The Regional Cults of Thessaly

THE REGIONAL CULTS OF THESSALY

A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

by Charles Denver Graninger January 2006

© 2006 Charles Denver Graninger

THE REGIONAL CULTS OF THESSALY Charles Denver Graninger, Ph.D. Cornell University 2006

Regionalism was a defining feature of Greek society in all periods of antiquity. The implications of this regionalism for the history of religion are crucial: No two areas of the Greek world worshipped the same pantheon of gods in the same way. Regional variation was the norm. This dissertation focuses on Thessaly, a large frontier area of mainland Greece which has yet to receive systematic attention in the field of history of religion, and analyzes its regional cults. By regional cult, I mean those cults which are attested in more than one place in Thessaly but do not have a near-panhellenic distribution outside of Thessaly. The problem is approached through a detailed study of the available literary, archaeological, numismatic and epigraphic sources. After providing an outline of major currents in Thessalian social and political history, I consider in succession the Thessalian calendar, Thessaly’s “federal” sanctuaries and other regional cults. Thessaly is found to be home to a wide variety of idiosyncratic cults, including: Apollo Kerdoios, Apollo Leschanorios, Artemis Throsia, Athena Itonia, Dionysus Karpios, Ennodia, Poseidon Petraios, Themis, Zeus Eleutherios, Zeus Homoloios and Zeus Thaulios, among others.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I thank my dissertation director, Kevin Clinton, as well as the other members of my committee, Hayden Pelliccia and Jeff Rusten, for their patience, goodwill and thoughtful criticism throughout the process of composition and revision. I also thank David Mankin for his sage guidance on all matters classical. Research travel in Greece was funded by a Michele Sicca Summer Research Grant from the Institute for European Studies, Cornell, and by an Oscar Broneer Travel Grant from the American School of Classical Studies in Athens. I will be forever grateful to both institutions.

v

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Charles Denver Graninger received a B.A. in Classics from New College of Florida in 1997, an M.A. in Classics (Greek) from the University of Colorado-Boulder in 1999, and a Ph.D. in Classics from Cornell University in 2006. In 2002-2003, he was the Michael Jameson fellow at the American School of Classical Studies in Athens. He was born in Fredericksburg, Virginia.

iii

For Tanya

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Biographical Sketch

iii

Dedication

iv

Acknowledgments

v

Table of Contents

vi

List of Tables

viii

List of Abbreviations

ix

Chapter 1: Introduction

1

Chapter 2: An Outline of Thessalian History

11

2.1: Foreign Affairs

11

2.2: Domestic Affairs

13

Chapter 3: The Thessalian Calendar

30

3.1: The Attic State Calendar and Attic Religion

31

3.2: The Thessalian Calendar(s) and Thessalian Religion

40

3.3: Conclusion

54

Chapter 4: Federal Sanctuaries

61

4.1: Athena Itonia at Philia

62

4.2: Zeus Eleutherios at Larisa

91

Chapter 5: Regional Cults

133

5.1: Apollo Kerdoios

136

5.2: Artemis Throsia

150

5.3: Dionysus Karpios

167

5.4: Ennodia

182

5.5: Poseidon Petraios

207

vi

5.6: Themis

222

5.7: Zeus Homoloios

244

5.8: Zeus Thaulios

256

Chapter 6: Conclusion

271

Appendix 1: An Epigraphic Inventory of the Cults of Tetradic Thessaly

278

Works Cited

300

vii

LIST OF TABLES

1. Dionysus Karpios in Thessalian Inscriptions

3

2. Athenian State Festivals and the Athenian Calendar

32

3. Epigraphic Evidence for the Thessalian Calendar(s), pre-196a

40

4. Month Festivals and the Thessalian Calendar

42

5. Thessalian Months and other Greek Calendars

57

6. The Calendars of Thessaly, Boiotia and Attica

58

7. Federal Documents from Philia

68

8. Victor Lists at the Eleutheria with Preamble

114

9. Other Eleutheria Victor Lists

117

10. Composite Program of the Eleutheria

122

11. Stena Victor Lists

124

12. Comparative order of events at the Stena and Eleutheria

128

13. Decree Publication in the Sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios, Larisa

139

14. Poseidon Petraios (?) and Thessalian Coinage

216

15. Chronological Distribution and Geographic Provenance of Inscriptions Discussed in Chapters 4-5

viii

273

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

The abbreviations for names of periodicals are those used in the latest issue of L’Année Philologique; those for names of epigraphic corpora are those used in the latest issue of Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum. The following abbreviations are also used in this work: DKP

K. Ziegler and W. Sontheimer (1964-1975). Der kleine Pauly. Stuttgart.

DNP

H. Cancik and H. Schneider (1996- ). Der neue Pauly. Stuttgart.

McD A. S. McDevitt (1970). Inscriptions from Thessaly. Hildesheim. SNG Sylloge nummorum Graecorum : the royal collection of coins and medals, Danish National Museum

ix

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

In his 1936 entry “Thessalia (Geschichte)” in Pauly-Wissowa, Hiller von Gaertringen commented on the subject of Thessalian religion: “Eine klare, die Tatsachen gebende Sammlung der Kulte fehlt noch.” 1 Some 70 years after Hiller’s statement, a basic foundation for the study of Thessalian religion is still wanting.

Thessalian Studies: Retrospect Two works are responsible for the birth of Thessalian studies: O. Kern’s 1908 Inscriptiones Thessaliae (= IG ix.2) and F. Stählin’s 1924 Das hellenische Thessalien. Kern’s corpus, which continues to furnish the epigraphic basis for all research on the region, made a systematic analysis of Thessalian social and political institutions possible. Stählin, a practitioner of the traditional art of historical geography, put Thessalian topography on a firm basis. Although not all of his identifications have been adopted in recent scholarship, his work has been the source of much productive disagreement. The Maison de l’Orient in Lyon has been associated with Thessalian studies for 30 years. Their numerous publications have helped to clarify many of the topographical problems in Stählin and have, in general, greatly augmented our knowledge of Thessalian society, e.g., the army, cadastration, penestai, etc. 2 Religion, with a few notable exceptions, has received much less attention on the whole. The witches of Thessaly continue to be popular, but scholars have tended to focus on their literary manifestations: Their imprint on the material record is

1 2

RE vi A, 1 s.v. Thessalia (Geschichte) col. 137. The works of Helly and Decourt are especially prominent.

1

2

insubstantial. 3 Daffa-Nikonanou has written a monograph on prominent Demeter cults in Thessaly, with special emphasis on votives. 4 Chrysostomou is author of a pair of important articles on Thessalian and Macedonian cults of Zeus and a major monograph on Ennodia. 5 In an influential but methodologically difficult monograph on Macedonian rites of initiation, Hatzopoulos has discussed the important Thessalian cult of Artemis Throsia. 6 There have been sporadic attempts at recovering a regional perspective on Thessalian religion. P. Philippson ambitiously and problematically attempted to sketch the initial fusion of Indo-European and indigenous, Aegean religious elements, which she argued took place first in Thessaly, and their subsequent development throughout the Bronze Age into a coherent religious system: She suggested that traces of this system are visible in the myths and cults of Thessaly of the historic period. 7 Tziaphalias and Rakatsanis have assembled all of the evidence for cult from the tetrad of Pelasgiotis. 8 Finally, Morgan has suggestively sketched some broad trends of prominent Thessalian cults in the Protogeometric to Archaic Age. 9

The Regional History of Religion The present dissertation is a preliminary attempt to write a history of Thessalian religion. Studies of this genre have a rich ancient and modern pedigree. 10 It

3

Most recently, Phillips 2002; Cazeaux 1979. Daffa-Nikonanou 1973. 5 Chrysostomou 1989-1991; Chrysostomou 1993-4; Chrysostomou 1998. 6 Hatzopoulos 1994. 7 Philippson 1944. Prominent reviews, all critical: Nilsson 1949; Edelstein 1953; Rose 1944; Fontenrose 1948. The idea of historical Thessaly as a primitive, never-never-land has been surprisingly slow to die. 8 Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997. This work is characterized by a number of hasty interpretations and ultimately fails to deliver the regional perspective implied by its title. 9 Morgan 2003. 10 For ancient regional histories, cf. the fragments collected in Tresp 1914. Contained therein are the remains of, e.g., Theognis’ and Gorgon’s “On the sacrifices at Rhodes,” Ister’s “Collection of Cretan Sacrifices,” Sosibios “On the sacrifices in Lakedaimon.” For modern regional studies, cf. the bibliography after Graf’s introduction to Nilsson 1995. 4

3

is nevertheless worth considering the question anew: Why write a regional history of religion? Among histories of religion which have a geographic orientation, 11 the regional history occupies an intermediate contextual ground between the grand, panhellenic survey and the narrower study of the cults of an individual polis or archaeological site. In the latter case, it cannot be emphasized enough that very few sites in the Greek world furnish enough source-material to make such a study possible: The confluence of large-scale, well-published excavation with an extensive epigraphic corpus and ample references in literary sources is rare. By adopting a broader frame of geographic reference, though, one can begin to use important pieces of evidence that could otherwise be left in terminal isolation. So, in the case of Thessaly, the cult of Dionysus Karpios is attested in five inscriptions, summarized below in Table 1:

Table 1 Dionysus Karpios in Thessalian Inscriptions

Location

Date

Context

Reference

1. Larisa

450-

Dedication

SEG 35.590a = Kontogiannis 1985;

(Pelasgiotis)

425a

(Dedicator

Ed. pr. Theocharis 1960: 185 = McD

Unknown)

355

11

As opposed to, for example, studies of individual cult figures, e.g., Herakles, Artemis, or types of religious practice, e.g., sacrifice, libation, supplication.

4

Table 1 (Continued) 2. Larisa

Ia

(Pelasgiotis)

List of priestesses of

SEG 17.288 = Ed. pr.

Demeter Phylake who

Oikonomides and

officiated at the

Koumanoudes 1956-7: 17-

petroeteiri¿j for

22, no. 1

Dionysus Karpios 3. Larisa

?

Ibid.

(Pelasgiotis) 4. Mikro

Arvanitopoulos 1911: 123, no. 26

Ia

Keserli (?)

Group Dedication

SEG 23.445 = McD 653 =

(phrouroi)

Ed. pr. Mastrokostas 1964:

(Pelasgiotis)

318-9, n. 2

5. Gomphi

aet.

Manumission dated by

(Hestiaiotis)

Aug.

league strategos and priest

IG ix.2 287b

of Dionysus Karpios

In a history of the cults of Larisa, primary focus would fall on inscriptions 1-3. With a regional frame of reference, however, it is possible to incorporate the inscriptions from Gomphi and Mikro Keserli, two minor sites that are not particularly well explored or published, two places that have produced tiny epigraphic corpora. These texts make a substantial contribution to our understanding of the cult. Both texts are late Hellenistic or early Roman in date and seem to mirror the increased activity of the cult that we see in Larisa in this time frame. The dedication by phrouroi in the Mikro Keserli text, perhaps the Thessalian equivalent of an ephebic class, broadens our understanding of the kind of individuals or collectives that honored this divinity. That the priest of Dionysus Karpios was an eponymous official in Hestiaotid Gomphi implies a cult of

5

some stature in that community. So, in the case of Dionysus Karpios at least, a regional frame of reference pays dividends. On the other side is the grand panhellenic survey, where the often unmanageable geographic frame of reference can lead to conclusions about Greek religion that often have little relevance to a particular locality. Here the regional history of religion can offer a productive check. For example, a common, perhaps dominant, narrative of Hellenistic religion states that traditional cults of the Greek poleis went into decline, receding before the rising popularity of “oriental” cults and an increasing focus on the personal experience of divinity. Two recent regional histories have demonstrated that part of this narrative is simply false. Fritz Graf, in his study of northern Ionian cults, revealed that priesthoods of traditional polis deities were maintained throughout the Hellenistic period. 12 Jon Mikalson has recently demonstrated that this was also the case in Athens and Attica. 13 If we must admit the fallibility of the traditional narrative in these two cases, then one becomes suspicious about where in fact this narrative does apply. The bar for non-Attic, regional histories of religion has been set very high. I signal here the recent contributions of Graf on northern Ionia, Schachter on Boiotia and Jost on Arcadia. 14 While the present dissertation aspires to be a foundation for a work that will eventually be placed alongside them, one crucial feature sets it apart: Jost, Schachter and Graf treat every cult attested in their chosen geographical region. As a region, however, Thessaly is simply too vast and the cults attested therein too numerous and problematic to find adequate coverage between the covers of a dissertation. 15

12

Graf 1985: passim. Mikalson 1998: 318ff. 14 Graf 1985; Schachter 1981-; Jost 1985. 15 Schachter’s history began as a DPhil thesis (Schachter 1981-: 1.ix). 13

6

I have therefore been forced to make a selection realized at two different levels. From the perspective of geography, I have restricted myself to so-called tetradic Thessaly, i.e., the plains which dominate the region, as opposed to greater Thessaly, i.e., the tetrads together with their mountainous, perioikic hinterland. 16 While the political distinction between perioikic and tetradic Thessaly, largely a feature of the Archaic and Classical period, breaks down in the Hellenistic and Roman period, with the conspicuous exception of Magnesia, this dissertation will maintain this distinction in all chronological periods. I have also limited the types of cult which are to be considered. The logic of this selection is best explained through a brief thought project. Let us imagine the totality of Greek cults as lying on a spectrum. At one end lie those cults which are panhellenic, i.e., they are observed throughout the Greek world. At the other end lie those cults which are exclusively local, i.e., they are observed in only one locality in the Greek world. In between there are a vast number of cults with divergent patterns of geographic distribution. Let us now extract all of the cults of Thessaly from this spectrum. Some of these cults will have belonged to the panhellenic end of the spectrum, others to the local end of the spectrum. 17 This dissertation aims to throw the schematic middle ground into very high relief, viz., those cults which are attested in more than one location in Thessaly but do not approach panhellenic distribution. I term these the “regional cults” of Thessaly. 18

16

Chapter 2 will discuss this distinction in some detail. In Appendix 1, “An Epigraphic Inventory of the Cults of Tetradic Thessaly,” I offer an outline of what such a spectrum might look like in the case of tetradic Thessaly on the basis of epigraphic evidence. 18 While it is a very small step to move from territory to society, to call these the “cults of the Thessalian ethnos” rather than the “regional cults of Thessaly,” it is a step that I am unwilling to take at this juncture. The Greek ethnos is gradually attracting more scholarly attention, but it remains rather poorly understood. 17

7

Cults of this sort fall into three basic groups, each of which I treat in a separate chapter: 1) Cults known from the Thessalian calendar, the regional status of which is implied by the use of a common calendar throughout Thessaly from at least the Hellenistic period, but perhaps earlier; 2) Federal cults, i.e., cults which receive some form of federal investment, often at a central sanctuary. While these cults may not meet the admittedly very minimal criteria for regional status, their connection with a political collectivity which had a regional orientation—the Thessalian League—merits their inclusion in this dissertation; 3) Other regional cults, i.e., those cults which are attested in more than one location in Thessaly but which lack panhellenic distribution.

Categories of Evidence The basic categories of evidence available for a study of Thessalian religion are largely the same as those available for other regions of the ancient Mediterranean world. Within each region, however, the character of each category of evidence and its ratio, with respect to both quality and quantity, to the other categories is distinctive. For example, regional histories of Arcadian and Boiotian religion must confront the testimony of Pausanias on practically every page. Detailed awareness of the history of Athens and Attica allows one to view religion in its social and political context to a degree unthinkable elsewhere. The dominant body of evidence in the case of Thessaly is, as we will see, epigraphic. The literary sources available for the history of Thessalian religion are not appreciably different from those available for other regions, with one major exception: Pausanias is absent. The degree to which this will affect the contour of the present study cannot be overemphasized. There will be little, e.g., in the way of ritual detail or description of cult images. But this absence is as much an opportunity as a liability, for

8

the periegete’s testimony too often exercises undue influence on the interpretation of religious phenomena. Coinage provides some of the most tantalizing, if intractable, evidence for the history of religion. The methodological problems posed by coins as a class of evidence are severe, for the presence of types on coinage served one fundamental purpose: “the type identified the issuing authority, and so not only made the coin acceptable to those who trusted or were subject to that authority, but also guaranteed its acceptance back by that authority if tendered to it in future payments.” 19 There is no evidence that types were selected by vote or popularity. When cult imagery appears, it reflects the perspective of the minting authority alone. Nevertheless, the correspondence between numismatic type and literary or epigraphic description is occasionally so precise that one is tempted to use the two bodies of evidence to illuminate one another. In the case of Thessalian coinage, in addition to the standard numismatic corpora, the work of Moustaka has been especially helpful. 20 In general, though, numismatics will play a subordinate role in this study and will primarily be used to supplement the image developed from other, chiefly epigraphic, sources. When compared with the archaeology of the rest of the Greek world, Thessaly is notable for the extensive excavation and publication of Neolithic and Early Christian material. Between these two periods, however, the quantity of excavation and publication drops off considerably. I have made extensive use of a number of syntheses and gazetteers of work accomplished to date, especially the publications of Gallis, 21 Leekley and Efstratiou, 22 as well as the annual Archaeological Reports.

19

Kraay 1976: 2. Moustaka 1983. 21 Gallis 1975a. 22 Leekley and Efstratiou 1980. 20

9

Large scale excavation and publication of Thessalian sites of the Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic and Roman periods is largely limited to Pherai and the sanctuary of Athena Itonia near Philia. Perioikic Thessaly has been more fortunate in this regard, where the sites of Demetrias, Goritsa, Gonnoi and Halos have all received definitive publication. The research presented in this dissertation draws most heavily on inscriptions. The number of Thessalian inscriptions has nearly tripled since Kern’s publication of IG ix.2. My familiarity with the post-IG body of evidence depends primarily on the Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum (Leiden: 1923-71, 1976-present) and the indispensable Inscriptions from Thessaly: An Analytical Handlist and Bibliography of A. S. McDevitt (Hildesheim: 1970) (= McD). I have also made extensive use of the Bulletin Epigraphique and the Epigraphical Bulletin of Greek Religion. I have made every attempt to be comprehensive, but some texts, through no fault other than my own, have doubtless escaped me.

Outline of the Project The program of this dissertation has been heavily influenced by Graf’s Nordionische Kulte. Following this introduction, chapter 2, “An Outline of Thessalian History,” attempts to provide a useful frame of reference for the findings presented later in the dissertation. This chapter draws heavily on both literary and material evidence in sketching the major currents in the social and political history of Thessaly from the Iron Age to the Empire, with special emphasis on the Archaic, Classical and Hellenistic periods. Chapters 3-5 are the heart of the dissertation and offer the most substantial and original scholarly contributions of the project. Chapter 3, “The Thessalian Calendar,” begins with an illustration of the relationship between cult and calendar in the ancient Greek world in the specific case of Athens. I then focus more narrowly on the calendar

10

of the Thessalian koinon and its potential contributions to the history of Thessalian religion. Chapter 4, “Federal Sanctuaries,” begins with some general reflections on the concept of a “federal sanctuary.” I then present and discuss the evidence for the two certain federal sanctuaries of Thessaly, Athena Itonia at Philia and Zeus Eleutherios at Larisa, and examine the possibility that the sanctuary of Athena Itonia at Iton was also federal. Chapter 5, “Regional Cults,” proposes two criteria for the classification of a cult as a regional cult. The chapter then considers the eight prominent Thessalian cults which meet these criteria: Apollo Kerdoios, Artemis Throsia, Dionysus Karpios, Ennodia, Poseidon Petraios, Themis, Zeus Homoloios, Zeus Thaulios. Chapter 6, “Conclusion,” offers some general observations about the findings of this dissertation and sketches some further lines of inquiry. Appendix 1, “An Epigraphic Inventory of the Cults of Tetradic Thessaly,” offers a sense of the full range of cults—local, regional, panhellenic—attested in the inscriptions of tetradic Thessaly.

CHAPTER 2 AN OUTLINE OF THESSALIAN HISTORY

The purpose of this chapter is to provide a brief narrative of Thessalian history, with special focus on the Archaic, Classical and Hellenistic periods. In so doing, I hope to create an adequate frame of reference for the following chapters which focus on religion. I neither canvas all of the relevant sources, nor do I tackle all of the region’s numerous thorny historiographical problems. My focus is on basic domestic and foreign political developments in Thessalian history and broader, observable trends in Thessalian society.

2.1: Foreign Affairs

Long considered the northern frontier of Mycenaean civilization, 1 recent excavations at Bronze Age Dimini (= Homeric Iolkos?) may reveal a settlement equal in stature to the great Peloponnesian centers of Mycenaean civilization. Thessaly’s prominence in the Homeric catalogue of ships is conspicuous. Although it is notoriously difficult to utilize that document for “historical” purposes, it is noteworthy that nearly all of the locations of Homeric Thessaly have produced Protogeometric material. 2 Thessaly seems to have been a major military power in northern Greece during the Archaic period. Thessalian forces allegedly participated in the Lelantine War and the first Sacred War. 3 A Thessalian alliance with the Peisistratids in Athens brought Thessalian forces into contact with the dominant power of the Peloponnese, Sparta, on 1

Feuer 1983. On the Bronze Age in northern Greece more generally, cf. Andreou, Fotiadis et al. 1996. Morgan 2003: 102-5. 3 Cf. Lehmann 1983. 2

11

12

at least two occasions in the late sixth century. The Thessalians were among the first Greek powers to medize during the Persian Wars, 4 although Herodotus suggests that this was a somewhat controversial decision of the Aleuadai, an aristocratic clan in Larisa, imposed upon Thessaly as a whole. The Thessalians do not seem to have been a major factor in the buildup to and fighting of the Peloponnesian Wars of the later fifth century. Following the war, Thessaly was wracked by internal conflict brought on by a struggle between the ruling houses of Pherai and Larisa for regional hegemony. 5 The most conspicuous outcome was the election of Philip II of Macedon as archon of the Thessalian League for life. 6 Thessaly becomes in effect a Macedonian province: Philip collected tribute from some regions of Thessaly and utilized Thessalian cavalry in a number of military campaigns. Following Philip’s assassination, Alexander maintained Macedonian control of Thessaly by winning election to the league archonship and used large numbers of Thessalian cavalry in his eastern campaigns. While Thessaly emerges from the struggle of the diadochoi as Antigonid territory, the history of third-century Thessaly is extremely obscure. The most influential development in the region was Demetrius Poliorcetes’ establishment in 294 BCE of Demetrias, a major Macedonian naval station and royal residence on the Pagasitic Gulf. The Macedonian presence in the region became more fully entrenched. The rise and dramatic expansion of the Aitolian League in central and northern Greece following the defeat of Brennus and the Gauls in 279 BCE gave Macedon a worthy opponent to the south. Thessaly was a major battleground for their competing interests throughout the middle and late third century and did not fully rest until Pydna.

4

Cf. Westlake 1936; Robertson 1976. Cf. Westlake 1935; Mandel 1980; Sprawski 1999. 6 Just. 11.3.2. 5

13

Rome officially moves onto the scene in 196 BCE with the defeat of Philip V in the Second Macedonian War. Thessaly was “freed” from Macedon and, to a lesser extent, Aitolia, by Flamininus and the Thessalian koinon was renewed. 7 Antiochus III’s invasion of Thessaly soon provided another context for the assertion of Roman power in the region. The territories administered by this league continued to grow throughout the second and first centuries BCE. Those possessions of Achaia Phthiotis which Aitolia did not continue to hold following the Flamininan settlement were fully integrated within the Thessalian League in 196 BCE. As a reward for her support of Rome during the war with Antiochus, Malis became Thessalian in 189 BCE; previously perioikic Perrhaebia joined in 146 BCE. The koina of the Spercheios valley—Ainis and Oetaea—were likely incorporated within the Thessalian League in 27 BCE. Of the Archaic and Classical perioikoi, only Magnesia maintained independence from the Thessalian League in the Imperial era. Thessaly was officially integrated within the Roman province of Achaia, most likely in 27 BCE. In 67 CE, Thessaly was likely detached from Achaia and incorporated within the province of Macedonia. 8

2.2: Domestic Affairs

The Early History of the Thessalian League To what extent can one speak of a Thessalian League in the Archaic and Classical period? Just who or what is concealed by mention of “the Thessalians” in literary and epigraphic sources is unclear in the pre-196a era. That the Thessalians possessed some mechanism for organizing concerted military activity by the time of

7 8

The circumstances surrounding this event will be considered in much greater detail in Chapter 4. Bowersock 1965.

14

the Lelantine War is sure—if the literary traditions concerning this conflict are valid— and Herodotus’ testimony on the medism of Thessaly suggests that the Aleuads of Larisa had the ability to enforce their will on Thessaly at large. Whether this power was realized through a set of formal institutions like assemblies and elective councils or through an informal web of political alliances among the region’s local elites is unclear. Coins bearing the title “of the Thessalians” appear alongside local issues in the fifth century. 9 The earliest epigraphic evidence for the existence of a Thessalian koinon is supplied by an early fourth-century proxeny decree, most likely from Pherai. The balance of evidence does suggest that some form of koinon existed in Thessaly in the Archaic and Classical periods.

Aleuas the Red and the Tetrads 10 Harpocration, s.v. tetrarxi¿a, preserves fragments of Hellanicus and Aristotle which are the foundation of our knowledge of Archaic Thessaly: tetta/rwn merw½n oÃntwn th=j

Qettali¿aj eÀkaston me/roj tetra\j

e)kaleiÍto, kaqa/ fhsin ¸Ella/nikoj (= FGrHist 601a F1) e)n toiÍj QettalikoiÍj. oÃnoma de/ fhsin eiånai taiÍj tetra/si Qettaliw½tin Fqiw½tin

Pelasgiw½tin

¸Estiaiw½tin. kaiì

¹Aristote/lhj (= Aristotle

fr. 497 Rose) de\ e)n tv= koinv= Qettalw½n politei¿# e)piì ¹Aleu/a tou= purrou= divrh=sqai¿ fhsin ei¹j Öd moi¿raj th\n Qettali¿an. “Thessaly has four parts and each part is called a tetrad, just as Hellanicus says in the Thessalika. He says that the tetrads are named Thessaliotis, Phthiotis, Pelasgiotis and Hestiaotis. In the Common Constitution of the Thessalians, Aristotle claims that Thessaly was divided into four parts during the time of Aleuas the Red.” 11 9

Cf. Martin 1985: 37-8. Cf. the fundamental contribution of Gschnitzer 1954. 11 Aleuas is commonly dated to the middle to late sixth century. 10

15

How did these tetrads function? Positive evidence is extremely scarce. A pair of inscriptions offer snapshots at different periods of Thessalian history. IG ii2 175 (Athens: 353/2a) [® ® ® ® ® ® ® kale/sai de\ tou\j pre/sb-] ej tw½n Qettalw½n e)piì c[e/nia e)j to\ prutaneiÍon e)-] s auÃrion : oiàde h(ire/[q]hs[an pre/sbej ® ® ãE-] [m]pedoj ¹Oh=qen, Ai¹sxi¿nh[j ® ® ® ® ® ® ®] ® oroj

¹Axarneu/j,

LIU [® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®]

5

[oiàde] wÓmosan Qettalw½n [® ® ® ® ® ® ®] [p]ole/marxoi:

Pelasgiwt[w½n ® ® ® ® ® ® ®]

Fqiwtw½n: Mega/loj. Qet[taliwtw½n ® ® ® ®] [ (E]st[i]wt[w½]n:

Eiãrwn. pe/zarxo[i ® ® ® ® ®]

F[i¿]lippoj, Polumi¿dhj : L [® ® ® ® ® ® ®]

10

Qi¿brwn, Kotimi¿laj : ¸Up [® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®] Qeo/dwroj,

Pame . oj, [® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®]

Dra . . . j,

Filo/laoj,

Oi [® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®]

¸Ippokra/thj vacat vacat “[…(Let it be decided) to invite the ambassad]ors of the Thessalians to a m[eal in the prytaneion t]omorrow. The following were select[ed as ambassadors…E]mpedos of Oe, Aischine[s…]oros of Acharnai, Liu[…]: The following of the Thessalians took an oath 12 […] Polemarchs: Of the Pelasgiot[ans…]; of the Phthiotans, Megalos; of the Thes[saliotans…]; of the Hestiotans: Eiron. Pezarch[s…] Philip, Polymides, L[…],

12

Or “the following took an oath: of the Thessalians…” Helly suggests that the lacuna should be filled “Thettalon [ archon.]”

16

Thibron, Kotimilas, Hyp[…], Theodorus, Pameos, […], Dra[..]s, Philolaos, Oi[…], Hippokrates vacat” This inscription commemorates an official delegation sent by the Thessalians to Athens. Each tetrad provided a polemarch. Although one cannot infer too much from such titulature, it is entirely possible that these tetrads were somehow connected with military organization. Our second inscription dates to the period of the renewed Thessalian League and concerns a massive shipment of Thessalian grain to Rome. The passage in question concerns the sources of the grain within Thessaly and the schedule of its delivery: SEG 34.558.31ff. = Garnsey, Gallant et al. 1984 (Larisa: 150-130a) ta\j de\ po/leij e(k?[a/]s?thn tou= diatage/ntoj si¿tou poih/sasqa[i] th\n katagwgh\n e)piì lime/n[a] to\n e)piì tou= Fala/roij hÄ e)n

Dhmhtriei¿ou hÄ e)m 32

Dhmhtria/di, tw½n me\n tria/k[o]nta du/o muriadw½n Pelasgiw¯taj me\n kaiì Fqiw¯taj e)n t%½ mhniì tw½i ¹Afri¿%, e)n tw½i mh-

¸Istiw¯taj de\ kaiì Qessaliw¯taj 34

niì tw½i Qui¿ pro\ th=j ei¹ka/doj?, tw½n <de\> de/ka mi¿aj muriadw½n e)n tw½i mhn[iì] tw½i Fullikw½i pro\ th=j pe/n?t?e kaiì deka/thj e)piì th=j Petrai¿ou strath-

36

gi¿aj. “…that each of the cities arrange the transport of its allocated grain down to the harbor, whether that of the Demetreion or at Phalera or at Demetrias; of which 320,000 (kophinoi) by the Pelasgiotai and the Phthiotai in the month of Aphrios, and

17

by the Hestaiotai and Thessaliotai in the monthe of Thyos before the 20th, and 110,000 (kophinoi) in the monthe of Phyllikos before the 15th, while Petraios is strategos…” (Trans. Garnsey, Gallant et al.) The passage suggests that a system of tetrads was still functioning in the middle of the second century BCE. Flamininus must have found them useful. The new Thessalian League seems to have maintained an aspect of the geographic organization of the Archaic and Classical league. While it would be rash to retroject the function of the Roman tetrads into an earlier period, it is nevertheless striking that these tetrads seem to occupy an intermediate administrative position between the League and its constituent cities. The Augustan geographer Strabo was acquainted with the tetrads. His introductory sketch of Thessalian topography remains the most useful discussion of their geographical boundaries (9.5.3): Toiau/th d' ouÅsa ei¹j te/ttara me/rh div/rhto: e)kaleiÍto de\ to\ me\n Fqiw½tij to\ de\

¸Estiaiw½tij to\ de\

Pelasgiw½tij. eÃxei d' h( me\n

Qettaliw½tij to\ de\

Fqiw½tij ta\ no/tia ta\ para\ th\n

Oiãthn a)po\ tou= Maliakou= ko/lpou kaiì Pulai+kou= me/xri th=j Dolopi¿aj kaiì th=j Pi¿ndou diatei¿nonta, platuno/mena de\ me/xri Farsa/lou kaiì tw½n pedi¿wn tw½n Qettalikw½n: h( d' ¸Estiaiw½tij ta\ e(spe/ria kaiì ta\ metacu\

Pi¿ndou kaiì th=j aÃnw

Makedoni¿aj:

ta\ de\ loipa\ oià te u(po\ tv= ¸Estiaiw¯tidi nemo/menoi ta\ pedi¿a, kalou/menoi de\ Pelasgiw½tai, suna/ptontej hÃdh toiÍj ka/tw Makedo/si, kaiì oi¸ e)fech=j ta\ me/xri Magnhtikh=j parali¿aj e)kplhrou=ntej xwri¿a. “Such being its nature, Thessaly was divided into four parts. One part was called Phthiotis, another Hestiaiotis, another Thessaliotis, and another Pelasgiotis. Phthiotis

18

occupies the southern parts which extend alongside Oeta from the Maliac, or Pylaic, Gulf as far as Dolopia and Pindus, and widen out as far as Pharsalus and the Thessalian plains. Hestiaeotis occupies the western parts and the parts between Pindus and Upper Macedonia. The remaining parts of Thessaly are held, first, by the people who live in the plains below Hestiaeotis (they are called Pelasgiotae and their country borders on Lower Macedonia), and, secondly, and those who fill out the districts extending as far as the Magnetan sea-coast [= Thessaliotai].” (Trans. Jones) Strabo reflects the geopolitical realities of the Augustan age when territory that had once been administered by the various ethne and koina bordering Thessaly to the north and south was not only controlled by the Thessalian League but also apparently incorporated within the pre-existing tetrad structure. For the Archaic period, it is likely that the tetrads consisted primarily of the two large plains of Thessaly. 13

Perioikoi 14 In the discussion so far, I have distinguished between Thessaly in the narrower sense—the tetrads, the plains—and Thessaly in the broader sense—the tetrads plus perioikoi. The three major perioikic regions—Magnesia, Perrhaebia, Achaia Phthiotis—are geographically contiguous to the tetrads. These three areas were represented on the council of the Delphic Amphictyony together with the Thessalians, a fact which suggests that these ethne had an equal status viz-à-viz the Thessalians at 13

Aristotle associates the Aleuas responsible for the division of the Thessalian plains into tetrads with another fundamental land division: Schol. (Vat.) ad Eurip. Rhes. v. 307 (p. 296 Cobet, p. 29 t. I Dind.) pe/lth a)spi¿j e)stin iãtun ou)k eÃxousa, kaqa/per fhsiìn ¹Aristote/lhj (= Aristotle fr. 498 Rose) e)n Qessalw½n politei¿# gra/fwn ouÀtwj dielwÜn de\ ta\j po/leij ¹Aleu/aj eÃtace kata\ to\n klh=ron pare/xein e(ka/stouj, i¸ppe/aj me\n tessara/konta, o(pli¿taj de\ o)gdoh/konta. “The pelte is a shield that lacks an outer border, just as Aristotle claims in the Constitution of the Thessalians, writing as follows: ‘After dividing up the cities, Aleuas ordered that each of them provide 40 cavalry and 80 hoplites per kleros.’” 14 The best discussion of the perioikoi remains Kip 1910. Cf. also Gschnitzer 1958: 1-6.

19

the time of the Amphictyony’s foundation. By the late sixth century, however, evidence begins to suggest that these perioikic regions were semi-dependant upon the tetrads. A number of references in Classical historians are crucial for our interpretation of the phenomenon. Herodotus comments at 5.94: ¸Ippi¿v de\ e)nqeu=ten a)pelaunome/n% e)di¿dou me\n

¹Amu/nthj o(

MakedwÜn ¹Anqemou=nta, e)di¿dosan de\ Qessaloiì ¹Iwlko/n “To Hippias, while he was in exile from Athens, Amyntas the Macedonian was offering Anthemous, the Thessalians, Iolkos.” The Thessalians, rather, some ruling clans of the Thessalians, and the Peisistratids were allies. Following Hippias’ expulsion from Athens, Herodotus informs us that he was offered the city of Iolkos, presumably to rule. Ps.-Skylax offers good fourthcentury evidence that Iolkos belonged to Magnesia, the mountainous, rocky peninsula which furnishes the eastern border to the eastern Thessalian plain. 15 In the early third century, Demetrius Poliorcetes founded the city of Demetrias by synoikism of a number or villages of Magnesia: Epigraphic and literary testimony prove that Iolkos participated in this synoikism. 16 If we assume, as seems likely, that Iolkos belonged to the territory of the Magnesians in the late sixth century, then we have evidence for that city’s lack of sovereignty with respect to the Thessalians. Thucydides provides evidence for the other perioikoi. At 2.101.2, he described the preparations of the Thessalians and their perioikoi for the arrival of Sitalkes’ army: kaqhme/nou d' au)tou= periì tou\j xw¯rouj tou/touj oi¸ pro\j no/ton oi¹kou=ntej

15 16

Qessaloiì kaiì

Ma/gnhtej kaiì oi¸ aÃlloi u(ph/kooi

Ps.-Skylax 65. Strabo 9.5.15; McDevitt 1030A-B (= Béquignon 1935: 74-7).

20

Qessalw½n kaiì oi¸ me/xri Qermopulw½n

àEllhnej e)fobh/qhsan mh\

kaiì e)piì sfa=j o( strato\j xwrh/sv, kaiì e)n paraskeuv= hÅsan. “While he [Sitalkes] remained in these parts, the people farther south, such as the Thessalians and the Magnesians and the remaining subjects of the Thessalians, and the Hellenes as far as Thermopylae, all feared that the army might advance against them, and prepared accordingly” (Trans. Crawley, with some modifications). Later, at 4.78.6, Thucydides describes the movements of Brasidas in Thessaly: a)po\ de\ tou/tou hÃdh oi¸ me\n tw½n Qessalw½n a)gwgoiì pa/lin a)ph=lqon, oi¸ de\ Perraiboiì au)to/n, u(ph/kooi oÃntej Qessalw½n, kate/sthsan e)j DiÍon th=j Perdi¿kkou a)rxh=j, oÁ u(po\ t%½

¹Olu/mp% Makedoni¿aj

pro\j Qessalou\j po/lisma keiÍtai. “Here his Thessalian escort went back and the Perrhaebians, who are subjects of Thessaly, brought him to Dium, a Macedonian city on the slopes of Mount Olympus, looking toward Thessaly in the dominions of Perdiccas” (Trans. Crawley, with some modifications). Discussing renewed Spartan preparations for war with Athens following the Sicilian expedition, Thucydides comments at 8.3.1: kaiì ¹Axaiou\j tou\j Fqiw¯taj kaiì tou\j aÃllouj tou\j tau/tv Qessalw½n u(phko/ouj memfome/nwn kaiì a)ko/ntwn tw½n Qessalw½n o(mh/rouj te/ tinaj h)na/gkase dou=nai kaiì xrh/mata “…in spite of the the protests and opposition of the the Thessalians, he [Agis] forced the Achaeans of Phthiotis and the other subjects of the Thessalians in those parts to give him money and hostages…” (Trans. Crawley, with some modifications) The three passages of Thucydides offer good evidence for the status of the Magnesians, Perrhaebians and Phthiotic Achaeans as hypekooi of the Thessalians at the time of the Peloponnesian War. Perrhaebia is the upland region north of the

21

Peneius river, bounded on the east by the Olympos massif, the Pindus chain on the west and Macedon to the north. Achaia Phthiotis is located to the southeast of the Thessalian plains and is roughly comprised of the Othrys massif and attendant coastal plain on the Malic and Pagasitic Gulfs. The passages do not allow us to make further inferences about the character of this status, but one may conjecture that the lack of sovereignty encountered in the case of Magnesian Iolkos was extended to these other territories as well. Xenophon reveals Jason of Pherai’s intentions with respect to the perioikoi at Hell. 6.1.19: proeiÍpe de\ toiÍj perioi¿koij pa=si kaiì to\n fo/ron wÐsper e)piì Sko/pa tetagme/noj hÅn fe/rein “And he [Jason of Pherai] ordered all of the perioikoi to pay tribute as it had been ordained in the time of Skopas.” The chronology of Skopas is uncertain, but he likely belongs to the Archaic period. Had the collection of perioikic tribute stopped between the era of Skopas and that of Jason? Had it been reduced? Increased? We cannot know. The assumptions revealed by the passage in Xenophon imply a dependant relationship: Jason orders, proeiÍpe, that tribute be paid according to what had been ordered, tetagme/noj hÅn, in an earlier period. Finally, the testimony of Strabo at 9.5.19 is vital for the question: ouÂtoi [sc. LarisaiÍoi] d' ouÅn kateiÍxon te/wj th\n Perraibi¿an kaiì fo/rouj e)pra/ttonto, eÀwj

Fi¿lippoj kate/sth ku/rioj tw½n

to/pwn “The people of Larisa at that time controlled Perrhaebia and extracted tribute, until Philip became master of the region.”

22

Strabo suggests that the “people of Larisa,” by which term he most likely means the Aleuads, had a special relationship with Perrhaebia. One is tempted to speculate that the other leading cities of tetradic Thessaly in the Archaic and Classical period, Pherai and Pharsalos, had individualized relationships with their perioikic neighbors—Pherai with Magnesia and Pharsalos with Achaia Phthiotis. The case for Pherai and Magnesia is suggested by a genealogy preserved by [Hesiod] in the Megalai Ehoiai (fr. 256 Merkelbach-West = Antoninus Liberalis 23.1): ãArgou tou= Fri¿cou kaiì Perimh/lhj th=j ¹Admh/tou qugatro\j e)ge/neto Ma/gnhj. “Magnes was the son of Argos, the son of Phrixos, and Perimele, the daughter of Admetus.” Here Magnes, the eponymous hero of Magnesia, is brought into a subordinate genealogical relationship to Ademtus, son of Pheres, the eponymous hero of Pherai. Xenophon’s specification the Jason was forcing “all” of the perioikoi to pay tribute may suggest an opposition to Magnesians, that is the perioikoi with whom the Pheraians were traditionally linked. Although there is no direct evidence for the relationship of Pharsalos and Achaia Phthiotis, it would not be surprising if this other great city of Archaic and Classical Thessaly had an exploitative relationship with its neighbor to the south. The admittedly patchy evidence allows us to glimpse different aspects of the relationship between tetradic Thessaly and its perioikic hinterland. At the time of the establishment of the Delphic Amphictyony, or at least very early in its history, the Magnesians, Perrhaebians, Phthiotic Achaeans and Thessalians were recognized as distinct ethne and had equivalent representation on that council. By the time of the Peloponnesian War, however, each of these ethne was described as being subject to the Thessalians. This subjection at the very least consisted of tribute-payment, but, as I

23

will show in the next section, may also be connected with the provision of penestai. Herodotus shows to what extent the sovereignty of the perioikoi could be infringed upon. The Perrhaebians and Magnesians both formed koina distinct from the Thessalian League in the post-Flamininus era. The Perrhaebians were eventually incorporated within the Thessalian League; the Magnesians remained an independent league until the era of Diocletian.

Penestai Tetradic Thessaly was home to a semi-permanent underclass known as penestai. 17 The scattered and fragmentary sources suggest that the penestai were a major source of agricultural labor and could, on occasion, be mobilized for military service. 18 The tendency of ancient authors to group them with, e.g., the helots of Laconia, has led modern scholars to project details about the experience of the helots onto the less well-known penestai. One must exercise caution, for the social structures of Thessaly and Laconia/Messenia in the Archaic and Classical periods were quite different. 19 Boiotian, Thessalian and perioikic, specifically Perrhaebian and Magnesian, origins are attested for the penestai. 20 Revolts seem to have been fairly common. 21 Xenophon, for example, claims that the oligarchic Critias traveled to Thessaly in 406 to foment a revolution of the penestai against their masters. 22 Ducat has persuasively argued that the institution was in decline by the late third century BCE. 23 17

The penestai have recently been the subject of a thorough monograph: Ducat 1994. Ducat 1994: 87ff. 19 Ducat 1994: 116-7. 20 Ducat 1994: 93-8. 21 Ducat 1994: 103-4. 22 Xen., Hell. 2.3.36. 23 Ducat 1994: 105ff. 18

24

Thessaly under Macedonian Rule 24 Of the period of Macedonian rule in Thessaly, Westlake observed: “The Macedonian period contains not a single historical character…More than ever before is it difficult to gauge the Thessalian point of view in foreign politics or to decide what party or section of the population is indicated when an authority refers vaguely to the ‘Thessalians.’ At home the inner history of the national state and the relationships between the leading cities are for long periods absolutely unknown.” 25 Little evidence has come to light since 1935 to ease Westlake’s despair. Since so much of the evidence for Thessalian religion dates precisely to the period of the Macedonian occupation, we must nevertheless inquire into the character of Macedonian rule in Thessaly. The successors of Alexander in Pherai soon revealed that they would continue an aggressive course in domestic and international politics. The Aleudai of Larisa enlisted the aid of Philip II of Macedon who had ascended to the throne in 360-359 BCE. The great northern king seems to have been responsible for some maneuvers in Thessaly against the tyrants of Pherai as early as 358. Aside from a marriage between Philip and Philinna, a Larisan woman, though, the consequences of these campaigns are dubious and their chronology has been disputed by modern scholars. 26 24

An excellent survey in Errington 1990: 59-70. Westlake 1935: 162-163. 26 The key passage is Diodorus Siculus 16.14.1-2, where the author has compressed the activities of a number of years into a single one (357/6): Kata\ de\ th\n ¸Ella/da ¹Ale/candroj o( Ferw½n tu/rannoj u(po\ th=j i¹di¿aj gunaiko\j Qh/bhj kaiì tw½n tau/thj a)delfw½n Luko/fronoj kaiì Tisifo/nou e)dolofonh/qh. ouÂtoi de\ to\ me\n prw½ton w¨j turannokto/noi mega/lhj e)tu/gxanon a)podoxh=j, uÀsteron de\ metanoh/santej kaiì tou\j misqofo/rouj xrh/masi pei¿santej a)ne/deican e(autou\j tura/nnouj kaiì pollou\j me\n tw½n a)ntiprattome/nwn a)neiÍlon, kataskeuasa/menoi de\ th\n du/namin a)cio/logon bi¿# kateiÍxon th\n a)rxh/n. oi¸ d' ¹Aleua/dai kalou/menoi para\ toiÍj QettaloiÍj, di' eu)ge/neian de\ a)ci¿wma eÃxontej peribo/hton a)ntepra/ttonto toiÍj tura/nnoij. ou)k oÃntej de\ kaq' e(autou\j a)cio/maxoi prosela/bonto Fi¿lippon su/mmaxon to\n Makedo/nwn basile/a. ouÂtoj de\ parelqwÜn ei¹j th\n Qettali¿an katepole/mhse tou\j tura/nnouj kaiì taiÍj po/lesin a)nakthsa/menoj th\n e)leuqeri¿an mega/lhn euÃnoian ei¹j tou\j Qettalou\j 25

25

Hoplites of the Thessalian League were involved in the early stages of the Third Sacred War in 356-5. 27 The conflict between Pherai and the League continued throughout this period, culminating in a further overture to Philip on the part of Larisa and the League. Lycophron of Pherai responded by enlisting the aid of Onomarchus, general of the Phokian forces. In 354, Onomarchus defeated Philip twice in Thessaly. 28 Philip returned to Thessaly in 353 and was appointed head of league forces. He seized Pagasai, the port of Pherai, and had begun to move against Pherai itself when Onomarchus returned to Thessaly. Philip won a decisive victory in the ensuing engagement abd then forced a settlement with Pherai: The tyrants Lycophron and Peitholaus together with their mercenary forces were permitted to leave the city in peace. After an aborted attempt on Thermopylae, Philip retreated north and began to remake Thessaly to his liking. 29 It was perhaps at this time that Philip was elected archon of the Thessalian League for life. After Philip’s assassination, the league elected Alexander as archon. 30

e)nedei¿cato: dio/per e)n taiÍj meta\ tau=ta pra/cesin a)eiì sunagwnista\j eÃsxen ou) mo/non au)to/j, a)lla\ kaiì meta\ tau=ta o( ui¸o\j A ¹ le/candroj. “In Greece, Alexander the tyrant of Pherae was murdered by his own wife Thebe and her brothers Lycophron and Tisiphonus. These at first won much approbation as tyrranicides, but later they underwent a change, and, by corrupting the mercenaries with bribes, they revealed themselves as tyrants. They put to death many of those who were opposed to them and, by building up a significant armed body of support, they proceeded to maintain their rule by force. Those among the Thessalians called the Aleuadae, who enjoyed a well publicized reputation because of their aristocratic lineage, began to set themselves up in opposition to the tyrants. But since they were not capable of fighting them on their own, they acquired as an ally Philip king of the Macedonians. He then entered Thessaly and, by overcoming the tyrants and regaining freedom for the cities, showed much goodwill to the Thessalians. Consequently in subsequent events not only Philip but also after him his son Alexander acquired them as confederates” (Trans. McQueen). For a sample of modern controversy, cf. Ehrhardt 1967, Griffith 1970. Ehrhardt suggests that Philip was not involved in Thessaly before 353, viz. the 3rd Sacred War; Griffith rehabilitates the case for earlier interventions beginning ca. 358. 27 The reliability of Diodorus Siculus, our main source for the war, is another matter of scholarly debate. Cf. Hammond 1937 with the response of Markle 1994. The best modern account of the war is Buckler 1989. 28 DS 16.35.2-3. 29 For a synopsis of what was involved in this reorganization of Thesally, cf. Helly 1995: 55. 30 Just. 11.3.2.

26

In his analysis of Thessalo-Macedonian relations during the early reign of Philip II, Westlake argues that the Thessalian league “ultimately profited by subjection to an organizer who substituted order for chaos,” but was “far too short-sighted to appreciate the menace of a growing power in the north.” 31 The decision to seek help from Philip was in keeping with traditional Thessalian politics where quarreling clans and poleis routinely sought military assistance beyond the region’s borders. For Westlake, Philip’s interest in Thessaly was also a combination of longterm tradition and short-term contingency. Strong Macedonian rulers always kept one eye on their southern border and Thessaly offered both military might and decent harborage in the Pagasitic gulf. 32 Cawkwell focuses on the same set of issues: The Thessalian cavalry was the largest and best-trained cavalry in the Greek world and could be an extremely valuable acquisition. A strong Macedonia required “a controlling interest in northern Thessaly.” 33 In an oft-quoted but rarely analyzed passage, Polybius provides one of the most suggestive images of Thessaly under Macedonian rule. I offer the passage in its full context (4.76.1-7): ¹Apellh=j d', oÁj hÅn me\n eiâj tw½n u(p'

¹Antigo/nou kataleifqe/ntwn

e)pitro/pwn tou= paido/j, pleiÍston d' e)tu/gxane to/te duna/menoj para\ t%½ basileiÍ, boulhqeiìj to\ tw½n paraplhsi¿an dia/qesin tv=

¹Axaiw½n eÃqnoj a)gageiÍn ei¹j

Qettalw½n, e)peba/leto pra=gma poieiÍn

moxqhro/n. Qettaloiì ga\r e)do/koun me\n kata\ no/mouj politeu/ein kaiì polu\ diafe/rein Makedo/nwn, die/feron d' ou)de/n, a)lla\ pa=n o(moi¿wj eÃpasxon Makedo/si kaiì pa=n e)poi¿oun to\ prostatto/menon toiÍj basilikoiÍj. dio\ kaiì pro\j tau/thn a(rmozo/menoj th\n u(po/qesin o( 31

Westlake 1935: 161. Westlake 1935: 161. 33 Cawkwell 1978: 68-70. 32

27

proeirhme/noj e)peba/leto katapeira/zein tw½n sustrateuome/nwn. to\ me\n ouÅn prw½ton e)pe/treye toiÍj Makedo/sin e)kbaleiÍn e)k tw½n staqmw½n a)eiì tou\j prokate/xontaj tw½n ¹Axaiw½n katalu/seij, o(moi¿wj de\ kaiì th\n lei¿an a)faireiÍsqai: meta\ de\ tau=ta ta\j xeiÍraj prose/fere dia\ tw½n u(phretw½n e)piì taiÍj tuxou/saij ai¹ti¿aij, tou\j de\ sunaganaktou=ntaj hÄ prosbohqou=ntaj toiÍj mastigoume/noij parwÜn au)to\j ei¹j th\n aÀlusin a)ph=ge, pepeisme/noj dia\ tou= toiou/tou tro/pou to\ kata\ braxu\ lh/sein ei¹j sunh/qeian a)gagwÜn tou= mhde/na mhde\n h(geiÍsqai deino/n, oÀ pot' aÄn pa/sxv tij u(po\ tou= basile/wj. “Apelles was one of those who had been left by Antigonus as guardians of his son, and had, as it happened, more influence than any one else with the king. He conceived the wish to bring the Achaeans into the same position as the Thessalians; and adopted for that purpose a very offensive line of conduct. The Thessalians were supposed to enjoy their own constitution, and to have quite a different status to the Macedonians; but in fact they had exactly the same, and obeyed every order of the royal ministers. It was with the purpose of bringing about the same state of things, that this officer now set himself to test the subservience of the Achaean contingent. At first he confined himself to giving the Macedonian soldiers leave to eject Achaeans from their quarters, who on any occasion had taken possession of them first, as well as to wrest from them any booty they might have taken; but he afterwards treated them with actual violence, through the agency of his subordinates, on any trifling pretext; while such as complained of this treatment, or took the part of those who were being beaten, he personally arrested and put into confinement: being convinced that by this method he would gradually and imperceptibly bring them into the habit of submitting, without remonstrance, to any thing which the king might choose to inflict.” 34 34

Trans. Shuckburgh.

28

Polybius’ anti-Macedonian and pro-Achaian biases are well-known and one cannot underestimate the role that they play in this description. His statement that Apelles was trying to bring the Achaians “into the same position as the Thessalians” nevertheless opens up a window on Macedonian strategies for dealing with a subject population. Apelles aims to create a docile Achaian populace which will cater to every whim of the Macedonian king. The logic of the passage suggests that what Apelles is aiming to achieve in Achaia has already been achieved with great success in Thessaly. It will be a slow process, but we are led to believe that, in time, the Achaians will be like the Thessalians: Completely unaware of their submissive status. Had Philip II, Alexander and their Antigonid successors to the Macedonian throne followed a similar course of forced conscription and naked violence in Thessaly? In the context of Philip V’s interventions in Messenia in 216/5 or 215/4, Polybius makes another set of incisive comments about Thessaly’s position within the Macedonian empire (7.11.4-5): oÀti me\n ouÅn au)t%½ meta\ to\ paralabeiÍn th\n basilei¿an ta/ te kata\ Qettali¿an kaiì Makedoni¿an kaiì sullh/bdhn ta\ kata\ th\n i¹di¿an a)rxh\n ouÀtwj u(pete/takto kaiì sune/kline taiÍj eu)noi¿aij w¨j ou)deniì tw½n pro/teron basile/wn, kai¿toi ne/% oÃnti paralabo/nti th\n Makedo/nwn dunastei¿an, eu)xere\j katamaqeiÍn e)k tou/twn. Sunexe/stata ga\r au)tou= perispasqe/ntoj e)k

Makedoni¿aj dia\ to\n

pro\j Ai¹twlou\j kaiì Lakedaimoni¿ouj po/lemon, ou)x oiâon e)stasi¿ase/ ti tw½n proeirhme/nwn e)qnw½n... “That after he succeeded to the throne, Thessaly, Macedonia, and all his hereditary dominions were more submissive and more attached to him than to any king before him, although he had come to the throne at such an early age, it is easy to see from the

29

following facts. Although he was frequently called away from Macedonia owing to the war against the Aitolians and Lacedaimonians, none of these peoples revolted…” 35 Like the Macedonian homeland, Thessaly in the late third century behaved like a “hereditary possession” of the Macedonian king. 36 This was not just an internal perspective, but recognized in the broader Greek world: When the Aitolians wished to strike at Macedon in the third century, they attacked Thessaly. 37

35

Trans. Paton. The impressions one gets from Polybius and the epigraphic record about Macedonian “imperialism” offer a useful counterweight to the claims of Billows 1995: “The pose of the king being a friendly and generous benefactor was, in short, a wonderful way for both ruler and city to cover the naked fact of domination, and so be able to get along without overt conflict despite the incompatible desires of the kings to control the cities and of the cities to be free of control” (p. 74); “In sum, the Greek cities remained in the Hellenistic period vital centers of Greek life and their support and good will was a valuable commodity to the kings. The kings recognized this by adopting the pose, largely thrust upon them by the Greeks themselves, of benefactors, and the Greeks in turn took advantage of this pose to extract whatever concessions they could in their relations with the kings” (p. 79). 37 For the history of Thessaly under Roman rule, cf. Bowersock 1965; Helly 1980; Helly 1983a. 36

CHAPTER 3 THE THESSALIAN CALENDAR

This chapter assesses the contribution of the Thessalian calendar to an understanding of Thessalian religion. 1 It is well recognized that ancient Greek month names were almost always based on the name of a festival that took place during that month. That there is a relationship between epichoric calendars and epichoric religious traditions is therefore clear: 2 It remains to assess the nature of this relationship. In section 1, I consider the Athenian calendar as a case study. Since knowledge of Attic cults and the Attic calendar far surpasses our knowledge of the cults and calendar of any other region in the ancient Greek world, we can examine how the two bodies of knowledge relate to one another. In so doing, it may be possible to glimpse the potential contributions of a study of epichoric calendars to the history of epichoric religion for, beyond Attica, it is more often than not the case that knowledge of a particular region’s calendar exceeds our knowledge of that region’s cults. In section 2, 1

Local calendars were an object of scholarly pursuit and implicated in broader inquiries concerning cult from a relatively early date. Philochorus (ca. 340-263/2a) wrote a Peri\ e(ortw=n, extremely fragmentary, in which he dated major Attic festivals by month and day (FGrHist 328 F 83-4). Callimachus wrote a Mhnw=n proshgori/ai kata\ e)/qnoj kai\ po/leij (p. 339 Pf.). Unfortunately nothing survives of this work. More important for our purposes is the work of Lysimachides (ca. 50a-50p) who is on record as the author of a Peri\ tw=n )Aqh/nhsi mhnw=n, fragments of which were preserved in the lexicon of Harpocration (FGrHist 366 F 1-3). Lysimachides was interested in the connection of month names with divinities and festivals. What is preserved in Harpocration is full of etymological argument and ritual detail. At FGrHist 366 F 3, Harpocration refers to him as one of oi( gra/yantej peri/ te e(ortw=n kai\ mhnw=n )Aqh/nhsi, suggesting that there was a group of scholars who were interested in the calendar. Cf. Trümpy 1997: 34, for a brief survey of modern scholarship. 2 E.g., Trümpy 1997. There are two basic morphologies of month names: 1) Months of the Ionian calendars almost always end in –(i)w/n, e.g. Attic (Ekatombaiw/n, Metageitniw/n, etc. This form is analyzable as an original genitive plural of a festival name in –ia. Trümpy reconstructs the morphological relationship between month name and festival name as follows: mh\n/mei\j x-i/wn (gen. plur.) “Month of festival x” > x-i/wn [scil. “month”] > x-i/wn (= nom. sing. month); 2) In the other calendars of the Greek world, month names end in -ioj. This appears to be an adjective formed from the name of a festival and it doubtless followed a similar line of development to what was has been suggested for the Ionian calendars: mh\n/mei\j x-ioj “Festival x month” > x-ioj [scil. “month”] > x-ioj (= nom. sing. month).

30

31

I present the evidence for the Thessalian calendar and discuss its importance for our understanding of Thessalian religion. The calendar can be an extremely technical subject. My interests are limited: What can the Thessalian calendar tell us about month festivals in the region? What contribution does this evidence make to our understanding of Thessalian religion? In section 3, I draw a set of provisional conclusions about the Thessalian calendar.

3.1: The Attic State Calendar and Attic Religion

What specific contribution does knowledge of the Attic calendar make to our understanding of Attic religion? In an attempt to answer this question, I record below in Table 2 the various months of the Athenian calendar, the corresponding festival, further epigraphic evidence for the divinity, festival and cult-place in Attica, and, finally, other festivals that are known to have taken place during that month. The table privileges inscriptions over literary sources in an attempt to glimpse, however sporadically, the underlying cultic reality of the month festivals—a reality that can be easily distorted when approached through literary sources alone. 3

3

Nearly all of these cult figures and festivals are represented in mostly late literary sources. Cf. Deubner 1966. The picture that emerges from epigraphic evidence is quite different.

32

Table 2 Athenian State Festivals and the Athenian Calendar

Month

Eponymous

Festival or related

Other attested

Festival

divinity epigraphically

state festivals

attested in Attica?

held during the

Sanctuary/Cult

month (Deubner

place(s) known in

and Mikalson) 4

Attica? Hekatombaion

Hekatombaia in

Apollo Hekatombaios?

12. Kronia; 16.

(July-August)

honor of Apollo

No; 6 Festival? No;

Synoikia; 28.

Hekatomabios (on

Sanctuary? No

Panathenaia;

Hekatombaion 7?) 5 Metageitnion

Metageitnia in

Apollo Metageitnios?

Herakleia in

(August-

honor of Apollo

No; 8 Festival? No;

Kynosarges (?);

September)

Metageitnios (on

Sanctuary? No

Panhellenia (?)

Metageitnion 7?) 7

4

While Deubner’s treatment of individual cults has been superseded in some cases, the overall synthesis has not. 5 Mikalson 1975: 26, “the day is suggested by the fact that the seventh day of the month was sacred to Apollo and by the fact that the sacrifice to Apollo Hekatombaios on Mykonos occurred on Hekatombaion 7.” 6 No theophoric names are listed in LGPN ii. 7 Mikalson 1975: 36, “There may be in this sacrifice (sc. a sacrifice to Apollo Patroios, Leto, Artemis and Athena conducted by the Salaminioi on Metageitnion 7) a reflection of the state Metageitnia…” 8 No theophoric names are listed in LGPN ii.

33 Table 2 (Continued) Boedromion

Boedromia in

Apollo Boedromios?

3. Commemoration

(September-

honor of Apollo

No; 10 Festival? No;

of Plataea; 5.

October)

Boedromios (on

Sanctuary? No

Genesia; 6.

Boedromion 7?) 9

Commemoration of Marathon, Festival of Artemis Agrotera; 12. Commemoration of the return from Phyle; 15.-22. Mysteria

Pyanopsion

Pyanopsia in honor Apollos Pyanopsios?

Proerosia (?); 12

(October-

of Apollo (as

No, but a theophoric

Oschophoria (?); 8.

November)

Pyanopsios?) on

name,

Theseia; 9. Stenia;

Pyanopsion 7

[Pua]ne/y?i[oj] (?)

30. Chalkeia;

may be attested; 11

Apatouria (?)

Festival? No; Sanctuary? No Maimakterion

Maimakteria in

Zeus Maimaktes?

(November-

honor of Zeus

No; 13 Festival? No;

December)

Maimaktes (date?)

Sanctuary? No

9

Pompaia (?)

Mikalson 1975: 51, “The seventh day of each month was sacred to Apollo, and for this reason Deubner (Feste, p. 202) follows E. Pfuhl (De Atheniensium Pompis Sacris, Berlin, 1900, p. 35, note 8) in dating the Boedromia, the festival of Apollo Boedromios, to this day.” 10 No theophoric names are attested in LGPN ii. 11 Cf. LGPN ii s.v. Puane/yioj. 12 It is also uncertain whether the Proerosia were a state festival. 13 No theophoric names are attested in LGPN ii.

34 Table 2 (Continued) Posideon

Poseideia in honor of Poseidon? Yes, but

(December-

Poseidon—aspect

aspect is unclear;

January)

unclear (on Posideon

Festival? No, but

8?)

sacrifice is offered to

26. Haloa

Poseidon on Posideon 8 on a private Attic sacrificial calendar (IG ii2 1367 16-18: IIp); 14 Sanctuary? Multiple sanctuaries of Poseidon in Attica are known, but aspect of the month festival Poseidon in unclear. Gamelion

Theogamia/Hieros

Zeus Gamelios, Hera

(January-

Gamos/Gamelia on

Gamelia? No; 15

February)

Gamelion 27 in

Festival? No;

honor of Zeus and

Sanctuary? No

Hera (?)—aspects unclear

14 15

Poseidonios is a common name in Attica. Cf. LGPN ii s.v. Poseidw/nioj. No theophoric names are attested in LGPN ii.

12-14. Lenaia (?)

35 Table 2 (Continued) Anthesterion

Anthesteria in honor

Dionysus

23. Diasia; (Delia

(February-

of Dionysus

Anthesterios? No, but

?); Mysteries in

March)

Anthesterios (?) on

Anthesterios is

Agrai

Anthesterion 11-13

attested in the Attic onomasticon; 16 Festival? Yes; Sanctuary? Yes: Limnaion, Boukoleion

Elaphebolion

Elaphebolia in honor

Artemis Elaphebolia?

8. Asklepieia,

(March-April)

of Artemis

No; 17 Festival? No;

Proagon; 9.-13. City

Elaphebolia (on

Sanctuary? No

Dionysia; Pandia

Elaphebolion 6?)

(?)

Mounichion

Mounichia in honor

Artemis Mounichia?

6. Delphinia; 19.

(April-May)

of Artemis

Yes: IG i3 369 (426-

Olympieia

Mounichios on

2a); 18 Festival? Yes:

Mounichion 16

IG ii2 2130; Sanctuary? Yes: Peiraeus

16

LGPN ii s.v. A ) nqesth/rioj lists 34 individuals with that name ranging in date from IIa to IIp. No theophoric names are attested in LGPN ii. 18 Five individuals from Attica are known by the presumably theophoric name Mou/nixoj (Va-IIp). Cf. LGPN ii s.v. Mou/nixoj. 17

36 Table 2 (Continued) Thargelion

Thargelia in honor of Apollo Thargelios?

19. Bendideia;

(May-June)

Apollo Thargelios on Yes: IG i3 156 (450-

Kallynteria (?); 25.

Thargelion 6-7

440a); 19 Festival?

Plynteria

Yes: LSS 14 (128a); Sanctuary?: No Skirophorion

Skira/Skiraphoria (?)

Demeter/Athena

3. Arrephoria (?);

(June-July)

in honor of Demeter

Skiraphoros? No.

14. Dipoleia;

or Athena (?) on

Festival? Yes: IG i3

Diisoteria (?)

Skirophorion 12—

250 (450-430a) (deme

aspects unclear,

of Paiania); IG ii2

perhaps as

1177.10, 1358b.30,

Skiraphoros (?)

51, 2773.13 (aet. Imp.); Sanctuary? No 20

The Athenian evidence admits of the following conclusions: 1) Apparently no month name reflects a festival related to the solar year. Since the calendar, based on the lunar year, and the environmental rhythms of the solar year were forever in tension with one another, there needed to be flexibility with respect to the calendar for the celebration of festivals connected with agriculture, e.g., sowing, harvest, grape pressing, etc.

19

The theophoric names Qargh/lioj and Qarghli/wn are sporadically attested in Attica (III-IIa). Cf. LGPN ii ad locc. 20 The location of Skiron, the terminus of the festival’s procession, is unknown.

37

2) The chief divinities honored in the month festivals are not otherwise prominent in the archaeological or epigraphic record. 21 Where a specific aspect of a divinity is suggested by a month name, e.g., Maimakterion, celebrated in honor of Zeus as Maimaktes, there is independent, non-literary evidence for the cult of the divinity in only two cases: Artemis Mounichia and Apollo Thargelios. It may be no coincidence that these are two of the three divinities—Dionysus Anthesterios is the third—who are certainly represented in the regional onomasticon by theophoric names which evoke the particular aspect of the divinity celebrated in the month festival. There is no independent material evidence for the cult of Apollo as Hekatombaios, Boedromios or Metageitnios, Zeus as Maimaktes, or Artemis as Elaphebolia. If we assume that the epigraphic record is more or less representative—a hazardous assumption that cannot be pushed too far—then one may speculate that most of the divinities worshipped in the festivals commemorated by month names did not receive cult beyond the confines of the month festival. Such a situation would obtain at least from the beginning of our regular epigraphic documentation in the fifth century BCE. The calendar is therefore not a good synchronic indicator of the prominence of a particular cult in Athenian state religion. When we approach the problem diachronically, however, other interpretive options become available. For example, the prominence of Apollo in the calendar—five month festivals honor him—suggests that at some point early in the calendar’s history, he was a singularly important figure in Attic cult; this should not be regarded as a purely Attic development, but a pan-Ionian 21

Excluding Poseideon, because the aspect in which Poseidon was worshipped during the Poseideia is unclear, and Gamelion and Skirophorion, because it is not clear that the festival name evokes a particular aspect of the god(s) worshipped during those month festivals. All of the divinities thought to have been worshipped during those festivals, Poseidon in the Poseideia, Zeus and Hera in the Gamelia and Athena and/or Demeter in the Skira, are of course prominent in Attic cult, but not in ways that are known to have been connected with these particular festivals. The key term is in this formulation is “known,” as the details of these festivals are exceedingly vague.

38

phenomenon. 22 While Apollo will continue to be a leading figure in Archaic, Classical and Hellenistic Athens, he is joined and even surpassed by others, especially Athena and Demeter. 3) On the basis of the Attic evidence, there is no guarantee that the festivals indicated by the month names had any special prominence within that particular month. The festivals suggested by the month names seem, at least by the time of our documentation, to have been relatively minor endeavors lasting for a day. Compare, for example, the Mysteria with the Boedromia, or the Panathenaia with the *Hekatombaia, or the *Elaphebolia with the Dionysia. Prominent exceptions are the Thargelia and Anthesteria. Again, in both cases the attendant divinities are represented in the regional onomasticon by theophoric names. This is not to say that the Boedromia and *Hekatombaia were not major festivals at some point, e.g., in Iron Age Attica, only that by the late Archaic/early Classical period, there is no evidence for continued prominence of these festivals. To be sure, in some cases the festival indicated by the month name seems to have been the major festival of that month, as, e.g., in the case of the Thargelia and the Anthesteria. In other cases, insufficient evidence makes it difficult to tell. How can we explain the state of affairs suggested in particular by points 2 and 3? The possibility that there is simply a gap in the evidentiary record cannot be discounted. Although we know more about the religion of Attica than any other area of the Greek world, there is and will continue to be much that escapes us. It may also be the case that our assumptions about the relative importance of month festivals need to be reexamined.

22

Nilsson’s supposition that Apollo’s importance in calendars reflects the influence of Delphi in their establishment (Nilsson 1920: 362ff.) has been persuasively challenged by Trümpy 1997. The evidence for the Ionian calendars is clearly and judiciously presented at Trümpy 1997.

39

Chronology offers a more critical explanation. Month names may appear already in Linear B 23 and Trümpy has conclusively demonstrated that there was a common Ionian Urkalendar, from which all Ionian calendars of the historic period, including Athens, are derived, and which must predate the Ionian migration from mainland Greece. 24 There is therefore a yawning gap of 500-plus years which separates the earliest documentary evidence for the Athenian calendar with its associated month festivals and the “original” naming of the months. While conservatism in the use of month names is observable in many cases, 25 there is no necessary correspondence with cult practice. Month festivals and the deities honored therein may originally have been extremely prominent, only to decline with the passage of time as collective knowledge of the festival waned. In the final analysis, the positive conclusion to be drawn from this case study of Athens is methodological. While the state calendar can be an extremely useful supplement to the remainder of the evidentiary record, there is no automatic, synchronic correlation between the use of a month name and the “importance” of a month festival. If Trümpy’s arguments are correct, the calendar may in some cases preserve a sequence of festivals whose origins lie in the early Iron Age, if not earlier. In most cases, were it not for the presence of the calendar, we would be completely ignorant of festivals of this type: In Attica, at any rate, they are not otherwise prominent in inscriptions. Second, the Attic month festivals do not seem to celebrate events that are tied to the solar year: If we extend this principle to the Thessalian 23

E.g. Trümpy 1989. Trümpy 1997: 18-38. Hall 1997 and Hall 2002 unfortunately do not discuss Trümpy’s de facto defense of the historicity of the Ionian migration. Her chronological framework for the development of the Ionian calendar can still stand, though, even if one recognizes the Ionian migration as purely discourse of the Archaic period. It may be the case that adoption and/or use of the “Ionian” calendar in the Iron Age was a conscious strategy of assimilation pursued by a variety of peoples inhabiting Attica, the Aegean and western Asia Minor. 25 Many, but not all, cases. Hellenistic cities, including Athens, could be persuaded to rename months in honor of the ruling dynast. Cf. Scott 1931. 24

40

calendar, then when faced with a month name and festival that are opaque, we can immediately eliminate certain types of festival from consideration, e.g., sowing festivals, harvest festivals, etc.

3.2: The Thessalian Calendar(s) and Thessalian Religion

The Thessalian Calendar(s), pre-196a Epigraphic evidence for month names in Thessaly begins in the early third century BCE and remains fairly patchy until the second century BCE, at which point we can identify the following twelve months as constituting the calendar of the Thessalian koinon: Itonios, Panemos, Themistios, Agagulios, Apollonios, Hermaios, Leschanorios, Aphrios, Thuios, Homoloios, Hippodromios, Phyllikos.26 Since the evidence seems to correspond to with a major political change in Thessaly—the refoundation of the koinon in 196a by Flamininus—it will be useful to see how the post-196a calendar compares with the pre-196a evidence. I summarize the pre-196a evidence below in Table 3.

Table 3 Epigraphic Evidence for the Thessalian Calendar(s), pre-196a

Location Reference

Month

Date

Pharsalos IThessEnip 50

Diyio/j

300-250a

(Ippodro/mioj 220-210a

Larisa

SEG 27.202.6 (= ed. pr. Gallis 1977)

Larisa

IG ix.2 517.10

Pa/nammoj

219a

Larisa

IG ix.2 517.40

Qemi/stioj

214a

26

Rensch 1908: 124ff.; Hiller in the index of IG ix.2; Samuel 1972: 83ff.; Trümpy 1997: 216ff.

41 Table 3 (Continued) Larisa

IG ix.2 522.22

Qu/oj

fin. IIIainit. Iia

Dipsios, attested in an honorary decree from Pharsalos, had no future in the league calendar. 27 Hippodromios, Panamos, Themistios and Thuos, attested in inscriptions from pre-196a Larisa, also belong to the calendar of the post-196a koinon. This correspondence has led Trümpy to suggest that the calendar of the post-196a Thessalian League was adopted from the city calendar of Larisa. 28 Such a position is tenable only if one assumes that the koinon lacked a common calendar in the pre-196a era and that the member cities of the league used local calendars. It is equally possible, however, that the Thessalian koinon utilized a common calendar before Flamininus’ refoundation. This calendar could have included the group of months from Larisa as well as the month from Pharsalos. Dipsios could have then been dropped from the calendar at a later date, perhaps in 196a, perhaps earlier. Epigraphic evidence for the league’s activities is unfortunately scant before 196a and the only extant league document published during this period lacks a month name. The evidence furnished by other mainland leagues is inconclusive. In the case of Aitolia, there is evidence only for a common league calendar. 29 When evidence for the Boiotian calendar begins in the third century BCE, a common league calendar is in place: We cannot know if the individual members of the league had their own, local calendars in an earlier period. 30 The Macedonian calendar displays a striking

27

Although no details of the festival *Dipsia have survived, the month name may also be attested in Linear B tablets from Pylos. Cf. Trümpy 1989. 28 Trümpy 1997: 177. 29 Trümpy 1997: 201. 30 Trümpy 1997: 244.

42

regularity and yields no evidence of local variation. 31 It is equally clear, however, that some koina utilized a common, league calendar and allowed for the maintenance of local calendars, e.g. West Lokris. 32 In this respect, as in others, it is impossible to generalize about the practices of koina as a whole. In the final analysis, while much commends Trümpy’s position on the league’s adoption of the Larisan calendar in 196a, there are other, equally plausible alternatives: There is not enough evidence to make a decisive determination.

The Thessalian Calendar, post-196a I summarize below in Table 4 the evidence for the month festivals of the koinon calendar.

Table 4 Month Festivals and the Thessalian Calendar

Month

Eponymous

Festival Name

Eponymous Cult

Name

Festival

attested in

Title attested in

Thessaly?

Thessaly?

Polyaenus 2.34

Yes: Multiple

Multiple

locations

sanctuaries

Itonios

Itonia in honor of Athena Itonia

Cult Place?

known Panemos

31 32

Uncertain

Trümpy 1997: 262ff. Trümpy 1997: 203ff.

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown

43 Table 4 (Continued) Themistios

Themistia in honor of Themis—aspect unclear

Agagulios

Agagulaia in honor of Artemis Agagulaia (?)

Apollonios

Apollonia in honor of Apollo—aspect unclear

Unknown Yes:

Multiple

Multiple

sanctuaries

locations

known

Unknown Yes:

Unknown

Pythion Unknown Yes: Multiple

Multiple sanctuaries

Locations known Hermaios

Hermaia in honor of Hermes—aspect unclear

Unknown Yes:

Unknown

Multiple Locations

Leschanorios

Leschanoria in honor of Apollo Leschanorios

Aphrios

Aphria in honor of Zeus Aphrios

Thuios

Thuia in honor of

Unknown Yes:

Unknown

Larisa Unknown Yes:

Unknown

Pherai Unknown No

Unknown

Unknown Yes:

Sanctuary at

Dionysus Thuios (?) Homoloios

Homoloia in honor of Zeus Homoloios

Multiple

Homolion (?)

Locations Hippodromios Hippodromia in honor of

Unknown No

Unknown

Poseidon Hippodromios Phyllikos

Phyllika in honor of Apollo Phyllios (?)

Unknown Unknown Sanctuary at Phyllos (?)

44

As a quick glance at the preceding table reveals, our knowledge of the relationship between the Thessalian calendar and the religious life of the region is much poorer than in the case of Athens and Attica. I summarize below what is known about the month festivals and the divinities worshipped therein. 33

Itonios = June/July or August/September 34 Itonios transparently refers to a festival of the Itonia celebrated in honor of Athena Itonia, one of the patron deities of the renewed koinon and perhaps of the earlier koinon as well. Both goddess and festival are well attested in literary and epigraphic sources. In the case of the festival, it is nearly certain that there was both a federal celebration of the Itonia held at the goddess’ sanctuary near modern Philia (AI1) and local celebrations of the festival (e.g., Krannon, AI16). Such an arrangement provides a useful template for consideration of other month festivals, although the remaining divinities honored in these festivals are not known to have possessed federal sanctuaries. I will discuss the cult of Athena Itonia in greater detail in Chapter 4.

Panemos = July/August or September/October Panemos is perhaps the most mysterious of all Greek months. Ancient sources have transmitted no clear etymology about the name. Trümpy attempts an admittedly speculative reconstruction and suggests that Pa/nhmoj is some composition of

33

While much of what precedes and follows is heavily indebted to Trümpy, her analysis of the religious significance of the month names of the Thessalian calendar is deficient in some important respects. 34 The uncertainty concerning the relationship of the Thessalian calendar to the modern calendar is due to a shift which can be dated to the middle of the second century BCE. GDI 1720 (Delphi: 170-157/6a) makes Thessalian Thu(i)os correspond to Delphian Endyspoitropios (= Attic Mounichion, modern April/May), while FD iii.2 213 (Delphi: 124a) makes Thessalian Thu(i)os correspond to Delphian Busios (= Attic Anthesterion, modern February/March). The motivation for such a shift is unclear. Cf. Trümpy 1997: 217.

45

pa=j, pa=sa, pa/n and h)=mar. She does not exclude the possibility that the name was not originally Greek. The month terminates neither in -iw/n nor in -ioj, but in -oj. This heterodox formation, according to Trümpy, makes it unlikely that a festival like the Pana/mia, attested in Boiotia, was the basis of the month name. 35 The distribution of the month is wide. It is the only month found in four different calendar families: Ionian, Aeolian, West Greek and Macedonian. There is no agreement among these families regarding the position of Panemos viz-à-viz the solar year. This drift is visible even within the Ionian calendar family where the position of the month is more mobile than one typically finds. 36 The broad geographic distribution of the month and its intractable etymology suggested to Trümpy that the month was one of the oldest to be preserved in calendars of the historical period. She furthermore advances the very attractive hypothesis, at least in the case of the Ionian calendars, that Panemos was originally an intercalary month in the Bronze Age, capable of being inserted into any point of the traditional sequence of months when the solar and lunar year had become particularly out of synch. After the Ionian migrations, the month remained in many local Ionian calendars but in most cases with a changed function. 37 How the month functioned in Thessaly is uncertain, although it seems clear that it was not an intercalary month, but a full member of the calendar. 38

Themistios = August/September or October/November Trümpy comments: “The month was evidently dedicated to a divinity whose jurisdiction lay in the preservation of the divine-natural orders (qe/mistej).” 39 In a 35

Such a festival would suggest a month of the form Panemios or Panemiōn, not Panemos. There are three typical locations for this month in the Ionian calendar, as opposed to the more normal one or two. 37 Trümpy 1997: 28-9. Panemos was an intercalary month on Rhodes and Delos. 38 As in Aitolia. Trümpy 1997: 28-29, with n. 112. 36

46

footnote, she draws attention to a passage of Plutarch which refers to Zeus Themistios. 40 Although the epithet Themistios is not elsewhere attested in literary or epigraphic sources for any god, it stands to reason that a number of divinities could have been worshipped under such an aspect. In the case of Thessaly, however, it is far more likely that the *Qemi/stia were celebrated in honor of the goddess Themis. Epigraphic attestations of her cult in the region are early and widespread, continuing into the third century BCE. I will consider the Thessalian cults of this goddess in greater detail in Chapter 5: “Regional Cults.”

Agagulios = September/October or November/December The meaning of the word is mysterious: Trümpy very tentatively compares the Boiotian month Alalkomenios which bears a reduplication similar to that of Agagulios and seems to ultimately derive from a place name, Alalkomene. A Thessalian toponym *Agagule is, however, unknown. 41 A recent epigraphic find from Pythion in Perrhaebia is cause for minor celebration on this front. During excavations of the Hellenistic temple of Apollo Pythios and Poseidon Patroos, a number of votive inscriptions dating to IV-IIIa were uncovered. Included in this group was a dedication to Artemis Agagulaia.42 Though it is entirely possible that other divinities shared this epithet, it is nevertheless mildly comforting to connect the month with Artemis, however tentatively. The goddess was extremely popular throughout Thessaly in a variety of aspects but, until the discovery

39

Trümpy 1997: 224. De communibus notitiis adversus Stoicos 1065E. 41 Trümpy 1997: 224-5. 42 Tziaphalias 1997. 40

47

of the Pythion dedication, it was impossible to connect her with the Thessalian calendar.

Apollonios = October/November or December/January The month name transparently corresponds to a festival in honor of Apollo, the *Apollonia, unattested in Thessaly. Although further details of the festival are not forthcoming, it must be noted that Apollo was a major cult figure in every period of Thessaly’s history.

Hermaios = November/December or January/February The month Hermaios suggests a festival of the *Hermaia which must be connected with Hermes. Details of the festival are not forthcoming. Though Hermes is not a major cult figure in Thessaly, the region has produced a large corpus of funerary inscriptions which are configured as both a monument to the deceased and a dedication to Hermes Chthonios. Hermaia are known from other areas of the Greek world. The best attested Hermaia are in Beroia where a second-century sacred law has provided new insight into the funding and program of the festival. There, as elsewhere, the festival was tightly bound to the workings of the gymnasium and took place at the end of the Macedonian year, in Hyperberetaios (modern September). 43 By contrast, in those locations which use a calendar that contains the month Hermaios/Hermaion, including Thessaly, the month invariably falls in the first half of the year. While we must be cautious in drawing anything other than the most

43

The Hermaia at Sestos, Pergamon and Eresos (Lesbos), perhaps at Eretria, also took place at the end of the calendar year. A month Hermaios/Hermaion is not present in the calendar of any location where the Hermaia are attested. Cf. Gauthier and Hatzopoulos 1993: 96f.

48

provisional conclusion from this datum, it is possible that the festival significance of the month Hermaios/Hermaion lay outside the gymnasium. 44

Leschanorios = December/January or February/March The epithet lesxhno/rioj is associated with Apollo in some late literary sources. Plutarch, De E apud Delphos 385c, suggests that people refer to Apollo as Lesxhno/rioj oÀtan e)nergw½si kaiì a)polau/wsi xrw¯menoi t%½ diale/gesqai kaiì filosofeiÍn pro\j a)llh/louj “[they call him] Leschanorian when people have active enjoyment of conversation and philosophic intercourse with one another” (trans. Babbitt). 45 Harpocration, Photius and Suda, s.v. le/sxai, quoting Cleanthes, make an even closer connection between Apollo and le/sxai: Klea/nqhj e)n t%½ periì qew½n a)ponenemh=sqai t%½

¹Apo/llwni ta\j

le/sxaj fhsiìn, e)ce/draij de\ o(moi¿aj gi¿nesqai au)ta\j, kaiì par' e)ni¿oij to\n qeo\n lesxhno/rion e)pikaleiÍsqai “Cleanthes claims in his work “On the Gods” that leschai are set aside for Apollo and they are like exedra, and among some people the god is invoked as leschanorios.” Each of these illustrations of the epithet corresponds well with Trümpy’s linguistic explanations: It can be understood either as a compound of le/sxh and a)nh/r with a possessive sense, e.g., “having men in the le/sxh/le/sxai,” or an adjective formed from *Lesxa/nwr, “patron of the le/sxh.” 46

44

Cf. Nilsson 1995: 392ff., for a synopsis of the Hermes festivals—surprisingly few in number—which are not connected with the gymnasium. 45 Cf. Cornutus (p. 69, ll. 14-17 Lang): kaiì lesxhno/rion d' au)to\n proshgo/reusan dia\ to\ ta\j h(me/raj taiÍj le/sxaij kaiì t%½ o(mileiÍn a)llh/loij sune/xesqai tou\j a)nqrw¯pouj, ta\j de\ nu/ktaj kaq' e(autou\j a)napau/esqai. 46 Trümpy 1997: 256-7.

49

A more local Thessalian connection is suggested by a dedication to Apollo Leschaios recovered from Larisa: Larisa, Va IG ix.2 1027a ãAploni Lesxai¿?o[i] ¹Aristi¿on o)ne/qeke koi¸ sundauxnafo/roi “Aristion and his fellow daphnephoroi dedicated to Apollo Leschaios.” Large rectangular stele (trabs) common in Archaic/early Classical Thessalian dedications. Another inscription, McD 651 (= Ed. pr. Woodward 1910: 157, no. 9) (Gyrton: IIa), is occasionally restored as a dedication to Apollo Leschaios, but this is extremely uncertain. 47 Though the name is common in Thessaly, this Aristion is otherwise unknown. 48 For other Thessalian daphnephoroi, cf. AK6. Kern adroitly compared Steph. Byz. s.v. Deipnia/j: kw¯mh

Qessali¿aj periì

La/rissan, oÀpou fasiì to\n

¹Apo/llwna

deipnh=sai prw½ton, oÀte e)k tw½n Te/mpewn kaqarqeiìj u(pe/streyen: kaiì t%½ paidiì t%½ diakomistv= th=j da/fnhj eÃqoj ei¹j th/nde paragenome/n% deipneiÍn. “Deipnias: An area of Thessaly near Larisa where they claim Apollo first ate when he returned from the Tempe after being purified; and it is custom for the boy who escorts the laurel to eat when he is present in this place.” The presence of laurel bearing in both text and inscription suggests a connection between the two. In addition to housing philosophic conversations of all sorts, leschai were places for general repose. Stephanus refers to the Delphian Stepteria, an enneateric festival which, according to Plutarch, reenacted the mythic flight of Apollo, 47

The preserved text reads: [--?--]AIOU Simi/oun | [--?--]S leitoreu/oun. Ed. pr., ad loc., comments: “…we should perhaps restore [ )/Aplounoj Lesx]ai/ou…” 48 LGPN iii.B s.v. )Aristi/wn 156.

50

polluted by the assassination of Python, to the Tempe for purification.49 I summarize the basic features of the festival: 1) a pais, whose parents must both be alive, leads a group to set fire to a structure, which was built within the sanctuary of Apollo at Delphi for this ritual purpose; 2) the group is chased from Delphi, the pais is alleged to endure labors of some sort before wandering to the Tempe, where the pais undergoes purification and the attendant group assumes the character of a theoria by offering rich sacrifices to Apollo. Laurel is culled; 50 3) the laurel is escorted back to Delphi, where it is used in victors’ crowns of the upcoming Pythia. 51 Stephanus describes a moment during stage 3, the return of the theoria from the Tempe to Delphi. The particulars of how this enneateric ritual was related to the presumably annual Thessalian *Leschanoria are unclear, though laurel-bearing of some sort seems to have been a central act in both festivals. It would not be surprising if, on the model of the Itonia, there was a federal celebration of the *Leschanoria at Deipnias and local celebrations of the festival in other parts of Thessaly.

Aphrios = January/February or March/April Trümpy, following the arguments of Kubitschek and Dümmler, connects the month name Aphrios with Aphrodite. 52 She suggests that the name was modeled on a shortened form of the name Aphrodite as evidenced in Nicander Alex. 406: )Afrw/. 53 49

Quaest. Graec. 12. Cf. Halliday, ad loc.: “Here and elsewhere Plutarch expresses what was evidently the official view, that the rites were essentially a mimesis of the story of Apollo and Python. The main difficulty arises from the fact that in our fragmentary record of what was actually done, there is nothing which would naturally lend itself to this view, which I personally believe to be a desperate venture of theological speculation.” 50 A sanctuary of Pythian Apollo has been identified in the Tempe. Cf. Theocharis 1960: 175. A cult of Apollo Tempeitas is attested in two inscriptions from Larisa: SEG 35.607 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 215-6, no. 94 (100a); IG ix.2 1034 (date?) 51 Nilsson 1995: 150ff., assembles the ancient sources and offers the fullest discussion of the festival. Cf. also Farnell 1895-1909: 4.293ff. 52 Kubitschek, RE i (1894) s.v. Aphrios, col. 2724; Dümmler, RE i (1894) s.v. Aphrodite, col. 2729; Trümpy 1997: 225. 53 Trümpy 1997:225. Cf. Etrucan apru, apparently borrowed from the Greeks, which stands behind the Latin springtime month Aprīlis.

51

While Trümpy’s suggestions are plausible, it is problematic that there is no positive evidence for )Afrw/ serving as a short form for Aphrodite in Thessaly. All extant Thessalian dedications to the goddess mention her in the full form. A few examples will suffice: IG ix.2 1359 (Phalara: ?) FilainwÜ

Eu)bio/tou |

i¸erateu/sasa ¹Afrodi¿tai; IG ix.2 236 (= IThessEnip 67) (Pharsalus: Va) Da/won ta)fr?[o]|di¿tai t#= Peiqo[iÍ]; IG ix.2 271 (Cierium: ?) Heu/dikoj | ¹Afrodi¿tai. A pair of dedications from Pherai mentioning Zeus Aphrios make it far more likely that the month and festival (* )/Afria) were sacred to Zeus: McD 242 (= Ed. pr. Giannopoulos 1913: 219-220, no. C4) (Pherai: date?): Diiì ¹Afri¿ou; IG ix.2 452 (Pherai: date?): D?iì ¹Afri¿ou. An epitaph discovered at Pagasai mentions an )Aghsa/ndra

¹Afri¿ou Ferai¿a 54 (III-IIa). The theophoric name lends an added

measure of support. While the presence of the month in the league calendar suggests a pan-Thessalian relevance, the provenance of the evidence suggests a close local connection between Zeus Aphrios and Pherai. Zeus is not elsewhere worshipped under the aspect of )/Afrioj and it is unclear what the nature of “foaming” Zeus could have been. 55 A text to be discussed in Chapter 5, ZT3, hints that Zeus Aphrios is related to another particularly Thessalian Zeus—Thaulios.

Thu(i)os = February/March or April/May The significance of the name is uncertain. Evidence from Elis and Phokis suggests a connection with Dionysus. Pausanias discusses a festival in honor of

54

IG ix.2 371 (III-IIa) = LGPN iii.B s.v. )/Afrioj 1. Costanzi 1913-1914, using arguments very similar to those deployed by Trümpy, connects the epithet with Aphrodite. 55

52

Dionysus known as the Thyia (6.26.1). 56 Plutarch describes a quasi-maenadic group of female devotees of Dionysus known as Thyiads who roamed the heights of Parnassos (Mulierum virtutes 249E ff.). In an Ionian context, though, Hesychius connects the name Qui=oj with Apollo in Miletus. 57 Given the occasional affinities between the Thessalian calendar and the socalled calendar of North-West Greece, it is plausible that the month Thu(i)os in Thessaly witnessed a festival in honor of Dionysus. Evidence for the cult of Dionysus in Thessaly is not especially numerous: Most prominent are a series of Roman inscriptions from Larisa which mention a shared cult of Dionysus Karpios and Demeter Phylake. This cult will be considered in greater detail in Chapter 5.

Homoloios = March/April or May/June The cult of Zeus Homoloios is known from Atrax, Larisa and Metropolis of tetradic Thessaly and it is very likely that the Thessalian *Homoloia were celebrated in his honor. 58 I will consider this cult in greater detail in Chapter 5.

Hippodromios = April/May or June/July A connection between the month Hippodromios and Poseidon seems virtually certain. Pindar refers to Poseidon as Hippodromios at Isthmian 1.54. It is as Hippodromios that the god receives a pig sacrifice in the month of Boedromion in the sacrificial calendar of the Salaminioi (SEG 21.527.91 = Agora xix L4a). Poseidon is associated with horses and horse racing in all areas of the Greek world. In Chapter 5, I

56

Thuios is also a month in the calendar of Elis, though there is not enough evidence to determine where in the year it fell. Cf. Trümpy 1997: 199ff. 57 Hesychius s.v. Qui+/oj: ¹Apo/llwn e)n Milh/t%. 58 Trümpy 1997: 225-6, 229 n. 923, does not take a position on the divinity honored in the Thessalian Homoloia.

53

will discuss the Thessalian cult of Poseidon Petraios, who may be related to Poseidon Hippodromios.

Phyllikos = May/June or July/August If Kramer’s supplements to a lacunose passage of Strabo have any merit, then it is possible that the *Phyllika were celebrated in honor of Apollo Phyllios. Strabo, discussing the tetrad Thessaliotis, mentions (9.5.14): o( Fu/ll[oj, o(/pou

)Apo/llw]noj tou= Fulli/ou i(ero/n

“Phyllos, where there is a sanctuary of Apollo Phyllios.” Kramer’s restorations fill the roughly 14 letter gap reasonably well and their sense is certainly defensible. The city of Phyllos is not well-attested in literary or material sources, however. 59 Though the -iko/j suffix is paralleled only by Macedonian Candiko/j among month names, it seems to be the functional equivalent of -ioj. The nature of the festival celebrated in this month is completely opaque.

Irregularities post-196a The uniform picture of the post-196a Thessalian calendar presented thus far has glossed over a number of observed irregularities. Two may be especially significant: 1) The epigraphic evidence, mostly manumissions, occasionally positions Hermaios before Apollonios. 60 There is no certain explanation for this alternation; 2) Inscriptions from Skotussa (SEG 15.370 (= Ed. pr. Pouilloux 1955: 442ff.): IIa) and Kierion (IThessEnip 15.5 (= IG ix.2 258): 196-150a) have provided evidence for another month: Iuggios. The month is not elsewhere attested in the Greek world.

59 60

For a survey of the problems, cf. Decourt 1995: 35-41; Decourt 1990: 174-181. Trümpy 1997: 216-7.

54

Trümpy tentatively connects the month with Dionysus on the basis of a lemma in Hesychius: )Iuggi/hj: o( Dio/nusoj. That Iuggios replaces Thuios in one of the years recorded by the Skotussa text supports this putative association with Dionysus. 61 This replacement is not observed after IIa. Pouilloux’s explanation is tempting: “Is it excessive to see in these particularities of the calendar the individualism of the cities which the creation of the koinon in 196 did not immediately cause to disappear?” 62 Since, in the Skotussa text, Thuios also appears in years where Iuggios is absent, it is possible that there was a regular alternation of the two months, at least for a period in second-century Skotussa.

3.3: Conclusion

It may be useful to provisionally apply the findings of the Attic case study, with which this chapter began, to the evidence for the Thessalian calendar. 1) Attic month festivals do not appear to have been related to the solar year. Although there is not enough evidence in the case of Thessaly to determine the relationship of Thessalian month festivals to the solar year, it is reasonable to assume that the difficulties inherent in reconciling the lunar calendar with the solar year applied throughout the Greek world. The absence of Demeter in the Thessalian calendar and her uncertain presence in the Attic calendar may illustrate this general tendency in Greek calendars.

61

The Kierion text does not allow for the reconstruction of even a partial sequence of months. Iuggios is not qualified as embolimos. The order of months in the Skotussa text, which differs radically from that of the koinon calendar, can best be attributed to scribal indifference. This same inscription suggests that, in Skotussa at least, the first month of the year was not Itonios, but Panemos. It is entirely possible that while the new year began in Itonios from the perspective of the koinon, the new year in Skotussa, from the perspective of the polis, officially began in Panemos. 62 Pouilloux 1955: 451.

55

2) With few exceptions, the divinities honored in Attic month festivals—at least those worshipped in a particular aspect, e.g., Hekatombaion > Apollo Hekatombaios, as opposed to a general aspect, e.g., Poseideon > Poseidon (aspect unclear)—do not appear to have been prominent in the epigraphic record, at least from the late Archaic/early Classical period. Somewhat surprisingly, this finding is not especially applicable to the Thessalian evidence. Setting aside the months of Apollonios and Hermaios, which do not suggest a specific aspect of either divinity, there is certain independent epigraphic evidence for five of the remaining ten months of the calendar—Athena Itonia, Themis, Apollo Leschanorios/Leschaios, Zeus Aphrios, Zeus Homoloios—and likely independent epigraphic or material evidence in the case of Artemis Agagulaia. There are a number of possible explanations for this circumstance. For some, it may be entirely possible that the Thessalian evidence reveals the magnitude of the gap in the Attic evidentiary record. For those keen to see the survival of primitive strata of Greek religion in Thessaly, however, the evidence on this point will surely be interpreted as an index of Thessalian conservatism in matters of cult, especially if a Bronze or Iron Age origin for the calendar is maintained. If one sees the Thessalian calendar as a comparatively late institution of Flamininus, then it may be possible to invert this relationship and see the calendar as a late reflection of older cults which had attained regional prominence. At bare minimum, however, all will agree that there was a comparatively close connection between the calendar of the Thessalian League and Thessaly’s regional cults, at least from the period of Flamininus’ reorganization. It also striking that so many of the cults represented in the Thessalian calendar either have epithets that are toponymic or are otherwise clearly linked with a particular district of Thessaly. Belonging to the former category are Phyllikos > Apollo Phyllios (Phyllos?), Homoloios > Zeus Homoloios (Homolion?), Itonios > Athena Itonia

56

(Iton?); Belonging to the latter are Leschanorios > Apollo Leschanorios/Leschaios (Deipnias) and Aphrios > Zeus Aphrios (Pherai). It is certainly possible that evidence concerning the former category is little more than an illustration of the ancient tendency to derive epithets from place names and that evidence pertaining to the latter category is accidental. If we accept these two cases as relatively honest, accurate reflections of discourse and belief in ancient Thessaly, however, then in the elevation of the cults of a particular polis or area of Thessaly to the status of regional cults or, perhaps more accurately, the retrojection of local origins for regional cults into the distant past, it may be possible to glimpse one way in which a common Thessalian identity was forged throughout the Archaic, Classical and Hellenistic periods. Unlike Athens, there is no one divinity whose month festivals overshadow those of the other divinities present in the calendar. Apollo’s dominance, not just of the Attic calendar, but of the calendars of Ionia more generally, does raise a central question in the case of Thessaly: How does the Thessalian calendar compare with other Greek calendars? Below, I offer a preliminary answer to this question in the form of Table 5.

57

Table 5 Thessalian Months and other Greek Calendars

Thessalian

Extra-Thessalian Parallels? 63

Koinon Itonios

WG: Skarpheia, Tauromenion; AOL: Lamia, Melitaia, Thaumakoi, Halos

Panemos

ION: Delos, Minoa (Amorgos), Samos, Perinthus, Miletos, Kyzikos, Sinope, Priene, Chios, Erythrai; WG: Lakonia, Epidauros, Argos, Megara, Corinth, Bouthrotos, Dodona, Corcyra, Tauromenion, Rhodes, Cos, Thera, Lyttos, Aitolia, Akarnania; AOL: Lamia, Boiotia, Pergamon; Macedonia

Themistios

AOL: Phthiotic Thebes, Lamia, Echinos

Agagulios

AOL: Echinos

Apollonios,

ION: Halikarnassos, Iasos; WG: Syracuse, Tauromenion, Elis; AOL:

vel sim.

Halos, Eresos, Methymna, Pergamon, Dardanos

Hermaios, vel

ION: Keos, Halikarnassos; WG: Epidauros, Argos, Aitolia,

sim.

Skarpheia; AOL: Thaumakoi, Boiotia

Leschanorios

WG: Gortyn, unknown Cretan city; AOL: Melitaia (?)

Aphrios

AOL: Echinos, Melitaia

Thuios/Thuos

WG: Elis; AOL: Lamia, Melitaia, Phthiotic Thebes, Boiotia

Homoloios

WG: Aitolia; AOL: Echinos, Melitaia, Thaumakoi, Phthiotic Thebes, Boiotia, Eresos, Kyme

63

Parallels are drawn from the indices to Trümpy 1997. NB: Calendar “families” are abbreviated in capital letters and underlined: WG = West Greek; AOL = Aiolian; ION = Ionian; Calendars of the Thessalian perioikoi are marked in boldface; The table charts simple occurrence of month name in the corresponding calendar. It does not indicate that the month occupied a similar position with respect to the solar year.

58 Table 5 (Continued) Hippodromios WG: Aitolia, Epizephyrian Lokris; AOL: Lamia, Echinos, Halos, Boiotia Phyllikos

WG: Messenia (?), Skarpheia

The relationship between the calendar of the Thessalian koinon and the individual calendars of the Thessalian perioikoi, however suggestive it may initially appear, is vexed and needs further research. 64 This work will not be attempted here. I offer this table purely for the purposes of comparison. The general similarities between the socalled West Greek and Aiolian calendars is striking and may reflect some shared cult traditions among the diverse peoples of central and northern Greece, as well as the northwest Peloponnese. A more pervasive relationship can be glimpsed by comparing the Thessalian calendar with that of the Boiotian koinon. In Table 6 below, I synchronize the calendars of Boiotia, Thessaly—both before and after the mid-secondcentury BCE shift—and, for the purposes of comparison, Attica.

Table 6 The Calendars of Thessaly, Boiotia and Attica

Modern

Thessaly (170-

Boiotia

157/6a vel

Thessaly

Athens

(124a vel post)

ante) July-August

Phyllikos

Hippodromios

Panemos

Hekatombaion (1)

64

In particular, findspot and chronology of many of these inscriptions are uncertain, as are, in general, the specific details of the political relationship between the Thessalian koinon and her perioikoi, i.e., beyond those points discussed in Chapter 2.

59 Table 6 (Continued) August-

Itonios (1)

Panemos

Themistios

Metageitnion

Panemos

Pamboiotios

Agagulios

Boedromion

Themistios

Damatrios

Apollonios

Pyanapsion

Agagulios

Alalkomenios

Hermaios

Maimakterion

Apollonios

Boukatios (1)

Leschanorios

Posideon

Hermaios

Hermaios

Aphrios

Gamelion

Leschanorios

Prostaterios

Thuios

Anthesterion

March-April

Aphrios

Agrionios

Homoloios

Elaphebolion

April-May

Thuios

Thuios

Hippodromios Mounichion

May-June

Homoloios

Homoloios

Phyllikos

Thargelion

June-July

Hippodromios

Theilouthios

Itonios (1)

Skirophorion

September SeptemberOctober OctoberNovember NovemberDecember DecemberJanuary JanuaryFebruary FebruaryMarch

The comparative evidence from the Boiotian calendar, the only other Aiolian calendar which is complete and can be aligned with the solar year, is illuminating. The several months which the calendars share fall in the same relative sequence: PanemosHermaios-Thuios-Homoloios-Hippodromios. 65 Indeed, in the earlier Thessalian 65

Boiotian Pamboiotikos was the month of the Pamboiotika, a festival in honor of Athena Itonia, among others. A parallel with Thessalian Itonios is plausible.

60

calendar, the months of Thuios, Homoloios and Hermaios occur at the same time as their Boiotian counterparts. It is difficult to know what precisely this parallelism conceals. In the next two chapters of this dissertation, we will encounter a number of Thessalian cults and sanctuaries which have a strong relationship with Boiotia and it is tempting to see some aspects of Thessalian and Boiotian religion as being thoroughly implicated. 3) In the case of Athens, there was no guarantee that month festivals were especially prominent within the month that they were celebrated. There is simply not enough evidence to evaluate the applicability of this finding in the case of Thessaly. The one festival of which we are reasonably well-informed is the Itonia, which seems to have been one of the major festivals, not just of the month Itonios, but of the entire year.

CHAPTER 4 FEDERAL SANCTUARIES

Introduction Every collective in Greek antiquity had a religious dimension. The identity of groups as diverse in size, function and orientation as the Delphian Labyads, Athenian Boule and the Delian League was expressed at some level through cult. Federal leagues were no different. In this chapter, I consider the two major federal sanctuaries of Thessaly, those of Athena Itonia at Philia and Zeus Eleutherios at Larissa, together with the cult conducted therein. 1 I designate as federal sanctuaries those sanctuaries which received some form of symbolic or material investment by a koinon or related federal structure. The investment could take forms as diverse as the publication of league documents in a particular sanctuary or federal sponsorship of a religious festival. There is a temporal dimension to this investment, however: I am most concerned with those sanctuaries that show evidence of repeated investment through time. These sanctuaries need not be “capitols” in any modern sense, 2 nor should they be freighted with the symbolism of the Archaic ethnos. 3 They were, quite simply, cult places where federal identity was expressed. 4 In theory, any sanctuary could become, i.e., could be constructed as, a federal sanctuary: In practice, very few did.

1

I also consider the substantial evidence that the sanctuary of Athena Itonia at Iton was federal. In Chapter 5, I will discuss the possibility that the sanctuary of Ennodia at Pherai was federal. 2 For a useful discussion of the problem of the federal capitol, cf. Mackil 2003: 134-8. 3 Cf. Morgan 2003: passim. 4 This does not exclude these sanctuaries from being simultaneously catering to a local or sub-regional clientele.

61

62

4.1: Athena Itonia at Philia

Introduction Athena Itonia received cult in antiquity on the Cycladic island of Amorgos, in Athens and, most prominently, as a chief divinity of the Boiotian and Thessalian Leagues. 5 Preller-Robert linked Athena Itonia with a more militant aspect of the goddess that is visible in Archaic and Classical literature and art. They nevertheless argue that, in the cult at Boiotian Koroneia in particular, it is possible to glimpse a connection between Athena Itonia and the agricultural aspects of the divinity known from Athens. 6 Farnell had very limited access to the epigraphic and archaeological discoveries that have so powerfully shaped our understanding of the goddess in her major cult centers. As a result, his focus is almost entirely literary. Drawing on Strabo 9.2.29 and Pausanias 9.34.1-2, where the goddess’ cult image is said to be accompanied by a consort at Koroneia in Boiotia, either Hades (Strabo) or Zeus (Pausanias), Farnell suggested that the goddess “fostered the growths of the earth and…therefore had some affinity to the chthonian deities.” He concluded from a passage of Bacchylides that the goddess was also connected with poetry in Boiotia. Ultimately for Farnell, however, these features were subservient to the political role that she played as tutelary deity of the Boiotian koinon, in whose honor the festival of 5

Athens: IG i3 383 A front col. II fr. V.152. Cf. [Plato] Ax. 364d1 for a mention of the Itonian gates in Athens. The Boiotian material is collected in Schachter 1981-: vol. 1, s.v. Athena (Haliartos, Koroneia). A number of inscriptions from Amorgos offer important details about the cult there: IG xii.7 22, 24-5 (Arkesine: IIIa), 35 (Arkesine: IIa), 241 (Minoa: IIIa); IG xii Suppl. 330 (Arkesine: IIa). The presence of the month name Itonios in the calendars of Lokris, Phokis and Tauromenion in Sicily suggests that the goddess may have received cult in those locations. 6 Preller 1894-1926: 1.214-5. Both RE and RML offer valuable collections of the literary and epigraphic evidence and construct a basic narrative of the dissemination of the cult, but neither focuses too much on interpreting the goddess’ function within the societies that she was worshipped: RML ii.1 s.v. Itonia coll. 567-9 (Drexler: 1890-1894); RE ix s.v. Itonia coll. 2364-6 (Adler: 1916). Deacy and Villing 2001 offer a useful summary of current and former interpretations of Athena in general.

63

the Pamboiotika was celebrated at Koroneia. He has less to say about Thessaly: It was the likely original home of the cult and Athena Itonia seems to have been especially connected with war there. 7 Wilamowitz offered a characteristically powerful vision. He interpreted Athena as a Cretan goddess imported to the Greek mainland. A goddess Itonia, shared by the Thessalians, Phokians and Boiotians, was associated with Athena at a later date by these peoples: “It is difficult to believe that the tribes invading at a relatively late date chose the Minoan goddess for their defender…But it is completely understandable that the Boiotians equated their Itonia with Athena, whom they found in the neighboring regions.” 8 Nilsson writes in a similar vein: Athena forced out other, older goddesses that had been affiliated with the state, e.g. Alea in Tegea and Itonia in Thessaly and Boiotia, and retained these former names as epithets.9 Papachatzis has recently reemphasized the chthonic character of Athena Itonia in Thessaly. 10 Another strand in modern scholarship has focused on the function of Athena Itonia as patron of federal political structures, viz., Thessalian koinon, Boiotian koinon. 11

The Epithet Itonia The earliest etymology of the epithet Itonia belongs to Armenidas 12 who is paraphrased in the scholion to Apollonius of Rhodes 1.551a: 7

Farnell 1895-1909: 1.301. Although Strabo preserves some details about a possible Thessalian origin of the cult, the idea that Thessaly was the original center of a number of major Greek cults was a trope of 19th and early-20th century scholarship. I hope to examine this trend in greater detail at another time. 8 Wilamowitz-Moellendorf 1956: 1.230-1. He adduces as further evidence of the “Minoan AthenaIndigenous Athena” hypothesis the two predominant iconographic forms of Athena—the sitting, feminine goddess and the standing warrior goddess. 9 Nilsson 1961-1967: 1.522. 10 Papachatzis 1992. 11 E.g., although from very different perspectives, Larsen 1968, Mackil 2003. 12 For Armenidas, cf. RE ii s.v. Armenidas, col. 1187 (Schwartz: 1896); FHG iv 339; FGrHist 378. Jacoby dates him “vor 400a”.

64

¹Armeni¿daj de\ e)n toiÍj

Qhbai+koiÍj ¹Amfiktu/onoj ui¸o\n

Qessali¿# gennhqh=nai, a)f' ouÂ

ãItwn po/lij kaiì

¹Itwniìj

ãItwnon e)n ¹Aqhna=.

“Armenidas in the Thebaika [says] that Itonos, the son of Amphictyon, was born in Thessaly, after whom there is a city, Iton, and Athena Itonis.” 13 Armenidas connects Athena’s epithet and the name of a town to a hero Itonos who was prominent in the epichoric myth of Thessaly and Boiotia. While the nature of the connection unfortunately cannot be deduced from the scholion, a paraphrase of the genealogist Simonides 14 preserved in the Etymologicum Magnum s.v. Iton 15 may give a clue: ¹Itwniìj kaiì

¹Itwni¿a h( ¹Aqhna= eiãrhtai para\ toiÍj

QessaloiÍj, a)po/

tinoj po/lewj ãItwnoj. fhsiì de\ o( genealo/goj Simwni¿dhj ¹Itw¯nou qugate/raj gene/sqai du/o,

¹Aqhna=n kaiì

¹Ioda/man, aÁj e)zhlwkui¿aj

th\n o(plomaxikh\n ei¹j eÃrin th\n ei¹j a)llh/laj xwrh=sai, a)naireqh=nai¿ te th\n ¹Ioda/man u(po\ th=j ¹Aqhna=j. “Athena is called Itonis and Itonia among the Thessalian from a certain city, Iton. But the genealogist Simonides asserts that Itonos had two daughters, Athena and Iodama, who in contention during a battle in arms, advanced against one another in strife, and that Iodama was killed by Athena.” The force of the de/ is key to any interpretation of the passage: It may signal a departure from the simple, preceding topographic explanation (“but…”) of the epithet, viz., Athena Itonia is named after Thessalian Itonos, or it may be continuative and offer an elaboration, not a contradiction, of the topographic hypothesis. Is this tale to be localized in Thessaly or someplace else, e.g., Boiotia? 13

Cf. also Herodian 3.1.39 ≈ Steph. Eth. 342.8-12. Athena’s epithet is variously preserved in the literary sources as Itonis or Itonia. Both refer to the same aspect of the goddess. 14 For Simonides the genealogist, cf. FGrH 8. His floruit is controversial: Jacoby doubts the date suggested at Suda s 442, ge/gone de\ pro\ tw=n Peloponnhsiakw=n, but Fowler 2000 accepts it. 15 The ancient sources preserve both Iton and Itonos as the name of a city in Thessaly.

65

Jacoby suggested that this passage of Simonides was a rationalization of Pausanias 9.34.2, where a peculiar aspect of the cult of Athena Itonia at Koroneia is described: le/getai de\ kaiì toio/nde,

¹Ioda/man i¸erwme/nhn tv= qe%½ nu/ktwr e)j to\

te/menoj e)selqeiÍn kaiì au)tv= th\n th=j qeou= th\n

¹Aqhna=n fanh=nai, t%½ xitw½ni de\

Medou/shj e)peiÍnai th=j Gorgo/noj kefalh/n:

¹Ioda/man de/, w¨j eiåde, gene/sqai li¿qon. kaiì dia\ tou=to e)pitiqeiÍsa gunh\ pu=r a)na\ pa=san h(me/ran e)piì th=j e)pile/gei tv= Boiwtw½n fwnv=

¹Ioda/maj to\n bwmo\n e)j triìj

¹Ioda/man zh=n kaiì ai¹teiÍn pu=r.

“The following is also said: Iodama, when she was priestess to the goddess, went into the sanctuary at night and Athena appeared to her, and the head of Medusa the Gorgon was on her chiton. Iodama became a stone when she saw it. For this reason, every day a woman, after putting fire on the altar of Iodama, says three times, in the Boiotian dialect, that Iodama is alive and asking for fire” (Trans. Jones). Jacoby’s reading is certainly plausible but, in the absence of a localization in Simonides, we cannot know whether the genealogist’s account was of purely epichoric relevance or if he was dealing with an aspect of the goddess that had broader appeal. The prominence of Iodama in both accounts is nevertheless notable. Leaving aside the question of the legend’s provenance, Simonides preserves a number of intriguing details about Athena Itonia. Most striking is the evidence of an alternate genealogy of the goddess or, perhaps more accurately in this case, heroine. A greater contrast with a panhellenic Athena, e.g. Polias, cannot be imagined. Also notable is the sibling rivalry and the contention with weapons. The militant character of the goddess suggested in the aitiology of this epithet has Archaic and Classical parallels: Pausanias claims that Athena Itonia was the “watchword” (synthema) of the

66

Thessalians during the 1st Sacred War; 16 the early coinage of the post-196a Thessalian koinon featured Athena Itonia as promachos on the reverse of a number of issues. 17 Recently, Robertson has argued that the significance of the epithet is related to neither topography nor heroic saga. According to Robertson, the epithet is concerned with processing: “Now at Coroneia Athena had the epithet

)Itwni/a ‘processional’

(< i)tw/n ‘procession’ < i)ta/w ‘go always’, ‘proceed’).” 18 He takes up the negative argument in the accompanying footnote: “Ancient theorists predictably said that Athena Itonia came from the place Iton, which they located in Thessaly, forcing-bed of folk migrations; modern theorists of the old school have happily adopted and extended this, so that it even takes in Athens. No refutation is needed.” 19 The confidence expressed in the last sentence is unjustified. While Robertson’s etymology of Itonia is at least plausible, there is indisputable material evidence that there was a settlement known as Iton or Itonos in Thessaly in the historical period: It was not just located there by “ancient theorists.” A connection between the name of the settlement, the divine epithet and a hero is, as demonstrated above, as old as the fifth-century BCE: It cannot be dismissed so casually.

Epigraphic Evidence In my discussion of the Thessalian calendar, it emerged that Itonios, certainly the month of the Itonia in honor of Athena Itonia, was the first month in the calendar of the Thessalian koinon. Theophoric names honoring the goddess are not common: Only IG ix.2 568 30 (Larisa: date?), a manumission, offers evidence for an individual, a manumitted slave, with the name Itonia.

16

Pausanias 10.1.10. E.g., Head 1911: 311; SNG iii Thessalia pl. 6. 18 Robertson 2001: 52. 19 Robertson 2001: 52, with n. 55. 17

67

AI1. Philia, 179-165a SEG 25.653 18ff. = Ed. pr. Habicht 1976a: 175-180 kaiì to\n stra[th-] [go\n ce/]n?ia/ te pe/myai au)toiÍj kaiì kale/sai e)piì [th\n qus]i¿an th\n sunteloume/nhn th=i

¹Aqh-

20

[na=i th=i ¹Itwni¿a]i kaiì toiÍj aÃlloij qeoiÍj: to\n de\ ta[mi¿an a)nagra/]yai to\ yh/fisma ei¹j ki¿ona liqi¿[nhn kaiì a)nasth=s]ai ei¹j to\ i¸ero\n th=j ¹Aqhn?[a=j.

vacat(?)

]

vacat

“And let the (league) strategos send xenia to them and invite them to the sacrifice conducted for Athena Itonia and the other gods. Let the treasurer publish the decree on a stone stele and set it up in the sanctuary of Athena.”

Stele. Habicht dates the stone on the basis of historical context. The text records the invitation of Ambracian ambassadors by the Thessalian League to a thysia in honor of Athena Itonia—Habicht’s plausible restoration. AI1 is the most important evidence for identifying the Geometric-Roman sanctuary at Philia as belonging to Athena Itonia. I will deal more fully with the archaeological evidence furnished by this sanctuary below. Below, in table 7, I summarize the content of other federal documents which have been recovered from Philia.

68

Table 7 Federal Documents from Philia

Date

Content

Reference

142-

Decree recording the decision reached by

McD 670 = Giannopoulos

140a

foreign judges in a boundary dispute involving

1927-28c: 119

Melitaea ?

Honorary statue?

Theocharis 1967

200-

Honorary inscription on statue base for M.

SEG 37.492 = Habicht

250p

Ulpios Eubiotos

1987a: 309-314, no. 3

200-

Honorary inscription on statue base for M.

SEG 37.493 =

250p

Ulpius Domitius

Giannopoulos 1927-28c: 218-220

That the sanctuary of Athena Itonia was a locus of publication for decrees and honors of the Thessalian koinon suggests that the cult was of some significance to the koinon.

AI2. Larisa, 150-130a SEG 34.558 60ff. = Ed. pr. Gallis 1976: 176-8 dedo/xqa[i] tw½i koinw½i Qessalw½n e)paine/sai

Timasi¿qeon,

Dio/timon e)piì th=i

ka-

61

loka)gaqi¿ai kaiì proaire/sei hÂi eÃxontej tugxa/nousin kaiì timh=sai eÀkaston au)tw½n ei¹ko/ni xalkv= e)f' iàppou, aÁj kaiì staqh=nai e)n tw½i teme/nei th=j

¹Aqhna=j th=j

63 ¹Itwnaj genome/nou tou= a)nhlw¯matoj

69

ta\j ei¹ko/naj kaiì ta\j ba/seij u(po\ tw½n sune/drwn. “Let it be decided by the koinon of the Thessalians to praise Timasitheos and Diotimos for the character and conduct which they in fact demonstrate and to honor each of them with a bronze equestrian image which are to be set up in the sanctuary of Athena Itonia with the expense for the images and their bases paid for by the synedroi.”

Marble stele. The text is dated onomastically. The stele contains three different documents, the first of which is an honorary decree for a group of judges that is to be published in the sanctuary of Zeus Eleutherios in Larisa (ll. 13-15): i(/na ge/nhtai h( a)nagrafh\ tou/[tou t]ou= yhfi/smatoj ei)j ki/ona liqi/nhn kai\ a)nateq$= e)n Lari/[s]ai e)n tw=i teme/nei tou= Dio\j tou= )Eleuqeri/ou. The second decree concerns the Thessalian League’s shipment of grain to Rome. The final decree honors Diotimos and Timasitheos, both of whom are known to have served as generals of the Thessalian koinon in the post-146a era, with bronze equestrian statues in the sanctuary of Athena Itonia. 20 The location did not call for further specification (ll. 63-64): kai\ staqh=nai e)n tw=i teme/nei th=j )Aqhna=j th=j )Itwnaj. The elliptical language suggests that this sanctuary was well-known to the prospective audience of this stele. Although in all likelihood the reference is to the Philia sanctuary, the possibility that there were multiple Athena Itonia sanctuaries in Thessaly should not automatically be excluded.

20

Kramolisch 1978: 65-6.

70

Literary Evidence The literary evidence concerning Thessalian manifestations of Athena Itonia is particularly rich and diverse. I begin with Apollonius of Rhodes and the associated scholia. AI3. Apollonius of Rhodes 1.549ff. e)p' a)krota/tvsi de\ nu/mfai Phlia/dej skopiv=sin e)qa/mbeon, ei¹soro/wsai eÃrgon ¹Aqhnai¿hj ¹Itwni¿doj h)de\ kaiì au)tou/j hÀrwaj xei¿ressin e)pikrada/ontaj e)retma/: “…on the topmost heights the nymphs of Pelion wondered as they beheld the work of Itonian Athena, and the heroes themselves wielding the oars” (Trans. Seaton). AI4. Hecataeus, FGrHist 1 F2 = Schol. A. R. 1.551 AI5. Armenidas, FGrHist 378 F1 = Schol. A. R. 1.551 AI6. Alexander Polyhistor, FGrHist 273 F92 = Schol. A. R. 1.551 < ¹Aq ¹Itwni¿doj>™ ¹Itwni¿aj Korwnei¿# th=j

Boiwti¿aj. o( me/ntoi

¹Aqhna=j e)stin i¸ero\n e)n ¹Apollw¯nioj ou)k aÄn le/goi

th\n ¹Aqhna=n e)piì kataskeuv= th=j ¹Argou=j a)po\ th=j e)n e)piklh/sewj, ma=llon de\ a)po\ Qessalikh=j

Korwnei¿#

¹Itwni¿aj, periì hÂj

¸EkataiÍoj me\n e)n tv= a§ tw½n ¸Istoriw½n le/gei: ¹Armeni¿daj de\ e)n toiÍj Qhbai+koiÍj ¹Amfiktu/onoj ui¸o\n

ãItwnon e)n Qessali¿#

gennhqh=nai, a)f' ou ãItwn po/lij kaiì

¹Itwniìj

¹Ale/candroj e)n t%½ a§ tw½n

¹Aqhna=. me/mnhtai kaiì

Kori¿nnhj u(pomnhma/twn.

“: There is a sanctuary of Athena Itonia in Koroneia in Boiotia. But Apollonios would not name Athena in the context of the construction of the Argo from her Koroneian epiclesis, but rather from Thessalian Itonia, concerning whom Hecataeus gives an account in the first book of his Histories. Armenidas in the

71

Thebaika says that Itonos the son of Amphictyon was born in Thessaly after whom there is a city Iton and Athena Itonis. Alexander also mentions her in the first book of Hypomnemata of Korinna.”

AI7. Apollonius of Rhodes 1.721ff. Au)ta\r oÀg' a)mf' wÓmoisi, qea=j ¹Itwni¿doj eÃrgon, di¿plaka porfure/hn peronh/sato, th/n oi¸ oÃpasse Palla/j, oÀte prw½ton druo/xouj e)peba/lleto nho/j ¹Argou=j, kaiì kano/nessi da/e zuga\ metrh/sasqai. “Now he buckled round his shoulders a purple mantle of double fold, the work of the Itonian goddess, which Pallas had given him when she first laid the keel-props of the ship Argo and taught him how to measure timbers with the rule” (Trans. Seaton).

AI8. Schol. ad A. R. 1.721 (Wendel) e)n Qessali¿# qea\ ¹Itwniìj tima=tai kaiì e)n Korwnei¿# [po/lij] th=j Boiwti¿aj, a)po\ ¹Itw¯nou tou= hÀrwoj. “In Thessaly the goddess is honored as Itonis and in Boiotian Koroneia, [named] from the hero Itonos.”

AI9. Apollonius of Rhodes 1.768 ToiÍ' aÃra dw½ra qea=j ¹Itwni¿doj hÅen ¹Aqh/nhj: “…Such were of the gifts of the Itonian goddess Athena…”

Three passages in Book 1 of the Argonautica may make reference to Athena Itonia. The textual tradition wavers between Itonis and Tritonis in AI3 and AI7. There are many potential sources of this confusion, including scribal error and characteristically

72

Alexandrian play with epithets. The uncertainty may also be related to a proekdosis of the Argonautica which the scholia mention at several points in book 1. AI4-6 seem to assure the reading ¹Itwni¿doj at AI3, where Athena Itonia is said to be responsible for the construction of the Argo. So too the preservation of Itonis in AI8 may assure its presence in AI7, where Jason’s cloak is a gift of qea=j

I¹ twni¿doj. At AI9, the

conclusion of the ekphrasis on Jason’s cloak, ¹Itwni¿doj is an emendation for the Tritwni/doj of the codices that can be traced to the editions of Hölzin (1641) and Brunck (1780/1813), retained in Fränkel’s OCT and Vian’s Budé. The reading is not preserved in the manuscripts or scholia. I am suspicious of this last passage in particular. Such variation in the use of epithet at the opening and close of the ekphrasis is in keeping with Apollonius’ poetics. Apollonius situates the goddess within a specifically Thessalian context and, in her construction of the Argo and her creation of Jason’s cloak, grants her the skills of a master weaver and craftsman—traits not unfamiliar from other, better documented aspects of the goddess, e.g., Ergane. In the attribution of these deeds to Athena Itonia, it is unclear whether Apollonius was maintaining an element of earlier epic treatments of the Argonautica or innovating.

AI10. Callimachus, h.Dem. 74-5 hÅnqon ¹Itwnia/doj nin ¹Aqanai¿aj e)p' aÃeqla ¹Ormeni¿dai kale/ontej. “The Ormenidai came to summon him (Erysichthon) to contests of Athena Itonia.”

73

The Thessalian setting for Callimachus’ hymn is emblematic of a broader ethnographic tendency in Hellenistic poetry. 21 We must therefore ask whether Callimachus knew of a tradition of contests in the Thessalian cult of Athena Itonia or if the mention of the divinity is a generic, ethnographic detail which helps to mark the context as specifically Thessalian. Since contests were a fairly common feature of religious festivals in antiquity, it is difficult to answer either question with much confidence. It is best to classify the presence of contests in the cult as merely possible. 22

AI11. AP 6.130 (Leonidas) Qessalaiì ai¸ bo/ej aiàde: para\ proqu/roisi d' ¹Aqa/naj e(sta=sin kalo\n dw½ron

¹Itwnia/doj,

pa=sai xa/lkeiai, duokai¿deka, Fra/dmonoj eÃrgon, kaiì pa=sai gumnw½n sku=lon a)p' ¹Illuriw½n. “These cows are Thessalian, and by the gates of Itonian Athena they stand, a beautiful gift, all of bronze, twelve in number, the work of Phradmon, all wrought from the spoil of the naked Illyrians.” (Trans. Paton).

Leonidas’ epigram suggests that battle spoils were appropriate in the Thessalian cult of Athena Itonia. Such an occurrence implies that the goddess was associated with some aspect of warfare.

21

Although the hymn is set in Thessaly, Hopkinson ad loc. suggests that the reference is to the Boiotian, not the Thessalian, cult. The presence of the Ormenidai, however, evokes Ormenus, the founder of Ormenium (cf. Iliad 2.734)—a still-to-be identified settlement in eastern Thessaly. 22 Games are known from the Itonia on Amorgos.

74

AI12. Polybius 25.3.2 = Constantius VII Porphyroge 2.175.88 = Eustathius 1.505.7ff. In discussing Perseus’ early moves upon becoming kind of Macedon, Polybius makes the following comments (25.3.2): 23 kaiì tou/twn e)ceti¿qei prografa\j eiãj te

Dh=lon kaiì

Delfou\j kaiì

to\ th=j ¹Itwni¿aj ¹Aqhna=j i¸ero/n, didou\j ou) mo/non th\n a)sfa/leian toiÍj kataporeuome/noij, a)lla\ kaiì tw½n u(parxo/ntwn komidh/n, a)f' wÒn eÀkastoj eÃfuge. “He posted up lists of these men at Delos, Delphi, and the temple of Itonian Athena, not only promising safety to such as returned, but the recovery of property they had left behind them” (Trans. Paton).

It is extremely unfortunate that Polybius does not specify the location of this sanctuary. Walbank argued that the historian was referring to a Thessalian sanctuary of Athena Itonia on the grounds that many of the Macedonian exiles and debtors had fled to Thessaly. 24 It is in any case notable that Polybius did need to specify a particular sanctuary of Athena Itonia. We are reminded of AI2, the triple decree of the Thessalian koinon discovered in Larisa which mentions a sanctuary of Athena Itonia but does not detail where in Thessaly the sanctuary was located. If there was a Thessalian setting for the sanctuary in Polybius, then its grouping with Delos and Delphi may suggest that the sanctuary of Athena Itonia held a stature in the Hellenistic period that extended beyond the borders of Thessaly. 25 23

On this event, cf. Gruen 1984. Adams 1982: 246, “…it was an internal measure designed to secure his position with Macedonia. It proclaimed Perseus’ consistent policy of maintaining his father’s friends and settling differences with his father’s enemies.” Further bibliography at Mendels 1978: 56, n. 8. 24 ad 25.3.2: “…since Thessaly, through its proximity to Macedon, will have harbored many of the exiles, Polybius is more likely to be referring to the Thessalian temple.” This position is also supported by Tarn 1913: 54, n. 35. 25 Walbank ad loc. sees two different strategies at work: The posting at the Itonia sanctuary was designed to reach a substantial community of Macedonian exiles; The Delos and Delphi listings were little more than pan-hellenic pandering.

75

AI13. Strabo 9.5.14 tw½n

Qhbw½n de\ e)n tv= mesogai¿# to\ Kro/kion pedi¿on pro\j t%½

katalh/gonti th=j

ãOqruoj, di' ou o( ãAmfrusoj r(eiÍ. tou/tou d'

u(pe/rkeitai o( ãItwnoj, oÀpou to\ th=j ¹Itwni¿aj i¸ero/n, a)f' ou kaiì to\ e)n tv=

Boiwti¿#, kaiì o(

Koua/rioj potamo/j: eiãrhtai de\ p[eriì

tou/tou kaiì]1 th=j ãArnhj e)n toiÍj BoiwtiakoiÍj. 1. suppl. Kramer “But the Krokian Plain is in the mesogaia of Thebes, bordering the foot of Othrys, through which the Amphrysos flows. Itonos is above this, where there is the hieron of the Itonian, from which there is the hieron in Boiotia and the Kouarios river: But there has been mention of this and Arne in the Boiotian section of this work” (Trans. Jones).

The city of Iton or Itonos is first mentioned in the Homeric catalogue of ships where it is described as “mother of flocks” (Iliad 2.696: )/Itwna/ te mhte/ra mh/lwn) and is part of the contingent of Protesilaus. Although Strabo’s description makes good topographic sense, there is as yet no suitable archaeological site in the area that he describes. 26 The evidence from the Homeric catalogue, although not probative in this regard, does accord well with Strabo’s topography: All of Protesilaus’ identified holdings are situated in Achaia Phthiotis. That the city did exist in historical times is proved by its mention in a pair of inscriptions from Cos. I offer the following text and translation of the first document,

26

This description of Itonos accords well with an earlier mention of the site (9.5.8). Excavations at a number of sites southwest of modern Almyros in the early 20th century yielded no material of sufficient antiquity to justify identification with the Iton mentioned in the catalogues of ships: The sites were all of the Classical period or later. Cf. Leekley and Efstratiou 1980: 130, s.v. Almyros for references to these excavations.

76

an honorary decree of the Coans for the Thessalians in honor of their provision of grain at a time of need (258-250a): 27 [a)gaqa=i tu/xai], d?e?d?o/?x?qai tw½i da/?[mwi ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® e)painh=sai me\n] ta\j po/leij ta\j e)n

Qessali¿ai k[aiì stefanw½sai au)ta\j stefa/nwi

xruse/wi a)po\ xrusw½n ¹Alecan-]

2

drei¿wn triakosi¿wn a)reta=j eÀnek[a kaiì filotimi¿aj kaiì eu)noi¿aj aÁj eÃxontej diateleu=nti] periì ta\n po/lin ta\n Kw¯iwn e)m pan?[tiì kairw½i: ai¸reiÍsqai de\ kaiì presbeuta\j treiÍj e)k pa/ntwn],

4

toiì de\ ai¸reqe/ntej a)fiko/menoi e)p[iì ® ® ® ® ® ® to/de to\ ya/fisma a)nado/ntw kaiì to\n ste/fanon tou=-] ton a)naggeila/ntw e)n

¹Itw¯nwi [kaiì a)naqe/ntw e)j to\ i¸aro\n ta=j

¹Aqa/naj to\ koino\n pa=si toiÍj Qessa-] loiÍj, e)pigra/yantej: "o( da=moj o(

6

Kw¯[iwn stefanoiÍ ta\j po/leij ta\j

e)n Qessali¿ai a)reta=j eÀneka] kaiì eu)noi¿aj".

8

“With Good Fortune, let it be decided by the de[mos…to praise] the cities in Thessaly a[nd to crown them with a gold crown worth 300 Alexandrian gold pieces because of the virtue [and ambition and good-will which they continually have] for the city of the Coans in every [circumstance: and (let it be decided) to select three ambassadors from everyone]. Let those who have been selected, after arriving, […issue this decree and announce th]is crown in Itonos [and let them dedicate it in the sanctuary of Athena, common to all the

27

Segre 1934: 172, B2 l. 6. If I am correct in asserting that the Itonos of the Cos inscriptions belonged to Achaia Phthiotis, there will be important consequences for our understanding of the relationship between tetradic Thessaly and Achaia Phthiotis in the years leading up to the 196a reestablishment of the koinon.

77

Thessa]lians, after inscribing: ‘The demos of the Co[ans crowns the cities in Thessaly because of virtue] and good-will.’” Though one may quibble with some of Segre’s restorations, the preserved text makes some uncontroversial, important points. First, a city of Itonos, at least in the Hellenistic period, did in fact exist 28 and it held some special significance for Thessaly, at least in the eyes of the Coans. Indeed, were it not for this inscription and another Coan document to be discussed below, one would be hard pressed to provide evidence for the continued functioning of the Thessalian League during the grim third century BCE. Second, although there is no reference to a sanctuary preserved on the stone, an act of dedication is suggested by the mention of an inscribed item in lines 78. It is therefore highly likely that some act of this embassy would have taken place in a sanctuary. Segre has plausibly restored the sanctuary of Athena (Itonia). The second decree is no less illuminating: 29 [® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®]k?an O.[® ® ® ® ® ® ®] [® ® ® ® toi de\ qewroi\ toi\] a?i¸reqe/ntej e)j ãItwnon [ a)fiko/menoi e)n tw=i pe/mptwi e)niau]tw=i e)paggello/ntw ta\ [ )Asklapi/eia tai=j po/lesi tai=j e)n] Qessali¿ai kaiì e)n ãArgei

4

[tw=i Pelasgikw=(?): toiì de\ qewroiì t]oiì e)j Samoqra/ikan a)pos[tello/menoi e)paggello/ntw ta\]

¹AsklapieiÍa e)g

Xi¿wi kaiì

[e)n Le/sbwi (?): toi\ de\ e)j Kw= paragin]o/menoi qewroiì foreu/ntw [e)n ta=i po/mpai stefa/noj: ta=n de\ a)]f?i?k?n?eumena=n(?) qewria=n

8

[® ® ®ca.®10 ?® ® ® ® e)pimelei/sqwsan toi\ i¸erofu/l]akej, toiì de\ [® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®] pana/?g?u?r?i?j? [® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®] 28

Pace Robertson 2001: 52. Ed. pr. Boesch 1908: 28, no. 1. The document has recently been republished with photographs and commentary at Rigsby 2004. I present Rigsby’s text and supplements. 29

78

“…The theoroi elected to go to Itonos are every fourth year to proclaim the Asklepieia to the cities in Thessaly and in Pelasgian(?) Argos; the theoroi sent to Samothrace are to proclaim the Asklepieia in Chios and Lesbos(?). The theoroi who come to Kos are to wear crowns in the procession;…the hierophylakes are to take care of the arriving(?) theoric missions…” (Trans. Rigsby). Here, Coan theoroi announce the festival of the Asklepeia at Itonos and then throughout Thessaly and Achaia Phthiotis (= Pelasgian Argos). 30 A connection between Itonos and Thessaly is again clear. Rigsby makes a number of important inferences about the celebration of the Itonia in third century Thessaly on the basis of this inscription. Most significant is his suggestion that these Itonia were not a panhellenic festival, but an annual celebration of the Thessalian League. The presence of Coan theoroi must therefore be a reflection of the special relationship between Thessaly and Cos. 31 It is in any case notable that during the third century BCE—what may be the most obscure period in Thessalian history—the Thessalian League may have celebrated Itonia. From the perspective of topography, the two Coan inscriptions and AI13 can be interpreted in two different ways: 1) Strabo’s description of Itonos is topographically correct. The Itonos mentioned in the Coan inscriptions refers to this town. Whether or not the sanctuary of Athena Itonia was central to either the announcement of the Asklepeia or the dedication of the crown is unknown; 2) Strabo’s description of Itonos is either topographically false or misleading: He actually means Philia. The Itonos mentioned in the Coan inscriptions is the sanctuary at Philia. Explanation 1) assumes that Strabo’s Itonos in the Krokian plain and that of the Coan inscriptions are the same. 32 While it is perhaps the most expedient position 30

The clever and plausible solution of Rigsby 2004. Rigsby 2004. 32 Rigsby 2004 supports this interpretation. 31

79

to take from the perspective of the evidence, there are two complicating factors. First, while the existence of multiple sanctuaries of Athena Itonia in Thessaly is not difficult to imagine, the Coan inscriptions intimate that the settlement of Itonos held some federal significance for the Thessalians, at least from the perspective of the Coans. On this reading, there would be two federal sanctuaries of Athena Itonia. Chronology poses a still greater difficulty. According to most reconstructions of Thessalian history, Achaia Phthiotis was not reincorporated within a Thessalian sphere of influence until after Flamininus’ reorganization of the territory in 196 BCE. Both Coan documents are dated to the third century BCE, a period in which Achaia Phthiotis was regularly partitioned by the conflicting powers of Macedon and the Aitolian League. 33 If the sanctuary was granted asylia, however, it is conceivable that it could have functioned as a federal sanctuary for the Thessalians. Explanation 2) is the explicit position of Kramolisch and is at least tacitly endorsed by Habicht. 34 The strength of this reading is that we witness the sanctuary of Athena Itonia at Philia behaving in a manner which accords well with our assumptions about federal sanctuaries. This solution also eliminates the chronological crux of explanation 1). With Achaia Phthiotis removed from the equation, the dates of the Coan texts accord perfectly well with the known history of Philia. The drawbacks of this reading are twofold. First, there is as yet no archaeological evidence for a settlement in the general vicinity of Philia. To be sure, Theocharis only excavated a very small area and there could be plenty of evidence waiting undiscovered nearby. While this absence in the material record is not terribly significant and should not weigh too heavily in our consideration of the literary and epigraphic evidence, it must nevertheless be noted.

33 34

Grainger 1999: 238ff., 415f., and passim; Scholten 2000: 154f., 179f., and passim. DNP v coll.1182-3 s.v. Iton (Kramolisch); Habicht 1976b.

80

Second, Strabo must be taken to be horribly wrong. This is, of course, possible, but one would suspect that an error of such magnitude would be accompanied by smaller ones in the vicinity: There are none. One might be tempted to add as a compromise candidate 2a): There are two Thessalian settlements by the name of Itonos—Strabo’s polis in the Krokian plain and the putative settlement at Philia. The Coan documents refer to the latter. The Greeks were no strangers to homonyny. 35 For example, ancient sources mention at least three different Thessalian settlements known as Larisa. It is therefore not prima facie implausible that there were two Thessalian cities known as Itonos. The advantage of such an interpretation is that one can regard Strabo’s description of Itonos as accurate, while maintaining the Philia sanctuary as the only federal sanctuary of Athena Itonia in Thessaly. The biggest obstacle to such an interpretation is that there is no ancient source which gives any indication that there were two cities with the name Itonos in Thessaly. I do not believe that our interpretive dilemma is severe enough to warrant such a solution. In sum, therefore, I have argued that AI13, when read in conjunction with the two Coan inscriptions discussed above, makes the following conclusions tenable: 1) A Thessalian city with the name Itonos did exist; 2) It was located in Achaia Phthiotis; 3) It was regarded, at least by the Coans, but almost certainly by the Thessalians as well, as somehow significant to the Thessalians qua ethnos or koinon; 4) A sanctuary of Athena Itonia was located nearby.

35

They still are not: One thinks of the ubiquity of mountains with the name Profitis Ilias in the Greek countryside.

81

AI14. Strabo 9.5.17 eÃsti de\ kaiì FarkadwÜn e)n tv= ¸Istiaiw¯tidi, kaiì r(eiÍ di' au)tw½n o( Phneio\j kaiì o( Koura/lioj: wÒn o( Koura/lioj r(ueiìj para\ to\ th=j ¹Itwni¿aj ¹Aqhna=j i¸ero\n ei¹j to\n

Phneio\n e)ci¿hsin.

“Pharkadon is in Hestiaiotis, and the Peneius and Kouralios flow through these places [in Hestiaiotis]: Of which two rivers, the Kouralios, 36 flowing past the hieron of Athena Itonia, empties into the Peneios…”

It is difficult to gauge the proximity of this sanctuary of Athena Itonia to the confluence of the Kouralios and Peneios. Two possibilities are open: Strabo could be describing two points that are far apart from one another (e.g., “After flowing past the great arch in St. Louis, the Mississippi River empties into the Gulf of Mexico”) or he could be describing two points that are close to one another (e.g., “After flowing past New Orleans, the Mississippi River empties into the Gulf of Mexico”). If we adopt the former reading, then it is entirely possible that Strabo here describes the Philia sanctuary. If, on the contrary, we follow the latter interpretation, then Strabo would be describing a third sanctuary of Athena Itonia in Thessaly. The following options for a reading of the two passages (AI13-14) in tandem lay open. If one assumes that there can only be one sanctuary of Athena Itonia, than it is possible to argue that Strabo is in both cases describing the sanctuary of Athena Itonia at Philia. This interpretation, favored by Kramolisch, holds that Strabo’s description of the Pharkadon temple is accurate, but that the geographer’s account of Itonos is deeply misguided. 37 36

The syntax is a little strange. One wonders whether there is some corruption in the passage. DNP v coll.1182-3 s.v. Iton: “Die Stadt [Iton] und ihr Heiligtum wurden lange wegen einer irrigen Entfernungsangabe Strabons (9.5.8) bei Halos (Achaia Phthiotis) vermutet, sind jedoch inzwischen durch Grabungen beim h. Philia, ca. 16 km. südöstlich von Karditsa ca. 10 km flussaufwärts von Kierion nachgewiesen.” 37

82

The near homonymy of the rivers (Kouarios and Kouralios) mentioned in the two passages could be seen as a mark of Strabo’s confusion. Yet, when Strabo quotes Alcaeus’ description of the temple of Athena Itonia in Boiotian Koroneia, he notes that the poet called the nearby river Kouralios instead of Kouarios (9.2.29): krath/santej de\ th=j ¹Itwni¿aj

Korwnei¿aj e)n t%½ pro\ au)th=j pedi¿% to\ th=j

¹Aqhna=j i¸ero\n i¸dru/santo o(mw¯numon t%½

Qettalik%½, kaiì

to\n pararre/onta potamo\n Koua/rion proshgo/reusan o(mofw¯nwj t%½ e)keiÍ.

¹AlkaiÍoj de\ kaleiÍ "w)=nass'

Kwra/lion le/gwn

¹Aqana/a polema/doke

aÀ poi Korwni¿aj med[ nau/w pa/roiqen a)mfi[. . . . . . .] Kwrali¿w potamw½ par' oÃxqaij." “After conquering Koroneia, in the plain before it they established a sanctuary of Athena Itonia homonymous with the Thessalian, and they called the river flowing alongside it the Kouarios, which sounds similar to the one in Thessaly. But Alcaeus calls it the Kouralios, saying: ‘Queen Athena, warlike one, who perhaps as ruler of Koroneia….in front of the temple…by the banks of the river Kouralios’” (Text and trans. Campbell). Strabo’s clear distinction between the two names in the case of Koroneia leads one to suspect that he is referring to two different rivers in the case of Thessaly. Contrary to the Kramolisch position, however, Strabo may be describing two completely different sanctuaries of Athena Itonia, one near Itonos in Achaia Phthiotis, the other either near the confluence of the Peneios and Kouralios rivers or at Philia. I suggest that this option is, on the whole, far more satisfying. Clearly, if one bases an interpretation solely on the two passages at hand, it is impossible to believe that Strabo is discussing the same location. One sanctuary, belonging to Itonos, he locates in

83

Achaia Phthiotis, the other, that of Pharkadon, Hestiaotis. The Itonos sanctuary is placed in a topography that is in every other respect precise and coherent. The Krokian plain, the Othrys massif and the locations of Halos and Phthiotic Thebes are all landmarks known to us: Strabo’s description makes perfect sense. Strabo’s reliability is a major concern to our reading of either passage. Like all ancient geographers, he is at times fallible. The overall impression in the case of Thessalian topography, however, is strong. His credibility is also enhanced by one passage which suggests a personal acquaintance with the Thessalian landscape (9.5.6): Farsa/lioi me\n deiknu/ousin a)po\ e(ch/konta stadi¿wn th=j e(autw½n po/lewj kateskamme/nhn po/lin. “The Pharsalians show a purposely-destroyed (lit. “dug out”) city 60 stadia from their own.” Although keeping open the possibility that deiknuein may derive from one of Strabo’s sources, it is nevertheless possible that this passage is one of the few places where the author gives a sense of his experience of an area. 38

AI15. Pausanias 1.13.2-3 ≈ Plut. Pyrrhus 26.9-10 ≈ Diodorus Siculus 22.11: krath/saj de\ th/n te i¹di¿an paraskeuh\n ¹Antigo/nou kaiì to\ par' au)t%½ Galatw½n ceniko\n e)di¿wcen e)j ta\j e)piì qala/ssv po/leij, au)to\j de\ Makedoni¿aj te th=j aÃnw kaiì Qessalw½n e)pekra/thse. dhloiÍ de\ ma/lista to\ me/geqoj th=j ma/xhj kaiì th\n Pu/rrou ni¿khn, w¨j para\ polu\ ge/noito, a)nateqe/nta oÀpla tw½n [te] to\ th=j

¹Aqhna=j i¸ero\n th=j

¹Itwni¿aj

Ferw½n metacu\ kaiì

Lari¿shj kaiì to\ e)pi¿gramma to\ e)p' au)toiÍj: Tou\j qureou\j o( Molosso\j 38

Dueck 2000: 23, 28.

Keltw½n e)j

¹Itwni¿di dw½ron

¹Aqa/n#

84

Pu/rroj a)po\ qrase/wn e)kre/masen

Galata=n,

pa/nta to\n ¹Antigo/nou kaqelwÜn strato/n. ou) me/ga qau=ma: ai¹xmataiì kaiì nu=n kaiì pa/roj Ai¹aki¿dai (= Theodoridas, AP 9.742). “[Pyrrhus], after overpowering the native troops of Antigonos and his Gallic mercenaries, he pursued them to the coast cities, and himself reduced upper Macedonia and the Thessalians. The extent of the fighting and the decisive character of the victory of Pyrrhus are shown best by the Celtic armour dedicated in the sanctuary of Itonian Athena between Pherai and Larisa, with this inscription on them: ‘Pyrrhus the Molossian hung these shields taken from bold Gauls as a gift to Itonian Athena, when he had destroyed all the host of Antigonus. ‘Tis no great marvel. The Aeacidae are warriors now, even as they were of old’” (Trans. Jones).

This event is also mentioned at Plutarch, Pyrrh. 26.9.10, and Diodorus Siculus 22.11, who agree that the dedication took place in a sanctuary of Athena Itonia, but do not say where. In the era before the discovery of the Philia temenos, a number of scholars argued that Pausanias was actually discussing the sanctuary at Itonos known from Strabo: They suggested that when Pausanias wrote Larisa, he really meant Larisa Cremaste, a settlement on the southern coast of Achaia Phthiotis. 39 If Pausanias meant the putative Itoneion at Itonos, though, there were available a number of better ways to describe this location than “between Pherai and Larisa.” Possible options include: “near Itonos,” or, if e.g. Itonos was no longer extant, “near the Krokian plain,” “between Phthiotic Thebes and Halos,” “at the foot of Othrys.” Even for Pausanias, the phrase “between Pherai and Larisa [Cremaste]” is circuitous and makes little topographic sense: The two cities are not a natural, or even a forced, pair.

39

E.g., Lévêque 1957: 566ff.

85

If we are not compelled by the assumption that there could only be one sanctuary of Athena Itonia in Thessaly, then there is no need to collapse the passages of Pausanias and Strabo. In a recent treatment of Pausanias’ topographic accuracy, Pritchett has compiled a catalogue of 58 of the gravest topographical errors allegedly perpetrated by the periegete: He is able to defend Pausanias in all but four cases. 40 We know that Pausanias visited Larisa—h)/kousa de\ kai\ a)/llon e)n Lari/shi lo/gon (9.30.9)—and at several other points in the text he refers to Thessalian issues. 41 Given the incomplete character of the narrative as it has been transmitted, it is possible that he even planned a separate section on the region that he was unable to complete. There is therefore no reason to doubt Pausanias’ testimony on this matter: On the contrary, the evidence would suggest that his testimony is to be privileged.

AI16. Polyaenus 2.34 ...e(orth=j ouÃshj tw½n kaloume/nwn

¹Itwni¿wn, e)n v pa/ntej

Krannw¯n

ioi pai¿zousin, a)nami¿caj toiÍj e)n tv= po/lei fu/laci tou\j a)po\ th=j po/lewj telw¯naj kaiì nh/fontaj e)pisth/saj oi¹nwme/noij plei¿ouj xili¿wn poli¿taj a)poktei¿naj tu/rannoj

Krannwni¿wn e)ge/neto.

“During the festival of the so-called Itonia, which all of the people of Krannon celebrate, Deinias merged his troops in the city with the tax-collectors from the city, and by opposing sober to inebriated men, he killed more than 1,000 citizens and became tyrant of the Krannonians” (Trans. Krentz and Wheeler).

40

Pritchett 1998-1999: 2.162. Pritchett found that the majority of these errors could be attributed either to alluviation in the landscape or lacunae within the text. 41 Other references to Thessaly: 6.5.2, 7.27.6.

86

Polyaenus’ account of Deinias’ seizure of tyrrany at Thessalian Krannon offers some basic features of local Itonia. At least some of the celebration took place within the polis. All of the people of Krannon are said to have participated. Drunkenness was a notable feature of the event. Yet, these activities, like Callimachus’ contests, could well characterize any number of Greek festivals. It is rather more likely that the mention of the Itonia is an ethnographic detail that marks the setting as specifically Thessalian for Polyaenus’ imperial audience.

Numismatic Evidence The figure of Athena has been identified on numerous Thessalian issues. 42 Although never specifically identified on the coinage by an inscription as Itonia, the figure of Athena as promachos—striding forward with shield and spear—has been recognized as Itonia on the early bronze and silver coinage of the reorganized Thessalian League (ca. 196a-0). 43 In imperial times she is less common, though still prominent. 44

Archaeological Evidence Giannopoulos’ discovery of a fragmentary decree of the Thessalian koinon and an Archaic bronze figurine in the area of Philia in the 1920s led him to suspect that an archaeological site of some significance lay waiting to be discovered in the vicinity. 45 Thorough excavation did not begin until Theocharis’ work in the 1960s. 46 It was

42

Moustaka 1983: 25-30. SNG Thessaly pl. 6-7, nos. 269-328. 44 Burrer 1993: 50. 45 Giannopoulos 1927-8a; Giannopoulos 1927-8b. 46 Theocharis 1961-62; Theocharis 1963; Theocharis 1964; Theocharis 1965; Theocharis 1967. PilaliPapasteriou and Papaefthymiou-Papanthimou 1983 represents an attempt in the early 1980s to clarify the relationship of the Mycenaean material the Geometric. The Iron Age remains have recently been reconsidered at Georganas 2002. 43

87

immediately apparent from the condition of the site that looters and treasure-hunters had confirmed Giannopoulos’ predictions. What remained was nevertheless impressive: Large numbers of weapons and fibulae of both bronze and iron, as well as other prestige votives including tripods and obeloi. 47 The votive patterns of the Archaic period were apparently maintained into the Hellenistic period, although the overall quantity of material drops off. It appears that both votives for dedication within the sanctuary as well as objects for daily use outside the sanctuary were produced. 48 The sanctuary seems therefore to have been implicated in a broader regional economy from a very early date. 49 Extant architecture is scarce. The earliest architectural fragments on site are roof tiles which belong to the Classical period. Remains of a stoa of Hellenistic date are present. There is evidence for continued use of the site into the later Roman period including a pair of inscriptions dated to 200-250p that record honors awarded to two men by the Thessalian koinon. 50 Only a relatively small area in Philia has been excavated and we must be cautious in how we evaluate absences in the archaeological record at Philia. Athough there is as yet no evidence for a temple or temenos wall, this does not mean that the sanctuary lacked both of these architectural forms. Similarly, although there is as yet no evidence of a nearby settlement, we cannot exclude the possibility that there was one. The basis for associating the sanctuary with Athena Itonia consists of a near certain restoration of an inscription found during Theocharis’ excavations, AI1. 51 Athena’s presence in the sanctuary is uncontroversial. Habicht’s restoration of [th=i ¹Itwni¿a]i is based to a large degree on other ancient evidence which 47

The small finds have been collected and interpreted in a recent catalogue: Kilian-Dirlmeier 2002. Risberg 1992. 49 Morgan 2003: 119. 50 SEG 37.492-493 (= Habicht 1987a). 51 SEG 26.688 (= Habicht 1976a). 48

88

associates Athena Itonia and Thessaly or, more specifically, suggests a relationship between Athena Itonia and the Thessalian koinon. AI2 is further epigraphic evidence for a connection between Athena Itonia and the federal league.

Discussion Kramolisch’s insistence that there was only one sanctuary of Athena Itonia in Thessaly and that it belonged to the koinon of the Thessalians is misguided. 52 His arguments in support of this claim are based on often tendentious readings of Strabo and Pausanias and a corresponding overvaluation of the archaeological evidence from Philia. Although it is rarely explicitly stated, such skepticism of the literary sources on this matter has been fueled at least in part by a long-standing assumption that Archaic ethne and their Classical and Hellenistic counterparts, koina, had a solitary, rural shrine that served as the ethnic or federal sanctuary. For example, Ehrenberg suggested that “the unity of the tribe remained alive and generally acknowledged, particularly when supported by a common centre of worship of the tribal god” and that “primitive and loose political forms (as in Thessaly, etc.) were transformed into a closer union, to a ‘Koinon’ which, like the tribal state, was often bound to a common shrine…” 53 In perhaps the most trenchant modern description of the ethnos, Snodgrass has written that the ethnos was characterized by “worshipping a tribal deity at a common religious centre.” 54 More recently and with specific reference to Thessaly,

52

My argument that there were multiple sanctuaries of Athena Itonia in Thessaly is not the first. Cf. Kilian-Dirlmeier 2002: 1n. 5, for references to the publications of Müller, Dümmler and Helly. Add E. Meyer, DKP ii s.v. Iton col. 1491 (1967). 53 Ehrenberg 1969: 23, 120. 54 Snodgrass 1980: 42. While the critical lexicon of the ethnos is thankfully undergoing revision— “tribes” and “tribalism” are less often used to discuss these social forms—some fundamental misconceptions about the relationship of cult and ethnos remain. It may be a false step to even speak of the ethnos as a unitary phenomenon.

89

Robert Parker has claimed: “Again it seems highly likely that though Philia does not enter our records as capitol of the federal state of Thessaly until the second century BC it had been the symbolic heart of the Thessalian ethnos since very early times.” 55 In the preceding, I have argued that the existence of a single sanctuary of Athena Itonia in Thessaly is nothing more than a bare possibility. The evidence suggesting multiple Thessalian sanctuaries of the goddess is, on the other hand, substantial and not easily explained away. I leave open the question about multiple federal Itonia sanctuaries: I will only caution against allowing modern typologies of federal/non-federal space to exercise too great an influence on how we interpret the ancient evidence. It is entirely possible that a second sanctuary of Athena Itonia could be constructed as a federal space: We need not imagine that this was a permanent condition of the sanctuary except in the sense that many spaces in Thessaly had the permanent potential to be constructed in such a way. The literary and material evidence suggests that there were as many as four different sanctuaries of Athena Itonia in Thessaly. I list them again in descending order of plausibility: 1) Philia; 2) Itonos; 3) “between Pherai and Larisa”; 4) on the Kouralios River (= Philia?). The members of the group share a number of important features. Three of the four sanctuaries are characterized by their extra-mural setting. The sanctuary at Philia lies at a great distance from the closest known settlement, Kierion. While Strabo is unclear about the topographic relationship of the sanctuary of Athena Itonia and the settlement of Itonos, he situates the Pharkadon temple in relation to natural features of the landscape, not within the walls of a city. Finally,

55

Parker 1998: 19. In the same paragraph, however, Parker proceeds to mention more complicated cases than “the simple pattern” of, e.g., Thessaly and Aitolia: “ethne with more than one religious centre, ethne with none at all of their own but gathering at a borrowed site, ethne whose political assemblies had become detached from their sacred centres, and so on.” I hope to have demonstrated that Thessaly is in fact one of these more complicated cases. That Aitolia is not a simple case either has been argued by Mackil 2003.

90

Pausanias describes Pyrrhus’ dedication of captured shields as taking place at a sanctuary between Pherai and Larisa. Two of the four sanctuaries are characterized by the dedication of weapons. There is evidence for both the manufacture and dedication of weapons at the Philia sanctuary. The literary images of Athena Itonia as both warrior (e.g., Pausanias 10.1.10, Etym. Magn. s.v. Iton) and craftsman (AI3, AI7) complement Philia’s material record. Pyrrhus dedicated armor at the Itonia sanctuary between Larisa and Pherai. We are less well-informed about the Itonos and Pharkadon sanctuaries on this account. Leonidas’ epigram offers another instance of the dedication of spoils from battle to Thessalian Itonia. Three of the four sanctuaries were also clearly foci of international activity. While Pyrrhus liked to link himself to the indigenous rulers of Phthia, the Aiakidai, he was king of Epirus when he made his dedication. It is impossible to know where in Itonos the Ceans made their announcement of the Asklepeia, but it is a reasonable assumption that this took place at the Itoneion located nearby. Although there is no explicit international activity at the Philia sanctuary, its presence may be suggested by the great numbers of votive objects of foreign provenance which are present at the sanctuary from the Geometric period. Some final observations. First, if the late date of our literary sources is any indication, the sacred landscape of Roman Thessaly may have been more full than previously imagined. Second, more speculatively, if in fact there were four different sanctuaries of Athena Itonia in Thessaly, then their geographic distribution would be extremely suggestive. Three of the four tetrads (Pelasgiotis, “between Larisa and Pherai,” AI15; Thessaliotis, Philia, AI1; Hestiaotis, at the confluence of the Kouralios and Peneios, AI14) would have their own sanctuary of Athena Itonia, while the fourth, Phthiotis, whose relationship with bordering Achaia Phthiotis has always been less

91

well-defined than that of the remaining perioikoi with the tetrads, could have had access to the Itonos sanctuary. Perhaps Aleuas the Red’s institution of the tetrads, about which we are meagerly informed, assumed a cultic dimension. Finally, for all of the argument about the federal importance of the Philia sanctuary and the federal/non-federal status of other Thessalian sanctuaries, it must be remembered that Philia played a powerful role at the sub-regional, sub-koinonic level as well. SEG 37.494 (230-200a), a text which establishes sympoliteia between two cities of western Thessaly, Gomphi and Thamiai, was found in Philia during Theocharis’ excavations. 56 If it was originally set up in the sanctuary of Athena Itonia, as seems probable despite SEG’s stated provenance of Metropolis, than it would be the earliest epigraphic testimony from the site. Perhaps the other Thessalian sanctuaries of Athena Itonia played a similar role in their respective settings.

4.2: Zeus Eleutherios at Larisa

Introduction Zeus was worshipped as Eleutherios in Thessaly at Larisa, where inscriptions reveal that he had a federal sanctuary which may have served as a counterweight to the federal Athena Itonia sanctuary near Philia. While Zeus Eleutherios was worshipped at a variety of different locations in the Greek world, the circumstances surrounding the institution of his cult were in each case predominantly local and typically involved the reacquisition of political e)leuqeri/a.

56

Ed. pr. Theocharis 1963. Cf. now Helly 1993.

92

A brief review of the literary, epigraphic and numismatic evidence for other cults of Zeus Eleutherios in the Greek world will provide a useful context for my discussion of the Thessalian evidence. 57 1) Samos, 522a. Our only source for this cult is Herodotus 3.142: ¹Epeidh\ ga/r oi¸ e)chgge/lqh o( Prw½ta me\n Dio\j

Polukra/teoj qa/natoj, e)poi¿ee toia/de.

¹Eleuqeri¿ou bwmo\n i¸dru/sato kaiì te/menoj periì

au)to\n ouÃrise tou=to to\ nu=n e)n t%½ proastei¿% e)sti¿. “For when the death of Polykrates had been announced to him (Maiandrios), he did the following things. First, he built an altar of Zeus Eleutherios and marked out a temenos about it which is visible even today in the suburbs.” News of the death of the tyrant Polykrates is greeted with the establishment of a cult of Zeus Eleutherios. Raaflaub, challenging Herodotus’ chronology, has recently argued that this cult could not have been established before 479 “when Samos was liberated from both Persian and tyrannical rule.” 58 2) Plataia, 479a. 59 There are a number of important literary sources concerned with the establishment of this cult. The earliest is Thucydides 2.71.2 where the Plataians argue that the Spartans in 429/8a are not acting in a manner worthy of their forbears by plotting an assault on Plataea: Pausani¿aj ga\r o( Kleombro/tou Lakedaimo/nioj e)leuqerw¯saj th\n ¸Ella/da a)po\ tw½n Mh/dwn meta\

¸Ellh/nwn tw½n e)qelhsa/ntwn

cuna/rasqai to\n ki¿ndunon th=j ma/xhj hÁ par' h(miÍn e)ge/neto, qu/saj e)n tv= Plataiw½n a)gor#= i¸era\ Diiì

57

)Eleuqeri¿% kaiì cugkale/saj

This is not an exhaustive catalogue, but a cross-section of illustrative examples. Raaflaub 2004: 111. 59 Cf., in particular, Schachter 1981-: 3.125ff. 58

93

pa/ntaj tou\j cumma/xouj a)pedi¿dou Plataieu=si gh=n kaiì po/lin th\n sfete/ran eÃxontaj au)tono/mouj oi¹keiÍn, strateu=sai¿ te mhde/na pote\ a)di¿kwj e)p' au)tou\j mhd' e)piì doulei¿#: “For Pausanias, son of Kleombrotos, a Spartan, after freeing Hellas from the Medes together with those Hellenes who were willing to undertake the risk of the battle which was upon us, sacrificed victims in the agora of the Plataians to Zeus Eleutherios and after calling together all of the allies he restored to the Plataians their own territory and city to inhabit, being autonomous, claiming that no one was to attack them ever with unjust purpose nor to enslave them” (Trans. Crawley). It is unclear whether Pausanias actually founded a cult of Zeus Eleutherios in the agora of Plataia following the defeat of the Persians, but it is a likely inference and, at the very least, his personal performance of cult is clear. Pausanias (9.2.5-6) is familiar with an altar and cult image of Zeus Eleutherios as well as the Eleutheria. Although he does not explicitly connect any of these monuments or contests with the Persian War, a discussion of the graves of Greeks who died in the battle at Plataia immediately precedes his description of the altar and cult image. 3) Athens, post 479a. 60 An altar, statue and stoa were dedicated to Zeus Eleutherios in the Athenian agora. The construction history of the site is complex, but it is probable that the complex began to be specifically associated with Zeus as Eleutherios following the Persian Wars. 4) Syracuse, 466/5a. Diodorus Siculus 11.72 offers the following description of the cult of Zeus Eleutherios in Syracuse following the removal of the tyrant Thrasyboulus:

60

Rosivach 1978; Rosivach 1987.

94

katalu/santej th\n Qrasubou/lou turanni¿da sunh/gagon e)kklhsi¿an, kaiì periì th=j i¹di¿aj dhmokrati¿aj bouleusa/menoi pa/ntej o(mognwmo/nwj e)yhfi¿santo Dio\j me\n )Eleuqeri¿ou kolottiaiÍon a)ndria/nta kataskeua/sai, kat' e)niauto\n de\ qu/ein

)Eleuqe/ria kaiì

a)gw½naj e)pifaneiÍj poieiÍn kata\ th\n au)th\n h(me/ran, e)n v to\n tu/rannon katalu/santej h)leuqe/rwsan th\n patri¿da: qu/ein d' e)n toiÍj a)gw½si toiÍj qeoiÍj tau/rouj tetrakosi¿ouj kaiì penth/konta, kaiì tou/touj dapana=n ei¹j th\n tw½n politw½n eu)wxi¿an. “After overthrowing the tyranny of Thrasyboulos, they assembled the ekklesia and, after conferring on the matter of their own democracy, all of them with a single mind voted both to make a colossal statue of Zeus Eleutherios and to sacrifice annually at the Eleutheria and to perform conspicuous games on the very day when, after overthrowing the tyrant, they freed their fatherland, and [they voted] to sacrifice, at the games, 450 bulls to the gods, and to provide the bulls for the merriment of the citizens” 5-9) Aetna, Agyrium, Alaesa, Eryx, Syracuse, 344-316a. 5-9) are attested numismatically and can be connected with the expedition of Timoleon. 61 While it is unclear whether the presence of Zeus Eleutherios on these coins reflects the establishment of cult in each of these locations or is merely a political symbol, one can note the historical similarity between Timoleon’s “freeing” of the Sicilian cities from tyrants and the establishment of cults of Zeus Eleutherios after both the fall of Thrasybulus in mid-fifth-century Syracuse and Polykrates’ demise on Samos. Common to the institution of each of these of cults of Zeus Eleutherios is the removal of threats to a community’s autonomy and prominent modern interpretations

61

Cf. Karlsson 1995; Castrizio 2002; Garraffo 1976-7. A minority view that some of these are to be connected with Dion (e.g., Cammarata 1984) has been convincingly refuted by Karlsson.

95

of the figure of Zeus Eleutherios have stressed his connection to the reacquisition of social and political order following a period of turbulence. Farnell emphasized the political significance of the cult of Zeus Eleutherios by stressing the Hellenic focus of the Plataia cult while recognizing that the figure was also prominent at the level of city-state (e.g., upon regaining freedom from tyrannical forces).62 Nilsson included the celebration of the Eleutheria in Larisa in his discussion of political festivals of Zeus, but did not discuss the cult in any detail. He later used the foundation of the cult of Zeus Eleutherios at Plataia following the defeat of the Persians as evidence for Zeus’ function as defender of the familial order and, by extension, the political freedom of the state. 63 Wilamowitz only briefly mentioned the establishment of the Athenian cult of Zeus Eleutherios after the Persian War as an illustration of Zeus’ ability to defend the weak against the hybris of the more powerful. 64 On the matter of the origin of the cult of Zeus Eleutherios in Larisa, scholars are unified: It was established in response to the removal of Macedonian hegemony over Thessaly accomplished by T. Quinctius Flamininus following the Second Macedonian War. 65 Although this analysis makes good intuitive sense and, as we have seen, there are numerous parallels throughout the Greek world, there is no positive literary or material evidence which supports or contradicts this hypothesis. 66 At the very least, such an assertion begs a crucial question which I will attempt to answer in 62

Farnell 1895-1909: 61-3. Nilsson 1961-1967: 1.417-8. 64 Wilamowitz-Moellendorf 1956: 2.172. 65 Preuner 1903: 372, “Die Eleutherien können frühestens im Jahre 196 v. Chr. Zum ersten Male gefeiert worden sein.” SIG3 613 n. 11: “cf. Niese III 197: ‘ Die in Larisa eingesetzten Eleutherien [sc. a. 196] feierten die Römer als Befreier.’” Kramolisch 1978: 86, “Die Eleutherien wurden zum Gedenken an die Freierklärung von Korinth im Jahr 196 als penteterische panhellenische Spiele in Larisa veranstaltet.” More recently, cf. Gallis 1988: 218, “The Eleutheria, or ‘Liberation Festival,” was initiated in 196 B.C., a year after the Macedonian king Philip V, under whose influence Thessaly was at that time, was defeated by the Romans in the battle of Kynoskephalai, an event considered to be the start of the liberation of Thessaly from Macedonian rule.” 66 An intriguing parallel may be offered by the worship of the emperor Nero as Zeus Eleutherios following his imitation of Flamininus’ Isthmian declaration. Cf. Rosivach 1987: 277-8. 63

96

the following section of this chapter. How did Greeks respond to Flamininus’ defeat of Philip at Kynoskephalai and his subsequent proclamation of Greek freedom at Isthmia?

The Greek Reaction to Flamininus 67 Flamininus’ proclamation of freedom for a number of Greek ethne at the Isthmian Games of 196 occupies a central position in many standard historical narratives of the period. But what would this statement have meant to a Thessalian audience? The rhetoric of the proclamation has been well explored by Walsh who emphasized the ubiquity of the sentiment in the Hellenistic world, 68 including dynasts who proclaimed freedom for those they were about to invade with astonishing regularity. Indeed, Antiochus III invaded mainland Greece not even a full decade following Flamininus’ proclamation with the intention of freeing Greece. There is every reason to believe that Flamininus’ proclamation would have been received cautiously by the Greeks so implicated, despite the enthusiasm recorded in Plutarch, Polybius and Livy. They had heard such sentiments many times before. This did not stop Greek cities and leagues from honoring Flamininus, however. I summarize below the most conspicuous literary and material evidence for honors awarded to Flamininus by Greek cities and leagues. 1) Panopeus (Phokis), IIa. Ed. pr. Klaffenbach 1971 [po/]l?ij Fa?[note/wn Ti/ton Ti/tou] [Kou]i+/nti[on stratago\n u(/paton] 67

For an overview of Flamininus’ career, cf. Nilsson 1961-1967: 2.178; RE xxiv s.v. Quinctius no. 45 (Gundel: 1963). 68 Walsh 1996.

97

[a(g]n?o/tht[oj e(/neken to\n au)ta=j] [eu)]erge/t[an]. “The city of the Phanoteans [dedicates a statue of] Titus, son of Titus, Quinctius, consul, because of his integrity, benefactor of the city” Statue base. The stone is heavily, if plausibly, restored on the basis of IG v.1 1165. Livy, describing the events of 198a, may offer a context for the honor (32.18.6): primo impetus Phanoteam sine certamine cepit. 2) Delphi. Plutarch, Flam. 12, mentions Flamininus’ dedications at Delphi, which most likely date to 197/6a. There is substantial evidence for Delphian reciprocation. The preserved head of a marble portrait statue has been identified with Flamininus on the basis of his portrait found on his gold staters: Chamoux has dated the honor to 198-4a on the basis of historical context. 69 The Delphians also awarded Flamininus proxeny, most likely in 189/8a, while he was censor in Rome. 70 An inscribed base for a bronze statue, SIG3 616, is often associated with this honor: [a( po/lij] tw½n

Del[fw½n

Ti¿ton Koi¿+gk]t?ion Ti¿tou [ui¸o\n

¸Rw-

maiÍon a)ret]a=j [eÀn]eken? [kaiì eu)ergesi¿aj ta=j ei¹j au)t]a\n ¹A[po/llwni] “The city of the Delphians [dedicates a statue of] Titus Quinctius, son of Titus, Roman, to Apollo because of his virtue and benefactions to the city” 3) Gythion. Two inscriptions record honors awarded to Titus by the Gythians. The first, SIG3 592 (195a), is a statue base: Ti¿ton

69 70

Ti¿tou

Chamoux 1965. SIG3 585.116.

Koi¿+gktion stratago\n uÀpaton

¸Rw-

98

mai¿wn o( da=moj o( Guqeata=n to\n au(tou= swth=ra. “The demos of the Gythians [dedicates a statue of] Titus, son of Titus, Quinctius, consul of the Romans, their saviour” The honor recognized Titus’ role in freeing the Gythians from Nabis. 71 A second inscription of the imperial period, ca. 15p, specifies that a day during a festival of the imperial cult is to be in honor of Titus. 72 4) Chalkis. Plutarch, Flam. 16.5-17.1, mentions several honors previously awarded to Titus which were still being observed in the second century CE. These include: the dedication of a gymnasium to Titus and Herakles; the dedication of a Delphinion to Titus and Apollo; the institution of cult in honor of Titus with an elected priesthood, sacrifice, libations and a paian. Plutarch connects these honors with Titus’ intervention on behalf of the Chalkidians with the consul Manius in 191a who intended to punish them for their support of Antiochus III’s invasion of Greece. A statue base of imperial date confirms Plutarch’s testimony about Titus’ relationship with the gymnasium in Chalkis and, in general, verifies Plutarch’s claims about the longevity of these honors: IG xii.9 931 ¹Aristo/maxoj ¹Aristoklei¿dou, ¹Amfikra/th[j] Eu)runo/mou Ti¿twi Swth=ri kaiì eu)erge/thi gumnasiarxh/santej.

71 72

Dittenberger ad loc. SEG 11.923 = Kougeas 1928a, Kougeas 1928b.

99

“Aristomachos son of Aristokleides, Amphikrates son of Eurynomos, after serving as gymnasiarchs, [dedicated] to Titus, saviour and benefactor.” 5) Eretria, IIa IG xii.9 233 [® ®] e)?linu/ein kaiì qu/[ein] [kaiì stefanhforeiÍn ¹EretrieiÍj pa/nta]j e)piì toiÍj ge[ge-] [nhme/noij® ® kaiì sth=sai Ti¿to]n uÀpaton

¸Rwm?[ai¿-]

[wn® ®e)n tw½i naw½i th=j ¹A]rte/midoj [® ®] “…(and let) [every Eretrian] celebrate and sacrifice and [wear garlands] on account of these [events…and erect in the sanctuary of A]rtemis (a statue of) Titus, consul of the Romans…” This heavily restored inscription records honors which may be specifically associated with the removal of Eretria, one of Philip’s fetters of Greece, from Macedonian control and their subsequent freedom. 73 For another possible Eretrian inscription honoring Flamininus, cf. SEG 41.729. 6) Kos, 198-194a Habicht 2002 = Ed. pr. Paton and Hicks 1891, no. 128 [o( da=moj] ÙÛTÚi¿ÙtÙoÙn ÙÛTÚi¿ÙtÙoÙu ÙÛKÙoÚi¿+ÙgÙ?[t]ÙoÙn, [strat]ÙaÙgÙo\Ùn ÙuÀÙpÙaÙtÙoÙn [ ¸Rwmai¿w]Ùn, Ùa)ÙrÙeÙtÙa=Ùj ÙeÀÙnÙeÙkÙa [kaiì] kaloka)]ÙaÙqÚi¿ÙaÙj ÙtÙa=Ùj ÙeÚi¹Ùj ÙaÙu(ÙtÙo\Ùn [kaiì to\j s]umm?Ùa/ÙxÙoÙj ÙkÙaÚiì ÙtÙo\Ùj [a)/lloj àE]llaÙnÙaÙj [Nik]o/maxoj Parm?[eni/skou e)poi/hsen] “The demos [dedicated a statue of] Titus, son of Titus, Quinctius, consul, because 73

Cf. Polyb. 18.45.5-6, 18.47.10-11; Liv. 33.34.10.

100

of virtue and kalokagathia towards the demos and the allies and the remaining Greeks. Nikomachos, son of Parmeniskos, made [it].” Statue base. There is no evidence that Titus visited Kos or that there was any special relationship between them. 74 7) Corinth (Achaian League), 196/5a? SEG 22.214 = Ed. pr. Bousquet 1964 Ti¿ton [Ti¿tou

Koi¿+gktion

¸RwmaiÍon]

¹Ari¿stain[oj Timoka/deoj DumaiÍoj] a)reta=j eÀne[ka kaiì eu)ergesi¿aj ta=j] eiãj te au([to\n kaiì tou\j ¹Axaiou/j]. “Aristainos son of Timokades from Dyme [dedicated a statue of] Titus, son of Titus, Quinctius, because of virtue and benefactions towards him and the Achaians.” Inscribed base of a statue dedicated by Aristainos, strategos of the Achaian League. 8) Argos. Daux 1964 noticed a contest named Titeia in an Argive decree of ca. 100a (l. 16): ei)j to\n a)gw=na tw=n Titei/[wn] “...in the agon of the Titeia...” The Argive honors were almost certainly a response to Flamininus’ proclamation of specifically Argive freedom at the Nemean Games in 195a. 75 9) Skotussa (Thessaly), 194a or 189/8a? SEG 23.412 = Ed. pr. Mastrokostas 1964: 309-310, no. 2a [P]rau/+loj [T]i¿ton

Foci¿nou

Ti¿tou

Koi¿+nktion

[a)]reth=j eÀneken kaiì eu)noi¿aj [t]h=j ei¹j au(to\n kaiì ei¹j th\n po/lin. “Praulos, son of Poxinos, [dedicated a statue of] Titus, son of Titus, Quinctius,

74 75

Habicht 2002. Liv. 34.41.3.

101

because of virtue and good-will towards him and towards the city.” Base of a statue dedicated by Praulos, who served as strategos of the Thessalian League in 190/89a. The corpus of epigraphic and literary evidence assembled above is in some respects striking. For the most part, cities and leagues do not seem to have honored Flamininus in thanksgiving for his Isthmian proclamation. The strongest candidates for recognition of the Ithmian proclamation are the honors awarded by Kos and the Achaian League. The other honors, especially those of Panopeus, Delphi, Gythion, Chalkis, Argos and Skotussa, seem to have responded to far more local concerns and recognized Flamininus’ direct, personal intervention. In the case of Thessaly, it is difficult to know whether the Eleutheria emerged solely as a response to their newfound freedom following Kynoskephalai or whether other factors were in play. The Roman settlement of Thessaly does seem to have stabilized the region in a productive and enduring fashion. An important inscription recording a senatus consultum on the matter of the border between Narthakion and Melitaea suggests that Flamininus was perceived as the prime mover in the settlement even fifty years after the fact (IG ix.2 89 B48-54: c. 140a?): k?[a] periì th=j xw¯raj kaiì tw½n i¸erw½n krithri¿oij [nen]ikhk[e/-] nai kata\ no/mouj tou\j

Qessalw½n, oiâÙj n?[o/-]

moij eÀ?wj ta?[n]u=n xrw½ntai, o[uÁ]j no/mouj Ti¿toj Koi¿+gktioj uÀpatoj a)po\ th=j tw½n de/ÙkÙa Ùpresbeutw½n gnw¯mhj eÃdwken kaiì kata\ do/gmÙa sugklh/tou, “…And concerning the land and the sanctuaries, [the Narthakians claimed] that they had been victorious [in court] in accordance with the laws of the Thessalians, laws

102

which they use up to the present, laws which Titus Quinctus [Flamininus], consul, gave, after consultation with the Ten Commissioners and in accordance with a decree of the senate…” 76 Even though Thessaly would face invasion from Antiochus III shortly after the Roman victory at Kynoskephalai and her relations with Macedonia would deteriorate in the 180s, it is indeed plausible that the Eleutheria were inaugurated in commemoration of their “freedom” from Macedonian rule in 197a and may even have included praise of Flamininus like that accorded to him by the people of Chalkis. This freedom should be connected with the direct interventions of Flamininus in Thessalian affairs, however, not its mere proclamation at Isthmia. While the decision of the Thessalians had a number of good precedents, it is slightly unsettling that this second federal cult of the Thessalians also has a Boiotian parallel—the Eleutheria celebrated at Plataia in commemoration of the Greek victory in the Persian Wars. As is well known, the Thessalians, conspicuous Medizers, fought against the Greek forces in the decisive battle at Plataia. It is tempting to speculate that the Thessalians celebrated not only their own freedom in their Eleutheria, but indeed recast themselves as instrumental in the new autonomy of what was once Macedonianoccupied Greece. AG 16.5, an elegy of Alcaeus, offers some support for this interpretation, for it links the ideology of Titus’ liberation of the Greeks with the Persian Wars: ãAgage kaiì

Ce/rchj

Pe/rsan strato\n

¸Ella/doj e)j ga=n,

kaiì Ti¿toj eu)rei¿aj aÃgag' a)p' ¹Itali¿aj: a)ll' o( me\n

Eu)rw¯p# dou=lon zugo\n au)xe/ni qh/swn

hÅlqen, o( d' a)mpau/swn ¸Ella/da doulosu/naj.

76

Trans. Sherk, with some modification.

103

“Xerxes led a Persian army to Greece and Titus led [an army] from broad Italy; The one came to place a slave’s yoke on Europe’s neck, the other to release Greece from servitude.”

Epigraphic Evidence 77 ZE1. Delphi, 186-184a SIG3 613; Cf. SEG 37.393bis; BE 1970: 314; BE 1971: 362; BE 1988: 662 a)nagoreu=sai de\ kaiì e)n toiÍj ¹Eleuqeri¿oij e)n tw½i gumnikw½i a)gw½ni, oÁn tiqe/asi oi¸ [Qe]ttaloi¿. “…[let it be decided by the Amphictyons] to announce [these honors] also at the Eleutheria in the gymnic contests, which the Thessalians celebrate.”

Amphictyonic honors for Nikostratos, son of Anaxippos, from Larisa, who served as a hieromnemon for the Thessalians to the Delphic Amphictyony and moreover was an Amphictyonic envoy to the Roman senate. This is the earliest certain reference to the Eleutheria. It is significant that at this early date the festival is recognized as being under the authority of the Thessalians.

ZE2. Larisa, 180-170a (Kramolisch) IG ix.2 525 a)gwnoqetou=ntoj tw½n

Qessal[w½n]

¹Androsqe/nou tou= ¹Italou= Gurtwni¿ou?

2

oi¸ nenikhko/tej ta\ ¹Eleuqe/ria

77

Dates listed as “(Kramolisch)” are based on the chronology of Hellenistic strategoi of the Thessalian League in Kramolisch 1978.

104

“When Androsthenes, son of Italos, from Gyrton, was agonothete of the Thessalians, the victors at the Eleutheria were…”

Marble stele. Preamble to a victor list of the Eleutheria. Androsthenes is recorded as strategos of the Thessalian League in 188/7a at Eusebius 115. 78 While it is not known if he would have held the office of League strategos and League agonothete at the same time, Kramolisch points out the similarity of the agonothetic dating formula to the more common strategos formula, e.g., IG ix.2 507 1 (Larisa: ca. 130a) strathgou=ntoj tw½n Qessalw½n Pol[l]i¿xou [tou= ® ® ]. 79 The events of this festival will be discussed below.

ZE3. Larisa, “um die Mitte des 2. Jh. [ante]” (Kramolisch) IG ix.2 508 19-30, 46-9 s]unfronti¿sai de\ kaiì tou\j k[h/-] [rukaj tou= koinou=], oÀtan o( a)gwÜn tw½n

¹Eleuqe[ri¿wn]

20

[suntel]h=?tai e)piì th=j a)gwnoqesi¿aj th=j mellou/[shj] [® ® ® ®]ton sunteleiÍsqai, [oÀpwj] aÄn a)nagoreu/s[w-] [sin e)n tw½]i a)gw½ni oÀti to\ koino\n

Qessalw½n stefanoiÍ [xru-]

[sw½i stef]a/nwi to/n te dh=mon to\n Milhsi¿wn kaiì tou\j [di-] k[asta\j] ou[j

Pellhna?[iÍ]on

K . . . . ou,

Kau/nion

Milh]si¿ouj, kaiì to\n grammate/a au)tw½n

¸Hra?[klei¿]tou

¹Aristo[klei¿-]

Fi¿lt[hn]

Milh/sion qallou= stefa/nwi, iàna hÅi s[um-]

fan[e/j], dio/ti Qessaloiì tou\j kalou\j kaiì a)gaqou\[j] t<w½>n [a)]n[d]rw½n e)pi¿s[t]antai taiÍj kataci¿aij xa/[risin]

78 79

26

Cf. LGPN iii.B s.v. ¹Androsqe/nhj 4. Kramolisch 1978: 50 n.40.

105

tima=n ktl.

30 oÀpwj a)n[agrafh=i]

46

to\ [yh/fisma to/de] ei¹j ki¿ona l[i]qi¿nhn kaiì {ai} a)na[teqh=i] [e)n

Lari¿shi ® e)n] tw½i teme/nei tou=

Dio\j tou= [)Eleuqe-]

[ri¿ou--] ktl. “Let the kerukes of the koinon jointly see to it that, whenever the contest of the Eleutheria is celebrated during the next agonothetic term….be celebrated, it be announced at the contest that the Thessalian League crowns with a gold crown the demos of the Milesians and the judges Pellenaios son of K…, Kaunios son of Aristokles, Milesians, and with a laurel crown their secretary Philtes son of Herakleitos, a Milesian, so that it be manifest that the Thessalians know how to honor good and worthy men with fitting honors…” “…that the decree be written up on a stone stele and erected in Larisa in the temenos of Zeus Eleutherios…”

Marble stele. Kramolisch offers a date in the middle of the second century on the basis of prosopography. The inscription is a decree of the Thessalian League honoring judges from Miletus and their secretary. The importance of the festival to the Thessalian League is clear, as is the presence of a sanctuary in Larisa.

ZE4. Larisa, 150-130a SEG 34.558 = Ed pr. Gallis 1976: 176-8 (ph.) fronti¿[sai de\ t]ou\j koinou\j aÃrxontaj iàna ge/nhtai h( a)nagrafh\ tou/[tou t]ou= yhfi¿smatoj ei¹j ki¿ona liqi¿nhn kaiì a)nateqv= e)n [s]ai e)n tw½i teme/nei tou=

Dio\j tou=

¹Eleuqeri¿ou

Lari¿-

106

“Let the common archons see to it that a copy of this decree be inscribed on a stone stele and set up in Larisa in the temenos of Zeus Eleutherios”

Large marble stele. Judges and their secretary, provenance unknown, are honored in a decree of the Thessalian League.

ZE5. Larisa, “vor oder nach 134/3” (Kramolisch) IG ix.2 507 32-34 [a)na-] r?a/ai to\ y?i[s]<m>a [u=]to ei¹j ki¿ona liqi¿nh[n kaiì sth=sai e)n] [tw½i i¸er]w½i tou= Dio\[j] tou=

¹Eleuqeri¿ou e)n

Lari¿s[hi ® ® ® ® ]

“…write up this decree on a stone stele and set it up in the sanctuary of Zeus Eleutherios in Larisa…”

Marble stele. Kramolisch dates the decree on the presence of Pollichos as eponymous strategos of the koinon. Proxeny decree of the Thessalian koinon for judges from Mylasa.

ZE6. Larisa, 139/8a (Kramolisch) IG ix.2 509 12-3 [i¸ere/wj de\

D]ÚiÙo\ÙoÙu= Ù Ù)ÛEleuqeri¿ou

¹Agasi¿nou

[tou= ® ® ®o]u Larisai¿ou: “…when Agasinos son of so-and-so from Larisa was priest of Zeus Eleutherios.”

107

Marble stele. Dating formula in an honorary decree. Kramolisch dates the document by the recorded League strategos, Leon son of Agesippos from Larisa (ll. 2-3). An Agasinos of Larisa, the patronymic is not preserved, is on record in a manumission decree from Kierion (IG ix.2 259) as league strategos. Kramolisch dates the document to 138/7-125/4a. He is very likely the Agasinos of ZE6. 80

ZE7. Delphi, 106a FD iii.4 49.1ff. [---------------------------------] kaiì poih/sasqai [ta\n a)nago/r]eusin ta=j ei¹ko/noj e)n tw½i gumnikw½i a)gw½ni tw½n Puqi¿wn kaiì Swthri¿wn, o(moi¿wj de\ kaiì

2

[e)n L]ari¿s[ai e)]n tw½i a)gw½n[i] tw½n [)E]leu[q]eri¿wn wÒi ti¿qenti [Q]essaloi¿, oÀpwj fanero\n [hÅ]i pa/ntoij oÀti [a( po/lij tw½n

Delfw½n ta=i eu)noi¿ai toiou/tw]n a)ndrw½n a)po[n]e/m[ei]

ta\j kataci¿aj tima/j

4

“…and [let it be decided] to make an announcement of the [award of] the statue in the gymnic agon of the Pythia and Soteria, and similarly in Larisa in the agon of the Eleutheria which the Thessalians put on, so that it be obvious to everyone that the city of the Delphians distributes honors worthy of the goodwill of such men”

Proxeny and associated honors awarded by the city of Delphi to Isagoras, son of Pherekrates, from Larisa. A near carbon copy of this decree was issued for Isagoras’ brother, Menekrates, in the same year (= FD iii.4 50). Both inscriptions stipulate that a copy of the decree is to be sent to the city of the Larisans (e.g., FD iii.4 49.16-7: a)postei¿]|[lasqai tou\j aÃrxontaj potiì ta\n po/lin tw½]n 80

Cf. LGPN iii.B s.v. ¹Agasi=noj 4-5.

108

Larisai¿[wn tou=de t]ou= yafi¿s[ma]toj a)[nti¿grafon] “…let the archons have sent to the city of the Larisans a copy of this decree”). Given the focus in the announcement on the pan-Thessalian character of the Eleutheria, one might have expected poti\ to\n koino\n tw=n Qessalw=n vel sim. It is possible that precisely such a sentiment lay behind the expression “to the city of the Larisans,” i.e., Larisa qua seat of the federal synedrion, not independent city.

ZE8. Larisa, init. Ia IG ix.2 528 ¹Isago/rou to[u= ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® a)gwnoqe-] tou=ntoj to\n ei¹ko[sto\n kaiì ® ® ® ® tw½n salw½n a)gw½na tw½i Diiì tw½?[i

Qes-]

¹Eleuqeri¿wi, i¸ere/-]

wj oÃntoj tou= Dio\j tou= ¹Eleu[qeri¿ou ® ® tou=]

4

Kleoni¿kou Larisai¿ou oiàd[e e)ni¿kwn]: “When Isagoras son…was agonthete at the twenty-something contest of the Thessalians for Zeus Eleutherios, when…son of Kleonikos from Larisa was priest of Zeus Eleutherios, the following were victorious…”

Marble stele. Preamble to a victor list of the Eleutheria. The events of this festival will be discussed below. The Isagoras mentioned as agonothete here is most likely Isagoras, son of Pherekrates, from Larisa. 81 He received proxeny at Delphi in 106/5a, in addition to serving as a tagos of Larisa. 82 Pherekrates the grandson of Pherekrates,

81 82

Cf. LGPN iii.B s.v. ¹Isago/raj 11. FD iii.4 49; IG ix.2 516.

109

perhaps the son of Isagoras, was league strategos ca. 100-80a. 83 The family was prominent in Larisa and beyond. This Kleonikos is otherwise unknown. 84

ZE9. Thespiai, aet. Aug. IG vii 1857 koino\n

Qessalw½n e)n Larei¿sv di¿j

4

“…[victorious] twice at the koinon of the Thessalians in Larisa…”

Part of a record of an athlete’s victories. The festival described as the “koinon of the Thessalians” is most likely the Eleutheria.

ZE10. Megara, post 196a IG vii 48 col. III 5-7 ¹Eleuqe/ria | ta\ e)n ari¿s[v] |

pugmh/n.

“…twice [victorious] at the Eleutheria in Larisa…”

The same inscription records a victory in the pankration in the Eleutheria at Larisa (col. V 10-12).

ZE11. Larisa, date? IG ix.2 614a 1-10 [--ca.-10?--] HRP?R?O? [--ca.-10?--] [eÃmpe]Ùd' Ùa)eqleu/wn, e)[te/lessa de\ | me/rme]ÙrÙa eÃrga: pe/nte per[iì] k[ro|ta/]foij a(rmosa/man stefa/nouÙj. ||

83 84

Kramolisch 1978: 87-88. Cf. LGPN iii.B s.v. Kleo/nikoj 14.

110

[wÒ]n eiâj me\n Neme/aj, eiâj eiâj a)po\

Da/liˆ®‰oj, | [eiâ]j ¹Alea=qen,

Qessalikw½[n | Z]ano\j ¹Eleuqeri¿wn,

eiâj o( par' ¸Erku/n?|n?# Basilh/i+oj: a)ll' a)ge/neioj | dissou/j, treiÍj de\ e(lo/man a)ndrj || e)n a(liki¿#. “…competing without fail, I accomplished difficult deeds. I fit five crowns about my temples, one of which is from Nemea, one from Delos, one from the Alea, one from the Thessalian Eleutheria of Zeus, one from the Basileia at Erkynna. 85 I took two as an ageneios, three in the adult category.”

Marble base. The phrase “Thessalian Eleutheria of Zeus” seems overdetermined, especially if the victor was from Larisa, as seems likely given the findspot. Metrical considerations notwithstanding, the fulsome language likely helped to differentiate the Thessalian Eleutheria from the Eleutheria at Plataia.

Literary Evidence There is no literary evidence concerning the Thessalian cult of Zeus Eleutherios.

Numismatic Evidence Coinage of the Thessalian League from 196a to the ascension of Augustus displayed a Zeus with an oak crown on the obverse, Athena as promachos on the reverse. The chronology of the coinage coupled with the evidence from inscriptions reviewed above suggests that the portrait is of Zeus Eleutherios. 86 It is likely that the two chief cults of the Thessalian League were celebrated on these issues.

85 86

Lit. “one [crown] is Delian…one is Basileian from Erkynna.” Head 1911: 311; SNG iii Thessaly pl. 6, nos. 269-299; Gardner 1883: 1ff.

111

Archaeological Evidence 87 The publication clauses of some League documents refer specifically to the sanctuary of Zeus Eleutherios in Larisa. Although the site has not been conclusively located, a number of discoveries made during a series of piecemeal, salvage excavations suggest that the temple was situated near the modern crossroads of Kouma, Alexandrou Panagouli and Palama. Sections of ancient foundation forming a roughly rectangular plan have been excavated scattered among a number of private businesses and domiciles near this intersection. That the construction of this building was perhaps impromptu is suggested by the foundation which incorporated a variety of older architectural members including Doric column drums, geison and epistyle blocks, triglyphs and, most interestingly, a bench from the first theatre of Larisa. Sections of the Paleochristian fortifications of Larisa have been found in the general vicinity of this rectangular structure. Various architectural members of Hellenistic date have been recovered including 14 Doric column drums, a geison block, triglyph fragments and pieces of a marble euthynteria. These members clearly belonged to a temple—Tziaphalias has suggested Zeus Eleutherios. Tziaphalias adduced two additional pieces of evidence in support of his identification. First, numerous bases for votive offerings have also been discovered on various plots in the vicinity of the foundation and the paleochristian wall. Second, and most importantly, two inscriptions with publication clauses referring to the sanctuary of Zeus Eleutherios in Larisa were discovered in a secondary context nearby. Certainty will only come with systematic excavation, but the architectural history of this rectangular foundation certainly suits the traditional narrative of the cult of Zeus Eleutherios. 87

For this section, cf. Tziaphalias 1994a: 170-2.

112

Discussion The Eleutheria 88 We noted above three inscriptions, two victor lists and one epitaph, concerning an agonistic festival in honor of Zeus Eleutherios, the Eleutheria. In addition to these two victor lists which make explicit mention of Zeus Eleutherios or the Eleutheria, Larisa has produced an additional corpus of victor lists, some fragmentary, some complete, some certainly pertinent to the Eleutheria, some doubtless related to another agonistic festival. Preuner already recognized in 1903 that these lists belonged to at least two different festivals. He made the following observations: 1) The preserved preambles differ greatly—one group refers to a festival for Zeus Eleutherios, the other to an agon toi=j prokinduneu/sasin or toiÍj prokekinduneuko/sin; 2) The types and sequence of preserved games differ greatly (e.g., equestrian events listed first in the agon toi=j prokinduneu/sasin, musical and cultural events listed first in the Eleutheria; contests in the former have a more militaristic character than the latter, e.g., Prosdrome Hippeon, Another Prosdrome Hippeon in Honor of Hegesaretos, Prosdrome Pesdon); 3) The age groups and origins of the contestants differ (e.g., boys, youths and men are recognized in the Eleutheria, only boys and men in the agon toi=j prokinduneu/sasin; victors in the former have ethnics, those in the latter lack them). 89 This distinction has not always been maintained in scholarship, however. For example, Kern mixed the order of these texts in IG. In RE xii (1925) s.v. Larisa 3, coll. 845-871, Stählin claimed that IG ix.2 531-2, which both mention an agon toi=j

88 89

Axenidis 1947; Gallis 1988. Preuner 1903: 373-4. L. Robert, BE 1964: no. 227, reiterates Preuner’s claims.

113

prokinduneu/sasin or toiÍj prokekinduneuko/sin in their respective preambles, were evidence that the Eleutheria were held in the Augustan period. More recently, Miller, in a chapter entitled “The Money Games,” has committed a series of grave errors in his presentation of the Eleutheria at Larisa: “These games were apparently not open to other Greeks; only citizens of Larisa participated. An inscription from about the time of Christ lists the events and the names of their winners (IG ix 2, 531; A 124). Many of these are standard competitions of the gymnikos agon: stadion and diaulos races, the pyx, and the pankration, for both men and boys. There were also competitions for trumpeters and heralds. Competitions in literary composition and rhetoric were held, but none in music—a significant difference with the Panathenaia: a torch race for boys, the apobates, and cavalry marksmanship, as well as a cavalry charge, an infantry charge, and infantry marksmanship and archery…It is curious that the Eleutheria did not seem to have any of the standard horse races.” 90 It will soon become clear that Miller is wrong in nearly every statement that he makes regarding the Eleutheria. It is therefore vitally important to analyze the evidence for each festival in turn. I begin with those inscriptions that are certainly connected with the Eleutheria. I summarize their contents below in Table 8:

90

Miller 2004: 145. The author appears to have mistaken the Eleutheria for the agon toi=j prokinduneu/sasin.

114

Table 8 Victor Lists at the Eleutheria with Preamble 91

Reference

Preserved Order of Contests

Victors’ Ethnics

IG ix.2 525

i. Trumpeters; ii. Heralds; iii.

i. Thessalian from Larisa; ii. Boiotian;

(= ZE2),

Auletes; iv. Kitharists; v.

iii. Boiotian; iv. Thessalian from

190-180a

Kitharodes; vi. Boys’

Larisa; v. kiqarwidw½n i¸ero\j

Pentathlon; vii. Youths’

o( ste/fanoj e)kri¿qh; 92 vi.

Pentathlon

Thessalian from unpreserved polis;

and Date

vii. Unpreserved IG ix.2 528

i. Trumpeters; ii. Heralds ; iii.

i. Thessalian from Kierion; ii.

(= ZE8),

Auletes; iv. Kitharists; v.

Thessalian from Larisa; iii. Ephesian;

init. Ia

Kitharodes; vi. Bull-hunting;

iv. Antiochene on the Maiander; v.

vii. Aphippolampas; viii.

Neapolitan; vi. Thessalian from

Aphippodroma; ix. Boys’

Larisa; vii. Thessalian from Pherai;

Pentathlon; x. Youths’

viii. Thessalian from Larisa; ix.

Pentathlon; xi. Men’s

Kyzikene; x. Patreus; xi. unpreserved

Pentathlon

91

Schmidt 1999: 74ff. offers some recent and useful comments on the epigraphic genre of the victory list. 92 The expression seems to have been applied in the event of a tie or when a winner could not otherwise be declared. Cf. Crowther 2000: 139: “Sacred contests or victories dedicated to the god of the festival, i(era/, are also found in a wide variety of events. They begin at least as early as the fourth century B.C. (in music and drama) and continues well into imperial times, when they become frequent. Sacred victories, unlike joint victories…are found both at local festivals and at the crown games including Olympia and Isthmia. In the case of sacred victories the names of athletes are not mentioned in the records, nor can we assume that the competitors received any rewards, for no statue was erected for them.”

115

The agonothete of ZE2, Androsthenes, son of Italos from Gyrton, was strategos of the Thessalian koinon in 188/7a. 93 Kern accordingly dated the inscription to 187a, but this is not a necessary inference: Androsthenes could have easily served as agonothete of the games before or after his service as strategos. Kramolisch opts for a more general date in the 180s BCE. 94 ZE8 refers to a numerical sequence of Eleutheria (i.e. “When Isagoras as agonothete of the Thessalians at the twenty-something contest for Zeus Eleutherios…”). The absence of such a sequence in ZE8, in conjunction with the date of Androsthenes’ generalship, would seem to indicate a relatively early stage of the festival, perhaps shortly after its putative foundation c. 196a. I will suggest below that the order of events and the provenance of competitors strengthens this hypothesis. ZE8 is roughly dated to the beginning of Ia on the basis of the identification of this Eleutheria as the “twenty-something” contest. Was the contest penteteric or trieteric? Preuner was the first to argue that the Eleutheria was a penteteric festival. 95 I here expand his argument and make its assumptions explicit: 1) Assumption: The Eleutheria were established in 196a or shortly thereafter; 2) Assumption: It is unlikely that an annual festival would attract international competitors; 3) If the Eleutheria was not celebrated annually then it is likely that the festival was either trieteric or penteteric; 4) The preamble of ZE8 refers to the “twenty-something contest of Zeus Eleutherios,” i.e., the 21st to 29th Eleutheria. If we assume both that the festival was instituted in 196a or thereabouts and that the festival, whether it was penteteric or trieteric, was celebrated regularly at this interval throughout the period in question, two chronological ranges are available: 154-138a (trieteric, i.e., 21 x 2 = 42, 196 – 42 = 154; 29 x 2 = 58, 196 – 58 = 138) or 112-80a (penteteric, i.e., 21 x 4 = 84, 196 – 84 = 112; 29 x 4 = 116, 196 – 116 = 80); 5) The prosopography of ZE8 suits the 93

Kramolisch 1978: A 9. Eusebius 115. Kramolisch 1978: 34. 95 Preuner 1903: 372. 94

116

penteteric range much better than the trieteric range: The victorious salpist in ZE8, Stratios, son of Melanthios, from Kierion, may be the brother of Philoarnos, son of Melanthios, from Kierion, who won the contest of trumpeters at the Mouseia in Thespiai (IG vii 1760.12). This Boiotian inscription is certainly dated to early Ia on prosopographical grounds. While this evidence is not decisive, it suits a penteteric Eleutheria better. While it is impossible to come to a firm conclusion on this question, the balance of the evidence suggests that the Eleutheria were penteteric. ZE2 and ZE8 share a number of features: 1) They both make mention of either the Eleutheria or Zeus Eleutherios; 2) Both are dated by an agonothete; 3) The Thessalians are mentioned as a collective in both texts. The festival seems therefore to have had a federal character; 4) The two texts share a number of thymelic and gymnic events (Trumpeters, Heralds, Auletes, Kitharists, Boys and Youths Pentathlon); 5) Although the category of Men’s Pentathlon is not preserved in ZE2, the preserved Boys’ and Youths’ Pentathlon in that text makes the restoration of a victor in the Men’s Pentathlon virtually certain. Both texts would then seem to have contests for three different age groups in at least one event; 6) Each text lists victors by patronymic and ethnic: The contests thus attracted international participants. A number of interesting differences between the two, however, suggest that the festival evolved over time: 1) In the preamble, where ZE2 dates the festival by agonothete alone, ZE8 dates the festival by the priest of Zeus Eleutherios as well as the agonothete. Perhaps the festival became more closely connected with the day-today functioning of the cult of Zeus Eleutherios over the course of the second century; 2) Although it is impossible to conclude with certainty that the three events of ZE8 in bold-face print (Bull-hunting, Aphippolampadi, Aphippodroma) were not also originally included in ZE2 when published, they do seem to be an intrusion in the order of ZE2 which is otherwise maintained in ZE8. These new events are not

117

paralleled in other panhellenic games of the period and may represent a specifically Thessalian agonistic tradition. It is in any case noteworthy that the victors in these three events are all Thessalians; 3) ZE8 preserves a greater diversity of ethnics than ZE2. It would seem that the prestige of the festival grew over the course of the perhaps hundred or so years separting ZE2 and ZE8. 96 Based on the preliminary analysis of ZE2 and ZE8 offered above, the following inscriptions, summarized in Table 9 below, may also be victor lists of the Eleutheria:

Table 9 Other Eleutheria Victor Lists

Reference

Preserved Order of

Victors’ Ethnics? Where

Contests

(How many)?

ZE12 = IG

Youths’ x; Men’s x;

Yes: Thasos (1), Kyme

ix.2 526

Boys’ Pankration;

(1), Magnesia on the

Youths’ Pankration;

Maiander (1), Syracuse

Men’s Pankration;

(1), Thebes (1), Kerkyra

Hoplite Race; Foal

(1); Thessalians only

Race; Horse Race; 2

listed by polis: Metropolis

Foal Chariot; 2 Horse

(1), Larisa (5), Atrax (1)

Date

post 196a

Chariot; 4 Foal Chariot; 4 Horse Chariot

96

Other possible victors at the Eleutheria: SEG 19.532 (= IDelos 2552), Ia; SEG 44.469 (fin. Ip).

118 Table 9 (Continued) ZE13 = IG

[Boys’ x], Youth’s x, Men’s x;

Yes: l. 15

post

ix.2 529

Boys’ y, Men’s y; Boys’ z,

Nikoklh=j

87a

Youth’s z, Men’s z; Boys’ a,

Nika/ta

Men’s a; Boy’s b, Men’s b; Boy’s

La[kedaimo/nioj] 98 ;

c, Youth’s c, Men’s c 97

l. 23 ¹Anti¿gonoj ¹Alki¿ppou Q[® ® ®] ?

ZE14 = IG

None preserved

Maybe : ll. 4-5

?

Qemisti¿wn

ix.2 530

[® Qessalo\j a)po\ Lari¿]|shj th=j Pel[asgi¿doj] ? ZE15 = IG

Heralds; Auletes; Kitharists;

Yes: Thessaly, polis

ix.2 534

Kitharodes; Bull-hunting;

unpreserved (2);

Aphippolampas; Aphippodroma;

Thessaly, Gyrton (1);

Boys’ Pentathlon; Youth’s

Thessaly, Larisa (1);

Pentathlon; Men’s Pentathlon;

Alabanda (1); Cos (1);

Boys’ Dolichon; Men’s Dolichon;

Lakedaimon (1);

Boy’s Stadion; Youth’s Stadion;

Sicyon (2); Laodikea

Men’s Stadion

(1); Epirus (1); Miletus

Ia

(1); Unpreserved (2)

97

The stone was broken in half vertically. Only the first two to four letters of each age group were preserved. 98 This is a near certain restoration on comparison with IG vii 417 (= I.Oropos 525) where Nikoklh=j Nika/ta Lakedaimo/nioj is listed as victor in the men’s stadion, diaulon and the hoplite race (ll. 16, 20, 50).

119 Table 9 (Continued) ZE16 = McD

[Youth’s Pankration]; Men’s Yes: Athens or

post

344 = Ed. pr.

Pankration; Hoplite Race; 2

Athamantia (1);

87a

Arvanitopoulos

Foal Chariot; Foal Race; 2

Kleitor (1);

1911: 124ff.,

Horse Chariot; Horse Race;

Lakedaimon (1);

no. 27

4 Foal Chariot; 4 Horse

Thessaly, Larisa (5);

Chariot

Thessaly, Kierion (1)

In the absence of a preserved preamble with explicit reference to Zeus Eleutherios or the Eleutheria, there are three key features which suggest that this group of inscriptions is to be connected with the Eleutheria: 1) Shared order of events with the Eleutheria (ZE15); 2) Three different age groups are recognized for certain events (ZE12-13, 15); 3) Victors are listed by patronymic and ethnic (ZE12-13, 15-16 maybe ZE14). The claim of ZE14 to this corpus is the most marginal. The amount of preserved text is exiguous and difficult to interpret. I offer Kern’s text and supplements: oiàde e)n[i¿kwn]: Niko/polij [® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®] vacat [(certaminis genus)] Qemisti¿wn [® ® Qessalo\j a)po\ Lari/-] shj th=j

Pel[asgi¿doj].

¹Apollwn[® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®] o( de\ a)[gwÜn i¸ero\j e)kri¿qh]. vacat [(certaminis genus)] Ni[® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®]

5

120

The stone is preserved on the top and left. If this is a victor list, we must make a number of assumptions. First, the preamble to the list, which would have contained at least the name of the festival or divinity in whose honor the games were held and the name of the agonothete, must have been inscribed on a separate stone which would have attached to the top or left of ZE14. Second, a name of a contest must have followed oiàde e)n[i¿kwn] on line 1 since Nikopolis in line 2 is in the nominative and should, therefore, be victor. ZE12 is also slightly suspicious, but on different grounds. In ZE2 and ZE8, when different age groups participate in contests of the same type, the name of the contest is repeated with each age group. For example, we read in ZE2: paiÍdaj pe/ntaqlon: KratiÍnoj

Puqoni¿kou

Qessalo\j [a)po\ ® ®].

14

a)genei¿ouj pe/ntaql[on]: [E]u)for[® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®] If we assume, as seems reasonable, that a cutter would have been consistent in how he expressed the relationship of age-class and contest on the stone, then ZE12 offers a slightly different arrangement: paiÍdaj pankrati¿ou: Dhmh/trioj

Dhmhtri¿ou

Surako/sioj.

a)genei¿ouj: ¹Aristo/dhmoj

Nikome/nouj

QhbaiÍoj

aÃndraj:

10

ãAttaloj Qeomnh/stou Mhtropoli¿thj. Here, the name of the event is only stated once, together with the youngest age-class. The older age-classes then follow. It is also possible that this was the practice in ZE13, but so little of the stone remains:

121

paiÍd[aj ® ®]: Swsikra/thj

Swsikra/to[u ® ® ® ® ® ®].

25

a)ge[nei¿ouj ® ®]: [® ®]noj Parme/nont[oj ® ® ® ® ® ® ®]. Here it is equally possible that the name of the event followed each age class or that it was stated only once with the youngest age group. ZE12 also diverges from ZE2 and ZE8 in omitting the ethnic Qessalo/j for Thessalian victors. Instead of, for example, Qessalo\j a)po\ Lari¿shj th=j Pelasgi¿doj, we read only Larisai=oj. Again, this may also have been the case with ZE13. There are two major interpretive options available. ZE12 and ZE13 may simply provide evidence for the evolution of the epigraphic habit of inscribing victor lists at the Eleutheria. As comparanda, one may also adduce IG ii2 2316, a victor list from the Panathenaia, which breaks with the sequence of such lists by offering a continuous text, i.e., without individual names of victors placed under the individual headings of contests. Tracy and Habicht have suggested that the shape of the stone was the determining factor in the layout of this Panathenaic victor list. 99 On the other hand, ZE12 and ZE13 may provide evidence for a second panhellenic festival at Larisa. Athens provides the best example of a Greek polis with multiple panhellenic athletic competitions. While the Mouseia and the Erotideia at Thespiai are both known to have attracted international participants, the programs of the two festivals were completely different—the former concerned solely with musical and dramatic events, the latter with athletics. Certainty on this matter is unattainable. I believe that the balance of the evidence suggests that ZE12-13 belong to the Eleutheria. 99

Tracy and Habicht 1991: 224.

122

Since ZE12 and ZE16 are both preserved at the bottom, we can be tolerably certain that we have the end of those two lists. These two inscriptions preserve the same events, but offer a slightly different order. If we combine ZE12 and ZE16 with ZE8 and ZE15—the two inscriptions that preserve the opening of the list—we arrive at the following program of events:

Table 10 Composite Program of the Eleutheria

Event

Reference

Event

Reference

1. Trumpeters 100

ZE2, ZE8

11. Stadion (Boys,

ZE15 (ZE13?)

Youths, Men) 2. Heralds 101

ZE2, ZE8,

12. Unknown (Boys, Men) ZE13

ZE15 3. Auletes

ZE2, ZE8,

13. Unknown (Boys, Men) ZE13

ZE15 4. Kitharists

5. Kitharodes

6. Bull-hunting

100

ZE2, ZE8,

14. Unknown (Boys,

ZE15

Youths, Men)

ZE2, ZE8,

15. Boxing (Boys, Youths, ZE10

ZE15

Men?)

ZE8,

16. Pankration (Boys,

ZE15

Youths, Men) 102

ZE12 (ZE13?)

E12 (E16?)

Crowther 1994; Nordquist 1994. Cf. Wolicki 2002: 93 n. 94, for a conspectus of other Hellenistic agonistic festivals with a contest of heralds. See also Crowther 1994. 102 Poliakoff 1987. 101

123 Table 10 (Continued) 7. Aphippolampas

ZE8,

17. Hoplite Race

E12, E16

18. Foal Race

E12, E16

19. Horse Race

E12, E16

E3, E7

ZE15 8. Aphippodroma

ZE8, ZE15

9. Pentathlon (Boys,

ZE2, ZE8,

Youths, Men)

ZE15, (ZE13?)

10. Dolichon (Boys,

ZE15,

20. Chariots Race (2 Foal,

Men)

(ZE13?)

2 Horse, 4 Foal, 4 Horse) 103

The gap between the opening group (ZE2, ZE8, ZE15) and the closing group (ZE12, ZE16) is partially filled by ZE13, where three unknown contests are open to Boys, Youths and Men and three unknown contests are open to Boys and Men alone. The preserved sequence in ZE13 would fit the end of the opening group and the beginning of the closing group quite well. It would require the addition of, at a minimum, two events to the program that were open to Boys and Men alone: This would be the minimum number of events needed. It is also possible, however, that there was a more extensive section of events between the Stadion and the Pankration: In this case ZE13 could overlap only the end of the opening group or only the beginning of the closing group. It may in fact overlap neither group of texts, in which case the number of events would need to be increased by at least six.

103

Kratzmüller 1993.

124

Stena 104 The second series of victor lists that have often been confused with those belonging to the Eleutheria in fact are to be associated with a festival known since Robert as the Stena. In Table 11, I summarize the evidence for this festival.

Table 11 Stena Victor Lists

Reference

Festival Name Preserved? Preserved Order of

Date

Contests S1 = McD 342

No; Heralds, Boys’ Stadion, Men’s Stadion

= Ed. pr.

med. IIa

Arvanitopoulos 1910: 352ff., no. 5 S2 = IG ix.2

Yes: ll.2-3 Agon toi=j | p[rokin]duneu/sasin; Bull- 106a

533

Hunting

S3 = IG ix.2

No; Men’s Boxing, Boys’ Pankration, Men’s

fin.

527

Pankration, Apobatike, Chariot for the Apobatike,

Ia/init.

Aphippodroma, Archery, Skopon Hippeon, Skopon

Ip ?

Pezon

104

Helly 1983a (= SEG 33.462).

125 Table 11 (Continued) S4 = IG ix.2

Yes: ll. 5-6 Agon toiÍj proke|kinduneuko/sin;

fin.

531 = SIG2

Bull-Hunting, Kataloge Palaia, Prosdrome Hippeon,

Ia/init.

671, SIG3 1059 Prosdrome Pezon, Prosdrome Synoridi, Aphippolampas, II

Ip

Trumpeters, Heralds, Boys’ Stadion, Men’s Stadion, Boys’ Diaulon, Men’s Diaulon, Boys’ Torch-race, Boys’ Boxing, Men’s Boxing, Boys’ Pankration, Men’s Pankration, Hoplite race, Aphippodroma, Apobatike, Skopon pezon, Archery, Skopon Hippon, Enkomion Logikon, Enkomion Epikon, Kataloge Nea, Epigranmati

S5 = IG ix.2

Yes: ll. 5-6 Agon toiÍj prokekinduneuko/|sin;

fin.

532

Bull-Hunting, Kataloge Palaia, Prosdrome Hippeon,

Ia/init.

Prosdrome Pezon, Prosdrome Synoridi, Aphippolampas,

Ip

Trumpeters, Heralds, Boys’ Stadion, Men’s Stadion, Boys’ Diaulon, Men’s Diaulon, Boys’ Boxing, Men’s Boxing, Boy’s Pankration S6 = McD 345

Yes: ll. 4-5 Agon toiÍj prokinduneu/sa|sin

Aet.

= Ed. pr.

<e)>pw½n stenw½n Foal Race, Horse Race,

Aug.

Theocharis

Bull-hunt, Prosdrome Hippeon, Another Prosdrome

1960: 185

Hippeon in Honor of Hegesaretos, Prosdrome Pesdon, Aphippolampas, Kataloge Palaia, Heralds, Trumpeters, Boys’ Stadion, Men’s Stadion, Boys’ Diaulon, Men’s Diaulon

The following points set this dossier apart from those inscriptions which certainly pertain to the Eleutheria: 1) The presence of some from of the verb

126

prokinduneu/ein in the preamble; 2) The absence of victors’ ethnics; 3) Extensive divergence in the types of contests. 105 It was the use of prokinduneu/ein that led Robert to “discover” the festival of the Stena. 106 I offer the following text of S6: Popli¿ou Ou)et[t]i¿ou Se/cstou ui¸ou= tageu/ontoj th\n prw¯thn xw¯ran kaiì tiqe/ntoj to\n a)gw½na toiÍj prokinduneu/sa-

4

sin <e)>pw½n stenw½n oÁn ti¿qhsin h( po/lij h( Lareisai¿wn strathgou=ntoj Moni¿mou oi¸ neneikhko/tej: 5 iàppwn stenw½n Theocharis; <e)>pw½n stenw½n Robert “When Poplius Ouettius, son of Sextus, was tagos of the first chora and put on the contest for those who fought in front at the Stena, which contest the city of Larisa puts on, and when Monimos was general, these were victorious…” Robert was unable to make good sense of Theocharis’ reading and countered with a near certain emendation. He was able to restore S2 on this model as well: p[rokin]duneu/sasin e)piì vacat | [tw=n S]te?n[w=n]. The contest was held for “those who fought at ‘the narrows.’” As a parallel for the syntax of the Stena preamble and for contests held in commemoration of a specific military event, Robert compared IGR iv, 159, l. 11-14 (Kyzikos: Ia): stefanou=sqai au)to\n kaiì e)n toiÍj kat' e)niauto\n tiqem[e/]no[ij eu)x]aristhri¿oij a)gw½sin ¸Hrw¯oij t%½ pa/p-

105 106

12

Preuner 1903. BE 1964, no. 227 remains the fundamental discussion of the festival.

127

pwi au)tou= ¹Asklhpia/dhi tw½i oi¹k?[i¿sthi kaiì t]oiÍj sunagwnisame/noij au)tw½i kat'

¹A-

lecandrei¿a e)n tw½i kata\ Pto[lem]a[i=on po]l[e/]m%. “…let him be crowned also at the annual contests, the Heroa, celebrated in thanksgiving for his grandfather Asklepiades, the oikist, and those who fought with him in Alexandria in the war against Ptolemy…” The active syntax of the Thessalian inscription, tiqe/ntoj to\n a)gw½na toiÍj prokinduneu/sasin, finds a parallel in the passive syntax of the Kyzikene inscription, tiqem[e/]no[ij eu)x]aristhri¿oij a)gw½sin ¸Hrw¯oij t%½ pa/p|pwi au)tou= ¹Asklhpia/dhi. In both cases, a form of tithemi agona receives a dative complement of the person or people in whose honor the contest is being held. The Thessalian festival would have memorialized a military engagement in which Thesslian forces played a leading role at a place known as the Stena. Robert finds such an occasion in the 171a battle between the Romans and Perseus at the Tempe. 107 Although the Romans were soundly defeated, the intervention of the Thessalian cavalry, which was originally serving in only a reserve role, mitigated the negative consequences of the battle for the Romans. Robert finds confirmation of the nature of the battle in the various unique contests of this festival, many of which have a martial, equestrian character. 108 It is difficult to quarrel with Robert’s reconstruction of the general outlines of the historical backdrop. One may wonder why the Tempe would be referred to as the Stena in this case, since the toponym “Tempe” was current at this time. That the festival was an act of commemoration of some military engagement does seem secure, however, given the Hellenistic vogue for this type of celebration. 109 107

Livy 42.57-61. BE 1964, no. 227. 109 Chaniotis 1995. 108

128

The victors lack ethnics. When this evidence is coupled with the emphasis on Larisa’s role in instituting the festival, it has been suggested that the festival was limited to citizens of Larisa alone. Kramolisch has conclusively demonstrated, however, that some of the victors are known from other areas of Thessaly. It therefore seems likely that the event was open to all Thessalians, not just the narrow subset of Larisa. 110 S4 is complete. In the following table I compare the events of the Stena as ordered in S4, which dates to the Augustan period, with a composite list of events for the Eleutheria. Divergent events are marked in bold.

Table 12 Comparative order of events at the Stena and Eleutheria

Stena (S4)

Eleutheria (composite)

Bull-hunting

Trumpeters

Kataloge palaia

Heralds

Prosdrome Hippeon 111

Auletes

Prosdrome Pezon

Kitharists

Prosdrome Synoridi

Kitharodes

Aphippolampas

Bull-hunting

Trumpeters

Aphippolampas

Heralds

Aphippodroma

Stadion (Boys, Mens)

Pentathlon (Boys, Youths, Men)

Diaulon (Boys, Mens)

Dolichon (Boys, Men)

110 111

Kramolisch 1978: 135-136. In S6, a second contest in honor of Hegesaretos is included.

129 Table 12 (Continued) Torch race (Boys)

Stadion (Boys, Youths, Men)

Boxing (Boys, Mens)

Unknown (Boys, Men)

Pankration (Boys, Mens)

Unknown (Boys, Men)

Hoplite Race

Unknown (Boys, Youths, Men)

Aphippodroma

Boxing (Boys, Youths, Men?)

Apobatike

Pankration (Boys, Youths, Men)

Skopon Pezon

Hoplite Race

Archery

Foal Race

Skopon Hippon

Horse Race

Enkomion logikon

Chariots Race (2 Foal, 2 Horse, 4 Foal, 4 Horse)

Enkomion epikon Kataloge nea Epigranmati

The program of the Eleutheria is far more standard than that of the Stena. For the Eleutheria, we find near equal emphasis laid on the thymelic, gymnic and hippic components of the festival. All are common in the programs of festivals celebrated in the Hellenistic Greek world. The great exceptions are the particularly Thessalian bull hunt, aphippolampas and aphippodroma, all of which are also part of the Stena. The Stena program is more idiosyncratic. Indeed, the general classificatory vocabulary of Greek festivals largely does not apply. None of the traditional thymelic events are represented, though one suspects that the contests in epigram, encomia and kataloge could be considered as such. The gymnic program is standard, but some events have a particularly martial dimension, e.g., the prosdrome pezon, “foot soldier assault.” The

130

hippic component is also martial in character. Archery on horseback (skopon hippon) and chariot assault (prosdrome synoridi) take the place of more traditional contests like the two and four horse chariot race. Although establishing firm dates for these inscriptions has proved difficuly, close analysis of the preserved preambles allows for a secure relative chronology. 112 Phase I: S2. I offer Helly’s text, following the suggestions of Robert: Dhma/rxou tou=

Ai¹sxi¿no[u]

tiqe/ntoj to\n a)gw½na toiÍj p[rokin]duneu/sasin e)piì vacat [tw=n ste]n[w=n] o(/n tiqhsin h(

4

[po/lij h( Larisai/]w[n : oi¸ nenikh]ÙkÙo/ÙtÙeÙj e)Ùn ÙsÙtÙrathg%½

Krate[ro/froni ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®]

“When Demarchos the son of Aischines put on the games for those who perished at the narrows, which contest the city of the Larisans established, the following were victorious...” The festival is securely date to 106a by the league general. On this restoration, the city of Larisa is credited with establishing the games. The first and only event prserved is the bull-hunt. Phase II: S6. I offer Robert’s text and the following translation: Popli¿ou Ou)et[t]i¿ou Se/cstou ui¸ou= tageu/ontoj th\n prw¯thn xw¯ran kaiì tiqe/ntoj to\n a)gw½na toiÍj prokinduneu/sasin <e)>pw½n stenw½n oÁn ti¿qhsin h( po/lij h( Lareisai¿wn strathgou=ntoj 112

Helly 1983a.

4

131

Moni¿mou oi¸ neneikhko/tej: “When Poplius Vettius, son of Sextus, was tagos of the first chora and put on the games for those who perished at the narrows, which contest the city of the Larisans established, when Monimos was general, the following were victorious…” For Helly, the chief difference between Phase I and Phase II is the agonothete’s service as tagos of the first chora. This suggests that the two functions were somehow linked. I would also note that a different order of events is preserved in Phase II where the bull hunt follows the foal race and horse race. The contest is also dated by an explicitly federal magistrate. Phase III: S4 and S5. Both inscriptions refer in their preamble to a renewal of the contest. I offer the following text and translation of the preamble of S4: Fi¿lwnoj tou= Fi¿lwnoj tou= tageu/ontoj th\n prw¯thn xw¯ran e)n strathg%½ ¸Hghsi¿#, tiqe/ntoj

4

to\n a)gw½na toiÍj prokekinduneuko/sin kata\ to\ geno/menon u(po\ tou= dh/mou yh/[fisma]

eriì th=j

8

a)nanew¯[sew]j tou= a)gw½noj. oi¸ neneikhko/tej: “When Philon the son of Philon was tagos of the first chora, during the generalship of Hegesias, and put on the games for those who perished at the narrows according to the previous decree of the people concerning the renewal of the games, the following were victorious…”

132

S5 uses the exact same introductory formulae but offers a different strategos and agonothete/tagos. The presence of the word a)nane/wsij suggests that the festival was not celebrated for a period of time, while the presence of the demos suggests that the city of Larisa continued to administer the festival in this new phase. Both texts preserve an extensive number of events and victors. The greatest divergence between the two concerns the boys’ torch race: The event is listed in S4 but not preserved in S5. Since S5 is not preserved after the boys’ pankration, it is entirely possible that the event was originally mentioned in a later section of this document.

Agonistic Facilities Such extensive programs of competition at both the Stena and Eleutheria and, presumably, at the other attested agonistic festivals celebrated at Larisa, would have necessitated a similarly extensive set of facilities. There are no secure literary or material indicia for the location of hippodrome, stadium or gymnasia which would have hosted the equestrian and gymnastic components of the program. 113 We are conversely well informed about potential settings of the cultural component of these festivals. Larisa was equipped with two theatres and an Odeion.

113

Tziaphalias 1994a: 174.

CHAPTER 5 REGIONAL CULTS

In this chapter, I discuss eight regional cults. Those cults that have been selected meet the following basic criteria: 1) The cults are attested, numismatically, literarily, archaeologically or epigraphically, in at least two different sites in tetradic Thessaly. Since my intention is to recover a regional perspective on Thessalian religion within the tetrads, not, e.g., Larisan or Pheraian religion, I have excluded cults which are attested at only one location in tetradic Thessaly. The geographic limit of the study, tetradic Thessaly, i.e., the plains of the region, 1 acknowledges the considerable evidence that the Thessalians were socially and politically distinct from their perioikic neighbors in antiquity. This observation cuts both ways, however, for there is also evidence that tetradic Thessaly and the periokoi shared some common religious traditions. 2 I therefore admit evidence from the perioikoi when a cult has a regional distribution with tetradic Thessaly and is also present in perioikic territory. Some methodological limitations to criterion 1): The evidentiary record is neither perfect nor necessarily representative and many cults only attested in one location in tetradic Thessaly were doubtless more widespread. On the other hand, some cults to which I have accorded a regional status may have actually been present only in two locations. These are the same types of challenges that face all who write regional histories of religion: They cannot be surmounted, only acknowledged. 2) The cults do not have a panhellenic or near panhellenic distribution outside of tetradic Thessaly. I do not examine, e.g., Athena Polias or Zeus Melichios, both of whom appear in multiple locations in tetradic Thessaly and throughout the Greek

1 2

I refer to the Archaic tetrads, not the expanded tetrads of the late Hellenistic and Roman period. Cf., e.g., the calendars.

133

134

world. This is not to deny that there may have been particularly Thessalian incarnations of panhellenic phenomena. The case of Asclepius is particularly noteworthy in this regard, for the well-known Thessalian claims to be the god’s homeland could have had a cultic dimension that would have set their practice apart from the rest of the Greek world. To make the case for a unique manifestation of this cult in Thessaly would require a presentation not of the Thessalian evidence alone, but, in order to establish a meaningful contrast, at the very least a reasonable subset of extra-Thessalian evidence for his cult. Such a task seemed unmanageable. In the course of preparing this dissertation, the need for enforceable limits on the evidence under consideration has been paramount. For point of reference, however, in Appendix 1, “An Epigraphic Inventory of the Cults of Tetradic Thessaly,” I furnish a list of all cults epigraphically attested in tetradic Thessaly. Some methodological limits to criterion 2): In most cases, what is evaluated as especially Thessalian are those cults whose epithets are attested only in Thessaly or in a smaller subset of the Greek world. The inevitable drawbacks of such an approach are numerous. Two problems in particular stand out: a) Language need not reflect difference at all—What the Thessalians call Itonia may be precisely parallel to what the Athenians call Polias; 3 b) Archaeology and numismatics are reduced to a subordinate, mostly supporting role. Again, these drawbacks can never be fully overcome in our current imperfect and incomplete state of knowledge. They can only be acknowledged.

3

Vaguely parallel is the desire to make a distinctive epithet say more than it should by appealing to comparative linguistics. There is no necessary relationship between epithet and the character of the divinity so described, however. At best, linguistic analysis of epithets can support other arguments. At worst, such analysis can bias the interpretation of primary evidence.

135

I term the cults that meet both of these criteria “regional cults.” For the purposes of this dissertation, the word “regional” implies nothing more than an observed pattern of geographic distribution which all cults in this chapter share. The evidence from a city like Atrax is suggestive and heartening, for it offers a sense both of what may be missing from those areas which are blessed with far less extensive epigraphic corpora and of what may perhaps be recoverable for our knowledge of the region as a whole through recourse to the criteria discussed above. The impression left by this city on the historical record is inconsequential. Though home to some powerful Thessalian families, it never dominated Thessalian politics like Larisa or Pherai. It is archaeologically undistinguished. It is, by any reasonable standard, a very “average” city, albeit one with a comparatively rich epigraphic corpus. The impressive variety of cults attested there include the following known from published inscriptions: Aphrodite (IIa) 4 ; Apollo Etdomaios 5 (200a); Apollo Lykeios 6 (IIa); Apollo Agreus 7 (200a); Artemis 8 (IIIa); Artemis Soteira 9 (IIa); Artemis Stratia 10 (IIa); Artemis Throsia 11 (300/250-150a); Asclepius 12 (date?); Athena Agoraia 13 (400-350a); Athena Polias 14 (VIa); Daimon Athanatos 15 (IIa); Demeter and Kore 16 (200a); Dionysus 17 (150-100a); Dionysus and Nymphs 18 (IIIa); Helios Basileus 19 (100a); Heracles 20 (200a); Leukathea 21 (200a); Mother of the 4

SEG 47.678 (= Ed. pr. Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 32). SEG 35.492 (= Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 197, no. 24). 6 SEG 33.450 (= Helly 1983b: 162). 7 SEG 35.491 (= Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 197, no. 23). 8 E.g., SEG 35.502 (= Ed. Pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 200, no. 34). 9 SEG 47.675 (= Tziaphalias 1993: 256, no. 38). 10 SEG 46.555 (= Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997). 11 SEG 34.481 (= Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984a: 481, no. 59), 35.500 (= Tziaphalias 1984b: 199, no. 32). 12 SEG 47.672 (= Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 30-2). 13 SEG 27.184 (= Gallis 1974: 277-81). 14 McD 326 (= Giannopoulos 1934-5). 15 SEG 46.634 (= Tziaphalias 1991: 223). 16 SEG 35.506 (= Tziaphalias 1984b: 201, no. 38). 17 SEG 34.495 (= Tziaphalias 1977). 18 SEG 45.554 (= Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 69). 19 SEG 34.492 (= Tziaphalias 1977). 5

136

Gods 22 (250-200a); Poseidon 23 (III-IIa); Poseidon Patragenes 24 (IIIa); Protesilaus 25 (200-150a); Serapis and Isis 26 (date ?); Themis Agoraia 27 (VIa); Zeus Homoloios 28 (250-200a); Zeus Kataibates 29 (IVa); Zeus Thaulios 30 (200a); Zeus Tritodios 31 (VIIIa); All the gods and goddesses 32 (IIIa). A final methodological limit. Problems of synchrony and diachrony are prominent in nearly every work that attempts to recover a historical or developmental perspective on Greek religion. While the regional approach helps to diminish the magnitude of some of these difficulties, the difficulties themselves still remain. I will try to offer diachronic interpretations of individual cults where the evidence is allows.

5.1: Apollo Kerdoios

Introduction Apollo was worshipped as Kerdoios in Skotussa and Larisa of tetradic Thessaly, as well as at Perrhaebian Phalanna and Chyretiai. The evidence for his cult is primarily epigraphic and spans the third through first centuries BCE. The epithet is not epigraphically attested for Apollo or any other divinity outside of Thessaly. While the epithet Kerdoios is to be connected with kerdos, the type of kerdos so specified remains open. In Homer, the word most often signifies “skill, guile, trickery.” Later, 20

E.g., SEG 34.487 (= Tziaphalias 1984a: 201, no.69). SEG 35.501 (= Tziaphalias 1984b: 200, no. 33). 22 SEG 34.488 (= Tziaphalias 1984a: 203, no. 71). 23 E.g., IG ix.2 475, 476. 24 SEG 46.557 (= Tziaphalias 1990). 25 SEG 34.477 (= Tziaphalias 1976). 26 SEG 29.503 (= Gallis 1973-4: 583). 27 SEG 45.553 (= Gallis 1974: 273-7). 28 E.g., SEG 35.493 (= Tziaphalias 1984a: 197-8, no. 65). 29 SEG 47.674 (= Tziaphalias 1993: 255, no. 27). 30 SEG 34.490 (= Tziaphalias 1977: 137-9). 31 SEG 34.494 (= Tziaphalias 1977: 137-9). 32 SEG 47.676 (= Tziaphalias 1994b: 339, no. 1). 21

137

the word is regularly used in the sense of “profit, gain, advantage.” 33 Both meanings are pervaded by a deep ambivalence: What is attained by guile and profitable for the individual is inevitably less so for the community at large. The sole literary source which describes Apollo as Kerdoios, a scholion to Lycophron 207, suggests that the latter meaning is operative: oÀti dia\ xrhsmw½n ta\ suntei¿nonta kaiì e)pikerdh= dei¿knusin “[Apollo is called Kerdoios] because through oracles he shows ambitious (?), advantageous things.” The oracular association is suggestive given Thessaly’s prominence within the Delphic amphictyony. It may be that Apollo Kerdoios is connected with especially Delphic aspects of Apollo. Cults of Delphian Apollo 34 and Pythian Apollo, 35 both of which must have born a close relationship to Delphi, are popular throughout Thessaly. A cult of Apollo Dōreios in conjunction with the sanctuary of Pythian Apollo in Perrhaebian Pythion may be loosely parallel.36 With the potential for gain through the assistance of oracles, however, there is equal potential for false interpretation and trickery. Apollo’s Thessalian son, Asclepius, is strongly associated with kerdos at Pindar, Pythian 3.54. It may be that Pindar’s awareness of Thessalian cults led him to stress kerdos in this particular context.

33

Cf. Cozzo 1988; Roisman 1990. E.g., IG ix.2 257.9-11 (Theotonion: Va); Helly 1970b: ll. 11-13 (Larisa: init. IIa). 35 E.g., IG ix.2 588 (Larisa: date?), but cf. now SEG 25.679, where the Larisan provenance is challenged; SEG 35.651 (Pythion: 100-50a); Helly 1973: II 158 (Gonnoi: 300-250a); McD 640-1 (= Ed. pr. Theocharis 1960: 175, nos. 2-3) (Tempe: aet. Hell.) 36 Unknown outside of Thessaly. Perhaps an Apollo who “gives gifts” rather than “Dorian” Apollo? SEG 35.657 (100a). Helly’s suggestion that Apollo Dōreios may also be attested at Perrhaebian Azoros is recorded at SEG 35.542. The text in question, however, SEG 23.464 (= Ed. pr. Béquignon 1964: 397, no. 4) was initially read as a dedication to Apollo Lykeios from Perrhaebian Pythion. 34

138

Artemis Kerdoia is attested in a still unpublished inscription from Larisa. This evidence raises the possibility of some form of joint cult of the two divinities. 37 Reliefs depicting the so-called Apollonian Triad—Apollo, Artemis and Leto—are common in all parts of Thessaly. 38 Hermes Kerdoios, known in literary sources but unattested epigraphically, offers an interesting point of comparison. 39 Cornutus (25, 7ff. Lang) claims that the god is known by that epithet because “he is the only cause of true gain for humans.” 40 The Suda is familiar with an anonymous Kerdoios Theos who is equated with “Hermes, because he procures profits.” 41

Epigraphic Evidence Apollo Kerdoios is not directly suggested by any of the known months of the Thessalian calendar. It is possible that the *Apollonia somehow honored Apollo as Kerdoios, but too little evidence remains to advance beyond speculation. Theophoric names are rare in the region: Only Kerdon is attested. 42

AK1. Larisa, III-IIa A series of decrees, primarily honorary, include clauses which specify publication in the sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios in Larisa. I have summarized these decrees in table 13:

37

Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 28 = SEG 47.746. von Graeve 1979: 143-155. 39 Wilamowitz-Moellendorf 1956: 1.322, suggested that Apollo as Kerdoios was closely related to Hermes, a pattern of relationship which began in the Homeric Hymn to Hermes and could be traced in a variety of different cultic environments. The god does not otherwise factor prominently in the standard modern panhellenic narratives of Greek religion. 40 mo/noj tw½n a)lhqinw½n kerdw½n aiãtioj wÔn toiÍj a)nqrw¯poij. 41 o( E ¸ rmh=j: w¨j ke/rdouj peripoihtiko/j. 42 LGPN iii.B s.v. Ke/rdwn 3-7. 38

139

Table 13 Decree Publication in the Sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios, Larisa

Reference

Date

Type of Decree

IG ix.2 521

init. IIIa

Evidence regarding a boundary dispute

SEG 27.202 =

220-210a

Honorary decree for Chrysogonus of Edessa

IG ix.2 517

214a

Letters of Philip V to the people of Larisa

McD 337 = Ed.

IIa

Honorary decree for Bombos, son of Alpheios, an

Ed. pr. Gallis 1977

pr. Béquignon

Aiolian from Alexandria, in thanks for his services

1935: 55-64

rendered on behalf of the local gymnasium

SEG 35.594 =

200-150a

Four fragmentary honorary decrees; the ethnic of

Ed. pr.

only one honorand is preserved: Aiolian from

Tziaphalias

Alexandria; the services rendered to Larisa by the

1984b: 229-230,

honorands are not preserved

no. 121 IG ix.2 512

171a (?)

Honorary decree for three ambassadors from Pergamon

140 Table 13 (Continued) SEG

167-

Copy of treaty between Ambracia and Charadra to be

35.665 B

157/6a

inscribed on a bronze stele and erected in the sanctuary of

36ff. = Ed.

Apollo Kerdoios in Larisa

pr. Cabanes and Andréou 1985 IG ix.2

145a

add. 205 I

Judgment of Makon of Larisa in the border dispute of Halos and Phthiotic Thebes; Copies of the text were to be set up in the sanctuaries of Apollo Kerdoios at Larisa, Athena Polias at Phthiotic Thebes, Artemis Panachaia at Halos and Apollo at Delphi; Only the copy from Delphi is extant

IG vii

post

Decree of Akraiphia honoring judges from Larisa; Request

4131

146a

that decree be published by the Larisans in the sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios

This collection of decrees attests to the presence of a sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios in Larisa and suggests its importance to the community. The cult seems to have maintained the same general function in the period of Macedonian domination as well as in the post-196a era: It was a location suitable for honoring foreigners who had served Larisa well and for recognizing honors awarded to Larisans by foreign states. Three documents are specifically concerned with boundary disputes. Although such disputes were legion at all periods of Greek history, it is tempting to see Apollo Kerdoios as especially suited to their resolution. It is possible that the sanctuary had a

141

more general political function for Larisa since the sanctuary of Athena on the acropolis is the only other known locus of publication for decrees of the city. 43

AK2. Larisa, IIIa IG ix.2 637 ou)x a(miìn plou/toio to/sa xa/rij, oÀsson o( su/mpaj ai¹wÜn a(mete/ran eiãsetai eu)se/bian, aÂi tu\ xareiìj o(si¿wj, aÃnqema ¸Hraklei¿dou

Kerdw¯ie,

Simie/w de/co kaiì Trallianou=.

Damokratei¿wn Eu)krati¿da. 5

vacat Swsime/nhj Swsime/nouj e)poi¿hsen. “There is not for us as much enjoyment of wealth as all time will recognize our piety, in which blessedly rejoicing, Kerdoie, accept the dedication of Simias and Eukratides, sons of Democrates. [A composition] of Herakleides from Tralles. Sosimenes son of Sosimenes made it.”

Marble plinth. Letter forms of the third century BCE (Kern). The inscription’s comparison of the dedicators’ enjoyment of wealth with Apollo’s enjoyment of the dedicators’ piety implies that Apollo is somehow responsible for the financial status of the two brothers. In turn, Simias and Eukratides pragmatically convert the act of dedication into a conspicuous display of this wealth: The mention of the poet Herakleides’ ethnic 44 and recognition that the attached votive was a commission 43

IG ix.2 517 45, where it is paired with the sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios as a locus of publication. This is the only evidence that the sanctuary of Athena played such a role in Larisa, however. 44 Bouvier 1979: 258.

142

heighten the prestige of the dedication. A connection between monetary kerdos and the epithet Kerdoios seems likely. It may also be the case, however, that the comparison of money and piety is nothing more than a topos with no real relationship to the context of dedication. That Apollo Kerdoios is the targeted recipient of this dedication is merely an inference from the prominence of the god in Larisa. Damokrates, Simios, Eukratides and the two men named Sosimenes are otherwise unknown.

AK3. Skotussa, 197-185a SEG 43.311 = Ed. pr. Missailidou-Despotidou 1993 ... aÄt toiÍ oÃntoi to/poi me\j po\t ta\n kampa\n toiÍ mesapurgi¿oi toiÍ ka\t to\

A 70

KerdoiÍon, v e)?peideiì plei¿oun to/poj

eiåe {S} da/mossoj, oiâ kexo/rtistai: aÄt ta=j kampa=j toiÍ mesapurgi¿oi toiÍ ka\t to\ KerdoiÍon aÃkainai pe/ttarej, po/dej? e(/c: v aÄt toiÍ pu/rgoi toiÍ gouniai¿oi toiÍ e)kka/tou toiÍ Kerdoi¿oi aÃkainai pe/nte, po/dej pe/nte: aÄt toiÍ pu/rgoi toiÍ eÄt tou= gouniai¿ou toiÍ e)kka/tou toiÍ Kerdoi¿oi me\c e)m potamo\n damo/ssan eÃmmen me\j po\t to\n Bu/stan, to\m ma\ oÃxon v i¹ddioustiko\n eÃmmen. “…as far as the bend of the curtain near the Kerdoion because there was more public space, there it has been left uncultivated as pasturage; from the bend of the curtain near the Kerdoion, 4 akainai 2 (?) feet; from the tower at the corner below the

143

Kerdoion, 5 akainai 5 feet; from the tower near the corner, below the Kerdoion, as far as the river to be public area, as far as towards Bystas, but the conduit to be private” (Trans. Missailidou-Despotidou).

A large, limestone stele broken into two parts. Letter forms of the first quarter of the second century BCE. The inscription is more closely dated by the mention of two men who were known to have served as strategoi of the Thessalian League in 190/89a and 183/2a. 45 The text delimits public lands in connection with a restructuring of Skotussa’s fortifications. It is by no means certain that the divinity honored in the Kerdoion was Apollo Kerdoios, only a possibility strongly suggested by the balance of the Thessalian evidence. Ed. pr., on the basis of an informal surface survey and close analysis of the text, tentatively locates the Kerdoion in the city’s southwestern quarter, beneath the acropolis. 46

AK4. Ambracia, 167-157/6a SEG 35.665 B 35ff. = Ed. pr. Cabanes and Andréou 1985 ...kai\] diata/cwntai poq ) au)tou\j oi( terma/s///tai ei)j te La-

)=Alin kai\

35

[ri/san----kai\ oi( pres]beutai\ sta/santw sta/laj xalke/aj e)n te tw=i erw=i tou= Dio/j [tou= )Olumpi/ou kai\ tou= )Ap]o/llwnoj tou= Kerdoi/ou e)n Lari/sai gegra/mmenaj o(mogra/fouj [e)n

45 46

)Ambraki/ai kai\ e)n Xara/]drwi ktl.

Missailidou-Despotidou 1993: 206. Missailidou-Despotidou 1993: 216-7.

144

“…and that the boundary commissioners split themselves up between Elis and Larisa…and let the ambassadors erect bronze stelai in the sanctuary of Olympian Zeus and of Apollo Kerdoios in Larisa, inscribed like those in Ambracia and Charadra…”

Several large fragments of a stele containing documents which recognize a new border between Ambracia and Charadros were recovered from the sanctuary of Apollo Soter in Ambracia. Included in this dossier are the instructions printed above which specify that a copy of the treaty be inscribed on a bronze stele and erected in the sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios in Larisa. The inscription is dated on the basis of the historical circumstances mentioned within the body of the text. Edd. pr. situate within a broad historical context the close connection between southern Epirus and Thessaly attested in this inscription. 47 SEG ad loc. offers the more narrow position of Habicht: “… the erection of a stele in Larisa is to be considered as a sign of gratitude for the decree of the Thessalian League granting financial support to Ambrakia in ca. 179-165 B.C.” 48 There is mention neither of “the Thessalians,” however, nor of either of the two wellknown federal sanctuaries of Thessaly, those of Zeus Eleutherios in Larisa and Athena Itonia near modern Philia. Does this inscription offer evidence that the sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios in Larisa had a federal status? Perhaps, but we must first make the case that by “Larisa” the Ambracians mean “the Thessalian League.” Larisa was clearly the most important city of the League in the second century BCE, home to the federal synedrion and host of the federal Eleutheria, and Habicht’s desire to equate the Thessalian League with Larisa is understandable. But as important as Larisa was to the koinon of the Thessalians, it is equally true that Larisa was a city sovereign with respect to many foreign and domestic affairs. The other foreign documents known to 47

Cabanes and Andréou 1985: 531-2. Habicht is referring to the decree recovered from the sanctuary of Athena Itonia near modern Philia and published by him as Habicht 1976b = SEG 26.688 = AI1. 48

145

have been set up in the sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios—the letters of Philip V and the honorary decree of the Akraiphians—were both directed at a specifically Larisan audience. Conversely, the non-foreign decrees to be published in the sanctuary are all products of the city of Larisa, not the Thessalian League. It is not necessary to speculate that publication in the sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios was somehow directly tied to the financial support offered by the Thessalian League. We cannot even exclude the possibility that Habicht’s inscription from Philia, AI1, postdates AK4. It is more likely that the publication clause indicates an important relationship between Ambracia and Larisa qua independent city. 49

AK5. Chyretiai, IIa (?) McD 1162 = Ed. pr. Woodward 1910: 154-5, no.6 ãAplouni Di¿kai[o]n [ka]iì

Kerdoi¿ou

Poli¿t?a?[j

S]oustra/teioj

IPEMOALEION to\n e(autou= pro/gonon

Pt[ol]e/ma?

¹Agaqounei¿a to\n e(auta=j paiÍda.

“To Apollo Kerdoios, Politas son of Sostrateios, dedicated Dikaios IPEMOALEION his step-son, and Ptolema, daughter of Agathon, [dedicated] her own son.”

Marble statue base. Date is suggested by LGPN iii.B under the entries of the names listed in the inscription, though its basis is unclear. Ptolema and Politas dedicate a statue of their son to Apollo Kerdoios. Apollo is occasionally associated with the development of adolescents in myth and cult. 50 We unfortunately cannot infer anything about the age of this “child” from the inscription. Dikaios is called pais and

49 50

Perhaps judges from Larisa mediated in the initial dispute. Cf. the references at Farnell 1895-1909: 4.148f.

146

progonos in relation to his parents, not in any absolute sense. IG xii,7 *4 (Delphi: Ia) is an intriguing parallel: A.

Ma/rion

Ne/pwta

Ai¹gialeino/n, tet[ei]mh-

me/non a)po\ th=j Korinqi¿wn boulh=j t[ei-] maiÍj bouleutikaiÍj kaiì a)[g]oranomikaiÍj, A.

Ma/-

rioj Ne/pwj path/r, Kori¿nqioj, kaiì ¹Iouli¿a Ai¹[gi]a/ lh [D]elfh/, to\n e(autw½n [u]i¸o\n

¹Apo/l[lwn]i Puqi¿-

5

wi. “A. Marius Nepos Aigialeinos, honored by the council of the Corinthians with bouleutic and agoranomic honors, A. Marius Nepos, father, a Corinthian, and Julia Aigiale Delphe, [dedicated] their son, i.e. A. Marius Nepos Aigialeinos, to Pythian Apollo.” Although AK5 lacks the explicit motivation of the Nepos inscription, it is worth noting that an amphithales pais led the procession from Delphi to the Tempe in the Stepteria and was also prominent in the Theban Daphnephoria.

AK6. Phalanna, Ia IG ix.2 1234 ãAplouni

Kerd[o]i¿ou

Sousi¿patroj

Polemarxi¿daioj o( qu/taj o)ne/qeike i¸eromnamonei¿saj kaiì a)rxidauxnaforei¿saj. “To Apollo Kerdoios, Sosipatros, son of Polemarchides, the sacrificer, dedicated, after serving as hieromnemon and archidauchnaphoros.”

147

Square marble base. Neither Sosipatros or Polemarchidas are otherwise known from Phalanna. The inscription is dated by letter form. The text contains a number of features which are significant for our understanding of the cult. While hierothytai are known throughout the Greek world, 51 the office of thytas is without epigraphic parallel. The most natural inference is that the thytas served the cult in some sacrificial capacity, but the Rhodian evidence opens up the possibility that the office is not specially connected with the cult: It may be that the thytas in Phalanna was a civic magistrate like the tagos. The participle i¸eromnamonei¿saj offers at least two interpretive possibilities: a general “religious official” and the more marked “representative on the council of the Delphic amphictyony.” 52 Although hieromnemones are common figures in Thessalian epigraphy, deciding between these two alternatives is not easy. Hieromnemones in the general sense are connected with a civic inventory of lands dedicated to various divinities of Larisa. 53 The prominence of Thessaly in the Delphic Amphictyony coupled with the fact that AK6 is a dedication to Apollo does open the possibility that the more marked sense of i(eromnamoneu/w is operative. Sosipatros son of Polemarchides is not mentioned in any Delphic document as an amphictyon of either Thessaly or Perrhaebia, however. 54 In the final analysis, the coupling of the

51

E.g., Thyrrheum (Akarnania): IG ix.12 247 (IIa); Andania: IG v.1 3447 (ante 191a). They are especially numerous on Rhodes: cf. IG xii.1. 52 LSJ s.v i(eromnamoneu/w “to be i(eromna/mwn”, s.v. i(eromna/mwn “I. adj. to be mindful of sacred things; II. 1. representative sent by each Amphictyonic state to the Delphic council; 2. magistrate who had charge of temples or religious matters; 3. recorder, registrar.” 53 Helly 1970b. It is likely that the IEROMN[-ca.-10-] of line 2 of the inscription, in the fragmentary preamble, refers to hieromnemones. Lines 29-32 are particularly suggestive: …euÀramen kaiì e)n tou= au)tou= to/pou ki¿ona[j-ca.-6-7-] Dio\j sunxrule/a, aÁ ma\ Eiàraj: me/nei kaiì e)pigrafa\ [-ca.-6-7-] [g]ramma/tessi: Skei¿beij kaiì àIpparxoj i¸erom[na/mo-] [n]ej e)sta/saien: ktl. “In the same place we also found stelai…one belonging to Zeus, fallen down, another belonging to Hera…an inscription…with the letters: ‘Skeibeis and Hipparchos, hieromnemones, erected.’” 54 Cf. the indices in Lefèvre 1998, Sánchez 2001.

148

participles with the apparently local designation of thytas tends to suggest that both hieromnemon and archidaphnephoros refer to local functions within the cult. dau/xna is Thessalian for da/fnh. 55 The prefix a)rxi- in the aorist participle a)rxidauxnaforei¿saj suggests that Sosipatros served as the chief laurel-bearer of a group of daphnephoroi. Daphnephoroi are also attested in the Thessalian cult of Apollo Leschaios. Compare IG ix.2 1027a (Larisa: Va): ãAploni

Lesxai¿?o[i]

¹Aristi¿on o)ne/qeke koi¸ sundauxnafo/roi. “Aristion and his fellow daphnephoroi dedicated to Apollo Leschaios.” I have considered the cult of Apollo Leschaios in connection with the Thessalian month Leschanorios and noted the strong resonances of that cult with the enneateric festival of the Stepteria. Laurel is also prominent in the cult of Pythian Apollo at Delphi, Apollo Ismenios at Thebes and in the cult of Apollo Daphnephoros at Eretria. 56 Given the popularity of Apollo in Thessaly, especially in aspects which recall his cult at Delphi, it is possible that the laurel-bearing in the cult of Apollo Kerdoios shares these Delphic resonances. Recently, another daphnephoroi inscription has been discovered in Thessaly (Atrax: Va): Eu)/forboj | a)rxidaux?|nofo/rej koi) s|undafnafo/|roi “Euphorbus [dedicated] while serving as archidaphnophoros together with the sundaphnaphoroi.” 57 It is safe to infer that an Apollo, perhaps Apollo Kerdoios or Leschaios, was the intended recipient of the dedication.

55

van der Velde 1924: 144. Delphi: Amandry 1950: 126-34; Sourvinou-Inwood 1979: 233-8; Thebes: Schachter 2000; Eretria: Bérard 1971. Ogle 1910 is still extremely useful. 57 SEG 47.679 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1994b: 340, no. 21. Chaniotis comments in SEG: “2-3: misread or miswritten a)rxidafn|ofo/roj?” Marble stele. 56

149

Literary Evidence There is no literary evidence concerning the Thessalian cult of Apollo Kerdoios.

Numismatic Evidence Apollo was relatively prominent on the coinage of Thessaly. During the period of Macedonian domination, issues from both Larisa and Metropolis featured Apollo. The god is also regularly present on the pre-Roman issues of the renewed Thessalian League, though he is not as common as either Athena Itonia or Zeus (presumably Eleutherios). Finally, Apollo is featured on various Thessalian issues of the imperial period, especially under Tiberius and Nero. 58 As Moustaka notes, there is no great variation in the representations of Apollo on Thessalian coinage, especially of the preRoman period, to match the variety of epithets attested in the region’s epigraphy. 59 It is difficult to connect any particular type with Apollo Kerdoios.

Archaeological Evidence Verdelis’ 1955 excavations in Larisa uncovered the foundations of a fourthcentury structure closely connected with a row of uninscribed statue bases. In light of the epigraphic evidence, he suggested that the building belonged to the sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios. 60 The site has not produced inscriptions or votives that indicate the presence of this particular deity and it is safest to leave the question of identification open.

58

Burrer 1993: 37, 42, 55ff. Moustaka 1983: 36-8. 60 Verdelis 1955: 149-50. 59

150

Discussion The evidence for Apollo Kerdoios indicates that the cult of the divinity functioned variously in Thessaly. In Larisa, Apollo Kerdoios was one of the chief polis divinities. Important state documents were regularly published in his sanctuary. The epigraphic evidence suggests that the sanctuary maintained the same basic set of functions during the period of Macedonian hegemony and the following era of the renewed Thessalian koinon. It is not possible to comment definitively on the role of the Skotussan Kerdoion. 61 As prominent as the god was within the polis pantheon, he also received the dedications of private individuals, as AK2 and AK5 make clear. It has also become clear during the preliminary presentation and commentary on the evidence for Apollo Kerdoios in Thessaly that the cult is part of a broader pattern of Apollo cults in Thessaly which have a strong orientation towards Delphi. The presence of daphnephoroi in the Phalanna cult may suggest a specific connection to the Delphic-Thessalian festival of the Stepteria.

5.2: Artemis Throsia

Introduction The cult of Artemis Throsia is attested in Thessaly at Atrax and Larisa from ca. 300-150a. It is not otherwise known in the Greek world. The significance of the epithet is neither obvious nor discussed in any ancient source. Modern scholars have offered the following basic explanations: 1) Arvanitopoulos compared the root qor-,

61

It may be significant that the putative locations for both the Skotussan and Larisan sanctuaries of Apollo Kerdoios are not on the acropolis of either city.

151

which he generally associated with the swelling of new growth, and hypothesized that Artemis Throsia was a divinity of fertility and birth. 62 Clement made the same linguistic comparison as Arvanitopoulos and suggested that Throsia was roughly parallel in sense to other, better known epithets of Artemis like, e.g., Gene/teira, Loxi/a, Ei)lei/quia, etc. 63 Hatzopoulos is in general agreement with this line of interpretation; 64 2) García Ramón argues that the epithet Throsia is connected with an unattested *qro/sij—“support, protection, transition”—and accordingly qualifies her as a goddess with an interest in those general realms; 65 3) Brulé, after acknowledging the possibility that the epithet is toponymic, compares qrw- and suggests that Artemis Throsia is a goddess associated with “lively forward movement,” viz., racing. He imparts, in partial acceptance of Hatzopoulos’ hypotheses concerning the goddess, an initiatory significance to the race. 66

Epigraphic Evidence There are no theophoric names built on the Thros- stem attested in Thessaly. A state festival of Artemis Throsia is not suggested by the federal calendar.

AT1. Atrax, ca. 300-250a SEG 35.500 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 199, no. 32 ¹Arte/midi

Qrosi¿#

¹Ep[ikra/]ta [® ®].

“Epikrata [dedicated] to Artemis Throsia”

62

Arvanitopoulos 1929. Clement 1934: 402-3. 64 Hatzopoulos 1994: 28. 65 García Ramón 1999: 11-13. He appears to be heavily influenced by Hatzopoulos’ initiatory interpretation of the cult. 66 Brulé 1997: 328-9. 63

152

“Naiskos stele with a pediment containing a shield.” 67 This Epikrata is otherwise unknown. 68

AT2. Larisa, ca. 200a SEG 35.615 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 206, no. 62 ¹Arte/midi Qrosi¿# Eu)pa/tra Pasimedontei¿a tele/ouma “To Artemis Throsia, Eupatra daughter of Pasimedoun [dedicated] a teleoma” 69

Pedimental, naiskos stele. The findspot of this inscription, though commonly referred to as Larisa, was in fact at the modern village of Kalochori, in the chora of ancient Larisa. This Eupatra is otherwise unknown, as is Pasimedoun. 70 The suggestive tele/ouma has one epigraphic parallel, also Thessalian, IG ix.2 1235 (Phalanna: IIa), naiskos stele: Damma/teri kai\ Ko/ra Me/lissa

¹Epigenei¿a telei¿ouma.

“To Demeter and Kore Melissa, daughter of Epigenes, [dedicated a] teleoma.” The word is open to many possible interpretations. Hatzopoulos attempts to fit both cults into an initiatory framework: “[the word teleoma] concerns the completion of a young girl’s growth which makes her a woman, a ‘complete women’, an ‘adult woman’...moreover, that this ‘completion,’ this ‘maturation,’ coincides, at least for certain representatives of the age group, with the completion of service in the sanctuary of the goddess, as Tziaphalias proposed, would not be surprising, but on the contrary, is suggested by the entirety of the dossier.” 71 67

SEG ad loc. LGPN iii.b s.v. ¹Epikra/ta 1. 69 Pasimedontei¿a Helly; Pasimelontei¿a ed. pr. 70 LGPN iii.B s.v. Eu)pa/tra 2; Pasime/doun 1. 71 Hatzopoulos 1994: 39-40. 68

153

I will consider Hatzopoulos’ position on the entirety of the dossier in the general discussion following the presentation of the evidence for the cult of Artemis Throsia. For the moment, it is important to note that there is absolutely no indication of the dedicator’s age or marital status in either of the two teleoma inscriptions. Moreover, in Thessalian inscriptions service in a cult is more commonly indicated by an appositional noun or attributive participle modifying the name of the dedicator as, e.g., AK6: ãAplouni

Kerd[o]i¿ou

Sousi¿patroj

Polemarxi¿daioj o( qu/taj o)ne/qeike i¸eromnamonei¿saj kaiì a)rxidauxnaforei¿saj. “To Apollo Kerdoios, Sosipatros, son of Polemarchides, the sacrificer, dedicated, after serving as hieromnemon and archidauchnaphoros.” I begin with the syntax of teleoma. Though the elliptical character of Greek dedicatory inscriptions renders precision in this case difficult, there would seem to be at least three possibilities: 1) It is the accusative object of a verb of dedication which by convention the reader must supply and means “stele,” e.g., “Eupatra [dedicated] a teleoma [= stele];” 2) It stands in a predicative relationship to the stele, e.g., “Eupatra [dedicated this stele as] a teleoma;” 3) It stands in a predicative relationship to some other object in the sanctuary which would have been identifiable as a teleoma. Although Hatzopoulos does not analyze the syntax of the dedication, he clearly understands the word as if it were a part of an adverbial phrase like kata\ telei/wma, vel sim., and could be translated as “so-and-so made a dedication ‘on the occasion of completion.’” At first sight, such a reading seems plausible on analogy with the common dedicatory pairing eu)xh\n—kat' eu)xh\n. Closer analysis reveals, however, that eu)xh\n and kat' eu)xh\n are not functional equivalents but refer to

154

two different moments in a process which may be schematically represented as follows: human vow to divinity (eu)xh\n eu)/casqai)—attainment of vow (eu)xh=j tuxei=n)—dedication in fulfillment of prior vow (eu)xh\n telei=n). The notion of eu)xh/ can cover both what is desired from the god and what is promised the god in return. In this light, the simple accusative eu)xh/n stands as a predicate to the stele itself or some other object in the sanctuary and marks out the dedication as a response to the attainment of a vow. The expression kat' eu)xh\n, on the other hand, draws attention to a different point of this process, viz., the moment of the vow itself, before attainment, although that the request was granted can easily be inferred. In support of this interpretation, it is instructive to briefly compare similar adverbial expressions in Hellenistic dedications. While dedications made kat' e)pi¿tagma, kat' e)pitagh/n and kat' oÃnar are relatively common, e)pitagh/n, e)pi¿tagma and oÃnar do not occur as simple accusatives. One may infer that if Eupatra wished her dedication to be kata\ telei/wma, she would have commissioned the cutter accordingly. On syntactic grounds, then, the interpretation suggested by Hatzopoulos is unlikely. Although we cannot exclude the possibility that in Thessaly teleoma was used as a generic word for “dedication,” it is prima facie improbable and we may set aside possibility 1). Possibilities 2) and 3) deserve more attention. The key question is determining the kind of predicative relationship that exists between teleoma and the physical presence of the dedication. LSJ s.v. telei/wma offers the following two definitions for the word: “ 1. completion, th=j oi)ki/aj Arist. Ph. 246a17; th=j yuxh=j Aq. Jb. 12.2, Eun. VS p. 500 B. 2. Thess. telei/ouma, dedication on the occasion of telei/wsij II, IG ix.2 1235.” For telei/wsij II, LSJ comments: “a. attainment of manhood. b. marriage.” telei/wma is a very rare word, used only in the passages cited in the three passages cited in the lexicon. LSJ’s connection with

155

telei/wsij suits Hatzopoulos’ initiatory framework very well, but how LSJ deduced so marked a meaning of the word in the case of IG ix.2 1235 from such paltry comparanda is unclear. Formally, telei/wma is a deverbative of tele(i)o/w, itself a derivative of te/leioj, and the general sense of “completion” offered by LSJ s.v. telei/wma 1 is appropriate. te/leioj and tele/w are both derived from te/loj and it is reasonable to see a strong semantic connection between the two. In what sense could a dedication be said to be a completion? Notably, tele/w and its compounds are used by literary authors and in inscriptions to signify the fulfillment or completion of a vow. This completion can refer to the divine accomplishment of a human vow, as in the case of IG vii 1794 (Thespiai: date?): eu)xa\n e)kktele/santi Dionu/soi Neome/dej eÃrgon a)nt' a)gaqo=n mna=m' a)ne/qeke to/de “To Dionysus who accomplished a vow, Neomedes dedicated this mnema for the good deeds.” More often, however, this complex of verbs is used to mark the human fulfillment of a vow. Compare, for example, the following passage of Herodotus (1.86.2): (O de\ sunnh/saj purh\n mega/lhn a)nebi¿base e)p' au)th\n to\n KroiÍso/n te e)n pe/dvsi dedeme/non kaiì diìj e(pta\

Ludw½n par' au)to\n paiÍdaj,

e)n no/% eÃxwn eiãte dh\ a)kroqi¿nia tau=ta katagieiÍn qew½n oÀte% dh/, eiãte kaiìeu)xh\n e)pitele/sai qe/lwn ktl. “Cyrus chained Croesus and placed him with fourteen Lydian boys on a great pyre that he had built; perhaps he intended them as a choice offering to some god of his, or perhaps he made a vow and wished to fulfill it…” (Trans. Sélincourt). Also relevant is Herodotus 2.65.4:

156

Oi¸ de\ e)n tv=si po/lisi eÀkastoi eu)xa\j ta/sde sfi a)potele/ousi “Their manner, in the various cities, of performing vows is as follows.” (Trans. Sélincourt). CEG 1.275 (Athens: 460-450a) provides a useful epigraphic parallel: po/tni' a)parxe\n te/nde Me/nandro[j a)ne/qeken] eu)xole\n tele/saj soi\ xa/rin a)nt[idido\j] “Mistress, Menander dedicated this aparchē in completion of his vow and in compensation to you.” Although the evidence does not allow a definitive conclusion to be reached, I provisionally suggest that the telei/wma of the two Thessalian inscriptions simply signifies that a prior request and vow of the dedicator to a divinity has been successful and now the dedicator must keep his or her end of the bargain. Such an interpretation, though less exciting than Hatzopoulos’ reading, makes a good deal more sense, particularly when viewed against the broader background of dedicatory inscriptions. Like the simple accusative eu)xh\n, telei/wma emphasizes the human completion of the vow and focuses on the end rather than the beginning of the vow process.

AT3. Larisa, med. IIa McD 360 = Ed. pr. Giannopoulos 1931: 178, no. 18 ¹Arte/midi Qrosi¿ai ¸Ippo/loxoj ¸Ippolo/xeioj u(p[e\r] Eu)biotei¿aj ¹Alecippei¿aj nebeusa/nsaj lu/tra. “To Artemis Throsia Hippolochos son of Hippolochos on behalf of Eubioteia daughter of Alexippeia who served as nebeuousa dedicated lutra.”

157

Marble base for a bronze statue, most likely of Artemis. 72 Clement and Hatzopoulos both allege that the Hippolochos and Eubioteia of this inscription are about to be married or newly married on the basis of McD 370 (= Ed. pr. Giannopoulos 1927-28c: 55, no. 1) (Larisa: med. IIa): o( dh=moj o( Larisai¿wn Eu)bio/than E[u)bio/-] tou, gunaiÍka de\

¸Ippolo/xou

tou=

Ke[fa/-]

lou, fu/si de\ ¹Aleci¿ppou tou= ¹Aleci¿ppo[u, i¸e-] rhteu/sasan “The demos of the Larisans [dedicated a statue of] Eubioteia, daughter of Eubiotos, wife of Hippolochus son of Kephalos, birth daughter of Alexippos son of Alexippos, after serving as a priestess.” 73 AT3 may represent the Eubioteia of McD 370 before her adoption by Eubiotos. 74 The two inscriptions plainly refer to two different men named Hippolochus, however. Eubioteia’s husband is Hippolochus son of Kephalos while the dedicator of AT3 is Hippolochus son of Hippolochus. It is certainly plausible that the dedicating Hippolochus of AT3 is related somehow to the Hippolochus who would later be Eubioteia’s husband. 75 The Hippolochi were an elite family of Larisa. Parallels for the aorist participle nebeusa/nsaj in Thessalian dedications are numerous: 1) Demetrias (?), fin. IIa, pedimental stele IG ix.2 1123 Dunatiìj Melanqi¿ou

72

¹Arte/midi Pagasi¿tidi nebeu/sa?[sa]

Arvanitopoulos 1929: 249. Clement 1934: 402-3; Hatzopoulos 1994: 28. 74 LGPN iii.B s.v. Eu)bio/teia 1, 2, regards them as different individuals. 75 For Alexippos, cf. LGPN iii.B s.v. )Ale/cippoj 9. 73

158

“Dynatis daughter of Melanthios [dedicated] to Artemis Pagasitis after serving as nebeuousa”; 2) Atrax, ca. 200a, pedimental stele SEG 34.489 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984a: 203, no. 73 Ni¿kh Nikago/rou nebeu/sasa “Nike daughter of Nikagora [dedicated] after serving as nebeuousa”; 3) Atrax, 200a, white marble naiskos stele SEG 34.493 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1977; Cf. also Tziaphalias 1984a: 196, no. 58 ¹Arte/midi

Ai¹xeloxiìj

Pu[q]ag[o-]

rai¿a e)pine[b]eu/sassa o)ne/[q]eike “To Artemis Aichelochis daughter of Pythagoras dedicated after serving as epinebeuousa”; 4) Atrax, IIa, marble pedimental stele SEG 46.633 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1991: 223 Laukri/ta Filonikei/a nebeu/sansa “Laukrita daughter of Philonikos [dedicated] after serving as nebeuousa”; 5) Atrax, IIIa, marble pedimental stele SEG 46.636 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1991: 223 [---]. A Damoxarei/a )Art[e/]m[i]d[i] nebeu/sassa “So-and-so daughter of Damochares [dedicated] to Artemis serving as nebeuousa”; 6) Atrax, IIIa, marble naiskos stele SEG 49.602 = Ed. pr.Tziaphalias 1996: 383 no. 12 )Arte/midi Qaumare/ta Eu)damidai/a nebeu/sass[a]

159

“To Artemis Thaumareta daughter of Eudamides [dedicated] after serving as nebeuousa.” The sense of the participle remains unclear. 76 Wilhelm would not hazard a guess in the editio princeps of what would later be IG ix.2 1134: For him, the meaning of nebeu/s[--] was “puzzling” (rätselhaft). 77 Kern did not attempt to fill the lacuna in his edition of IG ix.2 1134, but printed a suggestion of Hiller in his apparatus: “An nebeu/s[asa] ut a)rkteu/sasa, i.e. postquam deae ne/brou nomine inservivit?” Later epigraphic evidence confirmed the existence of an aorist participle as in Hiller’s supplement. His suggested parallel with the Attic Arkteia was also picked up and has proven extremely influential in subsequent scholarship on the cult. While Clement preferred to connect nebeu/w with *neboj, an unattested by-form of nebro/j, 78 therefore slightly modifying the linguistic argument implied in Hiller’s note, he too perceived a close connection between the more numerous attestations of nebeu/sasa, now closely connected with Artemis Throsia by the 1931 publication of AT3, and the cult of Artemis at Brauron: “In each, Artemis is a fertility goddess, the patroness of women as bearers of children. In each cult existed an identical ritual of the worship of the goddess through identification of the worshipper with the sacred animal of the goddess.” 79 A different line of argument was suggested by Arvanitopoulos and later more fully developed by Hatzopoulos. Arvanitopoulos suggested that nebeu/sasa derived from the adjective ne/(w)oj, -a and compared Hesychius s.v. ne/ai: a)gwnisa/menai gunai=kej to\n i(ero\n dro/mon

76

Cf. Kajava 1999 for a study of “Greek denominatives deriving from the names of animals” (p. 18). Wilhelm 1890: 303. 78 Clement 1934: 403-4. He adduces ai)=sxoj, ai)sxu/nw, ai)sxro/j as a parallel development. But cf. Kajava 1999: 17, “This sounds most arbitrary, and so it is no wonder that an alternative explanation (viz., Hatzopoulos) has been advanced.” 79 Clement 1934: 406-407. 77

160

“neai: women who competed in the sacred race.” For Hatzopoulos, the women designated as nebeusasai have participated in an initiatory rite: “…nothing hinders us from posing as a working hypothesis that nebeu/w is a technical verb derived from ne/(w)oj, signifying the state of someone who belongs to an age class participating in an initiatory cycle. The participle nebeu/sa(n)sa would designate the young girl after accomplishing this cycle, the end of which was perhaps marked by a race (un rite de sortie).” 80 This is a very dubious etymology, however: There is no evidence for a Thessalian sound law whereby intervocalic digamma became beta. 81 In the absence of a clear etymology, every solution to this problem must remain provisional. The objections which applied to Hatzopoulos’ interpretation of AT2 largely apply here. There is absolutely no indication of the age of the dedicating woman. Nor does Hatzopoulos provide any parallels for dedications made by individuals in commemoration of their participation in an age class initiatory rite. Helly follows Clement in suggesting that the women so designated were simply officials in the cult who made a dedication at the end of their term. 82 This is more appealing on the whole. There is a formal similarity between AT3 and the numerous Thessalian dedications which record the dedicator’s prior service in the cult with an aorist participle. The lu/tra of AT3 are equally confusing. Expressions involving lu/tra or lu/tron occur in several Thessalian manumissions and seem to roughly correspond to latin peculium. 83 Given the prosopography of AT3, however, it is unlikely that the word has maintained this strict sense: The inscription mentions two members at the

80

Hatzopoulos 1994: 32. Buck 1955: 48-9. 82 BE 1988: no. 712. 83 Bielman 1989: 31; Babacos 1966: 43-4. 81

161

upper limit of the Thessalian aristocracy. It is theoretically possible that Hippolochos manumitted a slave and then purchased a dedication for Artemis Throsia with a slave’s peculium. Herodotus 5.77 presents a like situation in the case of prisoners of war: Kaiì tw½n lu/trwn th\n deka/thn a)ne/qhkan poihsa/menoi te/qrippon xa/lkeon “And they made a dedication of a tithe of the lutra, after getting a bronze chariot made [with the lutra]” (Trans. Sélincourt). Again, Thessalian dedicatory parallels are not lacking: 1) Trikka, IIa, inscribed on the abacus of a Doric capital IG ix.2 303 ¹Arte/midi

¹Akrai¿#

Xaropiìj

Filokra/touj,

¹Amwmh/ta Krati¿nou lu/tron “To Artemis Akraia, Charopis daughter of Philokrates, Amometa daughter of Kratinus [dedicated] lutron.”; 2) Demetrias, date?, statue base McD 1034 = Ed. pr. Arvanitopoulos 1911: 298-9, no. 47 to\ koino\n tw½?n Magnh/twn: [--?--] tou= pa/ppou au(tou= vac. lu/tron?. “The koinon of the Magnesians. [So-and-so dedicated] the lutron of his own grandfather (?)”; 84 84

Arvanitopoulos comments ad loc.: “The koinon of the Magnesians is named in the first line because it took part in the consecration in some fashion. It is indeed in the public treasury in which the tax ‘conforming to the laws of the Magnesians’ ought to be paid which was mentioned in IG ix.2 1100b 11.” This is deeply unsatisfactory. Cf. Hatzopoulos 1994: 38, who classifies the document, perhaps rashly, as “inutilisable.” True, the inscription is very difficult in its current state of publication. Nevertheless, the following points are worth stating: 1) The dedicating body ought to be the koinon of the Magnesians. Cf. IG ix.2 1132 (Demetrias: IIa), base: t?o\ koino\n tw½n Magnh/[twn] Kri¿twna Kri¿twnoj Dhmh[trih=]

162

3) Larisa, ca. 200a, pedimental stele SEG 35.605 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 221, no. 100; Cf. now SEG 38.436b, 44.451 Diosko/roij Kratero/froun ¹Exefro/neioj lu/tra. “To the Dioskoroi Kraterophron son of Echephron [dedicated] lutra.” Arvanitopoulos, on the basis of an entry in Hesychius, equates the lutra with katharmata and interprets them as thank-offerings for deliverance from the labor of child birth. 85 For Hatzopoulos, the divinties who receive lutra, the Dioskoroi and Artemis in various aspects, are kourotrophic. He suggests in the case of Artemis that lutra were dedicated following completion of a rite of passage marking the transition from virginity to marriageablity and, comparing the cult of Hera Akraia at Perachora or Artemis Brauronia at Brauron, perhaps involving some form of sequestration. The lutra of AT3 are therefore a symbolic ransom. Brulé takes issue with Hatzopoulos’ interpretation and counters with his own: “In Thessaly, as elsewhere, those females who have attained a certain physical development, who have become ‘belle’ and are on the verge of being ‘taken by a man,’ these very females ought to dedicate something to Artemis in order to ask for her protection and to pardon themselves in advance for the loss of their virginity. We should therefore be faced with, unless I am mistaken, a metaphorical usage of lutron.” 86

strathgh/santa tw½n Magnh/?[twn] [a)]reth=j eÀneken kaiì eu)noi¿aj th=j ei¹j? [e(autou/j] 2) The monument is a statue base which should have held an image of the individual whose name has fallen out in the lacuna. The Magnesians will have honored this individual with a statue, here described as a lutron, presumably for his good service to the Magnesians. Pindar Isthmian 8.1 ff., to be discussed below, offers a good parallel for describing honors paid to an individual as lutron. The sequence tou= pa/ppou au(tou remains riddling. Autopsy may be able to clarify the text. 85 Arvanitopoulos 1929: 251. 86 Brulé 1997: 328. A similar interpretation is also offered at Lazzarini 1997.

163

The semantics of lutra do occasionally shift from freedom/imprisonment to a less marked sense of exchange or compensation. 87 Two passages in Pindar make it clear that, at least in the context of epinician poetry, lutra could be any kind of compensation for a prior good deed or praiseworthy way of being: 1) Pindar, Isthmian 8.1ff.: Klea/ndr% tij a(liki¿# | te lu/tron euÃdocon, wÕ ne/oi, kama/twn | patro\j a)glao\n Telesa/rxou para\ pro/quron | i¹wÜn a)negeire/tw | kw½mon,

¹Isqmia/doj te ni¿|kaj aÃpoina, kaiì

Neme/# | a)e/qlwn oÀti

kra/toj e)c|eu=re “In honor of youthful Kleandros, let one of you go, O young men, to the splendid portal of his father Telesarchos to awaken the revel, as a glorious requital for his

87

Lutra are present in the Anatolian confession inscriptions where the word seems to mean “atonement.” More problematic is SEG 28.529 (= Ed. pr. Peek 1974: no. 907 (Phthiotic Thebes: Ip), which offers a possible parallel for the metaphorical usages of lutron, lutra cited above: AuÅloj I¹ ou/nioj ¸Rou=foj hÀrwj xaiÍre. ¹Aoui¿a mu/sta xaiÍre. vacat a)ndrei¿an stratiaiÍj o(po/shn e)nedi¿cato ¸Rou=foj, klu=qi kaiì ei¹j a)reth\n qau/mason a)krota/thn: oÀpla kaiì ei¹rh/nhj diede/cato kaiì meta\ do/chj misqo\n e)p' eu)sebi¿v tou=ton e)karpi¿sato, 4 [ou) mo/]non a)nqrw¯poij a)re/saj to\ priìn w¨j stratiw¯thj, [a)l]la\ kaiì a)qana/twn lu/tra labwÜn oÀsia: [ou)k hÅ]n? e)?xq ? r ? h\ MoiÍra: bi¿ou te/loj euÀrato koino/n. ®® [ko]u/fh soi fqime/nwn hÀde ge/noito ko/nij. 8 The epigram has not factored in any discussion of the possible meaning of lutron, lutra in Thessalian dedications. While the epigram is conspicuous in a number of respects, I focus only on line 6. The use of the aorist participle of lamba/nw with lu/tron, -a evokes a phrase found in some Thesslian manumissions. Compare, for example, IG ix.2 1119 10ff. (Demetrias: ?): PELW . . . . . . ¹Ap?pi¿ou | a)phleuqe/rwsen | Tro/fimon mhdeniì | prosh/konta lu/tron | labou=sa pa[r'] au)tou= | sn§. “Pelo[- -] daughter of Appios freed Trophimos, [so that] he belongs to no one, after taking from him lutron worth [denarii].” In the case of the manumission, the phrase clearly refers to the slave’s peculium. This was also appropriate in prisoner-of-war contexts: cf. Thucydides 6.5.3 xro/n% I¸ ppokra/thj uÀsteron Ge/laj tu/rannoj, lu/tra a)ndrw½n Surakosi¿wn ai¹x malw¯twn labwÜn th\n gh=n th\n Kamarinai¿wn; “…later Hippokrates the tyrant of Gela took the land of the Kamarinans as the lutra of Syracusan prisoners…” The context of the epigram is not parallel, however.

164

efforts and a reward both for his Isthmian victory and because at Nemea he gained triumph in the contests” (Trans. Race); 2) Pindar, Olympian 7.77ff: to/qi lu/tÈron sumfora=j oi¹ktra=j gluku\

Tlapole/m% | iàstatai

Tirunqi¿wn a)rxage/t#, | wÐsper qe%½, | mh/lwn te knisa/essa pompa\ | kaiì kri¿sij a)mf' a)e/qloij. “There, in sweet recompense for the lamentable mishap, is established for Tlapolemos, the Tirynthians’ colony-founder, as if for a god, a procession of rich sacrificial flocks and the judging of athletic contests” (Trans. Race). The semantics of apoine are roughly parallel. Compensation is at the root of Greek religion: Worshippers hope that their piety will be compensated by good treatment from the gods. Similarly, when a worshipper vows that he or she will make a dedication when a particular god has acted in accordance with his or her wishes, the god demands compensation. I suggest that the use of lutra in these Thessalian dedications is comparable to the use of teleoma and euchen discussed above. It marks the dedication, either the stele itself or some other object within the sanctuary, as compensation for divine good-will. Again, if Arvanitopoulos’ etymology of Throsia is anywhere near the mark, perhaps this compensation was the result of successful labor. 88

AT4. Atrax, ca. 150a SEG 34.481 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984a: 481, no. 59 ¹Aleca/ndra Ladokei¿a tageu/sansa

88

¹Arte/midi

Such an interpretation has already been forwarded by Arvanitopoulos, Clement, et al., but without any focus on the import of lutra.

165

Qrosi¿#. “Alexandra, daughter of Ladokos, [dedicated] after serving as tagos for Artemis Throsia”

Marble plaque. Alexandra daughter of Ladokeia is also mentioned in a fragmentary stele, almost certainly votive although the divinity’s name is not present, from Atrax (ca. 150a). 89 SEG 46.638 (= Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1991: 224) (Atrax: IIIa), “marble pedimental stele decorated with two Doric half-columns and a relief shield,” 90 furnishes the sole Thessalian parallel for the use of tageu/sansa, vel sim., in a dedication: Damaine/ta

(Agemaxei/a tageu/sassa o)ne/qeiken

“Damaineta daughter of Hagemacheia after serving as tageuousa dedicated.” Hatzopoulos reads this use of tageu/sansa in conjunction with the nebeusasa, epinebeusasa participles discussed above and suggests that there was a hierarchy of initiation within the cult of Artemis. 91 It is not clear if Hatzopoulos has in mind the gradation mystes—epoptes observed at Eleusis and Samothrace. If so, the type of initiation undergone in a mystery cult was very different from the initiation of the socalled “rites of passage” type. He does not provide any parallels for hierarchy of initiation within the “rites of passage” type in any case. It is far easier and more sensible to see a female official in the cult of Artemis Throsia who served as tageousa. The word tagos was a catch-all title for civic official in northern Greece—compare the use of archon in Athens—and it would not be surprising for it to appear in a cultic context. 89

SEG 34.482 = Tziaphalias 1984a: 197, no. 60. SEG ad loc. 91 Hatzopoulos 1994: 33-4. 90

166

Literary Evidence There is no literary evidence for the cult of Artemis Throsia.

Numismatic Evidence There is no numismatic evidence for the cult of Artemis Throsia.

Archaeological Evidence There is no archaeological evidence for the cult of Artemis Throsia.

Discussion Since my presentation of the primary evidence has alternately presented and criticized Hatzopoulos’ interpretation of specific details, it would be useful to briefly summarize his arguments in their totality. 92 Hatzopoulos argues that the types of age-class initiation observed by VidalNaquet in Sparta and Athens have parallels in the northern Greek world. On the basis of the Thessalian inscriptions discussed above, he postulates an initiatory rite in the cult of Artemis Throsia connected with the maturation of young women. Many of his readings are tendentious and his presentation contains less argument than agglomeration. This is not to say that his approach is fruitless. On the contrary, his analyses in Cultes et rites de passage en Macedoine are integrally connected with his other work on Macedonian instutions, viz., resituating Macedon away from the Demosthenic limits of culture and civilization and towards a broader “northern Greek” milieu of which Macedon, along with Epirus, Aetolia and Thessaly, is a part. This broader project will continue to pay rich dividends.

92

His arguments have won general adherence. Cf., e.g., Cole 2004: 210, “In Thessaly and Macedonia, epigraphical traces of a three-stage ritual of maturation for young girls survive.”

167

If the analysis offered of Artemis Throsia in this section has stripped the cult of its initiatory significance, it has offered something positive in return: A glimpse of a relationship between votary and divinity characterized by an idiosyncratic lexicon of compensation. While I have suggested that this language communicates ideas that are not alien to the panhellenic dedicatory vocabulary, the stark emphasis on the human compensation of the divinity is unique. Although this attitude seems to have been especially characteristic of the cult of Artemis Throsia, it is significant that this language also appears in Thessalian dedications to the Dioskoroi and Demeter and Kore. It may be possible to speak of a regional attitude towards those divinities.

5.3: Dionysus Karpios

Introduction Dionysus was worshiped as Karpios at Gomphi, Larisa and near the modern village of Mikro-Keserli—locations within tetradic Thessaly—from the Classical to the Roman imperial era. Although the god was honored under related aspects in other areas of the Greek world, it is only in Thessaly that he was known as Karpios. The epithet karpios is connected with the noun karpos which can signify a wide variety of agricultural produce or fruit as well as, more generally, any kind of gain. 93 Both Farnell and Wilamowitz noted the connection of some Dionysus cults with agriculture. 94 Although Thessaly was a major grain producing region, Theophrastus suggests that vines could also flourish there (Hist. Plant. 4.14.13): 93

Cf. the application of Homeric karpo\n a)rou/rhj to both vines (e.g. Il. 3.246) and cereal foods. Farnell 1895-1909: 5.118. Farnell focuses almost exclusively on the connection of the god with trees and ivy, though. Wilamowitz-Moellendorf 1956: 2.77-78, “Er war es, der das vegetative Leben in seinem über die ganze Erde erstreckten Reiche zur Blüte bringt, nicht nur den Weinstock, sondern auch die Fruchtbäume gedeihen lässt; nicht dass er tätig eingriffe, aber sein Erscheinen weckt überall dieses Leben und erregt in den Seinen Kraft und Lust zum Lebensgenusse; so weit ist das Rasen herabgestimmt.” 94

168

Ta\ d' e)kpage/nta, oÀtan mh\ tele/wj a)po/lhtai, ta/xista a)nablasta/nei, wÐste eu)qu\j th\n aÃmpelon karpoforeiÍn, wÐsper e)n Qettali¿#. “Frozen plants, when they are not completely destroyed, regenerate extremely quickly, so that the vine bears fruit immediately, just as in Thessaly.” Indeed, vines and grapes are nearly as common on the coinage of Thessalian cities as grain.

Epigraphic Evidence DK1. Larisa, 450-425a SEG 35.590a = Kontogiannis 1985 Ed. pr. Theocharis 1960: 185 = McD 355 Dionu/soi Karpi¿oi. “To/of Dionysus Karpios” Stele. Stoichedon. Theocharis read Dionu/so Karpi¿o, but the text offered above and in SEG is secure on the basis of Kontogiannis’ photograph. Kontogiannis also backdated the inscription to 450-425a from Theocharis’ fourth-century BCE date.

DK2. Larisa, haud ante Ia SEG 17.288 = McD 346 = Ed. pr. Oikonomides and Koumanoudes 1956-7: 17-22, no. 1; Cf. BE 1959: no. 224 [® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® leitoreu/onsa] [t#=]

Damma/teri t#=

[tou=] [ri¿da].

Dionu/sou tou=

Fula/k# kaiì aÃrcan[sa] Karpi¿ou ta\n petro[etei-]

169

Eu)pa/tra

Pando/kou

leitoreu/onsa t#=

5

Da[m-]

ma/teri t#= Fula/k# aÃrcan[sa t]ou= Dionu/sou tou= Karpi¿ou [t]a\n petroeteiri¿da. [® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ®] leitoreu/onsa t#= [Damma/teri t#= [tou=

10

Fu]la/k# kaiì aÃrcansa

Dionu/]sou tou=

Karpi¿ou ta\n petro-

[eteiri¿da]. vacat [® ® ® ®]kliìj Eu)docei¿a leito[reu/onsa] t#=

Damma/teri t#=

Ful-

15

[a/k# kaiì aÃrc]ansa tou= Dionu/sou [tou= Karpi¿]ou ta\n petroeteiri¿da. [® ® ® ® ®]ra sa [t#

Nikei¿a leitoreu/on-

Dam]ma/teri t#=

[aÃrc]ansa tou=

Fula/k# kaiì

Dionu/sou tou=

Kar-

20

[pi¿ou] ta\n petroeteire/da (sic). [® ® ® ® ®]E.SA

Le/ontoj lei-

[tore]u/onsa t#= {t#=}

Dam-

[ma/]teri {teri} t#= Fula/k# kaiì aÃrcansa tou= Dionu/[sou tou=]

Karpi¿ou ta\n pe-

troeteire/da (sic). Poluceniìj ¹Antipulei¿a l[ei-] toreu/onsa t#=

Damma/teri t[#=]

25

170

[F]ula/k# kaiì aÃrcansa tou= Dio[nu/s-] [ou tou=

30

Ka]rp[i¿o]u ta\n petroete[i-]

[ri¿da]. “ (1) […] leitor of Demeter Phylaka and after serving as archousa of Dionysus Karpios for four years. (2) Eupatra, daughter of Pandokus, leitor of Demeter Phylaka and after serving as archousa of Dionysus Karpios for four years. (3) […] leitor of Demeter Phylaka and after serving as archousa of Dionysus Karpios for four years. (4) […]klis, daughter of Eudoxus, leitor of Demeter Phylaka and after serving as archousa of Dionysus Karpios for four years. (5) […]ra, daughter of Nikes, leitor of Demeter Phylaka and after serving as archousa of Dionysus Karpios for four years. (6) […]esa, daughter of Leon, leitor of Demeter Phylaka and after serving as archousa of Dionysus Karpios for four years.. (7) Polyxenis, daughter of Antipyleia, leitor of Demeter Phylaka and after serving as archousa of Dionysus Karpios for four years.”

Pedimental stele, broken at top and bottom. The seven entries appear to have inscribed by seven different hands. Letter forms of the early first century BCE (edd. pr.) The format of each entry is extremely regular. The name of each priestess is qualified with a patronymic (either as adjective or genitive noun) and followed by the participial phrase leitoreu/onsa t#= Damma/teri t#= Fula/k# kaiì aÃrcansa tou= Dionu/sou tou= Karpi¿ou ta\n petroeteiri¿da “leitor of Demeter Phylaka and after serving as archousa of Dionysus Karpios for four years.” The syntax of the first half of each entry is clear: Leitoreu/w is often assumed to be a Thessalian equivalent for i(erateu/w, “to serve as priest/priestess,” 95

95

van der Velde 1924: 146. E.g. IG ix.2 397 (Skotussa: IV-IIIa): leitoreu/ontoj )Askalapioi= Zoui+/loi “When Zoilos was leitor for Asklepius.” Cf. Hesych. s.v. lei/torej: i(e/reiai.

171

but the word may be a more general term that can indicate priesthood in some cases, but not always. Like i(erateu/w, leitoreu/w takes a dative object. The office of archousa is known also in Attica. LSS 124 (= IG ii2 1184) is an especially illuminating document (Athens (Cholargos): med. IVa): ta\j de\ a)rxou/saj koineiÍ a)mfote/raj dido/nai th=j i¸erei¿aj ei¹j th\n e(orth\n kaiì th\n e)pime/leia-

5

n tw½n Qesmofori¿wn h(miekteiÍon kriqw½n ktl. “Let both the female archousai in common th=j i¸erei¿aj (?) 96 give to the festival and management (i.e. for the management of the festival) of the Thesmophoria a half measure of grain…” The specification a)mfote/raj suggests that these were not anonymous benefactors but female officials of the festival. 97

DK3. Larisa, Ia McD 361 = Ed. pr. Arvanitopoulos 1911: 123, no. 26 [® ®]ai¿a ei de\

¹A?leci?kra/[to]u?j f?[u/s-]

¹Aleca/ndrou leitor?[eu/-]

sansa ta\n petroethri¿da ta=

Damma/teri ta=

ka kaiì tou=

Fula/-

Dionu/sou tou=

Karpi¿ou.

96 97

Probably a cutter’s mistake for th= i(erei/a. Clinton 1996: 113 with n. 6.

172

“…aia, adopted daughter of Alexikrates, birth daughter of Alexander, was leitor for four years for Demeter Phylake and Dionysus Karpios.”

Pedimental stele, complete on the left and right, broken at the top and bottom. The text presented here is most likely the beginning of a new column of priestesses.

DK4. Mikro-Keserli (= ancient Elateia?), Ia SEG 23.445 = McD 653 = Ed. pr. Mastrokostas 1964: 318-9, n. 2; Cf. BE 1965: no. 219 [Dionu/s%] Karpi¿% ãAsandroj Qrase/o?u? a)rxifrourh/saj kaiì oi¸ su/mfrouroi. “To [Dionysus] Karpios, Asandros son of Thrasea, after serving as archiphrouros, and the symphrouroi [dedicated]”

Ed. pr.: “Stèle en forme de temple dorique…” This inscription belongs to a series of 12 dedications recovered from the area of the modern village of Mikro-Keserli. An ancient identification of the site is uncertain. Sykourion and Mopsion were previous candidates: 98 Helly has recently suggested Elateia, though he admits that the identification is not iron-clad. 99 The dedicators in each case are some combination of an archiphrouros and symphrouroi. Divinities honored include Artemis Phaesphoros, Zeus Perpheretas, the hero Aineas as well as the present dedication to (Dionysus) Karpios. The sequence begins in the late fourth century BCE and continues into the first century BCE, though most come from the post-196a era. A second, smaller series

98 99

Baker 2001: 193. Helly 1987: 192.

173

covering roughly the same time span comes from Gonnoi. The divinity honored there is Athens Polias. 100 The identity of these phrouroi is unclear. While it is most likely that they constituted some form of garrison, either urban, as in the case of Gonnoi, or rural, as in the case of Mikro-Keserli, 101 phrouroi are also known as cult officials in the wider Greek world. At Epidauros, for example, phrouroi receive sacrificial prerogatives. 102 Despite Robert’s stinging reply to Franke, the matter cannot be considered closed.103

DK5. Gomphi, aet. Aug. (27-25a?) IG ix.2 287b i¸erhteu/ontoj tou= Dionu/sou tou=

Karpi¿ou

Fonni¿ou tou= Eu)ruda/mantoj, strathgou=ntoj

Sw<s>a/ndrou oi¸ a)pe-

5

leuqerwqe/ntej ktl. “When Phonnios, son of Eurydamon, was priest of Dionysus and Sosander was strategos [of the Thessalian League], the following were freed…”

100

Both series are printed, together with recent bibliography, in Baker 2001. Launey 1949-50: 1010-1011. 102 Cf., e.g., IG iv.12 40 (400a). 103 Franke 1956: 183-9, identified these phrouroi as religious personnel connected with the Stepteria, to which Robert offered the following memorable outburst (BE 1959: no. 225): “C’est chercher midi à quatorze heures et entrer dans les nuages alors que tout est clair: il s’agit des soldats et de leur chef qui gardent une forteresse.” 101

174

The status of the priest of Dionysus Karpios as eponymous official in Gomphi suggests that the cult was of some importance there. This same Phonnios is listed as a manumittor of a slave at IG ix.2 287a 6-7.

DK6. Larisa, aet. Imp. IG ix.2 573 Dh/mhtri

Fula/-

k# kaiì Dionu/s% Karpi¿%

5

¹Olumpi¿[x]?a

Me/nw-

noj, kata\ qugatropoii¿an d[e\]

10

¹Olumpi¿xou kaiì Meni¿ppou, Sebasth/a i¸erhteu/-

15

sasa. “To Demeter Phylake and Dionysus Karpios, Olympicha birth daughter of Meno [offered], adopted daughter of Olympichos and Menippos, after serving as priestess sebastea…”

175

The inscription was found in the new agora of modern Larisa, “Victoria,” and is dated on the basis of lunate letters in Kern’s transcription. The text seems to indicate that Olympicha was adopted into two different families. While parallels are scarce, it is likely that Olympicha’s first adoptive father died and that she was adopted a second time. As perplexing, and more crucial from the perspective of cult, is the sense of the phrase Sebasth/a i¸erhteu/sasa. Helly has collected all of the Thessalian inscriptions which use some form of the adjective sebasth-. He concludes, somewhat nebulously: “Le mot s’ajoute à l’ethnique traditionnel partout où celui-ci apparaît: dans les dédicaces de cités, pour les citoyens à l’etranger, sur les monnaies. Il est employé seul lorsque les citoyens sont nommés dans leur propre cite; mais il n’est pas constamment exprimé. L’adjectif paraît être une qualification complémentaire de l’ethnique. On en a déduit que certaines villes thessaliennes ont pris le qualicatif de Sebasth/ à partir de l’époque d’Auguste. Mais les monnaies montrent que ce sont tous les Thessaliens qui ont mérité cette appellation.” 104 It may be the case that just as the Thessalians qua league and, e.g., the Lamians qua polis merited the honorific sebasteos, vel sim., so too specific individuals could also use this honorific. 105 If in the case of the league and the polis the term conveyed an elect status with respect to Rome, it is reasonable to assume that this applied also in the case of the individual. At the very least, sebasth/a i¸erhteu/sasa would seem to imply some form of imperial control over the priesthood of this cult. Whether this entailed a connection to the Imperial cult in Larisa is uncertain. Prott noted that in Ephesos a 104

Helly 1975: 126-7. At BE 1976: no. 331, Robert promised a discussion of the uses of this word “dans son contexte historique.” I have not been able to locate it.

105

176

mystery cult of Dionysus Phleus and Demeter Karpophoros was connected with the imperial cult. 106 There is no evidence of mysteries in the cult at Larisa, though. 107

Literary Evidence There is no literary evidence concerning Dionysus Karpios in Thessaly.

Numismatic Evidence In general, Dionysus is not prominent on the coinage of Thessaly. Where he is present, it is impossible to determine in what aspect he appears. Head reports a fourthcentury issue from Hestiaotid Metropolis with an image of a standing Dionysus on the reverse. 108 Grapes appear on fourth-century issues from Skotussa 109 and stillunidentified Eurea, 110 but this iconography has only the most generic Dionysiac connotations.

Archaeological Evidence Specific archaelogical evidence for Thessalian sanctuaries of Dionysus Karpios is completely lacking.

Discussion The earliest evidence for the cult of Dionysus Karpios in Thessaly comes from mid-fifth-century Larisa and consists of a simple, anonymous dedication recorded on a stele. There is no further activity until the first-century BCE when the cult of Dionysus Karpios is attested in three diverse areas of Thessaly. The eponymous status of the 106

Prott 1902: 186. Pace Börker and Merkelbach ad IEphesos 1595. 108 Head 1911: 302. 109 SNG Thessaly no. 256; Head 1911: 309. 110 SNG Thessaly no. 49; Head 1911: 294. 107

177

priest of Dionysus Karpios at Hestaiotid Gomphi suggests that the cult had a civic prominence there. Reinforcing the importance of the cult to the polis is the phrouroi dedication to Dionysus Karpios from Mikro Keserli in eastern Pelasgiotis. Finally, evidence for a joint cult of Dionysus Karpios and Demeter Phylaka in Larisa begins in the first-century BCE and continues into the imperial period. Few other cults in Thessaly provide evidence for so broad a geographic and chronological span. In general, we observe that the cult survives the period of Macedonian domination and undergoes, in Larisa at least, significant modification during the first century BCE. Three inscriptions from Larisa of the late Hellenistic and Roman imperial periods reveal a shared cult of Demeter Phylaka and Dionysus Karpios. There is no evidence for this pairing from any other area of Thessaly. Demeter Phylaka is attested only in Larisa and the significance of the epithet Phylaka is unclear. Perhaps the epithet alludes to origins of this Demeter cult in the city of Phylake in Achaia Phthiotis. Perhaps it is to be connected with the noun phylax in an agricultural context. 111 Pairings of Demeter and Dionysus are relatively common in both mythic and cultic contexts. Two examples from the extra-Thessalian Mediterranean are particularly emblematic. Although there is no evidence that Dionysus received cult during the Eleusinian mysteries, he was a conspicuous mythic initiate and he had a deme sanctuary of considerable importance near the sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at Eleusis. 112 In addition to Prott’s Ephesian mysteries of Dionysus and Demeter mentioned above, a series of imperial dedications from Aigeai in Cilicia provide evidence of a shared cult of Dionysus and Demeter, e.g., SEG 37.1248A = Ed. pr.

111

Cf. Farnell 1895-1909: 3.37, where the author speculates in a related context: “Perhaps she [Demeter] was supposed to lock the door of the granary in her festival of )Epiklei/dia.” 112 Clinton 1992: 66-7, 123-5.

178

Dagron and Feissel 1987: 121-4, no. 78 (209-211p): Dionu/s% | Kallika/rp% | kaiì | Dhmh/tri Karpo|tro/f%. “To Dionysus Kallikarpos and Demeter Karpotrophos.” 113 A second inscription recording a dedication to Caracalla and Septimius Severus is on the same stone. It is possible to discern the broad outlines of cult development in the small epigraphic dossier concerning these two divinities. Let us compare the final entry in the long catalogue of priestesses recorded in DK2 with the less extensive priestess record in DK3: DK2 Poluceniìj ¹Antipulei¿a l[ei]|toreu/onsa t#= Damma/teri t[#=] | [F]ula/k# kaiì aÃrcansa tou=

Dio[nu/s]|[ou tou=

Ka]rp[i¿o]u ta\n

petroete[i]|[ri¿da]. “Polyxenis, daughter of Antipyleia, leitor of Demeter Phylaka and after serving as archousa for Dionysus Karpios.” DK3 [® ®]ai¿a

¹A?leci?kra/[to]u?j f?[u/s]|ei de\

ta\n petroethri¿|da ta=

Damma/teri ta=

¹Aleca/ndrou leitor?[eu/]|sansa Fula/?|ka kaiì tou=

Dionu/sou

tou= | Karpi¿ou. “…aia, adopted daughter of Alexikrates, birth daughter of Alexander, was leitor of Demeter Phylake and Dionysus Karpios for four years.” The change in expression between the two documents may reflect an important development in the cultic relationship between the two divinities. When read in

113

Other dedications to Demeter and Dionysus from Aigeai also double as dedications to the imperial family, although the chronological relationship between the two types of dedication is not always clear. Cf. Robert 1973. For other dedications to Demeter and Dionysus from Aigeai, cf. Dagron and Feissel 1987: 122.

179

isolation, DK2 suggests that Dionysus Karpios and Demeter Phylake are related only through the shared figure of the archousa/leitor. The testimony of DK1, the fifthcentury dedication to Dionysus Karpios is not probative for questions concerning the status quo ante: It is entirely possible that Demeter and Dionysus were already linked in the fifth century but that the dedicator of DK1 elected to honor only Dionysus. At some later point, perhaps a decade, perhaps fifty years, DK3 reveals that the distinction between archousa and leitor had collapsed. It is now a single leitor who serves both divinities. Such a change may mask a considerable reorganization of the cult at some point in the first century BCE. Since the preserved thickness, .145m, and width, .403m, of DK3 compare well with the preserved dimensions of DK2 (thickness: .20m; width: .42m), it is likely that the two inscriptions belong to the same series of priestess records. Both inscriptions are composed in archaizing Thessalian dialect. 114 DK6 documents the extension of this cult into the imperial period in addition to providing solid evidence that the two divinities continued to be served by a single priestess: Dh/mh|tri Fula/|k# kaiì Di|onu/s% | Karpi¿% | ¹Olumpi¿|x?a Me/nw|noj, kata\ | qugatro|poii¿an de\? |

¹Olumpi¿|xou kaiì |

Meni¿ppou | Sebasth/|a i¸erhteu/|sasa. “To Demeter Phylake and Dionysus Karpios, Olympicha, birth daughter of Meno, adopted daughter of Olympichos and Menippos, sebastea, after serving as priestess, [offered]” As I have suggested above, it may be possible to glimpse a connection between the cult of Demeter and Dionysus and that of the imperial family.

114

Arvanitopoulos 1911: 123-4.

180

It is unclear whether Dionysus Karpios is to be connected with the theatre and sanctuary of Dionysus mentioned in a fragmentary inscription from Larisa, IG ix.2 522 11-12 (fin. IIIa-init. IIa): to\ me/roj to\ pro\j to\ qe/a[tron--ca.-25?--] to\ i¸ero\n tou= Dionu/sou e)pi\ TAU[---]. 115 “the portion near the theatre [---] the sanctuary of Dionysus…” Although the precise spatial relationship between the two structures cannot be determined from this text, there are references in other parts of the inscription to areas near the theatre and it is correspondingly possible that the two buildings were near one another. Evidence for Dionysia in Larisa is furnished by SEG 26.677.70-83 (Larisa, IIa) (= Ed. pr. Giovannini 1976: 205-213): … oÀ]pwj de\ kaiì

LarisaiÍoi parakolou-

[qh/swsi ta\j e)yhfisme/naj ti]ma\[j] t%½ te dh/m% au)tw½n kaiì toiÍj dikas[taiÍj kaiì t%½ grammateiÍ, de]do/xqai gra/yai periì tou/twn tou\j pole[ma/rxouj toiÍj tagoiÍ]j [k]aiì tv= po/lei tv= Larisai¿wn u(pota/cantj [tou=de tou= yhfi¿smatoj to\] a)n[ti¿]grafon kaiì sfragisame/nouj tv= dh[mosi¿# sfragiÍdi kaiì dou=nai] t[oiÍ]j dikastaiÍj oÀpwj dia\ tou/twn diako- 75 [mi¿shtai: gra/yai de\ kaiì di]o/t[i] par[a]kaleiÍ o( dh=moj o(

115

The restoration qe/a[tron] is ensured by other references to a theatre in the inscription, e.g. line 9 pro\j to\ qe/atro[n], line 26 ei)j th\n xw=sin tou= qea/trou.

181

Peparhqi¿wn [au)tou\j to/n te ste/fanon kaiì ta\j] e)yhfisme/naj tima\j a)pode/cas[qai kaiì a)nagra/yai to/de to\ yh/fisma e]i¹j sthlh\n liqi¿nhn kaiì a)naqeiÍnai [e)n t%½ e)pifanesta/t% to/p%:] fronti¿sai de\ kaiì tou\j tagou\j meta\ tou= a)[gwnoqe/tou oÀpwj e)n toiÍj] prw¯toi[j] Dionusi¿oij meta\ to\ suntelesq[h=-] [nai ta\j sponda\j kaiì par' au)toiÍj] a)[n]agoreuqw½sin e)n t%½ qea/tr% aiàde [ai¸ e)yhfime/nai timaiì t%½ te dh/m]% au)tw½n kaiì toiÍj dikastaiÍj kaiì t%½ gram[mateiÍ: ktl.] “…so that the Larisans comply with the honors voted to their demos, the judges and the secretary, let it be decided that the polemarchs write [a letter] to the tagoi and the city of the Larisans about these things, appending a copy of this decree, sealing it with the public seal and give it to the judges so that the letter be conveyed by them; Let them write that the demos of the Perparethians enjoins them to accept the crown and the voted honors and to publish this decree on a stone stele and to set it up in a most conspicuous place, and the demos of the Perparethians enjoins the tagoi together with the agonothete to see to it that on the first day of the Dionysia, after pouring the libations, these honors voted for their demos and the judges and secretary be read in the theatre by them…” Given the nature of both the honors, e.g., awards to the demos of Larisa, and the officiating personnel—the tagoi of Larisa—it is most likely that this was a polis festival rather than a federal festival. Dionysia furnished a regular context for the

182

award of honors. It is possible that the local Dionysia at Larisa honored Dionysus as Karpios.

5.4: Ennodia

Introduction The cult of Ennodia is attested in Pherai, Pagasai and Larisa of tetradic Thessaly and in perioikic Phalanna, Demetrias, Pythion, Gonnoi and Phthiotic Thebes. Evidence for her cult in Thessaly is common from the archaic through the Hellenistic period. Outside of Thessaly, cult of the goddess is found, often syncretized with Artemis or Hekate or simply described as Artemis Pheraia, in Macedonia, Euboia, Opuntian Lokris, Epidauros, Thera, Egyptian Coptos, Sicyon, Argos, Syracuse, Athens and Dalmatian Issa. 116 This section will focus on her Thessalian manifestations. The most likely etymology of the goddess’ name reflects an association with crossroads. I offer the analysis of Dubois: “ )Ennodi/a is explained as *e)n-hodi/a
™ th\n Qessali¿da Pe/tran. xwri¿on de/ e)stin, e)n %Ò Poseidw½noj aÃgetai a)gw¯n, w¨j a)po\ tou= to/pou PetraiÍon kaleiÍsqai. Pi¿ndaroj: "paiÍ

Poseidw½noj

Petrai¿ou".

“Haemonian rock: Thessalian Petra. It is a place where an agon of Poseidon is held so that he is called Petraios from the place. Pindar: ‘Son of Poseidon Petraios…’”

The most suggestive aspect of the Apollonian passage and the commentary provided by the scholiast is the presence of the Thessalian sanctuary of Poseidon Petraios in a catalogue of the god’s other major Greek cult sites, especially those at Isthmia, Taenarus, Onchestos, Calauria and Geraistos. 207 The scholiast derives Petraios from an otherwise unknown Thessalian location, Petra. 208 The rock from which Skyphios sprung was apparently known as Petra.

207

For an exploration of the linked features of three of these sanctuaries, cf. Schumacher 1993. The author emphasizes the extra-mural, liminal setting and asylum function of each. 208 But, cf. Herodotus 5.92b, where Cypselus’ father is Aetion, son of Echechratides, from Petra. The name Echechratides and Herodotus’ mention that the family was Lapith in lineage makes a Thessalian connection likely.

216

“Haemonian” refers to Haemon, father of Thessalos, and regularly means “Thessalian” in Hellenistic literature. 209

Numismatic Evidence Given the prominence of Thessalian horses in martial and agonistic contexts, it is not surprising to see them prominently displayed on Thessalian coinages of the Classical and Hellenistic periods. On a number of occasions, however, it is possible to move beyond the generic significance of the horse and glimpse a specific connection with Poseidon, perhaps as Petraios. I summarize the results in the following table:

Table 14 Poseidon Petraios (?) and Thessalian Coinage

Type

City

Dates

Reference/Notes

1. Obv.: “Youth

Larisa,

479-

SNG Thessaly 38 (Crannon) with

restraining bull”; Rev.:

Crannon,

440a

trident in the reverse field; 93, 98-

“Horse trailing reign”

Pharcadon,

101 (Larisa); 209-211

(SNG 93)

Pherai,

(Pharcadon); 234-235 (Pherai);

2. Obv.: “Forepart of

Pherai

horse springing from

479-

SNG Thessaly 236

450a

rock”; Rev.: “Corngrain in deep incuse square”

209

Cf. Hunter ad Argonautica 3.1090. Additional references in Roman literature: V. G. 1.12 with Serv. ad loc.; Luc. 6.396ff with schol ad loc.; Slightly different accounts in Stat. Theb. 4.43 with Lact. Plac. ad loc.

217 Table 14 (Continued) 3. Obv.: “Athena”; Rev.: “Forepart of

Orthe (?)

350-

SNG

horse springing from rock with olive

(Perrhaebia)

200a

Thessaly

bushes” 4. Obv.: “Artemis (?) facing”; Rev.:

183 Skotussa

IIIa

SNG

“Poseidon seated on rock with trident and

Thessaly

dolphin”

253

The interpretation of the motivations for coin types is extraordinarily subjective. The suggestions advanced in the following commentary must be treated accordingly. The provocative imagery of the coins bearing type 1 is has drawn the attention of many numismatists and historians of religion. The presence of these types on the coinage of the so-called “Munzunion” of the fifth century BCE suggests a relevance that, if not pan-Thessalian, is certainly supra-local. The association of the scenes with Poseidon is made secure by the presence of the trident on the issue from Crannon. It is uncertain whether such a reading of the reverse then entitles us to interpret the struggle with the bull depicted on the obverse as also connected with Poseidon. 210 These scenes of bull wrestling on Thessalian coinage have been linked with the so-called Minoan taurokathapsia and, more substantively, with the taurotheria listed in the victors lists of the Thessalian Eleutheria and Stena and a pair of inscriptions from Larisa containing the names of men in groups of four or seven and named oi¸ to\n tau=ron pefeira/kontej (IG ix.2 535-6: init. Ia). 211 Nilsson was justly skeptical: 212 Neither festival was explicitly connected with Poseidon. 213

210

Moustaka 1983: 22; Head 1911: 293-4. Thess. feira/w = qhra/w. 212 Nilsson 1995: 80-1. 211

218

It may also be possible to read the scenes not as sequential or coincidental scenes in a Poseidon ritual, but as two distinct moments in two different rituals. The obverse and the reverse occur independently of one another on numerous Thessalian issues of the Classical and Hellenistic period. The scene of a bridled horse running with no rider is in any case reminiscent of the obscure chariot ritual at Boiotian Onchestos described in the Homeric Hymn to Apollo. The representation of a horse springing forth from a rock on types 2-3 may recall Thessalian traditions concerning Poseidon Petraios and the birth of the first horse. In the case of Pherai, Gardner proposed an alternative interpretation: The horse emerging from the rock was a reference to the famous Hypereia spring in Pherai. 214 The Hypereia fountain is quite clearly depicted on a number of Pheraian types, however, independent of the horse leaping from the rock. While this does not furnish positive proof against Gardner’s interpretation, it does militate against it. If the interpretation of the horse leaping from the rock as a reference to Poseidon Petraios is sound, then it may be possible to read the presence of the grain on the reverse of 2, a common symbol on Thessalian coinage of the Classical period, as an allusion to the transformation of the Thessalian countryside from deluge to land suited for agriculture. The Skotussan issue, type 4, has a number of elements that also allude to that event, viz. Poseidon, the trident, a rock. The dolphin does not figure in any versions of the myths as they have come down to us, but Poseidon is often depicted in the company of dolphins. 215 A cache of fragments of votive marble dolphins, one of which was inscribed [Pot]eidou=ni and dated to ca. 350-300a, were recently 213

Although, if Robert is right that the Stena commemorated Thessalian support of Rome in a battle at the Tempe, then it is possible to see how Poseidon, as Petraios, Lutaios or in a related aspect, could have been honored. 214 Gardner 1883: xxxvi-xxxvii. 215 Burkert 1985: 137.

219

recovered from the modern village of Prinos, near ancient Trikka (modern Trikala).216 These findings from so inland a site powerfully suggest that Poseidon maintained a strong link with the sea in Thessaly.

Archaeological Evidence Beyond the dolphins mentioned above, whose connection to Poseidon Petraios is suggested only by the coinage from Skotussa, tetradic Thessaly has yet to yield any firm archaeological evidence for the cult of Poseidon Petraios.

Discussion Nearly every region of Greece had its own tradition locating Poseidon’s creation of the original horse in its territory. 217 The coupling of this aitiology with the drainage of the Thessalian countryside is unique, however, and it lends the god an unparalleled status in Thessalian myth. The evidence gives no clear sense about where the sanctuary of Poseidon Petraios was located. In or around the Tempe would seem a logical location, but this remains a bare possibility. Although no myth links Poseidon, Apollo and the Tempe, it is significant that both divinities have such strong resonances with the area. Whether this stands behind the occasional pairing of Apollo and Poseidon in Thessalian religion, especially at Soros and Pythion, is uncertain. Perhaps significantly, the aitiology of the Thessalian festival of the Peloria, in honor of Zeus Peloros, shares a number of elements with those texts which describe Poseidon Petraios’ role in the drainage of Thessaly. Athenaeus 14.639 quotes the following excerpt of Baton of Sinope (= FGrHist 268 F5):

216 217

SEG 40.503 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1985. Burkert 1985: 138.

220

Ba/twn d' o( Sinwpeu\j o( r(h/twr e)n t%½ periì Qessali¿aj kaiì Ai¸moni¿aj safw½j e)mfani¿zei th\n tw½n

Satournali¿wn e(orth\n

¸Ellhnikwta/thn, fa/skwn au)th\n para\ toiÍj kaleiÍsqai, gra/fwn ouÀtwj"qusi¿aj koinh=j toiÍj ginome/nhj a)paggeiÍlai¿ tina t%½

QessaloiÍj Pelw¯ria PelasgoiÍj

Pelasg%½aÃndra, %Ò oÃnoma hÅn

Pe/lwroj, dio/ti e)n tv= Ai¸moni¿# seismw½n mega/lwn genome/nwn r(agei¿h ta\

Te/mph oÃrh o)nomazo/mena kaiì dio/ti dia\ tou=

diasth/matoj o(rmh=san to\ th=j li¿mnhj uÀdwr e)mba/lloi ei¹j to\ tou= Phneiou= r(eiÍqron, kaiì th\n pro/teron limna/zousan xw¯ran aÀpasan gegumnw½sqai kaiì a)nachrainome/nwn tw½n u(da/twn pedi¿a qaumasta\ t%½ mege/qei kaiì t%½ ka/llei a)nafai¿nesqai. a)kou/santa ouÅn to\n Pelasgo\n th\n tra/pezan a)fqo/nwj au(t%½ kekosmhme/nhn t%½ Pelw¯r% paraqeiÍnai. kaiì tou\j aÃllouj de\ filofronoume/nouj eÀkaston fe/rein oÀ ti eÃxoi par' au(t%½ be/ltiston kaiì paratiqe/nai e)piì th\n tra/pezan t%½ a)paggei¿lanti, kaiì au)to\n to\n Pelasgo\n proqu/mwj diakoneiÍn kaiì tw½n aÃllwn tou\j e)n a)ciw¯mati oÃntaj u(phreteiÍn, kaqo/ti e(ka/st% o( kairo\j pare/pipten. dio/per fasi¿n, e)peiì th\n xw¯ran kate/sxon, a)pomi¿mhma th=j to/te genome/nhj e(orth=j ... kaiì qu/ontaj Diiì Pelwri¿% trape/zaj te lamprw½j kosmou=ntaj paratiqe/nai kaiì ouÀtwj fila/nqrwpon [te] th\n panh/gurin sunteleiÍn, wÐste kaiì tou\j ce/nouj aÀpantaj e)piì th\n qoi¿nhn paralamba/nein kaiì tou\j desmw¯taj lu/ein kaiì tou\j oi¹ke/taj katakli¿nantaj meta\ pa/shj parrhsi¿aj e(stia=n, diakonou/ntwn au)toiÍj tw½n despotw½n: kaiì to\ su/nolon eÃti kaiì nu=n megi¿sthn e(orth\n aÃgontaj prosagoreu/ein Pelw¯ria."

Qessalou\j

221

“The orator Baton of Sinope, in his book On Thessaly and Haemonia, makes it clear that the festival of the Saturnalia is a very Greek affair; he says that among the Thessalians it is called the Peloria and writes as follows: ‘As a public sacrifice which was being held by the Pelasgians a man named Pelorus brought the news to Pelasgus that in Haemonia, during great earthquakes the mountains called Tempe had broken apart, and through the aperture the water of the lake rushed and was pouring into the stream of the Peneius, so that the land which had been marshy before was now entirely bared to view, and as the waters dried up, plains were appearing of wondrous extent and beauty. Well, when Pelasgus heard the story he set before Pelorus a table lavishly provided by himself. The other people, also, in friendly gratitude brought whatever each one possessed of his best, and set it upon the table for the messenger, while Pelasgus waited on him devotedly, and all other men of high rank assisted, according to the opportunity that fell to each. Hence, they say, after they had got possession of the territory, they instituted a festival in imitation of the one that had been held on that earlier occasion, and sacrificing to Zeus Pelorius they set up gaily furnished tables and carry out the festivities so generously that all foreigners, even, are welcomed to the feast, prisoners are set free, and slaves, reclining on couches with the utmost liberty, are entertained while their masters wait on them; in short, even to this day the Thessalians hold this as their chief festival, calling it Peloria’” (trans. Gulick). Despite the very dubious restoration of the festival name at McD 167 (= Ed. pr. Arvanitopoulos 1911: 301-305, no. 50) (Pharsalos: IVa), neither Zeus Peloros nor the Peloria are otherwise known in Thessaly or, indeed, elsewhere. Robertson suggests that Poseidon Petraios must have been honored in some fashion during the Peloria. 218

218

Robertson 1984: 8.

222

Although penestai are never explicitly mentioned in this passage, Ducat implies that they lie behind the oiketai. 219 Parallels for Saturnalia-type festivals of this type are known for the Clarotes of Kydonia (Crete). 220

5.6: Themis

Introduction “The cult of Themis is found to be early and important only in Thessaly, that is, on the border of barbarism, the very region where the characteristic of which the Greeks from early times were proud, their regard for what is fitting and right, should be emphasized.” 221

The first half of Rose’s statement is undoubtedly true. Themis emerges as one of the most important figures in Thessalian religion and is especially well-known in the Archaic and early Classical periods. Her cult is attested at Atrax, Pherai and Mondaia of tetradic Thessaly. Among the perioikoi, her cult is found at Perrhaebian Phalanna, Magnesia and Phthiotic Thebes. While her cult is not uncommon in the Greek world outside of the borders of Thessaly, in no other region is worship of the goddess so prevalent. 222 The second section of Rose’s statement is less certain. Earlier scholars tended to explain Themis in one of two ways—either as an earth goddess, 223 often with oracular associations, or as a goddess of justice, sometimes as a personification of the

219

Ducat 1994: 101-2. Nilsson 1995: 393. 221 Rose 1958. 222 The goddess is conspicuously present in the three great, panhellenic oracular centers of mainland Greece. Cf. Berti 2002. Boiotia and Attica are two other regions with several prominent Themis cults. 223 E.g., Preller 1894-1926: 1.477 with n. 1; Wilamowitz-Moellendorf 1956: 1.202-3. 220

223

abstract notion themis. 224 Neither view adequately captures the diverse image of the goddess that emerges from Archaic and Classical literature, however. Since the various traditions concerning Themis (and themis) have been judiciously treated in a number of scholarly works, I take this opportunity to merely foreground some themes that will be significant for my consideration of the goddess’ cult in Thessaly. 225 In Homer, Themis has strong connections with the agora. The most striking passage is Iliad 11.806 ff., where the word themis seems to be synonymous with an assembly: a)ll' oÀte dh\ kata\ nh=aj ¹Odussh=oj qei¿oio iâce qe/wn

Pa/trokloj, iàna/ sf' a)gorh/ te qe/mij te

hÃhn, tv= dh\ kai¿ sfi qew½n e)teteu/xato bwmoi¿ “But when in his running Patroclus came to the ships of godlike Odysseus, where was their place of assembly and place of judgment, where also had been built their altars of the gods…” (Trans. Murray). 226 At Iliad 20.4, the goddess Themis is connected with an Olympian agora: Zeu\j de\

Qe/mista ke/leuse qeou\j a)gorh\n de\ kale/ssai

“But Zeus told Themis to summon the gods to the place of assembly…” (Trans. Murrary). Telemachus invokes she and Zeus in connection with a human agora at Odyssey 2.68f.: li¿ssomai h)me\n Zhno\j ¹Olumpi¿ou h)de\ Qe/mistoj, hÀ t' a)ndrw½n a)gora\j h)me\n lu/ei h)de\ kaqi¿zei

224

E.g., DKP v s.v. Themis col. 676 (Potscher: 1975). See especially Janko’s note on Iliad 15.87-8 for Themis in Homer and the epic cycle; Vos 1956; Rudhardt 1999. 226 Hainsworth ad loc.: “qe/mij is evidently a ‘assembly’, qe/mistej being what such a body endorsed.” Altars are already present in the Homeric agora. 225

224

“I pray you by Olympian Zeus and by Themis who dissolves and gathers the assemblies of men” (Trans. Murray). As is clear from the preceding examples, Themis is closely linked with Zeus in poetry of the Archaic period. At Hesiod Theog. 901, Zeus takes Themis as his second wife: deu/teron h)ga/geto liparh\n Qe/min “Second he married sleek Themis.” His relationship with Themis is stressed in the twenty-third Homeric hymn, where the two are linked in conversation: oÀj te Qe/misti e)gklido\n e(zome/nv pukinou\j o)a/rouj o)ari¿zei “[Zeus] who consults closely with Themis as she sits leaning against him” (Trans. West). Pindar picks up this connection (Olympian 8.21-3): eÃnqa sw¯teira Dio\j ceni¿ou pa/redroj a)skeiÍtai

Qe/mij

eÃcox' a)nqrw¯pwn “…where Themis, the saving goddess enthroned beside Zeus, respecter of strangers, is venerated…” (Trans. Race). A controversial fragment of his hymns may make Themis the first wife of Zeus (Hymni fr 30.1-5): 227 prw½ton me\n euÃboulon

Qe/min ou)rani¿an

xrus<e/ai>sin iàppoij ¹Wkeanou= para\ paga=n MoiÍrai potiì kli¿maka semna\n aÅgon

227

Ou)lu/mpou lipara\n kaq' o(do/n

The idea has the brilliant pedigree of Wilamowitz, Jacoby and Solmsen, but West’s objections at Theogony 901 are sound—without the complete context of the fragment, we cannot know whether Pindar said “ ‘<So he swallowed Metis; but he did not remain without wives.> First the Fates brought Themis to Olympus’, etc.”

225

swth=roj a)rxai¿an aÃloxon Dio\j eÃmmen “First did the fates bring wise-counseling, heavenly Themis on golden horses from the springs of Okeanos along a shining road to the hallowed stair of Olympus to be the primordial wife of Zeus Savior” (Trans. Race). The testimonia concerning Themis Ichnaia which I will consider below offers an important Thessalian counterpart to this complex of stories linking Zeus and Themis. Indeed, it has been suggested by Steve Miller that in Thessaly, where Hera cults are notoriously sparse, Themis was the “Olympian” bride of Zeus. 228 Themis is associated with prophecy in poetry of the Archaic period. Themis was the author of a number of important prophecies. At Pindar Isthmian 8, Themis calms a conflict between Zeus and Poseidon over Thetis (30-34): a)ll' ouà sfin aÃmbrotoi te/lesan eu)na\n qew½n prapi¿dej, e)peiì qesfa/twn <e)p>a/kou|san: eiåpe d' euÃbouloj e)n me/soisi

Qe/mij,

eiàneken peprwme/non hÅn, fe/rteron pate/roj aÃnakta go/non tekeiÍn ponti¿an qeo/n “But the gods’ immortal minds did not accomplish that wedlock for them, when they heard what was ordained. For wise-counseling Themis said in their midst that it was fated for the goddess of the sea to bear a royal son mightier than his father” (Trans. Race). Pindar clearly presents Themis with the authority of an oracle by describing her speech as qesfa/twn and its contents as what is peprwme/non. It is also tempting to see a close connection between Thessaly and Themis recognized by Pindar in this

228

Miller 1974: 252-255.

226

passage. The consequences of Themis’ prophecy are specifically Thessalian: Thetis will marry a Thessalian, Peleus. Themis is also implicated in the beginning of the Trojan War. While the extant literature is not explicit that this was an oracular or prophetic act—Proclus’ epitome of the Cypria (Chrest. i.24-5) calls attention to the fact that Zeu\j bouleu/etai meta\ th=j Qe/midoj periì tou=

Trwi+kou= pole/mou “Zeus counseled with

Themis about the Trojan War”—a fourth-century pelike from Kertsch depicts Themis sitting on an omphalos, speaking with Zeus in the company of other divinties. 229 Themis is first associated with the oracle of Delphi by Aeschylus (Eum. 1-4), where she is said to be a prior owner of the oracle. This suggestion became current in both literary and artistic presentations, 230 although the historicity of these earlier stages is doubtful. That such a story could even be developed about Themis, however, is revelatory of her general affinities with oracular and prophetic arts.

Epigraphic Evidence The Thessalian calendar contained the month Themistios in which the *Themistia were celebrated, almost certainly in honor of Themis. LGPN iii.B lists 18 Thessalians whose names begin in Themis-.

T1. Phalanna, VIa IG ix.2 1236 [® ®]j

¹Oresta[i¿]a o)ne/qeke ta=i Qe/missti.

“[so-and-so] daughter of Orestas [dedicated] to Themis.”

229

LIMC s.v. Themis 17 = LIMC s.v. Aphrodite 1416 E.g. Eur. I.T. 1259 ff., LIMC s.v. Themis 10-11. For a critical evaluation of the entire complex, see Sourvinou-Inwood 1986.

230

227

The original physical form of this stone is not clear from the extant descriptions. The text is dated on the basis of letter form. This Orestas is not otherwise known. 231

T2. Atrax, VIa SEG 27.183 = SEG 45.553 = Ed. pr. Gallis 1974: 273-277. Cf. BE 1976: no. 339 Qe/misti

¹Agorai¿ai

oi¸ tagoiì o)ne/qeken oi¸ a)mfiì

Ko/rron

kaiì Wannei¿an kaiì

¹Omfali¿ona.

“To Themis Agoraia, the tagoi led by Korros, Wanneia and Omphalion dedicated”

Large marble stele with a vertical rectangular cutting on its face for the insertion of a votive and a tenon on top also for securing a votive. 232 The dating of the monument is controversial as the stone was inscribed by at least two different cutters. According to Jeffrey’s typology of Thessalian letter forms, the alphas and thetas of line 1 are later than those of the following lines. 233 Gallis offers a date in the first half of the 4th century BCE for line 1, while the rest of the inscription dates to the end of the 6th century or 1st half of the 5th century BCE. 234 There is no evidence for an erasure beneath line 1. 235 How are we to explain this rather curious inscription? Gallis suggests that it must have initially been self-evident to the dedicators, the public as a whole and

231

LGPN iii.B s.v. )Ore/staj 36. I was able to examine the stone in the Larisa apotheke in July 2004. 233 Jefferey 1990: 96ff. Line 1 contains a5 and q3, while the following lines contain a1 and q2. 234 Gallis 1974: 274. 235 Gallis 1974: 276. 232

228

Themis herself to what deity this dedication belonged. 236 He posits a later change in the environment within which the stele was originally situated: Perhaps the presence of other dedications no longer made it clear for what divinity the stele was set up. 237 Since there were at least two areas on the stele where votives could have been attached, it is possible that the votive bore a distinctive image of Themis or otherwise left no doubt to the viewer to whom the object was offered. A second stele, dedicated to Athena Agoraia, was found near this dedication to Themis Agoraia and it carries the same basic traits: The letter forms used for the names of the dedicators—not tagoi in this case, but archons—date to the middle or late 5th century BCE, while the line that carries the name of Athena Agoraia dates to the first half of the 4th century. Gallis suggests that whatever motivated the later cutting of Themis Agoraia on T2 also motivated the later cutting of the Athena Agoraia dedication. He also suggests that the same individual was responsible for the later cuttings. 238 While Gallis’ reconstruction is plausible, one must be cautious in dating inscriptions by letter form, especially when, as in Archaic Atrax, local comparanda are not especially numerous. Jefferey’s extraordinarily useful typologies must still be verified on a case by case basis. There is no reason why T2 could not have been produced by two contemporary cutters in Atrax using different letter forms. SEG 41.540A (Ambracia: VIa), though a considerably larger monument than T2, offers a useful parallel for this phenomenon.

236

Gallis 1974: 276. One could envision numerous scenarios: For example, the stele could have stood within the temenos of Themis in Atrax. 237 Gallis 1974: 276. 238 Gallis 1974: 278.

229

The inscription specifies the dedicating tagoi as oi¸ a)mfiì kaiì

Wannei¿an | kaiì

Ko/rron |

¹Omfali¿ona, which Helly translates as “les tages

Korros, Arneias et Omphalion et leur entourage.” 239 Expressions like oi( peri/, oi( a)mfi/ + accusative proper name are common in Thessaly. Typically the context of the inscription clearly delineates what binds the group. In Thessaly, the expression very frequently occurs as shorthand for local colleges of tagoi. For example, IG ix.2 1231 13ff. (Phalanna: fin. IIa): e)pimele\j [d]e\ gene/sqw toiÍj [ta]goiÍj toiÍj periì

Eu)bi¿oton, oÀpwj

[pr]oceni¿a hÀde a)nagrafv= ei¹j ki¿on[a] [li]qi¿nhn ktl. “Let Eubiotos and the other tagoi see to it that this proxeny be inscribed on a stone stele…” Rather than list the names of all the tagoi who held the office of tagos in Phalanna at that time—usually 5, but sometimes as many as 7—the expression oi( peri/ marks out the entire group by mentioning only one member. 240 None of the three tagoi mentioned in T2 are otherwise known. 241 The role of tagoi in Archaic and Classical Thessalian society is a matter of some dispute. It seems clear that in the case of T2, tagoi are a college of local

239

Helly 1995. E.g., Il. 3.146-9: Oiá d' a)mfiì Pri¿amon kaiì Pa/nqoon h)de\ Qumoi¿thn | La/mpo/n te Kluti¿on q' I¸ keta/ona/ t' oÃzon A ã rhoj | Ou)kale/gwn te kaiì ¹Anth/nwr pepnume/nw aÃmfw | hÀato dhmoge/rontej e)piì Skaiv=si pu/lvsi. Kirk translates ad loc. “ ‘Those around Priam and Panthoos…as well as Oukalegon and Antenor’, i.e. Priam and his companions Panthoos and so on” and cites further Homeric parallels at Il. 2.445, 6.435-7. 240 For fuller explication of formulae of this type, Cf. BE 1965: no. 210. 241 Cf. LGPN iii.B s.v. Wannei/aj 1; )Omfali/wn 3; Ko/rroj 1.

230

magistrates. An Archaic sacred law from Atrax reveals that tagoi received fines for infractions in the cult of Athena Polias. 242 Themis was also worshipped as Agoraia in Magnesia (T4, to be considered below). While the epithet Agoraia is technically applicable to any divinity whose cult was situated in the vicinity of the Agora, it is nevertheless tempting to see Themis being worshipped in a particularly Homeric aspect in Thessaly. 243 The dedication to Athena Agoraia which was discovered with T2 suggests that the two goddesses were cultically or at least conceptually linked.

T3. Magnesia, V-IVa SEG 37.491 = Ed pr. Magoulas 1985: 89-94 Qe/misti prosteiqi¿dia, toiÍ i¸eroiÍ aÃkainna

4

I deka/poj. “Breast plates/horse armor for Themis, one ten-foot measuring rod for the sanctuary”

Stele. The stone is dated by letter form. Any interpretation of this inscription is dependant on a proper appreciation of the syntax. While prosteiqi¿dia could be either nominative or accusative, aÃkainna can only be in the nominative case. The classification of the inscription as a votive offering is prima facie unlikely. Autopsy of

242

Ed. pr. Giannopoulos 1934-5: 140. Helly 1979, has argued that this inscription is from Argoura, not Atrax. 243 Her association with the agora extends beyond Thessaly, e.g., at Boiotian Thebes, where a sanctuary of Themis was next to that of Zeus Agoraios (Paus. 9.25.1).

231

the stone in the Larisa apotheke in July 2004 revealed no trace of a cutting for the insertion of a votive. It is likely that this stone is an abbreviated inventory. prosthqi¿dion only occurs three times in Greek literature and is defined by LSJ as a “breast-ornament.” Pollux 2.162 suggests an equine context: kaleiÍtai de\ kaiì prosthqi¿dia iàppwn oÀpla “the armor of horses is also called prostethidia.” Magoulas follows this line of interpretation in the editio princeps. 244 The other two occurrences of the word have nothing to do with horses, however: 1) Polybius 21.6.7 ¹Ecelqo/ntej me\n

Ga/lloi du/o meta\ tu/pwn kaiì prosthqidi¿wn

e)de/onto mhde\n a)nh/keston bouleu/esqai periì th=j po/lewj “Two Galli or priests of Cybele with images and pectorals came out of the town, and besought them not to resort to extreme measures against the city” (Trans. Paton); 2) Polybius 21.37.5-7 paragi¿nontai Ga/lloi par' ãAttidoj kaiì Batta/kou tw½n e)k Pessinou=ntoj i¸ere/wn th=j Mhtro\j tw½n qew½n, eÃxontej prosthqi¿dia kaiì tu/pouj, fa/skontej prosagge/llein th\n qeo\n ni¿khn kaiì kra/toj “As he was encamped close to the river, two Galli, with pectorals and images, came on behalf of Attis and Battacus, the priests of the Mother of the Gods at Pessinus, announcing that the goddess foretold his victory” (Trans. Paton). Which of the attested literary usages, if either, is most likely for T3? Given Thessaly’s reputation for horsemanship in antiquity and the goddess’ popularity in the region, it is plausible that equine armor would be at home in a sanctuary of Themis. Known dedications of horse armor or other kinds of implements 244

Magoulas 1985: 90.

232

worn by horses are not uncommon. Deities or heroes who receive these types of votive may be in some way associated with horses or the dedication may relate specifically to the circumstances preceding the dedication. For example, Plutarch describes how Cimon dedicated a bridal to Athena before leaving Athens at the advance of the Persians. 245 Victorious armies would occasionally dedicate equine accoutrements of their enemy as a tithe of spoils. Timoleon allegedly offered a chariot of the Carthaginians to Apollo following his victory at Crimesus, although it is unclear if the chariot actually participated in the fighting or if it was a commissioned piece. 246 In his report on the bronzes uncovered during the early excavations of Olympia, A. Furtwängler commented on a number of rings discovered in the area of the Pelopeion and near the altar of Zeus which had parallels with rings associated with horse armor discovered in South Italian graves. 247 Furtwängler also associated a bronze knob 248 found near the west façade of the temple of Zeus with a bridal and a bronze plate found north of the Prytaneion with some kind of horse armor. 249 These dedications of horse armor at Olympia, if indeed that is what they are, may be associated with Pelops, although such activity is not otherwise attested in his cult at Olympia. 250 He is associated with horses in myth and votive dedications of horse armor do not seem out of place in his cult. We find another possible explanation for these presumed dedications of horse armor within the Altis when we consider the vast quantities of armor dedicated to Zeus in the Archaic and early Classical period. Armies regularly commemorated their

245

Plutarch, Kimon 5.2. Plutarch suggests that the dedication was in this case symbolic of the Athenians’ need for sailors, not cavalry, to combat the Persians. 246 Rouse 1902: 107. Plutarch, Timoleon 27. 247 Furtwängler 1896: 63-64. He provided no further details about the South Italian graves, however. 248 Furtwängler 1896: 97-98, no. 682. 249 Furtwängler 1896: 195, no. 1252: “vielleicht von Pferdergeschirr.” 250 For discussion of Pelops’ cult at Olympia, see Pausanias 5.13 ff., Burkert 1983: 93 ff. Pausanias mentions no votives, but mentions a ram sacrifice with oracular features.

233

victories with dedications of armor, either as a simple thank offering or as a tithe. 251 Both types of action have been associated with the oracle of Zeus at Olympia, an institution which seems to have been particularly connected with war. 252 Beyond Olympia, we find a conspicuous presence of horse accoutrements in the Attic cult of Poseidon Hippios celebrated at Colonnus. 253 If a cult inventory has been supplemented and interpreted correctly, it is interesting to note that equine headgear is included in a list of objects which seem to have played an actual role in the cult, together with offering tables, cups and implements for flaying and roasting sacrificial animals. 254 There are therefore good parallels for the presence of the equine apparatus in cult contexts, especially of those divinities which are known to have had a special relationship with horses. The pectorals worn by Galli are known from a handful of material remains. 255 We simply do not know enough about the costume of officials and devotees of cults of Themis in the Greek world to determine whether Galli-like pectorals could have played any role. One may also speculate that a cult image of Themis was adorned with prostethidia. There is not enough evidence in the final analysis to determine which, if either, of these meanings is operative. Lines 4-5 of the inscription are no less problematic. LSJ s.v. aÃkaina offers the following possible meanings: “I. spike, prick, goad; II. 1. ten-foot rod used as a measure; 2. square measure of 100 ft.” The specification that the aÃkainna is 251

It is the inscriptions that seal this interpretation. No pieces of the proposed horse armor carry any trace of an inscription. 252 It is not likely that these dedications are associated with victors at the games themselves. Victorious riders tended to commemorate their victories with actual models of horses or chariots. Cf. Rouse 1902: 166-7. 253 IG i3 405, IG ii2 1542 25. 254 IG i3 405 (413/2-405/4a) where a kekru]falei¿o is mentioned. LSJ s.v. kekru/faloj I.2: “part of the head stall of a bridle.” Cf. Xen. Eq. 6.8. 255 Gow 1960: 89-90, with illustrations and references to an Antonine relief.

234

deka/poj, “ten feet long” not “ten,” makes it extremely unlikely that land is here recorded. We may therefore immediately exclude LSJ II 2. An exact parallel for the expression in T3 is found in Callimachus Aetia 24.6-7: deka/p[o]un d' eiåxen aÃkainan oÀge, a)mfo/teron ke/ntron te bow½n k?aiì=me/tron a)rou/rhj “He [Thiodamas] held a ten-foot pole, both a goad for the oxen and a measure for the land” (Trans. Trypanis). Apollonius Rhodius 3.1323-4 reads: e)rgati¿nhj wÐj ti¿j te Pelasgi¿di nu/ssen a)kai¿nv ou)ta/zwn lago/naj “[Jason] like some ploughman with a Pelasgian goad pricked [the bulls] striking their flanks” (Trans. Seaton with modification). On the word a)kai¿nv, the scholiast (Wendel) comments: a)ntiì tou= ke/ntr%. aÃkaina de/ e)sti me/tron deka/poun, Qessalw½n euÀrema, hÄ r(a/bdoj poimenikh\ para\

PelasgoiÍj hu(rhme/nh

“akaina: instead of ‘goad’. The akaina is a ten-foot measure, an invention of the Thessalians, or a shepherds’ staff found among the Pelasgians.” Comparison of Apollonius’ simple use of the word as “goad” with Callimachus’ fulsome gloss of the phrase as both “goad” and “measuring stick” leads one to wonder whether the deka/pouj a)/kaina was the subject of some Alexandrean quarrel. Thessalian inscriptions of the Hellenistic period attest to the use of a)/kaina as an abstract unit of distance, 256 but the concrete meaning of “measuring stick/goad” seems much more appropriate for T3. One could understand the presence of a measuring rod/cattle prod in a number of different ways. Themis has associations with agriculture through the Horai, her 256

E.g., SEG 43.311 = Ed. pr. Missailidou-Despotidou 1993.

235

daughters by Zeus. 257 A dedicatory epigram of Agathios Scholastichus (AP 6.41) offers a useful parallel for the dedication of a goad to a goddess of agriculture: Xalko\n a)rotrhth\n klasibw¯laka neiotomh=a kaiì th\n taurode/tin bu/rsan e)pauxeni¿hn kaiì bou/plhktron aÃkainan e)xetlh/enta/ te go/mfon DhoiÍ

Kallime/nhj aÃnqeto geiopo/noj,

tmh/caj eu)aro/tou r(a/xin o)rga/doj: ei¹ de\ e)pineu/seij to\n sta/xun a)mh=sai, kaiì drepa/nhn komi¿sw. “His brazen share that breaks the clods and cuts the fallows, the leather thong that passes under the neck of the ox, the goad with which he pricks it, and his plough-bolt doth the husbandman Callimenes dedicate to thee, Demeter, after cutting the back of his well-ploughed field. Grant me to reap the corn, and I will bring thee a sickle, too” (Trans. Paton). It is conceivable that the abbreviated inventory of T3 records the presence of an akainna in the sanctuary of Themis which had been dedicated to her. 258 Another potential parallel comes from Rhamnous where Themis and Nemesis were honored with a joint cult. A damaged votive relief from Rhamnous depicts Themis and Nemesis. The latter holds what is usually called a scepter but may be a measuring rod. A popular coin type from Roman Smyrna represents two Nemeses, one of which sometimes holds a measuring rod. 259 I will later suggest that the two goddesses may also have been associated in Thessaly. What significance such an object would have held within the cult of Themis in Magnesia is unclear. The concept of measurement was closely connected with ideas of retribution and justice. 257

Hes., Theog. 901. Harpocration, s.v. Bou/xeta, preserves a tradition wherein Themis is carried by ox to Boucheta following the flood of Deucalion. A goad may have been useful in this mythical circumstance as well, though there is no way of knowing if such a tradition was current in Magnesia. 259 E.g., LIMC s.v. Nemesis 10. 258

236

T4. Magnesia, 500-450a McD 1040 = Ed. pr. Arvanitopoulos 1911: 300-1, no. 49 Q?e/midi a)g?orai¿ai. “To Themis Agoraia.”

Small stele. The date is suggested by letter form. Themis Agoraia is also known from Atrax (T2).

T5. Pherai, IVa SEG 45.645 = Ed. pr. Miller 1974 [[ [ (Isti/]a Dh[m]h/thr [ )En]odi/a )Afrodi/th )Aqhna= [Q]e/mij ]] [[ (Is[t]i/a Dhmh/thr )En[od]i/a

)Aqhn[a=]

→

)Afrod[i/]th Qe/mi[j] ]] ←

[Qe/]mij )Afrodi/th )Aqhna= )Enodi/a Dhmh/thr (Isti/a

→

“Hestia, Demeter, Enodia, Aphrodite, Athena, Themis; Hestia, Demeter, Enodia, Athena, Aphrodite, Themis; Themis, Aphrodite, Athena, Enodia, Demeter, Hestia.”

Large marble altar. I have treated the monument in the section on Ennodia (= E9).

T6. Phthiotic Thebes, 250-217a McDevitt 50 = Ed. pr. Arvanitopoulos 1908: 171 Q?e/midi “To Themis.”

237

Stele. Date suggested by letter form. It is noteworthy that the stele was recovered during excavation in and around a sanctuary of Athena at Phthiotic Thebes. The two figures may have been associated in cult here as at Atrax.

T7. Gonnoi, ca. 178a Helly 1973: II, no. 69 8-10 ...kai\ par ) e)kei/noij h( proceni/a a)nagraf$= ei)j ki/ona liqi/nhn [kai\] teq$= e)n t%½ i¸er%½ th=j Qe/midoj ktl. “…let the proxeny decree be published among among them, the Mondaians, on a stone stele and set up in the sanctuary of Themis…”

Marble stele. Text is dated by eponymous strategos of the Thessalian League. A decree of proxeny is voted for judges from the Thessalian city of Mondaia by the Perrhaebian city of Gonnoi.

T8. Dodona, date? SIG2 793 Di\ Na/wi kai\ Diw/nai e)pikoina=tai Mon[d]aiata=n to\ koino\n pe\r to [a)r-] gu/rroi ta=j Qe/misto<j>, ai) a)ekt[o/]n e)sti ta= Qemi/[s]ti kai\ be/ltion e)<s>kixre/men. “The community of the Mondaeans enquires of Zeus Naios and Dione concerning the money of Themis whether it is permissible and better to put it on loan for Themis.” 260

260

Trans. Parke.

238

Lead lamella. Inscriptions of this sort are extremely difficult to date. The people of Mondaia inquire about loaning money from the sanctuary of Themis to raise revenues.

Literary Evidence T9. Strabo 9.5.14 tau=ta d' e)stiì th=j sumpa/shj oÀpou

Qettaliw¯tidoj mia=j tw½n tetta/rwn meri¿dwn th=j

Qettali¿aj, hÂj kaiì ta\ u(p'

¹Apo/llw>noj tou=

Eu)rupu/l% kaiì o(

Fulli¿ou i¸ero/n, kaiì

Fu/ll th=j )Aqamani/aj. “But these locations belong to Thessaliotis, one of the four tetrads of all Thessaly, to which belongs both the territories governed by Eurypylos and Phyllos, where there is a sanctuary of Apollo Phyllios, and Ichnai, where Themis Ichnaia is honored. Both Kierium and all the land up to Athamania belong to it.”

Themis Ichnaia is already mentioned at Homeric Hymn to Apollo 89ff. as one of the goddesses who assists Leto during the birth of Apollo: Au)ta\r e)pei¿ r(' oÃmose/n te teleu/thse/n te to\n oÀrkon, Dh=loj me\n ma/la xaiÍre go/n% e(ka/toio aÃnaktoj, LhtwÜ d' e)nnh=ma/r te kaiì e)nne/a nu/ktaj a)e/lptoij w©di¿nessi pe/parto. qeaiì d' eÃsan eÃndoqi pa=sai oÀssai aÃristai eÃsan,

Diw¯nh te

¹Ixnai¿h te Qe/mij kaiì a)ga/stonoj

¸Rei¿h te ¹Amfitri¿th

“Now when Leto had sworn and ended her oath, Delos was very glad at the birth of the far-shooting lord. But Leto was racked nine days and nine nights with pains beyond wont. And there were with her all the chiefest of the goddesses, Dione and

239

Rhea and Themis Ichnaia and loud-moaning Amphitrite.” (Trans. Evelyn-White with modification). While the testimony of Strabo allows for a topographic explanation of Ichnaia, other related explanations of the epithet were current in antiquity. Stephanus, s.v. ãIxnai, comments as follows: po/lij

Makedoni¿aj.

¸Hro/dotoj e(bdo/mv.

au)th/n fhsi...to\ e)qniko\n

¹IxnaiÍoj kaiì

¹Eratosqe/nhj de\

¹Ixnai¿a h(

ãAxnaj

Qe/mij. diwkome/nh

ga\r u(po\ tou= Dio\j katelh/fqh e)n toiÍj tw½n ¹Ixnai¿wn to/poij, kaiì a)po\ tou= diwxqh=nai kat' iãxnoj w©noma/sqh. “Ichnai: City of Macedonia. Herodotus in the seventh book. Eratosthenes calls it Achnai…The ethnic is Ichnaios, [like] Themis Ichnaia. For she, pursued by Zeus, was seized/raped by him in the region of Ichnai, and she is so-called because she was tracked down by her footsteps.” I will consider the Macedonian location of this myth presently. The verb katelh/fqh suggests violence 261 and contrasts sharply with the more neutral h(ga/geto of the Hesiodic account. 262 Lycophron Alex. 128-131 also mentions an Ichnaian goddess, most likely Themis: keiÍno/j se, Gouneu\j wÐsper, e)rga/thj di¿khj, th=j q' ¸Hli¿ou qugatro\j ¹Ixnai¿aj brabeu/j, e)pesbolh/saj lugra\ nosfieiÍ ga/mwn, li¿ptonta ka/sshj e)kbalwÜn peleia/doj.

261 262

Cf. LSJ, s.v. katalamba/nw I.1, II. Hes., Theog. 901. h)ga/geto could easily conceal an act of violence, however.

240

“He, like to Guneus, minister of right and judge of the Ichnaian daughter of the sun, with stern rebuke shall rob thee of thy mate, and drive thee lusting from thy wanton dove” (Trans. Mooney with modification). A scholion on the passage makes a number of significant observations (ANt (Leone)): quga/thr de\ tou= (Hli/ou Qe/mij, dio/ti kai\ au)th\ “pa/nta e)for#= kai\ pa/nta e)pakou/ei”, o(/qen kai\

)Ixnai/a dia\ to\ kat ) i)/xnoj tw=n

a)nqrw/pwn poreu/esqai. “The daughter of the sun is Themis, because she also ‘sees and hears all things,’ for which reason she is also Ichnaia because she proceeds along the footsteps of men.” While this is a very different image of Themis Ichnaia than that encountered in Stephanus, one is tempted to read the two passages in conjunction. Just as Themis Ichnaia was tracked by her footsteps, so now she too tracks others by their footsteps. Schol. B (Leone) suggests that Lycophron does not literally mean that Themis was the daughter of Helios. One may infer the relationship’s symbolic dimension from the quotation of Od. 11.109, a description of Helios in Homer, in schol. ANt (Leone). Themis Ichnaia is the daughter of Helios because she functions similarly. To proceed along someone’s footsteps can signify, in addition to the neutral sense of follow, both to emulate 263 and to pursue for the purposes of punishment or retribution. The latter sense is to be preferred in the case of Themis Ichnaia. The Lycophron scholion intimates this retributive aspect of Themis, an aspect also suggested by her association with Nemesis at Rhamnous, who is also once described as Ichnaia (Diodorus: A.G. 9.4051-2): Adrh/steia/ se diÍa kaiì i¹xnai¿h se fula/ssoi parqe/noj, h( pollou\j yeusame/nh, Ne/mesij

263

Cf. Pind., Nemean 6.15-20.

241

“Divine Adrasteia and the tracker-maiden, deceiver of many, Nemesis—may they keep you safe” (Trans. Gow-Page). 264 Indeed, it would be easy to mistake the activities of Themis at, e.g., Quintus of Smyrna 13.369 ff., where she is described floating in the air, watching the a)nqrw/pwn fu=la, for those of Nemesis. It is possible that the two goddesses were perceived as doublets of one another in some areas and doubleness seems characteristic of the cults of both goddesses, e.g., double Nemeses at Smyrna (Paus. 1.33.7-9), double Themides at Troizen (Paus. 2.31.5). If or how these aspects of Themis Ichnaia were reflected in the actual cult of Themis Ichnaia in Thessaly is totally uncertain. I have speculated in the case of the Magnesian akainna, T3, that a measuring rod may symbolize the goddess’ retributive function. Strabo is our only source for Thessalian Ichnai, the location of which remains unknown. Giorgiades attached the name Ichnai to a group of ancient remains in northern Thessaliotis, near modern Elja. 265 Stählin could do no better than echo Strabo: “Über Ichnai oder Achnai, wo die Themis Ichnaia verehrt wurde, weiss man nur, dass es zur Thessaliotis gehörte.” 266 A recent student of the topography of the region, Jean-Claude Decourt, despaired of locating Ichnai. 267 Strabo’s authority has nevertheless not been challenged by modern scholars. A Macedonian Ichnai is better attested. 268 We have already encountered this city at Stephanus s.v. ãIxnai. In his account of Xerxes’ movements along the Thracian and Macedonian coastline, Herodotus mentions Ichnai and Pella as

264

This passage led Canterus to comment ad Lyc. 129: Ichnaea vocatur Themis seu Nemesis… Georgiades 1894: 206. 266 Stählin 1967: 135. 267 Decourt 1990: 180, “Phyllos ne devait pas être très éloignée d’Ichnai (mais où était Ichnai?)” 268 A Mesopotamian Ichnai, doubtless a product of Macedon’s eastern campaigns in the Hellenistic period, is known from, e.g., Plut., Cras. 25.12, Cassius Dio 40.12. 265

242

occupying a narrow strip of land near the opening of the Axius River into the Thermaic Gulf, on the border of the Bottiean and Mygdonian territories. 269 Pliny places Ichnai in the same general vicinity as Herodotus. 270 Macedonian Ichnai is known to have minted coins with the ethnic IXNAON, IXNAIWN, from the middle of the 6th century. 271 Hesychius s.v. < ¹Ixnai¿hn xw¯ran> complicates Strabo’s testimony considerably: th\n

Makedoni¿an, eÃnqa to\ manteiÍon o(

¹Apo/llwn kate/sxe, kaiì

tima=tai ¹Ixnai¿h Qe/mij “Ichnaian territory: Macedonia, where Apollo has an oracle and Themis Ichnaia is honored.” Are Strabo’s Thessalian Ichnai and Themis Ichnaia simply a mistake or is it possible that there were two places known as Ichnai, one in Thessaly and one in Macedonia, each with its own cult of Themis Ichnaia? Satisfactory arguments could be made on both fronts. While Strabo’s reliability is often justifiably impugned, mere homonymy of place and cult is not sufficient to condemn him here. 272 What historical circumstance could explain the testimony of both Strabo and Hesychius? One possibility is that there was a close, perhaps colonial, relationship between the two settlements. This would clarify both the shared city name and cult. Ennodia and 269

Herodotus 7.123. Pliny HN 4.35: mox in ora Ichnae, fluvius Axius. 271 Hammond and Griffith 1972-1988: 2.76f., 85. Cf. Head 1911: 199. Since the coins are similar in type to others certainly produced in Macedonia at this time and since the date precedes the putative beginning of Thessalian coinage, it is almost certain that these coins belong to Macedonian, not Thessalian, Ichnai. 272 It is impossible to determine to which Ichnai the few mentions of the city or the ethnic in epigraphical texts refer. The city of Ichnai, most likely either Thessalian or Macedonian, is mentioned in a Delphian list of theorodokoi (ed. pr. Plassart 1921: col. III, l. 63: e)n ãIxnaij Di¿hj A ¹ lke/tou). The Ichnaian ethnic is mentioned in a Delphian proxeny decree (FD iii.3 207 2). The Ichnaian comes between an individual from Edessa and one from Meliboea in a sequence of names originating from Thessaly or Macedonia. The ethnic is also known from in a sepulchral inscription from Athens (IG iii.2 2500: date?). 270

243

perhaps Zeus Thaulios offer parallels for other cults shared between Macedonia and Thessaly.

Numismatic Evidence There is no conclusive numismatic evidence for Themis in Thessaly.

Archaeological Evidence There is no archaeological evidence for the cult of Themis in Thessaly.

Discussion The portrait of Themis that has emerged in the course of this presentation is multifaceted. While I hope to have demonstrated her popularity at all periods of Thessalian history, the Archaic and early Classical evidence is more substantial than what has been preserved for the other cults treated in this dissertation. The cult of Themis seems to have been established in Thessaly early and its distribution was wide. In fact, each of three main peioikic satellites of tetradic Thessaly provides evidence for the cult. Perrhaebian Phalanna in the Archaic period (T1), Magnesia in the Classical period (T3-4) and Phthiotic Thebes in the Hellenistic era (T6). In the figure of Themis at least, there seems to have been some kind of common religious ground among the various territories. The association of Themis and the agora attested in Homer is also present in her Thessalian manifestations. It is not surprising to find the goddess deeply implicated in the political life of various localities of the region, especially in Mondaia, where her sanctuary was perhaps the principal locus of publication of state documents (T7), and in Atrax, where the goddess was worshipped by the local college

244

of tagoi in the Archaic period (T2). The goddess could also be worshipped by individuals, as T1 indicates. The cult of Themis was also well established in Boiotia and certain aspects of her worship there are comparable to what we have observed in her Thessalian cults. 273 Pausanias mentions a temple of Themis in Tanagra 274 and a sanctuary, with cult image, in suburban Thebes. 275 Her sanctuary in Thebes is near that of Zeus Agoraios while her temple in Tanagra is in a precinct which housed the temples of polis divinities.

5.7: Zeus Homoloios

Introduction Nilsson presciently recognized that the cult of Zeus Homoloios in central and northern Greece was much more important than the extant evidence would suggest. 276 In the case of Thessaly, his supposition has been entirely borne out by the archaeological discoveries of the past thirty years. The cult of Zeus Homoloios,

273

Vos 1956: 69 and 78, argued that the worship of Themis in Boiotia was of considerable antiquity and connected with the cults of Themis in Thessaly. Although the evidence from Boiotia is late, two passages from Pausanias and a Hellenistic inscription, Schachter 1981-: 3.50 n. 7, admits that Vos’ proposal is tenable: “…the grouping at Tanagra suggests he may be right” (i.e. Themis’ temple is located near other gods who, ibid., 50, “embod[y] a feature essential to the functioning of the polis.”) 274 Pausanias 9.22.1: e)n Tana/gr# de\ para\ to\ i¸ero\n tou= Dionu/sou Qe/mido/j e)stin, o( de\ ¹Afrodi¿thj, kaiì o( tri¿toj tw½n naw½n ¹Apo/llwnoj, o(mou= de\ au)t%½ [kaiì] ãArtemi¿j te kaiì Lhtw¯. “Beside the sanctuary of Dionysus at Tanagra are three temples, one of Themis, another of Aphrodite, and the third of Apollo; with Apollo are joined Artemis and Leto” (trans. Jones). 275 Pausanias 9.25.4: kata\ de\ th\n o(do\n a)po\ tw½n pulw½n tw½n Nhistw½n to\ me\n Qe/mido/j e)stin i¸ero\n kaiì aÃgalma leukou= li¿qou, to\ de\ e)fech=j Moirw½n, to\ de\ A ¹ gorai¿ou Dio/j. “Along the road from the Neistan gate are three sanctuaries. There is a sanctuary of Themis, with an image of white marble; adjoining it is a sanctuary of the fates, while the third is of Zeus of the Market” (trans. Jones). 276 Nilsson 1995: 12-3. Zeus Homoloios surprisingly does not factor in the other standard panhellenic surveys. Cook 1914-1940 discusses the cult at 900 n.1, 904 n.4.

245

previously and inconclusively thought to have existed in Thessaly on the presence of the month name Homoloios in the league calendar, is now certainly attested in inscriptions from Atrax, Larisa and Metropolis of tetradic Thessaly. The cult is also attested in Boiotian Thebes, Eretria and Eresos (Lesbos). On Lindos, a Zeus Amalos is known which may be related to Homoloios. The month Homoloios is present in the calendars of the Thessalian league, Boiotia, Aitolia and Lesbos. There was no agreement about the epithet’s meaning in antiquity. 277 Ancient scholars variously appealed to topography, mythology and philology, often in combination. Regional and local variation was the norm. Though much of the ancient literary evidence is concerned with the epithet’s relevance in a Boiotian, especially Theban, context, I will begin with what may be a particularly Thessalian explanation. A fragment of Aristophanes the Boiotian preserved in both Photius and the Suda presents a mythic aitiology of the cult—albeit abbreviated—in a Thessalian context (Aristophanes the Boiotian, FGrHist 379 F 2 = Photius s.v. ¸Omolw¯i+oj Zeu/j): e)n Qh/baij kaiì e)n aÃllaij po/lesi Boiwti¿aj: kaiì o( e)n

Qessali¿ai

a)po\ ¸Omolw¯aj profh/tidoj th=j ¹Enue/wj: hÁn profh=tin ei¹j Delfou\j pemfqh=nai o( ¹Aristofa/nhj e)n deute/rwi Qhbai+kw½n. “Homoloian Zeus: In Thebes and in other cities of Boiotia. And the one in Thessaly (sc. is named) from Homoloa, prophet of Enyo, which prophet Aristophanes claims, in the second book of the Thebaika, was sent to Delphi.” Aristophanes of Boiotia was active in the late fifth-early fourth century BCE and wrote a Thebaika or Thebaion Horon from which the preceding fragment originated. Suda s.v. ¸Omolw¯i+oj transmits the text with a subtle but significant difference: Zeu\j e)n

277

Qh/baij kaiì e)n aÃllaij po/lesi BoiwtikaiÍj kaiì e)n

Wilamowitz-Moellendorf 1891: 214-6, discusses the relevant sources.

246

Qessali¿#: a)po\ ¸Omol%¯aj profh/tidoj, th=j ¹Enue/wj: hÁn profh=tin ei¹j Delfou\j pemfqh=nai, w¨j ¹Aristofa/nhj e)n b§ Qhbai+kw½n. “Homoloios: Zeus in Thebes and other cities of Boiotia and in Thessaly; (sc. named) from Homoloa, prophet of Enyo, which prophet Aristophanes claims, in the second book of the Thebaika, was sent to Delphi.” Did Aristophanes record a shared Boiotian and Thessalian tradition concerning Zeus Homoloios (Suda) or one specific to Thessaly (Photius)? Given the repeated syntax e)n...kai\ e)n...kai\ e)n of the opening of the entry, it is easy to see how the definite article o( dropped out in Suda. It is far more difficult to explain how it would have been introduced into Photius. It is therefore likely that Aristophanes used the tale of Homoloa the prophetess to explain the Thessalian cult of Zeus Homoloios. Enyo, often represented in myth and cult as the female consort of Enyalios or Ares, 278 is not otherwise connected with Thessaly or with oracles, although Ares was a popular oracular divinity in Asia Minor. 279 Although the fragment is terse, it is possible to situate this account within the framework of other cult aitiologies where an individual is sent to Delphi when his or her territory is afflicted by some malaise and returns with instructions to found a new cult. 280 Given the observed tendency of Enyo to be paired with a male figure in myth and cult, one wonders whether Zeus Homoloios played this role in Thessaly. Aside from this admittedly problematic fragment of Aristophanes, however, the literary sources do not connect Zeus Homoloios with Thessaly but with Boiotia, especially Thebes, where the epithet Homoloios, vel sim. is applied in addition to Athena 281 , Demeter 282 and one pair of the seven gates of Thebes. The gates in 278

Graf 1985: 268. Cf. also Guarducci 1985: 11ff. Ares and Enyalios are only sporadically attested in northern Greece. Cf. Graf 1985: 267. 280 RE viii col. 2262 (Jessen) s.v. Homoloia. 281 Schol. Lyk. 520. The cult is not epigraphically attested. 282 Photius s.v. Homoloios Zeus; Suda s.v. Homoloios; Apost. s.v. Homoloios Zeus. Cf. Doria 1985. 279

247

particular attracted attention, and understanding how ancient traditions explained the significance of the epithet in this particular case of Theban topography may assist our inquiry into the epithet’s significance in Thessaly. Let us begin with the scholion to Euripides Phoen. 1119 ( ¸Omolwi¿si de\ ta/cin ei)=xe pro\j pu/laij. “He directed his squadron toward the Homoloian Gates.”): auÂtai ouÀtwj e)klh/qhsan a)po\

¸Omolwe/wj tou=

ga\r periì ¹Amfi¿ona/ fasi su\n toiÍj paisiìn aÀma

¹Amfi¿onoj.

Tou\j

Ka/dm% teixi¿sai

th\n po/lin. ¹Aristo/dhmoj (FGrHist 383 F 5a) d' au)ta/j fhsin ouÀtw klhqh=nai dia\ to\ plhsi¿on eiånai tou= de\ a)po\ mia=j tw½n

¸Omolwou h(/rwoj.

ãAlloi

Nio/bhj qugate/rwn, ¸Omolwi¿+doj kaloume/nhj.

“These gates were so-called, viz. Homoloian, from Homoloes the son of Amphion. For they say that those with Amphion, together with their children, at the time of Kadmos, built a wall for the city. Aristodemos 283 asserts that they were so-called because of the proximity of the hero Homoloos. Others say that it was from of one of the daughters of Niobe named Homolois.” Multiple explanations of the epithet for the gates existed within a Theban frame of reference. Although this entry has no direct bearing on Zeus Homoloios, it is reasonable to conjecture, given his prominence in Theban religion, that there were as many explanations of his epithet which relied exclusively on local genealogy and/or topography—perhaps the same as those listed here. Another strand of interpretation, however, which combined the mythological approach with a topographical explanation, has slightly more bearing on Thessaly. The northern reach of the Ossa massif which formed the southern border of the Tempe was in antiquity known as Homole, vel sim., upon which there was a settlement known as 283

A series of questions about the identity of Aristodemos “the Theban” need not vex us here. He is most likely the same Aristodemos quoted in the Euripides scholion supra and is dated by Jacoby to ca. 150-130a.

248

Homolion, vel sim. 284 Steph. Byz. s.v. ¸Omo/lh associates the Homoloian Gates of Thebes and Boiotian Zeus Homoloios with this region: oÃroj

Qettali¿aj.

oi¹kou=ntej

Pausani¿aj e)na/t%. le/getai kaiì < àOmoloj.> oi¸

¸OmoloeiÍj. kaiì

¸Omolwi¿+dej, kaiì

Zeu\j

Qhbw½n [pu/l]ai pro\j t%½ oÃrei

¸Omolw¯i+oj tima=tai e)n

Boiwti¿#.

“Homole: a mountain in Thessaly. Pausanias in the ninth book. It is also called Homolos. The inhabitants (sc. are called) Homoloeis. And the gates of Thebes oriented toward the mountain are called Homoloian, and Zeus Homoloios is honored in Boiotia.” Therein is a loose association of a Boiotian cult epiclesis with Thessalian and Theban topography. As we have seen above in the Euripides scholion, there was no shortage of competing, perhaps cooperative, explanations of the Homolian Gates in Thebes. Such was the nature of ancient aitiology. The passage in Pausanias to which Stephanus alludes, 9.8.5-7, makes the Theban-Thessalian connection more explicit: ta\j de\ e)piì tau/taij pu/laj o)noma/zousin ei¹sin

¹Wgugi¿aj, teleutaiÍai de/

¸Omolwi¿dej: e)fai¿neto de\ eiånai¿ moi kaiì to\ oÃnoma new¯taton

taiÍj pu/laij tau/taij, ai¸ de\ ¹Wgu/giai to\ a)rxaio/taton. (9.8.6) ta\j de\ ¸Omolwi¿daj klhqh=nai¿ fasin e)piì toi%½de. h(ni¿ka u(po\

¹Argei¿wn

ma/xv pro\j Gli¿santi e)krath/qhsan, to/te o(mou= Laoda/manti t%½ ¹Eteokle/ouj u(peci¿asin oi¸ polloi¿: tou/twn ouÅn moiÍra th\n me\n e)j tou\j ¹Illuriou\j porei¿an a)pw¯knhse,trapo/menoi de\ e)j Qessalou\j katalamba/nousin 284

¸Omo/lhn, o)rw½n tw½n

E.g. Strabo 9.5.22: to\ me\n ouÅn O ¸ mo/lion hÄ th\n O ¸ mo/lhn (le/getai ga\r a)mfote/rwjŸ a)podote/on au)toiÍj: eiãrhtai d' e)n toiÍj MakedonikoiÍj oÀti e)stiì pro\j tv= ãOssv kata\ th\n a)rxh\n th=j tou= Phneiou= dia\ tw½n Tempw½n diekbolh=j. “Now Homolium, or Homolê (for it is spelled both ways), should be assigned to the Magnesians; as I have said in my description of Macedonia, it is close to Ossa, situated where the Peneius begins to discharge its waters through Tempê” (trans. Jones).

249

Qessalikw½n kaiì euÃgewn ma/lista kaiì uÀdasin e)pirreome/nhn. (9.8.7) Qersa/ndrou de\ tou=

Polunei¿kouj a)nakalesame/nou sfa=j e)piì ta\

oi¹keiÍa, ta\j pu/laj dia\ wÒn th\n ka/qodon e)poiou=nto a)po\ th=j ¸Omo/lhj o)noma/zousin ¸Omolwi¿daj. “Next after these gates is the one called Ogygian, and lastly the Homoloian gate. It appeared to me too that the name of the last was the most recent, and that of the Ogygian the most ancient. The name Homoloian is derived, they say, from the following circumstance. When the Thebans were beaten in battle by the Argives near Glisas, most of them withdrew along with Laodamas, the son of Eteocles. A portion of them shrank from the journey to Illyria, and turning aside to Thessaly, they seized Homole, the most fertile and best-watered of the Thessalian mountains. When they were recalled to their homes by Thersander, the son of Polyneices, they called the gate, through which they passed on their return, the Homoloian gate after Homole.” 285 While there is no explicit mention of Zeus Homoloios, we glimpse in Pausanias’ prehistory of the Homoloian Gates at Thebes a complex of issues similar to those we witnessed in the case of Athena Itonia: War resulting in travel between Thessaly and Boiotia and the transposition of the toponymy of one region to the other. If we supplement the Pausanias passage with the lemma in Stephanus, an association of the Theban gates with Zeus Homoloios and Thessalian topography becomes more plausible. Other evidence helps us flesh out the picture. A connection between Thessalian Homole and a festival known as the Homoloia is suggested by Aristophanes the Boiotian, preserved in the scholion to Theocritus 7.103a 286 : ¸Omo/lh de\ Qettali¿aj oÃroj, w¨j ãEforoj (FGrHist 70 F 228) kaiì 285

Trans. Jones. Theocritus 7.103: to/n moi, Pa/n, O ¸ mo/laj e)rato\n pe/don oÀste le/logxaj ktl. “Ah, Pan, to whom has fallen the lovely plain of Homole…” (trans. Gow) 286

250

¹Aristo/dhmoj o(

QhbaiÍoj (FGrHist 383 F 5b) e)n oiâj i¸storeiÍ periì

th=j e(orth=j tw½n ¸Omolwi¿+wn kaiì Pi¿ndaroj e)n toiÍj ¸Uporxh/masin (fr. 113 Snell-Mahler). “Homole is a mountain in Thessaly, so Ephoros and Aristodemos the Theban, in the work in which he makes an inquiry about the festival of the Homoloia, and Pindar in the Hyporchemata.” Most significant for my purposes is the implicit suggestion in the scholion that Aristodemos connected Thessalian topography with a festival known as the Homoloia—perhaps Theban, given Aristodemos’ ethnic and the suggestive presence of Pindar. Istros offers evidence for a third type of interpretation current in antiquity (FGrHist 334 F 5 = Photius s.v. ¸Omolw¯i+oj Zeu/j ≈ Suda s.v. ¸Omolw¯i+oj): ãIstroj de\ e)n th=i dwdeka/thi th=j sunagwgh=j, dia\ to\ par' Ai¹oleu=sin to\ o(monohtiko\n kaiì ei¹rhniko\n oÀmolon 287 le/gesqai. “Istros, in the twelfth book of the Synagoge (sc. says that Zeus is called Homoloian) because among the Aiolians what is agreeable and peaceful is called homolon.” Istros “the Callimachean” was a wide-ranging Alexandrian scholar of the mid-third century BCE who authored an Attika, also known as Synagoge ton Atthidon, in at least 14 books, from which the preceding fragment originated. Not a history in any true sense, the Attika seems to have been a digest of events treated in previous Atthides. It is impossible to ascertain how this etymology emerged within the work. Jacoby notes: “Istros’ reference to an Aiolian word is by no means foolish in view of the geographic sphere of the epithet, of the festival Homoloia, and of the month Homoloios. It is

287

oÀmolon Photius: o(/milon Sud. A.

251

remarkable anyhow that he explains the epithet etymologically, not deriving it a)po\ to/pou.” 288 While there is no need to force Istros’ philological explanation of the epithet into a necessary relationship with the other interpretive traditions known in antiquity, one may note the implied reconciliation between Laodamas and Thersander, children of Eteocles and Polyneices, in the Pausanias passage. It is also entirely possible that Istros’ discussion is based on analogy with well-known cults of Zeus Homonoia. A striking shared feature of each interpretive strand is their frame of reference. Zeus Homoloios is situated within an Aiolian milieu, whether Boiotian or Thessalian, or Boiotian and Thessalian, or, as Istros explicitly states, Aiolian. This general feature is, as Jacoby notes, entirely borne out by the epigraphic evidence both for month names and cult. In general, the details of the mythological explanations are not in themselves especially trustworthy or illuminating about the character of the deity. Local tradition was predictably malleable and subject to manipulation throughout time for purposes which are irrecoverable. Perhaps more significant, however, is the testimony of Pausanias, to which we will return at the close of this section. Let us now consider the epigraphic and archaeological evidence for the cult of Zeus Homoloios in Thessaly.

Epigraphic Evidence Epigraphic evidence for the cult of Zeus Homoloios in Thessaly was at one point entirely limited to the month Homoloios in the League calendar, a dubious attestation of the cult in itself. In the past thirty years, however, four Thessalian dedications to Zeus Homoloios have been published.

288

Jacoby’s commentary ad loc.

252

ZH1. Atrax, ca. 250-200a SEG 35.493 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984a: 197-8, no. 65 Di[iì+]

¸Omoloui¿o[u].

“To/Of Zeus Homoloios”

Marble pedimental stele. It is not clear if this dedication is the ineditum mentioned in Helly’s publication of ZH2 and dated to IV-IIIa. 289

ZH2. Atrax, fin. III-init. IIa Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1977: 137, no. 3. Cf. SEG 33.452 = Helly 1983b: 163-4 ¹Ale/candroj Qrasulo/xeioj Diiì ¸Omoloui¿ou. “Alexander son of Thrasylochus [dedicated] to Zeus Homoloios.”

Marble pedimental stele. Letter forms of the late third-early second century BCE. The date corresponds well with the typology of the dedication. 290 This Alexander (= LGPN iii.B s.v. ¹Ale/candroj 93) is on record as a tagos of Atrax in SEG 29.502, now dated to 230-200a. 291 He is the father of two sons, Thrasylochus and Theodorus, who were strategoi of the Thessalian League in 187/6a and 184/3a respectively. 292 The former, during his tenure as strategos, was honored with proxeny by the Delphians (SIG3 585 165); the latter was victor in the horse race at the Eleutheria (IG ix.2 526

289

Helly 1983b: 164. Helly 1983b: 164. 291 = Ed. pr. Gallis 1973-4: 583-4. For the date, cf. Marek 1982: 115; Helly 1983b: 157-160. 292 Kramolisch 1978: 50-1. 290

253

16). As Habicht notes, “the family must have been one of the leading families of Thessaly and certainly the first in Atrax.” 293

ZH3. Larisa, Ia vel ante SEG 35.608 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 216-217, no. 96 A Diì ¸Omoloui¿ou ¹Andragaqi¿dai oi¸ e)n kullia/daij. “To Zeus Homoloios the Andragathidai in the kylliadai (dedicated)”

Marble stele. Undated by ed. pr., but the stele was later reused to record a series of manumissions which date to Ia (SEG 35.599). There are some minor discrepancies between ed. pr.’s transcription and the drawing of line 1 and 3. I have printed SEG’s text. Ed. pr. interprets the Andragathidai of line 2 as a family or phratry and the oi¸ e)n kullia/daij of line 3 as the name of a phyle. The termination –idai is certainly suggestive of a family. The phrase oi¸ e)n kullia/daij in line 3 is more difficult and may identify a branch of the Andragathidai by where they lived or owned property.

ZH4. Metropolis, date ? SEG 40.482 = Ed. pr. Intzesiloglou 1985: 195 Diiì ¸Omoloi¿oi. “To/for Zeus Homoloios” 293

Habicht 1987c: 24.

254

SEG: “Stele with crowning member and two akroteria.” Undated by ed. pr.

Numismatic Evidence I have briefly considered images of Zeus on Thessalian coinages in an earlier section of Zeus Eleutherios. Though a popular figure, he is nowhere identified on coinage as Homoloios nor does he otherwise possess any iconographic attribute that suggests his representation as Homoloios.

Archaeological Evidence None of the Thessalian inscriptions concerning Zeus Homoloios was retrieved from the site of its primary deposition. The acropolis of ancient Homolion has produced evidence for an Archaic apsidal building, tentatively identified as a temple, associated with a fragment of a monumental terracotta foot stamped with a thunderbolt. 294 The thunderbolt coupled with the ancient topographic explanations of the epithet Homoloios allows for an interpretation of this site as a sanctuary of Zeus Homoloios. The evidentiary record is still too slender for this interpretation to bear any real weight, however.

Discussion Perhaps the most salient feature to emerge from our discussion of the variety of ancient explanations of the epithet Homoloios is the Aiolian frame of reference. This impression is confirmed by the epigraphic evidence. Cultic relationships between Boiotia and Thessaly are disarmingly common. With the presence of Homoloios in the calendar of Lesbian Kyme and the significant numbers of theophoric names in Lesbos 294

Arvanitopoulos 1910: 189-90; Arvanitopoulos 1911: 284-287.

255

and Aiolis of Asia Minor, though, it becomes legitimately possible to speak of an Aiolian cultic stratum in the case of Zeus Homoloios. This can only be a beginning, for evidence of the cult’s Thessalian manifestation, to say nothing of an Aiolian dimension, is still on the whole scarce. If the cult was originally a kind of peak cult localized at Thessalian Homole, it later became unmoored from its surroundings and spread to large areas of northcentral Greece and Aeolis in Asia Minor. In this sense, then, and on a much smaller scale, it may be seen to mirror the spread of the cult of Zeus Olympios, which perhaps also began as a peak cult but eventually grew to panhellenic proportions, chiefly through the prestige of Olympia in Elis. 295 The extent to which a connection with Thessalian Homole/Homolion was perceived in the performance of the cult at its various locations is uncertain. The testimony of Pausanias certainly suggests that in the second century CE, some Thebans felt that the Homoloian Gates were linked to that particular region of northern Thessaly. The geographical distribution of the cult within tetradic Thessaly is roughly parallel to that of Dionysus Karpios. The two securely dated inscriptions from Thessaly, ZH1 and ZH2, both belong to the late third or early second century BCE. If there is any truth to the identification of the temenos on the acropolis of Homolion as belonging to Zeus Homoloios, then our earliest evidence may be several centuries earlier. The presence of the month Homoloios in the league calendar in any case suggests an earlier date. This calendar evidence also indicates that the Homoloia in Thessaly were a state festival. The divinity could also receive private dedications, however, as evidenced by ZH1, ZH2 and ZH4. ZH2, the dedication of Alexander, indicates that

295

Cf. Nilsson 1995: 12-13 where the author suggests that Zeus Homoloios was overshadowed by Zeus Olympios.

256

the cult could be patronized by elite members of Thessalian society. Finally, the dedication of the Andragathidai, ZH3, reveals that Zeus Homoloios could also receive cult from gentilicial groups. 296 The brevity of each of the dedications does not enable us to glimpse his particular sphere of influence. Theophoric names like ¸Omolwiìj and ¸Omolw¯i+xoj, though attested throughout the Greek world, are especially common in Boiotia. 297 They are rare in Thessaly, however: Only one (Omolw/i+xoj is known from Phthiotic Thebes. 298 Whether this reflects a different conception of the divinity in the two regions or differing onomastic taste is uncertain.

5.8: Zeus Thaulios

Introduction The cult of Zeus Thaulios is attested in Pherai, Larisa, Pharsalos and Atrax of tetradic Thessaly. The cult is unattested outside of tetradic Thessaly. The significance of the epithet is completely opaque. Three groups of mostly late literary texts have been exploited by scholars in an attempt to clarify the epithet’s meaning. 1) Hesychius s.v. Qau/lia makes reference to a Dorian festival known as the Thaulia: e(orth\ a)xqeiÍsa u(po\

Ktea/tou: par' oÁ kaiì le/gein tou\j

DwrieiÍj “Thaulia: A festival introduced by Kteates, wherein the Dorians claim to thaulizein.” The festival is not otherwise attested. 299 296

Graf 1985: 31 discusses several examples of Zeus Olympios receiving gentilicial cult. E.g., LGPN iii.B s.v. (Omolw/i+xoj identifies 104 different Boiotians with that name. Cf. Sittig 1912: 14-15. On the related names Amaloichos, vel sim., in Asia Minor, cf. Robert 1960a: 237ff. 298 LGPN iii.B s.v. O ( molw/ix + oj 107. 299 Cf. Nilsson 1995: 472. 297

257

2) A perplexing group of texts concerns the Attic Bouphonia: a) Hesychius s.v. [boutu/pon]: [bouqu/thn] ...

¹Aqh/nhsin e)kaleiÍto, e)k tou= Qaulwnidw½n

ge/nouj kaqista/menoj “…[ox-striker]: called [ox-sacrificer] in Athens, established by the family of the Thaulonidai.” b) Hesychius s.v. Qaulwni¿dai: ge/noj i¹qagenw½n ¹Aqh/nhsi “Thaulonidai: family of true-born (?) at Athens” c) Suda s.v. Boufo/nia™ e(orth\ para\ ¹Aqhnai¿oij pa/nu a)rxai¿a. e)n ga\r toiÍj Dii+polei¿oij fasiì to\n bou=n to\ po/panon fageiÍn to\ pareskeuasme/non ei¹j th\n qusi¿an,

Qau/lwna de/ tina, w¨j eiåxe, t%½ pele/kei a)pokteiÍnai to\n

bou=n, w¨j kaiì ¹Androti¿wn fhsi¿. “Bouphonia: An extremely ancient festival [celebrated] in Athens. For they say that at the Dipoleia a cow ate the popanon which had been prepared for the thysia. A certain Thaulon, so [the story] goes, killed the cow with an ax, as Androtion too claims.” d) Suda s.v. Qau/lwn, Qau/lwnoj: oÁj t%½ i¹di¿% pele/kei a)pe/kteine to\n bou=n to\n fago/nta to\ po/panon, oÀper hÅn pareskeuasme/non ei¹j th\n qusi¿an e)n toiÍj kaiì zh/tei e)n t%½

Dii+poli¿oij.

Boufo/nia.

“Thaulon, Thaulonos: [the individual] who with his own axe killed the cow after it ate the popanon which had been prepared for the thysia at the Dipoleia. See also ‘Bouphonia.’” This group of testimonia concerns the aitiology of the Attic Bouphonia. According to Androtion, the earliest witness, Thaulon killed a cow that had eaten a cake prepared

258

for the sacrifice and feast at the Dipoleia, a festival in honor of Zeus Polias. This Thaulon may have been the eponymous hero of the Attic genos of the Thaulonidai who, if the first fragmentary testimony from Hesychius is reliable, established the rite of the Bouphonia and officiated in the cult. 300 None of the testimonia suggest a connection with Thessaly and it may be best to regard this similarity of names as coincidental. 3) The most suggestive evidence comes from Hesychius and Herodian who both claim that Thaulos/Thaulios was an epiclesis for Macedonian Ares: a) Hesychius s.v. Qau/lioj hÄ ãArhj

Qau=loj:

Makedo/nioj

“Thaulios or Thaulos: Macedonian Ares.” b) Herodian s.v. Qau=moj hÄ ãArhj

Qau=loj:

Makedo/nioj.

“Thaumos or Thaulos: Macedonian Ares.” A tantalizing pair of testimonia. While literary and numismatic sources in particular reveal that Ares was a popular figure in Macedonia, 301 nowhere else does he receive the epiclesis Thaulios. The implication of Thessalian and Macedonian politics was early and complete. Whether this state of affairs was a reflection of a deeper cultural connection between the two or merely a necessary feature of geographic proximity has been one of the more intriguing questions in contemporary Thessalian scholarship. It is plausible that with the cult of Zeus Thaulios we are faced with another instance of cultic overlap between Macedonia and Thessaly, just as in the case of Ennodia and Themis Ichnaia.

300

Parker 1996: 299, regards the Thaulonidai as a certain or probable Athenian genos: “…there is no reason to doubt the existence of an autonomous genos of Thaulonidai who supplied…the most important of all boutupoi.” 301 Baege 1913: 62-70.

259

Modern scholars have variously attempted to explain the epithet’s significance on the basis of these testimonia and in conjunction with comparative linguistics and/or the historical record. I briefly summarize three prominent, admittedly provisional, interpretations. 302 Hiller von Gaertringen compares the greek qau- with the Germanic dau visible in, e.g., Old High German tōt: “Then Thaulon would be the same as bouphonos, Thaulia = bouphonia and Zeus Thaulios the god to whom the Bouphonia applied.” 303 Solmsen, followed by Chantraine, compared Hipponax fr. 3 (West): 304 ¸Ermh= kuna/gxa, mhionistiì

Kandau=la,

fwrw½n e(taiÍre, deu=ro/ moi skapardeu=sai. “Hermes, dog throttler, Candaules in Maeonian, companion of thieves, come give me a hand (?)” 305 He suggested that Thaulios could be rendered as “throttler” and further supposed that the epithet concealed a reference to an archaic manner of sacrifice by strangling or throttling, visible on some Mycenaean gems and preserved on Hellenistic-Early Imperial coin issues of Ilion. 306 Following a similar chain of association, Chrysostomou connects Zeus Thaulios with Zeus Phonios, known on an inscription from Larisa. 307 He further suggests that Zeus Thaulios was a god of purification, specifically for those who had committed homicide. He explains the prominence of the cult in Thessaly as a response to the violent factionalism which seems to have perpetually gripped the region. 308

302

Cf., in addition, Costanzi 1913; Costanzi 1914. Hiller v. Gaertingen 1911: 156, “Dann würde Qau/lwn dasselbe wie boufo/noj, Qau/lia = boufo/nia sein, und Zeus Qau/lioj der Gott, dem die Boufo/nia gelten.” 304 Solmsen 1911: 286-7; Chantraine s.v. Thaulios. 305 Trans. Gerber. 306 Solmsen 1911: 290-1. 307 In line 38 of the inventory published at Helly 1970b. 308 Chrysostomou 1998: 241. Cf. also Chrysostomou 1993-4: 185-189. 303

260

I am very skeptical of the applicability of any of these explanations to the Thessalian Zeus Thaulios. 309 There is simply no need to be compelled to make all of the literary evidence fit a uniform picture, especially when so much of it is late and lacking any basis in the epigraphic or material record. There are no details that can either support or contradict the Bouphonia hypothesis. The case is similar with the material record. There are no votives, no certain visual representations of the god even, that assist our understanding of his character. In such circumstances, comparative linguistics can only furnish supporting evidence for cult interpretation. Chrysostomou’s vaguely historicizing reading is only slightly more attractive. We will see that the majority of dedications to Zeus Thaulios have been dated to periods of great political stress in Thessaly, but this chronological coincidence leads his argument to excess: Since these dedications were made during a period of social conflict, they must be related to it. It is safest to temporarily admit our ignorance of the significance of Thaulios in a Thessalian context and to focus on the epigraphic and material evidence itself to determine if any patterns emerge. 310

Archaeological and Epigraphic Evidence Pharsalos A small rise near ancient Pharsalos has produced architectural members suggestive of a Doric temple and dated to the Late Archaic or Early Classical period.

309

When pursued to their logical conclusions, some of these arguments lead to stunning conclusions. On the basis of the Hiller-Solmsen line, Zeus Thaulios will have once had a near panhellenic status and the Bouphonia, or the equivalent, would have had a role in the Ionian, Dorian and Aiolian world. While Trümpy has recently proven that the Bouphonia belonged to the oldest, pre-migration stratum of Ionian religion, there is insufficient evidence to extend this practice to the Dorian and Aiolian world, if indeed one can even speak of such a thing. These linguistic similarities are just that, similarities. They cannot be a substitution for argument. 310 In the following sections, I treat archaeological and epigraphic evidence together.

261

Arvanitopoulos claims to have seen a number of votive bases in the vicinity. Initially extramural, this site was eventually incorporated within the expanded fortifications of the fourth century BCE. Subsequent excavation on site brought to light a number of female terracotta figurines dating to the Hellenistic period. 311 The sanctuary was tentatively connected with Zeus Thaulios on the basis of an inscription found on site, since lost, and first published by Arvanitopoulos:

ZT1. Pharsalos, IVa IThessEnip 62 Di\ Qauli/wi a)nxistw=n o(i peri\ Parme/niskon “To Zeus Thaulios, a)nxistw=n (?) Parmeniskos 312 and his group [offered]”

Rupestral. Now irrecoverable due to modern building in the area. The line division is uncertain. Giannopoulos proposed a fourth-century date for unclear reasons. For the expression o(i peri\ + accusative name, see T2. The suggestive and troubling a)nxistw=n is apparently a partitive genitive, the whole from which Parmeniskos and his group are a subdivision. The a)nxistw=n, otherwise unattested in Thessaly, must be members of an a)gxistei¿a, for which compare Suda, s.v. ¹Agxisteu/j kaiì

¹Agxistei¿a:

sugge/neia. kaiì < ¹AgxisteiÍj,> oi¸ a)po\ a)delfw½n kaiì a)neyiw½n kaiì qei¿wn kata\ pate/ra kaiì mhte/ra e)gguta/tw tou= teleuth/santoj. oi¸ de\ eÃcw tou/twn, suggeneiÍj mo/non. oi¸ de\ kat' e)pigami¿an 311

Theocharis 1964: 260-1. = LGPN iii.B s.v. Parmeni/skoj 46. The name is attested three other times in Pharsalos and is popular throughout Thessaly.

312

262

mixqe/ntej toiÍj oiãkoij oi¹keiÍoi le/gontai. “Anchisteus and Anchisteia: Syngeneia. Anchisteis: Those nearest the deceased from the brothers or nephews or uncles, by father or mother: Those outside of this group are only syngeneis. Those by a second marriage mixed into the household are called oikeioi.” The notion had a specialized sense in Athens. Jebb comments succinctly on Sophocles Antigone 174: “In Attic law, a)gxistei¿a was any degree of relationship on which a claim to an inheritance could be founded in the absence of a will otherwise disposing of it.” 313 A new sacred law from Entella (init. vel med. IIIa), NGSL 26, details the symbolic reformation of a fractured and fractious populace into small, five man groups which avoided the kind of a)gxistei¿a also avoided in the courts (ll. 17-9): 314 ...kai\ e)k tw=n loi[p]w=n polita=n potiklarw/ntw trei=j po\t tou\j du/o e)/cw ta=n agxiste?ia=n a(=n o( no/moj e)k tw=n d?ikasthri/wn meqi/stasqai ke/letai. “…they shall then choose by lot three men from the rest of the citizens in addition to the (former) two, avoiding relationships which the law states deviate from the (practice of the) courts.” 315 While it is hazardous to assume that the concept had the same specific legal sense in Thessaly, the Pharsalos dedication may provide evidence for a positive cultic function of such a kinship group in the region.

313

Cf. MacDowell 1989: passim for further discussion of anchisteia in Athenian law. SEG 30.1119 = Ed. pr. Nenci 1980: no. III. Cf. SEG 29.1130 bis B 37-41 for a series of secondcentury Klazomenian regulations about who cannot serve on a jury: ou) deiÍ dika/zein: mh\ dika/zein pate/ra paid[iì] | mhde\ paiÍda patriì m[hd]e\ a)delfou\j a)delfw½i mhde\ a)delfidou=j | mhde\ pa/trwaj mhd[e\] mh/trwaj mhde\ gambrou\j mhde\ penqerou\j mhde\ koinwnou\?[j th=]j [di¿]k?hj mhde\ proce/nouj mhde\ tou\j ei¹sagwgeiÍj | tw½n dikw½n mhd[e\ tou\j tr]e?fome/nouj u(po\ th=j po/lewj. 315 Trans. Lupu. 314

263

Chrysostomou has recently tried to add Ennodia to this sanctuary. He draws attention in particular to the presence in both Pherai and Pharsalos of a Doric temple in the vicinity of both a Protogeometric-Geometric sanctuary and a major crossroads. He also attempts to connect the female terracotta figurines with Ennodia. 316 Morgan is suspicious, pointing out that “while the hypothesis that this was shared with Ennodia is attractive, it is unproven and the votive record is not comparable.” 317 A second inscription mentioning Zeus Thaulios was recovered from the acropolis of Paleopharsalus, modern Xylades:318

ZT2. Pharsalos, IVa IThessEnip 63 = Ed. pr. Woodward 1910: 154, no. 5 Dio\j Qauli/ou “Belonging to Zeus Thaulios”

Altar. Letter forms of the fourth century BCE. Given the distance between Paleopharsalus and Pharsalus, it is likely that this altar did not emanate from the putative sanctuary in Pharsalos. It should be regarded as evidence for a second cult of Zeus Thaulios.

Pherai The large sanctuary north of the modern town of Velestino has been variously attributed to Zeus Thaulios, Ennodia or Zeus Thaulios and Ennodia. Arvanitopoulos and Béquignon both associated the sanctuary with Zeus Thaulios: Zeus Thaulios was the best attested god in Pherai in the early decades of the twentieth century and the 316

Chrysostomou 1998: 62. Morgan 2003: 139. 318 The identification of Paleopharsalus with modern Xylades is suggested by Decourt 1990: 218ff. 317

264

sanctuary was the largest known in Pherai. New epigraphic and archaeological discoveries have led to a reevaluation of that hypothesis, with the consensus now beginning to shift to Ennodia. 319 In the final analysis, though, the identification of the sanctuary must remain open as the accumulation of evidence has not been decisive. I have discussed this sanctuary at greater length in the section on Ennodia. Irrespective of the sanctuary’s identity, the epigraphic evidence proves that Zeus Thaulios was a major cult figure in Pherai. There are five published inscriptions.

ZT3. Pherai, fin. IV-init. IIIa. SEG 48.669 = Chrysostomou 1998: 236 Dii\ Qauli/w[i] F?ilo/laoj Liontome/[neioj] Qra/sulloj Kleoda/m[eioj] Sousi/bioj )Aristomedo/n?[teioj] Mennei/aj Pausann[iai=oj] K?allikra/teij Fereni/k?[eioj] )E?p?i?k?r?a/?t?e?i?j?

)A?. [-----]

“To Zeus Thaulios: Philolaos son of Liontemenos, Thrasyllos son of Kleodamos, Sosibios son of Aristomedon, Menneias son of Pausannias, Kallikrates son of Pherenikes, Epikrates son of A[…]”

Fragmentary marble pedimental stele with relief shield in tympanum. Chrysostomou does not publish a proper edition of the inscription but mentions it in passing in a footnote. He does publish a photograph from which the above readings were made. The cutter appears to have confused Thaulios and Aphrios—two aspects of Zeus well319

E.g., Chrysostomou 1998: 38ff.

265

known in Pherai. While the QA of Thaulios is clear, the sequence FR follows. On top of the FR, however, the sequence UL has been cut. It appears that the cutter began to inscribe Thaulios, but became confused and continued the inscription as “Aphrios.” He seems to have corrected his mistake by recutting FR as UL. Paint would have emphasized the cutter’s correction. While accidents of this type are not uncommon in the epigraphic record, this momentary confusion may suggest that, at least in the mind of one Thessalian, the aspects of Thaulios and Aphrios were related in Pherai. Chrysostomou plausibly suggests that the document is a catalogue of priests of Zeus Thaulios, 320 though one should not rule out other possibilities, e.g., tagoi, other sacral officials. Several birth names or patronymics mentioned in this text are also known from the large catalogue of the gymnasiarchs of Pherai (SEG 25.664 = Ed. pr. Theocharis 1964: 265-7 321 : E.g., Philolaos, father of [Philola]os (?) (SEG 25.664 I 21 (c. 320a) = LGPN iii.B s.v. Filo/laoj 23); A Liontemenos is mentioned as gymnasiarch at SEG 25.664 II 3 (= LGPN iii.B s.v. Liontome/neij 4) and then as father of the gymnasiarch Pithoun and Thiozotos at SEG 25.664 II 49, 59; Aristomedoun son of Aristomedeis is listed as gymnasiarch in 303 BCE at SEG 25.664 I 54 (= LGPN iii.B s.v. )Aristome/doun), etc. 322 While in each of the preceding cases the evidence is not sufficient to prove that any of the dedicators belonged to gymnasiarchic families,

320

Chrysostomou 1998: 236. Cf. now SEG 29.552 = Helly, te Riele et al. 1979. Cf. also Habicht 1976b. 322 References for those not mentioned in the Gymnasiarch list: This is the first mention of Qra/sulloj in Pherai, otherwise only known from Demetrias, cf. LGPN iii.B s.v. Qra/sulloj. There is no Kleo/damoj known from Pherai, but cf. LGPN iii.B s.v. Kleo/dhmoj 1 for a similar name in Hellenistic Pherai. A Sousi/bioj is known from second-century BCE Pherai, cf. LGPN iii.B s.v. Sousi/bioj 5. A Kallikra/teij is known from second-century Pherai, cf. LGPN iii.B s.v. Kallikra/teij 31. 321

266

the sheer volume of overlap suggests that this must have been the case in at least some cases. The most significant, and in fact only definite, overlap between the two documents, however, lies in the figure of Kallikrates son of Pherenikos. He must be the brother of Apeimantos son of Pherenikos mentioned as gymnasiarch in 308/7 BCE (SEG 25.664 I 39). The individuals mentioned in the dedication for Zeus Thaulios will, not surprisingly, have belonged to the local elite.

ZT4. Pherai, date? McD 238 = Béquignon 1937: 87-8, no. 52 [Di]iì+ Qauli¿w. “To Zeus Thalios”

Stele.

ZT5. Pherai, date? McD 239 = Béquignon 1937: 91, no. 65 Diiì+ Qauli¿ou. “To Zeus Thaulios”

Stele.

267

ZT6. Pherai, date? McD 240 = Béquignon 1937: 92, no. 66 Dio\j Qauli¿o[u]. “Of Zeus Thaulios”

Stele.

ZT7. Pherai, date? McD 241 = Béquignon 1937: 94, no. 71 Diiì+ Qauli¿[ou]. “To Zeus Thaulios”

Stele.

These four anonymous dedications to Zeus Thaulios were recovered from various parts of ancient Pherai. None can be directly associated with Pherai’s great Doric temple. Béquignon unfortunately does not attempt to date these texts. In addition to the inscriptions connected with the possible sanctuary sites at Pharsalos and Pherai, Atrax and Larisa have also produced evidence for the cult of Zeus Thaulios.

ZT8. Larisa, 300a SEG 35.613 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 227, no. 114 Di[iì] Qauli¿ou. “To Zeus Thaulios”

268

“Small white marble pedimental stele” (SEG). Discovered on the acropolis of Larisa in the foundations of Agios Achilleus. Chrysostomou mentions another unpublished dedication to Zeus Thaulios from the Larisa acropolis, dated 350-300a. 323 He would connect both dedications with the sanctuary of Zeus Phonios which was on the acropolis of Larisa, although the basis for the association of these two aspects of Zeus is uncertain. Given the heavy Byzantine building on the Larisa acropolis, it is difficult to read too much into the findspot of these inscriptions.

ZT9. Atrax, 200a SEG 34.490 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1977: 137-9 Diiì : Qauli¿%. “To Zeus Thaulios”

Dedicatory stele. The inscription is dated by letter form. Chrysostomou refers to a possible sanctuary site in the vicinity of the southern cemetery of Atrax where ZT9 and the ineditum discussed below were discovered. 324 A pair of anonymous dedications to Zeus Tritodios were also discovered in the area, one dating to ca. 450400a, the other to IIIa. 325 The significance of Tritodios is unclear. Helly, comparing tritw/, an Aiolian word for “head,” and di=oj, proposed “of the brilliant head”; he also suggested “of the three roads” as another possibility. 326 Recently, Dubois has analyzed the epithet as a compound of o(do/j and Trito- < Tritto-

323

Chrysostomou 1998: 238, with n. 927. Chrysostomou 1998: 59-60. 325 SEG 33.453-4 = Ed. pr. Helly 1983b: 165-8. It is unclear if SEG 34.494 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1977: 137-9, is a third dedication from the same area, unless it = SEG 33.454. What may be a fourth dedication to Zeus Tritodios from Atrax is mentioned at SEG 32.569 = Gallis 1975b: 199, no. 20. 326 Helly 1983b: 165-8. 324

269

< Tripto- (cf. tri/bw): “of frequented roads.” 327 He sees the etymology and popularity of Ennodia as comparable. Whichever linguistic analysis one chooses and however one understands the relationship of that analysis to the character of Zeus Tritodios, the proximity of the dedications to Zeus as Tritodios and Thaulios may suggest that the two aspects were related. Chrysostomou 328 and Decourt 329 mention an ineditum from Atrax. Chrysostomou suggests a fourth-century BCE date for unclear reasons. 330 Decourt writes: “Finally, still in Atrax, in the dedication offered to Zeus Thaulios by the Simmidai, the name of the group is followed by those of twenty members, without patronymic, then those of the magistrates of said group, the tagoi. The absence of a patronymic would be more conducive to an interpretation of the members of this list as a religious organization and not a civic collective. However, that one of the tagoi, Simmidas, bears the name of the group could be conducive to recognizing a genos there: One can say no more about it.” 331

Numismatic Evidence See under Zeus Homoloios.

Discussion The particular character of Zeus Thaulios cannot be ascertained by combining the traces preserved in the late literary resemblances—none of which, it must be noted, actually refer to Zeus Thaulios—with comparative linguistics. No material has 327

SEG 37.443 = Dubois 1987. Chrysostomou 1998: 236 with n. 918. 329 Decourt and Tziaphalias 2001: 147. 330 Chrysostomou 1998: 236 with n. 918. 331 Decourt and Tziaphalias 2001: 147. 328

270

emerged from the putative sanctuary sites at Pharsalos or Pherai, to say nothing of Atrax, or the inscriptions which allows us to test Hiller, Solmsen or Chrysostomou’s provisional conclusions about the character of Zeus Thaulios worship. When we consider the epigraphic evidence alone, a very different picture of the cult emerges. The geographical distribution of the cult is relatively broad, while the chronological range of dedications is quite brief, with most falling in the fourth and third centuries BCE. Again, one feels a particular lack in the case of the Pherai dedications. The types of dedication fall into two basic categories: The simple, anonymous votive stele and the larger group dedication. In the case of the ineditum from Atrax and the rupestral text from Pharsalos, this group was probably gentilicial. ZT3 from Pherai, also a group dedication, is less clear. The negative evidence admits no definite conclusions, but is nonetheless suggestive. There are no attested theophoric names in Thessaly, a region from which we know over 13,000 different names, which explicitly evoke Thaulios. The published volumes of LGPN(i-iii.B) list no name anywhere in the Greek world which begins in Qaul-. While we are one chance find away from changing this picture, the situation is nevertheless surprising for such a major deity. Zeus Thaulios belongs to a select group of deities which did not produce theophoric names. Parker comments: “Most notably, powers associated with the Underworld are avoided: no mortal is named for Kore/Persephone, great goddess though she was, for the Eumenides, for Hades, or for Plouton.” 332 This is a relatively well defined subset of deities with circumscribed interests. If the Thessalian picture holds true, this would be the clearest evidence yet, negative though it is, for the nature of Zeus Thaulios. 333

332 333

Parker 2000: 54-55. Greeks based personal names on even detestable divinities like Ares. Cf. Sittig 1912: 116f.

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION

This dissertation is not thesis-driven and is ill-suited to conclusions in any traditional sense of the word. If pushed to offer a set of conclusions, however, this dissertation can defensibly be said to have made some progress in sketching the broad outlines of what may be called the regional (tetradic) Thessalian pantheon. This pantheon has been reconstructed by appealing to the region’s calendar(s) and its extensive epigraphic corpus. Numismatic, literary and archaeological evidence has been adduced in support when available. On the basis of this evidence, the following divinities can claim certain membership in this pantheon: Athena as Itonia; Themis, aspect unclear; Apollo as Kerdoios, Leschanorios and with unclear aspect; Hermes, aspect unclear; Ennodia; Artemis as Throsia; Zeus as Aphrios, Homoloios, Thaulios and Eleutherios; Dionysus as Karpios; Poseidon as Petraios and Hippodromios. The following divinities have a less certain claim to this pantheon: Artemis as Agagulaia; Apollo as Phyllios; Dionysus as Thuios. That a geographical region as large as tetradic Thessaly can be said to have been the site of a relatively coherent set of deities is an observation which may have considerable implications for the future study of ethnos and/or koinon religion. Prior studies of ethnos religion have tended to focus on a unitary religious center, often styled as a capitol. The present study suggests that such a picture, if not entirely false, certainly oversimplifies the evidence, at least in the case of Thessaly. While there does seem to have been an upper tier of sanctuaries which housed cults of special relevance to the ethnos or koinon as a whole, e.g. Athena Itonia at Philia, Zeus Eleutherios at Larisa, perhaps Apollo Leschaios/Leschanorios at Deipnias, there were a relatively large number of potentially polycentric cults including, significantly, Athena Itonia

271

272

herself, attested throughout the region, which must have been as vital to the day-to-day religion of the ethnos or koinon as the cults situated in the “capitol” sanctuaries. The series of individual case studies of the cults dedicated to the members of this pantheon has yielded fruit from time to time. I have attempted to consider the full range of available evidence and to keep interpretations of this evidence situated in a historical context. It will always be alluring to try to move beyond the individual cases and glimpse some broader patterns of development. In this case, however, the quest for meta-conclusions seems doomed to banality. Nevertheless, I present table 15 which may be of some use in uncovering both what was expected and what was slightly less so:

273

Table 15 Chronological Distribution and Geographic Provenance of Inscriptions Discussed in Chapters 4-5 1

Findspot

VI-

IIIa

IIa

Ia

IVa Larisa

Pherai

Undated

Total

IIIp

DK1;

AK1

AI2;

ZE8, 15;

E11,

(3),

ZE2-6;

DK2-3

E22

2;

AK1 (4);

E15;

AT2-3;

ZT8

E12-14

ZT3

E1-2, 4-

E3, 7,

I-

9

DK6

ZE11-14,

36

16; AK1 (1); ZH3

ZT4-7

14

6, 8

(=T5) Atrax

T2

AT1;

AT4;

ZH1

ZH2;

6

ZT9 Pharsalos

ZT1-2

Pagasai

E10 (?)

Skotussa Metropolis 1

2 E10 (?)

1

AK3

1 ZH4

1

NB: I have attempted to accommodate the great variety of methods for dating inscriptions observed in this dissertation, e.g., 196a, post 196a, IIa, aet. Hell., etc., by adhering to the following basic principles: Inscriptions belonging to a range of dates which spans two centuries, e.g., III-IIa, are placed in the later century; Inscriptions dated to a cusp, e.g., 200a, are placed in the following century, e.g., IIa; Those inscriptions dated aet. Hell., vel sim., are placed in IIa; Those inscriptions dated to a broader chronological range, e.g., post 196a, are placed in the “Undated” column; ZE12-16, i.e., the Eleutheria victor lists which do not mention Zeus Eleutherios or the Eleutheria, are included; The inscriptions listed in Table 5.1.1 collectively as AK1 are here listed individually—e.g. , AK1 (3) under Larisa, IIIa, means that three inscriptions listed in Table 5.1.1 were dated to IIIa.

274

Table 15 (Continued) Gomphi

DK5

1

Mikro-

DK4

1

Keserli Philia Tetradic

AI1 9 + 1?

9

T1

E19

26 + 1?

1 6

1

12

64

Thessaly Total Phalanna Gonnoi

E20

AK6 T7

Pythion

2 E21

Chyretiai Perrhaebia

3

1

AK5 (?) 1

2

1 + 1?

1 2

0

0

7

Total Phthiotic

E16-

Thebes

18;

4

T6 Achaia

0

4

0

0

0

0

4

Phthiotis Total “Magnesia”

T3-4

Magnesia

2

2 0

0

0

0

0

2

Total Delphi Thepiai

ZE1, 7

2 ZE9

1

275

Table 15 (Continued) Megara

ZE10

Ambracia

AK4 =

1 1

AK1 (1) Dodona Extra-

T8

1

0

0

3

0

1

2

6

Total

12 +

15

28 + 2?

8

2

14

83

Inscriptions

1?

Thessalian Total

by Century

The archaeological, numismatic and literary evidence is more resistant to such crude formalization and has not been included. Since the samples involved are so small—the 76 inscriptions from tetradic and perioikic Thessaly discussed in this chapter pale in comparison to the now over 4,000 inscriptions recovered from the region—only the most provisional conclusions can be drawn. The geographic range of the epigraphic evidence is not surprising. Larisa produced nearly half of the epigraphic evidence discussed in this dissertation (35 of 82 total), well over half of all the inscriptions considered from tetradic Thessaly (35 of 63 total). Pherai is a distant, but significant, second. These were the two most affluent and politically dominant cities of Thessaly in the Classical and Hellenistic periods. Atrax’ prominence, as discussed in the introduction to chapter 5, is anomalous. There is more evidence for the cults discussed in chapters 4-5 in the second century BCE than in any other century. It is tempting, but not necessary, to connect this profusion with the political stability inaugurated by the new koinon.

276

The vast majority of the cults discussed in chapters 4-5 are attested both before and after the 196a watershed, however. Prominent exceptions include: Zeus Eleutherios, whose cult was not inaugurated until early IIa; Poseidon Petraios, who is unattested epigraphically in Thessaly; Athena Itonia, whose cult is epigraphically attested only in IIa, but whose sanctuary at Philia is known to have been in use since the Geometric period; Themis, who is unattested in tetradic Thessaly following Flamininus’ settlement, but present in perioikic Perrhaebia at this time. The overall, regional impression of the cults discussed in chapters 4-5 is one of continual presence in the Thessalian landscape from the Classical through the Hellenistic period. Continuity of function is, however, another matter. Unfortunately, the evidence at hand is inadequate to approach this problem from a regional perspective. In the case of Larisa, whose elect status cannot be considered representative of Thessaly as a whole, one may point to the following phenomena observed in the course of this dissertation: the apparent continuity of function of the sanctuary of Apollo Kerdoios between the third and second centuries BCE; the expansion of the program of the Eleutheria and the festival’s concurrent attraction of increasingly diverse competitors between the second and first centuries BCE; the possible reorganization of the cult of Demeter Phylaka and Dionysus Karpios in the first century BCE and its potential connection with the imperial cult in the first century CE; the renewal of the Stena, likely in the Augustan era, following a period when the festival had ceased to be observed. In lieu of formal conclusions, however, it may be useful to sketch further avenues of inquiry. I offer the following geographical groupings which inevitably reflect the interests and idiosyncracies of the project as a whole:

277

1) Tetradic Thessaly. If this dissertation has succeeded in identifying specifically Thessalian cults, it remains to fill out the rest of the picture, from both the panhellenic and the local perspective. 2) Perioikic Thessaly. The cults of perioikic Thessaly have been discussed in this dissertation only when they could be aligned with cults of tetradic Thessaly. This was most striking in the cases of Themis and Ennodia, where all three major perioikic regions have produced evidence for these two cults. Is this evidence for an organic, cultic koine shared by tetradic and perioikic Thessaly or was it a forced or perhaps voluntary method of assimilation between the two regions? If the latter, in which direction did influence run? Further research on the cults of perioikic Thessaly may shed some light on this complex of issues. 3) Thessaly and Boiotia. The fairly numerous connections between the cults of Boiotia and Thessaly observed in this dissertation, especially in the case of Athena Itonia and Zeus Homoloios, but including also Zeus Eleutherios and Themis, warrant further study. Again, is the coincidence of these cults evidence for a common substratum of religious practice uniting the two regions or the product of conscious manipulation for a still to be identified purposes? 4) Thessaly and Macedon. Potential cultic connections between these two regions have been observed in the case of Ennodia, Zeus Thaulios and Themis Ichnaia. It would be useful to consider this evidence against the broader evidentiary backdrop of Thessalian and Macedonian relations which were extensive throughout antiquity.

APPENDIX 1 AN EPIGRAPHIC INVENTORY OF THE CULTS OF TETRADIC THESSALY

This dissertation has attempted to illuminate what I have termed the regional stratum of Thessalian religion. As a point of contrast, it will be useful cast some light on the local and panhellenic strata of Thessalian religion. In the following pages, I offer a complete inventory of the cults of tetradic Thessaly, excepting the Imperial cult, as known from the region’s epigraphy. The inscriptions collected here belong to two basic types: 1) Dedications mentioning the name of a divinity; 2) Publication clauses in decrees.

APHRODITE without epithet Atrax: SEG 47.678 = Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 32 (IIa) Cierium: IG ix.2 271 (date?) Elateia: McD 662 = Giannopoulos 1933: 1, no. 2 (date?) Larisa: IG ix.2 571 (IIIa) Metropolis: IG ix.2 1231.25 (IIa) Phalara: IG ix.2 1359 (date?) Pherai: SEG 45.645 = Ed. pr. Miller 1974 (IVa)

Aphrodite Pandemos Larisa: IG ix.2 572 (date?)

Aphrodite Peitho Pharsalos: IG ix.2 236 = IThessEnip 67 (Va?)

278

279

APOLLO without epithet Atrax: SEG 35.504 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 200, no. 36 (IIa) Larisa: IG ix.2 569 (date?) SEG 29.535 = Gallis 1973-4: 582 (aet. Rom.) Ortha: SEG 42.529 = Intzesiloglou 1987 (300-250a)

Apollo Agreus Atrax: SEG 35.491 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 197, no. 23 (200a) Mylae: IG ix.2 332 (IIIa)

Apollo Aguiatas Pharsalos: IG ix.2 241 (date?)

Apollo Aisonios Campus Dotius: IG ix.2 1098 1 (date?)

Apollo Delphaios Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa) Theotonium: IG ix.2 257 (Va)

Apollo Etdomaios Atrax: SEG 35.492 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 197, no. 24 (IIa?)

1

Also attested at Gonnoi: SEG 35.570-1 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 208-9, nos. 70-1 (200-150a)

280

Apollo Gadenos (Tadenos?) Campus Dotius: IG ix.2 1076 (date?)

Apollo Hekatombaios Metropolis: SEG 36.548 = Helly 1970a (IIIa)

Apollo Kerdoios Larisa: IG ix.2 521 (init. IIIa) SEG 27.202 = Ed. pr. Gallis 1977 (220-210a) IG ix.2 517 (214a) McD 337 = Ed. pr. Béquignon 1935: 55-64 (IIa) SEG 35.594 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 229-230, no. 121 (200-150a) IG ix.2 512 (171a?) SEG 35.665 B 36ff. = Ed. pr. Cabanes and Andréou 1985 (167-157/6a) IG ix.2 add. 205 I (145a) IG vii 4131 (post 146a) IG ix.2 637 (IIIa) Skotussa: SEG 43.311 = Ed. pr. Missailidou-Despotidou 1993 (197-185a)

Apollo Leschaios Larisa: IG ix.2 1027 (450-425a)

Apollo Leukatas Mopsion: IG ix.2 1059 (date?)

281

Apollo Lykeios Atrax: SEG 33.450 = Helly 1983b: 162 (IIa) Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Apollo Mousagetes Larisa: SEG 47.746 = Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 24 (IVa)

Apollo Proernos Krannon: SEG 31.572 = Habicht 1981 (200a)

Apollo Promantas Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Apollo Pythios Larisa: IG ix.2 588 (date?) Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Apollo Tempeites Larisa: SEG 35.607 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 215-6, no. 94 (100a)

ARTEMIS without epithet Atrax: SEG 34.480 = Tziaphalias 1984a: 195, no. 56 (IIIa) SEG 34.491 = Tziaphalias 1977 (300-250a) SEG 34.493 = Tziaphalias 1977 (200a) SEG 35.502 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 200, no. 34 (IIIa)

282

SEG 43.240 = Tziaphalias 1988: 277 (200-150a) SEG 49.602 = Tziaphalias 1996 (IIIa) Krannon: SEG 42.507 = Tziaphalias 1987 (100-50a) Trikke: IG ix.2 304 (date?) Mopsion: IG ix.2 1059 (date?) Pharsalos: IG ix.2 239 (date?) Pherai: SEG 34.572 = Kakavoyannis 1977 (300a)

Artemis Akraia Trikke: IG ix.2 303 (date?)

Artemis Chalkaeitis Larisa: SEG 29.536 = Gallis 1973-4: 581 (date?)

Artemis Delphinia Gyrton: IG ix.2 1035 (date?)

Artemis Eileithyia Larisa: SEG 45.616 = Tziaphalias 1989: 239 (IIIa)

Artemis Ennodia Pherai: McD 232 = Béquignon 1937: 83, no. 27 (date?)

Artemis Eukleia Pherai: IG ix.2 420 (date?)

283

Artemis Kerdoia Larisa: SEG 47.746 = Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 28 (date?)

Artemis Lochia Larisa: SEG 37.487 = Habicht 1987b: 314, no. 5 (IIIp)

Artemis Ourania Mopseion: SEG 47.750 = Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 28 (date?)

Artemis (?) Phaesphoros, Phosphoros Mopsion: IG ix.2 1060 (II-Ia) IG ix.2 1061 (Ia) IG ix.2 1063 (I-IIp)

Artemis in the Skia Pherai: IG ix.2 417 (date?)

Artemis Soteira Atrax: SEG 47.675 = Tziaphalias 1993: 256, no. 38 (IIa)

Artemis Stratia Atrax: SEG 45.555 = Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997 (IIa)

Artemis Throsia Atrax: SEG 35.500 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 199, no. 32 (300-250a?) SEG 34.481 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984a: 481, no. 59 (ca. 150a)

284

Larisa: SEG 35.615 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 206, no. 62 (date?) McD 360 = Ed. pr. Giannopoulos 1931: 178, no. 18 (med. IIa)

ASKLEPIOS without epithet Atrax: SEG 47.672 = Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 30-2 (date?) Gyrton: SEG 47.729 = Tziaphalias 1993: 258 (date?) Larisa: IG ix.2 570 (aet. Hell.) Mopseion: SEG 47.750 = Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 30 (date?) Pharsalos: IG ix.2 240 (date?) Pherai: IG ix.2 416 (date?); McD 233 = Giannopoulos 1913: 218-9, no. C 2 (date?) Skotussa: IG ix.2 397 (date?)

Asklepioi Crannon: SEG 43.280 = Tziaphalias 1988: 280-1 (IIIa)

Hygeia Larisa: McD 409 = Giannopoulos 1933: 2, no. 5 (date?)

ATARGATIS Parthenos Pherai: McD 237 = Béquignon 1937: 91, no. 64 (date?)

Parthenos Bambukia Krannon: McD 316 = Ed. pr. Theocharis 1961-62: 179, no. 4 b (date?)

285

ATHENA without epithet Crannon: IG ix.2 460.7 (date?) Larisa: IG ix.2 517.45 (214a) Pherai: SEG 45.645 = Ed. pr. Miller 1974 (IVa)

Athena Agoraia Atrax: SEG 27.184 = Gallis 1974: 277-81 (V-IVa)

Athena Itonia Larisa: SEG 34.558 = Ed. pr. Gallis 1976: 176-8 (150-130a) Philia: SEG 25.653 18ff. = Habicht 1976b (179-165a)

Athena Lageitarra Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Athena Polias Argoura: McD 326 = Giannopoulos 1934-5 (VIa)

Athena Patroia Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Athena Thersys Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

286

DEMETER without epithet Pherai: SEG 45.645 = Ed. pr. Miller 1974 (IVa)

Demeter and Kore Atrax: SEG 35.506 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 201, no. 38 (200a)

Demeter, Kore and Despote Larisa: McD 364 = Arvanitopoulos 1910: 377-8, no. 24 (aet. Rom.)

Demeter and Monogone Trikke: IG ix.2 305 (aet. Hell.)

Demeter Megalartos Pherai: IG ix.2 418 (date?)

Demeter Phylaka and Dionysus Karpios Larisa: McD 346 = Ed. pr. Oikonomides and Koumanoudes 1956-7: 17-22, no. 1 (haud ante Ia) McD 361 = Ed. pr. Arvanitopoulos 1911: 123, no. 26 (Ia) IG ix.2 573 (aet. Imp.)

Demeter Ploutea Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

287

DIONYSUS without epithet Atrax: SEG 34.495 = Tziaphalias 1977 (150-100a) Larisa: IG ix.2 522 (fin. III-init. IIa) IG ix.2 574 (date?) SEG 26.677 = Giovannini 1976 (IIa) Pherai: SEG 39.507 = Intzesiloglou 1984 (IIIa)

Dionysus and Nymphs Atrax: SEG 45.554 = Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 69 (IIIa)

Dionysus Karpios Gomphi: IG ix.2 287b (27-25a?) Larisa: SEG 35.590a = Kontogiannis 1985 (450-425a) Elateia (?): McD 653 = Ed. pr. Mastrokostas 1964: 318-9, n. 2 (Ia)

Dionysus Karpios and Demeter Phylaka Larisa: McD 346 = Ed. pr. Oikonomides and Koumanoudes 1956-7: 17-22, no. 1 (haud ante Ia) McD 361 = Ed. pr. Arvanitopoulos 1911: 123, no. 26 (Ia) IG ix.2 573 (aet. Imp.)

Macedonian Dionysus Larisa: SEG 27.206 = Gallis 1972 (aet. Aug.)

288

DIOSKOUROI Pherai: IG ix.2 419 (date?) SEG 34.563 (IIIa) = Ed. pr. Chrysostomou 1983: 97-8 (IIIa) McD 234 = Ed. pr. Giannopoulos 1930: 180, no. 3 (250a) McD 235 = Béquignon 1937: 91, no. 62 Larisa: SEG 35.605 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 221, no. 100 (200a)

EGYPTIAN GODS Harpocrates: Larisa: IG ix.2 588 (Ia)

Isis and Sarapis: Atrax: SEG 29.503 = Gallis 1973-4: 583 (date?) Krannon: IG ix.2 465 (date?) Larisa: SEG 35.610 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 222, no. 102 (IIIa) Pherai: SEG 46.657 = Nikolaou 1991 (IIa)

Isis, Serapis, Anubis: Pagasai: IG ix.2 360 (date?) Larisa: IG ix.2 590 (date?)

Isis, Serapis, Anubis, Horos Larisa: IG ix.2 589 (IIa)

Isis, Serapis, Anubis, Harpocrates Larisa: IG ix.2 pg. 122 C (date?)

289

ENNODIA without epithet Pherai: SEG 45.645 = Ed. pr. Miller 1974 (IVa) Chrysostomou 1998: 25, no. 1 (med. IIa) Chrysostomou 1998: 26-8, no. 1 (350-300a) Chrysostomou 1998: 28-33 (200-150a) Chrysostomou 1998: 33-4, no. 3 (150-100a) Béquignon 1937: 83, no. 27 (aet. Hell.) IG ix.2 421 (175-150a)

Ennodia and Zeus Meilichios (?) Pherai: Chrysostomou 1998: 44 (IVa)

Ennodia, Zeus Meilichios and Po[…] Larisa: IG ix.2 578 (ca. 145a)

Ennodia Alexatis Larisa: IG ix.2 576 (300-250a)

Ennodia Astika Larisa: IG ix.2 575 (450-425a)

Ennodia Korilla Pherai: SEG 38.450 = Ed. pr. Intzesiloglou 1980: 272-3 (150-100a)

290

Ennodia Mykaika Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Ennodia Patroa Pagasai: IG ix.2 358 (IV-IIa)

Ennodia Stathmia Larisa: IG ix.2 577 (aet. Hell.)

Ennodia Strogika Patroa Larisa: SEG 49.622 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1996: 382, no. 1 (fin. Va-init. IIa)

GE without epithet Larisa: SEG 29.533 = Gallis 1973-4: 582 (IVa)

Ge Pantareta Phayttos: IG ix.2 491 (date?)

HELIOS without epithet Pherai: McD 236 = Béquignon 1937: 89, no. 56 (date?)

Helios Basileus and all the Theoi Patrooi and all the Theai Atrax: SEG 34.492 = Tziaphalias 1977 (100a)

291

HERA without epithet Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Hera and Zeus Larisa: McD 365 = Giannopoulos 1931: 177, no. 13 (aet. Rom.?)

HERAKLES Atrax: SEG 34.487 = Tziaphalias 1984a: 201, no. 69 (200a) SEG 35.498 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 199, no. 30 (200a) Cierium: IG ix.2 258.12 = IThessEnip 15 (168a) Larisa: IG ix.2 580 = Kontogiannis 1985: 116-21 (IVa) Pagasai: IG ix.2 359 (III-IIa) Pherai: SEG 34.564-5 = Kakavoyannis 1978 (200-150a) Skotussa: SEG 25.661 (500-450a) SEG 43.311 = Missailidou-Despotidou 1993 (197-185a)

HERMES Hermes Bruchalios Pharsalos: IThessEnip 69 (med. Va)

HESTIA Pherai: SEG 45.645 = Ed. pr. Miller 1974 (IVa)

Hestia and Symmachos Pharsalos: IThessEnip 68 (400-350a)

292

KABEIROI Larisa: McD 359 = Arvanitopoulos 1910: 375-7, no. 23 (init. IIa)

Theoi Megaloi Cierium: IG ix.2 264 (date?) Larisa: IG ix.2 581 (date?)

LEUKATHEA Atrax: SEG 35.501 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 200, no. 33 (200a) Larisa: McD 358 = Arvanitopoulos 1910: 378-8, no. 25 (IIIa) SEG 45.617 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1989 (IIIa) Pherai: IG ix.2 422 (date?)

MOIRAI without epithet Cierium: IG ix.2 282 (date?)

Moirai Patroai Pherai: SEG 42.535 = Intzesiloglou 1987 (aet. Hell.)

MOTHER OF THE GODS Atrax: SEG 34.488 = Tziaphalias 1984a: 203, no. 71 (250-200a) Larisa: IG ix.2 583 (date?) SEG 40.478 = Tziaphalias 1985 (250-200a)

293

MUSES Phayttos: IG ix.2 492 (date?) Larisa: IG ix.2 584 (IVa)

NYMPHS: Pharsalos: McD 166 = Comparetti 1921 (Va)

Nymphs and Dionysus Atrax: SEG 45.554 = Rakatsanis and Tziaphalias 1997: 69 (IIIa)

Nymphs and other divinities: Pharsalos: IThessEnip 73 (IVa)

POSEIDON without epithet Amphanai: McD 193 = Giannopoulos 1932: 27, no. 12 Atrax: IG ix.2 475 (date?) IG ix.2 476 (III-IIa) SEG 35.495 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 198, no. 27 (300-250a) Larisa: IG ix.2 585 (date?) IG ix.2 587 (date?) SEG 35.606 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 215, no. 93 (300a) SEG 35.617 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 205, no. 59 (150a) SEG 43.284 = Tziaphalias 1988: 260 (IIIa) Pagasai: McD 195 = Giannopoulos 1933: 4, no. 12 (date?) Prinos: SEG 40.503 = Tziaphalias 1985 (350-300a)

294

Skotussa: SEG 47.787 = Tziaphalias 1993: 257 (IIIa)

Poseidon Helikapanios (?) Larisa: IG ix.2 586 (Ia)

Poseidon Impsios Larisa: SEG 42.511-2 = Kontogiannis 1992: 381-5, nos. 1-2 (aet. Hell.)

Poseidon of the Krannaian Gate Larisa: SEG 15.377 = Verdelis 1958 (IVa)

Poseidon Kouerios Cierium: IG ix.2 265 (date?)

Poseidon Patragenes Atrax: SEG 45.557 = Tziaphalias 1990: 219 (IIIa) 2

Poseidon Zeuxanthios Krannon: McD 317 = Ed. pr. Giannopoulos 1933: 1-2, no. 4 (IIa) 3

THEMIS without epithet Pherai: SEG 45.645 = Ed. pr. Miller 1974 (IVa)

2 3

Also attested at Magnesian Kerkinion. The inscription has been redated from late Roman (ed. pr.) to IIa at SEG 42.515 = Kontogiannis 1992.

295

Themia Agoraia Atrax: SEG 27.183 = Gallis 1974: 273-7 (VIa)

ZEUS without epithet Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Zeus and Hera Larisa: McD 365 = Giannopoulos 1931: 177, no. 13 (aet. Rom.?)

Zeus Aphrios Pherai: McD 242 = Giannopoulos 1913: 219-20, no. C 4 (date?) IG ix.2 452 (date?)

Zeus Archanno Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Zeus Homoloios Atrax: SEG 35.493 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984a: p. 197-8, no. 65 (250-200a) Tziaphalias 1977: 137, no. 3 (fin. III-init. IIa) Larisa: SEG 35.608 = Ed. pr. Tziaphalias 1984b: 216-217, no. 96 A (Ia vel ante) Metropolis: SEG 40.482 = Ed. pr. Intzesiloglou 1985: 195 (date?)

Zeus Hyperdexios Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

296

Zeus Hypsistos Gyrton: SEG 47.730 = Tziaphalias 1993: 258, no. 58 (aet. Imp.?)

Zeus Kataibates Atrax: SEG 47.674 = Tziaphalias 1993: 255, no. 27 (IVa) Pharkadon: SEG 43.296 (Ia)

Zeus Megas Krannon: SEG 43.281 = Tziaphalias 1988 (aet. Imp.)

Zeus Melichios and Ennodia (?) Pherai: SEG 48.667 = Chrysostomou 1998: 44 (IVa)

Zeus Meilichios, Ennodia and Po[…] Larisa: IG ix.2 578 (ca. 145a)

Zeus Meilichios and Agathe Tyche Larisa: SEG 45.619 = Tziaphalias 1990: 220 (Ia)

Zeus Olympios Pharsalos: SEG 27.222 = Gallis 1974: 281-3 (init. IVa)

Zeus Palamnios Gomphi: IG ix.2 291 (?)

297

Zeus Pherpheretas Mopsion: IG ix.2 1057 (50a-0) (cf. now Helly 1983a: 365, n. 69; Baker 2001)

Zeus Phonios Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Zeus Soter Pharsalos: IG ix.2 237-8

Zeus Thaulios Atrax: SEG 34.490 = Tziaphalias 1977: 137-9 (200a) Larisa: SEG 35.613 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 227, no. 114 (300a) Pharsalos: IThessEnip 62 (IVa) IThessEnip 63 = Ed. pr. Woodward 1910: 154, no. 5 (IVa) Pherai: SEG 48.669 = Chrysostomou 1998: 236 (fin. IV-init. IIIa) McD 238 = Béquignon 1937: 87-8, no. 52 (date?) McD 239 = Béquignon 1937: 91, no. 65 (date?) McD 240 = Béquignon 1937: 92, no. 66 (date?) McD 241 = Béquignon 1937: 94, no. 71 (date?)

Zeus Tritodios Atrax: SEG 34.494 = Tziaphalias 1977: 137-9 (300a) SEG 33.453-4 = Helly 1983b: 165-8 (V-IIIa) 4

4

SEG 34.494 = SEG 33.454?

298

OTHER CULT FIGURES Agathos Theos Larisa: SEG 43.285 = Tziaphalias 1988: 280 (II-IIIp) SEG 45.618 = Tziaphalias 1989: 239 (IIa)

Aguiatai Pharsalos: IThessEnip 74 (350-300a)

All the gods and goddesses Atrax: SEG 47.676 = Tziaphalias 1994b: 339, no. 1 (IIIa)

Aristoi Argoussa: SEG 43.235 = Tziaphalias 1988 (IIa) 5

Charites Krannon: SEG 42.507 = Tziaphalias 1987 (100-50a) Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Daimon Athanatos Atrax: SEG 46.634 = Tziaphalias 1991: 223 (IIa)

Harmonia Larisa: McD 356 = Theocharis 1960: 185 (fin. Va)

5

Aristoi as recipients of cult are also attested at Gonnoi in Perrhaebia (SEG 29.519 = Gallis 1973-4: 571) (I-IIp).

299

Helen Skotussa: SEG 43.311 = Missailidou-Despotidou 1993 (197-185a)

Hero Krannon: SEG 35.584 = Tziaphalias 1984b: 204, no. 56 (200a)

Hero Oinousseus Krannon: SEG 45.612 = Tziaphalias 1990: 220 (IVa)

Ionios Epaphas Larisa: Helly 1970b (init. IIa)

Melia Larisa: IG ix.2 582 (Ia)

Poliophylax Larisa: SEG 27.205 = Helly 1977: 534-5

Protesilaus Atrax: SEG 34.477 = Tziaphalias 1976 (200-150a)

Symmachos Pharsalos: IThessEnip 68 (400-350a)

Troph[eis?] Larisa: Helly 1970b (IIa)

WORKS CITED

Adams, W. L. (1982). Perseus and the Third Macedonian War. Philip II, Alexander the Great and the Macedonian Heritage. W. L. Adams and E. N. Borza. Lanham, MD: 237-256.

Amandry, P. (1950). La Mantique apollinienne à Delphes. Essai sur le fonctionnement de l'oracle. Paris.

Andreou, S., M. Fotiadis, et al. (1996). "Review of Aegean Prehistory V: The Neolithic and Bronze Age of Northern Greece." AJA 100: 537-597.

Arvanitopoulos, A. S. (1908). "Anaskaphai kai ereunai epi tis akropoleos." Praktika: 170-5.

Arvanitopoulos, A. S. (1910). "Thessalikai Epigraphai." AE: 331-382, 407-408.

Arvanitopoulos, A. S. (1911). "Inscriptions inédites de Thessalie." RPh 35: 123-139, 282-305.

Arvanitopoulos, A. S. (1920). "Anaskaphai kai ereunai en Argolidi kai Thessalia." Praktika: 17-28.

Arvanitopoulos, A. S. (1929). "I Throsia Artemis ton Larissaion kai ai nebeusansai." Polemon 1: 249-251.

300

301

Axenidis, T. D. (1947). Oi archaioi thessalikoi agones kai i politistiki ton simasia. Athens.

Babacos, A. (1966). Actes d'aliénation en commun at autres phénomènes apparantés d'après le droit de la Thessalie antique. Thessaloniki.

Baege, W. (1913). De Macedonum sacris. Ph.D. Diss., Halle.

Baker, P. (2001). "Quelques Remarques sur des Institutions Militaires dans les Cités de Thessalie à l'Époque Hellénistique." AncW 32: 191-206.

Béquignon, Y. (1935). "Études Thessaliennes, VII." BCH 59: 36-77.

Béquignon, Y. (1937). Récherches archéologiques à Phères. Paris.

Béquignon, Y. (1964). "Études Thessaliennes, XI." BCH 88: 395-412.

Bérard, C. (1971). "Architecture eretrienne et mythologie delphique. Le Daphnéphoréion." AntK 14: 59-73.

Berti, I. (2002). "Epigraphical documentary evidence for the Themis cult: prophecy and politics." Kernos 15: 225-234.

Bielman, A. (1989). "Lutra, prisonniers et affranchis." MH 46: 25-41.

302

Billows, R. A. (1995). Kings and Colonists: Aspects of Macedonian Imperialism. Leiden.

Boesch, P. (1908). Theoros. Ph.D. diss., Zurich.

Bousquet, J. (1964). "Inscriptions grecques concernant des Romains." BCH 88: 607615.

Bouvier, H. (1979). Poètes et prosateurs de Thessalie dans les inscriptions. La Thessalie. B. Helly. Paris: 257-264.

Bowersock, G. W. (1965). "Zur Geschichte des römischen Thessaliens." RhM 108: 277-289.

Brulé, P. (1997). "La Macédoine et les rites d'initiation." Kernos 7: 319-330.

Buck, C. D. (1955). The Greek Dialects. Chicago.

Buckler, J. (1989). Philip II and the Sacred War. Leiden.

Burkert, W. (1983). Homo Necans. Berkeley.

Burkert, W. (1985). Greek Religion. Cambridge, MA.

Burrer, F. (1993). Münzprägung und Geschichte des thessalischen Bundes in der römischen Kaiserzeit bis auf Hadrian (31 v. Chr. - 138 n. Chr.). Saarbrücken.

303

Cabanes, P. and J. Andréou (1985). "Le réglement frontalier entre les citès d'Ambracie et de Charadros." BCH 109: 499-544.

Cammarata, E. (1984). Da Dionisio a Timoleonte. Problemi di numismatica della Sicilia antica. Modica.

Castrizio, D. (2002). "Un modelo statuario per lo Zeus Eleutherios delle monete bronzee di Timoleonte?" NAC 31: 151-168.

Cawkwell, G. (1978). Philip of Macedon. London.

Cazeaux, J. (1979). La Thessalie de magiciennes. La Thessalie. B. Helly. Paris: 265275.

Chamoux, F. (1965). "Un portrait de Flamininus à Delphes." BCH 89: 214-224.

Chaniotis, A. (1995). Sich selbst feiern? Die städtischen Feste des Hellenismus im Spannungsfeld zwischen Religion und Politik. Stadtbild und Bürgerbild im Hellenismus. P. Zanker and M. Wörrle. Munich: 147-172.

Chrysostomou, P. (1983). "To pandocheio kai to Dioskoureio ton Pheron." AAA 16: 95-106.

Chrysostomou, P. (1989-1991). "I latreia tou Dia os kairikou theou sti Thessalia kai ti Makedonia." AD 44-46 A: 21-72.

304

Chrysostomou, P. (1993-4). "Oi thessalomakedonikoi theoi ton katharmon." Makedonika 29: 175-207.

Chrysostomou, P. (1998). I Thessaliki Thea En(n)odia i Pheraia Thea. Athens.

Clement, P. (1934). "New Evidence for the Origin of the Iphigeneia Legend." AC 3: 393-409.

Clement, P. (1939). "A Note on the Thessalian Cult of Enodia." Hesperia 8: 200.

Clinton, K. M. (1992). Myth and Cult: The Iconography of the Eleusinian Mysteries. Stockholm.

Clinton, K. M. (1996). The Thesmophorion in Central Athens and the Celebration of the Thesmophoria in Attica. The Role of Religion in the Early Greek Polis. R. Hägg. Stockholm: 111-125.

Cole, S. G. (2004). Landscapes, Gender, and Ritual Space: The Ancient Greek Experience. Berkeley.

Comparetti, D. (1921). Le iscrizione testè scoperte dell' antro di Farsalos (Tessaglia) e le iscrizione dell' antro dell' Himetto (Attica). Opuscoli Epigrafici. Firenze. 3: 247-248.

Cook, A. B. (1914-1940). Zeus: A Study in Ancient Religion. Cambridge.

305

Costanzi, V. (1913). "Zeus Thaulios." Athenaeum 1: 406-411.

Costanzi, V. (1913-1914). "Zeus Aphrios e il nome Aphrodite." Atti Accad. Sc. di Torino 49: 913-917.

Costanzi, V. (1914). "Ancora Zeus Thaulios." Athenaeum 2: 49-51.

Cozzo, A. (1988). Kerdos : semantica, ideologie e società nella Grecia antica. Rome.

Crowther, N. B. (1994). "The Role of Heralds and Trumpeters at Greek Athletic Festivals." Nikephoros 7: 135-155.

Crowther, N. B. (2000). "Resolving an Impasse: Draws, Dead Heats and Similar Decisions in Greek Athletics." Nikephoros 13: 125-140.

Daffa-Nikonanou, A. (1973). Thessalika iera Dimitros kai koroplastika anathimata. Volos.

Dagron, G. and D. Feissel (1987). Inscriptions de Cilicie. Paris.

Daux, G. (1964). "Concours de Titeia dans un décret d'Argos." BCH 88: 569-576.

Deacy, S. and A. Villing (2001). Athena Past and Present: An Introduction. Athena in the Classical World. S. Deacy and A. Villing. Leiden: 1-25.

Decourt, J.-C. (1990). La vallée de l'Énipeus en Thessalie. Paris.

306

Decourt, J.-C. (1995). Inscriptions de Thessalie I: Les cités de la vallée de l'Énipeus. Athens.

Decourt, J.-C. and A. Tziaphalias (2001). "La stèle dite des Ménandridai." ZPE 137: 139-152.

Detienne, M. (1971). "Athena and the Mastery of the Horse." History of Religions 11: 161-184.

Deubner, L. (1966). Attische Feste. Hildesheim.

Doria, L. B. P. (1985). Aspetti del culto di Demetre in Beozia. La Béotie antique. Paris: 159-168.

Dubois, L. (1987). "Zeus Tritodios." REG 100: 458-461.

Ducat, J. (1994). Les Pénestes de Thessalie. Paris.

Dueck, D. (2000). Strabo of Amasia: A Greek Man of Letters in Augustan Rome. London and New York.

Edelstein, L. (1953). "Review of Philippson." AJA 57: 140.

Ehrenberg, V. (1969). The Greek State. London.

307

Ehrhardt, C. (1967). "Two Notes on Philip of Macedon's First Interventions in Thessaly." CQ 61: 296-301.

Errington, R. M. (1990). A History of Macedonia. Berkeley.

Farnell, L. R. (1895-1909). The Cults of the Greek States. Oxford.

Feuer, B. (1983). The Northern Mycenaean Border in Thessaly. Oxford.

Fontenrose, J. (1948). "Review of Philippson." AJP 69: 117-118.

Fowler, R. L. (2000). Early Greek Mythography. New York.

Franke, P. R. (1956). "Drei neue Inschriften aus Thessalien." AA: 183-192.

Furtwängler, A. (1896). Olympia IV: Die Bronzen. Berlin.

Gallis, K. J. (1972). "Chronika." AD 27 B: 419.

Gallis, K. J. (1973-4). "Chronika." AD 29 B: 571, 581-583.

Gallis, K. J. (1974). "Anathimatikai epigrafai ex Atragos kai Farsalon." AAA 7: 273286.

Gallis, K. J. (1975a). A Short Chronicle of Greek Archaeological Investigations in Thessaly from 1881 until the Present Day. La Thessalie. B. Helly. Paris: 1-30.

308

Gallis, K. J. (1975b). "Chronika." AD 30 B: 199.

Gallis, K. J. (1976). "Chronika." AD 31 B: 176-178.

Gallis, K. J. (1977). Chrysogonos ex Edesses: Larisaikon timetikon psephisma. Ancient Macedonia, 2. Thessaloniki: 33-43.

Gallis, K. J. (1988). The Games in Ancient Larisa: An Example of Provincial Olympic Games. The Archaeology of the Olympics: The Olympics and Other Festivals in Antiquity. W. A. Raschke. Madison, WI: 217-235.

García Ramón, J. L. (1999). Onomastique grecque, dialectes grecs et grammaire comparée. Des dialectes grecs aux Lois de Gortyne. C. Dobias-Lalou. Paris: 722.

Gardner, P. (1883). Catalogue of Greek coins. Thessaly to Aetolia. London.

Garnsey, P., T. Gallant, et al. (1984). "Thessaly and the Grain Supply of Rome during the Second Century B.C." JRS 74: 30-44.

Garraffo, S. (1976-7). "Zeus Eleutherios - Zeus Olympios. Note de numismatica siracusana." AIIN 23-4: 9-50.

Gauthier, P. and M. B. Hatzopoulos (1993). La loi gymnasiarchique de Beroia. Athens.

309

Georganas, I. (2002). The Archaeology of early Iron Age Thessaly (ca. 1100-800 BC). Ph.D. diss., Nottingham.

Georgiades, N. (1894). Thessalia. Volos.

Giannopoulos, N. I. (1913). "Thessalias Epigraphai." AE: 217-220.

Giannopoulos, N. I. (1926). "Epigraphai Thessalias." AD 10: 49-54.

Giannopoulos, N. I. (1927-8a). "Epigraphai ek Philias tes thessalikes Karditses." AE: 119-127.

Giannopoulos, N. I. (1927-8b). "Paratereseis peri tes ek Philias tes Karditsas Epigraphes." AE: 203-205.

Giannopoulos, N. I. (1927-28c). "Epigraphai ek Thessalias." AD 11: 55-67.

Giannopoulos, N. I. (1930). "Thessalikai Epigraphai." AE: 96-107, 176-181.

Giannopoulos, N. I. (1931). "Epigraphai Thessalias." AE: 175-180.

Giannopoulos, N. I. (1932). "Epigraphai ek Thessalias." AE: 17-29.

Giannopoulos, N. I. (1933). "Thessalias Epigraphai." AE: 1-7.

Giannopoulos, N. I. (1934-5). "Epigraphai ek Thessalias." AE: 140-150.

310

Giovannini, A. (1976). Ein Beschluss der Peparethier für Richter aus Larisa. Demetrias I. Bonn: 205-213.

Gow, A. S. F. (1960). "The Gallus and the Lion." JHS 80: 88-93.

Graf, F. (1985). Nordionische Kulte: religionsgeschichtliche und epigraphische Untersuchungen zu den Kulten von Chios, Erythrai, Klazomenai und Phokaia. Rome.

Grainger, J. (1999). The League of the Aitolians. Leiden.

Griffith, G. T. (1970). "Philip of Macedon's Early Interventions in Thessaly (358-352 B.C.)." CQ 64: 67-80.

Gruen, E. (1984). The Hellenistic World and the Coming of Rome. Berkeley.

Gschnitzer, F. (1954). "Namen und Wesen der thessalischen Tetraden." Hermes 82: 451-464.

Gschnitzer, F. (1958). Abhängige Orte im griechischen Altertum. Munich.

Guarducci, M. (1985). "Una nuova dea a Naxos in Sicilia e gli antichi legami fra la Naxos siceliota e l'omonima isola delle Cicladi." MEFR 97: 7-34.

Habicht, C. (1976a). Ambrakia und der thessalische Bund zur Zeit des Perseuskrieges. Demetrias I. Bonn: 175-180.

311

Habicht, C. (1976b). Hellenistische Gymnasiarchenliste aus Pherai. Demetrias I. Bonn: 181-197.

Habicht, C. (1981). Eine neue Urkunde zur Geschichte Thessaliens unter der makedonischen Herrschaft. Ancient Macedonian Studies in Honor of Charles F. Edson. Thessaloniki: 193-198.

Habicht, C. (1983). "Makedonen in Larisa?" Chiron 13: 21-32.

Habicht, C. (1987a). Neue Inschriften aus Demetrias. Demetrias V: 269-306.

Habicht, C. (1987b). Neue Inschriften aus Thessalien. Demetrias V. Bonn: 307-317.

Habicht, C. (1987c). "Zu neuen Inschriften aus Thessalien." Tyche 2: 23-28.

Habicht, C. (2002). Beiträge zu koischen Inschriften des 2. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. Widerstand - Anpassung - Integration. Die griechische Staatenwalt und Rom: Festschrift für Jürgen Deininger zum 65. Geburtstag. N. Ehrhardt and L.-M. Günther. Stuttgart: 103-108.

Hall, J. (1997). Ethnic identity in Greek antiquity. New York.

Hall, J. (2002). Hellenicity: Between Ethnicity and Culture. Chicago.

Hammond, N. G. L. (1937). "The Sources of Diodorus Siculus XVI (I)." CQ 31: 7991.

312

Hammond, N. G. L. and G. T. Griffith (1972-1988). A History of Macedonia. Oxford.

Hatzopoulos, M. B. (1994). Cultes et rites de passage en Macedoine. Athens.

Head, B. V. (1911). Historia numorum, a manual of Greek numismatics. Oxford.

Helly, B. (1970a). "La convention des Basaidai." BCH 94: 161-189.

Helly, B. (1970b). "À Larisa: Bouleversements et remise en ordre de sanctuaires." Mnemosyne 23: 250-296.

Helly, B. (1973). Gonnoi. Amsterdam.

Helly, B. (1975). "Actes d'affranchissement thessaliens." BCH 99: 119-144.

Helly, B. (1977). Politarques, poliarques et politophylaques. Ancient Macedonia, 2. Thessaloniki: 531-44.

Helly, B. (1979). "Argoura, Atrax et Crannon." ZPE 35: 241-253.

Helly, B. (1980). La Thessalie à L'Époque romaine. Mémoires II. Saint-Étienne: 3750.

Helly, B. (1983a). Les Italiens en Thessalie au IIe et au Ier s. av. J.-C. Les "Bourgeoisies" Municipales Italiennes aux IIe et Ier Siècles av. J.-C. M. Cébeillac-Gervasoni. Naples: 355-380.

313

Helly, B. (1983b). "Sur quelques inscriptions d'Atrax." ZPE 51: 157-168.

Helly, B. (1987). Inscriptions de Thessalie: État du corpus. Acta Centri Historiae Terra Antiqua Balcanica, II. A. Fol, V. Zhikov and N. Nedjakov. Trinovi: 172-197.

Helly, B. (1993). Accord de sympolitie entre Gomphoi at Thamiai (Ithômé). Dialectologia Graeca; actas del II Coloquio Internacional de Dialectologia Griega (Miraflores de la Sierra, (Madrid), 19-21 de junio de 1991). Madrid: 167-200.

Helly, B. (1995). L'État thessalien. Aleuas le Roux, les tétrades et les tagoi. Lyon.

Helly, B., G. J. te Riele, et al. (1979). La liste des gymnasiarques de Phères pour les années 330-189 av. J.C. La Thessalie. B. Helly. Paris: 220-255.

Hiller v. Gaertingen, F. (1911). "Zeus Thaulios." Hermes 46: 154-156.

Intzesiloglou, B. G. (1980). "Chronika." AD 35 B: 272-273.

Intzesiloglou, B. G. (1984). "Chronika." AD 39 B: 149.

Intzesiloglou, B. G. (1985). "Chronika." AD 40 B: 195.

Intzesiloglou, B. G. (1987). "Chronika." AD 42 B: 271-272.

314

Jefferey, L. H. (1990). The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece. Oxford.

Jost, M. (1985). Sanctuaires et cultes d'Arcadie. Paris.

Kajava, M. (1999). "Arktos: arkteuo and the like." Arctos 33: 15-66.

Kakavoyannis, E. C. (1977). "Chronika." AD 32 B: 128.

Kakavoyannis, E. C. (1978). "Pheraioi Hyloureisantes." AD 33 A: 318-324.

Karlsson, L. (1995). "The Symbols of Freedom and Democracy on the Bronze Coinage of Timoleon." Acta Hyperborea 6: 149-170.

Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. (2002). Kleinfunde aus den Athena Itonia-Heiligtum bei Philia (Thessalien). Bonn.

Kip, G. (1910). Thessalische Studien. Ph.D. diss., Halle.

Klaffenbach, G. (1971). "Eine neue Ehrenstatue für T. Quinctius Flamininus." Chiron 1: 167-168.

Kontogiannis, A. (1985). Paratiriseis stin IG, ix 2 580 (kai se alles stoichidon epigraphes tis Larisas). Praktika tou a' istorikou-archaiologikou sumposiou Larisa (parelthon kai mellon). Larisa: 111-129.

315

Kontogiannis, A. (1992). Impsios: Poseidon o Zugios. Diethnes Sunedrio gia tin Archaia Thessalia sti mnimi tou Dimitri R. Theochari. Athens: 381-391.

Kougeas, S. B. (1928a). "Epigaphikai ek Gytheiou symbolai eis ten istorian tes lakonikes kata tous chronous tes Romaikes Autokratorias." Hellenica 1: 7-44.

Kougeas, S. B. (1928b). "Prostheke eis tas epigraphikas ek Gytheiou symbolas." Hellenica 1: 152-7.

Kraay, C. M. (1976). Archaic and Classical Greek Coins. Berkeley and Los Angeles.

Kramolisch, H. (1978). Die Strategen des thessalischen Bundes vom Jahr 196 v. Chr. bis zum Ausgang der römischen Republik. Bonn.

Kratzmüller, B. (1993). "Synoris - Apene. Zweigespannrennen an den Grossen Panathenäen." Nikephoros 6: 75-91.

Kraus, T. (1960). Hekate. Heidelberg.

Larsen, J. A. O. (1968). Greek federal states: their institutions and history. Oxford.

Launey, M. (1949-50). Recherches sur les armées hellénistiques. Paris.

Lazzarini, M. L. (1997). Alcuni termini del lessico sacrale greco nei documenti epigrafici. Atti del II Seminario Internazionale Studi sui Lessici Tecnici Greci e Latini. P. R. Colace. Messina-Naples: 207-212.

316

Leekley, D. and N. Efstratiou (1980). Archaeological Excavations in Central and Northern Greece. Park Ridge, NJ.

Lefèvre, F. (1998). L'Amphictionie Pyléo-Delphique: Histoire et Institutions.

Lehmann, G. A. (1983). "Thessaliens Hegemonie über Mittelgriechenland im 6. Jh. v. Chr." Boreas 6: 35-43.

Lévêque, P. (1957). Pyrrhos. Paris.

Long, C. R. (1987). The Twelve Gods of Greece and Rome. Leiden.

MacDowell, D. M. (1989). "The Oikos in Athenian Law." CQ n.s. 39: 10-21.

Mackil, E. M. (2003). Koinon and koinonia: Mechanisms and structures of political collectivity in Classical and Hellenistic Greece. Ph.D. diss., Princeton.

Magoulas, G. (1985). "Symboli stin archaia elliniki dialektologia." Glossologia 4: 89100.

Mandel, J. (1980). "Jason. The tyrant of Pherae, Tagus of Thessaly as reflected in ancient sources and modern literature. The image of the new tyrant." RSA 10: 47-77.

317

Marek, C. (1982). "Ein kretischer Offizier im Bundesgenossenkrieg." ZPE 48: 112116.

Markle, M. M. (1994). Diodorus' Sources for the Sacred War in Book 16. Ventures into Greek History. I. Worthington. Oxford: 43-69.

Martin, T. R. (1985). Sovereignty and Coinage in Classical Greece. Princeton.

Mastrokostas, E. (1964). "Inscriptions de Locride et de Thessalie." REA 66: 291-319.

Mastrokostas, E. (1978). "On the Grave Epigram from Pella, AAA x (1977) 259-263." AAA 11: 196-197.

Mendels, D. (1978). "Perseus and the Socio-economic Quetion in Greece (179-172/1 B.C.). A Study in Roman Propaganda." AncSoc 9: 55-73.

Mikalson, J. (1975). The Sacred and Civil Calendar of the Athenian Year. Princeton.

Mikalson, J. (1998). Religion in Hellenistic Athens. Berkeley.

Miller, S. (1974). "The Altar of the Six Goddesses in Thessalian Pherai." CSCA 7: 231-256.

Miller, S. G. (2004). Ancient Greek Athletics. New Haven and London.

318

Missailidou-Despotidou, V. (1993). "A Hellenistic Inscription from Skotoussa (Thessaly) and the Fortifications of the City." BSA 88: 187-217.

Morgan, C. (2003). Early Greek States Beyond the Polis. London and New York.

Moustaka, A. (1983). Kulte und Mythen auf thessalischen Münzen. Würzburg.

Nenci, G. (1980). "Sei decreti inediti da Entella." AnnPisa III 10: 1271-1275.

Nikolaou, E. (1991). "Chronika." AD 46 B: 212.

Nilsson, M. (1920). Primitive Time-Reckoning. Lund.

Nilsson, M. (1940). Greek folk religion. Philadelphia.

Nilsson, M. (1949). "Review of Philippson." Gnomon 21: 75-77.

Nilsson, M. (1961-1967). Geschichte der griechischen Religion. Munich.

Nilsson, M. (1995). Griechische Feste von religiöser Bedeutung mit Ausschluss der Attischen. Stuttgart.

Nordquist, G. (1994). Some Notes on Musicians in Greek Cult. Ancient Greek Cult Practice from the Epigraphical Evidence. R. Hägg. Stockholm: 81-93.

Ogle, M. B. (1910). "Laurel in Ancient Religion and Folk-Lore." AJP 31: 287-311.

319

Oikonomides, A. N. and S. N. Koumanoudes (1956-7). "Epigraphai anekdotoi Larisis kai Epidaurou." Polemon 6: 17-32.

Østby, E. (1994). A reconsideration of the classical temple at Pherai. La Thessalie: Quinze années de recherches archéologiques, 1975-1990, bilans et perspectives. Athens. B: 139-142.

Papachatzis, N. D. (1992). I physi kai i katagogi tis thessalikis Itonias kai tis panellinias Athinas. Diethnes synedrio gia tin archaia Thessalia sti mnimi tou Dimitri P. Theochari. Athens: 321-325.

Parker, R. (1996). Athenian Religion, a History. Oxford.

Parker, R. (1998). Cleomenes on the Acropolis. An Inaugural Lecture delivered before the University of Oxford on 12 May 1997. Oxford.

Parker, R. (2000). Theophoric Names and Greek Religion. Greek Personal Names: Their Value as Evidence. S. Hornblower and E. Matthews. Oxford: 53-80.

Paton, W. R. and E. L. Hicks (1891). The inscriptions of Cos. Oxford.

Peek, W. (1934). "Griechische Inschriften." MDAI 59: 35-80.

Peek, W. (1974). Griechische Vers-Inschriften aud Thessalien. Heidelberg.

320

Philippson, P. (1944). Thessalische Mythologie. Zurich.

Phillips, O. (2002). The Witches' Thessaly. Magic and Ritual in the Ancient World. P. Mirecki and M. Meyer. Leiden: 378-386.

Pilali-Papasteriou, A. and K. Papaefthymiou-Papanthimou (1983). "Nea anaskaphike ereuna sto Iero tes Philias." Anthropologika 4: 49-68.

Plassart, A. (1921). "La liste des Theorodoques." BCH 45: 1-85.

Poliakoff, M. B. (1987). Combat Sports in the Ancient World: Competition, Violence, and Culture. New Haven and London.

Pouilloux, J. (1955). "Actes d'affranchisement thessaliens." BCH 79: 442-466.

Preller, L. (1894-1926). Griechische mythologie. Berlin.

Preuner, E. (1903). "Griechische Siegerlisten." AM 28: 338-382.

Pritchett, K. (1998-1999). Pausanias Periegetes. Amsterdam.

Prott, H. v. (1902). "Dionyos Kathegemon." AM 27: 161-188.

Raaflaub, K. (2004). The Discovery of Freedom in Ancient Greece. Chicago and London.

321

Rakatsanis, K. and A. Tziaphalias (1997). Latreies kai iera stin archaia Thessalia: A' Pelasgiotis. Ioannina.

Rensch, W. (1908). De manumissionum titulis apud Thessalos. Halle.

Rigsby, K. J. (2004). Theoroi for the Koan Asklepieia. The Hellenistic Polis of Kos: State, Economy and Culture. Proceedings of an International Seminar organized by the Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University, 11-13 May, 2000. K. Höghammar. Uppsala: 9-14.

Risberg, C. (1992). Metal-working in Greek Sanctuaries. Economics of Cult in the Ancient Greek World: Proceedings of the Uppsala Symposium 1990. T. Linders and B. Alroth. Uppsala: 33-40.

Robert, L. (1940). "Petraios, Onomastique et Géographie." Hellenica 1: 121-126.

Robert, L. (1960a). "Inscriptions d'Asie Mineure au Musée de Leyde." Hellenica 1112: 214-262.

Robert, L. (1960b). "Une deésse à cheval en Macédoine." Hellenica 11-12: 588-595.

Robert, L. (1973). "De Cilicie à Messine et à Plymouth avec deux inscriptions grecques errantes." JS: 161-211.

Robertson, N. (1976). "The Thessalian expedition of 480 B.C." JHS 96: 100-120.

322

Robertson, N. (1984). "Poseidon's Festival at the Winter Solstice." CQ 34: 1-16.

Robertson, N. (2001). Athena as Weather Goddess. Athena in the Classical World. S. Deacy and A. Villing. Leiden: 29-55.

Roisman, H. M. (1990). "Kerdion in the Iliad: Profit and Trickiness." TAPA 120: 2335.

Rose, H. J. (1944). "Review of Philippson." JHS 44: 110-111.

Rose, H. J. (1958). "Review of Vos." CR n.s. 8: 79.

Rosivach, V. J. (1978). "The Altar of Zeus Agoraios in the Heracleidae." PdP 33: 3247.

Rosivach, V. J. (1987). "The Cult of Zeus Eleutherios at Athens." PdP 42: 262-285.

Rouse, W. D. (1902). Greek Votive Offerings. Cambridge.

Rudhardt, J. (1999). Thémis et les Hôrai. Geneva.

Samuel, A. E. (1972). Greek and Roman Chronology: Calendars and Years in Classical Antiquity. Munich.

Sánchez, P. (2001). L'Amphictionie des Pyles et de Delphes. Stuttgart.

323

Schachter, A. (1981-). Cults of Boiotia. London.

Schachter, A. (2000). The Daphnephoria of Thebes. Presenza e funzione della città di Tebe nella cultura greca. P. A. Bernardini. Pisa: 99-123.

Schmidt, D. (1999). "An Unusual Victory List from Keos: IG XII, 5, 608 and the Dating of Bakchylides." JHS 119: 67-85.

Scholten, J. B. (2000). The Politics of Plunder: Aitolians and Their Koinon in the Early Hellenistic Era, 279-217 B.C. Berkeley.

Schumacher, R. W. M. (1993). Three related sanctuaries of Poseidon: Geraistos, Kalaureia and Tainaron. Greek Sanctuaries, New Approaches. N. Marinatos and R. Hägg. London and New York: 62-87.

Scott, K. (1931). "Greek and Roman Honorific Months." YCS 2: 201-278.

Segre, M. (1934). "Grano di Tessaglia a Coo." RFIC 62, n.s. 12: 169-193.

Sittig, E. (1912). De graecorum nominibus theophoris. Ph.D. diss., Halle.

Snodgrass, A. (1980). Archaic Greece. The Age of Experiment. London.

Solmsen, F. (1911). "Zeus Thaulios." Hermes 46: 286-91.

324

Sourvinou-Inwood, C. (1979). "The Myth of the First Temples at Delphi." CQ n.s. 29: 231-251.

Sourvinou-Inwood, C. (1986). Myth as History: The Previous Owners of the Delphic Oracle. Interpretations of Greek Mythology. J.-M. Bremmer. Totowa: 215241.

Sprawski, S. (1999). Jason of Pherae : a study of history of Thessaly in years 431-370 BC. Krakow.

Stählin, F. (1967). Das hellenische Thessalien. Amsterdam.

Tarn, W. W. (1913). Antigonos Gonatas. Oxford.

Theocharis, D. (1960). "Chronika." AD 16 B: 174-175, 181, 185.

Theocharis, D. (1961-62). "Chronika." AD 17 B: 178-179.

Theocharis, D. (1963). "Chronika." AD 18 B: 135-139.

Theocharis, D. (1964). "Chronika." AD 19 B: 260-261, 265-267.

Theocharis, D. (1965). "Chronika." AD 20 B: 311-313.

Theocharis, D. (1967). "Chronika." AD 22 B: 296-297.

325

Tracy, S. and C. Habicht (1991). "New and Old Panathenaic Victor Lists." Hesperia 60: 187-236.

Tresp, A. (1914). Die Fragmente der griechischen Kultschriftsteller. Giessen.

Trümpy, C. (1989). "Nochmals zu den mykenischen Fr-Täfelchen. Die Zeitangaben innerhalb der pylischen Ölrationenserie." SMEA 27: 191-234.

Trümpy, C. (1997). Untersuchungen zu den altgriechischen Monatsnamen und Monatsfolgen. Heidelberg.

Tziaphalias, A. (1976). "Chronika." AD 31 B: 184.

Tziaphalias, A. (1977). "Chronika." AD 32 B: 137-139.

Tziaphalias, A. (1984a). "Anekdotes epigraphes apo tin archaia thessaliki poli Atraga." Thessaliko Himerologio 6: 177-208.

Tziaphalias, A. (1984b). "Anekdotes thessalikes epigraphes." Thessaliko Himerologio 7: 193-234.

Tziaphalias, A. (1985). "Chronika." AD 40 B: 206.

Tziaphalias, A. (1987). "Chronika." AD 42 B: 287.

Tziaphalias, A. (1988). "Chronika." AD 43 B: 260, 277-283.

326

Tziaphalias, A. (1989). "Chronika." AD 44 B: 239.

Tziaphalias, A. (1990). "Chronika." AD 45 B: 219-220.

Tziaphalias, A. (1991). "Chronika." AD 46 B: 223-225.

Tziaphalias, A. (1993). "Chronika." AD 48 B: 255-258.

Tziaphalias, A. (1994a). Dekapente Chronia Anaskaphon stin Archaia Larisa. La Thessalie: Quinze années de recherches archéologiques, 1975-1990, bilans et perspectives. Athens. B: 153-178.

Tziaphalias, A. (1994b). "Chronika." AD 49 B: 339-340.

Tziaphalias, A. (1996). "Chronika." AD 51 B: 382-383.

Tziaphalias, A. (1997). "Chronika." AD 52 B: 499-501.

van der Velde, R. (1924). Thessalische Dialektgeographie. Utrecht.

Verdelis, N. M. (1955). "Anaskaphi Larisis." Praktika: 147-150.

Verdelis, N. M. (1958). "Mnimeion Poseidonos en Larisi." Thessalika 1: 29-38.

327

von Graeve, V. (1979). Thessalische Weihreliefs an die apollinische Trias. La Thessalie. B. Helly. Paris: 143-155.

Vos, H. (1956). Themis. Assen.

Walsh, J. J. (1996). "Flamininus and the Propaganda of Liberation." Historia 45: 344363.

Westlake, H. D. (1935). Thessaly in the fourth century B.C. London.

Westlake, H. D. (1936). "The Medism of Thessaly." JHS 56: 12-24.

Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, U. v. (1891). "Die sieben Thore Theben." Hermes 26: 191242.

Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, U. v. (1956). Der Glaube der Hellenen. Basel.

Wilhelm, A. (1890). "Inschriften aus Thessalien." AM 15: 283-317.

Wolicki, A. (2002). "The Heralds and the Games in Archaic and Classical Greece." Nikephoros 15: 69-97.

Woodward, A. M. (1910). "Greek Inscriptions from Thessaly." LAA 3: 145-160.