DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.14696#0060
Zeus Kataibdtes
I3
Such a spot would thenceforward be sacred to the fiery sky con-
ceived as flashing downwards ; in other words, it would be sacred
to Zeus in the character of Keraunos^.
ii. Zeus Kataibates.
Hardly more advanced is the conception of Zeus that underlies
his title Kataibdtes, ' He who descends.' As far back as the close of
the seventeenth century this title began to arouse the interest of
scholars. E. Holthenus in a letter to J. G. Graevius declared that it
had nothing to do with thunderbolts, but denoted Jupiter who
' descended' from heaven to enquire into the truth of worldly
things, to punish sinners, and to benefit mankind. This hasty
conjecture provoked a reply from P. Burmannus the elder, who in
1 H. Usener in his Gottemamen Bonn 1896—one of the greatest modern works on
classical religion—argued that Indo-Europaean gods have passed through three stages of
development, viz. (1) as 'Momentary gods' (Augenbltcksgoiter), (2) as 'Departmental
gods' (Sondergbtter), (3) as 'Personal gods' (personltche Gotter). The first stage is repre-
sented by such individual and temporary divinities as the eipeaiuvri of the Athenian
harvester or the spear by which the Arcadian Parthenopaios used to swear: the second,
by such specific and limited divinities as those of the Roman indigitamcnta (Varro's
di cerli) or of ancient Lithuanian cult: the third, by the great personal deities of Greece
and Italy. Usener (ib. p. 286 ff. and more fully in the Khein. Mus. 1905 lx. 1—30
=Kleine Schriften Leipzig and Berlin 1913 iv. 471—497) contends that Keraunos was
first an Augenblicksgott, then a Sondergott, and lastly an attribute of a pers'&nlicher Gott,
i.e. that, to begin with, any and every lightning-flash was regarded as a divinity, that
next men advanced to the more general conception of one lightning-god, and that finally
he was absorbed into the larger personality of Zeus. The three stages in the evolution of
Keraunos would thus be marked by the terms nepawoi, Kepawds, and Zeus Kepavvtos.
With a general criticism of Usener's far-reaching theory I am not here concerned (for
its validity in the Greek area see L. R. Farnell 'The place of the Sonder- Gotter in Greek
Polytheism' in Anthropological Essays presented to Edivard Burnett Tylor Oxford 1907
pp. 81—100, and in the Italian area G. Wissowa ' Echte und falsche Sondergbtter in der
romischen Religion' in his Gesammelte Abhandlungen zar rbmischen Religions- undStadt-
geschichte Munchen 1904 pp. 304—326), but with its special applicability to the case of
Zeus Kepawos. Usener (Khein. A/us. 1905 lx. 16 — Kleine Schriften Leipzig and Berlin
1913 iv. 484) holds that the very expression Zeus Kepawos involves an inner contradiction,
since it unites the last with the first stage of his evolutionary sequence: Zeus had before
the days of Homer developed into apersonlicher Gott, the hurler of the lightning ; and, if
he is here combined with an Augenblicksgott, the particular lightning-flash, we can only
explain the combination by saying that side by side with the later development of a
personlicher Gott the earlier conception of an Augenblicksgott has persisted, clinging with
amazing tenacity to the actual custom of considering a spot struck by lightning as the
abode of a divinity. I confess, I find it easier to suppose—though the supposition is
expressly deprecated by Usener—that in this remarkable inscription not only Keraunos
but Zeus too is still in the zoistic stage. If even in the philosophy of a Herakleitos Zeus
as the fiery sky was equated with Keraunos, a fortiori might we look to find that com-
bination of primitive ideas in the memorial of an Arcadian rite. On this showing there is
no inner inconsistency in the title Zeus Kepauvos; and we are of course still free to accept
Usener's great theory as to the evolution of Indo-Europaean gods.
I3
Such a spot would thenceforward be sacred to the fiery sky con-
ceived as flashing downwards ; in other words, it would be sacred
to Zeus in the character of Keraunos^.
ii. Zeus Kataibates.
Hardly more advanced is the conception of Zeus that underlies
his title Kataibdtes, ' He who descends.' As far back as the close of
the seventeenth century this title began to arouse the interest of
scholars. E. Holthenus in a letter to J. G. Graevius declared that it
had nothing to do with thunderbolts, but denoted Jupiter who
' descended' from heaven to enquire into the truth of worldly
things, to punish sinners, and to benefit mankind. This hasty
conjecture provoked a reply from P. Burmannus the elder, who in
1 H. Usener in his Gottemamen Bonn 1896—one of the greatest modern works on
classical religion—argued that Indo-Europaean gods have passed through three stages of
development, viz. (1) as 'Momentary gods' (Augenbltcksgoiter), (2) as 'Departmental
gods' (Sondergbtter), (3) as 'Personal gods' (personltche Gotter). The first stage is repre-
sented by such individual and temporary divinities as the eipeaiuvri of the Athenian
harvester or the spear by which the Arcadian Parthenopaios used to swear: the second,
by such specific and limited divinities as those of the Roman indigitamcnta (Varro's
di cerli) or of ancient Lithuanian cult: the third, by the great personal deities of Greece
and Italy. Usener (ib. p. 286 ff. and more fully in the Khein. Mus. 1905 lx. 1—30
=Kleine Schriften Leipzig and Berlin 1913 iv. 471—497) contends that Keraunos was
first an Augenblicksgott, then a Sondergott, and lastly an attribute of a pers'&nlicher Gott,
i.e. that, to begin with, any and every lightning-flash was regarded as a divinity, that
next men advanced to the more general conception of one lightning-god, and that finally
he was absorbed into the larger personality of Zeus. The three stages in the evolution of
Keraunos would thus be marked by the terms nepawoi, Kepawds, and Zeus Kepavvtos.
With a general criticism of Usener's far-reaching theory I am not here concerned (for
its validity in the Greek area see L. R. Farnell 'The place of the Sonder- Gotter in Greek
Polytheism' in Anthropological Essays presented to Edivard Burnett Tylor Oxford 1907
pp. 81—100, and in the Italian area G. Wissowa ' Echte und falsche Sondergbtter in der
romischen Religion' in his Gesammelte Abhandlungen zar rbmischen Religions- undStadt-
geschichte Munchen 1904 pp. 304—326), but with its special applicability to the case of
Zeus Kepawos. Usener (Khein. A/us. 1905 lx. 16 — Kleine Schriften Leipzig and Berlin
1913 iv. 484) holds that the very expression Zeus Kepawos involves an inner contradiction,
since it unites the last with the first stage of his evolutionary sequence: Zeus had before
the days of Homer developed into apersonlicher Gott, the hurler of the lightning ; and, if
he is here combined with an Augenblicksgott, the particular lightning-flash, we can only
explain the combination by saying that side by side with the later development of a
personlicher Gott the earlier conception of an Augenblicksgott has persisted, clinging with
amazing tenacity to the actual custom of considering a spot struck by lightning as the
abode of a divinity. I confess, I find it easier to suppose—though the supposition is
expressly deprecated by Usener—that in this remarkable inscription not only Keraunos
but Zeus too is still in the zoistic stage. If even in the philosophy of a Herakleitos Zeus
as the fiery sky was equated with Keraunos, a fortiori might we look to find that com-
bination of primitive ideas in the memorial of an Arcadian rite. On this showing there is
no inner inconsistency in the title Zeus Kepauvos; and we are of course still free to accept
Usener's great theory as to the evolution of Indo-Europaean gods.