Divine

Foreign Judaism in Ancient Rome

thatcher@uoregon.edu

It seems that the Romans were mostly supportive of Judaism until around the first century. Just like other foreign cults, such as the ones from Egypt or Greece, Romans allowed this religion to practice due to its ancient origins. Emperor Claudius even says, “Do not dishonor any of the traditional practices connected with the worship of their God” (Warrior, 14.8). This shows how Romans were protective in their early relationship with Rome because of the Jews ancient roots. The Jews views clashed with much of Roman worship but they were allowed to be different in most cases. Many times in Warrior Judaism is associated with Egyptian religion as well showing where Judaism was placed in the pantheon of foreign cults and religions. Rives even says that Judaism was perceived as “divine” in some ways due to its understanding of truth (193). The Jews were allowed many rights during the Roman Empire but I think the thing that changed that was the coming of Jesus. Jesus changed religion and created a tension.

This tension was not only with Romans but with Judaism as well. As the strength of Christianity grew so did Roman elites fear of all other foreign religions. Tiberius was one of the first emperors to start discriminating against the Jews eventually leading to a tax just for being Jewish (Warrior, 14.19). Tacitus reveals a lot in his excerpt from Warrior about the feeling towards foreign religions in the Roman Empire. Tacitus shows both his knowledge and ignorance of Judaism. He cites Moses and The Sabbath but questions where they come from and why Jews are so “weird and abominable”. He argues that Jews only do these things, such as circumcision, to be different than other peoples. Tacitus makes two connections to Judaism and Egyptian religion both in their sacrificing and burial rituals. While writing about Moses’ laws he says, “In theses everything that we regard as sacred is held to be profane. On the other hand they permit things that for us are taboo” (Warrior, 14.21).

Salvation in the Corpus Hermeticum

jeromej

Hermes Trismegistos, “Thrice Greatest Hermes,” is the Greek name for the Egyptian God Thoth. He is accredited as a great writer, and many works associate him with the skills of astrology, alchemy, spells, and medicine. The basic Hermetic perspective on the cosmos and human beings was very similar to what is known as the “gnostic” view.  The Hermetic tradition saw the material world as corrupt and inferior.  Additionally, humanity contains within itself an element from a higher level of existence to which people should strive to return (Rives 167).  Thus, the idea of salvation for Hermetic worshipers was found in the ability to free their spirit from their material body.  This separation was accomplished through the acquirement of certain knowledge that is hidden within the human spirit.  If one learns the all-important fact that he is originally from life and life, he “shall advance to life once again” (Rives 179).

The dialogue between the divine Hermes and his student Tat in the Corpus Hermeticum elaborate in greater detail these points on the Hermetic conception of the human condition and salvation.  In addition to confirming the condemned state of the material world, Hermes reveals to Tat that those who are born from God are also themselves God. Knowledge is not taught, but remembered whenever God wills it (65). Thus, for Hermetic worshipers the knowledge necessary for salvation and detachment from the physical cannot be imparted to them from an outside source; it must be found within them because it already exists hidden and silent within them.  Hermes then instructs Tat to cleanse “himself from the torments of the material world which arise from the lack of reason” (67). There are twelve torments in total which Hermes addresses barriers towards salvation: Ignorance, sorrow, intemperance, lust, injustice, greed, deceit, envy, treachery, anger, recklessness, and malice. Each of these torments is overcome by ten powers of God that are imparted during the process of rebirth, with knowledge listed as the foremost power among the ten. After singing a hymn of thanks and praise for receiving the rebirth and salvation from the powers of God (70), Hermes gives Tat one final order.  “And now that you have learnt this from me, keep silence about this miracle and reveal it to no one the tradition of rebirth, lest we be called betrayers” (71). This condition of secrecy is peculiar in light of the early statement made by Hermes that knowledge cannot be taught, but rather is only recalled according to God’s will. If the salvific knowledge can’t be taught, then Tat’s words should carry no consequence. Nevertheless, those who have been reborn must exercise the utmost secrecy.

Out of the various models of religious esoterica the Rives outlines in his chapter, the Hermetic tradition most obviously falls under the allure of salvation. This is best captured by a quote from Hermes, where he instructs Tat that “the visible body born of nature is far different from that of spiritual birth. For the one can be dissolved and the other cannot; the one is mortal and the other immortal. Do you not know that you have become divine and that you are a son of the One?  So also am I” (68). The Hermetic tradition offers a means to not just merely continue on in the afterlife with a somewhat comfortable existence, as is the case with Isis worshipper Lucius (Rives 174).  Instead, those who acquire the saving knowledge become immortal spirits, who eventually become like god (Rives 179).  The Hermetic tradition seems to also fall under Rives model of religious intensification quite well.  The imparting of the ten powers of God is an extremely intimate exchange.  That the Corpus Hermeticum is in the format of a discussion also lends to prove how this tradition contained the advantage of an intense and personal religious experience.

The Healer and Savior Asclepius.

jeromej

In the temple of Asclepius there is an ivory and gold statue that is half the size of the statue of Zeus in Athens. This statue of Asclepius depicts him sitting on a throne; in one hand he wields a staff, and the other he holds above the head of a serpent. Across from the temple is where the god’s suppliants sleep. Within the Tholos (Round House) there stood several slabs inscribed with the names of people Asclepius had healed and what he had healed them from. After entering the sanctuary, the suppliant would fall asleep and await a vision from the god. The general pattern of the healing was that the god would approach the infirmed in dream and then promise to heal the wound.  When day came, the suppliant would awake and find himself healed exactly as it had been seen in the vision. Sometimes snakes would carry out the healings for Asclepius, as seen in the selection from Aristophanes’ Wealth (Warrior 112). Disease and sickness were daily realities for everyone in the Hellenistic era, and even more so for those living in highly populated cities such as Athens and Rome. The Roman historian Livy observes that a plague running through Rome was a serious threat (Warrior 260). To have a god of healing present in the city would be of great benefit.

Aristides seems to have a very personal and direct relationship with Asclepius. He writes as though Asclepius speaks in an audible voice concerning his ailments and healings. In the story of how his tumor on his leg is healed, the doctors and other people have no communication with the god. Aristides is the only one who can hear the god’s divine guidance towards healing. Most often he refers to Asclepius as the God, but other times he uses the term “Savior” (Pg. 224 line 7) or even “Lord” (228 line 24).  This highly personal relationship operates very differently from the divine-human relationships of the Classical Age.  The first major difference is that in the case of Asclepius it is the god who initiates the interaction. Instead of Aristides going to a temple or festival, he is met by the god in his dreams wherever he may be. Additionally, Aristides is healed before any form of sacrifice is made, if one is even made at all. This contrasts to the Classical Age cults, where an offering had to be made on the human’s side if there was any hope of the gods acting benevolently.

Based on the readings, it seems to me that ancient medicine and religion were at odds with one another and didn’t mix well. This sentiment is best captured when Aristides tumor has been healed, and the doctors insist that the only way for the remaining skin to finish healing was by surgery.  Aristides states that the doctors “thought it right that I grant this, for now the God’s part had been done. He did not even allow them this… And he brought everything back together, so that after a few days had passed, no one was able to find on which thigh the tumor had been, but they were both unscarred in every respect” (Aristides 220 line 67-68). While some of his ailments would be cured by use of drugs or remedies, the cure was always attributed to the work of the god and never a result of ancient medicine.

Diversity in Divinity: Gods and Heroes

jeromej

                As has been made clear already in the few days of this class, the Greco-Roman concept of the divine world is fluid and complex.  However, Mikalson’s chapter on the categorization of the divine world was very enlightening for understanding how these countless deities could co-exist in the same general culture.  The first two major categories that the Greeks used to categorize the divine were Gods and Heroes.  Gods are generally defined as beings who were born immortal and remain as such. Heroes, on the other hand, are defined as people who lived on the earth as a human and did extraordinarily great or awful deeds. Heroes all die, but alters would be erected in their remembrance because some cultic followers believed the hero still influenced the community in some way.  Gods and heroes are further categorized by whether they are Ouranic (“of the sky”) or Chthonic (“of the earth”). Such a classification determined whether rituals took place during the day or night, and what type of sacrifice would be made.

                Mikalson further notes three categories used to identify each God: the name, the epithet, and the locale.  This three level system is what allows for such a great diversity to exist in the number of Greek deities. Gods with the same name and epithet but a different locale would have dissimilar myths surrounding their origins. The epithet defined the function that the god served.  Poseidon Soter and Poseidon Hippios are both Poseidon, yet they are both very different deities; one tends to sailors at sea, and the other horses on land. The use of epithets demonstrates how the Greeks primarily identified the Gods based on their function. This aspect is seen most clearly in Warrior’s selection from Hesiod’s Theogony.  As each god is born, he or she is described based on the activity or function they excel at.  Artemis is called an archeress, Hephaestus is excellent in the arts, and Athena is known for her battle expertise (Warrior 21).

                 In contrast to gods, whose influence and mythology could spread over large areas, heroes are generally confined to a specific locale. This location was typically based off of their real or imagined tomb, and thus confined the heroes influence to a single state or neighborhood. A good example of this practice is seen in the remarks of the geographer Pausanias.  He observes how the people of Marathon worship the dead from battle at their tombs, and that these dead have come to be known as heroes (Warrior 7).

While the Greek system of categorizing Gods and heroes allowed for an extremely wide diversity of myths and beliefs, there were some generally established basic features.  According to fifth century historian Herodotus, Hesiod and Homer were responsible for creating a “divine genealogy.” They gave the gods their names, epithets, offices, skills, and appearances and solidified it in their literature. They likely received much of their ideas from long standing oral traditions. Mikalson observes that these basic features developed in literature along very different lines from the local cult myths (Mikalson 35).

                Mikalson’s discussion on the myth of Dionysus, Icarus, and Erigone explains why certain sanctuaries and cultic practices were founded in ancient Greece.  The Athenians celebrated a “swinging” ritual known as the Aiora during a Dionysian festival each year, which likely originates from the myth of Erigone hanging herself.  The killing and burial of Icarus in the myth also explain the origins of his cult as the eponymous hero of the deme Icarion (Mikalson 58).

The myth of Dionysus, Icarus, and

The Nature of the Divine and Approaches to Roman Religion

oglesby@uoregon.edu

Ben Oglesby 

Rives’ explanation of the category divine in the roman context shows just how broad a concept the idea of the divine was in that time and place. From inside the idea of divinity he unpacked a huge amount of spiritual diversity in both belief and practice. What is most different from the monotheistic faiths seemed to be the large number of things that have a divine element, from the gods all the way down to the numen/genius/etc of everyday people and things. What Rives says about Roman religious practices intersects with our initial discussion of Roman belief in a significant, but semi superficial way as we lacked the depth of knowledge that he has. It seems that we did manage to cover all three parts of the tripartite Roman faith in our initial discussion as we covered the cultic practices, the myths surrounding the pantheon, and briefly we mentioned philosophy and its relation to Roman faith. We definitely need to fine tune our initial ideas, but it seems like we were not too off base as a group. We should talk more about the diversity of divine beings as I don’t think the idea of daimons or spirits came up in our discussion.