Which author contends that the gods are depicted in a human shape with human attributes?

Which author contends that the gods are depicted in a human shape with human attributes?

• A. Harrison
• B. Camps
• C. Galinsky
• D. Richard Rutherford

Answer: (B)

The idea being tested is that ancient gods are portrayed as human-shaped beings with human attributes, a concept called anthropomorphism in myth and epic. Camps makes the case that poets repeatedly present deities in recognizable bodily form and with motives, emotions, and decisions that mirror human behavior. This likeness to humans isn’t just cosmetic; it lets divine actions be read through familiar moral and social lenses—gods intervene in ways that reflect personal agendas, rivalries, favors, and punishments, much as people do. That humanized portrayal helps readers understand the gods’ role in shaping events and the moral order of the narrative, rather than treating them as abstract, impersonal forces. Other scholars like Harrison, Galinsky, and Rutherford explore related topics—such as ritual function, social power, or broader theoretical readings—but they do not center on the specific claim that gods are depicted in a human shape with human attributes in the same way Camps does.

The idea being tested is that ancient gods are portrayed as human-shaped beings with human attributes, a concept called anthropomorphism in myth and epic. Camps makes the case that poets repeatedly present deities in recognizable bodily form and with motives, emotions, and decisions that mirror human behavior. This likeness to humans isn’t just cosmetic; it lets divine actions be read through familiar moral and social lenses—gods intervene in ways that reflect personal agendas, rivalries, favors, and punishments, much as people do. That humanized portrayal helps readers understand the gods’ role in shaping events and the moral order of the narrative, rather than treating them as abstract, impersonal forces. Other scholars like Harrison, Galinsky, and Rutherford explore related topics—such as ritual function, social power, or broader theoretical readings—but they do not center on the specific claim that gods are depicted in a human shape with human attributes in the same way Camps does.