Did the Greeks sacrifice all the animals they ate? Gunnel Ekroth (\u201cMeat in ancient Greece\u201d) says No, though he also says that most of the meat they ate was \u201csacred,\u201d even if not \u201csacrificial.\u201d The distinction of the two is crucial.<\/p>\n
Drawing mainly from osteological evidence to supplement that from written sources and iconography, he argues that the Greek diet was much more varied than we might have thought, and we can tell from the bone evidence that many of the animals were consumed in temple areas: \u201cPresent
\nin the osteological evidence are also dogs, horses, donkeys, mules, cats,
\nchicken, geese, pigeons, red deer, fallow deer, roe deer, wild boars, foxes,
\nbears, wolves, weasels, turtles, snakes, crocodiles, gazelles, camels,
\nvultures and lions.\u201d These exotic animals are rare: \u201cBones from species other than cattle, sheep, goats andpigs only represent a small part of the osteological material recovered in any
\nsanctuary.\u201d But they are there, and Ekroth thinks they were consumed \u2013 including lions, perhaps bears, foxes, and weasels too (256-8).<\/p>\n
Though consumed in sacred areas, the bones suggest that they were not burned on the altar. There are knife marks that indicate butchering, but not often burns or calcification. He suggests that many animals would have been butchered at home and their meat brought to the sanctuary to supplement the meat from the sacrificed animals. None of these animals would be offered to the gods, but the meal would still be a sacred meal: \u201cThe osteological material can Another key feature of his argument is the observation that boiling was the most common method of preparing meat. Boiling is the great equalizer of meat; in the cauldron, dog, croc, roe, and button all blend together. This was a practical benefit. Those who brought donkey for the sacred feast throw it into a pot, and may get an upgrade, but either way they don\u2019t have to eat straight donkey. The pot also blurs the distinctions between \u201csacred\u201d and \u201cprofane.\u201d All that\u2019s boiled in the pot becomes equally sacred, whatever its origin and whatever kind of animal it came from.<\/p>\n (Gunnel Ekroth, \u201cMeat in ancient Greece: sacrifice, sacred or secular?\u201d Food & History<\/em> 5:1 [2007] 249-72.)<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Did the Greeks sacrifice all the animals they ate? Gunnel Ekroth (\u201cMeat in ancient Greece\u201d) says No, though he also says that most of the meat they ate was \u201csacred,\u201d even if not \u201csacrificial.\u201d The distinction of the two is crucial. Drawing mainly from osteological evidence to supplement that from written sources and iconography, he […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3021,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[591,529,373],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-15837","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-ancient-diet","category-greek-religion","category-sacrifice"],"yoast_head":"\n
\nbe taken to demonstrate that all bones recovered in a sanctuary cannot
\nautomatically be taken to represent sacrificial victims in the traditional
\nsense and that some of the animals eaten may have been slaughtered in
\nthe sanctuary without having parts cut out and burnt on the altar. The
\nbone evidence here constitutes an argument for different kinds of rituals
\nat the killing of an animal; the elaborate, full-scale thysia, as well as more
\nscaled-down rituals, which were both simpler and quicker and which
\nmay have been used at the additional killings in the sanctuary as well as
\nin the domestic context or the market. To these animals slaughtered in
\nthe sanctuaries could be added meat brought there from animals killed\u00a0at home, at hunts or in the market consisting of game, dogs, horses and
\nperhaps even kenebreia<\/em>, whole or in parts\u201d (268-9). Dogs and horses could provide sacred meat; there not sacrificial.<\/p>\n