Polytheism

Today’s topic is very interesting. I say this because I think we often take it for granted that the ancient Greeks worshipped many deities. What I mean by this is that we don’t think about it as a complex and confused network, instead we think of each deity as a single being. Of course each deity has their own attributes, flaws and personality and looking at each individually may help you to understand them better. But you can never fully understand how a certain deity works and fits in Greek society until you look at them in the centre of a vast system.

The image I’ve used today is a picture I took of the whiteboard in the lecture. You can see how messy and disordered it is! It is meant to be a representation of the Olympic gods. Our first task was to list all of the twelve Olympians that we could remember…easy right? Wrong! It was much harder than I expected to list the gods that we talk about in every lecture and once you have named them, putting them in any kind of order is almost impossible! This proves the complexity of the Greek gods discussed above.

Firstly I want to discuss how polytheism is on the surface a very alien concept to a monotheistic Christian society. In previous posts we have thought about how this needs to be cast aside in the journey through Greek religion but in this instance it is a curious pathway to delve down. In Christianity we worship one god, God. Yes? I’m not so sure. I believe that within Christianity there are many figures that are ‘worshipped’. We have the angels- protectors and deliverers of divine messages. Virgin Mary is often in the receiving ends of prayer, as is Jesus Christ. Even Saints are arguably worshipped; St. Christopher is on sovereigns across the world as a symbol for safe travel (this is not totally dissimilar to Hermes, god of travel.) Yes they are all worshipped in different ways to God, yet they are still looked upon as sanctified beings. Mortals with human flaws: looked at and worshipped for differing attributes. This sounds a lot like our network of Greek gods. A more apparent comparison would be the religion of Hinduism. They worship many gods in a very similar fashion to the Greeks, as well as having ‘minor gods’ in the form of spirits. These gods have different roles and different forms, some even personify what they represent in a similar way that Hades is the underworld and also the guardian on the underworld and Nike both the representative and personification of victory. In this respect Hinduism is arguably a better counterpart to Greek polytheism. Unfortunately for my research, I know less about Hinduism than I do about the ancient Greeks! But the bare bones of the argument show that polytheism does still exist, perhaps strangely in Christianity as well as Hinduism. It is also worth noting Buddhism. Buddha was a human being, a mortal man that accomplished enlightenment to the highest level. This is very fascinating as this somewhat parallels the Greek gods and how they had limitations and other mortal attributes. It also has a small connection with Hercules who (although the son of Zeus) has his own journey to becoming a god himself (whether Hercules is a hero or god is an entirely different blog!)

                 

Confronting polytheism is as complex as my accompanying picture. It seems only natural to take each god or goddess separately and this is a reasonable approach as each god has clear and defined qualities. However, this is deeply problematic. It totally removes the idea of polytheism. As we have discussed, these gods are a part of a group, a network. You can’t detach one god in order to understand them better. This is over-simplifying polytheism with a Christian mentality. To understand any of the gods, you must understand where he/she fits into this system or pantheon of gods. You can’t look at a god in seclusion. This is truly depicted in the tale of Hippolytus, a man that refuses to revere Aphrodite in favour of Artemis. The story ends with Hippolytus’ death. A somewhat severe metaphor on how not to confront polytheism. 

The pairing example used in class was that of Hermes and Hestia. On the base of the statue of Zeus at Olympia, each of the gods is paired including these two apparently opposite deities. But upon inspection it is a sure example of how god pairings can compliment each other and bring forth each other’s attributes.

                 Hermes= the moving outside messenger…change.
                 Hestia= the fixed space of the interior hearth…constant.

This is a small example of how the gods fit together and how they accompany and overlap each other perfectly.

With that said I want to try and begin to confront the diversity of the gods, specifically Athena. All of the major gods held several functions and our modern perception of them is somewhat simplified (the idea of Ares as the god of war and Poseidon as the sea god etc. perhaps we can blame Disney for this?) Athena is particularly diverse and therefore has many epithets that show her roles in the Greek world:

Epithet	Meaning
Athena Polias	City protectress.
Athena Promachos	Champion.
Athena Parthenos	The Maiden.
Athena Hygieia	Promoted health.
Athena Nike	Victory.
Athena Polymetis	Cunning in many ways.

That is just a small collection of her many manifestations. Deacy states, “Who was Athena, we will consider: a unified being with numerous specialised qualities? Or is her diversity the point of her nature?” (p.5) This is something that is difficult to answer. Athena is so diverse she almost pairs and compliments with herself, as Hermes and Hestia do with each other above. She possessed characteristics that appose each other, such as war and women’s work. And when you do pair her with other gods, her varieties of qualities are amplified even further! Deacy further examines this:

As a power of technology she had affinities with her fellow craft deity Hephaistos. 

As a power of war, she complemented Ares. She supported Zeus, meanwhile, in his 

role as guarantor of divine and human justice…As the virgin warrior…she is on one

 level the opposite of Aphrodite, the power of sexuality and love. But in certain 

contexts…she possesses traits characteristic of that goddess.” (p.6)

This alone shows how hard it is to pinpoint Athena as a deity. Due to her vast qualities she contrasts and shows unity with each god you consider. Poseidon shows anger and brute force compared with her intelligence and skill, yet they both have connections with the horse (Poseidon Hippios and Athena Hippia.) Even working as one in myth, with Poseidon birthing Pegesos and Athena giving Bellerophon the ability to ride him. Parker says “It can be argued…that the two gods relate to horses in different ways: Poseidon symbolises the raw power of the mighty beast, Athena the technological skill needed to master that power…” (p.389) He then goes on to say that this connection can be nullified as other sources say Poseidon was the first to tame a horse.  But either way, this shows that everyday human life involved many different gods adding their own skills and qualities. Looking closer at Athena, Deacy goes on the explain that one way to attempt to seek out Athena’s true nature is to look at her manifestation of Athena Polymetis, metis or cunning. This is perhaps a vehicle to decipher why she is ever changing. And that perhaps trying to label Athena with absolute statements is going against everything that she is meant to represent. She is cunning and therefore she can fit into any necessary situation, or as Deacy puts it, “…her cunning. But rather than enabling us to sum her up, it shows us that the point of Athena was that she was ever ‘on-the-move’.” (p.6-7) Perhaps the very point of Athena is that she is unexplainable. She is connected to each of her fellow deities in the network with both opposing and complimenting characteristics. She is a convenient instrument in both myth and modern day explanations.

I fear this is a topic that could have an entire dissertation written on, a small blog post doesn’t do it justice! Next week we will be studying anthropomorphism.