II. 3.4444; u.paYELov Poll. 10.65. 50 Cf Meuli 218, 256f, 262; D.H. 7.72.15ff. That there was some rule how to place the pieces on the altar is implied in €u8e-rluas Hes. Th. 541. The flute-player is often seen on vase-paintings (supra n.37); ef Hdt. 1.132; Apollod. 3.15.7.4; 71'atwvl,ELV, Sokolowski, Lois sacrees de l' Asie Mineure no.24 A.34 (Erythrai); the Paian of Iphigeneia, E. IA I 468ff. Flutes play the Kau-r6pEwv P.tAoS when the Spartans slaughter the u.p&'yta before battle, X. Lac. 13.8, HG 4.2.20; Plu. Lye. 22.2. 51 Cf Meuli 246f, 268ff. That the U1TA&'YXVa were roasted on the altar is shown by the name u1TAayxv61T'TTJs (Plin. NH 22.44, 34.81) together with the pictorial tradition (Rizza, op.cit. [supra n.37]). On uvu1TAaYXV€Vnv cf Ar. Pax 1115, Eup. fr.108 (CAF 1.286), Ath. 9.410B; u1TAayxvwv P.ETovu{a D.H. 1.40.4; D.C. 37.30.3. WALTER BURKERT 109 first of all. No wonder that UV0'7Tl\aYXJlEVEtJl is the firmest foundation of fellowship. The shudder dies away in a feeling of physical well-being. When the u7Tl\ayxva have been eaten and the fire has died down, the preparation begins for the main meal, which was generally of a quite secular character.52 We see, then, that the ritual of a Greek sacrifice is designed to dis­ play the destruction of life as the sacral center of the action. The many complicated preparations stress how unnatural and shocking this is. There are some special cases in which the representation of the feelings of guilt, the c< comedy of innocence" seems quite excessive. Above all, the Buphonia at Athens: the ox must himself be responsible for his own death; he is induced to eat barley cakes from the altar of Zeus, and then punished for sacrilege with the axe. But the sacrificing priest immediately throws the axe away and flees, a trial follows the sacrificial meal, in which the responsibility is passed from one to another, until finally a knife is pronounced guilty and thrown into the sea. But the ox is stuffed and harnessed to a plough-he is, as it were resurrected.53 The goat-sacrifice to Dionysus is in fact another example of making the victim responsible for its own death: the goat, it is said, has gnawed the vine, and must therefore die. In Corinth, at the festival of Hera Akraia, the she-goat was made to dig up for her­ self the knife with which she was slaughtered (n.71). Most characteristic of all these rites is the ambivalence of feeling displayed in the ceremony. Man, sacrificing according to the will of the god, still has to overcome or even to outwit his reluctance to kill. Expressing his feelings of guilt and remorse, man shows his deeply rooted respect for life. Prevalent however is a higher necessity, which commands him to kill. "Das Opfer ist die aIteste Form der religiosen Handlung" (Kuhn, l.e. 17). From this fact, the inference has been drawn that there was some kind of 'Urmonotheismus', a primordial revelation of the idea of God. The 'Promethean' division and the horrible fascination of blood­ shed are perhaps less comforting. It could seem advisable to resign completely, considering the fact that we are led back well into palaeolithic times. We shall never have direct evidence for religious belief in this period; and even if we had, as modern ethnologists were 52 Cato, Agr. 50: ubi daps profanata comestaque erit; Ku8uytC1aV'TWV S€ Tuum ••• Ath. 149c; on the exception, ov opa, supra n.36. 53 Cf. Deubner, op.cit. (supra n.24) 158ff. I cannot discuss here his somewhat hyper. critical treatment of Porph. Abst. 2.29£; Meuli 275f. 110 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL in a position to ask hunters living under similar conditions about their motives, it would still be a question whether primitive man could give a more lucid explanation of his ritual than the Greeks, who are so often said to have misunderstood their own cults completely. But we must not overestimate the importance of beliefs and explanations in religion. Down to the beginnings of Christianity and even farther on, the justification of religion is tradition. Rites are performed Kanx 7 rd: 7Td.rpLa, and this is the reason why so little change took place in these rites between palaeolithic times and the Greeks, during tens of thou- sands of years. So the essential matter cannot have been what a hypo- thetical EvpEr~s came to feel or believe, owing to his private experience or associations, but rather it was the effect of the rite on society according to the structure of the human psyche. Instead of asking which incident could bring forth some special form of religion, we should ask why it succeeded and was preserved. The answer can be seen in its function in human society. We may still speak of P€a.p LXX 1 Ma. 7.19. On the analogies of capital punishment and sacrifice. K. v. Amira. Die germanischen Todesstrafen (AbhMunchen 1922). 60 Sallust, Cat. 22; D.C. 37.30.3. 61 That Dionysus is killed as a goat is a theory advanced esp. by Cook and Nilsson (supra n.2). Dionysus is called ~EpLOS (Apollod. 3.4.3); but ~PLc/>OS is not rpayos (supra n.27). The theory of the Eniautos-Daimon was developed by J. Harrison in cooperation with F. M. Cornford and G. Murray, in Themis2 (Cambridge 1927) 331ff. 341ff. It is accepted. with modifications, by Webster (128f; BullInstClassStud 5 [1958] 43£1); criticism in Pickard-Cambridge, Dith.1 185ff; Else, Origin 27f. The oriental texts are interpreted according to the "seasonal pattern" by Th. Gaster, Thespis2 (New York 1961). In fact, £Yta.VT6s is rather seldom per­ sonified and never called 3a.{JLwy (cf RE V [1905] 2568f); what is more important, the 'seasonal' festivals seem to be a secondary interpretation, indeed the most harmless deSig­ nation of older ritual. The exceptional fires lit in times of emergency CNotfeuer', Jahn, op.cit. [supra n.42] 34f) are more primitive than the annual fires; and the fires as well as the combat rites can take place in any time of the year: the rites are independent of the 114 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL making his death a triumph of aggression. When Domitian tried to restrict viticulture, the epigram ofEuenus CAP 9.75) was turned against him as an almost deadly weapon (Suet. Dom. 14.2): people readily associated the dying goat with the emperor they hated. On the other hand, there is the , , " > I <;!I center 0 t e eve ope trage y, aKfLTJv 7TpOS av'T'TJv TJPfLEV7JS 'TpaYCfJotas (Tzetzes, De trag. 63) stands the kommos. Sacrifice was usually accom­ panied by the music of the flute, and while the cithara is the normal instrument for choral lyric otherwise, the aulos is used predominantly in tragedy.64 There is a more important point: there is a form of the < comedy of innocence' in which masked, disguised men have to kill seasons. Of course man has always been apt to project his feelings into surrounding nature, and the invention of agriculture and the establishment of an annual calendar of festivals were to stress this interpretation. Still, the main problem for man is not winter, but man. 62 Uter musti plenus Euanthius p.13.l0 Wessner; Serv.Auct. in Georg. 2.380; Diom. pAS8. Another possibility of mock resurrection would be that one of the participants dresses in the skin of the victim and begins to dance. There is abundant evidence for such customs elsewhere (Meuli 242 n.2), and it would be tempting to see the interrelation goat-satyr in this way, but there is no Greek evidence to support it. Martial explicitly states that the he-goat was castrated in the moment of slaughter, 3.24; in a similar way, the equus October had its tail torn off (cf H. Wagenvoort, Serta philologica Aenopontana [Innsbruck 1962] 273ff). Whether this rite was always connected with the Dionysiac goat-sacrifice we do not know. 63 Hdt. 2.39f, 42; Tibullus 1.2.28; cf Robertson Smith, op.cit. (supra n.34) 299fT, 430ff. In Siebenburgen (Rumania), there was, down to the 19th century, a ceremony of pig­ slaughter called 'pig-memorial' CSchweinegedenkmal': H. v. Wlislocki, Aus dem Volksleben der Magyaren [Munchen 1893] 30), in which "sich der jungste Ehemann auf den Fussboden und zwar auf den Bauch gekehrt und ausgestreckt niederlegt. Er darfkein Gleid ruhren ... wahrend die Hausfrau auf einem gross en Teller den gesottenen oder gebratenen, mit Tannengezweig und Immergrun umwundenen Schweinskopf ihm auf das Hinterhaupt setzt, worauf die Gesellschaft ihn wild stampfend und jubelnd umtanzt. Eillt der Teller dabei von seinem Haupte, so gibt dem daliegenden Genossen jeder der Gaste einige Hiebe"; cf 'IK&'p,o, To£h 'TTpw-ra 'TT£pl TP&.YOV wPX"1aavTo. On the kommos in tragedy, cf esp. Nilsson, Opuscula I.7sff. 64 H. Huchzermeyer, Aulos und Kithara in der griechischen Musik (Diss.Munster 1930) 54tf. BURKERT PLATE 4 Figure 3. Skyphos of the Theseus Painter, Agora P 1547 (Col/rtesy of tile American Scllool of Classical Stlldies at Atllens) DIO;-';YSIAC PROCESSIO:'\ WITH FLCTE-PLAYER AND GOAT (cf n.25 no.14) Figure 4. Relieffrom Assur, early Second Millennium B.C. ('V. Andrae. Kliitrelief aus dem BYlI1111en des AH!lrtrHWP/S 9'11 ,4Hj,r rRpl"lin 19,11 nLltP 1\ PLA TE 5 BURKERT Figure 5. Detail of Caeretan Hydria, Copenhagen 13567 (Collrtesy of .\iational .\[lIsellln, Copenhagen, Departlllfllt of Orient,d and Classical Antiq~lities) BULL SACRIFICE: ALTAR WITH FIRE, COLUMN WITH CACLDRON, MA:"I CARRYING AXE, Bl'LL BOWI:,\G HIS HEAD (cf 0.45), ATTE:,\DAxr CARRYING WATER-VESSEL, KA:"IEPHORCS, FLFrE-PLAYER Figure 6. Detail (:f Campanian Amphora Paris, Cabinet des Medailles 876 (A. de Ridder, Cataloglle des vases peints de Iii Bibliothe'jlle Satiollale [Paris 1902] figure 126) 1\1EDEA'S SO~ DYING AT AN ALTAR WALTER BURKERT 115 the anima1.65 The Tpaycp8o{ too hide their identity; no tragedy without masks. By preference, the choruses of tragedy wear the masks of foreigners or of women; if they represent Athenians, they can only be very old men (Sophocles, OC 112), hardly ever the young citizens of Athens they really are. And whereas the Greeks were so fond of names that they even made catalogues a form of poetry, no member of the tragic chorus ever seems to be called by an individual name (ef. Freud, I.e. 187). All this would fit the following hypothesis: the TpaycpDol are origi­ nally a troop of masked men who have to perform the sacrifice of the Tpayos which falls due in spring; they perform with lamentation, song, and mumming, and in the end they may feast on the goat. It is possible that the custom was at home in Icaria; seriousness and "satyr-like" fun may have interpenetrated in a curious way. Rudi­ ments of an agon, competition between several groups could arise at an early date. The transformation to a high level of literature, the adaptation of the heroic myth remains, of course, a unique achieve­ ment. Nevertheless, it is based on pre-existing elements: the use of masks, song and dance at the OV/L€~'T}, lamentation, the music of the flute, the name TpaYlfJDla, all combined in the basic situation of sacri­ fice: man face to face with death. We may ask why it was TpaYlfJDla in particular which became tragedy, not a hypothetical *f3olfJDla or *KptlfJOla. By comparison with the ox and the ram, the goat is the least attractive. But this may be just the reason. The victim has only a representative function, he is used for the fulfilment and discharge of an inevitable threat in the human soul which is really directed against man. In the sacrifice of the goat these psychological forces are least absorbed by the symbol on which they concentrate; matter and form are never perfectly adjusted, and thus there arises the continual need for new forms of expression. The sacrifice of the bull especially had long ago become an official, civic affair, it was an immutable and established part of the ritual of the polis. But in the sacrifice of the goat village-custom still allowed an element of aVTouxeDta'eu(Jat; there were changes and additions. Because it was not too serious, the mummers' play could evolve. The (JVP.EA"f) provoked what would have been impossible at an ordinary 86 Meuli 228: "Die Jager des Kreises Turudansk bemalen sieh das Gesieht mit Russ, dann kennt sie der Bar nieht." In Wiirttemberg (Germany), pigs are slaughtered on Shrove Tuesday, and mummers break into the house and fetch their share of the freshly killed meat: Handworterbuch des deutschen Aberglaubens VII (1935-36) 1083. 3-G•R •B•S• 116 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL altar. This was the reason why Tpaytp8la could come to depict the C tragic' condition humaine. Tpaytp8la emancipated itself from the Tpayos. And yet the essence of the sacrifice still pervades tragedy even in its maturity. In Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, there still stands in the back­ ground, if not in the center, the pattern of the sacrifice, the ritual slaying, (M€Lv. A few instances may suffice. I deliberately pass over those tragedies in which the whole plot is concerned with human sacrifice-Iphigeneia at Aulis, lphigeneia in Tauris, Bacchae; Sophocles wrote a Polyxena, Aeschylus a Pentheus. Euripides used the motif of human sacrifice in many variations-Heracleidae, Hecuba, Phoenissae; Erechtheus, Phrixus. He made even Alcestis' death a sacrifice, Thanatos a sacrificial priest, lEPEVS Bav&vTwv (25), whereas Aegisthus is slain by Orestes with the sacrificial knife at the sacrifice.66 What is more general and more important: any sort of killing in tragedy may be termed BVE£V as early as Aeschylus, and the intoxication of killing is called {3aKXEvEw.67 In earlier choral lyric, these metaphors do not occur. This imagery however is not something superficial: if tragedy draws on heroic myth, every hero has his cults, i.e., his sacrifices.68 The situa­ tion of the sacrifice may be just the point where heroic myth and Dionysiac Tpaytp8la meet each other. 66 E. EI. 785fI, 816, 838. Clytaemestra, too, arrives for sacrifice, 1125; 1132, 1142; after­ wards Orestes says: KaTTJP~ap.av (1222); cf. Murray in Harrison, op.at. (supra n.61) 356. Neoptolemus in Delphi is killed when sacrificing, E. Andr. 1112fI; Pi. N. 7.42, Pae. 6.116ff. Polyphontes in EUripides, Kresphontes is killed on occasion of a sacrifice (Hygin. Fab. 137). Cf. the saga of Titus Tatius, D.H. 2.52.3. Perhaps it is no coincidence that the skolion on Harmodios and Aristogeiton expressly states that their deed occurred 'A8TJvalTJS EV 8vu{aLS (Carm.Pop. 895 Page). 67 Cf. E. HF 451 (with Wilamowitz ad loc.): Megara, returning towards the altar which failed to protect her, asks for the l€PEVS, the uos .Iv TCP l"pcp' TOV /)€ ETOV<; 1l'£p£"A80VTO<; ol K}.."1Pw8€VT€S v.ro£ 8vovaLv, ~ ()€ 01<; ••• aVLXV£V"L TO ,tcpos. The 'comedy of innocence' is particularly apparent in Photios: oZ -r7JV 1l'apOX~v fL£P-£a8wfL€VO£ Yii KpVt/JaVT£S -r7Jv p.rZxa£pav Ea~1l'ToVTo E7rL}..£Mja8cn •..• (=Paus.Gr. ed. Erbse Tf 2) ••• fL£Ta TO ivaylaaL -r7Jv fLaxa£pav a7l'0KpV7rTOVa£, TCP O€ E~ij<; ET££ TO fL€}..Aov 1l'aA£v Evayl'£a8aL l£p£wv •• . (=Paus.Gr. ed. Erbse a 42; cf Zen. Par. 1.27, Hsch. S.V. al, alya, Suid. at 235 etc.). It is not quite clear whether the knife was left in the soil for the whole year or re­ moved and rehidden in secret, but this does not make any difference for the meaning of the rite. The fate of the goat was proverbial, Com.adesp. fr,47 Demianczuk, Klearchos fr.83a Wehrli; the anecdote was even transmitted to Arabs and Indians, S. Fraenkel, ZDMG 46 (1892) 737ff; R. Pischel, ib. 47 (1893) 86ff. Besides the paroemiographers, the main testimony on the Corinthian rite is Parmeniskos in Schol. in E. Med. 264; black garments: Paus. 2.3.7. That Medea, though inadvertently, killed her own children in the temple of Hera Akraia was already in Eumelos (Paus. 2.3.11); as it seemed strange that the Corin­ thians should atone for Medea's crime, the myth was altered to make the Corinthians the murderers of the children. On the connection with initiation rites, A. Brelich, Studi e matenali di stona delle religioni 30 (1959) 227ff. Cf also G. Dobesch, Wst 75 (1962) 83-89. .. WALTER BURKERT 119 The myth told that the children of the Corinthians suffered this penalty to atone for the children of Medea, who had died and were buried there in the temenos of Hera Akraia. The mysterious sword, which year by year was dug up and then re-buried, was said to be the very sword with which Medea killed her children. We need not here go into the question of how far the ritual along with the myth is to be understood as an initiation ceremony. At all events, the metaphor of the (}vp.a at the climax of Euripides' play leads back to a sacrificial ritual which comprises the mystery of death. Lastly, the Agamemnon of Aeschylus: through it the language of sacrificial ritual runs like a leitmotiv. The choral song begins with the portent of the two eagles tearing in pieces the pregnant hare, (}VOP.€VOL (137); to this corresponds the goddess' demand for" another sacrifice," U1TEv80JLlva Ovulav €,rlpav (151). So Agamemnon becomes the "sacri­ ficer" of his own daughter, €TAa 8' o15v OVT-ryp YEvEUOat OvyaTpos (224, cf 215), and now one evil generates another. When the news comes of Agamemnon's victory and imminent return, Clytaemestra prepares a great sacrifice (83f, 261ff, 587ff); does the sacrificial fire burn on the altar in the orchestra? In the palace herds of sheep stand ready TrpJs uc/>ayas (1056£). Yet instead of the smell of sacrifice, Cassandra scents murder (1309f). She calls for OAOAVy~ (1118) at the unprecedented (}vp.a which is going to happen here: he who commits it deserves lapidation.72 Later Clytaemestra boasts that she has slain her husband "for Ate and Erinys," that is, as a sacrifice (1433, cf 1415ff). Then she tries to disclaim responsibility: the Alastor of Atreus himself has killed, or rather sacrificed, Agamemnon, has slain him as the full­ grown victim after the young animals, TEAEOV vEapa'is Em(}vuas (1504). Even so, at the great sacrificial festivals, first the lesser, then the full­ grown victims fell. Cassandra is another sacrifice. With full know­ ledge she goes to her destruction, "like a heifer driven on by a god, you go unafraid to the altar" (1297f). One sacrifice leads to another: finally Orestes is the victim of the Erinyes-ETr~ 8€ 'TCp 'TEOVP.EVCP 7"08E P.EAos (Eumenides 329ff, cf 305) runs the binding-song. This again is more than a mere metaphor, a stylistic ornament. Agamemnon dies WS TLS T€ KaTEKTaV€ {3ovv ETr~ c/>a7V[J (Odyssey 4.535, 72 On BVfLa AfiVCTtfLO" see E. Fraenkel (Oxford 1950) ad lac.; but he does not quote the decisive parallel from sacrificial ritual, the sacrifice to Dionysus in Tenedus, Ael. NA 12.34: o yfi fLTJ" 1Ta-ragas aUro (the calf) -r.>.fi-ra, Tjj oalff Ka! EaTfi €1Tl ~" B&AaTTa" q,fil'ryfi'. Cf. the aition for the bull-sacrifice in Lindos, Philostr. Im. 2.24; the rite of mummi­ fication, D.S. 1.91; infra n.74. 120 GREEK TRAGEDY AND SACRIFICIAL RITUAL 11.411); to be more exact, Clytaemestra throws a net over him and strikes him down with the axe, 7TlA€KVS, fJOV7TA~g. This is in fact how a bull was killed; the famous gold cup from Vaphio shows the bull struggling in the net-the table decoration of some Mycenaean prince who had himself celebrated as a victor over the bull. So Cassandra in her vision sees Agamemnon as the TaiJpos, caught in the Hblack­ horned device," the net.73 A MfJ'Y/s receives his blood (1129, cf. 1540)­ even this a feature of the ritual. We have very little information about the Argive cults. But it is not mere fancy to conjecture that the myth of the death of Agamemnon was connected with a sacrificial ritual, a bull-sacrifice--fJovt/J()JIta-in a similar way as the myth of the death of Medea's children was con­ nected with the Corinthian sacrifice of a goat at the Akraia festival. The bull as a symbol of the king must have played a very important part in the Mycenaean-Minoan world, and this bull-symbolism con­ centrates on the major sanctuary of the Argive plain, the Heraion which was called Argos itself. Here we have herds of sacred cows, Zeus as a bull, 10 as a cow, Epaphos, their common son, again as a bull, Cleobis and Biton drawing the sacred chariot as substitutes for oxen. Most remarkable is Argos Panoptes, slain by Hermes, apparently the eponym of sanctuary and city. Argos was clad in bull's hide, having conquered the bull, and was in his turn killed by Hermes, the fJovt/J6vos. As was seen long ago, the epithet Panoptes makes him a duplicate of Zeus himself; and how the community of Argos arose and got its name from the primordial crime of Argos' death may now be under­ standable. It was a Bvala A€.vmp.os. Incidentally, Pausanias mentions a7T6pfY11TOt Bvalat (2.17.1) at theHeraion.74 They may have preceded the 78 Aeschylus assodates the net with fishing, 1382, 1432, but ayp€vp.a O'YJpos Ch. 998; the crater Boston 63.1246 (E. Vermeule, AJA 70 [1966] Iff, pl.I-3) depicts it as a kind of Coan garment. On Aesch. Ag. 1127 cf. Fraenkel's discussion. U On the cults performed in the Heraion see Ch. Waldstein, The Argive Heraeum I (Boston 1902) Iff; Nilsson, op.cit. (supra n.7l) 42ff. The myths were told at least in four different ways already in the old epics-Danais, Phoronis, Aigimios, Hesiodean Cata­ logues; cf. E. Meyer, Forschungen z:ur alten Geschichte I (Halle 1892) 67ff. The connection with Egypt may, however, be much older than Meyer argued, cf. Astour, cp.cit. (supra n.30) 80ff, and T. T. Duke, C] 61 (1965) 134. 'Euboia', Paus. 2.17.1; sacred cowherds, Schol. in Pi. N. pp.3fDrachmann; Argos and 10 in the sanctuary, Apollod. 2.1.3; Zeus transformed into a bull, A. Supp. 301; Epaphos=Apis, Hdt. 2.153, Meyer op.cit. 78;= Apopi 'Bull', Duke op.cit.; Argos clad in oxskin. Apollod. 2.1.2, Schol. in E. Ph. 1116, vase-paintings e.g. ABV 148.2= Cook III.632, AR V2 579,84= Cook III.633, AR VI 1409,9= Cook 1.460. GenealOgists contrasted Argos the king to Argos Panoptes, though they differed considerably as to the relationship of the two Argoi (Hes. in Apollod. 2.1.3.3; Pherekydes, FGrHist 3 F 66/67 with Jacoby's commentary). Argos the king clearly is the secondary figure (cf. Meyer, op.cit. WALTER BURKERT 121 main festival of Heraia, as in Athens the Buphonia are due in the last month of the year, to be followed by the new year festival, the Panathenaia. Not all the problems can be solved. It was not the intention of this paper to show the origin of tragedy, but only to investigate the clue offered by the word TpaYCf?8la. It has emerged that the tradition of a goat-sacrifice deserves to be taken seriously; it leads back to the depths of prehistoric human development, as well as into the center of tragedy. This will do no damage to the originality of the Greeks. Indeed the uniqueness of their achievement emerges most clearly when we compare what in other civilizations sprang from similar roots: ceremonial hunting and warfare, human sacrifice, gladiators, bullfights. It may be that the sublimation and transformation per­ formed by the Greek poets are so fundamental as to reduce to nothingness any crude' origins'. Or do the greatest poets only provide sublime expression for what already existed at the most primitive stages of human development? Human existence face to face with death-that is the kernel of TpaYCf?8ta. TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITAT BERLIN April, 1966 90), the cult devoted to Argos (Varro in Aug. Civ. 18.6) must therefore originally have dealt with the Panoptes. ZdJS '1TaJl6'1T77]S A. Bu. 1045, ef PrellerJRobert, op.cit. I (supra n.36) 396 n.l. Meyer thought there was no answer to the question "wie solI man es erkHiren, dass er (Argos), also urspriinglkh Zeus, von Hermes erschlagen wird?" (op.cit. 72 n.l). On the death of the aboriginal king, cf. Historia 11 (1962) 365ff. Hermes is called f1ovcpovos Hymn.Mere. 436. The symbolic lapidation of Hermes for slaying Argos: Xanthos, FGrHist 765 F 29, Antikleides, FGrHist 140 F 19, Eust. p.1809.38ff. Varro (Aug. Civ. 18.6, from De genre populi Romani; Varro, RR 2.5.4) mentions an Argive hero 'Homogyros' (changed to 'bomagiros' by Wilamowitz in the edition of Yarra, RR by G. Goetz [Leipzig 1912], but he overlooked the parallel passage in Augustine), equivalent to the Athenian Buzyges, slain by the thunderbolt. Could his name mean 'he who leads the bull round the altar' (cf. supra nn.37 and 44) in an Argive Buphonia-ritual?