Religious Excitement in Ancient Anatolia: Cult and Devotional Forms for Solar and Lunar Gods (Colloquia Antiqua) 9042937297, 9789042937291

Citation preview

Religious Excitement in Ancient Anatolia Cult and Devotional Forms for Solar and Lunar Gods

By Iulian Moga

PEETERS

RELIGIOUS EXCITEMENT IN ANCIENT ANATOLIA

COLLOQUIA ANTIQUA SupplementstotheJournalANCIENTWEST&EAST

SERIES EDITOR

GOCHA R. TSETSKHLADZE (UK) EDITORIAL BOARD

A. Avram (Romania/France), Sir John Boardman (UK), J. Hargrave (UK), M. Kazanski (France), A. Mehl (Germany), A. Podossinov (Russia), N. Theodossiev (Bulgaria), J. Wiesehöfer (Germany) ADVISORY BOARD

S. Atasoy (Turkey), L. Ballesteros Pastor (Spain), J. Bouzek (Czech Rep.), S. Burstein (USA), J. Carter (USA), B. d’Agostino (Italy), J. de Boer (The Netherlands), A. Domínguez (Spain), O. Doonan (USA), A. Kuhrt (UK), Sir Fergus Millar (UK), J.-P. Morel (France), M. Pearce (UK), D. Potts (USA), A. Rathje (Denmark), R. Rollinger (Austria), A. Snodgrass (UK), M. Sommer (Germany), D. Stronach (USA), M. Tiverios (Greece), C. Ulf (Austria), J. Vela Tejada (Spain)

ColloquiaAntiquais a refereed publication

For proposals and editorial and other matters, please contact the Series Editor: Gocha R. Tsetskhladze The Gallery Spa Road Llandrindod Wells Powys LD1 5ER UK E-mail: [email protected]

COLLOQUIA ANTIQUA ————— 23 —————

RELIGIOUS EXCITEMENT IN ANCIENT ANATOLIA Cult and Devotional Forms for Solar and Lunar Gods

By

IULIAN MOGA Translation of Greek inscriptions by Ştefan Teofil Grosu, Ligia Ruscu, Alexey Belousov, Eugenia Andreeva, Mihaela Paraschiv and Iulian Moga Text translated into English by Alina Piftor

PEETERS LEUVEN – PARIS – BRISTOL, CT

2019

A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. ISBN 978-90-429-3729-1 eISBN 978-90-429-3730-7 D/2019/0602/84 © 2019, Peeters, Bondgenotenlaan 153, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage or retrieval devices or systems, without prior written permission from the publisher, except the quotation of brief passages for review purposes.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Series Editor’s Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IX

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XI

Foreword – SilviuSanie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XV

List of Abbreviations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XIX

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Framework, Typology, Themes and Research Directions Geopolitical and Ethno-demographic Circumstances . . .

1 1 7

PART I:

THE WORLD OF GODS

CHAPTER 1:

The Universal Gods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hypsistos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mithra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mên . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

27 27 37 65

CHAPTER 2:

The Solar and Lunar Rider-Gods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hosios kai Dikaios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lairbenos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Dioscuri and the Pisidian Goddess . . . . . . . . . . . Sandan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sozon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

81 81 84 88 95 97

CHAPTER 3:

Lunar and/or Solar Goddesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Anaitis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mâ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Artemis Pergaia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

101 101 109 123

TABLE OF CONTENTS

VI

PART II:

THE WORLD OF DEDICATORS. ORGANISATION OF THE SACRED PLACE

CHAPTER 4:

Sanctuaries and Temples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Types of Sanctuaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Income, Estates, Transactions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

131 131 133

CHAPTER 5:

Priests and Dedicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Temple Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Dedicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

141 141 154

PART III:

THE WORLD OF DIVINE IN CHANGE

CHAPTER 6:

Categories of Inscriptions regarding the Solar and Lunar Cults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dedications and Ex-votos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Funerary Inscriptions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Confession Inscriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Consecrations (Katagraphai) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Honorific Inscriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CHAPTER 7:

Means of Communication. Characteristics of the Divine World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Master Gods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Relatives of Gods: Sons, Mothers and Companions God’s Receptiveness: Redemption and Fulfilment of Prayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Commands, Visions, Epiphanies, Oracles . . . . . . . . . Angels, Gods, Demons: Divine Hierarchies . . . . . . .

CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

165 165 166 175 183 185

187 187 190 191 193 200 205

Catalogue 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Hypsistos and the Assimilated Deities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mithra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hosios kai Dikaios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mên. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Anaitis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mâ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Artemis Pergaia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

215 268 275 338 434 462 467

TABLE OF CONTENTS

8. 9. 10. 11.

VII

Lairbenos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sandan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Dioscuri and the Pisidian Goddess. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sozon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

487 548 550 563

Literary Testimonia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

571

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

577

Concordance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

609

Epigraphic Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

679

SERIES EDITOR’S PREFACE

In this book, Iulian Moga brings together under one cover a study of universal, solar and lunar gods and goddesses: Hypsistos, Mithra, Mên, Hosios kai Dikaios, Lairbenos, the Dioscuri, the Pisidian goddess, Sandan, Sozon, Anaitis, Mâ and Artemis Pergaia. They are considered against the geopolitical and ethno-demographic situation in Anatolia, primarily in the Roman period, not only their characteristics but also the background to their appearance before Roman times, cultural adaptation of Anatolian deities, their sacred landscape, etc. The author, using all kinds of available evidence, provides a typology embodying characteristics and conceptual and iconographic elements for all of the deities listed above. The second half of the main text examines the organisation and nature of the temples and sanctuaries themselves, their personnel, who were the dedicators, and into what categories the inscriptions can be divided (dedicatory, funerary, confessional, honorific, etc.) The main text is balanced by a very welcome, useful and comprehensive catalogue, organised according to the deities studied and within this by region. Detailed descriptions are given of each item – where found, where kept, Greek inscriptions on the objects (with English translations), etc. Literary testimonia, an extensive bibliography, a lengthy concordance and detailed indexes conclude the volume. I hope that colleagues will receive this book warmly, not least its catalogue. It is a work that has been many years in gestation and preparation, deriving from the author’s doctoral studies on solar and lunar cults, undertaken at Alexander Ioan Cuza University in Iaşi, where he now teaches, and at the University of Angers (defended there). I would like to offer my sincere thanks, as ever, to Peeters our publisher and to echo the author’s appreciation of James Hargrave for the many hours he has spent working on this volume. Gocha R. TSETSKHLADZE Series Editor 21 May 2018

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Αὐτοφυής, ἀδίδακτος, ἀμήτωρ, ἀστυφελικτός, οὔνομα μὴ χωρῶν, πολυώνυμος, ἐν πυρὶ ναίων, τοῦτο Θεός· μεικρὰ δὲ Θεοῦ μερὶς ἄνγελοι ἡμεῖς. Τοῦτο πευθομένοισι Θεοῦ πέρι ὅστις ὑπάρχει, Αἰθέρα πανδερκῆ Θεὸν ἒννεπεν, εἰς ὃν ὁρῶντας εὔχεσθ᾽ ἠώους πρὸς ἀνατολίην ἐσορῶντας.

It is anything but easy to work with distinguished specialists in history, not because of any potential difficulty in inter-personal relations but because one holds them in awe and feels a permanent desire to rise to their expectations and, as far as possible, to their standards. From the beginning, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my PhD tutors Prof. Silviu Sanie and Prof. Michel Molin, to the professors of our department at the Alexander Ioan Cuza University of Iaşi (Lucreţiu Bîrliba, Octavian Bounegru, Victor Spinei, Mihail Vasilescu), as well as to Prof. Alexandru-Florin Platon, former Dean of the Faculty, for their constant support, advice and care without which it would have been impossible to finish this work. Under the supervision of Prof. Lucreţiu Bîrliba, an excellent programme coordinator and Chancellor the Faculty, I have been working for years on activities related to ancient history, as well as on research projects such as ‘Migration and Acculturation in the Eastern European Part of the Roman Empire (1st–7th centuries AD)’1 and the post-doctoral ‘Contributions to the Study of Interference Environments. Monotheist Religions and Proselytism in Asia Minor and the Circumpontic Area (1st–3rd centuries AD)’. This book represents the outcome.2 I had the honour and great pleasure to work for several years as the academic secretary of the Dr Alexandru Safran Centre for Jewish History and Hebrew Studies with Prof. Platon, the current director of the institution. I hope in the years to come to have the same intense and effective collaboration as before, so that all our common projects be materialised. I am also deeply grateful and obliged to several distinguished Romanian and foreign professors and specialists with whom I have collaborated and whose opinions I have sought on various academic matters: Hüseyin Sabri Alanyalı, Metin Alparslan, Radu Ardevan, Eka Avaliani, Alexandru Avram, John Baines, 1 2

http://migrations.uaic.ro/site/index.php/despre. Respectively CNCS Romania projects 103/2009–2011 and POSDRU/89/1.5/S/49944.

XII

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Alexandru Barnea, Marie-Françoise Baslez, Gary Beckman, Alain Blomart, Corinne Bonnet, Angus Bowie, Marija Buzov, Jean-Yves Carrez-Marratray, İnci Delemen, Hugh Elton, Sergey Fazlulin, Denis Feissel, Moshe Fischer, Zaraza Freidman, Ehud Galili, Ulrich Gotter, Arsen Hakobyan, Carol Iancu, Vedat Keleş Yana Morozova, Hakan Oniz, David Owen, Mihriban Özbaşaran, Georgia Petridou, Ioan Piso, Alexander Rubel, Ligia Ruscu, Jack Sasson, Christoph Schäfer, Tolga Tek, Gocha Tsetskhladze, Lutgarde Vandeput and Seth Ward. Some I met during international conferences and symposia or during research fellowships abroad; with others I worked together on the international project ‘Conception of “Eternal Capitals” – From Ancient Cosmopolitan Cities to Modern Megalopolises. Regional Seminar for Excellence in Teaching (ReSET)’ supported by the Open Society Institute3 and coordinated by Prof. Eka Avaliani (Iv. Javakhishvili State University of Tbilisi), Prof. John Baines (University of Oxford) and Leila Kiknadze (University of Georgia). The first steps in my teaching career were made under the careful supervision of Prof. Nelu Zugravu, whom I deeply respect, and during my professional development, I have been supported by colleagues in the department and faculty, always feeling encouraged in this highly competitive environment. I would also like to thank Profs. Petronel Zahariuc, Mihai Cojocariu and Lucian Leuştean for their advice and support, and for their help during difficult times. My gratitude embraces colleagues from the Archaeology Institute in Iaşi, the Eco-Museum Research Institute in Tulcea, the State University in Chişinău, as well as from Anadolu University in Eskişehir. I have enjoyed a valuable collaboration with Prof. Marius-Tiberiu Alexianu and Prof. Neculai Bolohan, even though our specialisations are rather different. I have particularly appreciated some effective conversations with Prof. Alexianu related to method and perspective in the field of theoretical and applied research. Under his supervision, I have spent three years working alongside Roxana Curcă, Vasile Cotiugă and Olivier Weller on a very interesting project regarding the ethno-archaeology of salt; we investigated Eastern sources regarding its extraction and processing.4 I wish to express my gratitude to the directorate and members of the French School of Archaeology of Athens and of the British Institute at Ankara for their hospitality and use of their rich facilities during my visits as fellow, visiting researcher or member of the Institute. I have enjoyed excellent study conditions at the University of Angers, where I completed and defended my doctoral thesis. I am deeply grateful to the directorate of the University, of the Doctoral 3 4

http://hespreset.tsu.ge/. http://ethnosal.uaic.ro/index.html.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

XIII

School, of the Faculty of Letters, Languages and Human Sciences and of the Maison des Sciences Humaines, as well as to the professors there. The group of collaborators and friends who supported me has grown in time to include Sorin Ailincăi, Iulian Bertea, Cezar Hârlăoanu, Camelia Manole, Crizantema Mironeanu, Mioara Mocanu, Adrian Muraru, Andrei Nicic, Liviu Petcu, Florina Platon, Petronela Podovei and Constantin Răchită, to all of whom I am grateful. I am equally grateful to friends and colleagues who helped with the translation of inscriptions and their interpretation Eugenia Andreeva, Alexey Belousov, Ștefan Teofil Grosu, Mihaela Paraschiv and Ligia Ruscu. I am deeply indebted to the friends who supported and encouraged me to go further: Ana-Maria Anton, Ana Caladei, Cristian Iosub, Natalia Mânzăteanu, Adrian Martin, Alexandra Nechifor, Roxana Nedelcu, Sorin Nemeti and Csaba Szabó, But, of course, the greatest support came from the family and friends, whom I love and deeply cherish: Loredana, Andrei and Alexandru have been nearby during difficult times and have helped me take the right decisions when everything seemed impossible. On the other hand, I am well aware that I cannot include here all those to whom I owe thanks. Let then be assured that I shall always be grateful to all of them. This volume is based on the structure and initial text of my doctoral thesis defended at the University of Angers, France, in 2009. Two years after publication in Romanian it was awarded the Mihail Kogălniceanu Prize by the Romanian Academy. As specifically required from the very beginning, some of the sections were presented at various congresses and symposia, to be later included in journals or collective volumes. The text of the volume generally follows that of the 2011 Romanian edition, with corrections and additional comments. The only major change is that of the epigraphic database, which was completely reorganised and unified, mainly according to regional criteria. The order of the regions is that of the SEG, but for practical reasons I have grouped some of them. Initially, this database started as a set of relevant examples that I continually updated year after year. The sole exception is Pisidian Antioch, where things remained unchanged. I am under a heavy debt of gratitude to Prof. Gocha Tsetskhladze as Series Editor of ColloquiaAntiqua and to the members of the Editorial and Advisory Boards of the series for agreeing to publish this work, not least to Dr James Hargrave for his work in copy-editing the volume. Iaşi 21 April 2017

FOREWORD

The theme investigated by the author is not only generous in its directions and possibilities of approach, but also very complex and difficult. People, merchandise, ideas, religions from the Mesopotamian or Iranian territories moved into the European lands over millennia, through the Anatolian area. For the relations with the Egyptian world, there are written testimonies that exceed the period researched by more than a millennium. Nevertheless, Asia Minor has not only been a corridor, an intercontinental rotating platform, but also a land where sustainable beliefs appeared and merged. The Anatolian divinities have a special place within the Eastern cults. In this matter, I find illustrative the admission of Magna Mater-Cybele among the divinities of pomoerium three centuries before the Principate, then that of the goddess Mâin the 1st century BC. Among the multi-oriented explorers of Asia Minor, one can find the names of great archaeologists, linguists, historians of religions, etc., such as Franz Cumont, Maarten Vermaseren, Louis Robert, Ladislav Zgusta, Robert Turcan, Eugene Lane and many others who wrote in the second half of the 20th century. The Hellenisation of Asia Minor, starting with the second half of the 1st millennium BC, led to a gradual erosion of the great ethnic and linguistic diversity, even though the Hellenisation process did not continue evenly: it was present in the coastal regions and less in the inland areas. Hellenisation was followed by a limited Roman colonisation, but the Roman administrative organisation, without taking into account the ethno-territorial limits, largely contributed to this process of unification. The effervescent religious life, the multitude of local divinities and of those that arrived in the Anatolian region, as well as the possibility of analysing their evolution in time augment the interest for the research of the cults in the region. Knowledge of certain Anatolian deities, of gods and goddesses belonging to neighbouring or remoter areas with similar appearance, is indispensable to the explorers of many Oriental divinities for proper understanding the significance of certain cult-related aspects. The new investigators and those who want to get a real insight on a certain segment in order to get a grasp of the bigger picture can access a rich literary inheritance of the Antiquity, collections of inscriptions, monographs on certain divinities or on the religion of the province as a whole, anthroponymic and toponymic studies, archaeological and sculptural monuments, etc.

XVI

FOREWORD

In his lengthy Introduction,the author points out in detail the geographical framework as it has been known from ancient sources to recent research, an occasion to pay homage to Strabo as well. The objectives of the investigation, clearly stated, are the following: the knowledge of the solar and lunar cults in Asia Minor, as well as the relationship between these cults and the religious views of the Roman world. The author briefly presents the multiple fields of human sciences that he has studied in order to determine the essence and peculiarities of Anatolian divinities and their propagation in the land of origin. When presenting the objectives of the volume, the author states that the problems approached constitute an absolute novelty in the Romanian historical research. Nevertheless, a mention, a slight tinge becomes apparent. The Anatolian divinities that spread in the Greek colonies of the western Black Sea coast, in Moesia Inferior and in Dacia have been dealt with in interesting investigations. These contributions belong to Maria Alexandrescu-Vianu, Dionisie Pippidi and Alexandru Popa. There are suggestive observations for many of them in the pages of the monograph entitled CorpusMonumentorum ReligionisEquitumDanuvinorum (CMRED), by Dumitru Tudor. Iulian Moga has taken a step further on a road still belonging to a predominantly Greekspeaking area, where records and images had already a long tradition in the 1st–3rd centuries AD. Hypsistos in particular benefits from a vast, documented presentation, illustrating his complex aspects and valences. Both the information on the first associations of the epithet hypsistos with Zeus and those related to Theos Hypsistos, where the Greek name refers to the name of the Jewish and Christian God, are approached. Hypsistos is the translation for one of the numerous terms through which God is invoked. The only exception, Thea Hypsiste, is mentioned as a form belonging to a goddess. Hypsistos met an impressive diffusion during the Roman Imperial time throughout the Mediterranean area, in the eastern regions of the empire, and a more limited one in the western provinces. In the presentation of Mithra, of the origin and evolution of the Mithraic cult, many of the hypotheses emitted in time, from that issued by Franz Cumont, who dominated the history of Ancient religions for more than half a century, to those expressed in the last decade by Maarten Vermaseren, Richard Gordon, Reinhold Merkelbach, Stig Wikander, Roger Beck, etc. are minutely analysed. Besides books and journals, there have been conferences and congresses exclusively dedicated to Mithraism. The author identified the important elements and showed a great capacity to synthesise. I may consider that most of the elements that constitute grossomodo – genesis, evolution – testimonies on the impact of the encounter between religions and philosophies that arrived, from various directions, to the space researched, have been covered. The

FOREWORD

XVII

detailed description of the places of worship, of the Mithraic iconography, the analysis of all the aspects provided by the epitaphs with references to the catalogue, without too rigid a separation of the parts, contribute to elaboration of grounded answers on the entire issue of Mithraism in Asia Minor. In the case of Mên, the third god among those included into the group of universal gods, the author investigates the Indo-Iranian origins, the evolution and the provinces where he was more popular. It is relevant here the influence the Iranian Mazdaism had, as illustrated by the belief in the afterlife and in the resurrection of the souls. A divinity with many epithets mirroring attributes of the god (katachtonios,epekoos, soter,plutodotes, aniketos, etc.), Mên had numerous and interesting mentions in documents, as well as associations with other divinities. He was also depicted in distinctive hypostases. There is a rich range of symbols recorded on his behalf: the moon crescent, the pine cone, the bull, the serpent, the rooster, all correlated with his attributes. The author managed to draw a complete picture of a very interesting divinity, making use of studies written after the elaboration of the main monograph volume on the topic. In the second chapter, ‘Solar and Lunar Rider-gods’, iconography was one of the main criteria for providing the due correlations. The area of diffusion of these deities, with the exception of the Dioscuri, is mainly restricted to the territory of Asia Minor. Here again certain divinities are known to us only through their appellatives. Hosios kai Dikaios is a god only twice attested outside the borders of Asia Minor. Announcer of justice, he holds as attributes the scales, symbol of justice, and the sceptre, representing the divine power. Lairbenos, a god with limited dissemination, has interesting names and associations, as well as a rich iconography, including the double axe. Many elements of the representation are common also with Rider Gods and the Danubian Riders. The Dioscuriflanking the Pisidian lunar goddess, largely diffused in the south-western part of Anatolia, show a similar iconography to that one met the Graeco-Roman world. Through his attributes and iconography, the Cilician god Sandan is yet specific to the Anatolian area. The fact that he was illustrated on the back of a lion also brings him closer to the iconography of fertility goddesses as well. In the same group should be included Sozon, a solar deity with a limited dissemination. The third chapter comprises the group of the solar and lunar goddesses, Anaitis,Mâand ArtemisPergaia, each with a rich history illustrating the main components merged in the Anatolian region, interesting because of their origins, evolution, attributes, iconography, associations and dedicators. For Anaitis, there are sources known in the Iranian world. Mâ has deeper roots in the land of origin and an early presence in the Roman pantheon, while Artemis Pergaia is interesting because of the attributes and of certain elements within the

XVIII

FOREWORD

iconography. For the three of them, there are studies that the author read, adding numerous documents about an almost unique religious life, hard to find in other areas of the ancient world. As equally captivating as the ‘world of the gods’ is that of the worshippers (Chapters 5 and 6) and of the priesthood organisation, from the higher ranks within the hierarchy to the lower categories of personnel. Besides the votive inscriptions, there are other categories of epigraphs (funerary, honorific) that refer to the gods analysed, also mentioning the reason for the dedications. The remaining category, that of the ‘confession inscriptions’, has, in my opinion, a more appropriate translation according to their purpose, as propitiatory, due to this kind offunction they provide. Very well depicted are the phenomena proper to the religious life in Asia Minor, the ways they are presented according to the sources the relationships between man and divinity, the means of communication and the characteristics of the divine world as described in the seventh chapter, as well as the conclusions regarding the world of gods by analysing the appellatives, attributes and symbols. As a general picture, we stand before a vast and complex book that involves important resources and work, a knowledge from various fields of human sciences, an accuracy required by the auxiliary sciences, a capacity of comprehension of general and peculiar aspects, of the specificity of the cults of the Anatolian region, and last but not least, an understanding of Oriental cults in general and of Roman religion overall, in the first three centuries AD. The volume has notable qualities, some of which have already been stated above. For an investigation that had to be taken back more than a millennium before, during the Hittite or Indo-Iranian world, so as to follow the evolution until the Roman period, the merit of the explorer is undeniable. Each chapter is well structured and written. The author has undertaken great research work for both the polytheistic and monotheistic views, making a correct estimation of the aspects related to the influence provided by the presence of certain Jewish communities in the researched area. He has a keen eye for synthesis, but he has also inserted very successful analytical segments. He provides a restitution of a ‘forma mentis’ for quite a long period, the epigraphs turning here into genuine treasures. In addition, he reveals that for the worshippers their gods were not exactly far from their daily problems. In prayer they were required to provide health and prosperity, protect graves, exonerate debts, protect against theft, and offer justice, care and punishment of culprits. Prof. Silviu Sanie Institute of Archaeology, Romanian Academy, Iaşi

ABBREVIATIONS

ActaArch AÉ AGRW AJA AnAnt ANRW AS BABesch BCH BÉ BMCPamphylia BMCPhrygia BWK CAHIran II CAHIranIII.2 CCCA CCIS CIG II CIJ I CIJ II CIL CIMRM CMRDM

ActaArchaeologica. L’AnnéeÉpigraphique. R.S. Ascough, P.A. Harland and J.S. Kloppenborg, Associations intheGreco-RomanWorld:ASourcebook (Waco 2011). AmericanJournalofArchaeology. AnatoliaAntiqua. W. Haase (ed.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der Römischen Welt (Berlin/New York). AnatolianStudies. BulletinvandeVereeniging…vandeantiekeBeschaving. Bulletindecorrespondancehellénique. BulletinÉpigraphique. G.F. Hill, CatalogueoftheGreekCoinsofLycia,Pamphylia,and Pisidia (London 1897; repr. Bologna 1964). B.V. Head, Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Phrygia (London 1906; repr. Bologna 1964). G. Petzl, ‘Die Beitinschriften Westkleinasiens’. EA 22 (1994), V–XXI and 1–175. I. Gershevitch (ed.), The Cambridge History of Iran, II: The MedianandAchaemenidPeriods (Cambridge 1985). E. Yarshater (ed.), The Cambridge History of Iran, III.2: The Seleucid,Parthian,andSasanianPeriods (Cambridge 1983). Corpus Cultus Cybelae Attidisque (Études préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l’Empire romain 50), 6 vols. (Leiden/ New York/Copenhagen/Cologne 1987–89). M.J. Vermaseren and E.N. Lane (eds.), CorpusCultusIovisSabazii (Études préliminaires aux religions orientales dans l’Empire romain 100), 3 vols. (Leiden/New York/Copenhagen/Cologne 1983–89). A. Boeckh (ed.), CorpusInscriptionumGraecarum, vol. 2 (Berlin 1843). P.J.-B. Frey, Corpus of Jewish Inscriptions. Jewish Inscriptions from the Third Century B.C. to the Seventh Century A.D., I: Europe (2nd ed., New York 1975). P.J.-B. Frey, Corpus Inscriptionum Iudaicarum. Recueil des inscriptions juives qui vont du IIIe siècle avant Jésus-Christ au VIIesiècledenotreère, II:Asie-Afrique (Vatican City 1952). CorpusInscriptionumLatinarum (Berlin 1863–1933). M.J. Vermaseren, Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum ReligionisMithriacae, 2 vols. (The Hague 1956, 1960). E.N. Lane, CorpusmonumentorumreligionisdeiMenis, 4 vols. (Leiden 1971–78).

XX

CMRDMAd CRAI CTH DAGR DFSJ DKP DNP V EA EncIran FGH GGM GRBS Hellenica HTR IBuresch ICilicia IDidyma IDR IGR IGSK

ABBREVIATIONS

E.N. Lane, ‘Corpus Monumentorum Religionis Dei Menis. Addenda, 1971–1981’. Journal of Early Christian Studies 1.4 (1981), 193–209. Comptes-rendus des séances de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. E. Laroche, Cataloguedestexteshittites (Paris 1971). C. Daremberg and E. Saglio (eds.), Dictionnaire des antiquités grecquesetromaines (Paris 1877–1919 ; repr. Graz 1963–68). B. Lifshitz, Donateursetfondateursdanslessynagoguesjuives. Répertoire des dédicaces grecques relatives à la réfection des synagogues (Paris 1967). DerKleinePauly (Stuttgart 1967–79). DerNeuePauly.EnzyklopädiederAntike (Stuttgart/Weimar 1998). EpigraphicaAnatolica. EncyclopaediaIranica. F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker (Leiden 1923– ). C. Müller (ed.), GeographiGraeciMinores, 2 vols. (Paris 1861). Greek,Roman,andByzantineStudies. L. Robert, Hellenica: Recueil d’épigraphie, de numismatique et d’antiquités grecques, 13 vols. (Paris 1940–65: 3, 1946; 6, 1948; 7, 1949; 9, 1950; 10, 1955; 11–12, 1960; 13, 1965). HarvardTheologicalReview. A. Körte (ed.), InscriptionesBureschianae (Greifswald 1902). G. Dagron, Inscriptions de Cilicie (Travaux et mémoires du Centre de recherche d’histoire et civilisation de Byzance. Monographie 4) (Paris 1987). T. Wiegand, Didyma, II:DieInschriftenvonAlbertRehm (Berlin 1958). I.I. Russu, I. Piso and V. Wollmann (eds.), Inscripţiile Daciei romane, III.2: Ulpia Traiana Dacica (Sarmizegetusa) (Bucharest 1980). R. Cagnat, J. Toutain and P. Jouguet(eds.), InscriptionesGraecae adresRomanaspertinenetes, 4 vols. (Paris 1911–27). InschriftenGriechischerStädteausKleinasien (Bonn 1975–2014): 3 P. Frisch, DieInschriftenvonIlion (1975). 4 R. Merkelbach, DieInschriftenvonAssos (1976). 5 H. Engelmann, DieInschriftenvonKyme (1976). 6 P. Frisch, DieInschriftenvonLampsakos (1978). 7 T. Ihnken, DieInschriftenvonMagnesiaamSipylos,miteinem KommentarzumSympolitievertragmitSmyrna (1978). 9 S. Şahin, Katalog der Antiken Inschriften des Museums von Iznik(Nikaia)/IznikMüzesiAntikyazıtlarKataloğu(DeutschTürkisch), I: (nr.1–633) (1979). 12 C. Börker and R. Merkelbach, Die Inschriften von Ephesos, II: (nr.101–599),Repertorium (1979). 17.2 R. Meriç, R. Merkelbach, J. Nollé and S. Şahin, DieInschriftenvonEphesos, VII.2: (nr.3501–5115),Repertorium (1981).

ABBREVIATIONS

XXI

17.3 H. Engelmann and J. Nollé, Die Inschriften von Ephesos, VIII.1 (1984). 17.4 J. Nollé, DieInschriftenvonEphesos, VIII.2 (1984). 18 E. Schwertheim, DieInschriftenvonKyzikosundUmgebung, I: Grabtexte (1980). 19 J. Krauss, Die Inschriften von Sestos und der Thrakischen Chersones (1980). 20 R. Merkelbach, F.K. Dörner and S. Şahin, DieInschriftenvon Kalchedon (1980). 22 M.Ç. Şahin, Inschriften von Stratonikeia, II.1: Lagina, StratonikeiaundUmgebung (1982). 22 M.Ç. Şahin, InschriftenvonStratonikeia, II.2: NeueInschriftenundIndices (1990). 23 G. Petzl, DieInschriftenvonSmyrna, I, Grabschriften,postume Ehrungen,Grabepigramme (1982). 24.1 G. Petzl, DieInschriftenvonSmyrna, II.1 (1987). 24.2 G. Petzl, DieInschriftenvonSmyrna, II.2: Addenda,CorrigendaundIndices (1990). 25 P. Frisch, DieInschriftenvonParion (1983). 26 E. Schwertheim, DieInschriftenvonKyzikosundUmgebung, II: Miletupolis.InschriftenundDenkmäler (1983). 27 W. Ameling, DieInschriftenvonPrusiasadHypium (1985). 29 T. Corsten, DieInschriftenvonKios (1985). 30 E. Varinoğlu, DieInschriftenvonKeramos (1986). 31 F. Becker-Bertau, DieInschriftenvonKlaudiuPolis (1986). 32 T. Corsten, Die Inschriften von Apameia (Bithynien) und Pylai (1987). 33 E. Schwertheim, DieInschriftenvonHadrianoiundHadrianeia (1987). 34 W. Blümel, DieInschriftenvonMylasa, I: InschriftenderStadt (1987). 35 W. Blümel, Die Inschriften von Mylasa, II: Inschriften aus derUmgebungderStadt (1988). 36 F.B. Poljakov, Die Inschriften von Tralleis und Nysa, I: Die InscriftenvonTralleis (1989). 37 J. Nollé and F. Schindler, DieInschriftenvonSelge (1991). 38 W. Blümel, DieInschriftenderrhodischenPeraia (1991). 39 T. Corsten, DieInschriftenvonPrusaadOlympum, I (1991). 40 T. Corsten, Die Inschriften von Prusa ad Olympum, II: Die Geschichte der Stadt in der Antike Inschriften unbekannter HerkunftimArchäologischenMuseumBursa (1993). 41 W. Blümel, DieInschriftenvonKnidos, I (1992). 43 J. Nollé, SideimAltertum.GeschichteundZeugnisse, I: Geographie-Geschichte-Testimonia. Griechische und lateinische Inschriften(1–4) (1993). 44 J. Nollé, SideimAltertum.GeschichteundZeugnisse, II: GriechischeundlateinischeInschriften(5–16).Papyri-Inschriften insidetischerSchriftundSprache-ErgänzungenundBerichtigungen-Konkordanzen-EpigraphischeIndices (2001).

XXII

ABBREVIATIONS

47 L. Jonnes, TheInscriptionsofHeracleaPontica (1994). 48 S. Şahin, DieInschriftenvonArykanda (1994). 49 T. Corsten, Die Inschriften von Laodikeia am Lykos, I: Die Inschriften(1997). 50 J. Strauber, DieBuchtvonAdramytteion, I: Topographie(LokalisierungantikerOrte/FundstellenvonAltertümern) (1996). 51 J. Stauber, DieBuchtvonAdramytteion, II: Inschriften-literarischeTestimonia-Münzen (1996). 52 J. Strubbe, ΑΡΑΙΕΠΙΤΥΜΒΙΟΙ.ImprecationsagainstDesecrators of the Grave in the Greek Epitaphs of Asia Minor. ACatalogue (1997). 53 M. Ricl, TheInscriptionsofAlexandreiaTroas (1997). 54 S. Şahin, Die Inschriften von Perge, I: Vorrömische Zeit, früheundhoheKaiserzeit (1999). 55.I D. Berges and J. Nollé, Tyana, I, Archäologisch-historische UntersuchungenzumsüdwestlichenKappadokien (2000). 55.II D. Berges and J. Nollé, Tyana, II: Archäologisch-historische UntersuchungenzumsüdwestlichenKappadokien (2000). 56 M.H. Sayar, DieInschriftenvonAnazarbosundUmgebung, I: InschriftenausdemStadtgebietunddernächstenUmgebung derStadt (2000). 57 G.H.R. Horsley and S. Mitchell, The Inscriptions of Central Pisidia,includingtextsfromKremna,Ariassos,Keraia,Hyia, Panemoteichos, the Sanctuary of Apollo of the Perminoundeis,Sia,Kocaaliler,andtheDöşemeBoğazi (2000). 58 A. Łajtar, DieInschriftenvonByzantion, I: Inschriften (2000). 59 T.V. Evans, GreeksandRomansinImperialAsia.MixedLanguage Inscriptions and Linguistic Evidence for Cultural InteractionuntiltheEndofADIII (2001). 60 T. Corsten, DieInschriftenvonKibyra, I: DieInschriftender StadtundihrernäherenUmgebung (2002). 62 L. Jonnes, TheInscriptionsoftheSultanDağiI(Philomelion, Thymbrion/Hadrianopolis,Tyraion) (2002). 63 B. Dreyer, H. Engelmann, Die Inschriften von Metropolis, I: DieDekretefürApol lonios. Städtische Politik unter den AttalidenundimKonfliktzwischenAristonikosundRom (2003). 64 D.H. French, The Inscriptions of Sinope, I: The Inscriptions (2004). 65 F.C. De Rossi, Iscrizioni dello Estremo Oriente Greco. Un repertorio (2004). 66 J. Strubbe, TheInscriptionsofPessinous (2005). 67 M.A. Byrne and G. Labarre, Nouvellesinscriptionsd’Antioche dePisidied’aprèslesNote-booksdeW.M.Ramsay (2006).

ABBREVIATIONS

IHierapolis IKomana ILS IMagnesia IMilet IPerée IPergamon IstMitt JHS JIGRE JRS KUB LIMC LKGI MAMA MEFRA NDIEC NIPh NIS OGIS OMS RAC RE RECAM

XXIII

T. Ritti (ed.), Museo Archeologico di Denizli-Hierapolis. Catalogo delle iscrizioni greche e latine (Pubblicazioni del Dipartimento di discipline storiche 25) (Naples 2008). F. Baz, DieInschriftenvonKomana(Hierapolis)inKappadokien (Istanbul 2007). H. Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae, 3 vols. (Berlin 1892–1916). O. Kern (ed.),DieInschriftenvonMagnesiaamMaeander (Berlin 1900). P. Herrmann and W. Günther, InschriftenvonMilet, 3 vols. (Berlin/ New York 1997–2006). A. Bresson, Recueil des inscriptions de la Pérée Rhodienne (Péréeintégrée) (Besançon 1991). M. Fränkel (ed.), DieInschriftenvonPergamon, 2 vols. (Berlin 1890, 1895). IstanbulerMitteilungen. JournalofHellenicStudies. W. Horbury and D. Noy (eds.), JewishInscriptionsoftheGraecoRomanEgypt (Cambridge 1992). JournalofRomanStudies. KeilschrifturkundenausBoghazköi, 40 vols. (Berlin 1916–68). Lexiconiconographicummythologiaeclassicae, 8 vols. (Zürich/ Munich/Düsseldorf 1981–97). M.P. de Hoz, Die lydischen Kulte im Lichte der griechischen Inschriften (Asia Minor Studien 36) (Bonn 1999). MonumentaAsiaeMinorisAntiqua, 10 vols. (London 1930–93). Mélangesdel’ÉcolefrançaisedeRome.Antiquité. G. Horsley etal., NewDocumentsIllustratingEarlyChristianity, 10 vols. (North Ryde, NSW/Grand Rapids, MI 1979– ). T. Drew-Bear, NouvellesInscriptionsdePhrygie (Studia Amstelodamensia ad epigraphicam, ius antiquum et papyrologicam pertinentia 16) (Zutphen 1978). L. Robert, Nouvelles Inscriptions de Sardes, I: Décret hellénistiquedeSardes.Dédicacesauxdieuxindigènes.Inscriptionsde lasynagogue (Paris 1964). W. Dittenberger (ed.),OrientisGraeciInscriptioniSelectae.Supplementum Inscriptionum Graecarum, 2 vols. (Hildesheim/ Zürich/New York 1986). L. Robert, Opera Minora Selecta. Épigraphie et antiquités grecques, 7 vols. (Amsterdam 1969–90 : 1–3, 1969 ; 4, 1974, 5–7, 1989-90). E. Dassmann et al. (eds.), Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum. Sachwörtebuch zur Auseinandersetzung des Christentums mitderantikenWelt (Stuttgart 1941– ). Paulys Real–Encyclopädie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft (Stuttgart 1894–1972). RegionalEpigraphicCataloguesofAsiaMinor, vols. 2–5 (Oxford/ London 1982–2007).

XXIV

RHR SEG SGO SNGCopenhagen TAM ŽA ZPE

ABBREVIATIONS

Revuedel’histoiredesreligions. SupplementumEpigraphicumGraecum, 63 vols. (Lyons/Amsterdam 1923– ). R. Merkelbach and J. Stauber (eds.), Steinepigramme aus dem griechischenOsten, 5 vols. (Stuttgart/Munich 1998–2004). SyllogeNummorumGraecorum[Denmark],TheRoyalCollection of Coins and Medals. Danish National Museum, VI: Phrygia to Cilicia (repr. Hewitt, NJ 1982). TituliAsiaeMinoris, 5 vols. (Vienna 1901–2007). ŽivaAntika/AntiquitéVivante (Skopije). ZeitschriftfürPapyrologieundEpigraphik.

INTRODUCTION

FRAMEWORK, TYPOLOGY, THEMES AND RESEARCH DIRECTIONS Eastern cults and practices gradually and persistently pervaded the GraecoRoman world. They did not offer in any way a unitary perspective, they simply had a common geographical origin. Thus, the most correct appellation in their case is the one formulated by Robert Turcan, ‘Graeco-Oriental cults’; the language of the cults was usually Greek, while the iconography etc. differed from that in their lands of origin in consequence of a process of Hellenisation. This is a specific phenomenon belonging to the so-called ‘diaspora cults’ (according to Jonathan Smith and J.H.W.G. Liebenschuetz1) that endures from the Hellenistic period, when these cults make their appearance in the GraecoRoman world, onward, loosening and losing progressively their connection with the ethnic elements and practices of the lands of their origin, thus undergoing significant transformations, iconographically and conceptually. In Asia Minor, this category includes principally Mithra, Mên and Artemis Anaitis (or Anahita), who, from the beginning of the Hellenistic period, lost contact with the Iranian ethnic elements in their territories of origin. The discussion is far from finished about the degree to which Eastern cults influenced the new religious mentalities that emerged in the period of the Principate. Numerous contemporary historians – such as Paul Veyne, Ramsay MacMullen, Robin Lane Fox, Jean Bayet, Marcel Le Glay, Robert Turcan, Jacques Flamant, etc. – have underlined various characteristic elements of the new type of religious thinking that spread throughout the Roman Empire and which was defined as ‘the second paganism’ or ‘a metamorphosed paganism’. On the other hand, we should take into account views specific to the religious philosophy of this period (late Stoicism, Neoplatonism, Neopythagorism), the theosophical oracles at Claros, Didyma and Delphi, or those promoted in the conservative rural environments of the Anatolian Peninsula (on which Louis Robert, Maurice Sartre, Polymnia Athanassiadi, A.R.R. Sheppard, Stephen Mitchell, Marijana Ricl and many others have expressed their opinions). Anatolia has always been a space of cultural exchange, where the various ethnic groups interacted, a fact attested since the very first written records of 1

J.S. Smith 1971, 237–38; Liebenschuetz 2000, 984–1008 (especially 992–97).

2

INTRODUCTION

the Hittite period, i.e. the Late Bronze Age. Syncretic expressions are clearly visible as early as the time of the Neo-Hittite kingdoms, starting with the reign of Hattušili III, and they become more so thanks to such important texts as the treaty between Suppiluliuma I and Šattiwaza/Mattiwaza, where one can notice an incipient phase of Mithraic typology. These cultural and religious changes were best underlined by Maciej Popko in his ReligionsinAsiaMinor,2 and for the Roman and Hellenistic periods in the works of Sartre, Mitchell, Joseph Keil and Beate Dignas. When considering ethnic and cultural exchanges and issues regarding the sacred geography of Anatolia, the mandatory starting point is Strabo’s Geography, who elaborates an ‘inventory’ of the situation during the Augustan period, thus constituting a true Domesday Book for that time. From this foundation we can easily distinguish alterations in mentality and religious imagery under the Principate. Strabo was not the first of the ancient authors to refer to Asia Minor. On the contrary, there were many who preceded him, starting with the logographers and with Herodotus of Halikarnassos. Nevertheless, Strabo described it in a very exact and veridical manner, for which reason he is rightly called the greatest geographer of antiquity. His testimonies concerning the solar and lunar divinities of Asia Minor found epigraphic, literary and numismatic acknowledgment. The data are even more important given that he was a native of Anatolian Pontus (from Amaseia) and, in consequence, he knew thoroughly the cultural and religious context of the ethnic groups he considered when writing about Anatolia. Moreover, he describes these ethnic and cultural entities at the beginning of the major transformation determined by the impact of Roman occupation upon political stability, the prosperity of the provinces, the mobility and permeability of human communities, the tolerance of the authorities regarding local beliefs, etc. But he also gives the same attention to the forms of organisation, legal rights and territories of Anatolian sanctuaries (with references to the presence of magi, sacred slavery, and to the processions and holidays consecrated to Anatolian divinities), and to the permanent intervention of the Roman authorities in the problems of these sanctuaries. Taking into account this ‘inventory’ of Strabo’s works, I will try to elaborate my own analysis of the underlying alterations that occurred in Asia Minor from a structural perspective, concerning religious life in general and that of the solar and lunar cults in particular. I will also analyse the synchronism between the Anatolian syncretic phenomena and those within the Roman Empire, specific to ‘the second paganism’. 2

Popko 1995.

INTRODUCTION

3

ObjectivesProposed From the outset of this project I wanted to analyse the typology, characteristics and conceptual and iconographic elements of the solar and lunar divinities of Asia Minor. I must mention from the start that I have tried to focus especially on native or indigenised cults, considering as a starting point the underlying elements, which I believe to be very important in defining the character of these divinities. The most significant aspect of the ethno-cultural setting is that these local or regional divinities evolved in a Hellenised or gradually Hellenising environment in the eastern part of the Roman Empire. This leads to the multitude of influences and interactions to which they were subject(ed). When studying Anatolian divinities, I do not confine myself to the Roman period of the first three centuries AD, rather I consider it necessary to have an insight into the incipient phases of these cults. The reason is to determine, as accurately as possible, the origin and typology of the divinities, the evolution of the iconography and of elements related to their imagery and symbolic representations, and the origin of certain practices and organisation models, such as sacred prostitution, slavery and properties of the Anatolian templestates. A comparative study can stake out a direct evolving line and identify the ‘kinship’ relations between divinities of the Hittite-Hurrian pantheon (Hebat or Hepat; Šanta) and corresponding local divinities throughout the Roman period (Mâ and Meter Hipta; Sandan). I have not included here divinities such as Artemis Ephesia, Aphrodite of Aphrodisias, Artemis Leukophryene of Magnesia-on-the-Meander or Cybele and Hekate, as they are only accidentally represented with the crescent symbol. Nevertheless, they present numerous functional and iconographic similarities with the female lunar or lunar-solar divinities studied here, with attributes of fertility goddesses, of growth and moistness. Another important aspect to take into account is the issues of polymorphism, polyonymy and the specific cultural adaptations the Anatolian deities had to undertake to cope with various interferences and environments. A polymorphic divinity deploys different typologies depending on the cultural setting he/ she is evolving into. It is well-known among historians of religion that transfer from one cultural setting to another necessarily implies the alteration of the specific characteristics depending on local or regional religious and cultural perceptions (from outer appearance reflected in iconography to one that emerges from the cultual sphere). Eventually, these alterations would determine a gradual change of identity through the conceptual outgrowth of a new type, very different subsequently from the other types emerging in other cultural environments. In certain cases, these intercultural approaches may

4

INTRODUCTION

generate the rise of extreme syncretic phenomena, as shown by numerous examples attested in the Roman period. During the 2nd and 3rd centuries, they could determine an almost complete change of identity, due to the total or partial syncretism of one or several divinities, resulting in a complex polyonymic deity whose name represented the sum of all the compound elements within that of every god, together with the corresponding epithets. For example, in Anatolia and in the Eastern world, one can encounter such syncretism for Hypsistos, Helios, Apollo and Mithra in constructions such as Helios Mithra agios Hypsistos Thourmasgades at Dura in Syria, Helios Theos Hypsistos at Pergamon, Apollo Lairbenos Theos Hypsistos at Hierapolis (Phrygia), Zeus Hypsistos Brontaios at Miletupolis in Mysia or Theos Hypsistos epekoos Helios at Amastris in Paphlagonia. In other cases, such as that of Artemis Anaitis or Mên, they were not subject to total syncretism; we have information only of a progressive adaptation from the native Iranian environment to the regional cultural particularities of Lydia and Pontus. Other divinities, such as Mâ of Komana in Cappadocia (Kummani in Hittite), had been attested in the same region almost continuously for approximately two millennia without any major changes in the perception or cultual forms. The latter divinity was the only Eastern one that thoroughly unofficially entered the Roman pantheon, as early as the reign of Sulla, through her identification with the Roman goddess of war that later became Bellona pedisequa (in other words, ‘the one that follows’, as the ceremonies held at Rome in her honour took place immediately after the Megalensian games dedicated to Cybele, the only Eastern goddess officially adopted through a senatusconsultum). Many of the inscriptions from the western and southern parts of Anatolia are somehow confined within the same imaginary demarcation line drawn between what is known as the deeply Hellenised coastal region and the mainly rural and more conservative hinterland. The only notable exceptions are the great sanctuaries in eastern Anatolia, the so-called temple-states, which also underwent structural changes, but were not entirely removed or altered. Is this demarcation line sufficiently clear and, most of all, stable? Do we have reason to believe that the Hellenised area was so restrictive that it totally prohibited access from the interior of the continent? Should we embrace the idea of ‘worlds apart’ that Mitchell mentions in his fundamental work on Anatolia, or should we simply reject this, as Dignas does? How far can we go with such a classification? Were there, towards the hinterland, at least in the case of eastern Lydia, some illiterate villagers in isolated and remote regions or should we believe, as Georg Petzl states, that ‘in the Hellenistic and Roman period, education and culture were highly valued by the inhabitants of these regions’?3 3

Petzl 2002, 93.

INTRODUCTION

5

Structure The book is divided into three parts, each comprising two or three chapters, concerning aspects of the world of the gods, that of mortals and, finally, to the relations between dedicators and divinities. I have chosen as a starting point the analysis of books about Asia Minor included in Strabo’s Geography, as they actually represent the most complete ‘inventory’ of the ethno-cultural and religious situation in the area at the beginning of the Principate. Strabo’s testimony is very interesting, not least because he was a native of the places he described, thus very well aware of the local context. But it is also a pretext to define the confines of Asia Minor, the issues the region had to deal with during Roman domination, the mobile limits of Hellenism, the blending of an ethnic and cultural melting pot in the west concomitantly with the Iranisation of the east, the cleavage between coastal and inland areas, the way in which Greeks and barbarians were perceived, the ethnic specificity of the native populations, etc. In practice, these elements are indispensable when considering the ethno-cultural environment in which these cults evolved during Roman domination and the religious phenomena that occurred within the limits of this area. The deities presented in the first part are grouped according to certain characteristics that are critically important. There is an extended examination of the universal gods (the first chapter) due to their importance for Asia Minor and to the Graeco-Roman East in general. The chapters of the first part have an identical structure: study of the origin of the name and of the divinity, an attempt to determine the area of dissemination, epithets, attributes, identifications with other gods, myths and the associated divinities, as well as symbolism and iconographical elements. The second part considers the economic life of the temples, the organisation of the sacred space, the nature of the priesthood and the categories of dedicators, association patterns, age and kinship. The final part analyses the alterations that occurred during this period in the perception of the divine world both in the Anatolian area and in the entire Roman Empire. Among the most important themes approached in the third part are the receptivity to dedicators’ demands, how gods and people communicated through oniric visions, divine commandments, epiphanies and oracles, as well as the ordering of the divine world. InvestigativeMethods Based on preliminary readings, an initial selection of the divinities to be included was made. A long period of research followed, selecting information and elaborating themes within the criteria determined for chapters within the

6

INTRODUCTION

first part of the book: origin of the name and of the divinity; area of dissemination; epithets; attributes; identifications with other gods; myths and divinities associated; as well as symbolism and iconographic elements; completed by a series of general and special papers on political, economic, social, cultural and religious aspects of Anatolia and of the Pontic, Aegean-Mediterranean and Near East regions from the Late Bronze Age – the Hittite period – to the Late Antique, with a focus, naturally, on the period of the Principate. I have also consulted works that focused on the religious phenomenology of the Eastern world, with special references to the Hellenistic and Roman Imperial periods. I chose this with the purpose of having a clear overall picture of the evolution and typology of these divinities, through a comparative, equally synchronic and diachronic study that also included other periods or regions with similar expressions. The research activity included documentation stages at major institutions abroad, mainly as a fellow of the French School of Archaeology at Athens and of the British Institute at Ankara (since 2006). During the research, I had access to the libraries of other institutions, such as the French Institute of Anatolian Studies in Istanbul, the Research Centre for Anatolian Civilizations of the Koç University in Istanbul, the Dutch School in Istanbul, the establishments of the German Archaeological Institute in Istanbul and in Athens, as well as the Swedish School in Rome. All of this enabled me to elaborate to compile an extended database comprising: editions of ancient authors, with translations in English, French, German or Romanian; most of the corpora of inscriptions, as well as regional ones (InschriftenGriechischerStädteausKleinasien, Tituli AsiaeMinoris, MonumentaAsiaeMinorisAntiqua, RegionalEpigraphicCatalogues of Asia Minor, etc.); specialised or general collections (Asia Minor Studien, AufstiegundNiedergangderRömischenWelt, the CambridgeAncient History, the CambridgeHistoryofIran, the CambridgeHistoryofJudaism); the main numismatic catalogues (RomanImperialCoinage, RomanProvincial Coinage, etc.); and a significant number of articles within specialist journals. I have also used studies that provide critical examination of ancient literary sources, such as those concerning the interpretation of the Avestan texts or those of Posidonius, Porphyrius and Herodotus on Mithraism, by Alain Blomart, Robert Turcan, Ilya Gershevitch and Thomas Corsten.4 For this analysis, I started with a representative selection of testimonia that included most of the epigraphic and iconographic mentions. The only exception is Pisidian Antioch where I had to restrict the number of the selections included in the epigraphic database/catalogue. At the end of the book, 4

Blomart 1993; 1994; Gershevitch 1959; Corsten 1991; Turcan 1968; 1975; etc.

INTRODUCTION

7

I have added literary testimonia, as well as a large thematically organised index. Thus, I begin with systematised epigraphic information, adding the data provided by the archaeological, literary and numismatic investigations. The solar and lunar character of the gods is indicated, first of all, by the symbolic elements accompanying or sometimes partially replacing their representations, mainly the radiate crown and the crescent. Most of them are also present in the iconographic descriptions at the end of the second part of the volume, except for Sandan and Artemis Pergaia. If, in the case of the latter, I have inserted the presentation of an idol with lunar attributes within the text of the corresponding chapter, in that of Sandan there are studies defining him as a solar divinity, not only in the Hittite but in the Roman period as well. There is numismatic evidence presented in the works of Pierre Chuvin, Nicole Thierry and Christian Augé, as well as in SNG Copenhagen VI, where the god is depicted holding a radiate crown. Also, a late testimony of St Jerome, who takes information from a lost work of Eusebius of Kaisareia, shows that this solar god, assimilated to a mountain, was still worshipped in the 4th century AD. As I have also indicated in connection with the fertility goddesses that were excluded from this approach, I could not include here the multitude of local divinities assimilated as various Anatolian Apollos (such as Apollo Bozenos, Apollo Karios, Apollo Perminoundeis, etc.): they present certain iconographic similarities, but not solar symbols as well. In other words, I have studied only the divinities that are clearly adjacent to such iconography. GEOPOLITICAL AND ETHNO-DEMOGRAPHIC CIRCUMSTANCES TheLimitsoftheAnatolianEthno-culturalArea The integration of the Anatolian territories into the Roman world took around two centuries, from 133 BC – when the Romans inherited the kingdom of Pergamon from Attalos III by testament – until AD 72, when Armenia Minor was included in Cappadocia, and the small Cilician territories were also annexed.5 As Mitchell shows, from this perspective Strabo’s testimony is the most important because it defines the entire first phase. The Roman history of Asia Minor can be divided into three periods:6

5 For the circumstances of the integration, see Picard et al. 2003, 149–66; Mitchell 2000, 119; Sartre 1998, 333–39. 6 Mitchell 2000, 117.

8

INTRODUCTION

1) Following the annexation of the Attalid kingdom until the time of Augustus, meaning the period that presents the initial impact of Roman domination. It is best described in Strabo’s Geography. For specific situations about the administrative organisation of the Anatolian territories before the Roman domination, his information represents the only literary evidence available;7 2) The early Imperial period (the Principate), i.e. the first three centuries AD; 3) The late Imperial period, corresponding to the victory of Christianity; roughly speaking, between the reign of Constantine and that of Justinian. When talking about the Anatolian ethno-cultural environment, we should underline that, despite the significant population diversity, there was great ethnic and demographic stability from the beginning of the Hellenistic period until the end of late antiquity. The region was not deeply endangered by the great invasions of large migratory groups that started in the middle of the 3rd century, unlike other areas within the empire, or by their settlement.8 Political stability, efficient administration and the security setting made this area one of the most prosperous in the entire empire. Roman domination did not lead to profound Romanisation of the native population as in other parts of the Graeco-Roman world; on the contrary, we witness an ongoing Hellenisation process due to the cultural prestige and utility of the Greek language in the eastern half of the Roman Empire. The populations within the Anatolian Peninsula gradually became Hellenised and, by the 4th–5th centuries, local idioms had completely disappeared.9 Roman colonisation was limited, and the most important colonies, founded in the Augustan period in the Pisidian and Isaurian areas as a result of the Homonadensian War, had only a strategic and military importance. Herodotus defined the territory of Asia Minor as a peninsula, an isthmus10 or an extension of the continent. To the north, it was separated by the Black Sea and by the Hellespont; to the south it started from the Gulf of Myriandros, situated near Phoenicia, and reached Cape Triopion in Caria.11 He also believed 7

Panichi 2005, 213. Lebreton 2009, 41. 9 Salmeri 2004, 203–06; Doni 2009, 216. 10 A view that Strabo took over later: Geography 12. 1. 3. For the terminology used here, see Debord 1999, 83. 11 Herodotus 4. 38 [ed. Grene]: ‘From the region bounded by these two seas, westward there stretch out two peninsulas (which I will now describe) to the sea. On the north side, one of these peninsulas, starting from the Phasis, stretches seaward along the Pontus and the Hellespont as far as Sigeum in the Troad. To the south, this same peninsula stretched along the seacoast from the Myriandic Gulf in Phoenicia as far as the Triopian Cape. In this peninsula there are thirty nations.’ It is one of the two peninsulas described by Herodotus, which framed the territory of 8

INTRODUCTION

9

that the Halys river separated Asia Minor from the rest of Asia, following roughly an imaginary axis that started from Sinope and led to the Tarsus in Cilicia.12 In the opinion of Pierre Debord, this trajectory represented a north– south itinerary that was not Greek13 but Persian or Anatolian in conception.14 According to the division of continents made by Strabo, the Anatolian Peninsula was a part of Asia, which was separated in the north from Europe by the Tanais (today, the Don).15 Strabo also clearly defined the limits of Anatolia, to which he dedicated three of the books in his Geography, by indicating the corresponding populations. At the very beginning of Book 12, he shows that the name given to the entire peninsula, similar to that of the continent, is Asia, and then he enumerates the most important groups inhabiting it (12. 1. 3: Text no. 1). In another passage, criticising Apollodorus for altering the words of Ephorus regarding the tribe of the Chalybes, Strabo establishes the eastern limits of the peninsula (Text no. 2). A third paragraph is that in which Strabo shows the importance that Ephesos acquired during the Roman domination: ‘… and the city, because of its advantageous situation in other respects, grows daily, and is the largest emporium in Asia this side the Taurus’ (Strabo 14. 1. 24). The name Asia is mentioned as Aswia16 or Assuwa as early as the Hittite period,17 defining a territory in the western part of the peninsula, most probably situated initially in Lydia and in the later Ionia.18 In the Annalsof Tudhaliyas I/II

Asia. By ignoring the Persian Gulf, Herodotus delimits the first peninsula to contain Phoenicia, Arabia, Assyria and Persia (4. 38). See also Debord 1999, 83–85. 12 Herodotus 1. 6, 1. 28 and especially 1. 72 [ed. Grene]: ‘So the Halys cuts off almost the whole of the lower part of Asia, from the Mediterranean opposite Cyprus to the Euxine. This is the neck of all this land, and it is, in length of journeying, five days of travel for an active man.’ See also Lebreton 2009, 28–30; Prontera 2000, 95. 13 The traditional Greek manner of describing the areas of Asia Minor was that of a fictional itinerary that started with the presentation of the coastal areas, advancing towards the interior of the continent. It is the method used by Herodotus 4. 37–39, then in the Periplus of Ps.-Scymnos F 21–F 34, Pomponius Mela 1. 2. 9–14, Dionysius Periegetes 765–875 = GGM II, 152–58, and, eventually, Strabo 12. 1. 3. 14 Debord 1999, 83–86 (and map 2 at p. 84, where the road is indicated as ‘route de l’isthme’: from Tarsus, passing through the Cilician Gates, then through Tyana, through Mazaka, crossing the royal road northward at half the distance between Zela and Ancyra, finally arriving to Sinope); Lebreton 2009, 25–31. 15 Strabo 17. 3. 1 (824). The same delimitation at Ps.-Scymnos F 16 and Pomponius Mela 1. 11. 8; 1. 3. 15. Dueck 2000, 44–45. 16 In the Mycenaean tablets of Pylos, among the women that were part of the palace staff, there are also mentions of Lydian natives. The female workers are grouped in the A series of the personnel list depending on the birthplace, in this case, a-*64-ja/Aswiai/ indicating the women of Aswia, meaning of Lydia (Nikoloudis 2007, 46–48; Watkins 2007, 136). 17 KUB XXIII, 11+12 (= CTH 142); KUB XXIII, 14 (= CTH 211.5); KUB XXVI, 91 (= CTH 183); KUB XXXIV, 43 (= CTH 824); KUB XL, 62 + KUB XIII, 9 (= CTH 258). 18 Bryce 2005, 125; Mitchell 2000, 141, n. 36.

10

INTRODUCTION

of the 14th century BC, there are mentions of the campaigns initiated by the Hittite sovereign to destroy the land of Assuwa, in fact an entire confederacy of 22 states that had joined forces to fight against the Hittites.19 The name of the land is also confirmed by another source that refers to the same conflict, i.e. an inscription written in Akkadian on the blade of a sword, which indicates that the object was dedicated to the Storm God after the victory of Duthaliyas [Tudhaliyas] over the Assuwa league.20 This large coalition of small kingdoms extended from the north-western part of the peninsula, from Wilusa, identified with Ilion, to central-southern Anatolia, also comprising the territory of Lukka (the later Lycia).21 As a result of this conflict, at the beginning of the 13th century BC, the Hittite sovereign Muwattalli concluded a treaty with the king of Wilusa, Alaksandu, through which the latter admitted his subordination to the Land of Hatti.22 Similarly, the Hittites made agreements with other states within Arzawa, meaning within the western area of Asia Minor, through which they acknowledged Hittite domination: the Land of the Seha River, situated in the central-western part of the peninsula23 at the level of the island of Lazpa (Lesbos), the kingdom of Hapalla (the central area of Phrygia) and MiraKuwaliya, with its capital at Apaša (later Ephesos).24 Yet the Hittiteswere, in their turn, identified as Asian on a series of monuments erected by Seti I at Beisan (Beth-Shan) and Karnak, which commemorate the victories obtained against Muwattalli II in Asia Minor, northern Syria and Palestine.25 However, Asia was also the name of the first province that the Romans administratively organised on this continent. Correspondingly, the first North African province was called Africa, equivalent of the Libya mentioned by Strabo.26 Nevertheless, it becomes apparent that the new province in the west of Anatolia comprised just a small part of the Anatolian territories, mainly those that had belonged to the Attalid kingdom, not the entirety of Asia Minor. 19

KUB XXIII, 27; Bryce 2006, 107–12. E. Cline 2007, 14, who also offers a translation: ‘As Duthaliya [Thudaliya] the Great King shattered the Assuwa-Country, he dedicated these swords to the Storm God, his Lord.’ 21 Killbrew 2005, 31; Bryce 2006, 107 and 148; for the conflict with Ahhiyawa and with Lukka during the reign of Hattušilli III, see Nikoloudis 2007, 49. 22 Bryce 2006, 107–09. 23 Gurney 1954, 40–50; Singer 2007, 21. Christopher Roosevelt considers that the name is related to the area of Lydia (Roosevelt 2009, 16–17). 24 Bryce 2006, 107; Mason 2007, 57–58. 25 Bryce 2005, 229; Killbrew 2005, 83; Pritchard 1955, 253–55. 26 Keil 1950, 740–41; Oxford Classical Dictionary, 2nd ed. (1970), 22–23; Mitchell 2000, 121; Prévot etal. 2006, 45–46; Arndt and Gingrich 1963, 115. For the equivalence of the names Asia Minor and Anatolia, see the contributions of Salmeri 1996, and 2000, 162, n. 12: ‘Con la denominazzione di Asia Minore ci si referisce alla parte più occidentale del continente asiatico, equivalente alla Turchia moderna tra l’Egeo e l’Eufrate.’ 20

INTRODUCTION

11

Varro underlines the fact that Asia is a term which refers not only to a continental entity but to a Roman province as well.27 Later on, we encounter such references to Asia as a province in Cicero (EpistolaeadAtticum 1. 15. 1) and Tacitus (Annals 4. 13). Similarly, the same idea of a province is indicated by an inscription where two archiereis of Asia, Ti. Claudius Celsus Orestianos and Flavia Lykia, the ‘daughter of the city’, were honoured by the Greeks of Asia and by the people (demos) of Kibyra.28 After the administrative reorganisation undertaken by Diocletian and Constantine the Great, the name applied to the newly formed province in the west of Anatolia. An interesting example from this period of a description of the travels undertaken during his lifetime by the deceased is the inscription of Aurelius Gaius, a veteran who settled in Phrygia at Kotiaeion (today Kütahya).29 The region of Asia Minor represents, in this case, the nodal point of the fictional itinerary described by Gaius.30 Thus, as far as the name Asia is concerned, there are three meanings: one referring to Asia as the territory of an entire continent, starting from the Bosporos and Propontis and leading to Sogdiana, and to India; another with the sense of Asia Minor, relating to the entire Anatolian Peninsula;31 and a third strictly limited to the provincial territory. Until not long ago, the name Asia Minor was considered to have been recorded in writing initially only in late antiquity, by Orosius,32 or later, around the 10th century, when this notion appeared in the work of Constantine Porphyrogenetos.33 However, it was mentioned for the first time by Ptolemy and then by Socrates Scholasticus in hisEcclesiasticalHistory. It was subsequently used in the 5th century, together with the term Asia, by Orosius as an equivalent of the entire area confined within the limits of the Anatolian Peninsula. With

27 Varro Delingualatina 5. 16: ‘Caelum “sky” is used in two ways, just as is Asia. For Asia means the Asia, which is not Europe, wherein is even Syria; and Asia means also that part of the aforementioned Asia, which is Ionia and our province’. Also, references to Asia as province in Deagricultura 1. 17. 2–3; 1. 8. 5–6 and 1. 2. 4, and as continent in Delingualatina 7. 21; 8. 56 and 9. 27. 28 RECAM III, 15.12; contra Georgacas 1971, 29, who considers that he refers to the entire area of Asia Minor. See also IGSK 67, 7, datable to AD 123–124 and 212–214, mentioning Smyrna as ‘…most illustrious, first of cities of Asia and twice neokoros of the Augusti’. 29 AÉ 1981, 777. 30 Lebreton 2009, 17. 31 Xenophon also makes references to Asia concerning the Greek cities on the western coast of Asia Minor (Hellenica 4. 2. 5–6; 4. 3. 1, 15; 4. 8. 5, 14, 21, 27; 5. 1. 31; 5. 3. 8) or to the populations within the Anatolian peninsula. See Xénophon Cyropedia 1. 1. 4. 32 Georgacas 1971, 30. 33 EncyclopaediaBritannica, rev. 14th ed., vol. 2 (1956), 535.

12

INTRODUCTION

the same form, it was then used by Ioannes Lydus and Theophanes and, finally, by Constantine Porphyrogenetos.34 The first and the most interesting example is that of Ptolemy. His perspective on the inhabited world of his time seems to have been influenced by a certain astrological determinism: he considered that the inclinations and character of the population within any given area were influenced by its geographical position and by the corresponding astrological sign. He divided the world into four parts, the same number as the triangles formed by the constellations influencing them (Ptolemy Tetrabyblos2. 3 [59–60]). He defined the limits of the various areas in Asia by contrasting them.35 This way, the southern quarter of Greater Asia comprised India,36 Ariana, Gedrosia, Parthia, Media, Persia, Babylonia, Mesopotamia and Assyria, with a corresponding triangle formed by the constellations of Taurus, Virgo and Capricorn (Ptolemy Tetrabyblos 2. 3 [64]). The northern quarter of Greater Asia comprised Hyrcania, Armenia, Matiana, Bactriana, Casperia, Serica, Sauromatica, Oxiana and Sogdiana, governed by the north-eastern triangle: Gemini, Libra and Aquarius (Ptolemy Tetrabyblos 2. 3 [66 –67]). The south-western corner of this quarter differed from the other parts, as its regions were the closest to the central area of the inhabited world: Bithynia, Phrygia, Colchis, Syria, Commagene, Cappadocia, Lydia, Lycia, Cilicia and Pamphylia (Ptolemy Tetrabyblos 2. 3 [68]). Cancer, Scorpio and Pisces govern them. Thus, this enumeration comprises the regions corresponding to Asia Minor, to which Syria and Colchis are added. Moreover, Ptolemy even used three times the name ‘Asia Minor’, clearly indicating its southern limit, which starts from Cilicia and ends at the level of the Cyclades (Ptolemy Tetrabyblos 2. 3 [62, 63 and 73]). The Greeks on the western coast used to name Asia Minor as Anatolia, a term that comes from the Greek word anatolē (ἀνατολή), meaning East,

34 Georgacas 1971, 31; John the Lydian DeMagistratibusreipublicaeRomanae 2. 10. 2 and 3. 31. 5, both passages referring to the relocation of the troops from Scythia and Moesia to Asia Minor by Constantine the Great; Paulus Orosius History Against the Pagans 1. 2. 26: ‘The region of Asia, or to speak accurately, Asia Minor, except the eastern part which advances towards Cappadocia and Syria, is surrounded on all sides by the sea: on the north by the Euxines Pontus; to the west, by the Propontis and the Hellespont, to the south by our sea [Mediterranean]; Mt Olympus is found there’. 35 Still by contrast, as in the case of Ptolemy, the funerary epitaph found at Nicaea, belonging to Hedys the doctor, may indicate that he had visited, during his lifetime, a different area than that where he was buried, Asia Minor. He mentions explicitly that, in his journeys, he saw ‘the currents of the Ocean and the bounds of the continent of Europe, and Libya and Great Asia’ (see Lebreton 2009, 18; Hellenica 2, 103–08). 36 Named in another place Ethiopia. See Ptolemy Tetrabyblos 2. 3 (60).

INTRODUCTION

13

Orient or Levant.37 Nevertheless, in this case it indicated not only a direction,38 as Sartre asserts, but an area that, starting in the 3rd century, became the equivalent of Asia Minor, even though, given its meaning, it could have been identified, at least theoretically, with other Eastern areas, such as Syria, Mesopotamia or Egypt.39 Nevertheless, modern historians noted the equivalence between the notions of Asia Minor and Anatolia, with a single notable exception, that of Sartre who, starting from a wrong interpretation of certain passages in the Introduction to Mitchell’s Anatolia:Land,Men,andGodsinAsiaMinor, comes to the wrong conclusion that there are two distinct entities, i.e. Asia Minor and Anatolia, an idea with which not even the French historians who have studied the subject agree: Pierre Briant,40 Pierre Debord,41 Jacques des Courtils,42 Alain Bresson,43 Jean-Louis Ferrary,44 Hadrien Bru, François Kirbihler and Stéphane Lebreton.45 In reality, Mitchell always refers to the west of Asia Minor and to the Anatolian plateau. Sartre presents the explanation for this theory in the first note of his book L’AsieMineureetl’Anatolied’AlexandreàDioclétien…46 In his work L’Orient romain,47 he had already mentioned the provinces that he thought they belonged to Asia Minor (Asia, Bithynia-Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Cilicia and Cyprus), but without any bibliographical references. Nonetheless, in the seventh chapter of the book, ‘Les provinces d’Asie Mineure’, he considers to the entire area of the Anatolian Peninsula.48 He also mentions the wholeness of this space later, when talking about ‘Les provinces anatoliennes’ in the eighth 37

Ramsay 1890, 495: ‘The terms “Asia Minor” and “Anatolia” are used rather loosely (…) as equivalent, denoting the whole peninsula west of Armenia and Mount Amanus’; Georgacas 1971, 27–30. 38 The word had various semantic valences, from the rise of a star or of any given celestial body, to the direction from where the Sun rises, astrologic ascendant, phase of a new moon, water stream source, the teething, or, in a Christian setting, it could refer to Christ as the East (Bailly 1966, 1950, 143; Arndt and Gingrich 1963, 61–62; Liddell and Scott 1996, 123). 39 Lampe 1961, 126; Sophocles 1983, 154; Georgacas 1971, 40. 40 Briant 1986. 41 Debord 2001, 145; 1999, 83–87. 42 des Courtils 2001. 43 Bresson 2001. 44 Ferrary 2001. 45 Bru, Kirbihler and Lebreton are editors of L’Asie Mineure dans l’Antiquité: échanges, populations et territoires. Regards actuels sur une péninsule, with a preface by Sartre himself. For the limits of Asia Minor and its identification with Anatolia, see Bru, Kirbihler and Lebreton 2009, 7–8. 46 Sartre 1995, 5. 47 Sartre 1991, 257. 48 Sartre 1991.

14

INTRODUCTION

chapter of Claude Lepelley’s Rome et l’intégration de l’Empire.49 More recently, he has added Lycia to this area, which he had ‘omitted’ initially, but eliminating Cilicia, Cappadocia, Galatia and Cyprus.50 Elsewhere in the same volume, he states that L’Anatolie désigne chez les Grecs davantage une direction qu’un pays. Il n’existe donc pas de définition territoriale du terme. Si les géographes nomment aujourd’hui ainsi l’ensemble de la péninsule qu’occupe la Turquie, les historiens en limitent plus volontiers l’étendue aux parties non égéennes, la distinguant ainsi de l’Asie Mineure. C’est le sens qui est retenu ici.51

It is thus a theory surprisingly lacking both method and constancy, which aims at demonstrating the very existence of a cleavage between the more Hellenised coastal areas and the yet ‘barbarian’ inland, a reality thoroughly underlined and commented upon in detail by Mitchell, Dignas, Ricl, Debord, Arminda Lozano and others. Despite the opinions of Sartre, I believe that Strabo defines in a very clear manner the boundaries of the Anatolian area, given that in Books 12–14 he talked about the whole peninsula, and in 14. 5. 22–24 he also explicitly indicated the populations inhabiting it, as well as its eastern limits.52 On the other side, the same cultural delimitation between the western areas of Asia Minor and the rest of the Anatolian Peninsula is also naturally perceived in both the German and Anglo-American historical literature.53

49

Sartre 1998. Sartre 2005, 252: ‘On désigne sous ce nom l’extrémité occidentale de la péninsule anatolienne, la façade égéenne située entre le Bosphore et la Lycie. Avant la conquête d’Alexandre, on y distinguait Eolide, Ionie et Doréide, en fonction de l’origine des colons grecs qui s’y étaient installés, mais, aux époques hellénistique et impériale, on compte du nord au sud la Bithynie, la Mysie, la Lydie, la Carie et la Lycie. S’y ajoutent les îles, proches du continent, de Ténédos et Imbros au nord, à Rhodes au sud, en passant par Lemnos, Lesbos, Chios et Samos pour se limiter aux plus importantes.’ 51 Lebrun and Sartre 2005, 108. 52 I also underline the opinion of Francesco Prontera: ‘Nella descrizione Straboe ha tuttavia salvaguardato l’unità geografica della penisola anatolica, collocandone alla fine (XIV, 3–5) le regioni ἐκτὸς τοῦ Ταύρου (Lycia, Panfilia e Cilicia con Cipro), che preparano così il passaggio alla restante trans-taurica, dove però si ricomincia dall’India (…), non dalla Siria. Dal XII al XIV libro il geografo non perderà mai di vista la fascia dele Tauro, che segna il limite meridionale delle singole corografie dalla Cappadocia alla Caria (Cappadocia, Ponto, Bitinia, Paflagonia, Galazia, Lycaonia, Pisidia, Frigia e Mysia, Troade, Lidia, Ionia, Caria)’ (Prontera 2000, 103). 53 Petzl 2002, 381. George Hanfmann also defined the functionality of the western territory of the peninsula, indicating it as ‘the zone of the peninsula of Asia Minor which represents most immediately the interplay and interpenetration of the Mediterranean and Anatolian and that of Near Eastern cultures’ (Hanfmann 1975, 1). 50

INTRODUCTION

15

TheEthno-culturalModellingofAsiaMinorinStrabo’sPerception:Greeks, RomansandNatives Strabo was not the first ancient author to give an account of Asia Minor. However, he described it in very minute detail, with an exact indication of the ethnic and religious complexity of the entire peninsula, initially starting from information that he had obtained personally, then by consulting an enormous body of documentary material. It is not by chance that he was considered by posterity the greatest geographer of his time – the end of the Republic and the beginning of the Principate – even though his contemporaries did not value him as he deserved.54 Strabo’s testimony on Asia Minor is particularly interesting because he was a native of the Pontic area who knew the local context very well. Moreover, he mentioned the initial impact of Roman domination upon the Anatolian territories, the integration of the native groups, the ethnic structure of the populations in the peninsula, the relations between the Romans and local client kingdoms, etc. As to religious life, he described the organisation, legal rights and territorial structures of the Anatolian sanctuaries, the presence of magi, sacred slaves, sacred prostitution, etc. His testimony is confirmed by numerous literary, epigraphic and numismatic sources. The region from which Strabo came is the Pontus or Pontic Cappadocia. Even though the historiography recorded him as a Greek author, his native city – Amaseia, an important city and former capital of the Pontic kingdom – was not properly a Greek city, as Sinope, Amissos and Trapezos were. This is why Josephus Flavius justly considered Strabo ‘a Cappadocian’.55 He himself is a clear example of deliberate acknowledgment of identity in a multi-ethnic and multi-linguistic cultural setting such as that of Asia Minor. Moreover, the expression of ethnic belonging involves a process of awareness concerning the adoption of an individual or collective identity.56 This process was particularly strong in Strabo’s case, also taking into account the history of his family. Recent studies by Sarah Pothecary and Edward van der Vliet even demonstrated that Strabo, as well as some members of his family, obtained Roman citizenship,57 which leads us to the issue of multiple identity,given that since his early days he had known a multi-ethnic setting dominated and shaped by two important cultures – Greek and Roman. Educated in the spirit of Greek culture and of its 54 His work was practically unknown until the 2nd or 3rd centuries AD (Lebreton 2009, 37–38; Dueck 2000, 145, 151–52). 55 Richards 1941, 79–80; Dueck 2000, 3–4. Richards clearly considered Strabo an exponent of the native Pontic aristocracy, who ended up taking Greek identity and culture. 56 van der Vliet 2003, 258. 57 van der Vliet 2003, 269–71; Pothecary 1999, 699–703.

16

INTRODUCTION

values, being the pupil of illustrious teachers such as Aristodemos of Nysa or Tyrannion of Amissos, he remained for a while at Nysa, in the Carian area of the province of Asia. The fact that he acknowledges a Greek identity in his native city of the Pontus does not exclude the possibility of his having barbarians among his ancestors. There are at least two examples that indicate there were foreigners among the members of his family. The first is Moaphernes, whose name shows his Iranian origin, who becomes governor and favourite of Mithridates VI Eupator. Moaphernes’ brother was the husband of Lagetas’ daughter, meaning of Strabo’s maternal grandmother. Unlike him, who remained loyal to Mithridates until the end, all the other members of his family took the side of Romans. Among them was his paternal grandfather, Ainiates (?), who was upset because the sovereign had had his first cousin (or nephew?) Tibius (probably a native as well) killed (Strabo 12. 3. 33), thus casing 15 fortresses to surrender to Lucullus in the course of the Second Mithridatic War. On the other side, it was another member of his family, Dorylaios, who became the high priest of the goddess Mâ during the reign of Mithridates Eupator in Pontic Komana. This specific function was an important one reserved to the members of the local aristocracy, which made the possessor the second man in the state after the king (Strabo 12. 3. 32–33). The treatise on general geography written by Strabo represented one of the most valuable syntheses on the currently known world (oikoumene), where he used the most accurate information available in the scientific world of that time.58 Among the original elements within it are the descriptions of recently discovered regions, as well as the uniqueness of his commentaries. It should also be underlined that, when taking information from other sources, he did not just insert it, but he reshaped and adapted it according to his own beliefs.59 As far as Poseidonios is concerned – despite his personal affinities for Stoic philosophy – Strabo limited his interest in his work mainly to the strictly geographical aspect, sometimes criticising him for his commentaries on Homer or on Eudoxos of Kyzikos,60 or on the division of continents.61 Even though it was one of his main documentary sources, besides Homer, Eratosthenes and Polybios, he used it only for the first two books, when describing Iberia and Gallia, the regions around the Black Sea, with the exception of Anatolia.62 There 58 He brings important contributions referring to the calculation of the Earth’s surface, for example, that he approximates better than Eratosthenes or Poseidonios – 70,000 by 30,000 stades. See, in this sense, Dueck 2000, 44. 59 van der Vliet 2003, 259–60 and 269–70. 60 Dueck 2000, 60–61. 61 Dueck 2000, 44–45. 62 Braund 2005.

INTRODUCTION

17

is only one episode in the history of Asia Minor that Strabo clearly takes from Poseidonios, as did Plutarch and Appian – that which concerned the elimination of the Cilician pirates by Pompey, but without giving any detail of the cult of Mithra.63 Even his determinist view of the influence of the climate upon the degree of civilisation and the customs of certain populations represents, according to some analysts of his work, a borrowing from Platonic philosophy rather than that of Poseidonios, though this very perspective is also present in the work of the latter.64 Nonetheless, Strabo did not try, unlike the Ionian materialist philosophers or the logographers, to fill the gaps in the inhabited world with myths or other fictitious stories.65 On the contrary, he came with a new vision of a universal geography, starting from the plan outlined by Eratosthenes.66 His work was also different from that of the other geographers of the time. He used some of their works to argue his own theories regarding the surface of the inhabited world, or for his astronomical or mathematical considerations.67 His work was, at the same time, a scientific geography, as well as a descriptive or human geography, as he was interested especially in human groups and in their ethnic specificity.68 It was also a very important political and economic geography, mainly in respect of Asia Minor, because some of the details about the economy and administrative organisation of Anatolia are unique as literary evidence – otherwise we have only epigraphic and numismatic sources.69 He did not share the pro-Roman ideas of Dionysios of Halikarnassos or of Polybios, though he truly admired the latter and he continued his activity chronologically by writing his own historical work, nowadays lost.70 Nonetheless, his admiration ceased there. Even though he acknowledged the great extent of the Roman world, he did not identify it conceptually – unlike Polybios and other contemporaries and later Roman writers – with the entire inhabited world; he 63 Desideri 1991, 301–02; Strasburger 1965, 42–44, 50–51; Dueck 2000, 61; Arslan 2003, 206–07; see also the chapter ‘Pompey and the Pirates’ in De Souza 1999, 149–78, especially 200–04. 64 Roseman (2005, 33) more of an Aristotelian loan; Dueck (2000, 78–79) believes that this view is determinist, with a Platonic influence. 65 Dihle 1994, 57–61; Said, Trédé and Le Boulluec 2004, 103–04, 178–81. 66 Dueck 2000, 48; Prontera 2000, 98–99. 67 It is Eratosthenes’ geography, where there are geological and mathematical hypotheses. Then, there is Hipparchos’ commentary on it, where he presents the astronomical and mathematical aspects of the geographical facts. Not least, there is the work of Ptolemy, with the same title – Geography, which presents only names of places and peoples. Nevertheless, the last lived a century later (Roseman 2005, 30). 68 Dueck 2000, 53; van der Vliet 2003, 257–59. 69 Lindsay 2005, 184–85, 192–94. 70 Dueck 2000, 46–49.

18

INTRODUCTION

took into account the numerous races outside it as well.71 Some of them, such as the Indians, were evolved enough to be included in the category of ‘refined barbarians’, into which also fell the Romans, in his perspective.72 In addition, he did not seek, as Polybios had done, a positive justification for Roman imperial expansion in the Greek or Hellenised world, nor did he consider that barbarians were only the ones outside the Roman Empire, the contemporary Roman attitude.73 Thus, I do not believe that we can talk about a notional bivalence at Strabo (mainly) regarding the terms barbaros and oikoumene, because – though he was aware of the Roman view – he accepted entirely the Greek perspective and interpretation of these notions. This is why we should consider the Geography as an ‘imperial work’ only in a strictly chronological sense, but not conceptually.74 In the Greek world, the term barbarian had negative connotations, as it was linguistically, ethnically and culturally opposed to Greek (Text no. 4).75 On the individual level, barbarians were savages, rough people (agrioi), who lacked the moral and ethical values of the Greeks: they knew nothing about inner balance, sobriety, moderation and reason proper to the Greeks.76 The barbarian races had none of the characteristics that defined a civilised society, i.e. the organisational capacity or the rule of law which could ensure order and stability.77 Strabo used the example of the Cappadocians who, once the last king died, asked to become part of the Roman Empire because they were incapable of ruling themselves (Strabo 12. 2. 11), even though they had entered the Roman sphere of influence as a client state. When Archelaos died, Cappadocia indeed became a province in AD 17.78 The question remains whether and to what extent Strabo envisaged a third cultural model. Eran Almagor considers that Strabo had a tripartite vision of the world: besides antagonist and the stereotypical division between Greeks and barbarians, he also took into account another category: that which Homer used to call barbarophonoi.79 Here, one should include populations that had 71

Richardson 1979, 1–4. Starting from Eratosthenes’ appreciations (see R. Smith 1981, 36; Champion 2000, 431). It is interesting that Polybios never uses the notion of ‘barbarian’ associated with the Romans. 73 Tanner 2000, 41 and 43–44; Richardson 1979, 4; R. Smith 1981, 35–36; Bowersock 1995, 3–7; Champion 2000, 425–28 (the analysis of the view within Polybios’ speeches related to the Romans as ‘honorary Greeks’). 74 Braund 2005, 216–21. 75 van der Vliet 2003, 260–62. 76 Champion 2000, 431. 77 Dueck 2000, 78–79; van der Vliet 2003, 264. The differentiation depended on the lifestyle, customs, language, appearance, community and political organisation. 78 Panichi 2005, 205. 79 See also Erskine 2001, 51–52. 72

INTRODUCTION

19

not yet reached the cultural level of the Greeks, but that would be part of mixed races.80 However, this is the very idea that Strabo rejected, that of a mixed race composed of Greeks and local populations (Strabo 14. 5. 23: Text no. 3).81 Yet, starting from personal experience, Strabo was aware that this was only a transitional phase,82 and that populations that lived together would become either barbarian (such as those in southern Italy)83 or Hellenic, matters in which deliberate choice played a very important part. In other words, the question did not concern only origin but acknowledged identity as well; otherwise, the risk of barbarisation would have been imminent. Nevertheless, one may find in Strabo the existence of an atypical third category – that of the ‘refined barbarian’, going beyond the stereotypical image of Greek vs barbarian, meaning civilised and educated vs uncivilised and savage. According to Eratosthenes’ categorisation, a taxonomy that Strabo takes over as well, the Romans, just like the Indians, Arians and Carthaginians, were in fact asteioibarbaroi, because even though they were not like the Greeks, they lived under laws, order and civilised leadership (Strabo 1. 4. 9).84 The Romans had practical abilities, while the Greeks had aesthetic skills and preferences (Strabo 5. 3. 8). The Quirites could have had a Greek origin and the Greeks would have founded Rome itself (Strabo 5. 3. 30). The Romans had the political power, but the Greeks enjoyed a particular status in the Roman world because of their cultural superiority. When mentioning the most important centres of Hellenic culture, Strabo does not forget to talk about the ignorance of the Romans regarding artistic productions, which they only imitated or stole and brought to Rome.85 Strabo envisaged the terrestrial world as an enormous island, a cloak that lay in the northern quarter of the globe that was, as the Stoics perceived, a sphere.86 The perception was hellenocentric: the Greeks occupied the centre of the known universe, and the nations were more savage, uneducated and uncivilised, the farther away they were from the centre.87 The coverage dedicated to 80

Almagor 2005, 44–46. See also van der Vliet 2003, 262. 82 The example of those natives of Gargara who became hemibarbaroi once the Milesian colonists were brought there (Strabo 13. 1. 58; cf. 14. 5. 25). See also the commentary of Dueck 2000, 77. 83 R. Smith 1981, 36; Almagor 2005, 43–44. 84 R. Smith 1981, 35–36; Dueck 2000, 82–83; Almagor 2005, 48–49, also commentaries at 52–54 on the different degrees of barbarisation. 85 Dueck 2000, 80–81. 86 For the details on the philosophical orientation of Strabo, see Roseman 2005. As regards the limits of the inhabited world, see also Dueck 2000, 43. 87 Almagor 2005, 47. 81

20

INTRODUCTION

every ethno-cultural area defined its importance.88 Greece is presented in three books of his Geography (8–10), Asia Minor in three (12–14), while peninsular Italy, Sicily and the adjacent islands only in two (5–6), the Iberian Peninsula in one (3), Gaul, Britain, the islands of Ierne and Thule and the Alpine region in one (4), Germany, Dacia, Scythia, Epirus, Thrace and Macedonia in one (7), Parthia, Media and Armenia in one (11), India and Persia in one (15), etc. As for the Anatolian populations, he defined the characteristics of every one of the ethnic groups (ἔθνος) that he considered more important (Text no. 1), 17 overall, among which were three Greek tribes – the Ionians, Aeolians and Dorians (Text no. 3). Greater Cappadocia, including the Pontus, which he also named Pontic Cappadocia, comprised a series of populations who spoke the same language and had customs very similar to those of the Armenians, the Persians and the populations of the southern Caucasus (Strabo 12. 1–4; Text no. 8). Here there were the most important local Anatolian sanctuaries within the central-eastern region of the peninsula, at Pontic Komana (Strabo 12. 3. 36: Text no. 9), Zela (Text no. 10), Cappadocian Komana (Strabo 12. 2. 3: Text no. 7), Venasa (Strabo 12. 2. 6; Text no. 11) and Kabeira (Strabo 12. 3. 31). Southward there is Cilicia, culturally (but not linguistically) divided into two parts. The inhabitants of Tracheia were situated in the western part, also called Rough Cilicia,89 a mountainous, poor and rural region that was inhabited by groups of pirates, as other similar areas such as Isauria, southern Lycaonia and northern Pisidia (Strabo 12. 6. 2–5; 12. 7. 3). The Romans gradually saw them off and pacified the region. Strabo is indeed the only ancient author who refers to the war between the Romans and the Homonadenses in the area in 3–2 BC that determined the Roman colonisation in the region.90 The inhabitants of Cilicia Pedias were strongly Hellenised and they had more important urban centres.91 The Cilicians often claimed supremacy over the Lycaonian territories.92 Lycaonian is attested as spoken language in one of the passages within Acts (14:11). However, the Pamphylian dialects did not survive the Hellenistic period. The Pamphylians, western neighbours of the Cilicians, were seen as having many common elements with the latter (Strabo 12. 7. 2; 14. 5. 5), and 88

Dueck 2000, 77. Rough Cilicia, initially called Hilakku in the Assyrian texts, must have given the name of the entire entity (Cilicia) (see Salmeri 2004, 188). 90 These territories were also home for the Homonadenses, who were involved in very difficult wars with Amyntas and P. Sulpicius Quirinus (see also Syme 1995, 225–41 [colonies]; 256–69 [Homonadenses]; Levick 1967, 203–14). 91 Salmeri 2004, 203: the Hellenisation process in the Cilician coastal regions (including of Rough Cilicia) is considered to have ended, at least linguistically, by the time Pompey intervened in the area. 92 Desideri 1991, 299–300. 89

INTRODUCTION

21

the Pisidians were similar to the Cilicians in lifestyle and political organisation.93 We should note that the populations in the south and south-west of Anatolia were the linguistic and cultural followers of the Luwians, one of the three main ethnic groups of the Hittite Empire.94 On the other hand, the Lycians were considered very different from the Pamphylians and the Cilicians (Strabo 12. 7. 3), despite the striking similarities in their forms of habitation. The Carians, like the Lycians or the inhabitants of western Lydia, Mysia and Bithynia, were Hellenised early.95 People still spoke Carian at Kaunos during Strabo’s lifetime (14. 2. 3, 28). A concrete example of the population mixture within the western part of Anatolia is the city of Kibyratis, situated on the border between the province of Asia and Lycia, where four languages were spoken: Pisidian, Solymian, Greek and Lydian, even though the latter had long disappeared as spoken language in Lydia proper (Strabo 13. 1. 65). The population amalgamation in western Anatolia was caused by two important factors: by the frequent changes in the boundaries of the Roman provinces in Asia Minor, determined by the wish of the Roman central authorities to fragment as much as possible the territories of the local populations into various administrative divisions that cut across ethnic boundaries, with the very purpose of taking better control over them; and also the voluntary intraregional migration of certain types of population, of which the case of the Pisidians is, perhaps, one of the most eloquent. A mountainous population, very dynamic from the military perspective, with a good level of civilisation and organisation, as confirmed by recent archaeological research, they managed to extend westward, starting in the Hellenistic period, into the surrounding territories near Lycia, Milyas and Kibyratis, thus becoming direct neighbours of the Carians and the Lydians. Even though it was less important, their eastward migration had nevertheless the same effects, because of the special mobility of these populations. Starting again in the Hellenistic period, around the Beyşehir and Suğla lakes the Pisidians, Pamphylians, Phrygians, Lycaonians, Isaurians and Cilicians formed an ethnic conglomerate.96 Thracian populations that had migrated from northern Thrace (Mysians) or from the frontier with Macedonia (Phrygians) mostly inhabited the north-west of Asia Minor.97 Though most of them were Hellenised (except for the population 93

Strabo 12. 7. 3; Desideri 1991, 300. Alongside the Hittites, the Nessites and the Phalaleans (see Melchert 2008, 31; Gilan 2007, 107–08; and Yakubovich 2007, 123–24, 129–31). 95 Mitchell 1993 I, 172–73; 2000, 121. 96 Doni 2009, 219–21; Mitchell 1991, 138–45. 97 Brixhe 2008, 69. 94

22

INTRODUCTION

in the centre and east of Phrygia), they continued to use Thracian names.98 The eastern part of Greater Phrygia was invaded in the 4th century BC by Galatian tribes who formed a powerful tetrarchy. The Galatians still spoke the same idiom in late antiquity,99 and Neo-Phrygian was attested in writing up to the 5th century AD.100 Nevertheless, linguistic criteria are not sufficient to identify populations. Take the example of the Kataonians and Cappadocians: though they spoke the same language, they were distinct ethnic groups and this is how they saw themselves; the Kataonians had a different origin and were subject to a process of linguistic acculturation (Strabo 12. 1. 2).101 Strabo also used his personal experience when describing both Cappadocia and the Pontus, territories he had definitely visited. He underlined here economic and cultural relations with Armenia, as two deeply Iranised regions, and he was the only ancient author to provide the information that Cappadocia was divided into two satrapies, which later became the Hellenistic kingdoms of Pontus and Cappadocia.102 It is worth noting the relative linguistic and cultural uniformity within central-eastern Anatolia, a circumstance confirmed by other sources. By contrast, in the western regions of Asia Minor, frequent migrations, temporary hegemonies and exchange relations with the Greeks had resulted in the gradual loss of the local idioms and the intermixture of populations (Strabo 12. 4. 6). As noted previously, the Romans also contributed to these alterations (μεταβολαί), without taking into account the specificity of the Anatolian populations when organising their administration. This intensified the amalgamation process103 and made the acknowledgment of ethnic limits impossible (Strabo 12. 4. 4), a subject upon which ancient authors could not agree either (Strabo 12. 8. 7). On the other hand, it is proven that political and administrative stability, security and prosperity, mobility and economic and cultural exchange led to an intensification of Hellenisation and intermixture of the native populations in the Roman Imperial period. Studies by numerous historians and linguists have underlined two main aspects: 1. The existence of a linguistic and cultural cleavage between the coastal, more Hellenised regions and those in the interior of the peninsula;104

98

Mitchell 1993 I, 175. Mitchell 1993 I, 173. 100 Brixhe 2008, 72. 101 See also the commentary of Mitchell 2000, 120. 102 Panichi 2005, 200–04 and n. 3. 103 Almagor 2005, 53; Ferrary 2001, 100–06. 104 Dignas 2003, 77–79; Lane Fox 1997, 44–46. 99

INTRODUCTION

23

2. In the inland areas, such as Phrygia, Galatia or Cappadocia, only the elites Hellenised rapidly, and local idioms may have survived linguistically in isolated enclaves until the 4th–5th centuries AD.105 Nevertheless, the re-assertion of cultural identity by the natives, even by those in the interior, mostly as regards local cults, is attested epigraphically in the 2nd–3rd centuries AD, starting with at least a partial linguistic Hellenisation process.106 The most concrete examples are those of north-eastern Lydia (Maionia and Katakekaumene), Phrygia Paroreia, northern Pisidia and northern Lycia. Worth noting are Strabo’s mentions of Anatolian sanctuaries, not least given that they are among the few written sources on this subject, with completions to be found in several passages of Pausanias and Tacitus, as well as in epigraphic or numismatic sources. The typology of the sanctuaries mentioned, patterns of organisation, estate relationships, the rights they enjoyed, the categories of sacred personnel, the cult practices and the way they functioned economically could be determined afterwards, at least partially, by correlating all of these sources.

105 106

Brixhe 2008, 72; Mitchell 1993 I, 170–76. Petzl 2002, 384.

PART I THE WORLD OF GODS

CHAPTER 1

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

HYPSISTOS The epithet ὕψιστος associated to Zeus appeared quite early in Greek literature. Pindar mentions it in his NemeanOdes (1. 90), while Pythia in Aeschylus’s Eumenides addresses not only Phoibos Apollo (Clement of Alexandria Protrepticus 37. 1; Aeschylus Eumenides 16–19; Homer Iliad 9. 404),1 but also the one by whose will he prophesies: Zeus the Highest (Aeschylus Eumenides 28). Nonetheless, in a pagan environment this quality of the Highest God is also ascribed to other gods, especially to those with an Eastern provenance, such as Attis, Sabazios, Sarapis and Mithra.2 The epithet was also used spatially, with reference to the highest places or to the height of the skies.3 Diogenes Laertius recalls Pythagoras’ view on the role played by Hermes in guiding the pure souls towards the uppermost region (ὁ ὕψιστος τόπος): Hermes is the steward of the souls, and for that reason is called Hermes the Escorter (πομπαῖος), Hermes the Keeper of the Gate (πυλῖος), and Hermes of the Underworld (χθόνιος), since it is he who brings in the souls from their bodies both by land and sea; and the pure are taken into the uppermost region, but the impure are not permitted to approach the pure or each other, but are bound by the Furies in bonds unbreakable (LivesandOpinionsofEminentPhilosophers 8. 31).4

The God of Israel is called the highest, Theos Hypsistos, in a series of passages within the Septuagint, in the Pentateuch (Genesis 14:18–22; Numbers 24:16; Deuteronomy 32:8), in Isaiah (14:14), in Daniel (7) and in Psalms (9:2, 90:1–9: 91:1). He appears with the same name in the works of Philon of Alexandria and Origen, but he is never present as Zeus Hypsistos – it would not have been possible – in a Jewish or Christian setting (Philo Delegationead Gaium 23. 157; 36. 278; 40. 317; InFlaccum 7. 46) Origen ContraCelsum 1. 1

Ceylan and Ritti 1997, 59; Otto 1995, 77. Moga 2007a; Ustinova 1999, 179; see also the first chapter dedicated to the history of this cult, written by Eugene Lane in CCIS III, 1–10; Bayet 1957, 206. 3 Colpe and Löw 1994, 1036; Arndt and Gingrich 1963, 857–58. 4 A similar view on the journey of souls to Theos Hypsistos is mentioned by Cumont (1910, 29–30) as an idea promoted by astral mysticism, starting with Poseidonios of Apameia. 2

28

CHAPTER 1

24; 5. 41). Moreover, we can find these two usages of the term, as an attribute of the divinity and spatial, in a passage of the First Epistle to the Corinthians by St Clement of Rome. Here, God is named ‘Thee who alone are Highest among the Highest’ (ὁ ὕψιστος ἐν ὑψίστοις).5 In reality, the term hypsistos represents the Greek translation of one of the divine names – Elyon – and it was used in parallel with other denominations naming God in the Jewish tradition:6 YHWH,7 Adonai (‘Master’),8 Sabaoth (‘the Lord of the Hosts’),9 El (‘the Powerful’)10 or its compounds, El Olam (‘Lord’: Genesis 21:33), El Shaddai (‘the Almighty’, initially ‘God on the mountain’),11 El Roi (‘God of Vision’: Genesis 16:13), El Berit(‘God of the covenant’: Judges 9:46), Eloha/Elohim (‘God’: Exodus 32:4–8; Deuteronomy 32:15; Psalms 49:23; 138:19).12 These divine names are also mentioned, for the most part, by the Christian writers who commented on certain passages within the Old Testament tradition. One of them is St Jerome, who in the twenty-fifth letter mentions the Highest as the fifth of the ten names used by the Jews to designate God, starting from the commentary on the first verse of Psalm 90, where He is also identified with the God of the sky: ‘You who dwell in the shelter of the Highest, who abide in the shade of the Almighty’ (ToMarcella 1–2). In his book PtolemaicAlexandria, P.M. Fraser shows that there is a major difference between the syncretic cult of Zeus Hypsistos attested in Lagid Egypt only towards the end of the Hellenistic period,13 and the Greek equivalent of 5 IClement 59. 3; Arndt and Gingrich 1963, 857. The same idea as in Isaiah (57:15): ‘…On high I dwell, and in holiness…’. See also 4.7.38 concerning the Master with the highest throne. 6 Hartman 1978, 674–82; Dictionnairedujudaïsme (Paris 1998), 203–06. 7 Psalms 117:26: ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord [YHWH]’; according to a popular etymology, Eheyeh-Asher-Eheyeh=‘I am who I am’ cf.Exodus (3:14; 6:2–3). Hartman 1978, 680. 8 As addressing formulas, Adoni = ‘Lord’ in Genesis (23:6; 23:15; 24:18) or adonaiYHWH =‘Lord God’ in Genesis (15:2; 15:8) and Deuteronomy (3:24; 9:26). 9 Hartman 1978, 680. 10 The etymology of the word remains obscure, but the general opinion is that the term derives from a radical meaning ‘to be powerful’. 11 In the Septuagint, Shaddai is translated by Pantokrator, ‘the Almighty’, a word also used by the Hypsistarians to name their supreme deity; the Jewish term appears to be related to the Akkadian šadū, meaning ‘mountain’ (cf. Hartman 1978, 677). In the Old Testament, the full name – ElShaddai – appears only in relation to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. See Genesis 17:1; 28:3; 35:11; 43:14; 48:3. 12 Lanckau 2011, 863–68. 13 Fraser 1998 II, 440–41: an inscription at Philadelphia mentions the regulation of a religious association on electing the leaders and on internal administrative issues; the emitting institution is called here οἱ ἐκ τῆς τοῦ Διὸς ̔Υψίστου συνόδου. Given that all members of this synodos were Egyptians, Fraser believes it was a pagan association. He favours the idea promoted by Nock (cf. Roberts, Skeat and Nock 1936) on the existence of such pagan association of Zeus

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

29

Yahweh, Theos Hypsistos.14 There had been similar mentions of Theos Hypsistos in a Jewish context in Egypt even in the last two centuries before Christ, in Hadra, Alexandria, Benha (Athribis) and Tell el-Iehoudineh (Leontopolis), or as a dedication to the All Great and Highest God – θεῳ μεγάλῳ μεγάλῳ ὑψίστῳ – from Fayum (29 BC).15 A very similar inscription to the last, dating from the end of the 2nd or the 3rd century, also mentioning the existence of a prayer house (προσευχή), was discovered at Kalecik in northern Galatia, and it recalls that the works here were done for the Great God, the Highest, the master of the skies (τῷ μεγάλῳ | Θεῷ ̔Υψίστῳ καὶ | ἐπουρανίῳ) and for his holy angels and for his worshipped place for prayer (1.5.1).16 The epithet under discussion was also applied to a feminine divinity, as in the case of two inscriptions from the 2nd–3rd centuries AD, discovered at İncesu (formerly Gölde) in Lydia, but conserved fragmentarily. They are both currently deposited in the Museum of Manisa. In the first instance, only the middle part of the marble stele survived, containing just the name of the deity, Thea Hypsiste (Θεᾷ ̔Υψίστῃ) and that of the dedicator, Glykon (1.2.6).17 The second inscription, besides the name Θ[ε]ᾷ ̔Υψίστῃ, has the epithet, προκαθημένη, meaning she who is to the fore or who presides over (1.2.7). In the Christian environment, the epithet ὕψιστος is encountered mainly in the works of the Apostolic fathers, the apologetics or the Patristic writers,18 or even in inscriptions within Asia Minor19 of the Cimmerian Bosporos.20 Such an example is the inscription discovered at Hadrianoi in Mysia – currently in the Museum of Bursa – dedicated to Neikatoris, son of Xenophon, who pleased the ‘host’ of the Highest through his singing and teachings and who dwells in the holy place of Christ:

Hypsistos or Theos Hypsistos, respectively, with no direct connection to the Jewish environment. However, he underlines that the Jewish themselves adopted – individually or collectively – the custom encountered in the pagan environment of offering dedications on behalf of the ruling Ptolemaic sovereign and of his wife (Fraser 1998 II, 282–83, 298). See in this sense the inscription at Gabbary, Alexandria, too, dedicated ‘on behalf of the queen and the king, to the great God who hears prayer’ (JIGRE 13 = CIJ II, 1432). 14 Fraser 1998 II, 283. 15 JIGRE 9 = CIJ II, 1433 (in Greek; 2nd century BC; Hadra, Alexandria) = DFSJ 87; JIGRE 27 = CIJ II, 1443 (in Greek; 2nd or 1st century BC; Athribis) = DFSJ 95; JIGRE 105 (in Greek; middle of the 2nd century BC–beginning of the 2nd century AD; Leontopolis); JIGRE 116 (in Greek; 29 BC; Fayum). 16 RECAM II, 209B = Sheppard 1980–81, 94; SEG 31, 1080. 17 Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 167; TAM V.1, 359 (with facsimile); Cook 1925 II, 881, no. 20; Keil 1923, 255, no. 241; Bailly 1966, 1640. 18 Colpe and Löw 1994, 1051–53. 19 IGSK 33, 120 (Christian). 20 SEG 48, no. 991; Diatroptov 1999.

30

CHAPTER 1

Beloved by everybody, deserving among the blessed and chosen for the glory of the holy, the prudent Neikatoris, the son of his father Xenophon, whom of all mortals gained greatest honour in the holy people of the Most High God, brought joy to and charmed them all with the Psalm songs and holy readings, and now rests immaculate in Christ’s place, the eternal Lord of life [--]. He lived a holy and irreproachable life for 8(6)? years [---], and his reputation was flawless [---]’ (1.3.3).21

According to some, the syncretic form of the Highest God was developed in the Mediterranean world starting at the time of the Ptolemies and it was propagated especially by Jews of the Diaspora and by proselytes and semi-proselytes.22 This deity was particularly diffused in Samaria, Phoenicia, Syria,23 Palmyra,24 Egypt and the Cimmerian Bosporos.25 In the European provinces of the Roman Empire, records attesting the presence of the pagan, Jewish or Christian Most High God were discovered at Olympia (Pausanias 5. 14. 6; 5. 15. 4), Athens26 and in the Delos Islands,27 in Cyprus, Crete, Argos, Imbros,28 Lemnos, Korkyra in Greece, at Amphipolis,29 Edessa, Kozani, Beroia,30 Thessalonica31 and Kerdylion in Macedonia, at Anchialos (near Burgos), Selymbria,Philippopolis (Plovdiv), Serdica (Sofia), Zelenigrad and Asenovgrad 21

Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 184; IGSK 33, 120; SEG 33, no. 1049. Barclay 2001, 61–64; 1996, 259–81; Fraser 1998, 282; Cumont 1916, 445; Sanie 1981, 157. It is not my intention here to present all the theories regarding the identity of the Most High God, so-called pagan monotheism and the problem of Godfearers, as I have mentioned them in several of my previous works (see, for example, Moga 2011a, 173–93; 2011c, 171–78; 2004; 2007a; Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, 27–34). Taking into account the limitations of Stephen Mitchell’s theory, even if we believe there is very much truthfullness in his perception of the Most High God, we may also assume, as Bowersock (2002), Gordon (2014) and Belayche (2005) have pointed out, that instead of thinking of a unified cult throughout the empire one should take into account the hypothesis of a multiplicity of regional aspects and variants of the cult, thus giving the impression of different types of gods venerated under the same guise of anonymity or rather of a single god that absorbed local traditions of pre-existing local mountaineous or heavenly deities (especially in Macedonia and the Syro-Palmyrene area) and whose corresponding variants are biunivocal in different ethno-cultural environments. 23 For example, in Dmeir. Hajjar 1990, 2266–67; SEG 47, nos. 1938–1939 and 2152; Cumont 1916, 445–48; ICilicia 14; Sanie 1981, 157. 24 SEG 47, no. 1938 (undated, addressed to Zeus Hypsistos); 1939 (dedication to Zeus Hypsistos from the beginning of the 3rd century AD). 25 Cumont 1916, 445–48; ICilicia 14 (in Greek; 4th–5th centuries AD; Diokaisareia/ Uzuncaburç); Sanie 1981, 157. 26 Colpe and Löw 1994, 1040. 27 DFSJ 3–8 = CIJ I, 726–731. 28 SEG 47, no. 1334; the cult of Zeus Hypsistos and that of the Thracian rider are attested also because of the close connections between the island and the Thracian area. 29 SEG 47, no. 878 = AÉ 1997, 465, no. 1361, thank-offering dedication to Zeus Hypsistos, dated since the 1st–2nd centuries AD. 30 Colpe and Löw 1994, 1040; J. Cormack 1941 (with the representation of an eagle). 31 SEG 47, no. 963 (addressed to Theos Hypsistos; it dates to the period of the Roman domination). 22

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

31

in Thracia, at Tomis (Constanţa) in Moesia and at Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa in Dacia.32 In the West, Theos Hypsistos is encountered only in Rome.33 Moreover, it appears that in native areas his cult influenced Gnosticism.34 In the Anatolian regions, the pagan forms of Theos Hypsistos and that of Zeus Hypsistos were widely diffused; they were encountered in practically all areas: in the Rhodian Peraia,35 in Bithynia (at Prusa,36 Nikomedeia37), Paphlagonia (Amastris,38 Kaisareia/Hadrianopolis,39 Ticium and Sinope40), Pontus (Laodikeia on the Lykos,41 Sebastopolis42, Amaseia43), Cappadocia (Anisa/Kültepe44), Cilicia (Diokaisareia,45 Seleukeia46), Pamphylia (Perge47), Pisidia(Sala,48 Belen,49 Sibidunda/Zivint,50 Termessos51), Lycia (Oinoanda52), Caria (Stratonikeia,53 Mylasa,54 Tralleis,55 Miletos,56 Aphrodisias57), Phrygia 32 Popescu 1991, 12; Pippidi 1988, 205; ISM II, 157 (42); Sanie 1981, 274; IGB III, 957 (Plovdiv), 1431 (Asenovgrad); IGB IV, 1941–1944 (Serdica), 2111 (Zelenigrad); Cumont 1916, 447. 33 Colpe and Löw 1994, 1043–44; Sanie1996, 5. 34 Sanie 1981, 162. 35 IGSK 38, 756 (Zeus Hypsistos). 36 Ameling 1999–2000; IGSK 40, 1013 (to Zeus Hypsistos). 37 TAM IV.1, 62 (Zeus Hypsistos with an eagle); TAM IV.1, 80 (Theos Hypsistos with an eagle); Mitchell 1993 II, 50; Dörner 1941, 37 (Zeus Hypsistos). 38 In the localities of Kuşkayası and Amasra (dedications to Theos Hypsistos epekoos Helios): Marek 1993, Am 1b, Am 32. 39 In the place called Ortadji-Kariessi: Marek 1993, H 24 (Theos Hypsistos, also calledTheos Athanatos). 40 Mitchell 1993 II, 49. 41 IGSK 49, 61 (Theos Hypsistos). 42 Today Sulusaray. Olshausen 1990, 1901; Cumont 1916, 448. 43 French 1996. 44 Huxley 1989, 30–31; Robert 1963, 483, 486–87. 45 ICilicia 14 (inscription discovered in the current locality of Uzuncaburç). 46 MAMA III, 1–4. 47 IGSK 54.I, 230 (Theos Hypsistos) and 231 (Theos Hypsistos). 48 Bean 1959, 74, no. 15 (discovered at Sala, near Burdur and addressed to Theos Hypsistos). 49 Bean 1960, 65, no. 115; Mitchell 1993 II, 49 (discovered at Belen, near Yavuz [Andya, in antiquity, Andeda] and addressed to Theos Hypsistosby a priest of Mên Ouranios). 50 Bean 1960, 70–71, no. 122; Mitchell 1993 II, 49. 51 Mitchell 1993 II, 49. 52 Colpe and Löw 1994, 1051 (addressed to Theos Hypsistos); Mitchell 1993 II, 44. 53 Sheppard 1980–81, 78–79, nos. 1, 2, 5. 54 IGSK 34, 212 and 310 (Zeus Hypsistos). 55 IGSK 36.I, 14 (to Theos Hypsistos, with the representation of an eagle). For the symbolism of the eagle in the Jewish environment and the psychopomp role, see Goodenough 1965, 149–50. 56 Sheppard 1980–81, 94; Kraabel 1969, 89; Robert 1968; Mitchell 1993 II, 49; Lane Fox 1997, 231–34, where the name of the priest of Theos Hypsistos Soter reads Ulpius Karpas, not Karpos/Carpus, as in those previously mentioned. Another Karpos is included in the inscription of Büyük Nefes: RECAM II, 418. 57 Reynolds and Tannenbaum 1987, 138–39, nos. 11 and 12. Both inscriptions are believed to be Jewish.

32

CHAPTER 1

(Kibyra,58 Seyitgazi,59 Akmonia60), Galatia (Büyük Nefes,61 Kalecik62), Ionia (Smyrna63), Lydia (Borlu,64 Philadelphia,65 Magnesia on the Siplylos,66 Thyateira67), Eolida (Pergamon68), Mysia (Miletupolis69), the Troad (Alexandreia Troas70), etc. These forms recorded the greatest diffusion in Lydia and Phrygia. Most dedications addressed to Theos Hypsistos or Zeus Hypsistos accompanied by angels come from Caria and Lydia. In the case of Phrygia, there are only inscriptions dedicated to Theos Hypsistos, but not to Zeus with this epithet.71 The Most High God was considered a heavenly, omnipotent divinity, residing in the highest spheres, in his quality of ruler of the world.72 His celestial attributes are also underlined by the epithet οὐράνιος attached to the god’s name, as in the inscriptions of Phoenicia or ἐπουράνιος in Galatia (1.5.1).73 Another representation of the ears related to Theos Hypsistos, but in a Jewish context, is the one at Diokaisareia (today Uzuncaburç) in Cilicia (1.8.1). In this case, the general opinion is that it symbolises submission to the orders received from the divinity or God who had paid attention to the prayers of humans. Also taking into account the passages within Psalms and other parts of the 58

IGSK 60, 92 (Theos Hypsistos). NIPh 8 (Theos Hypsistos and Hosios kai Dikaios). 60 Drew-Bear 1976, 247–49, nos. 1 and 2 (Theos Hypsistos); also, a Jewish imprecation taken from the Septuagint, addressed to the robbers of the grave discovered at Yenice köy, see also Mitchell 1993 II, 49. 61 RECAM II, 418 (Theos Hypsistos). A dedication of the trader Karpos of Ancyra, to Hypsistos, most probably identified with Zeus Tavianus (who had as attributes the lightning, the sceptre, and the eagle). 62 RECAM II, 209 B (Theos Hypsistos) = Sheppard 1980–81, 94, no. 11. 63 IGSK 24.I, 764 (Theos Hypsistos). 64 Sheppard 1980–81, 99, no. 12 (where Theos Hypsistosappears alongside Megalo Theios Epiphanes and Thea Larmene). 65 Sheppard 1980–81, 100, no. 12a. 66 TAM V.2, 1400, a dedication at Sarıçam, a village north from Magnesia on the Sipylos. There are also lamps (λυχναψίαι) dedicated to Theos Hypsistos, as at Oinoanda (Mitchell 1993 II, 44, n. 256). See also Kraabel’s commentary on the lamps and their importance in the Jewish cult (Kraabel 1969, 90). 67 ETAM 23, 26 and 27, discovered at Medar, north from Thyateira. The first of them is addressed by Ioulianos – a dyer – as a thank-offering because the god had delivered him. 68 IPergamon 330 (Helios Theos Hypsistos). A similar name to that of the female dedicator of this inscription (Tation) is also encountered as Tatis on an inscription north from Yenice, in the territory of the Phrygian Akmonia. 69 IGSK 26, 5 (to Zeus Hypsistos Brontaios, 2nd–3rd centuries AD). A similar inscription was discovered at Cytaeum, in the north of the Black Sea. 70 IGSK 53, 76 (Theos Hypsistos). 71 Drew-Bear and Naour 1990, 2035. 72 Cumont 1916, 445; Sanie 1981, 156. 73 Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 202; SEG 31, 1080; Sheppard 1980–81, 94, no. 11; Cumont 1916, 445. The Jews also attributed the epithet ouranios to Yahweh (Origen ContraCelsum 1. 24). 59

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

33

Bible regarding this receptivity of God (Psalms 114:1–2, 129:2; Deuteronomy 1:45), Gilbert Dagron and Denis Feissel believe that we can even talk about a ‘ἐπήκοος Yahweh’.74 The cultual practices of the Hypsistarians seemed similar in many aspects to Jewish ones, but it appears that they also presented Iranian influences. What we know for certain is that the worshippers of Theos Hypsistos had only partially drawn away from worshipping the gods and from giving pagan offerings; in exchange, they worshipped fire and light. They rejected circumcision, but they respected the Jewish law on forbidden foods, especially the consumption of pork (Gregory of Nazianzus FuneralOrations 122).75 Literary testimonia on the Hypsistarians, the activities of the sect and their religious views are very scarce and date only after the 4th century. They are practically confined to just two passages in the works of the Cappadocian Fathers Gregory of Nazianzus and Gregory of Nyssa, as well as a third in a book written by Epiphanios of Salamis (referring to a group identified by some scholars with the Hypsistarians). As a paradox, the brother of Gregory of Nyssa, Basil the Great, left no mention of the Hypsistarians, though he definitely was aware of their activity in the Anatolian region.76 First, because in the neighbourhood of one of his family’s Cappadocian residences at Anisa or Hanisa (Kültepe), an inscription dedicated to Zeus Hypsistos was discovered.77 Secondly, because Basil was present at the speech given by Gregory of Nazianzus in AD 374 in honour of his deceased father.78 On the other hand, the priest Gregory (who seems to have lived in the 8th century AD) showed in The Life of St. Gregory the Theologian that the father of the great hierarch, Gregory the Elder, ‘left away the superstitious and false teaching of the Hypsistarians’, converted to the Christian faith and then became a leader of the church in Nazianzus.79 He was converted by a group of bishops travelling through Cappadocia in AD 325 to attend the ecumenical Synod of Nicaea.80 This assertion is also confirmed by Benoît Gain, who believes that the Hypsistarians were not liable to persecution and that they were not even mentioned in

74

ICilicia 14. Fraser 1998 II, 282; Gain 1985, 245. This prohibition is expressed twice in the Old Testament: Leviticus 11:7 (‘[the pig], which does indeed have hoofs and is cloven-footed, but does not chew the cud and is therefore unclean for you’) and Deuteronomy 14:8. 76 Gain 1985, 263–64. 77 Huxley 1989, 30–31; Robert 1963, 483, 486–87. The presence of the Jews at Hanisa. 78 Schaff and Wace 1994 VII, 255. 79 Grigorie de Nazianz 9; Leclercq 1925, 2946. 80 Mitchell 1993 II, 51. 75

34

CHAPTER 1

the imperial rescripts concerning the prosecution of sects because they were either too few or were cautious in their relations with the authorities.81 In his discourse against Eunomios (In Eunomium 2), Gregory of Nyssa names them Hypsistiani (Ὑψιστιανοί). He underlines that, unlike Christians, who worshipped always and exclusively a single God, Father of all things, the Only One and unchanged, these communities of pagans acknowledged the existence of several deities, but they worshipped just one god, called Hypsistos (‘the Most High’) and Pantokrator (‘the Almighty’), but not Father, which could mean that they also accepted other ‘invented’ gods. According to some scholars (Emil Schürer, Stephen Mitchell, Yulia Ustinova), the attribute of Pantokrator would certainly indicate Jewish influences on the conceptions of the Hypsistarians.82 The second author to consider the Hypsistarians(Ὑψιστάριοι) is Gregory of Nazianzus. In the oration addressed to his sister, Gorgonia, he spoke first about the faith of their father, while presenting him as a virtuous man who had ‘escaped from the bondage of his father’s gods’, an allusion to the idolatry accepted by this sect (Oration 8. 4–5). In the oration of AD 374, he presents the teaching of the Hypsistarians as a mixture of two entirely opposite views: the Greek and the Jewish. On the one hand, they rejected the idols and sacrifices accepted by the Greeks, but they venerated fire and light; on the other, they observed the Sabbath and the Jewish prescriptions regarding forbidden foods, but they rejected circumcision.83 These ‘humble men’, continues Gregory, called themselves Hypsistarians and they worshipped only the Almighty (Pantokrator) (Oration 8. 5). The prescriptions on the observance of the Sabbath as a day of rest and on diet made the Hypsistarians more like a Judaising pagan sect; hence, the notion referring to the observance of the Sabbath, σαββατίζειν, had already become, in the first centuries AD, synonymous with the action of Judaising, ἰουδαίζειν. Alfredo Rabello even concludes that the observance of the Sabbath and of the Sunday as holidays continued to coexist even in the Christian environment until the Synod of Laodicea prohibited the Jewish holiday through Canons 16 and 29.84 As for worshipping fire and light, influences could have come mainly from two directions: Iranian and Jewish. Besides the Romans, these two communi-

81

Gain 1985, 264. Schürer 1897, 217–18; Mitchell 1993 II, 50; Ustinova 1999, 225. 83 Maybe also not to be in scope of the laws on proselytism and circumcision, especially starting with the reign of Hadrian (see Rabello 2000, 37–68, especially 49–53). 84 Rabello 2000, 1303; von Hefele 1907, 1015. 82

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

35

ties represented the best attested non-native ethnic elements in the entire Anatolian area. Persian settlement started with the establishment of the Achaemenid rule (6th–4th centuries BC) and it proved more persistent in Ionia, Lycia, Caria, Galatia, Phrygia, Cappadocia and Pontus, especially in a rural environment. These people were descendants of the military colonists of the Achaemenid period. Though they were involved rather early in civic life, being integrated in the Anatolian world and linguistically assimilated (in the case of the elites, the process occurring far more rapidly), the Iranians managed to conserve their cultural identity and especially their religious traditions due to the influence of the Graeco-Persian dynasts of Pontus, Cappadocia and Commagene throughout the entire Hellenistic period and at the beginning of the Principate.85 The cult of fire had deep roots in Iranian religious tradition and it was attested by numerous archaeological and literary discoveries until the 5th–6th centuries AD and even later.86 Hence, when mentioning the outbreak of persecutions against Christians within the Sassanid kingdom during the reign of Yezdegerdes I/Isdigerdes (AD 399–420), Theodoret of Cyrrhus comments on the numerous fire altars (πυρεῖα) spread everywhere, as, in his words, they ‘regarded the fire as their god’.87 In Asia Minor, as Pausanias (5. 27. 5) also reports, there are testimonies of worship at such fire altars in the 2nd century AD, mainly in Lydia and Pisidia. Fire altars could also be encountered at Palmyra, within the cult of Ζεὺς ὕψιστος καὶ ἐπήκοος; his correspondent in the Aramaic inscriptions is ‘He whose name is blessed for eternity’ or ‘the good and the merciful’ and he is to be identified with Baalshamin.88 However, the presence of Syro-Palmyrene elements in Anatolia is rather modest and one cannot even take into account a possible involvement of these Semitic elements in the perception of the Most High God.89 Firmicus Maternus (De errore profanarum religionum 5. 1) believed that ‘the Persians and all the Magi who dwell in the confines of the Persian land give their preference to fire and think it ought to be ranked above all other elements’,90 and Clement of Alexandria asserts that not only the Persian Magi but also ‘many of the inhabitants of Asia have assigned honour to fire’ 85

Sartre 1998, 382; 1995, 318–19; Sheppard 1980–81, 81. Duchesne-Guillemin 1983; Ustinova 1999, 135. 87 Duchesne-Guillemin 1983, 889–90; Theodoret of CyrrhusEcclesiasticalHistory 5. 39. 1–5. 88 Downey 2004; LIMC III.1, 75–78 (Collart); Ustinova 1999, 222; Sanie 1981, 156. 89 Sartre 1998, 382–83; 1995, 322; Sheppard 1980–81, 80. 90 Ed. C.A. Forbes (see Forbes 1970, 51–52); see also 5. 2–3 for the symbolism of opposites and of the sexual differentiations within the cults of Mithra and Anahita and the pertinent commentaries of R. Turcan (1982, 204–05). 86

36

CHAPTER 1

(Protrepticus 5. 65. 1). Fire-worshipping had an important role not only within the cults of Persian Mithra and of Anahita, but most of all in the case of Ahura Mazda. An interesting passage of Yasna (62. 7) presents ‘the fire of Ahura Mazda’ as a personified conscience in dialogue with the worshippers, whom he advises to do good deeds and to make sure the divine fire always burns: ‘The son of Ahura Mazda brings fame to all for whom he cooks the evening and morning (meals). From everyone he requires good sacrifices, desired sacrifices, praised sacrifices…’ Hence, we should underline the focus on the moral aspect, represented by the good deed, not on the strict observance of a certain type of sacrifice, and least of all of the blood sacrifice: ‘This is Atar’s blessing (for him), bright-burning fuel (which) has been properly prepared according to the rites of Truth.’91 The Jewish element was largely diffused, just like the Iranian. However, unlike the latter, it is attested mainly in an urban environment. Jewish communities were identified at Akmonia, Apameia, Synnada in Phrygia, Myndos and Hyllarima in Caria, Hypaipa, Philadelphia and Sardis in Lydia, as well as Smyrna, Miletos, Teos, Phokaia and Ephesos on the western coast.92 Josephus Flavius noticed the influence of the Jewish customs among pagans, though he exaggerated a little, by stating that groups of pagans had always shown interest in Jewish religious practices, ‘and there is not one city, Greek or barbarian, nor a single nation, to which our custom of abstaining from work on the seventh day has not spread and where the fasts and the lighting of lamps and many of our prohibitions in the matter of food are not observed’ (AgainstApion 2. 282–283).93 Epiphanios of Salamis (Panarion 80. 1–3) refers to another sect, called Massalians (Μασσαλιανοί) or Euphemites (Εὐφημῖται), identified with the Hypsistarians. He also indicated another denomination attributed to them, that of μαρτυριανοί, because they worshipped the members of the sect who had been killed by Lupicianus, most likely, according to G.W.H. Lampe, the same person as Lucillianus, governor of Mesopotamia.94 He described them as Greeks or at least as pagans who admitted the possibility of the existence of several divinities, but who worshipped one god only, Pantokrator. They gathered within religious associations where Christians believed that they worshipped Satan, reason for which they called these associations σατανιανοί. They did not made sacrifices, and the essential element of the cult was the morning and evening prayer within places of worship, called eukteria or pro91 92 93 94

Geldner 1926, 28. Sheppard 1980–81, 83; Mitchell 1993 II, 32–36; Sartre 1995, 319–20. Similar examples in McKay 1994. Lampe 1961, 833.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

37

seuchai, surrounded by lamps and torches.95 As we shall see, this is a similar image to those present on the inscriptions of Oinoanda. Nonetheless, these pagan Messalians were mistaken for the members of a Christian heretic sect, the Messalians (Μεσσαλιανοί) or the Messalites (Μεσσαλῖται), which seems to have emerged in the second half of the 4th century, probably also because they had similar views. They were condemned by the synods of Antioch (ca. AD 385), Side (AD 383), Constantinople (AD 426) and Ephesos (AD 431).96 Theodoret of Cyrrhus showed that the members of the Messalian heresy were called ‘Euchites’ (Εὐχαῖται) or ‘those who pray’, but they were also known as ‘enthusiasts’ or ‘inspired’, because they claimed a direct power from the Holy Ghost (they considered this a manifestation as His presence). They shunned labour as some kind of vice and they considered their oniric visions as prophecies. The leaders of this heresy, Dadoes and Sabbas, Adelphios and Hermas, Symeon and others, even if they believed communion to be of no use, never really abandoned it. They were contradicted by Letoios (bishop of the church of Melitene), Amphilocus (the bishop of the metropolis of Lycaonia) and Flavian (bishop of Antioch). The latter, after exposing Adelphios and other Messalian monks of Edessa, expelled them from Syria, the reason why they went to Pamphylia. The discussion between Flavian and Adelphios shows that the Messalians believed the rite of baptism to have no benefits to those who received it. They also believed that the demons within them could be driven away only by ardent prayers: When the demons are driven away by the fervency of prayer, the most Holy Spirit visits us, and gives sensible and visible signs of his own presence, by freeing the body from the perturbation of passion, and the soul from evil propensities; so that, henceforth, there is no more need of fasting for the subjugations of the body, nor of instruction for the restraint and direction of the soul. Whoever has enjoyed this visitation is delivered from all inward struggles; he clearly foresees the future, and gazes with his own eyes upon the Holy Trinity (Theodoret of Cyrrhus EcclesiasticalHistory 4. 11).

MITHRA The theory regarding the Iranian origin of the Mithraic cult, advanced by Franz Cumont in TextesetmonumentsfigurésrelatifsauxmystèresdeMithra97 and accepted for more than seven decades, has been gradually re-considered, 95 96 97

Mitchell 1993 II, 50–51. Maraval 2005, 1401; Ferguson 1999, 747. Cumont 1896; 1899; Moga 2007c.

38

CHAPTER 1

amended or contradicted by other scholars such as Stig Wikander,98 Jacques Duchesne-Guillemin,99 Ernest Will,100 Maarten Vermaseren,101 L.A. Campbell,102 Reinhold Merkelbach,103 R.L. Gordon,104 Roger Beck,105 Manfred Clauss,106 David Ulansey,107 etc. Cumont, considering Mithraism as ‘the Roman form of Mazdaism’,108 but perverted by certain Babylonian and Hellenistic influences, as well as by Semitic doctrines, not least by doctrines characteristic of local Anatolian beliefs, believed that the diffusion of the cult throughout the empire occurred at the time of territorial annexation in Asia Minor and Syria under Pompey and (mainly) the Flavians. The path for thorough discussion and analysis was opened by a series of international congresses considering the doctrinal aspects of Mithraism: in Manchester (1971),109 Tehran (1975)110 and Rome-Ostia (1978).111 In their works, Vermaseren and Clauss supported the idea of a Mithraic cult created in Rome and then diffused through the entire Roman world.112 With virulent reaction at times towards the opinions promoted by Cumont, Wikander stated that the Graeco-Roman Mithra had nothing in common with the Iranian god and that his doctrinal aspects were finalised in the Danubian provinces.113 Following the same line, Gordon made the widest critical analysis of the main components of Cumont’s theory of the persistence of Iranian, mostly of the Mazdean, elements in Roman Mithraism in his study Franz Cumont and the DoctrinesofMithraism.114 From a somewhat traditionalist position, Turcan believes that ‘Mithra is Iranian, but Mithraism is Graeco-Roman’.115 Merkelbach follows this direction to a certain extent: after admitting the presence of certain Iranian elements, he 98 Wikander 1946, especially 211–21, a hypothesis later characterised by Ulansey as singular and with no impact. 99 Duchesne-Guillemin 1955. 100 Will 1955. 101 Vermaseren 1963, 13–29. 102 L. Campbell 1968. 103 Merkelbach 1984. 104 Gordon 1975; 1994. 105 Beck 1984. 106 Beck 1998, 115–17; Vollkommer 1991, 265–66. 107 Ulansey 1989, 8–14. 108 Cumont 1949, 272. 109 Hinnells 1975; Lincoln 1977. 110 Lavagne 1975. 111 Bianchi 1979a; Mellor 1992, 391–96. 112 Gordon 1994, 467–68. 113 Gordon 1975, 217–18, 242; Will 1955, 145–46, 153, 162; Beck 1984, 2063–71. 114 Gordon 1975. 115 Turcan 2000.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

39

underlines that Mithraism was a creation of the Graeco-Roman world, whose cosmological aspects were determined by philosophical, mainly Platonic, influences, and by astrological and astronomical perspectives specific to this period.116 The criticism, partially justified, brought to Cumont’s ideas, and the intentions of certain scholars, such as Wikander or Gordon, to minimise the Iranian influences on Graeco-Roman Mithraism, open the way for new debate, mostly on the role played by Asia Minor in this process, all the more so as Cumont produced the most important study on this theme, with reference to precisely the area concerned. Two aspects in particular should be studied: evidence meant to justify assertions concerning the Anatolian origin of Mithraism; and the extent to which one can talk about the presence of Iranian elements in Graeco-Roman Mithraism. From a conceptual and chronological perspective, there are four evolutionary phases in perception of the god Mit(h)ra and his cult. They correspond to integration in special cultural and spiritual environments, but also in certain cases into different geographical areas. First, one can distinguish an archaic phase, when Mitra is present as god of the Indo-European populations in Anatolia. The second phase would be the diffusion during Achaemenid domination through the Anatolian territories. The third one corresponds to the Hellenistic period and to the beginning of the Principate, when the mysteryspecific aspects were shaped, and the fourth, situated after the beginning of the 2nd century AD, when Mithraism began to be diffused throughout the entire empire. The oldest testimony of the presence of the god Mitra in Anatolia is his mention in a treaty, probably concluded in 1380 BC, between the Hittite king Suppiluliuma I (1380–ca. 1340 BC) and Mattiwaza (by certain variant readings) or Kurtiwaza (by others).117 In the text of the inscription, discovered in 1907 at Bogazköy on the site of the old Hittite capital of Hattuša, the following gods are invoked as Indo-European divine guarantors and witnesses: Mitra and Varuna, mentioned in the text as ‘the twin gods Mitra and Uruwana’ or ‘the Mitra and Uruwana doublet’, represent the function of sovereignty; Indra (Indar in the treaty) was a warrior divinity parexcellence; the twins Nāsatya are mentioned

116

Merkelbach 1956; Beck 1993, 307. Turcan and Ries call him Mattiwaza; however, Dumézil does not agree with this reconstitution and he proposed the forms Kur-ti-ú-a(z)-za or even Šat-ti-ú-a(z)-za. See Ries 1990, 2734; 2000, 92–93; Turcan 1998, 225; Dumézil 1977, 82–84; Duchesne-Guillemin 1993, 1083. For the variant Šattiwaza and mostly for the importance of these divinities, see Haas 1994, 5–6 and 542–43. 117

40

CHAPTER 1

here as Nassatyana118 and they were considered gods of fertility, miracleworkers, providers of health and youth and of economic prosperity.119 W. Schulz, Sven Konow and A. Christensen were among the scholars who initially analysed the Bogazköy inscription, but they failed to provide a plausible explanation for the presence of those divinities in the text of the treaty. Georges Dumézil showed that, in reality, this enumeration corresponds to the canonical list of the three-function gods, present in the Vedic literature as divine couples (Mitra–Varuna, Indra–Agni), and the Aśvin gods.120 In the Vedic tradition, both Mitra and Varuna were part of the Āditya group of deities (Rig Veda 10. 125; Braihadāranyaka Upanishad 6. 4. 28), with a ‘fundamentally binary’ structure, in the words of Dumézil, meaning that it was composed of divine couples.121 This group also included deities such as Aryaman and Bhaga, with a subsequent important role. According to tradition, the Great Mother Āditya/Aditi gave birth to Mitra and Varuna as snakes which, by getting rid of their skin, became immortal.122 In theRigVeda (ca. 1500–1000 BC), the goddess Āditya, considered as the Great Mother Goddess parexcellence, is represented as a bovine (RigVeda 1. 153. 3; 8. 90. 15; 10. 11. 1). She was the ‘supporter of creatures’, mother of the god Mitra and of the lord of truth and universal order, Varuna. She was also the mother of Indra, king of the gods and archetype of the world monarch, who is often addressed as a bull.123 Sovereignty shapes two facets, two halves, illustrated by Mitra and Varuna, distinct (even antagonistic) concerning their respective fields of action, their characters and, not least, their affinities for attributes specific to other functions within Dumézil’s system of three functions. TheRigVeda places side by side, ‘with a clear intention of differentiation’, Varuna with the sky and Mitra with the earth. Mitra patronises the Day, Varuna the Night. Joseph Campbell sees Mitra, even in certain passages of the RigVeda, as the Sun God (8. 25. 3; 10. 36. 3; 10. 132. 6).124 Based on one of the current interpretations of the initial meaning of the word mitra (‘contract’), Dumézil assessed that this divinity facilitated and guaranteed alliances and treaties.125 Starting from his original approach to the etymology of the same word/term, composed, in his 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125

Beckman 1999, nos. 6A § 14 and 6B § 11; Turcan 2000, 12–13. Ries 2000, 92. Dumézil 1940. Dumézil 1993, 102. Comte 1991, 22. J. Campbell 1969, 63. Cf.J. Campbell 1969, 63. Dumézil 1993, 103.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

41

opinion, from the root *mei / *moi, present in all Indo-European languages, Turcan concludes that it implied a semantic bivalence. Hence, the term had the meaning of both ‘contract’ and ‘friend’, which would not only constitute an incidental homonymy, as Ilya Gershevitch showed,126 but it would consolidate the idea of reciprocity.127 On the contrary, Varuna is a great wizard who, through ‘the creating magic of the temporary or sustainable forms’, māyā, catches the perpetrators. The characters of the two divinities are different, too. As opposed to Mitra, a ‘friendly’, benevolent and comforting god, Varuna has a violent, menacing and unpredictable personality. He patronises the beginning, while Mitra masters the end. Concerning the affinities of the two divinities, things are again clearly differentiated. Mitra is more interested in the actions corresponding to the third function – pastoral prosperity and pacifying. Varuna is more interested in the second, characterised by conquering violence, specific to Indra.128 Through the reform introduced by Zoroaster, an interesting and complex phenomenon occurred: the foundation of a moral monotheism, which eliminated all the other divinities worshipped by the groups of warriors and clans of stockbreeders in the favour of a single god, Ahura Mazda. He patronised the struggle between two spirits: Spenta Mainyu, seen as the Holy Spirit, and Ahra (or Angra) Mainyu.129 According to Julien Ries, Zoroaster maintained, however, the three-function divine structure by replacing the Arian gods with some entities gravitating as archangels around the supreme god.130 With the generic name of Amesha Spenta or the Bounteous Spirits, these are: Vohu Manah, Asha, Khshathra, Armaiti, Haurvatāt and Ameratāt. Together with Mazda, they form a thinking and action unit, given that, as shown by an early Avestan hymn (Yasht 19. 16), ‘the seven are of the same manner of thinking, speaking and acting’.131 One can easily identify the correspondence between AmeshaSpenta and the old Vedic divinities. Thus, Vohu Manah or the Good Mind, close to the people and guardian of the cattle herds and of the entire fauna, corresponds to the Indo-Iranian god Mithra. Vohu Manah was believed to direct the souls of mortals to Paradise, towards the throne of Ahura Mazda.132 He preceded all the other immortal entities, being considered the first manifestation of the supreme 126 127 128 129 130 131 132

Gershevitch 1959. Turcan 2000, 11–12. Dumézil 1993, 103–04. de Breuil 1982, 31. Ries 2000, 92–93. de Breuil 1982, 35. Duchesne-Guillemin 1993, 1086.

42

CHAPTER 1

god. Asha, who symbolised the cosmic, ritual, social and moral order, being the correspondent of Varuna, follows him. Vohu Manah and Asha were the bounteous spirits often invoked in the hymns forming the oldest part of the Avesta: the Gāthā. However, the first of them also had warlike attributes, which brought this deity closer to the second function. This was a healing divinity and a power of the light, thus prefiguring the deus invictus of GraecoRoman Mithraism. Thus, the hymn dedicated to the Sun (Yasht 6) presented this Mithra as the brightest of the yazatas.133 The third entity, Khshathra of the Divine Kingdom, replaced the warlike function of Indra and corresponded to metals, considered symbols of power. Armaiti or Holy Devotion, born by Sarasvati, the female immortal presented as an androgynous divinity, was the symbol of moderation and piety and of earthly fertility. Finally, Haurvatāt, who symbolised health and who was the descendant of one of the Nāsatya twins, represented the lord of the waters, while Ameratāt – Immortality, his twin brother – was the lord of the flora.134 Dumézil underlines an interesting aspect: the initial thinking of Zoroaster, meaning pure Zoroastrianism, is that expressed in the Gāthā, ‘where monotheism is the absolute master, where, under Ahura Mazda, none of the divine persons with Vedic names, too, was preserved as god or demon’. It is the stage where the divine entities emerge around the Wise Lord; they are considered in the same manner as archangels.135 In the immediately following period, certain pre-Zoroastrian divinities were ‘recovered’, illustrating the ‘worshipful beings’, yazatas, meaning archangels. Of course, Mithra, ‘first of the heavenly gods’ (Yasht 10. 13), was also among them; however, his image did not relate as before to that of a divine couple. Nonetheless, we should bear in mind that certain hymns where Mithra is depicted in this manner, Yashts10 and 13, for example, were composed in the same archaic language as the Gāthic texts,136 which demonstrates a certain unity of vision. In this instance, we are talking about traces of post-Gāthic Zoroastrianism, ‘a second form of the reformed Iranian religion’, as it was defined.137 Mithra is depicted in the same hypostasis, that of guarantor of fidelity, as well as of social cohesion, also confirmed by the use, within the same text of the hymn dedicated to the god (Mihr Yasht), of the word mithra as both common and proper noun, with the sense of ‘contract’: 133

Turcan 2000, 17. Ries 2000, 93; Turcan 2000, 15–16; de Breuil 1982, 35–36. 135 Dumézil 1997, 41–49; 1992, 211–18. 136 de Breuil 1982, 26–27. The hymn to Mithra represented only one of the 30 original hymns (21 of which survived) dedicated to a divinity for each day of the month (Ries 1990, 2737). 137 Dumézil 1997, 118. 134

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

43

‘Break not the contract [mithra] O Spitama! neither the one that thou hadst entered into with one of the unfaithful, nor the one that thou hadst entered into with one of the faithful who is one of thy own faith. For Mithra stands for both the faithful and the unfaithful’ (Yasht 10. 2).138 Here it should be underlined that this contract was exerted on behalf of Ahura Mazda. This god creates Mithra ‘the lord of wide pastures’139 as his image, ‘as worthy of sacrifice, as worthy of prayer’ as he himself was (Yasht 10. 1). This way, Mithra becomes a universal god, categorised as ‘powerful, all-knowing and undeceivable’, leaning against his 10,000 spies (Yasht 10. 69), a creator god (Yasht 10. 25),140 a divinity of the starlight sky (in other words, in direct relation with the celestial light of the Sun and of the stars, of day and night, a perspective which is also present in the main representations of tauroctony within the later mithraea), the most suggestive of them being that of Marino in Italy.141 This cosmic relationship is also underlined in the end of the Hymn to Mithra (Yasht 10. 145): ‘by the plant barsom we worship Mithra and Ahura, the glorious Lords of Truth, free forever from corruption: we worship the stars, the Moon and the Sun. We worship Mithra, the Lord of all lands.’142 However, he has already acquired the prerogatives of all the three functions: sovereign god, protector of the ‘wide pastures’, of family and human communities (Yasht 10. 79) and of fertility (Yasht 10. 61),143 guarantor of order, lord of the truth, of respecting the vows (there was a custom in Iran of swearing to Mithra in the presence of the sacred fire).144 In other words, he was a veritable supreme judge of human actions. He dwelt in the spiritual world, on the golden peaks of the bright Mt Hara (today Elburz), where day and night were all the same, a place with no sickness of temptations from the lawless, where ‘the immortal saints united with the Sun’145 publicly admitted their sins before him (Yasht 10. 50–51). On the same mountain there was 138 For the passages cited from Yasht (10) I have used mainly Geldner 1926; Gershevich 1959; and Malandra 1983. 139 An epithet encountered in numerous passages within Yasht 10: 1, 46, 86–87. 140 Ries 1990, 2738. 141 Ries 1990, 2733, 2738, 2768. 142 In the interpretation of Eliade 1991, 321. 143 Eliade 1991, 321 and 326–27. 144 Ries 1990, 2768. 145 A possible identification of Mithra with the Sun is also present in Yasht 10. 142, as well as in the later texts, such as in Vendīdād 19. 28–29, where there is a passage on the judgement of souls: ‘When the man is dead, when his time is over, then the wicked, evil-doing Daevas cut off his eyesight. On the third night, when the dawn appears and brightens up, when Mithra, the god with beautiful weapons, reaches the all-happy mountains, and the Sun is rising (28), then the fiend named Vīzaresha, or, Spitama Zarathustra, carries off in bonds the souls of the wicked Daeva-worshippers who live in sin.’

44

CHAPTER 1

also the Cinvat Bridge (or Činwadpuhl), where Mithra presided over a court, assisted by Sraosha (Srōš) and Rashnu (Rašn); the latter weighed the good and the bad deeds of the soul on a spiritual scale, an image that was not familiar to Gāthic writings, but was indeed transmitted later on in Mazdaism.146 Passing the bridge has been associated at times with an initiatory test, as the bridge widened for the faithful and sharpened as the top of a cutting edge for the unfaithful.147 The same gods, seen by certain scholars as the precursors of the later Dadophors, accompany him on his nocturnal journeys,148 when the ‘angry lord’ (Yasht 10. 69) goes and rushes with his ever-swift chariot drawn by four white, bright, undying horses, ‘living on heavenly food’ (Yasht 10. 13; 68; 125–127), upon those who lie unto Mithra, ‘letting tears run over their chins’ (Yasht 10. 38), upon the demons (daeva) of the malicious Ahriman (Yasht 10. 52), who tries to lead the faithful astray from the right path into the ‘House of Falsity’ (Yasht 10. 87). Thus, Mithra guaranteed to the faithful protection and victory over the evil, as underlined by a passage within the Avestan hymn dedicated to the god: ‘Thou art a keeper (pāta) and protector (nipāta) of those who lie not: though art the maintainer (pāta) of those who lie not. With thee hath Verethraghna, made by Ahura, contracted the best of all friendships’ (Yasht 10. 79–80). It is interesting that such a scene of demons being punished is found later in Mazdaism and then, in the Roman period, on the walls of a mithraeum discovered at Hawarte, situated near Apameia in Syria.149 In this case, the demons within or near the ‘City of Darkness’ are each stricken by a sunray; in another scene, the Malicious, who can be identified, in Gawlikowski’s opinion, with deus Arimanius mentioned on certain Western inscriptions, depicted with human features but with two heads, is enchained by Mithra. It is the first such attestation in a mithraeum, which could indicate that the inheritance left by Iranian conceptual forms in Graeco-Roman Mithraism is much richer than initially considered by certain of Cumont’s critics. More than two decades earlier, Turcan had already stated the possibility of such an interpretation, by showing that the salvation of the faithful, as perceived in Graeco-Roman Mithraism, had nothing in common with the Platonic or Neoplatonic soteriology or with the conceptions on this subject within the Metroac, Isiac or Christian cults: ‘S’il s’explique en fonction d’un dualisme,

146 147 148 149

Tafażżolī 1985, 594–95. Eliade 1991, 324–27. Malandra 1990. Gawlikowski 2000, 161–71.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

45

ce n’est pas celui de l’esprit et du corps, de l’âme et du monde, mais de la lumière et des ténèbres, de la mort et de la vie.’150 From the reign of the first Achaemenids, new religious syntheses emerged that encompassed and transformed a series of elements within ‘Orthodox’ Zoroastrianism, but also aspects of the pre-Zoroastrian religious background:151 reformed Mazdaism and Zurvanism, two currents in which the vision of – even only apparent – Zoroastrian monotheism disappeared, being replaced by a dualist ideology, which would survive later under various forms in Manichaeism and Mazdakism, and in the practices of the mediaeval sect of al-Bābakīyah.152 This is a tauroctonic, solar, demiurgic Mithra, worshipped inclusively in the military environment within secret male groups such as Männerbund, starting in the reign ofCyrus the Great (ca. 550–530 BC) and diffused through magi, Median in origin, as demonstrated by scholars such as R.A. Bowman,153 Jacques Duchesne-Guillemin,154 Miltiades Papatheophanes,155 Martin Schwartz,156 D.P. Orsi,157 Michael York,158 Julien Ries159 and others. This type of perception – and not the Avestan one – would constitute one of the starting points for the constitution of Graeco-Roman Mithraism. However, there is still a long way to go in order to reach to the Mithraic mysteries. Starting in the 5th century BC, Zurvanism emerged, in which doctrine Ahura Mazda was no longer the central figure, the eternal and supreme god, but became the twin brother of Ahriman and son of Zurvan Akarana (infinite time), as shown in two works: one of Ps.-Clement (2nd –3rd centuries) and the other of Eznik of Kolb (5th century).160 Each of the twins had a genesis of his own: Ahura Mazda/Ormazd created the sky, the earth and all the good and beautiful things; Ahriman created the demons and the world of darkness.161 150 Turcan 1982, 183–84. For soteriology, see des Places 1982; Flamant 1982; Griffiths 1982; and other contributions to Bianchi and Vermaseren 1982. 151 de Breuil 1982, 28, 32–33; Ries 1990, 2747–48. 152 Lieu 1994, 1–21 and 105–13; Brown 1969; Widengren 1979. 153 Bowman 1970, 15, 23, 27; J.S. Smith 1971, 239–40. 154 Duchesne-Guillemin 1985. 155 Papatheophanes 1985, 132–37. 156 Schwartz 1985, especially 684–90. 157 Orsi 1988, 155–58. 158 York 1993. 159 Ries 1990, 2753–54, with an interesting commentary: ‘Au moment de la reprise du polythéisme mazdéen qui est obligé de récupérer Mithra, un dieu très populaire, ce sont probablement les théologiens réformateurs, eux mêmes de la première fonction, qui ont annexé la force guerrière au domaine propre de la souveraineté religieuse.’ 160 Boyce 1989, 686; Duchesne-Guillemin 1984, 671; Chaumont 1985, 706. 161 Duchesne-Guillemin 1984, 671.

46

CHAPTER 1

Some of these cosmological aspects were adopted in Mazdean religion,162 a fact also reflected by Plutarch who, in De Iside et Osiride 46, shows that Zoroaster taught the Persians to offer sacrifices to Areimanios. He presents what he categorises as ‘the doctrine of Zoroaster the Mage, who is reported to have lived 5000 years before the Trojan War.’ Ahura Mazda (Ormuzd), god of light and creator of the world, represented the good principle, while Angra Mainyu (Ahriman), god of darkness and ignorance, was characterised by the evil principle. Mithra was between the two principles, the reason for which the Persians called him mesitēs (μεσίτης), with the sense of ‘intermediary’ or ‘mediator’. Alternatively, this aspect related by Plutarch represents a late conception of the reformative Mazdean theologians. The same can also be said of Porphyry’s assertion, which can be found in his De antro Nympharum 6, where he shows that Zoroaster was the first to perform an initiation ceremony in a cave, as this custom certainly dates from a subsequent period. There have been opinions that tauroctony had no place within Mazdean traditions, as in Persian writings it is Ahriman who kills the bull, not Mithra.163 But it is worth noting that this tradition is rather late as well, given the period when the Bundahishn (the book which refers to this myth) was elaborated – certainly after the 3rd century.164 Most probably, its emergence should be related to the activity of the ‘archimagus’ (mobad) Kartīr/Kardēr who, during the reign of Shapur I (AD 243–272), with the intention of re-imposing the values of traditional Zoroastrianism, which the Sassanids emphasised, wanted to put into a negative light tauroctony practised in non-Zoroastrian environments. Moreover, Zoroaster had openly declared his hostility to sacrificing bulls and the consumption of haoma, practices formerly current in the Iranian world and during his missionary activity, only to be eventually resumed in Mazdaism. The creating act of bull-slaying and its symbolism associated with the sacrifice of the Primordial Bull165 were accepted realities ever since the Achaemenid period. Iranian sovereigns themselves agreed with them, as two stories presented by ancient historians show, depicting the way in which Cambyses (529–522 BC) and Artaxerxes III Ochos (358–338 BC) sacrificed the sacred

162

Chaumont 1985, 706. Duchesne-Guillemin 1984, 672. 164 de Breuil 1982, 27; see the chapter ‘Zoroastrian Religion’ in the Cambridge History of Iran (Duchesne-Guillemin 1983, especially 877–80, and 898–902 for the relations with the Zurvanism). Actually, his reform was more neo-Mazdean in nature. 165 Bivar 2005, 346–48. For the categorisation of the conceptions on the role of tauroctony as saving act, see Beck 1984, 2079–84; 1998, 123–25. 163

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

47

Apis bulls of Memphis, thus horrifying the Egyptians.166 Merkelbach suggestively comments upon these aspects, by showing that ‘… the killing of the Apis bull must have had more of a mystical motivation. The Persian king was Mithra incarnate. Now, when a sacred bull appeared, Mithra had to reiterate his great deed and to kill the bull. According to the Persian view, it was a redemptive act.’167 The significances of the creating act of tauroctony did not vanish, which is why such representations began to appear in the Hellenistic kingdoms from the 1st century BC, at Isbarta (Baris) in Asia Minor168 and also in the Cimmerian Bosporos,169 related, most probably, to the uptake of a dynastic cult dedicated to this god. The particular aspects of the deity represented at Isbarta, mostly the presence of wings, caused certain scholars state that the deity was in fact Nike, the goddess of victory.170 However, Nike is never represented kilted. Moreover, the deity is flanked by two goddesses of victory, one of them holding a palm branch, a sign of divine power, as shown by Vermaseren, who also mentions other similar scenes such as that of Ptuj.171 The bull represented an incarnation of fertility, associated with lunar symbolism parexcellence, whose fluids, blood and seed ensured the fecundity of the creating act.172 The sacrifice itself marked the idea of a universal salvation of the whole of humanity. However, unlike other Eastern deities, Mithra identified according to Geo Widengren with the ‘Saviour-king’, achieved this through a fertilising sacrifice, and not through his own sacrifice, given that he is not a god who dies and then resurrects.173 The Sun, the Moon and the stars almost always accompany the image of Mithra’s sacrifice, represented near a natural cave, a central cultural scene placed behind the altars within the mithraea and the spelaea, as they gravitated around Mt Hara, Mithra’s dwelling in Avestan Zoroastrianism.174 Mithra’s victory was the triumph of light over darkness, a fact also suggested by some Mithraic representations, such as those at Marino, Capua and Barberini,175 where the Sun blesses the creating act by sending a ray of light towards Mithra’s head. Moreo166

Ries 1990, 2760. Merkelbach 1956, 154–56. 168 Cumont 1939, 70. 169 Kobylina 1976, 26–27, nos. 27–30; Turcan 2001. 170 Will 1955, 155, 161–62, 169–76; Beck 1984, 2019. It is equally interesting though to encounter Diana with a crescent moon stabbing a cervid at the neck, in the very same position as in the tauroctonic scene, on three of the rock-cut reliefs at the bottom of the Philippi acropolis. See Collart and Ducrey 1975, 17 (fig. 6) and 106–09, nos. 80–82 (figs. 101–105). 171 Vermaseren 1951, 294–95. 172 York 1993, 204–05. 173 Turcan 1982. 174 Widengren 1960, 22–24. 175 Beck 1984, 2032, 2034. 167

48

CHAPTER 1

ver, when his gaze is not directed towards the interlocutor, the god turns his head towards Sol/Helios, usually placed in the left side of the scene. The same rays falling upon the heads of demons are also depicted on the fresco at Hawarte. Some scholars, such as Duchesne-Guillemin and York, have underlined the importance of the opposition/polarity principle or of lunar–solar duality in tauroctonic scenes,176 a fact indicated not only by the presence of the Moon and the Sun but also by that of the raven, the cock and the Dadophors: Cautes and Cautopates held their torches in opposite directions, thus marking the beginning and the end of the astral cycle. They were in many cases identified with Mithra, both on Western inscriptions and also by Ps.-Dionysius the Areopagite who mentions the celebrations dedicated by the magi in memory of the triple Mithra (Letters 7. 2). Together, the three form an image of eternity marked by the sequence of astral cycles. The same conclusion could also be drawn from the symbols that accompany in several cases the torch-bearers, i.e. to the cudgel, specific to the Avestan god,177 but attributed to the Dadophors on the vessel discovered at Mainz, as well as the bow, with its connection to prominent mythological moments such as the ‘hunting scene’ represented at Dura Europos and the ‘miracle of rain’ on the relief at Neunheim. The bow is also shown in the hand of a pater, who completes the act of initiation of a neophyte accompanied by the heliodromus, in the only scene of this type present on the vessel at Mainz.178 This latter symbolic element appears at Cautopates, on the damaged fresco of the mithraeum at Perge in the south of Asia Minor, dated to the second half of the 2nd century AD.179 Tauroctony initially marked the beginning of the spring cycle and it was most probably related to the Mithrakana festival, which took place initially on the spring equinox and then, after the calendar reform of 150 BC by the Arsacid sovereigns, on the autumn equinox.180 Mithra ends up being identified with a lord of the equinoxes, as Porphyry himself states (DeantroNympharum 24).181 Because of the Parthian reform, Mithrakana is identified with the Iranian celebration of the Persian New Year, Nawroz, when the sovereign symbolically reiterated the cosmogony renewing the world.182 However, this reform would be having much deeper implications for the religious ideology of Graeco-Persian sovereigns during the Hellenistic period and that of the Sassanids later on, so 176 177 178 179 180 181 182

Beck 1993, 309; York 1993, 309. Eliade 1991, 321. Beck 2000. IGSK 54.I, 248. Malandra 1990, 96; Boyce 1975, 107–08. Beck 2000, 157. Eliade 1991, 316.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

49

that it underlined their quality as representatives of the divinity, bearers of the divine aureole, hvarenō, i.e. the ‘heavenly light’ or ‘fire of divine glory’.183 Mithra becomes a protector of the dynasty, and the sovereign himself was considered his reincarnation. The latter received divine power from the hand of the god, an aspect illustrated by the Commagenian reliefs of Nimrud Dagh and Arsameia Nymphaios from the reign of the Graeco-Persian Hellenistic sovereign Antiochos I. This scene, entitled dexiosis, underlined loyalty to the contract184 concluded between the two parties. It is interesting that it also appears in GraecoRoman Mithraism: on the altar of Flavius Aper at Poetovio (Ptuj), where the contracting parties are Helios/Sol and Mithra.185 However, in the Roman world as well, the god would probably keep the same qualities of protector of the imperial house, despite the fact that, as Marcel Simon justly underlined, Mithra was never officially accepted within the Roman pantheon.186 This provides an explanation for the phrase fautor imperii sui, ‘protector of their empire’, on a dedication of AD 308 discovered at Carnuntum (in Pannonia Superior), where Diocletian and the other Tetrarchs are called Iovii et Herculii religiossimi AugustietCaesares,187 but also for the issues of a local coin, at Tarsus (Cilicia), during the reign of Gordian III, before the commencement of his campaign against the Persians. It is beyond doubt that this evidence demonstrates both political importance and ideological support for imperial authority. A seductive theory on the origin of the Mithraic mysteries is that of Beck. In his article of 1998, ‘The Mysteries of Mithras: A New Account of their Genesis’, by insisting on the role of Commagenian military elements and the 1997 discovery of the mithraeum at Doliche, he suggests a Commagenian origin for the mysteries, placed at the beginning of the 1st century AD.188 Joseph Campbell recognised Mithra as a solar god in certain passages within the RigVeda (8. 25. 3; 10. 36. 3; 10. 132. 6).189 The idea is interesting since, until not long ago, the identification of Mithra with a solar divinity had been considered a more recent theory. Campbell’s assertion is confirmed by numismatic discoveries on the territory of the Kushan Empire, dated to the first two centuries AD. On a bronze coin minted during the reign of king Huvishka (2nd century AD), Mithra’s head is diademed with a radiate disk.190 The god 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190

Ries 1990, 2760–61; Chaumont 1985, 706. Ries 1990, 2761–62. Clauss 2000, 59. Simon 1979. Clauss 2000, 7, 28. Beck 1998. Cf.J. Campbell 1969, 63. Stawinski 1979, 64–65.

50

CHAPTER 1

was mentioned on Kushan coins mostly under the name of Miro or Miiro.191 Actually, the extended pantheon of the Kushan Empire included not only Ahura Mazda and Buddha but also Herakles, Serapis and the lunar divinity Mao (the equivalent of Anatolian Mên).192 Mithra was sometimes identified with Apollo or Helios.193 Naturally, there were certain syncretic tendencies during the domination of the first Kushan kings – Vima Kadphises (1st century AD), Kanishka and Huvishka (2nd century AD) – given the climate of religious tolerance that ensued in the course of their reigns. However, taking into account the aforementioned passages of theRigVeda, the deity may have had solar attributes much sooner than initially thought. The first evidence of initiation in the Anatolian cult of Mithra appeared quite early, in the Hellenistic period, when a fundamental change emerged in the conceptual view of the cult of in the Anatolian and Syro-Palmyrene world. This was possible because Iranian political domination of these territories had ceased, which had important consequences:194 as there was no longer direct connection with its areas of origin, the cult of Mithra eventually became just a simple religious system of the Iranian diaspora. J.Z. Smith underlines the alterations that emerge in Graeco-Oriental religions attested in the diaspora during the Hellenistic period: a lesser concern by the diasporan ethnic elements for the areas of origin, in parallel with an intake of elements related to visions, epiphanies, celestial journeys (it is worth mentioning that the idea of a celestial journey of the soul appeared now for the first time in the Mithraic cult);195 the transformation of these religious systems from ‘national/ethnic’ religions into religions concerned with the salvation of the individual and with personal devotion and aspects related to the transcendent: ‘It was a shift (…) from “birthright” to “convinced” religion’; and groups of worshippers no longer limited to certain ethnic elements (who continued to speak their native language or who, in the second or third generation, had been linguistically assimilated), but also containing numerous converts within other populations, a fact that naturally led to the assimilation of new religious concepts, syncretism and, basically, to a reinterpretation of the old belief.196 This would also explain the presence of the initiatory ceremonies attested in the case of the Cilician pirates mentioned by Plutarch (LifeofPompey 24), as well as the moment depicted by ancient authors of Nero’s initiation and attendance at the sacred feasts in the 191 192 193 194 195 196

Turcan 2000, 37. Stawinski 1979, 90–91. Stoyanov 1999, 56. Merkelbach 1956. Segal 1979, 353–57. J.S. Smith 1971, 237–38.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

51

honour of Mithra. The initiations are also mentioned in inscriptions from the 3rd century BC onward. The inscription of Ariaramneia (Rhodandos, currently Çamlica) in Cappadocia shows the new religious realities (2.9.1).197 Henri Grégoire discovered it in 1907 on a rock in the Taurus Mountains.198 It mentions the initiation of a Mithraworshipping magus. Cumont, in his study Mithra en Asie Mineure, restored the inscription as: Σαγάριος | Μαγ[αφέ]ρνου | στρατηγὸς | Ἀριαραμνεί(ας) | ἐμάγευσε Μίθρῃ and then ‫זגר בר מתגפרץ רב חגא | פגיש ]למ[חרה‬.199 The names of the Ariaramna Mountain and of the nearby stream, as well as the presence of Median magi are also mentioned on the so-called ‘fortification tablets’ of Persepolis at least two centuries before.200 The meaning of the Graeco-Aramaic bilingual text has been interpreted in several ways, both as to dating and meaning. Cumont believed it to date to the 1st century AD, but more recent works place it in the Hellenistic period, sometime between the 3rd and 1st centuries BC. In Cumont’s opinion, the phrase ἐμάγευσε Μίθρῃ means ‘becoming a magus of Mithra’, thus indicating that the inscription would have been engraved for an initiationceremony.201 Beck and Mitchell mention nothing about a potential initiation, but they note the strategos Sagarios Magaphernos celebrating a ceremony dedicated to the god Mithra.202 Another equally interesting dedication is that of Sarıhüyük (2.5.1)203 on the territory of Ancyra. The inscription could be deciphered only partially, but in all likelihood there were penalties for those who tried to misappropriate the funds of the temple, as its editor, who dated it to the 1st century AD, showed.204 Because of the loans that they had contracted and not returned, their relatives, meaning their ‘benefactors and supplicants’, could not pay their dues to the temple. This inscription also refers to the existence of a tradition transmitted by the magi concerning Mithra: ‘following the magi, celebrate and pray to Mithra’. 197 Mitchell 1993 II, 29; Beck 1984, 2018–19; Will 1955, 15; Nock 1942, 349; Cumont 1939, 68; CMRDM I, 19. 198 Grégoire 1908, 445; Mitchell 1993 II, 29; Beck 1984, 2018–19. 199 Cumont 1939, 67–69. 200 Schwarz 1985, 687–88; Papatheophanes 1985, 108–34. 201 Cumont 1939, 68: ‘Nous avons exprimé naguère l’opinion que εμάγευσε Μίθρῃ devait peut-être se traduire, suivant une signification fréquente de l’aoriste, par «devint mage de Mithra»’. See also Vermaseren 1963, 22. 202 Beck 1984, 2018–19: ‘…? celebrated a Magian rite for Mithres’; Mitchell 1993 II, 29: ‘… a Graeco-Aramaic bilingual text shows a regional official called a stratêgos conducting a Mazdean ceremony for the god’. 203 RECAM II, 404; Gordon 1994, 470. 204 Mitchell 1993 II, 29: ‘The overall sense of this inscription seems to have been to prescribe penalties for those who misappropriated temple funds.’

52

CHAPTER 1

The typology of the rock-born hero is a commonplace within mythological cycles disseminated mostly in the Caucasus, which show similarities with the Anatolian and Jewish mythological traditions. Thus, the Phrygian legend of Agdistis, the Ossetian poems, the Jewish myths on Armillus and the Georgian myths on Amirani probably have the same origin: The Song of Ullikummi, well known in the Hittite-Hurrite tradition.205 However, the closest formulation to the Hittite version is given by the legend of Diorphus’ birth, mentioned by Ps.-Plutarch (DeFluviis 23. 1–4). This testimony was often invoked to support hypotheses about the Iranian origin of the Mithraic mysteries and the exclusion of women from the Mithraic cult.206 This latter has been questioned more recently, mostly by Jonathan David.207 Ps.-Plutarch shows that Mithra, who was supposed to hate women, nonetheless wanted to have a son and fertilised a rock, situated somewhere near the most important river of Armenia, the Araxes. When the time came, the rock gave birth to a boy called Diorphus. He challenged Ares to a fight and, after being killed by the latter, the gods transformed him into the mountain that bear his name.208 Russell identifies the last deity with Vahagn, a divinity of storm, lightening and rain.209 Despite the similarities with the Anatolian legend of Agdistis, it is practically impossible to prove Mithra’s bisexuality, a matter also noted by Vermaseren.210 The testimony of Firmicus Maternus (Deerroreprofanarumreligionum 5. 1–2) is not fully edifying either.211 205 Russell 1990; de Jong 1997, 291. On the Hittite tablets the legend of the birth of Ullikummi (as a result of the intercourse between the god Kumarbi and a rock near the city of Urkish) is related: ‘At Cool Pond a great Rock is lying:/ Its length is three leagues,/ but its width which it has below is [one] and a half leagues./ His mind sprang forward,/ he slept with the Rock,/ and his manhood [flowed] into it./ Five times he took it,/ [and again] ten times he took her…’ The rockborn baby was given to the Mother Goddess and he later became the stone monster, whom only Teshub, Ea and 70 other gods managed to defeat in battle (Güterbock’s translation in Hoffner and Diamond 1997, 58). For Mithraism in western Georgia, see Tsetskhladze 1992. 206 David 2000, 137; Vermaseren 1951, 290–91; Colpe 1983, 853–56. 207 David 2000. At the end of his study (p. 141), David appreciates that ‘…the status of women within the mysteries of Mithras, like so many aspects of this enigmatic religion, is perhaps indeterminable. Women were involved with the cult in some areas, but whether they were actually initiated is uncertain. Regardless, to state that women were excluded from the rites is to dismiss a substantial amount of evidence, and to repeat a time-honoured scholarly misinterpretation.’ 208 de Jong 1997, 291–94. 209 Russell 1990, 2683–84; Grigorian 1993, 166. 210 Vermaseren 1951, 288: ‘It is not possible to prove the bisexual character of Mithras, though it is remarkable that apparently his sex is sometimes not indicated and is still hidden in the rock.’ 211 After talking about the cult of fire in the Persian world, he shows that the magi believed it to be made of two powers, corresponding to the two sexes (adutriusquesexus). However, in the subsequent paragraph, Maternus − though he shows that the magi related his cult to the power of fire – indicates Mithra as a male deity.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

53

Celsus mentions some elements of the Mithraic doctrine in the Persian version: ‘There is a symbol of the two orbits in heaven, the one being that of the fixed stars and the other that assigned to the planets. […] The symbol is this. There is a ladder with seven gates and at its top an eighth gate’ (Origen Contra Celsum 6. 22). These gates are interpreted as the representation of the seven planetary skies through which the soul has to pass,212 by invoking a previous passage within Origen’s work where the belief of the old Greeks in the existence of planetary spheres is mentioned.213 Celsus associates the gates with particular metals and planets: the first gate (made of lead) is that of Saturn; the second gate, made of tin, corresponds to Venus; the third gate, made of bronze, belongs to Jupiter; the fourth gate, made of iron, is that of Mercury; the fifth gate, ‘made of an alloy’, belongs to Mars; the sixth gate, made of silver, belongs to the Moon; finally, the seventh gate is made of gold and it corresponds to the Sun, ‘resembling its colours’. Beyond the obviously puerile explanations provided by Celsus, confuted by Origen, who says that ‘he connects musical theories with the theology of the Persians’, it appears to be a clear correspondence between the seven gates and the planetary symbols, though not in that particular order (ContraCelsum 6. 22). The fact that Celsus’ version does contain an inkling of the truth is strengthened by the symbolism of the elements presented on the pavement of the mithraeum called ‘of the seven spheres’, Mitreo delle sette sfere, discovered at Ostia. On the mosaic inside the mithraeum,the symbols of the zodiac are presented; they frame four semi-circles corresponding to the planetary skies or, more likely, to the seven initiation stages represented in another mithraeum at Ostia, that of Felicissimus. The general opinion is that the first literary mention of the sacrificial slaying of the bull in a Mithraic context comes from P. Papinius Statius, who, towards the year AD 80, spoke of ‘Mithras, that beneath the rocky Persean cave strains at the reluctant-following horns’ (Thebaid 1. 718–720).214 Cumont believed that Mithraic communities adopted sacrificial bull-slaying from the worshippers of the Great Mother of Anatolia. The Romans borrowed this rite, whose character was to remain unaltered under the action of the Mazdean beliefs, from the Cappadocian temples.215 212

Eliade 1995, 126–27. According to Plato, in their path from earth to sky – to the ‘plain of truth’ – the souls are carried round by charioteers. See in this sense the passage of Plato Phaidros 248 a–d. 214 Adsis, o memor hospitii, Iunoniaque arua / dexter ames, seu te roseum Titana uocari / gentisAchaemenidaeritu,seupraestatOsirin/frugiferum,seuPerseisubrupibusantri/indignatasequitorquentemcornuaMithram. 215 Cumont 1904; 1949; 1909, 100–04; 1896, 334. Sanie shows that not only the rite of the taurobolium was borrowed from the cult of Cybele and of Attis, but the symbol of the pine, too, cf. Sanie 1982. See also Özkaya 1997. 213

54

CHAPTER 1

As Turcan also underlines, the orientation of the sanctuary seems to have had a great importance as well, since the moment the mithraeum opened to worshippers of the god, sunlight had to fall on the central image of Mithra Tauroctonus! Many of these mithraeaorspelaea had their entrance towards the south-east or the south,216 just as most of the rock-cut altars in Phrygia had the same orientation. According to tradition, it was Zoroaster who first dedicated in the mountains such a cave (spelaeum) to Mithra. This is confirmed by a writing of Porphyry: Similarly, the Persians call the place a cave where they introduce an initiate to the mysteries, revealing to him the path by which the souls descend and go back again. For Eubulus tells us that Zoroaster was the first to dedicate a natural cave in honor of Mithras, the creator and father of all; it was located in the mountains near Persia and had flowers and springs. This cave bore for him the image of the Cosmos which Mithras had created and the things which the cave contained, by their proportionate arrangement, provided him with symbols of the elements and climates of the Cosmos. After Zoroaster others adopted the custom of performing their rites of initiation in caves and grottoes which were either natural or artificial. (…) It was under these influences, I think, that the Pythagoreans, and Plato after them, called the Cosmos a cave or grotto. For in Empedocles the powers that guide souls say: ‘We have arrived here in this covered cave’ (OntheCaveoftheNymphs 6–8).

It is interesting that, though Porphyry sees Zoroaster as the first dedicator of such a cultual building, he underlines that the building was not in Iranian territory proper but in the mountains near Persia, an area that Carsten Colpe calls outer Iran, which can indicate territories in the east of Anatolia or in Armenia.217 Naturally, as in the case of other initiatory ceremonies, introducing the neophyte in the cave/grotto, spelaeum,was a purifying act in itself, called regressusaduterum, whose symbolical significance was deciphered by Mircea Eliade.218 The gesture meant that the initiate regressed to the embryo stage in order to be born again, regenerated and metamorphosed to a new life.219 Hence, the neophyte’s entrance to the cave meant going back to his origins in order to ascend to the skies. Precisely through its central character, the cave designates the place of birth and regeneration.220 Beck believes that he Commagene kingdom was where the Mithraic mysteries were formulated. Up to its absorption by Rome, Commagene was a client state ruled by C. Iulius Antiochus IV Epiphanes (AD 37–72), descendent of a

216 217 218 219 220

Turcan 2000, 76–77. Colpe 1983, 854–55. Eliade 1995, 69–71. Eliade 1995, 68. Chevalier and Gheerbrant 1994–95 III, 78.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

55

Graeco-Iranian dynasty.221 Dispossessed of his kingdom by Gaius Caligula, but probably still ruling a territory in the south of Lycaonia, Antiochus got back his kingdom during the reign of Claudius, as well as a part of Cilicia (Josephus Flavius JewishAntiquities 19. 276–277; Cassius Dio RomanHistory 60. 8. 1). Beck makes the distinction between the founding group and the group in transit. According to him, the former had to prove a rich Iranian tradition, centred on Mithra-worship, and a western tradition ‘in which astrology furnished the master metaphors of cosmology and soteriology’.222 The royal Commagene cult, like other similar cults within neighbouring regions (Armenia, Cappadocia, Pontus, Cilicia), played an important role in the transmission of Mithraism in the course of the Hellenistic period,223 as demonstrated by the above dedication of Antiochus, dated around the middle of the 1st century BC. After the annexation of Commagene and its inclusion among the empire’s provinces, autochthonous military elements and their families played an important role in the propagation of Mithraism.224 The royal troops started to make contact with Roman militaries within the legions XVApollinaris, VMacedonica and IIAdiutrix before AD 72 as well, during the siege of Jerusalem, when the king of Commagene offered support to the Roman troops involved in the First Jewish War (TacitusHistories 5. 1), the Civil Wars of AD 68–69, by helping Otho against Vitellius (Tacitus Histories 2. 25), and in the campaign of Domitius Corbulo against the Armenians (Tacitus Annals 13. 7–8), during Nero’s reign. Beck’s view, with all its positive aspects considered, is however too restrictive, both regarding theformative area of Mithraism as a religion of mysteries (being limited to the Commagene kingdom) and the so-called founding group, identified in his opinion with subjects of that state. The area where these mutations occurred must surely have been much larger, including at least a part, or eventually the entire territory of the future Roman provinces in the south-east of Asia Minor (Cilicia, Commagene, Cappadocia, Pontus, Armenia). The existence of theophoric names such as Mithridates in the case of some Anatolian dynasts in both the Hellenistic and the Roman period may constitute an indication of the prestige of Mithra.225 Moreover, some of the satraps in Anatolia were called Mithridates, Mithrobarzanes or Mithraphernes.226 At Cappadocian 221

On the origin and history of this dynasty, see Sullivan 1977. Beck 1998, 117–19. 223 Turcan 2000, 25. 224 Beck 1998, 122: ‘What I propose, then, is that the Mysteries of Mithras were developed within a subset of these Commagenian soldiers and family retainers and were transmitted by them at various points of contact to their counterparts in the Roman world.’ 225 Josephus Flavius, JewishAntiquities 14. 112–114; 16. 18 (for Mithridates VI Eupator, king of Pontus); and 14. 128–136, 138–139, 193 (for Mithridates of Pergamon). 226 Turchi 1923, 176. 222

56

CHAPTER 1

Komana, numerous names derived from the miθr-/mitr- radical are registered, even after the Roman conquest: Mithrateidios, Mithratochmes, Iulius Mitra, Mithres or Mithrei.227 The existence of certain dedicators bearing the name Μίθρης is also attested on other inscriptions at Tyana in the south-west of Cappadocia,228 and at Ilğin in the Sultan Dağı region in central Anatolia.229 In the Hellenistic states that emerged after the dissolution of the empire of Alexander the Great, cosmopolitan and universalistic tendencies grew progressively, and the interaction between the two worlds, Graeco-Macedonian and Eastern, had multiple implications in both the religious and philosophical fields, as well as in literature, the sciences and architecture.230 Syncretism became the dominant characteristic of the entire period following the foundation of the Hellenistic states and ending immediately after the legalisation of Christianity through the Edict of Milan (Mediolanum) in AD 313. In consequence, there was also an alteration in the perception of the old Persian divinities who went through a Hellenisation process, bearing the names and borrowing the attributes of Greek divinities. Thus, in Commagene in the middle of the 1st century BC, there were gods with mixed names, Greek and Iranian: Zeus Oromazdes, Apollo Mithra Helios Hermes, Artagnes Ares.231 On the inscription at Nemrud Dagh mentioning these divinities, Antiochus of Commagene (69–34 BC) claims to be one of the descendants of the Achaemenid sovereign Darius (522–486 BC), the son of Hystaspes, but also of Seleukos I Nikator (ca. 358–280 BC). The cult and the celebrations of these deities were instituted ‘by merging his double origin, and blended together the gods and the rites of the Persians and Greeks’.232 The phenomenon mentioned is present in all the regions that, up to the Roman conquest, had been governed by dynasts claiming to be descendants of the last Achaemenid sovereigns: Cappadocia, Pontus, Commagene and Armenia. The frequent occurrence of the name Mithridates among some members of these royal houses, as well as in the case of other categories of dedicators, also suggests a certain devotion to the old Mithraic belief with a Persian origin. The cult of Mithra is very little attested in the Greek or Hellenised environments in the west and north-west of Asia Minor.233 The presence of the Mith-

227 228 229 230 231 232 233

Harper 1968, 145. IGSK 55.I, 83. IGSK 62, 331. Eliade 1995, 137. Duchesne-Guillemin 1993, 1084. Cumont 1904, 1944. Turcan 2000, 49–50.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

57

raic cult was identified at Trapezos,234 Herakleia Pontica235 and Amisos in Pontus, Amastris in Paphlagonia, Kios in Bithynia, Daskyleion, Amorion236 and Aizanitis237 in Phrygia, Ariaramneia238 and Kaisareia.239 The cult also left traces at Tyana (Kilisse-Hissar)240 and Arabissos in Cappadocia, Nemrud Dagh in Commagene, Anazarbos241 and Tarsos in Cilicia, Derbe and Artanada in Lycaonia, Baris (Isbarta) in Pisidia,242 Hierokaisareia and Hypaipa in Lydia, Colophon in Mysia,243 and Kawagh-Dagh244 and Oinoanda245 in Lycia. In the west of Asia Minor, just a single inscription, in Latin, was discovered at Colophon in Mysia that was dedicated to DeussanctusinvictusMit(h)ra,246 which reinforces the assertion about the reduced impact of the cult in Greek or highly Hellenised settings.247 It is uncertain whether the sanctuaries at Pergamon and Kapikaya should be included in the category of Mithraic places of worship or not.248 Undoubtedly, there was a spelaeum at Trapezos in Pontus, on the heights of a hill situated on the eastern side of the city and which was called Μιθρίος βουνός up to the Middle Ages (‘the hill of Mithra’).249 The legend of St Eugene, patron saint of the city, mentions him destroying the idol right on the site of the future church of John the Baptist.250 On Anatolian coins, Mithra is often represented with radiate head. At Trapezos, during Trajan’s reign, there was a bust of him with a radiate Phrygian cap. From the joint reign of the emperors Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, the typology began to change. Mithra is depicted on horseback, like an Anatolian 234

Cumont 1939, 71–74. SEG 47, no. 1503. 236 Cumont 1899, 91, no. 4; 1939, 70; Wüst 1932, col. 2151. 237 Beck 1998, 119. 238 Cumont 1939, 68; Mitchell 1993 II, 29, n. 162; Beck 1984, 2018–19. 239 CIL III.1 suppl., 6772 = Cumont 1899, 91, no. 2; Clauss 1992, 238. 240 IGSK 55.1, 34 = Cumont 1899, 91, no. 3; see also IGSK 55.1, 83, where the Mithres and Mâ teophores appear. 241 IGSK 56, 9; Clauss 1992, 238. 242 Cumont 1939, 70–71, with the presentation of the relief at Isbarta and commentaries on the iconographic particularities of the monument depicting a tauroctonic scene. 243 CIMRM 24B (suppl.); Clauss 1992, 238;Beck 1984, 2018–19. 244 Wüst 1932, col. 2151. 245 Milner and M. Smith 1994, 71. 246 Clauss 1992, 238;Beck 1984, 2018–19 (DeosanctoinvictoMit[h]rae). 247 Clauss 1992, 238. 248 Dahlinger 1979; 1977, 51;Turcan 2000, 35; Clauss 1992, 293, in relation to the attestation of the Mithraic cult at Amaseia, Antioch and Pergamon. 249 Cumont 1939, 71: ‘Dans le Pont, où régnèrent des Mithridate, Mithra fut certainement adoré comme dieu tutélaire depuis l’époque hellénistique, et l’on savait depuis longtemps que la ville de Trapézus l’honorait spécialement. La légende locale raconte comment le martyr détruisit une idole sur la colline qui encore au Moyen Age s’appelait Μιθρίος βουνός.’ 250 SynaxariumEcclesiaeConstantinopolitanae, 20 January 406; cf. Delehaye 1933, 172. 235

58

CHAPTER 1

rider,251 as well as Mên or Sozon.252 A coin minted at Tarsos bears the legend ΤΑΡΣΟΥ ΜΗΤΡΟΠΟΛΕ; it was issued during the campaign of Gordian III (AD 238–244) against the Persians.253 The inscription on an altar discovered at Anazarbos (Anazarva) in Cilicia survives only in fragments, and it is rather difficult to determine the first part: [[---]] |6 [[̔υπάτου τὸ]] β΄, π(ατρὸς) π(ατρίδος) [Μ. Αὐρή?]|λιος Σέλευκος ἱε[ρεὺς καὶ] |8 πατὴρ διὰ βίου (2.8.1).254 According to Turcan, it dates to the 2nd century and it was dedicated to Zeus-Helios-Mithra by a person acting as a priest and as a pater at the same time (ἱε[ρεὺς καὶ] πατὴρ).255 The two functions were compatible but not mutually dependent: a person did not have to be, at the same time, both a priest and the head of the community. Taking into account the discovery of the inscription in a Roman colony, Clauss believes that the [---]λιος ending completes the name of a dedicator bearing the tria nomina: [Μ. Αὐρή?]|λιος Σέλευκος.256 Mustafa Hamdi Sayar, the editor of the corpus containing the inscriptions of Anazarbos and the surroundings, shares this opinion.257 At Tyana (Kilise Hisar) in Cappadocia, an inscription was discovered inside a mosque; its provenance and dating remain a mystery so far, just as Dietrich Berges and Johannes Nollé consider: Θεῷ δικαίῳ Μίθρᾳ, translated as ‘To the just god Mithra’ (2.9.3).258 At first sight, the text could refer to a possible identification of Mithra with the Phrygian divinity Hosios kai Dikaios,259 ‘The Holy and Just’, with solar attributes,260 and fulfilling, as shown also by Anatolian inscriptions,261 the function of Helios’ messenger (angelos). Also as 251 As a rider, Mithra often appears on the monuments on the east and south coast of the Black Sea, but also in the Bosporan kingdom; cf. Ustinova 1999, 270–75. 252 Cumont 1939, 72; Sartre 1996, 325; Olhausen 1990, 1887–90 (for Mên Pharnakou and Mithra). 253 Cumont 1904, 1945; 1908; Turcan 2000, 25. 254 IGSK 56, 9; Clauss 1992, 238; CIMRM II, 27bis (suppl.); AÉ 1954, 7; SEG 12, 515. 255 Turcan 2000, 25. 256 Clauss 1992, 238. 257 Furthermore, he reproduced the text as follows, starting with line six: ‘[---] Konsul zum zweiten Mal, Vater des Vaterlandes, M(arcus) Aurelius Seleukos lebenslänglich Priester und “Vater” auf Lebenszeit des Zeus Helios, des unbesiegbaren Mithras, hat den Altar (geweiht) entsprechend seinem Versprechen an die Vaterstadt’ (IGSK 56, 9 = CIMRM II, 27bis [suppl.] = SEG 12, 515). Sayar dates the inscription to the 3rd century. 258 IGSK 55.1, 34 = Cumont 1899, 91, no. 3 = CIMRM, I, 18; ‘Gefunden in Kemerhisar bei der türkischen Moschee; keine Angaben zum Monument’ (IGSK 55.1, 211); Clauss 1992, 238; Mitchell 1993 II, 29, n. 162; Beck 1984, 2018–19. 259 Drew-Bear 1976, 263–64. 260 Robert 1971, 617. For the representations of this deity in Thrace and Moesia, see TachevaHitova 1983, 266–68. 261 IGSK 52, 19. The dedication addressed to Hosios kai Dikaios dates to the 1st century AD and it comes from Hadrianoutherai, central Mysia. Such cases – in which the Phrygian divinity

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

59

Mithra, he was sometimes represented on monuments as an Anatolian rider, with a radiate crown on his head, as well as with the double axe (labrys). However, it is highly unlikely for this to have been an indirect reference to one of the Mithraic initiatory stages: that of heliodromus.262 More likely, the attribute within the inscription at Tyana underlined Mithra’s quality of guarantor of justice, of the cosmic order and as protector of vows – functions that had also been present in all his previous hypostases.263 In Asia Minor, Mithra was fully syncretised, in most cases with Helios or Sol Invictus; in fact, this was also one of the peculiarities of Anatolian Mithraism. One of the rare Anatolian inscriptions in Latin dedicated to Mithra comes from Cappadocian Kaisareia: Solem/Sol(i)Invicto/M(u)trae/ProSaluteet / incolumitate / C(h)re(s)imi Augg(ustorum) / n(ostri) dispensatoris / Callimor(p)hus eiusdem / votum so(lvit) li(b)ens animo,264 which could be translated as ‘For the health and safety of Chresimus, steward of our emperors, I, Callimorphus, his cashier, (dedicated this image of) the Sun to Sol Invictus Mithra (and thus) fulfilled my vow with joy, from the heart’ (2.9.2). On a monument discovered in 1926 by Christopher Cox at Savçılar in the north-west of Phrygia, situated on the territory of ancient Ancyra Sidera, Mithra is represented, just like at Oinoanda, as a bust, wearing the usual Phrygian cap (2.6.2).265 The votive inscription is addressed to Helios-Mithra in AD 77/8 by Midon, son of Solon:266 Ἡλίῳ Μίθρᾳ Μίδων | Σώλονος | ἀνέθηκεν | εὐχήν. | [Ἔ]τους ρξβ΄ μ(ηνὸς) Π(ανήμου), meaning: ‘To Helios Mithra, Midon son of Solon dedicated (the altar) in fulfilment of the vow. In the year 162, in the month of Panemos.’ Helios-Mithra is represented in the same hypostasis of solar god on the wall of the boukonisterion dedicated to Septimius Severus, placed in the agora of Oinoanda in Lycia. Helios-Mithra is depicted with other reliefs, on top of a niche supposedly housing a well (2.7.2).267 To his left, the two riding Dioscuri with cloaks spread in the wind, flanking on each side a goddess often depicted

appears besides similar solar deities such as Helios or Apollo – are also found on other inscriptions, such as those in northern Galatia, at Karahoca in the district of Hayamana (RECAM II, 242) and at Yukari Dudaş (RECAM II, 44). See also the commentaries of Mitchell 1993 II, 25–26. 262 In relation to the Mithraic initiatory stages and especially as regards the heliodromus, see Beck 2000, 155–67; Colpe 1983, 854–55. 263 de Jong 1997, 284–88; Turcan 1982, 181. 264 CIL III.1, Suppl., 6772. 265 Beck 1998, 119; Gordon 1994, 470; MAMA X, 449 (pl. XLVIII); CIMRM 23; Will 1955, 154; Cumont 1939, 69. 266 MAMA X, 449; Beck 1998, 118–19. 267 Milner and M. Smith 1994, 71 (with pl. XVI a, b).

60

CHAPTER 1

on representations in the south and south-west of the Anatolian plateau, generically called ‘the Pisidian goddess’. Underneath this group is an inscription: ‘To the Dioscuri, saviour gods’. To the right of Helios is a representation of Hermes as an archer, together with the dedication ‘to Hermes, the leader’. Hermes was probably the most venerated deity of the Pisidians. A little farther, there is an image of a bearded character with curly hair, probably depicting the dedicator himself. The inscription can be translated as: ‘To Zeus the Saviour, Lic(innius) Hyaki(n)thos, the torch-bearer (dadouchos) (dedicated this) to the gods who accompany the altar.’ The terms dadouchos and dadophoroi are equivalent and they are encountered in other cults as well, such as the Mithraic cult or the mysteries of Demeter at Eleusis, where they were part of the annual procession (Herodotus 8. 65).268 The solar deity was represented at Oinoanda by a head surrounded by nine rays, with curly hair and beardless face. His bust is framed by a vault above. The two-line inscription is dedicated ‘To Helios-Mithra’. N.P. Milner and M.F. Smith believe that syncretism between Helios and Mithra is rather rare in Anatolia; in this case, the emphasis is on the old, local form of the Mithraic cult, different from the cult of Mysteries, which disseminated very rapidly throughout the entire Roman Empire starting in the 2nd century.269 Thus, this would be a cultual form closer to the Graeco-Persian one. In fact, as we have already seen, the presence of Persian names in Anatolia is quite well attested. However, I wish to underline that, after analysis of the epigraphic material, the identification of Mithra with Helios represents, in contrast, a commonplace in Asia Minor. Finally, Mithra appears syncretised not only with Helios but also with Serapis, as shown by a dedication at Herakleia Pontica, also mentioned by Cyriacus of Ancona, in a slightly different version from the original (2.4.1):270 Διὶ Ἡλίῳ Μίθρᾳ Σέραπι Ἰούλιος Πύρρος εὐξάμενος ἀν(έθηκεν). Robert believed that there is a connection between Pyrros and Pyrsos, also encountered as the Greek cognomen of a Roman citizen, G. Ioulios Kornelia Pyrsos Aelianos. However, he rejects Johannes Sundwall’s assertion regarding the alleged Carian origin of this name.271 The identification of Mithra with Serapis 268

Bailly 1966, 424. Milner and M. Smith 1994, 70–74. 270 SEG 47, 1503: ‘Dedication to Zeus Helios Serapis’, undated. Inscription engraved on a large foot (ca. 120 cm long) and copied by Cyriacus of Ancona (ed. pr. F. Di Benedetto). It is no. 43 in Cyriacus’ manuscript. In Cyriacus’ minuscule transcription the text runs: Διὶ Ἡλίῳ Μίθρας Ἐραππουλιος Πυρρος ευξάμενος αμ. Di Benedetto suggests that Cyriacus saw the following capitals: ΔΙΙΗΛΙΩ ΜΙΘΡΑΣ ΕΡΑΠΠΙΙΟΥΛΙΟΣ ΠΥΡΡΟΣΕΥΞΑ ΜΕΝΟΣΑΝ. This yields the following text: Διὶ Ἡλίῳ Μίθρᾳ Σέραπι Ἰούλιος Πύρρος εὐξάμενος ἀν(έθηκεν)”. 271 Robert 1963, 65–67. 269

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

61

as a solar divinity occurred, most probably, towards the end of the Principate, especially under Caracalla.272 According to Pliny the Elder (NH 30. 17), Tiridates, after arriving to Rome to receive the crown as king of Armenia from the emperor, initiated Nero into Mithra’s ‘feast’,273 which could refer to the ritual banquets that the initiated performed in the mithraea. During the coronation ceremony, Cassius Dio states, when he acknowledged himself as subject of Nero, Tiridates compared the latter with Mithra: ‘Master, I am the descendant of Arsaces, brother of the kings Vologaesus and Pacorus, and thy slave. And I have come to thee, my god, to worship thee as I do Mithras. The destiny thou spinnest for me shall be mine; for thou art my Fortune and my Fate’ (RomanHistory 62. 5). The episode, mentioned by Pliny the Elder (NH 30. 16), Tacitus (Annals 12. 50), Suetonius (Nero 6. 13, 30) and Cassius Dio (Roman History 63. 1–7), as well as by other ancient writers,274 could represent a confirmation of the emperor’s initiation into the Mithraic mysteries, but it might also be associated with other aspects. First, one should not forget the role of sovereign divinity fulfilled by Mithra in the Graeco-Persian syncretic pantheon, or the use of this cult by the Eastern dynasts to justify their own position within the state. This justification was exactly what Nero needed to impose gradually a form of government similar to the Oriental type of despotism.275 Nero exhibited a certain philo-orientalism, also considering his affinity for deaSyria.276 Nonetheless, Suetonius shows that this passion had a rather ephemeral character: ‘He utterly despised all cults, with the sole exception of that of the Syrian Goddess, and even acquired such a contempt for her that he made water on her image, after he was enamoured of another superstition…’ (Nero 56). In addition, the persecution of Christians because of the fire that devastated Rome on July 19th AD 64 had nothing to do with Nero’s adhesion to Mithraism, as supported by certain scholars and confirmed by many relatively recent studies.277 Finally, another indirect connection 272 Mithra already appears in this period identified with a universal, almighty, unique, undefeated, salvatory, benefactory deity, who brings richness and prosperity, as he is depicted on inscriptions from the reign of Caracalla: heis Zeus (Serapis) Mithra Helios kosmokrator aneiketosandZeusHeliosMegasSarapissoterploutodotesepekooseuergetesaneiketosMithras. Cf. García 2001, 566. 273 Vermaseren 1963, 24. 274 Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities (20. 74). On Nero’s adhesion to the cult of Mithra, see Cumont 1933. Simon, in his study (1979, 412–13), says that we cannot speak of Nero’s or Commodus’ conversion to Mithraism, but of an adhesion, as the first would have supposed passing from one religion to another and a rupture from the previous belief, which cannot even be imagined for the ancient paganism. 275 Zosso and Zingg 1995, 25; Bravo 1997, 189. 276 DeaSyria, identified, in many cases, with Cybele. 277 For a thorough analysis of the incident’s causes, see Gray-Fow 1998; Jephargon 1999.

62

CHAPTER 1

between the solar theology promoted during the reign of Nero and Mithraism was the emperor’s request to be considered similar to Apollo, Helios/Sol (Suetonius Nero 6. 53; Seneca Apocolocynthosis 4)278 or even Phaeton.279 Actually, the innocent cithara-player had erected in the vestibule of the Golden House, DomusAurea, a statue that looked like the one at Rhodes, depicting him as a solar divinity.280 Luc Duret even states that the walls of the Golden House and of Villa Farnese could represent the scene of an investiture ritual, during which Helios transmitted his worldly sovereign power to his son and successor, Phaeton. In this case, Phaeton’s myth would have a different interpretation from that of the existing literary tradition,281 with the obvious goal of asserting the legitimacy of the prince’s power.282 Mithra’s identification with Phaeton and Apollo is attested in literary texts and on inscriptions as well (Nonnos Dionysiaca 21. 250–251, 40. 399–401).283 Sol/Helios was an old divinity, symbolising the Sun; it was present in both the Roman and Greek pantheons. In the Greek world, he was often represented with an enclosing solar disc and with satyriby his side. However, maybe the most common scene on both Roman coins of the Republican period and Greek reliefs is that in which Sol/Helios is depicted in a quadriga drawn by four horses, sometimes accompanied by the signs of the zodiac. The horses symbolise, most probably, the four seasons.284 From the 2nd century, Sol/Helios acquired the specific features of a Syrian divinity. In many cases, Sol adopted the epithet invictus, which denotes Eastern influence upon the perception of divinity, yet not necessarily a Syrian or Iranian affiliation.285 The epithet represents the translation of the Greek term ἀνίκητος,286 attributed to celestial powers revived after death, thus defeating the forces of darkness. The Syrianbaalim identified with Helios often received

278 In regard to the main features of Nero’s solar theology, see Cerfaux and Tondriau 1957, 250–53; Gagé 1981; Cizek 1986, 82–84; Mourgues 1988; Grimal 1992, 107–11. 279 Duret 1988. 280 Duret 1988, 131; Turcan 2000, 27; Maryon 1956. Even Cassius Dio showed that ‘at his birth just before dawn rays not cast by any visible beam enveloped him’ (RomanHistory 61. 2), and Suetonius believes that he was born ‘just as the Sun rose, so that he was touched by its rays almost before he could be laid upon the ground’ (Nero 6). 281 Hesiod Theogony 986–988; Apollonios of Rhodes Argonautica 4598–4600; Hyginus Astronomica 2. 42; Lucretius De rerum natura 5. 394–406; Lucian Dialogi deorum 25. Ovid (Metamorphoses 2. 1–405) provides the most detailed version of this mythological tradition. 282 Duret 1988, 150–55. 283 de Jong 1997, 284–88. 284 Sanie 1981, 123–24; Cohen 1908, 1377–81. 285 Sanie 1981, 124. 286 Bailly 1966, 166.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

63

this epiclesis (Sol Invictus Elagabal, Sol Invictus Malachbel, etc.).287 The first epigraphic mention of Sol Invictus dates to the middle of the 2nd century (158 BC).288 However, dedications such as the one addressed to Deo invicto Mithrae are older, since the reign of the Flavians.289 The Persian equivalent of the epithet attributed to Mithra, nabarze, is also encountered in Dacia.290 Sol Invictus and Mithra became similar because of many common elements in cultic forms and dogmas, iconographic motifs, baptismal purification, etc.291 Moreover, the rebirth of the Sun, on December 25th, called NatalisInvictior NatalisSolis, was celebrated in both cults.292 In the East, there was the belief that a legitimate sovereign ruled by the mercy of Ahura Mazda, whose protection was shown by his sending the hvarenō, a divine halo of fire. This view led to the doctrine that the Sun was the one transmitting the aureole.293 From the end of the 2nd century, emperors encouraged Mithraism because of its support for the divine right of monarchs: this was also a dominant characteristic of the dynastic cult in the south-east and east of Asia Minor, as previously pointed out. The annexation of client kingdoms and the administrative reorganisation of some provinces in Asia Minor under the Flavians generated an intake of more Eastern cults in other provinces of the Roman Empire, including the development of Graeco-Roman Mithraism, already crystallised. The kingdom of Pontus, ruled by Polemon II (AD 38–63), had already been included in the empire in AD 64, during the reign of Nero.294 In his first years of rule, Vespasian (AD 69–79) annexed Commagene, Sophene and Armenia Minor (Josephus Flavius TheJewishWars 7. 7. 1–2; Suetonius Vespasian 8. 4). The province of Cappadocia included Pontus and Armenia Minor, and in AD 73–74 it was reorganised as a proconsular province, also being renamed Galatia-Cappadocia. Much later, in AD 113, under Trajan, the territory was divided again into the distinct provinces of Galatia and Cappadocia. The former possessions of Antiochus IV of Commagene were named Cilicia Campestris. Lycia-Pamphylia separated from Galatia in AD 73/74.295

287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295

Cumont 1908, 1383; Sanie 1981, 125–27. CIL VI, 715. CIL VI, 615. IDR III.2, 307; an inscription dedicated by Ampliatus, imperial slave and dispenser. Sanie 1981, 124. Cumont 1908, 1384. EncyclopaediaBritannica, rev. 14th ed., vol. 15 (1956), 622–24. Luttwak 1987, 88. Sartre 1995, 173–76; Luttwak 1987, 88–90.

64

CHAPTER 1

The permissive policy of the Flavians was followed by that of the Antonines, when cults such as those of Serapis, Isis and Mithra flourished. Commodus (AD 161–192), the first emperor to adopt the title of invictus, gave special attention to the cults of Hercules, Serapis and Mithra, and to all the Eastern cults in general.296 This is also shown by some dedications addressed to the emperor by certain worshippers of Mithra. Such an example is that given to honour the emperor by the members of a Mithraic community at Virunum (today Zollfeld) in Noricum, on June 26th AD 184.297 Turcan believes that M. Aur. Antoninus Commodus was the first emperor to be initiated into the mysteries of Mithra. However, despite the opinion previously stated by Cumont, who labelled it a conversion impériale, Turcan considers it a ‘private’ initiation, as no coin or public monument mentions this event.298 Commodus’ biographer within the Historia Augusta focuses on the emperor’s extravagances: He practised the worship of Isis and even went so far as to shave his head and carry a statue of Anubis. In his passion for cruelty he actually ordered the votaries of Bellona to cut off one of their arms, and as for the devotees of Isis, he forced them to beat their breasts with pine-cones even to the point of death. While he was carrying about the statue of Anubis, he used to smite the heads of the devotees of Isis with the face of the statue. (…) He desecrated the rites of Mithra with actual murder, although it was customary in them merely to say or pretend something that would produce an impression of terror (CommodusAntoninus 9).

Gradually, Helios/Sol Invictus became the supreme god in the official hierarchy of gods, thus undermining the position of Jupiter Capitolinus. However, the most important aspect may be that this name is attributed ‘to all Oriental divinities considered solar by the theologians of the empire. This phrase, very generous, that ignored all the local appellatives could match the different celestial powers or monotheistic tendencies of the period…’299 Mithra, identified this way with Sol Invictus, became the provider of authority and victory for the imperial house, the protector of the emperor and of the state.300 After analysing the archaeological, epigraphic, literary and numismatic information about Mithra arising from Anatolia, several aspects may be underlined. First, the cult of Mit(h)ra has a rather even dissemination, thus emphasising the typology of all four evolutionary stages. Secondly, in the Anatolian and Syro-Palmyrene areas certain peculiarities occur, a matter stressed in this 296

Cumont 1908, 1385; Garnsey and Saller 1987, 171–72; Zosso and Zingg 1995, 60. AÉ 1994, 1334. For an interesting commentary on the inscription, see Remy and Kayser 1999, 147, no. 102. 298 Turcan 2000, 41; Simon 1979, 412. 299 Cumont 1908, 1383–84 (my translation). 300 EncyclopaediaBritannica, rev. 14th ed., vol. 15 (1956), 622–24; Cumont 1908, 1384. 297

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

65

analysis, making Mithra acquire a special place among the specific forms of Western Mithraism. The Persian influence is more obvious, as shown by the presence of Iranian dedicators and by total syncretisation with Helios/Sol Invictus,301 and the mention, on Anatolian inscriptions and in pagan, Christian and Manichean literary texts, of magi (related to this cult in the region until the 3rd century)302 and of the Mithrakana festivities, celebrated according to the Persian custom, directly related to the Mithraic forms of cult. There is sufficient evidence to conclude that Graeco-Roman Mithraism came from this area: the first mentions of initiation and sacred feasts; the presence of Median magi in Anatolia and their role in cultual forms; the translation of the initial meaning of Mithrakana and its ideological implications; the presence of the first mythological mentions – in the east of Anatolia, Armenia and the south of the Caucasus – of the birth of Mithra and bull-stealing; the emergence of the first iconographic motifs, starting in the 1st century BC, regarding the tauroctony ritual. Furthermore, except for the Latin inscription at Cappadocian Kaisareia, no other Anatolian epigraph mentions the role played by members of the administrative and military structures in disseminating the Mithraic cult in Anatolia.303 Moreover, just like Maseis and Kakasbos, Mên, Apollo Alsenos, Sozon and Hosios kai Dikaios, Mithra also appears as an Anatolian rider. In addition, the presence of some spelaea and, at the same time, the absence of mithraea (attested only at Perge in Pisidia, and at Trapezos in Pontus) should be understood as just one of the multiple peculiarities of Mithraism in the area.304 MÊN An Indo-Iranian divinity, Mên was highly popular especially in the area of Pisidia, Phrygia and eastern Lydia.305 Though he was known in ancient sources as a Phrygian divinity par excellence, especially in the works of Lucian of Samosata (Zeus Tragoedus 8, 42), Athenaios of Naukratis306 and Strabo (12. 3. 301

Mitchell 1993 II, 30; Beck 1984, 2019; Ustinova1999, 274–75. de Jong 1997, 371–77; Lieu 1994, 2–11; Brown 1969; Schwartz 1985, 696–97; Boyce 1975; Gain 1985, 260–62. 303 Mitchell 1993 II, 30; White 1996, 47–59. 304 White1996, 56–57. 305 Moga 2007b; Labarre and Taşlialan 2002; van Haeperen-Pourbaix 1983, 243–48; Keil 1923, 255–57; Ferrari 2003; Sartre1995, 323. 306 Deipnosophistae 2. 17 (43b) mentions a village in Phrygia, on the Meander, called ‘the borough of Mên’, as a temple of Mên Carus was built there. Strabo 12. 8. 20 mentions that this temple, situated between Laodiceia and Carura, also included a school of medicine. See also Özsait, Labarre and Özsait 2004, 71–72. 302

66

CHAPTER 1

31),307 this perspective has been ever more disputed by more recent research308 (Texts nos. 12–15). Throughout the entire Anatolian world this name was given in the Roman Imperial period to the god who provided a positive heavenly influence, helping the plants grow, ensuring the prosperity of households, and facilitated fertility and the reproduction of animals. He was popular especially in the rural setting, where inhabitants invoked him as protector of their farms and lands.309 Agnès van Haeperen-Pourbaix believes that the special veneration of Mên mainly in Phrygia was due mostly to the influences of Persian Mazdaism as early as the Achaemenid period, and to the persistence, within the local population, of beliefs related to the afterlife, the resurrection and the immortality of the soul.310 Both van Haeperen-Pourbaix and Eugene Lane insist upon the Iranian components that influenced fundamentally the formation of the Anatolian view of Mên. This reality is reflected mainly by: the iconographic similarities between Mên and his Indo-Scythian correspondent Mao; association, in most cases (at least in the Lydian region), with the Persian goddess Artemis Anaitis;311 and, furthermore, the presence of the divine Iranian aureole, hvarenō, related to Pontic Mên Pharnakou.312 Mên was considered the master of the animal and vegetal world, a fertility and procreation deity, a master of both the living and the dead.313 He had thaumaturgic and oracular attributes, with both chthonic and heavenly implications. His sovereignty concerned the terrestrial, but also the subterranean universe.314 In representations, he is illustrated with a crescent behind his shoulders, μηνίσκος,315 probably also because of the confusion between his name and the Greek word corresponding to the Moon or to the month (Text no. 12).316 In one form or another, the word is present in most Indo-European languages: mā- and māsah in Sanskrit, māh in Avestan and Paleo-Persian,

307 Clement of Alexandria (Protrepticus 2. 26. 1) notes the Phrygians worshipping the Moon (σελήνη). 308 Hübner 2003, 181–83; Lane 1990, 2170–71. 309 Cumont 1909, 93; Legrand 1963. 310 van Haeperen-Pourbaix 1983, 244–47. 311 Diakonoff 1979; CMRDMAd; Speidel 1984, 2232–38. 312 van Haeperen-Pourbaix 1983, 236–39; Lane 1990, 2170–73. It is possible though for Mên to have assimilated the pre-existing Moon God Arma at the moment of his coming in Anatolia, as some of the studies suggest. See Labarre 2009, 392; 2010, 61–69; LKGI, p. 38; Goetze 1954; Erzen 1953, 4. 313 Turcan 1998, 83. 314 Cumont 1909, 93. 315 Bailly 1966, 1278; Lechat 1963. 316 It appears as Μήν in Lucian of Samosata ZeusTragoedus 8. The important aspect, in my opinion, is that μήν also meant month (corresponding to the Latin mensis); cf. Bailly 1966, 1277.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

67

mī(s)in Celtic, amis in Armenian, mezne in Umbrian, mēnsis in Latin, mōnađ in Anglo-Saxon and mĕseči in Ancient Slavic.317 According to a different etymology, the name Mên could derive from the Lydian word for ‘bright’ or ‘strong’318 – close enough in sense to the epiclesis naramsit (meaning ‘bright god’ or ‘rising light’) applied to the Chaldean Moon God, Sin.319 Cumont even suggested the existence of a direct filiation between Sîn of Harran (situated in Osroene) and Mên.320 This denomination probably facilitated the subsequent syncretic manners of interpretation of his attributes. In many cases, Mên was considered the pair of Attis or even identified with him. The cult of the lunar god is attested in the first four centuries AD in the Iranian and Armenian regions,321 as well as in remote regions in the Hindu Kush Mountains, the territory of the Kushan Empire. The divinity is shown on golden coins dated to the time of the Kushan kings Kanishka and Huvishka in the 1st–2nd centuries AD.322 On the obverse of one of those of Kanishka, the king is represented standing in front of an altar, while on the reverse the lunar god has a crescent on his shoulders. This iconography is entirely similar to the Anatolian.323 In the Kushan pantheon, the lunar divinity had the name Mao or Mah324 and he was the equivalent of the Anatolian Mên. From an etymologic perspective, the words mah and μήν had the same root *mēns-, with similar meanings: the calendar month and the Moon. Both at Bāmiyān and at Chorasax, Rabatak and in other centres within the Kushan Empire, there are representations or mentions of Mithra325 (often identified with Apollo or Helios), Serapis, Herakles, Ahura Mazda and Buddha.326 As to Mên’s appellatives encountered in literary texts, it is worth noting that of Mên Pharnakou, mentioned by Strabo (12. 3. 31), occurring in the regions of Albania in the Caucasus, Phrygia and Pisidia; Mên Phrygios, mentioned by Lucian of Samosata (ZeusTragoedus 8, 42) for Phrygia; and Sabazios Mên, in a scholion of Proclus with a similar reference to Phrygia.327 317

Chantraine 1983, 695–96; Stamatikou 1994, 623–24. Kernbach 1995, 357. 319 Kernbach 1995, 576. 320 Cumont 1913a, 449. 321 Widengren 1968, 257, 322 (the Parthian and Sassanid period), 379–72; Molé 1962, 218–29. 322 Lane 1990, 2170. 323 Stawinski 1979, 44 (figs. 40–41). 324 Rowland 2000 [1938]. 325 IGSK 65, 318. On the stele at Rabatak containing the so-called ResGestae of the Kushan king Kanishka (1st–2nd centuries AD), there are mentions of Mithra (Miioro), Nana, Ahura Mazda, Umma, Sroshardo and Narasa. 326 Stawinski 1979, 64–65. 327 ScholiainPlatonisTimaeum 4. 251C; cf. Santoro 1973, 184–85. 318

68

CHAPTER 1

The inscriptions dedicated to Mên are extremely diverse, thus giving the impression of several local divinities venerated under different names (Mên Labanas, Mên Axiottenou, Mên Tiamou, Mên Tyrannos, etc.) and mentioned on the same epigraphs (4.2.10; 4.2.16; 4.2.20; 4.2.33; 4.2.34; 4.2.41; 4.2.46; 4.2.50). Moreover, in some particular cases, dedications or invocations were addressed to the nine Mên (4.8.17 and 4.8.18) or the three Mên (4.8.20), thus providing even a more puzzling image. Variations of his name are encountered frequently. Besides the common form of Mên, there are others such as Meis and Mis which are somewhat usual in inscriptions. Only once does the name of the deity appear as Man, in an inscription from Aizanoi in Phrygia, where is joined by Hekata, i.e. the goddess Hecate (4.6.2). There are even instances when different spellings of the god’s name appear within the same inscription: Great is the Mother of Mên Axiottenos! Glykon, the son of Apollonios, and Myrtion, the wife of Apollonios, (set up) this praise for Heavenly Mên and for Mên of Artemidoros who rules over Axiotta, for their rescue and for that of their children. ‘For you, Lord, have shown mercy, when I was a captive.’ Great is your holiness, great is your justice, great is your victory, great are your punishments, great is the (council of) the twelve gods which is by your side! ‘I was made captive because of Demainetos, the son of my brother. For I had neglected my own affairs and helped you, as if you were my own son. But you locked me in and kept me captive, as if I were a criminal and not your paternal uncle! Great is thus Meis, the ruler over Axiotta! You have given me satisfaction (and) I praise you!’ In the year 142, in the month of Panemos, on the second day (4.2.16).

Equally rare but real is his identification with the goddess Luna at Pisidian Antioch, either directly or within an abbreviated formula (4.7.11; 4.7.21). His specific epithets can be divided into several categories:328 (1) Those indicating the most likely the name of the founder of sanctuary, preceded or not by ex/ek: Artemidorou (4.2.20; 4.2.120), Apolloniou (Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ ἐξ Ἀπολλωνίου: 4.2.64), Attalou (4.2.119), Epikratou (4.2.48; 4.2.49; 4.2.54), Diodotou (4.2.69; 4.2.93), Tiamou (4.2.6; 4.2.41; 4.2.73; 4.2.79; 4.2.80; 4.2.86–88; 4.2.94; 4.2.95) or even Pharnakou; (2) Instances where the name of the founder in the genitive is completed by an ethnic or geographical indication, eventually also by the name of the governed community: Mên of Artemidoros Axiottenos, who rules over Koresa (Μῆνα Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξιοττηνὸν Κόρεσα κατέχοντα: 4.2.11); Mên of Artemidoros, who rules over Axiotta (Μηνὶ Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξιοττα κατέχοντι: 4.2.16; 4.2.82); Mên of Artemidoros Axiot(t)enos (Μηνὸς Ἀρτεμιδώρου 328 See also Ricl 2016, 157–62; Labarre 2010, 36–44; 2009, 394–95; Hübner 2003, 181–91; Labarre and Taşlialan 2002, 273–74; LKGI, pp. 39–59; Herrmann 1978, 422–23.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

69

Ἀξιοττηνοῦ: 4.2.51; Μηνὶ Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξιοτηνῷ: 4.2.62); Axiotenos of Epikrates (Ἀξιοτηνῷ ἐξ Ἐπικράτου: 4.2.54); Mên Axiottenos, who rules as king in Perkos (Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ Περκον βασιλεύοντα: 4.2.47); Heavenly Mên of Artemidoros who rules over Axiotta (Μῆνα Οὐράνιον Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξιοττα κατέχοντα: 4.2.17); (3) Those related to geographical or ethnic origin or personal names: Axio(t) tenos (4.2.2; 4.2.10; 4.2.18; 4.2.22; 4.2.24; 4.2.32; 4.2.33; 4.2.35–38; 4.2.40; 4.2.44; 4.2.55; 4.2.56; 4.2.66; 4.2.76; 4.2.85; 4.2.97; 4.2.99; 4.2.110; 4.2.112; 4.2.116; 4.2.118), Axiettenos (4.2.72), Axittenos (4.2.68), Axitenos (4.2.21), Axetenos (4.2.31), Kavalenos/Kaulenos (4.6.35), Dolanos (4.4.3), Gainaianos (4.5.5), Moty(l)leites (4.2.15; 4.2.19; 4.2.42), Motyllites (4.2.43), Motelleites (4.2.57), Petraeites (4.2.31; 4.2.34; 4.2.52; 4.2.59; 4.2.70; 4.2.71; 4.2.74: Μηνὶ Πετραείτῃ ἐν Περεύδῳ), Ploneates (4.2.39), Xenaugonenos (4.6.18), Andronenos (4.5.6), Patalaos (4.6.32), Selmeenos (4.8.21 and 4.8.23), Italikos (4.6.28), Nannos (4.6.10), Touitenos (4.6.26), Mantalenos (4.5.4), Kabikandreos (4.8.3), …pykenos (4.5.3), Kopileton (4.7.32), Keraeiton (4.7.35), Toleseon (4.7.46), Plouristreon (4.6.34), Labanas (4.2.20; 4.2.33; 4.2.34; 4.2.74; 4.2.119), Labanes (4.2.59), etc.; (4) Epithets that indicate attributes and functions of the god: ouranios (4.2.16; 4.2.41; 4.2.46; 4.2.50; 4.4.1; 4.5.1; 4.6.5; 4.6.6; 4.6.31; 4.8.2), katachthonios, phosphoros (attested only in an oracular context in southern Anatolia: 4.6.23; 4.7.1; 4.7.2; 4.7.25; 4.7.37; 4.7.41; 4.7.45; 4.7.47; 4.7.48), epekoos (4.7.43),patrios,soter (4.6.11), ploutodotes (4.6.11),aniketos, asylos (4.7.40; 4.7.42), tyrannos (4.2.52; 4.2.53; 4.2.60; 4.2.67; 4.2.86; 4.3.1), basileus (4.4.2; 4.7.38), megas (4.2.120), hosios (4.2.90), dikaios (3.6.31);329 (5) In some other cases we encounter both for Mên and for Anaitis more complex constructions formulated as acclamations, where these deities claim the authority over entire communities: ‘Great (is) Mis Tiamou Artemidorou, who rules over Axiotta and his power!’ (Μέγας Μὶς Τιαμου Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξιοττα κατέχων καὶ ἡ δύναμις αὐτοῦ: 4.2.3); ‘Great (is) the Heavenly Mên of Artemidoros, who rules over Axiotta and his power, all-seeing judge in heaven’ (Μέγας Μεὶς Οὐράνιος Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξιοττα κατέχων καὶ ἡ δύναμις αὐτοῦ, κριτὴς ἀλάθητος ἐν οὐρανῷ, εἰς ὃν κατέφυγεν: 4.2.4); ‘Great is Meis of Artemidoros, who rules over Axiotta!’ (Μέγας Μεὶς ἐξ Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξιοττα κατέχων: 4.2.10); ‘Great is Mis Artemidorou, who rules over Axitta and his power!’ (Μέγας Μὶς Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἄξιττα κατέχων καὶ ἡ δύναμις αὐτοῦ: 4.2.89); ‘Great is Meis Axiottenos, who rules as king over Tarsi!’ (Μέγας Μεὶς Ἀξιοττηνὸς Τάρσι βασιλεύων: 4.2.104); ‘Great is 329

Labarre and Taşlialan 2002, 273.

70

CHAPTER 1

Mên Petraeites, who rules as king over the village’ (Μέγας Μὴν Πετραείτης τὴν κώμην βασιλεύων: 4.2.70); ‘Great is thus Meis, the ruler over Axiotta!’ (μέγας οὖν ἐστι | Μεὶς Ἀξιοττα κατέχων: 4.2.16). The Lydian epicleses τύραννος (tyrannos), ‘master’, and later menotyrannus330 – used perhaps because of the identification with Attis, according to Lane – as well as κύριος (kyrios: 4.9.1), ‘lord’, underline the quality of Mên as a universal, all-powerful god, master of the celestial (ouranios: 4.6.6; 4.6.31; 4.8.2) and terrestrial or subterranean (katachthonios: 4.8.5–12) world, provider of prosperity (ploutodotes: 4.6.11) for human communities.331 In the case of Mên, in contrast with the multitude of different local variants, one of the acclamations proclaims the uniqueness and immortality of the heavenly god: ‘One is the god in heavens, great is the Heavenly Mên! Great is the power of the immortal god!’ (4.2.105) In one of the two inscriptions that mention the gods with the epithet ‘king’ (basileus: 4.4.2; 4.7.38), this idea of omnipotent ruler is associated with that of love for mankind: ‘To Mên the human-loving, the much-desired king. Having written thus, Troilos son of Ophelion with gentle prayers in common with his beloved wife dedicated (the image of Mên), ever propitious to chaste men and women’ (4.7.38). In addition, other formulas that attest his quality of undefeated god, i.e. invictus, ἀνείκητος (aneikētos), saxigenus or πετραειτής (petraeitēs),332 in a similar way to the epithets applied to Mithra, for example, are often encountered. As masters of the after-world, Mên Tymoleites (4.2.113) and Mên Katachthonios were invoked as protectors of the funerary monuments. And the same protective functions seems to have been attributed to Mên Kamareites (4.2.81; 4.2.115) as well. But this Mên of the underworld could be equally heavenly at the same time in invocations like that of Tosuntașı in Rough Cilicia: ‘I adjure Mên of the underworld and of the heavens that nobody should damage (this) work’ (4.8.26); or that of Sidamaria in Lycaonia where the god is invoked again for the protection of the family funerary complex: ‘I conjure the Heavenly Mên and of the underworld, for no one to be allowed to plough the wall surrounding the grave or to sell it, except for (our) brother’ (4.8.24). Most commonly in funerary imprecations the potential perpetrator is warned through different kinds of formulations that he/she will have to deal with the anger of Mên of the underworld (4.8.5–7; 4.8.9–12), of Mên Axiottenos (4.2.102; 4.2.106) or simply of Mên (4.2.101). In an inscription from Saittai in 330 331 332

Turcan 1998, 83. Lane 1990, 2162–63. CMRDM I, 21; van Haeperen-Pourbaix 1983, 242.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

71

Lydia Mên Axiottenos and the twelve gods are to remain remorseless for generations against all the successors of the potential wrongdoer: In the year 193, in the month of Deios, on the fourth day, in the waning. Nia, daughter of Menedemos, honoured her son Alexandros, also called Trophimos, and his brothers Euarestos and Polybios, sons of Eutychos, and his maternal uncle Apollonios honoured (him). If anyone damages the stele, he will have the Axiottenos seated among the twelve gods, remorseless for generations (4.2.100).

The culprit could also be bound by an oath taken against him (4.7.34; 4.8.1), or forced to pay a fine of 2500 denarii to the treasury of the temple, as in the following example of Ikonion in Lycaonia: Larkio[s ---], while still alive, set up a sarcophagus for himself, for (his) wife Posille and for his children. I conjure Mên of the underworld and the gods underworld for no one to transgress this grave or to bring another body inside it; the one who will bring a body or will commit a transgression will pay 2500 denarii to the treasury and will deal with the anger of Mên (4.8.8).

In certain situations, the interpretation of epithets can prove a severe challenge, because it is hard to figure out a definitive solution. In an inscription on a small tablet of unknown provenance, Meis bears the epithet Ouarathos. According to Nicola Cau, this epithet, most probably of Anatolian origin, could have a double interpretation: on the one hand, it might have been an epithet denoting one of the functions of the god (as helping god or Storm God); on the other hand, it is also possible to consider a toponym, hypothetically restored as *Ουραθα/Warata, where a sanctuary of this god may have been placed (to be identified at Mnara, north-west of Phaselis in Lycia).333 Mên was also seen as one of the ancestral gods, which is also confirmed by the use of the phrase ὁ πάτριος θεός in some inscriptions of the Roman colony in Pisidian Antioch or of προπάτωρ in a letter engraved on a stone from Sardis.334 Mên is a listener, always paying keen attention to the prayers of the worshippers (as we can deduce from the multitude of the anonymous naiskoi on the sanctuary near Pisidian Antioch or from the frequency of use of the epithet epekoos: 4.7.26; 4.7.40). His protective function could also be underlined by his mention as Mên asylos on a fragmentary inscription dedicated both to Θεῷ ἀσύλῳ Μῆνι as well as perhaps another deity (4.7.42). At Pisidian Apollonia, it is the mountain consecrated to the god which is perceived as holy and inviolable: ‘The holy and inviolable mountain of the manifest god Mên Askainos’ (4.7.23). 333

Cau 2004, 4. Levick1970, 39–47, nos. 5, 26. Fragment no. 4 presented in the article mentioned contains a dedication addressed to the god Mên by T. Claudius Pasinianus Summarudes. 334

72

CHAPTER 1

A more problematic case is the epiclesis ἄσκηνος (askēnos) or askaios, encountered everywhere on the coins of Sardis or on Phrygian, Pisidian and Pamphylian inscriptions (as askēnos: 4.2.108, askainos: 4.7.23 or askaēnos: 4.6.4; 4.6.13; 4.6.30; 4.7.3; 4.7.7; 4.7.9; 4.7.12; 4.7.18; 4.8.15), as well as among literary texts (Text no. 16). It can indicate two things. The first is the relationship with the Iranian world,335 while the second is a certain propagandistic intention of the Roman authorities, a hypothesis initially supported by Lane and more recently by Salzmann.336 The second version seems more plausible, for two reasons. First, at least two other inscriptions show the same intentionality. One, discovered at Eskişehir on the site of the ancient Phrygian city of Dorylaion, was dedicated to Mên Italikos, a clear-cut allusion to the connection between the Anatolian and Roman worlds.337 The second one, especially, proves the connection with the imperial cult, as well as the involvement of the Roman authorities in matters regarding the organisation and financing the cult of Mên Askenos. It was discovered at Sardis and indicates the content of a letter addressed, probably in the time of Commodus, by the priest who administrated the goods of the temple dedicated to the ‘ancestral god’ Mên Askenos (called here Μὴν Ἄσκηνος προπάτωρ), Hermogenes, son of Demetrios of Sardis, to the proconsul of the province of Asia, Arrius Antoninus. The text of the inscription is highly important because it is the first time that Mên is depicted as a god whose worshippers were initiated into mysteries. Here it is shown that, in accordance with the privileges previously granted by kings, most probably the Achaemenid or Attalid sovereigns,338 and later the Roman governors and the council of the Lydian city, ‘the god is to receive from the magistrates of the city the customarily established and decided amount of 600 denarii for the sacrifices and the libations on behalf of the god and for the victory and eternal permanence of the emperor and for a plentiful crops’ (4.2.108). There are very interesting answers added at the end of Hermogenes’ letter as a testimony. The first is that of the procurator during the reign of Vespasianus, Venuleius Valens, to a similar interpellation, where he demands the magistrates grant the customary sum to celebrate‘the mysteries of Mên’ (τοῦ Μηνὸς μυστήρια),339 and the second is that of the proconsul Asprenas, who confirms the previous dispositions. 335

van Haeperen-Pourbaix 1983, 239–45. Lane 1990, 2171–73; Salzmann 1980. Contra Labarre and Taşlialan 2002, 273, n. 22. For the propagandistic use of the cult see also Khatchadourian 2011, 164–65. 337 Lane 1975; 1990, 2171. 338 Actually, the Romans acquired these privileges gradually (see Syme 1995, 344–47 and Dignas 2002, 225). 339 Malay 1999, 119–22, no. 131. The existence of Mên’s mysteries is also proven by an inscription at Darmara, where he is associated to the goddess Demeter: CMRDM I, 75 = IGSK 17.1, 3252. For the commentary see, CMRDM III, 83. 336

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

73

Secondly, returning to the epiclesis, ἀσκηνός (askēnos), I do not believe that the epithet derives from ashkenaz, despite the parallels with the IndoIranian world,340 rather that it relates to the Romans’ propagandistic use of the myth of their Trojan origins as early as the reign of Augustus. This would not be the only case of the kind. The same ideological motivation is also encountered once the Romans adopt the cult of the Great Phrygian Mother of gods, Cybele or Magna deum Mater Idaea. This way, there was a focus on the kinships between the Romans and the Anatolian populations based on the hypothetical descent of the Italians from the son of Aeneas, Ascanius.341 This reality had a double purpose: first, it facilitated the integration and co-optation of the local populations in order to ensure their loyalty; secondly, it was a solid enough ideological justification of the legitimate right of the Romans to dominate, to govern the world, as explicitly formulated in Virgil’s Aeneid.342 Mên is present everywhere in the votive inscriptions or the altars, columns, statue bases, rock-cut reliefs, bronze plates, etc. discovered in Phrygia, Pisidia and eastern Lydia, in Athens, Rhodes, Thassos and Dacia,343 but sometimes also as local versions, such as Mên Pharnakou of Cabeira in Pontus.344 According to Strabo (12. 3. 31), some temples dedicated to the lunar deity were also erected in the region of Caucasian Albania (Text no. 8). Furthermore, it is known from the HistoriaAugusta that Antoninus Caracalla, by establishing his winter camp at Edessa before starting the campaign against the Parthians, went to Mesopotamia, at Carrhae (Karrhai) or the current Haran,345 to venerate and to bring offerings to a local god identified with Lunus (Antoninus Caracalla 6). Aelius Spartianus, the alleged author of Caracalla’s biography, also adds that the Eastern populations believed that women dominated those who named the Moon by a feminine noun. On the contrary, they thought that those who had a masculine noun designating it did not fall for the cunning charms of women (AntoninusCaracalla 7). The Mesopotamian temple of this local lunar god still existed during the reign of Julian the Apostate, according to the testimony of Ammianus Marcellinus (23. 3). Sometimes, the god presented strong local particularities. Such is the case of Mên Pharnakou, whose important place of worship was at Cabeira, an influential temple-state in northern Anatolia, which would come, together with Zela and Megalopolitis, under the domination of Pythodoris, a client queen of 340

van Haeperen-Pourbaix 1983, 239–42; Erzen 1953, 7. Schachermeyr 1929, 281–303; Briquel 1991, 407–48, 479–88, especially 487–88; Wainwright 1959; Ferrari 2003, 107, 468. 342 Galinski 1967; Niels 2001; Jones 2001; de Chaisemartin 2001. 343 Ferrari 2003, 543. 344 Sartre 1995, 325. 345 Lloyd and Brice 1951; Green 1992, 22–28. 341

74

CHAPTER 1

Rome.346 Pompey transformed the city into a royal residence; he modified its name to Diospolis, and then queen Pythodoris changed it again to Augusta or Sebaste. Strabo mentions here a small urban settlement, Ameria, situated in the close vicinity of Cabeira, inhabited by persons in the service of the temple. It also comprised a sacred domain, as mentioned in the case of other templestates or Anatolian temples, whose benefices were destined to priests. Considering the great respect and attention given to the god by the local dynasty, when the inhabitants of the region made an oath, they swore by ‘the Fortune of the king’ or by ‘Mên of Pharnakes’, which was highly significant, because in those places the oath was considered an inviolable and sacred element (Strabo 12. 3. 31).347 Starting from this passage of Strabo’s, several hypotheses were advanced on the origin of the epiclesis implicitly associated to the deity and on the nature of his perception in the collective mindset. Eckart Olshausen believed that it came from the name of the local dynast Pharnakes. Van Haeperen-Pourbaix and then Ustinova related it rather to one of the fundamental concepts of Iranian religion: hvarenō, the divine fire or aureole that protected legitimate monarchs and indicated the protection, favour, chance, brightness and happiness granted to them by the divinity. This conclusion comes from Pharnaces’ being nothing more than the Hellenised form of pharnah, the Persian equivalent of the Avestan concept of hvarenō. This also explains the conceptual similarity, in the Pontus region, between Mên and Mithra, the one who indisputably possessed hvarenō.348 Mên is often attested in the military environment, but also in the civilian settings of Roman colonies. A number of inscriptions discovered in the hieron on the hill of Karakuyu, very near the former Roman colony of Pisidian Antioch, are dedicated to Mên Askaenos, perceived as a local divinity. We have already discussed his prestige within the Roman aristocracy of the region, interested in promoting his cult, and the propagandistic aspects based on the alleged ethnic affinity between Romans and the local population. The first inscriptions were discovered during the excavations conducted by Sir William Ramsay between 1911 and 1913.349 Significant, though, is the reduced number 346

Dignas 2002, 226–27; Sartre 1995, 325; Olshausen 1990, 1887–89. Such oaths are also encountered: meherkle – ‘on Hercules’, etc. (Aulus Gellius Noctes Atticae 11. 6. 1–6; Pliny NH 7. 1. 2). 348 Ustinova 1999, 149–51, 276–77, who also indicates that the radical pharn was used as part of the name for some Scythian solar divinities, also encountered in the Bosporan space: Pharnouchos and Pharsiris (van Haeperen-Pourbaix 1983, 236–42: the assimilation of the two divinities, Mithra and Mên, becomes noticeable mainly in the case of the Trapezuntine coins). See also Ehling 2001; Cerfaux and Tondriau 1957, 89–90. 349 Mitchell 2002; Levick 1970. For the sanctuary of Mên at Pisidian Antioch and his cult there, see also Labarre 2010, 71–113; Raff 2011; Mitchell and Waelkens 1998, 37–90. 347

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

75

of inscriptions in Latin. The first of these fragments, with irregular contours, represents most probably the god on the back of a bull, near a circular altar. The name of the dedicator, which could be reproduced as L. Flavonius Paulinus, indicates that he belonged to an influential family of the second half of the 2nd century.350 The second contains the name of Publ(ius) Kapetolin(us) Stephan(us). The Hellenised form of the cognomen Capitolinus is to be noted. The name may have been preceded by the formula L.V.S., which appears on other Latin inscriptions dedicated to Mên as well. Lane considered that this formula could mean Lunaevotumsolvit, with a focus in this case on the deity to which the inscription is addressed. Two other epigraphs in Latin have been published relatively recently by Marie-Thérèse Le Dinahet,351 one of which mentions a certain Flavius(?) Musa (4.7.13), and the other presents two brothers, Patrokles and probably Kallicles or Perikles, with the same abbreviation, L.V.S. (4.7.11). Sometimes, the divine penalty followed those who did not give due importance to the demands of the god. An inscription dated to AD 118/9 mentions the cruel penalty received by a neglectful devotee: In the year 203, in the month of Artemisios, on the sixth day. Trophime, daughter of Artemidoros Kikinnas, was summoned by the god to his service but she did not want to come at once. Hence, the god punished her and made her insane. She consulted Meter Tarsene and Apollo Tarsios and Mên Artemidorou Axiottenos, who rules over Koresa, and he ordered her to set up a stele to record of the god’s punishment and to enrol in the service of the gods (4.2.11).352

Mên often appears on dedications accompanied by other divinities, sometimes with similar attributes or with the same origin, such as in the case of the Iranian goddess Anahita, also present in Anatolia in the Hellenised form as Artemis Anaitis. However, it is important to note that, customarily, when Mên is mentioned on an inscription in the presence of another deity, he is in second or third position (for example, 4.2.6; 4.2.11; 4.2.20; 4.2.23).353 On a monument dated to AD 171/2, erected, through the care of Dionysios, son of Diodoros, and Hermogenes, son of Valerius, by a sacred association, Zeus Masphalatenos, a local divinity worshipped under the name of the Greek deity, accompanies Mên of Tiamos and Mên Tyrannos, a rather common practice in the Anatolian region. The inscription preserves an imprecation addressed to those who would disobey the vow taken:

350 351 352 353

Levick 1970, 37; le Dinahet 2002. le Dinahet 2002, 206, no. 7 and 208, no. 9. BWK 57 = CMRDM I, 47 = Sartre 1995, 326. Legrand 1963, 1397.

76

CHAPTER 1

In accordance with the command of the gods, the sacred association orders that a vow to Zeus Masphalatenos, Mên Tiamou and Mên Tyrannos be observed after nine days. But should anyone disobey, he will certainly know the power of Zeus. Dionysios, son of Diodoros, and Hermogenes, son of Valerius, were supervising. In the year 256, in the month of Dystros (4.2.86).

The components of this ‘holy and new community’ also appear on another stele, with the same origin and date, which records the fulfilment of the promise: The holy and new community fulfilled this vow in accordance with the command of the ruling lord Zeus Masphalatenos and Mên Tiamou. Iulianus, son of Menekrates, son of Diodoros, Dionysios, son of Papias, Hermogenes, son of Hermippos, Loukios, son of Onesimos, Diogenes, son of Glykon, Diogenes, son of Maximos, Trophimos, son of Hermippos, Apollonios, son of Apollonios, Theodoros, son of Theodoros, Markianos, son of Markianos, Menandros, son of Hermogenes, Hermogenes, son of Statianos, Metrodoros, son of Euelpistos, Asklepiades, son of Markianos, Asklepiades, son of Dionysios, Hermogenes, son of Trophimos, Sabelos, son of Hermogenes; when Iulianus and Hermogenes were curators. In the year 256, in the month of Dystros (4.2.87).354

In two of the dedications at Azita, Mên of Tiamos and the Iranian goddess are invoked as guarantors of justice, in order to solve the various conflicts between community members. Beside invoking the name of the divinities, setting up the sceptre or putting it on the altarwere also among the rituals accompanying such a request.355 This way, on an inscription dated to AD 114/5, Anaitis and Mên of Tiamos are summoned to solve a dispute between the villagers related to the ownership of certain animals: Great is Meter Anaeitis, who rules over Azita, and Meis Tiamou, and their powers! Hermogenes and Apollonios, the sons of Apollonios Midas. When three piglets belonging to Demainetos and Papias of Azita wandered off from the byre of Syros and became mixed with the herd of Hermogenes and Apollonios, their fiveyear-old slave boy fed them, they led them inside. When Demainetos and Papias came searching, by malignancy they did not admit. Therefore the sceptre of the goddess and the Lord Tiamou was set up (on the altar), the goddess therefore showed her power for they did not confess their guilt: after Hermogenes died, his wife and the child, and his brother Apolonios appeased her, and now we bear witness to her and praise her together with (our) children. In the year 199 (5.2.12 = 4.2.12).356

Hence, there was a ritual of setting up the sceptre, a gesture meaning that the guilty person was bound by oath until the penalty was fulfilled.357 Those who wished to escape such a curse had to pray to be unbound from the sceptre 354 355 356 357

Sartre 1995, 326. Sartre 1995, 325, nos. 1, 2; Gordon 2004, 185–87; BWK 3, 35, 68. BWK 68; Sartre 1995, 325. Robert 1983, 519–22.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

77

(i.e. from the oath), like the descendants – Sokrateia, Moschas, Iucundus, and Menekrates – of a woman called Tatias. She had poisoned her stepson, and then she set up the sceptre and proffered infamies and placed curses in the sanctuary dedicated to the Great Goddess Artemis Anaitis and to Mên Tiamou. After being poisoned, Iucundus became mad and then he died. However, the punishment fell upon Tatias, leaving her descendants in awe of the powers of the divinities at Azita: But the gods gave her a punishment which she did not escape. Likewise her son Sokrates, as he went through the entrance that led to the grove, holding a vinecutting sickle, it fell out of his hand on his foot, and thus he was dispatched in same-day punishment. Great are the gods in Axitta! And they instructed that the sceptre and oaths which had been made in the temple be undone, and Iucundus’ and Moschion’s children, and Tatias’s grandchildren, Sokrateia and Moschas and Iucundus and Menekrates did undo them, in all ways propitiating the gods, and from now on we bless them, writing the powers of gods on a stele (5.2.13 = 4.2.13).358

However, the most significant aspect may be the inclusion of Mên among the so-called theoi epekooi, meaning the ‘prayer-listening gods’, or simply ‘listening gods’, as it presents a way to express direct contact between the god and the dedicator in a personal manner.359 On one of the inscriptions discovered in Pisidian Antioch, containing dedications to Mên epekoos, the god is represented on the back of an animal, probably a horse or a bull.360 This category also included Asklepios, Hygeia,361 Telesphoros, Artemis, Aphrodite, Apollo and Hercules/Herakles, ‘healing’ or ‘saviour’ divinities.362 The epithet epekoos was also attached to Yahweh. An inscription at Gabbary, Alexandria, probably dating from 37 BC, is addressed to God as theomegaloepekoo.363 Usually, the epiclesis applied to the divinities is accompanied by a representation of ears on the monument, which meant submission to the orders received by the divinity or attention paid by those gods to the prayers addressed by their worshippers. Such a symbol is also related to Theos Hypsistos (but in a Jewish context, by all appearances), on an inscription discovered at Uzuncaburç, the site of ancient Diokaisareia in Cilicia.364 Other organs represented on stelae (legs, eyes, etc.) indicated body parts which had been healed miraculously by the divinity. 358 BWK 69; Sartre 1995, 325–26. The inscription is dated to AD 156/7; translation in CMRDM I, 44. 359 Levick 1970, 44–46. 360 Levick 1970, 45, no. 21. 361 CIL III, 7740 a. 362 Sanie 1981, 159. 363 JIGRE 13 = CIJ II, 1432; Fraser1998, 34. See also JIGRE 116 = CIJ II, 1532. 364 ICilicia 14.

78

CHAPTER 1

Hence, Mên was one of the thaumaturgic and oracular gods who helped believers heal certain disorders. It is known that in the sanctuary dedicated to Mên Carou, situated between Laodicea and Carura, a school of medicine had been established, first under the guidance of Zeuxis and then of Alexandros Philalethes (a Greek physician who lived during the reign of Ptolemaios Lagos: Strabo 12. 8. 20). Certain connections with divinatory practices should not be excluded either. Macrobius states that the disciplines of medicine and divination are closely allied: a physician foresees both the good states and the bad that a body will experience, just as Hippocrates says that a physician must tell about a sick person ‘the things that are and were before and those that are going to be’, that is, the things that are, that were, and that soon will come to follow (Saturnalia 1. 20. 5).

An inscription discovered at Ayazviran near Kula contains identification elements specific to both divinities, thus underlying certain syncretic trends. Dated to AD 235/6, it is similar in many ways to a group of votive inscriptions at Kula. The inscription can be translated as: ‘To Mên Axiottenos. Tatiane, daughter of Herpos, having vowed a bull on behalf of (her) brothers and being heard, but not being able to bring the bull, asked the god, and he was granted forgiveness to bring the stele in return. In the year 320, in the month of Panemos, on the tenth day’ (4.2.24).365 The stele has a semi-circular fronton that represents a relief crescent. Though the base of the stele is irregular, the inscription is complete. The relief illustrates Mên to the left of the viewer, clad in his usual cloak with long sleeves and wearing boots, as well as a Phrygian cap, with the top leftwards, reaching the lower part of the pediment. In his right hand, Mên holds a round object, hard to identify, probably a pine cone or a globe. To his left, there is a spear with a large and widened top, usually seen as the sceptre of the god’s power. Mên is usually flanked by two lions, represented frontally, just as in the similar representations of Cybele flanked by the two animals. To the left of the deity there is a bull, the sacrificial animal specific to him; in this case, it is the bull promised by Tatiane, depicted with its tail up and facing the viewer, with a slightly humorous tone. In many instances Mên was identified with Attis and represented as a shepherd,366 holding a pine cone, a sign of immortality. The symbol is also present in connection with Sabazios and within the Metroac cult. In other instances, Attis is depicted with a crescent on his shoulders.367 The representations of Mên 365 366 367

Lane 1970, 51–52. CCCA VI, 454, 582. Turcan 1998, 83.

THE UNIVERSAL GODS

79

on coins in the area of Pontus and Phrygia indicate a similar iconography to that of Mithra – the god acquiring solar attributes as well and being depicted as an Anatolian rider.368 As a rider-god, Mên is mentioned among the gods at Motella in Lydia who acted as divine patrons of the entire social life of the small rural communities and of the individual and collective destinies of these communities as a veritable council of gods. Actually, the image depicting him in this hypostasis is typical of the Anatolian Dioscuri who appear next to the so-called ‘Pisidian goddess’, a local Artemis. In the upper register, Mên on one side and one of the local Apollos, probably Lairbenos, on the other, are depicted facing each other on horseback flanking the Anatolian Mother Goddess in a central position, most probably Artemis Anaitis or the Mother of Mên, encountered on an inscription. Attis, Mên, Mithra and the Dadophors (Cautes and Cautopates) appear as shepherds, wearing traditional Eastern costumes, with a short tunic and the ever-present Phrygian cap. Mên and Mithra are represented on the backs of bulls. Certain iconographic similaritiesbetween Mên, Attis and the Dadophors can easily be underlined, though the sources do not mention an explicit identification of the first two with the latter.369 Nonetheless, a possible influence is not excluded, mostly in the latter part of the Principate, concerning the specific roles and attributes of these characters. We cannot be certain how these mutual influences regarding the cultic forms and ceremonies dedicated to these deities functioned over the centuries. Nonetheless, from an iconographic perspective, there are certain common features showing that these motifs and symbols had wide dissemination in the Anatolian world. Among the commonly used symbols referring to gods in Asia Minor are the pine cone (in relation to Adonis, Attis, Mên, Sabazios and Artemis Pergaia) and the bull (in the cult of Mên, Jupiter Dolichenus,370 Mithra, Cybele and even of the Hurrite Storm God, Teshub371), the snake (Apollo, Asklepios, Glykon, Mên, Artemis Ephesia, etc.), the cock (Mên) and the almond (for Attis, whose core was considered the centre of the world). Nonetheless, just as in the case of Attis, Osiris or other Graeco-Oriental deities, Mên was a god triumphant over death, descending into the after-world, 368

Legrand 1963, 1395. Cumont 1899, nos. 27, 54, 286, 291, 313, 314, 322. He mentions the main iconographic differences between Attis and the Dadophors: a) Dadophors always bear torches; b) Cautes and Cautopates are presented in a mobile posture, legs crossed; c) the Phrygian cap of Attis is decorated sometimes with stars (no. 437). 370 Sanie 1981, 62, 69, 76–77. 371 Daniel 1986, 109, 114–15. 369

80

CHAPTER 1

defeating the hostile forces of darkness, in order to be resurrected, three days afterwards, to a new life: When the quarter of the moon appears, the god inaugurates his career, he fights against the demon of the darkness, who is devoured by the former moon, his father; then, he reigns in glory during the full moon, he is devoured and defeated by the demoniac animal, he descends three days in the underworld and, in the end, he resurrects triumphantly.372 The iconographic elements always accompanying Mên’s imagery refer permanently to this symbolism of the monthly cycle of regeneration, fecund life and rebirth, marked every time by the beginning moment, represented by a crescent moon.

372 Durand 2000, 304. See also van Haeperen-Pourbaix 1983, 245–48 and Labarre 2010, 34–35.

CHAPTER 2

THE SOLAR AND LUNAR RIDER-GODS

HOSIOS KAI DIKAIOS The name, aspect and typology of Hosios kai Dikaios have varied depending on the area of diffusion. For the most part, this was limited to central and southern Phrygia and to eastern Lydia, but there are also other sporadic mentions in the contiguous zones of Mysia and Galatia. Besides Asia Minor, there are at least two more important mentions in Moesia, at Anchialos and Nikopolis on the Istros, probably dating in the 2nd century AD, but the number of archaeological discoveries is still very small.1 The form of the name also varies. It is spelled Hosios kai Dikaios (3.2.1; 3.2.2; 3.2.4; 3.2.6; 3.2.9; 3.2.10; 3.2.12–14; 3.2.20; 3.3.1–3; 3.3.5; 3.6.18; 3.6.49; 3.6.52; 3.6.101; 3.6.105; 3.6.113; 3.6.114; 3.7.1; 3.7.3; 3.7.7; 3.7.8), Hosios kai Dikeos (3.4.2; 3.5.2; 3.6.2; 3.6.15; 3.6.28; 3.6.36; 3.6.53; 3.6.84; 3.6.94), Hoseios kai Deikaios (3.2.7), Hosios ke Dikaios (3.2.3; 3.6.107; 3.6.110) and Hosios ke Dikeos (3.5.2; 3.6.9 = 4.2.9; 3.6.17; 3.6.19–21; 3.6.25; 3.6.33; 3.6.56–59; 3.6.63; 3.6.75; 3.6.76; 3.6.81; 3.6.87; 3.6.88; 3.6.92; 3.6.93; 3.6.102; 3.6.106), or Hosios Dikaios (3.3.4; 3.6.8; 3.6.12; 3.6.14; 3.6.22; 3.6.27; 3.6.86; 3.7.2; 3.8.1; 3.8.3) and Hosios Dikeos (3.1.2; 3.4.1; 3.6.26; 3.6.51; 3.6.54; 3.6.55; 3.6.64; 3.6.71; 3.6.77; 3.6.79; 3.6.83; 3.6.89; 3.6.90; 3.6.95; 3.6.96; 3.6.98; 3.6.103; 3.6.111). Sometimes only the form Hosios (3.2.18; 3.5.1; 3.6.6; 3.6.7; 3.6.11; 3.6.13; 3.6.29; 3.6.35; 3.6.36; 3.6.50; 3.6.78; 3.6.103 = 1.6.18; 3.6.108; 3.6.109; 3.6.118; 3.10.1), Hoseios (3.6.117) or Dikaios (3.6.116) is present. Orthographic variation of a name depending on current pronunciation is far from unusual, also being attested for the other Anatolian divinities considered. Taking into account

1 Tacheva-Hitova 1983, 266, no. 1 = IGB V, 372bis, no. 2 = IGB, II 680 (pl. LXXXVII). On both of them, the plural form of the gods’ names appears; they were dedicated to the Holy and to the Just God (theoiHosioskaiDikaios). The first inscription is addressed by a female dedicator, Atala(n)te, as gratitude for the gods. The city council (boulē) and the inhabitants (dēmos) dedicated the second inscription, after a dream vision, concretised as an order from the divinity (kat’epitagēnoneirou).

82

CHAPTER 2

what we can deduce from the content of the inscriptions, there was also a feminine equivalent named either Hosia (3.6.19) or Hosia Dikaia (3.2.10). The anonymous character and the high degree of abstraction are not surprising,2 as there are numerous similar examples, especially for the west of Anatolia, of such abstract divinities, sometimes with angelic attributes and mentioned as part of divine hierarchies:3 Theos Hypsistos, Sozon, Dikaiosyne, Sophrosyne,4 Theios Basileus (1.1.25), Theios Basilikos (1.1.8; 1.1.34; 1.1.35), Theios Pantodynastes (3.6.111), Theios Angelos (1.1.24; 1.1.36), Theios Angelos Ouranios (1.1.23), Agathos Angelos (1.1.37), Theios Agathos (1.1.33), Theios (1.1.22; 1.1.26–29; 1.1.31; 1.1.32), Megas Theios (1.2.10; 1.1.12; 1.1.30), etc. Hosios kai Dikaios is mentioned on dedications in three types of situation related to his divine nature: as divine being, ‘Holy and Just Divinity’, Theios Hosios kai Dikaios (3.2.4; 3.6.1; 3.6.101); as angelic being, ‘Holy and Just Messenger’, Angelos Hosios kai Dikaios (3.6.101, 3.6.117) or Angelos Hosios Dikaios (3.4.3); and as god, ‘Holy God’, Theos Hosios (3.8.2), ‘Holy and Just God’, Theos Hosios kai Dikaios (3.2.5; 3.2.6; 3.2.10–14; 3.6.18; 3.6.104) or ‘Great Holy and Just God’, Megas Theos Hosios kai Dikaios (3.6.18). However, the surprising aspect is the relative ambiguity in the manner of perception, suggesting a unique or multiple identity. This dilemma occurs because there are mentions of just one Hosios kai Dikaios in the Maionian area of Lydia, with a typical iconography for an Anatolian rider, who travels around the world serving the Sun God, being depicted himself as the all-knowing god of justice.5 However, in the area of Phrygia Epiktetos, Hosios and Dikaios appear as distinct entities, with different attributes: scales as the symbol of justice and the sceptre as an illustration of divine power punishing the wrongdoer.6 Sometimes, the sceptre is replaced with a measuring cubit.7 From the examples offered by monuments dedicated to the Immortal Gods (Theoi Athanatoi), similarly represented on monuments as a single rider-god facing right, this could also be an abbreviated depiction proper to multiple entities belonging to the Maionian area.8

2

Ricl 1992a, 75. 3.2.9 and 1.7.4. 4 Mitchell 1993 II, 16 and 25–26. 5 Chaniotis 2004a, 10 (for Helios pantepoptēs); Robert 1987, 379 (à ‘Hélios Justicier’); Ricl 1990, 160–61; Merkelbach 1993, 295; Delemen 1999, 65–66. 6 Tanrıver 2003, 29–31; Tacheva-Hitova 1983, 266. 7 Merkelbach 1993, 295. 8 Delemen 1999, 66 and 70–71. 3

THE SOLAR AND LUNAR RIDER-GODS

83

The plural form of the divinity’s name occurs less frequently than the singular. The first such example is a white marble votive stele discovered at Dorylaion (Eskişehir), in central Phrygia,9 erected in the 2nd century AD by Philopator, Chrestos and Andreas. It is dedicated simply to the ‘Justices’, using here the dative Dikesi: ‘Philopator and Chrestos and Andreas, to the Justices, for people and for assets, in fulfilment of the vow’ (3.6.30). In contrast, in the second case, also discovered at Dorylaion, Teimotheos, the one who dedicates a small limestone stele, with triangular pediment and acroteria, sees the gods as ‘Holy Gods’, Theoi Hosioi (3.6.34).10 At Inönü, nearby,11 these saviour TheoiHosioi are imagined as Hosios Phoibos and Mên Dikaios on a 3rd-century marble stele (with a triangular pediment), alongside the Mother of Gods. Zeus Bronton is on top of the hierarchy, on the pediment, while in the lower registers there are, first, Helios the all-seeing in a quadriga,12 with rampant horses, and underneath, besides Dionysos with a thyrsus, a ridergod with a double axe. The last could even be a local version of Apollo, illustrated as a hypostasis of Hosios, or Mên or as hypostasis of Dikaios, with Helios watching above. As already mentioned, Hosios kai Dikaios was a messenger of this Sun God, hence in a lower hierarchical position.13 This is also the image associated in the inscription, that of the ‘eye of justice’ (Dikes Ophtalmos): ‘To the Mother of Gods, the Holy Phoibos, and Mên the Just, the eye of justice, the men of Saklea dedicated this to the saviour holy gods, for just judgment’14 (3.6.31). In another place, Hosios (kai) Dikaios is associated with the ‘lord’ (kyrios) Helios (3.5.1). On the other hand, in the same previously mentioned case, Mên should rather be identified with one of the hypostases of the god Dikaios than the latter being a mere epithet attached to him.15 A completely different situation occurs at Tyana, where Mithra has dikaios only as an epithet (2.9.3).16 The third set of examples contain explicit mention of the gods Hosios and Dikaios, doubled by representations where the two divinities are always 9

Ricl 1991, 13, no. 24 (pl. 3, fig. 24). Ricl 1991, 15–16, no. 28 (pl. 6, fig. 28). It dates to the 2nd–3rd centuries AD. A similar item would be the inscription 3.2.16, coming from Emre, dedicated to ἐπηκόοις θεοῖς Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ by Agathonike, to heal her eyes and sight. 11 Ricl 1991, 13–14, no. 25 (pl. 3, fig. 25). 12 For Helios pantepoptēs: Iliad 3. 277; Odyssey 12. 323. 13 For the idea of Hosios and Dikaios as messenger(s) of the all-seeing Helios, see Merkelbach 1993, 295. 14 Chaniotis 2004a, 10. 15 On the contrary, Ricl considers it a mere epithet attached to Mên: Ricl 1992a, 82 (for the commentaries on the monument) and 75 (epithet). 16 IGSK 55.I, 34; Beck 1984, 2018–19; CIMRM I, 18; Cumont 1899, 91, no. 3. 10

84

CHAPTER 2

depicted holding hands and have specific attributes: the scales as a symbol of divine justice, and a sceptre or a measuring instrument as the sign of justice and law on earth (3.2.16; 3.6.32). For instance, Herophilos, son of Papas, dedicates an ex-voto Θεοῖς ὁσίοις καὶ δικαίοις on a white marble altar found on the road connecting Inönü to Kütahya, between the villages of Esnemez and Kümbet (3.6.32), while at Hadrianopolis, the community dedicates an altar to the Holy and Just gods, by worshipping the priest Synmachos, son of Manos (3.6.49). In the same way, at Philomelion, Menestratos, son of Epatorix (3.6.113), dedicates a stele to the Holy and to the Just gods, after having promised it to Apollo the Saviour, the son of Leto, and to Helios the ruler. A similar example may be the inscription from Emre (3.2.16), dedicated to ἐπηκόοις θεοῖς Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ by Agathoneike, to heal her eyes and sight. LAIRBENOS There are several ways of emphasising the complexity of religious practices and of the Anatolian ethno-cultural environment. One of these is a macroregional approach to the various types of diachronic influence on the cultural field, a perspective first adopted by Keil17 at the beginning of the 20th century (for the Lydian area), and later by Petzl18 and by Mitchell19 for the entire western area of the Anatolian Peninsula. In their opinion, western Anatolia shows a stratified model, where each component brought a contribution to defining a common religious phenomenology for the area, beyond local specific peculiarities. Consequently, the region appears as a genuine cultural melting pot, with attested influences from highly diverse environments, such as Hittite, Luwian, Iranian, Thracian, Celtic, Semitic, Egyptian, etc., confirmed not only by literary texts but also by epigraphic, numismatic and archaeological studies. Other approaches include, for example, the study of individualised conceptual metalanguage mostly through inscriptions. This is represented by common phrases encountered in pagan, Jewish and Christian environments that can, though not implicitly, express syncretic forms. But it is more likely that they illustrate intense religious competition to attract worshippers belonging to other religious systems, as shown by Angelos Chaniotis20 in one of his recent studies. A different approach is the contextual and comparative individual 17 18 19 20

Moga 2011b; Keil 1923, 242–45. Petzl 2003, 93–94. Mitchell 1993 I, 5–10. Chaniotis 2010a, 115–21.

THE SOLAR AND LUNAR RIDER-GODS

85

study of certain socio-religious practices and behaviours, some with important legal effects. Such is the case of the public confession of sins or of the consecration of sacred slaves to divinities in certain cults in Lydia and (mostly) Phrygia. Apollo Lairbenos is one of the local divinities with a limited diffusion: the main sanctuary and surrounding towns and villages in the south of Phrygia and in the east of Lydia. This area is identifiable by combining where the monuments (stelae, statue bases and altars) were discovered – Bahadınlar, Sazak, Develiler, Selcukler, Akkent and Çal21 – with indications found on inscriptions of the origin of the dedicators: from Atyochorion (8.6.106), Blaundos (8.6.66; 8.6.107), Motella (8.6.66; 8.6.67; 8.6.70; 8.6.72; 8.6.75; 8.6.76; 8.6.108; 8.6.110; 8.6.152; 8.6.153), Hierapolis (8.6.69; 8.6.71; 8.6.112; 8.6.155) and Dionysoupolis (8.6.74). The name has various spellings, most probably because it was difficult to transpose the local pronunciation into Greek.22 The following forms of it have been identified: Larbenos (8.6.23), Lerbenos (8.6.145), Lairmenos (8.6.112), Apollo Leimenos (8.6.109), Apollo Lairmenos (8.6.13; 8.6.20; 8.6.74), Apollo Lermenos (8.6.4; 8.6.37; 8.6.69), Helios Larmenos (8.6.14), Helios Lermenos (8.6.21), Helios Lerbenos (8.6.156), Helios Apollo Lairmenos (8.6.3; 8.6.5; 8.6.6; 8.6.9; 8.6.15; 8.6.16; 8.6.22; 8.6.28; 8.6.29; 8.6.41; 8.6.43; 8.6.47; 8.6.53; 8.6.55–58; 8.6.66; 8.6.72; 8.6.75; 8.6.113; 8.6.114; 8.6.116–120; 8.6.123; 8.6.125; 8.6.128–134), Helios Apollo Lairbenos (8.6.12; 8.6.24; 8.6.25; 8.6.71), Helios Apollo Larbenos (8.6.155), Helios Apollo Lerbenos (8.6.8), Helios Apollo Lamenos (8.6.135), Helios Apollo Leimenos (8.6.10), Helios Apollo Larmenos (8.6.59; 8.6.64), Helios Apollo Lermenos (8.6.2; 8.6.11; 8.6.39; 8.6.63?; 8.6.67; 8.6.68; 8.6.70; 8.6.127; 8.6.153), Helios Apollo Lyermenos (8.6.106; 8.6.115), Helios Apollo Laemenos (8.6.124), Theos Apollo Lermenos (8.6.50), Theos Apollo Larmenos (8.6.52), Theos Helios Apollo Lermenos (8.6.61) and Theos Helios Apollo Labenos (8.6.144). Only at Sazak, in two of the inscriptions on a marble altar, is the name not mentioned at all. The first inscription, datable in AD 241, states that Aurelia Ammia Dioga consecrates Ammia, her adopted child (8.6.151),23 but with an interesting addition: ‘provided that she never attacks me for being abandoned’. The second also involves a sacred consecration, in AD 226, by Aurelius Mar-

21 22 23

Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 6; Delemen 1999, 46. Ramsay 1895, 133. Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 23, no. K9; Miller 1985, 58; MAMA IV, 278 I (pl. 58).

86

CHAPTER 2

cus Apollonius of Motella, for an unknown person, but one who had probably been mentioned on the stele (8.6.152).24 Though the inscriptions in the main sanctuary of the god refer mainly to the name Lairmenos/Lermenos, most modern studies dedicated to him use the spelling Lairbenos, the one generally present on coins in the nearby city of Hierapolis, starting from Caracalla’s reign.25 As in the case of other indigenous or naturalised Anatolian divinities, the name of the god must have referred to his native place, still unidentified. However, the similarities with the geographical epithets applied to other divinities are surprising, such as Thea Larmene near Borlu, at Saittai in western Lydia (1.2.12),26 Thea Lagbene in northern Lycia, Pisidia and Kabalis,27 or Meis (Mên) Labanas at Silandos in the north-east of Lydia (4.2.119).28 The latter form is very similar to Helios Apollo Labenos (8.6.144). Considering these similarities, we may presume that they could have had the same place of origin, namely Lagbe in Kabalis, which was actually not very far distant. A commonplace in the inscriptions is the constant identification with Helios and Apollo, which is meant to accentuate both the solar attributes of the divinity (through a mingling with the all-seeing Helios who crosses the world and from whom nothing can be hidden) (Lucian of Samosata Double Indictment 1)29 and his quality as oracular god and interpreter of the divine will,30 of god of order, equity and justice (Antoninus Liberalis Metamorphoses 4. 4).31 But he was also conjoined with Apollo because, both in inscriptions (1.7.4) and literary texts, he was perceived mostly as a divinity interpreting Zeus’ will, thus prophesying on his behalf (Iliad 9. 404; Aeschylus Eumenides 28; Clement of Alexandria Protrepticus 37. 1; Lactantius DivineInstitutes 1. 7. 1; Plutarch De defectu oraculorum 7 [413 B]; De Pythiaa oraculis 28 [408 B–C]). This is also visible from the multitude of Anatolian Apollos with

24

Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 24, no. K10; Miller 1985, 58; MAMA IV, 278 II (pl. 58). BMC Phrygia 236–38, nos. 54–66 and the homonia-type of emissions with Ephesos, Smyrna, Sardis and Kyzikos (BMCPhrygia 261–62, nos. 171–185). 26 Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 172; Malay 1994, 1830; TAM V.1, 186; Sheppard 1980–81, 99–100, no. 12; Robert 1958, 112. 27 Robert 1987, 438–41. Thea Lagmene, sometimes called Artemis Lagbene, was a local goddess of Lagbe, a locality in Kabalis, represented on the back of a boar, her sacred animal, holding a torch in one hand and a crown in the other. 28 Ricl 2003b, 102–06, no. 1; Petzl 1997, 70–75, no. 2 (pls. 1–2). 29 Though, on principle, Helios and Apollo are usually one and the same, Plutarch is the one who shows to the clearest the functional difference between them (De defectu oraculorum 42 [433 D–E]). 30 Athanassiadi 1992, 53; Robert 1971, 614; MacMullen 1987, 31–32, and 142. 31 See Lane Fox 1997, 42. 25

THE SOLAR AND LUNAR RIDER-GODS

87

oracular functions,32 and it is also highlighted by his identification with Helios Pythios Apollo Lairbenos, ascribed to this god at Hierapolis.33 On the other hand, both the epithets of the god and the content of the dedications consolidate the idea of an oracular god who manifested his power visibly.34 He communicated through the divine orders that he transmitted to his worshippers, a concrete example being that of Charixenos, son of Menekleos in Dionysopolis, who set up a limestone pedestal which the god Apollo Lairmenos, the manifest god (theos epiphanēs), had requested (8.6.74).35 Also at the injunction of the god, Markos, son of Dionysodoros of Motella, consecrated his foster son, Ammias, to Helios Apollo Lairmenos at the beginning of the 3rd century AD (8.6.72).36 On the other hand, the god could also express his intentions through oniric visions, either to declare his wish regarding the consecration of hieroi or sacred officials, or to show his discontent caused by the previous sins of the dedicators (8.6.69; 8.6.70; 8.6.143; 8.6.153). According to another inscription discovered at Ortaköy, the god was considered the master of the dedicator’s body (κύριος), who saved it and rendered it back following his penitence.37 This reference actually indicates another side of the deity, that of a healer god. Thus, on a dedication belonging to Papias of Motella, he is named Helios Apollo Laimernos alexikakos (i.e. the averter of evil) (8.6.75),38 on a statue pedestal probably depicting Apollo with the bow, chasing away the plague epidemics. This plague may have extended to Hierapolis after the sack of Seleukeia in AD 165. The god’s sanctuary was identified at Atyochorion, near Ortaköy in Phrygia, on a hill near the Meander river.39 Here, he was worshipped alongside his mother, called either Meter Leto or Meter, or even simply the Goddess (Thea),40 the one ‘who makes the impossible possible’.41 They shared here a

32 Athanassiadi 1992, 45; Burkert 1985, 114–18; Mitchell 1993 II, 44; MacKay 1990, 2110–15. 33 Delemen 1999, 47. See also Miller 1985, 48; Lane Fox 1997, 248. 34 Miller 1985, 48; Ceylan and Ritti 1997; Lane Fox 1997, 44–45, and 246–50. 35 Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 8, no. D4; Miller 1985, 51; MAMA IV, 277 A I (pl. 57); Ramsay 1895, 147, no. 37; Hogarth and Hogarth 1887, 376, no. 1. 36 Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 23, no. K7; Miller 1985, 57; MAMA IV, 277 A II (pl. 57). 37 BWK 123. 38 Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 8, no. D3; Miller 1985, 51; MAMA IV, 275 A (pl. 56). 39 Robert 1962, 129; Lane Fox 1997, 45; Delemen 1997, 46; Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 2–7. 40 For instance, Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 10–12, no. D12, D18, and D19. 41 BWK 122. In a confession inscription dedicated by Aphia, daughter of Theodoros.

88

CHAPTER 2

common cult (8.6.112).42 The sanctuary included, besides the main temple, a meeting room and a portico (stoa).43 The main representations of the god are those on coins belonging to the city of Hierapolis, starting in Caracalla’s reign, and those on votive stelae. In the first case, he always appears standing, facing right, with a radiate head.44 Sometimes, on the reverse of the coins we can find other associations of divinities: Apollo Archegetes, depicted with a plectrum and a lyre;45 Selene or Hecate in a biga drawn by two horses, holding two torches and having a crescent moon behind her shoulders;46 Hygeia sitting on a throne, wearing a kalathos above her head;47 and a winged Nemesis.48 In representations on votive stelae at Akkent near Denizli and at Sebaste (Sivaslı) in Phrygia, or at least in the first of them, the god is depicted on horseback, with a double axe on his shoulder, a short tunic and a chlamys flying out behind him.49 Actually, the double axe was one of his common attributes.50 Stelae dedicated to him can also present the image of organs affected by divine punishment, as seen on the monument of Aurelius Soterchos, punished for entering the sanctuary in an impure state and for having intercourse there (8.6.108). THE DIOSCURI AND THE PISIDIAN GODDESS The cult of the Dioscuri flanking the lunar goddess is found largely in southwestern Anatolia, especially in Pisidia, the north of Lycia and in Pamphylia and Kabalis.51 Their iconography is very similar to that encountered in the Graeco-Roman, Persian and Bactrian worlds;52 for this reason, there have been numerous discussions related to the possible origin of this cult in Anatolia, with epigraphic, numismatic, literary or mythological arguments. 42

Ramsay 1895, 133. Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 3. 44 BMCPhrygia 236–38, nos. 54–66, and 261–62, nos. 171–85. 45 BMCPhrygia 236, no. 54, and 237, no. 60. 46 BMCPhrygia 236, no. 55. 47 BMCPhrygia 236–37, nos. 57–59. 48 BMCPhrygia 237, no. 62. 49 Delemen 1999, 46. 50 Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 3–5. 51 For a very detailed situation on the archaeological discoveries, see Kearsley 2002; Robert 1987, 397–422; Frei 1990, 1784–86; T. Smith 1997; Milner 1997; Milner and M. Smith 1994. 52 LIMCIII.1 (593–97: Augé and de Bellefonds; 608–35: Gury; 567–93: Hermary); DKP II, 92–94; Will 1955, 113–14; Barnard 2003; Zayadine 1991, 300–05; Azarpay 1988; Lo Muzio 1999. For the Indo-European inheritance, see Grottanelli 1986; and for the area of Greece, Köhne 1998 and Chapouthier 1935. 43

THE SOLAR AND LUNAR RIDER-GODS

89

From the beginning, we should mention some of the peculiarities of this cult in the Anatolian area. First, many rock-cut reliefs have been attested in the more-or-less isolated rural regions of Lycia or Pisidia, such as Balboura and its surroundings,53 Oinoanda54 and the area connecting it to Elimalı, then Kızılbel, Yuvalak, Tefenni, Dont, Idebessos, Kuyu Gügü, Korkuteli,55 and in the east of Pisidia at Köstek and Yanıktaş.56 In cases such as Kızılbel or Yanıktaş, these complexes often take the shape of indigenous outdoor stone sanctuaries.57 The records on these reliefs are completed by dedications on altars, votive tablets or stelae, but to a significantly lesser extent.58 Secondly, the appearance and content of these dedications are equally important. With a sole notable exception, all the dedicators mentioned epigraphically are men. Usually, just one name of the dedicator is mentioned, very often followed by a patronymic.59 The great number of non-epigraphic dedications is surprising, present only as visual representations, such as in the sanctuary of Mên Askaēnos in Pisidian Antioch,60 where there are many naiskoi with no indication on the people who executed and dedicated them. According to Robert, they must have reflected the popular belief that, regardless of whether the dedicator’s name or request was mentioned, the god knew exactly who they were and consequently could fulfil the request.61 They could also be evidence of the gods having answered the prayers of the dedicators, with these representations just an indication of gratitude. Thirdly, how the Dioscuri and the ‘Pisidian goddess’ are depicted, as well as the symbols represented, largely reflect local habits: the short tunic and the chlamys flying out, as well as the double axe,62 the spear (10.7.5; 10.7.6; 10.7.11; 10.7.26; 10.7.30), sword or dagger (10.7.15; 10.7.23; 10.7.26) and the cane or cudgel are similar to all the other representations of the Anatolian riders in the south of Phrygia, in Pisidia, Lydia and Kabalis. The crescent (10.7.5) and eagle (10.7.3; 10.7.13; 10.7.14; 10.7.17; 10.7.20; 10.7.22; 10.7.24; 10.7.29) are frequently present on the pediment of stelae. Dioscuri are depicted either naked (10.7.4; 10.7.11; 10.7.28) or in a military armour 53

T. Smith 1997, 26–31; Bean 1956, 150. Milner and M. Smith 1994, 65–70. 55 Robert 1987, 327. 56 Özsait 2004, 103–05; Özsait, Labarre and Özsait 2004, 69. 57 Talloen 2015, 230–36; Robert 1987, 413–17; Kearsley 2002, 404 and the commentary of RECAM, V, 31. 58 T. Smith 1997, 22–23. 59 Kearlsey 2002, 402. 60 Mitchell 2002, 313–15. 61 Robert 1987, 416 –17. 62 Chapouthier 1935, 74–75, no. 67. 54

90

CHAPTER 2

(10.7.26), but almost always wearing a chlamys. The position of the horses, naturally with the head pulled to the inside, is at times atypical (10.7.26). Horses are seldom absent (10.7.4; 10.7.11). To the right of the entire iconographic unit other characters could be represented as well, for example Hermes, with cornucopia or the hand held towards the other gods (10.7.5?; 10.7.6), radiate Helios,63 naked Herakles holding in one hand the cudgel and the skin of the Nemean lion in the other (10.7.7), or Mên with the crescent moon behind his shoulders (10.7.31). Another commonplace in local iconography is the female figure flanked by two facing riders. She does not seem that much a Hellenised ‘Helen’; on the contrary, she is depicted almost always as a native goddess with lunar typology.64 Thus, she appears with long tunics, falling to the ankles (10.7.17; 10.7.24; 10.7.33) or leaving only the toes visible (10.7.3; 10.7.4–6; 10.7.11; 10.7.12; 10.7.16; 10.7.18; 10.7.21–23; 10.7.25), draped in a richly folded himation, the head covered with a veil (10.7.5; 10.7.20; 10.7.21; 10.7.23–25; 10.7.31; 10.7.32). She is represented either at the same level with the Dioscuri or on a pedestal (10.7.14; 10.7.25; 10.7.30; 10.7.31). There is usually a polos (10.7.27; 10.7.28), or a crescent above her head (10.7.14; 10.7.16; 10.7.17; 10.7.20–22; 10.7.29; 10.7.33) or around her neck like a necklace (10.7.12). The crescent attribute sometimes even stands for the divinity herself (10.7.15).65 The ‘Pisidian goddess’ can hold a sceptre as symbol of power (10.7.14; 10.7.16; 10.7.19; 10.7.33). She sometimes puts her hand under the himation (10.7.5; 10.7.11; 10.7.13; 10.7.21; 10.7.23; 10.7.25; 10.7.32), at other times she leaves it outside, uncovered (10.7.16; 10.7.33), or she has both hands along the body line (10.7.12; 10.7.17; 10.7.24). In just one case, the chiton is longer and it forms some sort of ‘bell’ at the base (5.2.5). Because of the lunar attributes, this ‘Pisidian goddess’ could be identified with Selene, Hecate or Artemis.66 According to the mythological traditions of the Greek world, the Dioscuri, Castor (‘the beaver’) and Polydeukes (‘sweeter than wine’) or Pollux, were known as ‘the two gods’ of Laconia or ‘the two masters’ of Attica. Their name shows them as the sons of Zeus.67

63 Besides Helios and Hermes, on the ‘fountain house’ at Oinoanda (Milner and M. Smith 1994, 65–68 with pl. XVI). 64 Chapouthier 1935, 115–20; Milner and M. Smith 1994, 66–67. 65 See also Kearsley 2002, 403; Robert 1987, 560, n. 2. 66 Robert 1987, 413. In a sole case indentified with Artemis Lagbene (T. Smith 1997, 14–15), and in another instance with Artemis Ephesia (Bonnet 1977, 43–45). 67 RE V, coll. 1087–89 (s.v. Dioskuren) (Bethe).

THE SOLAR AND LUNAR RIDER-GODS

91

One of the traditions records that only Helen and Pollux were the children of Zeus, while Castor was the descendant of Tyndareus, king of Sparta. As a consequence, only Pollux was immortal, but Castor also became immortal thanks to his brother’s devotion, who shared this gift of immortality with him (Pindar Nemean Odes 10. 55). Hence, they became ‘those who live one day out of two’ (ἑτερήμεροι), and their name was given to the Gemini Constellation, after Zeus turned them into stars (Ovid Fasti 5. 694); Euripides Helen 140). This couple was the symbol of fraternal love (Plutarch De fraterno amore 1 [478 A]), but also symbolised the athletic ideal.68 In the hymn dedicated to them, Homer calls them the Tyndaric twins, who sprang from Olympian Zeus or, more simply, Tyndaridae, after Tyndareus, king of Sparta and husband of their mother, Leda (Homer TotheDioscuri 1. 2, 18). According to another tradition, Castor and Pollux were the sons of ‘neatankled’ Leda, and they had two sisters, Helen and Clytemnestra. The legend says that Leda laid two eggs: one egg held Helen and Pollux, while the other held Clytemnestra and Castor. In all probability, Leda bore them on the Taygetus Mountain in Sparta, which makes the Dioscuri typical Lacedaemonian heroes.69 Castor was particularly skilled in the art of horse taming, and Polydeukes was famous for boxing and wrestling.70 Initially adored in Sparta as gods of the light, the Dioscuri were salvation divinities par excellence, as well as protectors of travellers and sailors; they made their appearance riding on swift horses, up in the sky. [When Leda had lain] the children who are the deliverers of men on earth and of swift-going ships/ when stormy gales rage over the ruthless sea/… until suddenly these two are seen darting through the air on tawny wings/ Forthwith they allay the blasts of the cruel winds and/ still the waves upon the surface of the white sea (Homer TotheDioscuri 1. 6–16).

The philosopher Seneca (Naturalesquaestiones 1. 1, 12–13), writing in the 1st century AD, by interpreting the storm-announcing signs, shows that sometimes meteorites can also appear during a voyage at sea (he calls them falling stars) and rest on a ship’s sail. At that moment, sailors in danger believe that they can get help from Castor and Pollux. Seneca’s assertion is also confirmed by his contemporary, Pliny the Elder, who speaks about shining meteorites. They are dangerous when they come singly, for they sink those ships on which they alight; or they set them on fire if they fall upon the bottom of the keel. But if the pair appear, they are salutary, and foretell a prosperous voyage; for by their 68

Bailly 1966, 2222. Homer TotheDioscuri 2. 3: ‘Beneath the heights of Taygetus stately Leda bare them.’ 70 The Odyssey (11. 300) shows that Polydeuces was ‘matchless in the fray’; cf. Homer To theDioscuri (1. 3). 69

92

CHAPTER 2

coming, it is supposed that the dreadful and threatening meteor called Helena, is driven away. And therefore it is, that men assign this mighty power to Castor and Pollux, and invocate them as gods at sea. Men’s heads, also, in the evening are seen to shine round about; which presageth some great matter. Of all these things there is no certain reason to be given; but they are hidden in the majesty of nature (NH 1. 37. 73).

Their earthly existence is related to three main events. First, they participated in the expedition against Athens, which led to them setting their sister Helen free (she had been abducted since she was very young by Theseus and held captive in the fortress of Aphidna), in Theseus’ absence (he was gone with Perithous in the Underworld to obtain Persephone’s return). They also took Aethra, the abductor’s mother, as a prisoner to Sparta. Furthermore, they banished Theseus’ descendants from the Athenian throne and placed Menestheus upon it.71 The second event is related by Apollonius of Rhodes in his Argonautica 2. 51–54. The Dioscuri, accompanied by the Argonauts, began their quest for the Golden Fleece. During this journey, the two brothers founded the city of Dioscuria in Colchis. Pollux defeated Amycus, king of the Bebryces (a population in Bithynia). This king, thought to be the son of the Bithynian nymph Melia and of Poseidon, god of the seas, used to enforce unjust laws on foreigners, and then prohibited the Dioscuri from leaving the country before challenging them to a boxing match. After a dreadful fight, Pollux defeated Amycus by hitting his ear so hard that he crushed his skull. When the Bebryceans saw that their king had been killed, they ambushed Pollux, but the Argonauts jumped to the rescue and chased them away. The third event is mentioned by Ovid in the Fasti, at the end of the 1st century BC. The Dioscuri had two cousins, Idas and Lynceus, the sons of Aphareus, who were engaged to the two daughters of king Leucippus, called the ‘Leucippides’: Phoebe and Hilaeira. They were, in their turn, cousins, because Tyndarus, Aphareus and Leucippus were brothers. According to one of the mythological traditions, once invited to the wedding of their cousins, Castor and Pollux kidnapped the young brides. A fight followed between them and Idas and Lynceus at a place called Aphidna.72 Castor died, killed by Lynceus, who perished, in his turn, by the hand of Pollux (Fasti 5. 700–720). At the request of the latter, Zeus granted them immortality, which they had to share, alternating (between Olympus and Hades). According to a different mythological tradition, the Dioscuri did indeed kidnap the Leucippides, but they became their wives, and they even had 71 72

Grimal 2001, 147–48. Ferrari 2000, 240.

THE SOLAR AND LUNAR RIDER-GODS

93

children. There was never a fight with Idas and Lynceus; on the contrary, they organised together an expedition to Arcadia in order to steal cattle. However, on their way back, they disagreed on sharing the loot and a fight began which ended in the death of both Castor and Lynceus. In his turn, Zeus killed Idas with a thunderbolt and placed Pollux in the sky.73 In Rome, where they were known as Castores, a temple was dedicated to them (Ovid Fasti 1. 705–708: on January 27th). Dokana, their symbol, was a schematic representation of a house – two parallel beams joined by two horizontal ones. Probably because of this symbol, they were often assimilated to the Penates (the divinities that protected the household). In Moralia, Plutarch shows that dokana was the symbol of brotherhood and that it illustrated the indissoluble unity of the Dioscuri (Defraternoamore 1 [478A]). As guardians of the gate represented by this symbol, they ensured the bond between the two worlds; they were protectors of the living and they accompanied the dead.74 Castor and Pollux have also often been identified with the Cabiri, probably because the latter were also protector gods of navigation,75 whose main place of worship was in Samothrace.76 Regarding this identification, the testimony of Diodorus Siculus is illustrative. As the ship was shattered by the storm, Orpheus, the only Argonaut initiated into the mysteries of Samothrace, prayed for the sailors to be saved and the wind soon ceased: ‘For this reason, the story of this reversal of fortune for the Argonauts has been handed down to succeeding generations, and sailors when caught in storms always direct their prayers to the deities of Samothrace and attribute the appearance of the two stars to the epiphany of the Dioscuri’ (Diodorus 4. 43. 1–2). The Dioscuri were assimilated to the Cabiri even though the latter were four in number: Axieros, Axiokersa, Axiokersos and Kasmilos.77 According to Strabo (10. 3. 20), the name of the Cabiri came from the Kabeiros Mountain in Berecynthia. Their cult was celebrated not only at Samothrace, but also at Lemnos, Imbros, Pergamon and in other centres of Asia Minor. Herodotus (2. 51. 5–17) believed that the inhabitants of Samothrace had learned the mysteries of these divinities from the Pelasgi. Diodorus relates the cult of Cybele and of her servants, the Corybantes,78 to the mysteries performed in Samothrace to honour the ‘Immortal’ Cabiri. He adds that ‘the 73

Grimal 2001, 126. Waites 1919, 17–18. 75 Ferrari 2000, 126. 76 This led to the word samothrakia ascribed to the sanctuaries of the Cabiri. 77 Ferrari 2000, 126. 78 Actually, in many of the legends, the Cabiri are mistaken for the Dactyli, the Curetes and the Corybantes: RE V, col. 1090 (Bethe); Ferrari 2000, 126–27. 74

94

CHAPTER 2

claim is also made that men who have taken part in the mysteries become both more pious and more just and better in every respect than they were before.’ Among the heroes and demigods desirous of taking part in the initiatory rite, he enumerates the Dioscuri, Herakles and Orpheus (Diodorus 5. 49). On an inscription discovered at Kayabasi, in the territory of ancient Oinoanda in the north-west of Lycia, the Dioscuri and Herakles are called the ‘undefeated gods’, while another inscription, at Beyşehir, is dedicated to ‘the Dioscuri gods of Samothrace who manifest themselves’.79 On the monument of Kayabasi, the Dioscuri are represented on horseback, one on each side of the goddess; to their right, one can find Herakles’ effigy. This iconography is very similar to that of the Danubian riders. The goddess was sometimes identified with Selene or Cybele, because she appears accompanied by crescent symbols.80 In most cases, she was called ‘the Pisidian goddess’ or ‘the Anatolian Moon goddess’. In only one relief, from Komba in Pisidia, is she associated with the Dodeka Theoi; the inscription is dedicated ‘to Artemis, to the Twelve Gods, and to their father’. According to Milner and Smith, most of the time under the appearance of the Greek name Dioscuri, some local Anatolian divinities known as Maseis and Kakasbos81 were worshipped, whose cult has in all probability a Lycian origin.82 However, the Dioscuri do not have as a specific symbol the cudgel that is characteristic for these two gods.83 There are cases where the Thraco-Anatolian name of the divinity is mentioned on inscriptions. Sometimes, Kakasbos has the same iconographic characteristics as Herakles, the Greek hero represented at Kibyratis holding a cudgel. However, he is entirely different from other Anatolian riders such as Mên or Sozon, who are associated with the Moon and the Sun, respectively.84 Some of the inscriptions depict the Dioscuri as saviour gods, such as the one on the wall of a fountain at Oinoanda dedicated to them in those terms. In this quality, they are also mentioned by Artemidorus Daldianus, a Greek writer from Asia Minor of the 2nd century AD, who shows that the ‘Dioscuri symbolise bad weather for those at sea, and for those on land, they symbolise quarrels, lawsuits, war or grave sickness. However, they also indicate that men will escape from misfortunes without any damage. For the gods are saviours’ (Oneirokritikon 2. 17. 37). However, they also announced victory, as indicated by the epithet of ‘bringers of good news’ (euangelloi) also addressed to them 79 80 81 82 83 84

Milner 1997, 44. Milner 1997, 15. Milner 1997, 66–68. T. Smith 1997, 8. Delemen 1999, 10–11. T. Smith 1997, 16.

THE SOLAR AND LUNAR RIDER-GODS

95

(10.7.16). Sometime in the 2nd–3rd centuries AD, Vettius Gaius dedicated to the same saviour Dioscuri a limestone stele after receiving a direct order ( ἐπιταγὴν) from them (10.7.17). He was most probably a Roman citizen and a member of the Vettii family, one of the Roman families in Pisidian Antioch, whose members were worshippers of Mên Askaenos in this important Roman colony.85 Nonetheless, the direct connection between gods and dedicators could also be underlined by another epithet often used for Eastern divinities in general, and for those studied in this research, that of ‘listening’ or ‘prayer-listening’ (epēkooi).86 SANDAN Sandan was one of the most important Cilician deities, adopted early in the Hittite and Luwian pantheons of Anatolia. He had both solar and chthonic attributes. His initial name, Šanta/Šanda, evolved gradually to Sanda, Sandes, Sandatis, Sardan, Sandan or Sandon.87 He appears for the first time in Hittite texts in the second half of the 14th century. He originally belonged to the pantheon of Emar (now Tell Meskene),88 an Amorite city on the west bank of the Euphrates in the north-east of Syria, nowadays on the bank of Lake Assad. It is one of the most important Syrian sites, besides Ugarit, Mari and Ebla, and it is situated at the crossroads of essential trade routes. Initially, the region of his diffusion must have been rather large, at least during the Hittite period, and it included the south of Anatolia and the Syro-Mesopotamian area. His name recommended him as god of the divine wrath, a devastating and warrior god, master of the savage world and of the animals.89 In translation, it means ‘the provoked’, ‘the bestirred’, and ‘the enraged’. Most often, he was invoked in the Zarpija-type of Hittite magical rituals, together with other ‘powerful’ and well-armed gods, Innarauant,90 in order to drive away plague epidemics. He was defined himself as a god of power, of divine force.91 He was, in the first instance, identified in the literature with Nergal, given certain common characteristics: the warrior function, that of plague banisher 85

Kearsley 2002, 408. 10.7.17 and 10.7.5. 87 Goetze 1954, 78. 88 Pohl 2004, 76; Lebrun 1988, 151–52; Joannès 2001, 279–81. 89 Lebrun 1988, 152; 2001, 93. 90 Kammenhuber 1990, 192; Pohl 2004, 86. 91 Pohl 2004, 76; Salvatori 1975, 403–06 (with a translation into Italian) = KUB IX, 31; Kammenhuber 1990, 188–89. 86

96

CHAPTER 2

and as master of the other world.92 Subsequently, this assimilation was also due to the iconographic similarities, as both of them were frequently represented on the back of a lion, holding a double axe.93 He was afterwards identified with Marduk, because the name of the Luwian Šanta used the same akkadogram as for Marduk.94 On the other side, both were gods of incantations and of the earth.95 However, in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, the most frequent identification in literary texts is with Herakles; but it did not last, as it was merely artificial.96 However, this identification may have a real background as, for instance, on the Achaemenid staters of Mazaios dating to 351/0 BC, from a hoard discovered in 1992 at Tarsus, it is also Herakles who is represented with an eagle and a lion.97 The image of Sandan is composite, constituted through selective and successive assimilation, the outcome of a long-term acculturation process. As a master of wild nature, he was depicted on the back of an animal, with a horned, sometimes even winged lion (9.8.1; 9.8.2). As a god of war, he has specific attributes, such as the bow, double axe, sword and quiver (gorytus), from time immemorial. Sometimes he also had a crown, a ring, a flower or a polos. On coins, there is no representation of a cult statue.98 He is always depicted standing, one leg forward, arms outstretched. There are two main monetary types identified: the god on the back of a lion (9.8.1; 9.8.2); the god inside his monument (9.8.3; 9.8.4).99 However, we must note that, from an iconographic perspective, the ‘monument’ was initially only an incenseburner,100 on which most probably the god ‘consumed himself’, dying and then resurrecting.101

92

Casabone 2003, 30–31; Jenkins 1972, 99–100. Chuvin 1981, 324–25. 94 Goetze 1954, 78 and 80; Kammenhuber 1990, 188 and 191–93. 95 Maybe even of vegetation, as shown by Salvatori 1975, 406; Pohl 2004, 85–88. 96 For the critique of these literary traditions, see Pohl 2004, 88–91; Ehling 2004, 144–45; Chuvin 1981, 312–25. 97 Öçmen and Davesne 1996, 186–88. 98 Pohl 2004, 74–82. 99 See also the examples presented by Augé in LIMC VII.1, 662–65 and the subtypes: nos. 2–3, Sandan within his monument, on platform; nos. 4a-4b, Sandan within his monument, with raised base, with a semi-circular bow above, supported by two characters with the arms raised and capped heads, 9.8.3 and 9.8.4; nos. 5, 6, 7a, Sandan on the horned lion, rightwards; no. 7b, Sandan on the horned lion, leftwards; 9.8.1 and 9.8.2. LIMC VII.2, 501–02. 100 The clearest examples in this sense are SNGCopenhagen VI, Cilicia nos. 332, 337, 341. 101 Wiens 1980, 1274; Chuvin 1981, 319–21. 93

THE SOLAR AND LUNAR RIDER-GODS

97

SOZON Sozon is a local solar divinity with a very limited area of diffusion in the south of Anatolia, mainly in regions where we encounter the most extensive evidence of the presence of Anatolian rider-gods, i.e. Lycia, Pisidia, southern Phrygia, Lydia, Lycaonia and Kybiratis. This is why he is sometimes considered a typically ‘Phrygian’ deity.102 The name is Greek, thus referring to a salvation divinity parexcellence.103 However, just like Hosios kai Dikaios, for instance, the real name is not known, only the defining attribute. This is why it is equally difficult to determine the origin, for this could be a similar situation to that of Anaitis, where a deity outside the Anatolian area is indigenised, and it takes over, at least from an iconographic standpoint, the symbolism and appearance of certain divinities with similar attributes from the land of adoption. The most recent opinion about the origin of Sozon is that of J.S. Sheldon, who considers that he is to be identified with Saošyant/Saoshyant, the world saviour, the one who will come at the end of days to redeem mankind and who will triumph on behalf of Ahura Mazda against the evil spirit.104 According to the Iranian tradition, Zoroaster himself was such a saviour, but so is the one who was to come after him, an even greater prophet who would complete his work.105 However, in an even broader sense, the term was applicable to all the righteous people who fight against evil and lies, in both this life and the next.106 Three of the older hypotheses as to Sozon’s identity are equally intriguing. All of them date to the end of the 19th century. According to the first, that of Hermann Usener, he was the continuator of the local god of fire, Mandros. This idea did not advance beyond hypothesis for want of other iconographic indications referring to such a divinity.107 On the other hand, starting from the linguistic similarity with Sabazios (sometimes spelled Saoazos), as well as from the fact that, at times, the term Sozon is proper as epithet to Zeus, and from the idea that both are known as salvation divinities, Ramsay believed that

102

Vermeule 1971, 41–42. Literally, this term is equivalent with Soter, meaning the ‘Saviour/Redeemer’: Delemen 1999, 40. 104 RECAM V, 102; Malandra 1983, 22–23; Gnoli 2005; Tafażżolī 1981. 105 Boyce 1996, 234–35; Boyce translated this term by ‘he who will bring benefit’ or ‘future benefactor’. 106 Boyce 1996, 235; Malandra 1983, 22–23. 107 Delemen 1999, 40. 103

98

CHAPTER 2

Sozon was nothing but a Hellenised version of the Phrygian god.108 Finally, according to K.G. Lanckoronski, Sozon was merely a local version of a deity identified with Zeus, i.e. Zeus Osogoa, and worshipped mostly at Mylasa in Caria, whose main attributes are the trident and the double axe.109 It is very hard to determine the exact attributes of Sozon because there are no local mythological traditions to underline them, except for a couple of dedications and reliefs, as well as the coins of Julia Domna (11.7.10),110 Septimius Severus (11.6.1),111 Gordian III112 and Gallienus.113 From the few records available, the first thing to notice is that, at least in one situation, he has the local denomination of Zozon, in an inscription datable to the 2nd–3rd centuries AD, addressed by Pan(n)ychis after a vow made. The dedication is present on a limestone shrine with pediment and acroteria, besides another one, mentioning Mâ (11.7.4).114 In this case, there are two options: the first is that Mâ is a theophoric name belonging to a single female dedicator, Mâ Pannychis; the second that there are, in fact, two dedications – one addressed to the goddess Mâ and the other one to Sozon. The latter seems more probable because the two texts appear on different sides; the name of the goddess is in the dative and, actually, there are also situations when different divinities appear on the same monument (for instance 3.6.30; 3.6.112; 6.9.1). The other inscriptions are either plain anonymous dedications, such as the one at Perminunda (11.7.12),115 or ex-votos, sometimes accompanied by figurative representations. On this occasion, we also notice the epithets addressed to the god: ‘master’ (kyrios), at Sura in Lycia,116 and ‘listening’ or ‘prayerlistening’ (epēkoos), two rather common denominations for the Anatolian area. The latter is present on a stone stele at Karamanlı (11.7.8), where the god is depicted as a rider, with double axe on the right shoulder. The votive inscription was addressed by a local inhabitant, as he has an epichoric name, Osaeis; 108 Vermeule continues with the identifications: ‘This is the Phrygian deity Men-SozonSabazios, who appears on coins of Eumeneia (Isheki) in Phrygia, also on horseback and with his double-axe’ (Vermeule 1971, 42). 109 Delemen 1999, 41. 110 LIMC VIII.1, 1149, no. 13 (Cremer); LIMC VIII.2 (with photograph no. 13); von Aulock 1977, 114, nos. 1124–1127; Hellenica III, 67. From Panemoteichos, Pisidia. 111 LIMCVIII.1, 1149, no. 14 (Cremer); LIMCVIII.2, 1997, no. 14 (with photograph); BMC Phrygia419, no. 5 (with pl. XLIX, 2). It comes from Themisonion in Phrygia. 112 Turcan 1978, 1029. On a coin at Arykanda, where Gordian III is represented with Sozon radiated, in the solar biga. 113 LIMCVIII.1, 1149, no. 12 (Cremer). From Mostene in Lydia. 114 RECAM V, 180 (with pls. 138–139). 115 RECAMV, 182; IGSK 57, 104g; Frei 1990, 1826, no. 33.5.1. 116 Hellenica XI–XII, 247–48; Drew-Bear 1976, 250, n. 14; Delemen 1999, 40.

THE SOLAR AND LUNAR RIDER-GODS

99

he was the son of Attalos and a former priest (ἱερασάμενος) of the god.117 Another ex-voto addressed by a public person to Sozon identified with Apollo is the one at Sizma north of Konya (11.8.3)118 belonging to Iatrokles, son of Menemarchos and grandson of Orestes, a member of the local council (βουλευτής). The same idea of the god’s receptivity to the dedicator’s requests is expressed in another inscription discovered in 1968 at Banaz in Phrygia (in the territory of Akmonia), at a place called Eksik or Çam Su Deresi; in this case, Auxanios Quintus kept his promise because he had been redeemed by Sozon.119 Equally interesting is the inscription at Karaçaviran in the Pisidian area, because Alexandros who dedicated an ex-voto to Sozon is called here ‘the one offered three times by Dionysos’ (Ἀλέξανδρος τρὶς Διονυσοδώρου).120 It could indicate that the dedicator was an adept of Orphism.121 The only divinity with whom Sozon is associated is one of the indigenous Mother Goddesses, called Meter Sozontes or the ‘Mother of Sozon’, on an altar, where she holds a sceptre and a phiale, and on her head is a floor-length veil.122 When Sozon is identified with a divinity, it is always with Apollo, both epigraphically and iconographically. I have previously mentioned the example of Iatrokles, who set up a monument for Apollo Sozon at Sizma (11.8.3).123 Another example is at Philomelion (Akşehir) in Lycaonia, on a blue marble altar datable to the 2nd century AD (3.6.113).124 In this case, the dative [Λητ]οïδῃ Σώζοντι makes a plain and clear reference to the identification with Apollo. From an iconographic perspective, Apollo’s identification with Sozon is encountered on two small 3rd-century AD stelae currently at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts.125 Other similar cases are those at Iconium (Konya), where Sozon takes the appearance of Apollo Citharede,126 and even the one at

117 Delemen 1999, 166, no. 290; LIMCVIII.1, 1148, no. 4 (Cremer); Hellenica III, 70; Ramsay 1895, 304, no. 98. 118 Delemen 1999, 167, no. 292;LIMCII.1, 245, no. 486 (Simon and Bauchhenss). 119 Drew-Bear 1976, 249–50. 120 Bean 1959, 106, no. 70. However, the inscription could have also originated at Hadriani (Gavur Ören). 121 Maybe following the same idea of the identification with Dionysos, the one born the third time from Zeus’ thigh. 122 RECAM V, 116 (with image at 86). 123 Delemen 1999, 167, no. 292; LIMC II.1, 245, no. 486 (Simon and Bauchhenss). The votive inscription has the following content: ‘Hermaios, the son of Menelaos, for Parsames, my son, to the Mother of Sozon, after making a vow.’ 124 Ricl 1991, 43, no. 95; Delemen 1999, 41–42. 125 Vermeule 1971, 41–42 (with figs. 51–52). 126 RECAM III, 16.

100

CHAPTER 2

the Museum of Burdur, a case in which the object in the left hand of the character is, naturally, a lyre.127 Given the area of diffusion, Sozon’s iconography is very similar to that of other rider-gods such as Apollo Alsenos, Maseis, Kakasbos, Herakles, Apollo Lairbenos, Apollo Perminoundeis, Hosios kai Dikaios, sometimes also Mên, with the same typical hypostases and common symbolic elements (the double axe,128 eagle,129 radiate crown130) specific to a god represented in most cases as a rider-god, with the chlamys flying out behind, with celestial attributes. However, sometimes he is depicted with other symbols: a spear,131 dagger, lyre,132 cane or whip.133 Quite rarely, the god’s chest is exposed.134 Nonetheless, he is also depicted naked.135

127

11.7.4 = RECAM V, 180. The double axe appears on both the god’s representations on steleae altars, rupestrian reliefs and coins: LIMC VIII.1, 1148, no. 4 (Cremer); Hellenica III, 69–72; Vermeule 1971, 41–42 (with figs. 51–52); Özsait, Labarre and Özsait 2004, 62–65, no. 4 (fig. 5) and 67, no. 13 (fig. 13), from Keçili Yanıktaş in Pisidia. 129 11.7.4 = RECAM V, 180. 130 An interesting representation is the one on an altar of the 2nd–3rd centuries AD from Beşkavak, currently in the Museum of Burdur (RECAM V, 18). Besides the representation of Dionysos, the monument also comprises a representation of a bust belonging to Apollo-Sozon, with a mantle over the shoulders, folded, fastened upon the right shoulder with a circular fibula. The radiated crown is semi-circular, very similar to the one currently in the Museum of Afyonhisar: LIMC VIII.1, 1149, no. 7 (Cremer). 131 Drew-Bear 1976, 250; LIMC VIII.1, 1148, no. 2 (Cremer) (at Saraycik in Lycia, currently in the Museum of Gölcük; 3rd century AD) and no. 5 (at Tefenni in Phrygia, on an altar of AD 312). In the latter case, it could also be a spear, for even a sword. 132 The dagger appears only one time, on a rectangular limestone altar, decorated with pediment and acroteria, dating to the 2nd–3rd centuries AD, with unknown origin: 11.7.4 = RECAM V, 180. In the same case, the character seems to hold a lyre. 133 On a cornaline gem, dating to the 3rd century AD, with unknown origin and uncertain identification: the god could be Sozon or even Helios: LIMC VIII.1, 1149, no. 15 (Cremer). 134 Delemen 1999, 39; LIMC VIII.1, 1149, nos. 7 and 8 (Cremer). 135 LIMC VIII.1, 1149 (Cremer); 11.7.4 = RECAM V, 180. 128

CHAPTER 3

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

ANAITIS A pre-Zoroastrian goddess, Anaitis was brought to Anatolia during Achaemenid rule. In her Indo-Iranian version she was called Sarasvatī, the mistress of waters, with the Iranian counterpart *Harahvatī. The last term refers to the celestial river springing from the mythical mountain Harā and discharging into the Vourukaša Sea through a thousand channels and tributaries. Hence, it was the source of all terrestrial waters (Yasht 5. 1, 21, 102).1 In the Achaemenid period, she is identified with another West Iranian divinity, *Anahitī, and her popularity grew.2 Precisely because of this identification, in the Avestan literature she becomes known as Arədvī Sūrā Anāhitā, through three epithets meaning ‘the humid’, ‘the mighty’ and ‘the immaculate’, which actually underline her triple functionality. She had sovereign power (‘the mighty’), sacerdotal power (‘the untainted’/ ‘the immaculate’) and she had a fertility role through identification with moistness (‘the humid’). The goddess becomes the personification of creative energy, thus possessing the hvarenō, the ‘power’, ‘light’, ‘divine energy’, ‘majesty’, with which she then invested Iranian sovereigns.3 This is why, in the later representations within the Iranian world, she is depicted with an aureole above the head (Yasht 13. 4).4 She sat alongside Ahura Mazda and Mithra, thus forming some kind of a protecting ‘triad’ for the Achaemenid sovereigns5 and, later, for the Arsacid6 and Sassanid7 rulers, where, most probably, Anahita was already

1

Moga 2012, 191–95; see also DNP I, coll. 644–645; LIMC I.1, 754 (Teixidor). Malandra 1983, 117–18; Boyce, Chaumont and Bier 1989, 1003; Cumont 1905, 24. 3 Orsi 1988, 136–39 and 146–49; Schwartz 1985, 670–71. 4 Dexter 1990, 70–73; Turcan 1975, 95–97. 5 Azarpay 1982; Eliade 1991, 317; de Breuil 1982, 71. However, during the reign of Artaxerxes III, on the inscription at Persepolis (A3Pa, § 4) only Ahura Mazda and Mithra are mentioned: ‘Le roi Artaxerxès déclare: «Qu’Ahuramazdā et le dieu Miθra me protègent, ainsi ce peuple et ce qui a été fait par moi […]»’ (= Lecocq 1997, 275–76). 6 Turcan 1975, 97. 7 Chaumont 1958, 160–61 and 170; Colpe 1983, 845–46. 2

102

CHAPTER 3

assimilated to the Moon, and Mithra to the Sun.8 At Persepolis, that ‘triad’ was even identified with Zeus, Apollo and Artemis during Ardashir’s reign.9 Such divine formulas, composed of the Supreme God, the Sun and the Moon were omnipresent in the common people’s traditions of the Caucasian region and of the bordering area of the Persian state, especially for the Albanians, Armenians and Medians (Text no. 8);10 in this case, she was probably assimilated in a syncretic manner.11 The first official epigraphic evidence of the cult of Anahita during the Achaemenid period is found inscribed at the bases of columns in palaces built in the reign of Artaxerxes II. In two texts, one at Hamadān12 and another at Susa,13 the ‘great king of kings’ Artaxerxes II mentions the divine protection from which he benefited against all evil. According to information provided by Berossos, which survives in the work of Clement of Alexandria, he is the first sovereign to have introduced the anthropomorphic veneration of Anahita (called ‘Aphrodite Anaitis’ in the text) in Babylon, at Susa and Ecbatana, also obliging the inhabitants of Bactriana, Damascus and Sardis to worship her (Clement of Alexandria Protrepticus 5. 65. 4). Several aspects of this passage are worth mentioning. Although Artaxerxes introduced the worship of statues in these centres this does not mean necessarily that anthropomorphic veneration of Anahita commenced with him. It appears that she had been venerated in a popular form prior to this.14 In fact, none of Berossos’ assertions supports the idea that Anahita had been introduced at this point and only as a dynastic cult whose practice was limited to the Persian aristocracy, as Maria Brosius tried to demonstrate.15 Considering the previous assimilations of Anahita with other fertility goddesses, such as Ishtar and especially Nanaia, she may have had a similar iconography to that of the 8

Turcan 1998, 228. Chaumont 1958, 160. 10 Strabo 11. 4. 8 (on Albanians), 15. 3. 13–16 (on Medians); Russell 1990, 2684; Schwartz 1985, 693–94; Colpe 1983, 843–45; van Esbroeck 1990, 2707–08 and 2711–14; Dumézil 1997, 121. 11 Eliade 1991, 317. 12 A2Ha (= Lecocq 1997, 269 § 2): ‘Grâce à Ahuramazdā, Anāhita et Miθra, j’ai fait cet apadana; qu’Ahuramazdā, Anāhita et Miθra me protègent de tout mal [et cet apadana; et qu’ils ne détruisent ni n’endommagent ce que j’ai fait].’ 13 A2Sa (= Lecocq 1997, 272–73 § 2v3): ‘Darius mon ancêtre a fait cet apadana; ensuite, du temps de mon grand-père Artaxerxès, il a brûlé; alors, grâce à Ahuramazdā, Anāhita et Miθra, j’ai fait reconstruire cet apadana. Qu’Ahuramazdā, Anāhita et Miθra me protègent de tout mal, ainsi que ce qu’il a fait, qu’ils ne [détruisent pas cet apadana, qu’ils n’endommagent ce que j’ai fait].’ 14 Boyce and Grenet 1991, 200–08; Jacobs 2006, 1–3; Corsten 1991, 170 and 177–78. 15 Brosius 1998, 228. For the theories regarding Artemis Persica, see Altınoluk 2013, 37–45; Herrmann 2002, 364–69. 9

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

103

Great Eastern Mothers, which in the Anatolian environment would have facilitated her initial identification with a Mother Goddess, and then with an Artemis.16 This led to her later appearance, in the Roman period, when she is depicted as Cybele (5.2.16; 5.2.54), Artemis Ephesia (5.2.2), or as a local Anatolian Artemis (5.2.15; 5.2.42),17 as well as to her identification in the inscriptions as Meter Anaitis or Artemis Anaitis. In ĀbānYasht, the hymn dedicated to her in the Avestan literature (Yasht5), Anahita has a composite, multifunctional image; like Mithra,18 she is presented as a yazata, meaning as an angelic being. In this case, all the abovementioned attributes are highlighted. The symbols used to describe her as goddess of the water alternate with the more recent, anthropomorphic ones: she drives a carriage drawn by four stallions, personifications of the wind, the rain, the clouds and the sleet (Yasht 5. 120). She is elsewhere depicted as a beautiful young lady, high-born and of noble appearance, wearing a dress of beaver fur, her favourite animal.19 She girds her waist tightly, so that her breasts are well-shaped; she holds a baresma in her hand and upon her head is a golden crown with a hundred stars (Yasht 5. 126–129; cf. Strabo 15. 3. 14).20 This representation could date to a time after Artaxerxes II’s introduction of the cultic images of the goddess (Clement of Alexandria Protrepticus 5. 65. 3), or it could copy that of a local idol in outer Iran (based on the fact that, in this case, the image is clearly hieratic).21 However, this could also relate to syncretic identifications with other fertility divinities, such as Ishtar, Nanaia or Allat, which is more likely a later attempt to harmonise the different images of river goddess and fertility divinity in the Zoroastrian milieux.22 Through identification with Ishtar, she becomes a divinity 16 During Achaemenid domination, she was first identified with Cybele, then with an Artemis, given that her attributes of warlike divinity in the Iranian world increased (Corsten 1991, 165–67; Rein 1993, 121–24; Hanaway 1982, 291–92). 17 Also on the coins at Hypaipa, Phrygian Apameia and Philadelphia, in parallel with the Greek-specific iconography of Artemis. See also LIMC II.1, 753–54 (Fleischer); Fleischer 1973, 185–87 (especially 187, where he admits that the iconographic assimilation of Anaitis with a local Artemis, must have occurred as early as the Persian domination); Horsley 1992, 139. 18 Mithra, ‘the first of the heavenly gods’ (Yasht 10. 13). 19 Malandra 1983, 119. A variety of beaver (Castor fiber), also called ‘Pontic dog’ (canis ponticus), encountered especially in the south of the Caucasus. At Balkh, eventually at Dilberjin, Anahita was worshipped alongside the Iranian Dioscuri (Lo Muzio 1999, 58). 20 See also the case of Mithra (Yasht 10. 145): ‘We sacrifice unto Mithra and Ahura, the two great, imperishable, holy gods; and unto the stars, and the Moon and the Sun, with the trees that yield up baresma. We sacrifice unto Mithra, the lord of all countries.’ 21 de Jong 1997, 272. 22 Shepherd 1980, 59; Malandra 1983, 118–19; Potts 2001, 25–27; LIMC II.1, 754 (Fleischer). Malandra says that it is caused by the Zoroastrians’ attempts to bring together to divergent elements: the idea of the ancient water goddess and the image of a fertility goddess, of uncertain

104

CHAPTER 3

of the planet Venus, of love and war.23 With the Elamite goddess Nanā/Nanaia, also a Great Mother,24 she had in common the iconography of the Mother Goddess sitting on a throne, flanked by two lions or riding upon a lion, sometimes with a crescent above her head, as in the case of Ashtarte, Allat/Alilat or Cybele.25 The most obvious structural and functional similarities are those with Nanaia, who was identified with Artemis several times as well, and whose cult spread not only in Mesopotamia, but also in Syria, Armenia, Sogdiana and Bactriana.26 This area of diffusion corresponds to that of the Iranian Anahita. On the other hand, there was a custom to consecrate sacred slaves both to her and to Anaitis.27 In Anatolian inscriptions, Anaitis is mentioned in several hypostases. First, with her Hellenised name, Anaitis (5.2.5; 5.2.21) or Anaeitis (5.2.4; 5.2.24; 5.2.47; 5.2.52; 5.2.57; 5.2.63; 5.2.64); secondly, as a divinity, by the name of Thea Anaeitis (5.2.6; 5.2.8; 5.2.14) or simply Thea (5.2.54); thirdly, she is identified with a Mother Goddess, as ‘Mother Anaitis’, Meter Anaitis (5.2.51), Meter Anaeitis (5.2.8; 5.2.9; 5.2.12; 5.2.44; 5.2.45; 5.2.48–50), Meter Anatis (5.2.16; 5.2.36), or even as ‘Anaitis of the Metroon’, Anaitis eg Metroo (5.2.31); and finally, she is identified with Artemis as Thea Artemis (5.2.25; 5.2.29), Artemis Anaeitis (5.2.1; 5.2.2; 5.2.7; 5.2.13; 5.2.15; 5.2.17–20; 5.2.27; 5.2.28; 5.2.38; 5.2.39; 5.2.42; 5.2.46; 5.2.61; 5.2.62), Artemis Anaitis (5.2.10) or simply Artemis (5.2.21; 5.2.26; 5.2.30?; 5.2.55). However, as Diakonoff underlined, she was never encountered as Meter Artemis Anaitis, which is a contradiction, in his opinion, in view of Artemis’ ‘specific character as a virgin goddess’, at least from the perspective of Greek mythological traditions.28 Rarely, she is mentioned as ‘Mother Anaitis of Axiotta’, Meter Anaitis Axiottenos, probably to underline that it was that specific version which came from Axiotta/Azitta (5.2.3). As is noticeable in the examples within the catalogue, there is only one mention on a marble stele dating to the

origin, but who syncretises with Inanna-Ishtar. Along the same line, I must underline the parallelism with the representation of Anaitis on Pontic coins, in her quality of fertility goddess: she is holding a bundle of rods (baresma), and a crescent is illustrated above her head (Waddington, Babelon and Reinach 1908, 159, no. 2; Olshausen 1990, 1871). 23 Boyce, Chaumont and Bier 1989, 1005–06. 24 As Przyluski (1950, 36–41) and, later, Durand (2000, 223–24) indicate, her name may have come from an onomatopoeic that simply meant ‘mother’ (nana), a mother-divinity of nature and fecundity. See also de Jong 1997, 273. 25 Gawlikowski 1990a, 2639–41, 2645–46; 1990b, 2666–68; Boyce, Chaumont and Bier 1989, 1006; de Jong 1997, 269–75 and 277–81; Schwartz 1985, 670. 26 Lo Muzio 1999, 58–59; Potts 2001, 25–27; Abdullaev 2003, 25; Malandra 1983, 119. 27 Darmezin 1999, 164–67, nos. 199–203 (at Susa, 2nd century BC). 28 Diakonoff 1979, 165.

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

105

first third of the 3rd century AD, for both Thea Anaeitis and Meter Anaeitis (5.2.8). In most of the cases, she is associated with Mên Tiamou in the inscriptions of eastern Lydia, a deity with whom she probably shared a common sanctuary at Kula. Both divinities were invoked as guarantors of justice and they had a common oath-of-allegiance ritual, using the sceptre as a symbol of power (5.2.42). The marble stele discovered at Emreköy is interesting from several standpoints. First, because it presents the local typical iconography: Mên/Meis Tiamou with the specific attributes, i.e. crescent moon, sceptre and pine cone, wears a ‘Phrygian’ cap and short chiton, himation and small boots. Anaitis is represented as on coins with a Greek-indigenous iconography; the only difference is that, this time, she has her left hand on the sceptre, and her right on an object that could be a phiale. A veil falling from shoulder to knee covers her hair, pulled back in a bun; she wears a himation over a floor-length tunic that leaves just the toes uncovered. The important aspect is that, beside these two Iranian goddesses, there is an altar of fire, like that described by Strabo and Pausanias for Lydian cultic centres,29 with a conical flame on top. There also seems to be a cultic idol on the (damaged) central image of a stele discovered at Ayazviran (5.2.15), but probably originating from the sanctuary of Kula, together with several other monuments (5.2.7; 5.2.8; 5.2.15; 5.2.18; 5.2.19; 5.2.39). Anaitis is at least twice depicted together with Mên of Axiotta on inscriptions (5.2.63; 5.2.57). The first mention dates to AD 159/60 and it was discovered at Kalburcu, but it probably comes from the common sanctuary of Anaitis and Mên Tiamou from Kula, together with four other stelae (5.2.63 = 4.2.117).30 It presents an interesting description of the circumstances leading to certain lands coming into temple ownership. Though Mên of Axiotta had asked him to erect two statues of the two deities worshipped in that sanctuary from his own revenues, Apollonios, son Apollonios, not only violated this injunction by delaying it, he also prevented Apphia from donating her own parcels to the god. After receiving a punishment that the stele fails to mention, he had to donate even his lot of grape vines to the sanctuary. The second example of this category (5.2.57 = 4.2.107)31 is that of a rather early funerary stele, dated AD 93/4, which mentions that Ammias, together with his entire family, commemorate two females, one of whom was probably a slave, Patera, while the 29 Strabo 15. 3. 14–16, who also mentions the presence of the magi holding their bundle of rods (barsom); Pausanias 5. 27. 30 BWK 71; Malay and Petzl 1985, 60–63, no. 4 (with photograph at pl. 3); SEG 35, 1164. 31 Diakonoff 1979, 148, no. 21 (fig. 28).

106

CHAPTER 3

other, Tryphaina, had been adopted as a foster child (threpte). They invoke divine protection for the deceased ‘to prevent anybody from doing any harm to the stele or on the monument’, through a curse ritual of raising the common sceptre of (Mên) Axiottenos and Anaeitis. In Cappadocia, Anaitis is mentioned alongside two other divinities identified with Zeus: a local Zeus of Thymnasa, and Zeus Pharnavas, identifiable with Ahura Mazda (6.9.1).32 However, this occurred most probably because these divinities shared a common sanctuary with the goddess Mâ in Cappadocian Komana. On just one occasion, Anaitis identified with Artemis appears alongside Zeus Sabazios:33 on a stele dating to AD 236/7 from near Sandal, discovered on the slope of Kara Devlit. This is a confession inscription mentioning that Aurelios Stratonikos admitted to having unknowingly cut down trees from the sacred forest of Zeus Sabazios and Artemis Anaitis: ‘In the year 320, in the month of Pereitios, on the twelfth day, Aurelius son of Stratonikos, the grandson of Stratonikos, having been punished for he unknowingly cut down trees from the sacred grove of Zeus Sabazios and Artemis Anaeitis, erected (this stele) in thanksgiving, after making a vow’ (5.2.58 = 4.2.25). She is also mentioned together with Apollo on one of the inscriptions where she is granted the epithet kyria, which can refer either to the idea of a local master deity (as in many other cases), or to the survival of one of the previous epithets belonging to the goddess Anahita: ‘Mistress’ or ‘Lady’ (5.2.64). This was a common epithet of the goddess in both the Persian world and Armenia.34 A second epithet that refers to her Iranian origin is barzochara. An inscription was discovered in 1964 at Ortaköy in the vilayet of Niğde, within the former Roman province of Cappadocia, north of Archelais.35 The epithet βαρζοχάρα is very rare. The root barz appears in the case of certain Persian names, such as the Cappadocian king Ariobarzanes I (1st century BC), dethroned several times during the conflicts with Mithridates VI Eupator of Pontus and finally reinstated by Pompey.36 Starting from the meaning of the epithet nabarze (= invictus), applied to Mithra, Michael Gough suggests37 that -barz signifies ‘success, victory’; χαρά stands for ‘joy’ in Greek. Hence, 32

Debord 2005. BWK 76; Diakonoff 1979, 148, no. 20; CCIS II, 33. 34 Boyce and Grenet 1991, 203 and 245–46; de Jong 1997, 272–73; Russell 1990, 2682; Duchesne-Guillemin 1983, 884; Boyce, Chaumont and Bier 1989, 1004–05. Durand even mentions the alleged double meaning of Ardvī in the Avestan tradition: both ‘River’ and ‘Lady’ (Durand 2000, 223). 35 Identified with the ancient Nitalis of Morimene, in the north-west of Cappadocia. 36 Mitchell 1993 I, 32. 37 For this theory, see Williams 1977, 109. 33

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

107

Anaitis Barzochara designates Anahit ‘the rejoicer of victory’, a very close image to that of the Cappadocian goddess Mâ, ἡ Νικήφορος Θέα,38 ‘the bringer of victory’: ‘With good fortune. To the Greatest goddess Anaeitis Barzochara, let Photis, Theon and Preima, also called Garse, the hierodules, remain unharmed in all things, together with their children, throughout their life. Flavia Preima…’39 Another explanation of the epithet is provided by Wikander, who points out that barzo- is actually the Vedic várcas, meaning ‘splendeur, éclat’, while -hara means farnah/xvarr, ‘lumière, éclat’.40 Finally, the third explanation for this epithet, which received the widest approval, is that it can mean ‘of high Hara’, a reference to the mythical mountain from which, in Iranian legend, all the waters of the earth spring.41 Other formulations that relate to an Iranian origin are ‘Artemis/Persian Diana’,42 Artemis Persike or Persica Diana, or ‘Persian Aphrodite’ (Περσιθέα ἡ Ἀφροδίτη); they are attested in sources both literary (Diodorus 5. 77. 6–8; Tacitus Annals 3. 62; Hesychius 2. 200443) and epigraphic (through an inscription of Hierokaisareia).44 The name Artemis Medeia is less probable, though it cannot totally be excluded.45 However, this origin seems to be indicated mostly by an association with streams. On a marble stele dating to the 2nd century, discovered at Kara Selendi in the Lydian city of Silandos, near the Hermos, she is invoked as ‘Anaeitis from the sacred water’ in order to protect Onesiphoros’ grave from profanation: ‘In the year 278, in the month of Gorpiaios, on the fifteenth day. Atalante honoured (her) son Onesiphoros, who lived 25 years. Should anyone desecrate the tomb after my death, he will feel the wrath of Anaeitis of the sacred water’46 (5.2.64). Perhaps one of the most interesting examples is that of a coin of Celene/Apameia, on which the hieratic statue of the goddess, with a polos and veil, just like the one at Hypaipa, is surrounded by the names of four rivers: MAI (Meander), MAR (Marsyas), OR (Orgas) and THER (Therma).47 38

Harper 1968, 101–02, no. 2.04. Harper 1967, 193: Ἀγαθῄ Τύχῃ | Θεᾷ Μεγίστῃ Ἀναειτίδι |2 Βαρζοχάρα Φωτίδα | καὶ Θέωνα καὶ Πρεῖμαν |4 τὴν καὶ Γαρσην ἱεροδούλους | ἀνεπηρεάστους ἐκ πάντων |6 μετ᾽ ἐπιγονῆς διὰ βίου. | Φλαουία Πρεῖμα… 40 Wikander 1972. 41 Boyce and Grenet 1991, 271; de Jong 1997, 272–73. 42 Lane Fox 1997, 555–56 and 559; Speidel 1984, 2232–36. 43 Cf. Speidel 1984, 2234–35. 44 TAM V.2, 1245. 45 Oikonomides 1982; Sherwin-White 1982, 30; de Jong 1997, 276, who considers it ‘a dubious case’. 46 Boyce and Grenet 1991, 245; Diakonoff 1979, 149, no. 23. 47 Boyce and Grenet 1991, 245; Ramsay 1897, 398–99 (pl. I.1), who underlines the striking resemblance with Artemis Ephesia. 39

108

CHAPTER 3

When the Greek writers mention Anahita, they assimilate her to known Greek divinities by referring to her attributes. However, as she is a multifunctional divinity, her identification was only approximate, meant to underline each time a certain fundamental feature. The first Greek writer to mention her cult was Herodotus. In a passage in Book 1 of his Histories, he speaks of a ‘heavenly Aphrodite’ (Aphrodita Ourania), whose cult would have been more recently taken over by the Persians from their neighbours, as they mistook her for Mithra (Herodotus 1. 131; FGH 680 F 11). This confusion determined the emergence of two interpretations. The first is Corsten’s: he considered it a later error of a copyist, who wrote Μίτραν in the text, instead of Μήτραν; thus, through the identification with a Mother Goddess, mainly with Cybele, her cult was limited to that of a solar god. The second is Turcan’s,48 who explains this confusion starting from a passage of Firmicus Maternus on pagan religion (De errore profanarum religionum 5. 1–2), regarding the double nature of the fire worshipped in the Persian world. Mithra would have represented the male element and Anaitis the female.49 However, most of the time, the goddess has been identified, through attributes common to those of Artemis (with an emphasis on chastity and on control over savage nature) (Plutarch Artaxerxes 27. 3),50 with Aphrodite (as divinity of love),51 Athena (when focusing on the warlike attributes or on those related to investiture rituals) (Plutarch Artaxerxes 3. 1) or Hera (as protector of love and marriage) (Plutarch Artaxerxes 23. 4–5). Her cult spread through Lydia, Phrygia and Caria in the west of Anatolia and Cappadocia, Pontus and Armenia in the east. Her main cultic centres in the west were at Hypaipa, Hierakome/Hierokaisareia, Philadelphia, Sardis, Kula, Hierolophos (Sariçam) and Gölmermere. However, there is evidence, mostly numismatic, of her worship at Celenae/Apameia (Phrygia), Clannuda (east from Katakekaumene), Attuda (on the border between Phrygia and Caria), Alabanda (in Caria), etc. Anaitis adopts two iconographic types in the Anatolian world, depending on the way in which she was associated or identified with known divinities. First, she takes over the iconography of an Anatolian Mother Goddess, being illustrated as Artemis Ephesia on both coins and monuments, as one of her 48

Turcan 1975, 90–97. This is confirmed by the passage of Strabo (15. 3. 16) where, after mentioning the sacred character of water for the Persians, he states ‘And to whatever god they offer sacrifice, to him they first offer prayer with fire.’ 50 See also Turcan 1975, 99–103 and de Jong 1997, 277–81. Each talks about the trifunctional structure of Anaitis, but they start from different authors: Firmicus Maternus in the case of Turcan and Plutarch in that of de Jong. 51 Turcan 1975, 100–03. 49

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

109

best-known hypostases. She was also depicted as a local goddess of a similar type, with veil and polos, in the same praying position, with outstretched arms, but without the polymastic characteristics. Secondly, she also adopts the Greek iconography of Artemis at hunt, with a bow and cervid by her side, in order to highlight purity, chastity and control over the elements of savage nature. The double iconography is present at Hierokaisareia, Philadelphia, Clannuda, Attuda and Albanda. The only notable exception is at Hypaipa, where only the Greek iconography, evidence of a strong Hellenisation of the cult, is attested. MÂ Mâ is an appellative encountered sometimes in Hittite texts, which represents nothing but a transposition into familiar language of the generic name for the Anatolian Mother Goddess. Starting from Emmanuel Laroche’s interpretation52, Eugène Cavaignac indicates that the name of the divinity was present in Hittite texts as the ideogram MAH.53 As for the original title, René Lebrun believes that the name Mâ could come from a hypothetical form, Mamma or Amamma.54 It is highly probable that the name of the divinity with whom the Sun Goddess of Arinna was identified in the middle period of the Hittite Empire, Hebat/ Hepat, survived until the Roman period as Meter Hipta. The latter is sometimes encountered together with Dionysos55 or Zeus Sabazios in Anatolian confession inscriptions in the north-east of Lydia (Katakekaumene).56 The first of these texts, discovered at Ayazviran, mentions that punishment was applied to an unknown person, most probably one of the sacerdotal personnel, for giving his approval to the arrest of the sacred slave Trophimos by the civil authorities.57 The second text, discovered in the surroundings of Kula, refers to a certain Diokles, son of Trophimos, who was punished in the eyes – though we do not know if it was a temporary loss of sight or blinding – by the two gods for having captured two of their sacred pigeons.58 52

Laroche 1947, 113. Cavaignac 1951, 48. 54 Moga 2010; Lebrun 2001, 88; Popko 1995, 114. 55 Cavaignac 1951, 49. 56 The inscriptions date to the 2nd–3rd centuries AD. 57 BWK 49 = CCIS II, 36 = TAM V.1, 459: ‘[---] Because I decided that the sacred slave Trophimos of Meter Hipta and of Zeus Sabazios be taken away by the authorities, I was punished at my eyes and I erected this stele.’ 58 BWK 50 = CCIS II, 40 = TAM V.1, 264: ‘To Zeus Sabazios and Mother Hipta. Diokles son of Trophimos: because I caught the doves of the gods, I was punished at my eyes and inscribed an account of the god’s power.’ 53

110

CHAPTER 3

Over time, there have been numerous attempts to determine whether and to what extent there is a connection between the divinity worshipped in the Hittite cultic centre of Kummanni and the goddess who managed to become, towards the end of the Hellenistic period and throughout the Roman Imperial period, one of the most important divinities worshipped in the CappadocianPontic area, or maybe even the national divinity of the Cappadocians par excellence, the goddess Mâ.59 The main goddess worshipped at Kummanni was a solar goddess of the Earth, known as the Sun Goddess of Arinna. She was considered, at the same time, a goddess of the afterlife.60 However, in the Hittite pantheon, there was another male deity of the Sun, different from this goddess. Even the assumed place of origin, Arinna, could not be precisely identified. Actually, Kummanni was not her only cultic centre. Though for the early Hittite period there are only a few proofs for the existence of her cult, in the Imperial period proper her presence is attested in numerous locations in the centre and south-east of Anatolia.61 This is anything but a coincidence, given that the Sun Goddess of Arinna was one of the most significant divinities within the Hittite pantheon. She was considered a protector of the Hittite monarchy62 and she had the epithet of ‘Lady of the Land’, being at times even assimilated to a ‘Shepherd of Mankind’, as she was directly in charge of the correct management of the land.63 It is important to underline that this is a fecundity divinity, associated to the humid fertility principle.64 The Sun Goddess of Arinna had been identified with a divinity of likely Hurrite origin, i.e. Allani, ever since the middle period of the Hittite Empire. The latter was called in her turn the ‘Lady of the Afterlife’.65 In Mesopotamia, she was known as Allatum.66 It is only natural to ask whether there is a connection between this goddess and the later Semitic goddess Allat, represented at Palmyra and in the Nabataean environment on a throne, between two lions, just like Anatolian Cybele or the Syrian goddess.67 Actually, there are 59

Thierry 2002, 53. Popko 1995, 89. 61 Popko 1995, 88–89. However, Lebrun talks about the existence of the cult at Kummanni even in the pre-Hittite era. Lebrun 2001, 88. 62 James 1966, 115. 63 Laroche 1947, 47–49. 64 James 1966, 115: ‘the producer of fecundity, rising from the sea’. 65 That deity had, partially, the attributes of Ereškigal, as she could decide who entered the after-world (Lebrun 1988, 152). 66 Popko 1995, 99 and 101; Haas 1994, 405–07. 67 Lebrun 2001, 88; Gawlikowski 1990a, 2639: the similarity with the image of Cybele on a throne is apparent (pl. XIX, fig. 42). See also Proeva 1983, 167. 60

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

111

indications that a counterpart of Hebat among the Hurrites of Ugarit was called Alalath, also identified with Aštarte.68 However, the Sun Goddess of Arinna progressively identifies (until complete fusion) with a Hurrite divinity called Hebat. This is stated in the clearest manner in a passage within the ‘Prayer of Queen Puduhepa to the Sun Goddess of Arinna and to her Circle for the Well-being of Hattušili’:69 ‘To the Sun Goddess of Arinna, my lady, queen of all the lands! In Hatti, you gave yourself the name Sun Goddess of Arinna, but the land which you made, that of the cedar,70 there you gave yourself the name Hebat.’71 In the same sense, it is worth noting that the first mention of the presence of sacred slaves in Anatolia is part of yet another invocation addressed to the Sun Goddess of Arinna: ‘The Prayer of Arnuwanda and Ašmunikal’ (Text no. 5).72 Hebat was considered to be the wife of the great god of storm and thunders, Tešub, and the two had a son together, the mountain god Sarrumma, also called the ‘King of the mountain’.73 Several aspects should be underlined here. First, the association with the symbol of the mountain, of the mound, of the betyl; secondly, the existence of this divine triad at Kummanni, through the personification of nature’s reproductive forces: the fertility Mother Goddess, the god of storm, weather and atmospheric phenomena in general, and the god of the mountain. In Anatolia, the goddess is often represented on the back of a lion, clad in a long himation, with a polos above her head. According to Popko, the lion underlines her chthonic attributes, though her heavenly features are also highlighted by phrases such as ‘Queen of the Sky’ or ‘Lady of the Sky’.74 On the other hand, Tešub had as a distinct feature the double axe75 and he was accompanied by two sacred bulls, Šeri and Hurri, who drew the carriage when the god started a battle.76 Sarrumma (or Šarruma), the god of the mountain, was worshipped as a bull and he was included in the Hurrian pantheon in Anatolia as ‘Tešub’s bull’. The warlike attributes of the Sun Goddess of Arinna are still to be proved, just like her alleged androgynous personality.77 68

Popko 1995, 98. As easily seen, the very name of this queen contains a radical deriving from the name of the Hurrite divinity. 70 That is the north of Syria and the Lebanon. 71 CTH 384 = Singer 2002, 101, no. 22. 72 CTH 375 = Singer 2002, 40–42, no. 5. 73 Lebrun 2001, 88–89; James 1966, 115–17. 74 Popko 1995, 97. 75 James 1966, 117. 76 Popko 1995, 97. 77 Cavaignac 1951, 49–50; Laroche 1973, 107. 69

112

CHAPTER 3

On the other hand, Kummanni was also a very important cultic centre for the Goddess of the Night, which the Hittite king Tudhaliya IV transferred to Samuha.78 Hence, this divinity may have borrowed certain lunar attributes, even starting from this period, from the night divinity that had resided there. The Roman goddess of war, Bellona, with whom Mâ was assimilated since the time of Sulla, was initially identified in the Roman world, due to her attributes, with the Sabine divinity Nerio.79 The latter name, sometimes spelled Neria or Nerienes, meant, according to information provided by Aulus Gellius (AD 125–180), ‘manhood’ or ‘bravery’.80 When commenting upon passages from the works of his predecessors regarding the Sabine goddess, among which are Marcus Varro’s Menippean satire, Battle of the Shadows, Plautus’ Truculentus and the Annals of Cn. Gellius, he believed that the tradition stating that Nerio to have been the wife of god Mars was justified (Aulus Gellius NoctesAtticae 13. 23. 1–19). Hence, A. Gellius defends Plautus, who had been accused of ascribing ‘with too great an eye to comic effect’ this ‘strange and false idea’ to an ignorant and rude soldier (NoctesAtticae 13. 23. 12). The image of Bellona, identified with Nerio, also appears on Roman coins under the Republic. Jean-Paul Morel mentions the existence of a denarius dating to 109 BC, during the time of Cn. Gellius, on which we find the scene depicting the abduction of the Sabine deity by Mars, prior to marriage.81 As with Zeus and Hera, Cronos and Rhea, and Isis and Osiris, the couple made of Mars and Nerio (Bellona) was based on an incestuous marriage between brother and sister. Like Seneca, St Augustine ridicules this view of the marriage between divinities: ‘And what of this, that we unite the gods in marriage, and that not even naturally, for we join brothers and sisters? We marry Bellona to Mars, Venus to Vulcan and Salacia to Neptune’ (Cityof God 6. 10).82 Bellona was identified in respect of her attributes of warlike divinity (Virgil Aeneid 8. 702) with Enyo as well, one of the bloodthirsty divinities who accompanied Ares. In his tragedy SevenagainstThebes, Aeschylus mentions

78

Strauss 2002, 323–38. Saglio 1963, 685 (s.v. Bellona); RE XVII, 1, col. 35 (s.v. Nerio) (Marbach). 80 This is why some emperors of the Julio-Claudian dynasty bore the name Nero. In Tiberius 1. 5, Suetonius mentions the case of Tiberius: ‘To their surnames, on the other hand, they added that of Nero, which in the Sabine tongue means ‘strong and valiant’ (NoctesAtticae 13. 23. 7). 81 Morel 1962, 10–16. On the obverse of the coin, we find the face of Bellona (Nerio), while on the reverse there is Mars in the quadriga, taking Nerio with the right hand and holding a shield in the left one. 82 On this couple, see also 4. 11, 21, 34. 79

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

113

the divine triad formed of Enyo, Ares and Phobos (the daimon of fear), as well as the bull-sacrifice ritual (44–49).83 A temple was dedicated to the goddess Bellona outside Rome’s pomoerium, at the edge of the Field of Mars (in extremo Campo Martio), according to Varro, by the consul Appius Claudius Caecus in 296 BC, after the defeat of the coalition of the Samnites, Etruscans and Gauls in the south of Etruria.84 The temple was erected because of a promise made to Bellona during the war (Livy 10. 19). Filippo Coarelli indicated that it had been emplaced at the foot of the Capitolium, next to Apollo’s, at the edge of Circus Flaminius.85 This was the place where the beginning of a war was decided (Ovid Fasti 6. 241–246).86 The small public square (brevisaria), mentioned by Ovid, represented the area where the rituals on the declaration of war took place. According to sacral tradition, the college of fetiales charged the paterpatratus to throw the spear of war into the territory considered hostile.87 Within the ceremony that took place before the temple of Bellona, a portion of the field edged by the columna bellica, which was meant to be a boundary stone, was symbolically sold to captive soldiers.88 Nonetheless, this Capitoline temple was not the only one built in Rome. The gesture of Apius Claudius Caecus was followed by that of P. Cornelius Rufus who, in 290 BC, dedicated a temple to Bellona Rufilia, in the vicinity of the one consecrated to the goddess Isis. Another similar sanctuary dedicated to Bellona Insulensis was situated in the island on the Tiber and it was related to the syncretic cult of the Cappadocian Bellona (Mâ). Bellona Pulviensis had a place of worship in Rome still to be identified.89 It is interesting that one of the meanings of pulvinus is ‘artificial hill’,90 thus designating the numerous montes Vaticani associated 83 ‘This night there were seven men, violent, terrible, captains,/ they slit the throat of a bull, catching the bull/ in an inverted shield, bound with black iron./ They splashed their hands in bull blood, they swore/ by the trinity of battle, Ares, god of strife,/ Enyo, goddess of frenzy, and Phobos, god of fear,/ either to sack and gut this city,/ or by dying to smear and defile/ this lifegiving land with their blood.’ 84 Palmer 1975, 653–64; Marchetti Longhi 1970, 139; Saglio 1963, 685 (s.v. Bellona). 85 Palmer 1975, 653. 86 ‘A terrace opens to the circus, where/ A column, small but famous, stands; for there/ The herald priest, with javelin in hand,/ Prenuntiate of warfare, takes his stand/ And hurls it thence, whenever Romans fling/ Defiance against commonwealth or king.’ 87 Beard, North and Price 1998, 26–27, 111–12; North 2000, 23. 88 RE III, col. 255 (s.v. Bellona) (Aust); Marchetti Longhi 1970, 136. 89 Palmer 1975, 653–54. 90 Gaffiot 1996, 1277. Pulvinus also meant cushion, elevation between two trenches, or bench land.

114

CHAPTER 3

with Bellona’s cult. According to Duncan Fishwick, the restoration of a Mons Vaticanus on August 30th AD 236 by the hastiferi of civitas Mattiacorum91 demonstrates the undeniable connection between the cult of Bellona, who bears in this case the epithetvirtus (dea Virtus Bellona), and that of the Great Mother of Gods, Magna Mater.92 The symbolism of the sacred mountain, the mound (pulvinus) and the betyl bear for Gilbert Durand the same meaning, related to astral ascension.93 Mons Vaticanus and the Capitoline, where the temples consecrated to Mâ were set up, also represented a symbolic image of the mountain range from the land of origin of Bellona-Mâ, i.e. the Anti-Taurus Mountains.94 This also suggests that Mâ might originally have had the attribute of protector of heights. Eliade shows that the sacred mountain, along with the temple dedicated to her, represented an axismundi, the place where Sky and Earth meet.95 The symbol of the sacred mountain carried the same properties within Christian imagery as in pagan: it represented not only the axis mundi but also the ladder which ‘makes the ascension towards the heavenly heights easier’. Furthermore, it was not only a factor defining a geographical space, but also one organising the phenomena and processes at macro- and microcosmic levels.96 In its area of origin, Bellona-Mâ was known mostly as a solar divinity. However, when the Romans ‘adopted’ her, they always represented her with a crescent, like a lunar, night goddess. This is because, as Plutarch remarks, Sulla (138–78 BC) saw in a dream ‘a goddess whom the Romans learned to worship from the Cappadocians’ (Sulla 9. 7–8). This occurred at Nola, in 85 BC, a couple of years before Sulla marched on Rome and conquered the city. In 83 BC, a fanaticusBellonae predicted for him military power and the subsequent victories (Sulla 17. 12–13).97 Thus, as the goddess’s prophecy came true, her cult was introduced in Rome after the Mithridatic Wars, in 63 BC (Cassius Dio RomanHistory frag. B 1091–21 = M 105, 3–6). In the eastern half of the Roman Empire, the cult of Bellona-Mâ spread mostly in Asia Minor, Cappadocian Komana (Hierapolis) (Strabo 12. 2. 3: Text no. 7) and Pontic Komana (Hierokaisareia) (Text no. 9),98 in Aiolia at 91

CIL XIII, 7281. Fishwick 1967, 144. 93 Durand 1998, 129. 94 Palmer 1975, 657. 95 Eliade 1999, 19–23. 96 Corneanu 2001, 273; Eliade and Culianu 1993, 297–98; Chevalier and Gheerbrant 1994– 95 II, 321–26. 97 Alföldi 1976, 152. 98 Strabo 12. 3. 36, and the coins mentioned below in the paragraph related to iconography within this section about Mâ. 92

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

115

Pergamon,99 in Lydia at Sardis100 and Hyrkanis,101 in the north of the Black Sea at Olbia,102 in Macedonia at Pretor,103 and in Thrace.104 Her oldest temple was situated in the Anti-Taurus Mountains, in the city of Komana in Kataonia, which was an important trading centre for merchants coming from Armenia (Strabo 12. 3. 36).105 For this reason, in this locality, a great number of her devotees were non-natives, coming from Armenia or Persia.106 Strabo derived the name of this locality starting from legend, thus also identifying the rites of this deity with those of Artemis Tauropolis: ‘It is thought that Orestes, with his sister Iphigeneia, brought these sacred rites here from Tauric Scythia, the rites in honour of Artemis Tauropolus, and that here they also deposited the hair [coma] of mourning; whence the city’s name [Komana]’ (Strabo 12. 2. 3: Text no. 7). However, in this case Strabo applied a fictitious etymology, as the real name of the Cappadocian temple-state derives from the Hurrite radical kumma-/kummi-, to which the singular determinative -ni, meaning ‘sacred (place, city)’, is added.107 This means, in practice, that the name of the city, starting with Caracalla’s reign, was nothing but the translation of this name, whose meaning had remained unchanged since the time of the Hittites. According to Diodorus Siculus (1. 46. 2; 18. 4), Artemis Tauropolis is none other than the Hellenised version of the goddess Bendis, worshipped throughout the

99

Ivantchik 2004, 10; Proeva 1983, 169. On an inscription dating to the Achaemenid period (the ninth year of the reign of Artaxerxes I or II, meaning 427 or 365 BC), Mâ is mentioned together with Zeus Baradates (an equivalent name for Ahura Mazda, meaning the ‘legislator’), Sabazios and Agdistis. Practically, it is an interdiction addressed by the Achaemenid authorities – through the hyparch Droaphernes, son of Barakos – to the priests of this Iranian Zeus; in fact, they were forbidden to attend the mysteries celebrated in the honour of indigenous divinities. This is the only known mention that associates mystery forms to this divinity. See Robert 1975, with the following translation of the interdiction, at p. 325: ‘(Droaphernès) ordonne à ses (de Zeus) néocores thérapeutiques qui ont le droit de pénétrer dans l’adyton et qui couronnent le dieu de ne pas participer aux mystères de Sabazios de ceux qui apportent les victimes pour être brulées et d’Agdistis et de Mâ.’ 101 In an ex-voto dating to the Hellenistic period, discovered among the ruins of this Lydian city, bearing the following meaning: ‘Moschion, the son of Diodoros, to Mâ the undefeated (aneiketos), after making a vow’ (TAM V.1, 1305; Robert 1975, 322–23). 102 At Olbia, mentioned on an inscription dating to the 2nd century BC, in honour of Stephanos, son of Alexandros from Smyrna, translated by Ivantchik as: ‘[St]ephanos, son of Ale[xander from Smyrna, after] sailing here, this [name of the object being dedicated to the goddess] (he has dedicated) to Ma the hearing one and [to all gods (?)]’ (Ivantchik 2004, 11). 103 Proeva 1983, 164–65. 104 Turcan 1998, 58; Saglio 1963, 685. 105 The ruins of Komana (now Şar in Turkey) have been researched since 1967 (see Harper and Bayburtluoğlu 1968; Baz 2007, 124–25). 106 Sartre 1995, 319. 107 Lebrun 2001, 87. 100

116

CHAPTER 3

entire Thracian world, sometimes also identified with the Roman goddess of the hunt, Diana (Minucius Felix Octavius 6. 1). On some of the inscriptions of the Hellenistic and Roman periods discovered during excavations at Cappadocian Komana, the goddess Mâ is considered he nikephoros thea, meaning ‘bringer of victory’.108 In one, the local institutions honoured the ‘righteous patron’ (τὸν ἁγνὸν προστάτην), Tiberius Claudius Aelianus Sosandros, for accomplishing a service from the funds of the bringer-of-victory goddess (6.9.2). Two others, dated to the end of the Hellenistic period and beginning of the Principate, mention the name Mithratochmes. In the first instance, Mithratochmes, son of Iazemis, appears as general of Kataonia and priest of the bringer-of-victory goddess (6.9.3). According to Richard Harper, it is the second name of Mithratochmes, i.e. Ariobarzanes, that suggests a close kinship with the reigning family of Cappadocia; we can read the second inscription as: ‘The gerousia (honoured) Mithratochmes, son of Iazemis, grandson of Mithratochmes, who is also known as Ariobarzanes, the priest of the bringer of victory goddess, gymnasiarch…’ (6.9.4). In fact, such a kinship was necessary should we also take into account the above-mentioned assertions of Strabo.109 Nikephoros is not the only epithet addressed to the goddess. It completes the series known since the Hellenistic period, such as aneiketos, ‘the undefeated’ (6.1.1 and 6.2.1), epekoos, ‘the prayer-listening’, virtus, ‘the virtuous’, and pedisequa, ‘the follower’ (of Cybele).110 Equally, at Cappadocian Komana, to the goddess is attributed dominance over the whole surrounding area in a dedication addressed by Mithratochmes to the great goddess of the land (6.9.5). Not very far from there, according to Robert and Drew-Bear, there was the habit of identifying her with Athena,111 due to their similar warrior attributes, as encountered at Kemerhisar in Cappadocia: ‘To Athena, the saviour and listening (goddess), Diodotos, son of Platon, maternal grandson of Diodotos, (who was) son of Diodotos, grandson of Zenobios, a priest and a descendant (of priests)… a former (priest) of Athena…’ (6.9.7). The diffusion of theophoric names can also be considered in order to emphasise the importance of the goddess and of her cult in the Cappadocian-Pontic area. On certain inscriptions discovered at Kırık Kilise near Şarköy (Cappadocian Komana), some persons bearing this name have a modest ancestry; they

108 109 110 111

Harper 1968, 101–02, nos. 2.04 and 2.05 = IKomana 75 and 76. Williams 1977, 109. Ivantchik 2004, 8; Fishwick 1967, 145–47; Alföldi 1976, 150–56; LIMC VI.1, 331 (Proeva). Robert 1963, 494; Drew-Bear 1991, 144–45.

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

117

may have also been slaves, as their filiation is not specified.112 There are also cases of freedmen who adopted the cognomen Mâ, such as Apidia Mâ (freedwoman of Aulus Clodius). However, persons belonging to the highest aristocratic circles of Cappadocia took this name as well: we can find them mentioned in the inscriptions discovered at Komana: Flavia Aeliana Mâ, wife of T. Flavius Aelianus Apollonios, high priest of the goddess,113 and probably the daughter of Aemilia Mâ and of T. Flavius Aelianus Socrates.114 In Cappadocian Komana, the Kataonian goddess had numerous sacred slaves (hierodouloi), as well as a great number of persons inspired by the divinity (theophoretoi) (Strabo 12. 2. 3). They were subordinated to a great priest (archiereus), whose function was hereditary, ranking second after the king in Cappadocia:115 Its inhabitants are Cataonians, who, though in a general way classed as subject to the king, are in most respects subject to the priest. The priest is master of the temple, and also of the temple-servants, who on my sojourn there were more than six thousand in number, men and women together. Also, considerable territory belongs to the temple, and the revenue is enjoyed by the priest. He is second in rank in Cappadocia after the king; and in general the priests belonged to the same family as the kings (Strabo 12. 2. 3: Text no. 7).

After being included in the Roman world, the hierodouloi became fanatici, and during the processions performed by those inspired by divinity, theophoretoi, they were called entheati. The cult of Bellona-Mâ was associated early on with bloody offerings and rituals. Thus, in 48 BC, the haruspices decided to have the temples of Isis and Serapis razed to the ground; in the course of the demolition, the temple of Bellona was unwittingly destroyed, too. In it, as Cassius Dio (42. 25) notes, ‘were found jars full of human flesh’. However, Christians disapproved of pagan initiatory rituals. Tertullian even claimed that ‘when men are dedicated to Bellona, the thigh is cut, the blood is caught in a little shield, and given them to consume – as a sign’ (Octavius 9. 10). In his dialogue Octavius, Minucius Felix believed that Jupiter Latiaris, worshipped in his opinion by the pagans through murders, would have taught Bellona ‘to imbrue her sacrifice with draughts of human blood; and to heal the falling sickness with a man’s 112 Harper 1969. On the first inscription 5.50, Mâ is mentioned as the mother of Koula, an Isaurian; in the second, 5.58, discovered on a limestone stele at Kırık Kilise, Mâ is the mother of Kratinos. 113 Harper 1968, 103–04, no. 2.07. T. Flavius Aelianus Apollonius and his family had estates in the north of Pontic Komana, in the area of the Kayapınar village, north of Şar (Cappadocian Komana). 114 Harper 1968, 104, no. 2.08. 115 Palmer 1975, 656.

118

CHAPTER 3

blood, a cure worse than the disease’ (Minucius Felix Octavius 30. 5). Much of the epigraphic material mentions the fanatici in the Roman world. For instance, there is an inscription dedicated to Bellona-Mâ, discovered in Rome, which described Lucius Cornelius Ianuarius as fanaticus ab aedem Bellonae Rufiliae.116 They were dressed, like the priests of the goddess Cybele, in black; they wore crowns with gems and long wool ribbons on their heads. Once in a state of delirium, amidst Phrygian rhythms of trumpets and tambourines, they made cuts on their arms, splashing their idol and those who attended the procession so that, inspired by divinity, they could subsequently foretell the future (Tibullus Elegies 1. 6. 45–50). Bellona was often called pedisequa, ‘the one who follows’, because her cult remained associated with that of the Great Mother.117 Diessanguinis (‘the day of the blood’) also represented Bellona’s festivity, as she was celebrated on March 24th by the spear-bearers (hastiferi) of the goddess, a brotherhood which Juvenal in his Satires identifies with the one of the Mother of the Gods. Actually, the Great Mother of the Gods often sheltered in her temples the ‘itinerant devotees’ of Bellona and those of the Syrian Goddess. In other cases, the places of worship for the two deities were very close to one another, such as in Ostia. However, the similarities go even further. Dietary restrictions represent another chapter with common elements for the two cults: literary sources indicate that the consumption of pork was forbidden for the worshippers of both Cybele (Pausanias 7. 17. 5) and Bellona-Mâ (Strabo 12. 8. 9). The frenzy, the sacred fury, took over both the fanatici of Bellona (Strabo 12. 3. 32), and the galli of Cybele (Strabo 13. 4. 14). As they became eunuchs, they actually performed an androgynisation ritual. Unlike bisexuals or double gods, the androgynes acquire their features not at birth, but by metamorphosis.118 This transformation could lead to the unification of extremes, to the re-integration, ‘completion’, with the ultimate purpose of acquiring primordial unity before the Creation.119 This is a sacred act, which should be related to the mystery of the coincidence of opposites: For the historian of religions, the coincidentiaoppositorum or the mystery of the totality can as easily be found in the symbolism, theories and beliefs concerned with the ultimate reality (…), as in the cosmogonies explaining the Creation as the fragmentation of a primordial unity. It is to be seen in orgiastic rituals aimed

116 D(is)m(anibus)/L(ucio)CornelioIanuario/fanaticoabIsisSerapis/abaedemBellonae Rufiliae / u(ixit) a(nnos) XXII, m(enses) XI, dies XXI fec(it) / C(aius) Calidius Custos amico / b(ene)m(erenti). 117 Turcan 1998, 59. 118 Delcourt 1996, 88. 119 Eliade 1942, 62–64.

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

119

at the reversal of human behaviour and the confusion of values, in the mystical techniques for the union of contraries, in the myths of the androgyne and the rites of androgynisation.120

From this perspective, the gesture of the galli, the priests of the goddess Cybele, and of those who followed Bellona’s cult of emasculation, as with Adgistis or Attis,121 essentially correspond to an androgynisation ritual illustrated mostly through mandatory sacrifice as a basis for all creative acts. Hence, self-mutilation was meant not only to set one free from the dominance of passion and uncontrolled sexual desire,122 but mostly to acquire primordial unity by merging the extremes. Thus, the initiated became as one with their divinity. The Italic iconography of Bellona and her counterparts differs slightly from the Anatolian; nonetheless, it underlines two of the most important aspects of this deity: the warlike and the astral. On Greek coins in southern Italy (of the Lucans and the Bruttii), Bellona, identified with Enyo in this case, is represented at the end of the 3rd century BC with a feathered helmet on her head, holding a sword or a spear, clad in a tunic (chiton) and diploidion.123 On Roman coins, Bellona is depicted in a similar manner, with a feathered helmet.124 On the obverse of a denarius of P. Licinius Nerva, dating to 113/2 BC, there is the bust of a goddess holding in her right hand a spear on her shoulder, and in the left a shield bearing the image (most probably) of a rider. On her head, the goddess wears a helmet embellished with two straight feathers on one side, above the ears. Andreas Alföldi considered this depiction to be foreign to the Roman iconography of Bellona, showing that in this particular case, at least, the goddess must be the Anatolian Bellona, i.e. Mâ.125 Above the helmet is a crescent and in front of the goddess a star, which could be interpreted as a monetary mark of value. The other significant example provided by Alföldi, that of the denarius of M. Volteius of 78 BC, depicts Virtus Bellona wearing a laurel-wreathed helmet.126 120

Eliade 1995, 75; 1965, 82. Concerning the gallii, the origin of the name, the emasculation and the role they played within the cult of Cybele, Bellona and the goddess Atargatis of Hierapolis, see Burkert 1979, 110–11; 1987, 25, 81; Hajjar 1990, 2258–62; Rubio 1999, 140–41. See also Nauta 2007. 122 Turcan 1998, 49. 123 LIMC III.1, 92, nos. 4a–4b and 5 (Blázquez), with figure in LIMC III.2, 71, nos. 4a–4b and 5. 124 For instance, LIMC III.1, 92, nos. 6a–6b (Blázquez), with figure in LIMC III.2, 72, nos. 6a–6b, datable to the end of the 3rd century and beginning of the 2nd century BC. 125 LIMC III.1, 93, no. 8 (Blázquez) = LIMC VI.1, 330, no. 7 (Proeva), with figure in LIMC III.2, 72, no. 8; Alföldi 1976, 149–51. 126 Alföldi 1976, 155 = LIMC VI.1, 330, no. 8 (Proeva) = LIMC III.1, 93, no. 9 (Blázquez). 121

120

CHAPTER 3

During the Imperial period, on denarii, sestertii and dupondii in the reign of Commodus (AD 181–184), Mâ-Bellona is represented similarly: clad in tunic, holding a forward-facing shield in one hand and a spear in the other, in a dynamic posture. Her head is helmeted, the reason why she was sometimes mistaken for Minerva or Athena, though she had previously been depicted in the same hypostasis. This iconography can be compared with similar reliefs within the empire or Anatolia. Such an example is the stele of Cologne, dating to the 2nd century AD, where the divinity is clad in a short tunic and himation, holding a cudgel in the left hand, her right arm leaning against a spear. Of course, she wears the famous helmet.127 On small bronze tablets, the iconography is very similar: the goddess is armour-clad, the head with a radiate crown; naturally, the shield, the spear and a cudgel or double axe are also part of the image. The animal that accompanies her is, most probably, a dog. The last element in the iconography of the Anatolian Bellona seems to have been rather important, given that it appears not only on the small bronze plates discovered at Abritus (Razgrad) in Moesia Inferior, but also on one discovered at Pretor in Macedonia; it is also represented as a figurine in Cappadocian Komana.128 Though she admits that there is no way to determine precisely the role of this symbol in the cult of the goddess Mâ, Nade Proeva agrees that it is related to the chthonic element. One of the most interesting representations on small bronze tablets, definitely originating from Anatolia, was initially commented upon by Henri Seyrig (who also edited it) and then by Debord.129 The goddess is armour-clad, with shoulder supports and lambrequins over a floor-length tunic, revealing only the tips of her toes. Over the cuirass, fastened with a button to the right shoulder, she wears a chlamys. Her right hand leans against a sceptre with the height of a sword (it could also be a spear), while in the left, she holds a sword; two eagles perch symmetrically on her shoulders and their gaze is directed towards her. On her head, she has a large, nine-rayed crown, and her long hair falls to the shoulders and to her back. The upper side of Bellona is framed by an iconographic motif represented by a trifold ribbon. The military clothing and the attributes underline both her warlike character and solar and heavenly features in general. The sceptre she holds, which reminds us of the name encountered on the inscription that mentions her as henikephorosthea or ‘the bringer of victory goddess’, highlights her almighty power.130 On coins of 127

LIMC VI.1, 330, no. 6 (Proeva), with figure in LIMC VI.2, 169, no. 6. Proeva 1983, 174–75; LIMC VI.1, 330, nos. 2 and 3 (Proeva), with figure in LIMC VI.2, 169, nos. 2 and 3. 129 Seyrig 1970; 1985; Debord 2005, 20–22. 130 See also Thierry 2002, 53, and previous examples. 128

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

121

the Cappadocian dynasts the goddess is represented like Athena Nikephoros, holding in the right hand a Victory (Nike), who holds, in turn, a crown.131 When he published the small tablet from Cappadocian Komana depicting Mâ, Seyrig underlined the iconographical differences from the representation on coins in Pontic Komana, the only sanctuary of Mâ with the right to mint coins. On these, except for the radiate crown, Mâ has only the cudgel and shield as warlike attributes, but no cuirass. In exchange, she wears just a sleeved, tight-belted, floor-length tunic. From this observation, Seyrig even talks about distinctive types of cultic practice for the two Komanas.132 The monetary typology of Pontic Komana (Hierokaisareia) in the Roman Imperial period was minutely established thanks to the monograph of Michel Amandry and Bernard Rémy, ComanaduPontsousl’Empireromain (1999). Pontic Komana minted coinage in three distinct phases: during the JulianClaudian dynasty from Tiberius to Nero, between AD 35/6 and AD 56/7; under the Antonines, in the reigns of Nerva and Trajan; and in the time of Septimius Severus, Caracalla and Julia Domna in AD 205/06. The only coin that was not included in any of the 13 known monetary types is one that illustrates the head of Dionysos to the right with a thyrsus in front of him on the obverse, and the frontal image of the goddess, holding a cudgel, on the reverse.133 Most of the coins show the goddess with a radiate crown and the usual cudgel (parazonium).134 The first monetary issues belonging to the second year of the Komana era, which would correspond to AD 35/6, are anepigraphic, and they represent the radiate head of the goddess on the obverse; on the reverse, there is a cudgel framed by a crown.135 Other issues depict the goddess before a tetrastyle temple, leaning her right arm against a shield, holding a cudgel in her left, with an eagle devouring a snake depicted on its pediment. These coins date to the reign of Septimius Severus.136 In some cases, the coins depict only the eagle holding the snake in the talons.137 The betyl of the goddess, with laurels, cuirassed and having a paludamentum, is depicted on coins either alone138 or alongside a Victory looking to the right, on top, that holds a crown in one hand and a palm branch in the other, or inside a tetrastyle temple with 131

Thierry 2002, 53–54. Seyrig 1970, 76 = 1985, 705. 133 Amandry and Rémy 1999, 47. 134 Proeva 1983, 167. 135 Amandry and Rémy 1999, 26, nos. 1–2 (pl. 1, figs. 1a, 2a). A similar emission during the reigns of Caligula, Claudius, and Nero (Amandry and Rémy 1999, 27–30). 136 Amandry and Rémy 1999, 33, type 5 (pl. 2, fig. 15a); Olshausen 1990, 1886. 137 Type 10 in the catalogue of Amandry and Rémy 1999, 35 (pl. 3, fig. 23a–b). 138 Amandry and Rémy 1999, 34–35, type 9 (pl. 3, fig. 21a–b). 132

122

CHAPTER 3

a split pediment.139 In other cases, the goddess has neither cudgel nor shield,140 but she sits on a platform and holds, probably, a cudgel; the shield is replaced by a bow.141 The significant aspect remains the way in which this Eastern deity known as Mâ, whose obscene and brutal practices, so foreign to the Roman spirit and temperament, would have recommended her more as an externa superstitio, managed to enter the official pantheon. This was done through her identification with another divinity whom she had impersonated since the reign of Sulla, thereby eluding the legal manner of deity adoption at Rome. Of course, like any other Eastern cult, that of Anatolian Bellona stood out through the exotic ceremonies, the prophetic delirium, or the bloody frenzy of her fanatical priests, who created an exciting, attractive atmosphere, full of show and colour, so different from the formalism, ritualism and ‘coldness’ specific to traditional Roman religion. We find almost the same atmosphere with regard to the Great Mother Cybele, the reason why the association of the ceremonies dedicated to the two goddesses was no mere coincidence. Within official Roman religion, foreign divinities were adopted in two specific ways. The first is evocatio, a request addressed to the gods of the enemy city to join their own divinities. The second was by decision of the Senate (senatusconsultum), after consulting the Sibylline Books, when it was noticed that there was no deity attend to a certain function within the Roman pantheon. This occurred because the state was considered the natural mediator of relations between citizens and the gods, and the introduction of an externasuperstitio, against the tradition of the ancestors (mosmaiorum), was labelled sacrilege and had to be punished as such (Cicero De legibus 2. 19, 25–26). This punishment was necessary because such an introduction would have destroyed the balance within these relations (pax Deorum). As for the goddess Cybele, she entered the official pantheon the second way, thus surmounting the barriers imposed by Roman conservatism. However, as in many other cases, a new element was introduced by invoking tradition, the myth of the Trojan origin of the Romans and of their lineage from the legendary Aeneas.142 Surprisingly and paradoxically at the same time, the Cappadocian Bellona, Mâ, managed to go beyond this Roman sense of rigour, despite her character of externasuperstitio, and become one of the divinities within the Roman pantheon in an unofficialmanner, by being identified with the ancient Italic goddess of war. 139 Amandry and Rémy 1999, 14, types 7 and 8 (pl. 3, fig. 20a). On the coins during the reign of Septimius Severus. 140 Amandry and Rémy 1999, 33–34, type 6, no. 18 (pl. 3, fig. 18a). 141 Amandry and Rémy 1999, 43–44, type 14, no. 60 (pl. 7, fig. 60a–b). 142 North 2000, 56; Bayet 1957, 165.

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

123

ARTEMIS PERGAIA Artemis Pergaia was one of the most important divinities in the city of Perge in Pamphylia, being considered, according to some inscriptions, the ruler, mistress or patron of the city. Her name comes from that of the city. The latter is attested for the first time in the famous treaty on the bronze tablet, between the sovereign of Hatti, Tudhaliya IV and the king of Tarhuntašša, Kurunta.143 Mention of this city under the name of Parha is very important, not only because it is shown as one of the most important centres of the region, but also because it was situated at the boundary between the Hittite territories and the populations of Lukka, the ancestors of the future Lycians.144 However, there is no reference to the cult of Artemis Pergaia until the Hellenistic period, when the goddess was mentioned as ‘mistress’. In other words, we cannot prove the ascendance and continuity of this cult starting from the Hittite period, a reality which remains for the time being only hypothetical.145 According to Onurkan, the first definite testimonia should be dated by philological analysis to not before the 3rd century BC.146 Other attempts, even more daring, have dated the oldest inscription in a local dialect discovered at Perge to the 5th–4th centuries BC.147 More precisely, there is a text on a stone block, moulded above, which Claude Brixhe and René Hodot translated as: ‘A la Suzeraine de Pergé Klémutas, fils de Lvaramus, vasirvotas, a dedié l’épistatis (de ce monument).’148 They indicated, on the one hand, the similarities with inscriptions of the Hellenistic period, and on the other, the fact that epistatis refers to the object of the dedication – in this case, the inscribed stone – not to an injunction received in a dream, as Kaygusuz had interpreted it.149 Sencer Şahin believes that the text refers to some kind of vow.150 143

Beckman 1999, 115, no. 18c, §6 (i 53–67). Abbasoğlu 2007, 22; Dinçol etal. 2000, 2; Melchert 2007, 508 (with an English translation): ‘From the border territory of Saranduwa the sea is boundary. From the border territory of Parha the Kastaraya River is boundary’; Bryce 2005, 304. 145 Popko 1995, 170, who actually indicates a weak attestation of the Luwian names in the Pamphylian area. Contra Pekman 1989, 57–58. See, however, the subsequent examples related to the founders (ktistai) and Plancia Magna; see also MacKay 1990, 2074–75 for a dating of the cult beginning during the Trojan War. 146 Onurkan 1969–70, 290; Pace 1923, 303–04. 147 MacKay 1990, 2048–49, who recalls the opinion of the publisher of the inscription of 1976, Ismail Kaygusuz. It was discovered by a team of Turkish researchers led by Jale Inan. 148 Brixhe and Hoot 1988, no. 225 = IGSK 54.I, 1. 149 Brixhe and Hoot 1988, 232–34. Kaygusuz interpreted the epistasi as a dative form, thus translating it ‘by dream-order’, taking into account an interpretation of Robert in Hellenica XI– XII, 543–46 for an oracle of Didyma, where the translation is ‘(divine) appearances’. 150 IGSK 54.I, 1. The translation is: ‘Der Herrin von Perge weihte (diesen Gegenstad) Klemutas, Sohn des Lvaramus, vasirvotas, als Epistatis (Gelübde?).’ 144

124

CHAPTER 3

The epithet used in this unique dialectal inscription concerning Artemis Pergaia is the counterpart of the Greek anassa, ‘mistress’, attested as female name at Patara in Lycia,151 but also as an epiclesis of Artemis in Callimachus’ writings.152 It is a frequent presence on Hellenistic coins from with the 3rd–2nd centuries BC onward, either with the dialectal local name of ИΑΝΑΨΑΣ ΠΡΕΙΙΑΣ (with the variations ИΑΝΑΨ ΠΡΕΙΙ and ΑΝΑΨΑΣ ΠΡΕΙΙΑΣ)153 or – later – as her Greek or Latin counterpart: ΑΡΤΕΜΙΔΟΣ ΠΕΡΓΑΙΑΣ or DIANA PER(GAEA).154 On inscriptions, the name of the deity is usually spelled Artemis (7.7.1–3; 7.7.6; 7.7.7; 7.7.9; 7.7.14–16; 7.7.19; 7.7.20; 7.7.22; 7.7.23; 7.7.25; 7.7.29; 7.7.31; 7.7.33; 7.7.36; 7.7.37), Artemis Pergaia (7.7.2; 7.7.3; 7.7.8; 7.7.10; 7.7.12; 7.7.13; 7.7.21; 7.7.24–28; 7.7.30; 7.7.32; 7.7.34; 7.7.35), Diana (7.7.33), Diana Pergaia (7.7.18) or Diana Pergensis (7.7.13). Rarely, variations of the name are encountered, such as in the acclamation (discussed later) addressed in Greek to Diana Ephesia and to Diana Perēsia. Here it is clearly a phonetic alteration, so as to make the name more correspondent and homophonic with that of Ephesia, who was at least as prestigious as Artemis of 151 Adak 1996, 136. On the other hand,anassais the female counterpart of anax, used almost exclusively for Apollo. 152 For the commentary of the HymntoArtemiswritten by Callimachus, mostly lines 112–137 (see Bing and Uhrmeister 1994). 153 For the name wanassaspreias, see also Abbasoğlu 2007, 21. 154 As regards the purchase of the priestly office of Artemis Pergaia at Halikarnassos in the 3rd century BC, see Sokolowski 1955, 170–72, no. 73. Osborne also provides a translation for no. 73 (Osborne 2000, 304, n. 33). ‘The man who purchases the office of priestess of Artemis Pergaia will provide a priestess who is a citizen woman, descended from citizens on both sides, on the mother’s side and the father’s side, over three generations. This woman who buys the post, will be priestess for her lifetime and will sacrifice the public sacrifices and private sacrifices, and will take the thigh and the joint around the thigh from each victim and a fourth part of the innards and the skins from each of the victims sacrificed publicly, and will take the thigh, the joint around the thigh and a fourth part of the innards of privately sacrificed victims. The Treasurers are to give the Prytaneis a full thirty drachmas for the sacrifice to Artemis. The wives of the Prytaneis in office during the month Herakleion are to take what is given by the city and provide the victim. The priestess is to complete the sacrifice on the twelfth of the month Herakleion. The priestess is to have an equal share with the wives of the Prytaneis who are in charge of the public sacrifice. The priestess is to make, at the beginning of every month, a prayer for aid on behalf of the city, receiving a drachma from the city.’ As for the residents of Naukratis, see Head1911, 702; Pekman 1989, 57–59. For those with the inscription ИΑΝΑΨΑΣ ΠΡΕΙΙΑΣ of the 2nd century BC until the Imperial period, see BMC Pamphylia 122, nos. 15–20. Those with the Greek inscription are emitted in parallel as silver tetradrachmas, drachmas, and hemidrachmas starting from the 2nd century BC (BMCPamphylia 119–21, nos. 1–14), then during the Flavians (BMCPamphylia 123, nos. 22–24 for Vespasian and Domitian), Antonines (BMC Pamphylia, 123, nos. 25 and 26 for Trajan and Hadrian). Starting with the Severans, they were emitted as ΠΕΡΓΑΙΑC ARTEMIDOC ΑCΥΛΟΥ (BMCPamphylia 129– 31, nos. 51–57 for Tranquilina, Philip the Arab and Otacilia Severa; 136–37, nos. 84–87 for Salonina). See also Pace 1923; Magie 1950 II, 58, n. 19.

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

125

Perge (7.7.39). According to Charlotte Roueché, Peresia could be better reproduced as Pergesia in this specific instance.155 Whatever happens to be the case, there are no other identifications of this local goddess with other divinities of the Greek pantheon. The only visible parallel is related to Artemis Ephesia who, as a version of the ancient Anatolian Mother Goddess, had the epithet anassa or ‘mistress’, with a very similar iconography as well.156 The area of diffusion of the cult of Artemis Pergaia varies depending on the period. Epigraphic and numismatic evidence attest the presence of the cult not only in Pamphylia, but also at Rhodes, Lindos, Thera (in the neighbouring islands), Oinoanda (in Lycia), Ambracia (in the north-west of Greece), Loryma (in the Carian Chersonese), Halikarnassos (in Caria) and Naukratis and Arsinates (in Egypt).157 During the Hellenistic period, her cult had already acquired a transregional importance. Almost all the ancient authors who mention Perge as the most important Pamphylian city also make the association with her sanctuary; in fact, it was one of the most famous in the world at that time.158 In almost all the locations, the most important contributions were brought either by native Pamphylians – we have the attestation of a pergaistai association at Lindos, whose main mission was to worship the goddess159 – or by pilgrims who came to the sanctuary of Perge for help or following an oracular vision,160 or else by itinerant priests, agyrtai. The latter, just like the mendicant priests of Cybele (metragyrtai) or of the Syrian goddess, collected funds for the temple.161 One of the main purposes of the celebrations, processions, games and festivities organised by Perge on various occasions to honour the goddess or the emperor (Asylia, Artemiseia-Vespasianeia, the penteteric games, the Pythian games) was precisely to augment the prestige of the city and of the main sanctuary dedicated to Artemis. It was also a way to attract the pilgrims and, implicitly, to raise the revenues of the sanctuary.162 155

Roueché 1989, 207; contra Horsley 1992, 136. Pekman 1989, 93–94. 157 IGSK 38, 21 (for the Rhodian Peraia); IGSK36, 12 (for the sanctuary of Artemis Pergaia at Loryma); Hellenica, V, 64; Pekman 1989, 93; MacKay 1990, 2059–60. 158 Rigsby 1996, 449. 159 MacKay 1990, 2059. 160 For the oracular attributes of the goddess, see IGSK 54.I, 245 (= 7.7.34); IGSK 54.I, 205 (= 7.7.30) and IGSK 54.I, 134 (= 7.7.19), as well as Rigsby 1996, 449: through an oracular vision, the goddess predicted to Artemidoros of Perge, a Ptolemaic member of priesthood belonging to Perge, that he would live 90 years. 161 Pace 1923, 304–05; Rigsby 1996, 449. 162 For the general festival of the sanctuary (panēgyres), see Strabo 14. 4. 2. The word used by Strabo underlines both the character of national festivity in Pamphylia, and that of solemn, eulogising reunion (Bailly 1966, 1451). For Asylia, Pythia, Olympia and Augusteia, seeMacKay 156

126

CHAPTER 3

For the Imperial period, two simultaneous phenomena occurred. First, an actual restriction of the area of diffusion of the cult at a supra-regional level becomes apparent, though there are isolated attestations in Cappadocian Kaisareia, for instance.163 Secondly, a multiplication of the numismatic evidence in particular, but also of the epigraphic, is obvious,164 namely in the Pisidian cities and in the immediate vicinity at Attaleia, Pogla, Selge, Andeda, Ariassos, Olbassa, Isinda, Pednelissos and Adada.165 Over time, there have been at least two attempts to explain this phenomenon. One is by K. Kraft, who stated that most of these coins were issues of the same mint and that accordingly this was a typical instance of iconographic contamination in the case of Artemis in those cities166. This explanation is plausible as such iconographic loans on Anatolian coins are quite frequent.167 On the other hand, Mitchell interpreted the diffusion in Pisidian areas near Pamphylia from the perspective of the effort made by the influential family of the Plancii to maintain and promote the cult outside the province, in an area where the family had important estates.168

1990, 2052–57. For Artemiseia-Vespasianeia and the penteteric games in the honour of the emperors, see IGSK 54.I, 60 (= 7.7.5); IGSK 54.I, 61 (= 7.7.6); IGSK 54.I, 63 (= 7.7.7); IGSK 54.I, 193 (= 7.7.25). Celebrations introduced because of private initiatives: IGSK 54.I, 66 (= 7.7.9), as well as a field and vineyard donations to the temple in the nearby locality of Aronda. Another similar initiative belongs to Stasias, son of Mouas and grandson of Trokondas (thus a Pamphylian inhabitant) in IGSK 54.I, 77 (= 7.7.12), for the cult of Apollo Lyrbotos. In this case, the goddess plays only the role of guarantor of the cause: the wrongdoers had to pay the fine to the treasury of the temple dedicated to Artemis Pergaia (Inan etal.2000, 333). 163 MacKay 1990, 2061–62, for the tetradrachmas emitted under Trajan, between 112 and 117 at Cappadocian Kaisareia. 164 See, for instance, the inscription at Selge in IGSK 37, 1, dedicated to the divinised emperors, to Artemis and to the city. 165 Inan etal. 2000, 332; Onurkan 1969–70, 294; MacKay 1990, 2060–66; Fleischer 1973, 241. 166 For an analysis of Kraft’s theory, see MacKay 1990, 2060–61. 167 See, for instance, the case of Hypaipa and Hierokaisareia, which shared the same cult of Anaitis, but with iconographic differences caused by the contamination related to the influence of the typically Greek iconography of Artemis at hunt (Robert 1976, 25–26; Altınoluk 2013, 37–45; contra Brosius 1998). The fact that the same divinity could have a double iconography, Greek and indigenous, without the existence of separate cults or even different versions of the same cult, is demonstrated by the monetary emissions of Artemis Pergaia. Regardless of whether the coins were emitted at Perge or in neighbouring cities, or if we talk about representations on stone monuments, we encounter both images of Pergaia as a typical Greek Artemis (at hunt, holding a bow and standing next to a deer) and faces of the lunar-solar goddess or of the cultic idol in her native version. These representations are encountered in parallel throughout the entire Hellenistic period and during the Principate. See also MacKay 1990, 2059–66; Onurkan 1969– 70, 291–97; Fleischer 1973, 236–54; Inan etal. 2000, 333–35. 168 Mitchell 1974, 27–39; MacKay 1990, 2057–58 and 2060–61. For the origin and influence of this family in the area, see also Jameson 1965, 55–57; Jones 1976, 231–35; Bean 1960, 66.

LUNAR AND/OR SOLAR GODDESSES

127

In the Roman period, two of the most common epithets were asylos and ‘ruler of the city’, naturally related to the life of the city, because Artemis Pergaia was mainly a polyadic divinity. A third epithet, with fewer occurrences, concerned relations between the community and the divinity; in this case, she was called epekoos, ‘the listening’, ‘the prayer-listening’ or ‘merciful-listener’, a rather common epithet in the case of other Eastern cults as well.169 The title of asylos related to the divinity appears for the first time in the course of the reign of Domitian – on the triumphal arch dedicated to the emperor (7.7.2) by Tiberius Claudius Apollonius Elaibares, a native whose ancestors probably obtained citizenship during the reign of Claudius or of another member of the Julio-Claudian dynasty, i.e. Tiberius. Apollonius, son of Apollonius, the one who dedicated the arch with his brother Demetrios, is probably the same person as Tiberius Claudius Apollonius Elaibares, considering the common filiation and the similar period when the two lived. Paradoxically, the first monetary emissions of the 3rd century BC at Perge depict the local Artemis as a typically Greek goddess at hunt, sometimes holding a torch.170 The conical stone or betyl, characteristic to the Anatolian fertility divinities illustrated as Mother Goddesses, such as Cybele and Mâ, also appears on the coins of Artemis of Perge, the upper side being probably decorated with metal ribbons.171 Another symbol present quite often on the coins of Perge is the eagle, usually depicted with open wings inside a two-column temple.172 Later, the idol appears both on the coins and on the reliefs discovered in the theatre of Perge and in the Pisidian area at Burdur. The most detailed images of cultic statues are found on these reliefs.173 This is standard iconography, as the divinity is depicted inside a structure with a triangle-shaped upper side. The head of the goddess is always shown in the upper part, in a central position, above a crescent, always represented frontally. The crescent is always shaped with the horns upward, unlike the first monetary types, where it was reversed.174 Under the crescent moon symbol, there are two circular structures that Onurkan initially interpreted as cymbals,175 but which Fleischer later considered to be two busts of imago clipeata type.176 Above her head, the goddess 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176

Santoro 1973; T. Smith 1997, 39; Weinrich 1912, 55–68. MacKay 1990, 2049. Onurkan 1969–70, 294. MacKay 1990, 2067; LIMC II.1, 765, nos. 3, 5 (Oppermann); II.2, 574, nos. 3, 5. Inan etal. 2000, 286. Fleischer 1973, 237–38. Onurkan 1969–70, 292–93. Fleischer 1973, 234.

128

CHAPTER 3

has a very tall polos, and to her sides one can encounter two rows of juxtaposed busts. Besides the cymbals on top of mouldings, there are also symmetrical pedestals, which Onurkan initially regarded as flameless torches (an interpretation totally rejected by Fleischer).177 Underneath this ovae-decorated rib are two or three registers with female figures, clad in long clothes, dancing and singing, either with a chithara or with the tympanon.178 However, there are some representations where the goddess is surrounded by such symbols as torches, a crescent with a star, or a bow and quiver of arrows. Hence, the presence of torches would not be surprising.179

177 178 179

Fleischer 1973, 246. Fleischer 1973, 245. See the explanation in IGSK 54.I, 59.

PART II THE WORLD OF DEDICATORS. ORGANISATION OF THE SACRED PLACE

CHAPTER 4

SANCTUARIES AND TEMPLES

TYPES OF SANCTUARIES There were at least three important categories of indigenous sanctuaries in the Anatolian world, mentioned also by Strabo: temple-states, urban sanctuaries, or ones that belonged to large cities, and rural sanctuaries, or those that belonged to small provincial towns, such as in Phrygia and Lydia. Though, in formal terms, they kept some of the previous privileges conferred by Achaemenid or Hellenistic sovereigns, the general trend, not only for the west of Asia Minor1 but also for the central-eastern area, showed a reduction of actual authority. This was apparent insofar as they passed under the authority either of the urban centres, in the former area, or of the client kings in the latter (for example Text no. 10).2 Some were granted even more privileges, such as the right of asylum (the sanctuary of Anaitis at Hierokaisareia, that of Artemis at Perga, that of the goddess Mâ in Pontic Komana3) or the right to issue coin (the sanctuary of the goddess Mâ at Pontic Komana4), destined for the numerous pilgrims that visited them. At other times, the city that administered the sanctuary issued coin with the image of the temple or of the divinity.5 If the sanctuary passed under the authority of another city, then it issued coins with the effigy of the deity or of the sacred place, as in the case of the sanctuary of Mên near Kabeira, which fell under the authority of Neokaisareia in the 3rd century AD.6 In some rural sanctuaries one may encounter several dedicators from a neighbouring city or town, other than the one to which they belonged administratively: for instance,

1

Dignas 2003, 79. Götter 2001, 305–06. 3 Rigsby 1996, 438–41 (Hierakome-Hierokaisareia), 449–52 (Perge) and 459 (Pontic Komana). 4 Amandry and Rémy 1999, 20. 5 Hierapolis: coins with Apollo Lairbenos; Hierokaisareia, and Hypaipa bearing the image of Anaitis; Perge for Artemis Pergaia, etc. 6 Lane Fox 1997, 556. 2

132

CHAPTER 4

the sanctuary of Apollo Lairbenos in the south of Phrygia, which was closer to the small town of Motella than to Hierapolis.7 All of these types of sanctuary, to a greater or lesser extent, possessed estates, just like other similar places of worship in the Eastern or Greek worlds.8 These included arable lands, forests and sacred groves (5.2.51 = 4.2.30; 5.2.58 = 4.2.25),9 sacred trees,10 uncultivated lands, pastures and gardens,11 vineyards (Text no. 9), etc., which brought in considerable revenues (Strabo 12. 3. 36). If the sanctuary was richer, then it could even own entire villages (also considered sacred), with a very important labour force.12 In other cases, equally significant benefits were brought to the sanctuaries by male and female hierodules dedicated to the divinity, who also devoted themselves to the practice of prostitution for the benefit of the temple. Such an example was that of one of the sacred slaves dedicated to Anaitis at Zela, who practised prostitution during the annual festivities called Sakaia. The slaves at Pontic Komana, consecrated to Mâ, practised the same ritual during certain seasonal celebrations, providing another example. Hence, the benefits were substantial, mostly because they attracted numerous visitors, as shown by Lane Fox. Referring to Pontic Komana, he states ‘Peu de villes pouvaient offrir un tel mélange de commerce et de vénération religieuse, de processions, de sexe et de femmes…’13 Maybe it is no coincidence that one of the very few records identifiable in the Hittite texts regarding the existence of sacred slaves is the prayer that Arnuwanda and his wife Ašmunikal addressed to the Sun Goddess of Arinna14 (Text no. 5), who was to become the goddess Mâ at Cappadocian Komana. As to the great Anatolian sanctuaries, the Romans generally followed the same principles as in the case of provincial administrative organisation in the 7

Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 3–4 and 53–55; Dignas 2003, 87. Bruit Zaidman and Schmitt Pantel 2002, 41–51; Pedley 2005, 39–56. 9 For similar cases of sacred plains, lakes, and groves: the grove and the village of Astyra, near Adramytteion, dedicated to Astyrene Artemis (Strabo 13. 1. 51; the same grove also harboured the temple of Artemis: 13. 1. 65); the grove of Apollo’s temple of Didyma, which comprised both the inside and the outside of the sanctuary’s sacred precinct; the grove of cypress at Ortygia (Strabo 14. 1. 20); there probably also was a grove at the outlet of the Caÿster river, where a series of lakes were dedicated to Artemis (Strabo 14. 1. 26); the sacred grove of Apollo Clarios in Colophon (Strabo 14. 1. 27); the grove near the sanctuary dedicated to Pluto, near Nysa in Caria (Strabo 14. 1. 44); the sacred groves of Leto in Glaukos and Physkos in Caria, near Rhodian Peraia (Strabo 14. 2. 2–3); Zeus’ sacred grove in the city of Arsinoê in Cyprus (Strabo 14. 6. 3). 10 Lane Fox 1997, 47–48; MacMullen 1987, 66–69; Rostad 2006a, 119. 11 Ricl 2003b, 105. 12 Lane Fox 1997, 556. 13 Lane Fox 1997, 555–57. 14 Singer 2002, 40–42, no. 5; CTH 65–66, no. 375 (Laroche); KUB XVII, 21 and the KUB duplicates, XXXI, 124 (+) XXXI, 72 and KUB XXIII, 115 + XXIII, 17 + XXXI 117. See also one of the later loyalty oaths in Text no. 6 (= CTH 255). 8

SANCTUARIES AND TEMPLES

133

region: they altered territorial limits and degrees of influence according to their own interests, sometimes taking into account only partially the previous ethnic boundaries. The main purpose of these actions was to prevent any revolt by the local population, to eliminate any core of resistance and to ensure effective gradual integration of and loyalty to the Roman state. One way was to dismantle previous administrative, political and religious structures or to transform them according to Roman interests: the great sanctuaries were usually given more territories, with new populations under their authority. From a decision-making perspective, they were brought under the authority of structures in their own turn obedient to the Roman state. In other words, their autonomy was gradually restricted. An illustrative example is that of the Pontic temples. Previously these were structures with a high degree of autonomy; they would become mere instruments of domination and integration, as well as a means of ensuring loyalty. A second way was to change decision-making within these structures in favour of persons submissive to the Romans, i.e. to change the form of power. The case of Strabo’s relative, Dorylaios, is quite relevant: though he betrayed his king (who was also his good friend) in order to win Roman favour, in a moment where not all was lost for the Pontic dynast, he was replaced first by Archelaus (one of Pompey’s companions), and then with Lycomedes. In Strabo’s period, he was replaced by Dyteutos (Strabo 12. 3. 33–35). This had a twofold purpose: loyalty toward the Roman state by imposing leaders who needed to have their decisions backed by the Roman authorities to legitimise their power, and the perpetuation of a provisional state of affairs by naming rulers with no relationship (of blood or any other nature) to the native environment, which meant that they could easily be changed. Furthermore, the administrative and/or religious structure could subsequently be reorganised without any opposition. In other words, temple-states were included, directly or indirectly, within the spiral of client-based relations with the Roman state. Directly, they were included through the formal and temporary recognition of a form of autonomy toward other political-administrative or religious structures. Indirectly, it was done by including them in client structures obedient to the Roman state. INCOME, ESTATES, TRANSACTIONS Great divergences of opinion exist about the character of the sacred economy of the temples and their degree of autonomy in relation to the Greek cities, especially in the case of sanctuaries that depended on those cities.15 In a 15

Dignas 2002, 13–15; Moga and Polat 2013, 117–21.

134

CHAPTER 4

letter addressed to provincial officials at the end of the 2nd century AD by the neokoros of the temple of Mên Askaenos of Sardis, we notice that the governor of the province was solicited to mediate a conflict between the magistrates of the city and the priests of the sanctuary dependent upon it (4.2.108).16 This situation was quite common in the Hellenistic period and continued into the Roman period as well, i.e. soliciting the help of the Roman rulers to mediate conflicts between cities and sanctuaries in respect of financial obligations.17 The temple neokoros Hermogenes, son of Demetrios, drew attention to the fact that the institutions of the city were obliged to ensure the annual sum of 600 denarii, necessary for the maintenance of the sanctuary, for daily sacrifices and for celebrations of the god’s mysteries. These privileges dated far back because, as stated in the text of the inscription, they had been granted by the ‘kings’ – Hellenistic or, more probably, Achaemenid – and the Roman rulers only confirmed them. Concerning its location, the sanctuary of Sardis mentioned here could be the same as the one situated near the well of Arsinoê, mentioned in another inscription referring to distribution of water sources inside the city. Other religious institutions mentioned in the latter inscription are the sanctuary of Zeus, the Jewish synagogue and the mystery association of Attis (4.2.112).18 In other situations, such as Pisidian Antioch or Perge, sanctuaries dedicated to Mên Askaenos19 and Artemis Pergaia (Strabo 14. 4. 2),20 for example, were 16

Ricl 2003a, 99–100; Dignas 2002, 139–41; Malay 1999, 23, 131. See also Edict 44 of the proconsul Paullus Fabius Persicus for the city of Ephesos regarding its financial obligations to the sanctuary of Artemis (IGSK 11.I, Ia, 17–19; Dignas 2002, 141–56). 18 Buckler and Robinson 1932, 17; Perdrizet 1896, 70–71. For other records regarding Sardis, see NIS 32–33. 19 On the Karakuyu hill, near Yalvaç. I believe that it was not a temple-state, as Götter considered it (2001, 305), but only an urban sanctuary, even in the Hellenistic period (Mitchell and Waelkens 1998, 37–90; Robert 1987, 355–59; Debord 1982, 151; Levick 1967, 73; Labarre 2010). 20 ‘Then one comes to the Cestrus River; and, sailing sixty stadia up this river, one comes to Pergê, a city; and near Pergê, on a lofty site, to the temple of Artemis Pergaea, where a general festival is celebrated every year.’ Nonetheless, most scholars place this sanctuary on the hill of Eyilik Belen, 1 km south from the city, in an important viticultural area, though the exact place is yet to be discovered (see the commentary in IGSK 54.I, 66; MacKay 1990, 2066; Hellenica V, 64–69; Onurkan 1969–70, 296–97). Hence, it may not have been situated a couple of miles away, as Dignas (2002, 11) believed, based on Strabo’s words; moreover, it may not have been a rural sanctuary, either, as Rigsby (1996, 450) believed, but one that belonged to the city, and the cult was maintained by Perge. On the other hand, besides this sanctuary within the territory, there may have also been an urban temple of Artemis Pergaia – field research seems to indicate such a possibility. Both temples may have been represented on city coins. This would explain, in my opinion, the difference between the two types of representation, one illustrating a tetrastyle temple with Ionic columns, and the other a temple with Corinthian columns. See also Onurkan 1969–70, 296–97 and MacKay 1990, 2066–68, who pinpointed this difference. 17

SANCTUARIES AND TEMPLES

135

considered urban, even though they were not situated on the true territory of the city but in the immediate vicinity. Sanctuaries could possess estates labelled as sacred lands, arable lands or vineyards; the latter especially could bring them significant income. Strabo refers to the large incomes of the great Anatolian sanctuaries, mostly at Pontic Komana, Venasa and Zela, where priests lived in luxury (Strabo 12. 2. 5; 12. 3. 36–37). Not only did they dispose of these estates as they wished, they could also use an important labour force composed mainly from the so-called ‘sacred functionaries/officials’ (hieroi) – theoretically free in legal terms, by Roman norms, but still in the service of the temple21 – and the ‘sacred slaves’ (hierodouloi). However, the priests could not sell them. Their number was impressive: 3000 at Venasa and 6000 at Cappadocian Komana. A part of the lower sacred personnel was used not only for agricultural activities, but they brought income from other sources as well: (1) they practised sacred prostitution within the cult of Anaitis or of the goddess Mâ; (2) the public representations of ‘the ones inspired by divinity’ (theophoretoi), who foretold the future after getting into a trance; (3) they travelled to various Anatolian cities or throughout the empire, asking for money for the deity (the itinerant priests of the Anatolian or North Syrian Great Mother Goddesses, such as Cybele, Artemis Ephesia, Artemis Pergaia, of the Syrian Goddess, etc.). Other sums of money were obtained by trading goods manufactured in the temple workshops (skins, weaving, etc.) at fairs.22 Sometimes worshippers donated lands with a strict destination, either for organising annual festivities that they wished to initiate or, in contrast, that the lands be exploited only for the benefit of the temple. There are several interesting examples of the first category. Under the Flavians, members of the Council of Elders in Perge formally registered donations made by a certain Marcus Feridius (a member of the local aristocracy), consisting of arable lands in the locality of Aronda and near the sanctuary of Artemis Pergaia, in order to initiate, after his death, celebrations that would probably coincide with his birthday. Hence, the harvests from these lands were used both to finance the festivities and to feed the inhabitants (7.7.9).23 A similar example is the one of the festivities initiated by Stasias, son of Mouas, at the beginning of the Antonine period, who left a life interest to his mother in properties in the locality of Baris, as well as lands with olive trees 21

Ricl 2003a, 88–89; Dignas 2003, 83–84. Ricl 2003a, 96. Regarding the sale of animal skins following sacrifices, see BWK 64, and the commentary in Ricl 2003a, 99, n. 142. 23 IGSK 54.I, 66. 22

136

CHAPTER 4

and their seedbeds, another important economic resource in the area. As indicated in the inscription, the condition was that the incomes be used, after her death, ‘as offering to Apollo and to purchase wine and bread for the festivals carried on my behalf every year in the ninth month, on the third day, so that the inhabitants of the village, after eating and drinking properly, remember me, and my brother Kotes, the son of Stasias, and my mother, Kille, the daughter of Mouas’ (7.7.12).24 Furthermore, there is a provision specifying that the properties must not be alienated or used for other purposes and, of course, there was also another clause mentioning a financial penalty should the wishes of the donor be ignored. It is worth setting several things straight in this case. The first surprising aspect is the similarity between the name of this local god, Apollo Lyrbotos, and that of Apollo Lairbenos, which makes us think of a hypothetical relation between the two. Secondly, the fact that a fee had to be paid to the treasury of the temple of Artemis in Perge suggests that the primary reason was related to safety – it was one of the safest treasuries in the area – and also considering the special protection granted to the sanctuary and its right of asylum. Moreover, given that the god was local, his sanctuary must not have been very significant, thus exposed to thefts of sacred property; such deeds occurred frequently. We cannot exclude, on the other hand, that the two divinities may have benefited from a common cult at a local level, which would coincide later with the more limited diffusion of Artemis Pergaia during the Roman period25 and, secondly, with such practices registered in the area.26 A third example is the inscription at Amorion which mentions the ‘feasts of the vineyards’ to honour the memory of Kyrilla, daughter of Gaius Antipatros. These feasts usually took place, together with other processions, ‘during the customary days of the mithrakana’, and they were organised by a community of ‘the initiates of the corporation (or tribe) of Zeus’: The initiates of the corporation of Zeus honoured Kyrilla, daughter of Antipatros Gaius, who died an untimely death, by dedicating the altar and by reverently gathering to honour her grave near the vineyards of Valerius Callistus in Lalandos, at the place called Kraonistra, one and a half plethora distance; it was given to them so that they may use the income from it each year to bring offerings during the customary days of the mithrakana; let the vineyards remain to the initiates who currently gather and are in charge of the rest of preparations; to them and to their descendants, and to their heirs for good, to all those who wish, without constrain (2.6.1).

24

IGSK 54.I, 77. MacKay 1990, 2066–69. 26 See 8.6.112; Herrmann and Varinlioğlu 1984. For a Lyrboton Kome in the area of Perge, see MacKay 1990, 2081–82. 25

SANCTUARIES AND TEMPLES

137

It is not certain whether any of those vineyards was donated to a sanctuary dedicated to Mithra. However, we do know that the initiates gathered to harvest them and that they had the right to use them; they also gathered to benefit from the usufruct and to celebrate the feasts in front of the monument dedicated to Kyrilla. On the other hand, it is hard to determine precisely the identity of the god: there are elements indicating the mystery forms (characteristic of the Graeco-Roman version), but the initiates gathered with the families, in order to take care of the initiatory aspects and of their fortunes, during ceremonies with an Iranian-specific origin and name (mithrakana). Hence, a Mithra of GraecoIranian appearance, who was worshipped by a brotherhood of initiates of Zeus; actually, the latter was none other than Ahura Mazda.27 However, it must not be forgotten that the ceremonies of initiation also represented sources of incomes, as well as the ritual ablution purifications, considering that they included a fee, which also added to the benefits of the priests and of the temples.28 There were also fees to be paid in the sanctuaries of the healing gods, where the dedicators came to wait for the god’s orders, and they often remained in the portico of the temple.29 And another fee came for consulting the oracles.30 Moreover, fees were required to exempt someone from a vow made in the temple, performed by a priest using the sceptre of Anaitis or of a local Mên; and we encounter such practices as they are mentioned in confession texts.31 A series of lands or assets became the property of sanctuaries through more or less voluntary donations from the members of rural communities. This occurred because the god commanded, and individuals had to submit to the divine will unconditionally. In one of the confession inscriptions, Apollonios, son of Apollonios, had to donate his own parcel of grape vines at Pagasi because he had not allowed Aphphia to make a similar offering to Mên Axiettenos and because the divinity had asked him to dedicate, at his own expense, statues of Mên Tiamou and Anaitis,32 and he had failed to execute the order promptly: In the year 244, in the month of Apellaios. Apollonios, son of Apollonios, angered Mên Axiettenos and he was punished. (The god) ordered him to erect the statues of Mên Tiamou and Anaeitis at his own expense; and as he postponed it for a period and he did not allow Apphia to inscribe a stele and to donate her lots, and now he has to donate his lot of grape vines near Pagasi, which separates the place of Claudius Milo, in the vicinity of Amyntas and Onesa. During the time of the priest Alexandros Mourkos (5.2.63 = 4.2.117). 27 28 29 30 31 32

Boyce and Grenet 1991, 259–61. Dignas 2002, 257–58. CMRDM I, 28 and 34. Ricl 2003a, 99. BWK 58. BWK 71; Malay and Petzl 1985, 59–63, no. 4; SEG 35, 1164.

138

CHAPTER 4

The construction and restoration of the sanctuary buildings, the organisation of daily rituals and of the festivals in the honour of the divinity incurred significant expenses that needed to be secured permanenly from their own revenues or from donations of dedicators (1.3.7; 1.6.7; 1.7.10; 3.6.51; 7.7.2; 7.7.3; 7.7.5; 7.7.7; 7.7.8; 7.7.10; 7.7.11; 7.7.26; 7.7.29; 8.6.5).33 Unlike other areas of the Greek world, such as Athens or Delos, where there are inventories of donations, in Asia Minor they are sporadic and concern mainly the previous period and not that investigated here (Didyma, Troy, Mylasa, Halikarnassos, Samos, Rhodes, Rhodian Peraia, Perge).34 Thus, the best method remains the analysis of votive inscriptions. Hence, there are mentions of the following in dedications, but also on decrees or other types of public inscription: (1) religious and civil constructions: porticoes (7.7.6?; 7.7.25; 8.6.106, a double portico);35 votive altars (1.2.9; 1.4.9; 1.2.15; 1.6.26; 2.6.1; 2.8.1; 3.3.6; 3.6.51; 3.2.19; 4.2.108), altars for incense (1.7.10: θυμιατιστήριον), votive columns (1.7.10: κέον; 7.7.33), columns of propylaea (1.6.14);36 cult buildings (spelaeum: 2.4.2; mithraeum: 2.4.2; proseuche: 1.5.1; metroon: 5.2.31; sanctuaries: 4.2.108; 4.2.112; 8.6.108; 8.6.71); public buildings (the nymphaeum dedicated to Septimius Severus and to Artemis Pergaia: 7.7.27); doors (3.6.51); (2) cult objects: votive lamps (1.2.9; 1.6.26; 1.7.5; 1.10.2, 1.10.4–8; 10.7.5; 10.7.33); lamp with a support (1.3.10); (3) statuettes, busts, images of the divinities: statues of Victory in the sanctuary of Apollo Lairbenos (8.6.76); statues of Mithra (2.4.2; 2.6.1); a statue of Mên;37 statues of Mên Tiamou and Anaitis (5.2.63 = 4.2.117); a statue or image of Anaitis (5.2.2; 5.2.15; 5.2.25; 5.2.47?); (4) stone stelae (1.8.3; 3.2.16; 4.2.86; 4.2.87; 8.6.109) and gravestones (1.3.5: τελαμών); (5) representations of the body parts cured by the divinity or of others that indicate the receptivity of the divinity to the request of the individual: ears (1.8.1: receptivity), eyes (5.2.8), breasts (5.2.8), bronze torsos (1.10.3), legs (1.7.11: receptivity; 5.2.8), genitalia.

33

Dignas 2005, 207–09. Dignas 2002, 18; IPérée 48; IGSK 54.I, 2. 35 CMRDM I, 28: a portico for hierodules, a dwelling and an annex building. 36 1.6.14: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ἀλέξα|νδρος Τιμο|θέου καὶ ἡ | σύνβιος αὐ|τοῦ Αὐρ(ηλία) Ἄμμι|α εὐξάμενοι | Θεῷ ̔Υψίστῳ | εὐχὴν σὺν | τοῖς τέκνοις | αὐτῶν Ἀττι|κὸς κὲ Ἀρτέμων | κὲ Τιμόθεος κὲ Ἀλέ|ξανδρος κὲ Πλάτων | ἀνέστησαν τοὺς κίονας σὺν τῳ προ|πύλῳ. 37 CMRDM I, 28. 34

SANCTUARIES AND TEMPLES

139

The treasuries of the temples also received amounts of money from taxes or fines. The most numerous examples come from the sanctuary of Apollo Lairbenos and from funerary imprecations, but there are also many similar cases concerning other categories of inscriptions. The amount of the fines generally ranged between 1500 and 2500 denarii (for instance, 5.2.43; 7.7.12; 8.6.2–4; 8.6.6; 8.6.6–15; 8.6.66). The temple treasury was one of the safest places to deposit money, which was occasionally lent to private individuals, city institutions or even states.38

38

Debord 1982, 225–26.

CHAPTER 5

PRIESTS AND DEDICATORS

TEMPLE PERSONNEL HigherCategories Both men and women could be part of the priesthood and there were no restrictions from this perspective. Nonetheless, the number of men attested as priests is clearly higher than that of women, in both urban and rural settings.1 Priesthood could be exhausting, as visible in an inscription of the second half of the 3rd century dedicated by a free woman, Charite, daughter of Apollonios (5.2.2). The white marble stele on which the inscription is set was discovered at Ayvatlar and show a certain iconographic peculiarity: a beardless cuirassed curly man, with a crown of twelve rays on his head, holding in one hand a cone and in the other a sceptre, who was identified with Helios. On the lower side, there is an image of the cult statue of Anaitis, in an archaic-type posture as a polymast supplicant, with open arms and a foreside quadrilled ependytes. It features an almost identical iconographic expression to that of Artemis Ephesia, which is closely related to that of the Anatolian Mother Goddesses such as Artemis Leukophryene, Aphrodite of Aphrodisias, Artemis of Sardis and even certain hypostases of Artemis Pergaia.2 As mentioned by the inscription, Charite ‘was exhausted because of the priesthood’, but we do not know whether it was simply a physical inability or some sort of fatigue given the multitude of attributes that she had to fulfil, aggravated by her personal misfortune: ‘To Artemis Anaetis. Charite, daughter of Apollonios, having gone (through) a misfortune and being exhausted because of the priesthood, in fulfilment of the vow.’

1 For the situation of sacerdotal functions in a West Anatolian rural setting, see Ricl 2003a, 81–83. 2 On both sides of the goddess, facing outwards, two sacred animals of the goddess are visible. A similar case of representation of Anaitis in the same manner as Artemis Ephesia is that of Ayazviran/Kula(?), dated AD 223/4: 5.2.15 = Diakonoff 1979, 146–47, no. 14. Similarly, she is also represented as Cybele or other related fertility goddess, being part of the same thematic group (Allat, Astarte, Nanaia, etc.) on a throne, with one lion on each side: 5.2.16.

142

CHAPTER 5

We can notice that, in the rural environment and in that of the small Anatolian towns, and mainly in the Lydian-Phrygian area, the attributes of priests and priestesses were sufficiently heavy regarding cult obligations and in administrative or socio-human terms. From a cultual point of view, members of the priesthood took care of daily rituals, of sacrifices and incantations, of mediating the relations between gods and humans by supervising the ceremony of setting the sceptres; they witnessed the oaths uttered in the temple, they took part in expiation ceremonies and they helped edit confession texts.3 They had to erect statues, altars of gods and to bring permanent offerings (4.4.1).4 They could also give sacred orders or dispositions with the status of local laws, valid not only within the precincts of the sanctuary but beyond, thus regulating the nature of the socio-human relationships within rural communities.5 Among the administrative functions, the most important were related to securing the assets of the sanctuary. Sometimes temple objects and properties were reported stolen,6 an offence assimilable to hierosylia, that is the profanation of a sacred monument,7 but covering all the assets in the ownership of the god/gods to whom the sanctuary was dedicated, including sacred groves, sacred waters, arable lands, monuments, buildings, statues and other types of votive offerings, assets within the temple’s treasury and sacred animals (for instance, fish, pigeons, etc.).8 The organisation and supervision of rural celebrations or of those within the sanctuary also fell to the priests,9 assisted by a curator (epimeletes) especially appointed for the task. The priests sometimes shared administrative duties with city or town officials if the sanctuaries were on their territories (7.7.9; 7.7.12).

3

Gordon 2004, 184–90; Petzl 1994, xii–xviii; Ricl 2003a, 85. Gordon 2004, 190–94; Salzmann and Lane 1984, 360, no. 8: the entire village, together with the priest Tyllios, erect a white marble altar to Mên Ouranios. 5 BWK 115 = MAMA IV, 288; ‘I, …, was punished for not knowing the provisions of priests and I entered in (sacred) place impure. I wrote (this) on the stele thankgiving’ (8.6.142). 6 LKGI 39.38 = BWK 64 = SEG 38, 370, no. 1234 = Malay 1988, 149, no. 2; ‘For Mên of Axiotta. Artemon and Atimetos were punished by the gods because their father used force to take the hides of animals from the temple and, starting from this day, they venerate the god. In the year 262, in the month of Audnaios, on the twelfth day’ (in AD 177/8) (4.2.32). In another confession inscription referring to Apollo Azyros, BWK 22: ‘In the year 300, in the month of Xandikos, on the twelfth day. (The children/threptoi?) Melite and Makedon were punished for their deed done afore the god. They also stole other objects there. Their parents asked Apollo Azyros on their behalf. They asked and made the dedication in thanksgiving.’ 7 Frézouls and Morant 1985, 237, mentioned afterwards by Schweyer 2002, 69 for the same term, hierosylos, ‘profanateur de monument sacré’. 8 Rostad 2006a, 117–23; Debord 2005, 17 and 26–30. 9 Ricl 2003a, 84. 4

PRIESTS AND DEDICATORS

143

In large cities such as Perge, members of the provincial aristocracy sometimes occupied several types of public office simultaneously, including one or more of priesthood, the administration of educational institutions for athletic exercise, the organisation of religious ceremonies and festivities (gymnasiarch), presiding over athletic competitions (agonothetes), and in other aspects of city administration or supply (demiurge, agoranomos, etc.).10 For instance, Tiberius Claudius Elaibares, who lived in the time of the Flavians or, most probably, during the reign of Trajan, was simultaneously a priest of Artemis, a demiurge for the fifth time, high priest of the imperial cult, priest of Concordia, praefectusfabrum and agonothetes of the triple games in the honour of the emperor (7.7.3). Gnaeus Postumius Cornutus, mentioned with his brother Quintus Postumius Fronto, also a priest of Artemis Pergaia under the Flavians (7.7. 5; 7.7.6), was high priest of the imperial cult, agonothetes of the penteteric games in the honour of the emperor, agonothetes of the ArtemiseiaVespasianeia games, demiurge and gymnasiarch of three gymnasia. A third important character at the end of the Antonines and the beginning of the Severans was Tiberius Claudius Vibianus Tertullus, high priest of the imperial cult, agonothete of the imperial penteteric games, priest of Artemis and demiurge, as well as judge and consultant by profession (7.7.25).11 Finally, an aristocrat whose name is unknown held, at the same time, the functions of priest of Artemis Pergaia asylos, demiurge, gymnasiarch and agoranomos (7.7.38). We should remember that the organisation of festivities, games and processions represented an important moment in the life of each locality or sanctuary, especially in terms of attracting funds and increasing prestige. Priests also had to ensure the security of those who came to sanctuaries as pilgrims for certain celebrations. Thus, they monitored the personnel who dealt with lodging or they took charge of it themselves.12 Priests were actively involved in the life of the communities, as they mediated conflicts, took care of the water supply and participated in healing the bodies and souls of others, etc.13 It is no coincidence that a series of dedications was made by members of the community to honour them during their lifetime or after their passing (3.3.6; 1.1.7; 1.8.3), mentioning them besides other members of the community, who were at times called in their

10

Pekman 1989, 88–90. For the similar pentaeteric games at Ephesos, see IGSK 11.I, 18d, with a commentary in Dignas 2002, 155–56. 12 See CMRDM I, 34. 13 Ricl 2003a, 84. 11

144

CHAPTER 5

turn ‘brothers’14 (3.6.110). In certain instances, it is the priests themselves who are mentioned with the entire community as dedicators.15 There are also situations when priests are mentioned alongside other members of their families: (1) When both had the function of priest and priestess, and they are mentioned on the inscription as a couple of sacerdotal dedicators (6.7.2; 7.7.6; 7.7.29). (2) When only one of the spouses has a sacerdotal function, but they set up the dedication together. (3) In the case of hereditary lifelong priesthoods.16 It is seldom possible to establish the sacerdotal hierarchy, but instances do exist, as there are mentions of functions such as ‘high-priest’ or ‘the first among the priests’ (3.6.26) and ‘the first among the ancestral priests’ (5.2.15), or in cases of accumulating several hierarchical functions and initiatory degrees.17 In most cases, in Greek cities priesthood was annual.18 There are also attestations of the sale for sacerdotal functions (such as at Halikarnassos for Artemis Pergaia, but for the Hellenistic period19). Priesthood could be a lifelong (7.7.5; 7.7.6; 7.7.14; 7.7.15; 7.7.17; 7.7.20; 7.7.23; 7.7.26) or hereditary honorific function20 (5.2.26). It could also be transferred to another member of the family.21 Three inscriptions from the end of the 2nd and beginning of the 3rd century, discovered at Şar (Cappadocian Komana), mention the hereditary character of the function of high priest at Komana. T. Fl. Aelianus Apollonius, lifelong high priest (dia biou), probably belonged to one of the most important provincial aristocratic families, which had estates in the area of the current village of Kayapınar, north of Şar.22 His wife, Fl. Aeliana Mâ,23 alongside whom he is mentioned, was – apparently – the daughter of T. Fl.

14 The priest Zotikos and the ‘brothers around him’. There are similar examples in the Christian communities and in those of the Hypsistarians in Asia Minor or in the Cimmerian Bosporos. 15 Such as the case of the priest Tyllios, who dedicates a shrine to Mên Ouranios together with the entire village (4.4.1). 16 Ricl 2003a, 82. See also 7.7.23; 4.7.49 (and the commentary in Naour 1980, 72, no. 30). 17 Marcus Aurelius Seleukos, priest and pater (2.8.1). It is interesting that, in Asia Minor, there are also cases of epigraphic mentions of the magi of Mithra, in a Graeco-Iranian manner (2.9.1; 2.5.1). 18 7.7.3; 7.7.24; 7.7.25; 7.7.29; 7.7.31 (former priest of Artemis Pergaia); 7.7.36; 7.7.38. 19 Pekman 1989, 93. 20 Theophron, priest of Artemis Anaitis at Hypaipa in Lydia, came from such a hereditary family (Ricl 2003a, 82; Horsley 1992, 124; IGSK 7.II, 3825). Another example: 5.2.26. 21 Dignas 2002, 254. 22 Harper 1968, 103–04, no. 2.06. 23 Harper 1968, 104, no. 2.07.

PRIESTS AND DEDICATORS

145

Aelianus Socrates and of Aemilia Mâ.24 Hence, the interesting point is that Fl. Aeliana Mâ is shown as the mother of five priests (archiereis). This indicates that the lifelong priesthood of T.Fl. Aelianus Apollonius had a purely honorific character, as his five sons undertook the function successively. ConsecratedandAuxiliaryPersonnel Although priests were assisted by numerous other categories of personnel, depending on the size and importance of the temples, only the scantiest and most fragmentary information about them is available. Among the auxiliary personnel it is worth mentioning two categories with relatively close attributes: the wardens (neokoroi: 4.2.108) and the curators of the temples (epimeletai: 5.2.25).25 They were in charge of keeping the temple clean, building activities, the temple treasuries, security, the temple archives and discipline within the sanctuary.26 Those who administered the temple’s assets were the cashiers, tamiaior trapezitai.27 However, there were also specific caretaker for the ceremonies of a specific god, who actually organised and supervised the events.28 Priests could also be assisted by prophets, such as Alexandros of Saittai (3.6.117). Two of the inscriptions addressed to the Most High God show that one person could occupy two functions at the same time, as in the case of Ulpius Carpus, twice honoured by two Milesian professional associations, one of gardeners and the other of fishermen (1.1.12; 1.1.13). The servile categories of the Anatolian population did not really correspond to the Roman legal classifications. The most concrete case was that of the hieroi (or ‘sacred functionaries’, as Petzl use to call them), who, as mentioned in the inscriptions of the sanctuary of Apollo Lairbenos near Motella, according to Roman law were legally free. Nonetheless, they were consecrated persons in the sacerdotal hierarchy and had to serve the divinity for a determined or non-determined period, which means that they were subject to the divinity and under the jurisdiction of the temple. That Anatolian hieroi were legally free, unlike their equivalents mentioned in Macedonian inscriptions or elsewhere in the Greek mainland, is clear 24

Harper 1968, 104, no. 2.08. For instance Metrophanes, who was called epimeletesnaou, ‘temple curator’. 26 Ricl 2003a, 86–87. 27 For explanations of the term, see Bailly 1966, 1952; Liddell and Scott 1996, 1810. See also Ricl 2003a, 87, n. 61. 28 The case of Q. Lucius Claudianus, serving Anaitis as ‘caretaker of the goddess’ processions’: 5.2.25. See also 1.4.10 and 5.2.49. Claudia Anthestia Magna was trapezo, meaning that she took care of the feasts for Artemis Pergaia (7.7.37). 25

146

CHAPTER 5

because they could have heirs and a fortune. In turn, they could consecrate to the god, as hieroi, their own descendants (8.6.63; 4.2.47), as did Diomas of Daphnos, who consecrated Diomas, ‘my son and heir’, to Apollo Lairbenos: ‘In the year 289, in the fourth month, on the seventeenth day. To Helios Apollo Lairmenos I, the hieros Diomas, son of Daphnos, consecrate Diomas, my son and heir. If anyone challenges (this), he/she will pay to the god 2500 denarii as a fine and another 2500 to the Imperial Treasury. With good fortune’ (8.6.73). Things were different concerning the sacred slaves, who were totally dependent and who had no power of decision starting with their consecration, be it limited or unlimited. In other words, the relationship between them and the divinity was some kind of short-term, medium-term or permanent agreement. Numerous written evidence, mostly epigraphic, literary or numismatic, attests the presence of certain categories of persons consecrated to the gods, either as free people (hieroi), or as sacred slaves, as well as certain peculiar practices. Ritual emasculation represented a gesture related to the change of sexual identity and it probably originated in the Near East, from the Mesopotamian area. It basically brought closer the galli of the Great Mother to the gala, kugarrû and assinnu of the Mesopotamian world29 and to the current Indian hijra.30 Though emasculation did not change the legal status of those who chose to serve the goddess, actually seen as domina or despoina, meaning ‘mistress’,31 the Phrygian eunuchs remained completely on the periphery of Roman society in the period we examine. They had a status similar to that of courtesans and of prostitutes.32 This association is not a coincidence. During the day called diessanguinis (March 24th), the galli, according to Timotheus, by imitating Attis’ drama and to end up identifying with him, in order rid themselves of their primary sexual instincts, cut off the virile member.33 Following emasculation, a tattoo, in the form of a specific sign destined for sacred slaves, was usually applied immediately to the lower abdomen, the clearest cue regarding their consecration to a certain divinity.34 Although the first attestation for this type of emasculation dates to the end of the 5th century 29

Thomas 1984, 1526–27; Roscoe 1996, 197, 213–17; Joannès 2001, 694–97. Roller 1999, 320–25; Roscoe 1996, 206–13. 31 Roller 1999, 306; Lidov 1996, 130, 140–44; Tacheva-Hitova 1983, 95–96, no. 50. 32 Thomas 1984, 1526–27; Turcan 1998, 62–63 and 81. 33 Fishwick 1967, 144: ‘(…) 24th March was the dies sanguinis, the climatic point in the festival of Magna Mater. Apparently under Claudius the old “Roman” Megalensia (4th to 10th April) was replaced by a new festival of ‘Phrygian’ character which by the third and fourth centuries at least celebrated the death and resurrection of Attis.’ See also Burkert 1987, 81. 34 Turcan 1998, 49, 62; Carcopino 1942, 78. 30

PRIESTS AND DEDICATORS

147

and the myth of Attis dates to the Hellenistic period, Walter Burkert believed that it was really an older Hittite-Phrygian tradition, perpetuated within the temple-state of Pessinus, which had taken over and developed the practice.35 Considering this information, we might believe that their sexual life was over and that they must have lived as monks: in communities, practising abstinence, dedicating body and soul only to the deities they served. This is far from the case. Actually, it was the beginning of new and exciting experiences, because of their sexual reorientation. Apuleius shows in his Metamorphoses (8. 26–30) that life was characterised by orgies and self-flagellation, presenting clear cues to gutsy homosexual practices. A tall young man assaulted by a group of galli had practically no method of resisting them: ‘He had scarcely tasted his pottage when he began to discover their beastly customs and inordinate desire of luxury. For they surrounded the young man as he sat at the table and abused him, contrary to all nature and reason.’ Such a frenetic libido is also described by Lucian of Samosata (De Syria Dea 22) concerning the effeminate eunuchs of the goddess Atargatis. Will Roscoe and Amy Richlin believe that the term cinaedus (the equivalent of the Greek κίναιδος) in Apuleius’ text, as well as the phrase used by him referring to the group of galli, chorus cinaedorum, represent clear clues to the fact they practised not only pederasty but male prostitution.36 Justin the Martyr uses a similar term (εἰς κιναιδίαν ἀποκόπτονται) when he describes the infamy of their alleged piety in the moment of emasculation for these beings of’ ‘undetermined sex’: And any one who uses such persons, besides the godless and infamous and impure intercourse, may possibly be having intercourse with his own child, or relative, or brother. And there are some who prostitute even their own children and wives, and some are openly mutilated for the purpose of sodomy; and they refer these mysteries to the mother of the gods, and along with each of those whom you esteem gods there is panted a serpent, a great symbol and mystery’ (FirstApology 27).37

The same sexual ambiguity is treated by another Christian writer, Lactantius (Divine Institutes 1. 21. 16–19 [35]),38 in whose opinion they are no longer 35

Burkert 1985, 179. Roscoe 1996, 205; Richlin 1993; see also DKP 4, coll. 1192–1194 (s.v. Prostitution). 37 In this case, the allusion to the symbolism used within the Eastern cults is interesting, especially related to the iconography of the serpent, a motif that I will also discuss in the following chapters. 38 ‘From this kind of sacrifices those public rites are to be judged signs of no less madness; some of which are in honour of the mother of the gods, in which men mutilate themselves; others are in honour of Virtus, whom they also call Bellona, in which the priests make offsprings not with the blood of another victim, but with their own. For, cutting their shoulders, and thrusting forth drawn swords in each hand, they run, they are beside themselves, they are frantic. Quintilian therefore says excellently in his Fanatic: “If a god compels this, he does it in anger”. Are 36

148

CHAPTER 5

men or women; the public sanguinary ceremonies in the honour of Cybele and of the Anatolian Bellona (Mâ) was nothing but madness and people had better lived like cattle than worship such impious gods. For Firmicus Maternus (Deerroreprofanarumreligionum 4. 2), and then for Augustine (CityofGod 2. 7, 7. 28), these priests were nothing but impure and unchaste castrated debauchees (impuri et impudici), an impersonation of demential turpitude (insana perstrepit turpitudo), which made them not only cut off their own male member, but also to boast of it in frantic gesticulations. Beyond the fierceness with which Christian authors condemned these pagan priests, it is worth highlighting the fact that, from their perspective, the deeds they committed and the practices against nature had a religious connotation. Moreover, in the Eastern world, such actions dedicated to the god, be it hierogamy or not, were usually seen as an aspect of daily life and were not perceived as scandalous in any respect. On the contrary, they did what their profession required, just as the farmer cultivated the land, the potter made pots and the merchant traded. There is every reason to believe that the origin of the word gallos itself can constitute a clue to identifying the source of these practices. It does not derive from River Gallos, as Callimachus or Herodian believed,39 nor from the Anatolian Celtic ethnos, as we might be tempted to suppose given the geographical position of the main Anatolian sanctuaries dedicated to Cybele, nor is it due to some accidental homonymy.40 The word actually comes from the SumeroAkkadian term gallu or gala (usually spelled kalû in Akkadian). Their name was often associated with kettledrums and the bull sacrifice.41 These gala used the eme-salSumerian dialect, mainly destined for women. Furthermore, their Sumerian name was spelled UŠ.KU on tablets. However, and most ironically, the same signs could also read GIS.DUR, which clearly meant ‘penis’ and even these things sacred? Is it not better to live like cattle, than to worship deities so impious, profane, and sanguinary?’ 39 Callimachus fr.411; Herodian of Antioch HistoryoftheRomanEmpire 1. 11 (29); Burkert 1987, 146–47. 40 Ballester 2002. Ballester believes that *gala meant ‘end, limit, frontier’. Other authors derive the name of the Celts – including those of Asia Minor – from the root gal-, which, in Old Irish, had a multitude of meanings, including the notions of bravery, cloud, vapour, smoke, or the capacity to do something (Darbyshire, Mitchell and Vardar 2000, 77). See also Firmicus Maternus Deerroreprofanarumreligionum 3. 1. 41 Burkert 1987, 35–36, 146–47; 1979, 108–11, 198–99. Burkert refers to an interesting passage in the work of Pausanias (7. 17. 9), where there is a mention of a ‘secret’ of Dyme related to the deity Attis (which he calls Attes, a version used in Asia Minor) and to the name of his father, whom he identifies with Kalaos the Phrygian. The kettledrums and cymbal were musical instruments also used in Cybele’s cult by the mendicant priests of the goddess. One of the literary accounts is Clement of Alexandria Protrepticus 2. 24. 1.

PRIESTS AND DEDICATORS

149

‘anus’. On the other hand, the term gala was a homophone for a word meaning ‘vulva’.42 Further interpretations are unrestricted by imagination. Nonetheless, other hypotheses were also proposed. Gonzalo Rubio, for instance, believes that the Phrygian term gallos can be derived from the Indo-European root * w g hl, which means ‘skimming’ or even ‘cutting’.43 Gala/kalû, kugarrû or assinnu were missionary priests consecrated to the goddess Inanna/Ishtar and they were usually presented as effeminate travesties, homosexuals and eunuchs. Onward from the middle of the 3rd millennium BC, these gala specialised mostly in issues related to lamentations and sacred hymns, and they usually took part in the daily sacrifices of the temples. The ceremonies officiated by gala and kugarrûwere meant either to calm the anger of a divinity, or to stir the anger of another one, by executing a wild warlike dance (like the later Corybantes and galli or the adoring fanatics of the Anatolian Bellona-Mâ), which included self-flagellations or even emasculations with knives and daggers, mystical trances, etc. On the other hand, gala also had a role of monitoring the female personnel of the temples, mostly made up of sacred prostitutes.44 Jérôme Carcopino, followed by Garth Thomas, showed that the galli were not subordinated to the archigalli and that the two institutions were actually distinctive. Unlike the first, the archigalli could receive the Roman citizenship (as they were not subjected to ritual emasculation) and they could marry or maintain their previous marital status.45 They were not part of the sacred drama during the blood day, dies sanguinis. The galli did not benefit from strict organisation and they did not depend on a particular sanctuary; they were itinerant, just like the metragyrtai or ‘those who gather for the Mother’, also called kybeboi, meaning the ones possessed by the goddess.46 It appears that they did not have the same attributes as the priests and that they were merely ‘tolerated’; in reality, they were discredited members of Roman society (they were some kind of ‘lower priesthood’ at most) and they could not have regrouped within acknowledged religious associations such as those of the cannophori, dendrophori, hastiferi, cultores or religiosi. Hence, they could

42

Roscoe 1996, 213–17; Rubio 1999. Rubio 1999, 141. 44 Joannès 2001 686, 694–97. 45 Carcopino 1942, 78–79, 100–02; Thomas 1984, 1525–28. 46 Roller 1999, 165. Roller proposes the translation of the word by ‘those who gather for the Mother’, as the word is made of two terms: the first, derived from Μήτηρ (Meter), and the second, ἀγύρτης (agyrtes), from the verb ἀγείρειν (ageirein), which means ‘collecting, gathering’ (Roscoe 1996, 200; Burkert 1987, 178). 43

150

CHAPTER 5

only be part of the numerous categories of degrees and functions within the Metroac cult personnel.47 A different perspective was formulated more recently by Walter Burkert, Lynn Roller, Stephen Mitchell and Will Roscoe, etc., and it has been much better received than that of Carcopino. In their opinion, galli are nothing but common priests of the Metroac cult, a name that was often generalised for those who were part of the permanent sacerdotal class.48 They could retain their previous family or friendship relationships and they could be part of religious associations. One of the few inscriptions discovered so far that refers to galli49 was discovered at Kyzikos and it dates to 46 BC. It states that Soterides Gallos (or maybe the Gaul Soterides, Σωτερίδης γάλλος, in Vermaseren’s reading) dedicated a monument to a Great Mother identifiable with Cybele, Meter Kotiane, for listening to his prayer regarding Marcus Stlaccius, a life companion (ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἰδίου συμβίου) who had been taken prisoner of war. However, the word could also apply very well, for instance, to those who were married, thus underlying that fact that the two had a very close, intimate relationship.50 The Attishiereus51 and Battakes supervised a priestly college from as early as the Hellenistic period, but their functions certainly date to a previous time. At the beginning of the 2nd century, during the Roman campaigns in Asia Minor, the fanatici Galli and Galli Matris Magnae still conserved their traditional functions within the temple-state of Pessinus, with its role as a very important cultural and economic centre. Similar temples to that at Pessinus, with their own sacred territories, slaves and a hierarchy of the sacerdotal and civic functions, are known everywhere in Anatolia since the period of Hittite domination.52 Some Anatolian sacerdotal or temple-states even had the right of granting sanctuary to those who sought refuge in their precincts (asylia), such as those of Artemis Ephesia or of the goddess Mâ of Komana. A different but equally interesting situation concerns the mention of hierodules in the texts of Anatolian dedications on confession stelae in Lydia, Phrygia and Mysia. Inscriptions of this type indicate that the divinities invoked were perceived as supreme moral authorities who could intervene not only to protect the dead and their graves against potential profanation, but also to regulate the behaviour and social relations between the members of a certain 47

Carcopino 1942, 98–99; Thomas 1984, 1525–33. Burkert 1987, 35–36. 49 CCCA I, 287. 50 Carcopino 1942, 102–03; Roscoe 1996, 203; Bailly 1966, 1821. 51 CCCA I, 58, 60. Both inscriptions discovered at the site of ancient Pessinus, in the Armenian cemetery of Sivrihisar. 52 Roscoe 1996, 199; Götter 2001. 48

PRIESTS AND DEDICATORS

151

community.53 On the other hand, it was considered that the gods could have a decisive influence on individual destinies given their omnipotence. A dedication of Aphias, daughter of Theodoros, addressed to Meter Leto, discovered in the sanctuary of Apollo Lairbenos in Motella, clearly shows that the goddess was perceived as the one who ‘makes the impossible possible’.54 Hence, we can obtain useful information to enhance our knowledge of the religious psychology, institutions and mentality of the dedicators, of their spiritual needs or perspectives, as well as the way in which they constituted the imagery of the divine world in a rather different manner, at least partially, at the beginning of the Principate, from the views promoted in the urbanised settings on the western and southern coasts of Asia Minor. This difference in the views and lifestyle specific to the conservative rural areas of central Anatolia had been underlined in numerous studies.55 In these regions of Anatolia, the view of the divinities was centred on the idea of morality, which is why they usually appeared as a board or a council of gods.56 All other authorities, civil or military, were forbidden to intervene in any way that would undermine their authority and omnipotence on the world of the mortals.57 Otherwise, the consequences could be devastating for those who did not respect these elementary rules. Two examples are illustrative. The first is that of the sacred slave Trophimos, the one who dedicated a marble stele to the goddess Meter Hipta and to Zeus Sabazios. The monument was discovered at Ayazviran, near Kula, in the north-east of Lydia.58 We cannot be certain what right the dedicator had over the sacred slave, but that he ordered his arrest or capture by a civil or military authority, probably by a magistrate,59 stirred up the wrath of gods, who punished him with an eye condition. The second example refers to a woman of Motella, whose name could not be deciphered on the fragmentary text of the inscription. By all appearances, she brought soldiers into the sanctuary, either to be protected from enemies60 or to get revenge on someone;61 for 53

Mitchell 1993 I, 189; Gordon 2004. BWK 122. 55 Dignas 2003; Marquardt 1892, 235–326; Sartre 1998; Petit 1974 I, 264–73; Lozano 2002; Mitchell 1993 I, 195: ‘The villages of rural Asia Minor lived a life that differed radically from that of the cities. Language and nomenclature, diet and lifestyle, cults and patterns of authority marked them as worlds apart. Villagers will have been regarded with a mixture of contempt, suspicion, and incompression by most city dwellers.’ 56 NIS 23–24; Mitchell 1993 I, 189–90; Lane Fox 1997, 136. 57 NIS 26. In the opinion of Robert, ‘dans ces sociétés paysannes et religieuses (…) les délits de toute sorte sont jugés et punis par les dieux’. 58 BWK 49 = CCIS II, 36. 59 NIS 26; CCIS III, pp. 17–18 for commentaries; see also Bailly 1966, 712. 60 BWK 114; NIS 26. 61 Mitchell 1993 I, 194. 54

152

CHAPTER 5

this gesture, she was justly punished: ‘Because I, … from Motella, daughter of Timotheos, brought up the soldier into the shrine wanting to defend myself against the enemies, I was for this reason punished and saved by the god, and I dedicated (the stele) thanksgiving’ (8.6.148). Lane Fox insisted that a great part of the dedicators of these inscriptions enjoyed a rather solid social and financial position within the predominantly rural communities, as they could afford all the expenses of setting up and inscribing these stelae.62 Yet, there were also numerous sacred slaves (hierodouloi) or hieroi rich enough to afford such a luxury. The first instance is that of a stele discovered at Sandal in Meonia, set up by the sacred slave Trophimos at the request of Zeus Sabazios.63 A truly captivating example is that of Theodoros, who was imprisoned on the orders of the gods and who was punished with an eye condition because of his sexual excesses, which his function prohibited, especially with young, unmarried girls (Ariagne, Arethusa).64 However, after he brought offerings to redeem his sins and mostly to propitiate the gods or to earn their favours, he was set free by Zeus and by the Great Mên Artemidorou: In the year 320, in the month of Panemos, on the twelfth day. In accordance with the fact that I was apprised by the gods, (namely) by Zeus and by the Great Mên of Artemidoros. ‘I have punished Theodoros on his eyes according to the transgressions he committed’. I had intercourse with Trophime, the slave of Haplokomas, wife of Euthyches, in the praetorium (= pletorin). I removed the first transgression (by offering) a sheep, a partridge and a mole. The second transgression: Even though I was a slave of the gods in Nonou, I had intercourse with Ariagne, who was unmarried. He removed (the transgression) with a piglet (and) a tuna. At the third transgression, I had intercourse with Arethusa, who was unmarried. He removed (the transgression) with a hen (or cock), a pigeon; with a kypros of a blend of wheat and barley and one prokhos of wine. Being pure, he gave a kypros of wheat to the priests and one prokhos. I took Zeus as intercessor. (He said): ‘Behold! I hurt his sight because of his deeds, but now he has propitiated the gods and written down the events on a stele and paid for his transgressions’. Asked by the council [the god (= Mên of Artemidoros?) proclaimed]: ‘I am merciful because my stele is raised on the day I appointed. You can open the prison; I will release the convict after one year and ten months’ (4.2.120).

The existence of these categories, hieroi and sacred slaves, was already a commonplace in Asia Minor in the Hellenistic period and at the beginning of the Principate, despite the fact that they were a small minority within the population. They could be born with this social status or they could be brought 62 63 64

Lane Fox 1997, 136. BWK 77 = CCIS II, 34. BWK 5.

PRIESTS AND DEDICATORS

153

into the service of the gods by their secular masters or even by their own parents. The most numerous and compact groups of inscriptions comes from the sanctuary of Apollo Lairbenos near Motella,65 the sanctuary of the goddess Meter Phileis near Philadelphia,66 and from the temple-states of the two Komanas (Pontic and Cappadocian).67 Here, it is useful to compare two situations regarding the lower cultual categories consecrated to gods, apparently similar, related but very different. The first case is that of the eunuch-priests of the Great Mother Goddesses generally associated to fertility functions: gala/kalû, kugarru and assinnu of Inanna/Ishtar, the eunuchs of the goddess Atargatis (Lucian De Syria Dea 6, 22), the galli of Cybele, the megabyzoi of Artemis Ephesia and the current Indian hijra consecrated to the divinity Bahucharā Mātā. The second case is that of the ‘sacred functionaries’ (hieroi) and of the hierodules, serving the same lunar divinities (including Mên), as well as others, unrelated to the lunar typology: Zeus Sabazios, Zeus Orkamanites, Zeus Osgoa, Zeus Panamaros, (Helios) Apollo Lairbenos, etc. The two categories had important administrative attributes, contributing to the temples’ income through their public activities (mendicancy and prostitution, respectively), despite the fact that they had modest positions within the lower echelons of the cult personnel in their temples. Their sexual life was enlivened by, among other things, orgies, sacred prostitution, obscenities and homosexuality, or, in some cases, a change of sexual identity. Their right of association is still an open question: it was unlikely for the galli, but normal for the hierodules. Their legal status separates them. For the galli, for instance, the consecration act was wild and irreversible. The act did not change their legal status. In contrast, for the hierodules this change was visible and it marked the adoption of another status within the conservative and ordered society of temple-states such as Venasa, Olba, the two Komanas, Zela, Acilisena, Ameria, Pessinus and Antioch, or the local sanctuaries of Anatolia (Tralles, Mylasa, Labraunda, Aizanoi, Ephesos, Miletos, Pergamon). However, this position was reversible because service to the divinities could be limited to a certain period, after which they became free of all obligations, though these services could also be unlimited, for the rest of their lives.

65 66 67

Ceylan and Ritti 1997; Miller 1985; BWK 106–24. Malay 1985; BWK 83–95. Mitchell 1993 I, 193.

154

CHAPTER 5

THE DEDICATORS IndividualsandHumanCommunities:Origin,Name,Age Name and Origin. Most of those who went to the rural sanctuaries or to those of small Phrygian or Lydian towns came from the surrounding areas. This is confirmed by the typology of their names and by a specific ethnic name (ethnikon). Most of them were free persons and citizens of the localities indicated by their ethnic name. Names in the south-western part of Asia Minor, whence, in practice, we have extracted most examples (Lydia, Phrygia, Pisidia, Pamphylia), reflect, on the one hand, the strong mixture of populations in the region and, on the other, the balance between the use of indigenous and Greek names. It is also worth mentioning the presence of multiple orthographic versions for the same name of person, for both theophoric and epichoric names.68 Theophoric names are more numerous in the predominant diffusion area of a particular divinity, derived from its name or from its equivalents (for instance, those coming from Athena or Mâ in Cappadocia, those based on the names of Artemis or Mên for south-western Anatolia). In the case of Mithra, the derived names of persons are relatively frequent, though the evidence perse related to the presence of the Mithraic cult in Anatolia is relatively scarce. It is also the case that the presence in the same area of the versions Mai-/Mei-/Mēn-, for both the name of the divinity Mên and that of persons, is more evidence of the Iranian origin of the cult.69 Age of the Dedicators. In certain situations, the formulation of the inscription lets us know whether the person was old. For instance, at Ayazviran in the north-east of Lydia, Aurelius Glykon was honoured by a sacred association (hierosdoumos), together with his son Dionysios and his grandson Chamason, for the many benefactions to the association and for honouring the gods. In this case, the first character honoured must have had a fine age, as he was also called the ‘first among the ancestral priests’: In the year 308, in the month of Panemos, on the eighteenth day. The sacred association honoured Aurelius Glykon, son of Dionysios, first among the ancestral priests of Artemis Anaeitis the cognate of god, with Dionysios, his son, and Chamason, his grandchild, for his (pious) service to the gods and for the beneficial deeds that had been done and will be done (by them) for the sacred association (5.2.15). 68 Ebiktetos for Epiktetos (1.6.8); Phybos for Phoibos (5.2.4; 5.2.5); Neikon/Neike for Nikon/Nike (3.2.1; 8.6.68); Kyrilla (2.6.1)/Kyrila (3.6.72); Melitine (5.2.15; 5.2.21)/Meltine (5.2.2; 5.2.6; 5.2.7; 3.2.13; 8.6.68)/Merteine (Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 40–41, no. 50). For the names in the area and for the ethnic situation, see Mitchell 1993 I, 174–75. 69 See also Boyce and Grenet 1991, 272–76; and the most interesting example, of Menophilos (‘the friend of the Moon’), Maidates’ father (‘the one given by the Moon’) at p. 276.

PRIESTS AND DEDICATORS

155

However, cases where exact age is mentioned are rare. This is all the more significant in case of funerary inscriptions. For instance Onesiphoros, mentioned on a stele at Kara Selendi dated AD 193/4, lived only 25 years, being honoured by his mother Atalante. The information is important not only from this perspective, but also for the fact that it attests the quality of Anaitis the water goddess, meaning of the humid fertility principle, just like her counterpart Anahita of the Persian world. Anaitis is called here ‘Anaitis of the sacred water’ (5.2.64). Adolescence is sometimes indicated explicitly, sometimes it can be deduced. Aurelius Eugenetor, the son of Elpidianos, the one whom the main institutions of Lydian Philadelphia, the Council and People, honour with a monument (very probably a statue), was one of the victors of the competitions organised within the great imperial celebrations of Anaitis (tamegalaSebastaAnaiteia). The honorific decree mentions him as philadelphos and ephebe, so he must have been aged 17 or 18. Another teenager is mentioned in the north-east of Lydia, at Kula, in a confession inscription dedicated by her mother, Syntyche, daughter of Apollonios and of Meltine (thus a free woman). The story itself is captivating, for it represents another example of the perpetuation of the parents’ sins upon the children and, implicitly, on the connection between the generations, as we will see in the following examples. Herakleides was 13 years old when a hyacinth stone was stolen from his parents’ house. After begging the god, Mên Artemidoros Axiot(t)enos, the thief, probably a girl of around the same age called Apphia, was discovered and harshly punished after only one month. The type of punishment is still unclear, either it was the death penalty inflicted by the god himself or a loss of virginity.70 The divinity then manifested its power again by punishing the son of the victim, for Syntyche’s having kept the punishment secret, thus refusing to ‘advertise’ for the god, in order to make him known and venerated: Syntyche, wife of Theogenes, (dedicated this stele) to Mên Artemidoros Axiot(t)enos. When her husband, Theogenes, found a hyacinth stone, it remained in their house and then was stolen. And when she was searching for it and inquiring she prayed to Mên Axiottenos for her to find satisfaction; and it was found burned and broken, wrapped in a linen shirt, put by the thief in the place where it lied when (yet) undamaged. And thus the god manifested his power on the thirty-first day, tore up Apphia, daughter of Glykon, who was a girl, and who had committed the theft and did this. And because she (i.e. Syntyche) defied the god’s power, since she had been asked by the girl’s mother to keep silent, the god also took revenge for this, (namely) because Syntyche did not publicise and exalt the god. Therefore he punished her child, Herakleides, of thirteen, and made her set up the report of 70

Chaniotis 1990, 129–30; Gordon 2004, 192–93.

156

CHAPTER 5

the punishment at his (sacred) place, because she rather acted on people’s interest than on god’s. It is Syntyche, the daughter of Apollonius and Meltine, who has brought the punishment to public knowledge (4.2.62).

Diomas, son71 and heir of a homonymous person, mentioned on a limestone pedestal in AD 205 at Asartepe in Phrygia (8.6.73), was probably also a teenager: ‘In the year 289, in the fourth month, on the seventeenth day. To Helios Apollo Lairmenos I, the hieros Diomas, son of Daphnos, consecrate Diomas, my son and heir. If anyone challenges (this), he/she will pay to the god 2500 denarii as fine and another 2500 to the Imperial Treasury. With good fortune.’ He was consecrated to Helios Apollo Lairmenos, probably becoming a hieros, by a relative who had this status himself. A very important indication is that regarding the right of this category of consecrated persons to own property and fortune and have a family, a situation incompatible with the servile status.72 A confession inscription datable to AD 210/11 mentions that two brothers, Metrophanes and Flavianes, sons of Philippikos, lost their parents and then they were followed by moneylenders, who stole written documents and copies of documents from their parents’ house (4.2.59).73 When those moneylenders sequestrated the orphans, the villagers of Tazenoi set up the sceptre in the temple, thus binding the perpetrators. The relief on the stele illustrates two characters: one as tall as an adult, bringing an offering to the altar, the other (most certainly a child, judging by the size, with right arm raised as in prayer. The fact that they are called orphans in the text shows that both or at least one of them was a minor when they were left, with his brother or some male relative able to become this guardian. They could not have both been children, as they would not have been able to support each other, considering that they lived alone. The inscription does not mention whether the incident occurred soon after their parents left them. The most probable hypothesis is that the image on the stele is an accurate representation of the two dedicators; the elder must already have been older than a teenager, given that he became the head of the family. There are two situations where the age of the dedicators is mentioned without knowing for certain their real age when the monuments were set up. Both inscriptions are part of the confession category. The first, discovered at Sandal and dated to AD 118/9,74 mentions that Metrodoros was required to set up another stele for a goddess, to replace the one that he had damaged when he 71

Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 62. For the legal and social condition of these hieroi, see Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 5–6, 50–51, 61–62; Ricl 2003a, 89; Dignas 2002, 238–43; Debord 1982, 78–83. 73 BWK 35 = CMRDM I, 62. 74 BWK 78 (with fig.) = Diakonoff 1979, 154–55, no. D1. 72

PRIESTS AND DEDICATORS

157

was a child: ‘In 230, in the month of Panemos. Metrodoros, son of Glykon, broke a small stele of the goddess when he was a child. She asked him to set up another one instead’ (5.2.60). The image on the monument immortalises the incident: the rest of the relief depicts the left arm of a child, meaning of the guilty person. The second, from AD 160/1, indicates the atonement sacrifice offered as a triplet (triphonos) by Phosphoros, for having committed a sin when he was six.75 Numerous dedications, ex-votos, confession inscriptions and katagraphai refer to children as members of a certain family or as persons who were consecrated by a relative, by adoptive parents, etc., to a divinity as hierodouloi, hieroi or hieroi kai eleutheroi.76 The indication of the exact age of a child, very rare, can also be accompanied by details of their social and legal status. Thus, Onesimos, son of Onesimos in Motella, consecrates his foster son (threptos), Synphoros (11 years old) to Helios Apollo Lairbenos Epiphanes, a divinity called in this case ruler of the city of Motella,77 clearly indicating this legal wardship on the main sanctuary of the divinity in the south of Phrygia: In the year 321, in the seventh month, on the thirtieth day. Aurelius, son of [O]nesimos from Mote[l]a let go, gave up on, [and consecra]ted to the manifest [god] Helios Apollo Lairmenos, protector of the city of Mote[la], his nursling, Synphoros, aged 11, and nobody can object to it. If anyone challenges the consecration, he/she will pay 2500 (denarii) as fine to the Imperial Treasury and 2500 to the god (8.6.53).

Taking into account the previous legal status of the father, the boy was going to become a hieros. Unlike him, Merteine (a popular form for Meltine or Melitine), a girl aged only five, was probably consecrated as a sacred slave, given that the term that characterises her, korasion (κοράσιον),78 was used to designate the young female slaves: ‘I (consecrate) the little girl called Merteine, aged five, to Heleios Apo[llo Lairmenos?], the protect[or] of the city of [Motel]la, according to the command of the god. If anyone challenges, he/she will pay to the god 2500 (denarii) as fine [and] 2500 to the Imperial 75 BWK 55: ‘Great is the Mother who gave birth to Meis; great is the Heavenly Meis, Meis of Artemidoros who rules over Axiotta and his power! As the son of Artemas, P(h)osphoros, while being six he put on an impure clothing, the god inquired; and a triphonon (took away his transgression). And he wrote on the stele about the god’s powers. In the year 245, in the month of Panemos, on the twelfth day.’ We do not know with certainty what the triad meant, but it is also mentioned on another confession inscription, with an unknown place of discovery (as in this case), but assumed to be somewhere in Kollyda (BWK 6). A similar situation, of atoning for sin through a nonad, is that of 4.2.118. 76 Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 62. 77 Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 36–38, no. K 46 (AD 237). 78 Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 40–41, no. K 50. The inscription dates to the 3rd century AD.

158

CHAPTER 5

Treasury (8.6.57). As in the previous inscription, Heleios(!) Apollo Lairbenos is considered the ruler of the city of Motella. Such child slaves were used for unpleasant tasks like guarding the cattle or as swineherds, despite their young age. A slave, whose name is unknown, appears on a confession inscription dated AD 114/5, discovered at Ayazviran (in the north-east of Lydia) dedicated to Mother Anaeitis, ‘the ruler of Azita’ and to Meis Tiamou. He was only five years old and he was the property of Hermogenes and Apollonios, sons of Apollonios Midas (5.2.12 = 4.2.12).79 Children or descendants in general are mentioned on inscriptions also precisely to indicate the connection between generations. This could have either positive or negative connotations. Sometimes children are those who atone for the parents’ sins.80 A certain Polion stated on one confession inscription, possibly dedicated at Kollyda in AD 238/9 to Zeus Oreites megas and to Mên Axiottenos, that he managed to atone for his sins and, thus, to propitiate the gods: ‘I have propitiated the gods for the sake of my children’s children and the descendants of my descendants.’81 Another situation concerns the transmission of knowledge from one generation to another. On a very fragmentary inscription of Sarıhüyük, which dates to the Imperial period, there is a mention of such successive generations (‘children of the children’) together in relation to the transmission of knowledge by the magi of Mithra (2.5.1).82 Finally, in certain conflicts or in specific funerary imprecations, the curse could concern the wrongdoer, his family or him and all of his descendants: ‘to feel the wrath of Apollo and of the mistress Anaeitis upon the children’s children and the descendants of their descendants’ (5.2.65).83 Kinships:NaturalandAdoptedChildren There is a high occurrence of adopted children in dedications of the sanctuary of Apollo Lairbenos at Motella, though there are practically similar exam79

BWK 68 (with fig.) = TAM V.1, 317 = Diakonoff 1979, 145–46, no. 11. BWK 9, 24. 81 BWK 9: ‘Pol(l)ion (dedicates this) to the Great Zeus Oreites and to Mên Axiottenos who rules as king in Perkos. As I was wrong and I iniquitously overstepped the border without permission, he was punished by the gods, in the year 323, in the month of Dystros, on the twentieth day. He removed the transgression with a triphonon consisting of a mole, a sparrow and a tuna; when the god-sent insanity vanished and he recovered, he set up the stele: a modius of wheat, a prokhos of wine. For the meal of the priests: a kypros and a half of wheat, a prokhos of wine, peas and salad; and I have propitiated the gods for the sake of my children’s children and the descendants of my descendants.’ 82 RECAM II, 404; Gordon 1994, 470. 83 IGSK 52, 66. 80

PRIESTS AND DEDICATORS

159

ples throughout the entire Anatolian world. Most of the time, they are mentioned in inscriptions as threptoi (8.6.10; 5.2.57 = 4.2.107; 8.6.67; 8.6.68; 8.6.71; 8.6.72; 8.6.151; 8.6.155), but they also appear as tethrammenoi (8.6.3; 8.6.6; 8.6.8), thremmenoi (3.5.1; 4.2.113), threpsai (3.6.27), trophimoi, trophei or syntrophoi (4.2.2).84 Names such as Threptos or Threptius an also appear as proper names (1.1.26; 1.4.12). In most cases, there are mentions of the good relationships between these children and their adoptive families, given that the children were mentioned besides their parents in dedications (5.2.8; 5.2.27). On one of the funerary stelae containing imprecations, the adoptive children are considered the most precious assets (4.2.113). Nevertheless, the relationship with adopted children was not always among the happiest. Sometimes very serious conflicts appeared. Following such a conflict, Ioulia ends up cursing the child in her care, Onesime, considering that she had the right to; however, when she did not get an answer from the gods, she asked them about it and they ‘came down on her’; afterwards, she changed her attitude and venerated them.85 ReligiousandProfessionalAssociations In Anatolia, there are quite numerous examples of religious and professional associations, but seldom explanations about their specific functions.86 Among the professional associations worth mentioning are those of Milesian fishermen (ὁ στόλος τῶν σωληνοκεντῶν: 1.1.13) and Milesian gardeners (ὁ στατίων τῶν κατὰ πόλιν κηπουρῶν: 1.1.12) and the sacred corporation of wool-workers (ἡ ἱερεὰ φυλὴ τῶν ἐριουργῶν: 5.2.55); among the religious ones, sacred associations such as hieroidoumoi (4.2.43 = 5.2.23) or the holy and new community (ἱερὰ συμβίωσις καὶ νεωτέρα: 4.2.86; 4.2.87), the association of ritual purifiers (οἱ καταλουστικοί: 4.2.5; 4.2.52)87 related to ceremonial ablutions, that of sacred symbol-bearers (οἱ συνβολαφόροι: 5.2.39),88 that of the mastigophori (οἱ μαστειγοφόροι: 7.7.25) and the association of young friends of angels (φιλανγέλων νεωτέρων συνβίωσις: 3.6.54; 3.6.59; 3.6.61). On the other hand, there is also a series of professions and functions 84 See also the introduction to MAMA IX, lxiv; Diakonoff 1979, 162; Robert 1955, 35–36; Guinea 1998; IGSK 52, 37. 85 BWK 20; Herrmann and Varinlioğlu 1984, 13, no. 9. Petzl 1994 interprets the verb as ‘to come down on’, while Herrmann and Varinlioğlu believes that it means to ‘overlook’ (the request of Iulia, the dedicator). 86 For functions and statuses, see Ricl 2003a, 92. 87 See also 5.2.1. Rostad 2006a, 171–72; Diakonoff 1979, 166, no. 1. 88 Herrmann and Malay 2007, 24, 97; Diakonoff 1979, 166, no. 19.

160

CHAPTER 5

of individuals, such as that of blacksmith (χαλκεύς: 1.6.7), physician (ἰατρός: 1.4.5; 6.1.1), dyer (βαφεύς: 1.2.20), trader (μονοπώλης: 1.5.4), stone-cutter (λατύπος: 3.6.31; 3.6.32), wool-plucker (νακοτίλτης: 5.2.49), tenant-in-chief of the imperial estates (μισθωτής: 10.7.5; 10.7.6), judge (κριτής: 3.3.2), officer (diogmites), irenarch,89 agoranome (ἀγορανόμος: 7.7.38), cavalry soldier (στρατιώτης εἱππεύς: 3.2.4), centurion (ἑκατόνταρχος: 1.4.9), prefect of a cavalry wing (ἔπαρχος ἱππέων: 7.7.23), military tribune of the second legion Traiana (χειλίαρχος λεγ. β΄ τὴν μάμμην: 7.7.23), praefectus fabrum and procurator (7.7.3; 1.4.2), judge and consultant (7.7.25). One interesting case is that of the cult associations such as doumos, of which there are records in Asia Minor and in the Lower Danube area, and which grouped worshippers of different divinities, such as Cybele, Artemis Anaitis90 or Hosios kai Dikaios,91 as they appear in inscriptions. In the dictionary definition, doumoswas a Phrygian term that defined either ‘a religious association of women, in Asia Minor related to the cult of the Great Mother’92 equivalent to those called mindis and speira, or a member of such an association. This is quite misleading; as there is no such relation. In Mihail Kogălniceanu, there is an inscription from the Dobrudja dated to the end of the 2nd/beginning of the 3rd century AD that which mentions a donation made by Aurelius Valerianus, who was called paterdumi, and by Flavia, materdumi.93 In this case, sacrati dumicould be similar to certain dumopireti, as the inscription of Lucius Oppius Maximus – a priest of the Great Mother of Gods who made a donation for the associations of dendrophori and dumopiretesinNovae–seems to indicate.94 The term dumopiretes makes us think of the Persian priests of Anahita (pyraithoi) that Strabo mentions (15. 3. 15). As for the inscription of Serdica, the text that survived is fragmentary, thus allowing different interpretations.95 We cannot know for certain whether the phrase hierosdoumos (ἱερὸς δοῦμος) indicated an equivalent to the above-mentioned sacratidumi96 or a hierodule of Anaitis, like Aurelius Glykon on a Lydian inscription.97 Maybe the second case is the most likely. On the other hand, records referring to the presence of hierodules belonging to lunar divinities in the Lower Danube and Balkan 89

BWK 13. Pippidi 1969, 228–33. 91 MAMA V, 183. 92 Chantraine 1983, 295. 93 CCCA VI, 454 = Tacheva-Hitova 1983, 78–80, no. 14 (that indicates the place of discovery at TropaeumTraiani). 94 CCCA VI, 385 = Tacheva-Hitova 1983, 73–74, no. 4. 95 Tacheva-Hitova 1983, 116–18, no. 101; CMRDM I, D 3 = CCCA VI, 342 = IGB V, 1925. 96 Tacheva-Hitova 1983, 78–80, no. 14. 97 Pippidi 1969, 232–33. 90

PRIESTS AND DEDICATORS

161

Peninsula are very sparse. For instance, there is a Macedonian shrine raised by a certain female hierodule of the Mother of Gods, Ariagne (Αριάγνη), together with her son, to Theos Hypsistos, after an order received from the latter (κατ᾽ ἐπιταγὴν Θεοῦ Ὑψίστου).98 Another shrine, discovered at Leukopetra near Beroia, dated AD 311, mentions Θεοδότης εἱερόδουλος Μητρὸς Θεῶν.99

98 99

Ustinova 1999, 221; Tataki 1988, 481; SEG 38, 583;CCCA VI, 179; Papazoglou 1981. SEG 27, 292; CCCA VI, 187.

PART III THE WORLD OF DIVINE IN CHANGE

CHAPTER 6

CATEGORIES OF INSCRIPTIONS REGARDING SOLAR AND LUNAR CULTS

DEDICATIONS AND EX-VOTOS There are slight differences between common dedications and ex-votos in content and formal aspect. In the case of the former, when there is an explicit mention that they were meant for something or someone in particular (using the preposition hyper), they denote there was an expectation of the dedicator and an unfulfilled prayer.1 In contrast, when this type of phrase appears in an ex-voto, the prayer was already listened to and fulfilled by the divinity, and the dedicator simply attests it, often with acknowledgments. Votive inscriptions underline the reciprocity of the relationship between man and divinity and, at the same time, the personal character of this relationship. Not only does man trust the god, but also he perceives him as a personal god. However, he believes it is his duty to keep his promise of setting up a monument, a stele, an altar, to bring any other kind of offering promised only when the god listens and answers to his prayer. If the prayers are not answered, he becomes free of all obligations, of any promise made to the gods in this matter. Burkert goes as far as to talk about a ‘votive religion’ that characterises this personalised relationship, thus underlying the intensity of the religious experiences and the otherwise public character of these promises.2 From a strictly formal perspective, in both cases terms like ‘I gave’ (ἀπέδωκα) (for instance, in 1.3.5) or ‘I raised/dedicated/set up’ (ἀνέθηκα) (1.3.6) followed by the type of consecrated object were frequently in use. There are also curious situations where the same inscription mentions that the offerings had to be ‘brought’ to certain divinities as expiations (ἀποτείνειν), but ‘consecrated’ (ἀναφέρειν) to others (6.9.1).3 Most votive inscriptions end 1

Rostad 2006a, 160–61. Burkert 1987, 12–29; Rostad 2006a, 158–68. 3 Debord 2005, 24–25; Aydaş 2002, 24. Offerings had to be brought to the goddess Mâ, but consecrated to Anaitis, to Zeus of Thymnasa, and to Zeus Pharnavas; the last is a version of Ahura Mazda. 2

166

CHAPTER 6

with the indication of the vow made (ἐυχή). Other times, εὐξάμενος is used to express the same action, maybe even consolidating the idea of anteriority (for instance, in 1.4.2; 2.4.1; 3.6.8; 3.6.12; 3.6.36),4 or it is shown that the dedicators are the ones bound by the vow (1.4.12). There are also situations where εὐξάμενος and ἐυχή appear in the same text (1.6.14; 3.2.1; 3.6.49). The phrase εὐχῆς χάριν (1.4.11; 1.4.14) or other terms that express the gratitude for the divinity are also used. Votive dedications and inscriptions contain several types of useful information: (1) Those regarding a person or group who perform(s) the act properly, meaning who brings the offering, raises an altar, a stele, a defence tower or even a triumphal arch, who restores a ruined temple or a house of prayer (proseuche); (2) Information on a person or persons for whom the dedicator is praying (usually a member of the family, friends, neighbours, or a person whose name is made known but whose connection to the dedicator is not: 3.6.117) or generic formulas (‘for everybody’, ‘for all living creatures’, etc.); (3) The type of event or the external factor that made that person or group address the god; (4) The dedicator’s wish: if he wants to thank the god for answering a previous prayer or if he asks for something that he hopes to get in the future (3.2.20).5 FUNERARY INSCRIPTIONS Funerary epitaphs are meant to honour and perpetuate the memory of the deceased and at times to praise their deeds. Most of the funerary inscriptions of Roman Anatolia contain the personal data of the buried person, lineage, functions, age, even social status and the ethnikon or an indication of the place of origin, and eventually the mention the good actions the deceased performed during their lifetime. This type of funerary inscription, whether simple or in verse, is quite common in every part of the Roman Empire, including the Greek-speaking areas of the East. Less common are situations where the posthumous homage of family members ends with an imprecation addressed to those who would commit an abominable deed concerning a funerary stele or a 4 5

See also McLean 2005, 254. ‘Glykia, for the eyes, to the Holy and Just one, dedicated (this) to redeem the vow.’

CATEGORIES OF INSCRIPTIONS REGARDING SOLAR AND LUNAR CULTS

167

tomb. In one of these cases the wrath of (Mên/Meis) Axi(o)ttenos was believed to come down on the wrongdoer.6 The inscription, written down on February 28th AD 226 on a marble stele with semi-circular pediment and from an unidentified place in the north-east of Lydia, represents a funeral homage addressed to the spouses Aurelius Diogenes and Aurelia Secunda. It could be translated as: In the year 380, in the month of Xandikos, on the eighth day. Aurelius Diogenes and Aurelia Secunda, revealers of wisdom, blessed with good children, united in marriage, as ordered by (Zeus) Kronion, were honoured by their children Aurelius Agathopous and Aurelia Iouliane and Aurelia Trophime, the daughter-in-law, and those who have already descended in the tenebrous darkness: Aurelius Diogenes, the one who passed away recently, Aurelius Kalandion, the one loved by all, and the grandsons and relatives, Aurelius Diogenianos, who kept an eternal affection, to the joy of his parents; the fatherland admires the well-worthy son of his parents. Should anyone commit a sin against these things, i.e. against the stele and the grave, he will have to deal with the wrath of (Mên) Axiottenos (4.2.40).

Judging by the year of the dedication and by the names, they must have become citizens following Caracalla’s edict of AD 212. All the members of the family, both parents and children, are Aurelii. I believe that the focus is precisely on their status as peregrini, of free people prior to citizenship, when the inscription underlines that the union between the parents had been legitimate, according to the decision of Zeus Kronion. The two other elements on which the laudatory discourse focuses are their moderation throughout their lives, since they are called revealers of wisdom, and the family values which they cherished, as they had been blessed with commendable children, whom they nourished and educated. Two of the children had been commendable too: Aurelius Kalandion was ‘the one loved by all, and the grandsons and relatives’, while the other, Aurelius Diogenianus, who preserved an ‘eternal love’ for his parents, is admired by the civic body of the city, the homeland, as a ‘worthy son of his parents’. However, together with another brother of theirs, Aurelius Diogenes, ‘the one who passed away recently’, they had died as well, as ‘they already went down to the tenebrous darkness’. Only two children and the daughter-in-law of the two spouses were still alive when the inscription was set up. Hence, this is posthumous homage to certain members of these families, in a private context, with an exaltation of the values of family life and the civic spirit, and the qualities of the two spouses, by reason of which they were ‘blessed with commendable children’.

6

Petzl 2002, 99–102, no. 3; Moga 2014.

168

CHAPTER 6

Equally rare was the situation when a funerary imprecation epitaph ended with a blessing formula,7 a fact that could suggest, according to Sarah Cormack, not only that the curses were believed to be powerful and effective, but also ‘that the dead could also bestow favours to the living’.8 Strubbe also underlined another positive aspect that differentiated Anatolian beliefs of the local Hellenised populations from those of the Greek mainland: the deceased were believed in Anatolia to live a proper life in the tomb after they had passed away and their new residence actually represented their home to dwell in.9 This could explain, I believe, both the almost fanatical care to protect the graves using all the religious-magical and legal methods at hand (like preventive curse ceremonies and the legal fines to be paid), and the conviction that the deceased could communicate from the other life with their living kin and other members of the community so as to bestow favours and blessings upon them. At least three inscriptions record the existence of these curse ceremonies that are also currently mentioned in confession inscriptions as well. Thus the fact that ‘the curse and the law were set’, as written on a Phrygian funerary inscription leads to such an assumption,10 while instances where the sceptres of the gods (which actually represented the power of the deity, hedynamistou theou) were set up in case someone should commit a sin against the stele or the tomb could illustrate the presence of this kind of preventative ceremony: ‘In the year 178, in the month of Deios, on the fourth day. Ammias the wife and the children Apollonios and Demophilos, honoured Patera and Tryphaina, the nursling; to prevent anybody from doing any harm to the stele or on the monument, they set up the sceptre of Axiottenos and Anaeitis’ (5.2.57). As I previously mentioned, according to their content two categories of funerary inscription are encountered in the Anatolian area during the Roman period. First, there are those encountered on funerary stelae, which contain eulogies addressed to members of the family or of a community recounting the virtues of the deceased or for the good relationships they had with those still alive. Secondly, it is worth mentioning funerary monuments that contain curse formulas. Another classification is provided by Strubbe when we take into account the presence or absence of any mention of the types of punishment envisaged. Thus, we can identify a nonspecific group of inscriptions, which contain imprecations that do not clearly specify the type of punishment desired or intended to be applied to the perpetrator, and a second group where the 7

IGSK 52, 155. S. Cormack 2004, 126. 9 Strubbe 1991, 40–41. 10 IGSK 52, 231; IGSK 52, 61 = CMRDM I, 71 = Diakonoff 1979, 148, no. 21; IGSK 52, 62. 8

CATEGORIES OF INSCRIPTIONS REGARDING SOLAR AND LUNAR CULTS

169

sought for punishment is specified.11 The classifications can be refined further by considering the content of these inscriptions, especially the categories of interdictions and the outcomes for potential culprits. The typology of information from an inscription that contains imprecations against tomb desecrators is generally: (1) The first mentioned was usually the name of the deceased, then that of the person who raised the monument, maybe even his wish and the invitation to respect his wishes; (2) Then the condition was expressed, introduced by the formulas ‘if someone’ or ‘if anyone’, as in the consecration inscriptions (katagraphai) and what could determine a hostile action; (3) The curse formulas, which could take various forms and referred to both this life and the afterlife; (4) Sometimes the fine that the grave violator would have to pay was also stated, and it ranged normally between 1000 and 2500 denarii. Any potential denouncer of a violation could also receive at times an amount of a third of the collected revenues. We can readily notice that this typological pattern was not always strictly or rigorously observed; in some instances the conditions or interdictions are mingled with the envisaged curses and with the wishes for the perpetrators and the fees to be paid to the local temple and/or the Imperial Treasury. For example, on a funerary epitaph of Theodotos and Ammia from Aphrodisias, following numerous interdictions related to the opening of the grave after the death of the owners, burial of another person, agreement to make someone else administer the monument and consent to removing the earthly remains, there was a formula stating that the potential culprit was to be considered impious, accursed and treated as a violator of the graves and that he was liable to pay 6000 silver denarii to the Imperial Treasury and the same amount to the temple of Aphrodite. Immediately afterwards there is another set of interdictions regarding the potential alienation of the burial place, burial of another body and removal of the deceased.12 The inscription discovered at Kalın Harman near Tabala in north-eastern Lydia, dated AD 261/2, contains all the typological elements of such a funerary imprecation, except for financial penalty. This is presumably because the authors wished only for divine punishment of the wrongdoer, and for the deed to be irredeemable, regardless of expiation. At the beginning, according to local custom, the date is stated with precision: the year, month and day when 11 12

Strubbe 1991, 33. IGSK 52, 101. For similar examples, see IGSK 52, 121 and 145; also IGSK 52, 229.

170

CHAPTER 6

the stele was raised (5.2.65). Less clear is what comes after the date: mention of ‘the raised one’ (hestamenē). It could be a clue to the position of that day within a liturgical calendar: either the ascending trend (if the phases of the Moon were considered), or the fact that that day would have been favourable (otherwise it would have been ‘descending’). A third possibility is for the day to have represented one when the sceptres of the gods there, a local Apollo and Anaitis, would have been raised during a ceremony meant to invoke the protection of the gods and to propitiate them. Then, we discover that those who raised the monument are members of the same family, who honour the memory of the deceased Stratonikianos, his sons Glykon and Stratonikianos, and his wife, Menophila. Then follows the curse addressed to those who would dishonour in any way the memory of the deceased: they and their descendants would know the wrath of Apollo and of the female ruler (kyria) Anaitis. The presence of funerary imprecations unveils the potential existence of a state of concern and uncertainty by the individuals and their kin regarding the security of the resting place. The main concern of those who raised such funerary monuments was to make sure that nobody would disturb their eternal sleep, that nobody would disturb their remains in order to look for valuable things, or, even worse, to throw out their remains in order to make room for others. This is exactly the wish of the unknown author of an inscription discovered at some point at Sardis, its whereabouts currently unknown.13 He threatens that, should his remains ever be disturbed, the wrongdoer would know the wrath of Mên Tymoleites and of all the other gods; then he expresses the type of punishment he wishes for the desecrator: to get nothing good, to lose everything he had already acquired, to lose his sight and the children in his care (thremma), and to be cursed even after death: ‘[---] if anyone throws (the remains) out, he will deal with the anger of [--- M]ên Tymoleites and of all the other gods; he and all his descendants will not know the joy of their nurslings or that of the eyesight, but he and his descendants will be utterly destroyed’ (4.2.113). A wide range of interdictions regarding graves and funerary complexes is found. Most of the concerns expressed in the inscriptions relate to the possibility of opening the tombs, coffins or urns,14 to defacing the writing on them,15 carving or digging,16 removal of the bodies,17 or introducing another corpse.18 13 14 15 16 17 18

IGSK IGSK IGSK IGSK IGSK IGSK

52, 52, 52, 52, 52, 52,

37. 36 and 86, 92, 97. 148 and 172. 87. 37. 36 and 43, 44, 73, 74.

CATEGORIES OF INSCRIPTIONS REGARDING SOLAR AND LUNAR CULTS

171

Sometimes the sin against the grave was perceived as an offence against the protecting divinity.19 Fear of partial20 or complete destruction of the monument is also stated.21 Some of the inscriptions specifically mention that no one was to be buried within after the insertion of the rightful owners,22 at times clearly indicated by their birth names.23 Destruction of goods connected with the funerary complex, be they inside the funerary chamber or in its immediate vicinity, was equally condemned.24 There are some instances where epitaphs forbid even touching the sepulchral monument.25 Neglecting the wishes of the deceased26 or ignorance of the curses and interdictions was also to be punished.27 It was also an outrage to consent to selling the grave or the annexed constructions,28 to ascribe it to someone else29 or to let another person administer it.30 Sometimes the penalty was almost impossible to pay, due to the gravity of the act of desecration, a wish that was clearly mentioned. An inscription discovered at Topuzdamları, near Saittai in Lydia,31 asserts that the culprit who might sin against the stele would never receive the mercy of Mên Axiottenos: ‘In the year 169, in the month of Peritos, on the sixth day. Asklepiades, son of Amyntas, and Elpis honoured their son Asklepiades. Alkaios and Aristokrates honoured their brother. If anyone damages (the monument), he will never find Mên Axiottenos merciful’ (4.2.102). A similar wish against a potential desecrator is encountered on another monument situated on the borderland of Thyateira and Hierokaisareia in the same region: the perpetrator was supposed neither to find the gods merciful, nor to enjoy having children or fertile land.32 The culprit was named ἀσεβής (impious) and ἁμαρτωλός (sinner, wrongdoer), but rarely ἱερόσυλος (sacrilegious).33 In various instances the violators of the graves were publicly accused of desecration and theft from the tombs,34 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

IGSK 52, 219. IGSK 52, 47 and 68. IGSK 52, 45 and 46. IGSK 52, 36 and 226, 229, 230, 231. IGSK 52, 36 and 40, 73, 120, 125, 224, 232, 234, 237, 243, 244, 248. IGSK 52, 39 and 90, 155. IGSK 52, 178 and 185. IGSK 52, 75. IGSK 52, 81. IGSK 52, 231. IGSK 52, 90 and 101. IGSK 52, 101. IGSK 52, 57. IGSK 52, 45. Strubbe 1991, 33–36. IGSK 52, 40.

172

CHAPTER 6

and usually cursed as well. The most common formula was that ‘he will be considered impious (asebes) and accursed (eparaton) and be (named) violator of the grave (tymbōrychos)’.35 Immediately after there followed the penalty the culprit had to pay, mostly in silver denarii, to the Imperial Treasury, local authorities or neighbouring temples. The denouncer of the felony was liable to receive a third of the whole revenue.36 The temple officials were to enforce the fines, as we find from an inscription from Aphrodisias dated after AD 212.37 The term hierosylos underlines the fact that the felony was committed against a sacred and inviolable place, and it was considered similar to theft from or desecration of a temple.38 An inscription on a family grave at Aphrodisias belonging to Aurelius Eumachos, his wife Aurelia Tatia, their son Aurelius Dionysios and his wife and children specifically mentions the fact that ‘nonetheless the grave monument must be consecrated after the burial of all those who have been inscribed here.’39 Let me mention is a funerary stele discovered at Büyütaşli Höyük in centraleastern Anatolia, datable to the 2nd century AD, where the perpetrator is perceived as a hierosylos (6.9.1). The epitaph presents the testamentary provisions of an anonymous but very wealthy member of the local aristocracy. This is why the initial editor, Murat Aydaş, believed he was a high priest in the sanctuary of the goddess Mâ in Cappadocian Komana.40 This interpretation was subsequently corrected by Debord just three years later, who also stressed the fact that the offerings were brought to the goddess Mâ, but consecrated to Anaitis, Zeus of Thymnasa and Zeus Pharnavas, the latter being a cover for Ahura Mazda.41 In other instances, no opportunity was given to the culprit to atone for this personal mistake; the punishment was meant to fall perpetually upon him/her and their family, ‘from forefathers to descendants of descendants’. Such is the case of an inscription published in 2007 by Hasan Malay and Marijana Ricl, which was unearthed at a Tosuntepe Mekvii, somewhere between the ancient cities of Thyateira and Hierokaisareia.42 Unlike other instances, the potential acts against the grave are given in particular detail, including not only physical violence, but also eventual magical spells and invocations: 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

For example, IGSK 52, 91 and 92–117. See, for example, IGSK 52, 90–119 and 123–25. IGSK 52, 121; S. Cormack 2004, 127. S. Cormack 2004, 126–27; Rigsby 1996, 43–48. IGSK 52, 113. Aydaş 2002, 25. Debord 2005. Malay and Ricl 2007, 118–19.

CATEGORIES OF INSCRIPTIONS REGARDING SOLAR AND LUNAR CULTS

173

… if he does anything dolomalo with a view to the alienation of anything inside it or around it, if he wrongfully cuts down, carries away, breaks in pieces, mutilates or dismantles anything, breaks off a part of statue or sarcophagus, sets (them) on fire, defiles, performs sacrifice to avert evil, for the sake of an invincible spell or a binding curse heaps up earth, makes a libation and removes illness or pain, lifts anybody lying here, moves him to a different place, strips him bare, throws him out and puts in the dead body of a stranger, unless he places someone in with Metrodoros’ permission, brings about some other cause of harm or through someone else – and he will give bad advice −, and although privy to it, does not even report it so that it remains secret.43

In some respects, it is similar to another epitaph discovered at Aphrodisias, dated after AD 212, which contains in part almost identical phraseology, at least for part of the curse: ‘may the earth not bear fruit for him, not the sea be navigable for him, and may the offspring of his children die and may another (offspring) not come to life for ever.’44 This fact demonstrates that there really was a common source for both funerary curses and that patterns like this may have had a regional circulation, like the Eumenian formula, or ones which state that the violator will be liable to the deity or will have to reckon to the god, a triple repetition like the so-called North and the East Phrygian curse formulas.45 Some people may have believed that a plain curse would suffice to keep the culprits and their accomplices away, and that the desecrators would give up once seeing the imprecation on the stele.46 Others considered that the perpetrators needed much more detail of what they might expect. We can find the conviction that the sin against the grave should be regarded as one against the protecting deity.47 This is why one of the most common wishes was for the gods to get angry at the perpetrators themselves48 or at them and their families alike.49 In a similar way, other stelae warned potential culprits of the fact that they would receive proper punishment from the enraged gods and goddesses.50 The anger of the deities could have been substituted by that of their sceptres, which were thought to embody the godly power itself (dynamis).51 The twelve

43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51

I followed here the translation of Malay and Ricl (2007, 118). S. Cormack 2004, 127. Strubbe 1991, 41–42. IGSK 52, 82. IGSK 52, 219. IGSK 52, 50. IGSK 52, 37 and 66. IGSK 52, 39 and 44, 49, 58, 59, 60, 63, 70–72. IGSK 52, 69.

174

CHAPTER 6

sceptres of the Lydian gods were attentive to the prayers of their worshippers and listened them;52 they would inflict their penalty53 and prove merciless.54 Another category of curses are targeted against the bodies, lives and individual destinies of the perpetrators. The curse involving underworld demons could also be associated at times with physical pains to the body of the desecrator.55 Among the mildest wishes destined for the perpetrators were those that implied physical pain and disease: loss of eyesight,56 fever,57 hydropsy,58 pains on the whole body,59 suffering or violent death (like those of Penteus and Tantalos),60 pestilence,61 incurable illness62 or other unmentioned grave diseases.63 Others insisted either on mutilation of the offender’s body64 or on total loss65 or dislocation of the limbs with an iron broom.66 Fear, horror67 and lack of divine mercy68 could also terrify the lives of the wrongdoers. Other epitaphs expressed the wish that the desecrator should have a barren life,69 have the life of a blood-shedder,70 share the same misfortunes as the impious,71 or, mostly, lack the happiness of his own children.72 Premature73 and violent death were amongst the most encountered wishes for the violators. The circumstances of death were also important, whether it concerned the lack of a burial place, death in a foreign country,74 painful death (such as being eaten by animals),75 a barren body,76 the same unfavourable

52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76

IGSK 52, 53. IGSK 52, 64 and 65. IGSK 52, 67. IGSK 52, 74. IGSK 52, 37 and 154, 265. IGSK 52, 264 and 285. IGSK 52, 163. IGSK 52, 74. IGSK 52, 205. IGSK 52, 146. IGSK 52, 398. IGSK 52, 163. IGSK 52, 285. IGSK 52, 268. IGSK 52, 230 and 238. IGSK 52, 50. IGSK 52, 45 and 51, 57. IGSK 52, 206. IGSK 52, 38. IGSK 52, 54. IGSK 52, 37. IGSK 52, 276. S. Cormack 2004, 127; IGSK 52, 294 and 401. IGSK 52, 151. IGSK 52, 149.

CATEGORIES OF INSCRIPTIONS REGARDING SOLAR AND LUNAR CULTS

175

conditions that lead to the death of the deceased,77 some other evil context78 or plainly in a very bad manner.79 Utter destruction for the wrongdoer alone, or together with his children,80 both dead and alive,81 and their massacre82 are also frequently mentioned in the epitaphs. We can conclude that funerary imprecations of Roman Imperial Anatolia are particularly interesting as they provide a valuable insight into the social and religious conduct of the Hellenised local populations and their particular care to ensure a peaceful, untroubled afterlife of their close kin. They also give us valuable information about family ties and integration of individuals within social structures, but mostly about conceptions of the afterlife and survival of individuals in the grave, their need for protection by using any means available, from preventive curse ceremonies for binding culprits to gratifying the institutions and temples, charging individuals with the protection of the graves and/or the denunciation of wrongdoers. Curses in a religious context can be encountered within the structure of confession inscriptions and judicial prayers, and they normally share with epitaphs related to funerary imprecations the fact that the unjustly treated person was already dead. But the major difference is the fact that the action of the perpetrator (theft, murder, fraud, unreturned loan, etc.) had already concluded when the inscription was raised. CONFESSION INSCRIPTIONS An important number of these were discovered in the north-east of Lydia and in neighbouring regions of Phrygia and Mysia, between the valleys of the Hermos and Meander. They are unique within the Graeco-Roman world. In antiquity, there was no specific name for this category of texts, which is why modern scholars have tried to find terms to define them: ‘confession’ or ‘propitiatory inscriptions’, and ‘Beichtinschriften’, ‘Sühne-Inschriften’, ‘stèles de confession’ etc. – phrases that can be translated as ‘confession inscriptions’ or ‘confession stelae’. When they were dedicated can be clearly identified in most of cases from their content, and it ranges between the second half of the 1st century AD and the third quarter of the 3rd century AD. The oldest (actually, also one of the shortest), dating to AD 57/8 (142 of the Sullan era), 77 78 79 80 81 82

IGSK IGSK IGSK IGSK IGSK IGSK

52, 52, 52, 52, 52, 52,

48 and 156, 157, 161, 165, 167. 170 and 171. 85. 73 and 75, 77, 78, 79. 87. 40.

176

CHAPTER 6

concerns Mên Artemodorou Axiottenos,83 while the most recent one is dedicated to the Great Zeus of the Twin Oaks (Μέγας Ζεὺς ἐ Δεδύμων δρύον) in AD 263/4 (348 of the Sullan era) by a certain Athenaios after the god addressed him during an oniric vision.84 It is worth underlining the very early date of emergence of inscriptions of public penitence, compared with other categories of Anatolian inscriptions, which clearly indicates that the West Anatolian area constituted a focal point for the emergence of a new type of religious mentality and of a new perspective on the world of gods. This perspective would extend to the entire Roman Empire, starting in the 2nd century and mostly since the 3rd century, through the massive penetration of Graeco-Oriental cults. Penitential prayers also existed in the Mesopotamian world,85 and they usually started with a hymn addressed to the relevant god or goddess. The confession perse followed and it was mainly related to the violation of certain moral, cult values or to the violation of certain interdictions. The first Mesopotamian texts of this type date to the Paleo-Babylonian period. Most of them, in Akkadian, were meant to propitiate the divinity and to abate the wrath of the god, even if it required the invocation of other deities capable of defending the penitent. It is interesting that the priests who were usually in charge with reciting the lamentations within specific apotropaic ceremonies were called gala or kalû, meaning the predecessors of the Anatolian eunuch-priests that we have talked about above. A ‘standard’ confession inscription presents, most often, the following typology of information: a) acknowledging the great powers of the god and the sin committed against the divinity; b) the punishment given by the deity and the way in which the deity manifested its powers; c) the sinner’s redemption; d) final formulations that included the warning that no one should take the powers and name of the god in vain. Thus, the salvation or atonement of the sinner was directly conditioned by the submission of the dedicator to the commandments given directly by the god himself, without intermediaries, through dreams and visions.86 For instance, a 2nd-century stele discovered at Buldan mentions that the dedicator 83

BWK 56; Moga 2004–05. BWK 11. 85 Joannès 2001, 686. 86 MacMullen 1987, 59–60, 102–06; Mitchell 1993 I, 192–94; 1985, 67; BWK 1, 9, 11, 33, 34, 65, 106; Burkert 1987, 12–29. 84

CATEGORIES OF INSCRIPTIONS REGARDING SOLAR AND LUNAR CULTS

177

was told by the god himself that he had become impure following a certain promise made.87 But when intermediaries do appear, they are nothing but some kind of ‘qualified personnel’ in the service of the deity: messengers/angels or gods subordinate to another god, higher, greater and more powerful; and priests and prophets or even associations of friends of angels. These types of religious views were widely diffused, especially in Lydia, Mysia and Phrygia, but also in Galatia, and, most importantly, they are not limited to the category of confession inscriptions. In the case of the deity called Hosios kai Dikaios (‘the Holy and Just’), an imprecation stele discovered at Hadrianoutherai in central Mysia, presents him as messenger – angelos – of the god Helios.88 To these two solar gods of justice and vengeance, Stateilia’s husband addressed, after her death, a Galatian epigraph, discovered at Karahoca, in order to have her dowry back, on the grounds that In the year […], in the month of Xandikos, […, -]os son of Gellios erected this altar and this door from his own funds to his wife, Stateilia, in remembrance. Stateilia, while living and conscious, gave in trust to someone a green woollen garment and two silver bracelets, and unless he returns them to us may you, the Holy (and) Just and Lord Helios, avenge her, a corpse, and her living children’ (3.5.1).89

On the other hand, an entire association of friends of angels(!) dedicated several stelae to Hosios kai Dikaios at Yaylababa Köyü (3.6.55; 3.6.60; 3.6.62), while at Temrek near Borlu (in Lydia), ‘The community of those from [--], through the prophet Alexandros of Saittai, erected (this monument) in thanksgiving (…) to the Holy and Just Angel’ (3.2.18).90 In this case, we can assume that the divinity to which the dedication was addressed (besides the Just and Holy Angel) could be either Helios or (more probably) the Most High God (Theos Hypsistos), or another universal god considered a supreme god by the persons who set it up. It is also to Hosios kai Dikaios that Telesphoros and Hermogenes of Stalla set up a confession stele because of their having committed perjury, even if the name of the deity is not clearly indicated within the text itself.91 Thus, it should not come as a surprise that a messenger (angelos) sent by Mên Petraieitis Axiottenos communicated to Chryseros and Stratonikos the order to venerate all the gods in order to find forgiveness for the sins 87

BWK 98. IGSK 52, 19; Ricl 1991, 46, no. 103. For a detailed commentary regarding Hosios kai Dikaios within the divine hierarchy, see Ricl 1992a, 97–101 (especially 99). 89 RECAM II, 242. 90 Sheppard 1980–81, 87–92, nos. 8, 9. 91 Drew-Bear 1976, 262–66, no. 17 = BWK 105; Mitchell 1993 II, 25–26. 88

178

CHAPTER 6

of which they are aware and for those of which they are not (4.2.31).92 Such evidence was already commonplace in western Anatolia and beyond. An interesting example of the above-mentioned typology is represented by a dedication addressed to Mên Axiottenos in AD 164/5, which was discovered at Köleköy,93 a location most probably situated on the territory of the Lydian city of Saittai: Great is Meis Axiottenos who rules as king over Tarsi! Because a sceptre was set up in case someone were to steal something from the bathhouse, when a cloak was stolen the god punished the thief, and after some time he made him bring back the garment to the god, and he confessed. Therefore, through a messenger the god commanded that the cloak be sold and to record the god’s powers on a stele. In the year 249 (4.2.104).

These dedications were usually set in up public places precisely for the names and influence of the gods not to be treated lightly or discredited, as well as acting as a warning to other members of the communities or passers-by.94 Most probably, they were placed on the walls of sanctuaries belonging to some of the specific indigenous deities: Zeus Didymeites, Zeus Oreites, Zeus Trosou, Zeus Orkamanites, Zeus Ogmenos, Mên Axiottenos, Mên eg Diodotou, Mên Petraeitis, Mên Labanas, Mên Tiamou, Zeus Sabazios, Meter Atimis, Meter Hipta, Meter Tarsene/Tazene, Meter Karpime, Meter Leto, Meter Phileis, Meter Talimmene, Meter Theon, Artemis Anaitis, Apollo Axyros/ Azyros, Apollo Bozenos, Apollo Propylaios, Apollo Tarsene, Apollo Lairbenos/Lairmenos/Lermenos, Hosios kai Dikaios or Theos Tarsios. Yet the discovery locations vary significantly. The densest groups of inscriptions come from (1) the sanctuary of Apollo Lairbenos, situated near Motella,95 but on the other bank of the Meander, (2) the sanctuary of Meter Phileis located several miles from the Lydian town of Philadelphia,96 in the upper valley of the Kogamos river and (3) sites corresponding to the small eastern Lydian settlements of Saittai, Kollyda and Kula, dedicated especially to the local Mên and Artemis Anaitis. The content of the confession texts refers to the damage incurred by certain individuals who neglected the powers of the gods and were punished as they deserved. One of the specific features that sets them apart from other inscriptions discovered in the area is that the wrongdoer had to publicly admit these

92 93 94 95 96

BWK 38. Sheppard 1980–81, 92, 94, no. 10 = CMRDM I, 69 = BWK 3. Robert 1987, 360. Petzl and Malay 1987, 459; Miller 1985; Ceylan and Ritti 1997. Malay 1985; BWK 83–95.

CATEGORIES OF INSCRIPTIONS REGARDING SOLAR AND LUNAR CULTS

179

personal sins so as to be forgiven (were it not already too late for the individual to express regrets for the deed) and subsequently erect a penitential stele.97 Hence, ‘advertising’ for those gods was definitely an important aspect in the matter. On the other hand, it was necessary for the dedicator to beg for the god’s mercy, to implore the divinity for divine vengeance not to extend to the closest relatives as the enraged Apollo and the mistress Anaitis were invoked to set vengeance for the one who dared to desecrate a monument ‘unto his children’s children and his descendants’ descendant’.98 This explains why, as we have shown before, a certain Polion was careful to offer, in AD 238/9, numerous gifts, including wine, food and animals, to the gods Mên Axiottenos, ‘the king of Perkos/Perkon’ and the Great Zeus Oreites for the divine rage to be tempered and for the gods’ favours to turn to their children’s children together with their own descendants (4.2.47). There are at least three other examples to support this theory. For instance, an inscription from Kula dedicated to Mên Artemidorou Axiot(t)enos states that a 13-year-old boy, Herakleides, had to suffer because of his mother’s intention to hide an event that clearly proved the manifestation of the great powers of the god, thus refusing to make public and properly worship the deity and acting ‘rather for the benefit of people than of the god’. Discovering that a specific stone of hyacinth which belonged to the family had been stolen, Syntyche, Theogenes’ wife and Herakleides’ mother, addressed her prayers to Mên Artemidorou Axiot(t)enos for the thief to be revealed.99 On the thirty-first day, the god manifested his powers and tore up the thief, a girl named Apphia. But at the girl’s mother request, Syntyche did not make this public, a deed that caused the god’s rage (4.2.62). A similar story is narrated on the inscription found at Ibrahim Ağa köy. Zeus Peizenos caused an eye injury to Diogenes’ daughter, Tatiane, for his having failed to fulfil a promise to the god. After redeeming the vow, the god was pleased and they subsequently erected the stele as a thank-offering.100 The third case refers to the lethal punishment of Sokrates,101 on the very same day that his own mother, Tatias, uttered calumnies and curses in the temple while not admitting her own sins (5.2.13). Nonetheless, there are cases where the real cause of the punishment remains a mystery, either because the discovered stelae are damaged (i.e. most of the inscriptions addressed to Meter Phileis in her sanctuary situated in the north-

97

Lane Fox 1997, 135. Mitchell 1993 I, 188. 99 BWK 59. 100 BWK 45. 101 BWK 69. 98

180

CHAPTER 6

east of Philadelphia)102 or for the simple fact that the dedicator himself failed to mention it.103 For instance, Epitynchanos raised a stele to Apollo Propylaios at Eumeneia because of a specific reason he omitted to state;104 so does Isias, who had been punished by Meter Talimmene(?),105 and Gaius, whose incomplete dedication does not allow any speculation about the ‘blessed reason’ for which he addressed the dedication (8.6.150). However, there was always a reason for the gods to manifest their vengeance upon the dedicators, regardless of whether the sins or errors were committed unintentionally106 or in full awareness: (a) poisonings, spells, or other actions related to occult practices;107 (b) sexual offences or desires (even of others) and rape;108 (c) ritual impurities or any other type of impurity;109 (d) the consumption of meat not sacrificed to the gods110 or wearing impure clothes;111 (e) perjury;112 (f) cursing in the temple113 or uttering improper words;114 (g) theft;115 (h) failure to keep promises;116 (i) violation of the sacred precinct (horion) and destruction of the god’s property (sacred pigeons117 or even sacred trees118); (j) refusal or delay in accomplishing a task or a ritual act required by the god119 or in attending the celebration of the god’s mysteries;120 (k) refusal to reveal the god’s actions and powers;121 (l) ignoring divine warnings;122 (m) interference by any civil or military authority;123 (n) refusal

102

BWK 83, 86–88, 91–93. BWK 40–41, 104, 109, 118. 104 Drew-Bear 1976, 260–61, no. 15 = BWK 104. 105 BWK 42; NIS 25. 106 BWK 10–11, 76. 107 BWK 69. 108 BWK 5, 110, 111, 117; Mitchell 1993 I, 194 – masturbating in the hieron. 109 MacMullen 1987, 96–97; BWK 36, 110, 112, 115–16, 120. 110 BWK 1, 123. 111 BWK 43, 55, 110. 112 MacMullen 1987, 100; BWK 52, 54, 68, 102–03, 105–07, 110, 120. 113 BWK 69. 114 BWK 95. 115 BWK 13, 59, 68, 106, 107. 116 BWK 45. 117 BWK 50, 106. 118 BWK 7, 10–11, 76. Related to the importance of sacred forests, especially in the oracular centres of Asia Minor, see also the study of Graf (1993) on the sacred forests and the oracles of Asia Minor. 119 BWK 71, 113. 120 BWK 108. 121 BWK 59. 122 BWK 7. 123 BWK 49 = CCIS II, 36; NIS 26. 103

CATEGORIES OF INSCRIPTIONS REGARDING SOLAR AND LUNAR CULTS

181

to return an amount of money borrowed;124 and (o) doubt or lack of trust in the deity.125 If the punishment had been too severe and caused the death of the individual, or if it had prevented him/her from erecting their own penitential stele, the closest relatives or even their foster children (threptoi)126 had to ask for the deity’s mercy in order to annul the curse or punishment and its consequences so that the deceased could rest in peace. This was the case of Asklas who, in AD 173/4, together with his nephews Asklas and Apollonides, dedicated at Küpüler a stele for a sin previously committed by his own father.127 In a similar fashion, Thalamos dedicated an inscription to Zeus Orkamanites because of his wife’s perjury.128 The case of Skollos was much more dramatic. He refused to return a sum of 40 denarii to Apollonios, swearing on the name of the gods Meter Atimis and Meis Tiamou to have returned it already. After Apollonios implored the goddess to do justice for him, she punished Skollos by death, and it was only Skollos’ daughter, Tatias, who could break the vow and its fatal consequences: (Great is Meter Atimis and great is Mên Tiamou), who rule over the village and great is their power! Apollonios (gave Skollos an amount of) 40 denarii. Then, when Apollonios reclaimed the money from Skollos, the latter swore an oath by the aforementioned gods to repay the collected sum within a deadline. Because he did not keep his promise, Apollonios ceded (the money) to the god. When Skollos was punished by the gods with death, after his death his daughter was punished by the gods. Tatias, the daughter, unfastened the curses and, having atoned, she now praises Meter Atimis and Mên Tiamou. In the year 230, in the month of Xandikos, on the fifteenth day (4.2.6).

Typologically, the punishments can be divided into several categories: disease (eye or chest injuries, trunk or leg conditions, divine possessions of the body);129 madness;130 dumbness;131 fatal accidents or accidents that would have led to death but for divine intervention;132 and others133 not mentioned in the texts of the inscriptions. A monument set up at Ayazviran in AD 118/9 mentions the harsh punishment received by Trophime, the daughter of Artemidoros, because of her 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133

BWK 54; Robert 1963, 267–70. BWK 10, 12. BWK 4; Mitchell 1993 I, 192. BWK 24. BWK 102; see also Drew-Bear and Naour 1990, 1939–44. BWK 5, 45, 49–50, 75, 84–85, 89, 93, 95, 123; MacMullen 1987, 88. NIS 25; Robert 1963, 268–70. BWK 1. BWK 7, 10–11, 59. BWK 12, 36, 96, 100.

182

CHAPTER 6

disobedience in accomplishing a task given by the god himself (possibly through a vision, while sleeping or in other circumstances). She became a lunatic, but after consulting the will of the gods Meter Tarsene, Apollo Tarsios and Mên Artemidorou Axiottenos, she decided to raise the stele to confess this divine vengeance (νέμεσις) and to put herself in the service of the gods (in other words, she most probably became a sacred slave of the gods): In the year 203, in the month of Artemisios, on the sixth day. Trophime, daughter of Artemidoros Kikinnas, was summoned by the god to his service but she did not want to come at once. Hence, the god punished her and made her insane. She consulted Meter Tarsene and Apollo Tarsios and Mên Artemidorou Axiottenos, who rules over Koresa, and he ordered her to set up a stele to record of the god’s punishment and to enrol in the service of the gods (4.2.11).

Around the sanctuaries and temples there were strictly defined sacred precincts, where gods manifested their direct jurisdiction. Crossing these boundaries in an impure state was a major crime. Inside, the supplicants felt that they were protected by the gods themselves and they believed themselves to be closer to their presence. It was here that many pilgrims or visitors found asylum or were lodged, even for weeks, while waiting for the gods to manifest their powers through numerous divine appearances or epiphanies (epiphaneiai).134 Others sought to be cured or to receive a commandment, an oniric vision oran oracle. Such answers from oracles were provided not only in the well-known sanctuaries of the Greek world, such as Claros or Didyma, but also in smaller ones (belonging to local gods), such as Apollo Lairbenos.135 Another significant detail regarding the perception of gods in the collective and individual mind is that the gods were viewed as omnipotent, with a decisive influence upon the human destinies. A dedication of Aphias, the daughter of Theodoros, addressed to Meter Leto in the sanctuary of Apollo Lairbenos near Motella, states that the goddess is the one ‘who makes the impossible possible’.136 Another from the same sanctuary, discovered at Ortaköy and dedicated probably to the same local Apollo, attests that the god was considered the master of the dedicator’s body (κύριος), who saved it and gave it back to him following his penitence.137 Some were even considered to ‘rule as kings’ (βασιλεύω), but they were also the lords of those human communities: Mên Axiottenos for Perkos/Perkon,138 134 For a more detailed analysis of the sacred places of sanctuaries and of the number of persons benefitting from the right of inviolability, see Rigsby 1996; Chaniotis 1996. 135 Miller 1985, 48; Ceylan and Ritti 1997; Lane Fox 1997, 44–45 and 246–50. 136 BWK 122. 137 BWK 123. 138 BWK 6.

CATEGORIES OF INSCRIPTIONS REGARDING SOLAR AND LUNAR CULTS

183

in Tarsi(?) in the territory of Saittai139 or in Koresa;140 Meter (Tarse)ne, Mis Labanas and Mis Artemidorou in the village (kome) of Dorou;141 and Meis Petraeitis in a settlement still unknown.142 Hence, not only were the gods considered omnipotent, but, furthermore, there was a focus on fundamental ideas, to be encountered also in the case of Theos Hypsistos: the ordering of the divine world (seen as a genuine celestial kingdom), governed by a supreme power; and the extension of the gods’ sphere of competence beyond it, to the mortal world.143 Hence, they were considered the supreme moral authority, which could regulate social behaviour and inter-human relationships; they made up a veritable council of gods, which dominated the lifestyle and moral aspects of the small Anatolian rural conservative communities.144 Before ending, I would add that we should be very cautious when drawing a clear line between local particularities and the general evolutionary trend of the Graeco-Oriental cults.145 It is true that, from the perspective of typological characteristics and the manner of publicly expressing individuals’ sins and penitence, this situation is unique for the Graeco-Roman world. Furthermore, these were mainly local gods, despite their omnipotence and their universal character. However, it is worth recollecting that, from a phenomenological perspective, they follow the same trends and they present features similar to the other Graeco-Oriental cults. CONSECRATIONS (Katagraphai) There always had to be someone to entrustto the divinity the future hieros or hierodoulos. This person was, most probably, some sort of guarantor for the dedicated person before the divinity. There are no cases of a person dedicating himself to the divinity, though the god sometimes required this directly (for one to come in his service), following a divine order and then stating the event on a stele. In other words, there are no direct accounts on how the gods manifested this power.

139

BWK 3. BWK 57. 141 BWK 40. 142 BWK 39. 143 Ricl 1992a, 97–101; Mitchell 1993 II, 43–51; 1999; Sheppard 1980–81; Athanassiadi 1992; MacMullen 1987, 24–25, 49, 124–52. 144 Mitchell 1993 I, 189. 145 Ustinova 1999, 217–21. 140

184

CHAPTER 6

The example of Trophima is one of the best known and it is present on one of the confession inscriptions (4.2.11).146 She was a free person, considering the mention of her lineage and the form of her father’s name.147 She ‘was summoned by the god to his service but she did not want to come at once’, thus she failed to respond promptly; for this reason, the god Mên Artemidoros Axiottenos punished her with temporary madness. After questioning the gods through oracles (more precisely, Mên Artemidoros Axiottenos, the master of Koresa, Meter Tarsene and Apollo Tarsios), she was ordered to inscribe a stele and to serve the gods. There is no exact reason for this event, as there is no knowledge of akatagraphe in this sense. However, considering her status as a free person, she must have become a hiera, that is if the event really did occur. There are sufficient examples among katagraphai that mention consecrations to the divinity of a natural or adopted child, or even a slave following an order or a dream; the phrases used in these situations are usually ‘in accordance with the command’ (kata epitagēn tou theou), or following a dream (kat’onar). However, such commands also appear in the case of common dedications, and not only for consecrations,148 as happened for instance to Charixenos the Dionysopolitan, who probably received the order to set up a statue (as the inscription is on a pediment) from Apollo Lairmenos, explicitly called ‘the manifest god’ (theosepiphanes) (8.6.74).149 Returning to consecrations following a command or dream, there are at least four relevant inscriptions. The first dates to the beginning of the 3rd century and refers to the consecration by a certain Markos, son of Dionysidoros of Motella, of an adopted child (threptos), following the order of Helios Apollo Lairbenos (8.6.72).150 Three others refer to instructions received in dreams. Both Aphphia of Hierapolis and Dion of Motella consecrate their own children, Demetrios, Roupos and Roupeinas, and Papirianos, respectively, to Helios Apollo Lairbenos in the 2nd century AD (8.6.69; 8.6.70).151 In the final instance, Didymos’ status is unknown, but we find out that he had been sent especially to a hieros, Dionysios, at the beginning of the 3rd century, by 146 BWK 57 =TAM V.1, 460 = CMRDM I, 47 (pl. XXI) = Herrmann 1962, 24 (pl. VI, no. 1) = Robert 1963, 166–67. 147 See MacLean 2005, 93–94. 148 Dignas 2003, 84; Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 22–26, 28–31, 39–40, nos. K5, K7, K11, K16, K23, K 30, K37, K49. 149 Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 8, no. D4. Here, the phrase used for the first order is kata epitagēn. 150 Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 23, no. K7. 151 8.6.69 = Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 22, no. K4; 8.6.70 = Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 22, no. K5. The formulas used are ‘following a divine dream’ (katatontheiononiron) and ‘after a dream’ (kat’oniron).

CATEGORIES OF INSCRIPTIONS REGARDING SOLAR AND LUNAR CULTS

185

Neikephoros of Motella, in order to be consecrated to Helios Apollo Lermenos (8.6.153). He could have been a relative of Dionysios and his wife or he could even have been their child raised by Neikephoros of Motella.152 HONORIFIC INSCRIPTIONS Inscriptions known within this category are, in most cases, dedicated by a community that honours someone for service to its members. It may contain direct references to a certain divinity venerated especially in that place or who had the role of omnipotent master of that space. It may also contain indirect references, with only a mention of the god’s name, but not as main character. An example is an honorific decree of the AD 20 (7.7.1)153 in honour of Apollonios, son of Lysimachos, set up by the citizens of Perge for his services to the community. Such inscriptions that bring homage to local benefactors are a rich source of information for the Hellenistic period. However, as Christopher Jones shows, in the Roman period, these kinds of mention of people still alive dropped off considerably, concomitantly with an increase of those for the deceased.154 The inscription represents a copy of the decree, placed on the outside wall of the public archive within a market square.155 The original was placed inside the main sanctuary of the goddess, located nearby, ‘in the most visible place’. This demonstrates again the special importance of the sanctuary for city life, besides other public institutions such as the theatre, nymphaeum, baths or gymnasium. The inscription shows that the gymnasium should have contained a stele reading: ‘The people honoured Apollonios, the son of Lysimachos, a good, brave, and patriotic man, full of virtues and worthy of praise among his forefathers.’ Here, as in the rest of the inscription, it is worth mentioning the authorities’ concern to highlight his availability and his willingness to serve the city gladly and always as readily as possible. He agreed to mediate in favour of the city, going to Rome on a mission at his own expense; there, he ‘proved his zeal for the city not just here, but also by presenting gifts at his own expense abroad, before Germanicus Caesar, as a submitted servant to the imperial house.’ Afterwards, he summoned a conventus iuridicus (= agora dikōn) in the forumAugustum (in the text: sebasteagora). As indicated also by Tacitus (Annals 2. 54), Germanicus intended to help the Eastern provinces, 152 153 154 155

Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 49. IGSK 54.I, 23. Jones 1995, 29. Şahin 1995, 21–24.

186

CHAPTER 6

which were either consumed by internal conflicts, or affected by the abuses of imperial officials; this is why in certain Anatolian cities he was regarded as their ‘saviour’ or ‘benefactor’.156 This must have also been the purpose of the conventus and of the visit paid to Germanicus, also considering the authority acquired from the Senate, which outranked that of the provincial governors. It is worth underlining here the presence of one of the formulas specific to the eulogising vocabulary of the period; the purpose was precisely to stimulate the citizens’ devotion and civic spirit by underlying not only the prestige thus acquired by the ‘chosen men’, but also the reciprocity of the services provided: ‘As accustomed, the people decided for those who serve the fatherland with such zeal to be rewarded with the highest honours, for others to know as well, the reciprocity benefactions of the city and to follow such men in the future.’

156

See the commentary of IGSK 54.I, 23 (at pp. 37–39 and 41).

CHAPTER 7

MEANS OF COMMUNICATION. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DIVINE WORLD

THE MASTER GODS The authority of gods extended over both the divine1 and terrestrial worlds, regardless of whether it was in a more conservative rural setting or an urban one, Hellenised and cosmopolitan. Though gods became significantly Hellenised, such as Artemis Pergaia, they conserved the attributes that underlined this power-relationship of the indigenous environment. The attitude and epiclesis of the gods consolidate the idea of dominating both celestial and earthly space,2 as we are talking about ancestral gods, protectors of families or of communities.3 The duty of the individual and of the community was to prove their piety to the divinity, through permanent offerings and donations to the sanctuary,4 and advertising,5 thus venerating the divinity publicly through eulogies addressed, in full sight, on inscriptions on stelae, shrines or temple walls; not least, the community asked for the agreement, or consulted the will, of the divinity through oracles or incubatio and by fulfilling direct commands.6 Worshippers had to state their belief in the divinity publicly (1.6.16; 5.2.17),7 by praying (1.1.5; 1.1.6; 3.2.12), until the god would have mercy on them and would listen to their prayers (5.2.27). One of the most interesting dedications may be that of Tychos, who erected probably a bronze statue to the listening Most

1 For instance, in 1.5.1: Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 202; SEG 31, 1080; Sheppard 1980–81, 94, no. 11; Cumont 1916, 445. 2 Belayche 2006, 257–58; Diakonoff 1979, 163–64; CMRDM I, 42, 47, 51, 67, 69, A1. Also, frequent epithets such as epouranios and ouranios(4.4.1). See also Moga and Daj 2013; Chiai 2010. 3 This is why they were ascribed epithets such as patrioi, patrikoi, papooi or syngenikoi (Ricl 2003a, 79); 4.2.108 (propator). 4 Rostad 2006a, 117. 5 Chaniotis 2004a, 12–13. 6 Arnold 2005, 434. 7 1.6.16: Aurelius Asklapon declared publicly his belief in the god in Rome; 5.2.17: Mousais and Kalligenia stated the power of the gods Artemis Anaitis and Mên Tiamou.

188

CHAPTER 7

High God that represents a ‘foot that follows the god’, (1.7.11) in accordance with the divine command. This is why these divinities usually had the epithet of epekoos, which indicated rapid receptiveness to the demands of the dedicator (1.3.1; 1.4.2; 1.4.9; 1.6.24; 1.6.26; 1.6.27; 1.7.11; 1.8.1; 3.2.16; 5.2.10; 5.2.27; 10.7.19; 10.7.33, etc.); the divinities were also called soter, which indicated deliverance/salvation from danger, disease, sorrow, weakness or public opprobrium (1.1.20; 1.6.2; 5.2.52; 7.7.2 soteira asylos; 10.7.20; 10.7.22).8 They manifested through epiphanies (hence the epithet epiphanes 8.6.8; 7.7.19; or euangelos: 10.7.20), and they defended humans from evil, thus granting sacred (asylos) (7.7.20; 7.7.21; 7.7.23; 7.7.24; 7.7.26–28; 7.7.34; 7.7.35; 7.7.38) or physical protection against illness, as well as against the plague.9 The toponymic epithets attached to deities can also constitute clear indicators of the region(s) that they dominated.10 These were individual (Mên/Meis Axiottenos, meaning Mên of Axiotta/Azita11 or in other situations, Apollo Nisyreites, Apollo Tarsenos/Tazenos or the group of local Mother Goddesses: Tarsene, Sipylene, Phileis, Aliane, Atimis,12 etc.) or collective. These collective names designated as the council of gods watched over those communities, like some kind of supreme moral councils that regulated behaviour and interhuman relationships.13 In this sense, there are mentions of names such as theoi Mokadenoi, ‘the gods of Mokadene’, theoiTabalenoi, ‘the gods of Tabala’,14 theoiPereudenoi, ‘the gods of Pereudos/-on’,15 theoiMotellenoi, ‘the gods of Motella’, theoihoiPerkēnōn, ‘the gods of Perkos/-on’,16 etc. However, there were also collective names that regrouped these gods, some of them solar or lunar, without referring to a particular earthly area but to somewhere in the after-world. For instance, Mên was part of the group of underground gods, theoi katachthonioi, especially as a protector of tombs (4.8.1; 4.8.5–12),17 in sharp contrast with his function of a celestial deity (1.7.1; 4.8.2), or even mentioned in funerary imprecations with the both functions at the same time as 8 Drew-Bear 1976, 249–50: Auxanos Quintus, who dedicates an ex-voto near Banaz in Phrygia, because he had been delivered by Sozon. 9 Hence the epithet alexikakos, ‘averter of evil’, ascribed to Helios Apollo Lairmenos (8.6.9). 10 Dignas 2002, 8–9. 11 Regarding the ‘master of Axiotta’, see Herrmann 1978. 12 Diakonoff 1979, 164. 13 Mitchell 1993 I, 189. 14 IGSK 52, 67. 15 Herrmann and Varinlioğlu 1984; BWK 16, 17, 20. 16 BWK 7. 17 The same function seems to have Mên Kamareites as well as protector of the καμάραι (see 4.2.81; 4.2.115), according to certain interpretations. See IGSK 52, 57 and explanations; CMRDM I, 56; LKGI, 35.2.

MEANS OF COMMUNICATION. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DIVINE WORLD

189

‘the Heavenly Mên and of the underworld’ (4.8.24), ‘Mên of the underworld and of the heavens’ (4.8.26) or ‘Mên of the above and of the underworld (4.8.16).18 The most concrete way of indicating the domination of a god over a territory was that of attaching a specific epithet, thus venerating at times through invocations such as ‘Great is (the divinity’s name), the master of/who rules over (the name of the place)’, followed by an indication of the type of miracle that the god had performed for that specific community.19 Sometimes there was a special mention that the god had manifested his divine power (dynamis), which could not be neglected, ignored or discarded (3.1.1; 1.5.2; 4.2.83; 4.2.86; 5.2.12; 5.2.13; 8.6.109). In addition, the sceptre could be indicated as an instrument of the god’s power, through which he was acknowledged as a guarantor of justice in both the terrestrial and celestial worlds. They were, first, gods of justice, immortal and undefeated, hence the frequent epithets of dikaios/dikaia (‘the just’) (2.9.3, Mithra dikaios; 3.6.31; 3.6.51; 5.2.12; 5.2.13; 5.2.57), athanatos (‘the immortal’) (1.4.6; 3.2.19) or aneiketos/invictus/aleiptos (‘the undefeated/the unconquered’).20 Specific epithets that designated them as masters were kyrios (3.6.51; 4.2.87),21 tyrannos (4.2.86, Mên Tyrannos; 4.2.87), katechōn/katechousa,22 basileus,23 archegetes (3.2.18) and proestōtēs tes poleōs,24 regardless of how much the cult was Hellenised. Things could exceed the physical, terrestrial limits of domination,25 to reach the highest spheres, almost monotheistic in tone views,26 through elevated formulas such as ‘God, Lord, the One who is forever’ (1.3.10), ‘the immortal god’ (1.4.6.), ‘the one and unique god’ (3.2.9), ‘Zeus the All-highest’ (1.6.20) or the divinity ‘self-born, untaught, motherless, unshakeable, bearing no name, many-named, dwelling in fire, such is god’ (1.7.4). 18

And also in Lycaonia and Cilicia (Lane 1976, 51–52; Diakonoff 1979, 166). Mostly in acclamations from the eastern part of Lydia, in confession inscriptions or in other types of acclamations (see the relevant section) (Herrmann 1978, 419–20). 20 2.8.1 (aneiketos); 2.9.2, 2.1.1 (invictus); 10.7.7 (aleiptois). 21 Ricl 2003a, 77. Pentru Sozon kyrios: Delemen 1999, 40. 22 4.2.11: ‘Mên Artemidorou Axiottenos, who rules over Koresa’; 4.2.84: ‘Mis of Artemidoros, who rule over Axiotta’; 5.2.12: ‘Great is Meter Anaeitis, who rules over Azita, and Meis Tiamou, and their powers!’ 23 Herrmann 1978, 419: Mên as master in Dorou kome, Koresa and Tarsi. 24 For Artemis Pergaia as protector and patron of the city of Perge (7.7.23; 7.7.24) or for Helios Apollo Lairbenos as patron of the city of Motella (Dignas 2003, 87; Ritti, Şimşek and Yıldız 2000, 36–38, no. K46 and 40–41, no. K50). 25 As one of the inscriptions clearly indicates these types of perceptions: ‘To the Most High God. By prophetic voice this altar (was raised) to the Most High God, he who is in the power of youth, who has power over everything, who cannot be seen, whose gaze is so dreadful that overthrows the mortals’ ground’ (1.4.4). 26 Marek 2010, 647–49; Chiai 2015, 29–30. 19

190

CHAPTER 7

THE RELATIVES OF GODS: SONS, MOTHERS AND COMPANIONS The Anatolian gods were not united, like those of the Romans, only by strictly ‘administrative’ connections related to their functionality. The mythological traditions regarding the interactions between these indigenous gods do not survive in the written sources for the most part. What we have is only the occasional and scanty information retrieved from inscriptions or reconstituted from an iconographical perspective, and it sometimes remains on the level of working hypothesis. The example of Cybele (and of her acolyte, Attis) is more fortunate: she was the best-known deity within the group of Anatolian Mother Goddesses and as she was officially adopted not only by the Greeks but also by the Romans, such mythological traditions were more interesting and they are mentioned in various sources. There are also situations where there is no certainty of the type of kinship between two divinities or on the precise identity of the divinity. However, it is known that such relationships did exist. Hence, an inscription discovered at Ayazviran in eastern Lydia states that Artemis Anaitis was related to another god, but we can only assume that it was either Mên or some local Apollo, considering that, in this area, she is depicted alongside both (5.2.15). Most probably Anaitis was precisely Mēnos tekousa,27 ‘the one who gave birth to Mên’ (4.2.46) or the Mother of Mên at Dorylaion (4.6.8). Similarly, we have a mother of Mên Axiottenos who is praised at Iaza in AD 57/8: ‘Great is the Mother of Mên Axiottenos!’ (4.2.16), and Kula in a dedication where she sits next to the same god: ‘To Mên Axiottenos and the Mother of Mên. Eutychis, nursling of G(aius) I(ulius) Aniketos, from Pergamon, was ill and she prayed to the god (saying) should I be healed I will set up a stele; as the god heard, I fulfilled the vow and praise his powers. In the year 260, in the month of Hyperberetaios, on the second day’ (4.2.63). Elsewhere, this goddess is worshipped together with Mên Tyrannos at Kula in Lydia: ‘In accordance with the inspiration from Zeus Killamenenos, the village of Archelaos consecrated (this statue of) the mother of Mên and Mên Tyrannos. In the year 246, in the month of Panemos’ (4.2.60). In most cases, the two gods appeared together,28 as they had a common Iranian origin and they shared a common cult in the local sanctuaries of eastern Lydia: at Kula and Asarcık for Mên Tiamou and Artemis Anaitis,29 and at Pereudos for Mên Ploneates and Anaitis. At the same time, 27 BWK 55; CMRDM I, 2AB; RECAM III, 110; Diakonoff 1979, 167–69; Veyne 1986. See also Ricl 1994, 159, no. 4. 28 An iconographic example could be that of Philadelphia in Lydia. See 4.2.96. 29 Petzl 1998a, 23.

MEANS OF COMMUNICATION. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DIVINE WORLD

191

there is no certainty of the real identity of the Mother of Sozon. She must have been among the Anatolian Great Mother Goddesses, such as Anaitis.30 Three of the Anatolian solar divinities, Theos Hypsistos, Hosios kai Dikaios and Apollo Lairbenos, even had companions. They were anonymous divinities, just like their paredroi: two of them are defined depending on their companion deities, Thea Hypsiste (1.2.6) and Hosia kai Dikaia (3.2.10) or simply Hosia (3.6.19), while the third is named through a toponymic epithet: Thea Larmene (1.2.12). GOD’S RECEPTIVENESS: REDEMPTION AND FULFILMENT OF PRAYER The personal character of the relationship between humans and the divinity is confirmed by the votive formulas and in the form of the demands addressed to the gods. For the common dedicator, the gods are those who make the impossible become possible,31 they are those who know the name and the wish of every worshipper, even though the latter may not reveal his identity and may simply place a naiskos on the temple walls, such as at Pisidian Antioch, in the sanctuary of Mên Askaenos, or set up anepigraphic rock-cut images of the rider-gods or of the Dioscuri with the ‘Pisidian goddess’ in the south of Anatolia.32 The most complex formulas also reflect the most generous or altruistic wishes for others. For instance, at Stratonikeia in Caria, Hekatas gave thanks to the Most High God and to the Divine ‘for himself, all his family, and his neighbours’ (1.1.32). Two of the best men (aristoi andres) dedicated in the 2nd century, on the territory of ancient Dorylaion, images to the Holy and Just God and to Helios ‘shining rosy-fingered’, asking for ‘the sustainable well-being for the sake of salvation of all those around them’ (3.6.24). In the same place and period, Philopator and Chrestos and Andreas set up for the Justices a marble stele ‘for people and for assets, in fulfilment of a vow’ (3.6.30). Finally, Stratonikeia is also the place of the dedication by Aelius Hekatomnus, addressed to the Divine Ruler and to the Most High God ‘for himself and for the children, wife, friends, relatives, his immediate family and for the city’ (1.1.25). The votive inventory is characterised by a multitude of types of demand. Among them, let me mention examples related to: 30 31 32

RECAM V, 116. BWK 122. Talloen 2015, 229–36; Robert 1987, 412–16.

192

CHAPTER 7

(a) Close community, family and relatives: ‘for himself and for his family’ (1.4.3; 3.6.22: ὑπὲρ αὑτοῦ κὲ τῶν ἰδίων); ‘for the others’ (3.6.62: ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀνθρπων); ‘for themselves and for all the members of their families’ (1.6.18 = 3.6.104: ὑπὲρ ἑαυτῶν καὶ τῶν εἰδίων πάντων); ‘for himself and for his family’ (3.2.5: ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τῶν ἰδίων πάντων); ‘for her own well-being and for the children’ (1.2.14: ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς καὶ τῶν τέκνῳν); ‘for himself’ (1.1.26: ὑπὲρ αὐτου); ‘for themselves and for their families’ (1.1.29: ὑπὲρ ἑαυτῶν καὶ τῶν ἰδίων); ‘for themselves and the members of their family’ (3.6.26: ὑπὲρ ἑαυτῶν καὶ τῶν ἰδίων); ‘for their children’ (3.2.1: ὑπὲρ τῶν παιδίων); Hermes and Meltine, the daughter of Meltine, his wife, ‘for (their) son Philippikos’ (3.2.3: ὑπὲρ Φιλιππικοῦ τοῦ υἱοῦ); ‘for the sake of their natural and adopted children’ (5.2.8: ὑπὲρ τέκνων καὶ θρεμμάτων); ‘for this disease-stricken person to be cured’ (4.2.72: διὰ τὸ σωθῆναι αὐτὸν ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ); (b) Well-being of the family, the community or social and professional groups: ‘for the sake of hope’ (3.6.11: ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐλπίδων); ‘for their family’ (1.1.27; 1.1.28; 3.6.33; 3.6.34: ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων); ‘for himself and for the members of his family’ (1.1.8; 3.6.28: ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τῶν ἰδίων πάντων); ‘for the salvation of the people of Appolenites’ (4.6.4: ὑπὲρ δήμου Ἀπποληνῶν σωτηρίας); (c) Properties owned: ‘for people and for assets’ (3.6.30: ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀνθρώπων κὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν ὑπαρχόντων); ‘for the redemption of their entire families and for fecund crops’ (3.6.102: περὶ τῶν ἰδίων πάντῶν σωτηρίας κὲ καρπῶν θελεσπορίας); (d) The health of the others and deliverance from illness or danger: ‘for salvation’ (3.6.7; 5.2.49: ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας); ‘or the healing of her eyes and her sight’ (3.2.16: ὑπὲρ τῆς τελείης ὀφθαλμῶν); ‘for their salvation and for that of their family’ (3.6.14: ὑπὲρ ἑαυτῶν σωτηρίας καὶ τῶν ἰδίων πάντων); ‘for the health and salvation of himself and his family’ (3.6.25: ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ κὲ τῶν ἰδίων πάντων ὑπὲρ ὑγίας κὲ σωτηρίας); ‘for the salvation of (his) nursling and for himself and the members of his family’ (3.6.27: ὑπὲρ τοῦ θρέψαντος σωτηρίας καὶ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τῶν ἰδίων πάντων); ‘for the salvation of his entire family’ (3.6.101: ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων πάντων σωτηρίας); ‘having been punished at the chest’ (4.2.95: κολασθεῖσα τοὺς μασστούς); ‘having suffered from inside pains’ (5.2.10: πάσχουσα τοῖς ἔσοθεν); ‘for their salvation’ (4.8.21: ὑπὲρ τῆς ἑαυτῶν σωτηρίας); ‘for the health of her eyes’ (5.2.7: ὑπὲρ ὑγείας τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν); ‘for (the healing of) the breasts’ (5.2.18 = 4.2.27: ὑπὲρ τῶν μαστῶν); ‘for the full recovery of her legs’ (5.2.28 = 4.2.58: ὑπὲρ τῆς ὁλοκληρίας τῶν ποδῶν);

MEANS OF COMMUNICATION. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DIVINE WORLD

193

(e) The health of livestock and their protection from danger: ‘for saving his cattle and his family’ (1.6.17: ὑπὲρ βοῶν σωτηρίας κὲ τῶν ἰδίων πάντων); ‘praying for the mule’ (4.2.54: εὐξαμένη ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἡμι|όνου); (f) The fecundity of the harvest: ‘for the salvation of their entire families and for the fecundity of harvests’ (3.6.102: περὶ τῶν ἰδίων πάντῶν σωτηρίας κε καρπῶν θελεσπορίας); ‘for the harvest’ (11.8.2: ὑπὲρ καρπῶν); (g) Fulfilling by the deity of wishes unknown to the reader of the inscription: ‘having made a promise and being heard, in thanksgiving’ (4.2.103: εὐξάμενος καὶ εἰσακουσθεὶς εὐχαριστῶ); ‘since they heard all my prayers’ (4.2.115: ὅτι μοι ἐπήκουσαν | πάντα); (h) Committing a sin or an unpardonable mistake: ‘having committed perjury’ (3.6.5: παρορκήσαντες); (i) The right judgment of the divinity: ‘for the salvation of his entire family’ (3.6.101: ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων πάντων σωτηρίας). COMMANDS, VISIONS, EPIPHANIES, ORACLES Most inscriptions dedicated to the Anatolian solar and lunar gods studied here date to the late Principate (the 2nd and 3rd centuries). They are the proof of a new religious mentality specific to a revitalised paganism, sometimes called ‘the second paganism’. The transformations that occurred in this period from a conceptual and psychological perspective have been stressed by Michel Meslin,33 Ramsay MacMullen,34 Robin Lane Fox,35 Jacques Flamant,36 Paul Veyne37 and Jean Bayet.38 The most interesting record of the use of a new common, multivalent religious language, specific to the religious philosophy of the period,39 a veritable ‘language of the gods’, as Lane Fox called it in his monumental work dedicated to the relations between pagans and Christians from the end of the Antonines,40 is represented by the inscription discovered at the end of the 19th century at the site of a small town in the north of Lycia, Oinoanda. The content of the inscription is partially reproduced in the Divine 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Meslin 1974. MacMullen 1987, 87–89. Lane Fox 1997, 179–81. Pietri and Flamant 1995. Veyne 1986. Bayet 1957, 169–71. Mitchell 1993 II, 44. Lane Fox 1997.

194

CHAPTER 7

Institutes of Lactantius (1. 7. 1 [17]),41 as well as in the thirteenth text of a collection of oracles elaborated in the 5th century, currently known as the Tübingen Theosophy.42 It was written on an altar carefully embedded in the upper side of the north-east part of the Hellenistic wall, along the stairs of the precinct perimeter, to the right of an entrance that leads to one of the defensive towers, so that the first rays of dawn sunlight should reach above the altar. It represents the hexametric answer provided by the oracle of Apollo of Claros on the nature of the Supreme God.43 Robert offers an excellent translation into French:44 Né de lui même, à la sagesse infuse, sans mère, inébranlable, ne comportait pas de nom, aux noms multiples, habitant du feu, voilà ce qu’est Dieu. Mais nous sommes une parcelle de Dieu, nous anges-messagers. À ceux qui interrogent au sujet de Dieu, pour savoir quel est son être il a déclaré l’Éther, dieu qui voit tout; c’est vers lui qu’il faut porter ses regards, et prier, le matin, en regardant vers l’Orient.45

At first glance, it could seem a mere coincidence, but the similarity between this view and that regarding the Most High God is obvious. The perception of the divine in the manner the Oinoanda oracle, much influenced by the theological and religio-philosophical perspectives of the time, mostly late Stoicism, Neopythagoreanism and Neoplatonism, was perfectly compatible with that of Theos Hypsistos. This reality is confirmed by another stimulating discovery: the existence of an inscription on another shrine placed directly under the one mentioned, with a rim for placing lamps.46 The inscription was restored: Χρωματὶς Θεῷ ̔Υψίστῳ τὸν λύχνον εὐχήν. In other words, Chromatis kept the promise made to the god of lighting a lamp: ‘Chromatis (dedicated) the lamp to the Most High God, in fulfilment of the vow’ (1.7.5). It is worth mentioning that an inscription found at Sariçam, north of the ancient Lydian city of Magnesia ad Siplylum, also mentions λυχναψίαι, therefore of lamps dedicated to the god in local celebrations. Lane Fox considers the name 41 ‘Apollo, indeed, whom they think divine above all others, and especially prophetic, giving responses at Colophon, – I suppose because, induced by the pleasantness of Asia, he had removed from Delphi, – to some one who asked who He was, or what God was at all, replied in twentyone verses, of which this is the beginning: “Self-produced, untaught, without a mother, unshaken,/ A name not even to be comprised in word, dwelling in fire,/ This is God; and we His messengers are a slight portion of God.”’ 42 TheosophorumGraecorumfragmenta 13, 106–108. See des Places 1984, 2301–02; Mitchell 1993 II, 43–44; Robert 1971, 597–603; Lane Fox 1997, 179–81; Milner and M. Smith 1994, 73–74. 43 Lane Fox 1997, 180–81; Athanassiadi 1992, 54. 44 Robert 1971, 602; see also the French translation within Lane Fox 1997, 180. 45 See also our translation at 1.7.4. 46 Hall 1978; Lane Fox 1997, 181.

MEANS OF COMMUNICATION. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DIVINE WORLD

195

given to this person ‘a female name which tended to be borne by former slaves or their children’; hence, it belonged to somebody of humble origin.47 However, this does not necessarily mean that Chromatis was a Christian. The available data do not necessary lead to such a hypothesis. Another surprising aspect at Oinoanda is that the orientation and placement of the altars, as well as the content of the oracles, indicate the direction to which the worshippers’ prayers should point – the spot where the first sunrays of dawn hit the Hellenistic wall.48 This type of eastward-facing prayer was common for Eastern peoples such as the Persians, for instance, a fact mentioned by Tertullian (Apologeticum 16. 9), as well as by certain philosophers such as Socrates49 or Apollonios of Tyana, of whom Philostratus says that, as priest of a solar divinity, he performed occult rites every morning, probably under the influence of brahmins or magi (LifeofApollonius 1. 16, 18, 25–26). The oracle of Oinoanda was created during a prolific period for Anatolian oracles, approximately between AD 150 and 250, but one less fruitful for the oracle of Delphi. Frequently, some functions of priests or prophets of the cult of Apollo were entrusted to certain philosophers, either Platonist, Stoic or Pythagorean.50 One of these scholars was Plutarch, who served for a long time as priest of Apollo at Delphi. When referring to the nature of the divinity, seen as unique, untouched and pure, he stated: But the God is, we are bound to assert, he is, with reference to no time but to that age wherein is no movement, or time, or duration; to which nothing is prior or subsequent; no future, no past, no elder, no younger, which by one long “now” has made the “always” perfect. Only with reference to this that which really is, is [ontos]; it has not come into being, it is not yet to be, it did not begin, it will not cease. Thus then we ought to hail him in worship, and thus to address him as “Thou Art”, aye, or in the very words of some of the old people, “Thou art one thing” (Plutarch OntheEatDelphi 20 [393 A–B]).

Views related to the existence and nature of such a unique supreme deity began timidly, first in philosophy, mainly in the works of the Pre-Socratic thinkers. The first such reference is the statement of Xenophanes of Colophon, made at the end of the 6th century: ‘There is one god the greatest among gods and men; / Not at all like mortals in body or in thought’ (Clement of Alexandria TheStromata 5. 109).51 The formula postulated by Xenophanes and used also by other pagan authors regarding the uniqueness of the divinity only 47 48 49 50 51

Mitchell 1993 II, 44. Lane Fox 1997, 181; Mitchell 1993 I, 181. Hamman 1980, 1200. Lane Fox 1997, 209. Burkert 1985, 305–37; Ustinova 1999, 218.

196

CHAPTER 7

acknowledged the superiority of a certain divinity in relationship to the others and his exceptional defining characteristics.52 It was not a statement marking a strict monotheism such as Judaism, but what is important here is that the premises were created for an ordered world of the sacred that functioned according to strict rules, a view to be re-encountered much later in the pagan philosophy of the first centuries AD. A similar conception on the nature of the divinity was subsequently developed by Plato and his disciples, Xenocrates of Chalcedon and Aristotle (Aristotle Metaphysica 12. 7. 20–25 [1072 b], 12. 5. 15 [1074 b)], 12. 10. 35 [1076 a]; Cicerodenaturadeorum 1. 13).53 As to the nature of the divinity, its role and the purpose of human existence, Cicero and then Diogenes Laertius mention the views of Plato, who insisted on the immateriality, incognisability, immovable and eternal character of the divinity and of the human soul (Diogenes Laertius LivesofEminentPhilosophers 3. 77).54 The divinity is unique, the source and cause of the entire creation, shaped like a sphere, identified with the principle of good (Diogenes 3. 72).55 This is why the purpose of each individual must be that of becoming an image of divinity, of identifying with the divinity (Diogenes 3. 78). Centuries later, this would be a goal of Neoplatonists and Neopythagoreans, eventually to become a common philosophical conception of late paganism, which the Christians adopted as well.56 Hence, it is no coincidence that Plotinus stated ‘“the end” and the goal [of life] was to be united to, to approach the God who is over all things’, as shown by his biographer, Porphyry (LifeofPlotinus 23). Stoics considered the divinity a creator fire, through the agency of which the universe was periodically purified as the result of a universal conflagration.57 This was perceived as a quintessentially solar divinity, given that for Cleanthes of Assos (ca. 331–232 BC) and his disciples, the Sun was not only the centre of the world, the ruler of the universe, the leading Reason, but mostly the 52

Edwards 1991, 223–26. Xenocrates shows that the highest god, who can be called Zeus, represents a unit, monas, while the Olympian gods may be assimilated to the sky and to the stars; cf. Burkert 1985, 330–31. 54 ‘Plato holds God, like the soul, to be incorporeal. For only thus is he exempt from change and decay. As already stated, he assumes the Ideas to be causes and principles whereby the world of natural objects is what it is’, and time ‘was created as an image of eternity’ (Diogenes 3. 73). See also Plato Theaitetos 176 b; Cicero denaturadeorum 1. 12. 55 ‘And the creation as a whole is caused by God, because it is the nature of the good to be beneficent, and the creation of the universe has the highest good for its cause. For the most beautiful of created things is due to the best of intelligible causes; so that, as God is of this nature, and the universe resembles the best in its perfect beauty, it will not be in the likeness of anything created, but only of God.’ 56 Stander 1999a. 57 Stander 1999b. 53

MEANS OF COMMUNICATION. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DIVINE WORLD

197

master and the lord of all things, the King par excellence.58 Seneca ascribed the same royal title to Jupiter, whom he disclosed as the deliverer of justice, the one ‘who presides over the universe’, ‘the soul and spirit of the world’, its ruler, the author of Creation, reason for which he should receive all names, mostly that of Providence, as ‘he concerns himself with us’.59 His contemporary Pliny the Elder, though he did not comply with Stoic philosophy, described the Sun as the main divinity, the ruler of the lands, the stars and the heaven, the mind of the whole world, and the supreme leading principle and divinity of nature (NH 2. 12–13). The emperor-philosopher Marcus Aurelius, a promoter of Late Stoicism, strongly believed that all the creatures of the universe were harmoniously coordinated into a single world by a sole material substance, a sole law, a sole common reason proper to the all conscious beings and, mostly, an ideal of perfection for all living creatures that are akin and share the same universal conscience: All things are meshed together, and a sacred bond unites them. Hardly a single thing is alien to the rest: ordered together in their places they together make up the one order out of the universe. There is one universe out of all things, one god pervading all things, one substance, one law, one common reason in all intelligent beings, and one truth – if indeed there is also one perfection of all cognate beings sharing in the same reason (Meditations 7. 9).

A step further was made by the Neoplatonist and Neopythagorean philosophers, from the beginning of the Principate. The Neopythagoreans supported the idea of a remote divinity, situated above everything, limited to such an extent that it could never contact material things. This is why they considered that the divinity should be venerated spiritually; they emphasised the need to live a pure life, an idea widely diffused in that period, in parallel with others who insisted on the moral aspects of the religious life. Furthermore, they admitted the existence of demons.60 Nonetheless, we should also reflect on the impact of these philosophicalreligious interpretations among the various categories of society and the extent to which they reflect their perspectives on the celestial world. Oracles such as those of Claros and Didyma were not destined for a restricted learned minority, but a far more numerous common public, as every year delegations from the important cities of the East and the whole empire, up to the Scottish or Danubian frontiers, came to those two cities, as did entire families of pilgrims 58 59 60

Grimal 1992, 110, 121. Seneca Deprovidentia 1. 1; Quaestionesnaturales 2. 42. 3; 2. 43. 1; 2. 45. Stander 1999a.

198

CHAPTER 7

or occasional individuals. Some of these oracles were engraved on the walls of temples.61 All the indications lead to the conclusion that, at Oinoanda, the two altars were not placed at the same point by coincidence, but that Chromatis added the altar in full knowledge of the content of the theological oracle and that she identified that all-knowing god with her pagan Theos Hypsistos,62 as ‘There is every reason to believe that the oracle and the dedication together identify one of the outdoor shrines of a “Hypsistarian sect”, whose beliefs and practices overlapped substantially with contemporary Jewish and Christian practices.’63 It was the same transcendental, abstract and anonymous divinity whose name could not be contained in words, ruler of all things, divine and human, as a famous inscription of Apulum names Jupiter the Highest or Iupiter Summus Exsuperantissimus, a true supreme ruler of the divine and human things and arbiter of all destinies.64 As he had the supreme position and he was named Pantokrator or Almighty in Bosporan inscriptions and in literary sources (Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa and Epiphanios of Salamis), this Highest God was identified with similar gods in function, position and power – Jupiter or Zeus. However, as underlined by Celsus: ‘It makes no difference whether we call Zeus the Most High or Zeus or Zen or Adonai or Sabaoth or Amoun like the Egyptians, or Papaeus like the Scythians’ (Origen Contra Celsum 1. 24).65 Perhaps this is also the reason why many of the Anatolian inscriptions name him either Theos Hypsistos or Zeus Hypsistos. The fact that the god could be named in various ways, as shown by the oracle, indicates one of the most widely disseminated, but hard to understand phenomena, what MacMullen among others calls polyonymy, which deployed ternary formulas to set equivalence between divinities, in regard of their specific attributes.66 However, the notion of polyonymy is closely connected to that of the anonymous god, as it was considered that the god was too high to be contained in a name.67 Hence, there is Helios Theos Hypsistos at Pergamon,68 Apollo Lairbenos Theos

61 Mitchell 1993 II, 44–45; Lane Fox 1997, 188–90; MacMullen 1987, 48–49, 118–19, 122– 23, 147. 62 Marek 2010, 648–49; Lane Fox 1997, 187. 63 Mitchell 1993 II, 44. 64 IDR III/5.1, 231 = CIL III, 1090 = ILS 2998; Sanie 1978, 1113–14. 65 See also Simon 1976. 66 Athanessiadi and Frede 1999, 8–9; MacMullen 1987, 146. 67 Interesting in this respect are the comments in Borret’s French edition of Origen regarding this passage and the polyonymy, with parallels in Platonic and Stoic, Isis-related, orphic and hermetic views (Borret 1967, 135). 68 IPergamon 330.

MEANS OF COMMUNICATION. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DIVINE WORLD

199

Hypsistos at Hierapolis in Phrygia,69 Zeus Hypsistos Brontaios at Miletupolis in Mysia,70 Theos Hypsistos epekoos Helios at Amastris in Paphlagonia,71 Theos Hypsistos ouranios72 at Sahin in Phoenicia, or even Zeus Helios Mithra agios Hypsistos epekoos Tourmasgades at Dura in Syria.73 Epithets were very often added to divinities, such as epekoos (‘prayer-listening’ or just ‘listening’), epouranios (‘ruler of heavens’), megalos (‘the great’), Pantokrator (‘the Almighty’) or soter (‘the saviour’) so that the powers of the gods be multiplied. Nonetheless, such characterisations are not present only for the highest god, but also for other deities within the Graeco-Roman world, and mostly for those of an Eastern origin. An interesting example is provided by an inscription, to an extent similar to that of Apulum, discovered at Kalecik in the north of Galatia, where it is stated that certain constructions were built and dedicated ‘to the great Most High and Heavenly God, to his holy angels, and for his venerable house of prayer’ (1.5.1). In various instances the god is syncretised with different local divinities, hence the numerous peculiarities. At Büyük Nefes, a merchant from Ancyra and Tavium, Karpos, probably a Jew, dedicated a monument to the god in fulfilment of a vow,74 which questions a probable identification of the respective divinity with Zeus Tavianus, mentioned by both Strabo (12. 5. 2) in relation to the homonymous place and by the inscriptions of Galatia75 and Dacia.76 In Mysia, the Most High God was identified with a Phrygian divinity of the weather and of atmospheric phenomena, Zeus Bronton, invoked as a deity of fertility by the Mysian, Bithynian and Phrygian villagers (1.3.7).77 But besides the agrarian character ascribed to this divinity, in Phrygia, the Most High God is also an abstract, moral and anonymousgod, like many of the local divinities. This was due to the fact that there is not even one Phrygian inscription that mentions him by identifying him with Zeus, but only as Theos Hypsistos.78 On a stele of Miletupolis, this sovereign god has the sceptre and lighteningas symbols of power. He also had an eagle at his side, as ‘incarnation, substitute, 69

Colpe and Löw 1994, 1051. IGSK 26.I, 5. 71 Marek 1993, Am 1b. 72 In an inscription dedicated Θεῷ ὑψίστῳ οὐρανίῳ ὑπάτῳ καὶ ἀνικήτῳ Μίθρᾳ (Cumont 1899, 92, no. 5). 73 Robert 1968, 594. 74 RECAM II, 418. 75 At Ancyra, as Zeus megistos Taenos and Zeus Taouianos. 76 Two of them come from Apulum and one from Napoca, dedicated to Jupiter Optimus Maximus Tavianus by Celts with an Anatolian origin; they were analysed by Husar (1999, 261–62). 77 IGSK 26.I, 5. 78 Drew-Bear and Naour 1990, 2035. 70

200

CHAPTER 7

or messenger of the highest heavenly divinity and of the celestial fire, the sun’.79 I have already stressed the identification of Theos Hypsistos with a solar divinity and the heights, a deity of light, also called in the oracle of Oinoanda ‘the Ethereal Fire’. A Zeus Aitherios is attested in the inscriptions of Mytilene and Miletos, while another oracle of Didyma, mentioned in the fourteenth paragraph of the TübingenTheosophy, as an answer given to a certain Teophilus, also mentions this supreme divinity, who resides beyond the celestial spheres, who is an eternal fire, in permanent motion, an eternity without limits, unknown even to the gods and called the Ethereal Fire, in a similar way to the oracle of Oinoanda.80 Artemidorus Daldianus, probably influenced by Middle Platonism, included in Oneirokritika the Ethereal Fire among the Olympian deities, besides Zeus, Hera, Aphrodite Ourania, Artemis, Apollo and Athena (2. 17. 34). This was a favourable oniric sign, as it opposed death, and an allusion to the doctrine of ether as the source of the soul and of life itself (Oneirokritika 2. 17. 35). ANGELS, GODS, DEMONS: DIVINE HIERARCHIES The idea of protecting, non-corporeal entities that represent the messengers of the divinity is encountered in both Jewish and Christian environments.81 For example, a follower of Sabazius is depicted on the tomb of Vibia within the catacomb of Praetextatus together with his good angel, angelus bonus.82 Mithra himself was identified in the first place in Zoroastrianism with a yazata, a sort of angel, a force of the light who fights on the side of Ahura Mazda, the one who embodied the principle of the good and the supreme divinity parexcellence. The angels (in Hebrew malahim, ‘messengers’) had the faculty of progressing, for the best or for the worst, thus becoming maleficent (in Hebrew shedim or mazikim, ‘harmful beings’).83 Angelolatry has often been a reason of dispute between Pharisees and Sadducees, as the latter rejected the existence of angels (Acts 23:7–8). In some opinions, even archaic Mosaism did not 79

Chevalier and Gheerbrant 1994–95 III, 475. TheosophorumGraecorumfragmenta 13, 109–115; Robert 1971, 605: ‘Il existe, résidant bien au-dessus de l’enveloppe supracéleste, un feu illimité, toujours en mouvement. Éternité sans bornes: les bienheureux (c’est-à-dire les dieux) ne peuvent le connaître, à moins que lui, Souverain Père, quand il en a ainsi jugé dans son conseil, en se donne lui-même à voir’. See des Places 1984, 2300–04; Mitchell 1993 II, 43–44. 81 Pippidi 1969, 267–81; Sanie 1981, 149 for the inscriptions of Viminacium and Ostia. 82 Turcan 1998, 370. 83 Hirschmann 2007, 137–39; St John of Damascus ElementaryIntroductionintoDogmas 2. 3; Attias and Benbassa 1997, 180–81; Kernbach 1995, 321–23. 80

MEANS OF COMMUNICATION. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DIVINE WORLD

201

contain any reference to angels, and a theory of angels is elaborated only in the period of the Babylonian exile, probably influenced by the Chaldean magi and maybe not totally independent of the Avestan tradition of Iran. In the pagan environments of the first centuries AD, under the influence of the theological and philosophical-religious trends of the time, certain specific ideas began to emerge wherein the perception arose of the divine world as an ordered society, populated by intermediary beings, angelic or demonic, in charge of monitoring the various regions of the universe, but who could also intervene in the life of the individual as messengersof the divine will, as mediators, by transmitting orders issued from a supreme divine power through oniric visions or epiphanies, or sometimes by punishments for moral trespasses.84 Such supernatural beings also made justice in relationship with the humans, thus becoming ‘angels of fire’, invoked to drive away the divine wrath and to avenge injustices.85 The role of angels of justice was performed, mostly in the Anatolian area, even by certain solar divinities, such as Apollo or Hosios kai Dikaios.86 Furthermore, Mithra, known for his quality as mediator, but also as a salvation god with solar attributes,87 was invoked as a divinity of justice in an inscription discovered at Tyana (2.9.3).88 However, given the ever-more accentuated presence of doctrines promoting astral immortality, Stoic and Neoplatonist exegeses, as well as strong henotheistic trends, the role of the divine justice that mediated between the celestial and terrestrial worlds and that led humans to the celestial spheres was ascribed to an almighty and universal supreme solar deity (kosmokrator), eventually to be identified with Helios.89 Yet, this was not just the pantepoptes Helios of the Homeric epic poems, and he could no longer be identified with a Sol indiges specific to traditional Roman religion, but he had become an Eastern deity, thus being called Sol Invictus (Iliad 3. 277; Odyssey 12. 323). Through the vision of the pagan theologians and philosophers of the time, especially Neoplatonist and Stoic, he was not only the Sun per se, but he had become a universal demiurge, a ruler of the world, an ethereal fire, a rational power, an ‘intelligent’

84

MacMullen 1987, 96–105, 132–39; Brenk 1986; Cumont 1915; J.Z. Smith 1978. Sheppard 1980–81, 86, no. 7, at Kidrama, in Caria. Another example is provided by Plutarch, who talks about the existence of spirits, ‘unforgetting avengers, as if they followed up the memories of some unforgotten foul deeds of earlier days’ (Plutarch Dedefectuoraculorum 15 [418 B-C]). 86 Sheppard 1980–81, 78–86, nos. 1–6; IGSK 52, 19; RECAM II, 44 and 242. 87 For a doctrinal comparison with Christianity, see Lease 1980. 88 IGSK 55.I, 34 = Cumont 1899, 91, no. 3 = CIMRM I, 18. 89 Cumont 1949, 171–88 and 289–93; 1963; 1913a; Tantillo 2003, 46; Segal 1980, 1349; Halsberghe 1972, 82. 85

202

CHAPTER 7

light, whose rays represented the vehicles through which the soul was elevated to the celestial heights.90 In the Christian perspective, within a celestial kingdom ordered as a strict hierarchical system91 and dominated by the radiant image of the divine judge, in many cases the angels themselves, at times called spirits or powers,92 had to fulfil many attributes. They also had universal cosmic functions, thus observing the divine will, venerating God, taking care of people’s wellbeing, watching over their penitence, reminding them about the finality of earthly life and the purpose of redemption, praying with those who suffer, taking the prayers of believers to the skies and, not least, serving as a role model for humans.93 Unlike fallen or lawless angels, who try to lead the human souls to perdition (The Apocalypse of Paul 14:1–6), in Christianity good angels become the messengers who lead souls of the believers before the Judge. As soon as the souls are brought to Heaven, saints greet them.94 In one of the Apocrypha, The Apocalypse of Paul (12:1), the ones charged by God to bring the souls of the righteous before the Supreme Judge in their final moment are called the angels of justice or saint angels, whose faces shine like the Sun. In the same text, the archangel Michael or ‘the angel of the covenant’ assists God in making the right judgment together with thousands of angels and archangels, and the cherubim and the 24 elders also mentioned in Revelation 4:10.95 Certain aspects are worth mentioning in regard to Theos Hypsistos, Hosios kai Dikaios, Apollo Lairbenos and Mên, which correspond to theological and philosophical-religious trends of the time.96 As each was a remote god, situated beyond the celestial spheres and on the edge of the cognoscible, he communicated or took contact with his worshippers by specific means:

90 Cumont 1949, 179–80; 1913a, 461–63; Mitchell 1993 II, 44 and 51; Athanassiadi 1992, 50 and 53; Dillon 2000, 927 and 936; cf. Clement of Alexandria Protrepticus 2. 25. 3–4 and Lactantius TheDivineInstitutes 1. 7. 1; 7. 13. 5–8. 91 Ps.-Dionysius the Areopagite On the Divine Names 6–9: seraphim, cherubim, thrones, reigns, powers, the masters, the beginners, archangels and angels; see also the examples in the literature on Paul (Babcock 1999). 92 Didymus of Alexandria On the Holy Spirit 56: the spirits are the celestial and rational powers named in the Scripture angels and powers. 93 Babcock 1999, 54. 94 Leclercq 1920; Comte 1991, 37–38. 95 ApocalypseofPaul 14:7. See also Hirschmann 2007, 138–40. 96 See Brenk 1986; Cumont 1910; 1916.

MEANS OF COMMUNICATION. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DIVINE WORLD

203

(1) Through nightly oniric visions; some inscriptions on monuments mention the formula κατὰ ὄναρ at Pergamon (1.3.9),97 Tralleis in Caria (1.1.38),98 Miletupolis in Mysia,99 Arvalia near Ephesos (3.1.1), Laodikeia Katakekaumene (3.2.14) and Nikomedeia in Bithynia;100 (2) With the help of a prophet: προφήτης τοῦ ἁγιωτάτου Θεοῦ ̔Υψίστου (1.1.13; 1.4.4; 3.4.3);101 the role of these prophets was underlined especially for the entire western area of Asia Minor, either regarding local solar gods (Hosios kai Dikaios),102 or non-indigenous religious perspectives that had taken over certain local customs (the case of Montanists);103 (3) Through divine powers,divine messengers or angels, which make up a rather strict hierarchy composed, first, by the godsperse with the role of messengers (θεὸς ἄγγελος = ‘messenger god’, especially Apollo and Hermes), angelic divinities (θείον ἀγγελικόν = ‘divine messenger’ or ἄγγελος τῶν θεῶν = ‘messenger of the gods’ at Stratonikeia, Kidrama and Lagina in Caria),104 who manifest themselves to mortals through epiphanies, as demonstrated by the existence of megas theiosepiphanes that appears together with Theos Hypsistos and Thea Larmene in a dedication dated to the 2nd century AD, discovered at Borlu (in Lydia).105 At the top of the divine hierarchy subordinated to the Highest God there seems to be a Royal Divinity, with possible Semitic influences.106 Despite the distance separating him from the terrestrial world, the supreme divinity could intervene directly in the life of humans. This would be the most plausible explanation for the use of symbols such as ears or raised palms depicted on stelae having an Anatolian origin or those from other areas of the 97

IPergamon 331. IGSK 36.I, 14. 99 IGSK 26.I, 5. 100 Dörner 1941, 37. 101 Cumont 1916, 447. 102 At Temrek, near Borlu (Lydia), an inscription dedicated to the Just and Holy Angel reminds us of the agency of Alexander of Saittai; cf. Sheppard 1980–81, 90–91, no. 9. For Hosios kai Dikaios in the hypostasis of angelofHelios, see also IGSK 52, 19. The dedication addressed to Hosios kai Dikaios dates to the 1st century AD and it was discovered at Hadrianoutherai in central Mysia. Such cases, where the Phrygian divinity appears besides other similar solar deities, such Helios or Apollo, are also encountered on other inscriptions, such as those in the north of Galatia, at Karahoca in the district of Hayamana (RECAM II, 242) and Yukari Dudaş (RECAM II, 44). In this sense, I also find interesting the commentaries of Mitchell (1993 II, 25–26). 103 Mitchell 1993 II, 46–47. 104 Sheppard 1980–81, 78–79, nos. 1–5 (Stratonikeia), 86, no. 6 (Lagina), no. 7 (Kidrama). 105 Sheppard 1980–81, 99–100, no. 12. 106 Sheppard 1980–81, 86, no. 6 (Lagina, in Caria). 98

204

CHAPTER 7

empire, as well as of the epithet epekoos ascribed to the Most High God.107 The god could miraculously cure the individual of a certain illness,108 or he could redeem/savehimfrom a maleficent influence,109 or he could avengean injustice by bringing divine punishment upon the wrongdoer.110 At Kidrama in Caria, the dedicator cursed the wrongdoer to be punished by the ‘angels of fire’,111 while on an epigraph at Delos the angels of the god were invoked, as well as Theos Hypsistos in his quality of ‘master of the souls and of the entire body’.112 Those who wanted to escape divine punishment had to repent their sins by imploring god’s mercy, as there was already a well-established tradition in this respect especially in Lydia and Phrygia.113

107

SEG 47, nos. 1938–1939. For instance, at Aizanoi in Phrygia, in the case of Aurelios Asklepiades; cf. Drew-Bear and Naour 1990, 2039–40. 109 The case of the dyer Ioulianos in the inscription discovered at Medar (north from Tyateira): Malay 1999, 26; SEG 47, no. 2152 (a papyrus of Egypt with unknown origin, dating the 3rd– 4th centuries AD, which mentions an exorcism). 110 CIJ I, 725 (Delos, end of the 2nd century–beginning of the 1st century BC; it contains a representation of the palms raised as in prayer); CIJ II, 769 (Akmonia in Phrygia). 111 Sheppard 1980–81, 86, no. 7. 112 CIJ I, 725. 113 Sheppard 1980–81, 87–88, no. 8 (on a dedication addressed to Hosios kai Dikaios from Yayla Baba Köy in the valley of Tembris). 108

CONCLUSIONS

The Anatolian divine world is characterised by a particular dynamic. On one hand, there are phenomena similar to those present in the Roman Empire during the first three centuries AD. On the other, many peculiarities individualise this world in relation to other Eastern areas. There are certain general characteristics that can be related to the divinities studied. First, these divinities were omnipotent and their sphere of influence extended not only upon the divine world, but also upon the human communities that they govern as absolute ‘masters’, ‘rulers’ or even ‘tyrants’. They were protecting, saviour divinities, who listened to the prayers of individuals or of groups (a fact highlighted by epithets such as soteresor epekooi). The relationship between these divinities and the dedicators was a personal one, dominated by power relations. As they were epiphanic gods for the most part, they manifested their power directly or through intermediaries (on earth, through priests or prophets, or at other times through divine, angelic beings), within oniric or oracular visions. The duty of community members and of individuals was that of observing the orders of the god, of bringing him offerings, of soliciting his advice by addressing questions to the divine will and, mostly, that of publicly eulogising the god. The advertising made to the god was one of the defining elements especially within rural communities in the eastern part of Lydia and in the centre and south of Phrygia. Actually, all these characteristics were much stronger than in the more Hellenised regions, where the god was first of all a polyadic divinity and less of a personal one (the case of Artemis Pergaia or of Sandan). Nonetheless, reality demonstrates that it is very difficult to draw a clear line between the deeply Hellenised area situated generally toward the coast and the more conservative inland rural area. This occurred first of all because that line moved continually toward the interior, thus leading gradually to the disappearance of local idioms and to the assimilation of the local cultural and religious substrate within the inner limits of Hellenism. On the other hand, this occurred because the relationship between the Hellenised urban setting and the rural was never interrupted. There was always a certain human mobility and permanent exchange between the two areas through rural pilgrims who brought offerings to the great sanctuaries or to the

206

CONCLUSIONS

sanctuaries of the small Phrygian or Lydian towns. These pilgrims asked the god to manifest his power and to elucidate a case, to avenge an injustice; they sought to propitiate the god, etc. Such requests existed largely because these were gods of justice, of vengeance, mostly with warlike attributes (represented either with the double axe specific to the celestial divinities in the south of Anatolia, with bow and arrows, or with the shield and clad in armour, etc.). Mên and Anaitis were especially invoked, either as protecting divinities in funerary imprecations or as gods of justice within specific ceremonies in the rural Lydian temples, where setting up the sceptre and the invocation addressed by the priest in the presence of the community members meant binding the wrongdoer(s) by a vow. The punishment of the divinity could fall on several successive generations if none of the descendants annulled the binding vow or the curse, more likely. This led to the ‘divine terror’ that such divinities could inspire, the reason why people had always to propitiate and eulogise them. Naturally, payment was required for all of these actions, which contributed to the income of the sanctuaries. Actually, autochthonous temples flourished by numerous means. Beside sacred properties (groves, lakes, forests), they usually possessed arable land or land growing vines as well, as with the great Cappadocian sanctuaries or in the vicinity of the sanctuary belonging to Artemis Pergaia. Such properties were often obtained following a divine command addressed explicitly or because of voluntary donation by the dedicators. Some sanctuaries even had workshops whose products were destined not only to satisfy its own needs but also for sale. Itinerant priests such as those of Artemis Pergaia (similar to those of Cybele or of Artemis Ephesia) also brought in substantial incomes, as did the slaves consecrated to the divinity who practised prostitution for the god’s benefit. This was an honourable activity; Herodotus shows that such women had no trouble finding spouses afterwards among members of the local aristocracy. Likewise, it is worth mentioning the divinities with a high degree of abstraction and anonymity: the real names of Hypsistos, Sozon and Hosios kai Dikaios are not known; they were named according to their dominant attributes, which became divine epicleses. This is why it is very difficult to determine whether their names were present only as an epithet of another divinity or if there is a more complex process of syncretism at work that results in a new divinity with many attributes (Helios Theos Hypsistos, Apollo Sozon/ Letoid Sozon, Hosios Apollo, Men Dikaios, etc.). In the last situation, the phenomenon of polyonymy1 played a very important role, because it was 1

See Athanassiadi and Frede 1999, 8.

CONCLUSIONS

207

generally considered that, by adding multiple divine names, the powers of the god increased proportionally. On the other hand, the names of the divinities were not always adapted and identified in the same manner. Thereby, phonetic polarisation2 emerged, which involved making a name from the equivalent in another language under multiple forms. In other words, the moment the autochthonous names began being identified with Greel phonemes, a wide variety of denominations emerged and the written form was only approximate, thus leaving the impression of a multitude of different local divinities, but with similar names (Lairbenos/ Lermenos/ Lyermenos/Leimenos; Mên/Meis/Mis, etc.). This is especially the case with Mên: cumulation, with mention of various cult founders within the god’s title, leaves the impression of a strong particularism, which is obviously in contrast to the universalist claims expressed in inscriptions through epithets such as ouranios or epouranios, or to the uniqueness of the god, expressed through the formula heishotheos. However, orthographic variants may also arise from the obvious tendency to spell the name of a divinity to match the then local pronunciation (Hosios kai Dikaios/Hosios ke Dikeos; Anaitis/Anaeitis/Anatis). These phenomena are sometimes redoubled by another one, equally important, in the case of Asia Minor. Multiple identifications of local divinities are a consequence of the fact that they were identified differently, depending on their specific attributes and attributions, in successive phases, underlining their similarities with Greek or even with Roman divinities. Hence, Mâ ended up being identified with Athena, Enyo or Bellona, Anaitis with Artemis, Aphrodite or Athena (each of them underlining a certain predominant function), Sandan with Herakles, Lairbenos with Helios and Apollo (also underlining here the quality of god of the Sun and that of god of light and wisdom). Many times, however, they overlapped only partially and this did not necessarily lead to a total identification with a Greek deity. It is worth mentioning at least two cases: that of Sozon, identified with Apollo in certain situations, but not to such an extent as to lose his identity totally, and that of Sandan, for whom assimilation with Herakles in the 3rd century BC–3rd century AD was only artificial, for which reason it did not last.3 In regard to iconography, we encounter very interesting phenomena. First, cases where different deities (and the iconographic set within which they are represented) have similar features are not uncommon. This underlines two trends: either those divinities have a common origin (the group of the Anato2 3

McLean 2005, 91. See here, for instance, Pohl 2004, 90–94; Ehling 2004, 144–45.

208

CONCLUSIONS

lian Great Mother Goddesses, whose local idols are represented in approximately the same manner: the case of Artemis Pergaia, closely connected typologically with Artemis Ephesia, Artemis Leukophryene of Magnesia on Meander, Artemis Sardiane of the Lydian capital, or Aphrodite of Aphrodisias); or they are iconographic loans, given the local and regional context (the example of Mên and Mithra as rider-gods on Pontic coins) or attributes similar to other autochthonous divinities (the case of the naturalised Anaitis who borrows features of the local Mother Goddesses, sometimes acquiring an iconography similar to that of Artemis Ephesia or of Cybele). The iconographical evolution of the divinities at various periods was another aspect approached in this volume. Frequently, iconography is bivalent, Greek and autochthonous, which sometimes determined confusions regarding the real identity of the deities. The example of Anaitis at Hypaipa, Hierokaisareia and Philadelphia in Lydia is illustrative in this sense. However, such situations also appear in other areas of Anatolia. Paradoxically, the first representations of Artemis Pergaia in the Hellenistic period were typically Greek, where the divinity had as attributes the bow and the cervid. Nonetheless, subsequent monetary emissions presented both the Greek and autochthonous versions. First, the idol depicted gives the impression of a goddess on a throne, flanked by wild animals (‘the Cybele model’). Subsequently, she was illustrated in the older form, with high polos and long veil, in the lower parts with representations of Dactyli, Curetes and Corybantes, just like the above-mentioned typologically related goddesses. On the other hand, the Anatolian cults themselves become, though to a lesser extent than other Eastern cults outside the peninsula, promoters of a new type of religious mentality. The most explicit formulation of this new pagan mentality, ever more accentuated throughout the 2nd–3rd centuries AD, is represented by the answers offered by the oracles of Apollo at Claros and Didyma regarding the way in which people should worship the divinity, the nature of the deities, the relations between humans and divinity, the role of the divine messengers, the immortality of the soul, etc. In particular, the oracle at Didyma seems to prove that, within paganism, there was a tendency to integrate the pagan pantheon within a religious system governed by a unique force represented by a supreme universal divinity.4 Strongly influenced by Judaism and by Iranian religious views, especially starting from the initial period, conceptions of Theos Hypsistos were adapted to the religious and philosophical innovations of the 2nd–3rd centuries AD, thereby presenting similar ideas to those specific to late Stoicism, Neopytha4

Mitchell 1993 II, 43.

CONCLUSIONS

209

goreanism and Neoplatonism, but also similar to ones disseminated by the Anatolian Apolline oracles. Thus, the views of the Hypsistarians on the nature and role of the divinity could hypothetically provide an important ideological support in defining the solar theology of the Roman emperors and regarding the accentuation of the henotheistic trends of the period under discussion. This way, there is an emphasis on the parallelism between the celestial and the terrestrial hierarchy, in full agreement with the idea of universal harmony ensured by the supreme divinity in the celestial kingdom, an almighty, unknown, solar, eternal deity, situated beyond the highest celestial spheres, whose representative in the terrestrial kingdom becomes precisely the state sovereign: the emperor.

CATALOGUE

INSCRIPTIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS The inscriptions are ordered alphabetically by locality, depending on their ancient name. When it is unknown, it is replaced with the current Turkish name. The main interest in this case is the place of provenance; this is why, if the monument was discovered in a certain location, but it definitely belongs to another place, this detail will be indicated in brackets, along with the locality where it was found. If the place of discovery is not known, it will be noted as pertaining to Anatolian territory (marked by an asterisk) or it will be mentioned in the final part of the catalogue with unknown find-spots. There are also indications of the evidence currently considered as referring to another divinity than the one indicated in the catalogue, but initially ascribed to the divinity in question. The bibliography for each item in the catalogue is presented in descending order of publication year, i.e. latest first. References, present in the text, are indicated in round brackets, comprising the name of the divinity and the number of the inscription in bold characters. Measurements are height × width × thickness (in cm).

1. HYPSISTOS AND ASSIMILATED DEITIES Caria, Ionia 1.1.1

Aphrodisias (Caria): Ex-votoofMarcianustoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Aphrodisias, in Caria. Chance find. Type: Small altar reconstituted from two parts, rudimentarily moulded in the upper part and at the base, on three sides. Dimensions: 10 × 26 × 10 cm. Letters: 1.5–2.5 cm. The inscription is set on two adjacent facets. Highly irregular and superficially engraved, non-datable. Lunatesigma, cursive alpha. Currentlocation: In the Museum of Aphrodisias. Excavation Inv. No. 65.337 + 67.199. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.25; Mitchell 1999, 136, no. 127; Reynolds and Tannenbaum 1987, 138, no. 11; SEG 37, no. 853. Date: Roman Imperial period (?). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: (FaceA) Μα|ρκια|[ν]ὸς | Θε󰰍ι. (FaceB) Ὑψίσ|τοι ε[ὐ]|χή. Translation: Marcianus,totheMostHighGod,avow.

1.1.2

Aphrodisias (Caria): VotiveinscriptionofTatastoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the Odeon of Aphrodisias, in Caria. Type: Upper right corner of a reused marble altar, upper moulding chiselled away and the face damaged, probably by burning. Dimensions: 12 × 13.5 × 9 cm. Letters: On the average, 1.5 cm. Late Hellenistic letters carefully executed but unevenly sized and spaced. Lunateepsilon, sigma andomega. Currentlocation: In the Museum of Aphrodisias. Excavation Inv. No. 65.433. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.25; Mitchell 1999, 136, no. 128; Reynolds and Tannenbaum 1987, 138–39, no. 12; SEG 37, no. 854. Date: 1st century BC–1st century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [---] Τατας | [Θ]εῷ Ὑψίστῳ | [---]. Translation: [---] Tatas,totheMostHighGod[---].

1.1.3

Didyma (Ionia): DedicationtoZeusHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in 1909 on the southern wing of the Temple at Didyma. Type: Small marble altar, damaged on top and with a crack in the lower part. Dimensions: 16 × 75 × 8.5 cm.

216

CATALOGUE

Letters: 1.8 cm. Lunate epsilon and sigma. Currentlocation: Miletos Museum. Inv. 152. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.85; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 132; IDidyma 128. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Διε|ὶ Ὑψ|ίστ|ῳ. Translation: ToZeusHypsistos.

1.1.4

Didyma (Ionia): ThevotiveinscriptionofHermiastoZeusHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in 1909 on the western side of the Temple at Didyma, near the precinct wall. Type: Blue-greyish marble pilaster-shaped base, not completely moulded in the upper and lower part. In the upper part, strongly bevelled corners. Dimensions: 76 × 25.5 cm; diameter: 29 cm. Letters: 3 cm. Lunate sigma. Currentlocation: Miletos Museum. Inv. no. 171. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.86; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 133; IDidyma 129. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Ἑρμίας Δ[ιὶ] | Ὑψίστῳ | κατὰ χρη|σμὸν |5 εὐχαρι|στήριον. Translation: HermiastoZeusHypsistos,inaccordancewiththeoracle,inthanksgiving.

1.1.5

Ephesos (Ionia): ThevotiveinscriptionofAureliaArtemisia dedicated toTheosHypsistosepekoos,onbronzeplaque

Discoverylocation: Ephesos. Type: Bronze votive plaque, the lower right corner missing. The text of the inscription placed below the eye. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: Hamburger Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.102; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 159; Merkelbach 1992, 55 (pl. Id); SEG 42, no. 1680. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Upper part of the plaque is made up of the very accurate representation of a part of a female figure between the cheekbones and the eyebrows. Between the eyebrows, in the upper part, there is a suspension ring. The character was obviously cross-eyed: the axis of the left eye is inward. The structure of the plaque was symmetrical, with handles (the right one destroyed). Text: Θεῷ ἐπηκόῳ Ὑψίσ|τῳ Αὐρηλία Ἀρτ[ε]|μισία Ἐπηεσοσία εὐ[ξα]|μένη καὶ ἐλ[εη]|θῖσα ἀνέθη[κεν]. Translation: TothelisteningMostHighGod,AureliaArtemisiafromEphesos,havingmade avowandfoundhispitydedicated(this).

CATALOGUE

1.1.6

217

Ephesos (Ionia): The votive inscription of Alexandros dedicated to TheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Ephesos, from the agora. Type: White marble altar. Dimensions: 35 × 35 × 16 cm. Letters: 2–2.4 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Ephesos. Inv. no. 1447. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.103; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 160; IGSK 14.4, 1234. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | Ἀλέξανδρος | Ἀττάλου | εὐξ[άμενος | ἀνέθηκεν]. Translation: To the Most High God Alexandros, the son of Attalos, having made a vow dedicated(thealtar).

1.1.7

Ephesos (Ionia): The votive inscription of Tiberius Claudius Eutychianos dedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Ephesos. Type: Altar reused as pedestal for a column. Dimensions: 95 × 62 cm. Letters: 3–3.2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.104; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 161; IGSK 14.4, 1235. Date: Roman Imperial period (?). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίσ[τῳ] | εὐχαριστ[ήσ]ας | εὐχήν· Τιβ(έριος) Κλαύδιο[ς] | Εὐτυχιαν[ὸς] | ἐπὶ ἱερέως Νεικ[ίας] | καὶ τῆς γλυκυτάτης | [---]. Translation: Tiberius Claudius Eutychianos, in fulfilment of the vow, thanksgiving to the MostHighGod,whileNeikiaswasapriestandtothebeloved[---].

1.1.8

Lagina (Caria): The votive inscription of Stephanion dedicated to ZeusHypsistosandtoTheiosBasilikos

Discoverylocation: Found at the site of acient Lagina. Type: Stele embedded in the wall of a house. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.149; Mitchell 1999, 136, no. 127; IGSK 22.1, 519; OMS 1, 115; Diehl and Cousin 1887, 159, no. 67. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: Διὶ Ὑψίσ[τῳ] καὶ Θείῳ τ[ῷ Βα]σιλικῷ Σ[τ]εφανίων ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τῶν ἰδίων πάντων εὐχαριστήριον. Translation: Stephanion,inthanksgiving,toZeustheMostHighandtotheRoyalDivine, forhimselfandforthemembersofhisfamily.

218 1.1.9

CATALOGUE

Labraunda (Caria): Dedication adressed to the emperor Trajan, toZeusLabraundeusandtoHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found at Labraunda, in the hieron. Type: Fragment of an architrave. Bibliography: Westholm 1963, 125–27, no. 5 (with pl. 3). Dimensions: 44 × 218 × 44 cm (Fragment B 143). Letters: 5.5–6 cm. Date: AD 106–117. Text: [Αὐτοκρά]το[ρι Νέ]ρου[ᾳ Τρα]ιανῷ Καίσαρι (vacat) Σεβαστῷ (vacat) Γε[ρ|μ]ανικῷ (vacat) [Δακικ]ῷ (vacat) καὶ Μεγίστῳ | Θεῷ Διὶ Λαβραύνδῳ | (vacat) καὶ τῷ Ὑψ[ί]στῳ (vacat) Πολείτης Ἀρι[σ]τέου Κορρα[--] ἱερατε|ύσας (vacat) ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων | ἀνέθηκεν (vacat) τόν τε λευκόλιθον στ|υλοβάτην (vacat) καὶ τοὺς ποικίλους κείονας (vacat) σὺν τοῖς σπιροκεφ|άλοις (vacat) καὶ τὸν ἐπιφερόμενον κατ᾽ αὐτῶν λευκόλιθον [κόσμον ---]. Translation:TothemosthonourableemperorNervaTrajanCaesar,defeateroftheGermans,oftheDacians,andtotheGreatestGodZeusofLabraundaandtotheMostHigh, Poleites,sonofAristeos,Korra[---],whileservingasapriestset,fromhisownresources,a whitestonestylobatanddifferentcolumnswithvolutedcapitals;andawhitestoneentablatureisplacedabovethem.

1.1.10

Magnesia on the Meander (Ionia): Ex-voto dedicated to Theos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: In the temple of Zeus in Magnesia on the Meander. Type: Series of combined stone blocks, coming from the temple’s cella. The text is 7 m long and it represents a tax registry that mentions the wealth of certain persons. We will only reproduce here line 13 on the D face. Letters: Approximately 1.5 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.152; Mitchell 2010, 203, no. A 41; IMagnesia 122 (with facsimile and pl. X, fig. 122). Date: Approx. AD 310 (Mitchell). Text: χω. Βουνίον (vacat) ἐξ. Ἀρτεμᾶ ἱερ(έως) Ὑψίστου. Translation:Bounios[…]ofArtemas,thepriestoftheMostHighGod.

1.1.11

Miletos (Ionia): InscriptiononanaltardedicatedtoZeusHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered between 1891 and 1900 into the wall of a mosque. Type: Circular white-bluish marble altar. Dimensions: 92 (height) × 52 (diameter) cm. Letters: 5.5–6 cm. Currentlocation: Miletos Museum. Inv. No. 56. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.156; IMilet III, 1253; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 134. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Initially, Mitchell had considered it Hellenistic. Text: Διὸς | Ὑψίστου. Translation: (Altar)ofZeustheMostHigh.

CATALOGUE

1.1.12

219

Miletos (Ionia): Honorary inscription dedicated to Ulpius Carpus, priest of hagiotatos Theos Hypsistos sōtēros, by an association of Milesiangardeners

Discoverylocation: Miletos. Dittenberger: LapisineaparteoppidiMileti,quaespectatinter meridiemetoccidentemsolem,inaedificatusinecclesiainitioaetatisByzantinaeexstructa. Type: Stone rectangular block. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Harland 2014, 292–93; Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.157; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 135; OGIS II, 755; Mitchell 1993 II, 49; Lane Fox 231 (he names him Ulpius Karpas). Date: The period of Hadrian’s reign (AD 117–135) (Mitchell); or the beginning of 3rd century AD (Lane Fox). Text: Τὸν ἱερέα τοῦ ἁγιωτά|του [Θεοῦ Ὑψί]στου σωτῆρος | Οὔλπιον Κάρπον | βουλευτὴν ὁ στατίων | τῶν κατὰ πόλιν κηπου|ρῶν τὸν ἴδιον εὐεργέτη[ν] | ὑπὲρ τῆς ἑαυτῶν σωτηρί[ας]. Translation: Theassociationofmunicipalgardeners(honours)thecouncillorUlpiusCarpus, theirbenefactor,thepriestoftheholyMostHighGod,thesaviour,fortheirsalvation.

1.1.13

Miletos (Ionia): Honorary inscription dedicated to Ulpius Carpus, prophetofTheosHypsistos,byanassociationofMilesianfishermen

Discovery location: Miletos. Dittenberger: Lapis inaedificatus Mileti in ecclesia aetatis Byzantinaeinitioexstructa,sitainextremaoppidipartemeridiemetoccidentemversus. Type: Stone rectangular block. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Harland 2014, 292–93; Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.158; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 136; OGIS II, 756; Mitchell 1993 II, 49. Date: The period of Hadrian’s reign (AD 117–135). Text: Οὔλπιον Κάρπον | τὸν προφήτην τοῦ | ἁγιωτάτου Θεοῦ | Ὑψίστου | ὁ στόλος τῶν σωληνο|κεντῶν τὸν ἴδιον εὐ|εργέτην διὰ πάντων. Translation: Thefleetofrazor-fishprickers(honours)UlpiusCarpus,prophetoftheMost HighGod,theirbenefactor,onbehalfofthemall.

1.1.14

Miletos (Ionia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in 1900 or 1901, on the field east from the street that leads to Akköi, near the Meander River. Type: White marble altar destroyed above, with slightly moulded base. Dimensions: 83 × 32 × 28 cm. Letters: 4–4.5 cm. Currentlocation: Miletos Museum. Inv. No. 96. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.159; Mitchell 2010, 202, no. A 39; IMilet III, 1252. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: Διὸς | Ὑπσίστου | κατὰ | χρησμόν (leaf). Translation: (Altar)ofZeustheMostHighGod,(dedicated)inaccordancewiththeoracle.

220 1.1.15

CATALOGUE

Miletos (Ionia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the necropolis situated beyond Delphinion. Type: White marble altar integrally surviving. Moulded in the lower part. Dimensions: 31 × 29 cm. Letters: 3.5–4 cm. Currentlocation: Miletos Museum. Inv. No. 1252. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.160; Mitchell 2010, 203, no. A 40; IMilet III, 1254. Date: 3rd century AD. Text: [? Διὸς] | [Ὑ]ψίσ|του. Translation:[?AltarofZeus]theMostHigh.

1.1.16

Miletos (Ionia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found at Miletos. Type: Grey marble altar with rounded upper part. Dimensions: 125 × 88 × 73 cm. Letters: 1.9 cm. Currentlocation: Miletos Museum. Inv. No. 1888. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.161; Mitchell 2010, 203, no. A 41; IMilet III, 1255. Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD. Text: Ζήλω|τος | Θεῷ |4 Ὑψί|[στῳ]. Translation:Zelotos,totheMostHighGod.

1.1.17

Mylasa (Caria): VotiveinscriptiontoZeusHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found in a private dwelling, at the site of Mylasa, in Caria. Type: Small pediment of white marble. Dimensions: 21 × 26 × 2 cm. Letters: 2–3 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.163; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 138; IGSK 34.2, 310. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [---]ΕΔ[--- | --] Διὶ | Ὑψίστῳ Translation: [---]toZeustheMostHigh.

1.1.18

Rhodian Peraia (Caria): ThevotiveinscriptionofAristondedicated toZeusHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Inscription identified at Pisye (Yeşilyurt-Pisiköy) by Paton and Myres, and then by Hula and Szanto. Type: Marble pedestal.

CATALOGUE

221

Dimensions: 35 × 20 × 16 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.183; SEG 51, no. 1549; Debord and Varinlioğlu 2001, 131–32, no. 29; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 139; IPerée 179; IGSK 38, 756 (with bibliography). Date: Roman Imperial period. Between AD 151 and 300 according to Bresson, Brun and Varinlioğlu. Representation: Crescent in the upper part of the inscription. Text: (crescent) Ἀρίστων κα|τὰ χρησμὸν ἀ|νατίθι Δὶ Ὑψί|στῳ [ε]ὐχα|ριστήριον. Translation: Ariston dedicates in thanksgiving to Zeus Hypsistos, in accordance with the oracle.

1.1.19

Rhodian Peraia (Caria): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Initially identified by Louis Robert at Pisiköy, in Caria, through a copy handed over to Alain Bresson. Type: White marble altar. Dimensions: 40 × 25 × 18 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. According to Louis Robert, the inscription was set in the middle of the altar. Currentlocation: The inscription could not be identified in the field. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.184; Mitchell 2010, 203, no. A 43; SEG 51, no. 1549; Debord and Varinlioğlu 2001, 131, no. 28. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: Ὑψίστου. Translation: (Altar)oftheMostHighGod.

1.1.20

Smyrna (Izmir, Ionia): ThevotiveinscriptionofSergis dedicatedto TheosHypsistossoter(?)

Discoverylocation: At Smyrna, in the agora. Type: Marble fragment. Dimensions: 11 × 26 × 1–7 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.233; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 162; IGSK 24.I, 764 (with facsimile). Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Σέργις Θεῷ | Ὑψίστῳ ΣΩ | --- ΛΟΥΝΟΥ ἀνέ|[θηκεν]. Translation: Sergis[---]dedicated(theoferring)totheMostHighGod,thesaviour(?).

1.1.21

Stratonikeia (Caria): DedicationtoZeusHypsistos,HekateSoteira, ZeusCapitolinusandTyche

Discoverylocation: Found at Stratonikeia. Type: Rectangular stone block. Dimensions: 17 × 16 cm.

222

CATALOGUE

Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.242; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 140; IGSK 21.1, 330. Date: AD 138–161. Text: [Διὶ] Ὑψίστῳ | καὶ Ἑκατῃ Σω[τίρῃ | κ]αὶ Διὶ Καπε[τωλίῳ |4 κ]αὶ Τύχῃ τοῦ μ[εγίστου | Αὐτ]οκράτορος Κα[ίσαρος] | Τίτου Αἰλίου Ἁδριανοῦ [Ἀντω|8νίνου] Σεβαστοῦ [Εὐσεβοῦς]. Translation: ToZeustheMostHigh,HekatetheSaviour,ZeusCapitolinus,andtheFortune, oftheveneratedemperorCaesarTitusAeliusHadrianusAntoninusAugustusPius.

1.1.22

Stratonikeia (Caria): VotiveinscriptiondedicatedtoZeusHypsistos andtoTh(e)ios

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Stratonikeia in the gymnasium. Type: Two fragments of the same small altar. Dimensions: 18 × 13 × 8 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.243; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 141; IGSK 22.2, 1306. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Representation of two ears. Text: Διὶ Ὑψί|στῳ καὶ τῷ Θίῳ | εὐαρι|στήρι[ον]. Translation: TotheMostHighandtheDivine,inthanksgiving.

1.1.23

Stratonikeia (Caria): The votive inscription of Boethos and of MenippostoZeusHypsistosandTheiosAngelosouranios

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Stratonikeia in the gymnasium. Type: Marble altar. Dimensions: 27.5 × 18 × 15 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Bibliography: Horsley and Luxford 2016, 153, no. 4e; Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.244; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 142; IGSK 22.2, 1307. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Διὶ Ὑψίστῳ | καὶ Θείῳ Ἀνγέ|λῳ Οὐρανίῳ Βό|ηθος καὶ Μένιπ|πος ὑπὲρ τῆς | ὑγίας πανοι|κίου χαριστή|ριον. Translation: BoethosandMenippos,inthanksgiving,forthehealthofthefamily,toZeus theMostHighandtheHeavenlyDivineAngel.

1.1.24

Stratonikeia (Caria): ThevotiveinscriptionofFlaviusDioklesand MamalontoTheosHypsistosandTheiosAngelos

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Stratonikeia in the gymnasium. Type: Marble altar. Dimensions: 37 × 30 × 12 cm.

CATALOGUE

223

Letters: 2 cm. Bibliography: Horsley and Luxford 2016, 153, no. 4f; Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.245; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 153; IGSK 22.2, 1308. Date: 2nd century AD (?). Text: [Θε]ῷ Ὑψ[ίστ]ῳ καὶ τ[ῷ | θ]είῳ ἀνγέλῳ | Φλ(άβιος) Διοκλῆς | καὶ Μάμαλον | ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν [κ]αὶ τῶν παιδί|ων καὶ τῶν ἰδίων | πάντων χαρισ|[τήριον]. Translation: TotheMostHighGodandtotheDivineAngel,FlaviusDioklesandMamalon, inthanksgiving,forthechildrenandfortheirentirefamily.

1.1.25

Stratonikeia (Caria): ThevotiveinscriptiontoAeliusHekatomnon, toTheosBasileusandHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found in the yard of Raşit Gürhan, west from Eskihisar (Stratonikeia). Type: White marble altar with relief acroteria. Dimensions: 93 × 21.5 cm. Letters: 1.2–1.8 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.246; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 154; IGSK 22.2, 1309. Date: 2nd century AD (?). Text: Θείῳ Βασιλῖ καὶ Ὑ|ψίστῳ Αἴ(λιος) | Ἑκατό|μνον ὑπὲρ | αὐτοῦ καὶ | τέκνων, γυ|ναικός, φίλων, | ἀνανκαίων, | ἰδίων ἀν|θρώπων καὶ | τῆς πόλεως. Translation: ToAeliusHekatomnon,totheRoyalDivineandtheMostHigh,forhimselfand forthechildren,wife,friends,relatives,hisimmediatefamilyandforthecity.

1.1.26

Stratonikeia (Caria): ThevotiveinscriptionofThreptosdedicatedto ZeusHypsistosandtoTheios

Discoverylocation: From the gymnasium of Stratonikeia. Type: Upper part of white marble altar, with acroteria with palmettes. Dimensions: 16.5 × 19 × 17.5 cm. Letters: 1.5–2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.247; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 155; IGSK 22.2, 1310. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Διεὶ Ὑψίστῳ | καὶ Θε|ίῳ Θρε|[πτ]ὸς ὑπὲρ | αὐτο[υ] | [---]. Translation: TotheZeustheMostHighandtotheDivine,Threptosforhimself[---].

1.1.27

Stratonikeia (Caria): VotiveinscriptionofTryphosatoZeusHypsistos andtoTh(e)ios

Discovery location: From the gymnasium of Stratonikeia. The altar was discovered in the house of Halil Savaş in Turgut (Lagina). Type: White marble altar, probably from the same place as the two previous inscriptions (1.1.25 and 1.1.26).

224

CATALOGUE

Dimensions: 21.5 × 10.5 cm. Letters: 1.2–1.5 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.248; IGSK 22.2, 552; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 156; SEG 38, no. 1901. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: [Δι]εὶ Ὑ[ψί|σ]τῳ καὶ Θί|ῳ Τρυφῶ|σα ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίω|ν εὐχαρι|στήριον. Translation: Tryphosa,inthanksgivingtoZeustheMostHighandtotheDivine,forherfamily.

1.1.28

Stratonikeia (Caria): The votive inscription of Phronimos and of  eithodedicatedtoZeusHypsistosandtoTh(e)ios P

Discoverylocation: Stratonikeia. Type: Small stele with mouldings above and below. Dimensions: 25 × 17 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.249; IGSK 22.1, 1110; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 143; Robert 1958, 115. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: Διὶ Ὑψίστῳ καὶ Θείῳ Φρόνιμος καὶ Πειθὼ ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων χαριστήριον. Translation: PhronimosandPeitho,inthanksgivingtotheZeustheMostHighandtothe Divinefortheirfamily.

1.1.29

Stratonikeia (Caria): The votive inscription of Euthyches, Synphilousa, Andreas and Antiochus dedicated to Zeus Hypsistos and to Theios

Discoverylocation: Stratonikeia. Type: Small stele with mouldings above and below. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.250; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 144; IGSK 22.1, 814 (with pl. XII). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: [Δ]ιὶ Ὑψίστ[ῳ] καὶ Θείῳ Εὐτυχὴς καὶ Σ[υν]φιλοῦσα, Ἀνδρέας, Ἀντίοχος ὑπὲρ ἑαυτῶν καὶ τῶν ἰδίων χαριστήριον. Translation: EuthychesandSynphilousa,Andreas(and)Antiochos,inthanksgivingtoZeus theMostHighandtotheDivine,forthemselvesandfortheirfamilies.

1.1.30

Stratonikeia (Caria): The votive inscription of Carpus Artemeous dedicatedtoZeusHypsistosandtoTheiosmegas

Discoverylocation: Stratonikeia. Type: Small marble altar. Dimensions: 27 × 21 × 15 cm. Letters: 1.2–1.9 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Bodrum.

CATALOGUE

225

Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.251; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 145; IGSK 22.1, 1111. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: [Δι]ὶ [Ὑψίστῳ καὶ | Θ]είῳ μεγάλ[ῳ] | Κάρπος Ἀρ|τεμήους μ[ε|τ]ὰ τῶν τέκν[ω]|ν καὶ τῶν ἰδί|ων πάντων | [χαρ]ι[στήριον]. Translation: CarpusArtemeous,alongwithhischildrenandhisfamily,inthanksgiving,to ZeustheMostHighandtotheGreatDivine.

1.1.31

Stratonikeia (Caria): DedicationtoZeusHypsistosandtoTheios

Discoverylocation: Stratonikeia. Type: Small marble altar. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: Museum of Bodrum. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.252; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 146; IGSK 22.1, 1112. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Διὶ Ὑψίστῳ | καὶ Θείῳ εὐ|χαριστήριον. Translation: ToZeustheMostHighandtotheDivine,inthanksgiving.

1.1.32

Stratonikeia (Caria): The votive inscription of Hekatas dedicated toTheosHypsistosandtoTh(e)ios

Discoverylocation: Stratonikeia. Type: Small marble altar. Dimensions: 17.5 × 13 × 10 cm. Letters: 1–1.3 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Bodrum. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.253; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 147; IGSK 22.1, 1113 (photograph pl. XV). Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | [κ]αὶ τῷ Θίῳ | Ἑκατᾶς εὐ|4χαριστῖ ὑπὲ[ρ] | ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τῶ ἰδίων π|άντων καὶ |8 τῶν γιτόν[ων]. Translation: Hekatas,inthanksgiving,totheMostHighGodandtotheDivine,forhimself, allhisfamilyandhisneighbours.

1.1.33

Stratonikeia (Caria): The votive inscription of Isokrates dedicated toZeusHypsistosandtoTheiosAgathos

Discoverylocation: Stratonikeia. Type: Small pedestal. Dimensions: 23 × 14 cm (at the base). Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.254; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 148; IGSK 22.1, 1114.

226

CATALOGUE

Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: [Δ]ιεὶ Ὑψί|2[σ]τῳ καὶ Θ[εί]|ῳ Ἀγαθῷ |4 [Ἰ]σοκράτη[ς]. Translation: Isokrates,toZeustheMostHighandtotheGoodDivine.

1.1.34

Stratonikeia (Caria): The votive inscription of Flavius Phaidros dedicatedtoZeusHypsistosandtoTh(e)iosBasilikos

Discoverylocation: Stratonikeia. Type: Small marble altar. Dimensions: 30 × 22.5 × 16.5 cm. Letters: 1.7–2.3 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Bodrum. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.255; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 149; IGSK 22.1, 1115 (photograph pl. XV). Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Διὶ Ὑψίστῳ | καὶ Θίῳ Βα|σιλικῷ Φλ(άβιος) |4 Φαῖδρος | ὑπὲρ αὐτοῦ | καὶ τῶν ἰδίων | χαριστή|8ριον. Translation: FlaviusPhaidros,inthanksgiving,toZeustheMostHighandtoRoyalDivine, forhimselfandhisfamily.

1.1.35

Stratonikeia (Caria): The votive inscription of Leontikos, Iatrokles andAntiochos dedicatedtoZeusHypsistosandtoTh(e)iosBasilikos

Discoverylocation: Stratonikeia. Type: Small marble altar. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: Museum of Bodrum. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.256; Mitchell 1999, 137–38, no. 152; IGSK 22.1, 1116. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Διὶ Ὑψί|στῳ καὶ Θ|ίῳ Βασι|4λικῷ ε[ὐ]|χ[α]ριστή|ριον Λεον|τίσκος, Ἰ[α]τ|8ροκλῆς, Ἀ|ντίοχος. Translation: Leontikos,IatroklesandAntiochos,inthanksgiving,toZeustheMostHighand toRoyalDivine.

1.1.36

Stratonikeia (Caria): ThevotiveinscriptionofNeosandEuphrosyne dedicatedtoZeusHypsistosandtoTheiosAngelos

Discoverylocation: Stratonikeia. Type: Small white marble altar. Dimensions: 34 × 20.5 × 13 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Bodrum. Bibliography: Horsley and Luxford 2016, 152, no. 4a; Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.257; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 150; IGSK 22.1, 1117. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD.

CATALOGUE

227

Text: Διὶ Ὑψίστῳ |2 καὶ Θείῳ Ἀγ|γέλῳ Νέ(ω)ν |4 καὶ Εὐφροσύ|νη ὑπὲρ |6 τῶν ἰδίων. Translation: NeonandEuphrosyne,toZeustheMostHighandtotheDivineAngel,fortheir family.

1.1.37

Stratonikeia (Caria): The votive inscription of Claudius Achilleus andGalatia dedicatedtoZeusHypsistosandtoAgathosAngelos

Discoverylocation: Stratonikeia. Type: Rectangular stone block. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Horsley and Luxford 2016, 152, no. 4b; Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.258; Mitchell 1999, 137, no. 151; IGSK 22.1, 1118. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: Διὶ Ὑψίστῳ καὶ | Ἀγαθῷ Ἀνγέλῳ | Κλαύδιος Ἀχιλ|λεὺς καὶ Γαλατ[ί]|α ὑπὲρ σωτηρί[ας] | μετὰ τῶν ἰδίων | πάντων χαριστ[ή]|ριον. Translation: ClaudiusAchilleusandGalatia,inthanksgiving,toZeustheMostHighandto theGoodAngel,forsalvation,alongwithalltheirrelatives.

1.1.38

Tralleis (Caria): DedicationtoTheosHypsistosfollowingadream

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Tralleis, in Caria. Type: Small white marble pedestal, possibly belonging to a column. Dimensions: 42 × 185 × 16 cm. Currentlocation: Initially in the Museum of the Evangelical School in Smyrna. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.298; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 158; IGSK 36.I, 14 (with fig.). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Frontal representation of relief eagle, open wings and head turned to the left. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | κατ᾽ ὄναρ. Translation: TotheMostHighGod,inaccordancewitha(prophetic)dream.

Lydia 1.2.1

Bagis (Lydia): Ex-votoofAgathopousandofTeleseiradedicatedto TheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Bagis, on the slope of the Çatal Tepe Mountain, in the region of Tabala. Type: Marble altar. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.60; LKGI 30.12; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 163; TAM V.1, 220. Date: AD 165–166 (= 250 Sullan era). Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ Ἀ|2γαθόπους καὶ Τελέσειρα εὐ|4χήν. Ἔτους σν΄, | μη(νὸς) Δαισίου, κ΄. Translation: Agathopous and Teleseira, to the Most High God, in fulfilment of the vow. Intheyear250,inthemonthofDaisios,onthetwentiethday.

228 1.2.2

CATALOGUE

Bagis (Lydia): Ex-votoofTyranisdedicatedtoHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Aktaş, near Bagis, in a private house. Type: White marble stele, with triangular pediment and acroteria. Traces of relief on the tympanum. Dimensions: 34 × 23 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.2–1.7 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.61; LKGI 30.8; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 164; TAM V.1, 7 (with facsimile); Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 237. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Wreath relief. Text: Τυρανὶς Ἀφφ[ι]|2άδος Ὑψ[ίστῳ] | εὐ[χήν]. Translation: TyranisofAphphias,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow. L1–2: Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 237: Ἀφ[φι]|2άδος.

1.2.3

Hierokaisareia (Lydia): Ex-voto of Lucius dedicated to Theos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Sazoba in the area of Hierokaisareia, in Lydia, in a private house. Type: Marble fragment. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.125; LKGI 30.5; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 168; TAM V.2, 1258. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Λούκιος Θε|ῷ Ὑψίστῳ ε|ὐχήν. Translation: Lucius,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.2.4

Hierokaisareia (Lydia): Ex-voto of Aurelius Basilikos dedicated to TheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Teyenli, on the territory of Hierokaisareia. Type: Circular altar, with moulded upper part. The profile destroyed for the most part. Broken in the lower part. Dimensions: 54 cm height; diameter: 39 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 528. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.126; LKGI 30.6; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 170; SEG 41, no. 1014; de Hoz 1991, 75–77 (with pl. Ia). Date: 3rd century AD (after AD 212). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [Α]ὐρ(ήλιος) Βασιλικὸς | [Ἀ]σκληπιακοῦ ὑπὲρ Αὐρ(ήλιος) Κτησιᾶ |4 […]ΥΔΙΟΥ Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ εὐχὴν | [ἀ]νέστησα. Translation: Aurelius Basilikos, the son of Asklepiakos, for Aurelius Ktesias, [the son of  ?Kla]udios,erected(this)totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

CATALOGUE

1.2.5

229

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): Ex-voto of Artemas dedicated to Theos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the village of Ayazviran, in Lydia. Mitchell states only that it comes from Maeonia. Type: Fragmentary marble stele, with gabled pediment, acroteria and moulded cornice. Dimensions: 57 × 28 × 6 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.139; LKGI 30.14; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 165; TAM V.1, 461a; SEG 28, no. 890; Petzl 1978a, 268, no. 15 (with photograph at pl. XIII). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: On the tympanum, in each of the lower corners there is a double ivy leaf, and a discus in central position, within the tympanum. The acroteria are decorated with palmettes. In the upper part there is an ornamental motif featuring a pine-cone, with a palmette decoration. Text: Ἀρτεμᾶς Θε|ῷ Ὑψίστῳ εὐ|χὴν ἀπέδωκα. Translation: I,Artemas,gave(this)totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.2.6

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): Ex-voto of Glykon dedicated to Thea Hypsiste

Discoverylocation: Found at Gölde (İncesu), in the St Theodore Chapel. Type: Marble stele; only the central part remaining. Dimensions: 39 × 29.5 × 4.5 cm. Letters: 1.5–1.8 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.110; LKGI 29.1; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 167; TAM V.1, 359 (with facsimile); Cook 1925 II, 881, no. 20; Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 189. Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Above the inscription, in the frame, the relief of a man, the right arm raised in prayer. Text: Θεᾷ Ὑψίστῃ Γλύκων | εὐχήν. Translation: Glykon,totheMostHighGoddess,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.2.7

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheaHypsiste

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Gölde/İncesu (the ancient Kollyda). Type: The middle and lower part of marble stele. Size and typology similar with the previous inscription, dedicated to the same anonymous female deity, Thea Hypsiste. The relief edge of the frame is very wide, with an outward moulding in the lower part, under the feet of the character. Dimensions: 30 × 30 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.5–1.8 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa.

230

CATALOGUE

Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.111; Mitchell 2010, 203, no. A 43; Malay 1999, 150 (with fig. 155 and pl. 112); SEG 49, no. 1588. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Within the relief frame, character with right arm raised in prayer. The palm is disproportionate compared to the rest of the body. In the right hand, falling near the body, he seems to be holding a round object, probably a patera. The cloak covers the left shoulder and most of the body, with oblique folds down to the ankles, thus leaving a part of the chiton uncovered. The face of the character is highly damaged and the features cannot be distinguished. Text: Θ[ε]ᾷ Ὑψίστῃ ΚΛΑ | ..... τῶν προκαθημένῃ [---]. Translation:TotheMostHighGoddess,[--]whopresidesover[---].

1.2.8

Kula (Lydia): Ex-votoofApolloniskos dedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Kula, near Maeonia, in Lydia. Into the wall of the Hagion Taxiarchon church. Type: Fragmentary white marble stele. Dimensions: 36.5 × 27 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.144; LKGI 30.13; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 166; TAM V.1, 266. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: A cross in the field above the inscribed part. Text: Ἀπολλωνίσκος | ὐπὲρ τοῦ υἱοῦ Ἑρ|μογένου Θεῷ | Ὑψίστῳ εὐχήν. Translation: Apolloniskos (dedicated the stele) for his son Hermogenes to the Most High God,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.2.9

Magnesia on Sipylos (Lydia): ThevotiveinscriptionofTeimotheos DiagorasandofMoschion onanaltar dedicatedtoHypsistos

Discovery location: Found at Sarıçam, on the territory of Magnesia on Sipylos. Mitchell indicates the place of discovery as Hierokaisareia. Type: Circular limestone altar, with moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: 91 cm height; 57 cm diameter. Letters: 2.5–2.8 cm. Currentlocation: In the mosque of Sarıçam. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.153; LKGI 30.7; Mitchell 1999, 138, no. 169; 1993 II, 44; TAM V.2, 1400. Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD (?). Text: Τειμόθεος Διαγόρου | Λαβραντίδης καὶ Μόσχιον | Τειμοθέου ἡ γυνὴ αὐτοῦ | Θεῶι Ὑψίστωι εὐχὴν τὸν | βωμόν. | Διαγόρας, Τειμόθεος, Πύθεος, | οἱ Τιμοτέου τοῦ Διαγόρου υἱοὶ | Λαβραντίδαι τὰς λυχναψίας | Ὑψίστωι ἀνέθηκαν. Translation: Teimotheos,thesonofDiagoras,fromLabraunda,andMoschion,daughterof Teimotheos,hiswife,(dedicated)thealtartotheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow. Diagoras, Teimotheos, Pytheos, the sons of Timoteos, son of Diagoras, from Labraunda, dedicatedtheselampstotheMostHigh.

CATALOGUE

1.2.10

231

Philadelphia (Lydia): Ex-votoofthepriestDiophantosdedicatedto TheosHypsistosandtoMegasTheios

Discoverylocation: Sidcovered in the surrounding areas of Alașehir (Philadelphia). Type: Lower part of a marble stele, damaged at sides and on the upper part. Dimensions: 56 × 48 × 5 cm. Letters: 2.1–2.5 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.193; LKGI 30.17; TAM V.3, 1635; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 171 (incomplete); Sheppard 1980–81, 100, no. 12a; SEG 20, no. 14; Buckler 1917, 93–94, no. 6. Date: Between AD 229/230 and AD 238/239 (= 260–269 Actian era). Representation: Above the inscribed field, traces of a relief that was removed. Text: [Θ]εῷ Ὑψί(σ)τῳ (καὶ) Μεγάλῳ Θε[ίῳ] |2 [Δ]ιόφαντος Ἀκιάμου ἱερεὺ[ς] | [ε]ὐχήν. Ἔτους σξ[.΄, μη(νὸς)] | Γορπιαίου βι΄. Translation: TotheMostHighGodandtotheGreatDivine,Diophantos,sonofAkiamos, thepriest,(dedicated)infulfilmentofthevow.Intheyear26[0–9],inthemonthofGorpiaios, onthetwelfthday. L1: LKGI 30.17: [Θ]εῷ Ὑψίτῳ (sic.) Μεγάλῳ θε[ῳ]/[ίῳ]; Buckler 1917, 93, no. 6: [Θ]εῷ Ὑψίτῳ, μεγάλῳ θε[ῳ]. L4: LKGI 30.17; Buckler 1917, 93–94, no. 6: Γορπιαίου θ(?)ι΄.

1.2.11

Philadelphia (Lydia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: On the territory of the city of Philadelphia in the east of Lydia. Type: Marble stele with triangular pediment and acroteria, with a tenon. Dimensions: 65 × 29/38 × 5 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.194; LKGI 30.16; Mitchell 2010, 203, no. A 47; TAM V.3, 1634; Keil and Premerstein 1908, 27, no. 39. Date: AD 238/239 (= 269 Actian era) or AD 184/185 (= 269 Sullan era). Representation: On the tympanum, in the lower corners, an ivy leaf each, and a boss in the centre. Text: Ἔτους σξθ΄, μη(νὸς) |2 Αὐδ(ν)αίου ι΄. Φλα|βία Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ |4 εὐχήν. Translation:Intheyear269,inthemonthofAudnaios,onthetenthday.TotheMostHigh God,Flavia(dedicatedthis)infulfilmentofthevow.

1.2.11a Philadelphia (area of, Lydia) = 5.2.43 1.2.12

Saittai (area of, Lydia): Ex-votoofDemodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos andtoMegasTheiosepiphanes

Discoverylocation: Found at Temrekköy, west from Borlu, in the area of Saittai. Type: Lower part of marble stele, broken in half.

232

CATALOGUE

Dimensions: 57 × 38 × 6 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. nos. 488 and 515 = 1166. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.71; LKGI 30.11; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 172; Malay 1994, 183 (with bibliography); TAM V.1, 186; Sheppard 1980–81, 99–100, no. 12; Hellenica 13, 112 (with French translation); OMS 1, 411; SEG 20, no. 10. Date: AD 171/172 (= 256 Sullan era). Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ καὶ Μεγ[ά]|2λῳ Θείῳ ἐπιφανεῖ Δη|μὼ θυγάτηρ Τυράν[νου]|4 Θεὰν Λαρμηνὴν ἀνέ[σ]|τησεν. Ἔτους σνζ΄. Translation: To the Most High God and the Great manifest Divine, Demo, daughter of Tyrannos,erected(thestelewiththereliefof)thegoddessLarmene.Intheyear256.

1.2.13

Silandos (Lydia): Ex-votoofHelenededicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Selendi. Embedded into the wall of a dwelling. Type: Marble altar. Dimensions: 85 × 28 × 23 cm. Letters: 2.2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.227; LKGI 30.10; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 173; TAM V.1, 52; Le Bas and Waddington 1870, 708. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Traces of a relief. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ εὐχὴν ἀνέθηκε Ἑλένη ὑπὲρ Θρασυβούλου τοῦ υἱοῦ Θρασυβούλου. Translation: TotheMostHighGod,Heleneinfullfilmentofthevowdedicated(thealtar)for Thrasyboulos,thesonofThrasyboulos.

1.2.14

Silandos (Lydia): Ex-votoofApphiondedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found in the ancient place of Silandos in Kara Selendi. Type: White marble stele, broken on all sides, except for the upper side. It has a triangular pediment with acroteria. Dimensions: 43 × 26 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.228; LKGI 30.9; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 174; SEG 33, no. 1027; Naour 1983, 116, no. 6 (with pl. 16). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: On the tympanum, in the centre, round protrusion decorated with a rosette, and in the right corner, a leaf. In the upper part of the stele, an olive wreath is featured. Text: [Θε]ῷ Ὑψίστῳ εὐ|[χ]ὴν Ἄπφιον Νέωνος | [ὑ]πὲρ αὐτῆς καὶ | [τ]ῶν τέκ[ν]ῳ[ν]. Translation: Apphion,ofNeon,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow,forherown well-beingandforthechildren.

CATALOGUE

1.2.15

233

Thyaira (Tire, Lydia): DedicationofthepriestNeikephorosaddressed toTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Thyaira, the Lower Cayster valley, relatively close to Ephesos. Type: Stone altar. Dimensions: 70 × 35 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.289; LKGI 30.15; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 175; IGSK 17, VII.1, 3303. Date: AD 172 (= 220 Caesarean era). Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | Νεικηφόρος Ἑρ|μοκράτου ἱερε|[ὺ]ς σὺν καὶ Ἑρμο|[κρ]άτει τῷ ἀδ[ελ|φῷ] τὸν βωμὸ[ν | ἀνέσ]τησαν | [ἔτ]ους σκ΄. Translation: TotheMostHighGod,thepriestNeikephoros,sonofHermokrates,alongwith hisbrother,Hermokrates,erectedthisaltarin220.

1.2.16

Thyateira (Lydia): Ex-voto of Moschianos dedicated to Theos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in 1853 in a house of Akhisar, in Lydia. Type: White marble eagle relief. Mentioned in TAM V.2, 898 as ‘Stela (?) in domo privata urbis Akhisar asservata’. Dimensions: 52 × 33 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Purchased in 1912 from Paris and donated to the Musée du Cinquantenaire (A 1912). Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.290; LKGI 30.2; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 176; TAM V.2, 898; Cumont 1913b, 54 (with images at pp. 67–68); Fontrier 1902, 239, no. 4. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Inscribed below the relief of an eagle with unfolded wings. The head is partially damaged on the right side. Text: Μοσχιανὸς Βασσιαν[οῦ] | Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ εὐχήν. Translation: Moschianos,sonofBassianos,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow. L1: Fontrier 1902, 239, no. 4: Βασιλεὺς. L1–2: Cumont gives another lecture of the inscription in Cumont 1913b, 54: Μοσχιανὸς Βασσιλλή[οῦ] | θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ εὐχήν, with the translation Moschianos(fils)deBasileaudieu Très-Hautenaccomplissementd’unvœu.

1.2.17

Thyateira (Lydia): Ex-votoofTryphosadedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the house of Simeon-Oglu Michalaki at Akhisar, in Lydia. Type: Small bluish marble altar, moulded on the upper and lower parts. Dimensions: 30.5 × 19 × 11 cm. Letters: 1.2 cm.

234

CATALOGUE

Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.291; LKGI 30.3; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 177; TAM V.2, 899; Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 29. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: There are no indications in this sense. Text: Τρυφῶσα | [Θ]εῷ Ὑψίστῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: Tryphosa,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.2.18

Thyateira (Lydia): Ex-voto of Asklepiakos dedicated to Theos Hypsistosepekoos

Discoverylocation: In the Turkish cemetery of Seydiköy, named Seyitahmet Mezarliği, in Lydia. Type: White marble altar with partially destroyed left part. Dimensions: 75 × 34 × 34 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.292; LKGI 30.4; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 178; TAM V.2, 900 (with pl. IX). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: [Θεῷ] Ὑψίστῳ |2 [κ]αὶ ἐπηκόῳ | [Ἀσ]κληπιακὸς |4 [εὐ]χὴν ἀνέθη|κεν. Translation: To the Most High and listening [God] Asklepiakos dedicated (this altar), in fulfilmentofthevow.

1.2.19

Thyateira (Lydia): Ex-votoofEuelpistetoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in a house of Akhisar. Type: Small altar moulded of marble. Dimensions: 19.5 × 11.5 × 11.5 cm. Letters: 0.9 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.293; LKGI 30.1; TAM V.2, 897; Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 28; Mitchell (1999) does not indicate it and he counts the other three inscriptions from Thyateira wrongly. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: There are no indications in this sense. Text: Εὐελστ[η] |2 Θεῷ Ὑψί[σ]|[τ]ῳ εὐχὴν |4 [ἀ]νέθηκ[ε] | [εὐ]τυχῶς. Translation: Euelpiste dedicated (this altar) with good fortune to the Most High God, in fulfilmentofthevow.

1.2.20

Thyateira (area of, Lydia): The votive inscription of Ioulianos dedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Medar (Ovaköy), north from the ancient settlement of Thyateira (today Akhisar, in Lydia). Altar discovered in 1994, after field walking surveys. Type: Rectangular marble altar. Dimensions: 45 × 23 × 23 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm.

CATALOGUE

235

Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa (Inv. no. 8015). Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.154; Mitchell 2010, 203, no. A 45; Malay 1999, 26 (with fig. 26); SEG 49, no. 1708. Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Ivy leaves in the inscribed field. Text: Ἰουλιανὸς (leaf) | βαφεὺς Θεῶι | [Ὑ]ψίσωι εὐχα|ριστήριον ὑ|5πὲρ τῆς αὐτοῦ σωτηρίας (leaf). Translation: Ioulianosthedyer(dedicatedthis)inthanksgivingtotheMostHighGod,forhis ownsalvation.

1.2.21

Thyateira (area of, Lydia): Ex-voto of Mousa dedicated to Theos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Medar (Ovaköy), north from the ancient settlement of Thyateira (today Akhisar, in Lydia). Altar discovered in 1994, after field walking surveys. Type: Rectangular marble altar, with acroteria, moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: 88 × 55 × 52 cm. Letters: 3 cm. The inscription is disposed in the upper part of the monument. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa (Inv. No. 8194). Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.155; Mitchell 2010, 203, no. A 46; Malay 1999, 23, 27 (with fig. 27 at pl. 21); SEG 49, no. 1709. Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: A flower in the inscribed field. Text: Μοῦσα Μηνοφί|λου Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | εὐχὴν ἀνέθη|4κεν (flower). Translation: Mousa,ofMenophilos,setthisuptotheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

Aiolis, Troas, Mysia 1.3.1

Alexandreia Troas (Troas): DedicationtoTheosHypsistosepekoos

Discoverylocation: Alexandria Troas. Type: Marble altar with pediment, upper part surviving. Dimensions: 32 × 61 × 62 cm. Letters: 4–4.5 cm. Currentlocation: Çanakkale Museum (without inventory number). Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.12; IGSK 53, 76 (with bibliography; photograph); Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 179. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [Ἐπηκ]όῳ Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | [χ]αριστήριον | [-]τυ[--]. Translation: TothelisteningMostHighGod,inthanksgiving[--].

236 1.3.2

CATALOGUE

Apollonia on Rhyndakos (Mysia): ThededicationofMarcusUlpius PauserostoZeusHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Apollonia on Rhyndakos. According to Le Bas and Waddington 1870, it was seen ‘A Aboullionte, sur un fragment dans l’église d’Hagios Johannes’. Type: Stone fragment. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.26; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 180; Le Bas and Waddington 1870, 1067. Date: 2nd century AD. Text: [Ἀγαθῇ] Τύχῃ· | [Μάρκ]ος Οὔλπιος | [Παυσ]έρως | [Διὶ] Ὑψίστῳ. Translation: Withgoodfortune.MarcusUlpiusPauserosto[Zeus]theMostHigh.

1.3.3

Hadrianoi (Mysia): Funerary epitaph of Neikatoris dedicated to TheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Hadrianoi, in Mysia. Found in Orhaneli, Merkez Medresi. Type: Marble pedestal; right corner surviving. Dimensions: 60 × 36 × 17 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Bursa. Inv. No. 2169. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.121; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 184; 1993 II, 50, n. 220 (mention); IGSK 33, 120 (with bibliography); SEG 33, no. 1049. Date: 4th century AD (?). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Τὸν πᾶσιν φίλον καὶ ἄξ[ιον ἐν] | πολυόλβοις | ἀνδράσιν [ἔν θ᾽ ἁ]|γίοις δόξαν ἐφειλάμ[ε]|νος | Νεικατόρις πινυτὸ[ς] | Ξενοφῶντος γονετοῦ [παῖς], | [ὂ]ς τειμὴν πλείστην ἐκτή|[σ]ατο πᾶσι βροτοῖσιν |5 [εἰν | ἁγί]ῳ τε λαῷ Θεοῦ Ὑ[ψί|σ]του ποίμνεια τέρπ[εν καὶ] | ψαλμοῖς τε ἁγείοις κ[άνα]|γνώσμασι{ν} πάντας ἔθε[λγεν], | ἐν ἁγείῳ τε τόπῳ εὔ[δει νῦν] Χρείστου ἄχραντο[ς] | [πάν]τοτε ἄνακτα ζόης βι[-]|τησαι καὶ θαλερ [---] | [ἐν δ᾽ αὐ]τοῖς μελάθροις αγα[---] | σας τε ἀμώμως |10 ὀκτώ[κοντα καὶ ἒξ λυ]|κάβαντας ἐμ[---] | δόξαν ἄρχαν[τον ἔχων ---] Translation: Belovedbyeverybody,deservingamongtheblessedandchosenforthegloryof theholy,theprudentNeikatoris,thesonofhisfatherXenophon,whomofallmortalsgained greatesthonourintheholypeopleoftheMostHighGod,broughtjoytoandcharmedthem allwiththePsalmsongsandholyreadings,andnowrestsimmaculateinChrist’splace,the eternalLordoflife[--].Helivedaholyandirreproachablelifefor8(6)?years[---],andhis reputationwasflawless[---].

1.3.4

Kyzikos (Mysia): Ex-votoofSogenes(?)dedicatedtoZeusHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found near the theatre. Type: Small cubical block of marble. An obling sinking on the upper surface. Dimensions: 17.5 × 14 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.146; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 181; C. Smith and de Rustafjaell 1902, 207, no. 14.

CATALOGUE

237

Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: [Σ]ωγ[ένης] | Νεικάνδρ[ου] | Διὶ Ὑψίστῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: Sogenes(?),thesonofNeikandros,toZeustheMostHigh,infulfilmentofthevow. L1: Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 181: [-]ΩΓ[-].

1.3.5

Kyzikos (Mysia): DedicationofThallosaddressedtoZeusHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found in the Kyzikos area, at Panormos (Bandırma). Type: White marble stele with a triangular pediment. Dimensions: 105 cm high. Currentlocation: British Museum. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.147; AGRW 110; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 182; Newton 1916, 1007 (with photograph); Perdrizet 1899, 592–93; Murray 1891, 10, no. 1 (with facsimile); Cook 1925 II, 881, no. 21 (pl. xxxix). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: The slab has a three-panel relief. Male deity with sceptre and phiale, identified with Zeus, shown beside Artemis and Apollo, holding phialai in their right hands. In their left hands Zeus holds a sceptre, Artemis a torch and Apollo a lyre. An omphalos with a serpent stands on the left side of Apollo. Six male persons are banqueting in the second panel, while in the third panel a person playing the doble floute sits next to a nude dancer, a man with a Phrygian cap and a servant near a wine bowl. Text: Διὶ Ὑ|2ψίστῳ κ(αὶ) | τῷ χώ[ρῳ] Θάλλος |4 ἐπώνυμος τὸν | τελαμῶνα ἀπέδωκα. Translation: ToZeustheMostHighandtheplace,Thallos,eponymousofficial,dedicated thestele. L1–5: Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 182: Διὶ ὑψίστῳ καὶ τῷ χω(ρίῳ] Θάλλος Ἐπώνυμος τὸν τελαμῶνα ἀπέδωκα. L3: Newton 1916, 1007: τῷ χώρῳ.

1.3.6

Kyzikos (Mysia): The dedication of Gaius Pescennius Onesimos addressedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the Armenian cemetery. Type: Stone stele. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.148; Mitchell 1999, 139, no. 183; CIG II, 3669. Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD. Text: Ἀγαθῆι Τύχηι | Γ(άϊος) Πεσκέννιος Ὀνέσιμος | Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ σωθεὶς ἀν|έθηκα ἐκ μεγάλου κινδύ|5νου μετὰ τῶν ἰδίων | νείκης εὐχαριστήριον | ἀναθεῖναι. Translation: Withgoodfortune.I,GaiusPescenniusOnesimos,alongwithmyfamily,dedicated(thisstele)totheMostHighGodwhodeliveredmefromagreatdanger,inthanksgiving forthevictory.

238 1.3.7

CATALOGUE

Miletupolis (area of, Mysia): Dedication of Tiberius Claudius SyntrophostoZeusHypsistosBrontaios

Discoverylocation: Karacabey, near Miletupolis. Built in the wall of the Haghia Paraskevi church. Type: Marble stele, with acroterium. Dimensions: 100 × 47/50 × 105 cm. Letters: 2 cm. The inscription is set below the relief, within tabulaansata. Currentlocation: Museum of Istanbul. Inv. no. 3. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.162; Mitchell 1999, 139–40, no. 185; IGSK 26.II, 5 (fig. 7; with bibliography). Date: 1st century AD (Mitchell); 2nd–3rd centuries (Schwertheim). Representation: Stele with rectangular pediment, acroteria, rosette featured in the tympanum. The god Hypsistos Brontaios is featured between the two columns, which support the pediment. He holds a sceptre in the left and in the stretched right arm – a lightning. On the same base, an eagle to the right. To the left a herm is featured. The caduceus can be seen on the god’s right shoulder. In the centre of the image, an altar decorated with garland, burning conical flame on top. In the lower part, below them, a laid down character, clad in long coat (female figure, according to Mitchell). Text: Τιβέριος Κλαύδιος | Σύντροφος Διὶ | Ὑψίστῳ κατ᾽ ἐπιτα|γὴν ἐκ τῶ ἰδί|ων ἀνέθηκεν | Βρονταίῳ. Translation: TiberiusClaudiusSyntrophosdedicated(thestele)totheMostHighGodthe Thundering,inaccordancewiththecommand(ofthegod),athisownexpenses.

1.3.8

Pergamon (Mysia): Ex-voto of Tation dedicated to Helios Theos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found in the sanctuary of Athena in Pergamon, in 1881. Type: Small marble altar, broken in half; the two halves were recuperated in fragments. Dimensions: 16.2 × 19.5 × 13 cm. Currentlocation: Pergamon. Inv. No. II 135, 140. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.185; Mitchell 1999, 140, no. 186; IPergamon 330 (with facsimile). Date: 1st century AD. Text: [Ἡλ]ίωι | Θ[ε]ῶι | Ὑψ[ί]στωι | Τάτιον | εὐχήν. Translation: Tation(dedicatedthealtar)toHelios,theMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.3.9

Pergamon (Mysia): Ex-votoofGlykinadedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found in the St. Theodor church of Pergamon. Type: Small altar of white marble. Dimensions: 52 × 23 × 19 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Pergamon. Inv. No. P 12. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.186; Mitchell 1999, 140, no. 187; IPergamon 331 (with facsimile).

CATALOGUE

239

Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD. Text: Γλύκινα | Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | εὐχὴν ἀνέθηκα | ἐρωμένη μετὰ τὸν | [---]. Translation: Glykinadedicated(thealtar)toTheosHypsistos,infulfilmentofthevow,asking thegodalongwith[---].

1.3.10

Pergamon (Mysia): DedicationofZopyrostoTheoskyrios

Discoverylocation: Found at Pergamon. Type: Stone rectangular block. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.187; Mitchell 1999, 140, no. 188. Date: 2nd century AD. Text: Θεὸς κύριος ὁ ὤν εἰς ἀεί. | Ζώπυρος τῷ κυρίωι τὸν βωμὸν καὶ τὴν φω[ι]τοφόρον μετὰ τοῦ φλογούχου. Translation: God,Lord,theOnewhoisforever.Zopyros(setup)analtarandthelampwith thesupporttotheLord. L2: φωιτοφόρος: ‘light-bearer’, candlestick, lamp hanger.

Bithynia, Pontus, Paphlagonia 1.4.1

Amaseia (Yassıçal, Pontus): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the village of Yassıçal (the ancient Ebimi), in the southern wall of the mosque, built into in a reversed position. Type: Yellowish limestone block fragment from a building, probably from an architrave. Damaged on all sides. Dimensions: 22 × 122 cm. Letters: Unknown size. The inscription is inscribed lengthwise, in median position. Currentlocation: In the mosque. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.13; Mitchell 2010, 204, no. A49; SEG 46, no. 1617; French 1996, 94, no. 19. Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ εὐχὴν Στρατόνικος (vacat) | Μητροδώρου σωθεὶς ἐκ μεγάλων | (vacat) κινδύνων. Translation:TotheMostHighGod,Stratonikos,thesonofMetrodoros,beingdeliveredfrom greatdangers,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.4.2

Amastris (Paphlagonia): Ex-votodedicatedbyTheosHypsistosHelios

Discoverylocation: Amastris, in Paphlagonia. Type: Rock-cut monument. Dimensions: 150 × 55 × 55 cm. Letters: 5 cm. The inscription is carved on base supporting a column. Currentlocation: In the place of discovery.

240

CATALOGUE

Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.14; Marek 2003, 47–48 (with photograph); Mitchell 1999, 140, no. 195; Marek 1993, Am. 1b, c. Date: AD 45. Representation: Rock-cut complex consisting on a base (on which the inscription was set), topped by a headless open-wing eagle. The text is inscribed alongside an inscription set up on behalf of the imperial peace and in honour of the emperor Claudius by the procurator C. Iulius Aquila, also a praefectusfabrum. On top, in a semicircular arched niche in the upper part and framed by pilasters, a toga-clad character, probably the dedicator of the last inscription. Text: Θεωι | Ὑψίστωι | ἐπηκό[ω]ι Ἥλ[ιοι?] | εὐ[ξάμενος?] | [--]. Translation: TothelisteningMostHighGodHelios,havingmadeavow[--].

1.4.3

Amastris (Paphlagonia): Ex-votodedicatedbyAureliusBasileusto TheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Amastris, in Paphlagonia. Type: Fragmentary limestone stele. Dimensions: 35 × 17 × 6 cm. Letters: 3 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Amasra. Without registration number. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.15; Mitchell 1999, 140, no. 196; SEG 35, no. 1322; Marek 1993, Am. 32. Date: 3rd century AD (?). Text: Θεῷ Ὑ[ψ]|ίστῳ Αὐρ(ήλιος) | Βασιλεὺς | ὑπὲρ τε ἑ|αυτοῦ καὶ | τῶν ἰδίων | εὐχῆς | χάριν. Translation: AureliusBasileus,totheMostHighGod,forhimselfandforhisfamily,dueto avow.

1.4.4

Amastris (Paphlagonia): Votive epigram dedicated to Theos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Amastris. Type: Slender altar with mouldings above and below. Dimensions: 133 × 52 × 50 cm. Letters: 4.3 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.16; Chaniotis 2010b, 117 (with translation); Mitchell 2010, 204, no. A51; SGO II, 309, no. 10/03/01; SEG 50, no. 1225; Marek 2000, 135–37 (with photograph). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ. | Ὀμφῇ ἀκερ|σεκόμου βω|4μὸν Θεου Ὑψίσ|τοιο, ὃς κατὰ | πάντων ἔστι | καὶ οὐ βλέπε|8ται, εἰσοράᾳ δὲ | δείμαθ᾽ ὅπως | ἀπαλάλκηται | βροτοιγέ|12α θνητῶν. Translation:TotheMostHighGod.Bypropheticvoicethisaltar(wasraised)totheMost HighGod,hewhoisinthepowerofyouth,whohaspowerovereverything,whocannotbe seen,whosegazeissodreadfulthatoverthrowsthemortals’ground.

CATALOGUE

1.4.5

241

Apameia (area of, Bithynia): Ex-voto dedicated by the physician AureliusPaulustoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered near Dineir, according to Robinson. Type: Stone stele. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.23; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 214; SEG 6, no. 266; Robinson 1927, 33, no. 6. Date: 3rd century AD. Text: Θεῷ | Ὑψίστῳ | εὐχὴν |4 (leaf) Αὐρ(ήλιος) (leaf) | Παλος | ὁ καὶ Ἐπ[ι]|θύμητ[ος] | ἰατρ[ός]. Translation: TotheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow,AureliusPaulus,alsocalled Epithymitos,thephysician.

1.4.6

Hadrianopolis (Bithynia): Dedication of the family of Aurelius EpithymetostoTheosHypsistosathanatos

Discoverylocation: Kaisareia/Hadrianopolis. Found at Ortadji-Kariessia. Type: Small rectangular altar. Dimensions: 50 × 22 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.122; Marek 2000, 135–37 (with photograph and translation); SEG 50, no. 1225; Mitchell 1999, 140, no. 197; 1993, H.24; Mendel 1901, 25, no. 163. Date: 3rd century AD. Text: [Ἀγα]θῇ Τύχῃ |2 [Θεῷ] Ὑψίστῳ | Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ἐπιθύμη|4τος κ(αὶ) Βασιλ|[ικ]ὴ σὺν τοῖς πα|6[ιδί]οις ἡμῶν εὐ|χαριστοῦμεν |8 θεῷ ἀθανάτῳ. Translation: With good fortune. To the Most High God, we, Aurelius Epithymetos and Basilike,alongwithourchildren,givethankstotheimmortalgod. L4: Marek: Ἐπιθύμητος; Mitchell: Ἐπιθυμητὸς. L4: Mitchell 1999, 140, no. 197: κὲ.

1.4.7

Nikomedeia (Bithynia): ThededicationofStratontoZeusHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Buried in the ground along with moulded base, at the entrance to the Akpınar Camii mosque. Type: Small marble altar. Dimensions: 34 × 37 × 28 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.172; Mitchell 1999, 140, no. 190; TAM IV.1, 62, Dörner 1941, 37 (with pl. 22). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: The image of an eagle. Text: Ἀγαθῇ Τύ[χῃ] | Διὶ Ὑψίστῳ Στρά|των Μουκάζου | κατὰ ὄναρ ἀνέσ|τησα.

242

CATALOGUE

Translation: Withgoodfortune.Straton,sonofMoukazos,erected(thisaltar)toZeusthe MostHigh,inaccordancewiththedream.

1.4.8

Nikomedeia (Bithynia): ThededicationofLuci(u)stoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found at the place called Kilise Yeri from the village of Hatipler. Type: Limestone altar, damaged above. Dimensions: 35 × 14 × 14 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm. Bibliography: TAM IV.1, 80. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: The image of an eagle with the head turned to the right. Text: [Ἀ]γαθῇ Τύχῃ. | Λούκις Ἄφ|φου Θεῷ | Ὑψίστῳ εὐ|χαριστήρι|ον. Translation: Withgoodfortune.Loukis,sonofAphphos,(dedicatedthis)totheMostHigh Godinthanksgiving.

1.4.9

Nikomedeia (Bithynia): ThededicationofStatiusRufinustoTheos Hypsistosepekoos

Discoverylocation: Nikomedeia. Type: Rectangular stone block. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.173; Mitchell 1999, 140, no. 192; TAM IV.1, 81. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | ἐπηκόῳ | Στάτιος | Ῥουφῆνος | ἑκατόνταρ|χος τὸν | βωμόν. Translation: StatiusRufinus,thecenturion,(dedicated)thealtartothelisteningMostHighGod.

1.4.10

Prusa* (Bithynia): Ex-votodedicatedtoZeusHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Probably from Prusa. The exact place of discovery is unknown. Type: Marble stele, fragmentary, the upper part surviving. Dimensions: 69 × 73 × 8 cm. Letters: (Frg. A) 3.5 cm; (Frg. B) 2.5 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.200; Mitchell 1999, 140, no. 189; IGSK 40.II, 1013 (with bibliography; photograph). Date: 1st century BC–1st century AD. Representation: Very damaged relief, in the lower part; it is impossible to determine the type of object featured. Text: [Ἡ κ]ώμη ἀνέθηκεν Διὶ Ὑψίστῳ |2 [τὴν] εὐχὴν, ἐπιμελητοῦ | Διοφάνου. |4 Πατερίων ἐχαρίσατο χώραν | τῇ κώμῃ μεδίμνων δέκα. Translation: Thevillagededicated(thisstele)toZeustheMostHigh,infulfilmentofavow; Diophaneswasinchargeoftheworks.Pateriongenerouslygavetothe(communityofthe) villagetheland(thatproduces)tenmedimnoi.

CATALOGUE

1.4.11

243

Sebastopolis (Pontus): Ex-votodedicatedbyPontiaValeriatoTheos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Sebastopolis. Type: Rectangular stone block. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.211; Mitchell 1999, 136, no. 127; Cumont and Cumont 1906, 203. Date: End 2nd century–3rd century AD. Text: Θεῷ Ὑ|ψίστῳ | εὐχῆς | χάριν Πον|τία Οὐαλε|ρία. Translation: PontiaValeriatotheMostHighGod,forshehad(made)avow.

1.4.12

Sinope (Sinop, Paphlagonia) 82: Ex-voto dedicated by Aelius ThreptionPontianosandSeverusMacertoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found at Sinop. Initially identified in front of the entrance to the Aslan mosque. Type: Limestone rectangular altar, with acroteria in the upper part, in the left and right corners. Dimensions: 104 × 46 × 46 cm. Letters: 2 cm (row 1), 4 cm (row 2), 3 cm (rows 3–4); letter O with a 1–1.5 cm size. Letters slightly erased. Currentlocation: Sinop Museum. Inv. no. 13.35.70. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.229; IGSK 64.I, 117; Mitchell 1999, 140, no. 198 (incomplete); French 1994, 106, no. 12; Robinson 1905, 306, no. 29; Robert 1937, 288; Cook 1925 II, 883, no. 25. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. (Mitchell); 1st–2nd centuries AD (D.H. French). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Ἀγαθῆι Τύχηι (vacat) |2 Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ· | Αἴλιος Θρεπτίων |4 Ποντιανός, Σεου|ῆρος Μάκερ, οἱ |6 ἀδελφοὶ εὐξάμενοι. Translation: WithGoodfortune!TotheMostHighGod,havingmadeavowthebrothers AeliusThreptionPontianos(and)SeverusMacer(dedicatedthealtar).

1.4.13

Sinope (area of, Paphlagonia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Gerna Dere, a coastal area belonging to the territory of the ancient city of Sinope. Type: Marble altar with lower and upper mouldings. Upper left corner missing. Dimensions: 24 × 16 × 48 cm. Letters: 2.2 cm. The exceptional detail is that the letter Ψ is 4 cm in size. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.230; Mitchell 2010, 204, no. A50; SEG 52, no. 1240; Ruscu 2005, 125–26; Doonan and Smart 2002, 22–23 (fig. 6; with incorrect transcription). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | Οὐαλερία | Μαρκιανή. Translation:TotheMostHighGod,ValeriaMarkiane.

244 1.4.14

CATALOGUE

Sinope (area of, Paphlagonia): Ex-votodedicatedby(....)losandhis wifeRufinatoTheosHypsistosmegas

Discoverylocation: Probably from Emreli. Type: Marble altar, subsequently used as support for a wooden pillar of a modern construction; damaged in the lower part. In the middle, a rather significant opening. Dimensions: 45 × 35 cm. Letters: 3 cm. Lunate sigma. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.231; IGSK 64.I, 119; Mitchell 1999, 140–41, no. 199; French 1994, 104, no. 12; Sheppard 1980–81, 96, n. 71; Robert 1937, 288; Robinson 1905, 304, no. 26. Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD (D.H. French). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Θεῷ μεγάλῳ |2 Ὑψίστῳ εὐχῆ[ς] | χά[ριν ἀνέ]θη|4κε [--]λος | μετὰ [τῆς γυ]ναι|6[κ]ὸς Ῥου[φ]εί[νας]. Translation: To the Most High and Great God, [--]los, with (his) wife, Rufina, dedicated (thealtar)forhavingmadeavow.

1.4.15

Sinope (Sinop, Paphlagonia): Ex-votodedicatedbyOnesiteimosand AgathemerostoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Sinop. Type: Circular limestone altar with upper moulding. Dimensions: 52.5 (height) × 30.5 (diameter) cm. Letters: Slightly damaged. 2 cm, except for O which is 1 cm in size. Currentlocation: Sinop Museum. Inv. No. 5.59.84. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.232; IGSK 64.I, 118; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 200; French 1994, 104–05, no. 2. Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Ἀγαθῇ Τύχῃ |2 Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ (vacat) | Ὀνησίτειμος |4 καὶ ὁ υἱὸς αὐτο{ς}ῦ | Ἀγαθήμερος |6 (vacat) εὐχήν. Translation: Withgoodfortune.TotheMostHighGod,OnesiteimosandhissonAgathemeros (dedicatedthealtar)infulfilmentofthevow.

1.4.16

Tiaion (Paphlagonia): Dedication of Oclatianus Domitianus addressedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Tiaion. Type: Large limestone altar. Dimensions: 170 × 57 × 44 cm. Letters: 5 cm. Currentlocation: The village of Öteyüz, near the ancient mosque. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.294; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 201; Robert 1937, 287, no. 12.

CATALOGUE

245

Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Ἀγαθῇ Τύχῃ. Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ Ὀκλατιανὸς Δομιτιανός. Translation: Withgoodfortune.OclatianusDomitianus,totheMostHighGod.

Galatia 1.5.1

Ankyra (Galatia): DedicationaddressedtomegasTheosHypsistos kaiepouranios

Discoverylocation: Kalecik, near Ankyra. Type: Red marble column with white veins. Dimensions: 46 × 28 (base)/26 (top) cm. Broken at the base and on top. Letters: 3.5 cm. Currentlocation: In the garden in front of Belediye. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.20; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 202; RECAM II, 209B; SEG 31, no. 1080; Sheppard 1980–81, 94, no. 11 (pl. 2.11). Date: 3rd century AD (?). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Τῷ μεγάλῳ | Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ καὶ | ἐπουρανίῳ καὶ |4 τοῖς ἁγίοις αὐτοῦ | ἀνγέλοις καὶ τῇ | προσκυνητῇ αὐ|τοῦ προσευχῇ τὰ |8 ὧδε ἔργα γείνεται. Translation: TothegreatMostHighandHeavenlyGod,tohisholyangels,andforhisvenerablehouseofprayertheseconstructionsweremade.

1.5.2

Germa (area of, Galatia): MentionofthepowerofHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Kazakent, in the surroundings of Germa. Type: Two limestone fragments. Possibly a Jewish monument. Dimensions: 18 × 34 cm (Fragm. A); 28 × 66 cm (Fragm. B). Letters: 5.2 cm. Currentlocation: Into one of the walls on the main street. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.109; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 203; RECAM II, 141; Mitchell 1993 II, 36. Date: 4th century AD (?). Representation: Fishbone representation. Text: Δύναμι|ς Ὑψίστου. Translation: PoweroftheMostHigh.

1.5.3

Pessinus (Galatia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in a garden in the south of the village of Ballıhisar. Type: Small grey-whitish marble altar; moulded upper part. Damaged on all sides. Dimensions: 32 × 17 × 15.5 cm. Letters: 1.9 cm.

246

CATALOGUE

Currentlocation: Museum of Ballıhisar. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.192; Mitchell 2010, 204, no. A52; Devreker 1995, 73, no. 1 (with photograph at pl. 5); SEG 45, no. 1703; AÉ 1995, no. 1532; IGSK 66, 23. Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Πρεῖμα Πρ[εί]|μου μεγά|ῳ Θεῷ Ὑψ[ί]|στῷ εὐχ[ήν]. Translation: Preima, daughter of Preimos, (dedicated this) to the great Most High God, infulfilmentofthevow.

1.5.4

Tavium (Galatia): Ex-voto dedicated by the merchant Carpus to TheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: In the house of Selahattin Ahmed in Büyük Nefes. Type: Pedestal with moulded upper part. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.279; SEG 52, no. 1944; Mitchell 1999, 136, no. 127; RECAM II, 418. Date: 2nd century AD. Text: Ἀγαθῇ Τύχῇ | Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ Καρ|πὸς Ἀγκυρανὸς | ὁ καὶ Ταουιανὸς | μονοπώλης ἀνέ|θηκα εὐχῆς ἕνεκ[εν]. Translation: Withgoodfortune.I,Carpus,traderofthecitiesofAnkyraandTavium,setup (this)totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

Phrygia 1.6.1

Aizanoi (Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Ağarı, on the territory of the ancient Aizanoi. Type: White-greyish marble slab, damaged on every side, placed in a wall of the mosque. Dimensions: 125 × 172 × 35 cm. Letters: 4–4.5 cm. Currentlocation: In the western wall of the mosque. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.3; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 208; MAMA IX, 59. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD (?). Representation: Incised dots on the right side of the monument, by all appearances making up a pattern. Text: [Γαι]αν[ó]ς? Ἀλεξάνδρου [Π?]ειόνιος |2 ὑπὲρ ἑ[α]υτοῦ [Θ]εῷ Ὑψίστῳ εὐχήν. Translation: Gaianos(?),sonofAlexandros,ofPeionia,totheMostHighGod,forhisown well-being,infulfilmentofthevow.

CATALOGUE

247

L1: MAMA IX, 59: \ N [..] Ἀλεξάνδρου ΙЄΙΟΝΙΟC. According to MAMA IX, 59, the ethnic could be either [Π]ειόνιος as indicated by Le Bas and Waddington 1870, 987 or others starting with Τ or Γ as Γειόνιος, Τειόνιος, Τετόνιος, Γεγόνιος, Τεγόνιος. Usually the early publications omit the first two words.

1.6.2

Aizanoi (Phrygia): Ex-voto dedicated by Aurelius Asklepiades to TheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Rediscovered embedded in a wall of a house in Haci Kebir, near Aizanoi by Drew-Bear and Naour and republished. Initially identified at Haci Köy, 5 km north-east from Aizanoi. Type: White-grayish marble rectangular altar. Dimensions: 62 × 51.5/39.5 cm. Letters: 3.2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.4; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 209; DrewBear and Naour 1990, 2039, no. 33; SEG 40, no. 1188; MAMA IX, P67; Kraabel 1969, 88; Cook 1925 II, 882, no. 23; Körte 1900, 405, no. 9. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: A garland in relief is represented on the front side. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ἀσκληπιάδ[ης] |2 ἐλεηθεὶς ἀπ᾽ ὅ|λλων τῶν παθημάτ[ων] |4 εὐξάμενος Θεῷ Ὑ[ψ]|ίστῳ μετὰ |6 τῶν εἰδίων. Translation: AureliusAsklepiades,becauseofmercifuldeliveryfrommanysufferings,having madeavow(setthisup)withhisfamilytotheMostHighGod. L 2–4: Kraabel: ‘becauseofmercifuldeliveryfrommanysufferings.’

1.6.3

Aizanoi (Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Kırgıl, near Aizanoi. Type: Marble basis. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.5; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 210; MAMA IX, P68; IBuresch 27, no. 46. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A wreath underneath the inscription. Text: [name] ὑπὲρ |2 τῶν τέκνων | Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ |4 εὐχήν. Translation: [name],totheMostHighGod,forthechildren,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.6.4

Aizanoi (Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Kırgıl, near Aizanoi. Found near the exterior ladder of a house. Type: Rectangular altar made of local, yellowish stone, with moulded upper part. Dimensions: 72 × 34 cm. Letters: 2.2 cm. Currentlocation: Built into the wall of the house.

248

CATALOGUE

Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.6; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 211; DrewBear and Naour 1990, 2041, no. 34 (pl. XIII.34); SEG 40, no. 1196. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A wreath is featured on the anterior side of the monument. Text: [-- name--]|2νου Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: [---]nos,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.6.5

Aizanoi (Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Kırgıl, near Aizanoi. Type: Le Bas and Waddington 1870, 987: ‘Sur une dalle mutilée’. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.7; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 212; MAMA IX, P69; Le Bas and Waddington 1870, 987. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: [name] Ἀλε[ξά]νδρου [Π?]ειόνιος |2 [Διῒ?] Ὑψίστῳ εὐχήν. Translation:[name],son ofAlexandros,ofPeionia,toZeus(?)theMostHigh,infulfilment ofthevow. L1: Le Bas and Waddington 1870, 987: ‘Il y a une petite ville de la Mysie appellée Pionia, mais sur ses monnaies l’ethnique est toujours Πιονίτης’. L1–2: Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 212: Ἀλεξάνδρου… υἱός… Ὑψίστῳ ευχήν. Here Mitchell has as biographical reference Le Bas and Waddington 1870, 987. The restitution of Le Bas and Waddington 1870, 987 is: [Ὁ δεῖνα] Ἀλε[ξά]νδρου [Π?]ειόνιος |2 [Διῒ] Ὑψίστῳ εὐχήν.

1.6.6

Aizanoi(?) (Phrygia): Ex-voto dedicated by Diokles to Theos  ypsistos H

Discovery location: Tavşanlı, near Aizanoi (in the middle basin of the Rhyndakos River). Found in the yard of a house in the locality. The indicated place of provenance would be a hill in Avara. Type: White marble rectangular altar, with a moulded lower part, with acroteria on the upper corners. Dimensions: 97 × 46 (upper part)–41 (middle part)–48 (lower part) × 41 (upper part)–36 (middle part)–44 (lower part) cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.8; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 213; DrewBear and Naour 1990, 2036, no. 31 (with translation; pl. XIII.31); SEG 40, no. 1227. Date: AD 257–258 (342 Sullan era). Representation: Decorated with a garland enclosing a triple sheaf of corn. Vine on reverse. Text: Ἔτους τμβ΄. Διοκλῆς | Ζήνωνος | μετὰ τῶν ἰδίων Θεῷ Ὑψίσ|τῳ εὐχήν. Translation: In342,Diokles,thesonofZenon,withhisfamily,totheMostHighGod,in fulfilmentofthevow.

CATALOGUE

1.6.7

249

Akmonia (Phrygia): ThededicationofAureliaTatisandofOnesimos addressedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Çorum, north from the site of Akmonia (of Ahat Köy). Type: Rectangular block built into the foundation of an annex building. Dimensions: 58 × 28 × 17 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.9; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 205; NDIEC 1981, 25–26, no. 2 (with translation); SEG 26–27, no. 1356; Drew-Bear 1976, 248–49, no. 2 (pl. 7, fig. 2). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Ἀγαθῇ Τύχ[ῃ] | Αὐρ(ήλια) Τατις Ὀ|νησίμου χαλ|4κέος σύνβιος | σὺν τῷ συμβί|ῳ Ὀνησίμῳ Θε|ῷ Ὑψίστῳ ἐκ τ|8ῶν ἰδίων ἀνέ|[στ]ησαν. Translation: Withgoodfortune.AureliaTatis,wifeofOnesimostheblacksmith,setup(this monument)alongwithherhusband,Onesimos,totheMostHighGod,attheirownexpense.

1.6.8

Akmonia (Phrygia): Ex-voto dedicated by Ebiktetos (!) to Theos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Yenice Köy, near Akmonia. Type: Small altar with moulded upper and lower side, with two acroteria. Dimensions: 37.5 × 16.5 × 16 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Afyonkarahisar (inv. 4105). Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.10; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 206; NDIEC 1981, 25–26, no. 1 (with translation); SEG 26–27, no. 1355; Drew-Bear 1976, 247–48, no. 1 (pl. 7, fig. 1). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: The acroteria frame the circular upper side decorated with a vine comprising three leaves on top of three spirals. Text: Ἐβίκτητος | ἐπύησε|ν Θεῷ |4 Ὑψίστῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: Ebiktetossetup(thisaltar)fortheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.6.9

Akmonia (Phrygia): Funerary imprecation against the tomb desecrators

Discoverylocation: Yenice Köy, near Akmonia. Type: Tombstone ending with a curse. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.11; Mitchell 1999, 141, no. 207; IJO II, 176; Strubbe 1994, 111, no. 5 (with translation); van der Horst 1991, 57; Trebilco 1991, 74–75; CIJ 769 (with translation); Sheppard 1979, 173; Hellenica 11–12, 407; Ramsay 1897, 652, no. 563 (with commentary).

250

CATALOGUE

Date: 3rd century AD. Text: [Ἐὰν δέ τις ἕτερον σῶμα εἰσενέγκη ἔσ]ται αὐτῷ πρὸς τὸν θεὸν τὸν ὕψιστον καὶ τὸ ἀρᾶς δρέπανον εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ [εἰσέλθοιτο καὶ μηδέναν ἐνκαταλείψαιτο]. Translation: Andwhoeverintroducesanotherbody(inthetomb),hewillhavetoreckonwith theMostHighGodandmaythesickleofthecursecomeintohishouseandleavenoone behind.

1.6.10 Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedbyAureliusAntipatros toTheosHypsistos Discoverylocation: Kuyucak, near Dorylaion. Type: Grey marble stele. Dimensions: 87 × 45 × 27 (visible part) cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Currentlocation: In the wall of the school at Kuyucak. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.94; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 216; MAMA V, 186 (pl. 45). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Decorated with a triple ears of corn and a six-leaved rosette. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ἀντίπατρ|2ος β΄ μετὰ τεκού|σας Ἀντωνίας |4 Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: AureliusAntipatros,thesonofAntipatros,withAntoniabearing(his)child,to theMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.6.11

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the area of Aşağı Çavlan Köyü. Type: Small rectangular altar of moulded limestone, with palm-leafed acroteria. Dimensions: 48 × 175/215 × 14.5 cm. Letters: 2.5–3 cm. The last two lines are written on the basement. Currentlocation: Archaeological Museum Eskișehir. Inv. no. A-147-82. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.95; Mitchell 2010, 204, no. A54; SEG 44, no. 1058; Ricl 1994, 169, no. 25. Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Incised ear of corn featured on the upper profile. Text: Νεῖλος |2 Δημοσ|θένου |4[Θ]εῷ Ὑψί|στῳ εὐχ|ήν. Translation:Neilos,sonofDemosthenes,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.6.12

Eumeneia (İğdir, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found at İğdir. Type: Votive altar with mouldings, broken below. Dimensions: 65 × 40 (upper moulding) / 36 (lower moulding) × 39 cm. Letters: 3–4 cm.

CATALOGUE

251

Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.107; MAMA XI, 31 (with squeeze). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: No relief. Text: [---] | [Ἀπολλ]ώνιο[ς?] | [--]ω[--] | [--]ΛΟΙΟ | [ὑπὲρ ἑ]α[υ]τοῦ? | [--]Ν[.]ω Ὑ|[ψ]έστῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: Apollonios(?)…forhisownwell-being(?)…totheMostHigh,infulfilmentof thevow.

1.6.13

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedbyAureliusIasonto TheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Aslanapa, near Kotiaeion, in the Upper Tembris Valley. Type: Votive altar. Dimensions: 84 × 56 × 53 cm. Currentlocation: Small mosque. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.28; Lochman 2003, 290, no. II 528; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 227; Drew-Bear and Naour 1990, 2038, no. 32 (pl. XIII); SEG 40, no. 1235; MAMA X, 261 (pl. XXX). Date: AD 253/254 (= 338 Sullan era). Representation: Altar with sheaf of corn within a garland. Text: [Ἐπὶ] Νικομ[ά]χου, | [ἔτου]ς τλη΄, Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ἰάσων Θεῷ | Ὑψίστῳ εὐχήν. Translation: During(theofficeof)Nikomachos,intheyear338,AureliusIason(dedicated this)totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.6.14

Kotiaeion⁄Aizanoi (Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedbyAureliusAlexandrosandhisfamilytoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Probably from Kotiaeion or Aizanoi. Indicated by Drew-Bear and Naour with unknown provenance. Type: Grey-whitish marble column tambour. Dimensions: 123 × 25.5 (upper diam.)/ 27 (lower diam.) cm. Letters: 3.8 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.143; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 215; DrewBear and Naour 1990, 2041–43, no. 35 (pl. XIV. 35a and b); SEG 40, no. 1251. Date: AD 308/309 (= 393 Sullan era). Text: Ἔτους τϙγ΄ | Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ἀλέξα|νδρος Τιμο|θέου καὶ ἡ | σύνβιος αὐ|τοῦ Αὐρ(ηλία) Ἄμμι|α εὐξάμενοι | Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ | εὐχὴν σὺν | τοῖς τέκνοις | αὐτῶν Ἀττι|κὸς κὲ Ἀρτέμων | κὲ Τιμόθεος κὲ Ἀλέ|ξανδρος κὲ Πλάτων | ἀνέστησαν τοὺς κίονας σὺν τῳ προ|πύλῳ. Translation: In393,AureliusAlexandros,sonofTimotheos,andhiswifeAur(elia)Ammia havingpromissedtoTheosHypsistos,alongwiththeirchildrenAttikos,Artemon,Timotheos,AlexandrosandPlaton,erectedthecolumnsandthepropylon,inaccordancewith thevow.

252 1.6.15

CATALOGUE

Laodicea on Lykos (Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Laodicea on Lykos, in the south of Phrygia. Type: Stone monument. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.150; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 217; IGSK 49, 61; Ramsay 1895, 78, no. 14; 1887, 354, no. 12. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: [---]ς Θεῷ Ὑψέστῳ εὐχήν. Translation: [---]stotheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.6.16

Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia): Ex-voto dedicated by Aurelius AsklapontoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found at Seyitgazı. Type: Grey marble double altar, little damaged in the upper part. Dimensions: 48 × 35 × 13 cm. Letters: 3–5 cm. The inscription is set on both altars. Currentlocation: At Seyit Gazi, on the eastern wall of the mosque. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.168; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 218; MAMA V, 211 (pl. 49). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: A wheat ear on each of the altar shafts. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίσ|τῳ εὐ|χὴν Αὐ|4ρήλιος | Ἀσκλάπω|ν ἣν ὁμο|λοησεν ἐν |8 Ῥωμῃ. Translation: To the Most High God, in accordance with the vow, Aurelius Asklapon (dedicatedthealtar)ashepromisedinRome.

1.6.17

Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia): Ex-voto dedicated by Gaius to Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found at Seyitgazı. Type: Small limestone altar, embedded into a wall. Dimensions: 35 × 16 (upper part)/13 (lower part) × 15 (visible part) cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Currentlocation: At Seyit Gazi, built into the wall on the side of the river. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.169; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 219; MAMA V, 212 (pl. 49). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: Γάϊος | Μάν|ου ὑπ|4ὲρ βοῶ|ν σωτηρ|ίας κὲ [τ]|ῶν ἰδί[ων π]|8άντων [Ὑψ]|ίστῳ εὐχ[ήν]. Translation: Gaius,thesonofManos,forsavinghiscattleandhisfamily,totheMostHigh God,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.6.18 Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos, toHosiosandtoZeus=3.6.103

CATALOGUE

1.6.19

253

Nakoleia (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered south from Yapıldağ, on the field. Type: Tufa slab. Dimensions: ca. 160 cm high. Letters: 2–3 cm. The inscription is set on a tabulaansata. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.171; Mitchell 2010, 204–05, no. A55; SGO III, 344–45, no. 16/41/09; SEG 43, no. 945; Mitchell 1993 I, 49–50; Haspels 1971 I, 313–14, no. 40 (with photograph at fig. 615). Date: 3rd–4th centuries AD. Text: Ζώσιμος Πατρικίου καὶ Δόμνης γέ|νος ἐσθλόν, πάτρης ἔντειμος ἑῆς καὶ ἐκ | λαοῦ Ὑψίστοιο, πνευματικαῖς καὶ | Ὁμηρίοις [ἐ]πέεσσιν [[---]] |5 γράψας ἐν πίνακι ὅσα χρῄζουσι βροτοῖσι | ἐν πίνακι πτυκτῷ σοφοῖσι τὸ μέλλο[ν] ὑπει[πώ]ν· | σὺν σεμνῇ ἀλόχῳ […]ΜΙΡΙ τῇ φιλοέργῳ | ἐπ᾽ ἄκος μεωσα (?) πέπλου[ς χα]ρίεντας ὕφην[ε]ν | καὶ θρέψαν φιλὰ τέκνα [τ]ά οἱ τυτθὰ προθάνοντο |10 κουρίδιον δὲ γάμον ὁμὸν λέχος ἀνφαγάπαζον, | οἱ κὰ ἔτ[ι] ζῶσιν τεῦξαν τόδε σῆμα κλεενόν. Translation: Zosimos, a noble offspring of Patricius and Domne, highly honoured in his fatherlandand(comingfrom)thepeopleoftheMostHigh,inspiritualandHomericwords… havingcarvedonthetabletwhatisofusetomortals,wasgoingtorepreattothewise(ones) onafoldingtablet:withhisrevered(and)hardworkingspouse…,hewovegracefulclothes forremedy;andtheybroughtup(their)belovedchildren,andputtheselittleonesforward, theyguarded(?)theirlawfulmarriageandtheconjugalbed;andtheysetupthissplendid monumentduringtheirlifetime. L2 and 11: κὰ instead of καὶ.

1.6.20

Phyteia (Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found ar Kurudere, nearly half distance between Dokimeion and Amorion. Type: Stele with gabled pediment, having upper and lower mouldings, the lower right corner slightly damaged. In the central part of the pediment, a boss. Dimensions: 45.5 × 23 × 7 cm. Letters: 1.6 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Anatolian Civilizations in Ankara. Inv. No. 26.156.64. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.18; Mitchell 2010, 204, A53; SGO III, 360, no. 16/44/01; Drew-Bear, Thomas and Yıldızturan 1999, 236, no. 364. Date: ca. AD 170. Text: Ζηνὶ Πανυψίστῳ | Χαρίτων Δοκιμε[ὺς] | ἀνέθηκεν εὐξά|μενος στήλην | ἀγλαίσας παλά|μαις. Translation:ToZeustheAll-highest,CharitonfromDokimeion,havingvoweddedicatedthe stele,whichheadornedwithhishands.

254 1.6.21

CATALOGUE

Synaos (Simav, Phrygia): Ex-voto dedicated by Aphias to Theos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Ulaşlar, near Synaos. Probably moved from the ancient cemetery. Type: White marble altar. Dimensions: 125 × 40/35/34 × 36/44 cm. Letters: 2.5–3 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.260; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 221; MAMA X, 427 (pl. XLVI). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Representation of a relief wreath. Text: Ἀφίας μετὰ τοῦ | υἱοῦ Εἰρηνέου | Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ εὐ|χήν. Translation: Aphias,alongwith(his)son,Eirenaios,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentof thevow.

1.6.22

Synaos (Simav, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Aşağı Yoncaağaç, near Synaos. Type: Small white marble altar, highly damaged by the climate. Column head and base with moulding. Dimensions: 92 × 34/27.5/36 × 32/27.5/34.5 cm. Letters: 2–2.25 cm. Currentlocation: In the cemetery of Aşağı Yoncaağaç. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.261; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 222; MAMA X, 435 (pl. XLVII). Date: AD 221/222 (= 306 Sullan era). Representation: Representation of a relief wreath. Text: [Ἔ]τους τς΄. Αὐ[-- | --]Σ Θεῷ Ὑψίσ|[τῳ] εὐχήν. Translation: Intheyear306.Au[--],totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.6.23

Synaos (Simav, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedbyAmmia

Discoverylocation: Aşağı Yoncaağaç, near Synaos. Type: Marble-looking limestone altar. Lower part buried, and the body perse starts from the relief wreath. Dimensions: 50 × 33/27 × 26/22 cm. Letters: 2–3 cm. Currentlocation: In the ancient village cemetery. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.262; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 223; MAMA X, 440 (pl. XLVIII). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Relief wreath with a small circle in the middle part. Text: Ἀμμία Θάλεν|τος Θεῶι | εὐχήν. Translation: Ammia, ofThales,totheGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

CATALOGUE

1.6.24

255

Synaos (Simav, Phrygia): Ex-voto dedicated to Theos Hypsistos e pekoos

Discoverylocation: Yukarı Yoncaağaç, near Synaos. Type: Grey limestone altar, semi-buried, with moulded column head. Dimensions: 115 × 54.5/47/53 × 47/42 cm. Letters: 2.25–2.5 cm. Currentlocation: In the ancient village cemetery. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.263; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 224; MAMA X, 443. Date: AD 211/212 (= 296 Sullan era). Representation: Representation of a wreath. Text: [Ἔτ]ους σπς΄. Θεῷ Ὑψ[ί]στ[ῳ ἐπ|2ηκ]όῳ Θερμηνοὶ εὐχήν. Translation: Intheyear296.TheinhabitantsofTherme(dedicatedthealtar)tothelistening MostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.6.25

Themisonion (Phrygia): DedicationtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered together with other blocks from Yumrutaș, near Acıpayam. Type: White marble fragmentary architrave. Dimensions: 20 × 165.5 × 40 cm. Letters: 2.4–2.7 cm. Currentlocation: Hierapolis Archaeology Museum, Denizli. Bibliography: IHierapolis 47. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: [---]ος Μήνιδος Τερτίου τὸ ὑπέρθυρον καὶ τὸ ὀδὺν Θεῷ Ὑψί|2στῳ (vacat) εὐχήν. Translation: [---]os,sonofMenisTertios(dedicated)thearchitraveandtheentrancehallto theMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.6.26

Tiberiopolis (area of, Phrygia): DedicationofIulia(?)addressedto Theosepekoos

Discoverylocation: Hasanlar, on the territory of the ancient Tiberiopolis. Type: Pink and white marble altar, buried in the lower part. Dimensions: 85 × 48 (column head)/43 (body) × 40 (column head)/35.5 (body) cm. Letters: 3–3.25 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.295; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 225; MAMA X, 488 (with facsimile). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic altar. Text: Θ[ε]ῷ ἐπηκόῳ | Ἰουλί[α? βῶμον] | σὺν τ[ῷ λύχν]ῳ? | καὶ τῇ πυράμῃ | ἀνέ[θ]ηκεν. Translation: Iulia(?),tothelisteningGod,dedicatedthealtarandthesupportwiththelamp(?).

256 1.6.27

CATALOGUE

Tiberiopolis (area of, Phrygia): Dedication to Theos Hypsistos epekoos

Discoverylocation: Hisarcık, near Tiberiopolis. Type: Limestone pilaster, reused. Semi-buried. Highly affected by bad weather; it features a broken pedestal. Probably initially used as altar. Dimensions: 137 × 51 (column head) / 44 (body) / 53 (base) × 50 (column head) / 45 (body) cm. Letters: 2.75–3.5 cm. Currentlocation: Near the mosque of Hisarcık. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.296; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 226; MAMA X, 504 (with facsimile). Date: AD 245/246 (= 330 Sullan era). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [Ἔτ]ους τλ΄ ΤΙΡ.̣Ω | Διοδώρου κὲ [ἡ γυ|νὴ] Ἀφφία ὑ[πὲρ ?ἰδί|ων Θε]ῷ ἐπηκό[ῳ Ὑψ|ίστ]ῳ εὐχή[ν]. Translation: Intheyear330.(…)ofDiodoros,withhiswifeAphphia,fortheirfamily,tothe listeningMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

Pisidia, Pamphilia, Lycia 1.7.1

Andeda (area of, Pisidia): ThededicationofQuintusNumerius,priest ofMênOuranios,toTheosHypsistos = 4.7.4

Discoverylocation: Belen, near the ancient site of Andeda /Andya (Yavuz). Type: Small circular altar used as pedestal for a pillar of the mosque. Buried for the most part. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.63; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 228; 1993 II, 49, n. 288; Bean 1960, 65, no. 115. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Κόιντος Νουμέρι|ος ἱερεὺς | Μηνὸς Ο[ὐ]|ρανίου κα|τὰ χρημα|τισμὸν ἀνέ|θηκε Θεῷ | Ὑψίστῳ. Translation: QuintusNumerius,priestoftheHeavenlyMên,dedicated(thealtar)totheMost HighGod,inaccordancewithanoracle.

1.7.2

Kibyra (area of, Lycia): DedicationtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found at Sorkun, in the house of Mehmet Ateş, but probably brought from Gölhisar Gölü, the Kibyra area. Type: Circular altar broken below, moulded in the upper part. Dimensions: 86 × 40 cm. Letters: 2.5–4 cm.

CATALOGUE

257

Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.145; Mitchell 2010, 205, no. A58; IGSK 60, 92; SEG 52, no. 1431; SEG 48, no. 1595; RECAM III, 58 (with photograph at p. 111). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ. Translation: TotheMostHighGod.

1.7.3

Neisa (Lycia): DedicationaddressedtoTheosHypsistostoallgods andgoddesses

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Neisa. Type: Rectangular marble plaque with upper left corner destroyed. Dimensions: 67 × 52 cm. Letters: 3.5 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.174; Şahin 2006, 38–39, no. 6; Engelmann 2006, 185–86; Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 232; TAM II.3, 737 (with facsimile); CCCA I, 731. Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [Μ(άρκος) Αὐρ(ήλιος) Δι]ονύσιος Διο|2[νυσίου] Διογένους λυ|[κιάρχ]ης Θεῷ Ὑψίσ|4[τῳ καὶ Μητρ]ὶ Ὀρείᾳ καὶ Κελε|[--] καὶ θεοῖς πᾶσι |6 [καὶ θεαῖς] πὰσαις χαρισ|[τ]ήριον. Translation:[M(arcus)Aur(elius)Di]onysios,sonofDio[nysios],thegrandsonofDiogenes, theLykiarches,inthanksgivingtotheMostHighGod,andtotheMountainMother,andto Kele[--]andtoallgods[and]goddesses.

1.7.4

Oinoanda (Lycia): Dedication addressed to Theos aitheros polyonymos

Discoverylocation: Altar discovered in the site of Oinoanda. Type: Stone altar built into the Hellenistic precinct wall. Moulded in the upper and lower part. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: Into the precinct wall. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.176; Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 233 (pl. 1, 2, pp. 88–89); Robert 1971 = OMS 5, 617–19; SEG 27, no. 933; Hall 1978, 263–67 (for archaeological context; pls. XI–XIII); Milner and M. Smith 1994, 73–74; Bean 1971, 37; Potter 1990, 351–55. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [Α]ὐτοφυής, ἀδί|δακτος, ἀμήτωρ, | ἀστυφελικτός, | οὔνομα μὴ χω|ρῶν, πολυώνυμος, | ἐν πυρὶ ναίων, | τοῦτο Θεός· μεικρὰ | δὲ Θεοῦ μερὶς ἄνγε|λοι ἡμεῖς. Τοῦτο πευ|θομένοισι Θεοῦ πέ|ρι ὅστις ὑπάρχει, | Αἰ[θ]έ[ρ]α πανδερκ[ῆ | Θε]ὸν ἒννεπεν, εἰς | ὃν ὁρῶντας εὔχεσθ᾽ ἠώ|ους πρὸς ἀνατολίην ἐσορῶ[ν]|τα[ς].

258

CATALOGUE

Translation: Self-born,untaught,motherless,unshakeable,bearingnoname,many-named, dwellinginfire,suchisgod.We,theangels,areasmallportionofgod.This,then,tothose whoaskaboutgod’snature,hedescribedthegodasall-seeingEther:tohimthenlookand prayatdawn,turningyourgazetotheEast.

1.7.5

Oinoanda (Lycia): Dedication addressed by Chromatis to Theos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Altar discovered in the site of Oinoanda. Type: Stone altar embedded in the Hellenistic precinct wall. Moulded in the upper and lower part. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: In the precinct wall, inside. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.177; Ameling 1999–2000, 107; Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 234 (pl. 3, p. 90); Colpe and Löw 1994, col. 1051; Hall 1978, 265. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Χρωματὶς Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ τὸν λύχνον εὐχήν. Translation: Chromatis(dedicated)thelamptotheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.7.6

Patara (Lycia): Ex-votodedicatedbyDemosthenestoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Altar discovered in 1895 in the site of Patara. Type: Rectangular limestone altar, with moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: 58 × 21 × 19 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.179; Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 235; TAM II.2, 402 (with facsimile). Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Θεῷ | Ὑψίστῳ | Δημοσθέ[ν|ης εὐχή]ν. Translation: Demosthenes(dedicatedthis)totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.7.7

Perge (Pamphylia): Ex-vototoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: At Perge, in Pamphylia, on the north-south main street. Type: Right corner of stone block (altar?). Dimensions: 10 × 12 × 5.5 cm. Letters: 2.3 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.188; IGSK 54, 230; Mitchell 2010, 205, no. A56. Date: 3rd century AD, by the shape of letters. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [---] |2 [---] Θεῷ | [Ὑ]ψίστῳ |4 [ε]ὐχήν. Translation: [---]totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

CATALOGUE

1.7.8

259

Perge (Pamphylia): Ex-vototo(Theos)Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in 1978 at Perge, in Pamphylia. Type: Small limestone altar; lower left part surviving. Dimensions: 25 × 11 × 17 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm. Currentlocation: Stored in the deposit of the excavations. Inv. No. P. 78,316. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.189; IGSK 54.I, 231 (with figure at pl. L); Mitchell 2010, 205, no. A57. Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD. Representation: Moulded lower part. Under the moulding, relief frame. Aniconic. Text: [--Name --]ΙΟΙΙΙ[--] |2 Συντυ[χιανοῦ? Θεῷ] | Ὑψίστ[ῳ --] |4 εὐχή[ν --]. Translation: [---],sonofSyntychianos?,totheMostHigh[God],infulfilmentofthevow. L2: Mitchell: Συντύ[χης Θεῷ].

1.7.9

Sagalassos (Pisidia): Ex-vototoTheosHypsistos

Discovery location: In front of the mosque in Sala (the Burdur area of Pisidia), partially buried at the base of a pillar. Type: Small altar. Dimensions: 60 × 22 × 22 cm. Letters: 3–3.5 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.206; Mitchell 1999, 136, no. 127; Bean 1959, 74, no. 15. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Αλλα Α[---] |2 καὶ Μέσα | Θεῷ Ὑψί[σ]|4τῳ εὐ[χ]ήν. Translation: AllaA[---]andMesa,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.7.10

Sibidunda (Pisidia): DedicationaddressedbyArtimasandbyMarkias toTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Sibidunda (Zivint), in Pisidia. Type: Rectangular pediment. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: In the yard of the post office in Zivint. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.226; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 230; 1993 II, 49; Bean 1959, 70, no. 122. Date: 2nd century AD. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ καὶ | ἁγείᾳ καταφυγῇ | Ἀρτιμᾶς υἱὸς Ἀρ|τίμου Μομμίου | καὶ [Μ]αρκίας ὁ αὐ|τὸς κτίστης ἀ|νέστησεν καὶ | τὸν θυμιατισ|τήρ(ι)ον καὶ κέον(α) | ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων. Translation: Artimas,sonofArtimasMommios,andMarkias,thebuilderhimself,erectedtothe MostHighGodandtotheholyrefuge,analtarforincenseandacolumn,attheirownexpense.

260 1.7.11

CATALOGUE

Termessos (Pisidia): Dedication addressed by Tychos to Theos Hypsistosepekoos

Discoverylocation: Termessos. Type: Moulded circular base. Mitchell: ‘This inscribed base originally supported a bronze statue of a left foot.’ Dimensions: 65 × 24.5 (upper part)/26.5 (lower part) cm. Letters: 3 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.280; Petridou 2009, 85; Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 231; TAM III.1, 32 (with facsimile); Weinreich 1912, 20, no. 99. Date: 2nd century AD. Text: Θεῷ ἐπηκόῳ Ὑ|2ίστω Τύχ|ος ὁ καὶ Ἀττα|4λιανός Ἑρ(μαίου) β΄ | Σύρου, πά(ροικος), κα|6τὰ κέλευσιν | αὐτοῦ ἔστη|8σην | σὺν τῷ ἕπον[τι] |10 ἴχνει θεοῦ. Translation: Tychos,theonealsonamedAttalianos,sonofHermaios,grandsonofHermaios, the Syrian, a paroikos, erected (this monument) to the listening Most High God, with a (depicted)footthatfollowsthegod,inaccordancewiththegod’scommand. L1: Mitchell: Ὑ|φίστω. L2–3: Heberdey: Τύχ[ι(?)|ος. L3–6: Mitchell: Ἀττα|λιανός . . . | Σύρου . . κα|τὰ κέλευσιν.

Lykaonia, Isauria, Cilicia 1.8.1

Diokaisareia (Cilicia): Ex-voto(toTheosHypsistos)onanaltarwith menorah

Discoverylocation: Purchased in 1964. From Diokaisareia (Uzuncaburç). Type: Small limestone altar, with a moulded upper and lower side. Upper moulding partially destroyed. Dimensions: 29 × 18 18 cm. Letters: The inscription is on the upper and the lower moulding. Currentlocation: Museum of Silifke. Inv. No. 138. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.87; ICilicia 14 (with pl. VII.14). Date: 4th–5th centuries AD (?). Probably earlier. Representation: On the main side, a four-branch relief candlestick (menorah) is featured, with a globe and a star on top. On the lateral sides, ears are featured also in relief (an allusion to the fact that the god listened to the prayer and to the epithet epekoos, implicitly). Text: (Text A): [--]α[--]ις. (Text B): εὐχήν. Translation: (Text B): [---]infulfilmentofthevow.

CATALOGUE

1.8.2

261

Ikonion (Konya, Lykaonia): Ex-votodedicatedby[.]eratesandhis familytoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found in Konya. Type: Marble altar, damaged above. Traces of mouldings in the upper and lower parts. Dimensions: 23 × 19 × 19 cm. Letters: 1.5–2 cm. Currentlocation: Konya Archaological Museum. Inv. No. 42. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.140; RECAM IV, 38 (with photograph at fig. 56); Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 236; MAMA VIII, 298 (with pl. 13, no. 298). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [.]ερατης Κ. Φιλο|λόγου μετὰ γυνα[ι]κὸς καὶ τέκνων | Θεῷ Ὑψίστῳ εὐ|χήν. Translation:[.]eratesK.,sonofPhilologos,alongwithhiswifeandhischildren,(dedicated this)totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.8.3

Ikonion (Konya, Lykaonia): DedicationofTrokondastothepriestof TheosHypsistos,Gourdos

Discoverylocation: Found in Konya. Type: Stone embedded in a building wall. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.141; SGO IV, 102, no. 14/07/04; Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 237; 1993 II, 292; SEG 43, no. 989; Cronin 1902, 124, no. 58. Date: 3rd century AD. Text: Γοῦρδος ἀνὴρ ἀγαθὸς | ἔνθ᾽ εὕδει ὥστε πέλεια· | ἤεν ἐν ἀνθρώποις ἱερεὺς |4 Θεοῦ Ὑψίστου· | τῷ στήλην Τροκόνδας | ὁ διάδοχος καὶ ὀπάων | τεῦξ᾽ ἕνεκα μνήμης |8 καὶ κοσμήσας ἐπὶ τύμβῳ. Translation: Gourdos,agoodman,sleepsherelikeadove.Hewasamongmenapriestof theMostHighGod.Trokondas,hissuccessorandcompanion,made[thestele]inhismemory arrangingitonthegrave.

1.8.4

Ikonion* (Konya, Lykaonia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Probably discovered in Konya. Type: Small reddish limestone altar, with a moulded upper and lower side; with acroteria on the upper profile. Dimensions: 25 × 12/15 × 15 cm. Letters: 1.5–2 cm. Currentlocation: Konya Archaological Museum. Inv. No. 1063. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.142; Mitchell 2010, 205, no. A60; SEG 52, no. 1458; RECAM IV, 39 (with photograph at fig. 57). Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψ|ίστῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: TotheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

262 1.8.5

CATALOGUE

Perta (area of, Lykaonia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found at the village of Burunkuyu, in the area of Perta (Giymir), ‘on the steps of a house’. Type: Deteriorated votive altar with mouldings. Dimensions: 38 × 17 (upper moulding) / 15 (shaft) / 17 (lower moulding) × 14 (upper moulding) / 12 (shaft) / 16 (lower moulding) cm. Letters: 2–3 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.191a; MAMA XI, 316 (with squeeze and drawing). Date: 3rd–4th centuries AD. Representation: No relief. Text: Θεῷ | Ὑψίσ|τῳ | εὐχὴ | Ἰάσω|ν | ὑπὲ[ρ] | ὑγ[εί|ας?]. Translation: TotheMostHigh,infulfilmentofthevow,Iason,for(his)health(?).

1.8.6

Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos (Cilicia): Ex-voto dedicated by AthenaiostoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos. G. Dagron and D. Feissel consider that these four dedications (Nos. 1.8.6–9) of Seleukeia could have come from the same place as the altar in Kaisareia (Uzuncaburç). See the commentary in IC 14. Keil indicated the place of discovery as unknown. Type: Small limestone altar with moulded upper and lower sides. Dimensions: 29 × 165 × 14 cm. Letters: 1.8–3 cm. Currentlocation: All the four dedications of Seleukeia were remarked by J. Keil in 1914 (Keil and Premerstein 1914), but they disappeared in 1925. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.212; Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 238; MAMA III, 1 (pl. 11, fig. 29). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Θεῷ | Ὑψίστῳ | εὐχή|ν Ἀθή|ναιος. Translation: Athenaios,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.8.7

Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos (Cilicia): Ex-votodedicatedbyAmmia toTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos, in Cilicia. See the previous commentary. Type: Limestone altar, with moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: 42.5 × 21.5 × 16 cm. Letters: 1.6–2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.213; Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 239; MAMA III, 2 (pl. 11, fig. 29). Date: 3rd century AD.

CATALOGUE

263

Representation: In the lower part of the altar, above the lower profile, the image of incised leaf. Above the inscription, in rectangular frame, image of the goddess. Text: Θεῷ Ὑψίσ|τῳ Ἀμμί|α εὐχήν. Translation: Ammia(dedicatedthealtar)totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.8.8

Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos (Cilicia): Ex-voto dedicated by DiogenestoTheosHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos, in Cilicia. See the previous commentary. Type: Limestone altar, with moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: 38.5 × 20 × 12 cm. Letters: 1.6–2 cm. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.214; Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 240; MAMA III, 3 (pl. 11, fig. 29). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Θεῷ Ὑ|2ψίστῳ | Διογένης |4 [--]γου|ρίου εὐχ|ήν. Translation: Diogenes,sonof[--]gourios,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

1.8.9

Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos (Cilicia): Ex-votodedicatedbyNasto ZeusHypsistos

Discoverylocation: Seleukeia on the Kalykadnos, in Cilicia. See the previous commentary. Type: Small limestone altar, with moulded upper and lower side. The main side is destroyed in the lower part. Dimensions: 26 × 11 × 12 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm (r. 1); 2.3 cm (l. 2 sqq.). Currentlocation: Disappeared monument. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.215; Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 241; MAMA III, 4 (pl. 11, fig. 29). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Διὶ Ὑ[ψίστῳ] | Νᾶς Μά|ρκου | [ε]ὐχήν. Translation: Nas,sonofMarkos,toZeustheMostHigh,infulfilmentofthevow.

Cappadocia 1.9.1

Hanisa (Cappadocia): Ex-voto dedicated by (…)ias to Theos Hypsistos

Discoverylocation: Found at Hanisa. Type: Marble stele, broken above and below. Dimensions: 17.5 × 15 × 8.2 cm.

264

CATALOGUE

Currentlocation: Ethnography Museum of Ankara. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.123; Mitchell 1999, 143, no. 242; Robert 1963, 486–87. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: [Θεῷ] | [Ὑ]ψείστ[ῳ-] |.ιας κατ᾽ ε[ὐ]χὴν ἀνέθη|κεν καὶ ταύτας | [--- three more lines, illegible ---]. Translation: (…)iasdedicated(thestele)totheMostHigh[God],inaccordancewiththe vow,andthese[---]. L1: Robert 1963, 486: [Διὶ].

Unknown provenance 1.10.1

Unknown provenance: Teodoros’thanksgivingtoTheosHypsistos, onabronzelamp

Discoverylocation: Unknown. Microasian provenance. Anonymous donation. Type: Upper part of bronze support for cult lamps. The tabulaansatais surviving, along with the inscription, suspension ring and fishtails, with the decorative motifs to support them. Green patina. Slightly rough surface. Dimensions: 14 × 7.7 × 0.2 cm. Letters: Inscription carefully set, on five rows, within the tabulaansata. Currentlocation: J. Paul Getty Museum, Malibu, California. Inv. No. 77.AC.38. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.300; Franken 2002, 371, no. 3 (fig. 3); Peppers 1980, 173–74, no. 2 (with fig. 2). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: At the end of the inscription, in the lower right part, small incised palm branch. Below the tabula, two relief fishtails. Text: Θεόδω|2ρος Θεῷ Ὑ|ψίστῳ εὐ|4χαρισ|τήριν. Translation: Theodoros,inthanksgivingtotheMostHighGod.

1.10.2

Unknown provenance: Moscheni’sthanksgivingtoTheosHypsistos onabronzetorso

Discoverylocation: Unknown. Microasian provenance. Anonymous donation. Type: Of the same series as the preceding one. Female bronze torso, probably belonging to the dedicator, with a tenon. The rough surface on the edge of the neck suggests there may have also been a head, but this is just a hypothesis. There are representations only for the first part of the arms, from under the shoulders. Green-blackish patina. Rough inner surface. Dimensions: 9.4 × 8 × 0.2 (thickness of material) cm. Letters: Letters are inscribed on the chest, above the breasts and on the shoulders. Above the first εὐχήν, there is an inscribed N. Currentlocation: J. Paul Getty Museum, Malibu, California. Inv. No. 77.AC.37. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.301; Peppers 1980, 173, no. 1 (with fig. 1). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD.

CATALOGUE

265

Representation: There are no incised iconographic motifs. Text: Μοσχένι εὐχὴν |2 Θεῷ Ὑψί[σ]τῳ. Translation: Moscheni,infulfilmentofthevow,totheMostHighGod. L1: Jeanne Peppers believes that the name is Μοσχίει, but a note at the end of her article shows that George Daux – at that time Visiting Scholar of the museum – cited it as Μοσχείν, with the mention that Μοσχείν = Μοσχίν = Μοσχίον.

1.10.3

Unknown provenance: Trophimos’thanksgivingtoTheosHypsistos onabronzetabula ansata

Discovery location: Unknown. Microasian provenance. Anonymous donation. Within the same series as the two previous items (the lamp and the torso). Type: Bronze tabulaansata, left handle, part of the inscription and little of the upper part missing. Dimensions: 5.3 × 11.7 cm. Currentlocation: J. Paul Getty Museum, Malibu, California. Inv. No. 77. AC. 36. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.302; Peppers 1980, 174, no. 3 (fig. 3). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic tablet. Text: [Τρό]φιμος Θεῷ Ὑψί|2[στῳ] εὐχαρίστῳ|[ν ἀ]νέθηκα. Translation: I,Trophimos,dedicated(this)inthanksgivingtotheMostHighGod. L1: Peppers reproduces the name as [Ἑφμό]φιος, also indicating the version Trophimos as possible.

1.10.4. Unknown provenance: Ex-voto of Aetis to Theos Hypsistos on a bronzetabletbelongingtoalamphanger Discoverylocation: Unknown. Type: Upper part of a lamp hanger. Dimensions: 11.6 cm height. Letters: Letters are positioned on the tablet below the suspension ring. Currentlocation: Antikensammlung Staatliche Museen Preußischer Kulturbesitz (Collection of Antiquities of the National Museums regarding the Prussian cultural heritage), Berlin. Inv. No. 1969.14. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.303; Franken 2002, 370, no. 1 (fig. 1). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The support is made of a tablet with a suspension ring on top, while beneath symmetrically disposed fish, arched tails fixed on the tablet. The pedestals on which the fish mouths are supported have no holes. In our opinion, it could not represent two ‘dolphins’, as stated by Franken, but simply two fish, considering that the fish scales are visibly depicted. The fishtails are also fixed on the tablet by two spiral-shaped motifs (S-shaped), with an outward upper loop. Text: Ἀέτις |2 Θεῷ | Ὑψίστῳ | ἐυχήν. Translation: Aetis,totheMostHighGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

266 1.10.5

CATALOGUE

Unknown provenance: Lamphanger

Discoverylocation: Unknown. Type: Upper part of a lamp hanger. Dimensions: 22.5 cm high. Letters: There is no trace of an inscription on the support. However, the text may have been applied on the tablet, because it does have four fastening holes. Currentlocation: Istanbul Archaeological Museum. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.304; Franken 2002, 370, no. 2 (fig. 2). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The same as the previous one; the difference is that the spirals have an inward upper loop, the fishtails are joined, the dorsal and lateral fins are prominent, and the pedestals on top of the fish have a fastening hole. Text: Anepigraphic tablet.

1.10.6

Unknown provenance: Lamphanger

Discoverylocation: Unknown. Purchased as donation in 1963 from Lawrence J. Majewski. Type: Upper part of a lamp hanger. Dimensions: 21.7 × 10.8 cm. Currentlocation: Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Inv. No. 63.185.1. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.305; Franken 2002, 371, no. 4 (fig. 8). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: It features the same structure as the preceding ones. The strip between the suspension ring and the tablet is more pronounced. Onto it, as well as onto the ring, dots were stamped as decorative motifs. The shapes in the upper and lower part of the tablet are decorated with V-shaped lines. The spiral-like motifs have the shape of twists, with inward upper loop. Fish have the dorsal fin more prominent, like a boss. Fish scales are featured, too. There are stamped dots also on the moulded pedestals under the fish mouths. In regard to the formal aspect, this item is very similar to the one of Novae, recorded by Franken with No. 5, which comes from the castrum of legio IItalica. Text: Anepigraphic item.

1.10.7

Unknown provenance: DedicationofLaudikefromHypaipatoTheos Hypsistosonalamphanger

Discoverylocation: Unknown. Type: Upper part of a lamp hanger. Dimensions: 20.7 × 10 cm. Letters: The inscription is set inside the tabulaansata on five rows, including the handles. Currentlocation: University of Toronto, University Art Centre. Malcove Collection. Inv. No. M 82.402. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.306; Franken 2002, 371, no. 6 (fig. 5). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD.

CATALOGUE

267

Representation: Lamp hanger; the same structure as the preceding ones. By the aspect and mostly by the shape of spiral structures that support the fishtails, it is very similar to the item in the J. Paul Getty Museum of Malibu, but in this case, the heads are more prominent. We believe that they very probably have the same provenance. The fish have the dorsal and lateral fins more prominent. The strip between the suspension ring and the tabula is elongated. Upper and lower edges of the tablet are decorated with V-shaped lines. Around the ring, there are stamped dots with decorative motifs. The pedestals that support the entire structure have fastening holes. Traces of scales. Text: Λαυδι|2κή Ὑπαιπή|νη Θεῷ Ὑψίσ|4τῳ ἀνέθη|κην. Translation: LaudikefromHypaipa,dedicated(this)totheMostHighGod.

1.10.8

Unknown provenance: The inscription of Stephanos on a lamp hanger

Discoverylocation: Unknown. Type: Upper part of a lamp hanger. Dimensions: 17 × 8.2 cm. Letters: The inscription is set on five rows inside the tabulaansata, including on the handles. Currentlocation: It was initially in the possession of the merchant Franz Trau of Vienna and then, in 1931, it was moved to the Collection of Antiquities in Vienna. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.307; Franken 2002, 371, no. 7 (fig. 6). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Lamp hanger with the same structure as the preceding ones. The suspension ring has stamped dots. The edges of the tabulaansata are decorated with V-shaped lines. Upper loops of the S-shaped supports for the fish are inward. The fishtails are joined in the upper part. The body of the fish in the left is missing from the middle part to the lower part. The fish are decorated with stamped dots and they have carved scales. Text: [---] σινβιωσεως |2 ξυστοπλα|τειτων τα|μιευοντος | Στεφαναυ.

268

CATALOGUE

2. MITHRA Caria, Ionia 2.1.1.

Colophon (Ionia): InscriptiondedicatedtosanctusinvictusMit(h)ra

Discoverylocation: Identified north from Colophon. Type: Stone stele (?). Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: CIMRM II, 24B (suppl.); Clauss 1992, 238; Beck 1984, 2018–19. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: No information on possible representations. Text: Deo sancto invicto Mit(h)rae. Translation: TotheholyinvinciblegodMit(h)ra.

Bithynia, Pontus, Paphlagonia 2.4.1.

Pontic Heraclea (Bithynia): Dedication addressed to Zeus Helios MithraSerapis

Discoverylocation: Unknown; inscription copied by Cyriacus of Ancona off a large foot (120 cm). Type: Inscribed object, unknown usage. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: SEG 47, no. 1503. Date: Undated epigraph; it could date to the Severans or later. Representation: No indications of iconographic representations. Text: Διὶ Ἡλίῳ Μίθρᾳ Σέραπι Ἰούλιος Πύρρος εὐξάμενος ἀν(έθηκεν). Translation: ToZeusHeliosMithraSerapis,IouliosPyrros,havingmadeavow,dedicated(this).

2.4.2.

Trapezus (Pontus):SpelaeumandstatuededicatedtoMithra

Discoverylocation: ‘The hill of Mithra’ (Μιθρίος βουνός), as it was called in the medieval period, according to a local legend of St Eugene, the hill east from the city, as protector of the city. Type: Spelaeum. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: The ancient spelaeum was most probably situated on the hilltop; it was subsequently replaced by the church of St John the Baptist; on this hill, St Eugene would have destroyed the statue of the divinity during the reign of Diocletian. Bibliography: Will 1955, 155; Cumont 1939, 71–72 and n. 5; Cumont and Cumont 1906, 367–69; Cumont 1899, 55c; 1896, 362. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: No information related to the aspect of the spelaeum or of the statue.

CATALOGUE

269

Galatia 2.5.1.

Sarıhüyük (Galatia): Inscription mentioning the existence of a traditiontransmittedbythemagi

Discovery location: At Sarıhüyük, near Kirşehir, in the north of Galatia, not far from the frontier with Cappadocia. Type: White marble stele, severely damaged on every side; carefully carved. Dimensions: 25 × 18 × 5 cm. Letters: 0.6–0.9 cm. Currentlocation: Private ownership. Bibliography: RECAM II, 404; Gordon 1994, 470. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Aniconic stele. Text: [--- | --] ΥΡΗΝΑΔΙΑ · [-- | --] τῶν παισὶ παίδων [-- | --κ]ατὰ μάγους Μίθρην [-- |5 -συ]ντελοῦντες καὶ εὐω[χοῦντες -- | --] · τε καὶ τοῖς ἐγγόνοις [-- | --] · μην ἔρανα τη · σου · [-- | --] γεγραμμένα ἕξουσιν [-- | -- κ]ὲ μηθένι ἐξέστω πρά[σσειν -- |10 --] ης αὐτῶν τρόπωι μη[δένι -- | --] ιδε μὴ ἀγάγωσιν ἐν τῷ [-- | --] υρεσει ἡντινοῦν ἑαυτοι [-- | --] τείσουσιν ἱερὰ ε[·]παραρ [-- | -- δραχμὰς] ἑξακισχιλίας καὶ ἡ πρᾶ[ξις -- |15 -- ἄ]λλῳ ΡΙ · · ΝΤ · · ω · · · · ἐπιφέ[ρειν -- | --] την ἐκ τε τῶν δεδανεισ[μένων -- | --] ων ἐγγόνων αὐτῶν κ[-- | --] οις καὶ ἐξ ἑνὸς κακ[·]πα[-- | -- τ]ρόπωι ω · ΑΝ · [-- |20 --] ΑΣΗΣ ἐξου[σίαν -- | --] ΣΤ [----]. Translation:[---]forthechildren’schildren[--],followingthemagi,celebrateandprayto Mithra[--]andfortherelatives[--]Iscatteredforyou[--]theywillhavethatwhatiswritten [--]itisnotallowedforanybodytodo[--]oftheminthiswaytono-one[--]theyshouldnot take(towards)[--]theywerefightingagainsther[--]theywillpayforthesacredthings[--] 6000(drachmae)[--]andthework[--]tosomeoneelse[--]tobring[--]oftheborrowed (money)[--]oftheirrelatives[--]andoutofone[--]inthisway[---].

Phrygia 2.6.1.

Amorion (Phrygia): Inscription regarding the celebration of the mithrakanafestivity

Discoverylocation: Found at Gheumeh (Amorion), north from Asizie. Type: Large limestone stele, inscribed on three on the faces. Lower edge is significantly damaged. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: CIMRM I, 22 (with bibliography); Cumont 1939, 70; Robert 1937, 306–08, no. 3; Wüst 1932, col. 2151; Cumont 1899, 4. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: I. [Φ]υλῆς Δὶος μύσται ἐτίμησαν |2 [Κ]ύριλλαν Ἀντιπάτρου τοῦ κα[ὶ | Γ]αίου θυγατέρα πρόμοιρον, τὸν |4 βωμὸν καθοσιώσαντες καὶ εἰς | τὴν θρησκείαν τοῦ μνημείου αὐ|6τῆς ἀγοράντες παρὰ Οὐαλε[ρ]ίου Κ[α]λ|λίστω (sic) ἀμπέλων ἐν Λαλ[άν]δῳ, τό|8πῳ Κρα[ο]νίστρα, πλέθρον ἑν κ[ὲ ἥ]μισ[υ], | ἐχαρίσαντο ὅπως τὴν ἐξ αὐτῶν πρόσ|10[ο]δον καταχρῶνται ταῖς κατὰ ἔτος | [ἐ]θίμοις ἡμέραις το[ῖς] Μίθρακά|12[ν]οις προστα[φ]ιάζ[οντες,

270

CATALOGUE

δ]ιαμεν[ο|υσ]ῶν τῶν ἀμπέλων τ[οῖ]ς συνεστῶ|14[σιν] ἀπὸ ἀρτὶ [μ]ύσταις καὶ τὴν λο[ι]|πὴν ἐπιμέλε[ιαν π]οι[ο]υμὲνοις καὶ ἑ[αυτ]|16οῖς καὶ ἐγ[γόν]ο[ις κ]αὶ κλ[ηρον|όμοι]ς αὐτῶν εἰς διηνεκείαν [τοῖς |18 ἐθελ]ήσασι [μ]ηδέν ἐπιβ[ιαζεσθαι? | ἐὰν δ᾽ἑπ]τάκις οἱ μύσται μηκετ[ι|20 θρηκεύ]ωσι εἷν[α]ι τ . . ι(?) .λοις | [--]ιο[--] εριλι(?) ο(?) .ι.υσμη | [---] αὐτοὺς ὁ Γάιος | . ωσις [---] εν [εἰ]ς ἑαυτο[ν] | . . τε [---] | ος σ [---] |γιι [---] | δω [---] | ενε [---]. II. [Ἀν]τίπατρος β΄ Γάϊο[ς |2 ἔδω]κεν ἐχαρίσατο φυ|λῆς Διὸς μύσταις ἀμ[πέ]|4λων τῶν οὐσῶν ἐν Λα|λάνδῳ, τόπῳ Κραονί|6στρᾳ, πλέθρα τέσσαρα ἥμι|συ γείτοσι Φιλώτᾳ Ἀσκλη|8πίαδου καὶ Σακκάλο[υ Ῥω]|μαίου κληρόνομοι[ς] |10 ὅπως τὴν ἐξ αὐτῶν [καρ]|πείαν καταχρᾶσθαι(ν) ἐ[θέ]|12λουσιν οἱ συνερχόμε|νοι καὶ θρησκεύοντες [ἡ]|14ρῷον Κυρίλλης τῆς θυ[γ]α|τρὸς αὐτοῦ κατὰ ἔτος |16 ταῖς ἐθίμοις ἡμέραις | τοῖς Μιθρακάνοις· [ἐὰν] δέ τις αὐτῶν μὴ |18 συνέλθῃ ἤ μὴ συν[θ]ρῃσκεύῃ αὐτὸς | ἤ κληρονόμ[οι αὐτοῦ οἱ |20 συν[μ]ετ[έχοντες [---]. III. αμπ]έλων τὸ καθόλου διὰ το τ[ε]|2τιμῆσθαι τὴν θυγατέρα αὐτ[οῦ | ὑ]πὸ τῶν μυστῶν καὶ ἀγάλματ[ι] |4 μαρμαρέῳ. Translation: I. The initiates of the corporation of Zeus honoured Kyrilla, daughter of Antipatros Gaius, who died an untimely death, by dedicating the altar and by reverently gatheringtohonourhergravenearthevineyardsofValeriusCallistusinLalandos,atthe placecalledKraonistra,oneandahalfplethoradistance;itwasgiventothemsothatthey mayusetheincomefromiteachyeartobringofferingsduringthecustomarydaysofthe mithrakana;letthevineyardsremaintotheinitiateswhocurrentlygatherandareincharge oftherestofpreparations;tothemandtotheirdescendants,andtotheirheirsforgood,to allthosewhowish,withoutconstrain.Ifforseventimestheinitiateswouldnolongerperform therites,let… II. AntipatrosGaius,sonofAntipatros,grantedtheinitiatesofthecorporationofZeusthe vineyards in Lalandos, at the place called Kraonistra, four and a half plethora distance, neighbouringonthepropertiesofPhilotas,sonofAsklepiades,andoftheheirsofSakkalos, theRoman,sothatthosewhowishtocometogetherandhonourthetombofhisdaughter Kyrillamayusetheprofitsfromiteachyearduringthecustomarydaysofthemithrakana. If any of them would not come and do the honouring, himself or his descendants, who takepart… III. Theentirevineyardfortheinitiatestohonourhisdaughterwithamarblestatue. I L8: Vermaseren: ἑν κ[ὲἤ] μισ[υ].

2.6.2.

Savçılar (Phrygia): InscriptiondedicatedbythePhrygianMidonto HeliosMithra

Discoverylocation: Monument discovered in 1926 by Christopher M. Cox north from the village of Savçılar, in the north-west of Phrygia, near Lake Simav (Synaus), on the territory of Ancyra Sidera, not far from the west limit of the ancient Aizanitis. The area is at the limit between Phrygia and Mysia. Type: Coarse granular white marble bomos.

CATALOGUE

271

Dimensions: 84 × 50/47/52 × 37 cm. Letters: 3 cm. Carefully carved and elegant letters. Bibliography: Beck 1998, 119; Gordon 1994, 470; MAMA X, 449 (with pl. XLVIII); CIMRM I, 23; Will 1955, 154; Cumont 1939, 69. Date: AD 77/78 (= 162 Sullan era). Representation: Following Cox’s description, Cumont indicated a representation of a bust wearing the Phrygian cap: ‘Reste d’un buste coiffé du bonnet phrygien.’ In MAMA X, Mitchell considers that Vermaseren is wrong when he believes that there would have been a representation of a bust belonging to Mithra, because it no longer exists. However, Gordon believes that such a representation definitely existed. Text: Ἡλίῳ Μίθρᾳ Μίδων | Σώλονος | ἀνέθηκεν | εὐχήν. | [Ἔ]τους ρξβ΄, μ(ηνὸς) Π(ανήμου). Translation: ToHeliosMithra,MidonsonofSolondedicated(thealtar)infulfilmentofthe vow.Inthe162,inthemonthofPanemos.

Pisidia, Pamphilia, Lycia 2.7.1.

Baris (Pisidia): Reliefwiththerepresentationofatauroctony

Discoverylocation: Found at Isparta. Type: Stone block, located in a Greek private house, discovered by Gertrude Bell during a journey to Asia Minor. Dimensions: Approximately 100 cm long. Bibliography: Cumont 1939, 70–71 (photograph of the relief at Isbarta; pl. II.1); Vermaseren 1951, 295; Beck 1984, 2019; Will 1955, 154, 161–62 (with fig. 29, at p. 175). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: The photograph presented by Cumont is partially obscured in the upper part. In the centre of the anepigraphic relief, the bull slayer – that Cumont identified with Mithra – is clad in a Persian costume, cloak over the shoulders. The bust is partially visible. The bull’s head and neck are not perceptible. The male has the right leg stretched and the left one – flexed – leans against the animal’s back. To the right side of the image, there is an altar decorated with a garland and a rosette, on which objects are featured (they could be easily interpreted as fruits, signs of abundance, or as Eucharistic breads marked with small crosses so as to be easier broken). To the right and to the left, in a symmetrical position, two facing winged Victories, each holding a palm branch. Beck and Will believe that the relief is a mere representation of a bull-slaying Victory, though Nike is never featured tunic fastened at the waistline so that to have a kilt-like appearance.

2.7.2.

Oinoanda (Lycia): InscriptionandmuralreliefdedicatedtoHelios Mithra

Discoverylocation: The wall of the Boukonisterion dedicated to Septimius Severus in the agora of Oinoanda. Type: The inscription and iconographic representation are set – along with other reliefs and inscriptions such as those dedicated to Hermes the ruler, Zeus the deliverer, or the saviour Dioscuri with the ‘Pisidian goddess’ – on the wall above a niche that may have previously included a fountain. Dimensions: 20.4 cm high.

272

CATALOGUE

Letters: 1.5–2 cm. The inscription is set in two registers. Currentlocation: The agora of Oinoanda. Bibliography: Milner and M. Smith 1994, 71 (with pl. XVI a, b). Date: The Severan period. Representation: Bust of Helios Mithra as a teenager, beardless, curly haired, head surrounded by nine rays. The representation is framed by sculpted arch, beneath which the text of the inscription is set. Text: Ἡλίῳ Μίθρᾳ. Translation: ToHeliosMithra.

2.7.3.

Perge (Pamphylia): DedicationtoHeliosMithrainthemithraeumof PergebyMarcusLucceiusCrispus

Discoverylocation: In a rock cave, situated 1.5 km north from Perge, with an arched portal 3.5 m high and wide. On the rear wall of the cave, a niche where it is assumed that the cultic image of the god would have been painted. The mithraeum included this man-made cave and an antechamber. Traces of cubic stone blocks and relief work are surviving. Type: White marble votive stele with the relief representation of tauroctony, which came off during illegal excavations in the cave wall. The right corner of the relief is missing (probably including the image of Selena in the upper right part, the anterior part of the bull, and the figure of Cautopates). Dimensions: 70 × 65 × 25 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Uniform and well carved letters. The inscription is set on four rows, the first two situated inside the tympanum, and the last two on the architrave of the pediment. Currentlocation: No details are known on the current location of the relief. Bibliography: IGSK 54, 248 (with pl. LVI). Date: Second half of the 2nd century AD. Representation: The relief depicts the entrance into a cave with pediment and architrave supported on pilasters with Corinthian column heads, by all appearances. In the upper left part, above the portal that imagines the bust of Helios, with radiate crown. The images of the dadophors are reversed. Cautopates holds a reflex-bow, which touches Mithra’ cloak. Text: Ἡλίῳ Μίθρ[ᾳ] | Μᾶρκος Λούκκ(ε)ιος Κρίσπος | ὑπὲρ τῆς ἱερᾶς βουλῆς καὶ δήμου Περγα[ίων] | εὐξάμενο[ς] καθιέρωσεν μετὰ τῶν τέ[κνων]. Translation: ToHeliosMithra,MarcusLucc(e)iusCrispus,onbehalfofthesacredcouncil andpeopleofPerge,havingmadeavow,consecrated(this)alongwithhischildren.

Lykaonia, Isauria, Cilicia 2.8.1.

Anazarbos (Cilicia): Inscription dedicated to an emperor, whose namewashammered,byapriestandpaterofZeusHeliosaneiketos Mithra

Discoverylocation: Found in the south-west corner of the Anazarbos stadium. Type: Moulded altar, surviving in fragments, upper part destroyed. The first five rows are completely erased, while the sixth is barely legible.

CATALOGUE

273

Dimensions: 137 × 47 × 45 cm. Letters: 2.5–4 cm. Inscription surviving, but significantly damaged. Currentlocation: Unknown. Bibliography: IGSK 56, 9; Clauss 1992, 238; CIMRM II, 27bis (suppl.); AÉ 1954, 7; SEG 12, no. 515. Date: ca. 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [[---]] |6 [[ὑπάτου τὸ]] β΄, π(ατρὸς) π(ατρίδος) [Μ(άρκος) Αὐρή?]|λιος Σέλευκος ἱε[ρεὺς καὶ] |8 πατὴρ διὰ βίου Διὸς [Ἡλί]ου | ἀνεικήτου Μίθρα τὸν [βωμὸν] |10 (vacat) καθ᾽ ἃ ὑπέσχετο τῇ πατ[ρίδι]. Translation: [---] consul for the second time, father of the fatherland, Marcus Aurelius Seleukos,priestandpaterforlifeofZeusHeliostheinvincibleMithra,(dedicatedthealtar) accordingtowhatherenderedaccountforhisnativecity.

Cappadocia 2.9.1.

Ariaramneia (Cappadocia): Accomplishmentofamagianritebythe strategosSagarios,thesonofMagaphernos

Discovery location: Situated 2 km away from Ariaramneia (Rhodandos), today Faraşa. Inscription carved on a rock in the Taurus gorge, discovered by Henri Grégoire in 1907. Type: Rock-cut inscription. Dimensions: The length of the row in Greek – which contains the word emageuse – is 114 cm. For the Aramaic text, the first row is 175 cm long, while the second is 108 cm long. Letters: Superficial carving, highly irregular letters. For the Greek text, between 16 and 22 cm. For the Aramaic text, ca. 9.5 cm. Bibliography: Mitchell 1993 II, 29; Beck 1984, 2018–19; Will 1955, 15; Cumont 1939, 68; CIMRM I, 19; Grégoire 1908, 445 (with sketch). Date: 3rd–1st centuries BC (?), according to Beck; 1st century AD, in Cumont’s opinion. Representation: Aniconic relief. Text: (Greek text) Σαγάριος | Μαγ[αφέ]ρνου | στρατηγὸς | Ἀριαραμνεί(ας) | ἐμάγευσε Μίθρῃ. (Aramaic text) ‫זגר בר מתגפרן רב חגא | פגיש ]למ[תרה‬ Translation: (Greek text) Sagarios, (son) of Magaphernos, the strategos of Ariaramna, celebratedamagianceremonyforMithra. (Aramaic text) Zagarn, son of Megapharn, celebrated as a magus a ceremony to honourMithra. L1: ‘? Celebrated a magian rite for Mithres’ (Beck); ‘a officié en qualité de mage (…), dans une cérémonie religieuse en l’honneur de Mithra’ (Grégoire); ‘devint mage de Mithra’/‘(…) il a accompli les cérémonies des mages en l’honneur de Mithra’ (Cumont); ‘celebrated a Magian ceremony’ (Nock).

274 2.9.2.

CATALOGUE

Caesarea (Cappadocia): Ex-votodedicatedbyCallimorphustoSol InvictusMithra

Discoverylocation: Caesarea in Cappadocia. Type: Inscribed marble column. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: Cumont identified it as the property of an antiquarian in Athens. Currently, there is no information on where it may be deposited. Bibliography: Clauss 1992, 238; CIMRM I, 17; Will 1955, 156; Cumont 1899, 2; CIL III/1 suppl., 6772 = 12135. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Cumont concludes (Cumont 1899, 2): ‘Callimorphus avait donc dédié une image du Soleil à Mithra.’ Vermaseren also mentions it in CIMRM I, 17: ‘So Callimorphus dedicated an image of Sol to Mithra.’ We do not know any actual detail of the image. Text: Solem / Soli invicto / Mythrae / pro salute et incolu/mitate / Chresimi Aug(ustorum) / n(ostrorum) dispensatoris / Callimorphus arkar/ius eiusdem / votum solvi / libens animo. Translation:ForthehealthandsafetyofChresimus,stewardofouremperors,I,Callimorphus,hiscashier,(dedicatedthisimageof)theSuntoSolInvictusMithra(andthus)fulfilled myvowwithjoy,fromtheheart.

2.9.3.

Tyana (Cappadocia): Ex-votoaddressedtodikaiosMithra

Discoverylocation: Found in Kemerhisar in a Turkish mosque. Unknown provenance. Type: No data regarding the type of monument. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: IGSK 55.I, 34; Beck 1984, 2018–19; CIMRM I, 18; Cumont 1899, 91, no. 3. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: There are no indications on the existence of any representation. Text: Θεῷ δικαίῳ Μίθρᾳ. Translation: TothejustgodMithra.

CATALOGUE

275

3. HOSIOS KAI DIKAIOS Caria, Ionia 3.1.1

Ephesos (area of, Ionia): AcclamationnearEphesos

Discoverylocation: Identified at Arvalia, near Ephesos, in Ionia. Type: Low-quality white marble stele; damaged lower and upper side. Dimensions: 98 × 47 × 28 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 47, no. 105 (with bibliography and facsimile); IGSK 17, 3100 (facsimile); Hellenica 10, 88–89; Peterson 1926, 205–06. Date: 3rd century AD (?). Representation: Trace of rosette on the tympanum. In one of the two niches with mouldings on the stele (the upper one), there is a depiction of young naked, curly-haired man, with radiate head. Text: Μέγα τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ θεοῦ, | μέγα τὸ ὅσιον, μέγα τὸ ἀγαθόν. | Κατ᾽ ὄναρ. Translation: Greatisthegod’sname,greatistheholy,greatisthegood!Inaccordancewith the(profetic)dream.

3.1.2

Smyrna (Izmir, Ionia):Ex-votoofAureliusMenophilustoHosios

Discoverylocation: Smyrna (Izmir). Type: Oval discus of white marble. Dimensions: Thickness: 3 cm; diameter 1.7–1.8 cm. Letters: Unknown size. The inscription is set around the discus. Currentlocation: Brought to Uşak from the Museum of the Evangelical School in Smyrna Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 41–42, no. 90 (with bibliography). Date: 3rd century AD (after 212). Representation: The image of radiate god, in a quadriga, holding in the left hand the bridles, and the right one up. Above the horses, on right side, there is a bird, and beneath, several wheat ears cut to the ground. Text: Ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ. Αὐρ(ήλιος) Μηνόφιλος Κολενης ἔθηκεν Ὁσίῳ εὐ[χή]ν. Translation: Withgoodfortune.AureliusMenophilusofKoleneerected(this)totheHoly,in fulfilmentofthevow.

Lydia 3.2.1

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): Ex-votoofNeikonandNeikeaddressedto HosiosandDikaios

Discoverylocation: Ayazviran/Ayasören, the ancient Iaza. Type: White marble stele without pediment, lower side and the left edge broken.

276

CATALOGUE

Dimensions: 29 × 29 × 4 cm. Letters: 1.8 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 27.12; Ricl 1991, 8, no. 13 (with bibliography; pl. 3, fig. 13); SEG 33, no. 1003; Naour 1983, 111, no. 3 (with pl. 14). Date: AD 209/210 (= 294 Sullan era). Representation: The inscribed surface was superficially cleaned. The stele margins are framed within thin mouldings. Text: Νείκων Διονυσίου | [κ]αὶ Νείκη εὐξάμε|[νο]ι ὑπὲρ τῶν παι|[δί]ων Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δι|5[κ]αίῳ εὐχήν. | Ἔτου[ς] σϙδ΄, μη(νὸς) Ὑπερ[βε|ρεταίου ..΄]. Translation: Neikon,sonofDionysios,andNeike,totheHolyandtheJust,fortheirchildren, aftermakingavow,intheyear294,inthemonthofHyperberetaios,ontheday…

3.2.2

Iaza (area of, Lydia): Ex-voto of Aurelius Myron to Hosios and Dikaios

Discoverylocation: Found at Bozen, near the village of Ayazviran (Ayasören, the ancient Iaza). Type: Fragmentary marble stele, with triangular pediment and acroteria. The cornice is moulded. Lower side of the monument no longer exists. Palmette-shaped acroteria. On top, the stele was probably decorated with ornamental motif shaped as pine-cone. Dimensions: 43 × 27 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.8 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 27.11; Ricl 1991, 8, no. 14 (with bibliography; pl. 3, fig. 14); TAM V.1, 450 a; SEG 28, no. 889; Petzl 1978a, 268, no. 14 (with photograph at pl. XIII). Date: After AD 212. Representation: In the corners of the tympanum, two moulded leaves, concave on the inside, with circular motif (discus) in the middle part. Text: Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ | Αὐρ(ήλιος) Μύρων | εὐχήν. Translation: AureliusMyron,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.2.3

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): Ex-voto of Hermes and of his family to TheiosHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Initially stored in the yard of the tonTaxiarchon church of Gölde. Type: Grey marble stele with acroteria on the sides and on top. Dimensions: 68 × 39 × 4.7 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Moved from Gölde to the Museum of the Evangelical School in Smyrna. Has since disappeared. Bibliography: LKGI 27.6; TAM V.1, 337; Ricl 1991, 2, no. 8 (with bibliography; pl. 2, fig. 8). Date: AD 172/173 (= 256 Sullan era). Representation: On the tympanum, ivy leaf in each of the lower corners, and discus inside, in central position. Left foot in the niche framed below the pediment.

CATALOGUE

277

Text: Θείῳ Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ | Ἑρμῆς Ἡφαιστίωνος | καὶ Μελτίνη β΄, ἡ γυνὴ αὐ|τοῦ, ὑπὲρ Φιλιππικοῦ |5 τοῦ υἱοῦ εὐχήν. Ἔτους σ|νζ΄, μη(νὸς) Ἀπελλαίου, η΄. Translation: TotheHolyandJustDivine,Hermes,sonofHephaistion,andMeltine,daughter ofMeltine,hiswife,for(their)sonPhilippikos,infulfilmentofthevow.Intheyear256,inthe monthofApellaios,ontheninthday.

3.2.4

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): Dedication of Aurelius Papias to Theos HosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Initially discovered and stored in the village of Gölde. Type: Stone stele (?). Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 27.7; Delemen 1999, 192, no. 364 (with bibliography); Ricl 1992a, 72–73; 1991, 6, no. 9 (with bibliography); TAM V.1, 338. Date: AD 242/243 (= 327 Sullan era). Representation: Image of rider. Text: Θεῷ Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δι[κ]αί[ῳ] | Αὐρ(ήλιος) Παπίας στρατ[ιώ|τ]ης εἱππεὺς κατα[..] | [π]αρασταθέντος τ[..] |5 [Π]ρίμου Ἀττικῷ ἀπε[..] | [θ]εὶς στήλην εὐχα[ρισ|τ]ῶν ἀνέθηκα. Ἔτο[υς] | [τ]κζ΄, μη(νὸς) Δίου, ηι΄. Translation: TotheHolyandJustGod,AureliusPapias,cavalrysoldier,after…withhelp fromPrimusAtticusdedicatedasteleinthanksgiving.Intheyear327,inthemonthofDios, onthenineteenthday.

3.2.5

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia):Ex-votoofKapitontoHosioskaiDikaios

Discovery location: Discovered and stored outside the village of Gölde, near the Turkish cemetery. Type: Fragmentary white marble, broken on all sides except the right. Dimensions: 26 × 25.5 × 7 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 27.8; Ricl 1991, 7, no. 10 (with bibliography); TAM V.1, 339; Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 186. Date: 2nd century AD (?). Representation: Traces of relief decoration below the inscription. Text: [-- θ]εῷ Ὁσίῳ καὶ | [Δικαίῳ Καπί]των Καπίτω|[νος ὑπὲρ ἑαυ]τοῦ καὶ τῶν | [ἰδίων πάντω]ν εὐχήν. Translation: [--]KapitonsonofKapitontotheHolyandJustGod,forhimselfandforhis family,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.2.6

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia):DedicationtoHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Gölde, from where it was moved to Sardis. Type: Marble stele damaged on every side; part of left margin surviving. Dimensions: Approximately 32.5 × 36 cm. Letters: Unknown size.

278

CATALOGUE

Currentlocation: Epigraphic collection of Sardis. No. 62.27. Bibliography: LKGI 27.9; TAM V.1, 340; Ricl 1991, 7, no. 11 (with bibliography; pl. 2, fig. 11); NIS 35. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Within the moulded niche, two characters, right arm raised in prayer. On top of knee-length, straight-folded tunics, the edges of cloaks are visible; they wear small boots; they are featured frontally, standing. Unfortunately, the upper side of the bodies no longer exists. Text: Κατὰ ἐπειταγ[ήν --] |2 [Ὁ]σείῳ καὶ Δεικ[αίῳ -] | [---]. Translation: Inaccordancewiththecommand[--]totheHolyandJust[---].

3.2.7

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia):DedicationofSe[---]toHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Initially stored in a chapel at the margin of the village. Type: Fragment of stele with circular pediment, broken in the right and lower part. Dimensions: 11 × 13.5 × 26 cm. Letters: 2.1 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 27.10; TAM V.1, 341; Ricl 1991, 7, no. 12 (with bibliography); Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 187. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Ὁσίῳ [καὶ Δικαί]|2ῳ Σε[-----] | [---]. Translation: TotheHolyandJust,Se[---].

3.2.8

Kula (Lydia):ThevotiveinscriptionofthepriestofStratoneikosand ofAsklepiatoHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Transferred from Kula to Manisa. Type: White marble stele with horseshoe-shaped pediment. Dimensions: 121 × 53 × 6.5 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 1948. Bibliography: LKGI 27.2; Delemen 1999, 191, no. 362 (with bibliography); Malay 1994, 177; Merkelbach 1993, 292 (with photograph at fig. 1); Ricl 1992a, 72–73; 1991, 3, no. 2 (pl. 1, fig. 2); LIMC V.1, 542, no. 4; TAM V.1, 246. Date: AD 256/257 (= 341 Sullan era). Representation: In the upper register, inside the horseshoe-shaped pediment a rider is featured. In the lower register, on top of the inscription, framed by two mouldings, a second representation of two dedicators – male and female – who bring an offering to an altar. Text: Στρατόνεικος Κακολεις τοῦ Ἑνὸς | καὶ Μόνου Θεοῦ [ἱ]ερεὺς καὶ τοῦ Ὁ|σίου καὶ Δικαίου μετὰ τῆς συμβίου | Ἀσκληπιαίας εὐξάμενοι περὶ τῶ[ν] |5 τέκνων εὐχαριστοῦντες ἀνήσ|τησαν. Ἔτους τμα΄. Translation: StratoneikosofKakola,priestoftheoneandonlygodandoftheHolyandJust, alongwithhiswifeAsklepiaia,havingmadeavowerectedthisinthanksgivingforthechildren.Intheyear341.

CATALOGUE

3.2.9

279

Kula (Lydia): Ex-votoofthepriestTrophimosandofhiswifeAlexandratoHosioskaiDikaiosandHosiakaiDikaia

Discoverylocation: Transferred from Kula to Manisa. Type: White marble stele, with ridged pediment, inside which there is moulded, semicircular, open tympanum in the lower part. The acroteria in the right and upper part did not survive. Only the acroterium on the left has remained intact. Dimensions: 116 × 53 × 65 cm. Letters: 2–2.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 1945. Bibliography: LKGI 26.1; Delemen 1999, 190, no. 360 (with bibliography); ETAM 19, 182; Merkelbach 1993, 292 (with photograph at fig. 2); Ricl 1991, 3, no. 3 (pl. I, fig. 3); LIMC V.1, 542, no. 3; LIMC V.2, 374, no. 3 (photograph); TAM V.1, 247. Date: AD 257/258 (= 342 Sullan era). Representation: In the central and upper part of the stele, there is a representation on two registers. In the upper side, a rider-god with radiate crown and wind-blown chlamys; he is depicted facing right, mounted, and holding horse bridles. On the lower side, there are three characters: two flank an altar, thus bringing offerings. These men are clad in ankle-long tunics and himations on top. To their left, a woman hand raised as for prayer, clad in straight-folded tunic, down to the ground, and himation on top. Text: Θεῷ Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ καὶ | Ὁσίᾳ καὶ Δικαίᾳ εὔξετο Ἀλε|ξάνδρα μετὰ Τροφίμου τοῦ | συνβίου ἱερέος ὑπὲρ τῶν |5 τέκνων διὰ τὴν περίπνυαν | εὐχαριστήριον ἀνέθηκαν· | ἔτους τμβ΄, μη(νὸς) Ὑπερβερτέου, η΄. Translation: To theHolyandtheJust(God)andtheHolyandtheJust(Goddess),AlexandrawithherhusbandTrophimos,thepriest,dedicated(thisstele)inthanksgivingforthe childrenbecauseof(healingof)pneumonia.Intheyear342,inthemonthHyperberteos, ontheninthday.

3.2.10

Kula (Lydia): Ex-voto of Erastros and of his family to Hosios kai Dikaios

Discoverylocation: Transferred from Kula to Manisa. Type: White marble stele with semicircular, horseshoe-shaped pediment and tenon. Dimensions: 112 × 51 × 8 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Manisa Museum. Inv. No. 1944. Bibliography: LKGI 27.3; Delemen 1999, 191–92, no. 363 (with bibliography); Malay 1994, 180; Ricl 1991, 4, no. 4 (with bibliography; pl. 1, fig. 4); LIMC V.1, 542, no. 2; LIMC V.2, 374, no. 2 (photograph); TAM V.1, 248; BÉ 1970, 527. Date: ca. AD 250. Representation: The stele is compartmented on four registers. In the upper register, inside the pediment, rider facing right, wind-blown cloak, framed by two cypress trees. In the two registers of the middle part, there are nine characters featured standing, frontally, right arm raised as for prayer (three women, three men and three children). In the lower left register, in a relief niche, a fourth child, the right arm raised. To the right of this aedicula, there is the inscribed field.

280

CATALOGUE

Text: Θεῷ Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ |2 Ἔραστρος μετὰ τῆς | συμβίου καὶ τῶν πεδί|4ων εὐχὴν ἀνέθηκα. Translation: TotheHolyandJustGod,Erastroswiththewifeandchildrendedicated(this stele),infulfilmentofthevow.

3.2.11

Kula (Lydia):DedicationofEutychistoTheosHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: The mosque of Kula. Type: Stone plaque (?). Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 27.4; TAM V.1, 249; Ricl 1991, 4, no. 5 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd century AD (?). Representation: No data on possible representations. Text: [Θ]εῷ Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ | [Εὐτ]υχὶς Ἀμμιανοῦ? [--] | [εὐξα]μένη κα[ὶ ἀ]κουθε[ῖσα] | [εὐ]χαριστο[ῦ]σα ἀνέ[θη|κε] τὴν εὐχήν. Translation: TotheHolyandJustGod,Eutychis,daughterofAmmianos?,whoprayedand washeard,dedicatedthisofferinginthanksgiving,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.2.12

Kula (area of, Lydia): Ex-voto of Apollonius and of the family to megastheosHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Area of Kula. Type: White marble stele, with triangular pediment and palmette-shaped acroteria, integrally surviving. The body of the stele narrows toward the top and has a tenon. Dimensions: 103 × 32/41 × 7 cm. Letters: 1.7–2.3 cm. Currentlocation: Istanbul Archaeological Museum. Inv. No. 6298. Bibliography: LKGI 27.5; Delemen 1999, 189–90, no. 359 (with bibliography); Merkelbach 1993, 293 (with photograph at fig. 3); Ricl 1991, 5, no. 7 (pl. 2, fig. 7); LIMC V.1, 542, no. 1; SEG 32, no. 1215. Date: AD 182/183 (= 276 Sullan era). Representation: On the tympanum, in each of the lower corners ivy leaf, and discus in the centre. Inside the stele, in a recessed niche, a rider facing right, with wind-blown cloak. He holds on the left shoulder a palm branch, and in the right hand, horse bridles. The horse’s mouth is slightly larger than the moulded frame. On the lower side of the niche, moulding representing a pedestal (?). Text: Μεγάλῳ θεῷ Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δι|καίῳ Τατιανὸς Ἀπολλωνίου | ὑπὲρ Γλυκείας τῆς γυναι|κὸς καὶ Ἀφφίου τῆς πενθε|5ρᾶς εὐχήν. Ἔτους σξζ΄, μη(νὸς) | Λώου, ι΄. Translation: To the Great Holy and Just God, Tatianos, son of Apollonios, for (his) wife Glykeiaandfor(his)mother-in-lawAphphia,infulfilmentofthevow.Intheyear276,inthe monthofLoos,ontheeleventhday.

3.2.13

Magnesia ad Sipylum* (Manisa, Lydia): Ex-votoofElpistoTheios HosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Unknown certainly.

CATALOGUE

281

Type: Marble stele with triangular pediment and decorated acroteria. The one on top is missing. Dimensions: 101 × 43 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 3785. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 568, no. 2; LKGI 27.17; published by Malay 1994, 179 (with fig. 62); mentioned by Ricl 1991, 9–10, no. 18. Date: AD 173/174 (= 258 Sullan era). Representation: Three dedicants are protrayed: a man, a child and a woman. Text: Θείῳ Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ Ἐλπὶς | ὑπὲρ Τρφίμου τοῦ υἱοῦ | καὶ Διογένου τοῦ καμβδί|ου(?) εὐχήν. Ἔτους σνη΄, μη(νὸς) Ἀρτεμεισίου, λ΄. Translation: TotheHolyandJustDivine,Elpis,forTrophimos,hissonandDiogenes,his grandson(?),infulfilmentofthevow.Intheyear258,inthemonthofArtemisios,onthe thirtiethday.

3.2.14

Maionia (Gökçeören, Lydia): TheinscriptionofthepriestessAuge inthanksgivingtoHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Gökçeören (formerly Menye) following a field walking survey of 1985. Type: Lower side of marble altar. Dimensions: 38 × 42.5 × 5 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 568, no. 5; Malay 1999, 158 (with fig. 163); mentioned by Ricl 1991, 9–10, no. 18; SEG 49, no. 1601. Date: AD 260/261 (= 345 Sullan era). Representation: On top of the inscription, the lower side of two busts is still surviving. Text: Αὔγη ἱέρια καθὼς ἐ[π]|τυχα καὶ ἐσηκούσ|θην εὐχὴν Θεῷ Ὁσίῳ | καὶ Δικαίῳ εὐχαριστοῦ|5σα μετὰ Ἀττικοῦ καὶ | μετὰ πάντων ἀνέθηκα. | Ἔτους τμε΄, μη(νὸς) Γορπιέου, | ει΄. Translation: I,Auge,thepriestess,asIachieved(thepurpose)andwasheard,givingthanks withAttikosandwitheverybodydedicated(thisaltar)infulfilmentofthevowtotheHolyand JustGod.Intheyear345,inthemonthofGorpiaios,onthefifteenthday.

3.2.15

Maionia (area of, Lydia): DedicationtothegodHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Stele found at Asar Mahalessi near the village of Esenyazı, on the territory of Maeonia. From the common sanctuary of Anaitis and of Mên Tiamou, identified by Christian Naour near the Asar neighbourhood. Type: Lower part of a marble stele. Unpublished. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 568, no. 3. Date: AD 225. Representation: Representation of the god on horseback. Text: Dedication addressed to θεὸς Ὅσιος καὶ Δίκαιος by the priest Telesphoros for his wife Gaiane and his household.

282 3.2.16

CATALOGUE

Nisyra (area of, Lydia): Dedication of Agathoneike to Theois epekooisHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Stored at a certain point in a house within the village of Emre. Type: The white marble stele was broken in half on the vertical. Dimensions: 15.5 × 19 × 6 cm (fragm. A); 14 × 15.5 × 5 cm (fragm. B). Letters: 1.8 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 27.13; TAM V.1, 586; Ricl 1991, 8–9, no. 15 (with bibliography); Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 180. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Anepigraphic monument. Text: [---] Ο [---] |2 [Ἀ]γαθονείκη [---] απ[---] | [--- Σαρ]διανὴ εὐχὴν [ποιήσασα, τ]οῦ θεοῦ Δ[---] |4 [-- ε]ὐχαριστοῦ[σα ὑπὲρ τῆς --] τελείης ὀ[φθαλμῶν --] | [αὐτῆ]ς ὁράσεως [τὴν στήλην ἀ]νέστησ[εν ἐπηκό|οις θε]οῖς Ὁσίῳ κα[ὶ Δικαίῳ ---]. Translation: [---]Agathoneike[--]ofSardis,infulfilmentofthevow,setupasteletothe listeninggods,theHolyandtheJust,thanksgivingforthehealingofhereyesandhersight [---].

3.2.17

Philadelphia(?) (Alașehir, Lydia): Ex-voto of Meltine to theos HosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Unknown certainly. Probably from Alaşehir (Philadelphia). Type: Votive marble stele, with triangular pediment and tympanum and tenon. The right part of the pediment is missing. Dimensions: 78 × 41.5 × 8 cm. Letters: 1.8–2.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 3055. Bibliography: Mitchell 2010, 203–04, no. A 48; Ricl 2008, 568, no. 4; TAM V.3, 1637; LKGI 27.16; Malay 1994, 19, 181 (with fig. 63); mentioned by Ricl 1991, 9, no. 17. Date: AD 242/243 (= 327 Sullan era) or AD 296/297 (= 327 Actian era). Representation: On the left side of the pediment, a part of acroterium and leaf decorating the inner corner of the tympanum are still visible. In the centre of the stele, above a median moulding, the family of the female dedicator who – along with her spouse – has the right arms raised as for prayer. Between them, their child is depicted holding grape cluster and a bird. The man is featured with sword and staff and he can be identified with a diogmites,a sort of micro-Asiatic police officer. The woman wears floor-length chiton and himation on top. Text: Θεῷ Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ | Μελτίνη εὐξαμένη ὑπ|ὲρ Γλαύκου τοῦ συμβίου | εὐχαριστοῦσα ἀπέδωκα |5 τὴν εὐχήν. Ἔτους τκζ΄, | μη(νὸς) Ξανδικοῦ, η΄. Translation: TotheHolyandJustGod,I,Meltine,prayingfor(my)husband,Glaukos,gave (thisstele)withjoy,infulfilmentofthevow.Intheyear327,inthemonthofXandikos,onthe eighthday. L1: The initial intention was to write Ὑψίστῳ, but the ΥΨ became ΟΣ, thus resulting Ὁσίῳ.

CATALOGUE

3.2.18

283

Saittai (area of, Lydia): Dedication of Alexandros of Saittai to  ngelosHosiosDikaios A

Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Temrekköy, not far from the ruins of the ancient city of Saittai. Type: White marble altar, damaged on all sides. Dimensions: 38 × 42 × 27 cm. Letters: 2.2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 158 = 1169. Bibliography: LKGI 27.1; Malay 1994, 178; Ricl 1991, 2, no. 1 (with bibliography; pl. 1, fig. 1); Ricl 1990, 160; TAM V.1, 185; SEG 21, no. 1689; Sheppard 1980–81, 90; SEG 20, no. 11; BÉ 1959, 391; Robert 1958, 120 (= OMS 1, 49). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [Ἡ--]νῶν κα[τ]οικία | [--] καὶ Ἀνγέλῳ Ὁσίῳ | [Δικ]αίῳ εὐχαριστοῦντε[ς] | [ἀν]έστησαν διὰ προφήτο[υ] | [Ἀ]λεξάνδρου Σαϊττηνο[ῦ]. Translation: Thecommunityofthosefrom[--],throughtheprophetAlexandrosofSaittai, erected(thismonument)inthanksgiving(…)totheHolyandJustAngel.

3.2.19

Sandal (Lydia): DedicationofGlykiatoHosiosandDikaios

Discoverylocation: Copied by W.M. Ramsay at Sandal, in 1884. Type: Stone slab. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 27.14; Ricl 1991, 9, no. 16 (with bibliography); TAM V.1, 598. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: There are no indications. Text: Γλυκία ὑπὲρ | ὀφθαλμῶν Ὁσί|ῳ κὶ Δικαίῳ εὐ|ξαμένη ἀνέ|θηκα. Translation: Glykia,forhereyes,totheHolyandJust,havingmadeavowdedicated(this).

3.2.20

Sardis (Lydia):Ex-votoofGaiusIuliusAneiketostoTheiosHosios kaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Indicated as coming from Sardis, though it may have also come from Kula. Type: White marble statue. Dimensions: 60 cm height (pedestal inscription; 12 × 24.5 cm). Currentlocation: Museum of Adana. Bibliography: LKGI 27.15; Ricl 1991, 46, no. 6 (with bibliography; pl. 2, fig. 6); SEG 28, no. 929. Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Representation of male character, right forearm, neck and head disappeared. In the left hand, he holds caduceus with two serpents intertwined. He wears knee-length tunic, with belt (the edges are visible) in the middle part. Above the chiton, he wears chlamys falling to the rear, but also covering the shoulders and part of the bust. The character is barefoot, and the feet lean against a tree trunk.

284

CATALOGUE

Text: Θείῳ Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ | Γ(άϊος) Ἰ(ούλιος) Ἀνείκητος εὐχήν, | προνοήσαντος Ἀμ|φιλόχου β΄, ἱερέος. Translation: TotheDivineandJustGod,GaiusIuliusAneiketos,infulfilmentofthevow,by thecareofAmphilochos,sonofAmphilochos,thepriest.

Aiolis, Troas, Mysia 3.3.1

Alexandreia (Troas):DedicationaddressedtoHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Found on the place of the ancient Alexandreia Troas. Type: Marble stele with relief. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 46, no. 104 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Two hands raised in prayer, above which fragmentary upper part of a human figure. Text: Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ. Translation: TotheHolyandtheJust.

3.3.2

Germa (area of, Mysia):DedicationtoHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Çağış, on the territory of the ancient Germa, in Mysia. Type: Stele with relief. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 46, no. 102 (with bibliography), see the explanation of Robert 1962, 387, n. 2. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The monument is divided into two registers. Upper one contains a representation of the dedicator’s family; the lower one depicts a heifer with its calf. Text: [Ὁσί]ῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ κριτής. Translation: TotheHolyandJust,thejudge(dedicated).

3.3.3

Hadrianeia (area of, Mysia): Ex-voto dedicated to Hosios (kai) Dikaios

Discovery location: Found in a place called Ören Mevkii, near the Cuma mosque in Sarıspahiler (Hadrianeia). Type: Small marble altar. Dimensions: 60 × 40 × 36 cm. Letters: 3–5 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 573, no. 37; IGSK 33, 136. Date: 2nd century AD. Text: Κομμη|νο[ὶ] Ὁσίῳ Δικαίῳ. Translation: PeopleofKomme(setupthis)totheHoly(and)Just.

CATALOGUE

3.3.4

285

Hadrianoi (area of, Mysia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Found at Kozluca. Type: Small rectangular altar with traces of acroteria and of discus on the upper side. Upper and lower margins moulded and damaged. Dimensions: 105 × 45 × 42 cm. Letters: 3.5 cm. The inscription is set in the upper part of the altar. Lunate sigma. Currentlocation: Museum of Burdur. Inv. No. 8003. Bibliography: RECAM V, 92 (pl. 87). Date: End of 2nd century–beginning of 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικ|αί{δ}ῳ Νουδε|ις ἀνέθενο ε|(vacat)ὐχήν (leaf). Translation: TotheHolyandtheJust,Noudeisdedicated(thealtar),infulfilmentofthevow.

3.3.5

Hadrianoi (area of, Mysia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discovery location: Found in the village of Derecik/Büyükorhan, on the territory of the ancient Hadrianoi city. Type: Small marble altar. Dimensions: 37 × 24/25 × 12/15 cm. Letters: 0.7–1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Bursa. Inv. No. 12.1.2001. Bibliography: Akyürek Şahin 2010, 271–73, no. 2; Fuchs and Delbarre-Bärtschi 2009; Ricl 2008, 574, no. 38. Date: 3rd century AD. Text: Ἀσκλᾶς Ἀντό|χου [ε]ὐχὴν ἀνέ|θετο Δε(vacat)ὶ Ἀ|4ναβατ|ηνῷ Ὁσου καὶ [Δ]ικ|αίου. Translation:Asklas,sonofAntiochos,infulfilmentofthevowtoZeusAnabatenos,(through theinstruction?)oftheHolyandtheJust.

3.3.6

Hadrianoutherai (Mysia): Funerary imprecation. Invocation addressedtoHelios,toHosiosandtoDikaios

Discoverylocation: Identified in the village of Bozen, situated south from the ancient Hadrianoutherai. Type: Marble plaque damaged on all sides, with two cavities in the lower left part. Dimensions: 46 × 52 × 22 cm. Letters: 1–1.5 cm. The first two rows of the inscription are separated from the rest of the text. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 573, no. 35; SGO II, 299, no. 08/06/06 (with bibliography); IGSK 52, 19; SEG 41, no. 1060; Petzl 1992, 143; Ricl 1991, 46, no. 103. Date: 1st century AD (Petzl). Text: [Ἡελίῳ], Ὁσίῳ τε Δικαίῳ χεῖρας ἀεί[ρω] |2 [--]Ι Ἀπολλωνίδης μνῆμα ποιησά[μενος -] | [ὅστις?] τολμήσει λίθον ἆραι ἢ τάφον αὐτό[ν?] |4 [ἠδ᾽ αἰ]ῳρεῖσθαι λύσας

286

CATALOGUE

ΟΥΔΙΩΣΝΕΜΕΣ[--] | [- στ]ήλλην ἄρας ἐπιθεῖναι τύμβον ἑ[αυτοῦ] |6 [----]Ν κλῦτε δαίμονες οἱ χθόνιοι [-] | [----]ΙΙ θρέμμα ὄνησιν ἔχοι [.]ΟΕ[.]ΕΙΝ[.] |8 [----] φένγος ἠελίου κατίδοι[-] | [-]Ω[.]ΗΛΕ[.]ΗΤΕ πανώλη [-] | [----]. Translation:IraisemyarmstoHelios,toHosiosandtoDikaios…Apollonidesforremembrance.Whoeverdarestoelevatethestoneorthegraveitself…wouldhanguntied…the cursewillbeinvokeduponhisowngrave…maythedaimonesoftheearthhearme…should myfosterchildhavetheprofitof…maythesunlightshineupon…all-destructive[---].

Bithynia, Pontus, Paphlagonia 3.4.1

Asar Kale (Paphlagonia): Dedication addressed to Hosios (kai) Dikaios

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the place called Asar Kale, along with the neighbourhood of Gaziler, situated 1 km from Gökçebey/Zonguldak, at the border between Bithynia and Paphlagonia. Type: Marble altar with moulded upper and lower side. It includes acroteria and discus in the upper central area. Dimensions: 130 × 39 × 36 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Ereğli. Bibliography: Akyürek Şahin 2010, 269–70, no. 1. Date: 2nd century AD. Text: Ὁσίῳ Δικαίῳ |2 Ἀλεξάνδρῳ | παρὰ μητρὶ |4 θεῶν Λυκω|χωρειτικῄ |6 Ι[----] | [.]ΦΑΝ[-]|8θης. Translation: TotheHolyandtheJust,toAlexandroswiththeMotheroftheGodsofLykos (dedicatedthisfrom?)[---].

3.4.2

İnegöl (Bithynia): Ex-votoofthecommunityinSarkotyletoHosios andDikaios

Discoverylocation: Discovered at İnegöl, on the territory of Bithynia. Type: Limestone altar with a moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: 82 × 36–47 × 32 cm. Letters: 2–3 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Bursa (wihout Inv. No.). Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 45–46, no. 101 (with bibliography); IGSK 39.I, 49 (photograph). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: On the anterior side, two male busts. The characters keep their hand to their chests. Beneath, relief scales. Text: Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικα[ί]ῳ | ἡ κώμη Σαρκοτύ|λη εὐχὴν ἀνέ|θηκαν. Translation: TotheHolyandJust,thevillageofSarkotylededicated(thisaltar)infulfilment ofthevow.

CATALOGUE

3.4.3

287

Modrene (area of, Bithynia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: Into the wall of a private dwelling in Tımaraktaş, near Mudurnu (ancient Modrene). Type: Small altar with moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: 60 × 35 cm. Letters: 4 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 574, no. 40; Akyürek Şahin 2004, 146–47, no. 7. Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Ἀγαθῇ τύχ[ῃ] | Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δικέ|ῳ εὐχήν | Μ(άρκος) Ἰούλιο[ς] | Οὐάλης [κὲ] | Ἐρυκία Χαρίτ[η]. Translation: Withgoodfortune.MarcusIuliusValens[and]ErykiaCharitetotheHolyand Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

Galatia 3.5.1

Kara Hoca (Galatia): Funerary imprecation. Invocation of Hosios (kai)Dikaios

Discoverylocation: The Kara Hoca village near the thermal sources of Myrikion. Type: Altar. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 40–41, no. 88 (with bibliography); RECAM II, 242; SEG 6, no. 71; Ramsay 1884, 252–54, no. 4. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Ἔτο[υ]ς […΄] μ[η]νὸς Ξ|ανδικοῦ [...... -]|ος Γε[λλ]ίου Στατειλί[ᾳ] | ἰδίᾳ γυναικὶ ἀνέστη[σε] |5 [τὸ]ν βωμὸν καὶ τὴν θύρα[ν] | ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων ἀνέστησεν μνήμης χάριν. | Στατειλία ζῶσα φρο|νοῦσα παραθήκην |10 ἔδωκι τινι ἐρέαν π[ρά]|σινον καὶ ψέλλια δύ|ο ἀργυρᾶ, κἂν μὴ ἀπο|δίδῃ, Ὅσιον Δίκεον, |Ἥλιε Κύριε, ὑμεῖς ἐκδι|15κήσατε αὐτὴν νεκρὰν | καὶ τὰ τέκνα ζῶντα. Translation: Intheyear[…],inthemonthofXandikos,[…,-]os,sonofGellios,erectedthis altar and this door from his own funds to his wife, Stateilia, in remembrance. Stateilia, whilelivingandconscious,gaveintrusttosomeoneagreenwoollengarmentandtwosilver bracelets,andunlesshereturnsthemtousmayyou,theHoly(and)JustandLordHelios, avengeher,acorpse,andherlivingchildren.

3.5.2

Togray (Galatia):Ex-votoofAbebastoHoseios

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Togray/Doğray, in the vicinity of a tomb. Type: Small altar. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 40, no. 87 (with bibliography); RECAM II, 18.

288

CATALOGUE

Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Ἀβέβας Ἀρίσ|2τωνος ὑπ|ὲρ τῶ ἰδίω|4ν Ὁσείῳ εὐ|χήν. Translation: Abebas,sonofAriston,(dedicatedthealtar)totheHoly,forhisfamily,infulfilmentofthevow. L1: RECAM II, 18: Αβιβας.

Phrygia 3.6.1

Afyon (area of, Phrygia):Ex-votoofthepriestZotikos

Discoverylocation: In the village of Seydiler, situated east from Afyon, in front of a mosque. Type: Marble small column. Dimensions: Unknown. Letters: Unknown size. Inscription carelessly carved. Currentlocation: In the place of discovery. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 42, no. 92 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δική|ῳ ὑπὲρ πάν|των σωτηρί|ας Ζωτι[κὸ]ς εἱ|5ερεὺς θεῷ ἀ[ρ]χη|γέτῃ [ε]ὐχήν. Translation:Zotikosthepriest,totheHolyandJustforeverybody’ssalvation,tothefoundergod,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.2

Afyon (area of, Phrygia):Ex-votoofNestortoHosios

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the village of Yükrük. Moved from Yükrük to Afyon in 1979. Type: White marble stele with acroteria and tenon, with relief discus inside the pediment, in central position. Dimensions: 30 × 15 × 45 cm. Letters: 1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Afyon. Inv. No. 1572. Bibliography: Adak, Akyürek Şahin and Güneş 2008, 88–89, no. 15; Ricl 1991, 42–43, no. 93 (with bibliography; pl. 15, fig. 93); LIMC V.1, 543, no. 11; MAMA VI, 389 (pl. 69). Date: 2nd century AD (?). Representation: In the centre, two characters with knee-length tunics, holding hands. They are clad in himations and they have long hair. The one to the right seems to be holding sceptre. Text: Νέστωρ Στρά|τωνος Ὁσίῳ | [εὐχ]|ήν. Translation: Nestor,sonofStraton,totheHoly,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.3

Afyon* (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosios

Discoverylocation: Unknown place of discovery. Type: White limestone altar with a lower and upper mouldings. Dimensions: 79 × 39 (moulding) / 29 (shaft) × 24 cm.

CATALOGUE

289

Letters: 1 cm. Currentlocation: Afyon Museum. Bibliography: Ricl 1992b, 98–99, no. 5 (with photograph at pl. 9, fig. a–d). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: On the main face of the altar, a bust of Hosios wearing a short sleeve tunic, with a partial rod on the right shoulder. On the right face, a bust of Herakles, with the skin of a lion, and on the left one, the bust of the god Helios, with a cloak fixed on the right shoulder. Text: [--]C̣ καὶ ΦΛΑΙΟCΔΟΜΩ[---] | [--]ΟΥΑΛΕΙΤΗΝΩΝ | Ὁσίῳ εὐ[χή[ν]. Translation:…toHosios,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.4

Afyon (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosios

Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Beyyazı (Ambanaz), near Afyon. Type: White marble tablet in the form of tabulaansata. Dimensions: 16.5 × 20.5 × 5 cm. Letters: 1 cm. Currentlocation: Afyon Museum. Inv. No. 10007. Bibliography: Akyürek Şahin 2007, 90–91, no. 65 (with photograph at p. 91); Ricl 1992b, 99–100, no. 6. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Four individuals are represented in relief on the plaque: a woman and a man in the upper register, and two children wearing large high-pitched cloaks. Text: [Ἀ]σκληπίδης Ὁσίῳ | (reliefs) εὐχήν. Translation:AsklepidestoHosios,infulfilmentofthevow. L1: Ricl 1992b, 97–98, no. 6: [Ἀσ]κληπιά[δ]ης.

3.6.5

Aizanoi* (Çavdarhisar, Phrygia): ConfessioninscriptionofTelesphorosandHermogenesmentioningaperjury

Discoverylocation: Unknown with certitude. The area of Stalla, most probably, but the actual place of provenance was not identified. The museum inventory indicates the old cemetery as place of provenance; it is currently destroyed, but the monuments there had been brought from another place (Prymnessos?). Type: Profiled altar, broken in the lower part and damaged in the upper part, on the moulding, where the letters are disposed laterally, toward the corners, thus illegible. Drew-Bear indicates the existence of relief acroteria that decorate the moulding. The inscription starts from this relief ledge and it continues on the body of the altar. Dimensions: 69 × 32.5 cm (upper part) / 28 cm (the rest) × 24 cm. Letters: 2.8 cm. Currentlocation: Archaeological Museum of Afyon (Afyonkarahisar). Inv. No. 825. Bibliography: BWK 105 (with fig.); Ricl 1991, 42, no. 91 (with bibliography; pl. 15, fig. 91); OMS 2, 1358–59; Drew-Bear 1976, 262–66, no. 17 (with photograph pl. 10, fig. 1). Date: Roman Imperial period.

290

CATALOGUE

Representation: The altar contains the schematic representation of two characters, identified as Hosios and Dikaios because of the similarity with the stele of Dorylaion. The two characters with long hair and the tunic below knee are depicted standing, on a narrow pedestal. Each holds a measurement tool: the left character holds a weighing scale, while the one on right side a length measure. Text: [Τελ]έσφορος καὶ Ἑ[ρμ]|ογένης Σταλλα|ηνοὶ παρορκή|σαντες ἀνέθη|5καν. Translation: Telesphoros and Hermogenes of Stalla, having committed perjury dedicated (thealtar).

3.6.6

Aizanoi (Çavdarhisar, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosios

Discoverylocation: Discovered when the city canals were cleaned up. Type: Statuette with the image of a rider. Dimensions: 24 × 16 cm. Letters: Unknown size. The inscription is set on two rows at the base of the statue. Currentlocation: Museum of Afyon. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 572, no. 31; SEG 52, no. 1248. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The statue depicts a male character mounted, with long and curly hair, clad in sleeved chiton; he holds a palm branch in the right hand. Text: Εὔ[ανδρ]ος ὑπὲρ ΚΓΙC|ΤΟΥ Ὁσίῳ εὐχὴν. Translation:Evandros(dedicatedthis)for…totheHoly,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.7

Aizanoi (Çavdarhisar, Phrygia): Inscription mentioning the vow madebyHosios

Discovery location: Aizanoi (today Çavdarhisar). Discovered in the west cemetery of Çavdarhisar. Type: Fragment of white marble architrave, damaged in the left and in the upper part. Dimensions: 21 × 83 × 33 cm. Letters: 2.5–3 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 36, no. 79 (with bibliography and fig.); MAMA IX, 64 (with facsimile). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [-- εὐξάμε]νος ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας Ὁσίου [---]. Translation: [--]havingmadeavow,forsalvation,totheHoly[---].

3.6.8

Aizanoi (Çavdarhisar, Phrygia):Ex-votoofthe‘people’ofTribantidestoHosios(kai)Dikaios

Discoverylocation: Probably Zemme (?), west from Çavdarhisar. Type: Plaque broken on left side; unknown size. Dimensions: Known width: 35.5 cm. Currentlocation: Unknown. The fragment was stored at Zemme at a certain point.

CATALOGUE

291

Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 37, no. 80 (with bibliography); Ramsay 1887, 513, no. 94. Date: 3rd century AD (?). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [Ὁ δῆμος ὁ Τριβα]ντ[ί]ων Ὁσίῳ | [Δικαίῳ ἐπη]κόῳ εὐξάμε|[νος καθιέρω]σεν. Translation: ThepeopleofTribantis,tothelisteningHolyand(theJust),consecrated(this) infulfilmentofavow.

3.6.9

Aizanoi (area of, Phrygia):Ex-votoaddressedtoMênandtoHosios kaiDikaios = 4.2.9

Discovery location: Seen at Kırgıl, north-west from Çavdarhisar, on the territory of the ancient Aizanoi. Type: Stele with moulding. The first line of the text is written on this moulding. Dimensions: Unknown. Letters: Approx. 2.5 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 37–38, no. 81 (with bibliography); MAMA IX, P 65 (p. 180), Sheppard 1980–81, 91, n. 64; CMRDM I, 88 (and CMRDM III, p. 78); Lane 1964, 22–23, no. 2; Perdrizet 1896, 62–63. Date: AD 190/191 (= 285 Sullan era). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [Ἔτ]ους σοε΄. Α[--] | Νεικήτας Παρδ|αλᾶ Μηνὶ θεῷ | εὐχήν. |5 Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δικέῳ | ἡ Ἀλιανῶν κα|τοικία. Σῶζε | τὴν κατοικίαν. Translation: Intheyear285…Neiketas,sonofPardalas,tothegodMên,infulfilmentofthe vow.TotheHolyandtheJust,thecommunityofAlianides.Savethecommunity! L1: Drew-Bear: [ἔτ]ους σοε΄ α΄, the first month of the year; CMRDM I, 88: [Ἔτ]ους σοε΄ ἀ [....].

3.6.10

Aizanoi (area of, Phrygia): Anepigraphicvotivealtar

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Tavşanlı, in the yard of a house, 50 km from Kütahya, on the territory of the ancient Aizanoi. Type: Massive altar of grey marble with traces of severely worn out inscriptions and reliefs. Dimensions: 131 (column head, 29; body, 81, pedestal, 21) × 46–51 (column head, 51; body, 46–49.5) × ca. 41 cm. Currentlocation: Tavşanlı. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 38, no. 82 (with bibliography); MAMA IX, 171. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: On front (which could also be the rear), on lower left side, there is the representation of a weighing scale. On right side, on a thin pedestal, the bust of a clad man, with radiate head. On left side, a rider moving rightward. Upper moulding of the right face features flower-shaped cross, typical for the Simav region, while the left face features dish-ended discus in the centre. Text: Anepigraphic altar.

292 3.6.11

CATALOGUE

Aizanoi (Çavdarhisar, Phrygia): Ex-votoofDemetriostoHosios

Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Kuruçay, south from Tavşanlı. Type: Worn out white marble altar with mouldings. Dimensions: 82 × 45–52 × 37–42 cm. Letters: 1.8–2 cm. The inscription is set on the anterior side, below the image of the naked god. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 38, no. 83 (with bibliography); MAMA IX, P 72 (p. 180). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Reliefs framed by niches with mouldings. On the anterior side, representation of a male person, nude, with radiate crown (Hosios), holding in the right hand an object hard to identify. On the right face, bust of female divinity with clothes on and crescent above the head. On the left face, bust of naked man, with representation of the arms only above the elbows. On the rear face, rider with radiate crown and wind-blown cloak. Text: [Δημή]τριος Δημητρίου νεώτε|[ρος Ὁ]σίῳ εὐχὴν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἐλπίδων. Translation: YoungDemetrios,sonofDemetrios,totheHoly,forthesakeofhope,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.12

Aizanoi (Çavdarhisar, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikaios

Discoverylocation: Built into the southern wall of the cemetery in the village of Gökağaç, situated east from Çavdarhisar on the territory of the ancient Aizanoi. Type: White-bluish marble plaque, reused, which used to have a pedestal or a support that stuck it in the ground. There is no way of telling which edge was sectioned in Antiquity or during secondary reuse. Dimensions: 157 × 48 × 28 cm. Letters: 3 cm. Currentlocation: Gökağaç. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 38–39, no. 84 (with bibliography); MAMA IX, 63 (pp. 24–25; with facsimile). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: .ΣΝΤΙΣ[.. εὐ]|[ξ]άμενο[ς ὑπὲρ? ἰδί]|ων Ὁσίῳ [Δικαίῳ] | vacatεὐχή[ν]. Translation: [---]havingmadeavow(dedicatedthis)forhisfamilytotheHolyandtheJust, infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.13

Aizanoi (Çavdarhisar, Phrygia): DedicationtoHosiosandtoDikeos

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Çavdarhisar. Type: Rectangular marble altar, with moulded upper and lower side, as well as acroteria. It features a cavity on upper side. Dimensions: 120 × 48 × 54 cm. Letters: 3 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 571, no. 26; Lehmer and Wörrle 2006, 73–75, no. 133; Ricl 1992b, 100, n. 16. Date: Roman Imperial period.

CATALOGUE

293

Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: ῟Ις θεὸς | ἐν οὐρανῷ | μέγα τὸ Ὅσιον, | μέγα τὸ Δίκεον. Translation:Oneisthegodintheskies,greatistheHoly,greatistheJust!

3.6.14

Amorion (Phrygia):Ex-votoofDemetriosandhisfamilyforHosios (kai)Dikaios

Discoverylocation: Probably Aslanlı (Amorion). Type: Altar. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: In the past, it was reserved at Amorion. It has disappeared. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 36, no. 89 (with bibliography); MAMAVII, 281a. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: Δημήτριος μ[ε]|τὰ τέκνων ὑπὲ|ρ ἑαυτῶν σωτη|ρίας καὶ τῶν ἰδί|5ων πάντων | Ὁσί|ῳ Δικαίῳ εὐχήν. Translation: Demetrioswiththechildren,fortheirsalvationandforthatoftheirfamily,to theHoly(and)theJust.

3.6.15

Appia (area of, Phrygia): DedicationtoHosioskaiDikeosandHosia Dikaia

Discoverylocation: Found at Akça Köy, being used as pillar of a wash-house. Type: White marble rectangular altar; moulded upper and lower side. The inscription is set on the moulding of the main and of the left lateral face. Dimensions: 80 × 39/47 × 28.5/33 cm. Letters: 1–1.75 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 571, no. 25; MAMA X, 158. Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: On the left face of the monument, visible traces of radiate bust. Text: Ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ | ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας τῶν [κατ] | οικούντων ΤΟΥ…ΗΝ.. | Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικέῳ ἐνδήμῳ εὐ[χὴν] |καὶ μητρὶ μακα|ρίᾳ Ὁσίᾳ Δικαίᾳ. Translation: Withgoodfortune.Forthesalvationofthosewholivein…totheHolyandthe Just,thelocal(god),infulfilmentofthevow,andtothehappymothertheHolyandtheJust (Goddess).

3.6.16

Appia (area of, Phrygia): DedicationtoHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the region of the upper Tembris valley in north Phrygia, in a rural sanctuary belonging to the territory of the ancient settlement of Appia. Type: Circular stele reconstituted out of two fragments. Lower left part missing. Dimensions: 23.7 × 23.4 × 4.1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Anatolian Civilizations in Ankara. Inv. No. 27.3.66. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 571, no. 23; Lochman 2003, 288, no. II, 498; Drew-Bear, Thomas and Yıldızturan 1999, 258, no. 396.

294

CATALOGUE

Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: In central position, inside the relief margin, two beardless characters are featured, following the typical iconography of the region for Hosios and Dikaios, with chiton and himation covering one shoulder. One of the characters holds, close to the body, a long object, most probably a sceptre. Text: Anepigraphic monument.

3.6.17

Appia (area of, Phrygia): DedicationtoHosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: Inside a deserted fountain of Doğanlar. Type: Grey marble altar, with chopped edges. Dimensions: 31 (visible) × 38 × 39 cm. Letters: 1.1–1.4 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 571, no. 24; MAMA X, 214. Date: 2nd century–beginning of 3rd century AD. Text: [-- Ὁσίου] | κὲ Δικέου ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας ἑαυτῶν | κὲ τέκνων κὲ τῆς πατρίδος Ζίν|γοτος κὲ τῶν ἰδίων τὸν βω|μὸν ἀνέστην. Translation: [--oftheHoly]andtheJust,fortheirsalvationandthatoftheirchildrenandof thefatherland,andofZingos,whoerectedthealtarathisownexpense.

3.6.18

Attouda (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votoaddressedtoHosioskeDikeos, HosiaandtoApollo

Discoverylocation: Built into the wall of a school in Kuyucak, 35 km of the ancient Phrygian town of Attouda. Type: Grey marble stele. Dimensions: 105 × 42 × 7 cm. Letters: 2.5–3 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 17–18, no. 32 (with bibliography; pl. 7, fig. 32). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [Ὑπὲρ .... ἀδελφι]|δοῦ μου κὲ τῆς ὑ|πάρξεώς μου Ὁσ|ίῳ κὲ Δικέῳ κὲ Ὁσία |5 κὲ Ἀπόλλων εὐχήν. Translation: For....mygrandsonandformywell-being,totheHolyandJustandtotheHoly (Goddess)andtoApollo,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.19

Attouda (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Calpurnius Alexandros to HosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: In the staircase of a building in Kuyucak. Type: Grey marble stele, with triangular pediment decorated with acroteria. The upper acroterion is destroyed. Dimensions: 116 × 38–48 × 15 cm. Letters: 2.75–3 cm.

CATALOGUE

295

Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 18, no. 33 (with bibliography; pl. 7, fig. 33). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: A round protrusion in the centre of the tympanum. Above the inscription, a crater. Text: Καλπούρνιος Ἀλέξ|ανδρος Ἰουλιανο|ῦ σὺν γυναικὶ Ἀμμ[ίᾳ] | περὶ τέκνων σω|5τηρίας κὲ τῆς κατ|οκίας Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δι|κέῳ εὐχήν. Translation: CalpurniusAlexandros,sonofIulianos,withhiswifeAmmia,forthesalvation of(their)childrenandofthecommunity,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.20

Attouda (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votoofAtticustoHosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: Built into a fountain at Kuyucak. In the surroundings of the locality. Type: White marble moulded altar, with acroteria. Dimensions: 94 × 29 × 35 cm. Letters: 3.5 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 18–19, no. 34 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Ἀττικὸς Κορ|νηλίας Γαιανῆς | πραγματευτὴ|ς ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ κὲ |5 τῶν δεσποτῶν | Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δικέῳ εὐχήν. Translation: Atticus, representative of Cornelia Gaiane, for himself and for the masters, totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.21

Attouda (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votoofTeimotheosandofhiswifeto HosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Found at Kuyucak. Tipulofthemonument: Stele with triangular pediment. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 19, no. 35 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: On the tympanum, in the middle part, a round protrusion. Text: Ἀπολλώνιος Τ|ειμοθέου κ|αὶ γυνὴ αὐτ|τοῦ Ὁσίῳ Δικ|5αίῳ εὐχήν. Translation: Apollonios,sonofTeimotheosandhiswife,totheHolyandJust,infulfilment ofthevow.

3.6.22

Avdan (Phrygia):Ex-votoofZotikosforHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: Avdan. Type: White-bluish marble altar, moulded in the lower and upper sides. Damaged above. Dimensions: 44.5 × 23 × 26 cm. Letters: 2–3 cm. The last two rows are written on the lower moulding. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 17, no. 30 (with bibliography; pl. 7, fig. 30); Haspels 1971 I, 335, no. 145 (with fig. 638). Date: 2nd century AD.

296

CATALOGUE

Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Ζωτικὸς | Στράτω|νος ὑπὲ|ρ αὑτοῦ |5 κὲ τῶν ἰδί|ων Ὁσίῳ | Δικέῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: Zotikos,sonofStraton,forhimselfandhisfamily,totheHoly(and)Just,in fulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.23

Avdan (area of, Phrygia): Dedication of Sokrates, Mama and  enophilostoHosios M

Discoverylocation: The Erenler Pinar fountain, near the village of Avdan. Type: Marble stele, damaged in the upper part. Dimensions: 151 × 48–55 × 1.7–2 cm. Letters: 3 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 17, no. 31 (with bibliography); MAMA V.1, 148 (with pl. 40). Date: 2nd century AD. Text: Σωκρτης Μην|οφίλου καὶ Μα|μα καὶ Μηνόφ[ι]|λος Ὁσίῳ. Translation: Sokrates,sonofMenophilos,andMamaandMenophilos,totheHoly.

3.6.24

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Dedicationinhexametersaddressed tothemightyHosios(kai)DikaiosandtoHelios

Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Avdan, in the territory of the ancient Dorylaion (Eskișehir). Type: Grey marble stele; lower and upper parts missing. Dimensions: 70 × 61 × 15–20 cm. Letters: 3.8–4.2 cm (r. 1–8); 2.5–3.2 cm (r. 9–13). Bibliography: SGO IV, 299, no. 16/34/02 (with bibliography); Ricl 1991, 16, no. 29 (with pl. 6, fig. 29); LIMC V.1, 543, no. 14; SEG 34, no. 1294. Date: 2nd century AD. Text: [---]Δ[--κ]ώ|μης Μαρλάκκου | ἄνδρες ἄριστοι ὄλ|βιον εὐξάμενοι |5 διαμονὴν ἰδίων πε|ρὶ πάντων εἵνεκε | σωτηρίας, Ὁσίῳ Δι|καίῳ τε μεγίστῳ, | λαμπρῷ θ᾽ Ἡελίῳ ῥοδο|10δακτύλῳ ἄξια δῶρα, | εἰκόνας ἀργυρέους καὶ | μαρμαρίνους, ἀνέθηκαν, | αὐτὸς ἕως ἐκέλευσεν | Λ..Κ....ΓΑΠΟΠΟ | [---]. Translation: [---]fromthevillageofMarlakkos,thebestmenprayingforthesustainable well-beingforthesakeofsalvationofallthosearoundthem,dedicatedtheduegifts,silver andmarblefigurestotheHoly(andthe)Just,themighty,(andthe)shiningrosy-fingered Helios,(as)hecommanded[---].

3.6.25

Dorylaion (Eskişehir, Phrygia):Ex-votoofMarcusAureliusTitianus NestortoHosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: Found at Eskişehir, in a house situated near the Tembris River (Porsuk Çay), in Phrygia Epiktetos. Type: Limestone altar. Dimensions: 77 cm height.

CATALOGUE

297

Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 10, no. 19 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: A bucranium is featured on the main face, on top of the inscription. Text: Ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ. | Μ(ᾶρκος) Αὐρ(ήλιος) Τιτια|νὸς Νέστωρ | ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ |5 κὲ τῶν ἰδίων πά|ντων ὑπὲρ ὑγ[ί]|ας κὲ σωτηρίας | Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δικέῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: Withgoodfortune.MarcusAureliusTitianusNestor,forthehealthandsalvationofhimselfandhisfamily,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.26

Dorylaion (Eskişehir, Phrygia):Ex-votoofHermedion,highpriest, andofhiswife,toHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: Found at Eskişehir, in Phrygia Epiktetos. Type: Marble stele with ridged pediment, as well as tympanum and acroteria. Dimensions: 208 × 51 × 13 cm. Letters: 2–3 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Istanbul. Inv. No. 748. Bibliography: Delemen 1999, 190–91, no. 361 (with bibliography); Ricl 1992a, 74–75; 1991, 10–11, no. 20 (with bibliography; pl. 3, fig. 20); LIMC V.1, 542, no. 6. Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: In the upper part, the pediment is decorated with acroteria, and the spiralshaped motifs continue on the tympanum. Inside it, in a semicircular niche, a riding character facing right in a dynamic position is featured. In the right hand, he holds an object identifiable with a cudgel, an axe, or a short spear. Under horse’s feet, an animal (?) is depicted. On the stele body, under the representation of the rider, there are three other characters with the right arms raised as for prayer; the characters are framed by two Doric pilasters. In the middle part, there is a woman flanked by two longhaired men, who hold their left arms forward and bent at the elbow. On lower side, above the inscribed field, radiate Helios with radiate crown, torch (?) in the right hand. Text: Ἑρμηδίων Ἑρμῆ|δος σὺν γυναι|κὶ Νάνᾳ, πρωτο|ιερεῖς, ὑπὲρ ἑαυ|5τῶν καὶ τῶν ἰδ|ίων Ὁσίῳ Δικέῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: Hermedion,highpriest,sonofHermeswithhiswifeNana,forthemselvesand themembersoftheirfamily,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.27

Dorylaion (Eskişehir, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikaios

Discoverylocation: Eskişehir. Type: Grey marble altar, moulded above and below, upper left corner destroyed. Representations on three of the altar faces. Dimensions: 92 × 31–38 × 31–37 cm. Letters: 2.2 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 11, no. 21 (with bibliography; pl. 4, fig. 21). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: On the main side, a man with long and curly hair is featured, whose cloakcovered bust is set on the back of a left-facing wolf. On the left side, a frontally depicted

298

CATALOGUE

character clad in long tunic and conical hat. On the left hand, he holds a round object, while in the left a weighing scale. On the rear face, a female figure (?), also wearing aconical hat similar to the one worn by the male character. Text: [---] | [ὑπὲρ το]ῦ θρέψαντο|[ς σωτηρί]ας καὶ ἑαυτ|[οῦ καὶ τῶ]ν ἰδίων πάν|5[των Ὁ]σίῳ Δικαίῳ εὐ|χήν. Translation: [---]forthesalvationof(his)nurslingandforhimselfandthemembersofhis family,totheHoly(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.28

Dorylaion (Eskişehir, Phrygia):Ex-votoofLimnestoHosios(kai) Dikeos

Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Başören in the area of Eskişehir. Type: Limestone altar. Dimensions: 100 × 37 × 27 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 12, no. 22 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Under the inscription on the main side, a young character with radiate crown and short chiton. In the left hand, he holds a spear and, with the right arm, he reaches out to a female character, probably a goddess, who holds burning torch (?) in the right hand. On the sides of the monument, there are two bucrania. Text: Ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ. | Λίμνης ὑπὲρ ἑα[υ]|τοῦ καὶ τῶν εἰδί|ων πάντων | Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικέῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: Withgoodfortune.Limnes,forhimselfandforthemembersofhisfamily,tothe Holy(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.29

Dorylaion (Eskişehir, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Manes and Asklas to HosiosandtoApollo

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the village of Başören in the area of Eskişehir. Type: Limestone altar with relief decoration. Dimensions: 110 × 37 × 27 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Text A is below the bust of the character, while text B below the rider’s. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 12–13, no. 23 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: On the anterior side, in a niche, a bearded character is depicted; below, a rider with radiate crown, holding double-axe. On left side, there is a crater, while on upper side an eagle and on lower side a bucranium. Text: (Fragm. A) Ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ. (Fragm. B) Μάνης καὶ Ἀσκλᾶ[ς] | οἱ Δόμνου Ὁσίῳ (or Θείῳ?) καὶ | Ἀπόλλωνι εὐχὴν ὑ|πὲρ τῆς ἑαυτῶν σω|5τηρίας. Translation: (Fragm. A) Withgoodfortune. (Fragm. B) ManesandAsklas,sonsofDomnus,toHosios(ortotheDivine)andtoApollo, fortheirsalvation,infulfilmentofthevow.

CATALOGUE

3.6.30

299

Dorylaion (Eskişehir, Phrygia):Ex-votoofPhilopator,Chrestosand AndreastoDikesi

Discoverylocation: In the surroundings of the city of Eskişehir. Type: White marble stele slightly narrowing above. The right corner is missing. Ridged pediment, with acroteria. On the tympanum, in central position, a longhaired divinity is featured (Zeus Bronton?), flanked by the busts of Helios (left) and Selene (right). Helios has the head surrounded by rays forming a triangle and framed within an aureole, while Selene is framed in the lower part within a rounded semicircular crescent. The surface between the two inscribed areas, below the pediment, is divided into two registers. In the upper register (on the left), a rider on the back of horse rampant facing right, holding double-axe. In the centre, two characters holding hands, clad in long, straight-folded tunics covered by himations with wavy folds, fastened on the left shoulder. The arm reaching out of the character on the left intersects the forelegs of the horse. Above the head, a part of the aureole (?). In the same upper register, on right side, a female bust. Lower register features on left side the image of a local Herakles with cudgel on the right shoulder, featured frontally, standing. To his right, Hermes holding the caduceus and the little bag (of money); there is also an image of two oxen in a plough. Dimensions: 59 × 42 × 65 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Carved on the tympanum and on the lower moulding. Currentlocation: Louvre Museum in Paris. Inv. No. MA 4288. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 13, no. 24 (with bibliography; pl. 3, fig. 24); LIMC V.2, 375, no. 9 (photograph). Date: 2nd century AD. Text: (Text A) Φιλοπά|τωρ | κὲ Χρῆστος κὲ Ἀνδρέας Δίκησι | ὑπὲρ τῶν ἀνθ[ρώπων] | κὲ ὑπὲρ τῶν ὑπα[ρχόν]|5των εὐχήν. (Text B) Ἡλίῳ. Translation: (Text A)PhilopatorandChrestosandAndreas,totheJustices,forpeopleandforassets,in fulfilmentofthevow. (Text B)ToHelios.

3.6.31

Dorylaion (Eskişehir, Phrygia):DedicationtoMeterTheon,Hosios PhoibosandMênDikaios = 4.6.12a

Discoverylocation: Inönü. Type: Grey marble stele, vaulted above, where triangular pediment is framed. Dimensions: 164 × 63 × 18 cm. Letters: 1.7–2.7 cm (text A); 1.9–2.4 cm (text B). Currentlocation: Istanbul Archaeological Museum. Inv. No. 4481. Bibliography: SGO IV, 299, no. 16/34/03; Ricl 1991, 13–14, no. 25 (with bibliography; pl. 5, fig. 25). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Inside the pediment, the bust of Zeus Bronton, right hand on the chest, under the himation. The hand – visible – is exaggeratedly large. To the god’s right, altar decorated with crowns. In the central register, between the moulding inscribed below the pediment (with

300

CATALOGUE

text A) and the rest of the inscription, in the lower part of the stele, there are two superimposed scenes, framed laterally by Carinthian columns. On top, Helios in a quadriga, with serpent under the hoofs of horses rampant. Beneath, rider with double-axe, as well as Dionysos clad in skins, with boots, standing and holding thyrsos in the left hand. Text: (Text A) Ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ. | Διομᾶς καὶ Εὐτύχης | λατύποι. (Text B) [Μ]ητρὶ Θεῶν, Φοίβῳ τ᾽ ὁσίῳ καὶ Μηνὶ | δικαίῳ, ὀφθαλμῷ τε Δίκης δικε|οφροσύνης χάριν ἄνδρες | Σακλεανοὶ σωτῆρσι θεοῖς |5 ὁσίοις ἀνέθηκαν. Translation: (Text A) Withgoodfortune.DiomasandEutyches,thestone-cutters. (Text B) TotheMotherofGods,theHolyPhoibosandMêntheJust,theeyeofJustice,the menofSakleadedicatedthistothesaviourholygods,forjustjudgment.

3.6.32

Dorylaion (Eskişehir, Phrygia):Ex-votoofHerophilostotheHosios andDikaiosgods

Discoverylocation: Found on the road linking Inönü to Kütahya, between the villages of Esnemez and Kümbet. Type: White marble altar, moulded above and below, with acroteria in the corners. Dimensions: 82 × 36.5–45 × 31.5 cm. Letters: 1.3–1.8 cm (text A); 1.6–2 cm (text B). Currentlocation: Istanbul Archaeological Museum. Inv. No. 846. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 14–15, no. 26 (with bibliography; pl. 5, fig. 26). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: On the main side of the altar, under the text A, rider with double-axe in the right hand. On the left side, a crater and a vine stock; to their left, a longhaired and bearded male, holding a sceptre with a serpent twined round it. Text B is set on top of the relief. On the rear side, a woman holding in the left a cornucopia and in the right hand a bunch of grapes. On the right face, a male character sitting on a pedestal, cloak raised leftward and holding in the right hand weighing scale, while in the left measure tool. He is surrounded by two garlands with ivy leaves. Text: (Text A) Ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ. Θεοῖς ὁσίοις καὶ δι|καίοις Ἡρόφιλ[ος] | Παπᾶ εὐχή[ν]. (Text B) Ἀσκλᾶς καὶ Ἀσκληπᾶ[ς] | οἱ Ἀσκληπᾶ, λατύποι | Κουρναιτηνοί. Translation: (Text A)Withgoodfortune.Herophilos,sonofPapas,totheHolyandJustgods,infulfilment ofthevow. (Text B)AsklasandAsklepas,sonsofAsklepas,Kournetinoi,thestone-cutters.

3.6.33

Dorylaion (Eskişehir, Phrygia): Ex-voto of the sons of Gaius to HosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: Found on the territory of the ancient Dorylaion. Type: Grey marble stele with triangular pediment and acroteria in the lateral and above the pediment. The cornice is moulded.

CATALOGUE

301

Dimensions: 253 × 90 × 23. Letters: 4–4.2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Eskişehir. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 15, no. 27 (with bibliography; pl. 6, fig. 27). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Within the tympanum, a goddess looking like Kybele, sitting and flanked by two lions. On the body of the stele, framed by two columns, representations of Helios in a quadriga and of bust belonging to a longhaired character (not necessarily female, see M. Ricl) holding the right hand to the chest, underneath the himation. This image was attributed to Zeus Bronton on other steles. Text: Πρωτᾶς κὲ Ἀπολ|λώνιος κὲ Ἀσκλη|πᾶς οἱ Γαḯου ὑπὲ|ρ τῶν ἰδίων Ὁσί|5ῳ κὲ Δικέῳ εὐχήν. Translation: ProtasandApolloniosandAsklepas,sonsofGaius,forthemembersoftheir family,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.34

Dorylaion (Eskişehir, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Teimotheos to Theois Hosiois

Discoverylocation: Unknown. Type: Small limestone stele with triangular pediment and acroteria. Broken in the lower left corner; moulded below. The margins of the pediment are prominent. Dimensions: 44 × 16–18 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.3–1.9 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Eskişehir. Inv. No. A-202-67. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 15–16, no. 28 (with bibliography; pl. 6, fig. 28). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Τειμόθε|ος ὑπὲρ τ|ῶν ἰδίων | θεοῖς ὁσί|5οις εὐχ|ήν. Translation: Teimotheos, for the members of his family, to the holy gods, in fulfilment of thevow.

3.6.35

Dorylaion* (Eskişehir, Phrygia): DedicationtoZeusandHosios

Discoverylocation: The exact place of discovery is unknown. Type: Altar with moulded above and below. Dimensions: 102 × 36/45 × 35/39 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Eskişehir. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 569, no. 6; SEG 44, no. 1068; Ricl 1994, 174, no. 35 (with fig. 35). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: On the anterior side, relief crater. Text: Διὶ κὲ Ὁσίῳ.. |2 …Ν [ὑπὲρ] α|[ὐ]τῶν κὲ τῶν ἰδί[ων]. Translation: ToZeusandtotheJust…N,[for]themandthemembersof(his/her)family.

302 3.6.36

CATALOGUE

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votoofAureliusGaiustoHosios Dikeos

Discoverylocation: Found at Sultandere, near Eskişehir. Type: Marble stele with triangular pediment, upper part missing. The pediment is connected to the rest of the stele, within relief frame, as there is no demarcation line between the two areas. The acroteria are damaged. Dimensions: 78 × 52/43.5 × 50 cm. Letters: 3–3.5 cm. Lunate sigma. Currentlocation: Stele currently stored in the residential area of İller-Bankası in Eskişehir. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 570, no. 11; Akyürek Şahin 2004, 144–45, no. 6. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Right above the inscription, there is the image of a character in a quadriga. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) (relief) Γάειος Μενεσ|2τράτου κὲ Χαρί|των γαμβρὸς |4 σὺν συνβίῳ | Ἀφίᾳ κὲ σὺν τοῖ[ς |6 ἰ]δίοις Ὁσίῳ Δικέῳ ε[ὐχήν]. Translation:AureliusGaius,sonofMenestratos,andChariton,(his)brother-in-law,along withthespouse,Aphia,andtheirfamily,totheHoly(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.37

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtothegodApollo andhisangelsHosiosandDikeos

Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Bozan, between Eskișehir and Mihalıççık. Type: White marble altar with lower and upper mouldings. Dimensions: 105 × 50 × 40 cm. Letters: 2.5–4 cm. The text begins on the upper moulding and continues on the shaft. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Inv. No. A-96-82 Bibliography: Horsley and Luxford 2016, 157, no. 7a; R. Cline 2011, 67; Ricl 1992b, 95–96, no. 1 (with photograph at pl. 9, fig. 1). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: On the main face, a radiated bust of Helios represented frontally in the middle of the shaft, with four protomes and forelegs of horses represented in opposite directions. Text: [Θε]οῦ Ἀπόλωνος κα[ὶ] | [τῶν] ἀνγέλων αὐτοῦ Ὁσίῳ [κὲ Δ]ικέῳ Μάντριος, Φον|4ικός καὶ Ἀσκληπιός, | ὑποτακτικοὶ θεῶν, | ὑπὲρ συνοίκων εὐτ|υχῶς πρὸς εὐ[χήν]. Translation:Mantrios,PhoinikosandAsklepios,subjectsofthegods,(setupthismonument) ofthegodApolloandofhisangelstotheHoly(and)Just,fortheirentirehousewithgood fortune,infulfilmentofthevow. L5: Horsley and, Luxford (2016, 157, no. 7a) translate ὑποτακτικοὶ θεῶν as ‘obedient servants of the gods’.

3.6.38

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHeliosandHosios keDikaios

Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Bozan, between Eskișehir and Mihalıççık. Type: Grey-white marble altar with lower and upper mouldings.

CATALOGUE

303

Dimensions: 115 × 44 (moulding) / 37 (shaft) × 40 cm. Letters: 2.5–4 cm. The text begins on the upper moulding and continues on the shaft. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Inv. No. A-96-82. Bibliography: Ricl 1992b, 96–97, no. 2 (with photograph at pl. 9, fig. 2). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: On the main face, a strip of leaves below the moulding. Underneath a bucranium and a garland attached at each edge of the altar by the horns of rams’ heads. Text: Φίλλυ[ς] Ἀπολ[ωνίου] |2 Ἡλίῳ, Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δ[ικ]|αίῳ ὑπὲρ ἑαυτο|4ῦ κὲ τῶν ἰδίων πάν|τῶν κὲ τῆς κώμη|6ς | σωτηρίας | εὐχήν. Translation:Phillys,sonofApollonios,(setthisup)toHelios,totheHolyandJust,forhimself andforallthemembersofhisfamilyandforthesalvationofthevillage,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.39

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the area of Dorylaion. Type: White marble altar with a lower and upper mouldings and a gable pediment. Two palmetteshaped acroteria on the lower corners of the pediment. The third one, on the top, is missing. Dimensions: 46 × 25 (moulding) / 21.5 (shaft) × 4 cm. Letters: 1.5–2.5 cm. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Inv. No. A-83-81. Bibliography: Ricl 1992b, 97–98, no. 3 (with photograph at pl. 9, fig. 3). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Inside the pediment, a radiated male bust in relief. Text: Καρικὸς Δι|2ονυσίου ὑ|πὲρ ἑαυτοῦ |4 κὲ τῶν ἰδίων | πάντων Ὁσί|6ῳ κὲ Δικέῳ θίῳ εὐχήν. Translation:Karikos,sonofDionysios,(setthisup)forhimselfandforallthemembersof hisfamilytothegodHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.40

Dorylaion* (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosiosDikeos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the area of Dorylaion. Type: White limestone altar with two pilasters, on either side of the main face. Dimensions: 42 × 31 × 6 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Bibliography: Ricl 1992b, 98, no. 4 (with photograph at pl. 9, fig. 4). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: No representation visible. Text: [Ἄν?]νιος Ἀ|2[γ?]αμήδο|υ Ὁσίῳ Δι|κέῳ εὐχήν. Translation:Annios,sonofAgamedos,toHosiosDikeos,infulfilmentofthevow. R 1: Ricl 1992b: Also Νώνιος or Φάνιος possible. R 1–3: Ricl 1992b: Ἀ[κ?]αμήδου.

304 3.6.41

CATALOGUE

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): DedicationtoHosiosDikaios

Discovery location: Found in an area north of Eskișehir where there was a sanctuary of Hosios kai Dikaios. Type: Marble altar. Unpublished. Dimensions: 156 × 69 × 38 cm. Letters: 2.9–4 cm. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 569, no. 11. Date: 3rd century AD. Text: Dedication addressed to Ὅσιος Δίκαιος by an anonymous person.

3.6.42

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosiosDikaios

Discovery location: Found in an area north of Eskișehir where there was a sanctuary of Hosios kai Dikaios. Type: Marble altar. Unpublished. Dimensions: 155 × 79 × 42 cm. Letters: 2–3.4 cm. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 569, no. 12. Date: 3rd century AD (?). Text: Ex-voto addressed to Ὅσιος Δίκαιος by an anonymous person for his wife Iouliane, his children Markianos and Ladike and his brother Telesphoros.

3.6.43

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosiosDikaios

Discovery location: Found in an area north of Eskișehir where there was a sanctuary of Hosios kai Dikaios. Type: Marble altar with mouldings. Unpublished. Dimensions: 149 × 60 × 37 cm. Letters: 2.1–3.5 cm. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 570, no. 13. Date: After AD 212. Text: Ex-voto addressed to Ὅσιος Δίκαιος by Aurelius Diogenes, son of Diogenes, for his wife Domna and the children.

3.6.44

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosiosDikaios

Discovery location: Found in an area north of Eskișehir where there was a sanctuary of Hosios kai Dikaios. Type: Marble altar. Unpublished. Dimensions: 144 × 73 × 44 cm. Letters: 2.6–3.7 cm.

CATALOGUE

305

Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 570, no. 14. Date: After AD 212. Text: Ex-voto addressed to Ὅσιος Δίκαιος by Aurelius Papianos, son of Menandros.

3.6.45

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosiosDikaios

Discovery location: Found in an area north of Eskișehir where there was a sanctuary of Hosios kai Dikaios. Type: Marble altar. Unpublished. Dimensions: 119 × 60 × 36 cm. Letters: 2.4–3.6 cm. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 570, no. 15. Date: After AD 212. Representation: Relief of a wheel and six horse hoofs. Text: Ex-voto addressed to Ὅσιος Δίκαιος by Aurelius Alexandros, son of Alexandros, together with his wife and children.

3.6.46

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosiosDikaios

Discovery location: Found in an area north of Eskișehir where there was a sanctuary of Hosios kai Dikaios. Type: Marble altar with mouldings. Unpublished. Dimensions: 142 × 60 × 36 cm. Letters: 2.8–4.2 cm. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 570, no. 16. Date: After AD 212. Representation: Relief of a haloed horseman on the upper moulding. Text: Ex-voto addressed to Ὅσιος Δίκαιος by Aurelius Asklepiakos, son of Alexandros, and Asklepiakos, together with the wife and children.

3.6.47

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosiosDikaios

Discovery location: Found in an area north of Eskișehir where there was a sanctuary of Hosios kai Dikaios. Type: Marble altar with mouldings. Unpublished. Dimensions: 135 × 76 × 35 cm. Letters: 2.4–3.8 cm. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 570, no. 17. Date: After AD 212. Representation: Relief of a wreath on the upper moulding.

306

CATALOGUE

Text: Ex-voto addressed to Ὅσιος Δίκαιος by the archiereus Aelius Philippianus Stratonikos for himself, his wife and his household.

3.6.48

Dorylaion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosiosDikaios

Discovery location: Found in an area north of Eskișehir where there was a sanctuary of Hosios kai Dikaios. Type: Marble altar. Unpublished. Dimensions: 158 × 70 × 37 cm. Letters: 2.5–3.5 cm. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 570, no. 18. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Relief of a grape cluster (?) on the main side. Text: Ex-voto addressed to Ὅσιος Δίκαιος by Germanos, son of Euarestos, his wife, Zotike, and the children.

3.6.49

Hadrianopolis (Phrygia):DedicationofthecommunityinHadrianopolisaddressedtoHosioikaiDikaioi

Discoverylocation: Karaağıl (Hadrianopolis). Type: Limestone altar with moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: 114 × 34–43 × 36–42 cm. Letters: 2.5–4 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 44, no. 96 (with bibliography; pl. 15, fig. 96); LIMC V.1, 543, no. 12; MAMA VII, 132 (with pl. 8). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The relief is much damaged. On the front side, under the inscribed field, there two characters clad in short tunics. The one to the right holds sceptre. There is an eagle (?) between them. On the left side, a rosette is featured. Text: [Ὁ] δῆμ[ος] | ὁσίο[ις καὶ] | δικαί[οις] | τὸν [βωμό]ν, |5 ἐπιμεληθέντο[ς] | [Σ]υνμάχου | Μάνου ἱερέω[ς]. Translation: ThepeoplededicatedanaltartotheHolyandJustgods,thepriestSynmachos, sonofManos,tookcare(ofsettingitup).

3.6.50

Kadoi* (Gediz, Phrygia): DedicationtoHosioskeDikaios

Discoverylocation: Discovery place unknown, somewhere in the region of Gediz (Kadoi). Type: Marble altar with moulded upper and lower side, with reliefs on three sides and palmette-shaped acroteria. Dimensions: 130 × 50/60 × 43/45 cm. Letters: 2–3 cm. Lunate sigma. The inscription is set on three registers: the upper one, between the acroteria, the median one, on the upper moulding, and the lower one, just under the profile, on the body of the stele. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Inv. No. 9522.

CATALOGUE

307

Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 573, no. 36; Akyürek Şahin 2004, 142–43, no. 5. Date: AD 137/138 (= 222 Sullan era) or AD 192. Representation: On the main side, there are two figures: female figure clad in polos and male character with semicircular aureole above the head, decorated with sunrays. On the right side of the altar, grape-cluster with vine leaf on top. On left side, a bucranium is depicted. Text: Ἔτους σκβ΄, μη(νὸς) αι΄ | Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δικαίῳ. Translation:Intheyear222,inthemonthof…,ontheeleventhday.TotheHolyandJust.

3.6.51

Kotiaeion (Kütahya, Phrygia): The votive inscription of Gorgias BebrykostoHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Kotiaeion (Kütahya), in the ancient Armenian cemetery. Type: Moulded altar, with acroteria. Dimensions: Unknown. Letters: Unknown size. The inscription starts on the upper moulding and it ends under the bust. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 23, no. 46 (with bibliography; pl. 9, fig. 46). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: On the main side, the bust of solar goddess, with crown of seven rays. Text: Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ | Γοργίας Βέβρυκος | ἐπανέ[στησεν....] | ΕΠ..... Translation: Gorgias,sonofBebryx,set(this)uptotheHolyandJust[--].

3.6.52

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): DedicationtoHosiosDikaios

Discoverylocation: Discovered near the ancient Kotiaion (at Muratlar Köyü/Domaniç). Type: Marble altar, with moulded upper and lower side, presenting reliefs on three of its sides. Dimensions: 85 × 36 × 27 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Inv. No. 8532. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 571, no. 21; Akyürek Şahin 2004, 138–42, no. 4; Lochman 2003, 201, no. 98. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The anterior side is structured on three registers. On the upper moulding, the text of the inscription is set. Above it, there are two palmette-shaped acroteria, which feature in the upper part, in central position, a bust of lunar divinity, most probably Mên, crescent on the rear, on shoulder level. In the lower register, two identical, beardless characters are depicted, wearing folded clothes, depicting Hosios and Dikaios. On the left side, Apollo as rider-god is depicted; on the right side, there is a bust of radiate Helios. Text: (front,onthemoulding) Ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ. Ὁσίω Δικαί[ῳ] Κοροσοκωμῆται | εὐχῆς χάριν ἀνέστησα[ν]. (front,ontopofthebusts) Ὅσιος Δίκαιος. (leftlateral) Ἀπόλλων. (rightlateral)Ἥλιος. Translation: Withgoodfortune.TotheHoly(and)Just,forthesakeofthevow(made),the villagersofKorosossetup(thealtar)./TheHoly(and)Just./Apollo./Helios.

308 3.6.53

CATALOGUE

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü, 22 km south-west from Kotiaeion (Kütahya). Type: White limestone stele, with only the upper side surviving. It features triangular pediment, with palmette-shaped acroteria on the corners and on top. The pediment decorated with denticles on the inside. Within the tympanum, the figure of solar god, head surrounded by triangular rays, framed within relief aureole. Under the pediment, framed by two Corinthian colonettes, Hosios and Dikaios, featured with long hair, straight-folded tunics, and himation on top. The figures are identical, Hosios (the one to the right) holding sceptre, and Dikaios probably scales. Dimensions: 24 × 24 × 3 cm. Letters: 1 cm. The inscription is set on the moulding below the pediment. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Merkelbach 1993, 293 (with photograph at fig. 4); Ricl 1991, 24, no. 47 (with bibliography; pl. 9, fig. 47); 1990, 163, no. 1 (pl. 1). Date: 3rd century AD. Text: Ὁσίῳ Δικέῳ εὐχήν. Translation: TotheHoly(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.54

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto of an association to Hosios (kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele broken into four pieces and reconstituted, with triangular pediment and acroteria (the upper one is missing). Dimensions: 49 × 34.5 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 286–87, no. II 482; Merkelbach 1993, 294 (with photograph at fig. 5); Ricl 1991, 24–25, no. 48 (with bibliography; pl. 10, fig. 48); LIMC V.1, 542, no. 7; Ricl 1990, 158, n. 5; Sheppard 1980–81, 87–89, no. 8 (pl. I). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Within the tympanum, as in the case of the previous monument, solar god, probably Helios, with radiate head, angular rays framed within a relief aureole. The character is longhaired. Under the pediment, between two Doric colonettes, Hosios and Dikaios, featured identically, with long chiton and himation on top. Hosios on right side, holding sceptre as high as him, and Dikaios on left side, with scales in the right hand. Text: Φιλανγέλων συνβί|ωσις Ὁσίῳ Δικέῳ εὐ|χήν. Translation: Theassociationoffriendsoftheangelsinfulfilmentofthevow,totheHolyand theJust.

3.6.55

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, left corner surviving. The triangular pediment features palmetteshaped acroteria.

CATALOGUE

309

Dimensions: 185 × 15 × 3 cm. Letters: 1 cm. The inscription is set on the lower moulding of the pediment. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 286, no. II 480; Ricl 1991, 25, no. 49 (with bibliography; pl. 10, fig. 49); 1990, 164, no. 2 (pl. I). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: On the tympanum, there is the bust of a beardless solar divinity, with radiate crown with angular rays, framed within halo-shaped circle. He seems to be holding both hands to the chest. Inside the stele per se, one can still set apart the young figure of a character with curly hair, also beardless. Next to him, on the left side, a colonette supporting the pediment. Text: Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δικέῳ εὐχ[ήν]. Translation: TotheHolyandtheJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.56

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(ke)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, with triangular pediment and palmette-shaped acroteria. Upper right corner is surviving. Dimensions: 24 × 13.5 × 35 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 286, no. II 481; Ricl 1991, 25, no. 50 (with bibliography; pl. 10, fig. 50); 1990, 164, no. 3 (pl. I). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: On the stele there is the figure of a beardless, curly-haired male. Next to him, on the right side, the traces of a colonette head which probably support the pediment. In the central part of the tympanum, one can still see the traces of solar crown, such as the one described in the previous example. Text: [Ὁσίῳ (κὲ) Δικέ]ῳ εὐχήν. Translation: [TotheHoly(and)Jus]t,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.57

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Exvotoof[…]ianosandMenela[os] toHosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, right lower corner surviving. Dimensions: 175 × 185 × 4 cm. Letters: 1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 286, no. II 478; Ricl 1991, 26, no. 51 (with bibliography; pl. 10, fig. 51); 1990, 164–65, no. 4 (pl. I). Date: 3rd century AD.

310

CATALOGUE

Representation: Inside the stele, only the lower part of a barefoot male is still visible; he is featured clad in calf-length tunic. In the left hand, he holds an object which appears to be the lower side of a sceptre. Next to him, the lower side of the trunk and pedestal of a column which most probably supported the pediment. Text: [---]ιανὸς κὲ Μενέλα|[ος ὑπὲρ τ]ῶν ἰδ{ιδ}ίων πάντ|[ων Ὁσί]ῳ κὲ Δικέῳ εὐχήν. Translation: [---]ianosandMenelaosforallthememberstheirfamily,totheHolyandJust, infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.58

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-votoofDionysostoHosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, lower left corner surviving. Dimensions: 165 × 11 × 15 cm. Letters: 0.5–1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 286, no. II 470; Ricl 1991, 26, no. 52 (with bibliography; pl. 10, fig. 52); 1990, 165, no. 5 (pl. I). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Lower side of a barefoot male holding in the left hand scales. He is clad in calf-length chiton and folded himation on top. To his left, a colonette is featured, with pedestal with three rings and the trunk probably twisted. Text: Διονύσι[(ο)ς ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων] | Ὁσί[ῳ (κὲ) Δικέῳ εὐχήν]. Translation: Dionysios,forhisfamily,totheHoly(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.59

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Inscription mentioning a religious association

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, right lower corner surviving. Dimensions: 18 × 16 × 45 cm. Letters: 1.2–1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 26, no. 53 (with bibliography; pl. 10, fig. 53); 1990, 165, no. 6 (pl. II). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Representation of bare feet, of the lower margin of a sceptre, and of a colonette pedestal. Text: [Φιλανγέλων ν]εωτέρων | [συνβίωσ]ις. Translation: Theassociationofyoungfriendsofangels.

3.6.60

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):DedicationofMene[laos]

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele; only the left side surviving.

CATALOGUE

311

Dimensions: 14 × 13 × 2 cm. Letters: 0.7–1.2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 27, no. 54 (with bibliography; pl. 11, fig. 54); 1990, 165–66, no. 7 (pl. II). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Lower side of the himation of a barefoot character, with a column pedestal to his left. Text: Μενέ[λαος ὑπὲρ τῶ]|ν αὐτ[οῦ---]|υ κὲ ὑπ[ὲρ---]. Translation: Menelaos,forhis[--]andfor[--].

3.6.61

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Fragmentofstele(?)

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Fragment of white limestone stele, damaged on all sides. Dimensions: 65 × 55 × 3 cm. Letters: 1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 27, no. 55 (with bibliography; pl. 11, fig. 55); 1990, 166, no. 8 (pl. II). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The pedestal of a colonette. Text: Φι[λανγέλων νεωτέρων συνβίωςις (?)]. Translation: Theassociationofyoungfriendsofangels(?).

3.6.62

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-votoofPapastoHosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, upper part destroyed. Dimensions: 22 × 23 × 3 cm. Letters: 1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 286, no. II 474; Merkelbach 1993, 294 (with photograph at fig. 6); Ricl 1991, 27, no. 56 (with bibliography; pl. 11, fig. 56); 1990, 167, no. 9 (pl. III). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: The central-lower part of a stele where the central field is occupied by two characters holding hands, framed between two colonettes. They are featured barefoot, clad in chitons, with himations on top. They seem to have a belt around the waist. Their heads are missing, but there are traces of locks above the shoulders. The character on the viewer’s left holds scales, while the one to the right holds ceptre in the left hand. Text: Παπας Παπία ὑπὲ|ρ τῶν ἀνθρπων | Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δικέὐχήν. Translation: Papas,sonofPapias,fortheothers,totheHolyandJustinfulfilmentofthevow (made).

312 3.6.63

CATALOGUE

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-votoofPapiasandofDiogeniato Hosios(ke)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, broken into two fragments. Dimensions: (Fragm. A) 19 × 135 × 3–4 cm; (Fragm. B) 195 × 12 × 3 cm. Letters: 0.6–1 cm (Fragm. A); 1 cm (Fragm. B). Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 286, no. II 473; Ricl 1991, 28, no. 57 (with bibliography; pl. 11, fig. 57); 1990, 167–68, no. 10 (pl. III). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Lower side of a barefoot character, with calf-length tunic, holding sceptre in the left hand. Text: Παπίας καὶ Διογένι|α ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων πά|ντων Ὁσίῳ Δικέῳ εὐχήν. Translation: PapiasandDiogenia,totheHoly(and)Just,fortheirfamily,infulfilmentof thevow.

3.6.64

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Zosimos to Hosios (kai) Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, lower side surviving. Dimensions: 15 × 185 × 43 cm. Letters: 1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 287, no. II 484; Ricl 1991, 28, no. 58 (with bibliography; pl. 12, fig. 58); 1990, 168, no. 11 (pl. III). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The central-lower corner of a stele, on which two barefoot characters holding hands are visible. They wear identical clothes; the tunic falls below the knee. In the right part, the pedestal of a colonette. Text: [Ζώσι]μος ὑπὲρ τέκνω|[ν Ὁσ]ίῳ Δικέῳ εὐχήν. Translation: Zosimos,totheHoly(and)Justforhischildren,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.65

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Aurelius Menemachos to HosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, destroyed in the upper part. Dimensions: 22.5 × 18 × 35 cm. Letters: 1–1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 287, no. II 490; Ricl 1991, 28–29, no. 59 (with bibliography; pl. 12, fig. 59); 1990, 168, no. 12 (pl. III).

CATALOGUE

313

Date: 3rd century AD (after 212). Representation: Central-lower side of stele with two barefoot characters in central position framed by two colonettes, with chiton and probably himation, too. They hold hands. The one in the right part holds a sceptre, while the one on the left, scales. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Μενέμαχος Με|νάνδρου ὑπὲρ τῶ | εἰδίων πάντω Ὁσί|ῳ κὲ Δικέῳ εὐχή. Translation: AureliusMenemachos,sonofMenandros,totheHolyandJust,forallthemembersofhisfamily,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.66

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):DedicationtoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, with only the lower side surviving. Dimensions: 145 × 215 × 2 cm. Letters: 0.7–1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Horsley and Luxford 2016, 158, no. 7b; Ricl 1991, 29, no. 60 (with bibliography; pl. 12, fig. 60); 1990, 169, no. 13 (pl. IV). Date: 3rd century AD (after 212). Representation: Lower side of two barefoot characters, clad in long chiton. The one to the right probably holds sceptre. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ἰστέφανος κὲ | Ἀμμιὰς ὑπὲρ τέ|κνου Ἀλεξάν[δ]|ρου Ὁσίῳ Δικέ[ῳ]. Translation: AureliusIstephanosandAmmias,forthechildAlexandros,totheHoly(and) Just.

3.6.67

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-votoofAureliusZotikostoHosios (kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, with only the lower side surviving. Dimensions: 22 × 20 × 3 cm. Letters: 1–1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 289, no. II 512; Ricl 1991, 29, no. 61 (with bibliography; pl. 12, fig. 61); 1990, 169–70, no. 14 (pl. IV). Date: 3rd century AD (after 212). Representation: The central-lower corner of a stele which depicts two barefoot characters holding hands, clad in long tunics. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ζωτικὸς | β΄ ὑπὲρ τέκνω | [κ]ὲ τῆς οἰκείας κὲ | Ἀλυμας οἱ ἀδ|5ε(λ)φοὶ Ὁσίῳ Δι|κέῳ εὐχήν. Translation: AureliusZotikos,sonofZotikos,forthechildrenandthehousehold,andAlymas, thebrothers,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

314 3.6.68

CATALOGUE

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Aurelius Zotikos and AlexandrostoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele broken into two fragments. Dimensions: (Fragm. A) 8 × 115 × 3.5 cm; (Fragm. B) 15 × 10 × 3 cm. Letters: 1–1.5 cm (Fragm. A); 1–1.7 cm. (Fragm. B). Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 509; Ricl 1991, 30, no. 62 (with bibliography; pl. 12, fig. 62); 1990, 170, no. 15 (pl. IV). Date: 3rd century AD (after 212). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ζωτικὸς κὲ | Ἀλέξανδρος | [ὑ]πὲρ ἑαυτῶν κὲ | [τῶν ἰδί]ων πά|5[ντῶν Ὁσ]ίῳ Δι|[κέῳ εὐχ]ήν. Translation: AureliusZotikosandAlexandrosforthemselvesandallthemembersoftheir families,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.69

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Aurelius(?) Alymas to Hosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Fragment of white limestone stele, destroyed in the upper and left part. Dimensions: 20 × 19 × 35 cm. Letters: 1–1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 289, no. II 513; Ricl 1991, 30, no. 63 (with bibliography; pl. 13, fig. 63); 1990, 171, no. 16 (pl. IV). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The feet of two characters. Text: [Αὐρ(ήλιος)?] Ἀλυμας | [Ζωτι]κοῦ ὑπὲρ | [τῶν ἰ]δίων πά|[ντων] Ὁσίῳ Δι|5[κέῳ] εὐχήν. Translation: Aurelius(?)Alymas,sonofZotikos,fortheirfamilies,totheHoly(and)Just,in fulfilmentofthevow. L1: Lochman 2003, 289, no. II 513: Αὐρ. Γαλυμας.

3.6.70

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-votoofKyrilatoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, with only the lower side surviving. Dimensions: 145 × 16 × 3 cm. Letters: 0.7–1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya.

CATALOGUE

315

Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 499; Ricl 1991, 31, no. 64 (with bibliography; pl. 13, fig. 64); 1990, 171, no. 17 (pl. V). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The feet and the bottoms of the tunics belonging to two characters. Text: Κύριλα ὑπὲρ ἀ[ν]|εψιῶν Ὁσίῳ Δικέ[ῳ] | εὐχήν. Translation: Kyrila,forhercousins,totheHoly(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.71

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-votoofAurelius(?)Menandrosand Aurelius(?)Parmennes

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, right lower corner surviving. Dimensions: 12 × 125 × 3 cm. Letters: 1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 31, no. 65 (with bibliography; pl. 13, fig. 65); 1990, 171–72, no. 18 (pl. V). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Bare feet and rest of tunic. To the right, probably rest of sceptre. Text: [Αὐρ(έλιος?) Μένα]νδρος κὲ | [Αὐρ(έλιος?) Πα]ρμέννη|[ς εὐχὴν (?) π]ρὸς ὠνή[ν]. Translation: Aurelius(?)MenandrosandAurelius(?)Parmennes,infulfilmentofthevow,for thepurchase.

3.6.72

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Timotheos to Hosios ke Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: Private collection. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 497; Ricl 1991, 31–32, no. 66 (with bibliography); 1990, 158, no. 5; LIMC V.1, 542–43, no. 8; LIMC V.2, 374, no. 8. Date: 3rd century AD. Text: Τιμόθεος Ὁ|σίῳ κὲ Δικέῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: Timotheos,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.73

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Aurelius Menophilos to Hosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Oval plaque of white limestone, broken into two fragments. Dimensions: (Fragm. A) 17 × 95 × 35 cm; (Fragm. B) 17 × 125 × 3 cm. Letters: 1–1.5 cm (Fragm. A); 1–1.2 cm (Fragm. B).

316

CATALOGUE

Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 500; Ricl 1991, 32, no. 67 (with bibliography; pl. 13, fig. 67); 1990, 172, no. 19 (pl. V). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Feet and tunic fragments. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Μη[ν]όφιλος | [ὑ]πὲρ τῶν τέκνων | Ὁσίῳ Δικέῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: AureliusMenophilos,forthechildren,totheHoly(and)Just,infulfilmentof thevow.

3.6.74

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Fragmentofdedication

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Oval plaque of white limestone. Dimensions: 14 × 125 × 2 cm. Letters: 1.1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 289, no. II 514; Ricl 1991, 32–33, no. 68 (with bibliography; pl. 13, fig. 68); 1990, 172–73, no. 20 (pl. VI). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Fragment of representation with two characters. However, only the lower side of a barefoot character, clad in long tunic, is surviving. Text: [-- Ἀλ]υμα? |2 [---]ΙΣΕ | [----]ΤΗ |4 [Ὁσίῳ?] κὲ | [Δικέῳ] Translation: [--]Alyma(?)[---]to[theHoly(?)]and[Just].

3.6.75

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Aurelia(?) Eumeneia to HosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone fragment, damaged on every side. Dimensions: 12 × 7 × 2 cm. Letters: 0.5–1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 504; Ricl 1991, 33, no. 69 (with bibliography; pl. 14, fig. 69); 1990, 173, no. 21 (pl. VI). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic fragment. Text: [Αὐρ(ηλία)?] Εὐμένε[ια] | [τοῦ δεῖνος?] ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδ[ίων] | [Ὁσίῳ (κὲ) Δικέ]ῳ εὐχήν. Translation: Aurelia(?)Eumeneia,daughterof [--],forherfamily,totheHoly(and)Just,in fulfilmentofthevow. L1–2: Lochman 2003, 288, no. II, 504: Αὐ. Μενμένε[μαχος ----].

CATALOGUE

3.6.76

317

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-votoofMenophilostoHosios(kai) Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Fragment of a white limestone plaque, damaged on every side. Dimensions: 12 × 13 × 3 cm. Letters: 1–1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 501; Ricl 1991, 33, no. 70 (with bibliography; pl. 14, fig. 70); 1990, 173, no. 22 (pl. VI). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic fragment. Text: [---]ΛΥΚ[---] | [ὑπ]ὲρ Μηνο[φίλου?] | Ὁσίῳ Δικ[έῳ εὐ]|χήν. Translation:[---]forMenophilos(?),totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.77

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Fragment of white limestone stele, damaged on every side. Dimensions: 14 × 12 × 25 cm. Letters: 1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 286, no. II 471; Ricl 1991, 33–34, no. 71 (with bibliography; pl. 14, fig. 71); 1990, 174–75, no. 23 (pl. VI). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Corner of the central part of stele that depicts two characters. Only the lower margins of the tunics just above the ankles are still visible; they were also wearing himation. The characters seem to wear small boots. Text: [---]ς ὑπὲρ τῶν [ἰδίων] | [Ὁσ]ίῳ εὐχήν. Translation: [---]s,forthefamily,totheHoly,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.78

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-votoof[…]nthosforHosios(kai) Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Fragment of white limestone stele. Dimensions: 11 × 15 × 3 cm. Letters: 0.5–1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 286, no. II 472; Ricl 1991, 34, no. 72 (with bibliography; pl. 14, fig. 72); 1990, 175, no. 24 (pl. VI). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The corner of the middle part of a stele that depicts two characters with long himations.

318

CATALOGUE

Text: […]νθος ὑπὲρ τ[ῶν ἰδί]|ων (τέκνων) Ὁσίῳ Δικέῳ ε[ὐχ-]| {τέκνων} ή[ν]. Translation: […]nthos,forhischildren,totheHoly(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.79

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Fragmentofex-voto

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Fragmentary stele of white limestone, with triangular pediment. Dimensions: 15 × 13 × 2 cm. Letters: 1.2–1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 287, no. II 489; Ricl 1991, 34, no. 73 (with bibliography; pl. 14, fig. 73); 1990, 175, no. 25 (pl. VII). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: On the tympanum, discus sectioned into four parts through a cross-shaped symbol. Below the pediment, on the right side, a young, beardless character, with short and curly hair. Text: εὐ|χή Translation: Avow.

3.6.80

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Fragmentary stele of white limestone, damaged on every side. Dimensions: 10 × 17 × 25 cm. Letters: 0.5–0.7 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 287, no. II 485; Ricl 1991, 34–35, no. 74 (with bibliography; pl. 14, fig. 74); 1990, 175–76, no. 26 (pl. VII). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The tunics and feet of two barefoot characters. Text: [---]ς ὑπὲρ τῶν [ἰδίων] | [Ὁσί]ῳ κὲ Δικέῳ εὐ[χήν]. Translation: [---]s,forthefamily,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.81

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): DedicationofMeno[philos]

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Fragment of white limestone stele. Dimensions: 9 × 11 × 32 cm. Letters: 1–1.2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 286, no. II 479; Ricl 1991, 35, no. 75 (with bibliography; pl. 14, fig. 75); 1990, 176, no. 27 (pl. VII). Date: 3rd century AD.

CATALOGUE

319

Representation: Aniconic fragment. Text: [---] κὲ Μηνό[φιλος --] | [ὑπὲρ τῆ]ς οἰκίας [---]. Translation: [---]andMenophilos[--]forthehousehold[---].

3.6.82

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Aurelius P[---] to Hosios (kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele; only the lower left corner surviving. Dimensions: 13 × 7 × 35 cm. Letters: 1–1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 35, no. 76 (with bibliography; pl. 14, fig. 76); 1990, 176, no. 28 (pl. VII). Date: 3rd century AD (after 212). Representation: Aniconic fragment. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Π[---] | [Ζ]ωτικ[οῦ] | [ἀ]νέ[θηκεν? ὑπὲ]|[ρ τ]ῶν [ἰδίων? Ὁσίῳ Δ]|5[ι]κέῳ [εὐχήν?]. Translation: AureliusP[---],sonofZotikos,dedicated?(this)forhisfamily(?)totheHoly (and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow(?).

3.6.83

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosioskaiDikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Fragmentary stele of white limestone; only the lower side surviving. Dimensions: 18 × 20 × 3 cm. Letters: 1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 505; Ricl 1991, 35, no. 77 (with bibliography; pl. 14, fig. 77); 1990, 176, no. 29 (pl. VII). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic fragment. Text: [---] ὑπὲρ τ[ῶν] | [ὑπ]αρχόντων Ὁ[σί]|[ῳ] καὶ Δικέῳ εὐήν. Translation: [---]fortheassets,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.84

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Fragment

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: White limestone stele, upper part surviving. Dimensions: 22.5 × 24 × 5.5 cm. Letters: 1–1.2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya.

320

CATALOGUE

Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 3, no. 78 (with bibliography; pl. 15, fig. 78); 1990, 177, no. 30 (pl. VII). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Inside the circular pediment with acroteria, the damaged figure of a character featured as longhaired bust. Below the pediment, in central position, framed by two colonettes with ivy clusters, a young, beardless character, with middle parted and combed back hair. Text: Ὡρέας Λυκώτου. Translation: Horeas,sonofLykotos.

3.6.85

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedbyAntipastoHosios (kai)Dikaios

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Marble stele with three palmette-shaped acroteria and semicircular pediment. Dimensions: Unknown. Letters: Unknown size. The inscription is set on the lower margin of the stele. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Inv. No. 9526. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 569, no. 7; Lochman 2003, 287, no. II 493; Mitchell 1993 II, 26–27, fig. 14; SEG 43, no. 939; BÉ 1995, 568; Drew-Bear, Thomas and Yıldızturan 1999, 326, no. 522 (with fig.). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: In the central part of the stele, in a recessed vaulted panel, the beardless figures of Hosios and Dikaios, with long and curly hair, down to the shoulders. They are featured bare foot, clad in chiton and himation, and holding hands, flanked by supported pilasters and column heads. Dikaios holds in the right hand hand, while Hosios a long object, probably a sceptre. Text: [Ἀ]ντιπᾶς ὑπὲρ τῶν εἰδί|2[ω]ν Ὁσίῳ Δικαίῳ εὐχήν. Translation: Antipasforhisfamily,totheHoly(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.86

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto dedicated by Asklepides to HosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Small stele of marble with pediment, broken into two parts. Dimensions: 33 × 24 × 3 cm. Letters: 1–1.5 cm. Lunate sigma. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Inv. No. 5832. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 569, no. 8; Akyürek Şahin 2004, 136–37, no. 1; Lochman 2003, 287, no. II 492. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Hosios and Dikaios are depicted flanked by two pilasters, clad as usually in chiton and himation. Dikaios holds scales in the right hand, while Hosios a long object, probably a sceptre.

CATALOGUE

321

Text: Ἀσκληπίδης Δι|2ονυσίου Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δικέ|ῳ εὐχήν. Translation: Asklepides,sonofDionysios,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow. L1: Lochman 2003, 287, no. II 492: Ἀσκληπιάδης.

3.6.87

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto dedicated by Aurelius ArchelaostoHosioskeDikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Small stele of white marble, with lateral acroteria, the one on top of the pediment destroyed. Lower side of the stele is missing. Dimensions: 28 × 27 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.2–1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Inv. No. 5833. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 569, no. 9; Akyürek Şahin 2004, 137, no. 2. Date: After AD 212. Representation: Hosios and Dikaios – framed by two pilasters – are featured as usually: one of them holds scales, while the other probably a sceptre. In the central area of the pediment, an eagle sitting on top of a dead hare is featured. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ἀρχέλαος Διον|2[υσίου Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δικέῳ εὐχήν]. Translation: Aurelius Archelaos, son of Dionysios, to the Holy and Just, in fulfilment of thevow.

3.6.88

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedbyAureliaPergamis toHosiosDikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Small circular stele, of white marble. Broken in the middle part. Only a small portion of the upper left part is missing. Dimensions: 33 × 25 (diameter) × 3.5 cm. Letters: 1 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Inv. No. 5832. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 569, no. 10; Akyürek Şahin 2004, 138, no. 3; Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 506. Date: After AD 212. Representation: Inside the circular pediment, within a frame with relief margins. Text: Αὐρ(ηλία) Περγαμ|ὶς ὑπὲρ τῶν | παιδίων | Ὁσίῳ Δικ|5έῳ εὐχήν. Translation: AureliaPergamis,forthechildren,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.89

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Two fragments belonging to a marble stele.

322

CATALOGUE

Dimensions: 10.5 × 27.5 × 4 cm. Letters: 1.4 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 576, no. 46; Lochman 2003, 286, no. II 475; SEG 53, no. 1482. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: In the lower area of the stele there are still traces of the relief that represents two characters (their feet), as well as the pilaster to the right. Text: [Ζ]ωτικὸς Ὀνησίμου Ὁσ|[ίῳ] Δικέῳ εὐχήν. Translation:Zotikos,sonofOnesimos,totheHoly(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.90

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-voto

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Two fragments belonging to a marble stele. Dimensions: 12 × 29 × 3.5 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 576, no. 47; Lochman 2003, 287, no. II 486; SEG 53, no. 1486. Date: After AD 212. Representation: In the lower area of the stele there are still traces of the relief that represents two characters, as well as the pilaster to the right. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ἀμμιανὸς κὲ Α. Ἰουλι|ανὸς κὲ Ἀλέξανδρος, οἱ Ἐπιτυνχάνου. Translation: AureliusAmmianusandA(urelius?)IulianusandAlexandros,sonsofEpitynchanos.

3.6.91

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(ke)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Triangular fragment of lower side of marble stele. Dimensions: 20 × 30 × 4.5 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 576, no. 48; Lochman 2003, 287, no. II 487; SEG 53, no. 1487. Date: After AD 212. Representation: There are still traces of the relief that represents two characters, as well as the left pilaster. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Διογένες Λαμυ[ρίδ?]|ου ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων πά[ντ]|ων Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δικέ|ῳ εὐχήν. Translation:AureliusDiogenes,sonofLamyris,forallthemembersofhisfamily,totheHoly andJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.92

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(ke)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Two fragments of the lower side of a marble stele.

CATALOGUE

323

Dimensions: 15.5 × 29.5 × 4 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 576, no. 49; Lochman 2003, 287, no. II 488; SEG 53, no. 1496. Date: After AD 212. Representation: There are still traces of the relief that represents two characters, as well as the right pilaster. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Γαλυμας Διογέ|νου ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδίων πάντων Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δικέ|ῳ εὐχήν. Translation:AureliusGalymas,sonofDiogenes,forallthemembersofhisfamily,tothe HolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.93

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Marble stele damaged in the upper part. Dimensions: 22 × 23.8 × 3.5 cm. Letters: 1.4 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 576, no. 50; Lochman 2003, 287, no. II 491; SEG 53, no. 1488. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: There still exist the central and lower parts of the relief depicting Hosios and Dikaios in their usual attire, framed by two pilasters. The heads are missing. Text: Ὑάκινθος Παπ[ί]α Ὁσί|ῳ καὶ Δικέῳ εὐχή[ν]. Translation:Hyakinthos,sonofPapias,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.94

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Two fragments of circular stele. Dimensions: 17.2 × 19.2 × 2.5 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 576, no. 51; Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 502; SEG 53, no. 1490. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Traces of a figure on left side, probably belonging to Dikaios. Text: [Μηνο]φιλιανὸ[ς] | [Μ]ηνοφίλου ὑ|πὲρ τῶν εἰδ[ί]|ων πάντων | Ὁσίῳ Δικέῳ | εὐχήν. Translation:Menophilianos,sonofMenophilos,forallthemembersofhisfamily,totheHoly (and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.95

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Two fragments of circular stone stele. Dimensions: 12 × 19.5 × 1.2 cm.

324

CATALOGUE

Letters: 1.2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 577, no. 52; Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 503; SEG 53, no. 1491. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: The feet of the divine figure to the left (Dikaios) are still visible. Text: [----]ος β΄ Ἐπιτυνχάνου ὑπ[ὲρ | τῶν τέκ]νων Ὁσίῳ Δικέῳ εὐχ[ήν]. Translation:[----]os,sonof…,grandsonofEpitynchanos,forthechildren,totheHoly(and) Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.96

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Fragment of circular stele. Dimensions: 21 × 16 × 3.6 cm. Letters: 1.9 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 577, no. 53; Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 507; SEG 53, no. 1494. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: There are still traces of two divine figures, most probably Hosios and Dikaios. Text: [----]νου | [---]. Translation:[----of--]nos|[---].

3.6.97

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Two fragments belonging to the lower part of circular stele. Dimensions: 22.5 × 26.5 × 3.5 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 577, no. 54; Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 506; SEG 53, no. 1497. Date: After AD 212. Representation: There are still traces of two divine figures, most probably Hosios and Dikaios. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ζωτικὸς | Ἀλεξάνδου | ὑπὲρ τῶν τέκ|νω(ν) κὲ τῶν ἐγγό|νων Ὁσίῳ Δικέ|ῳ εὐχήν. Translation: AureliusZotikos,sonofAlexandros,forthechildrenandgrandchildren,tothe Holy(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.98

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Two fragments belonging to the lower part of circular stele. Dimensions: 25.5 × 23.5 × 3 cm. Letters: 1.8 cm.

CATALOGUE

325

Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 577, no. 55; Lochman 2003, 288, no. II 506; SEG 53, no. 1498. Date: After AD 212. Representation: There are still traces of two divine figures, most probably Hosios and Dikaios. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Διογένης Ζωτ[ι]|κοῦ ὑπὲρ τῆς ἑαυ|τοῦ σωτηρίας κὲ τὴς | οἰκείας Ὁσίῳ Δι|κέῳ εὐχήν. Translation:AureliusDiogenes,sonofZotikos,forthesalvationofhimselfandhishousehold,totheHoly(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.99

Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikeos

Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Two fragments belonging to the lower part of circular stele. Dimensions: 22.5 × 24 × 27 cm. Letters: 1.6 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 577, no. 56; Lochman 2003, 289, no. II 511; SEG 53, no. 1499. Date: After AD 212. Representation: There are still traces of two divine representations, most probably Hosios and Dikaios. Text: Αὐρ(ήλιος) Ζωτικὸς | β΄ Ἀλεξάνδρου ὑπὲρ τῶν τέκ|νω(ν) κὲ τῶν ἐγ|γόνων Ὁσίῳ | Δικέῳ εὐχήν. Translation:AureliusZotikos,sonofZotikos,grandsonofAlexandros,forthechildrenand thegrandchildren,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.100 Kotiaeion (area of, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikeos Discoverylocation: The sanctuary of Yaylababa Köyü. Type: Fragment of the lower side of circular stele. Dimensions: 17.5 × 23 × 4 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Kütahya. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 577, no. 57; Lochman 2003, 289, no. II 515; SEG 53, no. 1495. Date: After AD 212. Representation: There are still traces of the relief that represents two characters, as well as the right pilaster. Text: Αὐρ(ηλία) Δόμνα Με|νάνδρου ὑπὲ|ρ τέκ|νω(ν) Ὁσίῳ | Δικέῳ εὐχήν. Translation: AureliaDomna,daughterofMenandros,forthechildren,totheHoly(and)Just, infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.101 Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia):Ex-votoofDemastoHosioskeDikeos Discoverylocation: Seyitgazi (Nakoleia). In a private house. Type: Sandstone monument with unknown shape.

326

CATALOGUE

Dimensions: 50 × 35 cm. Letters: 3.5 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 19, no. 36 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Δημᾶς Δημ|ᾶ ὑπὲρ τῶν | ἰδίων πάντω|ν σωτηρίας Ὁ|5σίῳ κὲ Δικέῳ ε|ὐχήν. Translation: Demas,sonofDemas,forthesalvationofhisentirefamily,totheHolyandJust, infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.102 Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia): Ex-voto of the community in ApokometontoHosios(kai)Dikeos Discoverylocation: Nakoleia (Seyitgazi). Discovered in a city house. Type: Moulded marble altar. Dimensions: 105 × 36–47 × 31–40.5 cm. Letters: 3 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Seyitgazi. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 19–20, no. 37 (with bibliography; pl. 7, fig. 37). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: In the centre, crown tied with ribbon. Text: [Ἀγ]αθῇ τύχῃ | [Ἀ]ποκωμητῶν, | [εὐ]ξάμενοι περὶ | τῶν ἰδίων πά|5ντῶν σωτηρ|ίας κὲ καρπῶν θ|ελεσ|πο|ρίας |10 Ὁσίῳ Δικέῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: Withgoodfortune.TheinhabitansofApokome,forthesalvationoftheirentire familiesandforthefecundityofharvests,totheHoly(and)Just,infulfilmentofthevow. L9: τελεcφορίαc.

3.6.103 Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoTheosHypsistos, toHosiosandtoZeus = 1.6.18 Discoverylocation: Nakoleia (Seyitgazi). Found in the city. Type: Marble altar, with moulded above and below. The altar is highly damaged on top and on the right part of the main side. Just a small portion of the upper moulding is surviving. On the rear face, the lower moulding is missing. Dimensions: 43 × 20.4–26.2 × 10–15 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Seyitgazi. Bibliography: Moga, Belousov and Grosu 2012, A1.170; Mitchell 1999, 142, no. 220; Ricl 1991, 20, no. 38 (with bibliography; pl. 8, fig. 38); SEG 28, no. 1182; NIS 41–42, no. 8 (pl. 13). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument.

CATALOGUE

327

Text: Δ[---]|ιος Λ[---]|ν θέου ἀ[νέθηκα?]|ν ὑπὲρ ἑαυτ[ῶν] |5 καὶ τῶν εἰδί[ω]|ν πάντων Θεῷ Ὑψίστ[ῳ] | καὶ Ὁσίῳ καὶ Διὶ | εὐχήν. Translation: D[---]iosL[---]ofthegod,dedicated(this)totheHighestGodandtotheHoly andtoZeus,forthemselvesandforallthemembersoftheirfamilies,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.104 Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Karikos to Hosios kai Dikaios Discoverylocation: Discovered in the surroundings of the city (at Şica-ed-Din) and subsequently moved to Eskişehir. Type: Grey marble altar, with moulded upper and lower side. On top, on the double moulding, there are two rows of acroteria, featured including in the middle part. The profiles are missing on the rear face. Upper moulding is damaged on the right face. Dimensions: 109 × 26–31.5 × 28–36 cm. Letters: 3.5 cm. Dishevelled writing. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 21, no. 39 (with bibliography; pl. 8, fig. 39). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: On the main side, in central position, relief bucranium under the inscribed field. On the right face, vine stock with grape clusters on each side, coming out of a crater. Text: Καρικὸς Φύ|βου Ὁσί[ῳ] | καὶ Δικ|αίῳ εὐ|5χὴν περὶ | τῶν ἰδίω|ν πάντων | σωτηρί|ας. Translation: Karikos,sonofPhybos,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow,forthe salvationofhisentirefamily.

3.6.105 Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia): Ex-votoofthePontanenoitoHosios keDikeos Discoverylocation: Monument found in the surroundings of the city, at Akın. Type: Monument of unknown shape and material. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 21, no. 40 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: On the anterior side, featured bucranium. Text: Ποντανη|[ν]οὶ Ὁσίῳ | [κὲ] Δικέῳ εὐ|χήν. Translation: ThePontanenoitotheHoly[and]Just,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.106 Nakoleia (area of, Phrygia): Ex-voto of Menogas and of Avia to HosioskeDikaios Discoverylocation: From a farm in Saraycık, near Seyitgazı. Type: Small stele with triangular pediment and acroteria; the upper acroterium was destroyed. Moulded upper and lower part. Dimensions: 44 × 16/23 × 17 cm. Letters: 2.8 cm.

328

CATALOGUE

Currentlocation: Museum of Seyitgazı. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 21–22, no. 41 (with bibliography; pl. 8, fig. 41); NIPh 39, no. 4 (tab. 11). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Μηνογᾶ|ς κ Ἀουία | Ὁσίῳ κὲ | Δικαίῳ |5 εὐχήν. Translation: MenogasandAviatotheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.107 Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia): Ex-vototoMeterTheonandHosios Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Güllü Dere, on the territory of the city, on the Türkmen Baba peak, where there is the sanctuary of the Mother of the Gods. Type: Moulded marble altar. Dimensions: 71 × 26/29 × 22/27 cm. Letters: 2.5–3 cm. The first row inscribed on the moulding. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 22, no. 42 (with bibliography); CCCA I, 188 (pl. XXXII). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: On the anterior side, god with radiate crown and goddess with polos and veil on her head. On the right face, a crown is featured. Text: [Μ]η[τρὶ Θε]ῶ[ν], | Ὁσίῳ εὐχὴ|ν πε[ρ]ὶ τέκ|νων. Translation: TotheMotheroftheGods(and)totheHoly,infulfilmentofthevow,forthe children.

3.6.108 Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia):Ex-vototoHosiosandZeusBronton Discoverylocation: Discovered in the village of Yukarı Söğüt, west from Nakoleia (Seyitgazı). Type: Stele with lower part moulded; damaged above. Dimensions: 101 × 46 × 15/19 cm. Letters: 3.5 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 22, no. 43 (with bibliography); NIPh 40, no. III.6 (pl. 12). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: In the lower part, a crown. Relief ribbons on the lateral margins. Text: [---] | Ὁσίῳ καὶ Διὶ | Βροντῶντι | εὐχήν. Translation: [---]totheHolyandtoZeusBronton,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.109 Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia):Ex-votoofthepriestHermastoHosios keDikaiosandApol(l)o Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Ayvalı, north-west from Seyitgazı. Type: Stele damaged above. Dimensions: 135 × 45 × 19 cm. Letters: 3 cm. Inscription carved between two relief ribbons. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 23, no. 44 (with bibliography; pl. 9, fig. 44); NIPh 39, no. 5 (pl. 11).

CATALOGUE

329

Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Relief traces of figure sitting on pedestal. Text: Ἱερεὺς | Ἑρμᾶς Δαμᾶ|δος σὺν ἀδελ|φοῖς περὶ Ζωτι|5κοῦ Ὁσίῳ κὲ Δ|ικ[αί]ῳ εὐχήν, κὲ Ἀπόλωνι | εὐχήν. Translation: ThepriestHermas,sonofDamas,alongwiththebrothersheadedbyZotikos, infulfilmentofthevowtotheHolyandJustandtoApol(l)o.

3.6.110 Nakoleia (Seyitgazı, Phrygia):Ex-votoofNeontoHosios Discoverylocation: Discovered at Doğan Çayır, north-east from Seyitgazi. Type: Lower side of stele. Dimensions: 30 × 23 × 10 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 23, no. 45 (with bibliography; pl. 9, fig. 45); NIPh 39, no. 5 (pl. 11). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Νέων Ὁσ|ίῳ εὐχ|ήν. Translation: Neon,totheHoly,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.111 Nakoleia (area of, Phrygia): DedicationtoHeliostheTitan,Hosios DikeosandTheios Discoverylocation: Built into the wall of a private house in the village of Yenikent, situated ca. 15 km from Seyitgazi (ancient Nakoleia). Type: Monument of unknown shape and size. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: SGO IV, 299, no. 16/35/01 (with bibliography); Ricl 2008, 571, no. 22; SEG 51, no. 1801. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: [Ἡε]λίῳ Τειτᾶνι κὲ Ο[--| --] ΑΕΙΔΑΙΙ Ὁσ|[ίῳ] Δικέῳ κὲ Θείῳ πα[ν]τ|οδυνάστῃ ἔνθ[α] |5 Πολυξενία, ὡς η[ὔξ]αντο κὲ ἐκέλεθσ[α]|ς, ἦκον κὲ νείκην χ[ρυ]σοστέφανον [---]|σαν εὐξάμενοί σε, μάκαρ, |10 περὶ ἑαυτῶν κὲ τεκέεσσιν, | οἷς ἱκέτας ἐπάκουε κὲ εἵλ[ε]|ος, οὐράνιον φῶς. Translation:ToHeliostheTitanand[----],totheHolyandJustandtotheDivine,theallruler,herecamePolyxenia,astheyhadprayedandasyouordered,and(erectedastatue)of Nike with a golden crown [---], praying to you, blessed one, for themselves and for their children;listentothesesuppliantsandshowthemmercy,heavenlylight!

3.6.112 Örencik (Phrygia): Ex-votoofDionysiostoHosioskaiDikaios Discoverylocation: Discovered at Örencik. Type: Marble altar with moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: Unknown. Letters: Unknown size.

330

CATALOGUE

Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 572, no. 27; Lehmer and Wörrle 2006, 75–76, no. 134. Date: AD 196. Representation: The iconographic representations are significantly damaged. On all sides, there are garlands fastened in the middle part with ribbons, inside which there are reliefs. On front side, two busts are depicted, most probably belonging to Hosios and Dikaios. On left side, radiate bust, while on the right one, an eagle (?). On the rear side, relief of a male character. Text: [Ὑ]πὲρ εὐ[χῆς Δι]|ονυσ[ίου] | --- (?) ---| Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ. | Ἔτους σπ΄, μη(νὸς) Γορπι|αίου ζκ΄. Translation:TofulfilavowofDionysios[---],totheHolyandJust.Intheyear280,inthe monthofGorpiaios,onthetwenty-seventhday.

3.6.113 Philomelion (Akşehir, Phrygia): DedicationofMenestratosaddressed tothegodsHosiosandDikaios Discoverylocation: Found at Akşehir (Philomelion). Type: White-bluish marble altar, damaged in the lateral parts. Dimensions: 100 × 40 × 47 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Stored at Akşehir, in the wall of Taş Medrese. Bibliography: SGO III, 391, no. 16/55/01; Ricl 1991, 43, no. 95 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd century AD (?). Representation: Below the inscription, there used to be a relief, but it was subsequently destroyed. Text: [Λητ]οϊδῃ Σώζοντι καὶ Ἡελίῳ βασιλῆι | [εὔξ]ατο βωμὸν ἀνὴρ υἱὸς Ἐπατόριγος | [ἱερ]ὸν ἀθανάτοισι Μενέστρατος, ὃν δι|[ασωθεὶς] θῆκε δικαιοτάτοις ἠδ᾽ ὁσίοισι ς. Translation: TothesonofLeto,(Apollo)theSaviourandtoHelios,theking,Menestratos, son of Epatorix, promised a sacred altar to the immortals; now that he was saved [from danger?]heerectedit,totheMostJustandtheHolygods.

3.6.114 Phrygia* (area of): Ex-votoofOnesiontoHosioskaiDikaios Discoverylocation: Place of discovery unknown, situated probably in Phrygia. Type: Stele with pediment and acroteria, destroyed in the lower part. Dimensions: 38 × 25 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Initially stored in the Museum of Izmir. Has since disappeared. There is still a copy of the inscribed field at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 572, no. 28; Petzl 1999, 100, no. 3; BÉ 2000, 596; SEG 49, no. 1852. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: On the circular tympanum, a female figure is featured, while on the body of the stele, longhaired rider facing right, holding palm branch. Text: Ὀνησίων Ὁσίω καὶ Δικαίῳ | εὐχὴν ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ | [---]. Translation: Onesion,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow,forhimself[---].

CATALOGUE

331

3.6.115 Phrygia* (area of): Ex-votoofAureliostoHosioskaiDikaios Discoverylocation: Place of discovery unknown, situated probably in Phrygia. Type: Rectangular altar of marble, with moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: 48 × 28 × 20 cm. Letters: 0.8–1.8 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Izmir. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 572, no. 29; Tanrıver 2003, 29. Date: After AD 212. Representation: Besides the sculpted phiale in the upper part of the main side, the monument reliefs on all sides. On the main side, images of Hosios and Dikaios, with short chiton and himation, holding hands. Dikaios holds the left arm on the shoulder of Hosios, who holds, close to the body, a short object. On the left face, rider with radiate head. The right side is decorated with crown and grape cluster, and the rear side depicts two bulls facing right. Text: (front) [Ἀγαθ]ῇ τύχῃ. (leftlateral) Αὐρήλιος | [....]κὸς Ὁσίῳ (rightlateral) καὶ Δικαίῳ (rear) εὐχ[ήν]. | Ἀλέξανδρος Δοκιμεὺς | ἐποίει. Translation: Withgoodfortune./Aurelius[…]kos,totheHoly/andtotheJust/infulfilment ofthevow.AlexandrosofDokimeionmade(thisaltar).

3.6.116 Tyriaion?* (Ilgın, Phrygia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosioskaiDikeos Discoverylocation: Place of discovery unknown, situated probably at Ilgın. Type: Limestone altar, with a moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: 92 × 36/45 × 39/45 cm. Letters: 2.5–3.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Konya, Inv. No. 1996.8.7. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 572, no. 30; RECAM IV, 24 (with figs. 35–36). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: On the main side, frontal representation of a radiate male, and beneath, the images of Hosios and Dikaios holding hands, with another altar aside. On left and right sides, there is a rider holding in the right hand an animal, and the left hand on top of an altar. Text: Κονισκουμενη|νῶν δῆμος | Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικέῳ εὐχ|[ήν]. Translation: ThepeopleofKoniskoumenetotheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.117 Tutağaç (N Phrygia):Ex-votoofGaiusandofApphiatoHosiosand toApollo Discoverylocation: Found in the ancient cemetery of Tutağaç, near the city of Mihalıççık. Type: Altar with moulded upper and lower side. Dimensions: Unknown. Letters: Unknown size. The first three lines are on the upper moulding. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 39, no. 85 (with bibliography and fig.); RECAM II, 44.

332

CATALOGUE

Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: On the upper moulding, the bust of a woman (?). On the anterior side, in central position, the image of Apollo holding the arm behind Marsyas’s nape, in the other hand holding the lyre. Beneath, featured crown. Text: Γάϊος κὲ Ἀπφία ὑ[π]|2ὲρ τῶν ἰδίων κὲ Λαού[α]|ς Ὁσίῳ, Ἀπόλλωνι, |4 θεοῖς ἐπηκόοις εὐ|χήν. Translation: GaiusandApphia,fortheirfamilies,andLavastotheHoly,toApollo,tothe listeninggods,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.6.118 Tutağaç (N Phrygia): Ex-votoofHosioskaiDikeos Discoverylocation: Found, as the previous one, in the cemetery of Tutağaç. Type: Votive stone altar. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 39–40, no. 86 (with bibliography); RECAM II, 45. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Two figures, one holding spear. Text: [Ὁσί]ῳ καὶ Δικέῳ ΠΑΡ | …ΔΙΑΤΕ ὑπὲρ ἑαυ|τῶν κὲ τῶν ἰδίων | πάντων εὐχήν. Translation: TotheHolyandJust…forthemselvesandtheirentirefamily,infulfilmentof thevow.

3.6.119 Yolcatı/Eftet (Phrygia): Ex-vototoHosios(kai)Dikeos Discoverylocation: At Yolcatı/Eftet, south of Soa, on the Tembris Valley. Type: Rectangular altar damaged below, with mouldings and traces of decorations on front side and on the left. Dimensions: 58 × 36.5 × 39.5 cm. Letters: 2.3 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 577, no. 58; SEG 53, no. 1523; Lochman 2003, 285, no. II 469. Date: ca. AD 200. Representation: On the main side, rider holding on the right shoulder double-axe (labrys), while on its left side, radiate bust with long hair. Text: [..........]Η | [..........]ν|τι Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δι|{καὶ Δι}(vacat)κέῳ | εὐχήν. Translation: …totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

Pisidia, Pamphilia, Lycia 3.7.1

Burdur* (Pisidia): Ex-voto dedicated to Apollo and to Hosios and Dikaios

Discoverylocation: From the district of Burdur. The exact place of provenance is unknown. Type: Small stele; upper side and small part of lower side missing. Dimensions: 33 × 30 × 8 cm.

CATALOGUE

333

Letters: 1.5 cm. The inscription is set in the two upper registers, on the edge of the iconographic field, to the left and on right side. Lunate sigma. Currentlocation: Museum of Burdur. Inv. No. 5392. Bibliography: RECAM V, 19; Ricl 2008, 573, no. 32. Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: The relief is disposed on three registers. On upper side, part of a rider with short tunic and boots, holding an object, is visible. In the central register, there are two radiate characters, featured frontally, holding their right hands to their chests, underneath the himation; only the palms are visible. On lower side, two facing dogs are featured. Text: [--] | Η | Ἀ|[π]ό|4λλ|ωνι| (vacat) [καὶ] |8 Ὁσ[ί]|ῳ | κα|ὶ Δι|12κα|ίῳ | εὐ|χή|16ν. Translation: [--name]toApolloandtotheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.7.2

Burdur* (Pisidia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosios(kai)Dikaios

Discoverylocation: From the district of Burdur. The exact place of provenance is unknown. Type: Small rectangular altar with traces of acroteria and omphalos phiale in the upper part. Deteriorated on left and upper side. Lower side is sectioned. Lower and upper margins are moulded. Dimensions: 41 × 13/19 × 19 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. The inscription is present on the entire surface of the bomos. Lunate sigma. Currentlocation: Museum of Burdur. Inv. No. 3075. Bibliography: RECAM V, 90 (with pl. 85); Ricl 2008, 573, no. 33. Date: 2nd century–beginning of 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Νείκαρ| (v.) {ρ}κο[ς] | δοῦ(λος) καὶ | Ἄρτεμ|εις Νε|ικάρκου | [Ὁ]σίῳ Δικαίῳ | [ε]ὐχ(vacat)ήν. Translation: Neikarkos,slave,andArtemeis,daughterofNeikarkos,totheHoly(and)Just, infulfilmentofthevow.

3.7.3

Burdur(?)* (Pisidia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Unknown provenance. Probably from the border area between the south of Phrygia and Pisidia. Type: Small rectangular altar with traces of acroteria and omphalos phiale in the upper part. Lower left corner destroyed. Dimensions: 49 × 20 × 18 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Lunate sigma. Currentlocation: Museum of Burdur. Inv. No. 301. Bibliography: RECAM V, 91 (pl. 86); Ricl 2008, 573, no. 34. Date: End of 2nd–beginning of 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Ἀλέξανδ[ρ]|ος Καλλι|κλέους Ὁ|[σ]ίῳ καὶ Δι|[κα]ίῳ εὐ|[χή]ν (vacat). Translation: Alexandros,sonofKallikles,totheHolyandJust,infulfilmentofthevow.

334 3.7.4

CATALOGUE

Burdur(?)* (Pisidia): Ex-voto

Discoverylocation: Unknown provenance. Probably the border area between the south of Phrygia and Pisidia. Type: Small rectangular altar with traces of acroteria and phiale in the upper part. Dimensions: 57 × 22/26 × 22 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. The inscription is set on left and right side of the iconographic representation. Currentlocation: Museum of Burdur. Inv. No. 120.53.83. Bibliography: RECAM V, 93 (pl. 88). Date: End of 2nd–beginning of 3rd century AD. Representation: Bust of male character with radiate head; on right side a circle is depicted, while to the left head-covered woman. Text: [..]ως ΟσΕ.. [καὶ] | [..] ωΝΑΝΝΕΙΙ[....] | κατὰ κέλευσιν τῶν θεῶν εὐχ(vacat)ὴν ἀ(vacat)|νέθη(vacat)καν. Translation:[Name]and[Name]dedicated(thisaltar)inaccordancewiththegods’command,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.7.5

Burdur(?)* (Pisidia): ConsecrationofasacredprecincttoDikaios

Discoverylocation: Discovery place unknown. Type: Fragment of stone block, destroyed in the lower part. Dimensions: 41 × 53 × 58 cm. Letters: 3 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Bursa. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 574, no. 39; IGSK 40.II, 1012; SEG 41, no. 1700. Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD. Text: ΕΠΙΛΕΙ[-]Ν[---] | ου καὶ Καλλείδ[η]ς, Θεό|δοτος, Τιμόθεος Εὐτυχᾶ, | Καρπιανός, Εὔτυχος τέ|μενος ἐχαρίσατο Δικαί|(vacat)ῳ. Translation: [---] and Kalleides, Theodotos, Timotheos, son of Eutychas, Karpianos, EutychosdonatedasacredprecincttotheJust.

3.7.6

Kibyra (area of, Lycia): HosiosandDikaiosasnewly-begottenson ofHerakles

Discoverylocation: Discovered by Louis Robert in the village of Bayramlar, near Kibyra. Type: White marble or limestone block at first inserted into the wall of a house. Rediscovered by Thomas Corsten in 1997 and then in 2008, being kept in the garden of a villager. Dimensions: 47 × 45 × 30 cm. Letters: 2.2–2.8 cm. Bibliography: Corsten and Ricl 2012, 143–51 (photograph at p. 144); Ricl 2008, 574, no. 42; 1991, 43, no. 94 (with bibliography). Date: AD 135/136 (= 112 Kibyran era, according to Robert’s initial reading). Representation: No representation. Initially described by Ricl as an ‘Autel inédit, avec représentation d’Héraklès, d’Hosion et de Χρυcέα Παρθένοc’.

CATALOGUE

335

Text: (vacat) Ἔτους [βιρ΄?] (vacat) |2 Θεοῖς ἐπηκόοις Ἡρα|κλεῖ καὶ Ἡρακλέως τέ|4κνῳ Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ ν[ε]|ογεννήτῳ καὶ Χρυσεί|ᾳ Παρθένῳ Αὐρήλιο[ς?] | Κράτερος Ῥεττύλου |8 καὶ Μῆνις β΄ Μαμμοθρέ|πτου καὶ Ἑρμαῖου νεω|[κ]όρος, ἱερεῖς, ἤγειραν | [ἐ]κ βάθρων τὸν ναὸν |12 ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων ὑπαρ|χόντων εὐτυχῶς | τοῖς ἐπηκόοις θεοῖς. Translation: Intheyear112.Tothelisteninggods,toHeraklesandHerakles’schild,tothe newly-begotten Holy and Just and to the Golden Virgin, Aurelius (?) Krateros, son of Rhettylos, and Menis, son of Menis and grandson of Mammothreptos, and Hermaios the warden,thepriests,buildupthetemplefromthegroundattheirownexpenses,withgood luck,tothelisteninggods. L1: Corsten and Ricl 2012, 144: Αὐρήλιο[ι?].

3.7.7

Kozağac (Lycia): Ex-votodedicatedtothejustgods

Discoverylocation: Discovered in a place called Gürleyik, situated west from the village of Kozağacı. Type: Rock-cut relief, shaped as a stele. Dimensions: 40 × 40 cm. Letters: 3–4 cm. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 574, no. 41; IGSK 60.I, 96; SEG 52, no. 1433. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: The relief features four figures framed within a niche: one of the figures is that of a veiled goddess, while the other faces belong to male characters clad in short tunics. The character situated to the left holds a short object, the one in the middle part has the left hand to his chest, and the one to the right holds caduceus in left. Text: Αλ[ ------] | θεοῖς δικαί[οις εὐ]χήν. Translation: …tothejustgods,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.7.8

Patara (Lycia): Ex-voto

Discoverylocation: East from Patara, in a rock-cut tomb. Type: The front of a rock-cut tomb, with two panels framed by pilasters. The one on the left is damaged. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 574, no. 43. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: In the right panel, the faces of a woman, of a man, and of a child are depicted, and the text is inscribed below. Text: (right panel) Εὐτυχίων τῷ | τέκνῳ Ἐπαφρο|δείτῳ μνεα|ς ἔνεκεν. (right pilaster) ΩΔΙΚΑΙΙΙ | ΑΜ....//..Ω. Translation: (right panel) Eutychion,to(his)sonEpaphrodeitos,inremembrance.

3.7.9

Perge (Pamphylia): DedicationaddressedtoHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the apodyterionof the thermae south from Perge.

336

CATALOGUE

Type: White marble altar with mouldings. Dimensions: 143 × 46 × 45 cm. Letters: 5 cm. Bibliography: IGSK 61, 309 (with photograph at pl. XI); Ricl 1991, 45, no. 100 (with bibliography; pl. 16, fig. 100). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: On the anterior facet, the upper moulding features acroteria on top and in the centre a rosette. Text: Ὁσίῳ καὶ | Δικαίῳ. Translation: TotheHolyandJust.

Lykaonia, Isauria, Cilicia 3.8.1

Ikonion (Konya, Lykaonia): Ex-votodedicatedtoDikaios

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Konya (Ikonion). Type: Small altar with mouldings in the upper part and lower part; broken in the upper left corner. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 45, no. 99 (with bibliography). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Γῆς πάρθε|κα[[γ]] Δικαίῳ | [εὐ]χήν. Translation: ToGe,tothemaiden(?),toDikaios,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.8.2

Laodikeia Katakekaumene (area of, Lykaonia): Dedication of  ubliustoHosios P

Discoverylocation: Dedeler, on the territory of Laodikeia Katakekaumene/Combusta. Type: Small stone plaque. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 44–45, no. 98 (with bibliography). Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: Πούβλιος | Πουβλίου | Ὁσίῳ θε|ῷ εὐχήν. Translation: Publius,sonofPublius,totheHolyGod,infulfilmentofthevow.

3.8.3

Laodikeia Katakekaumene (Lykaonia): Dedication of Epagathos andMeirostoHosioskaiDikaios

Discoverylocation: Ladik (LaodikeiaKatakekaumene). Type: Stone altar. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 44, no. 97 (with bibliography).

CATALOGUE

337

Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: No information on any possible representation. Text: Ὁσίῳ [καὶ] | [Δικαίῳ] | [θε]ῷ | Ἐπάγαθος |5 καὶ Μεῖρος | κατὰ ὀνείρου κέλευσιν. Translation: TotheHoly[andJust]God,EpagathosandMeiros,inaccordancewiththe order(received)inadream.

3.8.4

Perta (area of, Lykaonia): Ex-votodedicatedtoHelios,Hosios(kai) DikaiosandApollo

Discoverylocation: Found in the neighbourhoods of the village Akçakaya, in the area of Perta (Giymir), ‘on the steps of a house’. Type: Deteriorated stele with a lower and lateral mouldings, broken above. Rough rear and lateral sides. Dimensions: 147 × 60 × 19 cm. Letters: 3–4 cm. Currentlocation: Eskișehir Museum. Bibliography: Erten and Sivas 2011, 185 (with photographs at pls. 1–2, pp. 195–96); Ricl 2008, 570, no. 20. Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Above the text, on the upper part of the stele, there are three figures represented frontally, with draped chitons, standing on a platform. On the left side from viewer’s perspective, god Helios is holding the right hand to the chest with a solar crown on his head, then Apollo with his right hand raised is holding a labrys and Hosios Dikaios has both hands raised. Text: Ἡλίῳ Ὁσίῳ | Δικαίῳ Ἀπ|όλλωνι |4 Μασικην|οὶ εὐχήν. Translation: ToHelios,totheHoly(and)Just,(and)toApollo,theinhabitantsofMasika,in fulfilmentofthevow.

Unknown provenance 3.10.1. Unknown provenance:DedicationofLuciferatoHosioskaiDikaios Discoverylocation: Unknown place in Asia Minor. Type: White marble stele. Dimensions: 45 × 26 × 6 cm. Letters: Unknown size. Currentlocation: Museum of Trieste. Bibliography: Ricl 1991, 47, no. 107 (with bibliography; pl. 16, fig. 107). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Representation of two forearms, palms raised as for prayer. Text: Λουκίφερα | Ὁσίῳ καὶ Δικαίῳ. Translation: Lucifera,totheHolyandJust.

338

CATALOGUE

4. MÊN Caria, Ionia 4.1.1

Aphrodisias (Geyre, Caria): DonationofKallikrates,priestofMên Askainos

Discoverylocation: Found in the city wall. Type: Marble block. Dimensions: 0.27 × 1.33 × 6.9 (visible) cm. Letters: 2.25–3 cm. Bibliography: CMRDM I, 119; MAMA VIII, 445; Hellenica 13, 128. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Ἡρακλεῖ καὶ τῷ [δή]μ[ῳ] (vacat) [τ]ὴν [τρά]πεζαν | Καλλικράτης Μολο[σσοῦ ἱε]ρε[ὺς] Μηνὸς | Ἀ[σκ]αινοῦ καὶ Ἑρμοῦ [Ἀγο]ραίου. Translation: ForHerakleisandforthepeople,Kallikrates,sonofMolossos,thepriestofMên AskainosandofHermesAgoraios(dedicated)thetable.

4.1.2

Aphrodisias (Geyre, Caria): DonationofKallikrates,priestofMên Askainos

Discoverylocation: Found in the wall near the stadium. Type: Marble fragments. Dimensions: 47 × 40 cm. Letters: 2–2.5 cm. Bibliography: CMRDM I, 120; MAMA VIII, 446; Hellenica, 13, 128–29. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Νίκη πά[ρ]ειμ[ι] | Καίσαρ[ι] ἀεί. | Θεοῖς Σεβαστο[ῖς καὶ τῶι] |4 δήμωι τὴν Νίκη[ν καὶ τὸν] | [λ]έντα (vacat) Καλ[λικράτης] | [Μ]ολοσσοῦ ἱε[ρεὺς Μηνὸς Ἀσ]|καινοῦ καὶ Ἑρ[μοῦ Ἀγοραίου, τὰ] |8 [προ]γονικὰ ἀν[αθήματα πάντα] | [ἐπ]ισκευάσας [ἀποκαθέστησεν]. Translation: I,Nike,standherebyCaesarforever.TotheAugustanGodsandtothepeople (thestatue)ofNikeandthelion(arededicated).Kallikrates,sonofMolossos,thepriestof MênAskainosandofHermesAgoraios,restoredalltheancestraldedicationsandsetthem uptotheinitialplace.

4.1.3

Magnesia on the Meander (Ionia): DedicationofPhiletostoMên

Discoverylocation: Discovered in a private house in Tekke, originating from the western area of the theatre, according to Lane. Type: Bluish marble stele. Dimensions: 20 × 32 × 26 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Bibliography: CMRDM I, 29 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 14, no. 2. Date: Roman Imperial period.

CATALOGUE

339

Text: Φίλητος ὁ παρὰ |2 Χαριδήμου ἀ|νέθηκεν τῷ Μη|4νί. Translation:Philetos,theonenearCharidemos,set(this)uptoMên.

4.1.4

Smyrna (Izmir, Ionia): Dedicationofsacredobjectstothetemple

Discoverylocation: Found at Sibile Tepe, on the eastern slope of Mt Pagos. Type: Marble stele. Dimensions: 130 × 49 × 9 cm. Currentlocation: Athens Epigraphical Museum. Inv. No. 4227. Bibliography: Thompson 2007, 101–03; CMRDM I, 28 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 14, no. 1 (line 15); Lane 1967–68, 44, no. 2 (commentary). Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Ἀπολλώνιος Μητροδώρου Σπάρος | ὁ πατὴρ τοῦ γενομένου ἱερέως Ἀπο[λ]|λωνίου τοῦ Ἀπολλωνίου Σπάρου τοῦ |4 Ἡλίου Ἀπόλλωνος Κισαλοδδηνοῦ, ἀ|νέθηκεν τῶι θεῶι καὶ τῆι πόλει τὰ κατασκευ|ασθέντα ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ, λαβὼν κατὰ ψήφισμα τὴν | ἀναγραφὴν ποιήσασθαι αὐτῶν ἐν στήλῃ. Καί |8 ἐστιν αὐτὸν ὁ θεὸς ἐπ[ὶ β]ήματος μαρμαρίνου | καὶ ἡ παρακειμένη τῶι θεῶ[ι] τράπεζα λίθου Λεσβί|ου ἔχουσα πόδας ἀνα[γλύ]πτους γρύπας καὶ πρὸ αὐ|τῆς ἀβάκηον μαρμάρινον πρὸς τὴν χρῆσιν τῶν|12 θυσιαζόντων καὶ θυμιατήριον τετράγωνον κα|τεσκευασμένον πέτρας Τηίας ἔχον περίπυρον | σιδηροῦν καὶ ἄγαλμα μαρμάριον Ἀρτέμιδος ἐ|πὶ παραστάδι μυλίνῃ καὶ Μηνὸς ἄγαλμα ἐπὶ βάσει |16 μαρμαρίνῃ, καὶ τράπεζα ποικίλη τετράγωνος | καὶ βωμὸς μαρμάρινος ἔχων ἀετὸν ἐν ἑαυτῷ | Διὸς καὶ ναὸς ἐξυλωμένος καὶ κεκεραμωμέ|νος καὶ τεθυρωμένος καὶ κεκλειδωμένος, |20 ἐν ᾧ καθείδρυται ἀγάλματα Πλούτωνος Ἡ|λίου καὶ Κούρης Σελήνης ἐπὶ βήματος | ἐμπεφιασμένα ἔχοντα καὶ παστῆον ξύλι|νον ναοειδὲς καὶ παστὸν λινοῦν, καὶ παρ᾽ ἑκατέ|24ρᾳ τῶν εἰσόδων βωμὸς Φωκαϊκὸς καὶ κλεῖν | κεχρυσωμένην καὶ ἐμπεφιασμένην πρὸς | τὴν λογήαν καὶ πομπὴν τῶν θεῶν καὶ στεγνὰ | ἐπίπεδα καὶ ἐπ᾽ αὐτῶν στοὰν κατῳκοδομημέ|28νην καὶ κεκεραμωμένην πρὸς τὴν οἴκησιν τῶν | ἱεροδούλων καὶ τὸν θεὸν θεραπευόντων καὶ | τὴν ἐνδώμησιν τοῦ τεμένους καὶ θεμελί|ωσιν ἐν τετραγόνῳ διὰ σπαράγματος, ἵνα |32 ἦν ἐπίπεδον ἐν ὁμαλῲ τὸ τέμενος, καὶ ὅπλα | τῶι θεῶι παρακείμενα τοῦ κόσμου χάριν | σιδηρᾶ ὀκτώ. Translation:Apollonios,sonofMetrodorosSparos,fatheroftheformerpriest,Apollonios, sonofApolloniosSparos,priestofHeliosApolloKisauloddenos,setupasadedicationtogod andtothecitythethingsprovidedbyhim,havingreceiveddecisionaccordingtothedecree toinscribethemonastele;theyareasfollows:the(statueofthe)godhimselfonamarble pedestal;andnexttothegod,atableofLesbianstonewithcurvedsculptedfeetandbeforeit amarbleslabtouseforsacrificingandasquareincensealtar,madeofstonefromTeos,with anironvesselforcontainingfire;andalongside,amarblestatueofArtemisonamillstone pedestal;andastatueofMênonamarblebasealongwithasquare,multicolouredtable; andamarblealtarwithaneagleofZeusonit;andatempleofwoodwithtiledroofand locked doors, in which clothed statues of Plouto Helios and of the goddess Koure Selene (placed)uponapedestalarededicated,holdingawoodenchestwiththeappearanceofa shrineandalinenembroideredcanopy;oneachoftheentrancesaPhokianaltar;andalock, gildedandcovered,fortheeulogyandcelebrationofthegods;andasurfaceofclosely-fitted pavementstonesandonthemastoabuiltupandroofedwithtilestohousethesacredslaves andtheworshippersofgod;andaprecinctwallandagroundworkwithchipsofstoneonall foursidesfortheprecinctwallgroundtobeeven;andshieldsnexttothegodfordecoration, madeofiron,eightinnumber.

340

CATALOGUE

Lydia 4.2.1

Almourenon katoikia (Tire, Lydia): Dedicationofsacredobjects

Discoverylocation: Originally spotted in 1892 the village of Darmara, then in Bayındır, and few years later in a church in Tire. Type: Stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 14.2; IGSK 17, 3252 (with bibliography); CMRDM I, 75 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 21, no. 30. Date: ca. AD 140. Text: ΟΜ | Π(όπλιον) Αἴλιον Μενεκράτην | τῇ ἱερείᾳ τῆς Δήμητρος |4 ἀνενένκαντα καὶ καθιερώ|σαντα κάλαθον περιάργυρον | τὸν λείποντα τοῖς τῆς Δήμη|τρος μυστηρίοις, καὶ τῷ προκα|8θημένῳ τῆς κώμης Μηνὶ ση|μήαν περιάργυρον, τὴν προ|πομπεύουσαν τῶν μυστηρί|ων αὐτοῦ. Διά τε τοῦτο καθι|12έρωσεν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἱεροσύνης | εἰς τὰς ἐπιθυσίας τῆς Δήμη|τρος τὰ πρὸ τῆς οἰκίας ἐργα|στήρια εἰς τὸ κατ᾽ ἐνιαυτὸν |16 ἕκαστον τῇ τοῦ καλάθου | ἀναφορᾷ τοὺς κληρωθέν|τας εἰς τὴν πομπὴν ἄνδρας | μετὰ τῶν ἀρχόντων προθύ|20οντας εὐωχεῖσθαι ἐν τῇ | οἰκίᾳ αὑτοῦ διὰ παντὸς τοῦ | βίου. | Ἐπὶ ἄρχοντος τῆς κατοικίας |24 Βερίου Βάσσου φιλοσεβάστου καὶ | τῶν συναρχόντων αὐτοῦ. Translation: PubliusAeliusMenekratesbroughtupanddedicatedtothepriestessDemeter asilvervesselmissingfromthemysteriesconsecratedtoDemeterandasilverstatueforMên, protectorofthevillage,forittobecarriedinfrontoftheprocessionofhismysteries.Tothis purpose,heconsecratedonbehalfofthepriesthoodforburningofincensetohonourDemetertheergasteriesinfrontofthehousewiththeofferingoftheprocessionalvessel,forthe mentossedforprocessiontobringthefirstsacrifices,togetherwiththearchontes,befeasted with all the honours in his house all their lifetime. When Verius Vassus, the friend of the emperor,wasarchonofthekatoikiaalongwithhisfellowarchons.

4.2.2

Axiotta (Hamidiye, Lydia): Dedication addressed by Trophime to MênAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Found in the village of Hamidiye, situated on the area of the ancient Saittai. Type: Yellowish fragmentary marble stele, with upper moulding. Lower half of the stele is destroyed. Dimensions: 36 × 33 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.36; TAM V.1, 490 a; CMRDMAd 195, no. 2 (with photograph 2); SEG 28, no. 903; Petzl 1978a, 268, no. 13 (with photograph at pl. XII). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: In the upper part of the stele, below the moulding, crescent is featured, upper and lower margin describing a perfect semicircular shape. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ |2 Τροφίμη Μενάνδρου | τοῦ Τυλίωνος ὑ|4[π]ὲρ τῶν συντρό|[φων --]του. Translation: ToMênAxiottenos,Trophime,daughterofMenandros,sonofTylion,(dedicated this)forthoseraisedtogether(syntrophoi).

CATALOGUE

341

L4–5: CMRDMAd 195, no. 2: ‘on behalf of her companions’.

4.2.3

Axiotta (Hamidiye, Lydia): Confession inscription addressed to MisTiamouArtemidorou

Discoverylocation: Identified at Hamidiye. Type: Upper side of moulded marble stele. Dimensions: 31 × 40.5 × 6.5 cm. Letters: 1–1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Bibliography: Herrmann and Malay 2007, 52 (fig. 52). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Above the inscription, upward relief crescent. Text: (crescent) Μέγας {Μ} Μὶς Τιάμου Ἀρμιδώρου (leaf?) | Ἀξιοττα κατέχων καὶ ἡ δύναμις αὐ|τοῦ· Ἀφιὰς συνέθετο γάμου κοινω|νίαν Γαιίου λίαν Κόσμου θυγατέραν, | [ἥ]τις οὐκ ἐτήρησε τὴν πίστιν τ|ῷ Γαείῳ ἀλλ᾽ ἐξήμαρτεν· μέγα|ς οὖν ΟΠΩΝ ὁ θεὸς· ἐκόλασεν αὐτὴ|[ν ---]CΙΙΑΙ CΛ ΠC[---]Λ | [-----]. Translation:Great(is)MisTiamouAr(te)midorouwhorulesoverAxiottaandhispower! Aphphias (?) intervened for a matrimonial alliance of Gaius with Ioulia, daughter of Kosmos;shedidnotkeepthecontractualfidelitytowardsGaiusbutcommittedafault.Now, greatisthegod…;hepunishedher[---].

4.2.4

Axiotta (Hamidiye, Lydia): ConfessioninscriptiontoMênOuranios Artemidorou

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the area situated between Hamidiye and Mağazadamları. Type: Upper side of moulded marble stele. Dimensions: 58 × 43 × 7 cm. Letters: 1.5–2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Bibliography: Herrmann and Malay 2007, 51 (fig. 51). Date: AD 102/103 (= 187 Sullan era). Representation: Above the inscription, upward relief crescent. Text: (crescent) Ἔτους ρπγ΄, μη(νὸς) Δαισίου βι΄. | Μέγας Μεὶς Οὐράνιος | Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξιοττα |4 κατέχων καὶ ἡ δύναμις αὐτοῦ, κρ[ι]|τὴς ἀλάθητος ἐν οὐρανῷ, εἰς ὃν | κατέυγεν Ἀλέξανδρος Σωκράτο[υ] | ὑπὲρ κλοπῆς τῆς προδηλουμένης· | Ἀμμιον Διογᾶ ἔχουσα θυγα|τέρα Μελτίνην ἦραν ἰδίον δ|αέρος ※ δ΄, ὁρκιζόμεναι ὤμοσαν· | [ἀ]πέκτεινεν ὁ θεὸς. Μέγας ὦν ὁ θ|[εός -------]ΙΑΝΤΟΝΥ[----]. Translation: Intheyear187,inthemonthofDaisios,onthetwelfthday.Great(is)theHeavenlyMênofArtemidoroswhorulesoverAxiottaandhispower,all-seeingjudgeinheaven, towhomAlexandros,sonofSokrates,appealedabouttherobberyoccuredhere:Ammion, wifeofDiogas,alongwithherdaughter,Meltine,tookaway4denariiofherbrother-in-law; (and)whentheywereaskedtotakeanoath(ofinnocence),theytookit(andcommittedperjury);(and)thegodput(them)todeath.Thegodbeinggreat…

342 4.2.5

CATALOGUE

Axiotta (Hamidiye, Lydia): Honorarydedicationaddressedbythe kataloustikoi

Discoverylocation: Brought from Hamidiye to Manisa. Type: White marble block in two fitting pieces. Dimensions: 28 × 62 × 38 cm. Letters: 1.3 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 476. Bibliography: Rostad 2006b, 97–98 (commentary and translation); LKGI 39.35; Malay 1994, 37 (with photograph at fig. 10); TAM V.1, 490; Debord 1982, 167 (mention); CMRDM I, A3; CMRDM III, p. 37; Hermann and Polatkan 1969, 55, no. 12. Date: AD 159/160 (= 244 Sullan era). Text: Τατιαν Ἑρμοκράτους Βάσσαν ἱέρειαν Μηνὸ[ς Ἀξι]|οττηνοῦ οἱ καταλουστικοὶ ἐτείμησαν δίά τε τὴν ἰς [τοὺς] | θεοὺς εὐσέβειαν καὶ θρησκείαν καὶ τὴν πρὸς π[άντας] |4 ἀνθρώπους φιλοκαγαθίαν, ἀναστραφεῖσαν ἐπὶ τῷ θε|ῷ ἀφιλοκέρδως παντὶ τῷ βίῳ διὰ γένους. Ἀνεστάθη δὲ ἔτους σμδ΄, μη(νὸς) Γορπιαίου βι΄, ἐπιμελησαμέου | Φιλοξένου β΄ γραμματέως, ζώσης ποιήσαν|8τες τὴν τειμὴν οἱ καταλουστικοὶ | ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων. Translation: The association of ritual-purifiers honoured Tatia Bassa, daughter of Hermokrates,thepriestessofMênAxiottenos,becauseofherpietyandserviceforthegods andherloving-goodnesstowardsallpeople,havinggivenbacktothegodwithoutseeking gainherentirelifeforthesakeofherpeople.(Thestele)wassetupintheyear244,inthe monthofGorpiaios,onthetwelfthday,whenthesecretaryPhiloxenos,sonofPhiloxenos, wasanintendant.Theritual-purifiershadthehonourmadefromtheirownresourceswhile shewasalive.

4.2.6

Doroukome? (Ayvatlar, Lydia): Confessioninscriptiondedicatedto MeterAtimisandMênTiamou

Discoverylocation: Apparently from Ayvatlar and brought to Gölde. Type: White marble stele with upper moulding and gabled pediment. Dimensions: 79 × 44 × 4 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Bibliography: Lozano 2007, 237; Chaniotis 2004a, 16–17 (with translation); 2004b, 244–45; LKGI 39.65 (with bibliography); BWK 54; TAM V.1, 440; CMRDM I, 51 (with facsimile); Lane 1964, 17, no. 16. Date: AD 118/119 (= 203 Sullan era). Text: [Μεγάλη Μήτηρ Ἄτιμις] | καὶ μέγας Μὴν Τιάμου τὴν . . .] | [. . . κώμην βασιλεύ]ων καὶ ἡ δύ|4[ναμις αὐτῶν μεγάλη]. Ἀπολλώνίος | [Σκόλλῳ παρέθε]το Ἀπολλωνί|ῳ [ὑπάρχοντα χαλκ]οῦ ※ μ(ύρια). Εἶτα ἀπα(ι)|τοῦντος τοῦ Ἀπολλωνίου τὸν χαλ|8κὸν παρὰ τοῦ Σκόλλου ὤμοσε τοὺς | προγεγραμ(μ)ένους θεοὺς ἰς προ|θεσμίαν ἀποδοῦναι τὸ | συναχθὲν κεφάλαιον. Μὴ τηρήσαντος |12 αὐτοῦ τὴν πίστιν παρεχώρησεν | τῇ θεῷ ὁ Ἀπολλώνιος. Κολασθέν|τος οὖν τοῦ Σκόλλου ὑπὸ τῶν θε|ῶν ἰς θανάτου λόγον μετὰ τὴν [τε]|16λευτὴν αὐτοῦ ἐπεζητήθη ὑπὸ τ[ῶν] | θεῶν. Τατιὰς οὖν ἡ θυγάτηρ αὐτοῦ | ἔλοισε τοὺς ὅρκους καὶ νῦν εἱλα|σαμένη εὐλογεῖ Μητρὶ Ἀτίμιτι |20 καὶ Μηνὶ Τιάμου. Ἔτους σγ΄, μη(νὸς) | Ξαννδικοῦ ει΄.

CATALOGUE

343

Translation:(GreatisMeterAtimisandgreatisMênTiamou),whoruleoverthevillageand greatistheirpower!Apollonios(gaveSkollosanamountof)40denarii.Then,whenApolloniosreclaimedthemoneyfromSkollos,thelattersworeanoathbytheaforementionedgods torepaythecollectedsumwithinadeadline.Becausehedidn’tkeephispromise,Apollonios ceded(themoney)tothegod.WhenSkolloswaspunishedbythegodswithdeath,afterhis deathhisdaughterwaspunishedbythegods.Tatias,thedaughter,unfastenedthecursesand, havingatoned,shenowpraisesMeterAtimisandMênTiamou.Intheyear230,inthemonth ofXandikos,onthefifteenthday.

4.2.7

Doroukome? (Ayvatlar, Lydia) = 5.2.6

4.2.8

Doroukome? (Ayvatlar, Lydia) = 5.2.8

4.2.9

Doroukome? (Ayvatlar, Lydia) = 3.6.9

4.2.10

Iaza?*/Maionia? (area of, Lydia): Ex-voto addressed to Meis ex ArtemidorouAxiottakatechon

Discoverylocation: Unknown location from Lydia. It may also come from Iaza (Ayazviran) because of the epithets of Mên in the introductory aretalogical formula. According to Maria Paz de Hoz, it is from Maionia. Type: White marble stele narrowing to the top. The lower part broken. Dimensions: 88 × 31/42 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.8 cm. Currentlocation: Archaeological Museum of Ușak. Inv. No. 10-3-75. Bibliography: LKGI 39.13; SEG 41, no. 1012; Varinlioğlu 1991, 93–94, no. 3 (with photograph at pl. 18). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Above the inscription, a large crescent moon is represented. Text: Μέγας Μεὶς ἐξ Ἀρ|τεμιδώρου Ἀξιοττα | κατέχων. Ἡρμιόνη|4 Θρέπτου εὐξαμένη Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ, | ἐὰν παρὰ τῆς μητρὸς | λήψομαι τὰ μέρη. Λαβοῦσα ἀνέθηκα τὴν στήλλην ὑπὲρ ὧν εὐξάμην. Translation: GreatisMeisofArtemidoroswhorulesoverAxiotta!Hermione,daughterof Threptos, having made a vow (I brought this) to Mên Axiottenos, in case I took the parts pertainingtomymother.IsetupasteleforthevowsImade.

4.2.11

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): Confession inscription mentioning Meter Tarsene,ApolloTarsiosandMênArtemidorosAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Discovered by P. Herrmann before 1962. Type: White marble stele broken into two parts. Dimensions: 104 × 42 × 8 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm.

344

CATALOGUE

Bibliography: Sartre 1995, 326; BWK 57 (with fig. at p. 68); TAM V.1, 460; CMRDM I, 47 (with pl. XXI); Lane 1964, 50, no. A1; Robert 1963, 166–67; Herrmann 1962, 24–26, no. 18 (pl. VI.1). Date: AD 118/119 (= 203 Sullan era). Representation: The monument has a moulding above, below which a crescent is carved; on the right side, carefully executed double-axe, and on left side wide crescent, covering the surface of a semicircle. In a recessed panel, a female figure with large cloak, himation, with rich folds, leaving only the right shoulder to the sight and worn over calf-length shirt, with vertical folds. Text: Ἔτους σγ΄, μη(νὸς) Ἀρτεμεισίου ς΄. Ἐ|πὶ Τροφίμη Ἀρτεμιδώρου Κι|κιννάδος κληθεῖσα ὑπὸ τοῦ | θεοῦ ἰς ὑπηρεσίας χάριν μὴ |5 βουληθοῦσα ταχέως προσελ|θεῖν, ἐκολάσετο αὐτὴν καὶ μα|νῆναι ἐποίησεν. Ἠρώτησε οὖν Μη|τέρα Ταρσηνὴν καὶ Ἀπόλλωνα Τάρσι|ον καὶ Μῆνα Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξι|10οττηνὸν Κόρεσα κατέχοντα | καὶ ἐκέλευσεν στηλλογραφ|ηθῆναι νέμεσιν καὶ καταγρά|ψαι ἐμαυτὴν ἰς ὑπηρεσίαν | τοῖς θεοῖς. Translation: Intheyear203,inthemonthofArtemisios,onthesixthday.Trophime,daughterof Artemidoros Kikinnas, was summoned by the god to his service but she did not want tocomeatonce.Hence,thegodpunishedherandmadeherinsane.SheconsultedMeterTarsene andApolloTarsiosandMênofArtemidorosAxiottenos,whorulesoverKoresa,andheordered hertosetupasteletorecordofthegod’spunishmentandtoenrolintheserviceofthegods.

4.2.12

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia) = 5.2.12

4.2.13

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia) = 5.2.13

4.2.14

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia) = 5.2.14

4.2.15

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): DedicationaddressedtoMênMotyleites

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the village of Ayazviran, in Lydia. Built into the staicase of a house. Type: White marble stele, tenon removed; broken above diagonally. Dimensions: 65 × 44 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.8 cm. The text of the inscription is engraved in the upper part of the stele. Bibliography: LKGI 39.59; SEG 33, no. 1002; Naour 1983, 110, no. 2 (with pl. 14). Date: AD 206/207 (= 291 Sullan era). Text: Μηνὶ Μοτυ[λείτῃ name] | ὑπὲρ Μικκάλ[υ τοῦ ἀδελ]|φοῦ καὶ τῶν παιδίω [---] | Ἔτους σϙα΄, μ(ηνὸς) Γορπιαίο[υ]. Translation:ToMênMotyleites,forMikkalos,thebrother,andforthechildren[---].Inthe year291,inthemonthofGorpiaios.

4.2.16

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): Confession inscription addressed to the MotherofMênAxiottenos,MênOuraniosandMên/MeisArtemidorou Axiottenos

Discovery location: Discovered in a house in Kepez Mevkii, but definitely from Mağazadamları, a place situated north of Iaza (Ayazviran) and north-west of Hamidiye. Type: Marble stele moulded above.

CATALOGUE

345

Dimensions: 146 × 58 × 7 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Bibliography: Ricl 2008, 577, no. 55; Malay 2003, 13–14 (with an English translation); mentioned by Petzl in BWK 56. Date: AD 57/58 (= 142 Sullan era). Representation: Traces of crescent above the inscription field. Text: Μεγάλη Μήτηρ Μηνὸς Ἀξιοττη|νοῦ· Μηνὶ Οὐρανίῳ, Μηνὶ Ἀρτεμι||δώρου Ἀξίοττα κατέχοντι· Γλύ|4κων Ἀπολλωνίου καὶ Μύρτιον Γλύ|κωνος εὐλογίαν περὶ τῆς ἑαυτῶν | σωτηρίας καὶ τῶν ἰδίων τέκνων· | σὺ γάρ με, κύριε, αἰχμαλωτιζόμε|8νον ἠλέησες, μέγα σοι τὸ ὅσιον, | μέγα σοι τὸ δίκαιον, μεγάλη νείκη, | μεγάλαι σαὶ νεμέσεις, μέγα σοι | τὸ δωδεκάθεον τὸ παρά σοι κα|τεκτισμένον· ἠχμαλωτίσθην |12 ὑπὸ ἀδελφοῦ τέκνου τοῦ Δημαι|νέτου ὄτι τὰ ἐμὰ προέλειψα καί | σοι βοίθεαν ἔδωκα ὡς τέκνῳ· |16 σὺ δὲ ἐξέκλεισές με καὶ ᾐχμα|λώτισάς με οὐχ ὡς πάτρως, ἀλλά | ὡς κακοῦργον· μέγας οὖν ἐστι | Μεὶς Ἀξιοττα κατέχων· τὸ εἰκα|20νόν μοι ἐποίησας· εὐλογῶ ὑμεῖν. | Ἔτους ρμβ΄, μη(νὸς) Πανήμου β΄. Translation: GreatistheMotherofMênAxiottenos!Glykon,thesonofApollonios,andMyrtion,thewifeofApollonios,(setup)thispraiseforHeavenlyMênandforMênofArtemidoros whorulesoverAxiotta,fortheirrescueandforthatoftheirchildren.‘Foryou,Lord,have shownmercy,whenIwasacaptive.’Greatisyourholiness,greatisyourjustice,greatisyour victory,greatareyourpunishments,greatisthe(councilof)thetwelvegodswhichisbyyour side!‘IwasmadecaptivebecauseofDemainetos,thesonofmybrother.ForIhadneglected myownaffairsandhelpedyou,asifyouweremyownson.Butyoulockedmeinandkeptme captive,asifIwereacriminalandnotyourpaternaluncle!GreatisthusMeis,therulerover Axiotta!Youhavegivenmesatisfaction(and)Ipraiseyou!’Intheyear142,inthemonthof Panemos,onthesecondday.

4.2.17

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): Confession inscription addressed to Mên OuraniosArtemidorou,therulerofAxiotta

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Iaza (Ayazviran). Type: Lower part of marble stele. Except for the right side, all the other sides are damaged. Dimensions: 90 × 54 × 5.5 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Manisa Museum. Bibliography: Herrmann and Malay 2007, 55 (fig. 55). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: […]ΙΡΟΡΑ Συνόδου Σαϊττῃ[νὴ ἐπεὶ ?] | [---]αγωγουμνων αὐτῆς [τῶν] | [.....]ων ἐπεύξατο Μῆνα Οὐρ[ά]|4νιον Ἀρ]τεμιδώρου Ἀξιοττα κατέ|[χοντα], καὶ ὡς πᾶσιν ἐπήκουες | [μου?] καὶ παρενθυμηθείσης | [μου π]αράθερμον ἀποδοῦναι |8 [τὴν] εὐχήν, ἐκόλασε με· διὸ ἔσ|[τησ]α τὴν στήλλη καὶ ἐπιγέγρα|[φα] τὰς τοῦ θεοῦ δυνάμεις καὶ ἀ|[π]ὸ νῦν εὐλογῶ. Translation: …ofSaittai,daughterofSynodos.Whenshe…wastaken(?),sheraiseda prayertotheHeavenlyMênofArtemidoroswhorulesoverAxiottaand,asalways,youhave listenedtomeand,afterIfailedtokeepmyvowintime,hepunishedme.ThisiswhyIsetup thesteleandIwroteaboutgod’spowersandIamveneratinghimhenceforth.

346 4.2.18

CATALOGUE

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): Ex-votodedicatedtoMênAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Found in a private house in Ayazviran. Type: Marble stele. Dimensions: 33 × 24 × 4 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.31; TAM V.1, 452; CMRDM I, 40 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 15, no. 3 (partial). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A woman is represented with right hand raised in adoration. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ Ἀθη|νίων ὑπὲρ Ὀνησίμη|ς τῆς τεθραμένης | εὐχήν. Translation: ToMênAxiottenos,AthenionforOnesime,hisadoptivedaughter,infulfilment ofavow.

4.2.19

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): DedicationtoMênMotyleites

Discoverylocation: Found at Ayazviran. Type: Marble stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: Manisa Museum. Inv. No. 5426. Bibliography: LKGI 39.58; Malay 1994, 168; TAM V.1, 457 (with fig. 58); CMRDM I, 41 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 15, no. 7; Cameron 1939b, 30 (a). Date: 2nd century AD (?). Representation: A man, a child and a woman are represented with their right hands raised in adoration. Text: [Τα]τιανὸς Γλαῦκος καὶ Ἀμμιανὴ φι|[λ]όθεοι Μηνὶ Μοτυλείτῃ εὐχαριστ|[ία]ν ἔθοντο εὐχόμενοι ἀεὶ ὑπὲρ | [θ]ρεπτῆς γένει πρώτης Σαβειν|ῆς [. . . . . .] ἥνπερ σώσειες σὺ [. . .]. Translation: TatianosGlaukosandAmmiane,thegod-loving,set(this)uprenderingthanks to Mên Motyleites, constantly praying for Sabeine, their first-born nursling…, whom you saved…

4.2.20

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): ConfessioninscriptiondedicatedtoMeter Tazene,MisLabanasandMisArtemidorou

Discoverylocation: Discovered on a field east of Ayazviran. Type: Upper part of a broken stele. Dimensions: 42 × 37 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.6 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.8; BWK 40; TAM V.1, 461; CMRDM I, 42 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 18, no. 20; Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 204. Date: AD 143/144 (= 228 Sullan era). Text: [Με]γάλη Μήτ[ηρ Ταζη]|νὴ καὶ Μὶς Λαβάνας [καὶ] | Μὶς Ἀρτεμιδώρου Δό|4ρου κώμην βασιλεύον|τες. Ἔτους σκη΄, μη(νὸς) Δαισί|ου Σε(βαστῇ), Ἰουλία Μητρὰ ἀνέ|στησε στήλλην ἐπιζητη|8σάντων τῶν θεῶν τὴν γ[ε]|γόνουσαν ἁμαρτίαν ὑ[πὸ] | [---].

CATALOGUE

347

Translation: GreatisMeterTazeneandMisLabanasandMisArtemidorou,whoruleover Doroukome!Intheyear228,inthemonthofDaisios,forSebaste,IouliaMetrasetupthe stelebeggingforforgivenesstothegodsforhavingcommittedtransgression,thosewhoknow (all)…

4.2.21

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): DedicationofTrophimostoMênAxitenos epekoos

Discoverylocation: Found in two different private houses in Ayazviran. Type: Stele of bluish marble broken in two pieces. Dimensions: 25 × 32 × 6.3 cm. Letters: 2.2 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.34; TAM V.1, 455; CMRDM I, 46 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 18, no. 21; Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 205. Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Three figures in relief are represented standing on a protruding rim, a girl, a man and a woman. Text: [Θεῷ ἐπηκ]όῳ Μηνὶ Ἀξιτη|[νῷ Τ]ρόφιμος ἐὐξάμε|[νος] καὶ ἐπιτυχὼν εὐχα|[ρισ]τῶν ἀνέθεκα | [. . . . . .] μη(νὸς) Δίου βι΄. Translation: TothelisteninggodMênAxitenos,I,Trophimos,havingprayedandsuccessfully reaching[whatIprayedfor]andbeingthankfulset(this)up…inthemonthofDios,onthe twelfthday.

4.2.22

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): DedicationtothegodAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Found before 1962 by P. Herrmann before 1962. Type: Fragment of a white marble stele (left corner). Dimensions: 24 × 22 × 7.5 cm. Letters: 1.4 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.33; TAM V.1, 454; CMRDM I, 48 (with photograph at pl. XXI); Lane 1964, 51, no. A6; Hermann 1962, no. 40 (with pl. XIII 1). Date: AD 177/178 (= 262 Sullan era). Representation: Traces of an undistinguishable relief. Text: Ἔτους σξβ΄, μη(νὸς) Ξ[ανδικοῦ --] | Θεῷ Ἀξιοττη[νῷ ---]|βούλων Τατιο[---] | [-Ἑ]ρμογένου [---]. Translation: Intheyear262,inthemonthofXandikos…TothegodAxiottenos[…]boulon (of?)Tatio[…]ofHermogenes.

4.2.23

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): Dedication of Glykon and Trophimos to MeterAtimisandMênTiamou

Discoverylocation: Found in 1969 in Ayazviran. Type: Small altar with upper moulding and deteriorated front face above. Dimensions: 58.5 × 24.5 (shaft) × 17 (shaft) cm.

348

CATALOGUE

Bibliography: Rostad 2006b, 94 (with translation); LKGI 39.66; TAM V.1, 458; CMRDM I, 49. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Μητρὶ Ἀτίμιτι | καὶ Μηνὶ Τιάμ|ου Γλύκων |4 Τρύφωνος καὶ | Τρόφιμος Θεο|γένου κατ᾽ ἐπι|ταγὴν τὸν βωμ|8ὸν ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων | ἀνέθηκαν. Translation: ToMeterAtimisandtoMênTiamou,Glykon,sonofTryphon,andTrophimos, sonofTheogenes,setupthealtarinaccordancewiththecommand,attheirownexpense.

4.2.24

Iaza (Ayazviran, Lydia): Confession inscription dedicated to Mên Axiottenos

Discoverylocation: Discovered in a field near Ayazviran. Type: Stele with a round pediment, diagonally broken into two perfectly shaped pieces. Dimensions: 88 × 50 × 4 cm. Letters: Approx. 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Archaeological Museum of Bergama. Bibliography: LKGI 39.32; BWK 61 (with photograph); TAM V.1, 453; van Strenten 1981, 87 (with photograph at fig. 26); CMRDM I, 50; Lane 1970, 51–52 (pl. VI.b). Date: AD 235/236 (= 320 Sullan era). Representation: A large crescent in relief is represented on the central part of the pediment. Underneath, on the main body of the stele, above the text there is another relief with the god Mên standing frontally, having on either side of his feet a lion and holding two objects in his hands, i.e. a spear-shaped sceptre on his left and a pine-cone on his right. Mên is depicted in his traditional costume, wearing a Phrygian cap, long tunic, long-sleeved chiton and a pair of boots. On the right side of the viewer, a humped bull is represented with its tail upwards. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ. Τατιανὴ Ἑρ|που εὐξαμένη ταῦρον ὑ|πὲρ ἀδελφῶν καὶ ἀκουσ|4θεῖσα, μὴ δυνασθεῖσα δὲ | ἀποδοῦναι ταῦρον, ἠρώτη|σε τὸν θεὸν καὶ συνεχώρησε | ἀπολαβεῖν στήλλην. Ἔτους τκ΄, |8 μη(νὸς) Πανήμου ι΄. Translation: ToMênAxiottenos.Tatiane,daughterofHerpos,havingvowedabullonbehalf of(her)brothersandbeingheard,butnotbeingabletobringthebull,askedthegod,andhe wasgrantedforgivenesstobringthesteleinreturn.Intheyear320,inthemonthofPanemos, onthetenthday. L1–2: BWK 61: Ἑρμίππου for Ἑρπου.

4.2.25

Kara Devlit/Sandal (Lydia) = 5.2.58

4.2.26

Katakekaumene* (Lydia) = 5.2.17

4.2.27

Katakekaumene* (Lydia) = 5.2.18

4.2.28

Katakekaumene* (Lydia) = 5.2.19

4.2.29

Katakekaumene* (Lydia) = 5.2.20

4.2.30

Katakekaumene* (Lydia) = 5.2.51

CATALOGUE

4.2.31

349

Katakekaumene* (area of, Lydia): Confessioninscriptionaddressed toMênPetraeitesAxetenos

Discoverylocation: Unknown location. Perhaps one of the sanctuaries of Mên Petraeites, according to G. Petzl. Type: Grey white marble stele with upper moulding. Dimensions: 85 × 37/47 × 7 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm. Currentlocation: Archaeological Museum of Ușak. Inv. No. 1-3-74. Bibliography: Horsley and Luxford 2016, 146, no. 3b; LKGI 39.42; BWK 38; Varinlioğlu 1991, 92–93, no. 2 (with photograph at pl. 18). Date: 3rd century AD. Representation: Below the moulding, on a protruded rim, a relief with two females. On the right side of the viewer, a child is holding her right hand in adoration and next to her a woman on her knees, begging for mercy and having her right arm raised to the front. Text: Ἠρώτησαν Χρυσέρως κὲ | Στρατόνεικος ἐξ εἰδό|των καὶ μὴ εἰδότων τοὺ|4ς πατρίους θεοὺς καθὼς | ἡμῖν ἐδηλώθη ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀν|γέλου τοῦ θεοῦ Μηνὸς Πε|τραείτου Ἀξετηνοῦ· εὐ|8χαριστῶ οὖν Ἀμμιὰς ὑπ|ὲρ Διονυσιάδος, καὶ ἐθήκομ|εν (δηκάρια) ἑκατὸν καθὼς ἐπε|ζήτησαν οἱ πάτριοι θεοί. Translation: ChryserosandStratoneikosenquiredtheancestralgodsregardingtheirknown andunknownsins;thiswasthusthiswaydisclosedbytheangelofMênPetraeitesAxetenos. I,Ammias,showmygratitudeforDionysiasandwepaid100denarii:asrequestedbythe ancestralgods.

4.2.32

Katakekaumene* (area of, Lydia): Confessioninscriptionaddressed toMênAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Probably Katakekaumene, in the north-eastern Lydia. Type: Marble stele with tenon. Dimensions: 96 × 39 × 5.5 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Bergama Museum. Inv. No. 4326. Bibliography: LKGI 39.38; BWK 64; SEG 38, no. 1234; Malay 1988, 149, no. 2 (with photograph at pl. 10.2). Date: AD 177/178 (= 262 Sullan era). Representation: A crescent above the text. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ. Ἀ[ρ]|τέμων καὶ Ἀτείμη|τος, ἐπεὶ ὁ πατὴρ αὐ|4τοῖς δορὰς ἦρεν βίᾳ ἐκ τοῦ ναοῦ, κολασ|θέντες ὑπὸ τοῦ θε|οῦ ἀπὸ νῦν εὐλογοῦ|8σιν. Ἔτους σξβ΄, μη(νὸς) Αὐ|δναίου βι΄. Translation: ToMênAxiottenos.ArtemonandAtimetoswerepunishedbythegodsbecause theirfatherusedforcetotakethehidesofanimalsfromthetempleand,startingfromthisday, theyveneratethegod.Intheyear262,inthemonthofAudnaios,onthetwelfthday. L4: SEG 38, no. 1234 and Malay 1988, 149, no. 2: δοράς: ‘probably skins of sacrificed animals’.

350 4.2.33

CATALOGUE

Katakekaumene* (area of, Lydia): Confessioninscriptionaddressed toMênLabanas

Discoverylocation: From an unidentified place situated on the middle course of the river Hermos, in the region of Katakekaumene. Type: White marble stele. Dimensions: 73 × 42 × 7 cm. Letters: 1.5–1.7 cm. Currentlocation: Archaological Museum of Izmir. Inv. No. 1973-1-3. Bibliography: LKGI 39.40; BWK 36; SEG 35, no. 1157; Herrmann 1985, 251–54, no. 1 (with photograph). Date: AD 191/192 (= 276 Sullan era). Representation: A crescent above the inscription. Text: Μηνὶ Λαβανα. Ἡ Ἐλπὶς | κατευτελίσασα Μῆνα | Λαβανα ἀκατάλουστος |4 οὖσα ἐπὶ τὸ βῆμά του ἀ|νέβη καὶ ἠρεύνησεν τὸ | βῆμα καὶ τὰς τάβλας αὐ|τοῦ. Ἐπιζητήσαντος τοῦ |8 θεοῦ οἱ κληρονόμοι εὐ|λογοῦντες ἀπέδωκαν. | Ἔτους σος΄, μη(νὸς) Περειτίου. | Καὶ Μηνεὶ Ἀξειτηνῷ |12 Καταιμόλυνέ μου τὸ βῆμα. | Εὐλογοῦτες ἀποείδο|μεν. Translation:ToMênLabana(s).ElpisshowedcontemptforMênLabana(s)andbeinginan impurestatesheenteredhispodiumandexaminedthepodiumandhistablets.Afterbeing punishedbythegod,theheirsmadeatonementpraising(him).Intheyear276,inthemonth ofPereitios.(Thestelewassetup)alsoforMênAxeitenos.Shedefiledmypodium.Wewitnessed,praising.

4.2.34

Katakekaumene* (area of, Lydia): Confessioninscriptionaddressed toMênLabanasandMênPetraeites

Discoverylocation: From an unidentified place situated on the middle course of the river Hermos, in the region of Katakekaumene. Type: White marble stele with gabled pediment and tenon. Above the pediment, three acroteria. On the tympanum, two leaves on the lower corners and a patera in the centre. Dimensions: 109 × 48 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Archaological Museum of Izmir. Inv. No. 1973-1-1. Bibliography: LKGI 39.55; BWK 37 (with photograph); SEG 35, no. 1158; Herrmann 1985, 255–59, no. 2 (with photograph). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Under the pediment, in a framed panel, three standing figures, with their right hands raised. Text: Μέγας Μεὶς Λαβανας καὶ Μεὶς | Πετραείτης. Ἐπὶ Ἀπολλώνιος | οἰκῶν ἐν οἰκίᾳ τοῦ θεοῦ παραν|4γελλομένῳ αὐτῷ ὑπὸ τοῦ θε|οῦ. Ἐπὶ ἠπίθησεν, ἀπετελέ|σετο αὐτοῦ Εἰούλιον τὸν υἱον | καὶ Μαρκίαν τὴν ἔκγονον αὐτοῦ, |8 καὶ ἐστηλογράφησεν τὰς δυνά|μις τῶν θεῶν, καὶ ἀπὸ νῦν συ | εὐλογῶ. Translation:GreatisMeisLabanasandMeisPetraeites!BecauseApolloniosdwelledinthe god’shouse,thegoddemanded:ashewasdisobedient,he(=thegod)tookthelifeofhisson, Iulius,andofhisniece,Marcia.Andhe(=Apollonios)wroteonthestelethepowersofgods andtheypraiseandworshiphimhenceforth.

CATALOGUE

4.2.35

351

Katakekaumene* (area of, Lydia): Confessioninscriptionaddressed tothegodAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Unknown provenance from Katakekaumene. Probably from Koresa or Köleköy (according to G. Petzl). Type: Marble stele with gabled pediment and tenon. Above the pediment, three palmette-type acroteria. Dimensions: Unknown. Copied and deciphered by H.W. Pleket and P. Herrmann from the photograph of Sotheby’sCatalogueofSale,Egyptian,MiddleEastern,Greek,Etruscanand RomanAntiquities, May 18th 1987, no. 349 (pl. XXVI). Auctioned on December 17th 1992. Bibliography: LKGI 39.41; BWK 58 (with photograph); SEG 37, no. 1000. Date: AD 166/167 (= 251 Sullan era). Representation: A large crescent moon inside the pediment. Within a sculpted vaulted niche, Mên with a crescent behind the shoulders is standing and holds a sceptre in his left hand and an object that looks like a bunch of grapes. Text: Ἔτους σνα΄, μη(νὸς) Πανήμου βι΄. Χάριν [ἔ]|δωκαν οἱ θεοὶ Εὐδόξῳ, ἵνα μὴ λυομ[έ]|νων ὅρκων τῆς Ταρσηνῆς λύει Εὔδο|4ξος ὑπὲρ τῆς ἰδίας γυναικός. Ἐπει | ὤμοσεν Σάρδιον καὶ παρώρκησεν, διὰ τοῦ|το - μήπω οὖσα ἐνῆλιξ {οὖσα} - δαπανή|σας ὁ Εὔδοξος ἐννέα ὀβολοὺς ἔλυ|8σε τοὺς ὅρκους καὶ ἐστηλλογ{γ}ράφησε | καὶ εὐχαριστεῖ. Ἵνα λύονται οἱ ὅρκοι τῷ | ὀνόματι τοῦ Ἀξιοττηνοῦ, ὥστε ὁ | λύων ὅρκους δαπανήσει δηνάρια ἑ|12κατὸν ἑβδομήκοντα πέντε. Τειμὴ|ν δὲ λήμψεται ἀφ᾽ αὐτῶν, ἣν ἂν ἐ|περωτήσι, εἰ ταῦτα δικαίως γ{ι}εγρ|αμμέν εἰσί, ἴν᾽ ἀνέσστησεν |16 στήλλην. Ὁ λύων σκῆππτρον θήσ|ει ἐπὶ τὸ ἱερὸν δηνάρια ἑκατὸν ἑβδο|μήκοντα πέντε{ι}, καὶ λέλυται τὸ σκῆπτ(ρον?) | δικαίως ΕΙΝΡΟΛΥΣΙΝΑΙ λελυμένυ|20ς τοὺς θεοὺς κατὰ ὡς ἐπέκρεινα|ὐτοί. Translation:Intheyear251,inthemonthofPanemos,onthetwelfthday.Thegodsmade EudoxosafavournottobreaktheoathstakentoTarsene[regarding?]Eudoxossothat(she) couldnolongerbehiswife(?).AsSardionhadtakenanoathandcommittedperjury–she wasnotoffullageyet–Eudoxosbroketheoaths,whilehepaidnineoboloi.Hewrotethe eventonasteleandheisgrateful.HewhobreakstheoathsinthenameofAxiottenos,heshall pay175denarii.He(=thegod)willreceivefromthisonethedueprice(tosetupthestele?), ifwrittencorrectly(?)forhimtosetupthestele.Hewhounbindsthesceptreshallpay175 denariitothesanctuary,and(only)thenthesceptreisjustlyunbound…unboundbythegods thewaytheydecidedforgood.

4.2.36

Katakekaumene* (area of, Lydia): Confessioninscriptionaddressed toMênAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Probably from Saittai. Type: Lower part of a marble stele with tenon. Dimensions: 40 × 63 × 5 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Bergama Museum. Inv. No. 4327. Bibliography: LKGI 39.39; BWK 65 (with photograph); SEG 38, no. 1235; Malay 1988, 150, no. 3. Date: ca. AD 200 (SEG) or late 2nd–early 3rd century (Malay).

352

CATALOGUE

Representation: Part of a woman in relief is visible. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ Ἀφφιὰς |2 Γλύκωνος εὔξατο, εἰ | τεκνώσει· γεγραμένη[ς] |4 τῆς εὐχῆς παρήλκυσε, | καὶ ἐκόλασε αὐτὴν καὶ | ἐκέλευσε ἐνγράψαι | τὰς δυνάμις τοῦ θεοῦ. Translation:Aphphias,daughterofGlykon,tookanoathtoMênAxiottenosshouldshehave achild.Whenherwishwasaccomplished,shedelayed(tofulfil)hervowandhepunished herandchargedherwithwritingaboutthegod’spowers.

4.2.37

Katakekaumene* (area of, Lydia): Dedication addressed to Mên Axiottenos

Discoverylocation: Unknown location from the Katakekaumene region. Type: Fragment of a marble stele. Dimensions: 15 × 21 × 4 cm. Letters: 1.8 cm. Currentlocation: Manisa Museum. Bibliography: LKGI 39.46; Malay 1994, 169. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: On the lower part of the stele, above the written text, feet of a woman are visible in a recessed panel. Text: [-- Μηνὶ Ἀξιο]ττηνῷ | [-----] ἀνέθ[η]|[κεν ---]. Translation: …toMênAxiottenos…set(this)up…

4.2.38

Katakekaumene* (area of, Lydia): Confessioninscriptionaddressed toMênAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Unknown location from the Katakekaumene region. Type: Marble stele. Dimensions: 74 × 43 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.8 cm. Currentlocation: Manisa Museum. Inv. No. 5666. Bibliography: LKGI 39.47; Malay 1994, 171 (with photograph at fig. 60). Date: AD 176/177 (= 261 Sullan era). Representation: A crescent moon above the inscription. Text: [Τα]τιὰς ἀγοράσασα | [..]α καταφρονουμέ|[νη] ἐξεχώρησα αὐτὰ |4 [Μ]ηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ, ἅτι|να πράξει ὡς ἄν θέλῃ. Ἔτους σξα΄, μη(νὸς) Ξανδι|κοῦ ζ΄. Translation:Tatiashavingspoken(openly)…andbeingtreatedcontemptuously,addressed thesetoMênAxiottenosforhimtodoashepleased.Intheyear261,inthemonthofXandikos, ontheseventhday.

4.2.39

Katakekaumene* (area of, Lydia): Ex-voto addressed to Mên Ploneates

Discoverylocation: Unknown location from the Katakekaumene region. Type: White marble stele with pediment, acroteria and tenon.

CATALOGUE

353

Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: Ușak Museum. Inv. No. 33-10-75. Bibliography: LKGI 39.62; SEG 34, no. 1216; Herrmann and Varinlioğlu 1984, 11–12, no. 7 (fig. 7). Date: AD 295/296 (= 380 Sullan era). Representation: A crescent is represented on inside the pediment. Text: Ἔτους τπ΄. Εὐξέ|μενος Τατια|νὸ εὐχὴν ἐν |4 Περεύδῳ Μη|νὶ Πλονεάτῃ καὶ | τοῖς συνεπερχομ|ένοις σὺν ἑαυτῷ· | ἔσχον τὴν εότητα | καὶ ἐν εὐχαρισίαις ἀνέθηκα. Translation:Intheyear380.Havingpromissed,I,Tatianos(setthisup)accordingtoavow inPereudostoMênPloneatesandto(thegod?)whoappearbeside.IkeptmyyouthandI raisedthisstelethanksgiving.

4.2.40

Katakekaumene(?)* (Lydia): Funeraryimprecationinvoking(Mên) Axiottenos’wrath

Discoverylocation: Unknown provenance. Probably the north-eastern area of Lydia. Type: White marble stele, with semicircular pediment in the upper part. Dimensions: 64 × 34 × 8 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. The inscribed field is featured by the entire surface of the stele, including the semicircular pediment and the moulding which delimited it from the body of the stele. Currentlocation: In a private collection. Bibliography: Petzl 2002, 99–102, no. 3 (with photograph). Date: AD 226, February 28th (= 380 Sullan era). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Ἔτους τι΄, μη(νὸς) Ξανδικοῦ η΄. Αὐρ. Διογένην κὲ Αὐρ. | Σικόνδαν τῆς σοφίας, | [τ]οὺς καλλιτέκνους, | [τ]οὺς ζευχθέντας ἐκ | βουλῆς Κρονίωνος ἐτί|μησαν οἱ υἱοὶ Αὐρ. Ἀγ(α)θό|πους κὲ Αὐρ. Ἰουλιανὴ κὲ Αὐρ. | Τροφίμη ἡ νύνφη κὲ οἱ προ|άξαντες ὑπὸ ζόφον εἱ|ερόνεντα· Αὐρ. Διογένης | ὁ μακαρίτης κὲ Αὐρ. Καλαν|δίων ὁ πᾶσι φίλος κὲ τὰ ἔγ|γονα κὲ οἱ συνγενεῖς κὲ Αὐρ. | Διογενειανὸς ὃς χάριν γονέων ἐώνεια φίλτρα ἐφύ|λαξ(ε)ν· θαυμάζι δὲ πάτρη τὸν ἐπάξιον υἱὸν γονέων. | Εἴ τις τούτοις παρααμαρ|[τ]ήσι -τῇ στήλῃ ἢ τῷ ἡρῴω -, | ἔξξι τὸν Ἀξιττηνὸν | κεχολομένον. Translation: Intheyear380,inthemonthofXandikos,ontheeighthday.AureliusDiogenes andAureliaSecunda,revealersofwisdom,blessedwithgoodchildren,unitedinmarriage, asorderedby(Zeus)Kronion,werehonouredbytheirchildrenAureliusAgathopousand AureliaIoulianeandAureliaTrophime,thedaughter-in-law,andthosewhohavealready descendedinthetenebrousdarkness:AureliusDiogenes,theonewhopassedawayrecently, AureliusKalandion,theonelovedbyall,andthegrandsonsandrelatives,AureliusDiogenianos, who kept an eternal affection, to the joy of his parents; the fatherland admires the well-worthysonofhisparents.Shouldanyonecommitasinagainstthesethings–meaning againstthesteleandthegrave–hewillhavetodealwiththewrathof(Mên)Axiottenos.

4.2.41

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): ConfessioninscriptionaddressedtoMeter Anaeitis,MeisTiamouandMeisOuranios = 5.2.22

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Gölde/İncesu (Kollyda).

354

CATALOGUE

Type: Upper side of marble stele, with triangular pediment. The acroterium on top is missing. Dimensions: 35 × 31 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.2–1.5 cm. Bibliography: Herrmann and Malay 2007, 83 (fig. 83). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: On the tympanum, there is an ivy leaf in each of the lower corners, and a round protrusion inside it, in central position. Text: Μεγάλη Μήτηρ Ἀναεῖτις | καὶ Μεὶς Τιαμου καὶ Μεὶς | Οὐράνιος Κόλλυδα κατέχον|τες καὶ ἡ δύναμις αὐτῶν· Τρύφαια Βαβυλωνίας δού|λη εσῆλθεν ἄθετος καὶ | ἐκολάσθη καὶ ἐξμολογη|[σ--------]. Translation:GreataretheMotherAnaeitisandMeisTiamouandtheHeavenlyMeis,who ruleoverKollyda,andtheirpower!Tryphaina,slaveofBabylonia,entered(thesanctuary?) inappropriatelyandwaspunishedandconfessed[---].

4.2.42

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): Confession inscription addressed to Mên Motylleites

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Gölde/İncesu (Kollyda). Type: Lower part of large marble stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 8345. Bibliography: Ricl 2011, 150; de Hoz 2009, 366; Herrmann and Malay 2007, 84 (fig. 84). Date: AD 197/198 (= 282 Sullan era). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: Μηνὸς Μοτυλλείτου ἰορτῆς γε|νομένου, ἐρχομένου αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ | τῆς ἰορτῆς, συνῆλθεν ὄχλος ξίφη καὶ ξύλα | καὶ λίθους, συντρίψαντες τοὺς ἱερο|δούλους καὶ τὰ ἀφυδρίσματα τῶν θεῶν, καὶ μηδενὶ χρῶμα τηρηθῆναι μήτε τῦ[ς] |8 θεοῖς μήτε τοῖς ἱεροδούλοις· εὑρε|θεὶς δὲ Ὀνίσμος Λάθυρος ἐν αὐτοῖς | καὶ μὴ δυνηθεὶς τὴν μάχην ἀνακρ|οῦσαι διαγενομένων ἐτῶν ε΄ κολάσ|12θη ἰς τὸν ὦμον καὶ δυσαπιστῶν τῷ θε|ῷ καὶ ὑπὸ μηδενὸς δυάμενος θαρα|πευθῆναι ἐαραπεύθην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ· | δευτέρᾳ οὖν κολάσει ἐδράχθην κατὰ |16 τῶν ἁπαλῶν ἐπὶ ἡμέρας τρεῖς | καὶ ὥρας τρεῖς· σωθεὶς οὖν ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ | κατὰ τὸ ἐμὸν μέρος εὐλογῶν ἀνέθηκα. | Ἔτους σπβ΄, μη(νὸς) Δαισίου κ΄. Translation:AfterthecelebrationofafestivalofMênMotylleites,whilehewascomingback fromthefestival,amobgatheredagainstthebasilica,withswordsandclubsandstonesand crushedthesacredslavesandtheimagesofthegods,andnobodycouldsave(their)skin, neitherthegods,northesacredslaves.OnesimosLathyrosfoundhimselfamongthemand sincehewasunabletostopthebattle,hewaspunishedathisshoulderafterfive(?)years. ‘AndasIdidnotobeythegod,andIcouldnotbecuredbyanybody,Iwascuredbythegod. Asasecondpunishment,Iwasseizedatthesoftpartsforthreedaysandthreehours.Being savedbythegod,formyownpart,Isetup(thisstele)inpraising’.Intheyear282,inthe monthofDaisios,onthetwentiethday. L9: Ὀνίσμος for Ὀνήσιμος.

CATALOGUE

4.2.43

355

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): Confession inscription addressed to Mên Motylleites,ZeusSabaziosandArtemisAnaeitis = 5.2.23

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Gölde/İncesu (the ancient Kollyda). Type: Lower part of large marble stele with pediment and tenon. Dimensions: 151 × 66 × 13 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 8346. Bibliography: Herrmann and Malay 2007, 85 (fig. 85). Date: AD 205/206 (= 290 Sullan era). Representation: In the upper part of the stele, above the inscribed field, male character reaching to his knees, who seems to have also dropped his shield. To his left, an animal that is probably attacking him. Text: (relief) Ἔτους σϙ΄, μη(νὸς) Περιτου· Ἀμμι|ανὸς καὶ Ἑρμογένης Τρύφωνος πάρισιν ἐρωτῶντες το|4ὺς Μῆνα Μοτυλλίτ|ην καὶ Δία Σαβάζιον καὶ Ἄρτε|μιν Ἀναεῖτιν καὶ μεγάλην συ|νᾶτος καὶ σύνκλητον τῶν θε|8ῶν ἐρωτῶντες τὴν κατοικία[ν] | καὶ τὸν ἱερὸν δοῦμον, ἵνα ἐλέ|ου τύχωσιν, ἐπὶ ἐκολάσθη[σ]|αν οὗτοι, ὅτι τὸν πατέρα ἐκρά|12τησαν ἐξομολογούμενον | τὰς δυνάμις τῶν θεῶν, καὶ ἐλη|μοσύνην μὴ λαβόντος τοῦ πα|τρὸς αὐτῶν, ἀλλὰ ἀποτελεσθέ|16ντος αὐτοῦ ̔μή τίς ποτεπαρευ|τελίσι τοὺς θεοὺς᾽ διὰ τὰς π[ρ]|ώτας προγραφὰς αὐτοῦ ἔγρα[ψ]|αν καὶ ἀνέθηκαν εὐλογοῦντε[ς] | τοῖς θεοῖς. Translation: In the year 290, in the month Peritios, Ammianos and Hermogenes, sons of Tryphon, appear (at the sanctuary) asking the gods Mên Motyllites, Zeus Sabazios, and ArtemisAnaeitisandthegreatsenateandcouncilofthegods,askingalsothevillageandthe sacred doumos,thattheymayfindmercy.Fortheyhavebeenpunishedbecausetheyseized their father, while he was acknowledging the powers of the gods. And their father did not obtainpity.However,afterhisdeath,theywrote(?)onaccountofhisfirstwrittendeclaration thatnobodyatanytimeshoulddisparagethegods,anddedicated(thestele)praisingthegods.

4.2.44

Kollyda (area of, Lydia): ConfessioninscriptionaddressedtoMên Axiottenos

Discoverylocation: Probably from Kollyda. Type: Blue white marble stele with upper moulding. Dimensions: 92 × 36/46 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm. Currentlocation: Archaeological Museum of Ușak. Bibliography: Gordon 2004, 192; LKGI 39.28; BWK 62 (with photograph); SEG 39, no. 1276; Varinlioğlu 1989, 42–43, no. 2 (with photograph at pl. 6.2). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A large crescent is represented under the upper moulding and in a recessed panel beneath, a man with his hand raised in adoration. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ καὶ τῇ δυ|νάμι αὐτοῦ. Ἐπὶ Πρέπουσα | ἀπελευθέρα τῆς εἱερείας |4 εὔξετο ὑπὲρ υἱοῦ Φιλήμο|νος, εἰ ἔσται ὁλόκληρος καὶ ἰα|τροῖς μήπος δαπανήσι, στηλ|λογραφῆσαι, καὶ γενομένης |8 τῆς εὐχῆς οὐκ ἀπέδωκεν· | νῦν ὁ θεὸς ἀπῇτεσε τὴν εὐ|χὴν καὶ ἐκόλασε τὸν πατέρα | Φιλήμονα, καὶ ἀποδίδι τὴν |12 εὐχὴν ὑπὲρ τοῦ υἱοῦ καὶ ἀπὸ | νῦν εὐλογῖ.

356

CATALOGUE

Translation: ForMênAxiottenosandhispower!AsPrepousa,freedwomanofthepriestess,hadtakenavowforhersonPhilemon‒incasehegotoveranddidn’thavetocover expensesforphysicians,shewouldwrite(this)downonastele‒becauseshe,despiteher wishbeinggranted,didnotfulfilherpromise,thegodwasthendemanding(thestele)and punishedthefatherofPhilemon.And(now)shekeepshervowforthesonandpraises(the god)henceforth.

4.2.45

Kollyda (area of, Lydia): Confession inscription addressed to  xiottenos A

Discoverylocation: Probably from Kollyda. Type: Blue white marble stele with upper moulding. Dimensions: 97 × 38/43 × 6 cm. Letters: 2.3 cm. Currentlocation: Archaeological Museum of Ușak. Inv. No. 23-35-75. Bibliography: LKGI 39.21; BWK 63 (with photograph); SEG 39, no. 1277; Varinlioğlu 1989, 43–45, no. 3 (with photograph at pl. 6.3). Date: AD 132/133 (= 217 Sullan era). Representation: Under the upper moulding, a thick U-shaped crescent moon within a circle. Text: Ἔτους σιζ΄, μηνὸς | Ὑπερβερτα[ί]|ου. |4 Στρατονείκη Μουσαί|ου δανισαμένη παρὰ | Εὐτυχίδος πυρῶν | μόδινον τῶν ἱερῶν |8 τοῦ Ἀξιοτηνοῦ καὶ πα|ρελκύσασα μέχρι σήμ|ερον, κολασθεῖσα ὑπὸ | τοῦ θεοῦ κατὰ τοῦ δε|12ξιοῦ μαστοῦ τὰ συν|αχθέντα σὺν τόκοις | ἀπέδωκεν εὐλογοῦ|σα τῷ Ἀξιοττηνῷ. Translation: Intheyear217,inthemonthofHyperber(e)taios.Stratoneike,thedaughterof Mousaios,tookasloanfromEutychis,onemodiusoftheholycornbelonging toAxiotenos. Delayingtomakethereturnuntiltoday,shewaspunishedbythegodatherrightbreastand gavebackthewholeamountwithinteresttoAxiottenospraising(him).

4.2.46

Kollyda (area of, Lydia): ConfessioninscriptionaddressedtoMeter tekousaandMeis

Discoverylocation: Probably from Kollyda. Type: Blue white marble stele with upper moulding. Dimensions: 80 × 32/41 × 8 cm. Letters: 1.8 cm. Currentlocation: Archaeological Museum of Ușak. Inv. No. 10-4-75. Bibliography: LKGI 39.3; BWK 55; SEG 39, no. 1278; Varinlioğlu 1989, 45–47, no. 4 (with photograph at pl. 7.4). Date: AD 169 (= 245 Sullan era). Representation: A large crescent under the moulding. Text: Μεγάλη Μήτηρ, Μηνὸς | τεκοῦσα, Μέγας Μεὶς | Οὐράνιος, Μεὶς Ἀρτεμι|4δώρου Ἀξιοττα κατέ|χων καὶ ἡ δύναμις αὐτοῦ· | ἐπεὶ Πωσφόρος Ἀρτεμᾶ | παιδίον ὢν ἔτων ἒξ ἐ|8πενδύτιον ἐνεδύσε|το σπίλους ἔχων, ὁ Θε|ὸ ἐπεζήτησεν, καὶ ἦρε | τρίφωνον καὶ ἐστηλ|12λογράφησεν τὰς δυ|νάμις τοῦ θεοῦ. Ἔτους σμε΄, μη(νὸς) Πανήμου βι΄.

CATALOGUE

357

Translation: GreatistheMotherwhogavebirthtoMên;greatistheHeavenlyMeis,Meis ofArtemidoroswhorulesoverAxiottaandhispower!AsthesonofArtemas,P(h)osphoros, whilebeingsixheputonanimpureclothing,thegodinquired;andatriphonon(tookaway histransgression).Andhewroteonthesteleaboutthegod’spowers.Intheyear245,inthe monthofPanemos,onthetwelfthday.

4.2.47

Kollyda (area of, Lydia): ConfessioninscriptionaddressedbyPollion toMênAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Probably from Kollyda. Type: White marble stele with gabled pediment, palmette-type acroteria and tenon. The upper acroterion is missing. Dimensions: 84 × 34/47 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.8 cm. Currentlocation: Archaeological Museum of Ușak. Inv. No. 2-1-74. Bibliography: LKGI 39.29; BWK 6 (with photograph); SEG 39, no. 1279; Varinlioğlu 1989, 47–49, no. 5 (with photograph at pl. 7.5). Date: AD 238/239 (= 323 Sullan era). Representation: On the tympanum, two leaves in the lower corner, a rosette in the centre and a large crescent underneath. Beneath the rim of the pediment, a standing man with his right hand raised in adoration, sitting on a platform. In his left hand he is holding a sceptre. Text: Διεὶ Ὀρείτῃ μεγά|λῳ κὲ Μηνὶ Ἀ|ξιοττηνῷ |4 Περκον βασιλεύ|οντα Πωλίων | ἐπί με ἔλαθεν | κὲ ὑπερέβην τὸν |8 ὅρον ἀθέτος, ἐκο|λάσαντο αὐτὸν | οἱ θεοί. Ἔτους τκγ΄, μη(νος) Δύσ|στρου λ΄. Τριφώνῳ ἀπῆρεν |12 ἀσφάλακι κὲ στρουθῷ κὲ θι|νίῳ κὲ τὴν θυμολυσίαν τὴν | εἶχαν οἱ θεοὶ ἐν ἔθι ἀναστανομένης τῆς στήλης. Μόδιος |16 πυρῶν, οἴνου πρόχος α΄, ἄρισ|τον τοῖς εἱερεῖσιν πυρῶν κύ|προν αΓ΄, οἴνου πρόχον αΓ΄, | ἐρέβινθοι κὲ ἀλεία, κὲ ἱλα|20σάμην τοὺς θεοὺς διὰ τέκνα τέ|κνων, ἔγγον᾽ ἐγόνων. Translation: Pol(l)ion(dedicatesthis)totheGreatZeusOreitesandtoMênAxiottenoswho rulesaskinginPerkos.AsIwaswrongandIiniquitouslyoversteppedtheborderwithout permission,hewaspunishedbythegods,intheyear323,inthemonthofDystros,onthe twentiethday.Heremovedthetransgressionwithatriphononconsistingofamole,asparrow andatuna;whenthegod-sentinsanityvanishedandherecovered,hesetupthestele:a modiusofwheat,aprokhosofwine.Forthemealofthepriests:akyprosandahalfofwheat, aprokhosofwine,peasandsalad;andIhavepropitiatedthegodsforthesakeofmychildren’schildrenandthedescendantsofmydescendants.

4.2.48

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): Ex-voto of Hermogenes dedicated to Mên AxiettenosexEpikratou

Discoverylocation: Found in the church of St. John at Gölde. Type: Marble stele broken above. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 39.23; TAM V.1, 344; CMRDM I, 31 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 15, no. 1. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A leg in relief is represented.

358

CATALOGUE

Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιεττηνῷ ἐξ Ἐπι|2κράτου Ἑρμογένης ἐπὶ χά|ριτος εὐχήν. Translation: ToMênAxiettenosofEpikrates,Hermogenes,asgratitude,infulfilmentofthevow.

4.2.49

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): DedicationtoMênAxiottenosexEpikratou

Discoverylocation: Found at Gölde. Type: Fragment of stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 39.24; TAM V.1, 345. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A wreath is represented. Text: Μη(νὶ) Ἀξιο[ττηνῷ] | [ἐξ] Ἐπι[κράτου?]. Translation:ToMênAxiottenosofEpikrates.

4.2.50

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): Dedication to Mên Ouranios and Mên Axiottenos

Discoverylocation: Found in the church of St. John at Gölde. Type: Stele broken above. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 39.27; TAM V.1, 349; CMRDM I, 32 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 15, no. 2. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Two eyes in relief. Text: Μηνὶ Οὐρανίῳ |2 Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ | [Ἰου]λία Ποπλίου. Translation: TotheHeavenlyMên,toMênAxiottenos,Iulia,thedaughterofPublius.

4.2.51

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): Dedication of Epios to Mên Artemidorou Axiottenos

Discoverylocation: Found into the paviment of the church St. Theodoros at Gölde. Type: White marble stele. Dimensions: 53 × 36.5 cm. Letters: 1.8–1.9 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.10; TAM V.1, 342; CMRDM I, 33 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 15, no. 4. Date: AD 122/123 (= 207 Sullan era). Representation: A crescent moon in relief is represented. Text: Ἔτους σζ΄, μη(νὸς) Ξανδικοῦ βι΄, κατὰ ἐπιταγὴν Μηνὸς Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξιοττηνοῦ, Ἤπιος Τ[ι]βερίου Φιλοκάλου δοῦλος ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τῶν τέκνων ἀνέθηκεν. Translation:Intheyear207,inthemonthofXandikos,onthetwelfthday,inaccordancewith thecommandofMênofArtemidorosAxiottenos,Epios,theslaveofTiberiusPhilokalos,set (this)upforhimselfandforhischildren.

CATALOGUE

4.2.52

359

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): DedicationofasacredassociationofMeter, MênTiamouandMênPetraeites

Discoverylocation: Found in west wall of the church of St. Taxiarches at Gölde. Type: Marble base with upper and lower mouldings. Dimensions: 24 × 54 cm. Letters: 0.8–1.4 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 15.17; TAM V, 351; CMRDM I, 34 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 16, no. 10 (partial); Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 183; Le Bas and Waddington 1870, 678. Date: AD 161/162 (= 246 Sullan era). Text: [Ἔτ]ους σμς΄, ἀνέθηκαν οἱ κα[τ]αλουστικοὶ Μητρ[ὸς θε]|[ῶν?] καὶ Μηνὸς Τιάμου καὶ Μηνὸς Πετραείτου τὸ [ἄγαλ]|μα τοῦ Διονύσου. |4 Ἰουλιανός, Δαμᾶς, Εὐσχήμων, Ἄπφιον, Ἀπφῦς, Μᾶρ|κος, Πόπλιος, Σεκοῦνδος, Πρωτόκτητος, Ἑρμοκράτης, Μητρόδωρος, Δαμᾶς, Ἀπφίας, Ἑρμογένης, Δαμᾶς, Μη|νόφιλος, Ἀπολλώνιος, Ἡραΐς, Ἑρμοκράτης, Ἀπολλώνιος, Γλύ|κων, Ἀπολλώνιος, Ἄμμιον, Τρύφων, Μελτίνη, Ἑρμογένης, | Παπίας, Ἑρμογένης, Ἀπφίας, Ἀσκλᾶς, Μελτίνη, Ἑρμογέ|νης, Νεικόμαχος, Πεία, Μᾶρκος, Τύχη, Ἀπέλλας, Ἀλέ|ξανδρος, Μελτίνη, Σώστρατος, Νεικίας, Ἰουλιανή, Μητροφάνης, Ἀθηναΐς. Translation: Intheyear246,theassociationofritual-purifiersoftheMother(ofGods?),of MênTiamouandofMênPetraeites(setup)thestatueofDionysos.(Theyareasfollows:) Ioulianos,Damas,Euschemon,Apphion,Apphys,Marcus,Publius,Secundus,Protoktetos, Hermokrates,Metrodoros,Damas,Apphias,Hermogenes,Damas,Menophilos,Apollonios, Herais,Hermokrates,Apollonios,Glykon,Apollonios,Ammion,Tryphon,Meltine,Hermogenes, Papias, Hermogenes, Apphias, Asklas, Meltine, Hermogenes, Neikomachos, Peia, Marcus, Tyche, Apellas, Alexandros, Meltine, Sostratos, Neikias, Iouliane, Metrophane, Athenais.

4.2.53

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): DedicationtoMênTyrannos

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Gölde. Type: Stone monument. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 39.72; TAM V.1, 350; CMRDM I, 36 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 17, no. 18 (partial); Le Bas and Waddington 1870, 685. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: [---]ΦΕΙΠΑΡΕΝ[--] | [--] Μηνεὶ Τυρά[ννῳ] | [οἱ Τροφί]μου κληρον[όμοι --] | [--] ἀνέθη[καν --]. Translation:…toMênTyrannos… thosearoundTrophimos,thekleronomoi…setthisup… L1–5: CMRDM I, 36: ρειπαρεν | Μηνεὶ Τυρά[ννῳ] | μουκληρον | . . . μοκαιτα | ιανεθι.

360 4.2.54

CATALOGUE

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): Ex-votoofElpisdedicatedtoAxiotenosex Epikratou

Discoverylocation: Found in the church of St. John at Gölde. Type: Fragment of white marble stele, broken above and below. Dimensions: 20 × 38 × 7.5 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.22; TAM V.1, 343; CMRDM I, 37 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 19, no. 27; Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 184; Le Bas and Waddington 1870, 686. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A relief that could represent a mule. Text: [Ἀξι]ο[τη]ν[ῷ] ἐ[ξ] Ἐπικρ[ά]|[το]υ Ἐλπὶς Ἀνδρονίκο[υ] | εὐξαμένη ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἡμι|όνου εὐχήν. Translation: ToAxiotenosofEpikrates.Elpis,thedaughterofAndronikos,prayingforthe mule,inaccordancewiththevow.

4.2.55

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): DedicationtoMênAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Found in the church of St. Theodoros at Gölde. Type: Fragment of white marble stele, broken on all sides. Dimensions: 11 × 19.5 × 4 cm. Letters: 1.2 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.25; TAM V.1, 346; CMRDM I, 38 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 18, no. 22; Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 185. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Two eyes are represented above the written text. Text: [Μηνὶ Ἀ]ξιοττηνῷ [--] | [----]. Translation: ToMênAxiottenos…

4.2.56

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): DedicationtoMênAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Found Gölde. Type: Fragment of stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 39.26; TAM V.1, 347. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A crescent moon is represented. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιο[ττηνῷ]. Translation: ToMênAxiottenos.

4.2.57

Kollyda (Gölde, Lydia): Ex-votodedicatedtoMênMotelleites

Discoverylocation: Found by G.M.A. Hanfmann at Gölde. Type: White marble stele.

CATALOGUE

361

Dimensions: 32 × 23.5 (top) / 31 (bottom) × 4.2 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.57; TAM V.1, 348; CMRDM I, 39 (with bibliography); Lane 1967– 68, 46, no. 8. Date: AD 228/229 (= 313 Sullan era). Representation: A woman is represented, with her right hand raised in adoration. Text: Ἔτους τιγ΄, μη(νὸς) Γορπιαίου | ηι΄. Μηνὶ Μοτελλείτῃ | Τροφίμη ὑπὲρ Ἰουλιανοῦ | τοῦ θρεπτοῦ εὐχὴν | ἀνέστησεν. Translation: Intheyear313,inthemonthofGorpiaios,ontheeighteenthday.ToMênMotelleites,Trophimeset(this)upforIoulianos,(her)nursling,infulfilmentofthevow.

4.2.58

Kula (Lydia) = 5.2.28

4.2.58a Kula (Lydia) = 5.2.32 4.2.59

Kula (Lydia): ConfessioninscriptiondedicatedtoMênPetraeitesand toMênLabanes

Discoverylocation: Discovered before 1880 near Kula. Type: Stele of white marble, damaged. Dimensions: 98 × 51/57 × 8 cm. Letters: 1.8–2.4 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.53; Sartre 1995, 326; BWK 35 (with bibliography; fig. at p. 43); TAM V.1, 231; CMRDM I, 62; Lane 1964, 16, no. 9 (incomplete); Robert 1987, 362. Date: AD 210/211 (= 295 Sullan era). Representation: The monument features two individuals. The child, depicted on the right side of the image, has the right arm raised in prayer. He is clad in calf-length toga (?). The character on his left, probably adult, brings offerings on an altar featured on his left side. Text: Ἔτους σϙε΄, μη(νὸς) Περειτίου η΄. | Μηνὶ Πετραείτῃ καὶ Μηνὶ Λα|βανῃ. Μητροφάνης καὶ Φλαβια|νὸς οἱ Φιλιππικοῦ καταλειφθ|5έντες ὑπὸ τῶν γονέων ἐν ὀρ|φανείᾳ καὶ ἐνίων αὐτοῖς ἐκ τῆ[ς] | κώμης καὶ ἀρόντων ἔνγραφα καὶ ἕτε|ρα εἴδη ἐκ τῆς οἰκίας αὐτῶν λα|10θραίως, καὶ περισυρομένων αὐτῶν | ὑπὸ δανιστῶν, ἡ Ταζηνῶν κατοι|κία ἀδοξήσασα ἐπέστησε τὸ | σκῆπτρον τοῖς κακῶς εἰς α(ὐ)τοὺς τ[ολ]|μήσασιν, καὶ ὁ θεὸς ἐξεζήτησεν [καὶ] |15 ἐκολάσετο καὶ διέφθειρε τοὺς [ἐπι]|βουλεύσαντας αὐτοῖς. Ὁ θεὸς [οὖν] | [ἐπεζήτ]ησε(?) στηλλογράφησα[ι εὐ|λογοῦντας τὰ]ς δυνάμις, ὅτι [--] | [---] τῆς[--]. Translation: In the year 295, in the month of Pereitios, on the eighth day. The sons of Philippikos,MetrophanesandFlavianus,(dedicatedthis)toMênPetraeitesandtoMên Labanes.Astheyhadlostboththeirparentsandsome(people)ofthevillagestolewritten documentsandothergoodsfromtheirhouseandastheywereharassedbymoneylenders, thecommunityofTazenoibecameangryandsetupthesceptreagainstthosewhohaddared to(dosuch)harm;andthegodlookedfor,found,anddestroyedthosewhohaddonethem harm.Thus,thegodaskedforthosewhoworshiphispowerstoinscribe(this)onastele [---].

362 4.2.60

CATALOGUE

Kula* (Lydia): Dedicationaddressedbyinhabitantsofthevillageof ArchelaostoMênTyrannosandtohismother

Discoverylocation: Bought from an antiquarian who would have purchased it from ‘Sedemli, near Manisa’. E. Schwertheim considers it more likely to have originated in the region of Kula. Type: White marble stele, with tenon. The foot surface is rough, unfinished. The body of the stele narrows toward the top, where it features shaped moulding. Dimensions: 127 × 0.52 (lower part)/0.48 (upper part) cm. Letters: 2 cm. The six rows of the inscription are set right below the frame and they cover more than a third of the inscribable surface. Currentlocation: Museum of Izmit. Bibliography: LKGI 39.2; CMRDM II, A8; Schwertheim 1975, pl. 66. Date: AD 161/162 (= 246 Sullan era). Representation: In the upper part the monument, it features two framed divine figures. The one on the viewer’s left depicts Mên, crescent on the rear, on shoulder level and Phrygian cap, whose ears drop to the nape. He is clad in tight waistline chiton, himation, and tunic fastened on the right shoulder, with margins dropping to the ankles. The folds are straight and they follow the bodyline. The god wears small boots. His left arm is raised, and the fingers most probably hold sceptre. The right arm is stretched on the side, while the palm upward holds small sphere-shaped object, which could be a pine-cone. The female divinity at his side wears polos above the head, tight waistline chiton, and the cloak, which drops to the ankles on the rear; on the anterior side, it starts from the left shoulder and it forms an arch on the level of the right thigh. The folds follow the bodyline diagonally. The goddess has the left arm stretched on the side; the palm, which exceeds the frame, supports a round object. In her left hand, on hip level, she holds a patera. By all appearances, she wears sandals. Text: Κατ᾽ ἐπίπνοιαν Διὸς Κιλ|λαμενηνοῦ Ἀρχελάου | κώμη Μηνὸς τεκοῦσαν καὶ Μῆναν Τύραννον καθι|έρωσαν. Ἔτους σμϛ΄, μην(ὸς) | Πανήμου. Translation: In accordance with the inspiration from Zeus Killamenenos, the village of Archelaosconsecrated(thisstatueof)themotherofMênandMênTyrannos.Intheyear246, inthemonthofPanemos.

4.2.61

Kula (area of, Lydia): Confessioninscriptiondedicatedtothegods ofNeaKome

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the whereabouts of Kula. Type: White marble stele with gabled pediment, akroteria and tenon. Dimensions: 81 × 38 × 6 cm. Letters: cm. The first line of the text on the rim of the pediment. Currentlocation: Manisa Museum. Inv. No. 5890. Bibliography: Gordon 2004, 196; BWK 47; Malay 1994, 163 (mention); BÉ 1990, 695; SEG 38, no. 1233; Malay 1985, 148–49, no. 1 (with photograph at pl. 10.1). Date: AD 146/147 (= 231 Sullan era). Representation: In between the first line of the text and the rest of it, a large crescent moon.

CATALOGUE

363

Text: Μεγάλοι θεοὶ Νέαν Κώμην κατέχοντες. (crescent) |2 Ἔτους σλα΄. Μηνοφίλα | ὑπὸ Πολυχρονίου τοῦ υ|4ἱοῦ χολιασθεῖσα καὶ τοῖς | θεοῖς ἐνευξαμένη ἰς τὸ |6 εἱκανοποηθῆναι αὐτὴν, | καὶ κολασθέντος αὐτοῦ |8 καὶ εἱλασαμένου τοὺς θε|ούς, ἐκέλευσεν αὐτὴν |10 στηλλογραφῆσαι τὰς δυνά|μεις τῶν θεῶν. Translation: GreatarethegodswhoruleoverNeaKome!Intheyear231.Menophilahad been angered by her son Polychronios and prayed to the gods so as to find satisfaction. Hewaspunishedandpropitiatedthegods,andthegod[Mên]orderedmetowritedownthe aboutthepowersofthegod.

4.2.62

Kula (area of, Lydia): Confession inscription addressed to Mên  rtemidorouAxiot(t)enos A

Discoverylocation: Found in the surroundings of Kula. Type: White marble stele with an upper moulding. Dimensions: 103 × 54 × 7 cm. Letters: 1.5–1.7 cm. Currentlocation: Manisa Museum. Inv. No. 5414. Bibliography: Gordon 2004, 192–93; LKGI 39.9; BWK 59; Malay 1994, 173; Chaniotis 1990, 127–31 (with translation); BÉ 1990, 692; SEG 37, no. 1001; Petzl and Malay 1987 (with photograph at pl. 1). Date: 2nd or 3rd century AD. Representation: A very large thin crescent, almost circular, on the top of the monument. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξιοτηνῷ. Συντύχη Θεογένου. Εὑροντος αὐ|τῆς Θεογένου τοῦ ἀνδρὸς λιθάριον ὑα|4κίνθιον, εἶτα κειμένου αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ οἰκίᾳ | αὐτῆς ἐκλάπη τὸ λιθάριον, καὶ ζητούσης | αὐτῆς καὶ βασανιζομένης ἐπεύξατο | Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ περὶ αὐτοῦ, ἵνα αὐτὴν |8 ἱκανοπήσι· καὶ εὑρέθη κατακεκαυμένον | καὶ ἠφανισμένον, ἐνδεμένον ἐν λινου|δίῳ ὑπὸ τοῦ κλέπτου τεθειμένον ἐπὶ | τὸν τόπον, οὗ ἔκειτο ὁλόκληρον. Οὕτως |12 τε ἐπιφανεὶς ὁ θεὸς ἐν μιᾷ καὶ τριακοσ|τῇ τὴν κλέψασα(ν) καὶ τοῦτο πυήσασα(ν) Ἀπφίαν | Γλύκωνος οὗσαν παρθένον διέρηξε· | περιυρούσης τε αὐτῆς τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ |16 θεοῦ διὰ τὸ ἠρωτῆσθαι ὑπὸ τῆς μητρὸς | τῆς παρθένου, ἵνα σειγήσι, καὶ ὁ θεὸς τοῦ|το ἐνεμέσησε, ὅτι οὐκ ἐξεφάντευ|σε οὐδὲ ὕψωσε τὸν θεὸν ἡ Συντύχη· διό|20τι ἐποιήσεν αὐτὴν ἐπὶ τέκνου Ἡρακλεί|δου ἐτῶν ιγ΄ νέμεσιν ἐπὶ τὸν τόπον αὐτοῦ | στῆσαι, ὅτι τὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων μᾶλλον ἐπό|ησεν ἢ τοῦ θεοῦ. Συντύχη Ἀπολλωνίου |24 θυγάτηρ καὶ Μελτίνης ἡ προγεγραφοῦ|σα τὴν νέμεσιν. Translation: Syntyche,wifeofTheogenes,(dedicatedthisstele)toMênofArtemidorosAxiot(t) enos.Whenherhusband,Theogenes,foundahyacinthstone,itremainedintheirhouseand thenwasstolen.AndwhenshewassearchingforitandinquiringsheprayedtoMênAxiottenos forhertofindsatisfaction;anditwasfoundburnedandbroken,wrappedinalinenshirt,put bythethiefintheplacewhereitliedwhen(yet)undamaged.Andthusthegodmanifestedhis poweronthethirty-firstday,rippedoffApphia,daughterofGlykon,whowasagirl,andwho hadcommittedthetheftanddidthis.Andbecauseshe(i.e.Syntyche)defiedthegod’spower, sinceshehadbeenaskedbythegirl’smothertokeepsilent,thegodalsotookrevengeforthis, (namely) because Syntyche did not publicise and exalt the god. Therefore he punished her child,Herakleides,ofthirteen,andmadehersetupthereportofthepunishmentathis (sacred) place,becausesheratheractedonpeople’sinterestthanongod’s.ItisSyntyche,thedaughter ofApolloniusandMeltine,who hasbroughtthepunishmenttopublicknowledge.

364 4.2.63

CATALOGUE

Kula (area of, Lydia): Confession inscription addressed to Mên  xiottenosandthemotherofMên A

Discoverylocation: Probably from Kula. Type: Blue white marble stele with upper moulding. Dimensions: 107 × 45/53 × 8 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm. Currentlocation: Archaeological Museum of Ușak. Inv. No. 10-2-75. Bibliography: LKGI 39.4; Varinlioğlu 1989, 40–42, no. 1 (photograph at pl. 6.1); SEG 39, no. 1275; not registered in BWK; see CMRDM I, A2 for the same persons. Date: AD 175–176 (= 260 Sullanic era). Representation: In a recessed panel, a standing woman with her right hand raised in adoration. A crescent to the left. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ καὶ Μηνὸς | τεκούσῃ. Εὐτυχὶς Γ(αίου) Ἰ(ουλίου) Ἀνική|του Περγαμηνοῦ θρεπτὴ εὐ|4ξαμένη τῷ θεῷ ἀσθενοῦσα, | εἰ μεταβολὴν σχῶ, στηλλο|γραφῆσαι, ἀκοῦσαντος τοῦ θε|οῦ ἀπέδωκα τὴν εὐχήν, καὶ |8 εὐχαριστῶ τῇ δυνάμι αὐτοῦ. Ἐτους σξ΄, μη(νὸς) Ὑπερβερεταίου β΄. Translation: ToMênAxiottenosandtheMotherofMên.Eutychis,nurslingofG(aius)I(ulius) Aniketos,fromPergamon,wasillandsheprayedtothegod(saying)shouldIbehealedIwill setupastele;asthegodheard,Ifulfilledthevowandpraisehispowers.Intheyear260,in themonthofHyperberetaios,onthesecondday.

4.2.64

Kula(?) (Lydia): Ex-votoaddressedtoMênAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Copied in Menye by Alfred Philippson. Type: Upper part of a white marble stele. Dimensions: 54.5 × 42 × 5 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 1947. Bibliography: LKGI 39.6; Malay 1994, 172; TAM V.1, 253; CMRDM I, A2; Hermann and Polatkan 1969, 57, no. 13 (fig. 17). Date: 2nd century AD(?). Representation: In a recessed panel, a standing woman with her right hand raised in adoration and a child are represented. A crescent to the left. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ ἐξ |2 Ἀπολλωνίου Γ(άϊος) Ἰ(ούλιος) Ἀνεί|κητος μετὰ καὶ Ἰ(ουλίας) Τύ|4χης τῆς συνβίου ὑπὲρ [--]ήθου τοῦ υἱοῦ εὐ|6[χὴν ἀνέθη]καν τοὺς [---]. Translation: To Mên Axiottenos of Apollonios, Gaius Iulius Aneiketos, with Iulia Tyches, (his)wife,for…ethos,(their)son,infulfilmentoftheirvowdedicated…

4.2.65

Kula(?) (Lydia): DedicationaddressedtoMên

Discoverylocation: Copied in Menye by Alfred Philippson. Type: Upper part of a stele with pediment. Dimensions: 21.5 × 28 cm.

CATALOGUE

365

Letters: 0.5–1 cm. Bibliography: CMRDM I, A4; Levick 1970, 46, no. 24. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A crescent is represented within the pediment. On the main panel, a crescent within a wrath underneath two surviving crescents, out of four. Text: (on the corner between the pediment and the main panel) [--]οικ(?) καὶ Ἄττικιανός. (to the right of the wreath) [τεκμορ]εύσαντες (above the crescent inside the wreath) [μετὰ ἀ]δελφῆς καὶ | [θ]ρεπτ[οῦ]. Translation: …oikandAttiakos.Thosewhopledgedtheirloyalty.(Theysetupthis)withthe sisterandthenursling. L3: Levick 1970, 47: θρεπτῶν or θρεπτοῦ.

4.2.66

Kula (Lydia): ConfessioninscriptiondedicatedtoMênAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Identified in Kula, but Herrmann also identified in TAM V.1 as possible locations Selendi and Saittai. Type: Stone tablet. Dimensions: 33 × 24 × 4 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.19; BWK 60; TAM V.1, 251; CMRDM I, 58 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 15, no. 5; Herrmann 1962, 45 (mention). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A crescent moon is represented. Text: [Μ]ηνὶ Ἀξιοττ(η)νῷ. Ἑπὶ | Ἑρμογένης Γλύκωνος | καὶ Νιτωνὶς Φιλοξένου |4 ἐλοιδώρησαν Ἀρτεμί|δωρον περὶ οἴνου, Ἀρτε|μίδωρος πιττάκιον ἔ|δωκεν. Ὁ θεὸς ἐκολά|8σετο τὸν Ἑρμογένην καὶ εἱλάσετο τὸν θε|ὸν καὶ ἀπὸ νῦν εὐδο|ξεῖ. Translation: ToMênAxiottenos.Hermogenes,sonofGlykon,andNitonis,sonofPhiloxenos, having calumniated Artemidoros concerning the wine, Artemidoros sent a letter. The godpunishedHermogenesandhepropitiatedthegodandfromnowonthegodwillbe pleased.

4.2.67

Kula (area of, Lydia): Confession inscription dedicated to Mên TyrannosandZeusOgmenos

Discoverylocation: Found in the area of Kula. Later brought to Smyrna. Type: Stele. Dimensions: 45 × 40 × 4 cm. Letters: 1.5–2 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.71; BWK 53; TAM V.1, 255; CMRDM I, 61 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 17, no. 17. Date: AD 142/143 (= 227 Sullan era). Representation: No representation recorded.

366

CATALOGUE

Text: [Ἔτ]ους σκζ΄, Ἀρτεμίδω[ρο]|ς Διοδότου καὶ Ἀμιὰς | μετὰ τῶν συνγενῶν ἐξ ἰδό|4των καὶ μὴ ἰδότων λύτρ|ον κατ᾽ ἐπιταγὴν Μηνὶ | Τυράννῳ καὶ Διὶ Ὀγμην|ῷ καὶ τοῖς σὺν αὐτῷ θεοῖς. Translation: Intheyear227,Artemidoros,sonofDiodotosandAmias,withtheirrelatives, boththosewhodoknowandthosewhodonot,[payed]aredemptionfeeinaccordancewith thecommand,toMênTyrannosandZeusOgmenosandthegodswhoarewithhim.

4.2.68

Kula (Lydia): DedicationofOnesimetoMênAxittenos

Discoverylocation: Unknown. Perhaps from Kula. Type: Round pediment stele with tenon. Dimensions: Unknown. The stele seems to slightly decrease from bottom to top and has a moulding at the bottom of the pediment. Bibliography: LKGI 39.20; TAM V.1, 252; CMRDM I, 65 (with photograph at pl. XXVII); Lane 1964, 51, no. A5; Herrmann 1962, 46, no. 39 (with photograph at pl. XII.1). Date: AD 269/270 (= 354 Sullan era). Representation: The stele has three fields of reliefs. In the upper register, which corrensponds to the round pediment, Mên is standing in between two opposed lions. The god is facing slightly rightway and is holding with his left hand a spear-type sceptre and with his right an object which might be a pine cone. Under the pediment, on a protruded rim, a standing boy is holding the reins of a horse positioned to the right from the viewer’s perspective. We have no indication regarding the identity of the rider; a crescent is slightly perceptible behind the shoulders of the character. Below the rim inscribed with the first line of the text lies the relief of a leg that was healed. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιττηνῷ | Ὀνησίμη ἡ μήτηρ ὑπὲρ | τοῦ ὑοῦ Τυράννου, ἐπει|4δὴ τὸν πόδα πονήσας εὐ|λογοῦσα ἀνέθηκα. Ἔτους τνδ΄, μη(νὸς) ς΄ Ξανδικοῦ θι΄. Translation: ToMênAxittenos,Onesimethemotherset(this)upblessingforhersonTyrannos,becausehehadalegsuffering.Intheyear354,inthemonthofXandikos,onthenineteenthday.

4.2.69

Kula (area of, Lydia): Confession inscription dedicated to Mên eg Diodotou

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the area of Kula. Type: White marble stele with gabled pediment, palmette-type acroteria and tenon. Dimensions: 80 × 36 × 6 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Manisa Museum. Inv. No. 405. Bibliography: LKGI 38.49; BWK 51; Malay 1994, 166 (mention); TAM V.1, 254; NDIEC 1983, 72, no. 46; CMRDM I, 66 (with photograph at pl. XXVII); Lane 1964, 51, no. A7; BÉ 1963, 227; Herrmann 1962, 47–49, no. 41 (pl. XII 3). Date: AD 148/149 (= 233 Sullan era). Representation: On the tympanum, a patera and two leaves on the lower corners. Below the pediment, Mên standing on the rim, with the crescent moon behind the shoulders, is represented in a recessed panel, wearing chiton, cloak, Phrygian cap. He is holding a pine cone in his left hand, and with his raised right, a spear-like sceptre.

CATALOGUE

367

Text: Μῆνα ἐγ Διοδότου. | Ἀλέξανδρος Θαλού|σης μετὰ Ἰουλίου καὶ |4 τῆς ἀδελφῆς ἐλυτρώ|σαντο τὸν θεὸν ἐξ εἰδό|των καὶ μὴ εἰδότων. | Ἔτους σλγ΄. Translation: To Mên of Diodotos. Alexandros, son of Thalous, with Iulius and his sister, redeemedtothegods,fromallknownandunknown(sins?),intheyear233.

4.2.70

Kula (area of, Lydia): Confession inscription dedicated to Mên Petraeites

Discoverylocation: Kavaklı, the area of Kula. Type: Fragment of a marble stele. Dimensions: 40 × 16 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.6 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.61; BWK 39; TAM V.1, 499; CMRDM I, 67 (with photograph at pl. XXVIII); Lane 1964, 16, no. 8; Herrmann 1962, 49 (pl. XII.2). Date: AD 115/116 to 214/215 (= 200–299 Sullan era). Representation: Fragment of a foot in relief, probably of a man standing. Text: Μέγας (relief) [Μὴν] | Πετραείτης [τὴν κώμην βα]|σιλεύων κ(αὶ) μ[εγάλη θεῶν] |4 Μήτηρ Ταζη[νή. Φιλλιππι]|κὸς Τατιαν[οῦ, ἐπειδὴ λύ]|μην ἐποίησ[α ἐπιορκήσας], | ἀπελεγχθε[ὶς ὑπὸ τῶν ἀν|8τιδίκων νῦ[ν ἱλασάμενος·] | μετὰ υἱοῦ [ἐστηλλογρά]|φησα τὰς δ[υνάμεις ὑμῶν]. | Ἔτους σ[. . .΄, μη(νὸς) . . .]|12ου η΄. Translation: GreatisMênPetraeiteswhorulesaskingoverthevillageandgreatisTazene theMotherofthegods!Phillipikos,sonofTatianos,becausewhenforesworinghecommitted aserioustransgression,hewasexemptedfromallwrongdoing,andnowheisinagoodstate; withmyson,Iengravedonthesteleyourpowers.Intheyear2..,inthemonthof…os,…on theeighthday. L1–2: CMRDM I, 67: Μέγας [Μὴν] | Πετραείτης

4.2.71

Kula (area of, Lydia): Ex-votodedicatedtoMênPetraeites

Discoverylocation: Kavaklı, the area of Kula. Type: Lower fragment of a white marble stele. Dimensions: 40 × 45 × 7 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.60; TAM V.1, 500; CMRDM I, 68 (with photograph at pl. XXVIII); Lane 1964, 52, no. A9; Herrmann 1962, 49, no. 43 (pl. XII.2). Date: AD 228/229 (= 313 Sullan era). Representation: No representation visible. Text: [Ἔτ]ους τγι΄, μ[(νὸς) . . .]|[.]ονις ὑπὲρ Μάρκου τοῦ | [ὑ]οῦ εὐξαμένη Μηνὶ |4 [Π]ετραείτῃ εὐλογῶ. Translation: Intheyear313,inthemonthof…onis,forthesonMarcus,havinggivenavow toMênPetraeites,Ipraisehim.

368 4.2.72

CATALOGUE

Kula (area of, Lydia): Ex-votooftheslaveEutychosdedicatedtoMên Axiettenos

Discoverylocation: Found in the wall of a house at Karaoba/Fülöz, about 2 km west of Ayazviran. Type: Block of white marble. Dimensions: 40 × 25 cm. Letters: ca. 1.5 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.30; TAM V.1, 442; CMRDM I, 72; Lane 1964, 51, no. A4; Herrmann 1962, 45–46, no. 38. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Εὔτυχος Ἰου|λίας Ταβίλλης | δοῦλος πραγμα|τευτὴς σὺν καὶ τῇ γυνικὶ | Ἐπιγόνῃ εὐχὴν | ὑπὲρ υἱοῦ Νεική|8[τ]ου Μηνὶ Ἀξι|εττηνῷ διὰ | τὸ σωθῆναι αὐ|τὸν ὑπὸ τοῦ θε|12οῦ ἀσθενοῦντα. Translation: Eutychos,thestewardslaveofIuliaTabille,alongwithhiswifeEpigone,(set thisup)toMênAxiettenosfortheirsonNeikeitos,forthisdisease-strickenpersontobecured, infulfilmentofthevow.

4.2.73

Kula (area of, Lydia): Ex-voto of Phronimos dedicated to Mên Tiamou

Discoverylocation: Found at Kavacık. Type: Small white marble round altar, with upper and lower mouldings. Dimensions: 33 × 16–18 (diameter) cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.64; TAM V.1, 424; CMRDM I, 73; Lane 1964, 52, no. A10; Herrmann 1962, 50, no. 44 (pl. XII.4). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Relief of a large crescent moon, almost circular. Text: Μηνὶ Τιά|2μου Φρό|νιμος |4 εὐχήν. Translation: ToMênTiamou,Phronimos,infulfilmentofthevow.

4.2.74

Kula (area of, Lydia): Confession inscription addressed to Mên LabanasandMênPetraeites

Discoverylocation: Found at Çalıbașı Köyü, in the area of Kula. Type: Lower part of a white marble stele with tenon. Dimensions: 85 × 35 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm. Currentlocation: Izmir Museum. Inv. No. 8792. Bibliography: LKGI 39.54; SEG 34, no. 1219; Herrmann and Varinlioğlu 1984, 15, no. 10. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: [-----]|ου Μηνὶ Λαβάνᾳ καὶ Μη|νὶ Πετραείτῃ ἐν Περεύ|δῳ Ἀμμία Ζηνᾶ Ἀνκυρα|4νὴ ὑπὲρ τῆς οἰκίας τῆς | ἡγόρασεν παρὰ Ἀμμίας | Καλλιμάχου ἔδωκα (δηνάρια) οβ΄, καθὼς ἐπεσζήτησαν οἱ | εἱεροὶ Ἀπολλώνιος Ἀπολλωνίου, Ἀντίοχος Ἀντιόχου, Γλύκων Ποπλίου.

CATALOGUE

369

Translation: ToMênLabanasandMênPetraeitesinPereudos.I,Ammia,daughterofZenas, fromAnkyra,gavetheamountof72denariiasthegodsdemanded,forthehouseIbought fromAmmia,daughterofKallimachos. ThiswasreceivedbythesacredfunctionariesApollonios,sonofApollonios,Apollonios,sonofApollonios,andGlykon,sonofPublius.

4.2.75

Magnesia ad Sipylum (Manisa, Lydia): Dedication of Kalbeisios OrpheustoMeterPlastene

Discoverylocation: Discovered in the sanctuary of Meter Plastene, east of Manisa. Type: Bronze statuette. Dimensions: 50 cm (height). Bibliography: CMRDM I, 84; Lane 1964, 22, no. 37 (mention). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Representation of Mên as a rider. Text: Μητρὶ θεῶν Πλαστήνῃ |2 Καλβείσιος Ὀρφεὺς | ἀνέθηκεν. Translation:KalbeisiosOrpheusset(this)uptotheMotherofgodsPlastene.

4.2.76

Magnesia ad Sipylum (Manisa, Lydia): Dedication of Artemon to MênAxiottenosandtheDivine

Discoverylocation: Found in Manisa. Type: Stone altar. Dimensions: Approx. 90 cm high. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. no. 320. Bibliography: LKGI39.37; Malay 1994, 170; TAM V.1, 524; SEG 29, no. 1176; CMRDM I, 85; Hermann and Polatkan 1969, no. 11 (with pl. V.13). Date: AD 184/185 (= 269 Sullan era). Representation: Crescent moon of the front side. Text: Μη(vacat)νὶ | (luna) | Ἀξι(vacat)οτ|τη(vacat)νῷ | καὶ Θείῳ | (garland) | Ἀρτέμων τὸ| πιάρις κατ᾽ ἐπ|(ιτα)γὴν ἀνέθηκεν | ἐπὶ τὰ ἴχνη. | Ἔτους σξθ΄, μη(νὸς) | Δαισίου β΄. Translation:ToMênAxiottenosandtotheDivine,Artemonthegardenerset(this)upontop of(divine)steps,inaccordancewiththecommandofthegods.Intheyear269,inthemonth Daisios,onthesecondday.

4.2.77 Maionia (area of, Lydia) = 5.2.39 4.2.78 Maionia (area of, Lydia) = 5.2.35 4.2.79 Maionia (area of, Lydia): Ex-votodedicatedtoArtemisAnaeitisandto MênTiamou = 5.2.40 Discoverylocation: Stele found in the area of the Görnevit village (today Esenyazı), on the territory of Maeonia. It seems to originate, just like the following two ex-votos (4.2.79 and 4.2.80), from the common sanctuary of Anaitis and of Mên Tiamou, identified by Christian Naour near the Asar neighbourhood.

370

CATALOGUE

Type: Fragmentary marble stele; only the lower side surviving. Dimensions: 20 × 29 × 4.5 cm. Letters: 1 cm. Bibliography: Petzl 1998a, 23–24, no. 2 (with pl. 2, fig. 4). Date: AD 252/253 (= 337 Sullan era). Representation: Only a couple of small fragments still exist from the relief, but they do not allow a reconstitution. Text: [Ἀ]ρτέμιδι Ἀναειτει κὲ | Μηνὶ Τιάμου Θάλεια ὑ|πὲρ Διονυσίου τοῦ ὑο[ῦ] | εὐχὴν ἀνέστηεν. Ἔτους τλζ΄. Translation: Thaleia erected (this offering) to Artemis Anaeitis and to Mên Tiamou, for Dionysios,(her)son,infulfilmentofthevow.Intheyear337.

4.2.80 Maionia (area of, Lydia): Ex-voto dedicated by Karpime to Artemis AnaeitisandtoMênTiamou = 5.2.41 Discovery location: Discovered at Görnevit, situated near the ancient Maeonia (today Menye), on the territory of this city. Type: White marble stele. The tenon was removed. Dimensions: 36 × 26 × 32.5 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm. Currentlocation: Unknown. Bibliography: Naour 1983, 108, no. 1 (with pl. 14). Date: AD 197/198 (= 282 Sullan era). Representation: In the upper part of the monument, portion of relief leg is featured. Text: Ἀρτέμιδι Ἀναεῖτι καὶ | Μηνὶ Τιάμου Καρπίμη | Κορβούλωνος ὑπὲρ ἑ|αυτῆς εὐχὴν ἀνέθηκε. Ἔτους σπβ΄, Περειτίου η΄. Translation: ToArtemisAnaeitisandtoMênTiamou,Karpime,daughterofCorboulo,dedicated(this)forherself,infulfilmentofthevow.Intheyear282,inthemonthofPereitios,on theeighthday.

4.2.81

Maionia (area of, Lydia): Ex-votoofHerakleidesdedicatedtoMên Kamareites

Discoverylocation: Built into the wall of a private house at Görnevit, in the area of Maionia. Type: Fragment of a marble stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: Hübner 2003, 184–85; CMRDM I, 56 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 18, no. 23. Date: AD 66/67 (= 151 Sullan era). Text: [Μηνὶ Καμα]|2ρείτῃ ε[ὐχὴν] | Ἡρακλείδης Με|4νεκράτου, | ἔτους ρνα΄, μη|6νὸς Γορπιαίου | ἀνέθηκεν. Translation: ToMênKamareites,infulfilmentofthevow.Herakleides,sonofMenekrates, dedicated(this)intheyear151,inthemonthofGorpiaios.

CATALOGUE

4.2.82

371

Maionia (Gökçeören, Lydia)/ Saittai?: Ex-voto of Deskylis dedicatedtoMênArtemidorouAxiottenos

Discovery location: Unknown location, most probably in north-eastern Lydia. Herrmann assigns it to Saittai on onomastic grounds. Type: Terracotta statuette. Dimensions: 67 cm height. Bibliography: Rostad 2006b, 91; LKGI 39.12; SEG 28, no. 916; TAM V.1, 526; CMRDM I, 86 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 50. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A draped female statuette with the head and both arms missing. Text: Δεσκυλὶς Δεσκύλου |2 Μηνὶ Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξι|οττα κατέχοντι ὑπὲρ τῶν |4 τέκνων εὐχήν. Translation:Deskylis,daughterofDeskylos,(setthisup)toMênofArtemidoroswhorules overAxiotta,forherchildren,infulfilmentofthevow.

4.2.83

Maionia (Gökçeören, Lydia): DedicationtoMênK…

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Gökçeören (Menye, ancient Maionia). Type: Fragment of white marble stele, known since 1962. Only the left side was surviving. Dimensions: 33 × 30 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: According to Lane, in the house of Süleyman Türe. Bibliography: LKGI 39.52; BWK 80 (with bibliography); TAM V.1, 527; CMRDM I, 55 (with photograph at pl. XXIII); Lane 1964, 51–52, no. A8; Herrmann 1962, 48–49, no. 42 (with photograph at pl. XIII.3). Date: AD 172/173 (= 257 Sullan era). Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [Ἔτου]ς σνζ΄, μη(νὸς) Πανήμ[ου ..΄ Ἐπεὶ(?)] | Ἕρμιππος Ἑρμίππου [---] | σετο τὸν θεὸν Μῆνα Κ[--] | μετὰ τῶν ἰδίων ἀδελ[φῶν Διονυσίου (?), Ἀ]|5πολλωνίου, Ὀρφέος ἀ[πέκτεινε --] | τὸν ἐπιζητηθέντα [--μετὰ] | Διονυσίου τοῦ ἀδελ[φοῦ-- μετὰ] | τὸ τετελευτηκένα[ι αὐτοὺς --] | εἱλάσοντο τὸν θεὸν [καὶ ἀπὸ νῦν εὐλο]|γοῦσιν. Translation: Intheyear257,inthemonthofPanemos,(ontheday..).Giventhat(?)Hermippos, son of Hermippos, (got angry with?) the god Mên K[--] and, along with his brothers Dionysios?,Apollonios,killedtheonetheysearchedfor[--]alongwiththebrotherDionysios [--](after)deaththeyfollowedthegodandtheypraisehimhenceforth.

4.2.84

Maionia (Gökçeören, Lydia): Dedication to Mis Artemidorou, the ruleroverAxiotta

Discoverylocation: Discovered in Menye. Copied in 1901 by A. Philippson. Type: The central part of marble stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 39.11; BWK 79 (with bibliography); CMRDMAd 196, no. 3; SEG 28, no. 910; TAM V.1, 525. Facsimile by Herrmann 1978, 417–20.

372

CATALOGUE

Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Above the inscription, a crescent. Text: Μέγας Μὶς Ἀρτεμιδώρου Ἀξ[ί|2ο]ττα κατέχων καὶ ἡ δύνα|[μ]ις αὐτοῦ. Ἐπὶ Τατία Νεικηφό|4ρου Μοκαδδηνὴ ἐδάνεισε Γα|[ḯ]ῳ καὶ Ἀφφία τῇ γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ Μ[ο|6κ]δδηνοῖς χαλκὸν ροειποῦσα | [.]ΤΗ . ΡΟΝ ανίζω· ὁ Γάιος οὖν ἐχρ[ε|8οκ]όησεν αύτήν· ἡ Τατίας οὖ[ν χρε|οκ]οπηθεῖσα ἐπεκαλέσετ[ο κατ᾽ αὐ|10τοῦ τὸ]ν θεόν. Μέγας οὖ[ν--] | [--τ]ὸν Γάιον καὶ Ε[--] |12[--χ]αρκὸν Ο[--] | [---]. Translation: GreatisMisofArtemidoros,whorulesoverAxiotta,andhispower!Tatias, daughterofNikephoros,fromMokaddene,havinglentmoneytoGaiusandtohiswife,Aphphia,fromMokaddene,toldthem:‘Iwilllendyouthemoneyuntil?---,’thenthesaidGaius trickedher.Asshewastricked,thesaidTatiasrosehervoicetothegodforhelp.Greatisnow (thegod)whopunished(?)Gaiusandreturned(?)[--]themoney! L3–6: CMRDM Ad 196, no. 3: Ἐπὶ Τατία Νεικηφό|4ρου Μοκκαδδην ἐδάνεισε Γα|[ΐ]ῳ καὶ Ἀφφία τῇ γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ Μ[ο|6κκ]δδηνοῖς χαλκὸν ροειποῦσα. L12: [χ]αρκὸν may have been χαλκὸν, just as in L6.

4.2.85

Maionia (Gökçeören, Lydia):Ex-vototoMênAxiotenos

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Gökçeören (formerly Menye, ancient Maionia), during the research in 1995. Type: The central part of marble stele. Dimensions: 20 × 40 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.5–2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Bibliography: Malay 1999, 157 (with fig. 162). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: In a niche above the inscription, four persons standing in prayer. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιοτηνῷ Ἑρμῆς Ἀνδρο|2[νικ?]ου εὐξάμενος καὶ ἐπτυ|[χών ---]. Translation: To Mên Axiotenos, Hermes, son of Andronik(?)os, having made a vow and fulfilling[---].

4.2.86

Maionia (Gökçeören, Lydia): Ex-voto of the members of a sacred associationtoZeusMasphalatenos,MênTiamouandMênTyrannos

Discoverylocation: Brought from Menye to Kula. Known since 1829. Type: Marble stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 39.67 (with bibliography); Sartre 1995, 326; TAM V.1, 536; CMRDM I, 53 (fig. at p. 36); Lane 1964, 16, no. 11; Legrand 1963, 1393. Date: AD 171/172 (= 256 Sullan era). Representation: In the upper part, within a frame above relief moulding, the juvenile beardless figures of two divinities – Helios and Mên – with shoulder-length hair are featured frontally. The specific solar and lunar symbols also occur: the solar god has a crown of twelve

CATALOGUE

373

somewhat asymmetrical rays, while the lunar god has crescent beyond his shoulders and in the upper part of the head, a protuberance which Lane interpreted as a possible Phrygian cap. Helios is shirtless, while Mên is very probably wearing tunic. Both divinities wear chlamys fastened on the right shoulder with button-shaped pin. Lower side of the busts was roughly finished, and to the sides the upper limbs of the two characters slightly exceed the relief frame. Text: Κατὰ τὴν τῶν θεῶν ἐπιτα|γὴν ἱερὸς δοῦμος εὐχὴν | Διὶ Μασφαλατηνῷ καὶ Μηνὶ | Τιάμου καὶ Μηνὶ Τυράννῷ |5 ἐκέλευσεν τηρεῖσθαι ἀ|πὸ ἡμερῶν θ΄. Εἴ τις δὲ τού|των ἀπειθήσι, ἀναγνώσ|εται τὰς δυνάμις τοῦ Δι|ὸς. Ἐπιμελησαμένου |10 Διονυσίου, Διοδώρου, | καὶ Ἑρμογένους Βαλερίου. | Ἔτους σνς΄, μη(νὸς) Δύστρου. Translation: Inaccordancewiththecommandofthegods,thesacredassociationordersthat avowtoZeusMasphalatenos,MênTiamouandMênTyrannosbeobservedafterninedays. But should anyone disobey, he will certainly know the power of Zeus. Dionysios, son of Diodoros,andHermogenes,sonofValerius,weresupervising.Intheyear256,inthemonth ofDystros.

4.2.87

Maionia (Gökçeören, Lydia): Ex-voto of the members of a sacred associationtoZeusMasphalatenosandMênTiamou

Discoverylocation: Brought from Menye to Kula. Known since 1829. Type: Marble stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 39.68 (with bibliography); Sartre 1995, 326; LIMC VI.1, 470, no. 133; TAM V.1, 537; CMRDM I, 54 (fig. at p. 37); Lane 1964, 16, no. 12 (partial); Legrand 1963, 1394. Date: AD 171/172 (= 256 Sullan era). Representation: In the upper part of the monument, within a frame above relief moulding (only partially visible on the left side of the monument), the figures of two standing divinities, featured frontally. Right above it there is Mên, depicted in his typically Oriental attire (‘Phrygian’), with short boots, anaxyride, large shirt and chlamys, and above the head, on top of the long and curly locks, a rather Iranian cap, with ears dropping to the shoulders and outward. The shirt is fastened around the waistline, which leaves the impression that, in the lower part, the god would rather wear a kilt-like cloth. On the neck, he seems to wear a necklace fastened on front, to the middle. Above his shoulders, the specific crescent moon. The cloak covers him partially, in folds, the left arm is stretched toward the viewer and he holds a round object, either small sphere (as symbol of celestial rule) or pine-cone (as symbol of longevity). The raised right hand holds the upper part of sceptre, in this case looking more like a spear. It is leant against the back of a small bull, though we believe that the initial intention of the sculptor was to imagine the support point beyond the animal, which creates an atypical perception of space. The beardless god supports his left foot of the neck of the small bull, thus making it bow its head in obedience. The rear side of the animal is slightly raised, and the tail – featured almost vertically – reaches the margin of the frame. The image of Mên is similar to the Mithraic scenes from two perspectives: 1) the god’s posture is very similar to the one of the dadophors; 2) the gesture of making the bull obedient, also featured on the coins, gems, or statuettes of Mên, refers more likely to an incipient iconographic stage of the Mithraic bullslaying scene. To the right of the image, there is Zeus Masphalatenos, with beard and long, curly hair, calf-length shirt with straight folds, with large, wavy cloak on top, leaving only the right shoulder to the sight. In his right hand – stretched to the side, toward Mên – he holds a

374

CATALOGUE

bird, probably considered the sacred animal of this divinity (a heavenly symbol that connects the divine and the human worlds, as messenger of the divine will). The right arm, near the body, supports a cane leant against the ground and reaching his shoulder. On the lower side, the cloak folds, the left arm, and the cane slightly exceeds the frame. Above, the spear tops and the top of Mên’s cap, as well as Zeus’ top of the head reach the upper margin of the frame. Judging by the way they were executed, this relief and the previous one were definitely elaborated and executed by the same sculptor, probably in the same sanctuary. Text: ̔Ιερὰ συμβίωσις καὶ νεωτέρα κατ᾽ ἐπι|ταγὴν τοῦ κοιρίου τυράννου Διὸς Μασ|φαλατηνοῦ καὶ Μηνὶ Τιάμου εὐχήν. Ἰουλ(ι)|ανὸς Μενεκράτου, Μενεκράτης Διοδώ|5ρου, Διονοίσιος Ὀνησίμου, Διογένης | Γλύκωνος, Διογένης Μαξίμου, Τρόφιμο[ς] | Ἑρμίππου, Ἀπολλώνιος β΄, Θεόδωρος β΄, | Μαρκιανὸς β΄, Μένανδρος Ἑρμογένου, Ἑρ|10μογένης Στατιανοῦ, Μητρόδωρος Εὐελπίσ|του, Ἀσκληπιάδης Μαρκιανοῦ, Ἀσκληπιά|δης Διονοισίου, | Ἑρμογένης Τροφίμου, | Βάβηλος Ἑρμογένου, ἐπιμελησαμένων | Ἰουλιανοῦ καὶ Ἑρμογένου. Ἔτους σνς΄, μη(νὸς) Δ(ύστρου). Translation: Theholyandnewcommunityfulfilledthisvowinaccordancewiththecommand oftherulinglordZeusMasphalatenosandMênTiamou.Iulianus,sonofMenekrates,sonof Diodoros,Dionysios,sonofPapias,Hermogenes,sonofHermippos,Loukios,sonofOnesimos, Diogenes, son of Glykon, Diogenes, son of Maximos, Trophimos, son of Hermippos, Apollonios,sonofApollonios,Theodoros,sonofTheodoros,Markianos,sonofMarkianos, Menandros, son of Hermogenes, Hermogenes, son of Statianos, Metrodoros, son of Euelpistos,Asklepiades,sonofMarkianos,Asklepiades,sonofDionysios,Hermogenes,son ofTrophimos,Sabelos,sonofHermogenes;whenIulianusandHermogeneswerecurators. Intheyear256,inthemonthofDystros.

4.2.88

Maionia (area of, Lydia): DedicationaddressedtoMênTiamou

Discoverylocation: Discovered at Soğanlı, situated south-west from the ancient Maionia. Type: Marble stele, lower side surviving. Left side destroyed. Dimensions: 40 × 38 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Bibliography: Herrmann and Malay 2007, 61 (fig. 61). Date: AD 183/184 (= 268 Sullan era). Representation: Above the inscribed field, on top of the moulding, only small portion of the feet belonging to a male and to a female character. Text: (relief) Μηνὶ Τιαμου Εὐέ[λ]|πιστος κατ᾽ ἐπιτα|γὴν τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ |4 [Τ]ελεσσίρς τῆς | [τ]εκούσης εὐχαρισ|[τ]ήριον ἀπέδωκα. | [Ἔτ]ους στη΄, μη(νὸς) Λώου. Translation: ToMênTiamou,Euelpistos,inaccordancewiththecommandofthegod,Igave thisthroughTelessira,(my)mother,inthanksgiving. Intheyear268,inthemonthofLoos.

4.2.89

Maionia (Gökçeören, Lydia): DedicationaddressedtoMisArtemidorou

Discoverylocation: Copied in Menye by Alfred Philippson. Type: Fragmentary upper part of a stone monument. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: CMRDM I, A1; Hermann and Polatkan 1969, no. 39.

CATALOGUE

375

Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Μέγας Μὶς Ἀρτεμιδώρου |2 Ἄξ|[ι]ττα κατέχων καὶ ἡ δύνα|[μις] αὐτοῦ. Translation:GreatisMisArtemidorouwhorulesoverAxittaandhispower!

4.2.90

Maionia (Gökçeören, Lydia): DedicationtoMênHoseos

Discoverylocation: Built into a fountain in Menye. Type: Stone plaque. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: CMRDM I, 52 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 15, no. 6. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Μ[ηνὶ] Ὁσήῳ Μάνης καὶ Βάνας ὁ |2 Μ[---]λλιωλιας ἡ μήτηρ αὐτῶν | τὸ πρόπυλον ειι ον. Translation: ToMêntheHoly,ManesandBanas,M……lliolias,theirmother,(setup)the propylaion…

4.2.91

Mostene(?) (Lydia): Dedicationofsacredobjects(?)

Discoverylocation: Found at Assar Tepe, near Kassaba, and then sent to Smyrna. Type: Stone stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 4.5; CMRDM I, 76; Lane 1964, 21, no. 31 (partial). Date: Roman Imperial period (?). Text: [---]νος ἔδωκεν ἡμεῖν [τὸ ---] | [---]οις ἀνθρώποηις συνοχῆς[---] | [---]αν ὥραν ἡμεῖν ὧν ἐπέταξεν [θεὸς --] |4 [---]ωμεν μὲν Μηνὸς καὶ Διὸς καὶ Κ[--] | [--- κ]αὶ τῶν κρατούντων θεῶν Σεβα[στῶν --] | [---]ἤσπισεν ἄνθρωπος ὑπὸ θεῶν [---] | [---]ὅσοις βωμοῖς καὶ [χ]άριν ἔσχεν οἷς σ[--] |8 [--- κ]αὶ Μηνογένης Βούτας ο[ἱ ---] | [--- τ]οῖς ἰδίοις μηδὲν ἐνλείπων κα[ὶ ---] | [--- ι]κῆς, ἧς καὶ μαντοσύνη κέκληται ὑπὸ θεῶ[ν] | [--]α ἐνέργειαν περὶ (τ)ῆς κατοικίας καὶ τῶν κρατούντω[ν], |12 ὧς ἐπέταξεν θεὸς προκαλούμενος ἀνθρώπ[οις] | εὐσέβηαν ἵν᾽ ἔχωσιν τὸ[ν] τόπον ἀσπίζειν προσκυ[νοῦντες] | [. .]μασιν νέμεσθαι, περὶ ὧν ἐπέταζεν θεός, καὶ μηδέν[α] | ἀνθρώπον ἀντιπεσεῖν τῷδε τόπῳ τ[ῶ]ν κρατού[ντων] |16 τῶν ἐπὶ τὴν βασίληαν κήπ[ω]ν, φυτῶν, εὐχόρτων π[εδίων] | [. . .]μοντα ὥσπερ Ἀφροδίτης, ὃν συνανέστησεν θ[εὸς] | πρόπυλον ἀριλλῶν σὺν κοσμήμασιν καὶ δένδρ[οις] | [. . .]σιν οἷς ἀπέδωκεν θεὸς ἀνθρώποις. Ταῦτ᾽ ἐπ[. . .] |20 σωφροσύνη ἀρκετὸν ἤδη γράμμα χαρὰν (π)αρέχον. Translation: …gavetous…forthepeopleofthecommunity…thehourwhenthegodcommandedus…ofMênandofZeusand…andoftheAugustangodswhorule…manbythe gods…howmanyaltarsandforwhichhehad…Menogenes,sonofBouta…andleaving nothingforthemselves…theartofforetelling,too,wascalledbythegods…theworkonthe dwellingandonthosewhorule,when,uponbeingsummoned,thegodorderedpeopletobe piousandtoworshiphimintheplacededicatedto(divine)protection…tobecomefurious, ofwhichthegodordered,andfornomantostandinthisplaceagainstthosewhoholdthe royalgardens,vineyards,andthemeadows…justasthe(temple)ofAphroditethatthegod erected,thepropyleumwiththejewelleryandthetrees…thatthegodgavetopeople.This… wisdomisalreadysufficient,thiswritingbringsjoy.

376

CATALOGUE

4.2.92

Nisyra (area of, Lydia) = 5.2.42

4.2.93

Philadelphia (Alașehir, Lydia): Confessioninscriptionaddressedto thegodMênegDiodotou

Discoverylocation: Found in Alașehir. Type: Two fitting parts of a white marble stele with tenon. Upper part of the monument is missing. Dimensions: 77 × 44 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Currentlocation: Manisa Museum. Inv. No. 5628. Bibliography: TAM V.3, 1631; LKGI 39.50; BWK 52 (with photograph); Malay 1994, 167 (with photograph at fig. 57). Date: AD 173/174 (= 204 Actian era) or AD 119/120 (= 204 Sullan era). Representation: Mên is represented frontally, standing in a framed recessed panel, with a crescent behind the shoulders, wearing a Phrygian cap and a cloak. He is holding a pine cone is his left hand and a spear-like sceptre with his right. Text: Μῆνα ἐγ Διοδότου Διογᾶς Διο|γένου Κόνδων ἔλοισα ἐξ ἐ|πιορκοσύνης. Ἔτους σδ΄. Translation: ToMênofDiodotos,I,DiogasKondon,sonofDiogenes,haveredeemedmyself fromperjury.Intheyear204.

4.2.94

Philadelphia (Alașehir, Lydia): Ex-votodedicatedtoMênTiamou

Discoverylocation: In 1908, it was in the pavement of the church St. George in Alașehir. Type: White marble stele with a triangular pediment. The upper part broken. Dimensions: 50 × 33.5 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Bibliography: TAM V.3, 1630; LKGI 39.69; CMRDM I, 82 (with bibliography); Lane 1964, 22, no. 35; Keil and Premerstein 1908, no. 38 (fig. 18). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Ivy leaves on the lower corners of the pediment. A reversed crescent on the body of the stele, above the written text. Text: Σέλευκος Σε|2λεύκου Μηνὶ Τι|άμου εὐχήν. Translation: Seleukos,sonofSeleukos,toMênTiamou,infulfilmentofthevow.

4.2.95

Philadelphia (Alașehir, Lydia): Ex-votodedicatedtoMênTiamou

Discoverylocation: Found at Killik, north-east of Philadelphia. Type: Lower part of a white marble stele. Dimensions: 26 × 27 × 5.5 cm. Letters: 2.5 cm. Bibliography: TAM V.3, 1565; LKGI 40.43; Malay 1994, 104; SEG 35, no. 1182; Malay 1985, 117, no. 9 (pl. 9).

CATALOGUE

377

Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Text: [Θεᾷ?] Φ[ιλ]εὶ καὶ |2 [Μην]ὶ Τ[ια]μου | [Πρ]οσόδ[ι]ν κολασ|4θεῖσα το[ὺ]ς μασστο|[ὺς] εὐχὴν ἀ[ν]έθηκα. Translation: [To the goddess?] Phileis and to Mên Tiamou, I, Prosodi(o)n, having been punishedatthechest,dedicated(this)infulfilmentofthevow. L3: SEG 35, no. 1182 and Malay 1985, 117, no. 9 (pl. 9): [Πρ]οσόδη?

4.2.96

Philadelphia (Alașehir, Lydia): Ex-votodedicatedtoMên/Meis(?)

Discoverylocation: Found at Alașehir (Philadelphia). Type: Lower part of a white marble stele with tenon. Dimensions: 49 × 30 × 7 cm. Letters: 1.6 cm. Bibliography: TAM V.3, 1543; LKGI 39.5; Keil and Premerstein 1908, no. 35. Date: 2nd century AD. Representation: Above the inscription, in a recessed panel, the image of two deities are represented: Mên with a short tunic and a cloak and to his right a goddess that could be the mother of this god (Menos tekousa), Anaitis or some other local Mothers (Meter Atimis, Meter Tazene, Meter Phileis). Text: Παυλῖνα εὐχὴ|ν ἀνέθηκεν. Translation: Paulinadedicated(this)infulfilmentofthevow.

4.2.97

Saittai (area of, Lydia): Ex-votodedicatedtoMênAxiottenos

Discoverylocation: Gökveliler, south-west from Saittai. Type: Upper side of marble stele, with moulded margin. Dimensions: 46 × 37 × 40 cm. Letters: 1.5–2 cm. Bibliography: Herrmann and Malay 2007, 45 (fig. 45). Date: AD 98/99 (= 183 Sullan era). Representation: Above the inscription, upward relief crescent. Text: (crescent) Ἔτους ρπγ΄, μη(νὸς) Γορπιαί|ου ζ΄. Ἱππόνικος Ἀσ|κληπιάδου Μηνὶ Ἀξι|4[οτ]τηνῷ ὑπὲρ τῆς γυ|[ν]αικὸς καὶ τῶν τεί|κνων εὐχήν. Translation: Intheyear183,inthemonthofGorpiaios,ontheseventhday.Hipponikos,son ofAsklepiades,(dedicatedthis)toMênofAxiottaforthewifeand(his)children,infulfilment ofthevow.

4.2.98

Saittai (area of, Lydia): Confessioninscriptionaddressedtothegod Tarsios

Discoverylocation: Probably from the area of Saittai. Type: White marble stele with round pediment and tenon. Dimensions: 83 × 40 cm.

378

CATALOGUE

Currentlocation: Private collection (Petzl). Bibliography: Gordon 2004, 187; LKGI 39.63; BWK 4 (with photograph); SEG 38, no. 1229; Cremer and Nollé 1988, 200–03, no. 1 (with photograph at p. 211, fig. 1). Date: AD 200/201 (= 285 Sullan era). Representation: Inside the pediment, a patera in the middle, a crescent moon above, to the left and two leaves in the lower corners. Two standing individuals are represented underneath the pediment, right above the written text. The one in the left of the viewer is trying to cut down a tree with an axe, while the character in the right side of the tree is holding his right arm raised, as if explaining something to the other, and an object in his left. Text: Ἔτους σπε΄, μη(νὸς) Πανήμου ι΄ ἀ(πιόντος). | Θεῷ Ταρσίῳ ἀλύτῳ· ἐπεὶ | ἐκώλυσεν ὁ Σεβῆρος τὸ |4 στεφάνωμα κοπῆναι, ἐ|πεζήτησεν ὁ θεὸς τὸ ἁ|μάρτημα. Ἀνέστησαν αἱ | αὐτοῦ τεθραμμέναι Ἀσια|8τεικὴ καὶ Ἰουλιανὴ εὐχα|ριστοῦσαι. Translation:Intheyear285,inthemonthPanemos,onthethirtiethday.TothegodTarsios, for whom there is no exemption. Because Severus prevented the cutting of branches for wreaths,thegodturnedhisattentiontowardsthismistake.Hisadoptivechildren,Asiatike andIuliane,setupthisstelethanksgiving.

4.2.99

Saittai (area of, Lydia): Confessioninscriptionaddressedtothegod Axiotenos

Discoverylocation: Probably from the area of Saittai. Type: White marble stele with acroteria, gabled pediment and tenon. Dimensions: 69 × 29 cm. Currentlocation: Private collection (Petzl). Bibliography: LKGI 39.48; BWK 66; SEG 38, no. 1229; Cremer and Nollé 1988, 203–05, no. 2 (with photograph at p. 212, fig. 2). Date: AD 188/189 (= 273 Sullan era). Representation: Above the pediment, three palmette-type acroteria. On the tympanum, a patera in the middle and two leaves in the lower corners. Beneath the pediment there is a large thick crescent moon. Text: Ἔτος σογ΄, μη(νὸς) ια΄. Αἰλια|2νὴ θεῷ Ἀξιοτηνῷ | εὐχὴν ὑπὲρ ὧν ἁ|4μαρτοῦσα ἐπέτυ|χεν ὑπὲρ Τιτιανῆς |6 θυγατρός. Translation: Intheyear273,intheeleventhmonth.Aeliane(dedicatedthis)tothegodAxiotenos,infulfilmentofthevow;althoughshewasasinner,shemanagedtosetthisupfor Titiane,herdaughter. L1: Ἔτος for Ἔτους.

4.2.100 Saittai (area of, Lydia): Funeraryimprecationaddressedtothegod Axiottenos Discoverylocation: Found in a house of Icikler, in the area of Saittai. Type: White marble stele. Dimensions: 55.5 × 40 × 4.5 cm. Letters: 1.9 cm.

CATALOGUE

379

Bibliography: LKGI 39.17; IGSK 52, 51 (partial); Strubbe 1994, 76, no. 10 (partial); Versnel 1985, 262 (mention of lines 5–9 as part of a confession inscription); CMRDMAd 194, no. 1 (with photograph 1); Herrmann 1978, 415, n. 2 (commentary); Bakır-Barthel and Müller 1979, 182, no. 36 (photograph at pl. VII); Petzl 1978b, 755, n. 37 (mention of lines 5–9). Date: AD 108/109 (= 193 Sullan era). Representation: Of the initial representation above the text, only three pairs of feet are visible. Text: Ἔτους ρϙγ΄, μη(νὸς) Δείου δ᾽ἀ(πιόντος). Νία Με[νεδή]|2μου Ἀλέξανδρον τὸν καὶ Τρό[φιμον] | τὸν υἱὸν ἐτείμησεν, καὶ Εὐάρεστος καὶ |4 Πολύβιος [οἱ] Ε[ὐτ]ύου οἱ ἀδελφοὶ καὶ Ἀπολλών[ιος ἐ]|τείμησαν ὁ μήτρως. Εἰ δέ τις προ[σαμάρ]|6τῃ τῇ στήλλῃ τὸν Ἀξιοττην[ὸν ἐν] | τῷ ἐχεῖ δωδεκάθην καθήμ[ενον] |8 [ἀ]νεξείλαστον τέκνα τέκν[ων] | ἕξει. Translation:Intheyear193,inthemonthofDeios,onthefourthday,inthewaning.Nia, daughterofMenedemos,honouredhersonAlexandros,alsocalledTrophimos,andhisbrothersEuarestosandPolybios,sonsofEutychos,andhismaternaluncleApollonioshonoured (him).Ifanyonedamagesthestele,hewillhavetheAxiottenosseatedamongthetwelvegods, remorselessforgenerations. L7: CMRDMAd 194, no. 1: δωδεκάθην, ‘twelfth’; Strubbe in IGSK 52, 51: δωδεκάθην should be interpreted as δωδεκάθι(ο)ν, ‘a group of twelve gods’.

4.2.101 Saittai (Lydia): FuneraryimprecationaddressedtothegodMên Discovery location: Found somewhere between Kalburcu and Köleköy, at Haci Huseyn Damları. Hermann assign this place to the neighbouring areas of Saittai, even if it is closer to Silandos, in the vicinity of Köleköy (Tarsi?). Type: White marble stele having the upper part of the triangular pediment damaged. Of the three acroteria, the upper one is missing. Dimensions: 74 × 41 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Bibliography: IGSK 52, 59; TAM V.1, 174 (and photograph at pl. XIII); Petzl 1978b, 755, n. 37. Date: AD 113/114 (= 198 Sullan era). Representation: In the central part of the tympanum, a six-petalled rosette and in the lower corners, two ivy leaves. Text: Ἔτους ρϙη΄, μη(νὸς) Ξανδι|κοῦ η΄. Ἀπολλώνι|ος καὶ Φιλόξενος |4 οἱ Πλοτάρχου ἐτείμ|ησαν τὸν πατέρα καὶ | Ἀπφίαν τὴν μητέρα. | Ἐἰ δέ τις ποσαμάρτῃ |8 τῆ στήλλῃ, τεύξεται | κεχολωμένου τοῦ Ἀ|ξιοττηνοῦ. Translation: In the year 198, in the month of Xandikos, on the eighth day. Apollonios and Philoxenos, sons of Plo(u)tarchos, honoured their father and their mother, Apphia. Ifanyonedamagesthestele,hewilldealwiththeangerofMên.

4.2.102 Saittai (area of, Lydia): Funerary imprecation of Asklepiades addressedtoMênAxiottenos Discoverylocation: Found at Topuzdamları/Emoddi, in the area of Saittai. Type: Fragment of a white marble stele, broken above and below. Dimensions: 39 × 49.5 × 11 cm. Letters: 2 cm.

380

CATALOGUE

Bibliography: LKGI 39.18; IGSK 52, 57 (partially); SEG 31, no. 1003; Naour 1981, 11–21, no. 1 (with pl. II). Date: AD 84/85 (= 169 Sullan era). Text: Ἔτους ρξθ΄, μη(νὸς) Περίτου ς΄. | [Ἀ]σκληπιάδης Ἀμύντου | καὶ Ἐλπὶς ἐτίμησαν Ἀσκλη|4πιάδην τὸ τέκνον. Ἀλκαῖος καὶ Ἀριστοκράτης τὸν ἀδελφὸν | ἐτείμησαν. Τίς τούτῳ ποσαμαρτήσεται, μηδέ|8ποτε τοῦ Ἀξιοττηνοῦ Μη|νὸς ἵλεως τύχιτο. Translation:Intheyear169,inthemonthofPeritos,onthesixthday.Asklepiades,sonof Amyntas,andElpishonouredtheirsonAsklepiades.AlkaiosandAristokrateshonouredtheir brother.Ifanyonedamages(themonument),hewillneverfindMênAxiottenosmerciful.

4.2.103 Saittai (area of, Lydia): Ex-votoofArioisaddressedtothegodsof Pereudos Discoverylocation: Found at Çalıbașı köyü, in the area of Saittai. Type: White marble stele with triangular pediment, acroteria and tenon. Dimensions: 75 × 30 × 6 cm. Letters: 2 cm. Currentlocation: Manisa Museum. Inv. No. 7057. Bibliography: Malay 1994, 174; SEG 34, no. 1220; BÉ 1984, 397; Herrmann and Varinlioğlu 1984, 16–17, no. 11 (fig. 11). Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: A crescent moon is represented above the text. Text: Μεγάλου. Θεοῖς |2 Περευδηνοῖς Ἀρι|οις εὐξάμενος |4 καὶ εἰσακουσθεὶς | εὐχαριστῶ. Translation: (Monument)ofthegreat(god).TothegodsofPereudos,Ariois,havingmadea promiseandbeingheard,inthanksgiving. L1: SEG 34, no. 1220: μεγάλου Μηνός. L2–3: SEG 34, no. 1220: Ἀριοις could be a mistake for Ἀριος(?).

4.2.104 Saittai (area of, Lydia): Confession inscription dedicated to Meis Axiottenos Discoverylocation: From Köleköy, in the area of Saittai, according to P. Herrmann. Type: White marble stele with upper moulding and tenon. Dimensions: 100 × 48 × 7 cm. Letters: 1.5 cm. Bibliography: Horsley and Luxford 2016, 145–46, no. 3a; LKGI 39.14; Petzl 2011, 123 (with translation); BWK 3; TAM V.1, 159; CMRDM I, 69 (pl. XXIX); Lane 1964, 50–51, no. A2; Herrmann 1962, no. 21 (with pl. VIII.2). Date: AD 164/165 (= 249 Sullan era). Representation: Two recessed panels are carved below the moulding. The upper, which is also the largest contains the relief of the god Mên with tunic, cloak, crescent behind the shoulders and Phrygian cap. With his raised right hand he holds a spear-like sceptre and in his left he holds a round object, perhps a pine cone. On the right side of the god we see the represen-

CATALOGUE

381

tation of the stolen cloak. The lower panel has the image of a boy with his both hands raised in adoration; this may be that of the culprit. Text: Μέγας Μεὶς Ἀξιοττηνὸς Τάρσι βα|σιλεύων. Ἐπεὶ ἐπεστάθη σκῆ|πτρον εἴ τις ἐκ τοῦ βαλανείου τι |4 κλέψι, κλαπέντος οὖν εἱματίου | ὁ θεὸς ἐνεμέσησε τὸν κλέπτην | καὶ ἐπόησε μετὰ χρόνον τὸ εἱμά|τιον ἐνενκῖν ἐπὶ τὸν θεὸν καὶ ἐ|8ξωμολογήσατο. Ὁ θεὸς οὖν ἐκέλευ|σε δἰ ἀνγέλου πραθῆναι τὸ εἱμά|τὶν καὶ στηλλογραφῆσαι τὰς δυ|νάμεις. Ἔτους σμθ΄. Translation: GreatisMeisAxiottenoswhorulesaskingoverTarsi!Becauseasceptrewas setupincasesomeoneweretostealsomethingfromthebathhouse,whenacloakwasstolen thegodpunishedthethief,andaftersometimehemadehimbringbackthegarmenttothe god,andheconfessed.Therefore,throughamessengerthegodcommandedthatthecloakbe soldandtorecordthegod’spowersonastele.Intheyear249.

4.2.105 Saittai (area of, Lydia): Dedicationwithanaretalogicalformula Discoverylocation: Found in front of a house in Alașehir. Type: White marble altar with upper and lower mouldings. Dimensions: 80.5 × 36 cm. Letters: 2.7–3.3 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.73; CMRDM I, 83 (with bibliography); CMRDM III, pp. 76 and 79, Lane 1964, 22, no. 36; OMS 1 426–27; Peterson 1926, 268–70; Keil and Premerstein 1911, no. 211. Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: Εἷς θεὸς ἐ|ν οὐρανοῖς, | μέγας Μὴν |4 Οὐράνιος, | μεγάλη δύ|ναμις τοῦ ἀ|θανάτου θε|8οῦ. Translation: Oneisthegodinheavens,greatistheHeavenlyMên!Greatisthepowerofthe immortalgod!

4.2.106 Saittai (area of, Lydia): FuneraryimprecationaddressedtoAxiottenos Discoverylocation: Found on a farm between Kalburcu and Köleköy. Type: White marble stele with gabled pediment and tenon, broken above. Palmette-type acroteria. Dimensions: 88 × 38 × 6 cm. Letters: 1.2 cm. Bibliography: IGSK 52, 60 (partially); TAM V.1, 173; CMRDM I, 70; Lane 1964, 52, no. A11. Date: AD 98/99 (= 183 Sullan era). Representation: A wreath is represented under the lower rim of the pediment, on the shaft of the stele. On the tympanum, a patera in the middle and two ivy leaves on the lower corners. Text: Ἔτους ρπγ΄, μη(νὸς) Πανήμου | ς΄. Δημήτριος Τειμάου καὶ | Ἀμμία ἡ γυνὴ αὐτοῦ Δη|4μόφιλον τὸν ἑαυτῶν υἱ|ὸν καὶ Ζηνᾶς ὁ ἀδελφὸς | αὐτοῦ ἐτείμησαν. Εἰ δέ | τις προσαμαρτάνῃ τῷ μνημεί|8ῳ, τεύξηται τοῦ Ἀξιοττη|νοῦ κεχολωμένου. Translation: In the year 183, in the month Panemos, on the sixth day. Demetrios, son of Teimaos,andAmmia,hiswife,honourDemophilos,theirson,(thesameas)Zenas,hisbrother (do).Ifanyonedamagesthemonument,hewillhavetodealwiththeangerofAxiottenos.

382

CATALOGUE

4.2.107 Saittai (area of, Lydia) = 5.2.57 4.2.108 Sardis (Lydia): Confirmingtheprivilegesofasanctuarybelongingto Mên Discoverylocation: Çapaklı (north-east from Sardis). Discovered at Gebeş Mahallesi, during the research of 1993. Type: Marble block; initially used as architrave. Dimensions: 90 × 52 × 17 cm. Letters: 2 cm (max.); traces of red dye on lines 2, 4 and 6. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 7971. Bibliography: Malay 1999, 131 (with fig. 136). Date: AD 188/189. Text: Ἐπ[ιστολὴ] | τῷ σωτῆρι τῆς ἐπαρχείας ἀνθ(άτῳ) | Ἀρρίῳ Ἀντωνείνῳ παρὰ Ἑρμογέ|νους τοῦ Δητρίου Σαρδιανοῦ νεω|5κόρου θεοῦ Μηνὸς Ἀσκηνοῦ προ|πάτορος τοῦ ὄντος ἐν Σάρδεσιν· | ἔχοντος, κύριε, δίκαια τοῦ θεοῦ ἐκ | βασιλικῶν δωρεῶν καὶ ἐπικρίσεων | ἐννόμων καὶ ἐπιτρόπων καὶ τῆς βου|10λῆς καὶ τοῦ δήμου δίδοσθαι κατ᾽ ἔτος | ὑπὸ τῶν ἀρχόντων τῆς πόλεως ὡρισ|μένα κὲ κεκριμένα ἐξ ἔθους ※ χ΄ εἴς | τε τὰς θυσίας κὲ σπονδὰς τοῦ θεοῦ | κὲ τοῦ αὐτοκράτορος [ν]είκης τε κὲ αἰ|15ωνίου διαμονῆς κὲ τῶν ἀφθόνων καρ|πῶν κὲ δεδομένων τούτων ὑπὸ τῶν κα|τ᾽ ἔτος ἀρχόντων, σήμερον μὴ διδομένων | ὑπὸ τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος ἄρχοντος Αὐρ(ήλιος) Κτη|σίππου κὲ ἐπὶ τούτων τῶν θυσιῶν δέο|20μαί σου τῆς τύχης κελεῦσαί σε τῷ ἄρ|χοντι Αὐρ(ήλιος) Κτησίππῳ δοῦναι τὰ ἐξ ἔθους | διδόμενα ※ χ΄ πρὸς τὸ τὰς θυσίας τῷ θεῷ | τὰς νενομισμένας ἐκτελεῖσθαι· ὐπέτα|ξα δὲ κὲ τῶν πρὸ σοῦ ἀνθυπάτων κὲ ἐπιτρό|25πων ἐπικρίσεις. Οὐενουλήϊος Βάλης | ἐπίτροπος Αὐτοκράτορος Οὐεσπασιανοῦ | Σαρδιανῶν ἄρχουσι χαίρειν· ἐξ ἔθους | εἰς τὰ τοῦ Μηνὸς μυστήρια χορηγούμενα | εὔλογόν ἐστιν δίδοσθαι ἑκάστου ἔτους· |30 κὲ Ἀσπ[ρήν]ας ἀνθύπατος οὕτ[ω]ς. Translation: LetterofHermogenes,sonofDemetriosofSardis,wardenofthetempleofthe ancestralgodMênAskênosbelongingtoSardis,totheproconsulArriusAntoninus,thesaviouroftheprovince.O,Lord!Accordingtotheprivledgesgrantedbythe(previous)kings andtothelegaldecisionsbothoftheprocuratorsandoftheCouncilandthePeople,thegod istoreceivefromthemagistratesofthecitythecustomarilyestablishedanddecidedamount of600denariiforthesacrificesandthelibationsonbehalfofthegodandforthevictoryand eternalpermanenceoftheemperorandforplentifulcrops.Thiswasgivenbythemagistrates everyyear,buttodaythemagistrateincharge,Aur.Ktesippos,isnotgivingthiscustomarily amount.Ontheoccasionofthesesacrifices,IappealtoyourGeniustoorderthemagistrate Aur.Ktesippostogivethehabitual600denarii,sothatthesacrificestothegodprescribed bythecustombeperformed.Iappendheretheearlierdecisionsofthepreviousproconsuls andprocurators.‘VenuleiusValens,procuratoroftheemperorVespasianustotheSardian magistrates, greetings! It is reasonable to give every year the customary amount for the mysteriesofMên.’TheproconsulAsprenas(decided)thesameway.

4.2.109 Sardis (Lydia) = 5.2.62

CATALOGUE

383

4.2.110 Sardis (Lydia): ConfessioninscriptiondedicatedtoMênAxiottenos Discoverylocation: Brought in 1910 to the museum of Smyrna from a house in Sart. Type: White-bluish slab, destroyed on all sides, except the right. Dimensions: 19 × 22, 5 × 7 cm. Letters: 1.7 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 39.45; BWK 100; CMRDM I, 77 (fig.); NIS 24 and 32, n. 2; Lane 1964, 21–22, no. 32; Buckler and Robinson 1932, 96 (with bibliography, fig. 84); Keil and Premerstein 1908, no. 25. Date: Approximately 2nd century AD (by the shape of the letters). Text: [-- name -ω]ν Ἀριστ[ονεί|2κου? ἐλεη]θεὶς καὶ ἁμ[αρ|τήσας κα]ταπίπτω εἰς ἀ[σ|4θένειαν] καὶ ὁμολογῶ τ[ὸ | ἁμάρτημ]α Μηνὶ Ἀξιο[τ|6τηνῷ καὶ στη]λογρ[αφῶ]. Translation: [--]onsonofAristoneikos?,asIwasshown(mercy)andIcommittedasin,now IbecameillandIadmitmysintoMênAxiottenosandIamwritingitonthisstele. L2: L. Robert excludes the reading [ἐλεη]θεὶς; other possible restitutions: [ἰα]θείς or [σω]θείς (G. Petzl).

4.2.111 Sardis (Lydia): ConfessioninscriptiondedicatedtoMênAxiotenos Discovery location: Upper fragment discovered in the floor of the ‘House of Bronzes’ in Sardis in 1959; the second one was found in 1961 in the garden of a house in Sart. Type: Two fragments of white marble stele; the width narrows toward the top. Upper fragment, damaged in the lower and upper sides, reused to serve as column base. Dimensions: Upper side: 24 × 33 × 5.5 cm; Lower side: 42 × 38–32 × 5–6 cm. Letters: 1.6–1.8 cm (upper side); 1.5–2 cm (the lower side). Currentlocation: The French Mission Headquarters (according to Lane). Bibliography: Rostad 2006b, 101 (translation and commentary); LKGI 39.43; BWK 101; CMRDM I, 80; Lane 1964, 22, no. 33 (partial); Lane 1967–68, 45, no. 7; NIS 23–24, 33–34 (pls. II.2 and III.2). Date: AD 160/161 (= 245 Sullan era) or AD 214/215 (= 245 Actian era). Representation: The second fragment features incised crescent. Text: [Μην]ὶ Ἀξιοτηνῷ. Ἐ[πα]|[φρόδ]ειτος οἰκο[νό]|[μος Κλαυ]δίο[υ Στρα]|[τ]ονείκου εὐξά[με]|5νος ἐὰν λήψεται | γυναῖκα ἣν θέλω | καὶ λαβὼν καὶ μὴ ἀ|ποδὼν τὴν εὐχὴν, | κολασθεὶς ἀνέθη|10κεν καὶ ἀπὸ νῦν εὐλο|γεῖ μετὰ τῶν ἰδίων | πάντων. Ἔτους σμε΄, | μ(ηνὸς) Δείου, βι΄. Translation: ToMênAxio(t)tenos.Epaphrodeitos,stewardofClaudiusStratoneikos,having madeavowifheshouldgetawifewhichIwant,andgettingherbutnotpayinghisvow,after beingpunishedheset(this)up,andfromnowon,heblesses(thegod)withthewholefamily. Intheyear245,inthemonthofDeios,onthetwelfthday.

4.2.112 Sardis (Lydia): Inscription mentioning the repartition of water sources Discoverylocation: Noticed by O. Rayet in 1974 near the agora and then moved to Smyrna by the Brazilian emperor Dom Pedro II; in 1896 it was still in Sardis, according to P. Perdrizet.

384

CATALOGUE

Type: Stone slab; the right side and probably the upper one destroyed. Dimensions: 110 × 65 × 14 cm. Bibliography: LKGI 12.2; CMRDM I, 79; Lane 1964, 22, no. 34 (partial); Buckler and Robinson 1932, 17; Perdrizet 1896, 70–71 (fig. 12). Date: Roman Imperial period. Text: [---] | καὶ ὅσοις ἀπενεμ[ήθη ὕδωρ· κρήνη] | γυμνασίω γερουσι[ακῶ ἐνταντία -· κρήνη] | μυστηρίοις δυσὶ[ν ἐναντία -· κρήνη] |4 Δομιτίας, (ἑκατοντά)χ(ους) ε΄· κρήνη Ε[name ---] | κρήνη Ληναεῖτ(ις) πρὸς τοῖς [---] | κρήνη μυστηρίω Ἄττει ἐνα[ντία ἀπόρρυ]|8τος εἰς τὸ Διός· συναγωγῆ[ς κρήνη -·] | κρήνη πρὸς τῶ ᾽Ωδείω, (ἑκατοντά)χ(ους) γ΄· [κρήνη - name]|του πρὸς τῆ διστέγω τῆς [ --- οὗ καὶ] | πύργοι, (τετρ)ά(μφορα) β΄· ἀνδροφυλακίο[υ κρήνη ἣ ἐπὶ] | τῆ καθόδω ἀγορᾶς πρὸς τ[---ὕδωρ] |12 πέμπει· κρήνη ἐν τοῖς [---name]|γιου· ἀπὸ ὑδρείο[υ κρήνη -· κρήνη Λυσι?]|μάχου, (ἑκατοντά)χ(ους) γ΄· κρήνη Π[name --- πρὸς τῶ]| Μηνογενείω, (ἑκατοντά)χ(ους) γ΄· κρή[νη Ἀρσινόης? -·] |16 ἀπὸ τῆς Ἀρσινόης κρ[ήνη ἀπόρρυτος] | περὶ τὸ Μηνός· κρήνη ἐ[ν---name]| του πρὸς τῆ πύλη· κρ[ῆναι ἃς κατεσκεύασαν] | Ῥοῦφος καὶ Λέπιδο[ς, ---name, ---]|20 Αὐρηλία Ἰουλία Μηνο[-, ---name]| δρα, (τετρ)ά(μφορα) β΄· Ἀσίννιος Μ[---]|νος, (τετρ)ά(μφορον) α΄· Φλ. Σεκ[---]. Translation: [---]andto(those)whomeverthewaterwasdistributed:thesourceoppositethe gymnasiumoftheCouncilofelders; thesourceoppositethetwomystery-halls;thesourceof Domitia,fivehundredchous;thesourceofE[---];thesourceofLenaeitisnearthe[---];the sourceontheoppositesideofthemystery-hallofAttisthatflowsintothesanctuaryofZeus; the source of the synagogue [---]; the source near the Odeion, three hundred chous; the sourceof(…)tosnearthetwostorey-buildingofthe[---]wheretherearealsotwotowers, two tetramphora; the source of the guard-house which is on the descending road to the marketplacesendswaterto[---];thesourcethatflowsfromthereservoir[…];thesourceof Lysimachos(?), three hundred chous; the fountain of P[---] near the Menogeneion, three hundredchous;thefountainofArsinoe(?);thesourceflowingfromtheArsinoeansource nearthesanctuaryofgodMên;thesourcefrom[---]of[---]os;thesourceswhichRufusand Lepidusand[---]built;[---],[---];AureliaIuliaMeno[---],[---],[---]dra,2tetramphora; AsinniusM[---]nos,1tetramphoron;FlaviusSec[---].

4.2.113 Sardis (Lydia): Imprecationagainsttombprofanation Discoverylocation: Purchased from a shop in Sart. Type: Funerary stele. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 39.70; IGSK 52, 37 (with bibliography); CMRDM I, 81; Buckler and Robinson 1932, 152 (with facsimile); Hellenica 13, 133; Lane 1964, 44–45, no. 6 (partial); NIS 32–33; Robert 1962, 277, n. 3. Date: Roman Imperial period. Representation: Aniconic monument. Text: [---]δυ[--|2 --]μένων ἔξω βάλῃ | [--- Μ]ηνὸς Τυμωλεί[του |4 καὶ τῶν θεῶν τ]ῶν ἄλλων πάν[των | κεχολωμένων] ύχοιτο μετὰ πάν|6[των τῶν ἐκγόν]ων, μήτε θ[ρ]εμμά|[των ὄνησις εἴ]η, μήτε ὀμμάτων |8 [ὄρασις, ἀλλ᾽] ἐξώλη γένοιτο | [μετὰ τῶν ἐκγόν]ων vac. Translation: [---]ifanyonethrows(theremains)out,hewilldealwiththeangerof[---M]ên Tymoleitesandofalltheothergods;heandallhisdescendantswillnotknowthejoyoftheir nurslingsorthatoftheeyesight,butheandhisdescendantswillbeutterlydestroyed.

CATALOGUE

385

4.2.114 Sardis (Lydia): ReliefofriderMên Discoverylocation: Found in a field near Sart. Type: Fragment of a marble stele broken all sides. Dimensions: 22.5 × 21 × 5 cm. Currentlocation: Ashmolean Museum, Oxford. Bibliography: Delemen 1999, 189, no. 357 (with bibliography); NIS 32. Date: Roman Imperial period (?). Representation: Mên, facing the viewer, is riding to the right, with a Phrygian cap and a crescent. Left forefoot of the horse on a small altar in front. Text: Anepigraphic monument.

4.2.115 Sardis (area of, Lydia): Ex-votodedicatedtoMênKamar(e)ites Discoverylocation: Found at Allahdiyen, south of Sardis. Type: Marble stele with gabled pediment and tenon. On the tympanum, a patera. Dimensions: 58 × 25 × 7.5 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Inv. No. 4609. Bibliography: LKGI 35.2; Malay 1994, 165 (fig. 56). Date: 1st–2nd centuries AD. Representation: Above the inscription, inside a recessed panel, a Nike holding in her left arm a palm branch. Text: [Ἀ]πελλῆς Ἀπελλήο[υς] | [Μ]ηνὶ Καμαρίτῃ καὶ | [Πλ]ούτωνι καὶ Κόρῃ εὐ|[χὴν] ὅτι μοι ἐπήκουσαν | πάντα. Translation: Apelles,sonofApelles,toMênKamar(e)ites,andPloutoandKore,infulfilment ofthevow,sincetheyheardallmyprayers.

4.2.116 Sardis (area of, Lydia): DedicationtoMênAxiottenos Discoverylocation: Found at the bath-gymnasium complex of Sardis. Type: Upper part of a marble block. Dimensions: Unknown. Bibliography: LKGI 39.44; SEG 36, no. 1102. Date: 2nd–3rd centuries AD. Representation: Not recorded. Text: Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ Ἀ|2μύντας ὑπὲρ ἑα[υ]|[τ]οῦ καὶ τῶν ἰδί|4[ων ---]. Translation: ToMênAxiottenos,Amyntas,forhimselfandforhisownfamily…

4.2.117 Silandos (area of, Lydia) = 5.2.63 4.2.118 Silandos (area of, Lydia): ConfessioninscriptionaddressedtoMên Axiottenos Discoverylocation: Discovered at Kalburcu, south-west of Silandos.

386

CATALOGUE

Type: Marble stele moulded above. Dimensions: 81 × 42 × 5 cm. Letters: 1.5–2 cm. Currentlocation: Museum of Manisa. Bibliography: Herrmann and Malay 2007, 70 (fig. 70). Date: AD 180/181 (= 265 Sullan era). Representation: On top of the inscription, an upward crescent moon in relief. Two ivy leaves featured above the moulding. Text: (crescent) Μηνὶ Ἀξιοττηνῷ, ἐπει|δὴ ὁ Γλύκων ἐκολάσθη ὑ|πὲρ παππικῶν ἐνγαίων, ἅ|4τινα Ἄτταλος, παρευχερί|σας τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ἔνγεα, ἐν|επορεύσετο ἐξουθενή|σας τοὺς θεοὺς τοὺς ἐν Νον|νου· ἃ παραδίδει Γλύκων τῷ | θεῷ χωρὶς δόλου πονηροῦ | δαπανήσ(ας) πυ(ρῶν) κύ(πρους) δ