Date sent: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 20:04:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Bargains with saints
From: Bunbury <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Send reply to: [log in to unmask]
At 07:48 PM 1/14/00 -0500, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>This is interesting because of the Roman formula: do ut des (I give that you
>may give).
>I am separated from scholarly apparatus on this formula, so I can only point
>out that the Romans were pretty straight forward about business with the gods
>(to judge from appearances). (I am of course not suggesting that the ROMAN
>Catholic church simply picked up the thread left by ancient ROMAN religion
>sensibilities.)
>Dan
Nudge, nudge; wink, wink; say no more; know what I mean?
*****
The do ut des formula is characteristic of ancient Greek religion
too, but shouldn't be seen as a simple bargain: "mortals and gods
were in a relationship defined in terms of an exchange of favours.
Moderns ... criticise this as merely *do ut des*, 'I give that you may
give', but such criticism misses the point. Like other systems of
gifts and counter-gifts, the Greek ritual system assumed choice on
both sides. Gifts to the gods were not a way of buying the gods,
but of creating goodwill from which humans might hope to benefit in
the future." (S. Price *Religions of the Ancient Greeks* [Cambridge
1999] 38-9). Anyone with an urge to dig further into this should
look at R. Parker 'Pleasing thighs: reciprocity in Greek religion' in
C Gill, N. Postlethwaite, R. Seaford (eds.) *Reciprocity in ancient
Greece* (Oxford 1998) and S. Pulleyn *Prayer in Greek religion*
(Oxford 1997) ch.2, with OT comparisons.
Roger Brock (classicist and lurker)
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|