Sacrifice

SACRIF' ICE,: ITS NATI]RE

AND F' I ]NCTION

Henri Flubert

and Marcel Mauss

Translated by

W. D. Halls

Foreword by

E. E. Evans-PritchardProfessor of Social Anthropology,

University of Oxford

THE UNIVE,RSITY OF CHICAGO PRE,SS

Translated.from the FrenchESSAI SUR LA NATURE E,T LA FONCTION DU SACRIFICE

L"'lnnde sociologique r 8gB

THE UNIVERSITY OF CJHICAGO PRESS

CHICAGO, 57COIIEN AND !\'ES'f LTD

r,oNDoN, E.C.4

@ E. E. Euans-Pritchard tg6tnLibrury oif Cong'ress Catalo;:.

Card Numhcr: 64-rzz6oPubhsltcd tg6en

No par't <>f this book may be reproducedin any ifornt u,tltlLout permtsston lfromtlze publislter, ercept lfor the quotatlon

of brie.f pas.ralfr'.r in cnttctsnt

i i;13

CONTE,NTS

Foreword by E. E. Evans-Pritchard page \r|i

Translator's Note ix

lntroduction r

Definition and unity of the sacrificial system I

The scheme of sacrifice 19

How the scheme varies according to the

general functions of the sacrifice 50

How the scheme varies according to the

I .II.

III.

w.

t'f i

_r;

{It

special functions of the sacrifice

V. The sacrifice of the God

Vl. Conclusion

Notes

Index

6r

7795

r 04.157

$

Printcd in Great Britairt

--

F'ORE,\ATORDby E. E. Evans-Pritchard

SOME YEARS AGO my colleagues and I at Oxford cameto the conclusion that some of the more important essaysof the school of the Annde sociologigue should be pub-lished in English translations and so reach a wider public.Several volumes have already been published,l and theseries has, f think, served the purpose for which it wasintended. We have therefore been encouraged to add tothe volumes already in print.

Hubert and Mauss'Essay on Sacrifice is one of the gemsof the Annde, and it treats of a subject of the utmost im-portance and one central in the study of comparativereligion. Robertson Smith was undoubtedly right, even ifhis attempts at evolutionary reconstruction were vitiatedby errors and misconceptions, in claiming that the sacri-

ficium is the basic rite in ancient (and primitive) religion,and also in saying that since sacrifice is so general an

l Emile Durkheim, Sociology and Philosophy, trans. by D. F.Pocock with an introduction by J. G. Peristiany, lgsb; MarcelMauss, The Gift, trans. by Ian Cunnision with an introduction byE. E. Evans-Pritchard, rg54; Robert Hertz, Death and the RightI.[and, trans. by Rodney and Claudia Needham, with an introduc-tion by E. E. Evans-Pritchard, 196o; Emile Durkheim and MarcelMauss, Primitiue Classiftcation, trans., edited, and with an intro-duction by Rodney Needham, 1965. The previous volumes werepublished by the same publishers as the present one: Cohen andwest'

vii

,7

Foreword

institution we must seek for a general meaning o{ it insome general explanation.

The literature on sacrifice is enormlius, but rhe socio-logical and social-anthropological contributions to it havebeen few. This is certainly one of the most important ofthem. I find its conclusions, evidently influenced byRober"tson Srnith's idea of the Semitic gods being reflec-tions, symbols, of the rnystical unity of social groups,rather lame, but as a study of the structure, or one mightalmost say the grammar, of the sacrificial rite the Essay issuperb. Though I am unable to comment on what theauthors say about the details of Vedic and Hebrewsacrifices, what they say about them is intended to havegeneral application to all sacrificial acts-or at any rateall blood sacrifices-everyrvhere and at al1 times, and tohave therefore a significance beyond the two cultr.rresfrom which the evidences discussed are taken.

If littie reference to this Essay has been made in recentdecades it is perhaps due to a lack of interest amongsociologists and social antlrropologists in religion and there-fore in its most fundamental rite. Interest in the subjectappears to be reviving, and it would seem an appropriatetime therefore for publication in an English translationof this remarkable piece of scholarly analysis.

I thank the Ford Foundation for assistance, through apersonal grant, in the prepar:ation of the volume.

An earlier partial translation by Arthur Julius Nelson,arrd rvithorrt references and notes, appeared in The OpenCourt, vol . XL, r96l , pp. 55-4^5, g5-roB, and r69-179under the title 'The Nature and Significance of theCeremony of Sacrifice, according to Hubert and Mauss'.

TRANSLATOR'S NOTE,

THIS STUDY OF SACRIFICE by H. Hubert and M.

Mauss'rvas first published in L'Annde sociologique, Paris,

r8g8 (pp. zg-r58). It was entitled 'Essai sur la Nature et

la Fonction du Sacrifice'.Certain points regarding the translation must be noted.

First, the notes have been checked so far as possible, andsome errors of reference corrected: but as the works citedhave in some cases not been accessible, a few errors rnay

remain. Secondly, Hebrew and Sanskrit words have beenadapted to English transliteration systems, but diacriticalmarks have been dispensed with. Lastly, for the word(sacrifiant', which has no exact Englisir equivalent, theword 'sacrifier' has been coined. In the essay the 'sacri-fier'is defined as'the subject to whom the benefits ofsacrifice accrue . . or who undergoes its effect'.

w.D.H.

Yl l t

E. E. EVANS-PRITCHARD

tx

-

INTRODIJCTION

OUR INTENTION IN THIS WORK is to define thenature and social function of sacrifice. The undertakingwould be an ambitious one if the way had not bue, pr"lpared for it by rhe researches of Tyior, Robertson Smith,and Frazer. We are conscious of what we owe to them.Brrt other studies allow us to propound a theory differentfrom theirs, and one which seems to us more comprehen-sive. Moreover, we do not think of presenting it s'ave as aprovisional hypothesis: on a subject so yast and complex,new information in the futr;re cannot fail to lead irs tomodify our present ideas. But, with these express reser-vations, it has seemed to us that it might be useful to co-ordinate the facts at our rlisposal urrd to formulate anoverall conception of them.

The history of the popular and ancient concepts of the'gift-sacrifice', the,food-sacrifice,, and the icontract_sacrifice', and the study of the repercussions these mayhave had on ritual will not detain us, interesting as it maybe. Theories of sacrifice are as old as religions, [ut to finiany which have a scientific character we must rook torecent years. It is to the anthropological school, and aboyeaIIto its English representatives, that the credit for havingelaborated them must go.

Tylor,l inspired simultaneously by Bastian, Spencer,and Darwin, and comparing facts borrowed from vuriousraces and civilizations, formulated an origin for the forms

I

w

Introduction

of sacrifice. Sacrifice, according to this miter, was origin-ally a gift made by the primitive to supernatural beingswith whonr he-needed to ingratiate himself. Then, whenthe gods grew greater and became more removed fromman, the necessity of continriing to pass on this gift tothern gave rise to sacrificial rites, intended to ensure thatthe objects thus spiritualized reached these spiritualbeings. The gift was follorved by homage, in which thedevotee no longer expressed an;'hope for a return. Fromthis it was but one step for sacrifice to become abnegationand renunciation; thus in the course of evolution the riteu'as carried over from the making of presents by theprimitive to the sacrifice of oneself. Yet if this theorydescribed accurately the phases of the moral developmentof the phenomenon, it did not account for its mechanism.On the whole, ir did no rnore than reproduce in preciselanguage the old, popular conceptions. l)oubtless it had initself some historical basis <lf truth. It is certain thatusualll', and to some extent, sacrifices were giftsz confer-ring on the devotee rights over his god. The gifts servedalso to feed the gods. But it was not sufficient to note thefact; it \\-as necessary t.o account for it.

It was Robertson Smiths who nas really the first toattempt a reasoned explanation of sacrifice. He was in-spired by the recent discovery of totemism.a In the sameway as the organization of the totemic clan had explainedfor hirrr the Arab and Semitic family,s he saw in the prac-tices of the totemic cult the root origin of sacrifice. lntotemisnr the totern or the god is relaied to its devotees:they are of the same flesh and blood; the object of the riteis to rnaintain and guarantee the common life that ani-mates them and the association that binds them together.If necessary, i[ re-establishes their unity. The ,blood

2

fntroduction

covenant t and the t common meal' are the simplest meansof obtaining this result. In the vierv of Robertson Smith,sacrifice is indistinguishable from these practices. Accord-ing to him it was a meal at which the devotees, by eatingthe totem, assimilated it to themseh'es, were assimilaredto it, and becarne allied with each other or with it.Sacrificial slauglrter had no other object than to makepossible the devouring of a sacred and consequently for-bidden animal. From the communion sacrifice RobertsonSmith delives the expiatory or propitiatory forms of sacri-fice, namely rhe pmculum and the gift-sacrifice or honor-ary sacrifice. In his opinion expiation is only the re-establishment of the broken coyenant; the totemicsacrifice had all the effects of an expiatory rite. Moreover,he discovers this virtue in all sacrifices. even after thecomplete disappearance of totemism.

It remained to be explained why the victim, originallydistributed among and eaten by the devotees, was in thepraculum generally wholly destroyed. This was because,as soon as the ancient totems were replaced in the religionof pastoral peoples by domestic animals, they figured insacrifices only rarely, when the circumstances wereespecially graye. Consequently they appeared too sacredfor the profane to touch: only the priests ate of them, orrather eyerlthing rvas destroyed. In this case the extremesanctity of the victirn finished up by becoming impurity;the ambiguous character of sacred things, lvhich Robert-son Smith so adrnirably pointed out, enabled him easily toexplain holv such a transformation could occur. On theother hand, w-hen the kinship between men and the ani-mals had ceased to be understood by the Semites, humansacrifice replaced animal sacrifice, for it lvas henceforththe sole means of establishing a direct exchange of blood

5

q

fntrodtrction

between the clan and the god. But then the ideas and

customs which protected the life of the individual in

society by proscribing cannibalism, caused the sacrificial

meal to fall into disuse.

Then again, the sacred chalacter of domestic animals,

daily profaned for the nourishment of man, gradually

diminished. The divinity became separate from its

animal forms. The victim, as it grew ever farther a'lvay

from the god, drew nearer to man, the owner of the herd.

Thus, to explain its being offered up, it came to be repre-

sented as a gift of man to the gods. In this way originated

the 'gift-sacrifice'. At the same time the similarity be-

tween the rites of punishment and sacrifice, the shedding

of blood which took place in both, gaye a punitory charac-

ter to communions of piacular origin and transformed

them into expiatory sacrifices.

To these resealches are ]inked on the one hand [he

studies of Frazer and on rhe other the theories of Jevons.

More circumspect on certain points, these theories are in

general the theological exaggeration of Smith's doctrine.6

Frazer? adds to it an important developrnent. Smith's

explanation of the sacrifice of the god had been rudimen-

tary. \Yithout misunderstanding its naturalist character,

he considered it as a piaculum of a higher order. The

ancient idea of kinship between the totemic victim and

the gods survived, in order to explain the annual sacri-

fices: they commemorated and re-enacted a drarna in

which the god rvas the victim. Frazer recognized the

sinrilarity existing betrveen these sacrificed gods and the

agrarian evil spirits of Mannhardt. e He compared to

the totemic sacrifice the ritual murder of the spirits of

vegetation. He sholved how there developed, from the

saclifice and the communion meal, lvherein mall was

+

fntrodrction

reputedly assimilated to the gods, the agrarian sacrifice inwhich, in order ro ally oneself to the god of the fields atthe term of his annual life, he was killed and then eaten.Frazer established also that often the old god, when sacri-

ficed in tlds way, and perhaps because of the taboos whichwere laid upon him, appeared to carry away rvith himsickness, death, and sin, and fulfilled the role of an ex-piatory victim and scapegoat. Yet although the idea ofexpulsion was prominent in these sacrifices, expiation stillseemed to originate in communion. Frazer set out tosupplement Smith's theory rather thau to discuss it.

The great flaw in this system is that it seeks to bring themultiplicity of sacrificial forms within the unity of anarbitrarily chosen principle. First, the universality oftotemism, the starting-point of the whole theory, is onlya postulate. Totemism in its pure form appears only in afew isolated tribes of Australia and America. To make itthe basis of all theriomorphic cults is to formulate ahypothesis which is perhaps useless, and is in any caseimpossible to verify. Above all, it is difficuit to find sacri-fices that are properly totemic. Frazer himself recognized

, that the toternic victirn was often the victim of an agrar-' ian sacrifice. In olher cases the so-called totems are repre-

sentatives of an arrimal species upon which depends thelife of the tribe, whether it be a domesticated species, orthe animal that is hunted by preference, or on the con-trary one that is especially feared. At the very leasu ameticulous description of a certain number of theseceremonies would be required. Yet this is precisely whatis lacking.

But let us accept for a moment this first hypothesis,however open to questiorr it may be. The course of theproof is itself subject to criticism. T'he crux of the doctrine

Y'

fntrodtrction

is the historical sequence and the logical derivation thatSmith claims to establish between the communion sacri_fice and other kinds of sacrifice., But 4.othing is moredoubtful. Any attempt at a comparative chronology of theArab, Hebrew or other sacrifices which he studied isinevitably disastrous. Those forms which appear to bemost simple are known to us only through recent texts.Their simplicity itself may stem from an insufficiency ofdocuments. In any case simplicity does not imply anypriority in time. If we confine ourselves to the data ofhistory and ethnography we find that everywhere thepiaculum exists side by side with communion. Moreover,this vagrre term piaculum allows Smith to describe. underthe same heading and in the same terms, purifications,propitiations, and expiations, and it is this confusion thatpreyents him from analysing the expiatory sacrifice.Undoubtedly these sacrifices are usually followed by areconciliation with the god; a sacrificial meal, a sprinklingof blood, or an anointing re-establish the correnant. Only,for smith, it is in these communion rites themselves thatthe purifying force of these hinds of sacrifices resides; theidea of expiation is thus engulfed in the idea of com_munion. IJndoubtedly he discovers in some eKtreme orsimplified forms something that he does not yenture tolink with communion, a kind of exorcism, the driving outof an evil spirit. But in his opinion these are magica$ro_cesses which involve no element of sacrifice. and heexplains with much learning and ingenuity their tardyintroduction into the mechanism of sacrifice. But this isprecisely what lve cannot grant. One of the'aims of thiswork is to demonstrate that the expulsion of a sacred.spirit, whether pure or irnpure, is a primordial componentof sacrifice, as primordial and irreducible as communion.

6'*

fntrodrctton

If the system of sacrifice has any unity, it must be sought

elsew-here.Robertson Smith's error lr*as above ali one of lmeiltgd.

fnstead of analysing in its original complexity the Semitic

ritual system, he set about classifying the facts g.gnea-lost_"giy, in accordance with the analogical connexionsthat he believed he saw between them. This is a charac-teristic common to English anthropologists, who are con-cerned above all with collecting and classifying documents.For our part, we do not desire to build up in our turn anencyciopedic survey which we could not make completeand vl'hich, coming after theirs, would serye no purpose.We shall try to study thoroughly typical facts, which weshall glean particularly from Sanskrit texts and from theBible. \\re are far from having documents of equal valueconcerning Greek and Roman sacrifices. By comparingscattered pieces of information provided by inscriptionsand writers, only an ill-assorted ritual can be built up. Onthe other hand, rve have in the Bible and in the Hindutexts collections of doctrines that belong to a definite era.The document is direct, drawn up by the participantsthemselves in their olvn language, in the very spirit inwhich they enacted the rites, even if not always with avery clear corlsciousness ol the origin and motive of theiractions.

Doubtless, when we are seeking to disentangle thesimple and elementary forms of an institution, it is dis-concerting to take as our starting-point for the investiga-tion complicated rituals of recent date that have beencommented upon and probably distorted by theologicalscholarship. But in this category of facts all purely his-torical investigations are fruitless. The antiquity of thetexts or of the facts recounted, the comparative barbarity

B7

/

V

Introdwtton

of the peoples and the apparent simplicity of the rites are

deceptive chronological indications. It is too much to seek

in an anthology of lines from the lliad even a rough

picture of primitive Greek sacrifice; they do not eYen

suffice to give us an exact idea of sacrifice in Homeric

times. We only glimpse the most ancient rites through

literary documents that are Yague and incomplete, frag-

mentary and misleading remnants, Lraditions lacking in

fidelity. It is likewise impossible to hope to glean from

ethnography alone the pattern of primitive institutions.

Generally distorted through over-hasty observation or

falsified by the exactness of our languages, the facts

recorded by ethnographers have value oniy if they are

compared with more precise and more complete docu-

ments.We do not therefore propose here to lrace the history

and genesis of sacrifice, and if we speak of priority, we

mean it in a logical and not an historical sense. Not that

we forgo the right to refer to classical texts or to eth-

nology in order to throw light upon our analysis and to

check the general character of our conclusions. But, in-

stead of directing our studies to artificially constituted

groupings of facts, in the well-defined and complete

rituals that we shall treat we shall have entities already

determined and natural systems of rites that command

attention. Restricted in this way by the texts, we shall be

less liable to omission or arbitrary classification. Lastly,

because the two religions that are to form the centre of

our investigations are Yery different, since one leads to

monotheism and the other to pantheism, we may hope

by comparing them to arrive at conclusions that are

sufficiently general.e

Chapter One

DE,F'INITION AND I]NITY OFTHtr SACRIF'ICIAL SYSTE,M

IT IS IMPORTANT, before proceeding further, to givean overall definition of the facts that we designate und.erthe heading of sacrifice.

The word 'sacrifice' immediately suggests the idea of a

,,consecration, and one might be tempted to believe thatThe two notions are identical. It is indeed certain thatsacrifice always implies a consecration; in eyery sacrificean object passes from the common into the religiousdomain; it is consecrated. But not all consecrations are ofthe same kind. In some the effects are limited to the

r

consecrated object, be it a man or a thing. This is, forexample, the case rvith unction. Wren a king is conse-crated, his religious personality alone is rnodified; apartfrom this, nothing is changed. fn sacrifice, on the otherhand, the consecration extends beyond the thing conse-crated; among other objects, it touches the moral personwho bears the expenses of the ceremony. The devoteewho provides the victim which is the object of the conse-cration is not, at the cornpletion of the operation, the sameas he was at the beginning. He has acquired a religiouscharacter which he did not have before, or has rid himselfof an unfavourable character with which he was affecied;

I

tri

lG,?-

Defnition and Unity o1f the Sacriftcial System

he has raised himself to a state of grace or has emerged

from a state of sin. In either case he has been religiously

transformed.IIte gtue the name 'sacrtjfi.er' to the subl'ect to ushom the

benefus of sacriftce thns accruc., or who undergoes its

, fficts.r0 This subject is sometimes an individual,ll some-'times a collectivityl2-a family, a clan, a tribe, a nation,a secret society. When it is a collectivity it may be thatthe group fulfils collectively the function of the sacrifier,that is, it attends the sacrifice as a body;l3 but sornetimesit delegates one of its members rvho acts in its stead andplace. Thus the family is generally represented by itshead,rr society by its magistrates.l6 This is a first stepin that succession of representations which we shail en-counter at eyery one of [he stages of sacrifice.

There are, however, cases where the effects of thesacrificial consecration are exerted not directly on thesacrifier himself, but on certain things which appertainmore or less directly to his person. In the sacrifice thattakes place at the building of a house,l6 it is the house thatis affected by it, and the quality that it acquires by thisnreans can survive longer than its owner for the time

being. fn other cases, it is the sacrifier's field, the river hehas to cross, the oath he takes, the treaty he makes, etc.We shall call those kinds of things for whose sake thesacrifice takes place objects olf sacrtrtce. lt is important,moreover, to notice that the sacrifier himself is alsoaffected through his presence at the sacrifice and throughthe interest or part he takes in it. The arnbit of action ofthe sacrifice is especially notelvorthy here, for it producesa double effect, one on the object for rvhich it is offeredand upon which it is desired to act, the other on the rnor-al

per.sot] lvho desir:rtg 4nd instigates that effest., Sornetirneslo

DeJtnition and Unity oif the Sacriftcial System

even it is only of use plovided it brings about this twofold

result. \\'hen the father of a family offers a sacrifice for

ihe inauguration of his house, not only rrrust the house be

capable of leceiving his family, but they must be fit to

enter it.r ?

We see what is the distinctive characteristic of conse-

cration in sacrifice: the thing consecrated serves as an iinJermediary between the sacrifier, or the object rvhich is r

to receive the practical benefits of the sacrifice, and the

divinity to whom the sacrifice is usually addressed, Man

ind the gt-id are not in direct contact. In this way sacrifice.

ii distinguished from most of the facts grouped under the

lieading of blood covenant, in which by the exchange of

blood a direct fusion of human and divine life is brought

about.l 8 The same will be said about certain instances of -the offering of hair. Here again, the subject who sacrificesis in direct communication rvith the god through the partof his person rvhich is offered up.1e Doubtless there areconnexions between these rites and sacrifice; but theymust lle distinguished from it.

But this first characteristic is not enough, for it does notallow us to distinguish sacrifice from those acls, in-adequately defined, which nray fittingly be termed offer-ings. There is indeed no offering in rvhich the objectconsecrated is not likewise interposed betrrreen rhe godand the offerer, and in rvhich the latter is not affected bythe consecration. But if every sacrifice is in effect anoblation, there are oblations of different kinds. Some-times the object consecrated is simply presented as avotiye offerin6l; consecration can assign it to the service ofthe god, but it does not change its nature by the merefact that it is made to pass into the religious domain.Those oblations of the firstfruits lvhich 'n'ere merely

j

r4

l l

wDeftnition and Unity of the Sacriftcial System

brought to the temple, remained there untouched and

belonged to the priests. On the other hand, in other cases

consecration destroys the object offered up; if an animal

i6'offered on the altar, the desired end is reached only

when its throat has been cut, or it is cut to pieces or con-

sumed by fire, in short, sacriftced. The object thus des-

troyed. is the uictim.It is clearly for oblations of this kind

that the name sacrifice must be reserved. We may sur-

mise that the difference between these two kinds of

operation depends upon their different degrees of

solemnity and their differing efficacy. In the case of sacri-

fice, the religious energy released is stronger. From this

arises the havoc it causes.In these conditions IMe must designate as sacrifice any

oblation, even of vegetabie matter, whenever the offering

or part of it is destroyed, although usage seems to limit the

word sacrifice to designate only sacrifices where blood is

shed. To restrict the meaning of the name in this way

is arbitrary. Due allowance having been made, the

mechanism of consecration is the same in all cases; there

is consequently no objective reason for distinguishing

between them. Thus the Hebrew mtnha is an oblation of

flour and cakes2o which accompanies certain sacrifices.

Yet it is so much a sacrifice like these other sacrifices that

Leviticus does not distinguish between them.21The same

rites are observed. A portion is destroyed on the altar fire,

the remainder being eaten entirely or in part by the

priests. In Greecez2 only vegetable oblations were per-

mitted on the altar of certain gods;23 thus there were

sacrificial rites which did not involve animal oblations.

The same may be said of libations of milk, wine, or ottrer

liqrrids.za They are subject in Greecezs to the same dis-

tinctions as sacrifices;'u on occasion thev can even replace

Deftnition and Unity of the Sacriftcial System

tLtem.z 7 The identity of these different operations was so

clearly felt by the Hindus that the objects offered up inthese different cases were themselves considered identical.They are all considered as equally living, and are treatedas such. Thus in a sacrifice considered to be of sufficientsolemnity, when the grains are crushed they are im-plored not to ayenge themselves upon the sacrifier forthe hurt done them. When the cakes are placed upon thepotsherds to bake, they are requested not to breaklrewhen they are cut, they are entreated not to injure thesacrifier and the priests. When a libation of milk is made-and all Hindu libations are made ivith milk or a milkproduct-it is not something inanimate that is offeredup, but the cow itself, in its liquid essence, its sap, itsfertility. z o

Thus we finally arrive at the following definition:Sacrtftce is a religious act which, through the consecrationo1f a uictim, ntodiftes the condrtion of the moral person whoaccomplishes it or that oif certain objects wtth which he isconcerned.so

For brevity of exposition we shall call those sacrificesin which the personality of the sacrifier is directlyaffecfed by the sacrifice personal sacrifices, and those inwhich objects, real or ideal, receive directly the sacrificialaction obj ectiue sacrtfices.

This defirrition not only restricts the object of our in-vestigations, but also settles for us a very important point:it presupposes the generic unity of sacrifices. Thus as weallowed ourselves to surrnise when we reproached Smithwith reducing the expiatory sacrifice to a communionsacrifice, it was not to establish the origiual and irredu-cible diversity of sacrificial systems. It rvas because theirunity, though real, was not of the kind he claimed.

t2

-f

t5

FF-

Deifi'nition and Unity of the Sacriftcial System

But this first result appears to contradict the endlessvariety lvhich at first sighr the fornrs of sacrifice seemto present. The occasions of sacrifice are innumerable,the effects desired are rrery diverse, and the multiplicityof ends implies that of means. Thus the custom has beenadopted, above all in Germany, of classifying sacrificesin a certain number of distinct categories: for example,one speaks of expiatory sacrifices (Siihnopfer), of sacri-fices of thanksgiving (Dankoffer), of. sacrifices of request(Brttopfer), etc. But in reality the demarcalions betweenthese categories are vague, confused, ancl often indiscern-ible; the same practices are to lle found to some extent inall of them. We shall not adopt any of the classificationsusually employed; they do not, in our opinion, resultfrom a methodical investigation. Without attempting topropound a new classification which would be open tothe same objections, in order to have an idea of the diver-sity of sacrifices rve shall content ourselyes here withborrolving one of the classifications given in Hindu texts.

Perhaps the most instructive is that which dividessacrifices into regular and occasional.sr Occasional sacri-fices are, firstly, sacramentai sacrifices (sarnskara), namelythose which accompany the solemn moments of life. Acertain nuntber of these are part of the domestic ritual (aslaid down in the Grihya sutras): those that take place atbirth, at the rite of tonsure, on the departure of a ward,at marriage, etc. Others are part of the solernn ritual;such are the anointing of a king, and the sacrifice con-ferring religious and civil attributes which are con-sidered superior to all others.32 Secondly, there are votivesacrifices lvhose occasional nature is even more markedl33lastly, there are curative and expiatory sacrifices. As forthe regular or, better, periodical sacrifices (rutyani), they

r4l

Dgfinitton and Unity of the Sacrtftctal System

are linked to certain fixed moments of time, independent

of men's rvill and of chance circumstance. Such are thedaiiy sacrifice, the sacrifice at new and fuii moon, thesacrifices at seasonal and pastoral festivals, and the first-fruits at the year's end. A11 are generally found both inthe solemn and the domestic ritual, with differencesappropriate to the solemnity of the one and the familycharacter of the other.

We see for how many different occasions the Brahminsmade sacrifices serve. But at the same time they feit sodeeply the unity of them all that they made this the basisof their theory. Almost all the texts of the solemn ritualfollow the same plan: the exposition of a basic rite that isgradually diversified to make it correspond to differentneeds.3a Thus the shrauta sutras and the brahmanaswhich comment upon them start from a general descrip-tion of the 'whole of the rites that constitute the sacrificeof cakes at the nerv and fuII moon, and it is this schemewhich is successively adapted, modified according to cir-cumstances, to all the ceremonies in which the cakesacrifice figures. Thus a cake sacrifice constitutes theessential ceremony both for seasonal festivals, whoseaspects are already so numerous and yaried (sacrifices tonature, sacrifices of purification, of the consumption ofthe first seeds, etc.), as well as for a rvhole series of votivesacrifices.gs And this is not a mere device of exposition,but there is in it a real sense of the flexibility of thesacrificial system. Let us take the solemn animal sacrifice.We find it existing separately or combined with others,in the most varied cases-in the periodical festivals ofnature and of vegetation, and in the occasional rites suchas the building of arr altar, or in rites whose object is toredeem the individual. As for the sacrifice of the soma,to

r5

rr.&

;r

Deftnition and Unity of the Sacrifictal System

since soma is suited for sacrifice only in spring, this canonly be a periodical fesrival.s ? Yet soma is sacrificed for amultiplicity of ends which sometimes depend upon andsometimes are independent of vows and occasions: ateyery spring, at the consecration of the king, to reach ahigher rank in society, to become invulnerable and vic-torious, to escape from misfortunes that threaten tobecome permanent. ln the same way rites of the oppositekind may have the same intention: internal reasons musthave been the cause for which the sterile cow sacrificed bythe Brahmins to Rudra, the evii god, is sacrificed in thesame manner as the goat to the beneficent heavenly godsAgni and Soma.38

The Hebrew ritual provides no less striking examplesof the complexity of the rites and the identical nature oftheir component elements. Leviticus reduces all sacri-fices to four basic forms: (olah, hattat, shelamtm, minha.ssThe names of two of these are significant. The hattat wasthe sacrifice employed especially to expiate the sin calledhattat or hataah, the definition of which given in Leviti-cus is unfortunately extremely vague.ao Th.e shelamimaL(DO( 0uola, eiprTrvr{) is a communion sacrifice, a sacri-fice of thanksgiving, of alliance, of vows. As for the terms(olah and minha, they are purely descriptive. Each recallsone of the special operations of the sacrifice: the latter, thepresentation of the victim, if it is of vegetable matterl theformer, the dispatch of the offering to the divinity.a2

This simplification of the system of sacrificesas isdoubtless the result of a classification too specialized, andmoreoyer, too afbitrary, to serye as a basis for a generalstudy of sacrifice. But in reality these four t5rical formsare not, or at least are no longer, real types of sacrifice,but kinds of abstract component elements in which one

rO

DeJt'nition and Unity of the Sacrificial System

of the organs of sacrifice is particularly developed; these

elements can always enter into more complex formulas.

The ritual split up the ceremonies to which each occasion

to sacrifice gave rise into a multiplicity of sacrifices that

were simple or were considered so. For instance, the

sacrifice at the ordination of the high priestaa is made up

of a hattat, the expiatory sacrifice; of an 'olah, tlne sacri-

fice in which the victim is wholly burntl and of the

sacrifice of the ram of consecrations, which is a zebah

shelamim, a communion sacrifice. The sacrifice for the

purification of women after childbirth includes a hattat

and an 'olah.a6 The sacrifice for the cleansing of a leper

inciudes rites analogous to those for the consecration of

the priest.ao Thus there are here two sacrifices, one

apparently expiatory and the other of communion,which end up by being similar rites. Thus even these twoirreducible ideas of expiation and of communion, of com-munication of a sacred quality and of expulsion of anopposing quality, cannot form the basis for a general andrigorous classification of sacrifices. We would perhaps seekr11 vain for examples of an expiatory sacrifice into whichno element of communion is interpolated, or for examplesof communion sacrifices which do not in some respectresemble expiatory ones.a 7

For we discover the same ambiguity not only in com-plex sacrifices, but even in the elementary sacrifices of thePentateuch. The zebah shelamimas is a communionsacrifice. Yet certain parts of the victim-the blood, thefat, or sorne of the entrails-are always placed on oneside, destroyed, or become prohibited. One limb is alwayseaten by the priests. The victim of the hattat may beassigned entirely to the priestslae failing the sacrifier,the sacrificerscommunicate. In tIrc hattat celebrated forthe

L7

t

Delfinition and Unity of the Sacri/t'cial System

consecration or purification of the temple or the altar, theblood of the victim is used to anoint the doors and walls.

This rite endows them with consecration.s0 Now a rite

of the same nature is to be found in the zebah shelamimof ordination; an exactly similar anointing with blood isperformed upon Aaron and his sons.sl

These examples show the affinity that links practiceswhich in their aim and results seem completely opposed.There is a continuity between the forms of sacrifice. Theyare both too diverse and yet too similar for it to be possibleto divide them into over-specialized categories. T)rey areail the same in essence, and it is this which constitlrtestheir unity. They are the outer coverings of one singlemechanism that we now propose to dismantle anddescribe.

Chapter Two

THE SCHE.ME OF SACRIF'ICE

Tsn EN'rnv

IT IS EVIDEN'I that we cannot hope here to sketch out

an abstract scheme of sacrifice comprehensive enough to

suit all linown casesi the variety of facts is too great. All

that can be done is to study specific forms of sacrifice thatare complex enough for ali the important moments of thedrama to be included in them and well enough known foran exact analysis to be made. The sacrifice which seems tous to arls\rrer best to these conditions is the Vedic Hindusacrifice of animals. Indeed we knorv of no other in whichthe details are better explained. All the participants arevery clearly presented at the time of their entrance andexit as well as during the course of the action. Moreover,it is an amorphous rite; it is not orientaled in a fixeddirection, but nay serve the most diverse ends. There isthus no sacrifice that lends itself better to the investiga-tion we desire to undertahe. For lhis reason we shali makeit the foundation of our study, except for grouping aroundthe analysis of it other facts taken either from lndia itelfor from other religions.

Sacrifice is a religious act that can only be carried outin a religious atmosphere and by means of essentially reli-gious agents. But, in general, before the ceremony neithersacrifier nor sacrificeri pgr place, instruments, or victim,

r9

I

r8

The Scheme of Sacrifice

possess this characteristic to a suitable degree. The firstphase of the sacrifice is intended to impart it to them.They are profane; their condition rnust be changed. Todo this, rites are necessary to introduce them into thesacred world and involve them in it, more or less pro-foundly, according to the importance of the part they havesubsequently to play. It is this which constitutes, in thevery words of the Sanskrit texts,52 the entry into thesacrtfice.

(l The sacrifter. In order to study the manner inwhich this change in condition is effected in the sacrifier,let us at once take an extreme, almost abnormal case,which does not belong to the ritual of animal sacrifice, butin which the common rites are as it were enlarged, andconsequently more easily observable. The case is that ofthe dikha, namely, the preparation of the sacrifier for thesacrifice of the soma.6a As soon as the priests have beenselected, a whole series of symbolic ceremonies begins forthe sacrifier. These will progressively strip him of thetemporal being that he possessed, in order to cause him tobe reborn in an entirely new form. All that touches uponthe gods must be divine; the sacrifier is obliged to becomea god himself in order to be capable of acting upon them. 6 a

To this end a special hut is built for him, tightly en-closed, for the dikshita is a god and the world of the godsis separated from that of men. 5 5 He is shaved and his nailsare cut,5o but according to the fashion of the gods-thatis to say, in the opposite order to that which is usuallyfollowed among men.5? After taking a bath of purifica-tion,re he dons a brand-new linen garrnent,se therebyindicating that a new existence is about to begin for him.Then, after various anointings,6 0 he is dressed in the skinof a black antelope.ol This is the solemn moment when

20


the new creature stirs within him. He has become a

foetus. His head is veiled and he is made to clench his

fists,e r for the embryo in its bag has its fists clenched. He

is made to walk around the hearth just as the foetus

moves within the womb. He remains in this state until

the great ceremony of the introduction of the soma.6a

Then he unclenches his fists, he unveils himself, he is

born into the divine existence, he is a god.But once his divine nature has been proclaimed,sa it

confers upon him the rights and imposes upon him theduties of a god, or at least those of a holy man. He musthave no contact with men of impure caste, nor withwomeni he does not reply to those who question him; hemust not be touched.6s Being a god, he is dispensed fromall sacrifice. He consumes only milk, the food of fasting.And this existence iasts for many long months until hisbody has become translucent. Then, having as it weresacrificed his former body66 and attained the highestdegree of nervous excitement, he is fit to sacrifice, and theceremonies begin.

This complicated, long-drawn-out initiation requiredfor ceremonies of exceptional gravity is only, it is true, anamplification. But it is found, although in a less developeddegree, in the preparatory rites for ordinary animal sacri-fice. In this case it is no ionger necessary for the sacrifierto become divine, but he must still become sacred. Forthis reason here also he shaves himself, bathes, abstainsfrom all sexual relationships, fasts and keeps vigil, etc.6?And even for these more simple rites the interpretationsthat are given to them by the accompanying prayers andthe Brahmanic commentaries clearly indicate their pur-port. We read at the very beginning of the ShatapathaBrahmana, '[The sacrifier] rinses his mouth. F'or

2t

IF

I

>.

F

The Scheme of Sacriftce

before this he is unfit for sacrifice. . . . For the waters are

pure. He becomes pure within. . . He passes.from the

uorld oif men tlnto the tuorld of the gods.'ae

These rites are not peculiar to the Hindus: the Senritic

world, Greece, and Rome also provide examples of them.

A certain degree of relationship with the god is demanded

first of all from those who rvish to be admitted to the

sacrifice.se Thus the stranger is generally excluded from

it,?o and eyen more so coltrtesans, slaves,?l and often

women. ? 2 Moreover, temporary purity is required. ? 3 The

advent of the divinity is terrible for those that are im-

purel?a rn'hen Yahweh was about to appear on Sinai, the

people had to wash their garments and remain chaste'75

In the same way the sacrifice is preceded by a more or less

lengthy period of purification. ? 6 This consists principally

of sprinklings with lustral water and ablutions. ? ? Some-

times the sacrifier must fast?8 and purge himself.?o He

must put on clean garmentsrso or even special onesEl

which impart to him a first touch of sanctity. Roman

ritual also generally prescribed the 'n'earing of the veil,

the sign of separation and consequently of consecration. s2

The crown that the sacrifier wore on his head, rn'hilst

warding off evil spirits, marked him as having a sacred

character.8s Sometimes the sacrifier completed his physi-

cdl preparations by shaving his head and eyebrows.8a AII

these purifications,s6 lustrations, and consecrations pre-

pared the profane participant for the sacred act, by

eliminating from his body the imperfections of his secular

nature, cutting him off from the common life, and intro-

ducing him step by step into the sacred world of the gods.

(z) The sacrificer. There are sacrifices in which there

are no other participants than the sacrifier and the victim.

But generally one does not venture to approach sacredoo

The Scheme o1f Sacriftce

things directly and alonel they are too lofty and serious a

matter. An intermediary, or at the very least a guide,

is necessary. s 6 This is the priest. More familiar with the

world of the gods, in which he is partly involved through

a previous consecration, s 7 he can approach it more closely

and wirh less fear than the layman, who is perhaps sullied

by unknown blemishes. At the same time he prevents the

sacrifier from committing fatal elrors. Sometimes the

profane person is even formally excluded from the sanc-

tuary and the sacrifice.8s In this case the priest becornes,

on the one hand, the mandatory of the sacrifier,s0 whose

condition he shares and whose sins he bears.0 0 On the

other hand, howeyer, he is sealed rvith a divine sealel Hebears the name,e2 the title,es or the robeea of his god.He is his minister, eyen his incarnate presence,e6 or atthe very least the repository of his power. He is the visibleagent of consecration in the sacrifice. In short, he standson the threshold of the sacred and the profane world andrepresents them both at one and the same time. They arelinked in him.

Because of his religious character, it might be supposedthat he at least can enter upon the sacrifice without anypreliminary initiation. This is in fact what tooh place inIndia. The Brahmin appeared with a nature almostentirely divine. Thus he had no need for a special con-secration, saye in extraordinary circumstancese o-f61

there are rites that require a previous preparation by thesacrificer as well as by the sacrifier. This differs from [hatwhich we have described for the layman only inasmuchas it is generally less complex. As the priest is naturallynearer to the sacred world, simpler operations are enoughto enable him to enter it completely.

Among the Hebrervs, despite the fact that the priest25

The Scheme oif Sacriftce

was ordained, he had to take certain extra precautions inorder to be able to sacrifice. He had to wash before enter-ing the sanctuary. e 7 Before the ceremony he had toabstain from wine and fermented liquids.o8 He put onlinen garments,ee which he took off immediately afterthe sacrifice.t.00 He laid these away in a consecrated piace,for they had already become holy, fearful objects whichwere dangerous for the profane to touch.l01 In his inter-course with the divine-although this was habitual forhim-the priest himself was perpetually under the threatof the supernatural deathl 02 thathadstruckdown Aaron'stwo sons,l 03 and lhose of Eli,l 0a as well as the priests ofthe family of Baithos.l05 By increasing his personal sanc-tity,r o e he made the difficult approach to the sanctuarveasier, and safeguarded himself.

But he did not sanctify himself wholly for his own sake:he did so also on behalf of the person or society in whosename he n'as acting. Because he exposed to danger rrotonly himself but those whose delegate he was, he wasobliged to take even greater precautions. This was parti-cularly noticeable at the festival of the Great Pardon.l0 ?

Indeed, on that day the high priest lepresents the peopleof lsrael. He seeks pardon for himself and for lsrael-forhimself and his famiiy by the bullock, for Israel by thetwo goats.1o8 Only after this expiation, and having setlight to the incense, does he penetrate behind the veil ofthe Holy of Holies,l0e where he finds God in the cloud.Such grave functions required very special preparations,as befitted the quasi-divine role that the priest fulfilled.Due allowance being made, the rites resemble those of thediksha discussed above. Seven days before the feast thehigh priest shuts himself off from his farnily,llo andremains in the cell of t}re paredri (the assessors).11r Like

e+

The Scheme oif Sacriftce

the Hindu sacrifier, he is the object of all sorts of atten-

tions. The evening before, old men sit round and read to

him the section of the Bible in which is laid down rhe

ritual of Kippur. He is given little to eat. Then he is con-

ducted into a special room,l12 where he is left alone after

having been adjured to change nothing in the rites. 'Then,both he and they weeping, they parted.'rra fhs wholenight long he must stay awake,114 for sleep is a timeduring which defiiements may unwittingly be con-tracted.l16 Thus the entire pontifical rite tends toward thesame purpose: to give the high priest an exceptional sanc-tity110 which will enable him to draw near to the godhidden behind the mercy-seat and to bear the burden ofthe sins that will be heaped upon his head.

G) T:he place, the instruments. For the sacrifice properto begin, it is not enough for the sacrifier and the priest tobe sanctified. It cannot take place at any time or any-where. For not all times of the day or year are equallypropitious for sacrifice; thele ale erren times at which itmust be ruled out. In Assyria, for example, it was for-bidden on the 7th, r4th, and srst of ths rn6n1l-r.rrzAccording to the nature and the purpose of the ceremony,the hour of celebration differed. Sometimes it had to beoffered during the dapimelll8 sometimes, on the otherhand, during the evening or at night.tts

The place of the ceremony must itself be sacred: out- ",,side a holy place immolation is mere murder.12o When )the sacrifice is performed in a templer2l or in a placealready sacred in itself, preliminary consecration is un-necessary or at least is very much shortened. This is thecase with the Hebrew sacrifice as laid down in the ritualof the Pentateuch. ft was celebrated in a single sanctuaryconsecrated beforehand,l22 chosen by the divinitytza utr4

25

The Scheme of Sacifice

made divine by his presence.l2t Thus the texts that havecome down to us contain no provisions relating to therepeated sanctifying of the place of sacrifice. Nevertheless,the purity and sanctity of the temple and the sanctuary hadto be maintained: daily sacrifi6s5r25 and an annual cere-mony of expiation were the means of fulfilling this nssfl.r r e

The Hindus had no temple. Each could choose for him-self the place where he rn'ished to sacrifigs.Lz? But thisplace had to be consecrated in advance by means of acertain number of rites, of which the most essential $/asthe setting up of the fires.1ze We shall not describe it indetaii. The complicated ceremonies of which it is madeup have as their object the kindling of a fire in which onlypure elements, already consecrated to Agni,l2 e will enter.One of these fires is even kindled by friction, so that it isentirely new.r30 In these conditions there is a rnagicalpower r,vhich wards off evil spirits, ]rarmful spells, anddevils. The fire is the slayer of demons.tsr [1 is eyen morethan this: it is the god, it is Agni in his complete fs1p.i3zIn the same y/ay, according to certain Biblical legendsalso, the fire of sacrifice is none other than the divinityitself, which consunr.es the victim, or, to put it mor.eexactly, the fire is the sign of consecration which sets it onfire.133 What is divine in the fire of the Hindu sacrificeis thus transmitted to the place of sacrifice and conse-crates i1.trr J|1is site consisted of a fairly large'hect-angular space, called t}'e uihara.Lss

Withirr this area is another space called tlne uedi,whose sacred character is even more pronounced. Thiscorresponds to the altar. Thus tlre uedt occupies a positioneyen more central than the fires. These, indeed, contraryto lvhat is the case in most other cul[s, are not on thealtar itself, but surround it.136 The outline of the uedi is

26

F

Tlrc Scheme of Sacrirtce

carefully marked out on the ground'137 to do this a spade

is taken-or irr other cases, the magical w-ooden sword-

and the earth is liglrtly touched with it, with the words,The wicked one is killed.'l3s By this all impurity is

destroyed; the magic circle is traced out, the site is con-

secrated. Within the boundaries thus delimited, the

ground is dug and levelled; the hole formed in this way

constitutes the altar. After a lustration that is both ex-

piatory and pr,rrificatory the bottonr of the hole is covered

with different hinds of turf. It is on this turf that the godsto whon the sacrifice is addressed come and sit; there,invisible yet present, they attend the ceremony.lse

We shall not describe in detail the various instru-mentsl4o which are laid upon the altar,ler after havingbeen either made ad hoc or carefully purified. But one ofthem must claim our attention, for it really forms part ofthe altar.ra2 This is the Iupa,, the stake to n'hich theanimal is to be bound. It is not a piece of rough wood, butthe tree from which it'was hen'n had already in itself adivine nature,r4s which unctions and libations have fur-ther reinfor6sd.rna lt also occupies a prominent position,for it is there that the victim will stand, the most im-portant of all the visible personages that rn'ill tahe part inthe ceremony.r45 Therefore the Brahmanas represent itas one of the points at lvhich all rhe religious forces thatare in operation in the sacrifice converge and are con-centrated. By its slender trunk, it recalls the manner inwhich the gods mounted up to heavenilao by its uppersection it gives power over heavenly things, by its middlepart, oyer the things of the air, by its lolver part, oyerthose of the earth.ra? But at the same time it representsthe sacrilier. It is the height of the sacrifier that deter-rnines its dimensions.l4s lVhen it is anointed. the sacrifier

oa

The Scheme of Sacri/tce

,.is anointed; when it is made firnr, it is the sacrifier thatis strengthened.rrs In it takes place, in a more markedmanner than in the priest, that communication, thatfusion of the gods and the sacrifier, which will becomeeYen more marked in the victim.lso

The scene is now set. The actors are ready. The entryof the victim will mark the beginning of the drama. Butbefore introducing it, we must point out an essentialcharacteristic of the sacrifice: the perfecr continuity that isnecessary ro it. From the moment that it has begun,r61it must continue to the end without interruption and inthe ritual order. All the operations of which it is com-posed must follow each other in turn without a break.The forces at work, if they are not directed in exactly theway prescribed, elude both sacrifier and priest and turnupon them in a terrible fashion.rs2 Even this outwardcontinuity of the rites is not enough.153 There must alsobe a like constancy in the mental state of sacrifier andsacrificer, concerning the gods, the victim, and the prayerthat one wants answered.rsn They must have unshake-able confidence in the automatic result of the sacrifice. Inshort, a religious act must be accomplished in a religiousframe of mind: the inward attitude must correspond tothe external one.155 lYe see how, from the very outset,sacrifice demanded a credo (shraddha is the equivalent ofcredo, even philologically), and how the act carried faithwith it.r6s

THp Vrcrru

We said above that in the Hindu rite the construction ofthe altar consists in describing a magic circle on theground. In reality ail the operations we have just con-sidered have the same purpose. They consist in tracing

z8


out a kind of series of concentric magic circles within the

sacred area. fn the outer circle stands the sacrifier; then

come in turn the priest, the altar, and the stake. On the

perimeter, where stands the layman on whose behalf the

sacrifice takes place, the religious atmosphere is weak and

minimal. It increases as the space in which it is developed

grows smaller. The rvhole actiyity of the place of sacrifice

is thus organized and concentrated round a single focus.

Everything converges on the victim who is now about to

appear. Everyrhing is ready for its reception. It is brought

in.Sometimes it was consecrated by the mere fact of its

birth: the species to which it belonged rvas joined to the

divinity by special links.15? Having thus a divine charac-

ter by nalure, it did not need to acquire one specially for

the occasion. But, more usually, fixed rites were neces-

sary to confer upon it the religious condition that its

destined role demanded. In certain cases where it had

been marked out long before, these ceremonies had takenplace before it was brought to the place of sacrifice.l5 8 Butoften at that moment it still had nothing sacred about it.It was merely in a state to fulfil certain conditions thatmade it eiigible to receive consecration. It had to be with-out defect, sickness, or infirmity.lEe It had to be of acertain colour,luo ug", and sex, according to the result tobe brought aboub.r61 But to bring this general apritudeinto action, to raise it to the tequired level of religiosity,the victim had to submit to a whole gamut of ceremonies.

fn certain countries it lvas dressed Dp,1u' painted orwhitened, iike the bos cretatus of Roman sacrifices. Itshorns were gilded,l 63 a crown was placed upon it, it wasbedecked with ribbons.l64 T'hese adomrnents imparted toit a religious character. Sometimes eyen the costume that

2g

The Scheme of Sacrifce

was put on it brought it closer to the god who presidedover the sacrifice: this was the purpose of the disguisesused in the agrarian sacrifices, of which traces onh'remain.l65 The semi-consecration thus conferred upon itcould moreover be obtained in another way. ln Mexicol s 6

and at Rhodesl6 7 the victim was made drunk. Thisdrunkenness was a sign of possession. The divine spiritwas already pervading the victim.

__Egt the Hindu ritual will enable us to follow moreclosely the whole series of operations in the course ofwhich the victirn is progressively made divine. After ithas been bathed,l68 il is brought in, whilst various liba-tions are made.l 6 0 It is then addressed, Iaudatory epithetsbeing heaped upon it, and it is exhorted to keep calm.l?0

i At the same time the god who is the lord of the animals isinvoked, in order to ask hinr to agree to the use of hisproperty as a victim.l?1 These precautions, propitia[ions,and marlis of honour serve a clual purpose. Firstly, theyacknowledge the sacred character of the victim: by beingtermed something excellent, the property of the gods, itbecomes so. But above all it must be persuaded to allowitself to be sacrificed peaceably, for the lvelfare of men,and not to tahe yengeance once it is dead. These usages,which are extremely frecluent,lzz 6o not signify, as hasbeen said, that the beast sacrificed is ahvays a formertotemic animal. The explanation lies closer at hand.There is in tlre vicrim a spirit rvhich it is the very aim ofthe sacrifice to liberate. This spirit must therefore beconciliated, for otherwise it miglrt become dangerouswhen freed; hence the flattery and preliminary apologies.

Then the victim is bound to the stake. At that momentthe sacred character it is in the act of acquiring is alreadyso great that the Brahmin can no longer touch it with

5o


lis hands, and the sacrifier himself hesitates to approach

it. He must be invited to do so, and encouraged by a

special formula addressed to him by a priest.l?3 Yet, in

order to develop this religiosity, already so intense, to the

utmost extent, three series of rites are required. The

animal is given water to drink,l?a for water is divine; its

body is.lustrated above, beneath, and on eyery parl,rzs

Then it is anointed with melted butter on the head, then

on the withers, the shoulders, the croup, and between the

horns. These anointings correspond to those which were

made with oii in Hebrew sacrifice, to the ceremony of the

npla salsa in Rome, or to the orl?'.ai or barley grains thatin Greece the bystanders threw upon the animal.l z 6 Like-wise, almost everylvhere are to be found libations analo-gous to those of lvhich lve have just spoken. They had astheir purpose to heap sanctity on the victim. Lastly, afterthese lustrations and anointings there comes in the Vedicritual a final ceremony whose effect is to enclose thevictim itself in a final inagic circle, smaller and more

-divine than the others. From the fire of the gods a priestplucks a brand, and with it in his hand walks three timesround the animal. This circumambulation took place inIndia round all the victims, with or without fire. It wasthe god Agni who surrounded the animal on aII sides,consecrated it, and set it apart.r? ? ._l

Yet,, even while continuing to move onward into theworld of the gods, the victim had to remain in touch withmankind. In the religions we are considering here, therneans used to ensLlre this contact are proyided by rheprinciples of magical and religious sympathy. Sometimesthere is a direct and natural representation: a farher istepresented by his son, whom he sacrifices, etc.l ? I Ingeneral, since a sacrifier is always obliged to undertahe

5L

r f f uc nrnu Ntn nt . )v- l l a I

V


the expenses in person, there is, by virtue ofthis very fact,

i more or less complete representation.lTe Bul in other

cases this association of the victim and the sacrifier is

brought about by a physical contact between the sacrifier

(sometimes the priest) and the victim. This contact is

obtained, in Semitic ritual, by the laying on of hands, and

in others by equivalent rites.leo Through this proximity

the victim, who aiready represents the gods, comes to

represent the sacrifier also. Indeed, it is not enough to say

that it represents him: it is merged in him. 'Ihe two per-

sonalities are fused together. At least in the Hindu ritual

this identification even becomes so complete that from

then onwards the future fate of the victim, its imminent

death, has a kind of reyerse effect upon the sacrifier.

Hence an ambiguous situation results for the latter. He

needs to touch the animal in order to remain united with

it, and yet is afraid to do so, for in so doing he runs the

risk of sharing its fate. The ritual resolves the difficulty

by taking a middle coltrse. The sacrifier touches the vic-

tim only through the priest, who himself only touches it

through the intermediary of one of the instnrments of

sacrifice.ler Thus this process of dran'ing together the

sacred and the profane, which we have seen come about

progressively through the various elements of the sacri-

fice, is completed in the victim.We have now arrived at the culminating point of the

ceremony. A1l the elements of the sacrifice are now

present; they have been brought into contact for the last

time. But the supreme act remains to be acconplishsd.l az

The victim is already sanctified to an extreme degree. But

the spirit residing in it, the divine principle which it now

contains, is still pent up in its body and attached by this

last link to the world of profane things' Death will release

52


it, thereby making the consecration definitive and

irrevocable. This is the solemn moment.That'which norv begins is a crirne, a kind of sacrilege.

So, while the victim was being led to the place of

slaughter, some rituals prescribed libations and expia-tions.l83 Excuses were made for the act that was about to

be carried out, the death of the animal was lamented,rar

one rvept for it as one would weep for a relative. Its par;.,don was ashed before it was struck down. The rest of rhespecies to which it belonged were harangued, as if theywere one vast family, entreated not to avenge the wrongabout to be done them in the person of one of their num-ber.l85 Under the influence of these same ideasrs6 theinstigator of the slaughter miglrt be punished by beat-ingr e z or exile. At Athens the priest at the sacrifice of theBouphonia fled, casting his axe away. A1l those who hadtaken part in the sacrifice were called to the Prytaneion.They threw the blame upon each other. Finally, the knifewas condemned and thrown into the sea.1 8 s The purifica-tions which the sacrificer had to undergo after the sacri-fice resembled moreover the expiation of a ffiminal.l 8 e

So, once the beast is placed in the prescribed positionand turned in the direction laid down in the rites,leoeveryone keeps silence. In India the priests turn round.The sacrifier and the officiating priest also turn round,rermurmuring propitiatory mantras.lez Nothing is to beheard save the orders given in a simple voice by the priestto the sacrifier. The latter then tightens the bond thatencircles the neck of the anirnal,res and 'quietens itsbreath',rsr as the euphemism employed has it. Thevictim is dead; the spirit has departed.

The rites of slaughter were extremely variable. Butevery cult insisted that they be scrupulously observed. To

55

Ii

r ^ l^ ^-^v- i

r t vn

The Scheme of Sacrtfice

moclify them was generaliy a fatal heresy, punishable by

excommunication and death.le5 'Ihis was because the act

of slaughter released an ambiguous force--or rather a

blind one, terrible by the very fact that it was a force' It

therefore had to be limited, directed, and tamed; this

was n'hat the rites were for. Most usually the nape of the

victim's neck, or the neck itself, was seYered'r g e Stoning

was an ancient rite that no longer took place in Judaea

except in certain cases of penal execntion, or in Greece

except as a tohen in the ritual of some festivals'le ? Else-

where the victim was knocked senselessl e 8 or hanged,l e e

So serious an operation could not be accompanied by too

many precautions..For the most part it lvas wished that

death should be prompt, and the passage of the victirn

from its earthly life to its divine one w'as hastened so as

not to leave evil influences time to vitiate the sacrificial

act, If the animal's cries were held to be bad omens' an

attempt was made to stifle or preYent them.200 Often, in

order to avoid any possible deviations once consecration

had taken place, the attempt was made to control the

effusion of the consecrated blood.201 Care lvas taken that

it fell only on a favourable spot,202 or things lvere so

arranged that not a single drop of it was shed'203 Some-

times, horvever, these precautions lvere considered un-

necessary. At Methydrion in Arcadia the rite ordained

that the victim should be torn to pieces.zoa There migirt

even be an advantage in prolonging its agony.205 Slow

death, like sudden death, could lighten the responsibility

ofthe sacrificer. For reasons already explained, the rituals

rvere ingenious in discovering attenuating circumstances'

ilhe rites rvere simpler lvhen only flour or cakes were

sacrificed instead of an animal. The oblation was cast

wholly or partially into the fireT

54'


Through this act of destruction the essential action of

the sacrifice was accomplished. The victim was separated

definitively from the profane world; it lvas conseu'ated,

it was sacrifted, in the etymological sense of the word,

and various languages garre the name sanctiiftcatton to

the act that brought that condition about. The victim

changed its nature, as did Demophoon, as did Achilles, as

did the son of the king of Byblos, when Demeter, Thetis,

and Isis consumed their humanity in the fire.206 Irs

death was like that of the phoenix:2o? it was reborn

sacred. But the phenomenon that occurred at that

moment had another aspect. If on the one hand thespirit was released, if it had passecl completely 'behindthe veil' into the r.r'orld of the gods, the body of theanimal on the other hand remained vi-sible and tangible.And it too, by the fact of consecration, r,l.as filled with asacred force that excluded it from the profane world.In short, the sacrificed victim resembled the dead w.hosesouls dwelt at one and the same time in the other worldand in the corpse. Thus its remains were treated rvith areligious respect:zo8 honours were paid to them.,Theslaughter thus left a sacred matter behind it, and it wasthis, as we shall nom'see, that served to procure the use-ful effects of the sacrificeT For this purpose it was sub-mitted to a double series of opelations. *Wlrat survived ofthe animal was attributed entirely to the sacred world,attributed entirely to the profane world, or sharedbetween the two7

The attribution to the sacred world, rr.hether to pro-tecting divinities or to maleficent spirits, was broughtabout by differing procedures. One of these consisted inbringing certain parts of the animai's body into contactwith the altar of the god, or with some objects rvhich rvere

55


especially consecrated to tti-. fr. ,ttu Hebrew hattat for

Yom Kippur, as described in the opening yerses of Levi-

ticus chap. iy,aos the sacrificer soaks his finger in the

blood which is presented to him. He sprinkles it seven

times before Yahweh, that is, on the veil, and smears a

little blood on the horns of the altar of s\,veet incense,

within the sanctuary."o The rest was poured at the foot

of the altar of tlte 'olah which stood at the entrance. In

the ordinary hattat the priest smeared the blood on the

horns of the altar of the'olah.zr 1 The blood of the victims

of the 'olah and tlte shelamim was simply poured out at

the foot of the altar.212 Elsewhere the sacred stone or the

face of the god was daubed vli1l i1.zra In Greece, at the

sacrifices to the water-gods, the blood was allowed to

flow into the waterlz1a or after having been collected in a

goblet, it was poured into the sea.215 When the victim

had been skinned, the idol might be dressed in the skin.216

This rite was particularly observecl in cerernonies at which

a sacred animal was sacrificed, no matter what form was

given to the idol.21? In any case, the victim that had been

killed was presented just as he had been presented before

the consecration.zls In the 'olah tlle assistants, having

cut up the victim into pieces, bear them with the head

to the officiating priest, who places them upon the

altar.rle In the ritual of th.e slrclatntm the portions pre-

sented received significant names: terumah, the raised

offering, tenuphah, the'turned' offering.zzo

Another method was incineration. In all the Hebrewsacrifices, in the same way as the blood was completely

disposed of by aspersion or effusion,221 the fat and entrails

rvere burned upon the altar-fire.2zz The poltions thus

consecrated to the god who personified the consecration

accordingly reached him in a pleasant-smelling smoke.22a

5o


When the god intervened in the sacrifice h.e was con-

sidered as consuming materially and in reality the sacri-

ficed flesh: it was 'his meat'.224 The Homeric poems showus the gods seated at the sacrificial banquets.22s Thecooked flesh reserved for the god2zo was presented to himand set before him. The god was to consrme it. In theBible on several occasions the divine fire spurts forth andconsumes the flesh lying upon the altar.227

From the flesh that was left over from this preliminarydestruction, other portions were taken away. The priesttook his share.22e Now the share of the priest was stillconsidered a divine share. The writers of the Pentateuchwere concerned to know whether the victim of the hattatwas to be burnt or eaten by the priests; according to Levi-ticus22e Moses and the sons of Aaron were in disagree-ment on this point. Clearly, the tlyo rites had thus thesame meanirg.rr0 In the same way, in the Roman ritesof expiation the priests ate the flesh.2ar In the zebahshelantim the priests kept for themselves the partsespecially presented to Yahweh-the shoulder and thebreast,2sz tlne tenuphah and Lir,le terumah. The portionsreserved for the priests could be eaten only by them andtheir families, in a sacred place.zra The Greek tefis con-tain much information, no less precise in nature, con-cerning the portions of the victims and the oblationsreserved for the sacrificers.zsa Sometimes, it is true, therites appear to be not very exacting; thus the priests taketheir portions home with themi money is made from theskins of the victims, and the deductions come to look likeperquisites. However, there is reason to believe that thepriests were, in this matter also, the agents, representa-tives, and deputies of the god. Thus the initiates ofBacchus, when possessed, tore to pieces their victims,

57

r - - r r^ dln u \ tn n=^vl l : l I ---

iiilI

lll

I

The Scheme oif SacrtJfce

and devoured them.236 Perhaps'we should also consideras priestly shares various deductions made by the kingszs o

or by sacred families.23?The purpose of the incineration and consumption by

the priest rn'as the complete elimination from temporalsurroundings of the parts of the animal thus destroyed oreaten. Lihe the soul which had already been released bythe sacrifice, they rvere in this way directed towards thesacred rn'orld. fn some cases the destruction and conse-quent elimination involved the whole body and not onlycertain parts of it. In the Hebrew 'olah, as in the Greekholocaust,z38 the victim was burned in its entirety uponthe altar or within the sacred place, without anphingbeing taken away from it. The priest, after washing theanimal's entrails and limbs, placed them on the fire,where they were burnt up.23e The sacrifice was some-times called kalil, meaning, tcomplete'.240

Among the cases of complete destruction some possessa special character. The immolation of the victim and thedestruction of its body were effected in one single action.ft was not first killed and its remains then burnt; every-thing took place at once. Such rvere the sacrifices by pre-cipitation. Whether the animal were cast into an abyss or]rurled down from the tower of a town or a temple yeofzrr

there rvas brought about ipso lfacto the brutal separationwhich was the sign of consecration.2az Sacrifices of thiskind were usually addressed to the infernal divinities orto evil spirits. As they were charged with evil influences,it lvas necessaly to drive them aw'ay? to cut them off fromreality. Doubtless some idea of attribution was not miss-ing from the operation. It rvas vaguely imagined that thesoul of the victim, with all the maieficent powers it con-tained, departed to return to the lvorld of the maleficent

58


powers; so the goat of the Atonement tvas dedicated to.lyzazel.zas But the essential thing was to eliminate it,to drive it arvay. Thus there were cases of its expulsionwithout its being put ro death. At Leucadia the escape ofthe victim was foreseen, but it was exiled.z44 The birdreleased in the fields at the sacrifice of the purification ofthe lepers in Judaea,2as the po0).rpr,o62ao hounded fromthe houses and out of the city of Athens, were sacrificedin this way. In spite of ritual differences the same pheno-menon takes place here as on the altar of I}re ,olah atJerusalem, when the victim disappears entirely in smokebefore the face of Yahweh. ln both instances it isseparated and enrirely disappears, although it is nottowards the same regions of the religious world thau itproceeds irr the two cases.

/When, however, the remains of the victim were notattributed wholly either ro the gods or to the evil spirits,they were used to communicate either to the sacrifiersor to the objects of sacrifice the religious qualities that thesacrificial consecration had kindled within them/ Theoperations we are about to describe correspond to thosewe encountered at the beginning of the ceremony. Wenoticed then how rhe sacrifier, by the laying on of hands,imparted to th.e victim something of his own personality.Now it is the victim or its renrains rvhich will pass on iothe sacrifier the new qualities it has acquired by the actionof sacrifice. This communication can be effected by amere blessing.za? But in general recou.rse was had romore material rites: for example, the sprinkling ofblood248 the application of the skin of the victim,zreanointings with the fat,zs o contact with the residue of thecremation.zs1 Sometimes the animal r ras cut into twoparts and the sacrifier walked between thgm.zor But the

59

ra luc nlnu Ntn n=avtf , =, t^

ffiliiiltri1lll,litl{l

l

iiir,.liitlIti


most perfect lvay of effecting communication was to

hand over to the sacrifier a portion of the victim, which

he consumed.253 By eating a portion of it he assimilated

to himself the characteristics of the whoie. Moreover,just as there were cases when all was burnt up by the

god, there w-ere others in which the sacrifier received the

whole of the oblation.25aHowever, the rights he enjoyed over the part of the

victim left for him were restricted by the rilual.265 Very

often he had to consume it within a limited time. Leviti-

cus permits the remains of a votive sacrifice (neder) and

of the sacrifice known as nednbah (voluntary offering), to

be eaten the day after the ceremony. But if any were left

on the third day they had to be burnt; he who ate them

then committed a graye sin.266 Generaliy the victim

must be eaten on the actual day of the sacrific€lrsz *n"t

that took place in the evening, nothing must be left till

the following morning: this is the case with bhe sacrifice

of the Passover.268 fn Greece similar restrictions were to

be found; for example, in the sacrifices 0eo[6 coig pr.er,].rXio4,

to the Chthonian gods, at Myonia, in Phocis.2se More-

over, the sacrificial meai could take place only within the

purlieus of the sanctuary.2so These precautions were

designed to prevent the remains of the victim' now

consecrated, from coming into contact with profane

things. Religion defended the sanctity of sacred objects

as well as protecting the laity against their malignity.

If the sanctifier, although profane, was admitted to touch

and eat them, it was because the consecration which

sanctified him had put him in a posirion to do so without

danger. But the effects of his consecration lasted only for

a while; after a time they disappeared, and this is why

the remains had to be eaten within a set period. If what

40

The Scheme of SacriJtce

was unused was not destroyed, it had at least to be locked

6way and guarded.2 6 r Even those remains of the cremated

offering that could be neither destroyed nor put to use

were not thrown away at random. They were deposited

in special places protected by religious prohibitions.262

The study of the Hindu sacrifice, .the description of

which we have interrupted, presents the whole gamut of

all these practices-a rare inslnn6s-foth those concern-

ing attribution to the gods and those concerning com-

munication to the sacrifiers.

Immediately after the victim has been choked to death

its sacrificial purity is assured by a special rite. A priest

leads up to the recumbent carcase the wife of the sacri-fier, who has been present at the ceremony.2 0a While thebody undergoes several washings she proffers the watersof pr-rrification264 at each orifice of the animal for it to

'drink'. When this has been done the cutting-up of thec€rcase begins. At the first stroke of the knife bloodflows. This is allowed to run away. It is the share ailottedto the evil spirits: 'Thou art the share of lhe rakshas2.266

Then there follows the ceremony whose purpose is toattribute to the god the essential part of the victim: this isIhe uapa-in medical parlance, the larger epiploic sac.2 6 6

It is removed swiftly, with ail sorts of precautions andpropitiations. It is taken away in procession like a victim,with the sacrifier always holding on to the priest who iscarrying it.28? It is cooked oyer the sacred fire and soarranged that the melting far falls drop by drop on thefire. It is said to fall upon 'the skin of the fire',zea ogAgni. Since Agni is entrusted with the task of handingover the offerings to the gods, this is a first portionattributed to them.26e Once Ihe uapa has been cookedand cut up, it is thrown into the fire,rzo amid blessings

4r

I r rn n=^vrJ f I Hn._.- -


and bowings, and after the necessary invocations havebeen made. It is a second portion for the gods. This fur'-

ther attribution is itself considered as a kind of completesacrifice.271 In this rvay apologies are made to lhe uapa,just as they had been made to the victim at the moment

of sacrifice. This done, they return to the animal, which

is skinned and from which eighteen morsels2T2 of fleshare cut off and then cooked together. The fat, the meat

stock and scum2?3 that float274 on the srrrface in the

cooking vessel are for the god or pair of gods to whom thesacrifice is addressed. All this is sacrificed in the fire.What is thus destroyed again formally represents thevictim irr its entirelyrzTs and by this means another totalelimination of the animal is carried out. Finally, from theeighteen pieces of rneat used to rnake this broth, a certainnumber are set aside and again attributed to variousdivinities or mythical personages.s 7 6

But seven of these portions are used for a completelydifferent purpose:27? it is through them that the sacredstrength of the victim will be passed on to the sacrifier.2 ? I

They constitute what is called Lhe ida. This name is alsothat of the goddess rvho personifies the anirnals and whois the dispenser of good fortune and fertility.z z e The sameword thus designates this divinity and the sacrificialportion.280 This is because the goddess comes and incar-nates herself in it during the actual course of the cere-mony. The way in which this incarnation takes place isas follows: In the hands of a priest, which have beenanointed beforehand,z8l the ida is placed, and the otherpriests and the sacrifier surround him and touch it.zezWhile they are in this posture the goddess is inyoked.283Here an invocation in the literal and technical sense ofthe word is meant (uocare in:to call into). The divinity

42

The Scheme o1f Sacriftce

is not only invited to be present at and to participate in

the sacrifice, but even to descend into the offering. What

takes place is a veritable transubstantiation. On hearing

the appeal the goddess anives, bringing with her all

kinds of mythical pon ers-1hose of the sun, the wind, the

atmosphere, the heavens, the earth, animals, etc. Thus,

as one text puts it, there is used up on tlne ida (the sacri-

ficial portion) everything good in the sacrifice and in theworld.zen Then the priest who held it in his hands eats

his portion,285 after lvhich the sacrifier does the same.286Everyone remains seated in silence until the sacrifier hasrinsed his mouth.28? Then2ss their portions are dis-tributed to the priests, each of whom represents a god.2 e e

Having made a distinction in the various rituals just

compared between the rites of attribution to the gods andthe rites of utilization by men, it is important to realizethe analogy between them. Both are made up of thesame practices and imply the same proceedings. We havediscerned in both the sprinkling of blood; the applyingof the skin, in the one case either to the altar or to theidol, in the other to the sacrifier or the objects of sacri-fice; the communion of food, fictional and mythical so faras the gods are concerned, but real as concerns men.Fundamentally these different operations are all sub-stantially identical. Once the victim has been sacrificedit is a question of placing it in contact either with the'sacred rvorld or with the persons or things that are tobenefit from the sacrifice. The sprinkling, the touching,and the applying of the skin are clearly only differentways of establishing a contact that the communion of foodcarries to the utmost extreme of intimacy. It bringsabout not only a mere external proximity, but a minglingof the two substances which become absorbed in each

r rar 16 nanu \ tn n=^vt l f I

4,5


other to the point of becoming indistinguishable. And if

these two rites are similar to this extent, it is because the

object pursued in the one and the other case is itself not

unanalogous. In both cases it is to pass on the religious

power that successive consecrations have accumulated in

the object sacrificed-on the one hand to the religious

sphere, in the other to the profane one to which the

sacrifier belongs. Both systems of rites contribute, each

in its orvn 1vay, to the establishment of that continuity

which appears to us, after this analysis, to be one of the

most remarkable characteristics of sacrifice' The victim

is the intermediary through which the communication is

established. Thanks to it, all the participants which come

together in sacrifice are united in it; all the forces which

meet in it are blended together.

But there is something more: not only a resemblance,

but a close solidarity exists between these two kinds of

practices of attribution. The first kind are the condition of

the second. For the victim to be used by men, the gods

must have received their share. It is indeed charged with

such sanctity that the profane person' in spite of the pre-

Iiminary consecrations which have to some exLent raised

him above his ordinary and normal naturer cannot touch

it without danger to himself. Consequently this reli-

giosity which it possesses, and lvhich makes it unusable

by mere mortals, must to some degree be diminished.

The immolation had already partially accomplished this.

It rvas in the spirit that this religiosity was most highly

concentrated. Once, then, the spirit has departed, the

victim becomes more approachabie; it can be handied

with fewer precautions. There were even sacrifices in

which, from then onwards, ali danger had disappearedl

they were those in which the whole animal was used by

44,

The Scheme o.1f Sacrifice

the sacrifier, without any part of it being attributed to

the gods. But in other cases this first operation did not

suffice to uncharge the victim as much as was necessary.

Thus a fresh beginning had to be made, in order [o

eliminate even more that part which still remained too

much to be feared, by driving it off into the regions of the

sacred. It was necessary, as the Hindu ritual says, to per-

form a kind of new sacrifice.zeo This was the purpose of

the rites of attribution to the gods.Consequently the numerous rites which are practised

on the victim can, in their essentials, be summed up ina simple schema. The victim is first consecrated. Thenthe forces which this consecration have aroused and con-centrated on it are allowed to escape, some to the beingsof the sacred rvorld, others to the beings of the profaneworld. The series of states through which it passes mightthus be represented by a curve: it rises to a maximumdegree of religiosity, where it remains only for a moment,and then progressively descends. We shall see that thesacrifier passes through corresponding phases.2 e1

Tsu Exrr

The useful results of the sacrifice have been accomplished;all, however, is not over. The group of people and thingsformed for the occasion around the victim has no furtherreason to exist. Yet it must be dissolved slowly, withoutdistr,rrbance, and, since it has been created through rites,it is rites alone that can unloosen the elements of whichit is composed. The bonds that joined priests and sacrifierto the victim have not been broken by the act of sacrifice.Ali those who have shared in the sacrifice have acquireda sacred character that isolates uhem from the world of the

t'

+5

The Scheme of SacriJtcc

profane. Yet they must be able to return to it. Ihey

must step outside the magic circle in which they remain

enclosed. Moreover, during the ceremonies errors mav

have been committed that must be wiped out before

the threads of normal life are taken up again. The

rites by which this exit from the sacrifices is effected

are the exact counterparts of those we observed at the

entry.2 o2

In the Hindu animal sacrifice, as moreoYer in all sacri-

fices according to the same ritual, this last phase of the

sacrifice is very exactly set out. Sacrifice is made of what

remains of the butter, and the fat is spattered on the

turf.z es Then a certain amount of equipment is destroyed

in the sacrificial fire, z sa the sacrificial turf,2 e 5, the reciter's

wand, the boards that surround the uedi.z eo The unusecl

lustration water is poured away and then, after due

reverence has been paid to the stake,ze? a libation is

made over it. Sometimes it is carried off home, for it is

supposed to purify from ritual errors; or, Iike the turf, it

is burnt.2es All that remains of the offerings is destroyed

by fire, and the utensils are cleansed and taken away after

having been washed.2ee OnIy the spit used to roast the

heart is buried-a special case in the rite, according to

which the instrument of crime or of suffering must be

hidden.s o o

As for the participants, this is what happens to them.

The priests, the sacrifier and his wife assemble together

and purify each other by the washing of hands.301 The

rite has a dual prrpose: first, it purifies them fromthe

errors that may have been committed during the sacri-

fice, and secondly from those that it was the object of the

sacrifice to wipe out. fn reaiity the religious atmosphere

of the sacrifice is abandoned. This is what is expressed in

46


the rite of the abandonment of the Yow:302 'O Agni, I

have made my Yow, I have made good my vow, f

become a man again. . . . I descend once more from the

world of the gods into the world of men.'303

A more extreme form of the same rite lvill make its

meaning more apparent: this is known as 'the bath of

bearing &way'aoa which ends the sacrifice of the soma,

and is the opposite of the diksha. After the instruments

have been laid aside, the sacrifier bathes in a calm pool

formed by running water.3os AII that remains of the

sacrifice is plunged into the ryater, all the pulpy branches

of the soma}06 The sacrifier then unties the sacrificial

girdle that he had put on at the dtksha.I{e unlooses also

the clasp that fastened certain parts of the woman's

clothing, as well as the turban, the skin of the blackantelope, and the two sacrificiai garments, and immerses

them all. Then his wife and he, immersed up to the neckin the water, recite prayers as they bathe, washing firsteach other's back and then the limbs.30? This done theyemerge from the water and put on brand-new clothes.3o8Thus everJthing has passed into the water and therebylost any dangerous or even simply religious character.The ritual errors that may have been made are expiated,as well as the crime that has been cornmitted by killingSoma the god. Though this rite is more complex thanthat first mentioned, it is nevertheless of the same kind:facts and theory assign to it the same function.

The Biblical texts are unfortunately less complete andless clear, yet lye find in them a few allusions to the samepractices. At the festival of the Atonement, after havingdriven away the goat of Azazel, the high priest returnedto the sanctuary and took off his sacred garb, tin ordernot to spread abroad the consecration'. He then washed

4.7

r - - r 16 aan u Nrn nf-vf l I I

The Scheme of Sacifice

himself, put on fresh clothing, went out and sacrificedthe 'olah.}oe The man who had led arvay the goatbathed and washed his clothes before returningl3ro theone who had burnt the remains of the hattat did thesame.3rl We do not know whether the other sacrificeswere accompanied by similar practices.slz ln Greece, afterthe expiatory sacrifices, the sacrificers, who refrained asmuch as possible from touching the victim, washed theirgarments in a river or spring before returning to thetown or to their fu66ss.3rs The utensils that had beenused in the sacrifice were carefully washed, when theywere not destroyed.sla These practices limited the effectsof the consecration. They are important enough to havesurvived in the Christian Mass. After the communion thepriest washes out the chalice and washes his hands. Whenthis has been done the Mass is finished, the cycie of cere-monies is closed, and the celebrant pronounces the finalformula of dismissal: frc, missa est. These ceremoniescorrespond to those which marked the entry into thesacrifice. The faithful and the priest are liberated, just asthey had been prepared at the beginning of the cere-mony. They are the reverse ceremonies, they counter-balance those at the beginning.

The religious condition of the sacrifier thus alsodescribes a cllrve symmetrical to the one traced by thevictim. He begins by rising progressively into the reli-gious sphere, and attains a culminating point, whence hedescends again into the profane. So each one of thecreatures and objects that play a part in the sacrifice isdrawn along as if in a continuous moyement which, fromentry to exit, proceeds along two opposing slopes. But ifthe curves thus described have the same general contour,they do not all rise to the same height. It is of course the

4,8

The Scheme o1f Sacrtftce

curve described by the victim that reaches the highesrpoint.

It is moreover clear that the respective importance ofthese phases of ascent and descent can vary infinitelyaccording to the circumstances. This rvill be shown in thepages that foilorv.

49

lili

l ; i

ilffir

riiii ,i i

Chapter Three

HOW THE, SCHE,ME VARIESACCORDING TO THtr

GE,NERAL F'T]NCTIONSOF' THE, SACRIFICE,

IN WHAT HAS GONE BtrFORE rve have indeed con-

structed only one scheme. But this scheme is something

other than a mere abstraction. We have seen that it was

realized in concreto in the case of the Hindu animai

sacrifice. Moreover, around this rite we have been able

to group a whole number of sacrificial rites that are pre-

scribed in the Semitic ritual and in the Greek and Latin

rituals. In reality, it constitutes the common material

from which the more particular forms of sacrifice are

taken. According to the end sought, according to the

function it is to fuifil, the parts of rvhich it is composed

can be arranged in different proportions and in a different

order. Some can assume more importance to the detri-

ment of othersl some may even be completely lacking.

Hence arises the multiplicity of sacrifices, but without

there being specific differences betn'een the various com-

binations. It is always the same elements that are differ-

entiy grouped or developed unequally. We shall attempt to

demonstrate this by considering a few fundamental types.

5o

The General Functions of the Sacriftce

Since the sacrifice has as its purpose to affect the reli-

gious state of the sacrifier or the object of sacrifice, we can

foresee a priori that the genelal lines of our plan mustvary according to what that state is at the beginning ofthe ceremony. Let us suppose first that it is neutral. Thesacrifier-and what we say about the sacrifier could berepeated for the object of sacrifice in the case of anobjective sacrifice-is not invested with any sacred charac-ter before the sacrifice. Sacrifice, therefore, has thefunction of imparting it to hirn. This is notably whatoccurs in sacrifices of initiation and ordination. In thesecases the distance is great between the point of departureof the sacrifier and the point which he is to attain. Thusthe ceremonies of introduction are necessarily very muchelaborated. He enters cautiously, step by step, into thesacred u'orld. Conversely, as the consecration is thenmore desired than feared, one w.ould be afraid of lessen-ing it by limiting and circumscribing it too closely. Thesacrifier, even when he has returned to the profaneworld, must retain something of what he has acquiredduring the course ofthe sacrifice. Therefore the practicesof the exit are reduced to their simplest expression; theymay even disappear completely. The Pentateuch indi-cates them only when it describes the rites of the ordina-tion of the priests and Levites. In the Christian Massthey survive only in the form of additional purifications.Moteover, the changes effected by these sacrifices aremore or less of Iong duration. They are sometimes con-stitutional and imply a real metamorphosis. ft wasclaimed that the man who touched the flesh of the humanvictim sacrificed to Zeus Lykaios (the taolf) on theLyceum was himself changed into a wolf, just as Lycaonhad been after having sacrificed a chi1d.s15 It is even for

5r

The General Functions of the Sacriftce The General Functions oif the Sacriftce

But, not unusually, the man who is about to sacrificealready has a sacred character, from rvhich ritual pro-hibitions may result which may be contrary to hisintentions. The impurityars that he acquires by notobserving religious laws or by contact with impurethings is a kind of consecration.szo The sinner, just likethe criminal, is a sacred being.aer If he sacrifices, thesacrifice has as its aim, or at least as one of its aims, to ridhim of his impurity. It is an expiation. But an importantfact must be noted: sickness, death, and sin are identicalfrom the religious viewpoint. Most ritual errors arepunished by misfortu-ne or physical [s1'1.3r2 And, reci-procally, these mischances are supposed to be caused byfaults committed consciously or unconsciously. The reli-gious consciousness, even that of our contemporaries, hasneyer clearly dissociated the breach of the divine lawsfrom the material consequences for the guilty person'sbody, his situation, and his future in another world.Thus we can treat together curative sacrifices and thosethat are purely expiatory. Both have it as their purposeto communicate to the victim, by the sacrificial continuity,the sacrifier's religious impurity and with that victim toeliminate it.

Thus the most elementary form of expiation is elimina-tion pure and simple. The expulsion of Azazel's goat, andthat of the bird in the sacrifice for the purification of aleper, is of this kind. On the Day of Atonement, twogoats were chosen. The high priest, after various hattat,laid both his hands on the head of one of them, confessedover it the sins of Israel, then sent it forth into the desert.ft bore away with it the sins that had been passed on toit by the laying on of hands.sr8 In the sacrifice for thepurification of the leper,32a the sacrificer took two turtle-

this reason that these sacrifices are to be found in the

rites of initiation, rites whose purpose is to introduce a

soul into a body.316 In any case the sacrifier, at the end of

the ceremony, was endowed n'ith a sacred character,

which sometimes entailed special prohibitions. This

character might even be incompatible with others of the

same kind. Thus at Olympia the man who, after having

sacrificed to Pelops, ate the flesh of his victim, had not

the right to sacrifice to Zeus.31?

This first characteristic goes with another' The pur-

pose of the whole rite is to increase the religiosiry of the

sacrifier. To this end he had to be associated as closely as

possible with the victim, because it is thanks to the

strength that the act of consecration has built up in the

victim that he acquires this desired characteristic. In this

case, we may say that the characteristic whose trans'

missiorr is the very aim of the sacrifice passes lfrom the

uicttm to the sacrifier (or to the obiect). Consequently, it

is after the immolation that they are brought into con-

tact, or at least it is at that moment that the most im-

portant contact is effected. Of course it may be that by the

laying on of hands a bond is established between the

sacrifier and the victim before the latter is destroyed. But

ssm6lirnss-for exarnple in the zebah shelamim-tbis is

completely laching, and in any case it is secondary' The

most essential thing is what takes place once the victim's

spirit has departed. It is then that the communion of food

is practised.are $s61lfices of this kind might be termed

sacrifices of 'sacralization'. The same word is also appro-

priate to sacrifices whose effect is not to create out of

nothing a sacred character in the sacrifier, but simply to

accentuate that sacred character of which he is already

pcrssessed'

52 cc

The General Functions o1f the Sacrtfice

doves. He cut the throat of one of them oYer ari

earthenware jar containing spring lYater. The other dove

was dipped in this water diluted with blood, with whicli

the leper was sprinkled. The living turtle-dove was therr

released and flew away, carrying the leprosy rvith it. Ther

sick man had then only to make an ablution to be purified

and cured. T}re hattat demonstrates as clear a procedure

of elimination in cases lvhere the remains of the victinr

were carried outside the camp and burned in their

entirety.326 The Hindu medicinal sacrifices reveal similar

cases.3z6 To cure a person of jaundice,3z? yellow birds

were tied beneath the patient's bed. He n'as sprinkled

with water in such a way that the water fell upon the

birds, rvhich began to twitter. As is said in the magit:

hymn, it is from this moment that the ' jaundice' is 'in

the yellow birds'.328 Let us go a little further than tliis

too material phase of the rite; let us consider the case of

a man under an evil spell. A series of rites are used, some

of which are purely symbolic,s2e but others are com-

parable to sacrifice. To the left leg'of a black cockerel'330

is tied a hook, and to the hook a cake. As the bird is ser

free,ssr is said, 'Fly aw-ay from here, evil omen,332 re-

moye yourself from herel fly off elsewhere to the one

who hates us; with this iron hook we bind you.'333 The

taint in the sacrifier has been attached to the bird and

has disappeared with it, either by being destroyed or by

falling upon the enemy.ssaThere is one case in particular, however, where it can

be clearly seen that the characteristic eiiminated in this

way is essentially a religious one: it is that of the'spit-

ox',a3r an expiatory victim to the god Rudra. Rudra is

lord of the animals, who can destroy them, and men, by

plague and fever. Thus he is the dangerous god.336 Now

54^

The General Functions of the Sacrtftce

as the god of cattle he exists within the herd at the sametime as he prowls round it and threatens it. To drive himfrom the cattle he is concentrated in the finest buli of theherd. This bull becomes Rudra himself; it is raised up,consecrated as such, and homage is paid to it.s3z Then-at least according to certain schools of opinion-it issacrificed outside the village, at midnight, in the woods. s s 8

In this rvay Rudra is eliminated.sse The Rudra of theanimals had departed to join the Rudra of the woods, thefields, and the crossroads. Thus the purpose of the sacri_fice has indeed been the expuision of a divine element.

In all these cases the sacred character which is passedon by sacrifice proceeds not from victim to sacrifier,saobut on the contrary from sacrifier to victim. It is got ridof by being passed on to the victim. Thus it is before andnot after the act of immolation that contact between thetwo takes place-at least that contact which is reallyessential. Once this character has been passed on to thevictim it tends on the other hand to flee from it, as wellas from the whole environment in which the ceremonyhas taken place. Because of this, rites of exit werldeveloped. The rites of this nature that we have indicatedin the Hebrew ritual have been presented to us only forexpiatory sacrifices. After the first sacrifice that has puri_fied him, the leper must complete his purification by u,additional ablution and even by a new sacrifice.s4l On theother hand, the rites of entry are limited or eyen missing.The sacrifier, being already invested rvith a religiorischaracter, has

'o need to acquire one. The religiosity that

marks him diminishes progressively from the inceptionof the ceremony. The movement ( upwards, that wefound in the complete sacrifice is ruclimentary or evenentirely iacking. We are thus confronted with another

)9

The General Functions of the Sacrifice

type, into which enter the same elements as in the sacri-

fice of sacralization. But these elements are orientated

in an opposite direction and their respective importance

is reversed.In what has so far been said, we have supposed that

the sacred character with which the sacrifier was marked

at the beginning of the sacrifice was for him a blemish, a

cause of religious inferiority, sin, impurity' etc. But there

are cases where the mechanism is exactly the same but

where the initiai state is a source of superiority for the

sacrifier, constituting a state of purity. The nazirsaz at

Jerusalem was an absolutely pure being. He had conse-

crated himself to Yahweh by taking a Yow, in conse-

quence of which he abstained from wine and from cutting

his hair. He had to keep himself free from all stain' But

once he had reached the end of the period of his Yow'343

he could release himself from it only by sacrifice. To do

this he takes a bath of purification'saa then he offers a

lamb as 'olah, a ewe as hattat, and a ram as zebah shela-

mim. He shaves his head, and throws the hair on the

fire on which the meat of the shelamimsaE is beingcooked'

When the sacrificer performs the zebah shelamim lte

places on the hands of the nazir the terumah and the

tenuphah, that is the consecrated portions, and a cake of

the corresponding offering'3a6 Afterwards these oblations

are presented to Yahweh. Then, says the text, the nazir

will be able to drink wine-that is to say, he is freed from

his consecration. This has passed partly into the hair that

is cut off and offered up on the altar, partly into the vic-

tim that represents him. Both things are eliminated. The

process is thus the same as in expiation. The sacred

character proceeds from the sacrifier to the victim, how-

ever high its religious value may be. Consequently the

56

The General Functions oif the Sacrtftce

sacrifice of expiation is itself oniy a special variety of a

rnore general type, which is independent of the favour-

able or unfavourable character of the religious stateaffected by the sacrifice. This might be termed thesacrtfice oif desacralization.

Things, like persons, may be in a state of such greatsanctity that because of it they become unusable anddangerous. Sacrifices of this kind become necessary. Thisis particularly the case with the products of the earth.Each species of fmit, cereal, and other products is sacredin its entirety, forbidden, so long as a rite, often of asacrificial nature, has not rid it of the prohibition whichprotects it.s47 To effect this there is concentrated in oneportion of the species of the fruit all the power containedin the others. Then this part is sacrificed, and by virtueof this alone, the others are released.s4s Or again, itpasses through two successive stages of desacralization: thewhole of the consecration is first of all concentrated in thefirstfruits, then these firstfruits themselves are repre-sented by a victim who is eliminated. This is what hap-pened, for example, lvhen the first fruits were broughtto Jerusalem.s4e The inhabitants of a localitya50 came ina body, bringing their baskets. At the head of the pro-cession walked a flute player. Kohanim went on ahead ofthe oncoming people. In the town eyerybody stood asthey passed by in order to pay due honour to the sacredthings there present. Behind the flautist was a bullock,with gilded horns and crowned with olive. This bullock,who perhaps carried the fruits or drew the cart, was latersacrificed.3sl Having arrived at the holy mountain,eyeryone, 'erren King Agrippa in person', took up hisbasket and walked up to the parvis.35z The doves thatwere perched on it served as burnt-offerings,353 and what

3{

The General Functions of the Sacrifice

was carried in the hand was handed oyer to the priest.

Thus in each case two means were superimposed uporr

each other to rid the firstfruits of holiness: consecra-

tion in the temple, sacrifice of the bullock, and sacrificc

of the doves, personifications of the virtues considered to

inhabit them.The comparison just made between the case of the

nazir and individuai expiation, betrveen the case of the

firstfruits and that of other things which must be rid of

a religious character more truly evil, Ieads us to an im*

portant observation. It is already a remalkable fact that,

in a general lvay, sacrifice could serve two such contra-

dictory aims as that of inducing a state of sanctity and

that of dispelling a state of sin. Since it is composed of thesame elements in both cases. there cannot exist betweenthese two states the clear-cut opposition that is generallyseen. But lve have also just seen that two states, one ofperfect purity, the other of impurity, could be the occa-

sion for the same sacrificial procedure, in which theelements are not only identical, but arranged in the sameorder and moving in the same direction. Conversely,moreoyer, it can happen that in certain conditions a stateof impurity is treated as if it were the opposite state. Thisis because we have only distinguished, at the same timeas the elementary mechanisms, types of an almostabstract nature, which in reality are usually inter-dependent. It would not be quite exact to representexpiation as an elimination pure and simple, in whichthe victim played merely the part of a passive inter-mediary or repository. The victim of the expiatory sacri-fice is more sacred than the sacrifier. There is laid uponit a consecration not always different from that which itaccluires in the sacrifices of sacralization. Thus we shall

58

The General Functions oif the Sacriftce

see rites of sacralization and expiatory rites combihed inone and the same sacrifice. The power that the victimcontains is of a complex nature: in the Hebrew litual theremains of the cremation of the red heifer, which arecollected in a purified place, make a man lvho is in anormal state impure by their contact, and yet serye topurify those who have acquired certain blemishes.ssaTo the same order of facts beiong certain of the contactsestablished betrveen the sacrifier and the victim after thesacrificial slauglrter: there are expiatory sacrifices inwhich, after the skin of the victim has been removed, thesacrifier must stand on or touch it before being completelypurified. In other cases the skin of the victim is draggedto the place for which the expiation is being made.s55 Inmore complex sacrifices, of which we shall have occasionto speah later, the elimination is compiicated by a processof absorption. In short, considering carefully the Hebrewsacrifice, the consecration of the victim is carried out inthe same way in tlrc hattat and the 'olah. Îhe rite ofattribution of the blood is merely more complete in theformer sacrifice. And it is remarkable that. the more com-plete the attribution of the blood, the more perfect theexpiatory exclusion. When the blood was carried into thesanctuary the victim was treated as impure and was burntoutside the carnp.s56 fn the opposite case, the victim waseaten by the priests like the consecrated portions of theshelamiru. What difference was there then between theimpnrity of the victim of the first hattat and the sacredcharacter of the victim of the second? fr[6ns-e1 ratherthere was a theological difference between the expiatorysacrifices and the sacrifices of sacralization. In t}.e hattatand in the other sacrifices there was indeed an attributionof blood at the altar, but the altar was divided by a red

59

VThe General Functions of the Sacriftce

line. The blood of tlne hattat was poured out beneath the

line; the blood of the burnt-offering, above it.36? Two

religious functions were present, but the distinction

between them was not very profound.

This is indeed because, as Robertson Smith has clearly

shown, what is pure and what is impure are not mutually

exclusive opposites; they are two aspects of religious

reality. The religious forces are characterized by their

intensity, their importance, their dignity; consequently

they are separated. That is what makes them what they

are, but the direction in which they are exerted is not

necessarily predetermined by their nature. They can be

exerted for good as well as for evil. It depends on the cir-

crrnstances, the rites employed, etc. Thus is explainedthe way in which the same mechanism of sacrifice cansatisfy religious needs the difference between wbich isextreme. It bears the same ambiguity as the religious

forces themselves. It can tend to both good and evil; the

victim represents death as well as life, illness as well ashealth, sin as well as virtue, falsity as well as truth. It is

the means of concentration of religious feeling; it ex-

presses it, it incarnates it, it carries it along. By actingupon the victim one acts upon religious feeling, directsir either by attracting and absorbing it, or by expellingand eliminating it. Thus in the same way is explained thefact that by suitable procedures these two forms of reli-

gious feeling can be transformed into each other, andthat rites which in certain cases appear contradictory aresometimes almost indistinguishable.

Chapter F our

HOW THE SCHEMEVARItrS ACCORDING TO THESPtrCIAL F'T]NCTIOI{S OF' THE

SACRIF'ICE

WB HAVB JUST DEMONSTRATED how our scheme isvaried to adapt itself to the different religious states inwhich the person affected by the sacrifice, be he who hemay, finds himself. But we haye not concerned ourselveswitir discovering what this person was in himself, butmerely whether or not he possessed a sacred characterbefore the ceremony. It is easy to predict, however, thatthe sacrifice cannot be the same when it is performed onbehalf of the sacrifier himself or of a thing in which hehas a special interest. Then the functions that it fulfilsmust become specialized. Let us see what differencescome about on this score.

We have called those sacrifices personal that directlyconcern the person of the sacrifier himself. From thisdefinition it follows that these all have one primecharacteristic in common: since the sacrifier is thebeginning and the end of the rite, the act begins andfinishes with him. It is a closed cycle about the sacrifier.Of course, we certainly know that there is always at least

6r6o

wThe Special Functions of the Sacriftce

an attribution of the spirit of the thing sacrificed to thegod or to the religious power that operates in the sacrifice.But the fact remains that the act accomplished by thesacrifier is of direct benefit to him.

Secondly, in all these kinds of sacrifice the sacrifier, bythe end of the ceremony, has improved his lot, either be-

cause he has eradicated the evil to rvhich he was a prey,

or because he has regained a state of grace, or becausehe has acquired a divine power. There are e.tren numer-

ous rituals in which a special formula, either at the exitor at the solemn moment of consecration, gives expressionto this change, the salvation that is rvrought3ss or theway in which the sacrifier is transported into the r,vorldof life.35e It may even happen that the communionbrings about a hind of alienation of the personality. Byeating the sacred thing, in which the god is thought tobe immanent, the sacrifier absorbs him. He is possessedby lrim, xdroyoq ix rori Oeori 1iverar,360 just as was thepriestess of the temple of Apollo on the Acropolis of ,\rgoswhen she had drunk the blood of the sacrificed lamb. Itwould seem, it is true, that expiatory sacrifice might nothave the same effect. But in reality the 'Day of Atone-ment' is also the'day of God'. It is the day when thosewho escape from sin by sacrifice are inscribed 'in thebook of life'.361 As in the case of saclalization, the linkbetween the sacred and the sacrifier, rvhich is establishedthrough the victim, regenerates the sacrifier and giveshim a new power. By the very fact that sin and deathhave been eliminated, favourably disposed forces comeinto play on behalf of the sacrifier.

This regeneration through personal sacrifice has givenlise to some important religious beliefs. Firstly, we mustlink with it the theory of rebirth by sacrifice. We have

6z

The Specral Functfons oif the Sacriftce

seen the symbols which identify the dikshrta with afoetus, then a Brahmin and a god. We know the im-portance of the doctrines of rebirth in the Greek mys-teries, the Scandinavian and Celtic mlthologies, the cultof Osiris, the Hindu and Avestan theologies, and even inChristian dogma. Norv very often these doctrines areiinked distinctly rvith the accomplishment of certainsacrificial rites: the consuming of the cake at Eleusis, oft};.e soma, of the franian haoma, slg.3 Gz

Often a change of name marks this re-creation of theindividual. We know rhat in religious belief the name iscloseiy iinked with the personality of him who bears it:it contains something of his soul.s6s Now sacrifice isaccompanied fairly frequently by a change of name. fnsome cases this change is restricted to the addition of anepithet. In India, even today, one may bear the title ofdikshita.364 But sometimes the name is comnletelvchanged. In the early Church the neophytes, after iavi.rgbeen exorcized, were baptized on Easter Day. Then, afterthis baptism, they were given communion, and a newname was bestowed upon them.s65 fn Jer,vish practiceeven today the same rite is employed rvhen one,s life is indanger.366 Nolv it is probable that this lvas formerlyaccompanied by sacrifice. \4/e know that at the momentof agony an expiatory sacrifice was offered by the Jews,B o zas moreover in all the religions of which we have ade-quate knowledge.368 It is therefore natural to think thatboth change of name and expiatory sacrifice formed partof the same complex of ritual, giving expr.ession to theradical modification that is brought about at that momentin the person of the sacrifier.

This vitalizing pon'el of sacrifice is nor limited to lifehere below, but is extended to the future life. In the

b5

The Special Functions of the Sacriftce

course of religious eyolution the notion of sacrifice hasbeen linked to ideas concerning the immortality of thesoul. On this point we have nothing to add to the theoriesof Rohde, Jevons, and Nutt on the Greek mysteries,soe

with which must be compared the facts cited by S. Ldvitaken from the teachings of the Brahmanas,s ? o and those

that Bergaigne and Darmesteter had already gleanedfrom the Vedica?1 and Avestans?2 texts. The reiationshipthat connects Christian communion with everlasting sal-yslisnrzr must also be mentioned. However importantthese facts may be, their importance must not be exag-

gerated. So long as the belief in immortality is not dis-entangled from the crude theology of sacrifice it remainsyague. It is the 'non-death' (amritam) of the soul that isensured by sacrifice. It is a guarantee against annihila-tion in the other life as weil as in this. But the idea ofpersonal immortality has only been divorced from thepreceding one after a philosophical elaboration, and more-over the concept of another life does not have its originsin the institution of sacrifice.s?a

The number, variety, and complexity of objectivesacrifices are such that we can only deal rvith themrather summarily. Save for the agricultural sacrifice, thestudy of which is now fairly well advanced, we shall haveto content ourselves with general remarks that show howthese sacrifices are linked to our general scheme.

The typical characteristic of objective sacrifices is tiratby definition, the chief effect of the rite accrues to someobject other than the sacrifier. Indeed, the sacrifice doesnot return to its point of departure; the things that itaims at modifying lie outside the sacrifier. The effectproduced upon him is thus secondary. Consequently, therites of entry and exit, which are concerned particularly

64

The Special Functions of the Sacriftce

with the sacrifier, become rudimentary. It is the middlestage, the consecration, tvhich tends to occupy more room.

Above all else, spirit must be created,azs lvhether toattribute it to the real or mythical being that the sacrifice

concerns, or so that something may be freed from somesacred power that made it unapproachable, or, on theother irand, to transform this power into pure spirit----orto pursue both purposes at the same time.

But moreover, the special nature of the object whoseinterests are concerned in the sacrifice modifies the sacri-fice itself. In the building sacrifice,sT6 for example, onesets out to create a spirit who will be the guardian of thehouse, altar, or town that one is building or wants tobuild, and which will become the power within it.s??Thus the rites of attribution are developed. The skull ofthe human victim, the cock, or the head of the owl, iswailed up. Again, depending on the nature of the build-ing, whether it is to be a temple, a to\yn) or a mele house,the importance of the victim differs. According as thebuilding is already built or is about to be built, the objectof the sacrifice will be to create the spirit or the protectingdivinity, or to propitiate the spirit of the soil which thebuilding operations are about to harm.3?s The colour ofthe victim yaries accordingly: it is, for example, black ifthe spirit of the earth has to be propitiated, rvhite if afavourable spirit is to be created.s?e The rites of destruc-tion are themselves not identical in the two cases.

In the sacrifice of request, it is sought above all tobring about certain special effects defined in the rite. Ifthe sacrifice is the fulfilment of a promise already made,if it is carried out to release the promiser from the moraland religious bond that binds him, the victim has tosome extent an expiatory character.sso If on the other

65

The Special Functions oif the Sacriftce

hand it is sought to bind the god by a contract, the sacri-fice has rather the form of an attribution:3at do ut des isthe principle, and consequently no portion is set asidefor the sacrifiers. If it is desired to thank the divinity fora special favour,382 the burnt-offering--that is to say thetotal attribution-or the shelamtm-the sacrifice in whicha portion is left over for the sacrifier-may be manda-tory. On the other hancl, the importance of the victim isin direct proportion to the gravity of the vow. fn short,the special characteristics of the victim depend on thenature of the thing desired: if rain is sought, one sacri-fices black co$.s,383 or interposes into the sacrifice a blackhorse on which lvater is poured,3sa etc. A very plausiblereason can be given for this principle. As in the magicaiact with which these rites are in certain respects boundup, the rite acts fundamentally by itself. The force un-leashed is an effective one. The victim is moulded onthe votive formula, is incorporated in it, fills and ani-mates it, bears it up to the gods, becomes its spirit, its

' Yehicle '. 3 8 5

We have only sketched out horv the theme of sacrificevaries according to the different effects that it is designedto obtain. Let us see how the various mechanisms wehave distinguished can be combined in one single sacri-fice. From this point of vierv the agrarian sacrifices areexcellent examples. For, though in essence objective, theyhave neyertheless considerable effects upon the sacrifier.

These sacrifices have a double object. Firstly, they aredestined to allow the land to be worked and its productsutilized, by lifting the prohibitions that protect them.Secondly, they are a means of fertilizing the cultivatedfields, and of preserving their life when after the harvestthey appear stripped and deacl. fn fact, the fields and

66

The Special Functions o1f the Sacriftce

their products are considered as eminently alive. Thereresides in them a religious principle that slumbers inwinter, reappears in spring, is manifested in the harvest,and thus malies harvest difficult for mortals to enterupon. Sometimes this principle is even represented as aspirit that mounts guard over the earth and its fruits. Itpossesses them, and it is this possession that constitutestheir sanctity. It must therefore be eliminated in orderthat the harvest and the use of the crops be madepossible. But at the same time, since it is the very life ofthe field, after having been expelled it must be recreatedand fixed in the earth whose fertility it produces. Thesacrifices of simple desacralization maybe adequate for thefirst need, but not for the second. Thus, for the most partagrarian sacrifices have a multiplicity of effects. In themdifferent forms of sacrifice are found combined. This isone of the cases rnshere we observe best that fundamentalcomplexity of sacrifice lvhich we cannot over-emphasize.Thus we do not claim, in these few pages, to present ageneral theory of agrarian sacrifice. We do not venture toforesee all the apparent, exceptions, and lve cannot un-ravel the tangle of historical developments. We shall con-fine or-rrselrres to the analysis of a rvell-knorvn sacrificewhich has already been the object of a number. of studies.This is the sacrifice to Zeus Polieus which the Athenianscelebrated at the festival known by the name of. Dtipotiaor Bouphonia.}86

This festival3 s ? took place in the month of June, at theend of the harvest and the beginning of the corn-threshing season. The chief ceremony took place on theAcropolis at the altar of Zeus Polieus. Cakes .rvere laid ona bronze table. l 'hey were unguarded.sss Then bullockswere let loose. Orre of them approached the altar, ate a

o7

The Special Functions o1f the Sacifice

portion of the offerings, and trampled the rest under-

foot.sag Immediately one of the sacrificers struck it with

his axe. When it was brought to the ground, a second

sacrificer finished it off by slitting its throat with a knife.

Others flayed it, r rhile the one who had struck the first

blow took flight. After the judgement at the Prytaneion

which we have already mentioned, the flesh of the

buliock was shared among those present, the skin, after

having been filled with straw' was sewn up again, and

the stuffed aninral was harnessed to a plough.

These singular practices gave rise to legend. Three

different versions attributed it to three different person-

ages: one to Diomos, the priest of Zeus Poiieus, another tr-r

Sopatros, the third to Thaulon'3e0 these seemed indeed

to be the mythical ancestors of the priests of this sacrifice.

In all three versions the priest iays the offering upon the

altarl a bullock approaches and appropriates it; the furious

priest strikes the sacrilegious animal and, now sacri-

legious himself, goes into exile. The longest of these

versions is the one in which Sopatros is the hero. A

drought and a famine result from his crime. When the

PJthian oracle is consulted, she tells the Athenians that

the exiled priest could save them. The murderer must be

punished, the victim brought back to life in a sacrifice

sirnilar to the one in which it died, and its flesh eaten.

Sopatros is brought back, his rights are restored to him so

that he may offer up the sacrifice, and the festival is

celebrated as described.

Such are the facts: what do they rneanZ In this festival

three actions must be distinguished: (i) the death of the

victim, (ii) the communion, (iii) the victim's resurrec-

t ion.3 e r

At the beginning of the ceremony cakes and seeds are

6B

The Special Functions o1f the Sacrifice

laid upon the aitar. These are probably the firstfruits ofthe threshed corn.sez This oblation is similar to all thosewhich allow the profane to use the harvest. All the sanc-tity of the corn to be threshed has been concentratedinthe cakes.gea The bullock touches them. The suddennessof the blow that strikes it demonstrates that, like a light-ning flash, consecration has passed over it. It has em-bodied the divine spirit immanenr in the firstfruits it haseaten. ft becomes that spirit, so much so that its slaughteris a sacrilege. 'fhe victim of the agrarian sacrifice alwaysrepresents symbolically the fields and their products.Thus it is brought into contact with them before thefinal conservation. In the present instance the bullockeats the cake made of the firstfruits, in others it is ledthrough the fields or the victim is killed with agriculturalimplements or half-buried.

But the facts rnust be considered in another light. Thevictim, as well as the field, can also represent the devoteeswho are about to profane the harvest by putting it toqss.sea Not only did the products of the ear-th cause thesacrifier to go auray, he could eyen be in such a conditionthat he had to remain away from them. The sacrifice rvasto remedy that condition. In certain cases purificatorypractices took place during the ceremony. Thus a con-fession was linked to the sacrifice.ses At other times thesacrifice itself effected this kind of expiation. It could beconsidered as a real redemption. In this way the Passoverbecame a general rite of redemption on the occasion ofthe eating of the firstfruits. Not only was the life of thefirst-bornsed among men redeemed by the blood of thePaschal lamb,ssz but every Hebrew was also freed fromdanger. These facts might perhaps be compared with thecontests that took place between the sacrifiers at certain

69

The Special Ftnrctions of the Sacrfice

agrarian festivals.3es The blows appeared to sanctify,

pirrify, and redeem them. Thus, in the first moment of the

iite,rne a double action takes place: (i) the desacralizatio'

of the harvested and threshed corn by means of the victim

which represents it; (ii) rhe redemption of the harvest-

women and the ploughmen by the immolation of this

victim, rvho rePt'esenLs tltem.

For the Diipolia, the documents do not allude to a

communication taking place betlveen the sacrifier and the

victim before the consecration. But it does occur after-

rvard.s: it is realized in a communion mealao0 which

constitutes a new phase in the ceremony. After the sacri-

ficers have been absolved from their sacrilege those

present may dare to take communion' We recall that,

according to the mJth, the P}thian oracle had advised

them to do so.a01 A large number of agrarian sacrifices

are followed by a similar kind of communion'4oz By

virtue of this communion the sacrifiers of the Diipolia

shared in the sacred" nature of the victim. They recelved

a form of consecration that was modified, because it was

sharecl ancl because a portion of the builock remained

intact. Invested. with the same sacred character as the

things they wished to use, they could approach 1[s6'aoa

It is-5y a rite of this character that the Kaffirs of Natal

and Zululand, ab the beginning of the year, permit

themselves to use the new fruits; the flesh of a victim is

coohed with seeds, fruits, ancl vegetables' The king places

a little in the mouth of each man, and this communion

sanctifies him the whole year through'ro't The com-

munion of the Passover had the same result'aos Very

often, in the sacrifices celebrated before the ploughing,

the ploughman is given a portion of the victim's flesh'a06

tt is true that this communion may appear to be useless,.70

The Speaal Functions o1f the Sacriftce

since the preliminary sacrifice has already had the effect

of profaning the earth and the seeds. It seems to have had

a dual use,40? and it is indeed possible that sometimes

the communion sufficed to bring about the effect desired.

But it generally follows upon a desacralization, which

aiready produces a first profanation. This is very notice-

able in the Hindu rite of tl:.e Varunapraghasas. The

barley is consecrated to Vamro,408 it is his food.a0e The

mj.th relates that formerly the creatures that partook ofit became dropsical. It is through the rite of n'hich we

are about to speak that they escaped this danger.nto [1 i5

performed as follows. Among other offerings,all two

priests make from grains of barley two figurines in theform of a ram and a ewe lamb. The sacrifier and his wifeplace on the ewe and the ram respectively tufts of woolthat represent breasts and testicles, in as great a quan-tity as possible.alz Then the sacrifice is performed; aportion is attributed to \taruna, as well as other offeringsof barley. Then the rest is solemnly eaten. Varuna,

'through the sacrifice, is driven away'413 and is elimin-ated. Those who eat the barley are freed from the 'bond'with which he might bind them. Then, by eating theremains of the figurines, the very spirit of the barley isabsorbed. The communion is thus clearly superadded tothe desacralization. In this and similar cases, it is doubt-less feared that the profanation has not been complete,and, moreover, that the sacrifier has received only asemi-consecration. The sacrifice establishes a balancebetween the sanctity of the object to be brought into useand that of the sacrifier.

But in sacrifices whose purpose is to fertilize theearth7414 that is, to infuse into it a divine life, or to rendermore active the life it may possess, there is no longer

7t


question, as before, of eliminating from it a sacred charac-

ter. One must be communicated to it. Thus the pro-

cesses of direct or indirect comrnunication are necessarily

involved in operations of this kind. A spirit that will

make it fertile must be fixed in the soil. The Khonds

sacrificed human victims to ensure the fertility of the

earth. The flesh was shared olrt anrong the differertt

groups and buried in the fields.4rs Elsewhere the blood of

the human victim was sprinkled over the earth.alo In

Europe ashes are spread on the fields on the feast of St

John, blessed bread on the feast of St Antony,alz the

bones of animals at Easter and other festivals.ale But often

the whole of the victim was not used in this way, and, as

at the Bouphonia, the sacrifiers received their share.41e

Sometimes it was even attributed to them in its entirety.

It was a way of allowing the ploughman to share in the

benefits of consecration, and perhaps eyen to entrust to

his charge the forces that he assimilated to himself, and

which, in other cases, were fixed in the field. Moreover,

the remnants of the meal were sown later, when it came

to sowing or ploughing time.a20 Or indeed a fresh victim

was shared out, a new incarnation of the agrarian spirit,

and the life that had formerly been drawn from the

earth was disseminated in it once more. What was givenback to the earth was what had been borrowed from it.a2r

This fundamental correspondence between the rites of

profanation of the firstfruits and those of the fertilization

of the fields, between the two victims-this could in cer-tain cases give rise to a veritable fusion of the two cere-

monies, rn'hich were then practised on the same victim.

This is what happened at the Bouphonia. These are a

sacrifice with a dual aspect: they are a sacrifice of the

threshingr since they began by an offering of the first-

72

The Special Functions of the Sacrifice

fruits, but they have also as their ultimate purpose thefertilization of the earth. Indeed. we haye seen thataccording to the legend the festival was established so asto put a stop to a famine and a drought. It might evenbe said that the communion carried out by using thebullock's flesh has likewise this dual purpose: to allowthe consumption of the new grain, and to bestow a spe-cial blessing on the citizens for their future agriculturaltasks.

But Iet us continue with our analysis of the data. Wearrive at the third phase of our rite. Sopatros, by killingthe bullock, had killed the spirit of the corn, and the cornhad not grown again. According to the terms of the oracle,the second sacrifice must bring the dead victim back tolife. This is why the dead bullock is stuffed with straw;the stuffed bullock422 is the bullock brought back to life.It is harnessed to the plough. The imitation 'ploughing'that it is made to carry out over the fields corresponds tothe dispersal of the victim among the Khonds. But it mustbe noticed that the individual existence of the bullockand of its spirit survives both the eating of its flesh andthe diffusion of its sacredness. This spirit, which is theyery same that has been extracted from the harvestwhen reaped, is to be found again in the skin sewn upafterhaving been filled with stra\ry. This characteristicis not peculiar to the Bouphonia. fn one of the Mexicanfestivals, to represent the rebirth of the spirit of agricul-ture the dead victim was skinned and the skin put on thevictim that rvas to succeed it the follorving vear.a23 InLusatia, at the spring festival, in which the 'dead one',the old god of vegetation, is buried, the shirt from themanikin that represents it is removed and immediatelyplaced on the May tree;azr with the garment, the spirit

75

The Specral Functions oif the Sacriftce

is also removed. It is thus the victim itself that is reboln.Norv this victim is the very spirit of vegetalion, which, atfirst concentrated in the firstfruits, rvas then carriedover into the animal, and has, rnoreover, been pr.rrified

and rejuvenated by the immolation. It is thus the very

principle of germination and fertility; it is the life of thefieids that is in this way reborn and revivified.426

What is especially striking in this sacrifice is the un-broken continuity of this life whose duration and trans-

mission it ensures. Once the spirit has been released bythe sacrificial slaughter, it rernains fixed in the place towhich the rite has directed it. In the Bouphonia it residesin the manikin of the stuffed bullock. \Arhen the resur-rection was not represented by a special ceremony, thepreservation of a part of the victim or of the ciblationattested to the persistence and presence of the spirit thatresided rvithin it. In Rome not only rvas the head of theOctober holse preserved, but its blood also n'as kept untilthe Palilia.426 The ashes of the sacrifice of the Forci-diciae lvere likewise kept until that time.az? fn Atheusthe remains of the pigs sacrificed at the Thesmophoria42 8

were stored away. These relics served as a body for thespirit reieased by the sacrifice. They allowed it to beseized and used, but-and this first of all-to be pre-served. The periodical return of the sacrifice at timeswhen the earth became bare assured the continuity ofnatural life. It permitted the localizing and fixing of thesacred character that it was advantageous to preserve,and u.hich reappeared the following year in the neu'fruits of the soil, to be incarnated again in a fresh victim.

'Ihe succession of agrarian sacrilices thr-rs presents anunbroken series of concentrations and diffusions. As soonas the vjctim has become a spirit, a genius, it is shared

74,

The Special Functions of the Sacrifice

out, it is dispr:rsecl, so that life may be sorvn rvith it. So

that this life may not be lost-and there is ahvays risk

of losing a little of it, as witness the story of Pelops and

his ivory shoulder-it must from time to time be brought

together again. The myth of Osiris, rvhose scattered limbs

were reassembled by Isis, is an image of this rhlthm and

alternation. fn short, the sacrifice contained in itself the

condition of its recurrence, not taking into account the

regular reclrll'ence of the labour of the fields. Moreover,this is laid clou'n in the legend that record.s the institution

of these sacrifices. The Pythian oracle prescribed theindefinite repetition of the Bouphonia, and other cere-monies of the sarle kind. Any intc.rruption was incon-ceivable.

fn a u'ord, just as personal sacrifice ensured the life ofthe person, so the objective sacrifice in general and theagrarian sacrificc in particular ensure the real and health-ful life of things.

Yet generaliy the cerenronial of thc agrarian sacrifices,one t)'pe of which we have just analysed, has been over-laid rvith ancillary rites, or even distorted according tothe interpretation that has been put on certain of itspractices. Magical rites of rain and sun are generallymixed up rvith it: the victim is drolvned, or water ispoured upon it; the fire of sacrifice or special fires repre-sent the fire of the sun.a2e On the other hand, it couldhappen that u'heu the rites of desacralization, whether ofobject or sacrifier, predominated, the whole rite couldtake on the character of a true expiatory sacrifice,as0 asFrazer has shown. The spirit of the fields that came outof the victim took on the form of a scapegoat.asl Theagrarian festival became a festival of Atonement. fnGreece thc mlths that recorded the institution of these

/c


festivals often represented them as the periodical ex-piation of original crimes. Such is the case with theBouphonia.asz

Thus from one single agrarian sacrifice a whole body ofconsequences may emerge. The value of the victim of asolemn sacrifice was so great, the expansive force of theconsecration so wide, that it was impossible to limit itsefficacy in an arbitrary fashion. The victim was a centreof attraction and radiated influences from it. The thingsthat the sacrifice could attain received their share of theseinfluences. According to the condition, nature, and needsof persons or objects, the effects produced could differ.

76

Chapter F ive

THtr SACRIF'ICE OF THE, GOD

THIS SINGULAR VALUE OF THE VICTIM clearlyappears in one of the most perfected forms of the histori-cal evolution of the sacrificiai system: the sacrifice of thegod. Indeed, it is in the sacrifice of a divine personagethat the idea of sacrifice attains its highest expression.Consequently it is under this guise that it has penetratedinto the most recent religions and given rise to beliefsand practices still current.

We shall see holv the agrarian sacrifices rvere able toprovide the point of departure for this evolution. Mann-hardt and F'razera33 already saw clearly the close con-nexions between the sacrifice of the god and the agrariansacrifices. We shall not recapitulate those points of thetopic that they have already dealt with. But, with thehelp of some additional facts, we shall seek to show howthis form of sacrifice is linked to the yery essence of themechanism of sacrifice. Our main efforts will be especiallydirected towards determining the considerable part thatmythology has played in this development.

fn order that a god may thus descend to the role of avictim, there must be some affinity between his natureand that of his victims. So that he may come to submithimself to destruction by sacrifice, his own origins mustbe in the sacrifice itself. fn certain respects this conditionappears to be fulfilled in all sacrifices, for the victim has

77

Yf

The Sacriftce oif the God

by a sacrifigs.la2 The goddess Toci, mother of the gods,was also presented as a woman whom sacrifice madedivine.448 In the same country, at the festival of the godTotec, prisoners were killed and flayed, and a priestdonned the skin of one of them and became the image ofthe god. He wore the god's ornaments and garb, sat on athrone, and received in his place the images of the first-fruits.e44 In the Cretan legend of Dionysus, the heart ofthe god, n'ho had been slaughtered by the Titans, wasplaced \n a eoanon, lvhere it rvas worshipped.44s Philo ofByblos uses a very significant expression to describe thestate of Okeanos, mutilated by his son Kronos: 'he wasconsecrated', d,grep60r2.44 6 Jn these legends subsists avague consciousness of the power of sacrifice. A vestigepersists also in the rites. At Jumibges, for example, wherethe part of the annual vegetation spirit was taken by aman whose tenure of office lasted for a year from Mid-summer Day, a pretence was made of casting the futureloup uert into the log fire. After this simulated executionhis predecessor handed oyer to him his insignia ofoffice.aa? The ceremony did not have as its effect merelyto embody the spirit of agriculturel the spirit was bornin the sacrifice itself.448 Now, given that we cannot dis-tinguish between evil spirits and agrarian victims, thesefacts are precisely examples of what we have stated con-cerning consecration and its direct effects. The sacrificialapotheosis is none other than the rebirth. of the victim.Its divinization is a special case and a superior kind ofsanctification and separation.,But this form hardly occulssave in sacrifices where, by localizing, concentrating, andaccumulating a sacred character, the victim is investedwith the highest degree of sanctity-a sanctity organizedand personified in the sacrifice./

8o

The Sacrifice of the God

\This is the nece.ssary condition for the sacrifice of the

god to be possible.)But in order that it may become a

reality, it is not enough for the god to have emerged from

the victim.) He must still possess his divine nature in its

entirety at the moment when he enters again into the

sacrifice to become a victim himself. This means that the

personification from which he has resulted must become

lasting and necessary. This indissoiuble association be-

tween creatures or a species of creatures and a super-

natural polver is the fruit of the regular recurrence of the

sacrifices, rvhich is here in question. The repetition of

these ceremonies in which, as a result of a habit or for any

other reason, the same victim reappears at regular inter-

vals has created a kind of continuous personality. Sincethe sacrifice preseryes its secondary effects, the creationof the divinity is the work of previous sacrifices. And thisis no chance, irrelevant fact, since, in a religion asabstract as Clrristianity, the figure of the Paschal Lamb,

the customary victim of an agrarian or pastoral sacrifice,has persisted and still serves even today to designate

Christ, that is to say God. Sacrifice has furnished theelements of divine symbolism.

But it is the imagination of the creators of mJths whichhas perfected the elaboration of the sacrifice of the God.Indeed, imagination has given firstly a status and a his-tory and consequently a more continuous life to theintermittent, du1l, and passive personality, which wasborn from the regular occurrence of sacrifices. This iswithout taking into account the fact that by releasing it

from its earthly womb, it has made it more divine. Some-times we can even foilow in the myth the various phasesof this progressive divinization. Thus the great Dorian

8r

I

The Sacrifce oif the God

festival of the I(arneia, celebrated in honour of ApolloKarneios, nas instituted, it was related, to expiate themurder of the soothsayer Karnos, slain by the HeraclidFlippotes.aae Now Apollo Karneios is none other than thesoothsayer Karnos whose sacrifice is accomplished andexpiated like that of the Diipolia. And Karnos himself, 'thehorned one',450 becomes confused with the hero Krios,

'the ram',asr ths hpostasis of the original animal vic-tim. From the sacrifice of the ram my-thology had createdthe murder of a hero and aftern'ards transformed thislatter into a great national god.

But, though mlthology has elaborated the representa-tion of the divine, it has not worhed upon arbitrary facts.

.The myths preserye traces of their origin: a sacrifice inmore or less distorted form constitutes the central episodeand, so to speak, the heart of the legendary iife of thegods that arose from sacrificer Sylvain Ldvi has explainedthe part that sacrificial rites play in Brahmanic rny.th-ology.ns' Let us see hol, more especially, the history ofthe agrarian gods is woven on to a bachcloth of agrarianrites. To demonstrate this we will group together sometypes of Greek or Semitic legends, resembling those ofAttis and Adonis, n'hich are so many distortions of thethcme of the sacrifice of the god. Some are mJths thatexplain the institution of certain ceremonies, others aretales generally arising from mJths similar to the for-mer'.453 Often the comrnemorative rites that corresponclto these legends (sacred dramas, processions, etc.)454have, so far as u.e knolr., none of the characteristics ofsacrifice. But the theme of the sacrifice of the god is amotif r,virich mythoiogical imagination has freely used.

The tomb of Zeus in Crete,a55 the death of Pan,$0and that of Adonis are weII enough known for a mere

8z

The Sacrtfice oif the God

mention of them to suffice. Adonis has left in Syrian

legend descendants who share his fate.as? It is true that

in some cases the divine tombs are perhaps monuments of

the cult of the dead. But more frequently, in our opinion,

the mythical death of the god recalls the ritual saclifice.

It is w'rapped up in the legend, rvhich is othern'ise

obscure, handed down in a garbled form and incornplete

as to circumstances that might allow us to determine its

true nature.On the Assyrian tablet of the legend of Adapa we may

read:a58 'From the earth have disappeared two gods;this is why I lvear the garb of mourning. Who are thesetwo gods? They are Du-mu-zu and Gish-zi-da.' TheThe death of Du-mu-zu is a mlthical sacrifice. This isproved by the fact that Ishtar, his mother and wife,wishes to brirrg him bach to iifease by pouring over hiscorpse \yater from the spr-ing of life, rvhich she hasfetched from hell-for in this she imitates the rites ofcertain agralian feasts. \Vhen the spirit of the fields hasdied or has been put to death, its body is thrown into thewater or is sprinkled with water. Then, whether it isrestored to life or whether a May tree rises up above itstomb, life is reborn. Here it is the lvater poured over thecorpse, and the resurrection, which cause us to identifythe dead god with an agrarian victim. In the m)'th ofOsiris it is the dispersal of the corpse and the tree rvhichgrows on his coffin.a00 At Troezen, in the periboh.rm ofthe temple of Hippolytus, an annual festival commemo-rated the ),r,0op6lra, the death of the goddesses Damiaand Auxesia, virgins and strangers from Crete, rvhoaccording to tradition had been stoned in a revolt.a e r fhsforeign goddesses are the stranger, the passer-by n'hooften plays a part in the festivals of the harvestl the

85

The Sacriftce o1f the God tl

stoning is a rite of sacrifice. Often the mere wounding of

a god is equivalent to his yearly death. Belen, asleep in

the Blumenthal at the foot of the rounded mountain top

of Guebwiller, was wounded in the foot by a wild boar,

just as Adonis rvas, and from every drop of blood that

flowed from his wound sprang up a florver.a62

jhe death of the god is often by suicidel Herahles on

Oeia, Melkart at Tyre,a63 the god Sandes or Sandon at

Tarsus,a6a Dido at Carthage-all burnt themselves to

death. The death of Melkart was commemorated each

summer by a festival which was a festival of the harvest.

Greek myhology has goddesses rvho bore the name of

'Ana1Xop6v1, the 'hanged' goddesses: such were Artemis,

Hecate, and Helen.a65 At Athens the hanged goddess

was Erigone, the mother of Staphylos, the hero of the

grape.a60 At Delphi she was called Charila'ao? Charila,

the story went, was a little girl who during a famine had

gone to the king to ask him for her share of the last

distribution of food. Beaten and driven away by him, she

had hanged herself in an isolated valley. Now an annual

festival was celebrated in her honour, instituted, it was

said, by the Pythian oracle. It began with a distribution

of corn. Then an image of Charila was madel it was

beaten, hung, and buried. In other legends the god

inflicts upon himself some mutilation from which he

sometimes dies. Such is the case with Attis and lvith

Eshmun, who pursued by Astronoe, mutilated himself

with an axe.

r{t was often the founder of a cult or the chief priest

of ihe qod rvhose death was related in the myth. Thus at

Iton, IJdama, on whose tomb burnt a sacred fire, was the

priestess of Athena ltonia.r6s In the same way Aglauros

of Athens, whose death the Plynteria were supposed to

B4

The Sacrft)ce of the God

erpiate, was also the priest of Athena. In reality the

priest and the god are but one and the same person.

Indeed we know that the priest can be an incarnation of

the god as well as the victim: often he disguises himself

in the god's likeness. But here there is the first differen-

tiation, a sort of mythological doubling of the divine

being and the victim.a6e Thanks to this doubling the god

appears to escape death.

It is to a differentiation of another kind that those

my'ths are due rvhose central episode is a god's combat

with a monster or another god. In Babylonian mythology

such are the figlrts of Marduk with Tiamat, that is to say

with Chaos;4 ? 0 those of Perseus killing the Gorgon or the

dragon of Joppa, of Bellerophon struggling against the

Chimera, of St. George vanquishing the Dajjal.a?r This

is also the case rvith the labours of Herakies, and indeed

with all theomachies, for in all these contests the van-

quished is as divine as the conqueror.

This episode is one of the mythological forms of the

sacrifice of the god. These divine struggles are indeed

equivalent to the death of a single god. They alternate in

the same festivals.a?2 The Isthmian games, celebrated in

spring, commemorate either the death of Melikertes or

the victory of 'fheseus over Sinis. The Nemean games

celebrate either the death of Archemoros or the Yictory of

Herakles over th.e Nemean lion. They are sometimes

accompanied by the same incidents. The defeat of the

monster is followed by the marriage of the god, of Per-

seus with Andromeda, of Herakles with Hesione. The

betrothed lvho is a prey to attack by the monster and is

delivered by the helo is moreoyer none other than the

'Muy Bride' of German legend, pursued by the spirits of

the wild hunt. In the cult of Attis the sacred marriage8g

The Sacrifice o1f the God t/

stoning is a rite of sacrifice. Often the mere wounding ofa god is equivalent to his yearly death. Belen, asleep in

the Blumenthal at the foot of the rounded mountain top

of Guebwiller, was wounded in the foot by a vvild boar,just as Adonis 'was, and from every drop of blood that

flowed from his wound sprang up a flower.re z

Jhe death of the god is often by suicideT Herahles on

Oeta, Melkart at Tyre,a63 the god Sandes or Sandon at

Tarsus,aoa Dido at carthage-all burnt themselves to

death. The death of Melkarr was commemorated each

summer by a festival which was a festival of the harvest.

Greek mythology has goddesses who bore the name of'AzayXop6vr;, the (hangedt goddesses: such were Artemis,

Hecate, and Heien.ros {1 Athens the hanged goddesswas Erigone, the mother of Staphylos, the hero of the

grape.46o At Delphi she was called Charila.a6? Charila,

the story went, \Mas a little girl who during a famine had

gone to the king to ask him for her share of the last

distribution of food. Beaten and driven away by him, she

had hanged herself in an isolated valley. Now an annual

festival was celebrated in her honour, instituted, it rvas

said, by the PJthian oracle. It began with a distribution

of corn. Then an image of Charila was madel it was

beaten, hungr and buried. In other legends the godinflicts upon himself some mutilation from rvhich he

sometimes dies. Such is the case with Attis and with

Eshmun, who pursued by Astronoe, mutilated himself

with an axe.

r{t was often the founder of a cult or the chief priest

of the god rvhose death was related in the myth. Thus at

Iton, Iodama, on whose tomb btrrnt a sacred fire, rvas the

priestess of Athena ftonia.rss In the same \yay Aglauros

of Athens, whose death the Plynteria were supposed toU4

The Sacrt/t)ce of the God

erpiate, was also the priest of Athena. In reaiity the

priest and the god are but one and the same person.

Indeed we know that the priest can be an incarnation of

the god as well as the victim: often he disguises himself

in the god's likeness. But here there is the first differen-

tiation, a sort of mythological doubling of the divine

being and the victim.a6e Thanks to this doubling the god

appears to escape death.It is to a differentiation of another kind that those

my'ths are due n'hose central episode is a god's combat

with a monster or another god. In Babylonian mJthology

such are the fights of Marduk with Tiamat, that is to say

with Chaos;a 7 0 those of Perseus killing the Gorgon or the

dragon of Joppa, of Bellerophon struggling against the

Chimera, of St. George vanquishing the Dajjal.r?1 This

is also the case with the labours of Herakles, and indeed

with all theomachies, for in all these contests the van-

quished is as divine as the conqueror.This episode is one of the mythological forms of the

sacrifice of the god. These divine struggles are indeed

equivalent to the death of a single god. 'Ihey alternate in

the same festivals.aT2 The Isthmian games, celebrated in

spring, commemorate either the death of Meiikertes or

the victory of Theseus over Sinis. The Nemean gamescelebrate either the death of Archemoros or the victory of

Herakles over the Nemean lion. They are sometimesaccompanied by the same incidents. 'Ihe defeat of the

monster is followed by the marriage of the god, of Per-seus with Andromeda, of Herakles with Hesione. The

betrothed who is a prey to attack by the monster and is

delivered by the hero is moreover none other than the

'Muy Bride' of German legend, pursued by the spirits of

the rn'ild hunt. In the cuit of Attis the sacred marriage85

The Sacriftce o1f the God

follows the death and resurrection of the god. They arebrought about in analogons circumstances and have thesame prupose. The victory of a young god over an age-

old monster is a rite of spring. The festival of Marduh,

on the first day of Nisan, re-enacted his victory over

Tiamat,nzs The festival of St. George, that is, the defeat

of the dragon, was celebrated on z5 April.a?a Now it w-asin tire spring that Attis died. Lastly, if it is tme, asBerossus reports, that an Assyrian version of the Genesisstory shorved BeI cutting himself in two to give birth tothe world, the tlvo episodes appear concurrently in thelegend of the same god: the suicide of Bel replaces hisduel with Clraos.4?5

To complete the proof of this equivalence of themes, itmust be added that the god often dies after his victory.In Grimm (Mcirchen,6o) the hero is assassinated whenasleep after his struggie rvith the dragon; the animalswho accompany him recall him to life.a?6 The legend ofHerakles displays the same adventure: after having slainTyphon, Herakles luy }ifeless, asphyxiated by themonster's breath; he was only restored to life by Iolaos,with the help of a quail.a?? fn the legend of Hesione,Herakles rvas swallowed by a whale. Castor, after havingkiiled Lynkeus, was ]rimself slain by ldas.a?8

These equivalences and alternations are easily expli-cable if u'e consider that the opponents brought face toface by the theme of combat are the product of thedoubling of a single spirit. The origin of rnyths of thisform has generally been forgotten. They are presentedas meteorological combats between the gods of light andthose of darkness or the abyss,a?e the gods of heaven andthose of hell. But it is extremely difficult to distinguishclearly the character of each of the contestants. They are

86


beings of the same nature, whose differentiation, acci-

dental and fluctuating, belongs to the religious imagina-

tion. Their kinship appears fully in the Assyrian pan-

theon. Assur and Marduk, solar gods, are the kings of the

Annunaki, the seven gods of the abyss.a80 Nergal, some-

times named Gibil, the god of fire, bears elsewhere the

name of a monster of hell. As for the seven gods of the

abyss, it is difficult, especially in the mlthologies that

succeeded the Assyrian mythology, to distinguish them

from the seven planetary gods, the executors of the will

of heaven.a8l Long before Greco-Roman syncretism,

which made the sun the lord of Hades,a82 and compared

Mithras with Pluto and Typhon,att the AssJ'rian tablets

said that Marduk ruled over the abyss,asa and that Gibil,

the fire,a86 and Marduk himself are sons of the abyss.a86

In Crete the Titans who put Dionysus to death were his

relatives.as? Elsewhere the hostile gods were brothers,

often twins.I e a $6ms1imes the struggle tooh place between

uncle and nephew, or eYen betlveen father and son.ass

Even if this relationship is lacking, another connexion

links the actors in the drama and shows their fundamental

identity. The animal sacred to Perseus at Seriphos was

the crab, the xclpxivoq.4eo Now the crab which, in the

legend of Seriphos' was the enemy of the Octopus, is

allied with the Lernean hydra, who is an octopus, to

fight with Herakles. The crab, like the scorpion, is now

the ally, now the enemy of the sun-god. Alt in all, they

are forms of the same god. The Mithraic bas-reliefs show

Mithras riding on the bull that he is going to sacrifice'

Thus Perseus rode Pegasus, sprung from the Gorgon's

blood. The monster or the sacrificial animal served as a

mount for the victorious god before or after the sacrifice'

In short, the two gods in the struggle or the m1'thical

c87

The Sacr,ifice oif the God

hunt are collaborators. Mithras and the bull, saysPorphJ'ry, are demiurges of equal status.4el

Thus sacrifice had produced in mJthology an innumer-able offspring. Passing from abstraction to abstraction, ithad become one of the fundamental themes of divinelegend. But it is preciseiy the introduction of this episodeinto the legend of a god which determined the shaping ofa ritual for the sacrifice of the god. Priest or victim,priest and victim, it is a god aiready formed that both actsand suffers in the sacrifice. Nor is the divinity of the vic-tim limited to the mythological sacrifice; it also appearsin the actual sacrifice which corresponds to it. Once themyth has taken shape it reacts upon the rite from whichit sprang and is realized in it. Thus the sacrifice of thegod is not merely the subject of a good mythologicalstory. W-hatever changes the personality of the god mayhave undergone irr the syncretism of pagan beliefs,whether fully developed or decayed, it is stili the godwho undergoes the sacrifice; he is not a rnere character ini t .4s2 At least in the or igin, there is a 'real presence', asin the Catholic mass. St Cyril of Alexandria aes relatesthat in certain ritual combats of gladiators, of regularrecurrence, a certain Kronos (116 Kp6voq) hidden underthe earth, received the purifying blood which flowedfrom their wounds. This Kp6voq 116 is the Saturn of theSaturnalia who, in other rituals, was put to death.aeaThe name given to the representative of the god tendedto identify him with the god. For this reason the highpriest of Attis, who also played the part of the victim,bore the name of his god and mJthical predecessor.as6Mexican religion offers some well-known examples of theidentity of victim and god. Particularly at the festival ofHuitzilopochtli4eo the statue of the god, made from

88

The Sacriftce oif the God

beetroot paste and kneaded in human blood, was divided

into pieces, shared out among the devotees, and eaten.

Doubtless, as we have seen, in every sacrifice the victim

has something of the god in hirn. But here it is the god

himself, and it is this identification which characterizes

the sacrifice of the god.But we know that the sacrifice is repeated periodically

because the rhythm of nature demands this regular

recurrence. The mJ'th, then, shows the god emerging

alive from the test only in order to submit him to it

afresh. His iife is thus composed of an uninterrupted

chain of sufferings and resurrections. Astarte brings

Adonis back to life, Ishtar Tammuz, Isis Osiris, Cybele

Attis, and Iolaos Herakles.re? The slain Dionysus is con-

ceived for the second time by Semele.ase We are already

a long way from the apotheosis mentioned at the begin-

ning of this chapter. The god emerges from the sacrifice

only to return into it, and conversely. There is no longer

any break in his personality. If he is rent in pieces, as are

Osiris and Pelops, the pieces are found, put together and

re-animated. Then the primitiYe purpose of the sacrifice

is relegated to the background. It is no longer an agrarian

or pastoral sacrifice. The god who comes to it as a victim

exists in himself-he has a multiplicity of qualities and

powerc. From this it follows that the sacrifice appears to

be a repetition and a commemoration of the original

sacrifice of the god.nte To the legend that relates it some

circumstance that guarantees its perpetuity is usually

added. Thus when a god dies a more or less natural death,

an oracle prescribes art expiatory sacrifice which re-

enacts the death of this god.u o o When one god vanquishes

another, he perpetuates the memory of his victory by the

inauguration of a cult.sor89


It must be noticed here that the abstraction which, inthe sacrifice, caused the god to be born, could impartanother aspect to the same practices. By a process ana-logous to the doubling which produced the theomachies,it could separate the god from the victim. In the mythsstudied above, the two adyersaries are equally divine.One of them appears as the priest in the sacrifice in whichhis predecessor expires. But the virtual divinity of thevictim is not always developed. Often the victim hasremained earthly, and consecluerttll the god created, n'hohad formerly emerged fi'om the victim, now remains out-side the sacrifice. Then the consecration, which causes thevictim to pass into the sacred world, takes on the appear-ance of an attribution or gift to a divine person, Even inthis case, however, it is ahvays a sacred animal that issacrificed, or at least something that recalls the origin ofthe sacrifice. fn short, the god rvas offered to himself:Dionysus the rarn became Dionysus Kriophagos.so2Sometimes, on the other hand, as in the doublings whichresulted from the theornachies, the sacrificed animalpassed for an enemy of the god.uot If it was immolatedit was to expiate a crime committed against a god by itsspecies. To the Virbius of Nemi, slain by horses, a horsewas sacrificed. 5 0 4 The notion of sacrifice ro the goddeveloped parallel with that of sacrifice gf the god.

The types of sacrifice of the god which we have justreyiewed are realized in conct-eto and combined togetherin one and the same Hindu rite, the sacrifice of thesoma.505 Firstly tve can see here what in the ritual is averitable sacrifice of the god. We cannot show here howSoma the god is confused rvith soma, the plant, how he isreally present in it, or descr.ibe the ceremonies at which itis brought in and received at the place of sacrifice. It is

9o

The Sacriftce of the God

carried on a shield, worshipped, then pressed and hilled.

Then, from these pressed branches, the god is released

and spreads himself through the world.-A series of dis-

tinct attributions communicate him to the various realms

of nature. This real presence, this birth of the god that

follows upon his death are, in a fashion, the ritual forms

of the m)4h. As for the purely mythical forms that tbis

sacrifice has accluired, they are indeed those rve have

described above. There is firstly, the identification of the

god Soma rvith Vritra, the enemy of the gods, the evil

spirit who holds the treasures of immortality and whom

Indra kills.5oo For, to explain how a god can be slain, he

was represented in the guise of an evil spirit. It is the

evil spirit who is put to death, and from it emerges the

god. From the covering of wickedness that enclosed it is

released the excellent essence. But on the other hand it is

often Soma who kills \rritral in any case it is he rvho gives

his strength to Indra, the warrior god, the destroyer of

the demons. In some texts even it is Soma lvho is his own

sacrificer. They go so far as to represent him as the arche-

type of the heavenly sacrificers. From this to the suicide

of the god the distance is not great. This distance the

Brahmins bridged.In this way they spotliglrted an important point in the

theory of sacrifice. We have seen that between the victim

and the god there is always some affinity: to Apollo

Karneios rams ale offered, to Varuna barley, etc' Like is

fed to like, and the victim is the food of the gods' Thus

sacrifice quickiy came to be considered as the Yery con-

dition of the divine existence. This it is that provides the

immortal substance on which the gods live. Thus not

only is it in sacrifice that some gods are born, it is by

sacrifice that all sustain their existence. So it has ended

9r

lii

rli

rii

iii

The Sacrifrce o1f the God

by appearing as their essence, their origin, and theircteator.so? It is also the creator ofthings, for in it theprinciple of all life resides. Soma is at one and the sanretime the sun and the moon in the heavens, the cloud, theIightning flash and the rain in the atmosphere, the kingof plants upon earth. In the soma as victim, all theseforms of Soma are combined. He is the repository of allthe nourishing and fertilizing principles in nature. He isat the same time the food of the gods and the intoxicatingdrink of men, the author of the immortality of the one,and of the ephemeral life of the others. All these forcesare concentrated, created, and distributed anew by sacri-fice. This then is'the iord of beings,, Prajapati. It is thePurusha60s of the famous hymn X, go of the Rig-Veda,from which are born the gods, rites, men, castes, sun,moon, plants, and cattle. It will become the Brahman ofclassical India. All theologies have attributed to it thatcreaiive power. Scattering and combining the divinity inturn, it sows beings as Jason and Cadmus sowed thedragon's teeth from which warriors were born. Fromdeath it draws out life. Flowers and plants grow on thecorpse of Adonis; swarms of bees fly out from the body ofthe lion killed by Samson, and from the bull of Aristaeus.

Thus theology borrowed its cosmogonies from thesacrificial myths. It explained creation by sacrifice, justas popular imagination explained the yearly life ofnature. For this it traced back the sacrifice of the god tothe origin of the world.soe

In the Assyrian cosmogony, the blood of the van-quished Tiamat had given rise to creatures. The separa-tion of the elements from chaos was looked upon as thesacrifice or suicide of the demiurge. Gunkel6r0 has proved,in our view, th.at the same concept \yas to be found in the

92

rriili

The Sacrifice of the God

popular beliefs of the Hebrews. It appears in Nordic

mythology. It is also at the basis of the Mithraic cult.

The bas-reliefs set out to portray the life that springs

from the sacrificed bull; its tail is shown as ending in abunch of ears of corn. In India the continual creation of

things by means of the rite eventually becomes an abso-

lr;rte creatio er nihtlo. In the beginning there was

nothing. Purusha desired. It is through his suicide, by the

abandonment of himself, by the renunciation of his

body, later a model for the Buddhist renunciation, that

the god brought about the existence of things.We may suppose that the regular recurrence of sacri-

fice persisted when sacrifice rvas heroified at this level.

The recurrent onslaughts of chaos and evil unceasingly

required new sacrifices, creative and redemptive. Thus

transformed and, so to speakr purified, sacrifice has been

preserved by Christian theology.611 Its efficacy has simply

been transferred from the physical world to the moral.

The redemptive sacrifice of the god is perpetuated in the

daiiy Mass. We do not claim to examine here how the

Christian ritual of sacrifice lvas built up, or how it is

linked to earlier rites. We believe, however, that in the

course of this n'ork we have sometimes been able to

compare the ceremonies of the Christian sacrifice with

those we have studied. It must suffice here simply to

recall their astounding likeness, and to indicate how the

development of rites so like those of the agrarian sacri-

fice could give rise to the concept of a sacrifice of redemp-

tion and communion of the unique and transcendent god.In this respect the Christian sacrifice is one of the most

instructive to be met with in history. By the same ritual

processes our priests seek almost the same effects as our

most lenrote ancestors. The mechanism of consecration

95


in the Catholic Mass is, in its general form, the same asthat of the Hindu sacrifices. It shows us, with a clarityleaving nothing to be desired, the alternating rhythrnof expiation and communion. The Christian imaginationhas built upon ancient models.

T{

t\

I1

,l

l,

I

ll

tlil

I

ilI

I

Chapter Six

CONCLUSION

IT CAN NOW BE SEEN more clearly of what in ouropinion the unity of the sacrificial system consists. It doesnot come, as Smith believed, from the fact that all thepossible kinds of sacrifice have emerged from one primi-tive, simple form. Such a sacrifice does not exist. Of allthe procedures of sacrifice, the most general, the leastrich in particular elements, that we have been able todistinguish, are those of sacralization and desacralization.Now actually in any sacrifice of desacralization, holveverpure it may be, we always find a sacralizatiorr of the vic-tim. Converselv, in any sacrifice of sacralization, even themost clearly marked, a desacralization is necessarilyimplied, for otherwise the remains of the victim could notbe used. The two elements are thus so closely inter-dependent that the one cannot exist without the other.

Moreover, these two kinds of sacrifice are still oniyabstract types. Every sacrifice takes place in certain givencircumstances and with a vielv to certain determined ends.From the diversity of the ends which may be pursuedin this way arise varying procedures, of rvhich we havegiven a few examples. Now there is no religion in whichthese procedures do not coexist in greater or lesser num-ber; ali the sacrificial rituals we know of display a greatcomplexity. Moreover, there is no special rite that is not

9594,

lii

lliti

Conclwion

complex in itself, for either it pursues several ends at

thu ,u-e time, or, to attain one end, it sets in motion

several forces. We have seen that sacrifices of desacraliza-

tion and even expiatory sacrifices proper become en-

tangled with communion sacrifices' But many other

exa-ples of complexity might be given' The Amazulu, to

bring on rain, assemble a herd of black bullocks, kill one

and eat it in silence, and then burn its bones outside the

village; which constitutes three different themes in one

operation.612In the Hindu animal sacrifice this complexity is even

more marked. We have found shares of the animal

attributed for expiation puposes to evil spirits, divine

shares put on one side, shares for communion that rn'ere

enjoyed by the sacrifier, shares for the priests that were

consumed by them. The victim serves equally for bring-

ing down imprecations on the enemy, for divination, and

for ,ro*s. fn one of its aspects sacrifice belongs to the

theriomorphic cults, for the soul of the animai is dis-

patched to heaven to join the archetypes of the animals

and maintain the species in perpetuity' It is also a rite of

consumption, for the sacrifier who has laid the fire may

not eat meat until he has made such a sacrifice' Lastly it

is a sacrifice of redemption, for the sacrifier is conse-

crated: he is in the power of the divinity, and redeems

himself by substituting the victim in his place' All this

is mixed up and confused in one and the same system,

which, despite its diversity, remains none the less har-

monious. This is ail the more the case with a rite of

immense purpoft iike the sacrifice to Soma, in rvhich,

over and above what we have just described, is realized

the case of the sacrifice of the god' In a word, just like a

magic ceremony or Prayer, which can serYt' at the same

96

Conclwion

time as an act of thanksgiving, a vow, and a propitiation,

sacrifice can fulfil a great variety of concurrent functions. .But if sacrifice is so complex, whence comes its unity? '

It is because, fundamentallyr beneath the diverse forms

it takes, it always consists in one same procedure, which

may be used for the most widely differing pru'poses. Thzs

procedure consists in establishing a means o1f communtca-

tion between the sacred and the profane tuorlds through

the mediation oif a uictim, that is, of a thing that in the

course of the cerenlony is destroyed. Norv, contrary to what,

Smith believed, the victim does not necessarily come to

the sacrifice with a religious natu-re already perfected and

clearly defined: it is the sacrifice itself that confers this

upon it. Sacrifice can therefore impart to the victim most

varied powerc and thereby make it suitable for fulfilling

-1he most varied functions, either by different rites or

- during the same rite. The victim can also pass on a sacred

_character of the religious world to the profane lvorld, or

vice versa. ft remains indifferent to the direction of the

current that passes through it. At the same time the

spirit that has been released from the victim can be

entrusted with the task of bearing a prayer to the

heavenly powers, it can be used to foretell the future, toredeem oneself from the n'rath of the gods by makingoyer one's portion of the victim to them, and, lastly,

3njoying the sacred flesh that remains. On the otherhand, once the victim has been set apart, it has a certainautonomy, no mattenwhat may be done. It is a focus ofenergy from which are released effects that surpass thenamow purpose that the sacrifier has assigned to the rite.

diate consequence is that the freed spirit departs tonourish the eternal life of the species. Thus sacrifice

97

Conclusion

natul'ally exceeds the narrow aims that the most ele-

mentary theologies assign to it' This is because it is not

macle up solely tf a series of individual actions. The rite

sets in -otion

the whole complex of sacred things to

which it is addressed. From the very beginning of this

stucly sacrifice has appeared as a particular ramification

of the system of consecration.

There is no need to explain at length why the profane

thus enters into a relationship lvith the divine: it is

because it sees in it the yery soulce of life. It therefore

has every interest in drawing closer to it, since it is there

that the very conditions for its existence are to be found'

But ]row is it that the profane only draws nearer by

remaining at a distance from it? How does it come about

that the profane only communicates with the sacred

through an intermediary? The destructive consequences

of the rite partly explain this strange procedure' If the

religious forces are the very principle of the forces of life'

the| are in themselves of such a nature that contact with

them is a fearful thing for the ordinary man' Above a1l'

when they reach a certain level of intensity, they cannot

be concentrated in a profane object without destroying it'

However much need he has of them, the sacrifier cannot

approach them save with the utmost prudence' That is

*fry b"t*een these Powers and himself he interposes

intermediaries, of whom the principal is the vlqlirn'-Tf he

involverl himself in the rite to the very end, he would

find death, not life. The victim takes his place' It alone

penetrates into the perilous domain of sacrifice, it dies

ih"r", and incleed it is there in order to die' The sacrifier

remains protected: the gods take the victim instead of

hirn. The uictim redeems him. Moses had not circumcised

his son, and Yahweh came to 'wrestle' with him in a

98

Il,

Concluston

hostelry. Moses was on the point of death when his wifesavagely cut off the child's foreskin and, casting it atYahweh's feet, said to him: 'Thou art for me a husbandof blood.' The destruction of the foreskin satisfied thegod; he did not destroy Moses, who was redeemed. Thereis no sacrifice into which some idea of redemption doesnot enter.

But this first explanation is not sufficiently general,for in the case of the offering, communication is alsoeffected through an intermediary, and yet no destructionoccurs. This is because too pon'erful a consecration hasgraye drawbacks, even n'hen it is not destructive. All thatis too deeply involved in the religious sphere is by thatvery fact removed from the sphere of the profane. Themore a being is imbued with religious feeling, the morehe is charged with prohibitions that render him isolated.The sacredness of the Nazir paralyses him. On the otherhand, all that enters into a too-intimate contact withsacred things takes on their nature and becornes sacredlike them. Now sacrifice is carried out by the profane.The action that it exerts upon people and things is

- destined to enable them to fulfil their roie in temporalIife. None can therefore enter with advantage uponsacrifice sarre on condition of being able to emerge fromit. The rites of exit partly serve this purpose. Theyweaken the force of the consecration. But by themselvesalone they could not n eaken it sufficiently if it had beentoo intense. It is therefore important that the sacrifier orthe object of sacrifice receive the consecration only

- when its force has been blunted, that is to say, indirectly.This is the purpose of the intermediary. Thanhs to it,the two worlds that are present can interpenetrate andyet remain distinct.

99

li[ir

Conclusion

In this r,vay is to be explained a Yery particular charac-

teristic of religious sacrifice. In any sacrifice tlr'ere is

an act of abnegation since the sacrifier deprives himself

and gives. Often this abnegation is even imposed upon

him as a duty. For sacrifice is not always optional; the

gods demand it. As the Hebrew ritual declares, worship

and service is owed them; as the Hindus say, their share

is owed them. But this abnegation and submission are

not without their selfish aspect. The sacrifier gives up

something of himself but he does not give himself.

Prudently, he sets himself aside' This is because if he"gives,

it is partly in order to receive. Thus sacrifice shows

, itself in a dual light; it is a useful act and it is an obliga-'tiorr. Disinterestedness is mingled with self-interest' That

is why it has so frecluently been conceived of as a form of

contract. Fundamentally there is perhaps no sacrifice

that has not some contractual element. The two parties

present exchange their services and each gets his due' For

the gods too have need of the profane. If nothing were

set aside from the harvest, the god of the corn would die;

in order that Dionysus may be reborn, Dionysus' goat

must be sacrificed at the grape-harvest; it is t}:e soma

that men give the gods to drink that fortifies them against

evil spirits. In order that the sacred may subsist, its share

must be given to it, and it is from the share of the pro-

fane that this apportionment is made. This ambiguity is

inherent in the Yery nature of sacrifice. It is dependent,

in fact, on the presence of the intermediary, and we

know that with no intermediary there is no sacrifice'

Because the victim is distinct from the sacrifier and the

god, it separates them while uniting them: .they draw

"lor" to each other, without giving themselves to each

other entirelY'loo

Conclusiort

'I'here is, however, one case from which all selfish cal-culation is absent. This is the case of the sacrifice of the

!od, for the god who sacrifices himself gives himselfirrevocably. This time all intermediaries have dis-appeared. The god, who is at the same time the sacrifier,is one with the victim and sometimes even with thesacrificer. All the differing elements which enrer intoordinary sacrifice here enter into each other and becomemixed together. But such mixing is possible only for

--qthical, that is, ideal beings. This is how the conceptof a god sacrificing himself for the world could berealized, and has become, even for the most civilizedpeoples, the highest expression and, as it were, the ideallimit of abnegation, in which no apportionment occrus.

But in the same way as the sacrifice of the god doesnot emerge from the imaginary sphere of religion, so itmight likewise be believed that the whole system is

Aerely a play of images. The powers ro whom thedevotee sacrifices his most precious possession seem tohave no positive element. The unbeliever sees in theserites only vain and costly illusions, and is astounded thatall manhind has so eagerly dissipated its strength forphantom gods. But there are perhaps true realities towhich it is possible to attach the institution in its entirety.Religious ideas, because they are believed, exist; theyexist objectively, as social facts. The sacred things in rela-tjon to which sacrifice functions, are social things. And thisis enough to explain sacrifice. For sacrifice to be trulyjirstified, two conditions are necessary. F irst of all, therernust exist outside the sacrifier things which cause himto go outside himself, and to which he owes lvhat hesacrifices. Nert, these things must be close to him so thathe can enter into relationship with them, find in them

lor

Conclusion

the strength and assrrrance he needs, and obtain fromcontact rvith them the benefits that he expects from hisrites. Now this character of intimate penetration andseparation, of immanence and transcendence, is distinc-tive of social matters to the highest degree. They alsoexist at th.e same time both within and outside the indi-vidual, according to one's viewpoint. We understandthen what, the function of sacrifice can be, leaving asidethe symbols whereby the believer expresses it to himself.

.It is a social functioh because sacrifice is concerned withsocial matters.

On the one hand, this personal renunciation of theirproperty by individuals or groups nourishes social forces.Not, doubtless, that society has need of the things whichare the materials of sacrifice. Here everything occurs inthe world of icleas, and it is mental and moral errergiesthat are in question. But the act of abnegation implicit ineyery sacrifice, by recalling frequently to the conscious-ness of the individual the preserlce of collective forces, infact sustains their ideal existence. These expiations andgeneral purifications, commrlnions and sacralizations ofgroups, these creations of the spirits of the cities give-orrenew periodically for the community, represented by itsgods-that character, good, strongr graye, and terrible,which is one of the essential traits of any social entity.Moreover, individuals find their own advantage in thissame act. They confer upon each other, upon themselyes,and upon those things they hold dear, the whole strengthof society. They invest with the authority of society theirrrows, their oaths, their maniages. They surround, as ifwith a protective sanctity, the fields they have ploughedand the houses they have built. At the same time theyfind in sacrifice the means of redressing equilibriums

roz

Conchtston

that have been upset: by expiation they redeem them_selves from social obloquy, the consequence of error, arldre-entel' the cornmunity; by the apportionments theymake of those things whose ..r* ,ociei.y hus reserved foritself they accluire the right to enjoy them. The socialnorm is thus maintairred without danger to themselves,without diminution for the group. Thus the social func_tion of sac'ifice is fulfirled, both for individuars and forthe community."r\nd as society is rnade up not only ofmen, but also of things and events, we perceive howsacrifice can follow and at the same time reproduce therhythms of human life and of naturel how it has beenable to become both periodical by the use of naturalphenomena, and occasional, as are the momentary needsof men, and in short to adapt itself to a thousand purposes.Z

Moreover we have been able to see, as we h"uu p"o_ceeded, horn'many beliefs and social practices .rot ,t.ictl,.religious are linked to sacrifice.(Me have dealt in turirwith questions of coutract, of redernption, of penalties, ofgifts, of abnegation, rvith icleas relating to the soul anclto irnmortality rvhich are still at the basis of commonmorality. This indicates the importance of sacrifice forsociologyTBut in this study we have not had to follow itin its development or all its ramifications. We havegiven ourselves only the task of attempting to put it inits piace.

TI'I 'Ijit 'I

r05

NOTE,S

ABBREVIATIONS

The following bibliographical abbreviationsare used in the Notes

Aitarejra Brahmanaz:l p as tamb a S hrauta Sutr aAshualayana Shrauta SutraAtharua VedaJ. G. Frazer, Gold.en BorzgA (references

are to first edn., z vols., London, r 8go)A. Hillebrandt. Das Altindische Neu-

und. Vollmondsopfer (Jena, fi7g)KawhiAta SztraKatyayana Shrauta SutraSylvain L6*t, La Doctrirn du sacrifice

daru bs Brahmanas (Paris, r8g8)Mannhardt, Mythologischz Forschwt-

gen (Strasbourg, 1884)Mannhardt, Wald- und tr'eldhultz

(Berlirr, rSZSl)Oldenberg, Religion der Veda (Berlin,

r8g+)W. R. Paton and E. L. Hicks. The fn-

scriptior* of Cos (Oxford, r8gr)Rig VedaJulius Schwab, Das altindischz Thier-

opfer (Erlangen, r886)Shatapatha BrahmanaRobertson Smith, Kinship and Mar^

riage in Early Arabin (Cambridge,r 889)

Robertson Smith, Religion of the Sern-ries (London,r88g; znd edn., r894)r04,

Stengel, G,I(

TB?,srSW/41

Notes

Stengel, Die griechischen Kulnsalter-thiimer (Munich, r8g8)

Taittiria BrahrnanaTaittiriya SamhitaVajasareyi SamhitaH. C. Rawlinson, The Curuiform fn-

scriptior* of Western,y'sra (London,

r86r-7o)

TNTRODUCTION

t. Primitiue CuJture (London, r87r), II, ch. xviii.z. See a rather superficial brochure by F. Nitzsch, Diz fdee und.

die Snfen des OpferhuJtt"ts (Kiel, r88g). Fundamentally, this is thetheory adopted by the two writers who have most severely criti-cized Robertson Smith: Wilken, 'Eene nieuwe theorie over denoorsprong des offers', De Gids, r89r, Pt. III, pp. 559ff, and M.Marillier, 'La Place du tot6mism€ . . .', Reutu d'histoire fus relLgions, vol. 37, r8g7-8.

3. Encyclopedia Britanntca (gth edn., r87g-8o), article 'Sacri-fice'; The Religion of the Semites.

4. J.F. N{clennan, 'The Worship of Animals and Plants', F'orl-nightly Reuieut, N.S. VI (1869), pp. 4o2ff,562ff; N.S. VII (r8Zo),

Pp.r94ff .g. Kiwhip and Marriage in Early Arabia.6. Jevons, An Introduction to tlre lfistory of Religion (London,

1896). tr'or its limitations see pp. r l l, l r5, r6o. E. Sidney Hartland,The Legend of Persetu (London, 1894-6), II, chap. xv, adoptedRobertson Smith's theory.

7. Frazer, The Golden Bough, chap. iii.8. Mannhardt, MIi; MythForsch.g. lYe must first of all indicate what texts we are using and what

is our critical attitude towards them. The documents of the Vedicritual are divided into Vedas or Samhitas, Brahmanas, and Sutras.The Samhitas are the collections of hymns and formulas recitedduring the rites; the Brahmanas are the mythological and theo-logical commentaries on the rites; the Sutras are the ritual manuals.Though each of these orders of texts rests on another, like a seriesof successive strata of which the most ancient are the Vedas (seeMax Muller, History of Sanskrit Literature, London, fi1g, p. 57c)we may, with the Hindu tradition which Sanskrit scholars are

105

,4itBApShSAshuShSAVFrazer, GB

Hillebrandt, NZO

KauSr.sasL6vi, Sacrij,ce

Marrnhardt, MythForsch

Mannhatdt, WFK

Oldenberg, RelZ

Paton, Cos

RI/Schwab, Thieropfer

ShBSmitlr, Rinship

Smith, RS

Notes

tending more and more to adopt, consider them all as forming onewhole and as complernentary to each other. Without attributing tothem precise or even approximate dates, rve can assert that they areincomprehensible without each other. The meaning of the prayers,the opinions of the Brahmins, their actions, are all closely linlied,and the meaning of the facts cannot be given without a continualcomparison of all the texts. These are divided up according to thefunctions of the priests who use them, and of the various Brahrninclans. lVe have used the follou'ing: 'Schools of the Narrator': theRig Veda, a collection of hymns employed by the lntar (not rhat itcontains only ritual hymns, or is of recent date), znd edn., MaxMuller (Sacred Bool<s of the East, vol. XXXII), translation by Lud-wig; and among other texts of this school the Aitareya Brahmana,ed. Aufrecht, trans. (into English) by Martin Haug (Bombav,1865); and, as Sutra, the lshualayana Shrauta,szrra (Bibliothecafndiana, vol. 49); 'Schools of the Officiant': (a) School of the WhiteYajurveda (Vajasaneyins), texts ed. by Weber; Vajasaneyi Sam-hita, the Veda of formulas; Shatapatha Brahmana, trans. Eggeling(Sacred Books of the Flast, vols. XII, XXVI, XLI, XLIII, XLN);Katyayana Sltrauta Sutra; (b) School of the Black Yajurveda(Taittiriyas) Taittiriya Samhita (ed. Weber, Indische Studien, XIand XII) contains the formulas and the Brahmana: TaittiriyaBrahmana, also contains formulas and the Brahrnana; -4pastamla-shrantta-sutra (ed. R. Garbe) whose ritual we have especially fol-lowed. To these texts must be added those of the domestic ritual,tne Grilqra Sutras of the various schools (trans. Oldenberg inSacred Boohs of the East, vols. XXIX, XXX). Besides these there isthe series of Atharva terts (for the Brahmin): Atharua-Veda, theVeda of incantations (ed. Whitney and Roth); translations: selec-tions by Bloomfield in Sacred Books of the East, vol. XLII; booksviii-xiii, V. Flenry. Kaushilta Sutra, ed. Bloornfield. Our study ofHindu ritual would have been impossible without the works ofCaland, Winternitz, and Sylvain L6vi.

For our study of sacrifice in the Bible, the basis is the Pentateuch.We shall not attempt to borrow from Biblical criticism the elementsof a history of Hebrew sacrificial rites. Firstly, the materials for sucha study seem to us insufficient. Next, even if we believe that Bibti-cal criticism can provicle the history of the terts, we refuse to con-fuse this history with that of the facts. In particular, whatever maybe the date ofLeviticus and ofthe Priestly Code in general; the ageof the text is uot, in our view, necessarily the age of the rite; thecharacteristics of the ritual may perhaps only have been settled

r06

Notes

rather late, but they existed before they were recorded, Thus we

have been able to avoid posing in the case of each rite the question

whether it did or did not belong to an ancient ritual. On the weak-

ness of some of the conclusions of the critical school, see J. Hal6vy,

'Recherches bibliques', Reuue Senitigue (1898), pp. rtr, SZtr,r95ff, 289ff; (r8g9) rff. On Hebrerv sacrifice see the following

general works: S. Munk, Palestine. (Paris, 1845); W. Nowack,

Lehrbuch der hebriiischen Arcluologza (Freiburg, r8g4), II, pP.

r38ff; I. Benzinger, Hebriiische ,4rclrcologie (Leipzig, r8g+), pP.

45 rff; see also the following special rn'orks: H. Hupfeld, De prima et

uerafestorum apud. I[ebraeos ratione (Programm, Halle, r85r); E.

Riehm, 'Uber das Schultlopfer' , Theologische Snd,ien wd Kritihen,

r8g4; W. F. Rinch, 'Das Schuldopfer ' , ibid., 1885; J. Bachmann,

Die Festgesetze des Pentateuclls (Berlin, 1858); J. H. Kurtz, Der

alttestamentliche Opferltulrru (Mitau, rit6z); E. Riehm, 'Der Begriff

der Siihne im alten Testament', Theologisclrc Satdien und Kritiken,

vol. 5o, fi77; I. C. Orelli, 'Einige alttestamentliche Priimissen

zur neutestamentlichen Vers6hnungslehre', Zeixchr. filr christl.

Wissen und christl. Leben, 1884; Miiller, Kritische Versuch ilber

den Ursprung urul dte gesc/ichtliche Enttticklung des Pessach und,

IVfazzothfestes (Inaug. I)iss., Bonn, r884); H. Schmoller, 'DasWesen der Siihne in der alttestamentlichen Opfertota', Theol,

Stud. und Krit., vol.64 (r8gr); Folck, De Nonnullis Veteris Testa-

menti Prophetarurn Locis, etc. (Programm, Dorpat, 1895); B.

Baentsch, Das Ileilighe.itsgesetz, Leu. zuii-rzuli (Erfurt, r8g5);

A. Kamphausen, Das Verhiiltnis des Meruchenopfers zur israeli-

tischen Religion (Prograrnm, Bonn, 1896). On the Gospel texts on

sacrifice, see Berdmore Compton, Sacriftce (London, 1896)'

CHAPTER ONE

ro. The yajamana of the Sanskrit texts. Note the use of this

word, the present pafiiciple middle voice of the verb yaj, to sat\-fice, F or the Hindu writers the sacrifier is the person who expects theeffect of his acts to react on himself. (Compare the Vedic formula,

'IVe who sacrifice for ourselves', the ye. yajamahe of the Avestan

formula yazamaide (Alfred Hillebrandt, Ritual Litteratur, Stras-

bourg, r8g7, p. r r). These bene-iftts of the sacrifice are, in our view,

the necessary consequences of the rite. They are not to be attri-

buted to the free divine rvill that theology has gradually inter-

polated between the religious act and its consequences. Thus it will

be understood that we have neglected a certain number of questions

r07

illl i

lil

I

Notes

which imply the hypothesis of the sacrifice-gift, and the inter-vention of strictly personal gods.

r r. This is normaily the case with the Hindu sacrifice, which is,as nearly as possible, an individual one,

12. e.9., I l iad I, y3f..r3. This is particularly the case with true totemic sacrifices, and

with those in which the group itself fulfils the role of sacrificer, andkills, tears apart, and devours the victim; finally, it is also the casewith a good number of human sacrifices, above all those of endo-cannibalism. But often the mere fact of being present is enough.

r4. In ancient fndia the master of the house (grihapati) sorne-times sacrifices for the whole family. When he is only a participantin the ceremonies, his family and his wife (the latter is present atthe great sacrifices) receive certain effects from the sacrifice.

r5. According to Ezekiel, the prince (nasi:exilarch) had to paythe costs of sacrifice at festivals, to provide the libations and thevictim. Cf. Ezek. xlv, 17; fI Chron. xxxi, 3.

16. See below, p. 65.17. See below, p. 65, n. g78. We shall cite especially the sacrifices

celebrated at the entrance of a guest into the house: H, C. Trum-bull, TAe Threshold Couennnt (Edinburgh, 1896), pp. rff.

r8. On the blood covenart and the way it has been }inked tosacrifice, see Smith, RS, Lecture IX; H. C. Trumbull , The BloodCouenant (London, r887).

rg. On the consecration of hair, see G. A. Wilken, 'Uber dasHaaropfer und einige andere Trauergebrd.uche bei den Volkernfndonesiens', Reuuc coloniale internationale, 1884.

zo. Lev. ii, rff; vi, 7ff; ix, 4.ff.; x, rzff; Exod. >oriii, r8; xxxiv, z5;Amos iv, 5. The mtnha so far fulfils the function of any other sacri-fice that a minha without oil and incense replaces a hattat and bearsthe same name. (Cf. Lev. v, rr). Minha is often used with thegeneral meaning of sacrifice (".g., I Kings xviii, zg, etc.). Con-versely, in the Marseilles inscription the word zebah is appiied likeminha to vegetable oblations: C.LS. 165, r, l2; r, :-4; cf.. ibid.,167, l i , g and ro.

ar. Lev. i i .ee. Aristophanes, Plutus, ll. 6ggtr Stengel, GK, pp. 8gff.25. Porphyry, De abstitzentia, ii, zg. Diogenes Laertius, viii, r5

(Delos). Stengel, GK, p. gz. Pliny, Nat. Hist., xviii, 7. Scholiumon Persius, i i , 48.

e4. Smith, R.9, pp. z5off He sees even in the libations of wine andoil of the Semitic rituals equivalents of the blood of animal victims.

r08

Notes

25. K. Bernhardi, Tranhopfer bei Homer, Prograrnm des kiinig-lichen Gyrnnasiums zu Leipzig, 1885. H. von Fritze, De libationcueterum Graecorum, Berlin, r895.

26. v1gritrra and plellxpatov. See Stengel, GK, pp.95 and rrr.J. G. Frazer, Pawanias (r8g8), III, p. 585.

a7. Stengel, GK, p.gg. A libation of spirits has sometimes re-placed, in modern practice, the ancient sacrifices. See P. Bahlmann,Mi)r*tcrland.ische Miirchnn (Miinster, r8g8), p. g4r. Cf. PaulSartori, 'Uber das Bauopfer', Zeitschr. filr Ethnologi"e, vol. 3o(r898), p. 25.

e8. See the texts cited by A. Hillebrandt, NVO, pp. 42, 42.29. Were these vegetable offerings substituted for bloody sacri-

fices, as was implied in the Roman formula, in sacris simulata proaerts accipi (Servius, Ad Aeneid., If, 116; Festus, 56ob)? It wasdoubtless convenient to imagine a steady progress from human toanimal sacrifice, then from animal sacrifice to figurines represent-ing animals, and thence, finally, to the offering of cakes. It ispossible that in certain cases, which moreover are little known, theintroduction of new rituals brought about these substitutions. Butthere is no authority for applying these facts to make generaliza-tions. The history of certain sacrifices presents rather a reverseprocess, The animals made from dough that were sacrificed at cer-tain agricultural festivals are images of agrarian evil spirits and notsimulacra of animal victims. The anaiysis of these ceremonies laterwill give the reason for this.

3o. It follows from this definition that between religious punish-ment and sacrifice (at least, expiatory sacrifice) there are bothanalogies and differences. Religious punishment also implies aconsecration (corxecratio bonorum et capitis); it is likewise a des-truction and is wrought by this consecration. The rites are similarenough to those of sacrifice for Robertson Smith to have seen inthem models of expiatory sacrifice. OnIy, in the case of punishment,the manifestation in a violent fashion of the consecration affectsdirectly the one who has committed the crime and who is himselfexpiating it; in the case of expiatory sacrifice, on the other hand,substitution takes place, and it is upon the victim, and not uponthe guilty one, that expiation falls. However, as society is con-taminated by the crime, the punishment is at the same time ameans for it to rid itself of the contamination with which it issullied. Thus, in respect of society, the guilty one ful.fils the part ofan expiatory victim. It may be said that there is punishment andsacrifice at one and the same time.

r09

l

Notes

5r. See Max Muller, 'Die Todtenbestattung bei den Blahma-nen', Z eits c hr ift de r D euts c lz en M o r genlci n dis c hen G es ell s c haft, v ol.IX, p. lxiii. .KSA,S, r. z. ro, rz, and commentary of Mahidhara, ad/oc., esp, at r r. Cf. I(ulluka on Manu, 21 25. tr'edrtnta Sara,7ff (ed.

B6htlingk in Sanskrit-Chresto., pp. 254, 255).It appears that thisclassification is adhered to only by fairly recent authorities, whileothers go back to more ancient terts. But in fact it is to be foundfirstly in the liturgical collections which distinguish from the regu-lar formulas (y"l^) the formulas of the optional rites (kamyeshti-

yajyas) and those of the expiatory rites (prayashcittani). ft is tobe found in the Brahmanas (for example, the ZB) which devotevery long sections either to expiations or to special vows and neces-sary sacrifices. Finally, the sutras continually separate the rites intoconstant (nityani) , obligatory, and periodic, into optional (hamyani),

occasional (naimittihani), and expiatory (prayaslrcittani). Thesedivisions are to be found in the solemn as well as the domesticritual. (See Oldenberg, 'Survey of the Contents of the Grihya-sutras', in Sacred Books of the East, vol. XXX, pp. 5o6ff.) These textsalso contain passages concerning the curative rites (blrcishajyan.i)

parallel to those made known to us in the Kaushiha Szrra (Adh.

III, ed. Bloomfield, rSgo). Thus the sacrifices were indeed dividedaccording to this classification from the very beginning, although itdid not become a conscious division until later.

32. The uajapeya. A. Weber, 'Uber den Vajapeya', Sitzber.h. h.

'4kad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, Phil.-hist. tr/. (r89e), pp. 765ff, and

A. Hillebrandt, Vedis che M2rtholo gie (Breslau, r 89 r - r go z), I, p. z 42.g5. For example, in order to obtain a son or long life (Hiile-

brandt, Ritual Litteratur (see n. ro abor-e), sects. 58 and 66). Thesesacrifices are extremely numerous, more so indeed than the pub-lished. texts which present them to us.

34. The principle is even so rigorous that the ritual of sacrificeis laid down even before that of the setting up of the altar. (See

Hillebrandt, ibid., sect. 59, Vorbemerkung.)

35. Hillebrandt, ibid., sect. 66.

56. We thus translate the word soma, in the composite formsomayajna, as a comnlon noun. The term is untranslatable, for theword designates at the same time the plant as the victim, the godreleased by the sacrifice, and the god sacrificed. Subject to thisconsideration, we make our own choice.

32, In fact the soma carfirot be sacrificed except at the timej whenit is in flower, that is, the spring. (See Ash.ualayana sonlrt prrqfog&in MS Wilson 459, Oxford, Bodleian Library, fo. ry7.)

l to

Notes

38. There is indeed the greatest possible analogy betrveen theritual of the sacrifice of the animal at Agni-Sonn (ApShS, VII) andthe Atharvan ritual of the smothering to death of the vasha(sterile cow) (.Kaz,S, 44 and 45). Similarly, in the dornestic ritualthe various animal sacrifices, including that of the expiatory bull(see below, p. 55) are so analogous to each other that both, accordingto different schools of thought, were able to serve as the fundamentaltheme for the description (see Hillebrandt, Rinnl Litteratur (see

n. ro above), sect. 44).39. Deut. x i i ,6, r r ,2Z, cf . Levi t . xvi i ,8, cf . Judg. xx, 26,

II Sam. vi, 17, etc., mention only the 'olah and the zebah or shela-mim.'fhe question of discovering whether these passages relate toprevious rituals or to parallel ones is not iruportant for the specialpurpose of our work. For the theory according to which the expi-atory sacrifices were only introduced into the Hebrew ritual at alater date, see the summary of Benzinger, Hebriiische Arclrcologie,pp. 44r and 447tr. 'fhe passage I Sam. iii, 14 is too vague for us tobe able to conclude from it in any way against the existence of thehattat. In any case it is irnpossible to admit that expiatory sacrificesare transformations of a monetary fine.

4o. Levit . iv, z.

4t. Shelamim:zebah shelamim. On the equivalence of thezebahim and the zebah shelamim, see Benzinger, ibid., p, 455.

42. In translating the word 'olah we adhere to the traditionalinterpretation, which is moreover founded on the Biblical phrase

'he iaused the'olah to r ise up (the r ising up)' . Cf. Clermont-Ganneau,'L' fnscript ion Nabat6enne de Kanathat ' , Comptes-Rendus de l'Acadimie des fnscriptiorzs, Paris, Series 4, vol. 26, r898,p. Sgg. For the 'avon and its expiation, see Halevy in Reuue Simi-tique, 1898, p. 49. Another kind of sin, expiation of which wasprovided for in the ritual, the asham (Levit. v) does not seem tohave given rise to a special form of sacrifice. It may be that thesacrifice which expiates it is designated by the name of asham, ltutaccording to Levit. v, the expiatory ceremony is made up of thehattat and the 'olah; Levit. vii, z-7, makes the lmttat and theasham identical; cf. Numb. v,gff. Yet Ezek. xl, j9; xlii, r3; xlvi,zo, formally distinguish between the two sacrifices.

45. The Marseilles inscription (C./.,S. I, 165) likewise reducesthe various sacrifices to three types, (r) the kalil, which is theequivalerrt of the Hebrew 'olah; (z) the sauat, sacri;ficium laudis ororationis, equivalent to the slrclami*; (d the slzelem-kalil. Line rrmentions only two special sacrifices, the sh"asaf and the hazut (see

t l l

il

Notes

C./..S., I, p. 255). Must the shelem-halil be considereil as a iuxta-position ofsacrifices? See G. A. Barton, 'On the Sacrifices Kalil and

Shelem-Kalil in the Marseilles fnscription', Proceedings of the

Amertcan Oriental Socizty, 1894, Pp' lxvii-lxix. Inscription 167(Carthage) distinguishes only helilim and sauat. Cf. Clermont-

Ganneau, ibid., pp. gg7-9.

44. Exod. r'cix; Levit' viii.

49. Levit. xii, 6.

46. Levit. xiv. Cf. Levit. xiv, 7, with Exod' xxix, eo.

47. 'Ihe Greek sacrifices are easily divided into communionsacrifices and expiatory sacrifices, sacrifices to the gods ofthe under-world and sacrifices to the heavenly gods: they are so classified in

Stengel's excellent manual (G/(). This classification is exact only

in appearance.48. Levit. iv, 9; vii, r41 ix, cr, etc.

49. Levit. x, 16.

5o. Ezek. xliii, rgff; xlv, rg. Cf. the purification of the leper,

Levit. xiv, 7.gr. Exod, rrcix, zo,

CHAPTER TWO

5a. The principle of the entry into the sacrifice is constant in theritual. It is remarkably expressed in the sacrifice of the sorna, inwhich we have the prayaniyeshti, the sacrifice of entry, corre-spondirrg exactly to the udayaniyeshti, the sacrifice of exit' ShB,

5, 2t 5, r ) 4, 5,r , r . Cf. Ai tB, 4,5, r and z;also T8,5, 6, r1 5, 5, 4 'Generally simple rites and direct consecration suffice to prepare forthe sacrifices. But we see that there are cases where the mainsacrifice is preceded b1' preliminary ones. Thus the praecidaneae(Aulus Gellius, IV, 6, Z). The llpo06ptata are not of the samenature (Euripides, fphigenia at Aulis, l5ro-r8, cf. Paton, Cos,

38, 17; but other sacrifices corresponded to them: ibid.,58, rz.

55. On the diJtsha, see Bruno-Lindner, Die Dihsa oder lTeilrcfilrd.as Somaopfer (Leipzig, 1878)' He studies only the theologicaltexts and compares them. Moreover' these texts of the ShB, AitB,and 7S are really complete on this question. H' Oldenberg, RelV,pp. 5g8tr, sees in the diltsha an ascetic rite comparable to those ofshamanism. He attaches no value to the symbolism of the cere-monies and believes it to be of recent date. Oldenberg seems reallyto have spotlighted one side ofthe facts; but his explanation is veryeasily reconcilable with our own. For the whole of the Brahmanic

tLq.

Notes

texts, see S. L6vi, Sacrifice, pp. rog-6. For the translation of theword di-ksha we associate ourselves with the opinion of Nf. Weber(op: rit., n. gz above, p.ZZ8).The dihsha is indicated only vaguelyin RV and had no need to be so. ft has a preponderant place in allthe rest of the Vedic literature. The success of this rite, whichmoreover has been very well preserved, vras very great in thePuranic and Tantric rituals.

g4. See Ldv| Sacrifrce, p. ro5.5d. f.S, 6, l, l , r.56. The Flindu texts give an excellent interpretation of this rite,

which is found in most religions; the hair, the eyebrows, the beard,the finger- and toe-nails are the 'dead part', the impure part of thebody, They are cut in order to make oneself pure. 7,S, 6, t, r, 2.

97. Levi, Sacrif ice, pp. 82, 88. fS, 6, r, l, g. ShB,5, r12,4 and 5.98. This is the rite of the apsudiltsha (ApShS, X, 6, r5ff) which

symbolizes both his purification (see the mantra 7S, r, z, r, r:ZS4, 2, d : RV, ro, rZ, ro and AV 6, gt, z) and his new conception.Here is the series of s5rmbols, foilowing AitB, r, g, rff: 'The bathsignifies his conception, the hut is the rvomb, the garment theamnion, the skin of the black antelope the chorion', etc. The schoolsvary slightly as to the various meanings of the different rites andtheir order.

gg. ApShS, X, 6, 6. The mantra is T8,5, ?,2, r.Cf. VS, 4, z andShB,5, r , z, zo.

6o. ApShS, X,6, r t f f ;X,7, r t r ;7S,6, l , r ,4and5,etc.6t. ApS\S, X, 8, rr and rz. This antelope skin, according to

certain texts (AitB,l.c., and ShB, 3, z, r, z,) is one of the mem-branes of the embryo god called the didiltshamana, the one whoinitiates. Other texts equally reliable (?S, 6, r, 3, 2,) say that thesacrifier must simply be clad in the skin of a Brahmanic animal, inorder to enable him to acquire the quality of a Brahmal.

62. ,4pShS, X, lr, z.65. ApShS, X, g, ro. 7S,6, r,5,3.Cf. Weber, fndischeSatdien,

X, p. 558, n. 4.64. ApShS, X, rr ,5f f 2S,6, r ,4,5.69. ApShS, X, rr, 7ff; X, rz, t, r5-r8.66. His atrnan, his individuality. He has becorne an 'offering to

the gods' . Ai tB,6, O, g; 6, g, 6. ,SAB, 3,5,4, zr . ApShS, X, 14, ro.'This is what is explained in the Brahmana. When this dikshitabecomes lean, he becomes pare (mcdhyo, sacrificial). lYhen there isnothing more, he becomes pure. When his skin touches his bones,he becomes pure. \Yhen he is fat he is initiated, when he is lean

1r5

liNotes

he sacrifices. what is missing from his limbs has been sacrificed.'

By fasting tlie sacrifier has stripped off his mortal body as far as

possible, to p.,t o,, an immortal form. \Ye see how ascetic practices

iook their piac" in the Hi.du system of sacrifice. (See L6vi, Sacri-

f ice,p.85, ,r. t. Cf'p. S+.) Developed{rom this time onwards' thev-*"t" ubi" to become, in classical Brahminism, in Jainism, in

Buddhism, the whole of sacrifice. For example, the Buddhist fast

uposatha corresponds exactly to the-fast of upauasatha,-of the

upauasathanighi ofthe ordinary sacrifice-, which corresponds to the

fast of clikslin. (See S/zB, I' I' r,7') The comparison is rnade by

Eggeling, adloc. (Sacred Books of the East, XII; cf ibid', z, r,4,2,

"al"l o.rih" fura of the di/*ha,ibid.,z,2,21 ro and rg') From the

sbB onwards the virtues of asceticism are considered as great as

those of sacrifice (ibid., g, 5, r, r^7, etc')' We need not point out

the analogy here with semitic, Greek and christian plactices. The

sacrificiallLst of Kippur has become the model for the other Jew-ish

fasts. These pt"puiitoty actions often become the tyPe for the

sacrifice of on"relf. The asceticism preliminaly to the sacrilice

became, in many cases, the whole sacrifice'62. A. Hil lebiandt, N/O, pp. 5, 4.C!' SlB, t, t, t, 7ff, and the

passages cited in the preceding note. Cf. Schwab, Thieropfer, p'

xxii, 59.68. S/r.-B, t, t, t ' tff.69. Numb. ix, r4; xv' r5-r5' zg' Cf' Pausanias, II, 27, t;

Euripides, Electra, TgS; C.I.A.II, 582, 583'

7o. .Iit" uncircumcised. cannot appear at the cult ceremonies'

Ezek. xliv. 7. Cf. Exod. xii, 45, 45, 48; Levit' xxii' lo' 12' 15'

Herodottrs VI, 6. W' Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscriptionwn Gryec1-

rum,558, "f.bT1,

s6. In classical and even \redic India, only the

me*bl-rs of the'thtee higher castes have the right to sacrifice'

7r. Athenaeus, IV, r49c; VI, z6zc..

72. Dittenberger (see n' 7o above), 575,9' Festus 82" Lam-

pridius, Elagabalus,6. Cato, De Agricultura,lxx'5ii, in the sacri-

iice to Mars Silrranus. The cases of the expulsion of women from

the ceremonies are very nurnerous.

75. Lev\t. vii, r9-zr; II Chron. x).x, LTl concerning the. sacri-

ficeif the Passover. Cf' C.I.G- 5562. Yet certain impurities did not

rule out certain sacrifices; e.g.' Numb' ix, ro' Cf' Od'ysseyXY, zzzff'

74. Exod. xix. zz.

7i. n"oa. xix, roff; Numb. xi, 18-25' The prohibition of sexual

relaiion, on the occasion of any ceremony is, moreovet, an almost

invariable religious PrinciPle.r r4,

Notes

76. Cf . Pausanias X, 32, g: panegyric of Tithorea.

77. Gen. xxxv, 2; Exod. xix, r4; xl, rz; Levit. vi i i , 6; Numb.viii, 7. Stengel, op. cit. (n. zz above), p. gZ. J. Marquardt, Hand-buch der Rdmischen Alterthumer, VI, p. 248, n. 7. Iliad, I, zr1ff.

78. Levit. xxili, 27, 5z; the fast of Kippur. Numb. xxix, 7. Cf.the fast of commr.rnicant and priest before the Catholic Mass.

79. See certain examples in Frazer, GB,II, 76.8o. Gen. xxxv, z) Exod, xxix, 8; xl, r5; Levit. viii, r5 (con-

secration of Aaron). Cf. Pausanias fI, 55, 4, procession of theChthonia of Hermione. Plutarch, Consolatio ad ,4pollonium, 55(l rg). The use of special garments, the daubing of the body or theface, form part of the ritual of almost all known festivals.

8r. Porphyry. See Vita Pythagorae, 17.82. S. Reinach, Le Voile de l'Oblation (t8gZ), pp. 5ff83. Stengel, GK, p.98. Menander, The Peasant, verse 8 (see H.

Weil, 'Le " Campagnard " de M6nandre' , Reuue des itu.des grecques,r8g8, p. rz5). E. Samter, 'Rdmische Sihnriten', Philologus, r9g7,pp.Ag4ff Festus, p.rrZ.

84. Numb. v\ii, 7. Lucian, De dea syri.a., gg.85, For the corpus of ceremonies preparatory (ihram:sanct\-

fication) to the ancient sacrifices corresponding to the present-daypilgrimages to Mecca, see J. Wellhausen, Reste Arabischen Heidcn-tums, pp. 79 ff The same practices at the pilgrimages to Hierapolis(Lucian, De dea syria, gg). Likewise for the pilgrims to the ancientTemple, Jer. xli, g. See Smith, RS, pp. 535, 48t (additional note).

86. The cases that are not borrowed from the domestic ritual andin which the sacrifier hirnself officiates are fairly rare in the reli-gions we are studying. In Judaea it was only at the Passoversacrifice that one could, in the absence of any Levite or Cohen andoutside Jerusalem, slay a victim. fn Greece, for example, the sacri-fice to Amphiaraos (Oropus) could be presented by the sacrifier inthe absence of a priest (C.I.G.G.S., %5). kr the Hindu ritual noone, unless he is a Brahmin, can sacrifice on the three fires of thegreat sacrifice. On the other hand, in the domestic cult, theDresence of a Brahmin was not insisted on. (I{illebrandt. Ritual-Lineratur (see n. ro above), p. 2o.)

87. Exod. xxix; Levit. viii; Numb. viii.88. Ezek. xliv, g, r^.89. II Chron . xxx, rZ. The Levites sacrifice the Passover for the

impure. In the absence of the Hindu sacrifier, one could carry outcertain essential rites on his behalf (Hillebrandt, NVO, p. 146,n. r ) .

r r5

Notes

go. Exod. xxviii, 58' Numb. xviii, r, z, 3'

ir. These two chiracteristics are very noticeable in the Brahmin'

on"the one hand. he is the delegate of the sacrifier, so much so that

he becomes the master of his life' (See L6vi, Sacrifce, p' rz') On

the other hand he is the delegate of the gods, so much so that he is

often treated as one when he is invited to the sacrifice, or when he

receives his sacerdotal portion (see below, P' 45, n' 289)' On the

character of the Brahmin in the ritual, see weber, Indische satdien,

X, p. rgd. Cf. ShB, r, 7, r,5, where the Brahmins are called human

gods.gz. Cult of Attis and Cybele, see Frazer, GB, p'3oo' Pausanias,

VIII, r5, r. Cf. Frazer, Pausanias,IV, p. zz5; V, p' z6r' F' -Back'

De Gri"rorum caerimoniis in quibus homines deorurn uice funge-bantur (Berlin, r885).

95. Pausanias, VI, zo, r.

ii. Panrattius, VfII, 15, 3 (cult of Demeter at Pheneus in

Arladia). Polyaenus, VIII, 59 (cult of Athene at Pellene)' See E'

Samter, 'Rijmische Siihnriten, die Trabea' (Philologtts, LVI, r897,

p. 5g4) for the garb of the Roman priest. Yet, according to Nlacro-

ti*, ill, 6, r7, the sacrifice at the Ara maxima is carried out with

the head. veiled, 'ne guis in aedc dei habitum ejus imitetur''

gd. Cf. Frazer, GB, I, pp. 286, 288, 3+5, 568, 37o; II, z, z7;

M,-HOfl"t, ' Zur Opfer-Anatomie', Cotespond'enzblatt der deutschen

Geselkchaftfilr )ntlropologie. Jhg' XXVII (Jan', 1896, no' r), 5'

96. In ihl "ut"

in which the Brahmin was himself the sacrifier,

"oi io the case of a sattra, a ritual ceremonial and great sacrifice

in which the priests were subiected to the diksha at the same time

as the sacrifiei, the king or the great man. fn all other cases, only

minor lustrations are laid down for the Brahmin: rinsing out the

mouth, washing the hands, etc. This rite was always obligatory

when evil powers had been mentioned. (Shankhayana-grilEra-sutra,

I, ro, g; lf,SAS, I, ro' 14.

97. Exod. xxx, zo, cr. Cf. Rawlinson, W.4I, e3, r' 15' for

the hands. The rvashing of the hands of faithful ancl priest is

customary in the s1'nagogue as well as in Catholic ritual'

98, Levit. x, 9; Ezek. xliv, ar; Josephus, '4ntiguities,5t.r2^,^2iJoslephus, De Bello Judaico, 5, 5, 7i Philo, De Ebrietate, r27ff'

gg. Levit. vi, ro; xvi, 4, 52. Cf' Exod. xxvii i , 40,42'roo. Levit. ni, 4i x'ri, c3. Ezek. xliv, r9.ror. Exod. xxviii, 55; Ezek. xlii, rr-r4 (the Septuagint text is

to be preferred).roc. Exod. xxviii, 45; *",

1"i6t.

Notes

ro3. Levit. x, rff.ro4. I Sam. iv, r r .ro5, See tlre legendary story in Talmud Jerus., Yoma, Gemara,

f, r, 5 (tr. Schwab), which says that a high priest who committeda ritual heresy on Yom Kippur would die on the spot, that wormswould come out of his nose, and the shoe from a calf's hoof fromhis forehead, as had happened to the priests of the family of Baithos.

ro6. Cf. Tosefta Sultkah, III, 16.ro7. We use the Mishnah and Talmud of Jerusalem, referring

the reader for convenience to Schwab's French translation: Yoma,chs. II, IIf, Schwab V, p. r5S. See on dris subject: J. Derenbourg,'Essai de restitution de I'ancienne r6daction de Massechet Kippou-rirn', Reuue d'etudes juiues, VI (r88a), 4rff; M. T. Ifoutsma, 'Overde isradlietische Vastendagen', Verslagen en Mededeelingen derhonin"klijke .4had. u. Wetercch., Afdeel. Letterk., Amsterdam,r8g7-8, vol. XII, part If, pp. 3tr

ro8. Levit. xvi.rog. Levit. xvi, z,rro. Talm. Jerus., Yoma (Schwab trans., p. 16r). On the occa-

sion of Kippur sacerdotal purity was reinforced, and absolute isola-tion was attained.

rrr. During these seven days the high priest conducts the ser-vice in fuII pontifical robes, which, as we know, had special virtues(Exod.;ocviii).

r rz. The cell of Beth-Abdinos.rt3. Yoma, Mishnah, I, 5. The Gemara (ad loc.) gives several

explanations of this rite, which has not been understood, One ofthem seems to indicate what may have been the true meaning: theold men weep because they are forced to abandon, thus isolated,the pontiff whose life is at the sarne time so precious and so fragile.

r 14. For this vigil he either carries on biblical exegesis himself,or listens to the learned men, or passages from the Bible are read tohim. The direction that he occupy himself during the night beforethe sacrifice with the sacred writings, that he speak of them andthem alone, is also a directive in Hindu sacrifice; it is also a direc-tive for the Sabbath and for feast-days generally, in the majorityof known rituals. The Christian vigils, at first especially for Easter,later increased in number, were perhaps an imitation of the learneddiscourses on the eve of the Jewish Passover.

rr5. Seminal losses-that is the explanation, a correct but in-complete one, given in our text. fn fact, it must be rememberedthat sleep is very usually considered a dangerous state; for the soul

L17

Notes

is then in movement, outside the body, to which it may not be

able to return. Now the death of the high priest would be a cala-

mity. This is forestalled by requiring him to keep vigil' Sleep is

Iikewise a dangerous state for the Hindu dihshita, who sleeps under

the protection of Agni, by the fire, in a special position (cf' ?S,

6, r , 4,5 and 6).116. talmud, Yoma, f , z, and Gemara, p. 168; cf ' Mishnah,

ibid., rrr, 5.r17. Hemerology of the month of Elul. I{/Af, I, IY, p' 3e, 3'

See Jastrow, The Origtnal Character of the Hebreu Sabbath'

rr8. Stengel , GK, p.r5 (sacri f ices to the heavenly gods).

rrg. Stengel, G-K (sacrifices to the Chthonian gods)' Pausanias,

II, 24, r (Argos), sacri{ice to Apollo Aeupu8r<btr1q. See p' 54 below

for the sacrifice of the bull to Rudra. The fixing of the day and

hour at which the sacrifice must be made is one of the most care-

fully detailed points in Hindu and other rituals. The constellation

under which the sacrifice takes place is also not a matter of

indifference.rzo. Levit . xvi i , 3-5.r s r . It must be understood that we do not wish to lay down any

priority in time for the place permanently consecrated over the

place consecrated for a set occasion' We reserve judgement com-

pletely on this question.-

rzz. Exod. >ocix, Z?,44; Numb. ix, r5ff; II Sarn. vi, t'71' I Kings

viii, 63, etc. As regards the prohibition against sacrificing elsewhere

than in Jerusalem, see Levit. xvii, 5-4; Deut' xii,5ff; xiv, 25i*v,

zo; xvi, zff. It is certain that this prohibition dates from later times.

See II Kings xxiii. It even seems that'lesser altars'always existed

in Palestine. TaIm. Babyl., Mishnah Megillah, gb; cf' Talm. Babl'l',

Zebahim, tr6a.rzg. Exod. xx, 24i Deut. xii, 5, etc.

rz4. Exod, ;orix, 4z-6, etc.

rz5. Exod. xxix, 58' Cf. Porphyry, De abstinentia, I, 25, etc'

Concerning the perpetuity of the altar fire, and the way in which

Israel's destiny is linked up with that of the Temple, see especially

Dan. ix, z7; viii, r r-r5; i, Sr, etc. This became a legendary theme

in Jewish literature.re6. Exod. )oo(, lo; Ezek. xlvi , r4.

rz7. Provided that it rvas propitious and declared'sacrificial' by

the Brahmins.rz8. On the setting up of the fires, see Flillebrandt (Ritual Lit-

teratur, see n. lo above), sect. 59' Koulikovski, 'Les Trois Feux

r t8

Notes

sacr6s du Rig-Veda' (Rernc de l'histoire des religions, XX (r88g),pp. r5rff), deals only with the riivision of the fires. \Meber, IndischcSnrdien, IX, p. ar6. Eggeling on ShB (Sacred Books of the East,XII, pp. z4?tr).

rag. The materials with and on which it is lighted and prepared(the Sambharas) all correspond to a very important m5,th (?8, r,r, g and g; cf. ShB, e, r, +). They are things in rvhich somethingigneous, particularly animate, seems to dwell: so animate them-selves that legend sees in certain of them the primitive forms of theworld. This cieation of fire symbolizes the creation of the world.

r5o. The fire is always created by friction at the time of theplacing of the fires, of an animal sacrifice, of the sacrifice of thesoma. See Schwab, Thieropfer, sect. +2, pp. ZZff.Weber, fndischeSturlien, I, tg7, n. 5. A Kuhn, Herabkurt dcs Feuers und desGijttertranAts (Giitersloh, 1886), pp. 7off. Around this creation ofthe fire-god the Brahmins wove, from the RZ onwards, pantheisticconceptions. For the fire of sacrifice alone is excelling, it alone isthe complete Agni, containirrg the 'three bodies of Agni'-histerrestrial essence (the domestic fire), his atmospheric essence (thelightning), and his heavenly essence (the sun); it contains all thatis animate, warm, and ' igneous' in the worid (ZB, r, 2, r15 and 4).

r5r. It is even one of the oldest epithets of Agni. See A. Ber-gaigne, La Religion Vddigue (Paris, 1878-85), II, p. zr7.

rgz. See note r50 above.r53. Levit. x, z; Judges vi, rrff, the sacrifice of Gideon; xiii,

rgff, Manoah; I Kings xviii, 48, Elijah; I Chron. xxi, 26, etc. Thepreparation ofthe fires bulks large in other rituals. On the necessityof a pure fire, cf. Levit. x, r; on the renewing of the fires inMexico: Sahagun, Historia de las cosas de Nueua Espaiia,II, p. r8;Chavero, Medco a trauCs de los siglos,I, p. ZZ; at Lemnos: Philo-stratus, Heroikos, XIX, r4; L. Couve, 'Inscription de Delphes',Bulletin de correspondance hellenigue, XYIII ( r 8g+), pp. 87 and gz;in freland, A. Bertrand, Religion d.es GauJois (Paris, 1897), p. ro6.Cf. Frazer, GB, II, pp. 26, rg4. Frazer, Pausanias, II, p. 3gz; V,p. 52r. tr'or fndo-European religions see Knauer in Fe*grilss forRoth, p. 64.

r54. It becomes the 'deuayajana', the place of sacrifice to thegods. One must refer to the mystical speculations of the Brahminson this point. The 'deuayajana' is tire only solid ground on earth.The earth itself exists only to serve as the place of sacrifice to thegods. This special site is also the base of operations of the gods, theircitadel; it is from there that, taking off in a bound (devayatana)

I r r9

ill

1rltltr

Notes

they ascended into heaven. It is moreover the centre of heaven andearth, the navel of the earth. However foolish such expressions

appear, we must recall that for the Jews the temple was the centre

of the earth, just as Rome was for the Romans; and on meclievaL

maps Jerusalem was the navel of the world. These ideas are not sooutlandish. The religious centre of life coincides with the centre

of the world.r35. The name has even becorne that of the Buddhist monas-

teries. We cannot follow either the detail or the order of the rites inthe Hindu animal sacrifice. Thus the ceremony of the Iighting ofthe fire is declared by at least one school (1(SAS, VI, 5, z6) to beinseparable from the ceremonies of bringing in the victim.

136. See the ground plans in Hillebrandt, NVO, p. rgr, and

Eggeling, Sacred Books of the East, XXVI, 475.r57. It is exactly measured out and takes on the most varied

shapes according to the sacrifice. (See Hillebrandt, NVO, pp. 47ff,r76ff; Schwab, T'hieropfer, pp. rbffi Thibaut, 'Baudhayana Shulba-paribhasha sutra', 'rn Pandit, Benates, IX (r8ZS).) In the case of

our animal sacrifice there are two uedi, one of which is approxi-mately the ordinary uedi that we describe in the text, the otherwhich is raised up (see Schwab, pp. 14, zr), on which there is afire which is one of the sacrificiai fires (,1pSAS,YII,7,5; see Schwab,p.3?). Due allowance being made, they are built up or hollorvedout in the same way,

r58. ZS, r, l, g, r, 9. The nantras express the fact that the evil

omens have been repelled, that the gods are protecting the uedi on

all sides. Those rn'hich accompany the building up of the uttara c-edi

rather express the second idea (ZE r, e, rz, e), especialJ.y those

which accompany the lustration of the altar which has beenconstructed.

r3g. From the RV onwards the gods bear the epithet 'barhish-adas', those who are sitting on the site of the sacrifice. (See FI. G.

Grassmann, W6rterbuch zum Rig-Veda (Leipzig, ft75), ad uerbum.)

Cf. RV,I I , Z,4;Y,3t , rz; VI , r , ro, etc.r4o. See Schwab, Thieropfer, pp. rr, 47. Ordinarily the sacred

utensils of a ternple may not be removed from it. Thus at Jerusalem

the knives were shut away in a special cell, that of. the halifoth.(See Talmud Jerus., Suhkah, Gemara, V, 8 (Schwab uans., VI,

p.Sr); Middoth, Gemara, IY,7; Yoma, I I I ,8.) Special sacri f ices,

such as the domestic sacrifice of the Passover, demand a brand-new

vessel; lihe'rvise in Greece, see Paton, Cos, 58, z1i 59,6. Cf. Frazer,

GB,I I , p.roZ.

190

Notes

r4r. See Schwab, Thieropfer, p. 44, for the enumeration ofthese instruments. ApShS, VII, 8. For the purification see Schrvab,

no. 35.r4z. ApShS, \III, g, 6. It is planted in such a way that one half

is within the bounds of the uedi, the other half outside it.r45. They search for the tree with the specified quality (IS,

6, 5, g, 4; ApShS, VII, r, 16 and r7. See Schwab, Thieropfer, pp.

2ff.) It is worshipped and propitiated (ApSh,S, VII, z, r); it is

anointed; it is felled with caution; the stump is anointed and an

incantation uttered. All these ceremonies clearly indicate, as Olden-berg perceived, an ancientvegetation crlJt (RelV.,p. 256). Oldenberg(p, So) cornpares this stake to sacrificial states in general, and

particularly to the Semitic asherah, also planted on the altar. (See

Smith, RS, p. r87, n. r.) The two comparisons are in part justified.

r44. ApShS, VfI, ro, rff For the meaning of the rite, TS, 6, 5,4, z and 5. The whole rite is certainly ancient. While the yupa isbeing anointed, and while it is being dug in and placed upright,nrantras of. the RF are recited (the hotar; ApShS, 3,, r, 8). Themantras are in the follo'wing order: f, 36, r3-r4:' III, 8, t3, a.5.4(the apri hymn); in the case when several anirnals are sacrificed

and several stahes erected, I I I ,8,6, rr. The same ri tual is pre-

scribed .4it8,6, z, rZ,22, rvhich comments on the verses of the

RZ. This hymn already expresses the ilifferent functions of theyupa, which slays demons, protects mankind, symbolizes life, bearsup the offering to the gods, supports heaven anrl earth. Cf. Z,S,61 3,4, r and 5,

r4g. The sacrifier also remains for a certain time holding theyupa. (ApShS, 7, t t, 5. According to certain sutras, the woman andthe officiant also remain there. The tradition of the Apastambinsseems preferable.) In any case it is the sacrifier who carries outpart of the anointing, and passes his hand along the 'rvhole lengthof the stake. All these rites have as their obiect the identificationof the sacrifier with the stake and with the victim, whose placehe is made for a tirne to take.

146. Ai tB,6, r , r1 cf . S/zB, t , 6, z, l , etc.r47. T5,6,5,4,5 and 4. Cf. ZS, 6, 5, 4, 7; SlzB, 5, Z, t , z, 5.r48. It has the height of the sacrifier when the latter is in a

chariot, orstandingwith upraised arms (?S, 6,5, 4, t ; ApShS,YII,e, r r f f .)

r4g, ZS, 6,5,4,4.r5o. We assume that what is valid for the uedi and the yupa is

also generally so for the altars, baetyls (sacred stones) and raised

L2L

Notes

stones on which or at the foot of which the sacrifice is made. Thealtar is the spnbol of the covenant between man and the gocls.Throughout the sacrifice the profane is being united to the divine.

r5r. Hence the prayer uttered at the beginning of any sacrificeby the sacri f ier, 'May I measure up to this r i te'(SDB, r, t , r , 7).Hence especially the metaphor, common in the Sanskrit texts,which compares the sacrifice to a cloth which is being woven andh:u:ng. RV, X, r5o; Bergaigne and Henry, Manuel pour itud.ier lesanscrit uCdique, p. r25n.; Levi, Sacrifice, p.Zg, p. 8o, n. r.

r5z. See Levi, Sacrifice, pp. 23ff. Any ritual error is a czl madein the cloth of sacrifice. By this act the magic forces escape andcause the sacrifier to die, or go mad, or be ruined. We have noneed to recall the famous cases related in the Bible of ritualheresies terribly punished; the sons of EIi, the leprosy of kingUzziah, etc. This is because it is perilous, as a general rule, tohandle sacred things; for example, in Vedic fndia one must takecare that the sacrifier does not touch the uedi (ShB, r, e, S, 4),touches no one with the magical wooden sword, etc.

r53. The ritual expiations have it in fact as their aim to isolatethe effects of the errors committed in the course of the rite (seeabove). Cf. Servius on Aeneid, IV, 696: et sciendum si guid. caeri-moniis nonifuerit obseruatum, piaculum admitti. Arnobius, IV, 5r.Cicero, De harwpicum respotrso,Xl, 23. fn the same way the frontalof the high priest at Jerusalem expiated any slight errors committedduring the rite: Exod. >cxviii, 58. Cf. Talmud Jerus., Yoma, II, t(trans. Schwab, V, p. 176).

r54. Here we have a curious parallel with the theories of theJewish ritual. A lamb consecrated for the Passover sacrifice couldnot be changed (Talmud, Pesachim, Mishnah, IX, 6). fn the sameway a beast set apart for a sacrifice must be sacrificed, even if thesacrifier dies (ibid., Hagigah, Gemara, I, r, ad fin.; Schwab, VI,p. z6r). For the same reason, on the eve of Kippur allthe animalsthat were to be slaughtered on the following day were paradedbefore the high priest. so that he did not confuse the variousvictims.

rsd. As we know, the attitude usually recommended is one ofsilence. See below, p. b3. Cf. Marquardt, op. cit. (n. 77 above), VI,p ' r78.

156. See Levi, Sacrfice, pp. rrsff.r57. These cases include those in which the victims are, or have

been, totemic creatures. But it is not logically necessary that sacredanimals, for example, should always have this character (see

t22

Notes

Marillier, Reuue de l'histoire des religions, XXXVI (r8g8), pp.egoff; Frazer, GB,II, pp. l3S-8), as, for example, is maintained byJevons (fntroduction to the History of Religion, London, 1896,p. S5). This theory is in part upheld by Robertson Smith, Kinship(see n. 5 above), pp. bo8ff, and R,S, pp. 352ff. The truth is that inone wa)' or another there is a definite relation between the godand his victim, and the latter often anives at the sacrifice alreadyconsecrated; cf. Stengel, GK, pp.ro7ff; Marquardt (n. 77 al:ove),p. rZ2) P. tr'oucart, 'Inscriptions de I'Acropole', Bulletin de corre-spondance lrcIllnique, XIII (r88g), p. r69; Scholion on ApolloniusRhodius, II, d4g (sacrifice of doves); W. M. Ramsay, Cities andBishoprics of Plzryrgia, I, p. rg8; Pausanias, III, 14,9, and Frazerad loc.; Plutarch, Quaestiones Romantae, r r r; Athenaeus, VIII,

346d (sacrifice of fish at Hierapolis), etc. In other cases, the godrefused certain victims. E.g., Pausanias, X, 52, 8; Herodotus, IV,6g; Pausanias, II, ro, 4. Yahweh never allowed any but the fourkinds of pure animals; sheep, cattle, goats, and doves.

r58. This again is a very general case; thus the horse of theashuamedh.a was tended and worshipped for many months. (See A.Hillebranrlt, 'Nationale Opfer in Alt-Indien', in Festgruss toBdhtlingh (Stuttgart, 1888), pp, 4off; in the same way were treatedthe meriah. of the Khonds, the bear of the Ainu, etc., all well-known cases.

r59. This is a Vedic prescription, as well as a Biblical and perhapsa general one. For the Hindu animal sacrifice, see Schwab, Thierop-

Jbr, p.xviii; H. Zimnter, Altindisches Leben (Berlin, r87g), p. r5r;KSAS, 6, 3, zz and paddh. ApShS, VIf, rz, r and commentary, ?S,

5, l, l.On the Temple victims, see Exod. xii, 5; Levit. xxii, rgff;Deut. xv. zr; xvii, r; Malachii,6-14, etc. Cf. Stengel, GK,p. ro7.

r6o. Thus the horse of the ashuamedhahad to be red (it bore thenarne Roltita-red-and was a symbol of the sun, See Henry,Les Hymnes Rohita de l'Atharua-Vida (Paris, r88g). On redvictinrs, see Festus, 45; Diodorus, f, 88; cf. Frazer, GB, II, gg.On black cows, to bring rain, see beJ.ow, p. 66. In Greece (Stengel,GK, p. 154), the victims destined for the heavenly gods weregenerally light in colour; those offered to the Chthonian gods werealways black.

16r. See below, p. 65.16z. Paton, Cos, SZ, zz. Stengel, GK, pp g7ff. Mannhardt,

PfltK, II, p. ro8.$5. Iliad, X, zg4i Odyssey, III, 584. Cf. Rawlinson, WAf,

IV, pp. zz,57fI. Cf. below p. 57.125

]g+. l:t"ias, x,52, 9.

Notes

ixi il i:l; 4W ;tf1,'f,';.i!*,",, p 644i 35 lr#,{,,?l,x!),,'!",,t*, i,' Jo"'u

$' i ;.( ri'rii,I|';,;,; ;:; ;::. ffi::, ro*h e s e ri ba,i on s a re

'1r', II, 34, cf. '!'[eber. f];i"]i".,'].:aucrds are to be tound also at

1ir!*k?littff#"Hf :l,-";id{#$',T_*H:il:"4i;';i,"JT'"*'u.'o" or *u ui.ii-

d!,i i,'; t ;:,,1, j*ie Hiqi;ff*fii::'T "i' :"' "'*"0"1 *Y: ::: i:7"1:'':':"{::*t';'' l' 1;l' vs' 6' 5, o :r:,,ô: i,,,o, p.u",ii ;+m* i{*i. ff #, ::t,: iT1"+x1;f,l i1;Lii"* t j* :1,* +i::i:I ;'+i iff;ij,tn:":':':{e:i:I\a::?:9:"i:tr;::"X;:+i'?l'}'.;*#"[if"ii:,::iii::,*:'"Ll';f'tffi li;#:Tllil*J**f ::??_'f:{:::2Ji!4}',f "":.Iit^:Ji!";1.?*,f;*}l.6T1is*T':::,:::,':Ti;"*"T"'_:L"i;iixr' j'i:",i,,ha,ir,"i",*"i"il:tfi ,',",1'"".?"'T:T:rFilT:T'"';:#'fi:i'r')iiiiffi ,the nature of the rite;L ? ei;i:'r'slg*.n'n'm*i*ti:'"" ;

174.-.4pShS, yII, r

lZl*#i:v::i: l'"$,]';;ryf:,'"?'u' " i'l'' Y'uil i. ,* ;*,." *,;,,1uijffi 'ritilT *#j: #l[i::,r,,."-,,*,.;";;'J';?:;::r+:;i::;!:;k;:i";Fi;:,"*:1i j:fl ,l1iJfr ;1il,:id:*",.liliixl":'ffi *tilts"::,t*rt75. ApShS, Vff, r5, to.

176. H, von Fri

Notes

o55ns*.,g"i,;;!':.i?i1;^f,,ITi;T#|',iff .:i,,ilr5l;,0,I;

F'i i*1"y"Fx*"il":T,' 11':T: 8131"=' th e oi,a i "."'.ii"""ar.irt"t' i, -"

I ** il t ̂ i. n" i e" ri r; ], s, 6 _;; ."ir". I H"; ;"i t ffi "i;'Some Syrian Folklore H,",", f f"Ziirr"J ,r,

companions or r_ltyr r"r,. *r, * ir, "y'r;";iil:3u;l; J iri::,:rlf ;l:

il*, :i:',:" :"fi "il, :li"fH?Hjn';i:"{i l. :## #jliJl,Ilft# ;;,f":rut,"

r*.."ii"" """"'*p"rable to the castin g of

r77. This is the cerem^h\r ^F s--^"-^ . , .ti on wi th r, *. rorr,ll ??l yu," : .r;#\il!nr " * circumam bu ra_es t anti q ui ty, rorl J " pries t (tih e ** ; ; ;;; r:#,:?t *Hil9il#;Studien,IX, p. rgg) r1,,-3r,""bra""uu1f.l1lfJff;*i,jl;;:"?;T11##i:Lthe East, XLW, ad,"toc.).{r" ,r*"""rg

"i ,fr" rite is threefold.t_:l1tt::rtr

1*ei:s,^1,1"a irr" fi* "i.t!r,i'rr," divine priest of thegods, repository of the treasures, who clon.rconducts him torvardtr," *"",i" | ffi ,1'*q: f::,'Jifu J#.'*_"H ;lr'j};,{f$1*15 +rs#**"1;?, t$i ;,**;fffaround the victim i*" ,r,Jg.J;;;;;;;;;" off. Fina'y iJ i, abeneficent ritual circumambu"lation, *ul"

"rro_ left to right, in

#:"t.r#il,:r,,.ffi !'fl:13:"#-Cl*irilt;3;pP."ying Wheel (Lonrj? ,U.nUl,'

""i'"rp""r"Uy the exhaustiver;;w!:";:):;*,;!::x"r::x;;r:^ j;::;i#::;:i,sclzaapen, Afdeeling J

;#,::#:fl Jrliilt,'fa # #;,fiT,:;tni::lln:or."^1 (H,il;il;"fril: ft *!f, "f,;W

sutra, ,, ,;-;t*;Caland, op. cit., p. 5oofr ::lr,',i,T :: I *"g:,1;:;iffi**= t'J%{iT;; :3'^":,.,1#lii:,::4!i{-:;;,,!r",""?;;i:8,:H"l:;"1;or Athamas. preuer, ,;*0,;(,{+;;;;{;":, ii, p,-0,". Ai"R.

ii

r2+

Notes

Basset, Nouueauz Contes Berblres (Paris, r8g7), no. gr. Cf. 1\{.Hijfler (see n. 95 above), a. Cf. the sacrifice of a member of thefamily. Porphyry, De abstinentia,Il, 27. Cf. the legend of Shamah-shepa (L6vi, Sacrifice, p. r55). The examples of this new repre-sentation are specially numerous in the building sacrifice. SeeSartori (n. z7 above) , p. rZ.

r7g. See above, p. lo, €.g., I Chron. xxi, z1ff, the story of Davidand Ornan's threshing-floor.

r8o. Levit . i , 4; i i i , z; iv, 4; xvi, er. Exod. xxix, r5, rg; cf.Numb. viii, ro; xxvii, r8, 25, Cf. Deut. >rxxiv, g. Ps. lxxxviii(lxxxix), 26. Tylor, Primitiue Culture,II, p. 5.Smith, RS, p. 425.

r9r. ApShS, VIf, r5, lo, l r . The mantra then says, Z$ j , r ,

4, 5, that the 'breath', the Iife of the sacrifier, is, like his desire,linked rvith the destiny of the animal , j, r, 5, r. The school of theWhite Yajurveda does not lay down any mantra (trS/zS, VI, S, S),and moreover does not cause any expiatory offerings to be madeat this juncture, a notable difference. But the rite of communica-t ion, as wel as the theory of i t , remainsthesame. 5h8,5,8, r, to.ZS, 6, 5, 8, r. The Brahrnins are arguing. 'The animalmust betouched', some of them say; 'But it is being led to its death; if he(the sacrifier) touched it from behind, the yajarnana would die onthe spot.' Others say: 'It is being led to heaven, and if he (the

sacrifier) did not touch it from behind, he would be separated fromheaven. That is why it must be touched with the two skervers ofthe vapa. Thus it is as it were touched and not touched.' (Cf. 6,

3, 5, r.) The SAB explains that the communication is a mysteriousone, both harmless and useful for the sacrifier, whose prayer andsoul go with the victim to heaven.

r8z. We do not study the question of the 'presentation' of thevictim to the god, and the invocation that more often than notaccompanies it. We should be led into overlong explanations, forin tiris lie the connexions between sacrifice and prayer. Let usmerely say that there are (r ) manual rites, such as tying the animalto the stake (see above, p. jo), and to the horns ofthe altar (Ps.

cxvi i (cxvi i i ) , 2Zi cf. Smith, RE p. yzz;Levit . i , rr); (e) oralrites: the invitation to the gods; hymns to the gods; a descriptionof the qualities of the victirn; a definition of the results expected.Consecration is called dorvn from on high by all these meanscombined.

r83. We aliude to the so-called apatyani Iibations of the Hinduanimal sacrifice (Schwab, Tltieropfer, p. 98, no. r, a in T8,5,8,rZ, 5, Iinks the word with the root pu, to purify). They are to be

120

Notes

found elsewhere only in the schools of the Black Yajurveda. Theyare carried out during the act of separation of the anima] by meansof the circumambulation of the fire, and at the moment when it isbeing led to the place of slaughter (ApShS, VII, rg, 4; the mantrasare: ZS, j , t t gt r, 2, explained in 2S,5, r,5,r. They are foundagain in MS, t, z, r). The formulas explain that the gods are takingpossession of the animal and that it is going up to heaven; that thisanimal represents the others, among those beasts whose master isRudra-Prajapati; that it is acceptable to the gods, and will giveIife and wealth in the form of cattle; that it is the portion ofRudra-Prajapati who, orr recovering his offspring and tying it up,

'is about to cease binding fputting to death] the living, animals ormen' , etc.

r84. Stengel , GK, p. ror. I{erodotus, i i , 5g, 40. At Rome,

Marquardt, op. cit. n. 77 above, p. rg2. Srnith, ftS, pp. 45of.Frazer, GB, I, p. 564; II, pp. rozff. Perhaps with these practices

must be compared the nrourrring of the !-Iaminica, at the festivalof the Argeii: Plutarch, Quaestiones Romanae, 86.

r85. This rite, very widespread, as Frazer has shown, is expressedin a remarkable fashion in the Hindu ritual. At the moment of the

suffocation, among the forrnulas recited by the officiating priest, themaitrauaruna-1hs fe1m11las of the adhrigunigada (,4slzuSlzS, III,

5, r explained \n AitB, 6, 6, r ), rvhich are reckoned among the mostancient in the Vedic ritual-is one that reads as follows:'Theyhave abandoned to us this creature, its mother and father, its

sister and its brother of the same stock, and its companion of thesame race. ' (ApShS,YII,29,7, rvi th TS, z, 6, rr, rz. See Schwab,Thieropfer, p. 14r n., andSlz-8, 51 8,3, rr; -4pShS, VII, r6, Z.-Cf.ZS, 6, 5, 8, 5, and ShB, 3,8, r , r5.)

r86. The shamitar, the'appeaser', the euphemistic name for thesacrificer, may or may not be a Brahrnin (ApShS, YII, 17, t4).In any case, he is a Brahmin of lower rank, for he bears the sin

of having killed a sacred, sometimes an inviolable, creature. Tn theritual is to be found a kind of imprecation against him: 'Among your

whole race, may such an appeaser never do such things', that is to

say, 'NIay you have no sacrificer among your relatives.' (We follow

the text of the AshuShS, III, 3, r, which Schwab also foJ.lows,Thieropfer, p. ro5, and not the text of AitB,6,7, rr.)

r87. Aelian, De Ntilttra animalium, XII, 54 (Tenedos). Smith,RS, p. 5o5.

r88. Porphyry, De abstinentia, II, zg-3o; Pausanias, I, 24, 4)28, ro. Myth of the institution of the Karneia: Pausanias, fII,

T27

Notes

15, 4; Usener, 'Gdttliche Synonyme', Rhcinisches }\i[wewn, r8q8,pp. 559ff. Stengel, GK, p. r4o. Plato, Laus, IX, 869.

r8g. See Frazer, Panuanias, III, pp. 54ff.rgo. They say: 'Turn his feet to the north, let his eye face the

sun, scatter his breath to the winds, his life to the atmosphere, tothe regions his hearing, to the earth his body.' These directions irrAshuShS, III, 3, t; cf. AitB, 6, 6, r5, are important. The head isturned towards the west, because that is the general path of things;the one that the sun takes, that the dead follow, that by rvhich thegods ascended into heaven, etc. The orientation of the victim is avery noteworthy fact. Unfortunately the information, whetherSemitic, classical or ethnographical, that we possess on the questionis relatively sparse. fn Judaea t-he victims were tied to the hornsof the altar, on different sides according to the nature of the sacri-fice, and seem to have had their heads turned towards the east.fn Greece, the victims offered to the Chthonian gods were sacri-ficed head downwards; those sacrificed to the heavenly gods hadtheir heads pointed towards the sky. (See lliad, I, 459 and scho-lium.) Cf. the bas-reliefs representing the Mithraic sacrifice of thebull, in F. Cumont, Teztes et monuinents relatifs au^z mystires deMithra.

ryr. ApShS, VII, 17. r. AshuShS, III, 5, 6. fn the same way,Catholic worshippers bow their heads at the Elevation in the Mass.

r gz. The animal is told that it is going up to heaven for the sakeof its own kind, that it is not to die, that it is not being harmed,that it is going the way of the good, on the path of Savitar (the sun),the road of the gods, etc. ApShS, VII, 16. T8,5,7,7, t4.

rg5. (,S/zS VI, r5, rg. It is important that the body be stillintact at the moment of death.

r94, Such is the order that is repeated three times. .4sAr-'SAS, III,

$t r7 ! , 'r9S. E.g., in G. Maspero, 'Sur un d6cret d'excornrnunication

trouv6 au Djebel-Barkal', Reuuc archiologigue, r87t , NS vol. zz,pp. AjSff (the Napata stele).

196. This took place in all cases in the Hebrew ritual (Levit. i,

4, etc.) save at the sacrifice of the doves, where the throat wasopened with the finger-nail (Levit. i, r4, r5). fn Greece, seeOdlrssey, III, 44g. Apolionius Rhodius, ,4rgonautica, I, 42gff.Sophocles, Ajaz, 2g6ff.

rg7. The stoning of Pharmakos at the Thargelia: Euripides,And.romache, rrz8; Istros, Fragmenta Histor, Graec., I, p. 4zz.Cf. the festival of the ),r0op6).r,c at Troezen, Pausanias, II, 3o.

r28

Notes

Cf. Mannhardt, WFK, I, 4r9, S48, 55s. The stoning seems tohave been to 'divide the responsibility' among the Lystanrlers.Jevons, Introduction to the Htstory of Retigion, p. 2g;.For thevictim struck from a distance, see Suidas, Bou;6no6. Cf. porphyry,De abstinentia, II, 54ff.

rg8. Dionysius of Halicarnasslls, yII, 72, r5. Apollonius Rho_

dilrs, Argoruzutica, I, 426. Odyssey, XIV, 425.rgg. Snrith, -RS, p. 37o.eoo. fn \redic India a series of expiations was laid down for the

case where the anirnal, at his entry into the field of sacrifice, madesinister signs. (ZB, 3, Z, 8, r and z; see commentary. See Schwab.Tlieropfer, p. 76, no.46); likewise for the cas" *here the animaiuttered a cry after being prepared for suffocation, or touched itsbelly with its hoof. ApS/$, YII, t7, z, 5. Cf . ?d O, ,, S, 2. For otherdata see lVeber, Omina et Portenta, pp. 322ff.

so r. We recall the Biblical principle whereby all blood shed. wasconsecrated to God, even that of animals killed in the chase; Levit,i i i , 17; xvi i , ro; Deut. xi i , 16, z3;xv, 25. Cf. in Greece, Od.yssey,II I , +SSt XIV, 427. Stengel, GK, p.4or. Fldf ler, op. ci t .-n. ggabove, p. 5. The same precaution was taken with regard to mil"k-;Hiifler, op. cit., ibid.

zoz. In Judaea the blood was caught in vessels and handed overto the officiating priest, Le'it. i, 5; ix, tz, ancl he used it in ritual,fn Greece, in some sacrifices, the blood was caught in a goblet,ogd,yrov or ogayeiov. Pollux, X, 65. Xenophon, ,:lnabasrs, II, zl g.

zog. Smith, RS, p. 4r7. Scythian sacrifice, Herodotus, IV, 6o;among certain tribes of the Altai the victim's backbone wasbroken. N. I(ondaliof e.t al., zTntiquitis de la Rwste mCrid.ionale(Par is, r89r) , p. r8r .

zo4. Pausanias, VIII, 57, 8. Smith, RS, p. 568.so5. Mannhardt, IVFK, I, pp. 28ffzo6. Plutarch, De Iside et Osir ide, tS, r?i Mannhardt, MK,

I), l r t

Rohde, Psyclze (Engl. trans.), p.5o2. A. Dieterich, NekSria(Leipzig, rSgO), pp. rg7ff, etc.

zo7. Wiedemann, Aeg. Zeitschr., 1878, .p. 89. Cf. Morgan,J. J. M. de, Recherches sur les origins de I'Egypi, Ethnogralphiep-rdhutorigue et tombeau royal de l{Cgadah (paris, r8g7), p. zr5.Cf. Frazer, GB, II, p. go.

zo8. Herodotus, Iff, gr, See the known facts in Frazer, GB,I I , pp. r rzf f .

zog. Levit . iu, S, Ti 16-19; xvi i , rr . This last passage is oftenrelied upon to prove that the e,xpiatory force of the iacrifice belongs

L2g

blood placed on

Talmud Jems.,

Ezek. xliii, zo.

doubtless arose

, PausaniasrIII,und. dic Lehre

Mary H. Kings-r. See Marillier,

d'frccriptionsMartin J. Hall,

) , pp. 96, 9z

Denkmiiler dertion of Hera

bones must

ibitions againstto God. I Sam.z-9. Cf. Virgil,

cf. A. B. ELis,

, rSgo), p. r rz.

the slrclamim,I , GK, p. ror ;

(lxvi), r5. Cf.above, p. 5gg.

s, IV, 6r . Cf.ves carried off

2,

Notes

burnt. For the victims that were boiled, see f Sam. ii, rg; Herodotus,IV, 6r.

zz7. See above, p. 26.zz8. Exod. xxix, 32ff; Levit. vii, 8, r4; I Sam. ii, r5ff; Ezek.

xliv, zg. C./.,S. 16g passim, 26.ezg. Levit . x, r6ff , cf. iv, rr; vi , r8ffz3o. The difference was resolved by making a distinction: the

victim had to be burnt 'outside the camp' when the blood hadbeen brought into the sanctuary, that is, at the sacrifice of the Dayof Atonement. In other cases the flesh belonged to the priests.Levit . vi , zi j x, 18; cf. iv, zr i vi i i , 17; iv, rr,

z3r. Cf. Act. tr'r. Arv. a zr8 (Corputs fnscr. Lat., YI, zro4), etporcilias piaculares epulati sunt et sattguinern postea. Servius onAeneid, III, z3r.

z3z. Exod. xxix, 27ff; Levit. vii, tj, zcjff; x, r4. Numb. v, givi, zo; xviii, 8ff; Deut. xviii, 3.

255. I-evit. vi, r9, zz. Only men could eat of the hattat, and.they had to be pure. For the shelamim (x, r4) the wives of theCohanim were admitted, but these had to be eaten in a pure place.The meats are always cooked in a sacred room: Ezek. xlvi, eo.

254. Paton, Cos, 57, zr, Sri 38, z, E) 59, roff. Michel, op. cit.n. 2r4 above, 714 (Mykonos), 726 ([4iletus). G. Doublet, 'Inscrip-tions du Paphlagonie' , Bulletin d.e correspondance lrcIldnique, r88g,p. 5oo (Sinope). Pausanias, V, rg, z. P. Stengel, 'Zunge desOpfertiers', Jahrbuch. fiir Philologie, r81g, pp. 687ff.

zg5. Rohde, Psyclte (Engl. trans.), p. ,SZ.e56. Herodotus, IV, 16r; YI, 97.e1Z. Pator:, Cos, 58, t7.238. Plutarch, Qtnestiones conuiuales, VI, 8, r (Smyrna) ; Virgil,

Aeneid, YI, z5z. Servius, ad loc. Cf. Tautain, in Anthropologie,r8gZ, p. 67o. The Septuagint here translates'olahby holocaust.

e1g. Levit . i , g; ix, 14; ix, zo; i , 17. Ezek. xl , 58.z4o. Deut. xxxi i i , ro; 'olah kal i l , I Sam. vi i , g; Ps. I ( l i ) , zr;

the kalil is distinguished from the 'olah.24r. Lucian, De dea syria, g8; IJerodian, V, Sff. Lampridius,

Elagabalus,8. F. C. \1[overs, Die Phdnizier (Bonn, r84r), I, 565.Plutarch, De Iside ct Osiridt:,5o. At the Thargelia: Amrnoniris, p.r4a Valck.; cf. Mannhardt, MythForsch, p. t36, n. r. At theThesmophoria: E. Rohde, 'Unedirte Lucianscholi€D .', Rhein-isches Mweurn (N.F. XXV, r87o), 54g (Scholiurrr on Lucian, Dial.

meretr., II, r). At Marseilles: Servius on Aeneid, III, 57. The

goat of Lzazel, on the day of the Atonement, was iikewise

t5rher boiled or

Notes

to the blood' But this text simply means that the brood pracecl onthe altar represents the life of ihe consecrated victim.

-_ sro. Exod, :oo<, ro; Levit. xvi, 16. See especially Talmud Jerus.,

Yoma,Mishnah, V,4, 6.s.rr. Levit. iv, zg, go; vii i , r5i k, g; xvi, r5; Ezek. xli i i , zo.zrz. Levit. i , g; ix, rz. Levit. i i i , rz.zr3. The custom of painting certain idols red doubtress arose

from these primitive fo_rms of an-ointing. See Frazer, pausanias, III,pp. zoff Fferodotus, IV, Oe. A. Sprenger, Das Lebe:n und. die Lehredes Mohammad (Berlin, r86r-5), voi. III, p. 452. Mary H. Kings_ley, Trauels in West zlfrica (London, rgg7j, p.-4gr. SeL MarilllEr,op. cit. n. a above, p, z2z, etc.

zr4. Stengel , GK, p.. rsr. C. Michel, Recueil tl,fnscriptionsgrecgues- (Brussels, rgoo),7r4,57 (Mykonos). Cf. Martin J. Hall,Trro"S? .My Spectacles in (Fganda (London, rggg), pp. 56, Si(Baganda).

zr5. Athenaeus, Vf, z6rD.

-sr6- Srnith, RE pp. 65ff. Cf. C. O. Miiller, Denhmiiler d.er

a.l1en Kurrt (Gcittingen, r85e), f, pl. lix, zggb, illustration of HeraAlyogdyo6.

2rZ. e.9., at Thebes, Herodotus, II, 4e.zr8. Varro, De Re Rusttca, I, ,g, 3.zr9. Levit. i, 6, 8, g; ix, rg. Exod. xxix, t7. The bones must

not be broken: Exod. xii, 46. Numb. ix, rz.ze.o. I .evi t . v i i , r4; ix , zt ; x, 14, rS) x l , rz, 2r .zzr. see above, p. 36. lYe recall the Bibrical prohibitio's against

eating blood, which is life, and which belones to God. I"Sam.xlv, 52,53; Deut. xii, z3; Levit. xvii, rr; Gen.1*, ,_5. Cf. Virgil,!1orgics, II, 484; Servius on Aenetd,III, 67; V, 7:g; "i.

A. B. EITir;T*"!-*"_:l""king Peoples oif the Slaue Coasr (Londln, r89o), p. rt2'.Cf. Maril l ier, op. cit. n. z above, p.5Sl.

_ o?n..L"t-r!: 1\i,5,4, r6ff; vi i, z5; ix, tg, zo; for the shelamim,

Levit. iv, 8tr, 19, 3r; ix, ro. fn Greece", Stengei, GK, p. rot';Paton, Cos, 38; Hesychius, dvSpata; Herodotus, IV, 6a._ ze1. Levir. i, g, 13, r1li i , z, g, etc.; psalm lxv (lxvi), r5. Cf.Isa. i, r5. Cf. Clermont-Ganneau, op, cit. n. 4z above, p.-599.Iliad,I, 3t7; YIII, g4gff.

zz4. Levit. xxi,8, rZ, zr. Ezek. xliv,7, Herodotus, IV,6r. Cf.for the Hirpi sorani and the way in which the wolves carried offthe rneat of sacrifices, Mannhardt, ,fFK, II, p. 352.

zzg. Odyssey, III, 5rff, VII, zorffcz6. In the Hebrew ritual the victim was either boilerl or

r50

Notes

burnt. For the victims that were boiled, see f Sam. ii, r5; Herodotus,IV,6r.

zz7. See above, p. a6.ez8. Exod. xxix. zzff;. Levit. vii, g, r4; f Sam. ii, r3ff; Ezek.

xliv, zg. C.LS. 165 "passim, 26.

zzg. Levit. x, r6ff, cf. iv, rr; vi, rgff.z3o. The difference was resolved by making a distinction: thevictim had to be burnt ,outside the camp' when the blood hadbeen brought into the sanctuary, that is, at'the sacrific" of tn" n"yof Atonement. fn other cases the flesh b"longed to the pri"rtJ.

Levi t . vr , z5; x, r8; cf . iv , zr ; v i i i , t7; iv , r r ,zy. Cf. Act. Fr. Arv-. a. ztg (Corpus fnscr. Lat.,yI, zro4), etp:rtil:t:,l!"culares epulati sunt et sanguinem postea. Servius onz4eneid, III, z5r.

.c52. Exod. x1ix,27ff; T,evit. vi i, t3, zgff; x, r4. Numb.v, givi, zo; xviii, 8ff; Deut. xviii. <.

, zg3. Levit- vi, rg,

!, Or,l; men could. eat of the hattat, and,they

had to be pure. For the shelamim (x, r4) the _t"";-;f ;;Cohanim were admirted, but these had to te eaten in a pure place.The meats are always cooked in a sacred room: Ezek. *lvi,.no.

254. Paton, Cot, .SZ,.2r, Sr; 3g, .2,5) je, rof f . Michel , 'op.

c i t .\. "t\

uF":, 7r4 (My!rn9s), 726 (Mit"t"i). G. Doublet,-;frir*if-tions du Pâphlagorrie,, Bulletin d.e correspond.ance hellintquc, rgg,g,q. ^5o9

(Sinope). Pausa'ias, V, 13, z. p. Steng"l, , l ;";;-;;;Opfertiers', Jahrbuch filr phitotog"i. rg79, pp. 687ff.

255. Rohde, Psyche (Engl. tran"s.), p ';S:,?:236. Herodotus, IV, r6i; Vf, 57.257. Paton, Cos, 58, 17.

_a38. Plutarch,Qtnestiones-conuiuales, Vf, g, r (Smyrna); Virgil,,4eneid, YJ, 211. Servius, ad, loc. Cf. tauiain, in )nthropolofr.e',r8g7, p._629. The Septuagint here translares ,olah by t otoroÎ.

'agg, Levit. i , g; ix, ,41 .-*, zo; i, t,7. Ezek. xl, g"g.

_ e4o. Deut. xxxii i , ro; ,olah kali l, I Sam. vii, gf ps. I (l i), ar;the kalil is distingtrished from the ,olah.z4r. Lucian, De de1 syria,-Sg;,Herodian, V, Sff Lampridius,

Elagabalus, S. F. C. Mol:lr, Die ph;nizie- inorrri, ,g4r),T-;65:Plutarch, Dc fside et Osiride,5o. At the Thargeli", A__""i"i i.r4z Valck.; cf. Mannhardt,_MythForsch, p.156, u. ,. et it"Thesmophoria: E. Rohcle, ,Uneiirte

Lu"ian"r"hoii€r .,, Nr;tsches Ll![useun (N.F. XXV, rgTo), d+g (Scholium on Lucian , DiaI.meretr., II, r). At nlarseilles, Seivius on Aeneid., III, g7. Thegoat of Lzazel, on the clay of the Atonement, was rikewise

r5r

Notes

thrown down from the top of a rock. (Talm. Babl., yoma,Mishnah,6zu.)

z4z. There is some analogy between these castings down of thevictirn and the drownings fractised at the agrarian festiva]s. see&engel,*G.&, pp. rzoff. -Mannhardt,

,FFK, iI, pp. ,7A, ,A7.di.Rohde, Psyche,I, rqz.243. Levit. xvi, iz.244. Strabo, X, z, g,245. Levit. xiv, 53.

-e46. Plutarch, Qtu.estiones conuiuales, Vf, g, r. For some factsof the same kind, the n'mber of which couid easily ;" l;;;;;;see Frazer, GB, II, pp. r52ff.

a47' Levit. ix, zc. The sa8 wonderfully expresses the sameprinciple: 'the sacrifice belongs to the godr, thi bl"rri";-;;;;sacrifier,' ShB, z, 3, 4, 5.

248. Levit. x:r. z. IVellhausen, op. cit. _n.

g5 above, p. rZ4(initiation). fn Greece, Xenophon, )rrlU"ri,l, s, g (oath). trrazer,Pausanias, III, p. e77, p. Sge (purificationj.a4g. Lucian, De dea.t{ry, qg, pausalias, I, 34, S (lying downon the skin of the viciim). 6i. Frur"., pousonios, lI, p. 426.Ar,dq x<f8tov. Stengel,

9!: p. 146. Cf. J. de Witte,',j-;ilJpi"ii_,ou la purification de Th6sje', Gazette archiologiqu, (p"C-;;i.9 (r88a! p. 552. Srnith, RC pp. 452,458.

z5o. Smith, R.t, pp. e8S_i.z5r. Ashes of the red heifer which are used as lustration waters.IVumb. xix, g. Ovid, Fasri, IV, 6<q, ,.^. )^)z5z. See above, Jer. x:o<iv, lutt'.t. i'#;, xviii, gz. The riteseems to have been a part.of a sacramentary sacrifice] symbolicalof a contract, Cf. Gen. xiii, 9ff. plutarch,

euaestiones Romanae,r I l .

?SS. It is known that the technical name of the flesh of they-b1h spla.mim, etc., that could b"

"orrrlr*"0 in Jerusalem wasKodashim (sanctities). (Cf. Septuagrnt, xpta-'&y,.a). Jer. xi, ,S. Cf.Smith, RS, p. za8.

zg4. In the zehah shelamim,.except for the reserved portions,the sacrifier is entitled to everything.cg5. See Smith, R,S, pp. %ZfL

"

e56' Levit ' vi i, r<-r8j i l ts' Exod. xxix, s+.cf.N1lannhardt,F|.FK,II, p. o5o. Fiuzer, Cn,if, i ,. ;;.

'"^"' '

257' Levit' vii, r5; xxii, zg, 5o. su" Dillmann-Knobel, vor. Xrr,p. 448.258. Exod. xii, ro; >aiii, rg; xxxiv, z5; I)eut. xvi. a.

132

Notes

::fl ilyt.::_*, jssi-,": .Frazer, pausanias,ti'::, tl. lI.,,t,1,5oi. cr. etr,u"*"i, -;fr

,- ;;z6o. Pausanias, II, iZ, ,, X, ;;;.' ;i;; ychius,- ' , - ( , "uuog,ev, paton, Cos, 39, 24.

buried.

III, p. z4o.

s.v. 'E<rttcr

:* .^T::l':lfi u:;q (c3lt or. rsis at rithorea). rhe remains:j ll :. n-.:l_ *""" " "ih i blt"d i" rh "

-;;;r'".# ffi; :; Tf.Hi

lilH:n*' a'd before each festivJ il;;;;,""'ffi.:':;;Xl

,_o::. .T,evit. vi, 4; xiv, 4; cf. iv. r r; the blood of the birds killedrn the temple was covered with earth. ,Lt Olympia ,t;;;;";heap of ashes before. tfr" uttu., pu,,.""r".i V, r5, g; see trrazer,Paula ntas, III, 5 66 ; Sten gel, GIf,-;.-;;.^^-"'

265. The wife of the sa"crifier l. p.".l"t at all the Hindu solemnsacrifices, standins in a,special ptu.", tooruly bound, and is theobject of certain rit"., *hi"h .";;;;;io hu. in some desreethe emanations of the sacrifice *a "rr,r."-fr*,

f;il;.;;;,-il,6, rff; ,4pSAS, IIf, rg, I, rs com.e64. She causes rhe

T-i_*ul to drink at every gasp for breath,saruan pranan (anst s., vII, r g, 6), while th" offi"iiot'rtl;kbr;;;animal's limbs liberalrsith.T;1;;!ls, ;,-i,n, ,.Cf. 6,3, 9, r;rS, vI, t4; ShB, z, B, z, 4, z); in fsr*r;*i, etc,, must be recon_stituted. The cerelony has';;""."1-;;;;gs. The Taittiriyinsemphasize its propitiatory nature: death is u ,pilrr,, u n;;,;it.hl^1T:

*t:n eich'gasp for breath ;";;;; f" upp"ur"d. For this::1r:",

at each gasp water is given it to drink, ""a

,f," p,i" ""ithe lame disappear with the water into the-eanh. (O dr*;,z, 8 and 16). Thus the Taittiriyi", prr, io, L"n orr" of the mantrasaddressed to each orifice of.thl

"li*^f, ;fjri"k,,

and not ,purifyyourself' (ZS); the expression *hi"h

"o.."rforrd, to the name of

ffi:lT;I1er"";ftil::::.'rtr.'" v";"'*ffi insists on tr'u f".i-is a riie, it i, """., ir,Jl?i,[j,:lt*,,:H'tf.","X*:;,li; :lmgods. Now the animal is killed *h";l;-;io"ut"d and appeased.'But the waters are the breaths oflji;6"y contain the vitalprinciple);

FT: ut performing tf,i" fif,i, i,rrt.^tlorr;, the breathsare replaced. The victim becoires Uf" urrJ the immortal food ofthe inrmortals., (SDB, loc. cit.\z6g. ApShS, VII , r8,

l+, ma:tr1siT, , ,s, g,2; see ibtd, . ,6,

3, 9, D, proposes a more eJlct_1ite (cf. {.9aj Vrl o, .,,1.

s". ,}.Jtexts of rhe school of the Rig V"a" Oni "it*igunigada, .4shuShS,

l '|l:l t Au!:.6, ?,.-t,1")r*trr:0""r Jirp.,"o,ing the blood inorder to repel the evil spirits' The discussion'that takus place aboutr35

Notes

this subject is interesting; it is explained that the evil spirits, like

the gods, are present at sacrifices; they also must have their share,

since otherwise, as they have a right to it, if they were not given it

to make them go away (nir-aua-da): cf. Oldenberg, RelV, p' zt8,

and ZS, 6, 5, g, z), dtey would 'weigh heavily'on the sacrifier

and his family. Other different parts of the I'ictirn are thus attri-

buted to the evil spirits. These are: the drops of blood which fall

when the heart is being cooked ({SizS, YI, 7, r5), and also the

stomach, the excrements, and the blades of grass on which the

blood that has been collected is spread. (ApShS does not give these

details; see Schwab, Thieropfer, p. ry7.) These are then all buried

in the 'pit for excrelnents'outside the place of sacrifice (ApShS,

VII, 16, r; cf. AshuShS, I I I , g, r). The AitB, 6,6, 16, gives another

interpretation to this burial. The texts readily glide over these

shares macle over to evil spirits. It seemed an irreiigious rite (cf.

AitB,6,7, z) to invite the enemies of the gods to the sacrifice' But

the rites are plain: in general all that is left from the sacrifice that

is unusable (for example, the husks of the corn ground to make a

cake) are rejected and cast out in this way. To these facts may be

compared the Greek practice of the sacrifice to "Hpa yapr.l).ia in

which the victim's gall was thrown away (Plutarch, Coniugalia

praecepte, z7) and the Biblical prescription to bury the blood of

the birds of purification. It is notelvorthy that the ritual of the

sacrifices of India shows that, contrary to accepted ideas, it is not

necessarily the principle of a bloody sacrifice that the blood be

made use of.g66. The upper portion of the peritoneum, muscular and fatty,

'the most juicy part from among the fatty parts, has been removed

from the middle for you, and to you we give i t ' , RV, I I I , 2r,5.

It is the central portion of the animal, the principle of its indivi-

vidual life, its atman (7S, 6, 3, g, 5), just as 'the blood is the life'

with the Semites. It is the sacrificial principle of the victim (the

medhas), ?S, 5, r , g, z;5h8,5,8, 2, z8; see Ai tB, 7,3, 6, a cur ious

ritual m1th.267. ApShS, VII, rg, 3ff. At the head walks a priest with a

lighted torch in his hand, then follows the priest who carries the

portion of the victim on two spits (for he must not touch it directly),

then the sacrifier who holds the priest as described earlier (ApShS'

VfI, rg, 6, 7, comm.). The reasons for the rite are the same as are

indicated above (see p. 35 and note r8r). 7S, 6, 5, 9, b and 4.268. RV, III, zr, 5. Oldenberg's translation (ad loc.) against

sayana n RI/ and rB. L5+

Notes

z69. The whole rite is very ancient, for one of the priests recitesthe hymn: Rtr l , I I , Z5, r, therr f l f , z r, in i ts entirety :TB,ILI, 6, ?,t f f :M5,3, ro, l . Cf. fS, 6, +,5, 5. Cf. Ait I) , Z, 2, 5ff .See Ludwig,Rig-Vt:da, IV, p. zo5. Bergaigne, Histoire de la liturgie uy'diEtc,p. r8, considers this hymn a recent one, as it is made up of versesof varying nretre, that is to say, a series of entirely separate for-mulas. (See Oldenberg, tr'cdic Ilymns, Sacred Books of the East,XLVI, p. 285.) This fact is indisputable; the formulas come fromdiverse sources and were collected together comparatively late.But the formulas are very nruch earlier than the hynrn. So muchso that, altl'rough the hymn was not written as a unity, it appearsas a unified whole in its object, and the natural way in which ithas been made up sho'"vs that it is linhed with one of the mostancient rites. The hymn describes very precisely all the details oft lre operation (cf. 7S, 6, 5, 9, 5 and SAB, 5,8,2, r r). The Brahminsfound a naturalist meaning in this sacrificial rite, which is amongthe most important.

z7o. ApShS,YII, zz, z.z7t. Ll) of them wash. ApShS, YII, zz,6:,KSAS, 6, 6, zg:

AshuShS,5, E, I and z. The mantras are Z,S, 4, r, S, r:RV,X,g, r-g.The ZS, Vf, r6, gives the same text as AI/, VI, 89. The lastmantra expresses deliverance from sickness, sin, death, and frommalediction, hurnan and divine. It is moreover the sacrilice of theaapa, wh\ch, where the sacrifice has as its aim to redeem a man,marks the precise moment of redemption.

z7z. See Schwab, T'hieropfer, no. 98, pp. rz6ff.275. See Schwab, ThieropJbr, p. r4r, no. r. Cf. Ludwig, Rzg-

Veda,IY, p. O6r.See.1pSlz. l , YI I ,25, 7tr . 5h8,3,8,3, to (SacredBooks of the East, XXVI, zor). Eggeling ad loc.

274. lpShS, VII, 25, 8.2ZS. 7.5,6,5, t t , r . During the sacri f icat ion is recited Rtr ' ,yI,

6o, rg; I , rog, 7 and 6:7 '8,6, j , r r , r f f , which are formulas ofglorification of the gods, and describe the way in which theyaccept the offering and consume it when it reaches them.

276. 'Io Agni, who completes the rites (see \Yeber, fndischeStudien, IX, p. erS) cf. Hillebrandt, op. cit. n. zB above, p. rr8.For the other creatures to whom are attributed shares (of the largeintestine) in a supplementary offering (ApShS, VII, 26, 8ff), seeSchwab, Thieropfer, no. ro4. The mantras recited and the re'sponses do not correspond very ciosely.

277. Other parts, \^'ithout borres, can be added to them. ,y'pSiS,VII , 24, r r .

K

lr

li

155

Notes

278. On the lda, see especially Oldenberg, ReIV, pp' z89ff, and

the passages cited in his Index.

z7g. See Bergaigne, op. ci t . , n. 15r above, f , PP. 323, 325; I I ,

gz, g4.Levi, Sacri ; f ice, pp. r lsff .

s8o. This moment of sacrifice is important enough for the SiB

to link up with it the farnous classicallegend of the flood. (S/zB, r,

8, r, in its entirety; Eggeling, ad loc., Sacred Boohs of the East,

XIL) Cf. \Yeber, fruilsclrc Studien, I, pp. Sff. Nluir, Old Saruhrit

Tezts, I, pp. r8z, rg6ff. But the other Brahmanas have only the

end of this legend, and only the end is an article of the Brahmirr

faith. According to them, it is by inventing the rite o{ the lda,

and thus creating the goddess Ida (his wife or his daughter,

according to the texts) that Manu, the first man and the first

sacrifier, acquired oflspring and cattle' (See 7E r, 7, 1 and z,

and 6 and 7 in their entirety,' TB, 3, Z, 5, 6.) In any case, it and its

corresponding material represent the animals, are their whole

strength: ida uai pashauo,' ida is the animals' .

z8r. See Fliilebrandt, IVVO, p. rz4; Schwab, Thieropfer, p. 148.

c8z. Hillebrandt, NVO, p. r25'

285. The ceremony is called idahuayana, or idopahuana, a tern

which corresponds exactly to the epiclesis of the Christian Mass.

The text is AshuShS, I, 7, 7, translated in Hillebrandt, NVO, pp.

rz5f; Oldenberg, RelV, pp. zgoff. The texts frornShankhya Shrauta

sutra,L to, t ; TB, 5, 5,8, r; 5, 5, r3, rf{are sl ight}y dif ferent ' This

invocation consists essentially in a series of appeals to the divinity,

which is thought to bring with it all the forces mentioned, and

moreover to invite in its turn the priests and the sacrifier to take

their share in the forces thus concentrated. During a pause the

sacrifier says (,1pSlzS, IV, ro, 6-2,5, r, ?, r, 2),'Let this offering'(of mingled milk) 'be my strength'.

284. TB, b, b, 8 adfin.; 3, 5, 13 adfin'

285. The auantareda, the supplementary ida that he holds in

his other hand. (See Weber, frulische Stu.dien, IX, p' 2ry.) He

says (AshuShS, t , 7,8; cf. ?S, z, 6,8, r and z): ' Ida, accept our

share, cause our corvs to prosper, cause our horses to prosper. You

have at your disposal the flower of wealth, feed us upon it, give us

of i t . 'e86. The sacrifier says: 'fda, accept, etc. may we partake

of you, partake in body and soul (commentary on IB), all of us

with all our people.' (TB, 5, Z, 5, 6.)

287. '4sh.-S/tS, I, 8, e'

e88. One school iays dolvn a rite of presentation to the manes

r50

Notes

(KSA.9, 5, 4, t6 and r7.) The rite, although an ancient one (ZS,r r, 3r) is only the r i te of a school.

z8g. See the urantras in Flillebrandt, NVO, re6ff; it is in thisr\ray that the mouth of the agnidhra (fire priest) is supposed to bethe very mouth of Agni. 'Ihus the sacerdotal shares are indeeddivine ones. There is no question here, as Oldenberg saw, of a meaftaken in common, a rite of social communion, whatever mayappear. In the fda'the share of the sacri f i t :r ' has a sort of 'medi-cating' power (Oldenberg) ; it gives strength to the sacrifier, 'itplaces the animals rvithin him', as the texts have it: pashunyajamane dadhati (note the use of the locative). See ?,S, z, 6, 7, 5iAi tB, z, go, r ; 6, ro, r r ; ShB, t ,8, r , rz, etc. The tdaforms part ofthe ritual of the Hindu solemn sacrifices. We must add that whatremains of the victim is to a certain extent profaned; the Brahminsand tlre sacrifier can take it home (Schwab, Thieropfer, p. r4g).We knorv of no rules laying dorvn the times allorved for eating thevictims' remains. But some exist for the consumption of all kindsof food generally.

zgo. See above, p. 4r.zgr. ft may cause sr.rrprise that in this scheme we have not

mentioned those cases where the victim is not an animal. We mightindeed have done so. We have seen, indeed, holv the rituals pro-claimed the equivaience of the two kinds of things (see above, p.r5). For example, irr the whole of the agrarian sacrifices theirbasic identity rrrakes possible the substitution of one for another(see p. 77). B:ut there is more: it is possible to establish realsymmetricai patterns between victims and sacrificiaL oblations, Thepreparation of the cakes, the way in which they were anointed withoil or butter, etc., corresponds to the preparation of the victim.Even the creation of the sacred thing during the course of theceremony is much rnore evident in the case of oblation than in anyother case, since it is often made entirely on the very place ofsacrifice. (See for India: Ilillebrandt, op. cit. n. z8 above, pp. 28,

4r.) Particularly when they are figurines (see for India, I{ille-brandt, op. ci t . n. ro above, sect. 64, p. 116; sect. 48. Cf. Weber,Nakshatra, II, g58-the information is rather fragnentary:Sanhh. grthya sutra, IY, rg). For Greece, see above, p. 12.Stengel, Gli , pp. goff Festus, rzg; cf. Frazer, GB,II , pp. 84, r3gff.C. O. Lobeck, Aglaoplmrnzs (Ki inigsberg, rSzg), pp. rrg, ro8off.Next, the destruction has the same characteristic of definitiveconsecration as the plrtting to death of an animal victim. At leastthe spirit of the oblation is always removed outside the real worl.d.

157

Notes

One difference only exists, natural because of the nature of things;in the majority of cases the moment of attribution and that olconsecration coincide, without the victim having as such thecharacter of something to be eliminated. fndeed, the libation isdestroyed at the very mornent when it falls upon the altar, is lostin the earth, evaporates or burns in the fire; the cake and thehandful of flour are consumed and disappear in smoke. The sacri-Iication and the attribution to the divinity make one singie tnomentin the ritual. But there is no doubt about the nature of the destmc-tion: thus the mere placing of wood to be burnt is, at certainmoments, a sacrifice itself in the Hindu ritual. (We allude to thesamidheni, see Hillebrandt, NVO, pp. T+tr.) Lastly the distribu-tion of shares is, mutatis mutandis, analogous to that of the animalsacrifice: thus in the case of the sacrifice at the full or new moon,we firrd shares for the gods, an ida, etc. Let us finally recall thatthe most important of all the Hindu sacrifices, the most extra-ordinary case perhaps ofall sacrifices, the one in which the victim ismade to undergo all possible kinds of treatment, the sacrifice of thesoma is,like the Christian sacrifice, made up of a vegetable oblation.

zgz. Nothing is easier to explain: for it is the sarne people andthe same things that are in question, and, from another viewpoint,by virtue of the well-known laws that regulate religious matters,it is the sarne processes of lustration which bestow or remove acharacter of sacredness.

zg3. ApShS',YIl , 26, rz; .KS/zS', 6, g, rr; T'5, r, 3, rr, r and SAB,

5, 8, d, 5, for the mantra (.K9zS has made better use of it). A seriesof minor sacrifices have been made (see Schwab, Thieropfer, no.r r r), the fonnulas for rvhich express the ending of the rite.

zg4. ApShS, YII, 27, 4; I{SAS, VI, g, rz. (It is remarkable that.!.pShS borrorvs the mantra frorn VS, VI, zr.)

zg5. Hillebrandt, NVO, pp. r4S-2, Schwab, Thieropfer, rd6-g.During this rite a curious recapitulation is made of the differentmornents of the sacrifice (TB, 5, 6, rS in its entirety) and of thebenefits that await the sacrifier; he will taste what he has giventhe gods to taste. (Cf. AshuShS, r, 9, r.)

z96. Flillebrandt, I{VO, pp. t4Z-g.z96. As he thanks him for having ransported the offering to the

gods:, , /pSlzS, VII , e8, z j TB, z,4, ?, r r ; cf . 75' , 3,5,8,4.zg8. ApSlS, ibid., 4. ^7itB, 6, 5, S.eg9. Schwab, Tltieropfer, p. ro7. Hillebrandt, NVO, pp. r4of.

3oo. ApSl$, VI I , 26, 15; ShB, j ,8, 5,8; ?E 6, 4, r , 8 i ZS, r ,5,t r ; VS,YI, zz; ,4pShS,YII ,27, 16.

r5d

Notes

3or. ApShS, e6, r6ff ; TS, r, 4, 49, 5.5oz. Hillebrandt, NVO, p. rZ4. Cf. L6vi, SacriJice, p. 66.

5o5. Cf. ShB, r, r , r , 4-7.5o4. ,4uabhrita. See lVeber, fnrlische, Studien, X, 5g5ff. Cf.

Oldenberg, Rel7, pp. 4o7ff. Perhaps the expressions 'fluid', etc.,used by Oldenberg are not the best, but he has nevertheless indi-cated the meaning of the rite as it appears 1e fs-net in the RI',where it is moreover mentioned (see Grassmann, Il'1rterbucJz zumRig-Veda, ad uerb.), but in all the other ritual and theologicaltexts. ApShS, YIII,7, rzfl and XIII, rgff. (S/zS, VI, to, t; X,8, r6ff .

go5. Tlrese places, the ponds, the tirthas, which even today inIndia are particularl-\'sacred spots, are alleged to be the favorrritepossession of Varuna. (ShB, 4,4, 5, ro.)

<o6. ,4pShS, XII I , eo, ro) l r .

5o7. ,4pShS, XIII, zz, z com. At the same time they repeatvarious formulas which explain that they are expiating their sins,their ritual errors, that they are acquiring strength, prosperity andglory, bv assimilating to themselves in this u'ay the magic forceof the waters. the r i1es. and the plants.

3o8. They give their old garments to the priests, thus aban-doning their former personality, and by putting on nelv ones theyare acquir ing'a new skin l ike a serpent ' . 'There is norv no noresin in them than in a toothless infant.' ShB, 4, 4, 5, e3.

5og. Levit. xvi, zz, 23. IIe ciranged his garb yet again afterhaving ceased to fast, and returned home to receive the congratu-lations of his frj.ends for having borne up under all the trials,accornplished all the rites and escaped all the dangers of that day.(Talmud Babl., Yoma, Mishnah, 7oa.)

gro. Levit . xvi. 26.

3rr. Levit . xvi,28. As l ikewise did he who brought back theashes of the red heifer.

grz. lYe know from Ezek. xliv, rg, that the garments of thepriests lvere shut away in'holy roorns', to which priests went todress and undress before going out to the people; contact withthese garments was dangerous for the laity.

5r5. Porphyry, De ,4bstinentia, II, 44. Paton, Cos, 58, 24. Cf.Frazer, GB, l l , pp. 5+f ' f .

5r4. Levit . vi , zr (hattat).

139

Notes

CHAPTER TI{REE

t5'._Plato,_R"publr:, VIII, 565D. Pausanias, VIIf, z, 6; VIII,z, 3. Pliny, Natural History, YIII, zz. See X,IannhalfLt, II.FI(, II.p. 34o. There is the same legend about the sanctuary of Hyre.Gruppe, Griechische llfythologie, pp. 62tr Cf. J. Wellha,rr"rr, Iirsz,Arabischen Heidentums, p. r6a and note, p. l6J. See below, p.no

3r6. We refer to the facts, well known since Mannhardt. Frazer.Sidney Hartland, under the name of ,external soul', with rvhichthe tlvo latter authors have linked the whole theory of initiation.

3r7. Pausanias, V, ]5, i. The same prohibition at pergamumfor those who had sacrificed to Telephus.

3r8, See above, p. 4o and p. 45. It is strictly then that theidentification sometimes sought between the sacrifier, the victim.and the god, is entirely realized. (On this principle, see Hebr. ii, r r. j

3r9. Psalm cv (cvi), 39. 'Thus they were defiled with their ownworks, and went a whoring with their ol.m inventions.'

5zo. Ler.it. xiff. Cf. Marquardt, op. cit. n. 77 above, p. 277. Cf.Frazer, art. 'Taboo', Encyclopedia Brttannica (gth ;dn.). Cf.Frazer, GB, passim. Cf. Jevorrs, Introduction. to tlrc l{istory. ofReligion, pp. ro7ff.

5zt. Cf. Rohde, Psyche, f , pp. r7g, rgz; S. R. Steinmetz,Ethnologische Studien zur ersten Entraichlung der Stralfe (Leiden,r8g4), II, pp. asoff.

5ze. This is the usual punishnent for ritual errors in Leviticus.Deuteronoml'and Exodus, as in Ezekiel and trre historical books;the rites must be observed if one does not want to clie or be attackedwith leprosy like king IJzziah. Cf. Oldenberg, Reltr , pp. zg7, 5tg.Cf. Bergaigne, op. cit. n. r3r above, fII, pp. r5off.

^^

323. Levit. xvi. Cf. above, note r8o.324. Levit. xiv, rff.525. tr'or the Greek expiatory sacrifices see Lasaulx, Siihnonfer

der Griechen (Wiirzburg, r84+), pp. 236ff; James Donaldson,'/Onthe Expiatory and Substitutionary Sacrifices of the Greek s, , Trans_a:tiotls of the Royal Societtrr of Eclinburgtt. (r87g 6), pp. 455ff. Forthe facts regarding the Germanic peoples, ,"" Ut.l.i, jiin, Di".4bu,,ehrenden und die Sillznopfer der De,utscherz, fnaug. I)iss.,Breslau, 1884, reprinted in I(. Weinhold (ed..), GerministischeAbhand.lungen (Breslau, r884), III (Die. deutschen Opfergebriiuchebei Ackerbau und, Viehsucht).

526. See Oldenberg, RelV, pp. z97ff, gzzff.r40

Notes

527. KauS, z6-18. Cf. I(uhn's fine article for a series of analo-gous rites in the whole of Europe (Kuhru Zeitschrift, XIII, pp.r r5ff). On this rite see Bloomfield, LIymns of the Atharua-Veda(Sacred Books of the East, XLIr), ad 2V, i, zz, p. 264; cf. fntro-duction to VII, 116 (p. 569).

3c8. AV, I , zz, 4.5zg. On the rites see Bloomfield, Sacred Books of the East,

XLII, introduction to VII, rrO (p.S6S), and M. I{ internitz, 'DerAltindische If ochzeitsritu ell', Denhs chri"ften der ltaiserl. Akad. derWissensch., Phil.-ltist. l(/., Vienna, XL (1892), pp. 6, rz, 23, 67.KauS, : '8, r7, 16.

35o. We translate literally. Bloomfield and the commentaryexplain (ad loc.) by the word 'crow'.

TzJ. AI/ , Vf I , r rg, r .

352. Lahshml, 'mark' of rnisfortune, the imprint of the goddessNirriti (of destruction). This mark correspontls both to the biackcolour of the crorv and to the small cahe that is tied to its feet.

355. The casting of evil spells on the enemy is a constant themeof the Vedic, Atharvan, and other rituals.

354. Cf.KauS,5z, t7.j6s. For this r i te see Oldenberg, ReIV, pp. 82, 446 \.r , and

above all Hillebrandt, op. cit. n. ro above, p. 85. The rite formspart of the domestic ritual. The texts are: Ashualayana grilryaSutra, 4, 8; Parashara, 5, 8; Hiranyakeshin, z, 8, gi Apastambagrilrya Sutr a, r g, r 3ff; ro r - r g. The text o f tJte A s ha. seems to attributeto this rite the meaning of a prosperity rite (4, 8, 35; Parashara,

5,8, z). But the characterist ics ofthe r i te arc very clear and thecommentary to l{iranyalteshin, z, g,7 (Kirste ed., p. r55) sees itas a shanti to Rudra, king of the animals, a 'way of appeasing' thegod by means of a victim who would be the 'spit-ox' (cf. Oiden-berg's translation of Hiranyakeslrn, Sacred Books of the East,XXX, p. zzo). Oldenberg sees above aII in this rite a case of animaLfetishism. Thus he insists principally on deveioping the remarkablepoint of the rite, rvhich is the incorporation of the god in the victim.The rite has come down to us only through fairly recent texts,which show considerable divergencies. We cannot give an his-torical analysis of them here. Our conclusion is that there werethree more or less heterogeneous rites, which were combined eitherin pairs or all together according to the Brahrnin schools and clans.We deal principaf.y rvith the rite o{ the Atreya clans (,4shu. Par.).In any case the rite is a very ancient one, and the hymns of theRZto Rudra (Y, +3; I , r r4; I I ,53; VII, 46) are, both by the Sutras

L 4"L

Notes

and by Sayana, devoted to this rite, to which they apply remarkabl-ywell.

g56. On Rudra, see above all Oldenber g, RelV, zfi-24, z}Sff;

535ff. Cf. A. Barth, 'M. Oldenberg et la religion du Veda', Journaldes Sauants (Paris, r896), pp. r55ff, 3r7ff, 38gff,47rff . Bergaignc,op. cit. n. rjr above, IfI, StlT; r5z-4. Levi, ,sacrifice, p. 167(AitB, 15, g, r). It is impossible for us to set out here the i"uro.r.,for our explanations of the mythical personality of Rudra.

g;7. This is the point on which all the schools are in agreement:it is made to sniffthe offerings (cf. Okienberg, RelI,-, p. 8:, and theway in which the divinized horse of the ashuamedha is tnade toinhale the offerings; cf. also l(S&S, r4, j, ro). It is calied by thewhole series of Rudra's names,. 'Om (the rnagic syllable) to Bhava,Om to Sharva, etc.,' cf. ZV, Iy, e8, and the texts to Rudra arerecited: TS, 4, 5, rff See Xl[antrapatha of ,lpastamba, ed. l{,Winternitz, fI, r8, roff.

358. According to Parashara.j3,g. No part of the animal can be brought back to the village

'because the god seehs to kill men.' The relatives could not upprouihthe place of sacrifice, nor eat the flesh of the victim, without arrorder and a special invitation. AslruShS, g, 8, 3t and 55 (see Olden-berg, Sacred Books of the East, XXIX, p. 258).

54o. For simplicit-y of exposition it is everywhere to be under-stood that the same thing can be repeated, in the same terrns ofthe objects.

g4r. Levit , xiv, roff

542. Nurnb, vi, r6ff. Talmud Jerus., Nazir (Schwab trans., IX,pP.8+tr) .

545. Talmud Jerus., Nazir, I, z. The nazir offers the samesacrifice when he rids himself of his hair, which has become tooheavy.

544. Ibid., ff, ro.

5+5. Ibid., VI, 7 and 8. Numb. vi, r8.

546. Numb. vi, rg.

547. See especially Frazer, GB, additional note to vo]. II, pp.

573ff, f.or some ethnographical facts; cf. ibid., II, pp. 67ff. Itwould be easy to increase the number of facts cited. Frazer rigl-rtlysaw that the majority of offerings of the firstfruits consist in theconsecration of a part of the eclible species, a part which representsthe whole. But his analysis, which moreover he keeps on a factuallevel, did not take into account the function that rvas served by therite in question.

r42

Notes

548. This part is normaliy the first of everything. IVe recall theextent of the tsiblical prescriptions concerning the firstborn,whether of men or of animals; the firstfruits and the first crops ofthe year, the first products of a tree ('orlah), the first wheat eaten(azymes), the first dough leavened (halLt). Of all that lives orgives life, the firstfruits belong to Yahweh. The benedictions ofthe Talmud and the synagogue further stress this notion, as theyare obligatory when a frrit is tasted for the first tirne, 'when ameal is begun, etc.

540. Talmud Jenrs., BikhurinL,III, X'fishnah, 1ff. It is evident thatwe cannot follow the rite in the Biblical texts, rvhich contain onlythe directions for the priests and not the popular usages. Thepopular nature of all this rite is clear; the flute player, the bullockcrorvned with olive, with giided horns (rvhich a kid r'vith silveredhorns could replace, cf. Gemara, ad loc.), the baskets, the doves-all these are original features of unquestionable antiquity. More-over these texts of the Mishnah are themselves very ancient.

ggo. They met together the previous evening, and spent thenight in the public square (according to the Gemara, for fear ofimpure contact).

35r. Gemara arJz.The rabbis discuss amongthenrselves rvhether\t is as shelamim or as 'olah.

ZS2. L rite of personal redernption, a fairly remarkable case.

3$. Ct.Talmud Babl., Menaltoth, 58a (Schr.r'ab, ad loc.).

354. Numb. xix.ggg. See above, p. 53.g56. Ritual of I(ippur.g57. Talmud Jerus., Maaser Sheni, YI, Gemara (see Schwab,

p. 242). Cf. Mid.doth, Mishnah, quoted ibid.

CHAPTER FOUR

558. I t is well kno*'n that this'death' into which the devotee isplunged before the return of Yahweh is a basic therne of theProphets and the Psaims. (Cf. Ezek. xxxvii, z; Job xxxiii, 28, andthe commentar-f in Talmud Jerus., Baba l(amma, Gerlara, YII,

S (+)). See the rvhole of Psalm cxiv--cxv (cxvi) and cxvii (cxviii)

from verse r7. ' I shal l not die, but l ive, 'etc. We need not remindreaders of the Catholic formulas in the Mass.

55g. In India, the whole world of sacrifice is considered to be

this new world. When the sacrifier who has been seated is raised

up, he is told: 'Stand up, into l i fe. 'While they rvalh bearing a

14.3

Notes

sacred object, the formula runs: 'Go the length of the vast atmo-sphere' (ZS, r, t, z, r). At the beginning of every rite one of thefirst mantras is: 'Thou for the juice, thou for the sap.' (ZS, r, r,r, r.) And at the end of the sacrifice the process of regeneration iscornplete (cf. above, p. 47, n. 3o8).

56o. Pausanias, fI, 24, r. For the transport induced by the soma,and the way in which the rusAzs who have drunk it feel themselveseither carried offinto the other world or possessed by the god Soma,see Bergaigne, op. c i t . n. r5r above, f , r5r f f ; Rtrz,X, rrg; X, 136,3, 6ff; VIII,48 in its entirety. Cf. Oldenberg, Religionrkr Vefut,-p.55o. For possession see G. A. Wilken, 'Het shamanisme bij devolken van den Indischen Archipel', e)ctract fuon Bijdragen tot detaal-, land- en uolkenhunde tân Nederlattdsch IndiE, t887, pp.4z7ff .Frazer, Pawanias, V, p.58r; cf . Pausanias, f ,34, J.W.H.Roscher, 'Die "I : lundekrankheit" der Pandareosti jchter undandere mythische Krankheiten', Rheinisches Mtueum, LIII, pp.t72ff.

g6r. These expressions are borrowed from the Biblical and Tal-mudic speculations on the day of ' judgernent', of Kippur.

36e. See our reviews of the books of A. Nutt, Rohde and Cheet-ham, in Annie sociologique, II (r8gg), pp. 2r4ff. On the Hindudoctrines, see L6vi, Sacrilfi,ce, ro2, ro8, 16r. On the haorna, see J.Darmesteter, Hauruatat et Ameretat (Paris, 1875), p. 54; Ormazd,et z4lriman (Paris, 1875), p. go.

565. See E. Lef6bure in Milusine (cf. n. 176 above), cols. r46ff;D. G. Brinton, Religioru of Primitiue Peoples, pp. 8gtr

564. The pilgrim of Mecca, the ancient sacrifier of the hajj,took and still takes the title haji. See Wellhausen, Reste ,4rabisclzenHeidentums, p, 80.

565. SeeDuchesne, Christ ianWorship (Eng. trans., rgrg edn.),pp. 5o8ff. See above, p. 52. On the relation between the sacrificeand the rites ofinitiation and the introduction of the nerv soul, seeFrazer, GB, I, 344tr. The errtry into the Christian life has alwaysbeen considered as a real change ofnature.

566. We know that in miny parallel cases, and even here,another result is intended: to outwit evil spirits by changing one'sname, to baffle bad luck. See Midraslz on EccI., V, 5, par. r;Talmud Babl., ltosb Haslnruth, r6b; Talmud Jerus., Shebuoth,Gemara, Vf, ro (Schwab trans., IV, p. Zg). Cf. C. Snouck Hur-gronje, Mekha in the Later Part of the rgth Century, trans. J. H.Monahan (Leiden and London, rgSl), p. gg.

367. Talmud Jerus., Gittin, Gernara, p. 4E (Schwab).

r+4,

Notes

568. See W. Caland, '4ltind.ischen Todten- und Bestattungs-gebriiuche (r896), no. s. J. J. M. de Groot, The Religious Sy-stem ofChtna (figz), I, p. 5.

g69. See reviews, AnnCe sociologigue (r89g), p. zt7.

57o. Sacrifrce, pp. gg-S. We adhere entirely to the cornparisonproposed by Levi between the Brahmin theory of escape fromdeath by sacrifice and the Buddhist theory of moltsha, deliverance.Cf. H. Oldenberg, Le Bouddha (Paris, rg54), pp. 48ff.

37r. See Bergaigne, op. cit, n. 15r above, for the amritam, the'immortal essence' conferred by the soma (I, pp. s54ff). But in it,as in Hillebrandt, Vedische Mythologie (n. 5z above), I, p. z9g etpasstrn, the interpretations of pure mythology have encroachedsomewhat on the explanations of the texts. See A. I(u,hn, Iferab-huryft des Fetnrs und, des Gdttertranhs (1886). Cf. 1\r. H. Roscher,Nektar ztnd. Ambrosia (Leipzig, r885).

372. See Darmesteter, Hauruatat et Anreretat, pp. 16, 4r.325. I\ dogma (e.g,, frenaeus, Aduersus Haereses,IV, 4, 8, 5)

as well as in the best-known rites. Thus the consecration of theHost is effected by a formula in which the effect of sacrifice uponsalvation is mentioned. See F. Magani, Antica liturgia romtrna(Milan, r8g8), II, p. 268, etc. With these facts might also be com-pared the Talmudic Haggada.h according to which the tribes thatvanished in the desert and have not oerforrned sacrifice rvill have nopart in eternat life (Talmud Jerus., Sinhedrin,Gemara, X, 4, q and 6),nor will the people of a city laid under interdict for having givenitself over to idolatry, nor will the impious liorah. This f'almudicpassage is based on Psalm xlix (l), 5; 'Gather nry saints togetherunto me, those that have made a covenant rvith me by sacrifice.'

574. This might be the place to study the political side, so tospeak, of sacrifice. Irr a fair number of politico-religious societies(secret societies in Melanesia and Guinea, Brahminism, etc.), thesocial hierarchy is often determined by the qualities each individualacquires in the course of sacrifice. It would also be appropriate toconsider the cases where it is the group (family, corporation,society, etc.) which is the sacrifier, and to see r,vhat are the effectsproduced on an entity of this kind by sacrifice. It rvould be easy tosee that all these sacrifices, of sacralization or desacralization, have,other things being equal, the same effects on society as on theindividual. But the question falis rather within the sphere ofgeneral sociology than in an exact study of sacrifice. Besicles, it hasbeen closely studied by English anthropologists: the effect of sacri-ficial cornmunion on society is one of their favourite topics. See

14,5

Notes

lyilh, RE pp. z84.ff; E. Sidney Hartland, The Legend. olf perseus,

II, chap. xi, etc.

- 375. Gmnt Allen, in the.second part of his The Euolution qf tlt.eIdea of God (London, rSgZ), has advancecl icleas concernirre ih",usacrifices and the sacrilices of the God which will perhaps ipp"a,relativel.v analogous to our. own (see especially pp. 265, 266) i3q,O4off). We hope, however, that fundamuntal differe.r"", *ili bunoticed also.

376. It is one of the rites the cornparative study of which is mostadvanced. See H. Gaidoz, Les Rites de la Construcrloz (paris, rggs):R. Winternitz, 'Einige Bemerkungen iiber das Bauopfer bei den

fldern' (l[ilteiltnge,n der Antlropologischen Geietkchaft zu

Wien., XYII (r887), Introd., pp. laZ]ff. Also especially the eihaus_tive rnonograph of P. Sartori, 'Uber das )3auopfer', in Zcitschrift

.fiir llthnographie,XXX (r8q8), with its classifiiation of the forr-rx,in which only the analysis of the rite leaves anything to be desired.For the preservation of the bodies or parts of the bodies of thevictims in b'ilding, see G. wilken, 'rets over de schedelvereeri'gbij de volken van den Indischen Archipel' (Bijdragcn tot de taall,Iand-, en uolkenkunde uan Ncderlandsch hzdid, XXXVII, rggg);Pinza, Conseruaziort.e delle teste ttmane, passirn.

577. This is the most common case. fn reality it is a matter ofcreating a kind of god to whom worship will later be paicl. This is acase parallel to rhat of the agrarian sacrifice. This spirit will bevag-ue or precise, will be fused with the force that makes the build_ing solid or wiii become a sort of personal god, or wil} be both atthe same time. But it will always be linkecl by certain ties to thevictim out of which it proceeds and to the building of which it isthe guardian and protector, against spells, illnesses, and mis_fortunes, inspiring respect for the threshold in all, whether thievesor inmates. (H. C. Trumbnll, The Threshold. Couenant, rg96.) Inthe same way as the agrarian victim is 'fixed' by sorving its remai's,so blood is spread over the foundations and later the head is wallecl

'p. The cor)struction sacrifice co']d be repeated later in various

rituals-firstly on grave occasions such as the repair of a buildingor the siege of a torvn; then it became periodic and was i., manicases mixed uP rvith agrarian sacrifices and, like ther', ga'e rise tLthe creation of mythical personages. See F. I)iimmler, ,sitten_

geschichtliche Parallelen', Philologus, LVI (1897), pp. rgff.578. This is also a ver,y common case. Here it is a matter of

redemption, through a victim, from the anger of the spirit that isthe olvner of the ground, or in sone cases of the buiiding itself.

t 4,o

Notes

In India the two rites are found combined (see Winternitz, Ioc. cit.)in the sacrifice to Vastoshpati, ' Rudra, Lord of the place'; normallythe;' 2t" separate. (Sartoli, op. cit. (n. SZ6 above), pp. 14, 15, rg,

42ff.)5Zg. See W-internitz, loc. cit.

58o. The best knor.rrr case is that of Jephthah's daughter. Butafter the accomplishment of a voluntarv sacrifice there is ahvaysthe feeling of having fulfilled one's obligations, of having 'shifted'the vow' as tire Hindu theologians forcibiy put it.

g8r. The general formula of attribution which the sacrifieruttered when the officiant cast any part into the fire ran in VedicIndia as follo'rvs: 'This to the god N.N., and not to rne.'

g8e. These are the sacrifices 'of thanksgiving', of praise, of theBible. They seem in most religions to ]rave been relatively few.For India, see Oldenberg, Religion dtr Veda., pp. Oo5, 3o6; lVilken,'Over eene nieurve theorie des Offers' , De Gids, r8go, pp.56gff.

a8e. H. (Jallarvay, Th.e Religious S3rstem o;f the Amazula (Spring-vale, Natal, 1868), p. 59, n. 14. Cf. Frazer, GB, II, 42, etc. Cf.Marillier, Reuue d'histoire des religions, XXXVI (r8g8), p. 2og.Cf. Bernardino de Sahagun, I.Iistoria de las cosas de I{ueuo Esparta,I I , p. eo.

g84. Hillebrandt, op. cit. tt. ro above, p. 75. \Yith these factsmust be compared the cases of drowning victims in water. In othercases water is poured over any victim: I Kings xviii, rgff, etc. Cf.Krahmer, 'Das Fest "Sinsja" und das tr'eldgebet', etc., Globus,LXXIII (1898), p. 165. Cf. Smirrrov and Boyer, Populations fin-zorses (1898), p. LZd.

385, In the Vedic ritual, when the animal is anointed on thecroup, is said: 'A4ay the Lord of the sacrifice (the sacrifier) go with(you and) his wil l to heavetr ' (ApShS, VII, r4, r; V5,6, ro, 6;TS t, 5,8, r), which is comrnented upon in 7,S, 6, 5, Z, +; ShB,

3, Z, 4, 8, where it is explained that the animal is going off toheaven and bears off on its croup the prayer of the sacrifier. Thevictim ]ras often been imagined as a messeuger of manhind, aswith the Mexicans and the Thracians of Flerodotus (IV, g, etc.).Our enumeration of objective sacrifices is by no means complete;we have not dealt with the divinatory sacrifice, the sacrifice ofimprecation, the food sacrilice, or the sacrilice of the oath, etc. Astudy of these various forms would perhaps reveal that in themalso there is question of creating and utilizing a sacred thing, aspirit directed towards such and such a thing. Perhaps from thisviewpoint it will be possible to arrive at a classil.ication.

14.7

Notes

386. See Mannhardt, MythForsch, pp. 68ff. Smith, RS, pp.

3o4ff. Irrazer, GB, I I , pp. 58, 4r. H. von Prott, 'Buphorien', inRheinisches L|'Iweum, r8gZ, pp. r87ff. Stengel, GK, pp. 6ggff L. R.Farnell, Cults of the Greek States, I, pp. 56, 58, 88ff (he sees inthe Bouphonia an instance of the totemic cult). Frazer, Panuanias,II, pp. 5o5lf; V, p. dog. A. Mommsen, Heortologze (1864), pp.

5r2ff. Grtrppe, Grieclisclte Mythologie, I, p. 2g.

587. See Pausanias, I, 24, 4) 28, ro. Porphyry, De abstinentia,II, g; 28ff. Scholiast on Aristophanes, Nubes, 985. Scholion onIliad, XVIII, 85. Suidas, Arb6 +!goq. Hesychius, Arbq Odxor.

588. Pausanias, f , 24, .1.

58g. Porphyry, De abstinentia,Il, 28.

5go. Porphyry, De abstinentia, II, zg; II, 28, 3o. Scholion onIJomer, l.c. Scholion on Aristophanes, l.c.

5gr. Ensebius, Praeparatio Euangelica, I I I , rr , lz, saw in thedeath of Adonis the symbol of the reaped crops. But this is tomake of the rite a vague and narrow idea.

5gz. Nlornmsen, loc. cit. (n. 386 above) believes that theBouphonia was a threshing festival.

395. Stengel , GK, p.sr6. claims that the superposing of thesacrifice of blood on the offering of the firstfruits in the Diipoliais a case of substitution of the blood sacrifice for vegetable offerings.

5g.tr. Cato, De .4gricuhura, r+. Ambarvalia: Marquardt, op. cit.n. 77 above, p. 2oo, n. 5. Cf. Frazet, GB, I, p. 39. See some veryclear examples of the same kind of facts in Sartori,'Bauopfer'(n. SZ6aboi'e), p. r7, and Pinza, op. cit. n. 376 abot'e, p. rg4.

Og5. There rvas a confession at the bringing of the tithe andthe fruits into the temple at Jerusalem, Talmud Jerus., Ma'aserSlzezl, Mishnah, V, ro. fn India a confession by the woma-n waspart of the ritual of the Varunapraghasas. Levi, Sacrifrce, p. r56.

396. J. Wellhausen, Prolegomena zu Geschichte fsraels (Berlin,

1886), ch. III, par. r. Smith, R.9, pp. 4o6,464, etc. In oppositionto the over-narrow interpretation of Wellhausen and Smith, wemaintain that the festival has the characteristic of communion.The rvay in which the first ear of corn is consumed must be noted,as rvell as that in which the first sheaf is consecrated. We must saythat here as elsewhere there is simply a case of a naturally complexrite, without there necessarily being any question of a fusion ofrites of different origin and nationality.

3g7. 'Ihe obligation to sacrifice the Passover, to consume thelamb, to bring the firstfruits (see above, n. 55o, cf. p. 7o) is inthe Hebrew ritual a strictly personal one. In the same way, in the

r4,6

Notes

rite of the Varunapraghasas, studied later on, we find a remark-

able instance of personal redemption. From each individual mem-

ber of the family is unloosed the 'bond' with 'rvhich Varuna might

tie him. As many barley cakes are made in the fonn of pots(karambhapatrani) as there are members of the family (ApShS,

VIII, 5, 4r), plus one extra, which represents the child to be born(TB, t,6, d, S) and at a certain moment of the ceremonv everyone

places them on his head (ApShS, VIII, 6, 4).In this way, says the

Brahmana, Varuna, the god of the barley, is driven away from

one's head (TB, r, 6, 5, 4) '

5g8. See Pausanias, II, 3e, z (Troezen), Cf. Frazer, Pausanias,

I I I , pp.266ff . Pausanias, I I I , r r ,z; : , 4,8 and ro; r9,7 (Sparta) '

H. Usener, 'Der Stoffder griechischen Epos', SitzBer. d. k. Akad.

d. Wiss. in Wien, Plil.-list.1{/., CXXXVII (r8g8)' pp' 42ff. Cf.

Mannhardt, WFK, I, p. z8r. Frazer, GB,II , 165. On the combats

at the Holi festivals, see lV. Crooke, Popular Religioru an'd Folhlore

of Northern India (Y{estminster, 1896), II, pp. 5r51f.' where

some equivalent phenomena will be found cited. But the rite is

a complex one, and it is very possible that there is in particular

here a magic imitation of the annual struggle between the good

and eviL spirits.

5gg. The legend indeed marks the almost expiatory character

of the Bouphonia.

4oo. L. F. Farnell, op. cit., n. 586, and Robertson Srnith, Ency-

clopedia Britannica, gth edn., art. 'Sacrifice', see in it a survival of

totemic communion.

4or. Porphyry, loc, ci t ,

4oz, Mannhardt, WFK, I, ro5. Frazer, GB, I I , pp' 7r, ro6,

r57; additional note to vol. II.

4o5. Cf. tr'razer, GB, II, pp. g' 2r, 23, 37, 42, ?5, 75, 78, etc.

4o4. Frazer, GB,II , p. 74.

4od. The Hebrews could not eat of the fruits of the Promised

Land until they had eaten of the unleavened bread and the lamb.

Jos. v, roff. Iixod. xii, r5ff; xxxiv, r8, etc.

4o6. Frazer, GB,II , p. 3r.

4o7. According to the text of the words of the Pythian oracle' it

seems that communion was relatively supererogatory (IQov Eoeo0au).

4o8. See Ldvi, Sacri.ftce, p. r55, n. 5.

4og. Heuce the name of the rite, 'the foods of Varuna'.

4ro. ShB, Dt S,e, r. SeeL6vi, Sacri l f ice, P' 156, no. r ' The text

TB, r, 6, 4, r, indicates only this last phase of the lnyth. lVe

are studying only one of the three rites that go to urake up the

r r$9

Notes

ceremony; one of these is a bath identical with the bath of the exitfrom the sacri f ice to soma (see above, p.+i l ; the ot irer is a con-fession by the u.ornau comparable in every respect to the Levitetesting of the aduiterous woman. Thus the rvhole festival has avery marked purificatory nature. (See above, p. 65, notes b62and 364.)

4rr. All made from barley; in exceptional cases some may bemade fronr rice. ApSh.S, VIII, g, gg.

4tz. ApShS, VIII , E, 42i 6, rf f ; roff Evidently these twoirnages represcrrt the spirit of the barley, considered as fertilizingand fertilized (cf. TIJ, 1,6, 4, {, on the figurative copulation ofthese two aniurals, by means of which the creatures are freed fromthe ties of Varuna), but there is no very clear text on this point;and al,though the rite indeed has in itself the meaning of a magicalcreation of the spirit of the barley (cf. S'/lB, e, S, 2, 16, where it issaid that the raur is 'Varuna visible' and where a figurative ramis concerned, and not any ram, as L6vi believes, Sacriifice, p. r55,n.4), the texts do not develop this meaning sufficiently for us toenlarge upon it.

4t5. Aua-yaj (TB, r,6, d, r.)

4r4. Mannhardt, WFI{, I, pp. g5off.

4r5. Macpherson, Mentoriak of Seruice in fndia, pp. regff Cf.the sacrifice of the bullock in the fields, GB, II, zo, 23, 4r.

4r6. Mannhardt, Wtr 'K, I , p. 36j.4r7. Bahlmann, Mi.i:nsterliindische Mtirclrcn, p. zg4.

4r8. Hti f ier, op. ci t . n. 95 above, 4.4r9. Frazer, GB, I I , pp. 21, 28ff. , 43, 47f[.4zo. Mannhardt, WFK, I, pp. g5off. Frazer, GB, I, pp. 38rff.4zt. In winter the spirit lived on the farm. Frazer, GB, II,

pp. r6, r4.

4zz. Cf. Kondakof, op. cit. n. eo1 above, p. r8r (Tribes of theAltai). Herodotus, fV, Tz.Frazer, GB,II , p.4z (China). Ibid.,pp.

94, 22o, for similar usages.

425. Frazer, GB,II , p. zeo.

4.24. Ib id. , T, p. 266.

425. ILid., I , pp. 297ff.

4e6. Ovid, fr'asti, IY,75rff. Propertius, IV, r, rg. I\{annhardt,WFK, II, pp. 3r4ff; MythForsch, p. r89.

427. Ovid, Fasti, IY, 659.

428. h\azer, GB, II, p. 45. Scholium to Lucian in RheinischesMtueum, NF XXV (r87o), pp. S48ff (Rohde). Cf. rhe cult of Isis atf i t i rorea; see above, p. 4r , n. z6r.

r50

Notes

4zg. See Nfarillier, op. cit. n. z above, p. zoB; II Kings xviii, rgff.45o. GB, I, p. 384.45r. Pharmakos (Thargelia), Boulimos. Plutarch, Qtnestiones

Conuiuales, VI, 8, r; Argei, at Rorne (Marquardt, op. cit. n. 77above, p. r9r); i l Iaunhardt, t[ythForsch, p. r35.

4zz. Cf. the Ttrargelia, expiation for the death of Androgeus.Gruppe, Grieclzisclrc Mytlrclogie, p. 3Z; the Karneia, that ofKatnos, etc. Cf. legi:ud of Melanippus and of Comaetho at Patras(Pausanias, VII, rg, zff).

CHAPTER FIVE

455. Mannhardt, WFK; MythForsch; Frazer, GB, I, pp. zr5ff;II, pp. rff Jevons, fntroduction to tlrc History of Religion (1896).Grant Allen, Euolution of the ldea of God, chap. x ff. FelixLiebrecht, 'Der aufgefressene Gott', tn Zur Volhskunde (He\l-bronn, rSZg), pp. 436, 43g. Goblet d'Alviella, 'Les Rites de lamoisson', Reuue d'histoire des religioru, XXXVIII (r8g8), pp. rff.Robertson Smith, art. 'Sacrifice', Encyclopedia Britannica, gthedn.; RS, pp. 4r4ff. Carl Vogt, 'Anthropophagie et Eacrificeshumains', Compte-rendu du Congrls fnternatiorutl d'.4rchiologieet Prehistoire, Bologna, r87r (Bologna, 1875), p. 525. We do notmaintain that every sacrifice of the god is of agrarian origin.

4g4. Obviously rve exclude the case of animal totems.

45g. Mannhardt, Korndiirlonen (Berlin, fi68); WFK; MythForsch. Frazer, GB,II, the innumerable facts cited; the victim, thespirit of the fields, the last sheaf, all bear the same name. We followtheir account here.

456. It even happens that eatables, etc., are placed there-a veryelementary sacrifice. Nlarrnhardt, IIry-K, I, p. 2r5.

437. Mannhardt, WFK, I, pp. 3,5o, 565. Frazer, GB, I, pp.g8rff; II, pp. sr, r83ff. Porphyry, De abstinentia, 1I, 27.

458. Cf. .Frazer, GlJ, I, p. 6<l.

43g. Arnobius, ,Tduersus Nationcs, V, sff. (The legend ofAgdistis, who obtains from Zeus a prornise that the corpse of Attisrvill not rot.) Julian, Oratio, V, r8o.

44o. Philo of Byblos, 44.44r. Roscher, .Lezicon, art. ' fkarios'.

442. Chavero, op. cit. n. rjs above, p. 365.443. Codex Ramirez: Relacion dcl origen delos Indios, ed. Vigil,

p. 28. Bernardino de Sahagun, Historia de las cosas de I'heuaEspaiia, II, r r and 5o.

r5r

Notes

4 44. H. H. Bancroft, T he N atiue Rac es o;f the P ac iific S tate s of N o r t hlmerica (NewYork, f i7g-6),II, pp. grgff. Frazer, GB,I,p. zzt.

449. Firmicus Maternus, De errore profanarum religionum, 6.Rohde, Psyche, II, p. r66. Frazer, Pausanias, IV, p. r45.

446. Philo of Byblos (ed. Orelli), 54. Cf. perhaps Bulletin de.correspondance lrcllinique, r896, pp. oSff.fnscription of E1-Bardj :d,rco0eor06vcoq Bv rQ ).ep1cr..

442. Mannhardt, WFK, II, p.525.

448. In Lusatia the spirit who drvelt among the corn was calleddeath. F-razer, GB, I, pp. e65ff. Cf. X{annhardt, ITFK, I, p. 4zo.fn other cases the birth of the spirit was enacted by giving the lastsheaf and the first grains of corn the form of a child or a smallanimal (the corn-baby of English authors): the god was born fronrthe agrarian sacrifice. See Mannhardt, MythForsch, pp. 62ff.Frazer, GB, I, p. 544; II, pp. 25ff. Birth of the gods: of Zeus orrIda, and Gruppe, Griechische Mythologie, p. z+8. Lydus, I)emerxibus, I\r, 48. See Pausanias, VfIf, e6, 6, for the birth ofAthene at Aliphera and the cult of Zeus Aeledcie (giving birth).Soma is also very often called a young god, the youngest of thegods (like Agni). Bergaigne, op. cit. n. r5r above, f, p. 244.

449. Theopompus, fragm. r7r (Fragm. Hist. Graec.,I,p.3o?).Pausanias, fII, r5, 4. Oinomaus iu Eusebius, Praeparatio Euan-gelica,Y,2o,5. Cf. H. Usener, 'Gcittliche Synonyme', RheinischesMusewn, LIII (r898), pp. Asgff. Cf. for a legend of the same kind,LUu,, yP.5w5LL.

45o. See Hesychius, s.u.45r. Pausanias, III, rJ, 5ff.4gz. Levi, Sacrilfilce, chap. II, cf. Bergaigne, op. cit. no. r5r

above, I, pp. rorff.

45g. See Usener, op. cit. n. 3g8 above; op. cit. n. 44g above.494. The mythical episodes are generally bound up with ritual

ceremonies. Thus Cyprian relates that in his youth he had been asilent actor in the Spdxovco6 Spaparoupyia at Antioch (Confbssio S.Cypriani, in Acta Sanctorum, Sept. 26, vol. VII Sept., p. zo5). Forthe simulation of the fight of Apollo against Python at Delphi, seeFrazer, Pausanias, III, p. 5z; Y, p. 244.

455. Cyril, ,4duersus Julianztm, X, 542. Diodorus, Vf, 5, O.456. Mannhardt, WFK, II, p. rg3; cf. p. r4g.

4g7. Clermont-Ganneau, 'La Stdle de Bybios', in Bibliothlquede l'Ecole d.es Ha.utes Etudes (Paris), vol. XLIV (r88o), p. 28. B. D.Eerdmans, 'Der lJrsprung der Cerernonien des Hosein-Festes', inZeit:chriftfilr 'lssyriologie, IX (r894), pp. 28off.

L5e

Notes

458. E. J. I{arper, 'Die Babylonischen Legenden von Etana, Zu,Adapa und Dibbarra', in Delitzsch, Beitriige zur "4ssyriologie, ILCf. Eduard Stucken, Astralmythen (Lelpzig, r896-7), II, p. 89.

4Sg. A. Jerenrias, Die Hi;llerfalrt der Ishtar (cf . the purificationof the carcase in the Vedic ritual, p. 4r, n. 264),

46o. Plutarch, De fside et Osiride, sects. r3,ff. F'razer, GB, I,pp. gorff. Firmicus Maternus, I)e errore profanarum reli.gionwn,the burying of Osiris in the mysteries of Isis.

46r. Pausan).as, II, 52, z.46n. 4,. Fournier, Vieilles coututnes des Vosges, y, 7o,465. Clernent of Rome, Rccognittones, X, 24, Cf. Herodotus,

VII, 167. F. C. Miivers, Dte Plt\nizier, I, pp. rgJ, rSS, Og4ff. H.Pietschmann, Geschichte der Phijnizier (r88g). Smith, RS, p.375, \ . 2.

+6+. O. Millier,'Sandon und Sardanapal', Nrcinisches Museum,r8zg, pp. 22-39.

465. Usener, Gc)tternamen (Bonn, r896), pp. e59ff.466. See above, p. 79.467. Plutarch, Quaestiones Graecae, rz.468. Pausanias, IX, 34, z.

469. And yet there are cases in which the three divine person-ages are hilled in turn, as in the myth of Busiris and Lityerses (seeMannhardt, .L[ytlz?brsch, pp. rff); the stranger is killed by Busirisand Lityerses, these latter are killed by Heraliles, arrd Heral<leswill commit suicide later.

47o. Hal6vy, Recherches bibliques (Paris, r895-rgr4), I, pp.zgff P. Jensen, Die Kosmologie dcr Bablrlonier (Strasbourg, r8go),pp. 263164. Hermann Gunkel, Sch6pfung und Chaos in Urzeitund Endzeit (r8gE); F. Delitzsch, Das Babylonische Weltsch\pf-ungsepos (r896).

4Zr. C. Clermont-Ganneau, 'I{orus et Saint-Georges', Reuuearchdologique, N.S. XXXII (r876), pp. tg6ff, 572ff; ,XXXII$87), 2,5; idenr,'La Stele de Byblos', Bibliothlque de I'Ecole desIlautes-Etwles (Paris), XLIV (r88o), pp. 78*82.

47e. Stengel, GA, pp. rorff.

475. Festival of Zag-Mu-K:u (resh-sharzi, beginning of the year).See O. E. Flagen, 'I(eilschrifturkunden zur Geschichte des K6nigsCyrus', Beitriige zur Asqrriologie, II (r8g+), p. %8. IF'{f, IY,23, 1gff.Cf. Re;trc de philo., r897, pp. r4zff

474. Clerrnont-Ganneau, 'I{onis et Saint-Georges' (see n. 4Zrabove), p. 588.

475. Eusebius, Chron., ed. Schone, I, r4, r8.r55

Notes

476. Cf . Hartland, The f,egend of Persetu,III, for the myth ofthe sleeping hero and its equivalents. In the sarne way Indra fallsexhausted after his struggle against the demon Vritra, or flees, etc.The same legend is related about Vishnu, etc.

477. Eudoxus, in Athenaeus, IX, 592E. Eustathius, Iliad, r7oz,5o.

478. Hyginus, Fabulae, 8o.

4?g. Usener, Stoff de.r Griechischen Epos (see n. SgB above).

48o. K. 28or, r (Bt.itriige zur Assyriologie,III, p. zz8; ibid.,II,pp. 258, 259). K. 2585. Somas judge of the Alunnaki. K 26o6,Etana, murderer of the Anunnaki.

48r. Cf. Talmud Babl., Hullin, qrb. T. I{aarbrilcker (trans.),Abu:l Fath.' .Lfuhammacl ash-Shahrastani, Religiowparteien undPhilosop|rcruchztlen (LIalle, rSgo-r), vol. II, pp. Str

482. Parthey, Pap. BerI., I, v. 32rff.48g. Martianus Capella, De nuptiis Plzilologiae et Mercurii, II,

r9r .

484. WAI, IY, er, rc.

489. MI, r4, a. Rev. g; Gibil, mar apsi (son of the abyss).486. W"4.I, cz, r. obv.,3o.

487. Cl. IJsener, 'Stoff der griechischen Epos', V. Thersites:Pharmakos accused by Achilles of having stolen the goblets ofApollo and put to death; and on the other hand Thersites:Theri-tas:ApoIIo.

488. Stucken, ,4stralmythen, II.489. Oineus and the sons of Agrios. Usener, op, cit. n. r88

above, p. 975.4go. K. Tiimpel, 'Der Karabos des Perseus', Philologus, LIII

(N.F. \4I), p. 544. Cf. Stucken, Astralmythen, I,pp.235ff.4gr. Porphyry, De ,lntro nympharum, 24. Darmesteter,

Ormazd et Altriman, pp. 52?ff. It goes without saying that thesymbolical explanations (e.g. in Gruppe, Griechisclrc Cultus undllfytltologie, pp. r5:ff; tr-razer, GB, I, p. +o2) will not do. Thesymbol is only an explanation after the event both of the myth anathe rite. Indeed, these legends are so naturally sacrificial that theycan be replaced by episodes in rvhich the god offers a sacrifice tohimself: e.g., the legend of Perseus (Pausanias of Damascus,fragm. A); Perseus offers a sacrifice to stop a flood (an introductorylegend in the cycle, probably recent); legend of Aristaeus; Dio-dorus, fV, 8r-2, Aristaeus sacrifices to stop a plague. Anotherlegend, Virgil, Georgics,IV, 548ff. Cf. E. Maass, Orpheus (Munich,r8g5), PP. 2?8-97) Gruppe, Griechische Mythologie, p. z4g, n' 2t

154

Notes

Porphyry, De antro nympharum, r8). Cf. Samson's lion (Jude.xiv, 8). For the Mithraic sacrifice, see F. Cumont, Tertes

"t Moni-

ments relatifs au-r mysttres de Mithra, passim. Darmesteter,Ormazd et Ahriman, p. rbo; for the sacrifying gods equivalent tothe contestant gods, or rather struggling with the help of sacrifice,see L6vi, SacriJice, II.

4gz. Mannhardt, WFK, I, p. 5r6.4g5. Adu. Julianum, IV, rz8.4g4. L. Parmentier, 'Le Roi des Saturnales', Reuue de Phito-

logie, t\g7, pp. r45ff.4gd. e.9., ,4thenische Mitteilungen, XIII, 58, Pessinus.496. Juan de Torquemada, Monarchia fndiana (Madrid, r7z5),

Bk. VI, chap. 38 (In Kingsborough, Antiquilies of Merico (London,r83o-48), VI, note, p. 4r4). Cortez, 3rd letter to Charles V (Kings-borough, VfIf, note, p. zz8).

4gZ. Cf.Mannhardt, WFK, I, pp. 558ff; 572ff.498. Proculus, Hymn to Athena, in Lobeck, -4glaophamus

(Regensburg, r8zg), I, p. 56r; E. Abel, Orphica (Leipzig, 1885),p '235.

4gg. See above, p. 8a (Karneia); see below, p. go. Cf. IJsener,op. cit. n. r88 above, p. g7r.

5oo. See above, p. Zg, n. 458.5or. Thus Herakles instituted the cult of Athena Alyogdlo6,

after his fight with Hippocoon (Pausanias, III, r5, 9). After throw-ing the bulls of Geryon into the spring I(yane, he orders his actionto be renewed (Diodonrs, V, 4: r-e).

5oz. Roscher, Lezikon, f, ro5g; tr 'razer, GB,I,p.5z8; cf. Hera,Aiyogayo6 (Pausanias, III, rg, g).

5og. Frazer, GB, II, pp. S8ff. Cf. H. Seidel, 'Sysrem der Feti-schverbote in Togo', Globus, LXXIiI (r8g8), p, J5S.

go4. Frazer, G.8., II, pp. S8ff. Cf. Diodorus, Y,62. Cf. theprinciple (Servius, ad Aerrcid.,III, r8): Victimae numtnibw aut persimilitudinem aut per contrarietatem immolabantur.

SoS. A bibliography on Soma will be found in \lacdonell, VedicMythology (Strasbourg, t8g7), p. rrb. See especially Bergaigne,op. cit. n, rbr above, f, t48, tzg; II, 298, g66, etc. Hillebrandt,op, cit. n. 3z above, I (has a succinct account of the rite itself), pp.r46ff. On soma in the Brahmanlzs, see Lev| Sacriftce, p. 169. Thesoma, an annual plant sacrificed in spring, seems to us to have beenespecially used originally in an agrarian rite. (See Bergaigne, ibid.,III, pp. B and g, n. r.) From the RV onrvards, it is the'king ofplants'and classical fndia developed this theme: see Hillebrandt,

155

Notes

op. cit. III, p. 5go. A complete study of the soma sacrifice hasnot yet been made. It wilj therefor-e be understood that rve havenot attempted to base anything on the texts, since the matterhere is unlimited. As for naturalistic interpretations of the somamyth, we cannot discuss them, but rve admit them all, not lindinqthem in any respect incompatible

go6. Levi, Sacrfrce, p. 16r. Bergaigne, op. cit. n. r3,r above,III, pp. 84, 85, 65, n. r, etc. Hillebrandt, Viguarapa, p. Ez\, etc.

5o7. See L6vi, Sacrifice, chap. I and Preface.5o8. Bergaigne, op. cit. n. r5r above, p. 2Zd. See the remark_

able discussion in Ludwig, Rig-Veda, III, p. 5o8.5og. Stucken, Astralmytlten, II, p. 97. Tahnud BabI., Ta,anith,

Gemara, z7b, The world rests upon the sacrifice celebratecl in thetemple.

5ro. H. Gunkel, Schdpfung und Chaos in [Jrzeit und End,zeit(Giittingen, r8g5).

5rr. See Yogt, op. cit. n. 453, p.5zS. Cf. Lasaulx, Die Si)hn-opfer der Griechen (r84r).

CHAPTER SIX

yz. H. Callaway, Religiow System of the Amazulu, p. 5g,cf. p. gz.

Aaron, r8sons of, e4r 5Z

abnegation, z, looabyss, gods of, 87Achilles, 35Ailapa, legend of, 83Adonis, 82f . , 89, gz) J9rAgdistis, 419Aglauros, 84Agrr i , 16, 26,5r, +L; I )o, r77agnihidra, 289Agni-Soma, 78agony:

prolonging victim's, g4sacrifice at, 65

agrarian sacrilices, g, 66ff., 77,Z8ff.

disguises at, 5oAinu, r;8Aitareya Braltmana, 9Aliphera, 448Allen, Grant, ;7y:a1tar, Flindu, z6f.; t 5oAmazulu, 96ambiguity, of the sacred, 3Amphiaraos, 85amrita(m), 64; 264, j7rLndtogels, 412Andromeda, 85animals, and life of tribe, 5Annunaki, 87;48o

INDEXNumbers in italics refer to notes (by note number, not by page)

anointing,of sacrifier, zoof victim, 3 r

antelope skin, eo, 47; 58,6rArrtony, St, feast of, 7z'Anayyoltivq,84,4 p a s tamb a - s hr auta - sutr a, gApollo, 6z; Karneios, 82, grapsudihsha, 58Archemoros, 85Argeii, r84, 41tArgos, 6zAristaeus, gz; 49rArtemis, 84asceticism, and sacrifice, 55asham, 4zasheralt, t43ashesr Tz, 74Ashualajrana Slzrauta Sutra, 9aslLuarnedlta, t 58, t6o, 117Assur, 87Assyr ia, 2d,83,82, gzAstarte, 89Astronoe, 84,4tharua-Veda, 9Atlrena/Athene, 85; 448 ; Itonia,

84Athens, 55, 3g, 6?, 24, 8+Atonement, Day of, sec l(ippurAtt is,7o, 82, 84,85, 86,88, 89;

$9r56

' ) !

attribution:to evil spirits, 26tof blood, 35, Sgf.of remains, 59ff.

Auxesia, 85auan.tareda, z8 sAvestas, 63,64'auon, 42Lzazel, goat of, 3g, 42, 55;24r

Bacchus, 4,7Baithos,24; I17baptism, 65bar ley, Z\ , ?8, gt ; 41r, 4r2Bastian, A., rbath, purif icatory, 20,2r, 56'bearing away, bath of: 4ZBel, 86Belen, 84Bellerophon, 85benefits of sacrifice, recipient,

Io; see a/so sacrifierBergaigne, A., 64Berossus, 86Beth-Abdinos, r-rzBible, as source, ,Bittopfer, t4blood:

disposal. of victim's, 44,202

sacredness of, zztblood covenant, zf. , rrbos cretattn, zgpoJAty"tos, 5gBoupltonia, lS, 62tr. , 22, 24,

76Brahman, gzBrahmanas, rS, z7i g, jrBrahmin(s), 15, 25; 9r, r85

purification of, 96bread, blessed, TzBuddhism, gi 66

fnder

bnilding sacrif ice, 65, Z8; )26,?77

bull,expiatory, 55; J8Mithra's, 87, 88, 95

bullock,sacrifice at Bouphonia, 6Zf ., Z3stuffed, 68, ?5, ?4

burnt sacrifice, 66; see also'olahBusir is, 459Byblos, 55

Cadmus, 9zcakes, sacri f ice of, tz, tg1 r$t 34t

6zf.cannibalism, 4Castor, 86centre of world, t j4Chaos, see TiamatCharila, 84

ro childbirth, purification after, r7Chimera, 85Christianity, and sacrifice, 8r,

gTf.Chthonian gods, 4o; r9ocircles, magic, 27, 28, zg, 3rcircumambulation of victim, 5 r ;

r77S6; cockerel, black, 54

colour, of victims, 69, 66; r5oCornaetho, 4jzcombats:

of gods, 85f.sacrificial, 6gf.

ZS, communion, 45, 5e,6z, ZoChristian, 63, 6+sacr i f ice, 3, 5,6, 13, t6, \?

const*ration, 55ancl sacrifice, q, r r

contractT element in sacrifice,60, roo

corn-baby, 448r58

corrr spirit, ?3, Z8cosrnogonies, gzcow, steri le, 16; ;8crab,87cries, victim's, stifling, 54crimes, expiation of, 76crown, 22curative sacrifice, tS, gj, 54Cybele, 8qCyprian, St,4t4Cyril of Alexandria, St, 88

Daijal, 85Damia,85Dankop.fer, 14Darmesteter, J., 6+Darwin, Charles, rdeath, before return of Yahweh,

Jt8Delphi, 8+; 4t4Demeter, 55, 7qDemophoon, 35desacralization, sacrifice of, 52,

62, zr , ?5, gsdestruction, total, of victirn, 3,

12,37ff .deuayajana, t j4Dido, 84Di ipol ia, 67, 7o,82diltsha, zoff.; y1, rrzdih.shita, 2o,63, g?Diomos, 68Dionysus, Zg, 80, 87, 8q, go,

roo; Kriophagos, godisguises, Sodismembermerft, 54domestic animals:

sacredness of, 4sacrifice of, 5

doves, 54, 57drowning, of victims, 384Dr-r-mu-zu, 83

Easter, 63, Zneffects of sacrifice, double, rof.Eleusis, 65Eli, z4; r5zelimination, 53f.Erigone, Zg, 8+errors, ritual, 25, 46, +2, g5;

rot l r t2 ' r tJ ' J22Eshmun, ?9,84ethnography, deficiencies of, 8exit, frorn sacrifice, 45ff., bd, ggexorcism, 6expenses) of sacrifice, 3eexpiatory sacrifice, 3, 4, 6, r4,

16, t7,51ff . , 58, 63; joexpulsion, S, 6, rZ, 5gl see also

scapegoat

faith, arld sacrifice, z8family sacrifices, 14fasting, zr; 66, 78fertilization, sacrifices for, 66,

7tf.; see a/so agrarian sacri-fices

fights, at sacrifices, 6gf.fires, z6firstfruits, t r, !/,6g{f; j48fists, clenched, arFlarninica, r84flood, legend of, z8oflour, rzr 54tr'orcidiciae, 74Frazer, J. G., 4f., ZE, Zz

garments,of Hebrew priest, e4; r I r, J r 2sacrificial, 94sacrifier's, 20, zz

George, St, 89, 86Gibil, 87gift sacrifice, z

origin of, 4

Indeo

r59

IndcxGish-zi-da, 85goat, sacrificial, of Kippur, zg,

5!; z4t; see also LzazeIgod:

consumption of victim by, 3?sacrifice of, 4f., 77ff., rorsacrificer as representilg, z5sacrifier as, zr

Gorgon, 8ggrains, crushed, r3Greek sacrifice, 7, 8, rz, ez, 36,

37,4o,48i 47, r9oGrihya Sutras, t4; 9Grimm, Brothers, 86guest, entry of, r7Gunkel, H., 92

Hades, 87hair, offering of, rr, 56; J43haji, j64

lr*{r, layng on of , 52, 3g, Szhands, washing of, 46; 97hanging, of victim, 34haoma, Sjhattat, :^6, 17, 36, 52, S+, 56,

sgt 20,2jJHebrew sacrifices:

classification, r6priest's preparation, z4f.

Hecate, 84hei fer , red,59; 2tr , JrrI{elen, 84Herakles, 2g,84,8g, 86, 82, 89;

Hippotes, 8zHirpi Sorani, :e4Holi festivals, 798holocaust, Greek, 58Holy of holies, z4homage, sacrifice as, aHomeric sacrifice, 8, g7nooK, lron, 54horns, gilding of, 29, S?t J49norse:

October, 74sacrifice, go

hor-rse, building of new, ro, rrHuitzilopochtli, 88human sacrif ice, 3, /z; r jhunt, wild, 86Hydra, 87Hyre, lry

ida,4zf . ; z8o, 289idah.uayana, z8 3Idas, 86niad,8imrnortality, 64impurity, sanctity as, 5, E3incineration, g6ff.Indra, gr; 476initiation:

of sacrifier, eof.sacrifices of, 5r, 5e

instrurnents:destruction of, 46of sacrifice, z7

invocation, of ida, 4fi.Iodama, 84Iolaos, 86, 89fshtar, Bj ,89fsis, 55, 75, 89Isthmian games, 8gIton,84

iaundice, 54Jephthah, daughter of, 18oJerusalem, r22, r J4Jevons, F. 8., 4, 64John, St, feast of, 7zJoppa, dragon of, 85Jumidges, 8o

Kaffirs, 7okali l,38; 4J, 24oKarneia, 8z; r88,4jzKarnos, 8zKatyayatn Shrauta Susra, 9Kaushiha Sutra, 9Khonds, Ze,, Z5; r t8king, coronation of, 9, 14, 16kinship, of victim and god, 4Kippur, 25,36, 42, 55,62;66,

rot , r ro, 2)Ohigh priest's preparation for,

24f.knife/knives, sacred, r4o

condemnation of, SbKodashtm, zy jKrios, 8zKronos, 88

Lakshmi, 332Lamb, Paschal, 69

Christ as, 8rlarrrentations, for victim, 55leper, cleansing ol rT, 5g, 55f.

3C

Leucadia, 39Ldvi , S. , 64,82Leviticus, 16, g6, 52, 40) glibations, re, 30, 5t , 53; t59

aparsyani, r83). t9opd\ta,83; r97Lityerses, 469Ioup vert, 8oLusatia, Z5; 448

Lycaon,5rLynkeus, 86

Mannhardt, W., 4, Z?mantras,33; r24, r44, r7j, r8r,

r8tMarduh, 85, 86, 87Mass, the, 48, 5r, 88, 93; 78,

r9r, jy8, j71May Bride, 85May tree, 25,85meal, common, 3Megara, 176Melanippus, 472Meilkertes, 8gMelkart, 84Methydrion, 34Mexico, 30, Zl,7gf., 88mi lk, rz, r5minha, re, t6; zoMithraic sacrifice, rgo, 4grMithras, 87, 88mohslm, j7omola salsa, 3t.monsters, combat with, 85Moses, 52, g8f.mutilation, self-, of god, 84Myonia, 4omysteries, Greek, 63, 64myth, and rite, 88mythology, Seff

Babylonian, 85Celtic, 65Greek, 75f.Nordic, 93Scandinavian, 63

nail cutting, zoname, change of, 65nazir, 96, ggneck, severing of, 34nedabah, 4o

torHesione, 85, 86high priest, Hebrew, z4f.

ordination of, r7prcparation for Kippur, z4f.

Hindu sacrifice, rqffoblations, r5place of, e6

Hippolytus, 85 Jason, ge

r60rOr

Nemean garnes, g5l\emt, c)oNergal, 87nityani, t4Nutt, A., 64

objects of sacrifice, roobjective sacri f ice, r5, t i4ff .obtatron, sre offeringOctopus, B7offerings, r rOkea-nos, 8o'ola/t , 16, tZ, J6, 3g, 3g, 4g, 56,

59; 4zOlympia, 52; 262ordination, sacrifices of, 5rOropus, 86Osir is, 65, 25, 8<, gooiAal, y; rZd

Palilia, 74Pan, 8zPardon, Great, 24; see also Kip-

purparedri, z4paryagnikriya, r77Passover, 4o, 69,'7o; g6, g9Patras, 412Pegasus, 87Pelops, 52, ZS, ggPentateuch, 9Pergamum, 1_r7periodical sacrifices, r4f.Perseus, 85,87; 49tPharmakos, r 97, '41rPhilo of Bvblo., SoPhocis, 4opiaculum, S, 4,6ploughing:

irnitation, 68, 75sacrrlrce at,7off,

Pluto, 87

fnde.z

Plynteria, 84politics, of sacri[ice, 174Porph;.ry, ggPrajapati, gzPrajapati-Ru t)ra, see Rudra_pra_

lapatrprecipitation, sacrifice by, 5gpriest:

33{ goa, identity, 85Flebrerv, 5eff.as sacrificer, egshare in sacrif ice, 57Priestiy Code, 9

protane, exclusion ofpropitiation, r"".tir;;' ui] ;'upunishment, and sacrifice] simi-

larity, 4; 1oP"t:..u"q impure, relation of, 6oprrrification, preliminary, z z.rurus_na, 92, 93Pythian oracle,-6g, ?o, Zi, g4

rain, sacrifice for, 66rahshas, share of,4r

'u?, !?, 82, gt ; qtzreDuth:

of sacrifier, zrsacrificial, 6zf.

redemption, and sacrifice, 96,99

red heifer, sec heiferrenunciation, erepresentation, in sacrifice, to,

3:-f.request, sacrifices ol r4, 65f.Rhodes, 3o

!,:f ?('' e=;.p, z6e; , , , fn, ,TnTttc, 74, 75J\onoe, l i . , 64Rornan sacridces, z,R"d;;, )i,'ii"i.i, ,,,,e22,

57, 74

^ Rudra-pra japati,' i 7, t g

7r09^

sacralization, sacrifices of , 52, g6,58f. ,95

sacrifice(s):classification, r4; Greek,

lfebrew, 16; Hindu,)r

as creator of gods, ozdefinition, 9ff1, rg "

double effect, r oentry upon, rgff.generic unity of, r3, r5rnstruments of, z7f.

",":d :f continuitv, zBob;ectrve, t5, 64ff., Z5personal , t3,6l f I . , 75place of; 25ff.t"g]lT and occasional, r4f.social frrnction ol, rorf.time of, z5unity of, 97varied functions, q6f.variety of, r4Vedic, rqff.and victim, relation, 5gf.vottve, 14

sacrificer, preparation of, zzff,sacrifier:

defined, ropreparation of, eoff.purification, of, g5relat lon lo stake, z7f.

1el31ion to vicrim, <r,2gff., S,in Vedic rite, zoff-

Samhitas, 9samskara, t4Samson, gesanctification, of victirr, 55Sandes/Sandon, 84Saturn, 88saua.tl 4 )scapegoat, 5, 53,75scorpion, 87

seasonal sacrifices, r<Semele, 89Seriphos, 87

47; shamitar, r8614; Shatapatlza Braltmana, 2fi.; 9shaving, 20, 2r, 22

sheaf,consecrated, 79relation to anirnal, 79

shelamim, r6, g6, 66;-z j j; seealso zebah slzclarnim

shtle.m-ltalil, 4;slrirt, manikin,s, 75slzraddha, z8Slrrauta sutras, rssilence, at sacrifice, 55Sinai, ezsinister signs, by victim, zoosrnner, as sacred, 55skin, victin,s, appliiation of, 56,, 59, 43, 59

s.taughter, methods of, 54sleep, dangers of, z5; rtSSmith, W. Ilobertson, zt., 4f[.,

r3, 6o, 95, gZsorrul, 42, 91, g?, 96, roo; 1G,

)7, .J60,1!9, Jossacrr t lce, r51., gof . ; ,2, 2gr i

lnd of:^ 4Z; prepararion

ro l ,2OI l .

Sopatros, 68, 7gsoul, external, ,16spells, evil:

casting of, jjj

^ release from, 5.1

Spencer, Herbert, rspirit creation of, 6gspirits, evil:

agrariart, 4; z9

fndcz

sacrifices to, 38share, of, 4r; z5Ssee also exorcisml expulsion

t6g

sprr-ox, 54; 115stalre, sacrificial, 271., 46staphylos, g4stoning of victim, 3+, g4; r 9Zstunning of victim, 54Stihnopfer, r4sun, fire of, 75Jutras, g, JIsword, wooden, z7syncretism, 82, 88

Tâiuirty a Bruhmarut, 9Taittiriya Samhita, q?aittiriyas I Taittiriyins, g, 2 64Tammuz, SqTelephus, SrTtemple,

consecration of, rgIlebrew, z5f.

knuphah, 56, JZ, 56Iereus, 126terumah, 56,32, 56texts, use of, 9thanksgiving, sacrifices of, 14,

t6; j8zThargelia, I 92, qS t, 4jzlhaulon,6Stheriomorphic cults:

and sacrifice, 96and totenrisrn, 5

Thersites, 487Theseus, 85Thesmophoria, 74Thetis, 35threshing, sacrilice at, 7zTiamat, 85, 86, gztirthas, loyTitans, 87Tithorea, z6rToci, 8otombs, divine, 8zf.Totec, 8o

fndez

totemisrn, 2; rtZnot universal, 5

tree, see stake, sacrificialTroezen, 83; tg7turtle-doves, see dovesTylor, E. B., rTyphon, 86, 87

:1ncti9n, g; see also anointingUzziah, rt2, t22

uajapeya, jzVajasaneyi Samhita, qI,-alasaneyinst ! t r / J, 264ua.pa, qlf.; 27rVaruna, Tr, gr(1'ruy'rra.shasls, zri J9t, Jg7rastosnpatr ,37dvedas, guedi, z6f,Vedic

literature, 9sacrifice, rgff.

vegetable oblations, ravegetation spirits, 74

murder of, 4vet l r 2t ,22victim, tz, 28ff., et passim

adornment of, zgf,anointing of, grconciliation of, goconsumption by sacrifier, 4odisposal of,35f., 4of.eligibility of, zgfunction in sacrifice, 97intoxication of, 50lameutation for, 55non-animal, z9lorientation of,53; t9opreparation of, zgff.presentation to god, rgeslaughter of, 331..

t64. ros

victim gods, 78vigils, Christian, rr4uilnra, z6Virbius, 9oVirgo, constellation, 79vow, abandonment of, 4ZVritra, gr

rvalling .up, 65; JZZlvater-gods, Greek, 50wife of sacrifier, 4r1 z6 jwine, rz; abstinence frour, 24,

56wolf, 5 r

fndez

women, expulsion of, zz; 7z

Yahweh, zz, 56, 3?, 39, 56, ggf.yaJamana, IoYajurveda, p, 18rYom Kippur, see I{ippur

Zag-mtt-ku,473zebah, zozebah slrclamim, 17, tB, lZ, 52,

g6; zS1, zy4Zeus, Ezi 448; Lykaios, 5r;

Polieus, O7f.tomb of, 8z

Documents

Sacrifice