The greeks categorized the divine world by god, epithet and location. By this I mean each individual god had many sides to them which are described by their epithet. The example that Mikalson gives in his book on page 33 is that of Poseidon Soter of Sunium and Poseidon Hippios. The former would deal with matters of the sea while to latter is responsible for horses, “One would pray in vain to Poseidon Soter to save his horse or to Poseidon Hippios to save his life at sea.” (Mikalson 33). The epithet describes something about that particular god’s function and characteristics. The locale of a god is where that god holds influence over. It would be foolish for people in one city or area to pray to the god of a different place as that is not their patron deity.
Homer and Hesiod are given the credit for formalizing the basic features of gods and heroes. Herodotus in his Histories says, “For I believe that Hesiod and Homer, who were 400 years before my time, and no more than that, made for the Greeks the genealogies of the gods, giving them their appropriate titles, assigning them their honors and skills, and describing their appearance.” (Warrior 2.1)
The picture of the Gods that I get from Warrior’s book is that they have a distinctly human element to them. That is not to say that they aren’t supernatural or otherworldly, but rather in Hesiod and Homer they seem to have human concerns. In Hesiod, for example, Rhea has to plot with her parents so she can have her child (Warrior 2.6, 470). In Homer’s The Iliad the gods plot against each other and seemingly admit mistakes, “How naive and senseless we are to set our hearts against Zeus!” (Warrior 2.18, 105) The gods are definitely not man, but they have an element of humanity in their interactions with each other and with humans.
The relationship that these myths have with practiced greek religion is that they myths explain things about the world and explain why certain gods have power over certain places or things. Mikalson says on page 54 that the truth of the myth is not the important part, but rather the message that is contained in the myth. He quotes G.S. Kirk as saying that they are “on the one hand good stories, on the other hand bearers of important messages about life in general and life-within-society in particular.” (Mikalson 54)
The myth that I am explaining is that of Athena, Poseidon, and Athens. In the myth all the gods decide to go down to Earth and claim the cities that they would become the patron god of. Athena and Poseidon get into a race to see who can claim Athens the fastest. Ultimately the story ends with Cecrops, the Athenian king at the time, deciding that Athena was the victor. After the race Athena planted and olive tree and Poseidon hit the Acropolis with his trident. This myth seems to serve several purposes in Greek and Athenian religious practice and thought. First it provides the Athenian citizen with a physical connection to the divine. As Mikalson states on page 56, “The Athenian would have before him a most impressive and beautiful representation of the story he had learned from childhood of how Athena became the eponymous patron of his city.” Secondly I think that it grounds Athens as being a city of great importance. Athens was a powerful and wealthy city but this story seems to show that it also was desirable to the gods themselves. The powerful Athena and Poseidon were involved enough with wanting the city as their own that they would race to claim it. In addition to this the judge of a race between immortals was just a man, the king of the city. The ancient Athenian king in that moment held some sort of power over two of the gods.
