THE GODS OF POLITICS IN EARLY GREEK CITIESfare, on the one hand, and harmony and concord, on the other, introduces a set of major
tensions that must be taken into account in any analysis of the political field.
The so-called Aphrodite of Magistrates is no zoological curiosity but is, on the con-
trary, central to thought about the nature of the council and about the concept of decision
and the power to deliberate upon communal matters. The all too Greek aspects of those
concepts, which may well try your patience, lead us to a whole micropantheon that spoke
solely of the political domain.
Let me return to the subject of comparativism and the question of what it is possible
to compare. It would be mistaken to take either the combination of politics and religion,
or that of theology and politics, or even that of politics and ritual as some kind of univer-
sal standard. ‘‘Politics’’ and ‘‘religion’’ are no more than dry encyclopedia entries. The
modernity of the Shinto ̄of the Meiji was invented using the deification and cult of a
top-hatted emperor who opened electric-power stations and new railway networks. The
‘‘minister of divine affairs’’ collaborated with the department of ‘‘National Studies’’ to
redefine the relations between Buddhists, Confucians, and Shintoists of a variety of per-
suasions. This was in the early twentieth century. It was an extraordinary politico-religious
configuration, which it was impossible to view in perspective until an attempt was made
to analyze its components and the formation of its successive strata. Shinto ̄was reason
enough, at the time. No doubt, but what kind of reason? And on the basis of what prac-
tices was it constructed? And what about the Christian West? Does it justify liberated
minds declaring that politics was invented in the religious domain—and besides, which
religious domain? Similarly, even if, as a hasty and preliminary hypothesis, in ancient
Rome religious power legitimated political power, is it not advisable to work with histori-
ans who can analyze the extremely complex system of assemblies and the interaction of
what the Romans calledauctoritasandinauguratio? Rome may have introduced citizen
gods and various kinds of contracts between men and the gods, but how and in the course
of what parallel or successive experiences did the domain of politics take shape there?
What I wish to suggest is that this kind of experimental and constructive comparativ-
ism, practiced by historians in collaboration with anthropologists, may provide a useful
way to probe the complexity of societies such as present-day Israel (which is but one of
many) that draw attention to the extreme fragility of what we call the ‘‘political domain.’’
It was much the same in the past. Nothing much has changed.^6
—Translated by Janet LloydPAGE 101101.................16224$ $CH1 10-13-06 12:34:00 PS