Ancient Greek Sacrifice: Why did they do it?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- When we think about animal sacrifice, ancient societies such as the Greeks come to mind. But why did they ritually slaughter animals? What did this do for their society?
Part 1: The Origins of Animal Sacrifice: • The Origins of Animal ...
Thank you to our patrons on Patreon who support this channel!
Patreon: www.patreon.com/religionforbreakfast
Facebook. religionforbreakfast
Twitter: @andrewmarkhenry
Andrew's religious studies book recommendations: amazon.com/shop...
Photo attributions:
Sphageion: commons.wikime...
Roman Procession image: commons.wikime...
Hermes altar, Agora of the Competaliasts on Delos: commons.wikime...
limestone Cypriot priest: www.metmuseum....
Demeter votive: upload.wikimed...
*eats cheeseburger while being shocked at pagan sacrifices*
Lol
Exactly! The hypocrisy of our societies.
I mean, I think there is a bit of difference. For a cheeseburger, you're just getting the meal and that's that. For a ritual sacrifice, you get a meal in this case, but also the animal is killed for the frivolity/nominality of religion; you're killing the animal but it's not even for anything particularly substantive. Similarly, killing animals just for their fur is different from killing animals for food because clothing from such furs is typically just for the purpose of gaudiness, to show off; not so with food
@@friedkeenan you didn’t watch the video?
They eat the animal in a community feast.
@@A.S2400 For reasons imbued with express religious purpose, and not all animal sacrifices are eaten. Also I said in my comment that you get a meal out of the ritual sacrifice
I really enjoy your work. I'm not sure how a channel with such exceptional content isn't much more popular. Keep it up!
Thanks! Its a tough market for mid-sized channels. Slow growth.
Hi GMS! Yep. This guy's pretty great!
Agreed! Well done Dr. Andrew Henry.
people aren't interested in learning about religion. the title alone restricts his growth.
don't mean to be a downer, Andrew. But it is true, people are either all in or all out, and very few are willing to dabble in actually learning. Probably because they devote their identity to their religious (or non-religious) beliefs.
AND then I saw the 6000 sub video from only 6 months ago... OK, maybe you just hadn't been seen. I stand corrected. Sorry if I was being a jerk, it wasn't on purpose.
Kinda reminds me of how in West African Vodun, animal sacrifices are almost always eaten as a mean with the ritual. Meanwhile most people outside the religion or academics focus solely on the killing of the animal and furthering the misconceptions of "evil voodoo". There's a lot more going on culturally and it really makes me wish people were more religiously and culturally literate.
3:56 Some Greek wasn't thinking to himself, "I am participating in a ritual that not only upholds social cohesion, but establishes a male-dominated priesthood." No, he was thinking, "Can someone please pass the barbecue sauce?"
woke garbage. typical from jewtube
"The thigh bones were burnt on the altar"... perhaps this is the true origin of why Jewish dietary rules say to not eat the hind quarters of the animal. Typically, it seems many prohibitions in ancient Judaism were to separate the jews from other peoples. In this case, do not use the cuts of meat that the Greeks used, especially the things used for religious practice in other people's religion (eg offering the thigh meat to the Greek gods).
Good point about the feast part of the sacrifice. This is also clearly part of the contemporary Muslim eid AL adha sacrifice.
And a good lesson in the broader idea of what makes for a religious "ritual" - an otherwise ordinary action done with special ceremony and rules (by whom, when, where, how) "sets it apart". To be "set apart" (separated from the ordinary) = "sacred".
lshulman58
There actually is no prohibition for eating the hind quarter of an animal in Judaism. There is requirement to remove the sciatic never before consumption though.
In western or more industrialised countries it's not common for to find kosher hind meat because its more cost effective to sell them to non kosher butchers.
In most jewish communities both historically and in modern day eat the rear cuts of the animal like the round, tail or shank after the sciatic nerve is removed. This ritual is based on a passage in the jewish bible (Genesis 32:33)
I have a hypothesis also as to the ban of pork from Hebrew diet while it was quite popular in Canaan in the bronze age : the philistines loved their pork (even held boars and boar tusks in great esteem)..so don't eat what the enemy eats.
When it comes to understanding cultural practices, there always seems to be a tension between what members of a community say what a particular cultural practice means to them, and what academic theorists say is the "real" meaning behind the practice. I don't think either perspective necessarily has a monopoly on truth, but the emic perspective (i.e. the perspective of the community members themselves) often gets ignored or under-appreciated-as if these people weren't humans with complex understandings of themselves and their own community, but rather were mindless automata who had no idea why they did what they did. The ancient Greeks themselves understood sacrifice to be an offering to the gods, so as to gain their favor and avoid their wrath. This is the perspective that we see over and over again in ancient Greek literature, especially in Homer. It seems inappropriate and (dare I say) Orientalizing to completely ignore this perspective, but instead have some armchair theorist barge in and say "well ACTUALLY the sacrifice REALLY meant such-and-such." I'm not saying that it isn't a worthwhile endeavor to try to understand how a certain practice was situated within a culture and the role it played in society, but any insight we gain from such theorizing should not supersede the perspective of the people who actually engaged in it.
The only time he mentioned the Gods they had little hearts over their eyes and he made it a joke. He spent more time putting his Marxist view in it.
@@mattallred That view ain't marxist. I know it seems weird but once in a while in the middle ages you got people that openly admitted that religion was to keep society together and even in the ancient world, even religious people through the ages recognized the utilitarian value of rituals and beliefs but now since some religious people are offended it becomes marxist?
Marx didn't invent anything regarding religion, it's just the most famous ideology that incorporated that notion.
And as someone that loved to demolish marxist thinkers in philosophy class I can say that recognizing the role of larger forces in history (and thus the history of religion) has been essential in understanding society integrating the old approach that conditioned by millennia of monarchies gave a bit too much importance to the head that was under the crown.
@@det.bullock4461 I'm talking about his explanation and opinion on the distribution of sacrificed animals as food
@@mattallred Sorry, I don't get it. Are you objecting with the maintaining of societal hierarchy thing or the "for them it was common sense" thing?
@@det.bullock4461 don't much feel like replying to a 4 month old comment why don't you just figure it out yourself :-)
How does this channel not have more subscribers? It's really interesting.
Not even necessarily at a temple, I remember in my Latin textbook there was a prayer formula from early Roman times for the suovitaurilia sacrifice which was meant to be recited by the head of the household when sacrificing a pig (suinus), sheep (ovis) and bull (taurus) at the same time. This video made me sort of realize that it was basically a ritualized barbecue.
Doesn’t this also explain where the concept of transubstantiation kind of came from in Catholicism?
Male priests distributing the meat (Eucharist) after a sacrifice (lamb).
Priests are the only ones who can distribute it.
They basically just replaced everything with Jesus.
Holy crap
I think that's the idea. Especially given that theologically, the Catholics view Jesus' sacrifice as replacing the need for animal sacrifice.
Kind of. The idea is that Christ served as a sacrifice to end sacrifices. Rene Girard has written beautifully on this. It's a myth to end other myths, and one that calls us to replace the ritual with the development of genuine love and care for our fellow humans. Matthew 9:13: Then he added, “Now go and learn the meaning of this Scripture: ‘I want you to show mercy, not offer sacrifices.’ For I have come to call not those who think they are righteous, but those who know they are sinners.
It's ironic in the extreme that your video examining the practice of animal sacrifice was de-monitorized by RUclips considering millions of animals are sacrificed hourly for breakfast, lunch and dinner, and that nothing is more monitored than the practice and products of animal agriculture. I'm just say'n...
It would be interesting to see this contrasted with the sacrificial practices of the Norse and the Aztec.
There is anthropological evidence that hunter gatherers often make an offering after killing an animal, typically sprinkling blood. The transition from hunter gatherer to keeping livestock was gradual so there was probably some overlap.
yes prayers and rituals after a successful hunt are still common today.
I agree, I would assumes hunters make sacrifices, of course it's hard to make animal sacrifices when you don't already have animals on hand, so instead there would have been things done to show gratitude and reciprocity for a successful hunt
Have you ever noticed that in films and television whenever there's a barbecue it's always a man cooking but that for most other cooking it seems to be a woman?
barbecue is an "outside" and "public" activity ; as opposed to preparing and cooking food on the fire/hearth "inside" the "private" part of the house. And also, you know, "meat" somehow equals "man" when it's not in a stew. Our society is weird.
Not just in films...in reality too
You could see remnants of the animal sacrifice in societies of the levant : it is with great pride that people in villages invite their friends over to feast on a slaughtered animal (usually a sheep) . the sheep is slaughtered in situ and the meat is grilled and eaten in a great feast. And people consider it as a great honor to invite or to be invited to a "thabiha" (which means at the same time slaughtering and sacrifice )
I disagree with the idea that it had much to do with upholding a male dominated society, because there were female led cults that had similar rituals.
In Pre-Hellenic times, there was human sacrifice. You need to read up on the Maenads, who performed the Zeus sacrifice. There's also the Bacchantes who performed human sacrifice.
Last of all, Iphegenia (not sure about her name), the daughter of Agamennon, was sacrificed so the Greek fleet could launch itself at Troy. The gods were offended by a human sacrifice so she was turned into a deer first
it is not totally correct
Put links for that
.
Hunting societies sometimes make sacrifices to thank the animals for their contribution to the humans survival.
dig the beard bro
no mention of bonding by eating a common meal
I've studied Sacrifice, mostly from Girard theories about it and I also came to the same conclusions, but also that meat is also consummed only when a sacrifice is made. I think it might be a way to cope with the killings of theses animals they were living with on a everyday basis. Most of theses people were living in the same house as their sheep and goats. We often forget about this part because we are now so detached with what happen before getting the meat in our plate. Even today, every small scale farmer I know are kind of sad when their lambs or calf go to the slaughterhouse and I really think that thinking about your animal as an offering to the gods instead of a victim of the butcher make you feel better
sacrifice is simple, you give something that means a lot to you and has high value, animals were those things to poorer people throughout history.
no.
Sacrafices were done by slaughtering the animal, or gathering expensive food, weapons and drink, then they would often leave these things out in fields, throw them in bogs or in rivers. Priests couldn't steal stuff even if they wanted too. If anyone was caught touching sacrifices for the Gods it would probably result in hell to pay for.
@mPky1 you have to remember there was no concept of atheism back then. The closest thing was monotheism or epicurianism. That the greek philosophers were agnostic is a lie.
I once witnessed a Himalayan ceremony where they sacrificed a goat to the deities and later on cooked it for the guests. It's a common practice among Himalyan tribals.
Do you have any video on bread/cakes offerings? I noticed they were pretty common... Just like fruits and other "not animal" offerings.
Monarchy is the best! Also some "family rituals" in ancient mesopotamia had some kind of "cake offerings" that every family did... I dont remember the name...
Do communion wafers count?
Two thoughts not in video or comments (that I've seen):
1. Animal "Sacrifice" (as opposed to a hunt or human ritualistic killing) seems to ritualistically let go of the genuine emotional attachment that accompanies slaughtering a domesticated animal.
Thus cultural message one: Sometimes, we have to let go of something we love or are attached to for the good of our health and the health of our community.
Deeper thought:
2. Sacrifice for a purpose, ritually, focuses the mind in a tangible way on time and action: (1) the deeds done in the past (that need forgiving or protection from), and (2) a better future.
Thus message two: Sacrifice integrates both attention to one's actions and the hope for a better future tangibly, and in an emotionally focussed and rememberable manner.
And message three: The community witnessing the sacrifice observes a tangible act of contrition and/or (in some cases) hope/praise.
The end result is that the person publicly giving the sacrifice lets go of a painful past emotion, and the group ritual results in that person feeling the forgiveness of the group that acknowledges his/her contrition, while simultaneously imagining a better future.
For ancient man, that's some pretty powerful psychology.
Great videos. In my opinion, the "S" sound is very loud in your vocal recordings. You could use a "de-esser" to lower it during your audio mastering process.
Do you think there was much difference between the Greek and Jewish way of sacrifice during the period of Hellenisation began by Alexander the Great? There were sacrifices in Jerusalem's Second temple, but they were probably different from the the Greek ones. And the sacrifice of poultry in 66 CE at Caesarea's synagogue by Greeks led to a Judean revolt against the Roman Empire, so there must have been something about that which wasn't pleasing to the Jews.
I hope you've got an answer, I've got a resit next week on Judaism :')
+Solace The Satanist Girl - Not sure where you got this information from, but the "First" Jewish Revolt was started by a Zealot military officer named, Eleazar (the son of Ananias ben Nebedeus, the High Priest from 46-58 CE), who, according to Josephus, "... urged a number of his friends among the priests, that no offering or sacrifice might be accepted but from the Jewish people. This single circumstance was the foundation of a war with the Romans; for, in consequence of this request of Eleazar, when the [daily] sacrifices of Caesar were presented, according to custom, to be offered up for the successes of the the people of Rome, they were rejected."
The incident at Caesarea's synagogue wasn't the only flagrant contradiction to the rights granted to the Jews by Roman law nor does it matter, because the anti-Pagan sentiments of the Jews were already ingrained in their national consciousness.
Even among the Pharisees (Heb. P'rushim; lit. Separatists), there were two opposing schools of thought about how to deal with this question. The patrician House of Shammai the Elder sought to eschew all contact with the Gentiles, unless a Gentile became a full-convert to Judaism. The plebeian House of Hillel the Elder, one the other hand, felt that the Gentiles only needed to be encouraged to eschew their idolatry and observe the seven categories of laws that were given by Noah to his sons; if doing so inspired them to be become full-converts, then ... okay ... but the Hillelites didn't feel that it was necessary for a Gentile to convert to Judaism in order to have a share in the World to Come.
BTW, the early Jewish followers of "Jesus" agreed with the plebeian House of Hillel and actively opposed the anti-Gentile agenda of the patrician House of Shammai and their supporters among the Zealots.
My source: my uni textbook, see press.princeton.edu/titles/9116.html What is your source?
P.S. I'll reply after the 24th of this month, because of my exam.
the keyword is "foreshadowing"
in Christian theology or perspective, animal sacrifice in the Old Testament is a "foreshadowing" of the "death of YESHUA / JESUS" (as the "sacrificial lamb" to cleanse & purify the sins of His flock)
> the animal must be spotless = YESHUA / JESUS is "blameless" or "without sin" (and by nature, animals are "sinless" creatures)
> the animal must have life (must have blood or breath of life) = YESHUA / JESUS has both qualities (infact, He's a lifegiver)
> the animal must be killed by the one making the offering (the sinner) = YESHUA / JESUS was condemned & killed by the "sinners"
offering one's precious animal or pet for that matter, is an "emotional journey". it isn't easy just like how Abraham sacrificed his one & only son, Isaac for a burnt offering.
that's why the best of the flocks must be put forward & sacrificed, not the diseased or dying ones, for it is an "emotional journey"
the sinner's life ought to have been the "perfect sacrifice" for one's grievous sin, but the animal became an alternative choice or replacement, infact fruits were rejected.
[ isn't He a more compassionate, understanding & kinder God than our current justice system running today?
in contemporary setting, the guilty perpetrator/suspect who committed the violent/heinous crime is either put behind bars for life or executed. ]
----------
the question that has been asked quite often: "why YESHUA / JESUS became the ultimate sacrifice?"
as stated in the book of Genesis -- "man is made in the image and likeness of God"
so, how does God look like?
He came here on earth (as prophesied in some Old Testament texts) to "show to us that human beings are indeed somewhat similar in the image & likeness of God -- that is YESHUA / JESUS"
His death, the ultimate sacrifice of all -- as He being God -- is the perfect sacrifice for the propiation of the sin of His people.
meaning, it was "final & executory". animal sacrifices were no longer essential to elicit divine mercy & forgiveness from God.
YESHUA / JESUS -- a God Himself --paid the ultimate price.
come to think of it -- do Christians really know if they are truly and sincerely forgiven by God for committing never-ending sins, or for taking an "abusive" stance on His divine mercy, countless times?
His divine mercy & forgiveness is a "mystery" which only He can answer, but it is stated in the Bible: "He is just and faithful to forgive"
----------
in continuation to the animal sacrifice -- in Hebrew, though this sacrifice appears "paganistic" or "ritualistic", it has deeper "intrinsic meanings or values" if you scratch the surface, unlike other ancient animal rituals (perhaps). infact, i think, it is more "profound" & "mysterious" rather than "straightforward"
overtime, animal sacrifices lost its true essence/significance/flavor and appeal. infact, "God grew tired of it". rituals became "commercialized" when animals were sold outside of the Temple (for the people of far-flung places) during King Herod's time. why do you think YESHUA / JESUS released His "religious zeal or anger" over these people that treated the Temple like a marketplace?
i think you knew the answer already.
----------
as i stated in my intro about "foreshadowing", the Bible has list of instances that i consider to be "foreshadowing"
i will enumerate a few briefly:
> the Exodus from Egypt to the Promised Land is somewhat akin to the journey of Christian faithfuls toward the Promised Paradise (the New Jerusalem / the New Heaven & Earth)
> the Noah's Flood is believed to be equivalent to the Apocalypse in the Book of Revelation (He will destroy the earth ruled by the "master trickster" - the evil wicked one)
> the destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem (the Holy of Holies, the Ark of the Covenant, the Mercy Seat) around 70 AD is now replaced by a "Christian body (flesh & blood)" as the Holy Temple of God, or, the so-called "indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit"
> the Blood of YESHUA / JESUS for the remission of the sin (the last farewell words of YESHUA / JESUS during the Last Supper) was a "foreshadowing" -- when the apostles (believed to be mostly in their teens or tweens) received the Holy Spirit -- Paul, Peter & John (Revelation) explained in-depth the quintessential & deeper meaning of YESHUA / JESUS' blood in their epistles
@@nzsl368 still messed up. That we sacrificed our own God and brother for our sins.
I have yet to find a sacrifice (not used for rituals such as healing) where the sacrificial animal has not been eaten...
Elizabeth Kleine they didn’t eat the witches in Salem or the virgins that where cast into the Hawaiian volcanoes as far as I know, but arguably they were trying to heal their relationship with a deity
1) Salem was executions. Not religious sacrifices.
2) Animal sacrifice is being discussed. Not Human sacrifice.
Elizabeth Kleine they were sacrificed because of spiritual beliefs, most animal sacrifices are not eaten, otherwise they wouldn’t be sacrifices, bats, snakes, cats and chickens are being sacrificed and not eaten as we speak, it is most often considered bad if it is a sacrifice, rituals of harvest, spring or even thanksgiving are another matter
I will mention that some portion of human was eaten in Aztec human sacrifices. Eating of sacrifices does seem to be extremely common across cultures. Of course there are always exceptions.
Some research would do you some good...
Well, in normal ritual practice involving animal sacrifices in modern day Chinese traditional society -- the rituals are the feasts to distribute meat, especially in rural regions, where limited in meat supplies comparing with urban residents.
Great video (and videos). I also think that animal sacrifice in this Greek context is very reflective of early Indo-European culture. It helped promote not just the priestly elite (who held the symbolic staff of the shaman) but the secular elite (descendant from the chief or big man). Largely because the elite as the owners of “the most” (and therefore surplus) large domestic animals (particularly cattle and bulls) were often donating the sacrifice to supply the feast. This is an essential element of Indo-European client/patron relationships. It’s not so different from your boss/parent buying you dinner today and was as you pointed out a very male domain in the Bronze Age. A Roman senator footing the bill for public games and feasting (and probably a few sacrifices) or a medieval lord feasting his knights in his hall are not much different either.
I started watching your channel, after looking for Dr Robert Price interviews,great mind. At times he talks over my head. So I needed back ground and you have helped greatly thank you!
Im surprised by the commonalities with Aztec human sacrifice. The value and catching of blood, the leading of a decorated victim in a large procession and the consumption of some of the meat afterwards. Counter to my education in historical science these things make me think that there are some universal experiences or conclusion people in the world reach.
I love how animal sacrifice was basically an ancient poolside barbecue
Wow, thanks, keeping it simple though apparently some don't catch all your very thoughtfully chosen words convey. You do carefully point out different types of sacrifice and some were for potlatch feasts, others like small birds (even mentioned in Bible) were both income for temple and like throwing money in a wishing well. Probably in urban settings the latter was much more common.
In villages the protein & fat intake during feasts is essential and by ritualiizing it they prevent over-consumption, eating all their breeding stock or like Indian ban on cow eating, their source of fat (butter), milk, yoghurt, cheese, and their work animal for plowing and cart pulling.
I came here with one question - what happens to the animal afterwards. I always suspected that they eat it, and give only the best cuts to "God". You answered my question! Thanks! Now animal sacrifice makes a lot more sense!
And they continue this ritual in some parts of Greece with a panayidi. In the village a bull is decorated and slaughter on a festival to honor the Patron saint of the village. Meat is distributed to the people . It’s an all around good time for everyone (except the bull?)
Also, I really like your channel.
I could be wrong, but I feel like there's a glaring omission here. Sacrifices were made to the gods. Why? If it's just a feast, or it's just about social cohesion, why bring god into it? If you ask me, there must have been a very significant religious aspect - probably some thought like, "if I give to the gods, the gods will give to me." Something very much like ancient Greek animal sacrifice is done by Hindus today in their worship, usually with offerings of vegetarian food, but in certain cases (the worship of Maa Kali especially) also with animals like goats. In this context the practice is very religious - it's not just a feast. It's about doing worship and receiving blessings in turn. I suspect it was similar for the Greeks.
Good Job. Excellent point tying into the old "Feast Trope"... goes right back to the original wild Hunter's Religion. --- The various cultural expressions and justifications for sacrifice, I find less interesting than the deep time origins.
The Bible states sea creatures and unclean animals are prohibited from being eaten. Mainly pork is considered filthy meat, it's also close to human flesh. I stopped eating meat since August of 2017, I'm Vegetarian, I doubt I'll ever eat meat again, I feel more healthy today.
The public feast at a sacrifice was more than just stuffing one's face. It was a way of participating and acknowledging the deity. Christians were recorded as refusing to partake of the sacrificial meats as a way to reject the deity being honored. So you couldn't just refuse to eat because eating was symbolic as well as physical. Hopefully a bite or two was good enough if you weren't hungry.
And in their turn, mediaeval Christians introduced pork into many public feasts to bait or torment the hidden Jews. However, if they had studied Jesuit casuistry, they could protect themselves by making a "mental reservation."
Hey, that sacrificial daily oblation offering on the alter there smells so yummy... Excellent work Andrew, keep it up!
Yes, it was a feast, but sacrifice also had a spiritual function. Participating in a sacrifice would bring divine blessing and not participating could earn divine wrath. Priests made sure ritual sacrifice had a carrot and stick effect on people.
It wasn't habitual for people to give up their best animal for slaughter to the priest, but they believed that if they didn't god would be angry with them.
We should look at ancient religion from the view of ancient people who followed it and not just 21st century's uptake on they believed.
So, why did they do it? Food. Was there a deeper motivation? Patriarchy... I feel like that never really got to the issue.
To appease the gods bloodthirst, to exchange favors with them, and avoid their fury.
The blood symbolises life and is therefore the highest gift to give them. The Gods already have everything. They don't need it.
It seems as if the Greek sacrifice was nothing more than a barbecue with religious introduction. Like Christians today say grace before a meal.
And talking of Christianity and meals I can't help but noticing the correlation between the ancient sacrifice and the eucharist. Jesus is the sacrificial lamb whose flesh and blood is consumed by the celebrants.
Christians didn't invent really anything, did they? They were just very good at recycling.
It should be understood that a careful reading of Genesis reveals that God did not ask Cain or Able or anyone else for a sacrifice of any kind. The story just points out that they brought sacrifices to God..It is not until centuries latter that God describes how sacrifices must be done etc.
This points out to me that God didn't need or want sacrifices, only that He was working with an apparent natural tendency of man, and attempting to make it an elevated experience..This becomes self evident when you learn that all cultures make sacrifices to their God or gods at some point in their past... P.S. good video, I subscribed .
If god didnt want a sacrifice then why, when presented with Cains offering did he prefer Abels Animal sacrifice to Cains crop sacrifice? Seems like an optimal moment to set the record strait and let everyone know which he prefered. (Hint: he did, he preferred animal sacrifices. That's why he praised Abel and not Cain)
It'd be interesting if you did a episode/series on the earliest known forms of spirituality/religion. I feel as if the majority of attempts at this are hand-waving generalizations about shamanism and animism, but never anything particularly substantive. I understand evidence of such things so long ago is sparse at best, and obviously there's no written religious text from that time for obvious reasons, so I understand regardless most of it would be conjecture, but I feel as if you'd deal with the subject matter in a more objective way than most. It'd make a great watch, I think.
Yeah, the "earliest religion" is one of my longterm fascinations. What did homo sapiens believe/practice 100,000 years ago? You're right most people brush it aside as "animism," but I haven't looked into the research. I definitely will do a video on this one day, I just have a backlog of vids to produce first.
Awesome, I look forward to it!
Wish you touched on how Greeks like Xenophon would use sacrifices and a soothsayer to make important decisions. Like in the Anabasis campaign.
We too sprinkle water on sheep before sacrificing it. but why..??
I know I'm late to the party with this video, but have we thought about the history of killing animals? Hunter gatherers returning from a successful hunt would have been a cause for celebration and feasting, and thanking whatever primitive gods they had. Once humans began domesticating animals, that behavior may have carried forward as ritualistic killing and feasting with religious overtones.
2:46 "Animal sacrifice is ancient, strange and we don't fully understand it or how it maintained order in ancient societies therefore, patriarchy"
Nancy jay....yeah I wonder which gender study course that "scholar" took at university.
Thanks here i can understand
There are texts dealing with animal sacrifices already in the Ugaritic material!
The Jews didn't do this though, they either let just the priest eat it or burned the meat
Religious sacrifice were for different reasons but yes the food a lot of times was also to feed the Levite priests since they were not given land specific to them. Reasons ranged from thanks/atoning for sin/feeding. I’m not sure but I think sometimes the person (not the priest) got to eat as well? But I’m not sure
You make ritual sacrifice sound like a weekend Texan barbecue.
Because it basically was. It's a barbecue where we commune with the Gods.
Can someone kindly answer me a simple question, who's answer I have been searching and yet couldn't find: Was there actual human sacrifice in ancient greece, devoted to the gods? I found an article that stated there was a human remain at an altar of Zeus on Mount Lykaion, which was made for animal sacrifices but ever since the human remains were found, there are speculations that there might have been human sacrifices as well. I'd really appreciate if someone could clearefy me.
Why don't we sacrifice plants too?
David Gusqui Loor we do sacrifice flowers to our loved ones, dead or alive, Most plants aren’t that impressive symbolically speaking, we sacrifice straw in the form of burning man or a scarecrow I guess, it’s about symbolism of vitality/beauty or warding off the undesirable, most plants don’t carry a lot of persuasion
Who doesn't?
Foods, flowers, incense, drinks, water, candles, art, song, dance, praise. All legitimate offerings.
Offerings of fruits, spirits, flowers, or grains are common in Shinto (shinsen), Hinduism (Yajna), Buddhism (Puja), ancient Judaism (minkhah) or even contemporary Catholicism in countries such as Mexico (ofrendas). Sometimes these "offerings" or "sacrifices" are to appease the gods, thank God for the harvest, or to honor the spirits of deceased loved ones. However, and I only know of this applying to Judaism, grain offering was often cast as an inferior sacrifice to animal slaughter (God rejected Cain's offering of fruit of his harvest in favor of Abel's firstlings of his flock, etc).
Picard is Wesley's Father vegetables aren’t popular anywhere though í guess?
lol, maybe the sacrifice of vegetables can be used to relieve of the burden and suffering of having to eat our Brussels sprouts! :)
Visit small villages today around world and you find still the feast is important for nutrition when the daily meal is legumes and grains. Just beans & tortillas every meal except regular holidays (at least monthly) or lentils & rice, potatoes & peas, etc.
Funny that as a guest they give you the extra fatty, greasy bits which to us may seem yucky but to them as a special honor. In eastern Asia, tofu isn't a vegetarian or low calorie deal, it's a much needed source of fat & protein (sometimes fancied up with a meat gravy).
And we today still gorge ourselves at holiday dinners; a hold over from feast culture?
Greeks: Here you go gods! 100 dead Oxens!!
Gods: Uh. Thanks.
An aroma pleasing to the Lord
I saw this video, and began to wonder: Why did animal sacrifice end in the ancient world, and when? That led me to Daniel Ulucci's work, which I'm now checking out. BTW, thanks for these videos. They are too detailed, I think, for my high school students, but they help me gain much-needed background so I can answer their questions in discussion.
Well first off, it didn't end. Animal sacrifice is still practiced everyday all around the world.
U have a nice voice.... I like your tone... 😊
We still practice sacrifice, just ask your Thanksgiving turkey
There was more to the origins and continuation of blood sacrifice than cultural or societal benefits of these rituals. The spiritual aspect of these rituals cannot be overlooked and provide the basis and the explanation for them. Paul the Apostle (in Acts 15:29) tells Christians not to eat meat that has been sacrificed to idols if they are aware of that fact. The reason is that Christians (who worship the One and Only God) should not partake of pagan rituals that have their origin in idolatry (or, demon-worship). The origin of pagan blood sacrifice is, in God's terms, idol-worship and demonic in origin. The reason pagan cultures observe animal sacrifice is because they have been instructed to do so. If Christians ate meat that they knew was sacrificed to idols, they would be giving homage to the devil.
As a priest, I'm going to have to subscribe
khaire
I am not of the opinion that animal sacrifice did not uphold a male dominated priesthood's elite status, but it really bothers me when women historians ignore that a fertile woman before birth control could have a baby pretty much every 18 months. Unless a woman was like a vestal Virgin how could she be in any position of power when she could be incapacitated or killed by childbirth and pregnancy?
Every 18 months? I assure you there are many siblings closer than that in age
Amazing channel!
My cat offers me dead mice (as what I interpret to be an offering of some kind) could ancient people have observed this kind of behavior in animals?
The procession you describe remind me a lot of the stations of the cross. Officially Jesus is sometimes referred to as the sacrificial lamb but it was interesting for me to see how these parallels bordered on parody.
Vanalovan,
The stations of the cross were instituted
for those who were unable to make a
pilgrimage to Jerusalem
good stuff, subbed
the sacrifice of Isaac
Do you think there is any other real reason that people get upset about animal sacrifice (specifically)other than just being divorced from the process of raising and slaughtering animals for food?
+seadawg93 For westerners I would assume the distance we are from the slaughtering process. In modern India, many Hindus find it an affront for religious reasons.
That makes sense.
I'm assuming (please correct me if I'm wrong) that those Hindus are vegetarian and find slaughtering animals at all to be an affront.Is that right? Certainly some Hindus are okay with animal sacrifice.
To me animal sacrifice makes just as much sense as any other offering, if the offerer is a meat eater.
Do you think the idea of offering is controversial or misunderstood in the west in general?
Hindus DO make ritual "offerings" to their gods. But it is generally plant based: grains, flowers, rice, and also dairy products (butter, milk, yogurt ), rather than meat. I do recall learning that ancient Hindus may have sacrificed animals just as other cultures did. One reason pacifists like Buddha and mahavira (jainism) rejected the rituals of their day.
I agree of course most Hindus make non-meat offerings, I was only pointing out that some Hindus make animal sacrifice today (thinking specifically, off the top of my head, of Durga and Kali practices in Bengal and in Nepal).
My point was that the rejection of animal sacrifice in Hinduism seems to me to be based on ahimsa and a rejection of animal killing animals at all, and not specifically because of the sacrifice.
Mostly I just find it interesting that, to me, the ideas of offerings are perfectly reasonable, I don't think many people would get weirded out by placing flowers or candles on an altar; but those same people might be truly disturbed about the idea of animal sacrifice, ...while eating steak or a Big Mac!
seadawg93 sacrificing animals is about witchcraft traditionally, to what god/spirit dictates the procedure and done differently is blasphemous towards any particular deity, Christians banned animal sacrifice since it is dogmatically forbidden and considered spiritual corruption, Muslims don’t eat meat unless it is sacrificed to their god in the right manner as well (halal) and so on, some animal sacrifice can many places be considered a direct assault on a particular belief or group and they would react
What about sacrifices for divination? Is the Faroese harvest of pilot whales a form of sacrifice or did it just start that way?
Love your content
2:46 I don't think mentioning patriarchy really helps. Animal sacrifice as an example of patriarchy because it was done by males doesn't bring anything new to the table. In history, everything important has been done by men or mostly men until roughly 50 years back. This doesn't help to illuminate the subject of sacrifice any further.
I too am godawful tired of hearing about male domination from UNMARRIED women !!
he said he's examining the way in which animal sacrifice impacted that society. if it served to support patriarchy, that's a legitimate impact to explore. Stephen, why does it matter to you if a woman talking about patriarchy is married or not? Last I checked, gender and marital status don't affect the truth value of the statements anyone makes.
I thought it was interesting, also weren't there some things women did in ancient religions? It's not as if they were barred from everything. Making the distinction here makes it clear who was allowed to do this practice and is useful.
I think it's useful here because of the Greco-Roman context. Women in Greco-Roman society were living in a very patriarchal social system. I don't think animal sacrifice, in of itself, is patriarchal, since there are societies where both sexes can oversee a sacrifice. In Voudon both priests and priestesses perform sacrifice, and literature tells us that there were both male and female druids, and we know druids in general oversaw sacrifices. Plus, in many societies small sacrifices are done at home, which could be done by men or women.
In the context of Greece though, they had a highly organized religion and social structure, and by laying mandatory religious rituals into the exclusive hands of a male and affluent priestly caste, you did reinforce the social hierarchy. This is found in a variety of religions. For example, the exclusive rights of the tribe of Levi in Judaism and an all male priestly order. In some sects of Hinduism, a writer name Manu is followed as law, and only a son can perform shraddha and light the pyre upon death to save the soul from re-birth and go straight to paradise.
Since this video is specifically directed at Greek animal sacrifice, which was part of a highly organized, hierarchical, and patriarchal paradigm: it's a worthwhile point to bring up.
Richard S. - there's a big list of accomplishment by women before 1967; Are you just trolling? In this case & others, men were the hunters most commonly distributing meat and this reinforces that old tradition (while most meals were gathered by women, though without the protein/fat boost meat gave).
Your conclusion is just too lose. I mean, they sure had motifs or set of beleif and it woulnd be just a thing to be done because its so commonly done
Didn't they also read the entrails to predict the future for omens?
A hunted animal was also a sacrifice of sorts or at least you thank the animal for giving up its body to you the hunter, offer some of the animal back to the earth ...eat specific parts of it immediately like the heart or liver, the whole thing was bound in ritual so its unsurprising that this is then carried over to domesticated animals and in fact to cereal crops
The radical feminist part could have been omitted even though it might be popular in American academics. Also you just said each sacrifice practice was unique but then generalize about it anyway.
Where I'm from...the sex and size of the animal is given according to the entity or for the request made to them....
It doesn't make any sense to suggest that the purpose of ritualized slaughter is to uphold patriarchy since ritualized slaughter could have been carried out by women. It's a neutral tool with nothing making it inherently male dominated. It'd be the same as claiming that the purpose of having currency is to uphold the patriarchy, because it's a tool that was used by a patriarchal society.
@@SonofSethoitae A bit of a late reply, seeing as how I commented two years ago lol. But that's beside the point.
Given the possibility for sacrifice to be used to either reinforce or subvert both a patriarchy or a matriarchy, or to be used for any number of other purposes not related to gendered power structures, it is evident that there is nothing tying it specifically to patriarchy, and so becomes nothing more than one of many neutral facets of a society's culture. So the only avenue left for the claim that it reinforces patriarchy is to argue that all non-subversive elements of a male dominated culture reinforce patriarchy, but it seems wholly unreasonable to attribute every facet of a culture to efforts of affecting the status quo.
P.S. Sorry for the wall of text, but I wanted to be sure to explain my position.
@@SonofSethoitae The implementation of currency reinforced Greek society, and so too (with Greece being patriarchal) reinforced the patriarchy. But it would seem absurd to claim that the purpose of currency in Greece was to reinforce the patriarchy. Ritualized slaughter is a neutral tool, same as currency. That is, unless it can be shown that the sacrifice was done with the specific intent to reinforce male rule.
@@SonofSethoitae Yes, I had Athens in mind when saying "Greeks". It is good to clarify it though.
Even in the quote you use it seems that male domination in the practice of sacrifice is a symptom of a patriarchal society rather than instituted with male supremacy in mind. It is the patriarchal mindset that it is the place of men to do the sacrificing, not the purpose of the sacrificing to place men above women. In this, the purpose for sacrifice is something other, and the patriarchal mindset then assigns men to the task.
To add a different avenue of understanding of the social workings of sacrifice, assuming that there are sentiments common to women of all cultures, it is reasonable to then assume that many women were happy to let men do the dirty work of the sacrificing. And in essence, they would be using the men as a tool to further themselves from something that many people would naturally find.... gross. Men being used as a tool in this case would run counter to the understanding of sacrifice being a form of further male empowerment.
@@SonofSethoitae It's important from where the patriarchy comes to the cultural practice. The barring of women from voting was a cultural practice that's purpose was to reinforce the patriarchy (Patriarchy is part of the foundation). However, in the time in which women couldn't vote, the purpose of voting, in itself, was in no part the reinforcement of patriarchy. A vote on the tax rate of soap has nothing to do with gendered power structures. (Patriarchy is only introduced from outside)
With the sacrifices, the male domination is a reinforcement of patriarchy, but the male domination of the practice isn't integral to the practice itself. It isn't the practice that is a reinforcement of patriarchy, it is the patriarchal attitudes that express the practice in such a way as to reinforce the patriarchy. Put simply, the purpose of the sacrifices was to "practice the religion"; the purpose of excluding women from the religious practices was to "reinforce the patriarchy."
As for the women agency thing, I think it's naive to think that without recognized institutional power that women don't still have tremendous power over men. But still, I cede in this regard.
I think to get to the bottom of this you really have to focus on WHO taught people to sacrifice in the first place. Personally, I feel certain that animal sacrifice was first introduced to humans by the "gods" or demons, for lack of a better term (demons being fallen angels or fallen el/gods). I suppose it could have even been the same being that tempted Adam and Eve in the garden-Satan. For me, as a person who studies the bible, I can see no instruction from El Shaddai, the almighty God, instructing Abel to sacrifice. In fact, it would seem that the first family was instructed not to eat the animals and to look after and care for them. So it makes no sense that they were not supposed to eat them and were supposed to care for them, but Abel decides to kill one for a sacrifice? Why on earth would El Shaddai ask this of him and if he did, wouldn't we see that in the scriptures? Yet we don't, but El Shaddai accepts the offering because Abel's heart is right in doing it to plus, El Shaddai (god almighty) even through numerous passages in the scriptures tell us that he is NOT pleased with animal sacrifice even though we do read that he enjoyed the "aroma" but then again, we read that he enjoyed the aroma of the death of Jesus so our human understanding of "aroma" is a little skewed. Og course, Josephus says that Abel did not offer the fat of the inside of the animal, but offered the "milk fat" and the Hebrew letters for both "fat" and "milk" are Chet, lamed, bet and vowel points ere not added timm...I think the 5th century? So it would seem that the vowel points is the only thing making us assume animal fat vs milkfat.
It seems that the most high GOd knew the people were accustomed to animal sacrifices all over the world after a few hundred years so out of mercy he worked with the system that people knew. But he put limits on it-like HOW it could be done and with what particular animals could be used while other kingdoms and nations had no limits or different traditions. But interestingly, even in Jeremiah 7:22 El Shaddai says that he never instructed Israel to sacrifice when he brought them into the wilderness. That is true. For two solid months they lived there before they even received the 10 commandments or the following instructions in Exodus 20 concerning sacrifices.
I think Christians have really messed up in saying that God created the sacrificials system to teach people about the future sacrifice of his son. I think that's totally backward. I think he sent his son to end a practice he never liked in the first place and thus took away the power of the demons by sending his son and at least ending the demonic practice of animal sacrifice for the people of El Shaddai. Other ancient cultures and today even still practice it, and this makes sense too, because when God divided that nations at the tower of Babel he set an angel or "Son of God" over every nation to rule over it according to the Greek Septuagint (Deuteronomy 32:8) and a few modern versions of the Bible that have updated their text with the findings of the Dead Sea Scrolls that matched up with the septuagint. So outside of the people who worshipped the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, which subsequently lead to Jesus as well, the rest of the word still followed after the gods over their nations. Which is partly aslo why we have so many religions with so many commonalities-even with Christianity.
I did a 15 minute video on this very topic giving all the scriptures that refer to how repulsed El Shaddai is with animal sacrifices. But then again, he is a God of free will and of mercy, so to me it makes total sense that he "ALLOWED" animal sacrifices to be part of worship to him, but really, he would have preferred that they had seen fit to stop the practice before he put an end to it at the cross. This, to me, makes the sacrifice that Jesus made of himself all that much more powerful because he gave his life to end a system that kept people enslaved to a demonic practice. There's a lot more to it. You can't get all theological in a RUclips comment section. I do know that I am not the first one to have come to this conclusion. I just found out a week ago that Moses Ben Maimon or Maimonides (sometimes called the Rambam) who was a Jewish philosopher also saw the same thing and wrote about it in the 1100's. At that time he was highly rejected. Today Jews still reject that portion of his writing, but uphold him as one of the greatest Jewish influences of all time. SO that kind of shocked me that my findings were not isolated. Others-even a Jew had realized this long before me.
I wonder if whoever sold the sacrificed meat would get more money from it since its source was used as a sacrifice to the gods.
You know I notice that people always sacrifice the bad parts of the animal to the gods. The thigh is the least tender meat of an animal as they use their leg a lot to you know, walk and also heads are not especially appetizing either
Head meat is some of the most delicate and delicious parts of an animal, what are you talking about? Also, in a time where meat was precious, a huge portion of flesh like the hind quarters would have been very valuable for feeding a family.
Chicken thigh is the best part, imo
There's nothing like a good excuse for a BBQ! :D
You should look into the African Orisha cult ceremonies, which are at least a few millennia older than the Greco-Roman and Middle-Eastern rituals . They too seem to be basically communal feasts that evolved into religious rituals.
You should also check the Iguvine tablets, from a pre-Roman Italic community, that contain detailed instructions for such a ritual feast (incidentally, dedicated to Zeus/Jove -- who seems to be the same god as Yaveh).
Why not accepting a less spiritual and more obvious explanation?
Animals were sacrificed to feed the gods. This is the common denominator in all ancient religions.
And if the original gods were not some invisible spiritual beings, but very real people of a ruling class or race, would they not demand tribute in the form of meat?
So animal sacrifices would just be a tax given to the rulers.
Now you're talkin'!
Most societies had sacrifces it wasnt one origin source geographically it started from nothing from all over the earth independently along with the required to the Deity or Deities.
Greeks did it appease the gods and to willingly spiritually give back to the divine. And it wasnt just greeks and romans, it was also ancient arabians levantine peoples and mesopotamians and anceint saudis, Persians, Indus peoples and Eurasians and indo europeans, Egyptians and many African peoples and Americas people south and north. Alot of them are similar but MOST all are Different if not All them are different unique of each peoples origins.
Vegans: Killing an animal for food is heartless.
Me: But what if it's a sacrificed animal?
Literally worse. Don't use god or gods to justify eating animals.
@@Fahrbot How is that worse?
You wouldn't really sacrifice an animal that had to suffer on the miasmic factory farming industry.
If you sacrifice an animal you make sure it's life was good, even treat them better than kings.
"talking about theory"
you didnt talk about metaphysics once in this video
We Hindus still sacrifice animals ✊.
Jai maa Kali
I absolutely agree
They lived and cared for the animals they killed. They had to deal with this in some way.
Even in the ancient world, the men did the barbecuing. Humans as usual then and now good and ‘gendering’ absolutely e v e r y t h i n g. Well, a bunch of things.
Why kill animals? Well, it would be nice if we could get at the meat without killing the animal; but I dunno, cutting off one leg at a time and eating that until all four legs are gone, while still keeping the animal alive, seems somehow wrong to me. Call me weird that way.
So.... animal sacrifice is a community barbecue. Sounds delicious.
In Judaism, keeping kosher is all about preserving animal life. When you limit yourself to only eating certain kinds of animals ... you allow the rest of nature to thrive. Take for example Chinese culture, where virtually everything is on the menu and/or in the medicine cabinet. Anything to enhance the libido, right? So, goodbye rhinos, tigers, and bears! OH MY! In Judaism, you're not allowed to hunt animals for food or trophies and you're only allowed to ritually slaughter and consume certain types of animals, which you probably won't find on an endangered species list. Keeping kosher is tied in with the concept of tikkun olam (lit. repairing the world). This Jewish practice might've originally risen out of concerns for resource scarcity, but it's evolved into a means of preserving the planet's diverse fauna, unlike other cultures that seem bent on destroying the ecosystem.
interesting!
I like to imagine religious rituals as being not _quite_ accurate to their gods' desires. For instance, Zeus would smell that delicious goat thigh, only to come down to the temple and find that some idiot burned it again. "Can't _any_ of these priests cook?" he asks as the laugh track rolls.
...Did I just turn a Greek religious ritual into a sitcom?
no you turned the molesting of innocent beings into brainfart. go vegan
I recommend Burkert's cousin: Girard. He and Burkert had a solid convo with JZ Smith in the book "Violent Origins."
Better than human sacrifice
.