gigantomachy. What this innovation seems to be doing is updating the mythic
significance of the battle, making its conflict between the forces of ‘‘good’’ (gods)
and ‘‘evil’’ (giants) stand as a mythic precursor of Athens’ encounter with her
‘‘barbarian’’ enemies, the Persians.
Another development occurred around the middle of the century, by which time
Athens had grown into great power with a large maritime empire, the ‘‘Delian
League.’’ The League’s headquarters had originally been the island of Delos, home
of a major cult of Apollo, but in 454 BC they were transferred to Athens. With the
city now confident enough to assert itself as an imperial power, Athena was effectively
promoted to patron deity of the whole empire. From now on each allied city was
required to participate in the festival, and to provide a panoply and a sacrificial cow.
This development exemplifies how the major festival of the Athenian state has its own
history. Ways of worshiping Athena evolved in accordance with the city’s development.
(See Chapter 26 for more on the Panathenaea.)
Religion and Politics: The Return of Peisistratos
and the Scandals of 415In looking at Athenian religion, we are given a unique opportunity to trace the
development of its cults and beliefs. As Parker points out, ‘‘whereas histories of
Greek religion and histories of Greece commonly pursue parallel paths at some
distance from one another, an account of Attic religion constantly intersects with
ordinary Athenian history’’ (1996:3). This section will examine events in two periods
in order to demonstrate the interaction of religion with the history of the city.
The first instance is an audacious act by the ousted tyrant Peisistratos that enabled
him to return triumphantly from exile in the 550s BC. He entered the city in a chariot
driven by a tall and beautiful young woman called Phye whom he had dressed up in
armor, while messengers were sent on ahead to announce that Athena herself was
welcoming him home. According to Herodotus, our source for what took place,
‘‘believing that the woman was the goddess herself, the citizens worshiped this
person, and welcomed Peisistratos’’ (1.60).
The event lets us take further our discussion above of the place of myth in Athens,
even though on face of it, as a historical event, it might seem to lack mythic
dimensions. It may seem out of place too in a discussion of ritual. Rituals are, after
all, repeated actions that depend for their efficacy upon rites being performed in the
correct way, by designated personnel at appropriate locations. This, in contrast, was a
one-off event outside the religious calendar. But the reason Peisistratos’ action
worked is that it used mythic and ritual elements in such a way as to generate a
range of religious responses.
Herodotus expresses astonishment that the Athenians, a people famed for their
rationality, should have let themselves be taken in by a ‘‘ridiculous trick.’’ But there is
no need to place undue emphasis upon Herodotus’ authorial intervention, for it serves
his purposes as a historian to adopt a rationalistic position (see Sinos 1998:86–8).
We might just as easily adopt an opposite interpretation of the event, seeing it as
exemplifying the Athenians’ dedication to religious phenomena. They were, after all,
The Religious System at Athens 231