Sacrifice in the Bronze Age Aegean and Near East a Poststructuralist Approach
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SACRIFICE IN THE BRONZE AGE AEGEAN AND NEAR EAST A POSTSTRUCTURALIST APPROACH VOL. I: TEXT This Thesis is submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of doctor in Philosophy 2011 LAERKE RECHT Trinity College Dublin DECLARATION I hereby declare that this thesis has not previously been submitted as an exercise for a degree at this or any other University, and that it is entirely my own work. I agree that the Library may lend or copy the thesis upon request. This permission covers only single copies made for study purposes, subject to normal conditions of acknowledgement. 3 SUMMARY METHODS AND FINDINGS The goal of this study is a better understanding of the practice of ‘sacrifice’ in the Bronze Age Aegean and Near East. This includes animal and human sacrifice, but not inanimate offerings. This has been done through collection and analysis of ‘primary’ material from all types of sources and data in order to gain as complete an understanding as possible: archaeological, iconographic and textual material. Electronic databases have been created, and the material has all been entered into these, which thus form the basis for further analyses, statistics and conclusions. These databases, both in their printed form as appendices, and as attached electronic (inter- active) versions, are a substantial part of this thesis. They bring together all the known evidence for animal and human sacrifice from the two geographical areas, from the three different types of material. Further, they can be used independent of the main text of the study: the reader can make their own searches, conclusions and use the many references to gain further information on a specific archaeological site, object or tablet. The study of sacrifice has a very long history, and another major goal of this study has been to explore how this history influences the way the material is interpreted and what kind of assumptions lie behind specific interpretations. In order to reveal such influences and assumptions, a poststructuralist approach is applied. This means not only a discussion of some of the theories concerning sacrifice, beginning with Edward Tylor and ending with Nancy Jay, but also a careful reading of the modern texts of archaeologists and scholars. Through this approach, assumptions and hierarchical binary oppositions which are often based on modern perceptions rather than the ancient material, are uncovered and discussed. Specific poststructuralist ideas from the 5 works of René Girard and Jean Baudrillard, are also applied to certain features of the material, suggesting new avenues of interpretation. More than anything, the material suggests that sacrifice was part of a great variety of rituals, performed for many different purposes – these include religious festivals and feasting, divination, treaties, the construction, reconstruction and destruction of buildings, and, not least, rituals associated with burials and the dead. The rituals involve many different species of animals, with sheep/goats emerging as the most commonly sacrificed animals. The treatment of sacrificed animals and humans also indicate great variety, perhaps based on species or the kind of ritual that the sacrifice was part of. Equids, dogs and humans, in particular, were often sacrificed whole, while in other instances, the head of the sacrificed animal appears to have had special importance. In modern interpretations, there is a tendency to view the material either in light of later, better known practices (such as those of later Greece or those known from the Bible) or of modern perceptions of social structures. Hierarchical oppositions, with one side being valued higher than the other, can be detected in some interpretations, based on such notions as burnt – unburnt, whole – partial, life – death, animal – human, and male – female. Without a basis in the primary material, such oppositions can lead to serious misunderstandings of ancient practices, and it is hoped that this study creates an increased awareness not only of the assumptions we bring to the material, but also of the way in which they colour our interpretations. Lastly, the application of Baudrillard’s analysis of the relationship between the living and the dead to sacrifice in mortuary contexts, and of Girard’s notions of the double to the many occurrences of heads, the depiction of frontal heads and the frequent mirroring of animals in images, provide a novel way of ‘reading’ the material. It should not, however, be seen as a final or as the only way of interpreting these features: clearly, the practice of sacrifice in the Bronze Age Aegean and Near East was too complex for a single, over-arching explanation. 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Christine Morris, for her support, advice and encouragement throughout the writing of this thesis. Great thanks also goes to my readers, who have gone through many hours of corrections and suggestions: Dr. Joanna Day, Dr. Peter Mackay, Aoife Fitzgerald and Dr. Assaf Yasur-Landau. The following people have kindly responded to specific questions about the material and offered advice and help concerning my work: Prof. Yannis Hamilakis, Prof. Alan S. Gilbert, Jonny Geber, Dr. Jan Driessen, Dr. Erik Hallager, Heather Graybehl, Dr. Walter Müller and Prof. Ingo Pini. Kalypso Allen and Sofia Iraklidis have helped me with translations when my own language skills did not suffice. I am very grateful for the financial support I have received in the form of postgraduate scholarships and travel grants from Trinity College Dublin, the Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences and the Danish Institute at Athens, as well as grants from Trinity College Dublin and the Biblical Archaeology Society, allowing me to gain essential fieldwork experience. Finally, this thesis could not have been written without the love and support of my family and friends: my parents, my brother and sisters, my friends Didde Nielsen, Eva Christensen, and in particular Katarzyna Zeman-Wiśniewska and Dr. Emma Saunders for putting up with me during the last few months of my research and providing valuable conversations not only about my work, but also about life in general. Most of all, I would like to thank Tibi Daróczi, for his never-ending love and for always keeping me challenged. 7 CONTENTS Vol. I: Declaration 3 Summary 5 Acknowledgements 7 Contents 9 List of maps, tables and figures 11 Introduction 13 Research questions 17 The geographical areas 18 Chronology 19 Poststructuralism 22 Material and sources 25 Tables and appendices 27 Outline 30 Chapter 1: Theories of sacrifice 33 Edward Burnett Tylor 35 William Robertson Smith 38 Henri Hubert and Marcel Mauss 42 Émile Durkheim 46 Walter Burkert 49 René Girard 54 Jonathan Zittell Smith 58 Nancy Jay 61 Theories specific to the Bronze Age Aegean and Near East 64 Defining sacrifice 70 Chapter 2: Sacrifice in the Bronze Age Aegean 77 Sacrifice and burials 82 Burials with complete animal skeletons 97 Sacrificial space 107 Sacrificial activities and practice 117 Foundation deposits 127 Sacrificial representations 128 Human sacrifice 138 Conclusions 147 9 Chapter 3: Sacrifice in the Bronze Age Near East 151 Sacrifice and burials 157 Burials with complete animal skeletons 171 Sacrificial space 179 Sacrificial activities 185 Foundation deposits 201 Sacrifice representations 204 Human sacrifice 213 Conclusions 225 Chapter 4: Comparisons and poststructuralism 227 Sacrifice and burials 230 Sacrificial space and activities 237 Foundation deposits 240 Treaties 244 Substitution 244 Human sacrifice 246 Sacrificial iconography 248 Types of animals sacrificed 250 Human-animal interfaces 256 Poststructuralist contributions 258 Death, liminality and poststructuralism 270 Sacrifice in the Aegean and Near East 285 Conclusions 289 Bibliography 297 Vol. II: Maps Tables Figures Explanatory note to the appendices and databases Appendix A: Aegean Burials Appendix B: Aegean Sacred Space Appendix C: Aegean Glyptic Appendix D: Aegean Iconography Appendix E: Aegean Texts Vol. III: Appendix F: Near Eastern Burials Appendix G: Near Eastern Sacred Space Appendix H: Near Eastern Glyptic Appendix I: Near Eastern Iconography Appendix J: Near Eastern Texts Attached: Disc with full pdf version and electronic databases. 10 LIST OF MAPS, TABLES AND FIGURES Map 1. Crete and Thera Map 2. The Greek Mainland Map 3. The Near East Table 1. Aegean chronology Table 2. Near Eastern chronology Table 3. Whole animal skeletons in burials Table 4. Sites of possible human sacrifice Table 5. Types of sacrifice according to material Figure 1. Database template (in text) Figure 2. Types of animal bones in Aegean burials Figure 3. Binary oppositions (in text) Figure 4. Types of animals in Near Eastern burials Figure 5. Binary oppositions (in text) 11 INTRODUCTION Sacrifice contains an element of mystery … The ancient mystery remains as impenetrable as ever. (Girard 2005: 2) It is evident that we cannot hope here to sketch out an abstract scheme of sacrifice comprehensive enough to suit all known cases; the variety of facts is too great. (Hubert & Mauss 1964: 19) The division [of sacrifice into human and animal] is based in effect on a value judgement, on the preconception that one category of victim – the human being – is quite unsuitable for sacrificial purposes, while another – the animal – is eminently sacrificable. We encounter here a survival of the sacrificial mode of thinking that perpetuates a misunderstanding about the institution as a whole. (Girard 2005: 11) The purpose of the sacrifice is to restore harmony to the community, to reinforce the social fabric. (Girard 2005: 8) 13 Blood. Death. Violence. Killing. God. Gods. Fire. Animals. Jesus. Mystery. Giving. Giving up. Missing out. Lent. Mass. Ramadan. Renounce. Being a parent. Alms. Altruism. Forfeit. Religion. Honour. Victim. Lamb. History. Offering. Gift. Cannibalism. Evil. Group pressure.1 These are some of the common modern associations with the word ‘sacrifice’. But what is sacrifice? As the quotes suggest, this question has been answered in many different ways.