This is a tangential, maybe fanciful, comment on the arguments raised in Llewelyn Morgan's 'Patterns of Redemption in V's Georgics' - Cambridge 1999. The sacrifices of civil war are seen as redemptive and constructive, particularly if they are presided over by the right historical figure - Augustus as Great Leader and (in effect) High Priest. Morgan pays great attention to the Katabasis of Aristaeus and revives some of the arguments of The Golden Bough, itself a study of the constructive possibilities of human sacrifice.
I wanted to refer to one feature of the sacrifices surrounding the Katabasis of Aeneas, that is the sometimes careful-seeming enumeration of sacrificial victims. The appropriate number of sacrifices is set on Minoan authority as 7 + 7, male and female. Minos demanded that of the Athenians and the Sibyl demands it of Aeneas (substituting animal victims). Another principle, 1 and 1 only for many, has appeared in Neptune's speech in Book V. Neptune's full prescription seems at first to be satisfied when Palinurus falls overboard, but on closer inspection this is not so, since Palinurus is not 'lost in the vortex, and sought for': he falls into a calm sea and dies on land. Misenus, having seemed safely to reach land, then slips, is sucked down and is anxiously searched for. Yet another number, 6, appears in Book VI 243, where the sacrifice is of 4 oxen, one lamb and one heifer. Is the implicit request to the gods to accept 6 for 7 a plea for divine mercy, or an offer by Aeneas himself to be the 7th victim if need be? In his Katabasis Aeneas encounters two groups of victims, but the right numbers, 7 + 7, seem to be missed both times. There are 8 Noble Women who died for love. The 7th is Caenis, whose return to her true form is a sign of hope, but the 8th is the angry and vengeful Dido, suggesting that Aeneas/Augustus himself is responsible for sacrifice that has become excessive. Then come the 9 warriors who died for Troy - the number creeps up. (If you add the Greek warriors of the older generation, there are 12). When we compare this with the other mismatched number, 1 for many becoming more than the promised 1, our confidence even in divine control of sacrifice is shaken. Even if the gods are apparently explicit, there is always a hidden meaning. Is this numerical slippage V's way of pointing out that when you start the process of human sacrifice you cannot stop it where you expect - it's always worse than you think that it will be. At this rate, there is always something false about the idea of leading and controlling the sacrifice for the common good and the redemption of the state. This idea would point to a less positive view of Augustus' high priestly role than Morgan indicates. - Martin ----------------------------------------------------------------------- To leave the Mantovano mailing list at any time, do NOT hit reply. Instead, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message "unsubscribe mantovano" in the body (omitting the quotation marks). You can also unsubscribe at http://virgil.org/mantovano/mantovano.htm#unsub
