The Mutilation of the Herms and the Profanation of the Mysteries: An Athenian Conspiracy Theory

Allegations of conspiracies tell us more about those who believe in their existence than they do about the presumed conspirators. Upon close inspection the mere presence of an actual conspiracy can be difficult to identify, much less any of its members. As historians, and students of human motivation, we are more interested in why a group believed in the existence of a conspiracy at a particular time, how it coped with this “knowledge,” and the long-term consequences of its actions.

Page 120

A few weeks prior to the sailing of the Athenian fleet to Sicily in 415 B.C.E., to conquer Syracuse, an unknown party mutilated most of the herms in Athens. A herm was a four cornered pillar topped by a male bust, with an enormous phallus set off at an angle. They marked roads and borders, and would be found outside homes and temples. They served as symbols of power and protection of those within. Those who have reviewed the ethological literature have remarked on the similarity in function to the males of a species of monkey who sit at the borders of the group’s territory, facing outside with erect phalli, exhibiting their potent masculinity to ward off would-be trespassers. Although Thukydides only mentions the mutilation of the faces of the herms, a chance remark in Aristophanes indicates that the phalli were chopped off (Thukydides, 6.27.1; Aristophanes, Lysistrata, 1094).

Considering this to be a bad omen for the expedition, the Athenians began an investigation. Suggestions that a group of young men drunk with wine had committed the act, or that it was done by the Corinthians (Corinth as mother-city of Syracuse was her ally), were ignored (Plutarch, Alkibiades, 18. pp. 3-4). Most Athenians believed it was the result of a conspiracy, sunomosia, literally a group leagued together by an oath, which sought to overthrow the democracy.

Rumors of other sacrileges quickly spread, and soon several resident aliens and slaves reported to the Athenian officials that a group of drunken young men had mocked the Eleusinian Mysteries, one of the most sacred and, to the non-initiate, secret rites in Athens. Implicated in this deed were Alkibiades and several of his close friends, acting as High Priest, Herald, and Torch Bearer. Ambitious, flamboyant, and of questionable moral character, but a daring and at times brilliant general, Alkibiades was one of the most prominent men in Athens. Born into the aristocracy, he was the favorite of many of the Athenian common people. He was also the main proponent of the expedition to Syracuse and one of its three generals. Although he demanded an immediate trial before the fleet sailed, his enemies, aware of his popularity with the troops, postponed his trial until the expedition returned.

The investigation into both acts of sacrilege continued after the fleet sailed. Denunciations were followed by arrests and trials, with those convicted facing execution and confiscation of their property. Diokleides alleged seeing 300 conspirators by moonlight the night the herms were mutilated, and named 42 prominent aristocrats who happened to be opponents of the democracy. They were arrested and detained, until someone pointed out that the herms were mutilated on a moonless night. Those implicated were released and Diokleides himself was executed (Andokides, De Mysteriis, pp. 37-42, 65-66).

An aristocratic woman named Alkibiades and several of his close associates as participants in the drunken mocking of the Mysteries (Andokides, De Mysteriis, 16). Alkibiades’ enemies engineered his recall from the fleet, dispatching a ship to bring him back to stand trial. Alkibiades managed to elude them, left the fleet, and joined Athens’ opponent in the war, Sparta.

Prosopographical analysis breaks down those implicated in the two sacrilegious acts into two main groups. Those alleged to have mutilated the herms were aristocrats, members of small clubs or associations of anti-democratic, pro-oligarchic men. The Athenian fleet was the main support of the democracy, and it was now hundreds of miles away, about to lay siege to Syracuse. One hundred Athenian ships, thousands of Athenian seamen and hoplites, were now unable to protect her from her internal enemies. In the eyes of the Athenian democrats, the mutilation of the herms, the chopping off of the phalli, was a visible, symbolic attack on Athens when she was at her most vulnerable. The perception that this reflected a conspiracy of the oligarchs, while the young, potent military force of Athens was far away, exacerbated their reaction.

The alleged profaners of the Mysteries belong to a different group. Though an aristocrat, Alkibiades had been popular among the Athenian populace and appeared to be a friend of the democracy. This earned him the jealousy of the other democratic leaders, who believed he kept them from achieving the highest political office. However, the recall of Alkibiades required the approval of the assembly, and Thukydides notes that the Athenian populace had become hostile toward him (Thukydides, 6.61.1). The Athenians apparently feared that Alkibiades, with the help of the fleet, might try to become tyrant of Athens if he conquered Sicily.

The political foes of a democracy in ancient Greece were two, oligarchy and tyranny. At a vulnerable moment, the Athenians reacted strongly against what appeared to be an oligarchic conspiracy, the mutilation of the many, the herms, by the few. They were also quick to believe that there was a conspiracy to make Alkibiades tyrant

Page 121

of Athens, although mimicry of the Mysteries or other religious rites was not unheard of at other times in sophisticated Athens, where sophists regularly attacked or criticized the traditional religion. The profanation of the Mysteries was certainly not a threat to the democracy, and the mutilation of the herms, though probably an attempt to prevent the Sicilian expedition by an evil omen, was certainly not an attempt to overthrow the democracy.

The result of their prosecution of the “conspirators” had grave consequences for Athens. It deprived her of her most charismatic, daring, and successful leader when Alkibiades fled to Sparta. The Athenian fleet, as well as the relief force sent in 413, was destroyed in Sicily, with a devastating loss of manpower for Athens. Most of those killed, captured, or enslaved were the main support of the democracy. Perhaps as a result of the suspicion of an oligarchic conspiracy, the oligarchs deposed the democracy in 411 and set up the Council of 400, which ruled Athens until 410. Soon after, Alkibiades returned from exile to the democratic fleet at Samos, and after the victory at Cyzicus in 410 the democracy was restored and Alkibiades the exile was welcomed back to Athens in 407. Alkibiades was exiled again a year later. Athens soon lost the war and surrendered in 404 to Sparta, who immediately installed a narrow oligarchy, the “Thirty Tyrants,” who remained in power until the democratic restoration 17 months later.

Thus we see that the baseless fears of a conspiracy had far reaching consequences for Athens, as she engaged in self-destructive behavior that resulted in the deaths of thousands of seamen and hoplites, the exile of her most successful general, the institution of a brief oligarchic rule a few years later, and the eventual loss of a long and costly war that she should otherwise have won.

Page 122