Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T12:31:19.918Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Delphic Oracle: Belief and Behaviour in Ancient Greece—and Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 August 2011

C. R. Whittaker
C. R. Whittaker
Affiliation:
University College of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, Salisbury, S. Rhodesia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Until comparatively recently writers on religion were absorbed by questions concerning the origins of religious beliefs and practices. They endowed primitive man with a kind of rational logicality in his belief, or, like Frazer, they saw his religious practices as simply the application of erroneous reasoning. The modern trend is to try to view the religious or cultural institution as an essential part of society, existing because of the needs of that society. This is the theme, for instance, of Malinowski when he says that “religion is not born out of speculation or reflection, still less out of illusion or misapprehension, but rather out of the real tragedies of human life, out of the conflict between human plans and realities.”

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 58 , Issue 1 , January 1965 , pp. 21 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1965

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Radcliffe-Brown, A. R., Taboo (1939), pp. 13–14Google Scholar.

2 Malinowski, B., “Culture”, Encyclopaedia of the Soc. Sciences, IV (1931), 641Google Scholar, but recorded in Lessa, W. A. and Vogt, E. Z., Reader in Comparative Religion (1958)Google Scholar, which I have found most useful as a convenient means of reference throughout this paper.

3 Nilsson, M. P., Cults, Myths, Oracles and Politics in Ancient Greece (1951).Google Scholar

4 Parke, H. W. and Wormell, D. E. W., The Delphic Oracle (1956), I, 36Google Scholar (hereafter referred to as DO).

5 DO, I, 17.

6 Diod. Sic., 16.20; Lucan, Phar., 5.165–97.

7 See Bouchard, M., L'Histoire des Oracles de Fontenelle (1947), pp. 53–55.Google Scholar

8 Amandry, P., La Mantique Apollinienne à Delphes (1950), p. 19.Google Scholar

9 Strabo, 9.3.5; Oppé, A. P., “The chasm at Delphi,” JHS 24 (1904), 214–40;Google Scholar DO, I, 19ff.; Holland, L. B., “The mantic mechanism at Delphi,” AJA 37 (1933), 201–04: but Holland's alternative of artificial gases is equally unacceptable.Google Scholar

10 E.g., DO, I, 22: “They (the Romans) were a nation quite unfamiliar with ecstatic prophecy.”

11 P. Amandry, op. cit., pp. 57–65.

12 Elderkin, G. W., “The natural and the artificial grotto,” Hesperia 10 (1941), 128–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13 Farnell, L. R., The Cults of the Greek States (1896–1909), III, 11–12.Google Scholar

14 As Rohde's thesis would suggest, but which is generally agreed now to be incorrect; e.g., Latte, K., “The coming of the Pythia”, HTR 32 (1940). 9–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

15 See below, p. 26; Amandry, op. cit., for the discussion of Plato, pp. 42–50.

16 Plato, Phaedrus, 244B.

17 Euripides, Ion, 258ff., 334ff., 413–16.

18 Euripides, Andromache, 1104–03.

19 Amandry, op. cit., pp. 118–25; DO I, p. 31; Parke, H. W., “A note on the Delphic priesthood”, CQ 34 (1940), 85–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20 Cf. Euripides, Ion, 413–16.

21 Euripides, Andromache, 1097–99:

ἀρχαί τε, πληροῦντές τε βουλευτήρια,

ίδίᾳ θ᾽ ὅσοι θεοῦ χρημάτων ἐϕέστασαν,

ϕρουρὰν ἐτάξαντ᾽ ἐν περιστύλοις δόμοις.

22 Euripides, Andromache, 1088–89 uses the phrase λαὸς οἰκήτωρ θεοῦ, which might mean the inhabitants of the precincts only, since it seems to be contrasted with the πόλις later on.

23 On the pythioi, Herodotus, 6.57; on the Athenian exegetes see especially Defradas, J., Thèmes de la Propagande Delphique (1954). pp. 205–07;Google Scholar DO I, p. 364, II, p. xiv.

24 Plato, Timaeus, 71E-72B, gives the full context.

25 If this seems too colourful a description, cf. the γροϕεῖς (sic) in an inscription of the first century B.C., SIG3 735; Amandry, op. cit., p. 121, n. 4; DO II, pp. xii–xiii.

26 DO II, p. xxiii.

26a E.g., Plutarch, 3.386C; see DO I, ch. 9, for fuller references.

27 DO II, p. xxvi.

28 IG II2, 204; Amandry, op. cit., p. 245, no. xxi.

29 Xenophon, Anabasis, 3.1.5–7.

30 DO I, p. 18.

31 Amandry, op. cit., ch. 6.

32 Amandry, op. cit., pp. 49ff.

33 DO I, p. 19, quotes one example of another type of answer.

34 DO I, pp. 130–39; the conjecture about Pythius is fully in accord with what we have seen to be a regular activity of the oracle.

35 Guthrie, W. K. C., The Greeks and their Gods (1950), pp. 254–55Google Scholar; “to study the Athens of the fifth and fourth centuries from the literary sources which alone are commonly taken into account is to skim the intellectual cream off its surface.”

36 Field, M. J., Search for Security (1960), pp. 55ff.Google Scholar

37 Field, op. cit., p. 60. I find her explanation of Moses' chemical intoxication (which she admits is unique) and the parallel given by R. Graves of a hallucinogenic mushroom at Delphi unconvincing in view of Field's own examples, pp. 80–81.

38 Field, op. cit, pp. 56, 57. Cf. Gelfand, M., Shona Religion (1962), p. 167.Google Scholar

39 Plutarch, 3.438a; Field, op. cit., p. 57. I see no evidence, on the other hand, to support Field's assumption that the Pythia habitually died after a short time as medium; p. 81.

40 Euripides, Ion, 92; DO I, p. 38; Field, op. cit., p. 56; Evans-Pritchard, E. E., Witchcraft among the Azande (1937), p. 162.Google Scholar

41 Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., pp. 169–70; DO II, p. xxv.

42 Gelfand, M., Medicine and Magic of the Mashona (1956), p. 126.Google Scholar

43 Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., pp. 170–71.

44 Mitchell, J. Clyde, “A note on the African conception of causality,” The Nyasaland Journal 5, no. 2 (July, 1952), 55.Google Scholar

45 Plutarch, 3.492 b; DO II, no. 316.

46 Garbett, G. Kingsley, “Religious aspects of political succession among the Valley Korekore,” from an unpublished report of the Central Africa Peoples Conference, Lusaka, 1963.Google Scholar

47 Field, op. cit., p. 58.

48 DO I, pp. 135–36.

49 Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., pp. 172–73, 175.

50 D. G. L., , “Mlimo,” Native Affairs Department Annual (hereafter referred to as NADA) 12 (1934), 84Google Scholar; Richards, J. B., “The Mlimo-Belief and Practice of the Kalanga,” NADA 20 (1942), 54.Google Scholar

51 Mitchell, op. cit., 56; Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., pp. 148–49.

52 Pausanias, 8.11.12; Thucydides, 8.1; Nilsson, op. cit., pp. 134–35.

53 Field, op. cit., pp. 57–58; Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., p. 175; cf. Gelfand, Shona Religion, p. 169.

54 Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., pp. 183–86; Herodotus, 1.47.1; DO II, no. 52.

55 Field, op. cit., p. 76.

56 Gelfand, Shona Religion, pp. 114–17; Medicine and Magic of the Mashona, p. 116; cf. Mitchell, op. cit., 55; Hunt, N. A., “Some notes on the witch-doctor's bones,” NADA 32 (1954), 16.Google Scholar

57 See Amandry, op. cit., p. 245, no. XVI.

58 Plato, Laws, 6.759D, 9.856 D–E, etc.

59 Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., pp. 261–62 and part III passim.

60 Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., p. 339.

61 Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., pp. 285, 309.

62 Devlin, C., “The Mashona and the British,” The Shield 186 (June, 1961), 7.Google Scholar

63 Ranger, T. O., “The organization of the Rebellions of 1896 and 1897,” pts. 1 and 2, History of Central Africa Peoples Conference, Lusaka, 1963.Google Scholar

64 The best account of the organization is given by Blake-Thompson, J. and Summers, R., “Mlimo and Mwari,” NADA 33 (1956), 53–58.Google Scholar

65 Field, op. cit., p. 103.

66 Blake-Thompson and Summers, op. cit., p. 55; G. Fortune, Transcript of a conversation with a priest at Zhilo (1963 unpublished); Parke, , “A note on the Delphic priesthood,” CQ 34 (1940), 86CrossRefGoogle Scholar; DO I, p. 35.

67 Kuper, H., Hughes, A. J. B., van Velsen, J., The Shona and Ndebele of S. Rhodesia (1955), p. 104.Google Scholar

68 One consultation of Mwari was reported as being followed by two days at the nearby Kraal, “where the affairs of the various manyusa are discussed,” Franklin, H., “Manyusa,” NADA 10 (1932), 80.Google Scholar

69 Ranger, op. cit., pt. 1, pp. 9, 11.

70 Stayt, H. A., The Bavenda (1921), p. 235.Google Scholar

71 Leslie, A., “The cave of Mlimo,” Rhodesian Agricultural Journal 17 (1920), 53–54.Google Scholar

72 Tshiwa's statement, 10 Jan. 1897, Central African Archives, LO5/4/1.

73 Franklin, op. cit., 79.

74 G. Fortune, op. cit.

75 Bullock, C., “The religion of the Mashona,” S. African J. of Science 24 (1927), 525.Google Scholar

76 Richards, J. B., “The Mlimo-Belief and Practice of the Kalanga,” NADA 19 (1942), 53.Google Scholar

77 Richards, op. cit., 54; the word “rock” (Ndebele ilitshe) is the usual word to refer to the shrine.

78 D. G. L., , “Mlimo,” NADA 11 (1934), 84.Google Scholar

79 Report on Lumbalevula, Sept. 28th, 1910, Central African Archives, A3/18/2.

80 Blake-Thompson and Summers, op. cit., 56; Franklin, op. cit., 81.

81 Gelfand, Shona Religion, pp. 146–48.

82 Franklin, op. cit., 79.

83 Cf. Malinowski, op. cit., pp. 638–39.

84 Durkheim, E., The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life (1915), pp. 419ff.Google Scholar

85 Herodotus, 1.60.

86 DO I, ch. 9.

87 Callaway, H., The Religious System of the Amazulu (1870), pp. 361–74.Google Scholar

88 N. G., , “Magango Hutari,” NADA 11 (1933), 30.Google Scholar

89 Pausanias, 10.18.1.

90 Stayt, op. cit., p. 236; cf. Bullock, op. cit., 124.

91 E.g., Lucian, Alex., 233.

92 Quoted by Guthrie, op. cit., p. 193.

93 Evans-Pritchard, op. cit., p. 338.

94 Plato, Apology, 21A; cf. DO I, pp. 402–03.

95 Since completing this paper, I have had brought to my notice by the editor of this journal the article by Nock, A. D., “Religious attitudes of the ancient Greeks,” Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc. 85 (1942), 472–82.Google Scholar Nock's approach to the Delphic problem was much the same as mine, though the material we use differs. Nock is chiefly concerned to show what kind of liberal thought could embrace scepticism, whereas I have set out to show that there was no incentive to agnosticism in classical Greek society.