DOCSLIB.ORG

Kretan Cult and Customs, Especially in the Classical and Hellenistic Periods: a Religious, Social, and Political Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

i Kretan cult and customs, especially in the Classical and Hellenistic periods: a religious, social, and political study Thesis submitted for degree of MPhil Carolyn Schofield University College London ii Declaration I, Carolyn Schofield, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been acknowledged in the thesis. iii Abstract Ancient Krete perceived itself, and was perceived from outside, as rather different from the rest of Greece, particularly with respect to religion, social structure, and laws. The purpose of the thesis is to explore the bases for these perceptions and their accuracy. Krete’s self-perception is examined in the light of the account of Diodoros Siculus (Book 5, 64-80, allegedly based on Kretan sources), backed up by inscriptions and archaeology, while outside perceptions are derived mainly from other literary sources, including, inter alia, Homer, Strabo, Plato and Aristotle, Herodotos and Polybios; in both cases making reference also to the fragments and testimonia of ancient historians of Krete. While the main cult-epithets of Zeus on Krete – Diktaios, associated with pre-Greek inhabitants of eastern Krete, Idatas, associated with Dorian settlers, and Kretagenes, the symbol of the Hellenistic koinon - are almost unique to the island, those of Apollo are not, but there is good reason to believe that both Delphinios and Pythios originated on Krete, and evidence too that the Eleusinian Mysteries and Orphic and Dionysiac rites had much in common with early Kretan practice. The early institutionalization of pederasty, and the abduction of boys described by Ephoros, are unique to Krete, but the latter is distinct from rites of initiation to manhood, which continued later on Krete than elsewhere, and were associated with different gods. Laws were inscribed earlier and in greater quantity on Krete than elsewhere, and it is argued that Sparta’s constitution was modeled on Krete’s, rather than vice versa. Despite opportunities for cities to meet, and the establishment of the Hellenistic koinon, the Kretans rarely spoke with a single voice. There is little evidence of historical colonization into or from Krete, and the island was uniquely uninvolved in outside wars and alliances over the period considered. iv Acknowledgements My principal supervisor was Simon Hornblower and my second supervisor Alan Griffiths; I owe more to both of them than I can easily express. Simon’s input is always extremely stimulating, and I have very much appreciated his immense knowledge, his unfailing ability to re-focus me whenever I lost my way, his rigorous attention to detail, and his never-failing availability, including attending two CA conferences to chair the panel when I gave papers. Alan has been constantly encouraging, particularly towards the end, and crisp and learned with useful insights and advice. I would also like to thank Chris Carey and Stephen Colvin for helpful suggestions at my upgrade panel, and Stephen also, as Graduate Tutor, for efficient support and excellent communications. Earlier contributions go back to Elizabeth Hamilton, who inspired me at school with her Latin teaching, and would have taught me Greek as well but sadly moved on, leaving an inadequate replacement, and me to gravitate through modern languages and mathematics to a degree in Engineering and career in industry. Much later the Open University gave me a second chance, and enthusiasm for Classics was inspired by Francis Lucas, my tutor in first year Greek and Homer, and Norman Shiel, with a course on fifth-century Athens. I am grateful to the OU for allowing me to complete my BA degree course at UCL, to Bob Sharples, who looked after the OU students there, and my teachers: Alan Griffiths, Maria Broggiato, Simon Hornblower, Herwig Maehler, Stephen Instone, Cornelia Roemer, and Richard Janko. I was encouraged by Richard Janko to do the MA and my thanks to Rhiannon Ashe, Simon Hornblower, and Cornelia Roemer in this connection are recorded elsewhere. Finally thanks to Sheila Cameron, for much practical advice on text manipulation, and to other supportive friends, particularly Julia Newton, Margaret Mountford, Ken Webb, and Derek Thompson, for their unfailing interest and encouragement. The map is from The Barrington Atlas of the Ancient World (ed. R.T.A. Talbert, Princeton and Oxford, 2000), and I am grateful to Sue Willetts, Ken Watson, and Chris Torrens for help in reproducing it. v Table of Contents Title-page i Declaration ii Abstract iii Acknowledgements iv Table of Contents v Abbreviations xi 1 Why Krete? 1 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Methodology 3 1.2.1 Diodoros and his ‘Kretan Sources’ 3 1.2.2 Inscriptions 6 1.2.3 Archaeology 6 1.2.4 Literary Evidence other than Diodoros 6 1.2.5 Topographical Autopsy 7 1.2.6 Period Covered 7 1.2.7 Bibliography 7 1.2.8 Spelling Convention 8 2 The Palaikastro Hymn and Kretan-born Zeus 9 2.1 Introduction 9 2.2 The Palaikastro Hymn 9 2.2.1 Introduction 9 2.2.2 Text and Translation 11 2.2.3 The Refrain 13 2.2.4 The Stanzas 15 2.2.5 Dates 17 2.2.6 The Daimones, The Kouretes, and the Singers 22 2.3 Kretan-born Zeus 25 2.3.1 The Nature of Zeus 25 2.3.2 The Birth of Zeus 26 2.3.3 The Tomb of Zeus 28 vi 2.4 Cults of Zeus 30 2.4.1 Zeus Diktaios and the Location of Dikte 30 2.4.2 Zeus Idatas (or Idaios) 33 2.4.3 Zeus Kretagenes 36 2.4.4 Other Cults of Zeus Found on Krete 38 2.5 Conclusions 40 3 Cults of Apollo in Krete 41 3.1 Introduction 41 3.2 Apollo Delphinios 42 3.2.1 Origins 42 3.2.2 Controversy at Dreros 44 3.2.3 Municipal Buildings and Rites of Passage 46 3.2.4 Purification 48 3.3 Apollo Pythios 49 3.3.1 Distribution of the Cult in Krete 49 3 3.2 Origins 51 3.4 Delphinios/Pythios Compared 53 3.4.1 Characteristics 53 3.4.2 The Evidence of Invocation 54 3.4.3 The Evidence of Coins 55 3.5 Apollo’s Predecessors 57 3.5.1 Paiawon 57 3.5.2 Reshep (A)mukal 57 3.5.3 Hyakinthos 57 3.6 Other Epithets of Apollo 58 3.7 Conclusions 60 4 Mystery Cults, Dionysos, and Orphism in Krete 62 4.1 Introduction 62 4.2 The Mysteries of Samothrace 62 4.3 The Eleusinian Mysteries 65 4.4 Convergence between the Orphic Tradition and the Eleusinian Mysteries 68 4.5 Kretan-born Zeus, Zagreus, and Dionysus 71 vii 4.6 Krete and the Orphic Tradition 73 4.6.1 Krete in Orphic Theogonies 73 4.6.2 Diodorus’ Kretan Sources, Orpheus, and the Orphic Tradition 76 4.6.3 The Gold Tablets and Mnemosyne 79 4.6.4 Pindar and Sicily 80 4.7 Dionysiac Cult and Orphic Tradition 82 4.8 Conclusions 85 5 Cults of Gods other than Zeus, Apollo, and Dionysos 87 5.1 Introduction 87 5.2 Recipients of Cult 87 5.2.1 Offspring of the Titans 87 5.2.2 Offspring of Zeus 90 5.2.3 Other Panhellenic Gods 98 5.2.4 Ancient Kretan Deities 100 6 Initiation 109 6.1 Definition of Initiation and Examples in Krete 109 6.2 The Abduction of Boys according to Ephoros 114 6.3 Relationships between males in Krete 116 6.3.1 Homosexuality 116 6.3.2. Pederasty 117 6.3.3 Chaste Relationships 118 6.4 Adolescent Age-groups and the Terms used for them 120 6.5 Abduction and Initiation 120 6.5.1 The Age of Abduction 121 6.5.2 Élite or Universal Ritual? 122 6.5.3 Summary 123 6.6 Gods, Festivals and Sites Associated with Initiation 124 6.6.1 Gods and Festivals 124 6.6.2 Sites 127 6.6.3 Summary 131 6.7 Conclusions 131 7 Laws, Social Relationships, and Customs 133 7.1 Introduction 133 7.2 The Traditional Background to Kretan Law 133 viii 7.3 Ancient Written Laws 137 7.3.1 Laws from Gortyn 137 7.3.2 Laws from Other Cities 139 7.3.3 Apollo as Guardian of the Law 141 7.4 Selected Issues Arising from the Laws 142 7.4.1 Homicide and Sacred Laws 142 7.4.2 Property, Inheritance, and Adoption 144 7.5 Political and Social Matters 147 7.5.1 Politics 147 7.5.2 Parallels with Sparta 149 7.5.3 Andreia 152 7.5.4 Constitution and Social Strata 154 7.5.5 Slavery 156 7.6 Literacy in Archaic Krete 157 7.7 Summary 163 8 Sanctuaries, Common Cults, Amphictionies, and the Koinon 165 8.1 Introduction 165 8.2 Location of Sanctuaries and Common Cults 166 8.2.1 Background 166 8.2.2 Minoan Peak Sanctuaries and Sacred Caves 166 8.2.3 Rural Sanctuaries in the Early Iron Age 167 8.2.4 Frontier Sanctuaries 169 8.3 The Evidence for Kretan Amphictionies 173 8.3.1 What is an Amphictiony? 173 8.3.2 Cult Epithets 175 8.3.3 Cultic Groupings 175 8.3.4 Possible Examples of Amphictionies 177 8.3.5 Political Aspects of Amphictionies 178 8.4 The Kretan Koinon 183 8.4.1 The Epigraphic Evidence 183 8.4.2 The Gortyn/Knossos Alliance 184 8.4.3 Membership and Management 186 8.5 Summary 189 9 Colonization, Kinship, and Invention of the Past 192 9.1 Introduction 192 ix 9.2 Inward Colonization 194 9.2.1 Ancient Godlings 194 9.2.2 Waves of Settlers 196 9.2.3 Founding Legends 201 9.2.4 Sparta and Dorian Colonization 203 9.2.5 Samians, Aiginetans, and Relations between Kydonia and Athens 205 9.3 Outward Colonization 209 9.3.1 Population Issues 209 9.3.2 Minos and the Islands 210 9.3.3 Sarpedon, Miletos, and Lycia 214 9.3.4 South Italy 217 9.3.5 Sicily 219 9.3.6 Mercenaries 222 9.4 Summary: Founding Myths and Political Spin 225 9.4.1 Historical Examples 225 9.4.2 The Uses of Myth 225 9.4.3 Autochthony and Mass Migrations 226 9.4.4 Creation of Founders and Political Spin 227 9.4.5 Conclusion 228 10 Foreign Relations 229 10.1 Introduction 229 10.2 Island Status 229 10.3 Colonization History 230 10.4 Ethnicity 231 10.5 Forms of Government 233 10.5.1 Krete 233 10.5.2 Kingdoms: Cyprus and Kyrene 234 10.5.3 Sicily 234 10.5.4 Rhodes 236 10.6 Outside Influences 236 10.6.1 The Persian Empire and Persian Wars 236 10.6.2 Athens and the Aegean 238 10.6.3 The Peloponnesian War and its Aftermath 239 10.6.4 Macedon and Persia 241 10.6.5 After Alexander 242 10.6.6 Kretan Squabbles, Piracy, and Foreign Intervention 244 10.6.7 Carthage and Rome 246 10.6.8 Timber, Shipbuilding, and Seafaring 247 10.7 Krete: the Odd One Out? 249 x 11 Summary and Conclusions 252 11.1 Ground Covered 252 11.2 Recurring Themes and Unresolved Questions 256 11.3 Kretan Exceptionalism and Contributions 259 11.3.1 Cults 259 11.3.2 Customs 261 11.3.3 Outside Relations 261 11.2.3.4 Island Mystique 262 Appendix 1 Epithets of Zeus among Gods Invoked in Bilateral Treaties 263 Appendix 2 Controversy at Dreros.
Recommended publications
  • Hadrian and the Greek East

    Hadrian and the Greek East

    HADRIAN AND THE GREEK EAST: IMPERIAL POLICY AND COMMUNICATION DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Demetrios Kritsotakis, B.A, M.A. * * * * * The Ohio State University 2008 Dissertation Committee: Approved by Professor Fritz Graf, Adviser Professor Tom Hawkins ____________________________ Professor Anthony Kaldellis Adviser Greek and Latin Graduate Program Copyright by Demetrios Kritsotakis 2008 ABSTRACT The Roman Emperor Hadrian pursued a policy of unification of the vast Empire. After his accession, he abandoned the expansionist policy of his predecessor Trajan and focused on securing the frontiers of the empire and on maintaining its stability. Of the utmost importance was the further integration and participation in his program of the peoples of the Greek East, especially of the Greek mainland and Asia Minor. Hadrian now invited them to become active members of the empire. By his lengthy travels and benefactions to the people of the region and by the creation of the Panhellenion, Hadrian attempted to create a second center of the Empire. Rome, in the West, was the first center; now a second one, in the East, would draw together the Greek people on both sides of the Aegean Sea. Thus he could accelerate the unification of the empire by focusing on its two most important elements, Romans and Greeks. Hadrian channeled his intentions in a number of ways, including the use of specific iconographical types on the coinage of his reign and religious language and themes in his interactions with the Greeks. In both cases it becomes evident that the Greeks not only understood his messages, but they also reacted in a positive way.
  • Athenians and Eleusinians in the West Pediment of the Parthenon

    Athenians and Eleusinians in the West Pediment of the Parthenon

    ATHENIANS AND ELEUSINIANS IN THE WEST PEDIMENT OF THE PARTHENON (PLATE 95) T HE IDENTIFICATION of the figuresin the west pedimentof the Parthenonhas long been problematic.I The evidencereadily enables us to reconstructthe composition of the pedimentand to identify its central figures.The subsidiaryfigures, however, are rath- er more difficult to interpret. I propose that those on the left side of the pediment may be identifiedas membersof the Athenian royal family, associatedwith the goddessAthena, and those on the right as membersof the Eleusinian royal family, associatedwith the god Posei- don. This alignment reflects the strife of the two gods on a heroic level, by referringto the legendary war between Athens and Eleusis. The recognition of the disjunctionbetween Athenians and Eleusinians and of parallelism and contrastbetween individualsand groups of figures on the pedimentpermits the identificationof each figure. The referenceto Eleusis in the pediment,moreover, indicates the importanceof that city and its majorcult, the Eleu- sinian Mysteries, to the Athenians. The referencereflects the developmentand exploitation of Athenian control of the Mysteries during the Archaic and Classical periods. This new proposalfor the identificationof the subsidiaryfigures of the west pedimentthus has critical I This article has its origins in a paper I wrote in a graduateseminar directedby ProfessorJohn Pollini at The Johns Hopkins University in 1979. I returned to this paper to revise and expand its ideas during 1986/1987, when I held the Jacob Hirsch Fellowship at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. In the summer of 1988, I was given a grant by the Committeeon Research of Tulane University to conduct furtherresearch for the article.
  • Ekaterina Avaliani (Tbilisi) *

    Ekaterina Avaliani (Tbilisi) *

    Phasis 2-3, 2000 Ekaterina Avaliani (Tbilisi) ORIGINS OF THE GREEK RELIGION: MINOAN AND MYCENAEAN CULTURAL CONVERGENCE Natw"ally, the convergence of Minoan and Mycenaean ethno-cultures would cause certain changes in religious consciousness. The metamorphosis in religion and mentality are hard to explain from the present perspective. During this process, the orientation of Minoan religion might have totally changed (the "victorious gods" of Achaeans might have eclipsed the older ones ofMinoans).1 On the other hand, the evidence of religious syncretism should by no means be ignored. Thus, based on the materials avail­ able, we may lead our investigation in the following directions: I. While identifying Minoan religious concepts and cults, we should operate with: a) scenes depicted on a11ifacts; b) antique written sources and mythopoetics, which have preserved certain information on Minoan religious concepts and rituals.2 2. To identify gods of the Mycenaean period, we use linear B texts and artifacts. It is evident that the Mycenaean period has the group of gods that are directly related to Minoan world, and on the other hand, the group of gods that is unknown to pre-Hellenic religious tradition. And, finally, 3.We identify another group of gods that reveal their syncretic nature already in the Mycenaean period. * * * Minoan cult rituals were tightly linked to nature. Cave dwellings, mountains and grottos were the charismatic spaces where the rituals were held.3 One of such grottos near Candia was related to the name of Minoan goddess Eileithyia.4 Homer also mentions Eileithyia. The goddess was believed to protect pregnant women and women in childbirth.5 Also, there might have been another sacred place, the top of a hill - Dikte, which was associated with Minoan goddess Diktunna (Dikte - "Sacred Mountain").6 Later in Greek mythology, the goddess assimilated to Artemis ("huntress") (Solinus II .
  • Les Opéras De Lully Remaniés Par Rebel Et Francœur Entre 1744 Et 1767 : Héritage Ou Modernité ? Pascal Denécheau

    Les Opéras De Lully Remaniés Par Rebel Et Francœur Entre 1744 Et 1767 : Héritage Ou Modernité ? Pascal Denécheau

    Les opéras de Lully remaniés par Rebel et Francœur entre 1744 et 1767 : héritage ou modernité ? Pascal Denécheau To cite this version: Pascal Denécheau. Les opéras de Lully remaniés par Rebel et Francœur entre 1744 et 1767 : héritage ou modernité ? : Deuxième séminaire de recherche de l’IRPMF : ”La notion d’héritage dans l’histoire de la musique”. 2007. halshs-00437641 HAL Id: halshs-00437641 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00437641 Preprint submitted on 1 Dec 2009 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. P. Denécheau : « Les opéras de Lully remaniés par Rebel et Francœur : héritage ou modernité ? » Les opéras de Lully remaniés par Rebel et Francœur entre 1744 et 1767 : héritage ou modernité ? Une grande partie des œuvres lyriques composées au XVIIe siècle par Lully et ses prédécesseurs ne se sont maintenues au répertoire de l’Opéra de Paris jusqu’à la fin du siècle suivant qu’au prix d’importants remaniements : les scènes jugées trop longues ou sans lien avec l’action principale furent coupées, quelques passages réécrits, un accompagnement de l’orchestre ajouté là où la voix n’était auparavant soutenue que par le continuo.
  • Demetrius Poliorcetes and the Hellenic League

    Demetrius Poliorcetes and the Hellenic League

    DEMETRIUSPOLIORCETES AND THE HELLENIC LEAGUE (PLATE 33) 1. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND D JURING the six years, 307/6-302/1 B.C., issues were raised and settled which shaped the course of western history for a long time to come. The epoch was alike critical for Athens, Hellas, and the Macedonians. The Macedonians faced squarely during this period the decision whether their world was to be one world or an aggregate of separate kingdoms with conflicting interests, and ill-defined boundaries, preserved by a precarious balance of power and incapable of common action against uprisings of Greek and oriental subjects and the plundering appetites of surrounding barbarians. The champion of unity was King Antigonus the One- Eyed, and his chief lieutenant his brilliant but unstatesmanlike son, King Demetrius the Taker of Cities, a master of siege operations and of naval construction and tactics, more skilled in organizing the land-instruments of warfare than in using them on the battle field. The final campaign between the champions of Macedonian unity and disunity opened in 307 with the liberation of Athens by Demetrius and ended in 301 B.C. with the Battle of the Kings, when Antigonus died in a hail of javelins and Demetrius' cavalry failed to penetrate a corps of 500 Indian elephants in a vain effort to rescue hinm. Of his four adversaries King Lysimachus and King Kassander left no successors; the other two, Kings Ptolemy of Egypt and Seleucus of Syria, were more fortunate, and they and Demetrius' able son, Antigonus Gonatas, planted the three dynasties with whom the Romans dealt and whom they successively destroyed in wars spread over 44 years.
  • The Herodotos Project (OSU-Ugent): Studies in Ancient Ethnography

    The Herodotos Project (OSU-Ugent): Studies in Ancient Ethnography

    Faculty of Literature and Philosophy Julie Boeten The Herodotos Project (OSU-UGent): Studies in Ancient Ethnography Barbarians in Strabo’s ‘Geography’ (Abii-Ionians) With a case-study: the Cappadocians Master thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Linguistics and Literature, Greek and Latin. 2015 Promotor: Prof. Dr. Mark Janse UGent Department of Greek Linguistics Co-Promotores: Prof. Brian Joseph Ohio State University Dr. Christopher Brown Ohio State University ACKNOWLEDGMENT In this acknowledgment I would like to thank everybody who has in some way been a part of this master thesis. First and foremost I want to thank my promotor Prof. Janse for giving me the opportunity to write my thesis in the context of the Herodotos Project, and for giving me suggestions and answering my questions. I am also grateful to Prof. Joseph and Dr. Brown, who have given Anke and me the chance to be a part of the Herodotos Project and who have consented into being our co- promotores. On a whole other level I wish to express my thanks to my parents, without whom I would not have been able to study at all. They have also supported me throughout the writing process and have read parts of the draft. Finally, I would also like to thank Kenneth, for being there for me and for correcting some passages of the thesis. Julie Boeten NEDERLANDSE SAMENVATTING Deze scriptie is geschreven in het kader van het Herodotos Project, een onderneming van de Ohio State University in samenwerking met UGent. De doelstelling van het project is het aanleggen van een databank met alle volkeren die gekend waren in de oudheid.
  • The Aegean Chapter Viii the Decorative

    The Aegean Chapter Viii the Decorative

    H. J. Kantor - Plant Ornament in the Ancient Near East, Chapter VIII: The Decorative Flora of Crete and the Late Helladic Mainland SECTION II: THE AEGEAN CHAPTER VIII THE DECORATIVE FLORA OF CRETE AND THE LATE HELLADIC MAINLAND In the midst of the sea, on the long island of Crete, there dwelt a people, possessors of the fabulous Minoan culture, who are known to have had trade relations with Egypt, and with other Near-Eastern lands. Still farther away towards the north lies the Mainland of Greece, a region that proved itself to be a very hospitable host to the graft of Minoan culture. Before the close of the LH period the ceramic results of this union were to be spread over the Near East in great profusion and it becomes necessary to define the extent of Aegean influence on those traditions of Near-Eastern art that lie within the scope of our topic. Before this is possible a concise summary of the plant ornamentation of the Aegean must be presented.1 This background forms a necessary basis without which the reaction of Aegean plant design on the main development of our story, be it large or small, cannot be determined. 1 A great deal of interest and work has been devoted to the study of Minoan decorative art almost since the beginning of its discovery, and full advantage of this has been taken in the preparation of the present survey. The chief treatments of the subject are as follows: Edith H. Hall, The Decorative Art of Crete in the Bronze Age (Philadelphia, 1907); Ernst Reisinger, Kretische Vasenmalerei vom Kamares bis zum Palast-Stil (Leipzig, Berlin, 1912); Diederich Fimmen, Die Kretisch-Mykenische Kulture (Leipzig, Berlin, 1924), Alois Gotsmich, Entwicklungsgang der Kretischen Ornamentik, Wein, 1923); Frederich Matz, Frühkretische Siegel (Berlin, 1928), covering a much wider field than is indicated by the title; Georg Karo, Die Schachtgräber von Mykenai (Munchen, 1939).
  • Separating Fact from Fiction in the Aiolian Migration

    Separating Fact from Fiction in the Aiolian Migration

    hesperia yy (2008) SEPARATING FACT Pages399-430 FROM FICTION IN THE AIOLIAN MIGRATION ABSTRACT Iron Age settlementsin the northeastAegean are usuallyattributed to Aioliancolonists who journeyed across the Aegean from mainland Greece. This articlereviews the literary accounts of the migration and presentsthe relevantarchaeological evidence, with a focuson newmaterial from Troy. No onearea played a dominantrole in colonizing Aiolis, nor is sucha widespread colonizationsupported by the archaeologicalrecord. But the aggressive promotionof migrationaccounts after the PersianWars provedmutually beneficialto bothsides of theAegean and justified the composition of the Delian League. Scholarlyassessments of habitation in thenortheast Aegean during the EarlyIron Age are remarkably consistent: most settlements are attributed toAiolian colonists who had journeyed across the Aegean from Thessaly, Boiotia,Akhaia, or a combinationof all three.1There is no uniformityin theancient sources that deal with the migration, although Orestes and his descendantsare named as theleaders in mostaccounts, and are credited withfounding colonies over a broadgeographic area, including Lesbos, Tenedos,the western and southerncoasts of theTroad, and theregion betweenthe bays of Adramyttion and Smyrna(Fig. 1). In otherwords, mainlandGreece has repeatedly been viewed as theagent responsible for 1. TroyIV, pp. 147-148,248-249; appendixgradually developed into a Mountjoy,Holt Parker,Gabe Pizzorno, Berard1959; Cook 1962,pp. 25-29; magisterialstudy that is includedhere Allison Sterrett,John Wallrodt, Mal- 1973,pp. 360-363;Vanschoonwinkel as a companionarticle (Parker 2008). colm Wiener, and the anonymous 1991,pp. 405-421; Tenger 1999, It is our hope that readersinterested in reviewersfor Hesperia. Most of trie pp. 121-126;Boardman 1999, pp. 23- the Aiolian migrationwill read both articlewas writtenin the Burnham 33; Fisher2000, pp.
  • Monuments, Materiality, and Meaning in the Classical Archaeology of Anatolia

    Monuments, Materiality, and Meaning in the Classical Archaeology of Anatolia

    MONUMENTS, MATERIALITY, AND MEANING IN THE CLASSICAL ARCHAEOLOGY OF ANATOLIA by Daniel David Shoup A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Classical Art and Archaeology) in The University of Michigan 2008 Doctoral Committee: Professor Elaine K. Gazda, Co-Chair Professor John F. Cherry, Co-Chair, Brown University Professor Fatma Müge Göçek Professor Christopher John Ratté Professor Norman Yoffee Acknowledgments Athena may have sprung from Zeus’ brow alone, but dissertations never have a solitary birth: especially this one, which is largely made up of the voices of others. I have been fortunate to have the support of many friends, colleagues, and mentors, whose ideas and suggestions have fundamentally shaped this work. I would also like to thank the dozens of people who agreed to be interviewed, whose ideas and voices animate this text and the sites where they work. I offer this dissertation in hope that it contributes, in some small way, to a bright future for archaeology in Turkey. My committee members have been unstinting in their support of what has proved to be an unconventional project. John Cherry’s able teaching and broad perspective on archaeology formed the matrix in which the ideas for this dissertation grew; Elaine Gazda’s support, guidance, and advocacy of the project was indispensible to its completion. Norman Yoffee provided ideas and support from the first draft of a very different prospectus – including very necessary encouragement to go out on a limb. Chris Ratté has been a generous host at the site of Aphrodisias and helpful commentator during the writing process.
  • Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion 1996

    Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion 1996

    Kernos Revue internationale et pluridisciplinaire de religion grecque antique 12 | 1999 Varia Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion 1996 Angelos Chaniotis, Joannis Mylonopoulos and Eftychia Stavrianopoulou Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/kernos/724 DOI: 10.4000/kernos.724 ISSN: 2034-7871 Publisher Centre international d'étude de la religion grecque antique Printed version Date of publication: 1 January 1999 Number of pages: 207-292 ISSN: 0776-3824 Electronic reference Angelos Chaniotis, Joannis Mylonopoulos and Eftychia Stavrianopoulou, « Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion 1996 », Kernos [Online], 12 | 1999, Online since 13 April 2011, connection on 15 September 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/kernos/724 Kernos Kemos, 12 (1999), p. 207-292. Epigtoaphic Bulletin for Greek Religion 1996 (EBGR 1996) The ninth issue of the BEGR contains only part of the epigraphie harvest of 1996; unforeseen circumstances have prevented me and my collaborators from covering all the publications of 1996, but we hope to close the gaps next year. We have also made several additions to previous issues. In the past years the BEGR had often summarized publications which were not primarily of epigraphie nature, thus tending to expand into an unavoidably incomplete bibliography of Greek religion. From this issue on we return to the original scope of this bulletin, whieh is to provide information on new epigraphie finds, new interpretations of inscriptions, epigraphieal corpora, and studies based p;imarily on the epigraphie material. Only if we focus on these types of books and articles, will we be able to present the newpublications without delays and, hopefully, without too many omissions.
  • 4.1. Aristophanes and His Works (TT 1-5)

    4.1. Aristophanes and His Works (TT 1-5)

    4. Aristophanes of Boiotia SALVATORE TUFANO – Sapienza Università di Roma, Roma [email protected] 4.1. Aristophanes and His Works (TT 1-5) T 1 (= BNJ 379 T 1; FGrHist 379 T 1; cp. F 5 [Plut. De Hdt. mal. 31.864D]).683 Ἀριστοφάνους […] τοῦ Βοιωτοῦ “Aristophanes [...] of Boiotia”. T 2 (= BNJ 379 T 2b; EGM I T 1A; cp. F 6 [Plut. De Hdt. mal. 33.866F-867A]). ὡς Ἀριστοφάνης ἐκ τῶν κατ᾽ ἄρχοντας ὑποµνηµάτων ἱστόρησε “As Aristophanes retold, from the public records organized through the yearly archons” (tr. S. Tufano) T 3 (= BNJ 379 T 2a; FGrHist 379 T 2; cp. F 2 [Steph. Byz. α 330, s.v. ἀντικονδυλεῖς]). Ἀριστοφάνης ὁ τοὺς Θηβαίους ὥρους γεγραφώς “Aristophanes, author of Theban Annals”. 683 Since these witnesses actually belong to the fragments, I comment on the textual problems in the commentary on the single fragments. Salvatore Tufano. Boiotia from Within. Teiresias Supplements Online, Volume 2. 2019. © Salvatore Tufano 2019. License Agreement: CC-BY-NC (permission to use, distribute, and reproduce in any medium, provided the original work is properly attributed and not used for commercial purposes). Tufano, Boiotia from Within – 4. Aristophanes T 4 (= EGM I F 1A; cp. F 1 [POxy. 2463, ll. 14-16]). Ἀριστοφάνης δ’[ἐν| τῆι α΄ {πρώτῃ} τῶν Βοι[ωτι-| κῶν πρώτῃ del. Fowler “Aristophanes, in the first book of his Boiotian Histories”. T 5 (= EGM I F 2; cp. F 3 [Suda ο 275, s.v. Ὁµολώϊος (= Phot. Lex. (g, z) ο 298 (III 82 Theodoridis)]). Ἀριστοφάνης ἐν β’ Θηβαϊκῶν ὁ Phot. ὡς Suda Ἀριστόδηµος Reines “Aristophanes, in the second book of his Theban Histories”.
  • © in This Web Service Cambridge University

    © in This Web Service Cambridge University

    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-76904-4 - Art in the Era of Alexander the Great: Paradigms of Manhood and their Cultural Traditions Ada Cohen Index More information INDEX Abdalonymus, 120, 122–123, 320n6. Aeschylus Alexander Romance, 14, 312n185 See also Alexander Agamemnon, 116 Alexander Sarcophagus, figs. 52–56 Sarcophagus Oresteia,4 analogy and program on, abduction, 51–55, 162, 301 Persians, 170, 172 119–129 abductor dressed as warrior, 175 Seven against Thebes, 181 description of, 119–120 death and, 9–10 Aesop, 4 ideology of, 123, 140 of male by female, 323n42 Agamemnon, 44, 52, 113, 116, 150, parallels to, 126–127 as metaphor for marriage, 207, 181 style and composition of, 120–123 216–217, 223, 229–230, 233, Agamemnon (Aeschylus), 116 Alexander the Great 332nn163–164. See also Agatharchus, 247, 336n43 Amazon connection, 60–61, 167 individual abductions; rape Agios Athanasios, tomb, 5, 28, 244, education of, 131 absolutism, link with rape, 301 262 gaze and, 40 absorption and theatrically, 38–39 Agora of Athens, relief bowls with hunt at Bazaira, 76, 263–264, Abu Ghraib prison, 173 abduction of Persephone, 210, 281–282 Abukir medallions, 23 figs. 98, 99 as lion, 114, 116 Acanthus, animal attacks on coins hunting scene, 263–264, fig. 119 as rider in lion vignette in Tomb II, from, 96, 108, 318n135 Agrigento, red-figure calyx krater, Vergina, 262–264 Achaean, 113–114 Coghill Painter, 219–220 Scythians and, 92 Achaemenid cylinder seal, 84, fig. 29 Agrigento Painter, Attic red-figure sexual restraint of, 166–168, 182, Achaemenid motif, in Attic art, 105 dinos, 274, fig.