Now, this little bit of graffiti is interesting for a number of reasons. Chief among them, however, would have to be the fact that it shows that the cult of the deified Ptolemies was still being conducted at such a remarkably late date. Kleopatra had died in 30 BCE, bringing to a close the Egyptian monarchy founded by Ptolemy Soter. Although she was survived by her children, the Lagide line itself ended almost a century later when Emperor Claudius had her grandson Ptolemy of Mauretania killed. So why did this cult continue for almost three centuries after the fact – particularly since there were no Ptolemies to keep it going, Egypt had long since been swallowed up by the Romans who certainly wouldn’t have been interested in perpetuating the memory of one of their greatest enemies, and we find it in a place that had never really been properly Hellenized or Romanized, at the southernmost tip of the country sharing a border with the hostile Nubians and Ethiopians?
The fact that it did survive in some form – and why would Petesenufe have gone to the trouble and personal expense to have the statue covered in gold, and further had a record inscribed of his benefaction, if it meant nothing at all to him? – challenges us to rethink a great deal that we take for granted about the cult of the Ptolemies. After all, we are often told that this was nothing but empty formalism, the propaganda of the court translated into the religious sphere. It was all about the securing of upward mobility through conspicuous displays of loyalty and the flattering of vain sensibilities. There was nothing truly religious about it – at best people may have enjoyed the processions, games, and theatrics that went with it, or felt some kind of connection to their leaders by participating in the cult (much like the collective frenzy that Hitler was able to stir up in his own populace during all those extravagant rallies he staged) but nothing lasting or meaningful can be found in the cult itself.
Except, of course, that if that was true why didn’t the whole thing collapse with the Ptolemies themselves? Much earlier than Petesenufe, we find a hint of just how important this cult may have been to the common people themselves.
“Now, the statues of
Why would he do this? Why would he have spent what amounted to a pretty sizable personal fortune to ensure the survival of these monuments? Especially since
It may seem simple, and perhaps even a little clichéd – but when it comes down to it, I think he loved her. Loved what she represented. Loved what he saw reflected in her person and in her life. Loved all that she was, and could have been, and still was even in death. And he thought that the object of his love was important enough that it deserved to be preserved, no matter how much it cost, and how much personal danger he risked to do so. You have to be an exceptional person to inspire that kind of love in other people, particularly people who may not have known you that well … and exceptional is certainly an accurate way to describe Kleopatra and her noble ancestors.
One of the most exceptional things about Kleopatra was the special concern she showed for the welfare of her people – she slashed taxes, initiated legal reforms, funded new festivals, gave a generous allotment for the maintenance of the priesthoods and the upkeep of the sacred animals, and began a public building project as part of her plan for revival of the country on a political, military, and religious level. More to the point, she was a potent and beloved symbol for her people to believe in during a troubled time, especially coming after a series of weak and incompetent monarchs. For a brief span it really looked like she was going to change the world, defeat
One of the most bizarre comments to have come out of the recent quarrel over gay marriage in Hellenic polytheism – and that is quite an accomplishment considering how many nasty and illogical things were tossed about during the proceedings* - would have to be Twink/Lisa’s statement:
However, I defend YSEE's stance, even if I don't agree with it. Technically, it is correct. It is also correct that the ancients held a low view of the effeminate man who turned away from Traditional marriage and family. It is what it is. We cannot try to explain it away or deny it. Whether we agree with it or not is a different story. Both Tim and I do not. But we still acknowledge that it was the worldview. We are expected to live the worldview.
I find this bizarre for a number of reasons. Why should anyone be forced to accept something that violates their own fundamental moral and religious principles? Is there, then, to be no place for critical thought and social evolution within her version of Hellenismos? And why must one give support to social institutions which have nothing to do with the actual religion itself? Just because the ancients worshiped the same gods as us does not mean that we need to imitate them in all of the particulars of their culture. I am quite okay with seeing slavery, the second-class status of women and foreigners (including other Greeks) at
And this brings up a very important point. People such as Twink wish us to regard the ancients as a monolithic people, their culture uniform, unchanging, and beyond critique. This does great damage to the complex realities of the ancient world. To begin with – as anyone who has ever cracked open a history book or watched popular movies like 300 and Alexander ought to know –
Even within a single polis there was never blind conformity. Every important matter of state was hotly debated in the boule and ekklesia assemblies – to say nothing of the common marketplace or agora. Nor was this simply a matter of politics – all aspects of life were put under careful scrutiny and their relative merits and shortcomings endlessly debated. We find Sokrates walking through the streets challenging people to examine what they actually meant by common concepts such as piety, justice, and truth. We find philosophers questioning the validity of the traditional myths and forms of worship and even the very existence of the ancestral gods themselves. The ‘Old Oligarch’ ranted against the upstart, unwashed masses who thought themselves equal to their inherent superiors and had become drunk on the political power they were unworthy to wield right in the heart of democratic Athens. We find people abominating the practice of meat-eating and arguing against land-ownership and slavery. And during major state-sponsored religious festivals, plays were performed which decried the unfair treatment of women and mocked popular political and military leaders who were no doubt right there in the audience. (And Aristophanes can be rather raunchy in his venomous attacks on the elite!)
This open inquiry, this willingness to lay everything bare and examine the fundamentals of culture, religion, and politics is precisely what made the Greeks so great. This, however, is a process that must be permitted never to cease. We have a sacred duty to continue the tradition today, in our own culture, in our own lives, and regarding the religion that we hold dear. We cannot stop at the easy answers, accept with smug satisfaction that “Homer said it, I believe it, that settles it.” Now, it may well be – and in my opinion often proves to be the case – that the ancients managed to hit upon the truth. But the ancients are to be honored because they were correct; we should not hold that an idea is correct simply because the ancients maintained it. When we do such a thing we place the ancients on a higher pedestal than truth, justice, wisdom, holiness, beauty and all of the other values which they themselves so highly regarded. I suspect they would be aghast at such a notion, and the first to criticize it and rightly heap scorn upon all those who had forfeited the divine quest for understanding which is the only thing that makes us truly worthy of being called human. This is not always an easy quest. It takes boldness and courage to ceaselessly question things, to try and get at the root and cause, and never to be satisfied with mere appearance and pat answers. We must not simply accept that something is true because it's said to be, but try and understand how and why and what sort of application this may have in the real world outside of intellectual contemplation. Sometimes we must even let go of things we have long held onto, things that are deeply cherished by us, once they prove to be false or no longer serve a valid purpose. Truth can be a harsh mistress, but Falsehood is infinitely worse.
* Take, for instance, the claim that being transgendered is a psychological disorder; couples who don’t have children are not favored in the eyes of the gods and it's actually their own damn fault; further, infertile people who try to serve a priestly office will end up struck dead by the gods; Alexander the Great was completely 100% straight - no fagginess there; fat people can’t be priests; you can be a gay Hellene – you just have to marry someone of the opposite sex, breed, and do your homo thing on the down low. There was, indeed, much to choose from here! But I stand by this one, for I think it has the greatest potential for harm. The others are easy to laugh off and see as nothing more than foolish ravings: this one has a seductive charm that many might easily fall prey to.
So, here’s my retelling of the Anansi story which I believe was called Anansi and the River-Goblin. I’ve changed a few things here and there, but it’s pretty much what I remember hearing.
Anansi the spider lived with his wife and their two children in the jungles of
But how can that be, you’re no doubt asking. Isn’t Anansi the one who traveled all over the world giving out wisdom to all the different peoples of the earth? Well, you see, Anansi stole that wisdom from the gods in heaven and he kept it in a jar so that he could have it all to himself. But one day he was climbing high up above the world, with the jar strapped to his back, when all of a sudden it slipped and broke against a tree, spilling all of its contents on the people down below. And a fat lot of good that wisdom has done them – they were better off without it if you ask me! But anyway, that’s a story for another day.
On this day, Anansi was taking a nap, as he did most days, trying to avoid the hot summer sun. He was having a really good dream, too, and he didn’t want to wake up from it. In his dream Anansi was King of All the Animals, and they brought him gifts so that he never had to do a bit of work aside from being King.
( Read more... )![]() | You are viewing Log in Create a LiveJournal Account Learn more | Explore LJ: Life Entertainment Music Culture News & Politics Technology |