燃烧的公牛,断骨头:在宗教背景下的祭祀仪式 Palace Period 美浓 Religion

燃烧的公牛,断骨头:在宗教背景下的祭祀仪式 Palace Period 美浓 Religion

By 罗伯特·詹姆斯·克罗马蒂( 酒吧 1792)。 Pp。 157,无花果77,地图2。考古出版社,牛津,2008年。£32. ISBN 978-1-4073-0208-5(纸)。


This book addresses the subject of 美浓 sacrifice primarily from the perspective of material data, faunal remains, and ash deposits, even as it also tackles theoretical issues. The title gives away the author’的主要方法。关键字是“context,”就是说,挖掘数据优先于肖像。


本书最有用的部分是第二章,其中介绍了已编译的数据。作者为动物遗迹的物质证据提供了表格指南,并警告不要过度概括和推测。在我们的处置表上指出哪些动物被牺牲,骨头被发现在哪里以及它们是否被燃烧确实是一项进步。将这些结果与公元前14世纪的Ugaritic片剂中证明的处死动物的书面清单进行比较可能对将来的研究有用。后者现已由Pardee(乌加里特的仪式和崇拜。古代世界的著作10 [Atlanta 2002]。这样的比较将为跨文化习惯提供一个很好的视角,并显示书面清单如何与遗留物进行比较。

Having said this, the results from the tables are not as unexpected as 上 e might have hoped. We already knew from the Hagia Triada sarcophagus that goats and bovines were the animals primarily slaughtered and offered to the gods, and although the author doubts that the tasseled and bleeding bovine 上 the sarcophagus is actually sacrificed, 上 e cannot take this suggestion seriously. There is more evidence: some 美浓 seals show pigs and rams lying 上 tables ( 不育系 1号 80; 不育系 2月8日482; 不育系 6号422)。许多最近出版的印章都暗示了牺牲,表明人们领导着多种动物,尤其是公牛和公羊( 不育系 6号329,330)。

关于牺牲的理论方面,这项工作的弱点是重大的。首先,没有讨论什么是“sacrifice.” Is it any offering to the gods, or just a bloody 上 e? Can 美浓 sacrifice actually be divided into bloody and bloodless? In other words, did the 美浓s themselves make such a distinction? Only the imagery can answer such questions.

作者声称动物牺牲,狂喜崇拜和顿悟之间没有明显的联系。但是,为什么首先要建立连接?应该介绍导致作者解决这个问题的思想史,尤其是亚瑟·埃文斯爵士和弗里德里希·马茨的讨论。 Cromarty将摇头丸定义为情绪高涨的状态,并指出“大多数社会都认可了意识形态改变状态的有限和限制形式”(100)。他基于奥利弗·狄金森(Oliver Dickinson)的观点,认为摇头丸是召唤旨在产生顿悟的仪式的结果。然后他得出的结论是,克里特岛的牺牲和顿悟之间没有明显的联系(100–2)。靠近马茨’的论文,应该得到承认。动物牺牲,顿悟和邪教图像之间的关系仍然模糊。

One general claim is that there was disunity in cult practice in 美浓 Crete (61). Treatment of feasting has been rather superficial until recent years; local variations have not been sufficiently highlighted (92). The author states that previous studies are Knosso-centric (80). There is a problem here. Were previous studies both Knosso-centric and 美浓-centric? Knosso-centric ideally ought to denote a perspective biased by the finds of Knossos, whereas 美浓-centric ought to denote a pan-Cretan perspective (A. Evans, 米诺斯宫 [London 1921] 13 n. 1). The definition of terms may need further exploration. As far as the unity of 美浓 culture, the author of this book is not alone in contesting it. The evidence, though, points to such unity. There is the use of Linear A throughout Crete and the Aegean in the second millennium. There is the occurrence of common symbols, such as the double axe, the rosette, the so-called sacral horns, the mason’标记,百合,纸莎草纸,棕榈树,敬拜猴子。使用均匀的密封施用。但是,尽管作者对接受的术语表示怀疑,但对细节并不表示怀疑。他将Thisbe戒指包括在肖像数据的专论中,却没有意识到这是公认的伪造(74、137 [图58])。

本书中没有肖像学。但是,如果正确使用了影像学并对其进行了深入的研究,它将补充对骨骼的研究,并有助于建立影像学的基本事实。“Minoan” ritual. This is not to deny that Cromarty makes a contribution. Had he confined his conclusions modestly to the scientific section of his work without embarking 上 general thoughts 上 theory of sacrifice, this would have been a far more satisfactory book. As it stands, the reader is left with a feeling that 上 ly particulars can be learned about 美浓 sacrifice and that each site must be studied by and for itself. But if we follow this, we are doomed as a discipline. If the bits of the ever-increasing material evidence are not ordered into hypotheses against which 上 e may argue, there will be no progress. We shall all be deconstructing 上 e another, and our field will dissolve into an infinite number of little particles with no detectable constellations.

Nanno Marinatos

的书评 燃烧的公牛,断骨头:在宗教背景下的祭祀仪式 Palace Period 美浓 Religion,由Robert James Cromarty撰写

评论者 Nanno Marinatos

美国考古学杂志 卷114号第一(2010年1月)

在线发布于 www.ajaonline.org/book-review/657

DOI: 10.3764 / ajaonline114.1.Marinatos



  • 网页地址和电子邮件地址自动变为链接。
  • 行和段被自动切分。