Animal Sacrifice

The animal-sacrifice, where it has lost its original meaning as an offered gift and has taken on a higher religious significance, has an inner relationship to the hero or god. The animal represents the god himself… The sacrifice of the animal means, therefore, the sacrifice of the animal nature, the instinctual libido.

Jung argues that animal sacrifice, at its deepest symbolic level, enacts the renunciation of instinctual libido, the slain animal being a figure for the god or hero whose death enables psychic and spiritual transformation.

Jung, Carl Gustav, Symbols of Transformation, 1952thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

all orders and forms of authority in human society are founded on institutionalized violence. This at least corresponds to the fundamental role played in biology by intraspecific aggression

Burkert’s foundational argument in Homo Necans posits that animal sacrifice, as sacralized killing, is the institutional form through which human societies channel aggression and constitute social order.

Burkert, Walter, Homo Necans: The Anthropology of Ancient Greek Sacrificial Ritual and Myth, 1972thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

In the earliest times the sacrificial animal had itself been sacred and its life untouchable; it might only be killed if all the members of the clan participated in the deed and shared their guilt in the presence of the god, so that the sacred substance could be yielded up and consumed by the clansmen

Freud, following Robertson Smith, argues that the primordial sacrificial animal was the totem — sacred and untouchable — whose communal slaughter and consumption constituted the original sacrificial meal and guilt-sharing of the clan.

Freud, Sigmund, Totem and Taboo, 1913thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

By expressing their ambivalence and remorse concerning even an animal killing, by humanizing the animal and showing a regard for its ‘will’, the sacrificers put away from themselves the worst possibility: that they will kill human beings… ‘Human sacrifice… is a possibility which, as a horrible threat, stands behind every sacrifice.’

Nussbaum, drawing on Burkert, argues that the ritual care and ambivalence surrounding animal sacrifice functions apotropaically — distancing participants from the bestiality of unpitying human slaughter that always lurks behind the ritual.

Martha C. Nussbaum, The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and Philosophy, 1986thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

together on the same level, men and women stand here about the altar, experience and bring death, honour the immortals, and in eating affirm life in its conditionality: it is the solidarity of mortals in the face of the immortals.

Burkert reads Greek animal sacrifice as a democratic, leveling ritual that constitutes communal solidarity through the shared experience of killing and eating, marking the boundary between mortal and immortal.

Burkert, Walter, Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical, 1977thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

The importance which is everywhere, without exception, ascribed to sacrifice lies in the fact that it offers satisfaction to the father for the outrage inflicted on him in the same act in which that deed is commemorated. As time went on, the animal lost its sacre

Freud contends that the universal importance of sacrifice is psychoanalytically grounded in its double function: commemorating and simultaneously atoning for the primal parricide, with the animal gradually losing its original sacred character as totem-substitute.

Freud, Sigmund, Totem and Taboo, 1913thesis

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

the bloody act must always have been attended with a double danger and a double fear: that the weapon might be turned against a fellow hunter, and that the death of the prey might signal an end with no future… What Karl Meuli called the ‘comedy of innocence’, the fiction of the willingness of the victim for sacrifice, is also to be seen in this context.

Burkert traces the prehistory of animal sacrifice to Paleolithic hunting anxiety, identifying Meuli’s ‘comedy of innocence’ — the ritual pretense of the victim’s willing consent — as a survival of hunting-era guilt-management.

Burkert, Walter, Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical, 1977supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

The animal too is sprinkled with water, causing it to jerk its head, which is interpreted as the animal nodding its assent.

Burkert describes the sacrificial ritual’s insistence on the victim’s apparent willing consent — a constitutive fiction of innocence that structures the entire Greek sacrificial ceremony.

Burkert, Walter, Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical, 1977supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

the quarry became a quasi-human adversary, experienced as human and treated accordingly… the warm running blood was the same. One could, perhaps, most clearly grasp the animal’s resemblance to man when it died. Thus, the quarry turned into a sacrificial victim.

Burkert argues that the perceived similarity between animal and human at the moment of death — shared flesh, blood, and physiognomy — is the anthropological origin of the sacrificial victim’s sacred status.

Burkert, Walter, Homo Necans: The Anthropology of Ancient Greek Sacrificial Ritual and Myth, 1972supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

the domestic animal is a possession which must be given away; thus, in addition… the reality of death and flowing blood is an unmitigated presence, perhaps all the more intense because the reaction is now inspired by a domestic animal, a familiar member of the household.

Burkert emphasizes that the transition from wild quarry to domestic animal in sacrificial practice intensifies the ritual’s emotional charge, as the familiar creature that is also a possession must be surrendered and killed.

Burkert, Walter, Homo Necans: The Anthropology of Ancient Greek Sacrificial Ritual and Myth, 1972supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

A sacrifice brings to our modern minds an altar as inevitably as it brings a god; both, in the sense we understand them, are late and superfluous. To sacrifice is, as the word implies, and as has been previously shown, to sanctify, to make sacred; to make sacred is to bring into contact with any source of force and fear, with any vehicle of mana.

Harrison argues that sacrifice in its most archaic form precedes both altar and personal god, its essence lying in the act of sanctification — making contact with impersonal sacred force — rather than in gift-giving to a deity.

Harrison, Jane Ellen, Themis: A Study of the Social Origins of Greek Religion, 1912supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

Robertson Smith, fired by the recent discoveries of totemism, saw what had necessarily escaped Dr Tylor, that the basis of primitive sacrifice was, not the giving a gift, but the eating of a tribal communal meal.

Harrison summarizes Robertson Smith’s decisive reorientation of sacrifice theory: the sacrificial act is fundamentally a communal meal of kinship solidarity, not a transactional gift to a deity.

Harrison, Jane Ellen, Themis: A Study of the Social Origins of Greek Religion, 1912supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

If a man shared a meal with his god he was expressing a conviction that they were of one substance; and he would never share a meal with one whom he regarded as a stranger. The sacrificial meal, then, was originally a feast of

Freud draws on Robertson Smith’s thesis that the shared sacrificial meal enacts identity of substance between worshippers and deity, constituting the social bond of kinship through common participation in the sacred animal’s body.

Freud, Sigmund, Totem and Taboo, 1913supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

the omdcyyva — the collective term for the organs — are quickly roasted in the fire from the altar and eaten at once. Thus the inner circle of active participants is brought together in a communal meal, transforming horror into pleasure.

Burkert documents the sequential structure of Greek animal sacrifice — from the killing through the distribution and immediate consumption of innards — showing how the ritual transforms the horror of killing into communal pleasure and solidarity.

Burkert, Walter, Homo Necans: The Anthropology of Ancient Greek Sacrificial Ritual and Myth, 1972supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

the entire sacrificial animal was expected to shudder, to tremble in every limb and emit quaking sounds. The sacrificial victim, standing for the sacrificer and the god who descended to the subterranean sphere and opened it to questions and answers, consented as it were with his whole body.

Kerényi describes the chthonic sacrificial ritual at Delphi in which the animal’s bodily trembling constitutes its consent, and the victim symbolically stands in for both the sacrificer and the descending god, linking animal sacrifice to oracular and underworld theology.

Kerényi, Carl, Dionysos: Archetypal Image of Indestructible Life, 1976supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

animal sacrifice: advance from, to human sacrifice, 495f; inner relationship to hero or god, 423

Jung’s index entry signals his systematic treatment of animal sacrifice as a stage in a developmental sequence leading toward human sacrifice, and as a ritual form bearing an intrinsic symbolic relationship to the hero or god.

Jung, Carl Gustav, Symbols of Transformation, 1952supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

the central importance of animal sacrifice to the polis, in important conceptions such as law and fate, and in Homer in the divine superstructure as well as in the descriptions of sacrifice, which are no more than a typical series of actions.

Seaford argues that animal sacrifice’s subjective continuity — its role as a repeated, normative collective action — underlies foundational Greek political and juridical conceptions including law, fate, and the divine order.

Seaford, Richard, Money and the Early Greek Mind: Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy, 2004supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

it is taken from the ritual expression in which the name of the sacrificial animal is in the ablative: sū facere ‘to sacrifice by means of an animal’ and not the animal itself. Facere + the ablative is certainly the ancient construction.

Benveniste’s linguistic analysis of the Latin suovetaurilia demonstrates that the grammatical structure of sacrificial nomenclature reflects an archaic Indo-European conception of sacrifice as a cultic act performed by means of, rather than upon, the animal.

Benveniste, Émile, Indo European Language and Society, 1973supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

After the suppression of the human sacrifices, inferior victims were substituted in some places; for instance, in the capital of Chinna Kimedy a goat took the place of the human victim. Others sacrifice a buffalo. They tie it to a wooden post in a sacred grove, dance wildly round it with brandished knives, then falling on the living animal, hack it to shreds

Campbell documents the historical substitution of animal for human sacrifice in South Asian ritual contexts, illustrating the widespread comparative pattern in which the animal victim replaces the human as the sacrificial surrogate.

Campbell, Joseph, Oriental Mythology: The Masks of God, Volume II, 1962supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

Even in an individual offering of an animal to deity, the Greek surrenders very little – insubstantial smoke to the gods, a certain small part of the animal to the priest. A whole animal is offered only in the (occasional) holocaust, or in merely symbolic form in the animal figurines offered in the temples.

Seaford argues that the Greek sacrificial economy is structured around symbolic rather than actual surrender — the gods receive minimal, immaterial portions while the community retains and consumes the bulk, with the fully dedicated holocaust being exceptional.

Seaford, Richard, Money and the Early Greek Mind: Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy, 2004supporting

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

‘Sacrifice is the oldest form of religious action.’ But much of the oldest evidence remains controversial. Meuli relied on the ‘burial of bears’ of Neanderthal times… they claimed that they had found bears’ skulls and bones, especially thigh-bones, carefully set up in caves, and that these corresponded to the ‘skull- and long bone sacrifice’ observed among Siberian hunters.

Burkert reviews and critically assesses Karl Meuli’s controversial paleolithic evidence — Neanderthal bear-bone deposits — for the prehistory of animal sacrifice, situating the skull-and-long-bone ritual complex within the deepest temporal horizon of the practice.

Burkert, Walter, Homo Necans: The Anthropology of Ancient Greek Sacrificial Ritual and Myth, 1972aside

Dig deeper with Sebastian →

the transient act of sacrifice finds permanent embodiment not just in the remnants (horns, skin, bones) of the victim, but also in various kinds of artefact. There are utensils: sacrificial axes, roasting spits, and various kinds of vessel used for lib

Seaford traces how the material remains and dedicated utensils of animal sacrifice become the origin-point of Greek sanctuary dedication practice, showing the sacrifice’s transient act acquiring permanence through object-offerings.

Seaford, Richard, Money and the Early Greek Mind: Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy, 2004aside

Dig deeper with Sebastian →