The sacrificial feast? A nice little sideline for the priests?
To what extent do you think that whole sacrifice thing was just nice little sideline for keeping the priests well fed? And, by extension, their flock, once the priests had had their fill.
That’s what Jeremy asks.
Don’t psychologists say that their three great unanswered questions are sleep, laughter, and religion? Far be it from me to go where psychologists dare not tread. And I have no more than a folk theory of the psychology of sacrifice.
I would say, though, that there is no way to understand cuisines in the ancient world (say from the first written records ca 3000 BC up to around the beginning of the Christian Era) without facing up to sacrifice and the feast that follows. It’s simply everywhere, all around the world. It’s Confucius and Leviticus and the Rig Vedas, Celtic chieftans and Roman emperors, Aztec warriors and Greek athletes.
This came as a surprise to me when I first started doing food history, though I suppose it shouldn’t have done. So if you’re in the same boat here’s a refresher.
Americans are just ending their big feast, Thanksgiving, and perhaps that’s the way to get in to the sacrificial feast. Thanksgiving is not a typical meal. Most people eat turkey and dressing and pumpkin pie only on that one day. But it is an emblematic meal. It shows you are a member of your family, it shows that your family like others across the nation is an American family, and it retains muted religious overtones.
Well, sacrificial feasts were like that, not in what you ate but in being emblematic. They were not typical meals, they were blow outs with lots of meat and lots of alcohol, they were eaten by all the warriors or citizens or athletes or fraternity, they showed you were a member of the tribe, chiefdom, kingdom or empire.
They came after a sacrifice. What’s sacrifice? Well, it’s a deal, perhaps a bribe. You say to the gods (who are still pretty much like humans, perhaps the ancestors, perhaps even an emperor, certainly with desires like hunger and thirst) that you will feed them in the hope that in return they will ensure that you have lots of children, bountiful harvests, and success in battle. Perhaps even that they will keep the cosmos running.
If that sounds like the Chamber of Commerce theory divine-human relations, well, that’s not so far off, except that in the absence of money, gifts of food serve instead.
And actually, it’s a very straightforward and appealing theory, much easier to understand than later religions with their promises of personal transformation. It lives on today in all the desperate moments when people say “If you let X live/prevent Y from coming to pass, I will do Z for the rest of my life.”
Anyway to get back to food, the gods everywhere had a penchant for aromas, easier to digest if you were a spirit than solid, solid flesh, and the particular aromas they liked were roast meat and alcohol or incense (though they certainly didn’t say no to other offerings of grains or fruits or what have you). So animals were led in procession, they were killed in front of the assembled company, parts of their body were roasted on the altar, and if all was done correctly–this was a big multimedia event with prayers, songs, incense, salt thrown on the fire turning it yellow and blue, smoke, sizzling flesh–they would look out for those who gave the sacrifice.
Then, and here the cook in me is frustrated, came a pause when the animals were butchered and dressed, when a meal was prepared (by whom, what else did it include), and then came the feast.
These could be small events for just a few people. They could also be huge events for thousands.
So back to Jeremy’s question. For some, it was an easy-to-understand insurance policy when times were uncertain, it was a way of connecting with the world of the spirits when you were less than certain about boundaries between life and death, waking and sleeping, consciousness and dreams. And from the economic point of view it did a good job of dealing with the meat of large domestic animals that if delicious and empowering was also perishable and came in a arge package that made it imperative to deal with it quickly.
For some it was undoubtedly a nice little sideline. Nice little sidelines have been a feature of human history from our earliest records, and have certainly never been limited to sacrifice.
And thus for some reformers–most of the founders of the “world” religions, it was to be got rid of and replaced with a more meaningful experience. This was a slow job, even when the reformers got the power of the state behind them. Sacrifice kept slipping back in everywhere, for all the reasons given and more–people did not want to be reformed by new church and state, they liked feasts.
But what I want to know is what the records are scarce on: the actual execution of these ceremonies. What went on? Who organized what? How long did they take to plan? How was the meat cut up? Who dealt with the blood and ashes? It’s my hunch that will teach us much more about the ancient world than speculating about whether or not it was all a scam.
Greek sources (ancient, not the 19th century founded modern state) give a fair bit of detail, including how the animal was prepared and who got what. Homer has the gods’ portion as thighbones wrapped in fat. It wasn’t just animals though, special cakes and dishes of all types. Near Syracuse I have seen the remains of sacrificial platforms where many many animals would have been processed, but much of these events would have been very small scale, so difficult to see the scam in every event, although I’m sure it happened.
Hard to see the scam in eating parkin at Bonfire Night*, which is what remains of sacrifice rites in the UK.
*(= “bone fire”; In some parts of Lincolnshire..on some peculiar nights, they make great fires in the public streets of their Towns with bones of oxon, sheep, &c. which are heaped together before. I am apt to believe..that from hence came the original of Bonefires.)
Yes, agreed there are these snippets. But it’s still mighty hard to get a handle on what happened between the killing and the feast.
No I don’t see the universal scam either, certainly not at the level of the humble family offering.
Not sure about the bone fire quote since you give neither attribution nor date. Could be folk etymology. But that traces of sacrifice linger, for sure.
The quote is from the 16th century, but the OED is quite clear on etymology of bonfire is “bone” + “fire”, also indicates that in some parts of Scotland bones were collected up into the 1800’s for the bonfire. There are many examples.
15th century England (the nativity of St. John the Baptist was the main Midsummer festival).
In worshyppe of saynte Johan the people waked at home, & made iij maner of fyres. One was clene bones and noo woode, and that is called a bone fyre.
May Day in 19th century Dublin:
“Another portion of ” the collection’ is expended in the purchase of a heap of turf, sufficient for a large fire, and, if the funds will allow, an old tar barrel. Formerly it was not considered complete without having a horse’s skull and other bones to burn in the fire. The depots for these bones were the tanners’ yards in a part of the suburbs, called Kilmainham ; and on May morning, groups of boys drag loads of bones to their several destinations. This practice gave rise to a threat, yet made use of:—”I will drag you like a horse’s head to the bone-fire.’ About dusk when no more money can be col’ected, the bush is trimmed, the turf and oones are made ready to set on fire, the candles are all lighted, the bush fully illuminated, and the boys giving three huzzas, begin to dance and jump round it. If their money will afford the expenditure, they have a pot of porter to drink round. After an hour or so, the heap of turf and bones are set fire to, and when the candles are burnt out, the bush is taken up and thrown into the flames. They continue playing about until the fire is burnt out; each then returns to his home ; and so ends their May-day.”
Interesting. Having been diverting myself with various histories of the Christianization of Europe, it seems pretty clear that it was a real uphill struggle, especially in the country. In fact I’ve often speculated that it never took in my family of countrypeople. They would enter churches, of course, for occasions such as funerals, they were proud of the fabric, they liked traditional church music of the 17th and 18th centuries. But of belief. I never heard any grandparent, parent, aunt or uncle, or cousin ever express the faintest sign of it, quite the reverse.
Hey Folks, As for other sacrificial snippets, Leviticus is pretty explicit, and of course Cato even gives you recipes – libum is a sacrificial cake.
As for the grand purpose, I am a little more inclined to the scam theory, or at least good state policy, PR, community building, propaganda, etc. In any case, I also find it extraordinarily interesting.
Mmm. I’m not religious, nor a group-joiner in any way – but I don’t see the scam angle except as an afterthought by those who are around (religious or part of the political elite or ‘just folks’) who individually have a predilection to those sorts of things. And of course they are always around wherever one goes in time or place.
The sacrificial feast appears to me as being in the same category of things as dancing, or story-telling, or art. It is a way in which humans reach out to understand and express those parts of themselves which are otherwise inexpressible. Joy, anger, fear, and of course sacrifice. All humans (except perhaps for sociopaths) must sacrifice in small (usually) or large (less frequently) ways each day in order to obtain the means to live. We compromise, we give up one thing for another, we even struggle. How, to explain this? It doesn’t make sense, explained flat-out in words, as “Oh that’s just the way it is,”The Gods like it that way.” It won’t go and sit in the heart that way as explanation, and in the heart is where the explanation is required.
Therefore the spectacle (of dance, of music, of theatre, of art, and) of sacrifice. Something internal is fed when the sacrificial meal is at hand. Can’t you imagine yourself at a sacrificial meal watching the poor beast giving his or her life and saying “Wow. That’s what I feel like sometimes. But I’m still standing.” And therefore, you know, alleliuia and all. And the next day can be met with what might be called a sense of enlightenment or at least with a sense of commonality with the pulse of the universe.
That’s my opinion anyway. Now can someone please explain the reason behind college football?
Cato’s cake is quite similar, the same to some extant Italian festival cakes. I wonder if they are related.
Am I the only asking, “Bones burn?”
Priests need to eat so it stands to reason that there needs to be the occasional feast, I mean sacrifice. There are certainly a fair number of Italian dishes that make fun of gluttonous priests.
I’m also fascinated by the nitty gritty of how to feed enormous groups of people and I’m sure there were numerous approaches. Slaughter one animal in public and have 3 already butchered, prepped, cooked and ready to serve to the populace. Or serve a lot of alcohol and people won’t notice that they haven’t gotten a bite of meat yet. Same trick any good restaurant will use if there is a delay in the kitchen.
Good question about disposal of sacred blood and ash. Could it be conserved and used for another ceremony?
The question of whether or not sacrifice was instituted to keep the priesthood fed and happy presupposes an oriental approach to the matter. Unlike the Jews, for instance, the Greeks, and later the Romans, did not limit sacrifice as the prerogative of any specific priestly caste. Indeed, among the Greeks, the *mageiros* (cook/chef) was often the one who performed the sacrifice at banquets etc., while private citizens also performed the sacrifices themselves in their own homes.
Isn’t sacrifice alive and well in the current-day practices of Santaria?
Had to look this up on the web. Yes, looks like it. When I was in West Africa, it was common to sacrifice a chicken, probably goats too though I don’t remember seeing that.
There are some nice recent archaeological studies on the remains of chiefly feasts at prehistoric Cahokia (near modern day St. Louis) – check Pauketat et al.
Thank you Sandy. I’ve checked some of these out and they are very interesting.