MYSTERY. It is necessary to differentiate mystery, Gr. from its homophone, properly written mistery, late Lat. ministerium, a trade or craft ; hence mystery plays (see DRAMA), those performed by trade-gilds. We must also set aside the Hellenistic meaning, common in modern languages, of "secret," "puzzling occurrence." Properly, then, a mystery is a Greek rite which is kept secret to shut the mouth or eyes) from all save the initiated (ot. ktbarac, of These are specially prepared to have the secret revealed to them, under the guidance of a hierophant (I.Epocktv.rns, "revealer of holy things"). According to Theon Smyr naeus (de util. math., p. 15, Hercher) there were four stages: (I) preliminary purification (Ka0appos); (2) communication of mystic knowledge, TEXETijS rap6.6octs, presumably including a sort of sermon of instruction or exhortation; (3) krorreta, or revelation of the holy things, the central point of the rite; (4) the crowning or garlanding of the mystic, who was thus, as it were, badged as a privileged person. We know that the central revelation was something done not spoken, or not merely spoken; Lucian says (de saltat., 15) that all mysteries included dancing. Hence it is usually, and reasonably, concluded that some sort of pageant or rudimentary sacred drama was shown.
We may now ask why the rites should be secret at all. A plausible but mistaken explanation has recently been revived by 0. Kern (Die Religion der Griechen, i. 1926) : the invading Hellenes oppressed, perhaps actually used religious persecution against, the earlier inhabitants of Greece, hence driving their cults into secrecy.
It might be urged in favour of this view that in Crete, accord ing to Diodorus Siculus (v. 77, 3), rites similar to the Greek mysteries lay open to all and had nothing "mysterious" about them, and also that the telesterion or hall of initiation at Eleusis originates in Minoan-Mycenaean constructions, and Eleusis it self has a name probably pre-Greek (cp. A. W. Persson in Archiv f. Religionswissenschaft, xxi., p. 291 ff. ; M. P. Nilsson, Minoan Mycenaean Religion, P. ff.) ; furthermore, that several survivals of things pre-Hellenic have been more or less certainly traced in the ritual of the mysteries, Eleusinian and other. But these considerations can hardly avail against the facts that .the mystic deities include many undoubtedly Greek, as Demeter, Kore, Ge, Aglauros, the Charites, Hecate, and others; that the ritual is in the hands of noble and distinguished families, not of slaves or other remnants of a conquered population ; and that a good magico-religious reason for secrecy can be given. The deities of these cults are one and all chthonian ; these, however benevo lent, are in their nature dangerous to approach; therefore, to avoid all possibility of disturbance at a critical time, it is but prudent to shroud the whole performance in secrecy, and keep the impure and unprepared at a safe distance.
For the student of Hellenism, the Eleusinian and Orphic cere monies are of paramount importance ; the Samothracian, which vied with these in attractiveness for the later Hellenic world, were not Hellenic in origin; nor wholly hellenized in character, and cannot be considered in an article of this compass.
As regards the Eleusinia, we are in a better position for the in vestigation of them than our predecessors were ; for the modern methods of comparative religion and anthropology have at least taught us to ask the right questions and to apply relevant hypoth eses; archaeology, the study of vases, excavations on the site, yielding an ever-increasing hoard of inscriptions, have taught us much concerning the external organization of the mysteries, and have shown us the beautiful figures of the deities as they ap peared to the eye or to the mental vision of the initiated.
In seeking to guess what the secret of the mysteries was, we must first rid ourselves of the notion that it was any esoteric philosophy, or elaborate theology kept hidden from the world at large. Negatively, we have no jot of evidence that the initiates were more intelligent than the rest of Greece, or that their belief or practice differed from those of their fellow-countrymen to any marked degree, although there need be no doubt that a certain amount of verbal instruction was given by the hierophant (see below). Positively, we have the repeated insistence, from the Homeric hymn down (hymn. Homer, ii., 48o) that the initiates saw something which greatly comforted their souls, not that they learned anything of great importance. What they saw was doubt less the sacred dromenon. We can realize what effect this might have on excited and believing minds, if we consider the im portance, for a pious Catholic, of such impressive ceremonies as the elevation of the Host at mass.' Our evidence is of two kinds. Firstly, a number of works of art show us scenes probably or certainly taken from the ritual of the Eleusinian or other mysteries. But here we may be cer tain that the artists, even if they themselves had no scruples, would not risk violating the deepest religious sentiments of thousands of their fellow-countrymen. Secondly, we have literary evidence. But this, if pagan, is restrained by the same reasons as the artists' from saying too much; if Christian, the writers sel dom, if ever, can be shown to have been initiates themselves; some indeed cannot have been, for they were never pagans. Their 'This is well and sympathetically discussed by 0. Kern, Die griechischen M ysterien der klassischen Zeit 11927], especially p. 23 ff. Aristotle 45, Rose] declares that the mystae learned nothing, but underwent "an experience and an influence" jrat9elv Kai otare0iivaLd an important testimony.