SACRED RITES AND PRACTICES
+General Inferences.+--That the old places of cult had their duly
ordained officials may be taken for granted; even the smallest of them,
like those of to-day, must have had appointed attendants. The Amarna
letters mention the wealthy temple of Byblos with the handmaidens of
the goddess of the city, and in Merneptah's reign we hear of a man of
Gaza who is described as a servant of Baal. We may be sure, also, that
the rites and festivals were similar to those usually prevalent among
agricultural peoples. The nature-worship of the age can be realised
from a survey of the old cults of Western Asia, and from the
denunciations of the Old Testament, which prove the persistence of
older licentious rites. Popular religion often continues to tolerate
practices which social life condemns, and the fertility of crops,
cattle, and of man himself, was co-ordinated {34} by an uncontrollable
use of analogy in which the example was set by the 'sacred' men and
women of the sanctuaries (_kādesh_; Deut. xxiii. 17, R.V. marg.).
Sympathetic magic--the imitation of the cause to produce a desired
effect--underlay a variety of rites among a people whose life depended
upon the gifts of the soil, whose religion was a way of life. Here,
however, we are restricted chiefly to some miscellaneous evidence which
the excavations suggest.
+The Disposal of the Dead.+--Incineration or cremation had been
originally practised by a people physically distinct from that among
whom inhumation prevailed. The latter innovation has been ascribed to
the invading Semites. Subsequently, in Carthage, cremation is found to
re-enter, presumably through foreign influence; but the two practices
co-exist, even in the same family, and it is probable that there, at
all events, cremation was only followed in special circumstances. A
large burial-cave at Gezer with a thick layer of burnt ash proves the
lengthy duration of the earlier custom. The same cave was afterwards
utilised by those who inhumed their dead, and thenceforth there is
little evolution in the history of early Palestinian burial. No
particular {35} orientation predominates; the dead are placed upon a
layer of stones, or within cists, or in pits in the floor of the
caverns. Both the contracted or squatting and the outstretched
attitude occur. From the story of Sinuhe (p. 9), it would seem that
burial in a sheep-skin was also customary. The needs of the dead are
supplied by vessels of food, which occasionally show traces of burning;
drink was more important, and the large jars sometimes contain small
cups for the convenience of the thirsty soul. In the case of a jug
with two mammillary projections one is reminded of a type usually
associated at Carthage with the burial of infants. A variety of
miscellaneous objects provided for other needs: weapons, jewels,
ostrich eggs, seals, scarabs, amulets, small figures in human or animal
form, etc. Especially characteristic of the later tombs are the
abundant deposits of lamps.
The abode of the dead being one of the centres of the religion of the
living, the tomb always possesses sanctity. The internal arrangements,
with platforms or hewn benches, will often suggest some burial-ritual.
The cup-marks, which frequently appear near or even in the tomb itself,
like those still to be seen upon Palestinian dolmens, could serve for
sacrifices or libations, {36} or to collect the refreshing rain for the
soul of the deceased. Or, again, later usage will suggest that they
were planted with flowers which, like the 'Gardens of Adonis,'
symbolised the mysteries of death and revival. Often, the dead are
buried beneath the streets (if the narrow windings deserve that name),
or within the houses, under circumstances which preclude the
foundation-sacrifices to be noticed presently. This feature is
scarcely accidental; it is well known elsewhere, and was probably
intended to keep the spirit of the dead near its former abode, over
which it could continue to exercise a benevolent influence.
+Jar Burial.+--It is sometimes difficult to distinguish between an
ordinary burial and some sacrificial ceremony. The burial of new-born
or very young infants in jars, in or near some sacred locality (p. 16
_sq._), points very strongly to the sacrifice of the first-born to
which the Old Testament bears witness (Micah vi. 7). But where the
circumstances make this view less probable, the special treatment of
those who died in early infancy needs consideration. In inhumation and
the return of the dead to the ground we are in the midst of ideas
associated {37} with 'mother-earth,' the begetter of all things. The
burial in a contracted or squatting position might naturally represent
the usual crouched posture of the individual as he sat in life-time
among his fellows; it might also point to a belief in the re-birth of
the soul of the dead. The jar-burials, where the infant is inserted
head downwards, are more suggestive of the latter, and evidence from
Africa and Asia shows that provision is sometimes made for the re-birth
of still-born or very young babes on the conviction that at some future
occasion they will enter again into a mother's womb. The numerous
emblems of nature-worship and the mother-goddess, especially at Gezer,
raise the presumption that the deities of the place were powers of
fertility and generation; and, just as the shrines of saints to-day are
visited by would-be mothers who hope for offspring, it is not
improbable that in olden times those who had been prematurely cut off
from the living were interred in sacred sites venerated by the women.
This view, which has been proposed by Dr. J. G. Frazer, will not apply
of course to those jar-burials where human-sacrifice is clearly
recognisable.[1]
[1] _Adonis, Attis, Osiris_, pp. 77 _sq._, 82 _sq._.
{38}
+Human Sacrifice.+--A gruesome discovery was made in a cistern at Gezer
where, together with a number of adult skeletons, lay the upper half of
a young girl about sixteen years of age. Near the mouth were the
decapitated heads of two girls. In another case at Gezer (described as
a 'foundation deposit') the upper half of the skeleton of a youth had
been placed with two adults. Perhaps we should here include the cases
where only a few bones of the deceased were preserved, _e.g._ in one
tomb the skull and certain other bones were missing. Vessels, also,
were found containing only one or two human bones: the patella of an
adult, the calvaria of a skull; but in the majority of instances they
belonged to infants. Partial burial of this character has been
explained on the theory of cannibalism; this practice, often based on
the idea of absorbing the attributes of the deceased, has left
scattered traces among the Semites. But the dismemberment of the dead
(known at Susa, Egypt, and common to many savage races) admits of other
explanations, whether, for example, we observe the use of bones as
amulets (p. 51 _sq._), or recall the story of the severed Osiris. In
the latter, however, it may be suspected that a sacrifice for magical
purposes underlies an aetiological {39} legend.[2] The bank of skulls
south of the monoliths of Gezer (p. 16) may perhaps recall the mound
(or pillar?) of heads which certain Assyrian kings erected in front of
the cities they conquered (_e.g._ Ashur-nasir-pal I.). Such a deed,
like their holocaust of children after a victory, was no unmeaning
ferocity; religion entered profoundly into ancient life, and every war
was a 'holy war.' The horrid rites in honour of the gods who fought
for their followers are to be traced in Egypt, Assyria, and the Old
Testament, and even as late as 307 B.C. the Carthaginians after their
defeat of Agathocles slew the choicest prisoners 'before the altar in
front of the holy tent.'
[2] J. G. Frazer, Adonis, etc., pp. 273 _sq._, 321, and especially 331
_sqq._ Here one may perhaps refer to the tradition that the prophet
Isaiah was sawn in half, hidden as he was in a tree (comp. also Ep.
Hebrews, xi. 37).
The widespread custom of _Foundation Sacrifice_ survives in Palestine
when popular opinion requires that blood shall be shed at the
inauguration of every important building, at the breaking-up of
unoccupied land, or at the opening of a new well. Thus, a sheep was
sacrificed at the building of a jetty for the landing of the German
Emperor at Haifa in 1898. The rite is a propitiation to the _numen_ of
the place.
{40} Mohammed in his day tried to prohibit such sacrifices to the
_jinn_, but the inveterate sentiment is summed up in the words of a
modern native: 'every house must have its death, either man, woman,
child, or animal.' The animal-victim is recognised as a substitute,
and vulgar superstition still associates with the foundation of
buildings some vague danger to human life--if not its loss. Traditions
of human sacrifice are recorded by mediæval and older writers, and
excavation has disclosed authentic examples. At Gezer the skeleton of
an adult female had been placed under the corner of a house, and the
bones of infants were often found in or under the walls of houses down
to the later Israelite period. At Megiddo, a young girl of about
fifteen was laid across a foundation-stone, and a victim at the foot of
a tower in Taanach was a child scarcely in its teens. A jar with the
remains of a new-born infant rested upon a platform in the Gezer
crematorium, and the evidence allowed the inference that it was a
dedicatory sacrifice when the cave was taken over and used for
inhumation. Infants buried in jars were found, together with bowls and
lamps, under the foundations in Gezer as late as the latter part of the
Israelite monarchy, although a modification had already been {41}
introduced in the simple deposits of lamps and bowls, usually at the
corners of houses or chambers or under the jambs of doors. If the
bowls represent the sacrificial offerings, the significance of the
lamps is uncertain. The victim in the rite had not been burned, but
probably buried alive, and it may be conjectured that the
identification of life and light (familiar from the Old Testament)
underlies the symbolical lamp. The modern Palestinian custom of
hanging lights in shrines, etc., in cases of sickness possibly involves
the same association of ideas. On the other hand, the lamps found in
tombs naturally recall the widespread custom of lighting the soul on
its dark journey, or of kindling a lamp in the home to enable it to
retrace its steps on the anniversary. These purely burial lamps are
very well known (_e.g._ in Carthage), and they survive in Palestine to
the Christian age, when they are inscribed with such distinctive
mottoes as 'Christ is my light,' or 'the light of Christ shines for
all.'
+The Importance of Sacrifice+ makes itself felt at every sacred site
from the enormous quantities of burnt ash before the caves of Serabit
to the similar accumulations upon the summit of Mount Hermon. The
worshipper believes that the rite {42} brings him into contact with the
powers who are to be nourished, invoked, or recompensed. Its
prevalence vividly indicates man's dependence upon them throughout the
seasons of the year and on the great occasions of life: birth,
circumcision (already practised in our period), marriage and death.
Underlying the sacrifice is the profound significance of blood. It is
the seat of existence; it has potent virtues whether for protection,
expiation, or purification; and the utmost care is taken to dispose of
it according to established usage. The fat, too, has no less its
living qualities, and since the oldest unguents were animal
fats--modern usage is often content with butter--it is probable that
anointing originally had a deeper meaning than would at first appear.
Wanton bloodshed called for vengeance, and when a Babylonian king
demanded that Ikhnaton should slay the Canaanites who had killed his
merchants, and thus 'bring back their blood' and prevent retaliation,
the inveterate blood-revenge of primitive social life finds an early
illustration. But as a sacrifice, the slaughter of human victims,
though perhaps not regular, was at least not exceptional, and the
frightful bloodshed which the Old Testament attests emphasises the
difficulties which confronted those teachers {43} of Israel who would
disassociate their national God from an inveterate practice (Ezek. xvi.
20 _sq._, xx. 31).
For a striking illustration of the diffusion and persistence of human
sacrifice we may refer to Carthage where the distress caused by
Agathocles in 310 B.C. was attributed to the wrath of the god to whom
the rich had been offering purchased children instead of their own.
But there is a general tendency in religion to soften crude rites, save
when a particularly efficacious offering is felt necessary in the midst
of some grave crisis, and of the changes in that background of cult
which has survived throughout the history of Palestine, the
substitution of the animal for the human victim is the most
significant. Yet, as we have seen, the idea of human sacrifice has not
entirely disappeared (p. 40). The animal is still recognised as a
'ransom,' and in the present rite of that name loss of human life is
averted by the sacrifice of some animal, and it is explained that the
sacrifice will combat and overcome the cause of the impending danger.
It would be only logical, therefore, to proceed on the assumption that
the greater the danger the more powerful and efficacious must be the
sacrifice. Current beliefs thus {44} afford suggestive hints for
earlier usage, and when we learn that to-day a natural death finds
consolation in the thought that it may have been the ransom for
another, we meet with an idea that could be put into practice: it is no
great step to the ceremonies (observed in Africa) which give effect to
the conviction that a man's life may be prolonged or his old age
recuperated by the actual sacrifice of another human being. It is
essentially the same idea when Egyptian kings, like Amenhotep II. and
Ramses II. slew the prisoners of war that they themselves or their name
'might live for ever.' (On the _name_, see below, p. 60.)
Sacrificial rites were never irrational, however difficult it may be to
perceive their object, and from a survey of comparative custom one can
sometimes picture the scenes by which they were accompanied. It is
only by such means that one can conjecturally explain the discovery
near the temple-area at Gezer of animal bones, sliced, hacked, and
broken into fragments, with no signs of having been cooked. One is
tempted to refer to a rite practised by the Arabs of the Sinaitic
desert towards the close of the fourth century A.D. The old ascete,
Nilus, describes a solemn procession of chanting worshippers {45} who
move around an altar of rude stones upon which is bound a camel. The
beast is stabbed, and the leader drinks of the gushing blood. At once
the assembly hack the victim to pieces, devouring it raw until the
whole is consumed--the entire ceremony begins with the rise of the
morning star (in whose honour it was performed) and ends with the
rising sun. Was some rite of this kind practised in Palestine? It
must be a matter for conjecture; the least that can be said is that the
scene is not too barbaric for our land and period.
+Broken Offerings,+ _e.g._ figurines, models, and other articles, when
found deposited in tombs, have been explained in the light of
comparative custom as destroyed or 'killed' to the end that their
'soul' may accompany that of the deceased. But other ideas are
evidently involved when the area of the sanctuary at Serabit proved to
be covered with a mass of pottery, plaques, bracelets, wands, sistra,
etc., so fragmentary that no single specimen could be pieced together.
At Gezer, also, although the plaques of the goddess were fairly tough,
all had been broken, and apparently with intention. We may compare the
modern custom of breaking pottery in fulfilment of a {46} vow, an
interesting illustration of which was furnished by the late Professor
Curtiss from Bludan on the road from Zebedany to Damascus. At a spot,
familiarly known as the 'mother of pieces,' is a rock-platform with
cave, shrine, sacred grove and hereditary ministers. Hither come the
women to break a jar when they have gained their one wish, and it is
singular to observe that the traditions which are attached to the
custom include the belief that a girl, the patroness of the shrine,
lies buried there. The likeness to the suggested rites at Gezer will
be noticed (p. 37). But the stories do not elucidate the peculiar
treatment of the offerings, and the usage finds its most probable
explanation in the persuasion that things once dedicated or put to a
sacred use are 'holy,' and cannot be used for ordinary purposes. We
touch upon a fundamental institution embodying a series of apparently
paradoxical ideas--the universal 'tabu.'
+'Holy' and 'Unclean.'+--The terms Holy or Sacred (comp. the Latin
_sacer_) are not to be understood in the ethical or moral sense. A
holy thing is one which has been set aside, dedicated, or restricted;
it is charged with supernatural influence which is contagious;
everything {47} that comes in contact with it also becomes holy. In
some cases it is provided that this inconvenient sanctity may be
purged; in others, the thing has to be destroyed. When the Talmud says
that a Canonical Book of the Old Testament 'defiles' the hand, it means
that the very sanctity of the book demands that the hand should be
ceremonially purified or cleansed before touching anything else. 'Holy
and unclean things,' to quote Robertson Smith, 'have this in common,
that in both cases certain restrictions lie on men's use of and contact
with them, and that the breach of these restrictions involves
supernatural dangers. The difference between the two appears, not in
their relation to man's ordinary life, but in their relation to the
gods. Holy things are not free to man, because they pertain to the
gods; uncleanness is shunned, according to the view taken in the higher
Semitic religions, because it is hateful to the god, and therefore not
to be tolerated.'
+Sacred Animals,+ in the light of the above, are those associated with
cults which might be regarded as illegitimate. An example is afforded
by the pig which enters into the rites and myths of Adonis, Attis,
Ninib, and Osiris. In a cavern south of the monoliths of Gezer a
number of {48} pig-bones lay underneath a shaft which led to the
cup-marked surface above (p. 16); the circumstances recall the
Thesmophoria, the caves and vaults in the Greek area connected with
Demeter and Proserpine, and the use of the pig in mystic rites of
chthonic and agricultural deities. In Palestine and Syria the animal
was used in certain exceptional sacrifices which were recognised as
idolatrous (Isaiah lxv. 4; lxvi. 17), and it was an open question
whether it was really polluted or holy. If, as the excavations
suggest, the sacrifice of the swine dates from the earliest inhabitants
of Gezer, with whom it was also a domestic animal, it is interesting to
observe the persistence of its character as a proper sacrificial animal
from pre-Semitic times by the side of the apparently contradictory
belief that it was also unclean.
The camel bones at Tell es-Sāfy, also, are of interest since
Robertson Smith has shown that the animal (which became 'unclean' to
the Israelites), though used by the Arabs for food and sacrifice, was
associated with ideas of sanctity, and its flesh was forbidden to
converts to Christianity. The model of a bronze cobra found in a
temple-enclosure (p. 15) might be conjecturally explained, but it will
suffice to remember that {49} serpents were and still are connected
with spirits both benevolent and malevolent. The recurrence of models
of the animal-world, the numerous representations upon seals of deer,
gazelles, etc. (animals connected with Astarte), or the predilection
for the lion upon objects discovered at Megiddo need not have any
specific meaning for the religious ideas. On the other hand, the
animal-like attributes which appear upon some plaques of the
mother-goddess are scarcely meaningless. There is no ground for the
assumption that Palestine was without the animal-deities and the
deities with special sacred animals, which have left their traces in
the surrounding lands, and it would be misleading to suppose that the
myths and legends which have grown up around these features account for
their origin. The conviction that man was made in the likeness of the
gods (who are therefore anthropomorphic) implies certain conceptions of
their nature, the development of which belongs to the history of
religion, and in turning next to the spirit-world of Ancient Palestine
it is necessary that we should be prepared to appreciate a mental
outlook profoundly different from our own.
{50}