untitled

(coco) #1

the principle ‘‘one good turn deserves another’’ applied to relations between men
and gods as well as to interpersonal friendships (Pulleyn 1997:28–9). But the Greeks
themselves questioned the value of their gifts of burnt fat and bones to the gods. The
Prometheus myth told by Hesiod turns precisely on Zeus’ irritation that Prometheus
apparently tried to trick him by offering him an attractive but nutritionally worthless
portion of the ur-sacrifice at Mekone. Comedians and satirists never tired of joking
about the idea of the gods addicted to the sweet-smelling smoke of sacrifice wafting
up to heaven. On a more serious note, Euthyphro in Plato’s dialogue of that name is
made to see by Socrates that the gods do notneedanything from men: that would
make them dependants. What they want is for men topleasethem (a form of the verb
chairo ̄is used here again) with their worship. So do not let us think that thecharis
relationship operative in worship was mercenary. Undoubtedly it wasbasedon reci-
procity in human relations (‘‘one good turn deserves another’’) but it was definitely
sublimated to suit relations with gods who were seen to need nothing from men but
who might grant everything when so disposed. We may partly explain the emphasis
on past/present/future sacrifices in Greek prayer by my earlier point: the ritual frame.
Since prayer was made at the moment of immolation, what more natural than to
associate the two things in prayer language? Since (in my view) the worshiper wished
to draw the gods’ attention to his prayer by blood-sacrifice, it was likely that he would
say so to the gods in words: ‘‘As I sacrifice [have sacrificed/will sacrifice] this animal
so I pray you grant me – .’’ We could explain the formulaic quality of thesedo ut des
utterances in prayer by reference to ritual structure rather than a literal-mindedness
on the part of the Greeks about gods’ likes and appetites.
A type of argument shared by hymns and prayers concerns myth, that is, narrative
about gods’ deeds in the past. I think we can recognize two aspects of this. On the
one hand we find prayers referring to past incidents in which the god addressed
showed him- or herself favorably inclined to help, and this is used as an argument why
he or she should repeat the favor now. On the other hand, hymns and prayers may tell
a traditional story about the god addressed to illustrate his or her virtue, which sets a
precedent for the present request. As kings and generals like to have their deeds
extolled, so gods might like to be reminded of their power and glory. The first type of
myth relates to the worshipers’ personal experience; the second to the fund of
traditional stories in general, or perhaps local, circulation.
The first poem in our editions of Sappho’s extant fragments is an interesting
example of the former type. The ‘‘I’’ calls on Aphrodite to help her in a love-affair,
using the argument: ‘‘If ever you helped me in the past help me now.’’ Then the ‘‘I’’
describes how the goddess did in fact appear in the past, riding her chariot pulled by
birds. On landing the goddess asked with a resigned smile: ‘‘What do you want now?
Who is itthis timethat I should persuade to fall in love with you?’’. The poem closes
by returning to present time: ‘‘Thus help me now!’’. For this poem Sappho has
constructed a personal myth of epiphany to back up a plea to Aphrodite to send
present aid. The prayer does not cite lavish sacrifices as the reason why Aphrodite
should grant the request, but rather the speaker invokes a precedent of divinecharis.
Moreover, she visualizes the goddess’charisthrough poetic art. She describes the
golden aspect of the goddess leaving father Zeus’ palace, the swift winged chariot
which taxied her to earth, and the immortal smile which played on her lips when she
spoke to the lover in distress. This evocation of a past display of divine grace is


Prayers and Hymns 125
Free download pdf