Gunnel EkrothStockholm University, Sweden Meat in ancient Greece: sacrificial, sacred or secular ? * Abstract Based on osteological evidence from Greek sanctuaries, this article explores the notion that all meat eaten by the ancient Greeks came from sacrificed animals. Cattle, sheep, goats and pigs made up the bulk of the meat eaten but wild animals, dogs and horses were also consumed, though rarely sacrificed at the altar. Most meat eaten at ritual meals seems to have been boiled, a cooking method eliminating distinctions in origin and status between the animals and transforming all their meat into sacred meat. Different degrees of sacred meat can be distinguished and all animals killed and eaten in sanctuaries are not to be considered as sacrificial victims. Keywords Meat Consumption Animal sacrifice Sacred Greece Sanctuaries Bones Dogs Horses Wild animals The purpose of this paper is to explore the relation between animal sacrifice and the consumption of meat in ancient Greece in the Archaic, Classical and Hellenistic periods (ca 700-100 BC). The starting point is whether all meat eaten by the Greeks came from sacrificial victims and whether there was no consumption of meat that was not linked to the sacred sphere. That meat for the Greeks was intimately connected to religion and to animal sacrifice in particular is beyond dispute, but should this lead us to assume that meat could not be regarded as “secular”, that is, as not having any connections to religion? * I would like to thank William Van Andringa for inviting me to the table ronde “Sacrifice et marché de la viande dans le monde romain. Rituels, commerce et pratiques alimentaires”. I am also grateful to Lovisa Strand for animated discussions of this topic and to the two anonymous reviewers for their pertinent comments. This article is part of a project funded by the National Bankof Sweden Tercentenary Foundation. Food & History, vol. 5, n° 1 (2007), pp. 249-272 10.1484 / J.FOOD.1.100193 250 Gunnel Ekroth The sacrifice of animal victims constituted the principal act of Greek religion.1 By this ritual men communicated with the gods, asked for help and support, and gave thanks for wishes already fulfilled. The animals sacrificed were usually eaten at the end of the ceremony and these collective meat meals fulfilled important functions both politically and socially. The principal kind of Greek sacrifice was called thysia and consisted of the killing of a domestic animal, usually cattle, sheep, goats or pigs, followed by its division and sharing between the divine recipient and the human participants. The animal was first consecrated to the god in question by a number of initial rituals at the altar. After the slitting of its throat, some blood was sprinkled on the front of the altar and the victim was opened up so that the internal organs could be inspected, especially the liver. Certain bones were cut out and burnt on the altar, the preferred sections being the thigh bones (femora) and the tail (caudal) vertebrae and the sacrum (the back part of the basin). These bones constituted the gods’ part of the sacrifice and the divinities were imagined as enjoying their share by inhaling the thick, fatty smoke, knise, rising from the burning bones. When the gods’ portion had been consumed in the fire, the animal’s body was butchered and the meat divided and distributed. Some prestigious and good meat-bearing parts, such as the back leg, might be deposited for the god on a sacred table next to the altar and these parts might also be given to the priest or priestess at the completion of the sacrifice. The rest of the meat was sectioned into equal portions based on weight and not on quality, and subsequently distributed to the worshippers or the group of people who were entitled to share in this particular sacrifice. A thysia sacrifice was concluded by a meal of the meat from the animal victim or victims, either in the sanctuary or the home, though on some occasions the meat was sold. In modern scholarship the structure and purpose of the thysia sacrifice have been interpreted as a way of defining the role and character of gods as distinct from that of men, but also as a means of differentiating men from wild animals, the principal criterion being what each group ate and how.2 1 The literature on Greek animal sacrifice is extensive, see, for example, Walter BURKERT, Homo necans. The anthropology of ancient Greek sacrificial ritual and myth (Berkeley, 1983), pp. 1-12; Walter BURKERT, Greek religion. Archaic and Classical (London, 1985), pp. 55-57; M. DETIENNE, J.-P. VERNANT (eds.), The cuisine of sacrifice among the Greeks (Chicago/ London, 1989); Folkert VAN STRATEN, Hierà kalá. Images of animal sacrifice in Archaic and Classical Greece (Leiden, 1995), passim; Sarah PEIRCE, “Death, revelry, and thysia”, Classical antiquity, vol. 12 (1993), pp. 219-260; Antoine HERMARY et al., “Sacrifice. Les sacrifices dans le monde grec”, in Thesaurus cultus et rituum antiquorum, vol. 1 (Los Angeles, 2004), pp. 65-68 and 110-118; S. GEORGOUDI et al. (eds.), La cuisine et l’autel. Les sacrifices en questions dans les sociétés de la Méditerranée ancienne (Paris, 2005). 2 Jean-Pierre VERNANT, “At man’s table: Hesiod’s foundation myth of sacrifice” in M. DETIENNE, J.-P. VERNANT (eds.), The cuisine of sacrifice among the Greeks (Chicago/ London, 1989), pp. 21-86. pp. “Culinary practices…”. DETIENNE. DETIENNE. 1992).). pp. 49-50.). On the division of the animal victim at Greek sacrifices” in A. VERNANT (eds. Meletes eis mnemen M. 3-11. pp. 1986). sacred or secular ? 251 The gods. Walter BURKERT. The cuisine of sacrifice among the Greeks (Chicago/London.P.-P. Greek religion…. apart from political rights. and its collective consumption have been seen as means for underlining not only the equality of all the participants in the sacrifices but also the equal positions of the citizens in relation to each other.3 The distribution of the meat in equal shares. see Gunnel EKROTH. 3 Marcel DETIENNE. status and privileges could be established by to whom meat was given on a particular occasion. VERNANT (eds. 250 BC (Princeton. 105-106. Histoire des repas publics dans les cités grecques (Roma.H. p. 2008). they distinguish themselves from wild animals which consume their meat raw and in a disorganised manner. For the division and distribution. The demes of Attica 508/7 – ca. Jean-Louis DURAND.). pp. “Sacrifice . 205-208. ROSIVACH. The religious as well as socio-political significance of animal sacrifice and the division. POLINSKAYA (eds. sometimes even by lot. and that meat normally could not be eaten except on the occasion of a sacrifice and according to its rules. distribution and consumption of meat have led modern scholars to claim that all the meat the ancient Greeks ate was linked to the sacrifice of domestic animals in some sense. 1-20. Michael H. pp. JAMESON. J. Citizenship gave. The cuisine of sacrifice among the Greeks (Chicago/London. manifest their immortality by only inhaling this vapour. pp. either by grilling or boiling it. “Culinary practices and the spirit of sacrifice” in M. pp. The system of public sacrifice in fourth-century Athens (Atlanta.-P. DETIENNE. David WHITEHEAD.Meat in ancient Greece : sacrificial. Die griechischen Kultusaltertümer (München. as they do not need to digest any meat. Greek religion…. 11-12 and 65-67. As men eat in organised groups and also cook their meat. At the same time hierarchies. the entitlement to meat from public sacrifices.-P. La cité au banquet. 55-59. pp. 5 Paul STENGEL. on the other hand. J. pp. 1989). 1989). VERNANT (eds. The importance of animal sacrifice is also evident in its intimate connection to the political and social structure of ancient Greece. pp.). 4 Pauline SCHMITT PANTEL. 55. 25 and 38. “At man’s table…”. 1989). Men. Jameson (Athens. Walter BURKERT. J. 119-128. Jean-Pierre VERNANT. Hieromnenon. “Meat. who receive the smoke from the bones burnt on the altar. man and god.4 Meat clearly had a more complex role for the Greeks than simply being the enjoyable culinary outcome of animal sacrifice that aimed to please or contact the gods. pp. MATTHAIOU. Vincent J. 259-290. 1994). “Greek animals: toward a topology of edible bodies” in M. 1920). The cuisine of sacrifice among the Greeks (Chicago/London. Marcel DETIENNE.5 Sacrifice has been seen a prerequisite for meat eating. I. have to eat to survive and by consuming the meat they demonstrate their mortality. and consequently the reason for performing animal sacrifice in antiquity has been explained as a way of legitimating the killing of animals for human purposes. though the citizens were obliged to participate in these events as well. 87-118 and “Ritual as instrumentality” in M. Heike LAXANDER. 88.R. 87-88.252 Gunnel Ekroth However. Pompe und Thysia. The system of public sacrifice…. pp. all three of which we know that the Greeks actually ate. 15-16. at least to us. pp. certainly have these precise meanings but they also cover a wider semantic field. does not show any indications of being set in a sacred context. p. Étude sur la boucherie. 1997). Pastoral economies in Classical antiquity (Cambridge. Jörg GEBAUER. pp. as well as Guy BERTHIAUME. Does the consumption of meat from these kinds of animals invalidate the notion of all meat being sacred. also illustrate the complexity of the issue. without any kind of ritual framework. the sacrificial terminology used. pp. 2002). 68-73. the literature referred to above. The model equating consumed meat with sacrificial meat from domestic animals. “Women and sacrifice in Classical Greece”. la cuisine et le sacrifice dans la Grèce ancienne (Leiden. 5. Even scholars who lean towards seeing all meat as ritual express some discomfort with this position. 38-39. vol. since it is here we get enough information to appreciate the problem. WHITTAKER (ed. 1982). 1-15. 6 Robin OSBORNE. pp.7 But the literary sources and the inscriptions and. The consuming passions of Classical Athens (London. p. 43 (1993). Vincent J. if we look at the sources in more detail there is evidence that seems to disagree with the notion that all meat was connected to sacrifice. 394. as there is evidence for slaughter of animals and handling of meat which. most of all. from species which were considered as not being fit for sacrifice or from animals that had died from natural causes. the verb thyein and the noun thysia. pp. n. a certain hesitation can be detected in completely discarding the notion of “secular” meat among the ancient Greeks. attractive as it may seem due to its link with and explanation of animal sacrifice within the social and political context. meat deriving from animals killed in the manner we would do today. that is. 1988). 7 See. often used in reference to a meal or dinner without any particular indications of the divinity to which the animal had been sacrificed or and animal husbandry in Classical Greece” in C. Classical quarterly. 11. which of course is understandable.und rotfigurigen Vasen (Münster.6 Furthermore. or are we to take this as representing a non-ritual handling of meat ? The evidence and its interpretation Most studies dealing with the issue of sacred meat have dealt with the written evidence. . Courtesans and fishcakes. Individuum und Gemeinschaft im Fest (Münster. The principal Greek terms for “to sacrifice” and “a sacrifice”.). Les rôles du mágeiros. Attische Tieropferdarstellungen auf schwarz. leaves aside meat from animals that had been killed at hunts. Nikolaus HIMMELMANN. 62-70 and 79-93. 1997). Tieropfer in der griechischen Kunst (Opladen. ROSIVACH. n. 2000). James DAVIDSON. he offers no elaboration of its status or origin. thyein and thysia are religious vocabulary and the use of either of these terms definitely signals that the activity covered. pp. 62-70 and 79-93. but there are a number of cases where there are no ritual markers. 9 Guy BERTHIAUME. including the consumption of meat. revelry. in the manner described at the beginning of this paper. pp. p. Tieropfer….8 Still. an “abattage rituel”. The majority of the ancient texts talk about the killing of animals in a sacrificial context or with a religious terminology. Robert Parker presented his paper at a seminar on animal sacrifice at the University of Reading in May 2007. Jörg GEBAUER. 340-341. if we look at the vases showing 8 Jean CASABONA.10 Outside the sphere of proper sacrifice and simplified rituals Berthiaume finds that there is evidence that animals could be killed and the meat eaten. a more scaled-down version of sacrifice is to be imagined. Characters 9. Nikolaus HIMMELMANN. Heike LAXANDER. Jean-Louis Durand. Most of the written evidence for the handling of meat has been discussed in detail in Guy Berthiaume’s magisterial study Les rôles du mageiros. “Greek animals…”.12 Most scholars have tended to follow him in considering the scenes of butchery. sacred or secular ? 253 allusions to other ritual elements of a sacrifice. and thysia”. pp. pp. or of the degree to which this meat may have been perceived as sacred in any sense. 13 Sarah PEIRCE. and Robert Parker has recently addressed the issue in a conference paper. carrying of legs of meat and symposia as related to the motif of thysia sacrifice and therefore depicting sacred meat. Pompe und Thysia…. “Death. 87-118 and “Ritual as instrumentality”.Meat in ancient Greece : sacrificial. 1966). As when Theophrastos speaks of meat being sold in the market. has to be linked to the cultic sphere in some sense. passim. 38-39. 1986). see also Jean-Louis DURAND Sacrifice et labour en Grèce ancienne.11 The iconographical evidence presents a similar situation. 119-128 (originally published in 1979). 11 Theophrastos. 76-82. pp. 219-260. Individuum und Gemeinschaft…. Recherches sur le vocabulaire des sacrifices en grec des origines à la fin de l’époque classique (Aix-en-Provence. 73. though the Greeks tried to avoid this meat. 12 Jean-Louis DURAND. pp. Les rôles du mágeiros…. pp. The question is to what extent a ritual such as a full-scale thysia sacrifice.4. It is evident that the written sources do not present us with a uniform picture of meat as sacred. At slaughter in family contexts to obtain meat for the dinner table as well as by butchers in the market.13 Still. who initiated the study of vase-paintings as a source for sacrifice and meat handling. .9 Berthiaume argues that most meat can clearly be shown to have had a sacrificial origin.. Essai d’anthropologie religieuse (Paris/Roma. is to be imagined in each instance. has argued that all meat represented in these scenes is to be viewed as handled within a ritual sphere. at least not such as can be perceived by the modern reader. 10 Ibid. 14 Similarly. “Legs of meat and civic identity on late 6th. 3 b. Nikolaus HIMMELMANN. Hesperia. though there are hardly ever any signs of these meals being linked to sacrifice. but none of the persons holding a leg can be identified as a priest. in the symposion scenes meat is seen lying on tables or about to be eaten. 448-470. fig. For a rare case of a symposion scene including an altar.-Th. . pp. Sacrificio e società nel mondo antico (Roma.17 Here we have to be aware that one reason behind the modern difficulties in accepting the concept of meat as sacred in ancient Greece is surely to be found in Christianity’s attitudes towards animal sacrifice. pp. and only a few vases showing the butchering also include an altar where the god’s portion is being burnt. see Brigitte LE GUEN-POLLET. Actes du colloque tenu à la Maison de l’Orient. ÉTIENNE. Attic vases”. 1991).). 18 Jean-Louis DURAND. London BM B 362. 219. The fact remains that ancient Greek does not seem to have had a term for slaughtering in a purely “secular” context and the literary sources do not talk about the killing of animals for alimentary purposes in a manner corresponding to modern practices. Pompe und Thysia…. Pauline SCHMITT PANTEL. 16 On symposion scenes with meat. a large group of scenes represent hind legs of animals being carried. vol. fig. “Greek animals…”. Hierà kalá…. 1988). “Spartizione e comunità nei banchetti greci” in C.F. Most scenes of butchering and meat handling contain no ritual references whatsoever.127.). 4-7 juin 1988 (Paris. “Espace sacrificiel et corps des bêtes immolées.254 Gunnel Ekroth the butchering of animals it is evident that it can be difficult for us to distinguish what is to be considered as sacred or not.16 However. 25. one of the great challenges was to wrench slaughter and meat-eating away from the 14 See Folkert VAN STRATEN. see Jörg GEBAUER.15 Finally. red-figure stamnos. 17 See Jean-Pierre VERNANT. 17-19. Remarques sur le vocabulaire désignant la part du prêtre dans la Grèce antique. PARISE (eds. N. forthcoming. Tieropfer…. Victoria TSOUKALA. Lyon. For the epigraphical evidence. it is clearly too simplistic to take the written and iconographical evidence that presents meat without linking it to religion as support for this meat being devoid of ritual connotations. see Jörg GEBAUER. “At man’s table…”. p. Oxford 1965. de l’époque classique à l’époque impériale” in R. 77 (2008). V160. LE DINAHET (eds. 60-63. held or given as gifts. 87-88.C.and 5th-century B. 123.18 When Christianity gradually took over in antiquity. and the scenes where legs of meat are handled have no ritual or sacrificial indicators. pp. often presented to the god or given to the priest as payment. 332-337. GROTTANELLI. pp. Pompe und Thysia…. see François LISSARRAGUE. From the epigraphical evidence we know that the hind leg occupied an important position within the sacrificial ritual. M. L’espace sacrificiel dans les civilisations méditerranéennes de l’antiquité. p. 15 For the handling and contexts of the back legs. often in an erotic context. Occasionally the butcher and his assistant may wear wreaths but usually they do not. pp. more frequently on black-figure than red-figure vases. black-figure column-krater. ). 1989). In this paper. Though bones have been recovered and even kept since the early excavations of Greek sanctuaries from the 19th century onwards.-P. the kind of animal the meat came from. even if we accept as a basic condition that meat was linked to religion. ALROTH (eds. presumably the meat from an animal which had died from natural causes. J. pp. The killing and butchering of animals had to become “secular”. Ancient Greek cult practice from the archaeological evidence (Stockholm. REESE.). inscriptions and images. The osteological material.). 49-56. 2005). for long neglected within the study of Greek religion. Actually.Meat in ancient Greece : sacrificial. GEORGOUDI et al. HÄGG. “Faunal remains from Greek sanctuaires” in R. B. The possible categories and degrees of “sacredness” need to be further explored. sacred or secular ? 255 pagan cults of which they had formed the core. see Stella GEORGOUDI. how and where this animal had been killed and where its meat was eaten. A diversified sacredness scale for meat can therefore be imagined. the ancient texts and vase-paintings seem to indicate that there were distinctions in the way that meat was categorized within the sacred realm. Still. ranging from the meat deriving from the full-scale thysia to the opposite end. DETIENNE. Robin HÄGG. “Sanctified slaughter in modern Greece: the “Kourbánia” of the Saints” in M. 20 See. and subconsciously tends to affect our way of interpreting the evidence which does not explicitly locate meat within a ritual context. Les sacrifices en questions dans les sociétés de la Méditerranée ancienne (Paris.19 This difference between pagans and Christians in the attitude to animals has too often been overlooked. 183-203.20 Field archaeological methods have also improved and 19 Any occurrences of “animal sacrifice” at Christian rituals are therefore not be seen as continuations or survivals of pagan religious practices but as later additions which rather fall back on Israelite and Jewish animal sacrifices as represented in the Bible. see Cristiano GROTTANELLI. (eds. pp. 1998). HÄGG (ed. The cuisine of sacrifice among the Greeks (Chicago/London. VERNANT (eds. dining. To link all meat explicitly to sacrifice of the thysia kind does not seem to fully account for these variations. it is not until the last decades that they have become the focus of proper study by experts. 387-407. “Osteology and Greek sacrificial practice” in R.). “Tuer des animaux pour la fête de Saint Félix” in S. pp. can provide information different from that of the texts. which will make it possible to diversify various assumptions surrounding the status of meat. David S. . or an essential part of men’s lives. There are many features which may have affected the understanding of meat as more or less sacred: its origins. I will concentrate on what the bone evidence can contribute to our understanding of this issue. La cuisine et l’autel. it may be more pertinent to consider why we are to expect that there was anything like non-ritual slaughter of animals and non-ritual meat in ancient Greece. Previous work on attitudes to meat has been based on written and iconographical sources. since some of the evidence is ignored. On the practical and conceptual distinctions. for example. would have been too intimately linked with pagan religion. . which parts of these animals are present and how these bones have been treated. goats and pigs. 22 Folkert VAN STRATEN. camels. . 490-491. Michael MACKINNON. vultures and lions. Present in the osteological evidence are also dogs. mainly show pigs and especially piglets. The question is in what proportions and on what occasions.. goats and Greek sacrificial ritual. Hierà kalá. In his study of animal sacrifice as represented on vase-paintings and votive reliefs Folkert Van Straten has clearly shown that the preferences of the animal victims for sacrifice depend on the category of evidence we consider. pp. chicken. Cattle. roe deer. sheep. 21 The osteological evidence discussed in this article will be given a fuller treatment elsewhere. on the other hand. horses.256 Gunnel Ekroth dry sieving and water flotation now result in an increasingly sophisticated knowledge of the bones. Zooarchaeology in Greece. Three particular issues of relevance for the understanding of the Greek attitudes to meat will be addressed here: the species found in Greek sanctuaries. The osteological material is a rich category of evidence which is constantly increasing. which reflect private undertakings commemorating actual sacrificial occasions. donkeys. 2003). foxes. fallow deer. esp. crocodiles. Bones from species other than cattle. gazelles. The epigraphical evidence in the form of sacrificial calendars offers us a third option. American journal of archaeology. 23 Ibid. sheep... turtles. cats. the preferred animals are the expensive cattle. weasels. pp. red deer. inscriptions and images. mules. a far from surprising picture which corresponds well with the written and iconographical evidence as to which animals could be sacrificed and therefore eaten.. “Osteological research in Classical archaeology”. 170-186. 121-123.21 Species The texts. and here sheep are the predominant victims. wild boars. geese. which show general scenes of sacrifices not being connected to a particular divinity. vol. 111 (2007). 170-181. bears. inscriptions and images make clear that the Greeks sacrificed and ate cattle. the detailed study and publication of the bone material from sanctuary sites present a greater diversity of species than do the texts. pp. goats and pigs make up the bulk of all bones recovered in Greek sanctuaries. The votive reliefs. pp. animals which were both abundant and not very costly. pigeons. snakes. 2005). wolves. representing public sacrifice usually on a local level. 473-504.22 On the vases. pp. Recent advances (Athens/London.23 However. Olympian and chthonian (Stockholm. occasion or group of worshippers. Eleni KOTJABOPOULOU et al. sheep. Tier und Museum. goat and pig bones. sheep. these bones are present and they are definitely worthy of a closer study than simply being dismissed as lacking connection to the religious activity because they derive from animals which according to modern standards cannot be eaten or which the Greeks are not considered to have sacrificed and eaten. sacred or secular ? 257 pigs only represent a small part of the osteological material recovered in any sanctuary. claws and single elements of exotic or non-local animals are also to be excluded. Angela VON DEN DRIESCH. 245-248. Isolated finds of bones are of less interest here. as well as the find contexts. Teeth. see Joachim BOESSNECK. rarely more than 10 %. “Sanctuaries in the Artemision of Ephesus” in R. Griechenland). Athenische Mitteilungen. pp. 106-107. Grabungen 1992 bis 1996”. Furthermore. 12. when the bones from the species usually considered as “non-edible” have been recovered together with the cattle. These finds should not be explained as intrusions and rubbish. Claws. Still. dogs and equids. Three categories of animals deserve particular attention – wild fauna. p. most often red deer. 21-24. “Weitere Reste exotischer Tiere aus dem Heraion auf Samos”. For Messene. At the sanctuary of Apollon and Artemis 24 For Samos.und Demeterheiligtum des antiken Messene (SW-Peloponnes. vol. which has sometimes been the case. 40 and fig. Ancient Greek cult practice from the archaeological evidence (Stockholm. 5 (1997). the bones must come from contexts which can be interpreted as either representing the bones that had been burnt on the altar or the leftovers from the meals where the meat was consumed. HÄGG (ed. as they may have been left there as individual bone dedications devoid of meat. pp.25 The analysis is therefore to be based on findings of bones from the fleshier parts of the animals and. 1998). “Reste exotischer Tiere aus dem Heraion von Samos”. as these are species which have been considered as not being compatible with the notion of all meat belonging to the sacrificial sphere. “Tieropfer aus einem Heroen. it should be made clear that the type of bones from each kind of animal must be taken into consideration. The osteological reports show that occasional bones of wild fauna have in fact been found in most Greek sanctuaries. as such bones could have ended up in a sanctuary when an animal skin was dedicated. pp. 98 (1983). but as votives.24 The same goes for the bear teeth at the Artemision at Ephesos. Joachim BOESSNECK. foot bones and horns have to be left aside.Meat in ancient Greece : sacrificial. the remains of animals which are known to have been sacrificed and eaten. . The crocodile bones in the sanctuary of Hera on Samos and the phalanx of a gazelle in Messene are not to be taken as the remains of sacrificial victims. 25 Anton BAMMER. which are pierced and may have belonged to a piece of jewellery. in particular. vol. that is. see Günter NOBIS.). 96 (1981). though some sites demonstrate a higher proportion of wild animals. neither as the leftovers of outlandish meals. In order to address the relevance of these more unusual species. roe deer and wild boar. Athenische Mitteilungen. vol. Angela VON DEN DRIESCH. ca 1 % came from wild species found mixed with the domesticated animals and presumably eaten. WAHL (eds.28 There is red deer. sheep. Knochenabfall von Opfermahlen und Weihgaben aus dem Heraion von Samos (7. which make up the bulk of the bones. pp. Angela VON DEN DRIESCH. largely good meat-bearing parts. 298-299. goat and pigs and bearing the same butchering marks as these latter species and usually unburnt.).258 Gunnel Ekroth at Kalapodi the bones from wild fauna make up a little more than 6 % of the osteological evidence from the Archaic period. vol. KOKABI. 87-119 and 169. came from wild animals. as well as smaller quantities of bear. SAHIN.) (München. Friedrich BREIN. . SCHWERTHEIM. 480 of which (10. A bone to be mentioned is the shoulder-blade of a lion found in a mixed Geometric-Archaic layer. some of which are from the fore limbs. E. pp. it may be possible that even this lion was eaten. 1988). p. 29 Günter NOBIS. hare. “Die Tierreste aus dem antiken Messene – Grabung 1990/91” in M. Table 48. weasel and wolf. 1994). 1991). pp.. 101-102 and Table 1. 108-110 and 148-151.und Demeterheiligtum…”.26 The body parts are predominantly vertebrae and fore and hind legs. 37. Petra WOLFF. “Tieropfer aus einem Heroen. 1978).. goats and pigs. Festschrift für Friedrich Karl Dörner (Leiden. WAGNER (eds. as are the cattle. The total mammal sample from the Archaic period consisted of 2228 fragments. Around 5 % of the bones recovered next to the temple of Artemis Orthia at the same site came from wild species: red deer. fallow deer. the rest being domesticated species. 8. respectively. a bone from the fleshier part of the animal’s body. fox. the fallow deer bones found. 14 bones of 257 and 49 bones of 803.. roe deer. Arbeitstreffen der Osteologen (Stuttgart. pp.57 %) came from wild fauna.29 The wolf bones included a shoulder-blade. p.27 As this scapula bears traces of fire and has chop marks. Die Tierreste aus dem Artemis-/Apollon-Heiligtum bei Kalapodi in Böotien/Griechenland (München. Of the bones from the Artemision at Ephesos. Tables 2 and 3. sheep. roe deer and wild boar. Beiträge zur Archäozoologie und Prähistorischen Anthropologie. 119 fragments of 550 identified. mainly consisting of red deer. 31 Joachim BOESSNECK. Chr. 4542 bones were identified. “Das Tieropfer am Artemisaltar von Ephesos” in S. p. In a pit in the centre of the cult building dedicated to the Heroes and Demeter almost a fifth of the osteological evidence of the early Archaic to late Classical periods consisted of wild animals. often found mixed with the bones of cattle. fox.30 At the Heraion on Samos. had been handled in the same manner as the bones of the domesticated species recovered from the food refuse deposits. roe deer. v. wild boar. 114. wild goat and a substantial amount of wild boar. 27 Ibid. In the two investigated areas. The sanctuaries at Messene have also yielded substantial quantities of bones from wild animals. The bones are unburnt and fragmented.31 Dog bones have been recovered in a number of sanctuaries. In the Hellenistic period. 30 Ibid. turtle and wolf. Studien zur Religion und Kultur Kleinasiens. Jh.). 302. This is the situation at the sacrificial area to the north of the temple of Apollon 26 Manfred STANZEL. J. J. 1. see Anton BAMMER. 28 Günter NOBIS. p. ALROTH (eds. Angela VON DEN DRIESCH. where the food debris consisted primarily of unburnt bones from sheep. p. p. Isabelle CHENAL-VELARDE. demonstrating that they had been skinned and gutted. 285-294. but also included the remains of two dogs with marks from knives. vol. “Tieropfer in Didyma − ein Nachtrag”. HUBER. two of which are from dog. Joachim BOESSNECK. p. vol. 32 of sheep/goat. sacred or secular ? 259 Daphnephoros at Eretria. were recovered as secondary deposited in a series of wells near the sanctuary of Apollon at Didyma. L’Aire sacrificielle au nord de Sanctuaire d’Apollon Daphnéphoros (Basel. J. “Tierknochenfunde aus Didyma II”. unburnt horse bones with butchering marks were recovered. Johann SCHÄFFER. A total of 29 bones were identified. Archäologischer Anzeiger (1992). mixed with the bones of cattle. Three of 103 bones in this deposit came from equids. pigs. Table 7. goat and pigs. pp. RENARD (eds. Bulletin de correspondance hellénique.Meat in ancient Greece : sacrificial. 2007). Of the 119 identified bones. A large quantity of dog bones. 34 Martine LEGUILLOUX. sheep and goat and a small amount of dog.33 A more direct example of dogs being used as food comes from the kitchen in the sanctuary of Poseidon and Amphitrite on Tenos.32 The variation of anatomical elements. see Klaus TUCHELT. 344-347. Eretria XIV. 2003). goat and pigs. 804. sheep. 819. Lot 6. 2005). Olympian and chthonian (Stockholm. pp. 33 Elizabeth R.34 As for equids. 120 (1996). pp. 75. including ribs apparently cut up into portions. finally. The bones consist to a large extent of parts of the upper legs and the meat seems to have been removed. REESE. Due to the variation in appearance and size of these animals the excavator has proposed that the dogs had been chosen on purpose rather than simply being randomly dumped. Archäologischer Anzeiger (1983). 36 Armelle GARDEISEN. the fragmentation of the bones and the traces of butchering into smaller portions are further signs that these dog bones were not present in this deposit by accident but that they were from animals that had been slaughtered and consumed just as the other animals.).36 Chop marks were also clearly visible on 32 Jacqueline STUDER. see ibid. where the bones consisted of cattle.35 At the sanctuary of Herakles on Thasos. Table 1. 123 (1999). It should be pointed out that this sample is very small. a part of the skull of a donkey was found among the bones in the sanctuary kitchen on Tenos. MEE. “Sacrifice et repas publics dans le sanctuaire de Poséidon à Ténos: les analyses archéozoologiques”. “Sacrifices d’animaux à l’Hérakleion de Thasos”. HÄGG. Food and culinary practices in the Neolithic and Bronze Age Aegean (Oxford. The deposit contained at least 25 individuals of cattle. 35 Martine LEGUILLOUX. Archäologischer Anzeiger (1986). p. Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. “Sacrifices for Poseidon and Melikertes-Palaimon at Isthmia” in R. 451 and Table 7. “The consumption of dog-meat in Classical Greece” in Ch. in total from more than 33 individuals. some of which showed signs of being butchered. 427. Joachim BOESSNECK. GEBHARD. B. Greek sacrificial ritual. 9 % came from dog. “Tierknochenfunde aus Didyma”. “Sacrifice et repas publics…”. Also the food debris from the sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia contained the remains of one dog. Table 2 and 451. “La part des dieux et celle des hommes : offrandes d’animaux et restes culinaires dans l’Aire sacrificielle nord” in S. David S. Cooking up the past. pp. . a total of 29 fragments. 140. 180. 641-646. p. and five pigs. presumably a sign of its meat having been consumed. See also James ROY. The feet and the spine are missing and this fact can be taken to indicate that these dogs were eaten just as the other animals found in the Didyma deposits.). av. Zooarchaeology in Greece. Pallas. Recent advances (Athens/London. David S. p. “From Lerna to Kastro: further thoughts on dogs as food in ancient Greece. Joris PETERS. Table 1. donkeys./Ier s. goat and pigs which constituted the main sources of meat. 105: 101 equid fragments of 5092 identified.37 Among the bones from the pit in the centre of the sanctuary of the Heroes and Demeter at Messene were found a small quantity of remains of horse and donkey. on the one hand. “Das Tieropfer am Artemisaltar…”. pp.260 Gunnel Ekroth the horse bones from the Artemision at Ephesos and indicate that these animals had been divided in order to be consumed. . Both the find contexts and the presence of chop and knife marks indicate that these animals were eaten in the sanctuaries. Table 3 and p.und Demeterheiligtum…”. Istanbuler Mitteilungen. 20 bones (1. vol. Petra WOLFF. fallow deer. the degree 37 Anton BAMMER. see Lynn M. the consumption of the meat following the actual sacrifice. Are dogs. these examples demonstrate that the presence of equids strongly indicate that their meat was eaten. 154-156. p. “Tieropfer aus einem Heroen. sheep. “Siedlungsabfall versus Opferreste: Essgewohnheiten im archaischen Milet”. KOTJABOPOULOU et al. horses.-C.. 108-110. 42 (1992). pp. pp.38 Though bones from horses never occur in large quantities in Greek cultic contexts. 102. the burning of the god’s portion on the altar. The bones can often be shown to correspond to two different kinds of activities. 154. vol. SNYDER. prejudices and reinvestigations” in E.39 The next question to address is whether the fact that the meat of an animal was consumed in a sanctuary also means that it had been sacrificed there. on the other. and. p. 39 See Philippe COLUMEAU. Walter E. “Sacrifice et viande dans les sanctuaires grecs et chypriotes (VIIe s. J. horses and game to be considered as sacrificial victims? A closer look at the osteological remains allows us to distinguish different kinds of treatment of the animals present in a sanctuary and. Sacrificial victims and other animals This sample of Greek sanctuaries shows that occasional dogs. horses and dogs were consumed in non-ritual contexts.40 The criteria to use when distinguishing these two categories of bones are which bones are included. roe deer. The bones of equids from Kalapodi can also be taken to represent dinner debris. Die Tierreste…. KLIPPEL. red deer. 40 The distinctions between these two kinds of deposits are well illustrated in Elizabeth R. 117-119. 52 (2000). pp. presumably.2 %) came from equids. 38 Günter NOBIS. of their meat. perceptions. wild boars and other nondomesticated animals complemented the cows. 140-147. 2003). Friedrich BREIN. REESE.) et l’apport de l’habitat de Kassopè”. 221-231. a fact which should not be surprising as settlement debris shows that both wild fauna. see Manfred STANZEL. GEBHARD. “Sacrifices for Poseidon…”. Angela VON DEN DRIESCH. Hesperia. or the consumption debris may have been thrown into the fire after the meat had been eaten. The leftovers of meals on the other hand. to what degree the bones show traces of burning.42 Presumably the cows. The meat from these sacrifices was eaten to the south-west of the temple and the refuse dumped in the Large Circular Pit. equids and wild animals are rarely recovered among the bones corresponding to the burning of the god’s portion. these bones are heavily burnt.. Furthermore. see Nancy BOOKIDIS et al. GEBHARD. sacred or secular ? 261 and type of fragmentation. “Dining in the sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at Corinth”. . cattle. pp. and most importantly. vol. REESE. Some examples will illustrate this situation. see the bones (pig. a distinction can be noted between altar deposits and consumption debris as to species: dogs. Another interesting observation is the fact that pig bones are infrequently found in the sacrificial deposits from the altars. or a mixture of these categories. The bones found here are of the same species as those recovered at the altar. 68 (1999). carbonized and calcined and shattered into small splinters. are primarily made up of bones from the meatbearing parts of the body and the parts burnt for the gods on the altar are present in small quantities or not at all. sheep and goats sacrificed at the altar were eaten at the dining area to the south-west but here were also 41 The osteological deposits recovered do not always demonstrate all of these criteria and bones from the altar activity and from the meals may have been mixed at a later stage when deposited. corresponding to a division into smaller portions or to the removal of the meat. David S. though these animals are encountered in the leftovers from the meals. patellae. sheep and goats were sacrificed and burnt at the Long Altar in front of the temple. The lower parts of the legs as well as the back of the skull with the horns are usually missing: these parts have very little meat and are likely to have been removed at the flaying of the animal or at the initial stages of butchering and therefore discarded elsewhere. as the meat would have protected the bones at the cooking process.Meat in ancient Greece : sacrificial. In the sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia. 140 and 149-153. “Sacrifices for Poseidon…”. but there were the remains of at least five pigs and a dog as well. Finally. The dining refuse also yielded as many as 25 cattle and 32 sheep/goat. 42-44 and 50-51. the presence of cut or chop marks. these bones bear few traces of having come in contact with the fire. There is often a substantial degree of fragmentation and breakage of the bones to access the marrow. which were both burnt and unburnt. pp. piglet and fish) from the three dining rooms in the sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at Corinth. 42 Elizabeth R. Tables 1 and 2. 130. The bones deriving from the activity at the altar usually consist of femora. since the purpose of burning these parts was to feast the noses of the gods with smoke.41 If we look at the bones from these two categories of osteological deposits. Chop and knife marks are often visible in the dining refuse. caudal vertebrae or sacrum bones. p. Anton BAMMER. SHAW (eds.3.43 At Kommos on Crete. HÄGG (eds. Manfred STANZEL.46 But the bone evidence also produces unexpected results. 107-115 and Plan 3: 6. forthcoming. 684-685. 45 Isabelle CHENAL-VELARDE. Kommos IV. 44 Joseph W.45 The osteological sample discussed here is small but we can conclude that the standard ritual practice seems to have been to burn thigh bones and tails from sheep. there is a gradual increase in pigs bones during the same period. Potnia. 25-35. pp. The Greek sanctuary. M. esp. as the case of the sanctuary of Apollon and Artemis at Kalapodi. RUSCILLO. sheep and goat. LAFFINEUR. “Ritual and development in the Greek sanctuary” in J. Table 1: 10 % of the bones derive from pigs and 5 % from dogs (a total of 100 identified fragments).8 % of the individuals identified (45 in total) are pigs. presumably since these parts had been removed and burnt on the altar. Within Temple C. pp. 162. The Greek sanctuary. SHAW. Kommos IV. p. 804-814 and 817-818: 17.). “Opferhandlungen des Alltagslebens im Heiligtum der Artemis Elaphebolos von Hyampolis in den Phasen SH III C – Spätgeometrisch” in R. SHAW. goat and cattle. Die Tierreste…. 10 (2001). D. M. Part 1 (Princeton/Oxford. “Thighs or tails? The osteological evidence as a source for Greek ritual norms” XIe colloque du CIERGA. 29. Petra WOLFF. Part 1 (Princeton/Oxford. La norme en matière religieuse dans la Grèce antique.S. see D.262 Gunnel Ekroth consumed animals that have left no traces at the altar. Table 6.W. goat. 196-197. FELSCH. pig and dog bones occur in the cooking hearths in front of the temple of Apollon while only sheep and goat make up the burnt altar material in the sacrificial area to the north. there are no pigs on the exterior altar (C) dating to the Classical and Hellenistic periods. Archaeofauna. 46 The scarcity of pig bones in the altar deposits is interesting considering the fact that pigs are stipulated in sacred laws as sacrificial victims and are often shown on votive reliefs. 2001). since sacra and caudal vertebrae are almost absent from the deposit. a hestiatorion. in J.W. vol. Grèce”. pp. 37. pp. 450.J. Deities and religion in the Aegean Bronze Age (Liège/Austin. This issue will discussed in Gunnel EKROTH. R. REESE. 34.2 % of Lot 6 are pig bones.44 Also at Eretria there may have been a similar situation: sheep. in Temple C. while pig bones were only found in the dinner debris accumulated elsewhere together with bones of cattle. M. “Sacrifices d’animaux…”.3 % of the bones come from pigs. pp. This osteological assemblage constitutes leftovers from meat eaten in the sanctuary. 2000).S. At the Herakleion on Thasos and the Artemision at Ephesos the deposits interpreted as deriving from the altars contained sheep. goats and cattle for the gods on the altar while the rest of the animals to be eaten were processed elsewhere in the sanctuaries. ROSE. Friedrich BREIN.). SHAW.). The link between the sacrificial activity to the north and the cooking of the hearths in front of the temple has been suggested by CHENAL-VELARDE. p. which seems to have served as a dining room.47 Exceptional here is the fact that the sacra and tails are 43 Armelle GARDEISEN. 2000). . “Des festins à l’entrée du temple? Sacrifices et consommation des animaux à l’époque géométrique dans le sanctuaire d’Apollon à Erétrie. p. while on the hearths inside the same building. SHAW (eds. “The Iron Age fauna”. “Das Tieropfer am Artemisaltar…”. 47 Rainer C. 244. At some sites. 10 % of the animal bones are made up of nondomesticated species. Joachim BOESSNECK. see Günter NOBIS. The contexts of bones of the wild animals. horses and animals dead from natural causes If not sacrificed at the altar. 111-131. Angela VON DEN DRIESCH. roe deer and wild boars were sacrificed to the gods and had a portion of their bones burnt for the gods. p. The reasons for bringing meat from wild animals. fallow deer. 50 See. pp. Knochenabfall von Opfermahlen…. though which parts are not specified. History of religions. 298. p. These animals may never have entered the sanctuary alive to be slaughtered there. 2003). Table 2 and 302-303.48 Game. or it could have been bought in the market where the animals had been slaughtered by a professional butcher. This meat may have been brought by the individuals who had killed the animals themselves. could have been taken to the sanctuary already butchered to supplement the live victims. and that they only contributed a lesser quantity of the meat eaten in sanctuaries. vol. dogs and equids indicate that these species were rarely or never sacrificed. sheep. vol. (eds. Acta praehistorica et archaeologica. social power and gender in early farming societies” in E.50 48 At the altar of Asklepios at Messene. and in many ways actually comparable to sacrifice. cattle. 34 (1994). mainly red deer and wild boars. 7/8 (1976-77). “The sacred geography of hunting: wild animals. goats and pigs could presumably be slaughtered in the sanctuary just for alimentary purposes. KOTJABOPOULOU et al. Recent advances (Athens/London. the material can be taken to represent only a few animals or even parts of them. dogs. such heads. the bones suggest that at Kalapodi red deer. but we should not totally rule out some kind of ritual treatment of the animal and its meat. Jean-Louis DURAND. Instead whole carcasses or sections. In fact. Yannis HAMILAKIS. 292. 49 Günter NOBIS. pp. but the meat from these species may occasionally have fulfilled a particular function within the ritual reflecting local practices or traits of the divine recipient. “Tierreste aus Tamassos auf Zypern”. p.Meat in ancient Greece : sacrificial. even today. for example. Valerio VALERI. though it has been suggested that fallow deer may have been kept and bred in deer parks in order to easily supply victims. “Wild victims: hunting as sacrifice and sacrifice as hunting in Huaulu”. dogs and horses could simply have been a desire or need to increase the amount of meat for consumption. sacred or secular ? 263 missing also from the wild species. 41. legs and backs. Zooarchaeology in Greece. Alain . “Die Tierreste aus dem antiken Messene…”. though different from that taking place at a thysia.).49 There is no evidence for Greek hunters handling their prey as the sacrificial victims in a sanctuary. Most of the wild animals represented among the bones must presumably have been game caught at hunts. Though the actual altar debris has not been found. few activities are so ritualized as hunting. fig. 230. A47. 239-247. to a torch-bearing goddess identified as Artemis or Hekate. p. For the bone evidence. A city of images: iconography and society in ancient Greece (Princeton. 1989). 5. The difficulties lie in knowing whether kapros is a wild or domesticated boar. 51 For osteological evidence of game in Artemis sanctuaries. Tier und Museum. A50. even specifying their weight. lines 37-38 and commentary p. 79. fallow deer. 1962).37) describes how he established a sanctuary to Artemis at Skillous. See Pausanias 8. 1 (Athens. 53 Angeliki LEMBESSI. vol. Homo necans…. perhaps an indication that these animals were already dead and butchered when brought to the sanctuary.e. “Sanctuaries in the Artemision…”. “Die Tierreste aus dem antiken Messene…”. “Sacrificial slaughter and initiatory hunt” in C. . 38. no. A24 and A9 (legs) and A 29 (head). pp.53 Good. late 5th century BC.3. 2002).264 Gunnel Ekroth At Kalapodi the absence of sacrum bones and tails of the red deer.38. who explains the handling of the thigh bones at a thysia sacrifice as inherited from Palaeolithic hunting rituals. see David GILL.51 A famous passage in Xenophon’s Anabasis (5. 1 (1988). 85. 197-201. a case of an already dead victim brought to a sanctuary for further rituals. See Walter BURKERT. Lois sacrées des cités grecques. roe and deer were killed. Occasionally sacred laws stipulate wild victims. Greek sacred law. 2005). A37. pp. 117-137. presumably a sacrificial victim.. describing a boar sacrificed to Apollon Epikourios at the agora of Megalopolis and once slaughtered taken to the sanctuary of Apollon Parrhasios where the thighs were cut out and burned and the meat eaten. there was a hunt where wild boars.8. 188: provision of wild boar weighing 20 minae at the sacrifice to Herakles (Attika. 298-299 and 302-303. no. such as legs or backs of wild animals killed in hunts may have been offered to the gods and displayed on a sacred table as a part of a trapezomata ritual or perhaps even given as honorary portions to priests or prominent officials. Rhodes. partly on the grounds belonging to the sanctuary. p. pp. roe deer and wild boars may indicate that these species could have been sacrificed just as the domesticated animals. Günter NOBIS. pp. 48-50. 12-18. pl.52 Some of the Archaic bronze plaques from the sanctuary of Hermes and Aphrodite at Kato Syme Viannou on Crete show young males carrying legs and heads of ibexes presumably to be offered as sacrifices. lines 29-30. “The sacred geography of hunting…”. Table 1. 1985). and presumably these animals would have supplemented the other victims sacrificed and eaten at the festival of the goddess. see also Anton BAMMER. Harvard Theological Review. 59-70. vol. sacrifice of a (wild?) boar. I rilievi votivi greci di periodo arcaico e classico (Bari. See also Franciszek SOKOLOWSKI. see Annamaria COMELLA. Yannis HAMILAKIS. Agesilaos 6. 54 For the deposition of raw meat on the sacred table of the god. “Trapezomata: a neglected aspect of Greek sacrifice”. 67 (1974). sacrifice of female deer to Artemis. Supplément (Paris. 72. Plutarchos. pp. 52 Eran LUPU. Vol. early 2nd century AD). i. Paul STENGEL. meaty parts. 42-47. BÉRARD et al.54 SCHNAPP. 1910). and this particular handling of the wild animals may conceivably be linked to Artemis being one of the divinities worshipped at the site. see Günter NOBIS.und Wildtiere aus dem Bergheiligtum Kato Syme/ SO-Kreta – Grabungen 1972 bis 1984”. a dog and a kid to Enyalios at Lindos. To hiero tou Herme kai tes Aphrodites ste Syme Viannou. Opferbräuche der Griechen (Leipzig/Berlin. A 5th-century relief from Aegina shows a family at an altar offering a goose and leading a deer. pp. At the annual festival. “Die Haus. A collection of new documents (Leiden. pp. presumably to Hekate. Greek. 58 James ROY.55 Any particular religious reason behind the choice of these animals is not obvious. horse. Characters 16. There is one possible vase painting showing a sacrifice of a dog. vol. . 137-142). “Sacrifice et mise à mort : aperçus sur le statut du cheval dans les pratiques rituelles grecques” in A. “Kynophagie.Meat in ancient Greece : sacrificial.60 55 Theophrastos. 819. pp. p. a sow more than ten years old. Festschrift für Friedrich Krinzinger. p. Folkert VAN STRATEN. 49 (1974). pp. the animals being completely burnt or discarded at the end of the sacrificial action.). BRANDT et al. Platon. though the dogs found in the early levels at the Artemision at Ephesos have been suggested as reflecting a Lydian ethnic presence at the site. see Armelle GARDEISEN. “Did the Greeks kneel before their gods?”. fig.13.. 434-435. Laverna. Food in the ancient world from A to Z (London/New York. 180. pp. 179. “Tierreste aus früheisenzeitlichen Schichten des Artemisions von Ephesos” in B. conceivably as they had become too old to be useful anymore. see also Guy BERTHIAUME. “Sacrifices d’animaux…”. Peter DANNER. see Stella GEORGOUDI. Nicholaos J. 14 (2003). pp. Synergia. 56 Gerhard FORSTENPOINTNER et al. 247. p. 120. Bulletin Antieke Beschaving. 27 (1975).56 Just as in the case of the dogs. Andrew DALBY. 90-91.57 When dogs.59 Meat of this kind could perhaps have been bought as well. horses and donkeys were eaten in sanctuaries a wish to have more food available may have lain behind their inclusion and perhaps also economic concerns contributed. see Frank FROST. Les équidés dans le monde méditerranéen antique (Lattes. “The consumption of dog-meat…”. On sausages of dog meat. as these animals must have been cheap. GARDEISEN (ed. Athens NM 1695. 40 (1999). 60-61. 60 Pollux 9. Literary texts occasionally speak of sacrifices of dogs to divinities such as Hekate or Enyalios or at purifications. 342-343 and 347-348. sv. “Sacrifice et repas publics…”. the written sources simply mention sacrifices of horses performed in a manner resulting in no meat being left to consume. 92-93. sv. 2005). 78 . Sacrifice and consumption of horses are commonly found in Gallic contexts. Siren feasts (London/New York. sacred or secular ? 265 There is less evidence for the ritual killing of dogs and horses and the extant sources mention rituals at which the meat would not have been eaten. pp. and p. Les Gaulois et les animaux (Paris. pp. Band I (Wien. see Patrice MÉNIEL. pp.). Les rôles du mágeiros…. vol. 2001). 2003). Andrew DALBY. p. The modest status of this meat is indicated by the ancient texts which often mention dogs and horses as marginal food spoken of in a derogatory manner or recommended to be eaten for medical purposes by those who were sick and weak. ca 440-430 BC. Roman and Byzantine studies. vol. “Sausage and meat preservation in antiquity”. 15 of the 24 cattle were between five and ten years old and one of the five sheep/goat more than five years.58 Though these animals may have been killed in the sanctuary. it seems more likely that they were slaughtered in the domestic context. vol. p. dog. Der Verzehr von Hundefleisch in Vorgeschichte und Antike”. Of the animals eaten in the sanctuary of Poseidon and Amphitrite on Tenos.48. 59 For the presence of elderly animals in the consumption debris. 1996). as a market for donkey meat is actually mentioned by a late source. 323-328. 30. (eds. “Sacrifices de chiens dans l’antiquité classique”. ZAGANIARIS. 57 For the written evidence. 2005). an Attic red-figure lekythos. see Martine LEGUILLOUX. It is interesting to note that in the consumption deposits dogs.266 Gunnel Ekroth Some of this additional meat may even have come from animals which had died from natural causes. 81-92 for a discussion of the evidence. pp. A 3rd century BC sacred law from Kos stipulates that a priestess of Demeter was not to come in contact with any thnasidia. no. just as she was to keep away from human corpses. thneseidia or nekrimaia in the ancient texts. Guy BERTHIAUME. 63 Franciszek SOKOLOWSKI. sheep.. though this may of course happen elsewhere as well. that is. On the 61 Ibid. Lois sacrées. no. Supplément. had the same status or had acquired the same status. This suggests that all of the meat.61 If kenebreia ever was brought to the sanctuaries is not known. no matter if it came from an animal which had been sacrificed at the altar or killed elsewhere. . once eaten in the sanctuary. Boiled meat – sacred meat The spectrum of meat available and consumed in the sanctuaries was clearly varied as to species and origin as well as to procedure and reason for slaughter but these distinctions were perhaps less important than one would think. even though not all animals had died at the altar and had had parts of them burnt there.63 Elimination of pollution may be the cause also here but perhaps the sellers of kenebreia tried to conduct their business at a sanctuary where meat from sacrifices was sold in an attempt to increase the status of what they were selling or simply to disguise its origin by passing it off among the vendors of meat of better quality. 154 A. from the Agora at the entrance of the sanctuary. There is evidence for the sale and consumption of such meat. 62 Franciszek SOKOLOWSKI. equids and game are found together with the cattle. no distinction was made between the different species when the meat was cooked to be eaten.62 A fragmentary 5th century inscription from Delphi. though it possible that it was to be avoided due to religious reasons as it may have spread impurity. Les rôles du mágeiros….. Perhaps this is to be taken to indicate that the priestess could encounter such meat in the sanctuary. 1969). Apparently.. 88. Lois sacrées des cités grecques (Paris. p. but understandably this was not considered as the most attractive kind of food. goat and pigs. lines 2-3. line 26.. the animals traditionally considered as suitable for sacrifice are mixed with the species that have been considered as unfit for thysia sacrifice. seems to prohibit the sale of dead animals of this kind. 37. The bones demonstrate the same treatment and the same chop and knife marks. labelled kenebreia. meat of animals which had died from natural causes. Premier numéro spécial (Paris. pp. “Meat. Proceedings of an International Colloquium. Armelle GARDEISEN. “Tieropfer aus einem Heroen. Euripides. 124-125. p. The deposits identified as consumption debris due to criteria such as a predominance of meat-bearing parts. 15-16. 7. Transformations in Sacrificial Practices. the sacrificial area at Eretria and the Large Circular Pit at Isthmia. 328. 243-246. pp. pp. sacred or secular ? 267 basis of the bones from meals consumed in a sanctuary I would propose that all of the meat eaten at these meals must have been considered as sacred meat.Meat in ancient Greece : sacrificial. “Relations entre la découpe bouchère et la structure de la musculature” in Le découpage et le partage du corps à travers le temps et l’espace. Boiling was convenient for several reasons. no. there are other arguments for boiling having been the most frequent cooking method at large scale sacrifices in sanctuaries. chop and knife marks. vol. ed. Angela VON DEN DRIESCH.64 The state of these bones suggests that they constitute the leftovers from meals where the meat had been boiled. 177. 140 and 153. apart from these practical considerations. see Philochoros. “Sacrifices for Poseidon…”. p. AMBOS (eds. (2008).. sheep. Echos du monde classique. forthcoming. Anthropozoologica. 66 The ancient sources point specifically to boiling as a means for making the meat tender. “La part des dieux…”. p. GEBHARD. Fragmente der griechischen Historiker. Deborah RUSCILLO. the sanctuary of Poseidon and Amphitrite on Tenos. Knochenabfall von Opfermahlen…. See also Miletos. STAVRIANOPOULOU. 209. goat or pig needs to be cooked in a high temperature and for a long period of time. C. The material from the sanctuary of the Heroes and Demeter at Messene is not burnt at all and only occasional bones from the consumption deposits from the Heraion on Samos. to mention a few examples. From Antiquity to the Modern Times. REESE. 100. Joachim BOESSNECK. boiling also made it possible to integrate the different 64 Günter NOBIS. pp. “Faunal remains from the Acropolis site. . JACOBY (Berlin. pp. “Siedlungsabfall versus Opferreste…”. Heidelberg. and a high degree of fragmentation also demonstrate another important feature: there is often a very low quantity of burnt bones in these deposits. Martine LEGUILLOUX. 37 (1993). A. “Sacrifices d’animaux…”. preferably being boiled. Elizabeth R. man and god…”. pp. cooked or raw? Divine and human culinary desires at Greek animal sacrifice” in E. Mytilene”. Cyclops. The actual cooking method is of essential importance for the understanding of this process. see Bernard L. 12-14 July 2006. 426 and 444. and ”Burnt. show traces of fire.66 More importantly. F 173. Table 2B. Isabelle CHENAL-VELARDE. Studies of meat texture have shown that around 2/3 of the meat of cattle. 811 and 817. especially when preparing food for a large number of people: the fat would stay in the rich broth. 1987).65 Although meat can be roasted without scorching the bones. 65 For this cooking method. David S. Angela VON DEN DRIESCH.). no matter which species the meat came from or where and how the animals had been killed. F. MICHAELS. the marrow was cooked and easily accessible and the meat would become tender.und Demeterheiligtum…”. see also Gunnel EKROTH. 1954). contrary to the altar deposits which are carbonized and calcined. Table 2 and 181. DUMONT. “Sacrifice et repas publics…”. the Herakleion on Thasos. Jaqueline STUDER. Joris PETERS. The altar debris consists mainly of cattle. inscriptions and depictions reveal. . If the meat of dogs.. see Gunnel EKROTH. horses. To these animals slaughtered in the sanctuaries could be added meat brought there from animals killed 67 For boiling as a means of disguising human meat in a stew of animal meat. the bone assemblages representing the god’s portion burnt on the altar and the leftovers of meals present certain differences as to which animals are included in each kind of deposit. and the usefulness of the concept of animals “not to be sacrificed” needs to be questioned. The osteological material can be taken to demonstrate that all bones recovered in a sanctuary cannot automatically be taken to represent sacrificial victims in the traditional sense and that some of the animals eaten may have been slaughtered in the sanctuary without having parts cut out and burnt on the altar.67 At this stage any distinctions between the sacrificial ox and the old dog were of little importance as all the meat boiled in the cauldron had now become sacred meat ready to be distributed and eaten. donkeys and wild animals could be consumed as sacred meat. sheep and goats. First of all.. but also the meat brought to the sanctuary already butchered. no-one could distinguish between the different kinds of meat as to origin. horses. The bone evidence here constitutes an argument for different kinds of rituals at the killing of an animal. either inside the sanctuary or outside it. cooked or raw?. In the cauldron would be placed the meat from the animals sacrificed at the altar in the thysia manner as well as the meat from the animals killed elsewhere. The bone material suggests that animals traditionally considered as being outside the sacrificial sphere could be eaten in sanctuaries and may occasionally even have had a religious function to fulfil. a wider spectrum of species related to religion has to be reckoned with. Once boiled. while in the consumption debris the same species are found but also pigs. The hierarchy of meat The osteological evidence allows us to diversify our view of meat and animal sacrifice. species and where and how the killing had taken place. it is evident that there were more animal species present in Greek sanctuaries than the texts.268 Gunnel Ekroth kinds of meat present at the sanctuary.”. ”Burnt. the elaborate. full-scale thysia. donkeys and wild animals. which were both simpler and quicker and which may have been used at the additional killings in the sanctuary as well as in the domestic context or the market. as well as smaller quantities of dogs. Second. as well as more scaled-down rituals. the fact that some kinds of meat which have usually been considered as unfit for religious use were actually eaten in Greek sanctuaries suggests that the context in which the meat was handled and eaten could change its degree of sacredness. 89 and 126. dogs and horses too old to be of further use. Still. sheep. but also where the meat was eaten. We should rather be looking for the degree of sacredness imbued in different kinds of meat and situations where meat was handled in order to distinguish a hierarchy of meat that depended on the species. In this hierarchy of meat. the sacrificial victim killed for a particular reason. the bone material can also be taken as an indication that the meat eaten within the sanctuaries was usually boiled. fragment 693K. it is an important piece of information. The degree of sacredness inherent in the meat varied depending on the purpose for the killing of the animal – to present the gods with an offering to thank them or ask for help. donkeys and wild animals would be on the same level as that of cattle. Indisputably this was the most important kind of meat but it should not lead us to believe that all animals eaten were necessarily sacrificial victims. The donkey sold in the market or the old and useless dog are not to be considered as sacred meat per se but their status could be raised to that of sacred meat when consumed in a sanctuary. and. as to species. . I would suggest that we should separate “sacrificial” meat from “sacred” meat. whole or in parts. once cooked in the communal casserole. Sacrificial victims from the altars would be mixed with the meat from pigs slaughtered elsewhere and from sheep. Boiled and ready to be served in equal portions. goats and pigs. The boiling would efficiently eliminate any differences between the different kinds of meat. dogs. Invite me when you are sacrificing something”. or to provide meat for the dinner table. 46. since it allows us to understand the mentality behind the treatment of the meat. horses.Meat in ancient Greece : sacrificial. 68 Guy BERTHIAUME. The sacrificial victim has clearly dominated our understanding of Greek attitudes to meat. n. that is. Les rôles du mágeiros…. on the one hand. Aristophanes. where the animals were killed and how. origin and quality. at hunts or in the market consisting of game. on the other. The meat from dogs. A fragment of Aristophanes has a person exclaim: “I don’t eat kenebreion. it would all comprise sacred meat.68 This statement seems to illustrate the two absolute opposites on this scale of sacred meat. the actual sacrificial victims from the animals which were killed to be eaten without having specific parts burnt on the altar. pp. If this was the case. Third. sacred or secular ? 269 at home. the carcass of an animal which had died from natural causes. horses and perhaps even kenebreia. 2005). prayer and sprinkling its blood. La cuisine et l’autel. The republic. p. “Manger avec les dieux. Plato. Les sacrifices en questions dans les sociétés de la Méditerranée ancienne (Paris. describing the way Themistokles’ dealt with the herds on Euboia to prevent the Persian army from profiting from these animals. presumably indicating a ritual killing of a large number of animals with the purpose of transforming them into food.69 Still. For domestic sacrifices. 109-110.8. . Sacrifices taking place in the domestic context are less frequently mentioned in our extant evidence and when they occur..19. since this was the most powerful ritual action that made the communication with the divinity possible.). 70 Homer. 72 Jean CASABONA. Another text which may concern a less elaborate ritual slaughter is a passage in Herodotos. The sacrifice by Eumaios in the Odyssey constitutes one example of a different kind of ritual killing.72 The principal aim seems to have been to get at the meat. The fact that not all animals would be killed at the altar and both game and animals often considered by modern scholars as “unfit for sacrifice” or “not possible to sacrifice” could end up in sanctuaries actually highlights the importance of the sacrificial victims.70 Here some meat is burnt and portions of cooked meat are offered to the gods. Sokrates arrives in the house of Polemarchos who sits on a chair with a wreath on his head since he had just finished sacrificing (tethykos) in the court. which here could be translated as “to slaughter” or “to sacrifice”.71 The term used for the action is the verb katathyein. Odyssey 14. 101. without blemish – but also 69 See. 285-286. see also Antoine HERMARY et al.198) when the Roman army under Decimus Brutus sacrifices/slaughters (katathyein) the cattle and salts the meat. This is understandable. see the discussion by John SCHEID. “Sacrifice…”. such as the use of the verb thyein with little information as to whether the action was an animal sacrifice or a vegetarian one consisting of cakes and libations. or actually both at the same time. for example. 73 A comparable case is found in Appianos (Bellum civile 3. pp.270 Gunnel Ekroth It is mainly the thysia sacrifice which we encounter in the literary. not to contact the gods. if we imagine that animals could be ritually slaughtered in a less elaborate fashion. Les rôles du mágeiros….73 The ritual actions performed on occasions such as these may have consisted of libations. epigraphical and iconographical sources.2. though some kind of recognition of the divine was certainly made. the information is very sparse. but there is no mention of thigh bones or tails. 328 C. taking place at home and focusing on other actions than a thysia would. Recherches sur le vocabulaire…. Partage sacrificiel et commensalité dans la Rome antique” in S. 32-37. A sacrificial victim had to be of a particular kind – healthy. cutting the hair from the animal’s head. pp. 71 8. (eds.414-439. Guy BERTHIAUME. GEORGOUDI et al. pp. there are in fact references to this kind of practices as well. 69-76. Les rôles du mágeiros….77 When we translate thyein and thysia as “sacrifice” or when we speak of “sacrifice” to describe an ancient activity. 71-72 and 129-130. and there were elaborate procedures for choosing the individual victims which could even be branded so that there would be no misunderstanding at the actual sacrifice. 271-273. Recherches sur le vocabulaire….F. see also Antoine HERMARY et al. and useful misinformation from Servius” in C.. ISENBERG. see Stella GEORGOUDI.). They could be raised in specialized herds consisting only of sacrificial animals and fattened for this purpose. MCDONOUGH.75 It was apparently of interest to regulate this particular meat. sex. the Ara Maxima. since they fall outside the modern idea of what constitutes a “sacrifice”.76 This meat was not only of guaranteed good quality as coming from recently killed and healthy animals. see Eran LUPU. age etc. pp. Classical philology. pp. pp. “Greek animals…”. 293. 12-23. 74 For the fattening of sacrificial animals. For us. 70 (1975). Swedish. imbued with the divine. 76-85 and 333-341. The Greek terms thysia and thyein meant sacrifice. meat from the sacrificial victims seems to have been a highly coveted commodity. “The pricing of sacrificial meat: eidolothuton. Jean CASABONA. M. it was the most sacred of all meat. Greek sacred law…. which of course reflects our modern notions of the sacred and the profane. But there is also a risk of excluding certain kinds of animals. separated from the “secular” actions. . Rerum humanarum et divinarum commentationes in honorem Jerzy Linderski (Stuttgart. Réalités et représentations animalières à partir des livres XVI et XVII des Géoponiques (Paris/Athens 1990). KONRAD (ed. 95-103. sacrifice means a ritual action only. 89. p. For choosing the sacrificial victims. Guy BERTHIAUME. One explanation for our difficulties in grasping the Greek concept of the different degrees of sacredness of meat could be our modern understanding of what is to be considered as sacred or being within the ritual sphere.74 The focus on the sacrificial victim in the written and iconographical sources may be due both to this meat being of better quality and therefore preferred and to the significance of these animals in the cult and their particular connection with the divinity. which was sold separately at the market. meat and modes of killing. The importance of meat from sacrificial victims is evident from many epigraphically attested regulations of which parts were to go on the sacrificial table and which would be given to the priest. “The sale of sacrificial meat”. pp.). Des chevaux et des boeufs dans le monde grec. 62-70. 2004).Meat in ancient Greece : sacrificial. Furthermore. pp. “Sacrifice…”. “Espace sacrificiel…”. 75 See Brigitte LE GUEN-POLLET. 76 For the sale of sacrificial meat. vol. but also the consumption and handling of meat in a ritual context in a way that is not encompassed in the semantic meaning of sacrifice in English. sacred or secular ? 271 corresponding to the specific rules of the cult (species. for example. pp. pp. Christopher M. there is always a risk of narrowing down the actions and kinds of evidence that can be included here. German and French. p. 77 See Jean-Louis DURAND. Augusto augurio. . western-European society. In order to better grasp the ancient views of meat and meat-eating we have to use and integrate various kinds of sources and here the osteological evidence clearly will have an important role to fulfil. the Greek attitudes to meat were vastly more complex than anything we encounter in our contemporary. Still. we have to be aware that although all meat may have been sacred for the ancient Greeks.272 Gunnel Ekroth To conclude. every killing of an animal was not a sacrifice.
Report "Ekroth Meat in Ancient Greece Food and History 2007"