著者

藤縄謙三編

出版者

南窓社

巻号頁・発行日

1993

著者

藤縄 謙三

出版者

京都大学

雑誌

京都大學文學部研究紀要 (ISSN:04529774)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.15, pp.65-"118-9", 1975-03-31

---

この論文は国立情報学研究所の学術雑誌公開支援事業により電子化されました。

著者

藤縄謙三著

出版者

新潮社

巻号頁・発行日

1989

著者

藤縄 謙三

出版者

日本西洋古典学会

雑誌

西洋古典学研究 (ISSN:04479114)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.17, pp.45-55, 1969-03-25 (Released:2017-05-23)

---

'Greek art reconciles two principles which are often opposed; on the one hand control and clarity and fundamental seriousness; on the other, brilliance, imagination and passion.' (H.D.F. Kitto). Such dual nature of Greek culture is usually explained as the outcome of the fusion of two peoples or cultures (Mediterranean and Indo-European). This explanation is, I believe, fundamentally correct, but not satisfactory enough; because a fusion of two cultures might also produce a neutral sort of culture. In order to explain the nature of Greek culture in full, we must seek some more direct causes in addition which produced its dual nature. In Classical Greece, the social and political organizations were clearly patriarchal, but if we turn to the realm of mythology and religion we can easily find many matriarchal traits. We often find both features in the same persons. For example Hesiod, a marked misogynist living in a patriarchal family, very often arranges the genealogies of gods in matrilinear systems. This matriarchy in mythology and religion (die mutterrechtliche Religion) was no doubt mainly of Mediterranean origin. From our almost exclusively archaeological evidence we cannot exactly know to what extent Minoan Civilization was matriarchal. It is possible that it may have had some matriarchal or at least matrilinear social systems, but they must have been incompatible with the new-comers' patriarchal systems; so they must have gone out of existence, say by the end of the Mycenaean Age, except in certain obscure districts (e.g. in Lycia) . On the other hand, Minoan religion was without any doubt matriarchal; and what was more, it could co-exist and combine with the patriarchal system, because it was especially connected with agriculture, the importance of which in Classical Greece was as great as it had been in the Minoan Age. Thus in Classical Greece we find the combination of the matriarchal religion with the patriarchal system, which I think was the basic structure of Greek culture. Analyzing some important Athenian legends and some tragic plays, we try to explain the operation and effects of the combination. The most ancient kings of Athens (Kekrops, Kranaos, Amphiktyon and Erichthonic's or Erechtheus) were said to have been born from Gaia, and all the Athenians proudly called themselves autochthones. This firm belief in the Mother Earth had its origin in the Mediterranean matriarchal religion, and promoted the unification of the Athenian Polis. Thus in a way matriarchal religion sustained the political superstructure. Aeschylus in the Eumenides clearly thought that a reconciliation of the Apolline principle (i.e. the patriarchal system) and the Eumenidean principle (i.e. the matriarchal religion) was absolutely necessary for the well-being of the Athenian Polis. In Euripides' Ion Kreusa's chthonian descent is often clearly mentioned, so she seems to represent the matriarchal religion ; while her only son Ion is given a divine father Apollon, the most distinct representative of patriarchy. Thus, according to Euripides Ion combines in himself our two principles. In Sophocles' Antigone and Euripides' Bacchae is depicted the disruption of the two principles. Antigone and Dionysos stand for the matriarchal religion which includes feminism and emotionalism, Kreon and Pentheus for the patriarchal and rationalistic principle. While in the Ion and the Eumenides Athena acts as mediatress between two parties or principles, in the Antigone and the Bacchae in which are treated problems of a foreign city, the poets do not try to settle them. We may say that some Athenian thinkers such as the three great tragedians were in some way conscious of the basic structure of their culture or spirit. The substructure (i. e. the emotional side) of their spirit was nourished by the matriarchal religion, while its superstructure (i.e. the rational side) was formed by their patriarchal social principle.