25 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

New gods for a new world: observations on an epigraphic interplay between Greeks and Romans (part 1)

Jenny Wallensten Swedish Institute at Athens; Athens, Greece; e-mail: jenny.wallensten@sia.gr

Abstract

In this paper is considered a certain type of close association between mortals and gods that developed during the late Hellenistic and Imperial era. The phenomenon can be traced in the epigraphic and in some numismatic sources, and features members of royal or Imperial houses honoured literally as New Gods, i.e.: Nero New (Neos) Apollo, Sabina New (Nea) Hera or Caracalla Neos Helios, etc. Why and when was an old god chosen for the creation and celebration of a new one? These titles are not just honorific and these combinations of mortal-gods are not random. They are a part of the constant, albeit not always direct, dialogue between rulers and subjects, between Roman emperors and Greek local communities. This particular conversation used traditional religion and civic display as its medium and was expressed through the language of mythology.

Keywords: Dedications; Ancient Greek Religion; Greek Epigraphy; Epithets, Neos Theos

1. Introduction

Greek polytheism was generally an inclusive system. The pantheon of a Greek city was not static, but moved along with the times and remained open to a potentially endless amount of new divine members. From the early Imperial era, among newly introduced deities were the Sebastos and the sebastoi: the reigning emperor and his predecessors, alongside other imperial family members. This cult could honour the emperor and his relatives as gods in their own right. At other times, members of the imperial clan were paired with pre-existing, traditional deities, in order to be honoured as Hera Sabina: (IEphesos 3411=IGRom IV 1595) or Hadrian Zeus Olympios (Isager & Pedersen 2012; IEphesos 3410; Milet I 7, 290). In this paper, I wish to explore aspects of a specific type of association between mortals and gods that developed during the Hellenistic period and continued to flourish in the Imperial era. The phenomenon can be traced in the epigraphic, and to some extent the numismatic, sources and features members of royal or Imperial houses honoured literally as New Gods, i.e., Titus New (Neos) Apollo, Sabina New (Nea) Hera or Caracalla Neos Helios, etc.1 The term Neos inserted between the human and the divine name distinguishes this group of other combinations human- god.2 The emperor is in fact given the name of the god, but because of the term Neos, he is not

1 It is possible that the “New Gods” eventually will be detectable in iconographic sources as well; many of the inscriptions, if not most, once belonged to statues. However, in the current state of research, the statue of a New God needs an inscription to be thus recognised. Furthermore, we cannot be sure that all dedicated statue bases once carried an image of the Neos or Nea divinity, see for example IGRom IV 1492, in which a woman dedicates a statue of Aphrodite to Sabina Nea Hera.

2 Some scholars do not make a distinction between, e.g., Livia Aphrodite and Livia New Aphrodite, but assume that they amount to the same thing and are interchangeable. See for example Nock 1928: 34, 37; Hahn 1994, 313, calls the 26 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017) straight-forwardly assimilated with the old deity.3 This complex phenomenon clearly merits an analysis on its own terms. The Neoi have indeed been noted and commented upon before, most importantly by A.D. Nock in his 1928 paper “Notes on Ruler Cult I-IV”. Nock, focusing on the Hellenistic period, believed that the Neos-title was an equivalent of the divine title used to render homage to the mortal thus designated, celebrating the mortal’s achievements within the activity sphere of the god in question (Nock 1928: 144, 148, 149, 151). He pointed out that the line between comparison and identification was vague, but argued that only in some very specific cases was a Neos-designated ruler considered as an incarnation of the named god (Nock 1928: 31, 147-148, 152). In this article I will try to further nuance this discussion through an examination of the Neoi Theoi visible in the epigraphic sources. I will briefly comment on the appearance and spread of the New Gods. The emphasis of this paper however lies on an interpretation of the function of the Neos-titulature during the Imperial era until the 3rd century AD.4 Why was an old god chosen for celebration and creation of a new one? What were the functions of these New Gods? I will firstly argue that these titles are not purely honorific and secondly, that the combinations mortal-gods are not random. Rather, they are part of a constant dialogue between ruler and subjects, between Roman emperors and Greek local communities. This particular conversation used traditional religion and civic display as its medium and was expressed through the common language of panhellenic mythology.

2. New gods: the epigraphic dossier

This study is based on a dossier consisting of 132 identified “New God inscriptions”.5 These I define as epigraphic documents featuring the combination of the name of a mortal in combination with the name of a deity, or, in some cases, a mythological or historical character, qualified by the word Neos or Nea.6 The inscriptions have been identified over an extensive geographical area, and

Neoi a Sonderform of the identification of an empress with a god. It should however be noted, but in all but a few cases, the human name comes first, followed by Neos/Nea and the name of the god (in at least 111 cases of the 132 inscriptions studied for this paper, 86 cases of which are imperial Neos divinities).

3 For a discussion on association and assimilation, see Wallensten 2014. Assimiliations as different from Neoi gods seems to be implied by Robert 1980: 400 n. 21.

4 As noted, Nock’s focus lies with the Hellenistic Neos gods. I have not included later examples of an Emperor celebrated as another Emperor. Roueché 1989: 98ff, no 61 discusses these examples, first attested in 451 AD, when Marcian is called New Constantine.

5 There are also some occurrences of Neoi in the numismatic sources. For this article, I have chosen not to include and examine them in detail; I will however occasionally make mention of such examples in the footnotes. This evidence certainly merits a study of its own, as do the literary sources where Neoi occasionally occur, although mostly in text not contemporary with the Neos honorand and the actual use of the title, which is the focus of this article. A future article will fully treat the literary dossier.

6 It should be noted that in some cases, the honorand receives two New God titles in the same inscription, as for example Julius Nikanor New Homer and New Themistokles (SEG 26 166; IG II2 1069; IG II2 3786; IG II2 3787; IG II2 3788; IG II2 3789) and possibly Drusilla as New Hera and New Aphrodite (Asklepieion, 255). I have tried to identify as many New Gods inscriptions as possible: if the survey has missed some relevant inscriptions, the treated material is still representative. I have not been able to study all stones myself; for this study I have accepted published restoration. This is due to the large material, but also because of the fact that many inscriptions were published a long time ago and has since gone missing or are in a worse state than when first discovered. A complete corpus of the Neoi will be prepared 27 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017) chronologically their dates span a period covered by the Hellenistic and the Imperial eras, into the third century AD.7 New Gods appear mainly in dedications and in honorific inscriptions on statue bases, but can also be found in other kinds of documents, such as honorary decrees and letters. They can furthermore be divided roughly into two groups; one containing inscriptions referring to members of the ruling Imperial family (Group 1, 98 inscriptions), and one referring to other more ordinary mortals (Group 2, 31 inscriptions).8

3. Chronological and geographical patterns

3.1. New gods of the Hellenistic period

It is possible that Alexander was called Neos Sesogchosis and Neos Dareios; this information is given by Pseudo-Kallisthenes (Book I, 34.2; Book II, 22.9. ed. Kroll).9 Our earliest evidence of the New God title in the epigraphic sources is however later and stem from the Ptolemaic royal house.10

by a scholarly team led by Stéphanie Wyler (Université de Paris Diderot, AnHiMA) and Anne-Françoise Jaccottet (Université de Genève).

7 The first securely attested instance of a New God title in the epigraphic sources is Ptolemaios XII New Dionysos, thus the last decennia of the first century BC. A priest of Arsinoë New Aphrodite has been identified in a third century BC inscription, however, the title is a restoration without comparanda. The latest examples I have included date to the third century AD.

8 I have counted Antinoos among imperial honorands. The three “missing” inscriptions are those where no member of the imperial house has been identified or even suggested.

9 Moreover, Plutarch says that comedy referred to Aspasia as a New Omphale, Deianeira and Hera (Plutarch, Pericles 24.6; It is not entirely clear the next that Nea belongs with Deianeira and Hera as well as Omphale, I thank an anonymous referee for this reference). Alexander the Great was certainly painted with the attributes of Zeus (see for example Pollitt 1986; Stewart 1993 191ff.) and perhaps other gods, but again, a discussion of this kind of iconographic association falls outside of the scope of this paper.

10 The restoration of a priest of Arsinoë Thea Nea Aphrodite should be rejected. Although there is no doubt that Arsinoë II frequently was associated and assimilated with Aphrodite, the specific title is here a restoration and mention of an Arsinoë Nea Aphrodite has otherwise not been identified in other epigraphic documents. For previous discussions, cf. most recently IPtol.Alex. 37; earlier Botti 1900: 571, no. 408 without the text, referring to a priest of Arsinoé- Aphrodite; Strack 1903: 538, no. 3; Breccia 1911 & 1976: 7, no. 12. Breccia dates the inscription 247–221 BC. Strack and Breccia present the reconstruction Arsinoe Thea Nea Aphrodite, based on the Poseidippos epigram quoted by Athenaeus, 7.318d. This passage does indeed connect Arsinoe with Aphrodite/Kypris, but does not give the specific title Thea Nea Aphrodite.

Πτολε[μαῖον Πτολεμαίου καὶ]

Βερενίκη[ς θεῶν Εὐεργετῶν]

Σίμων Κα[λλικράτου Σάμιος]

ὁ ἱερεὺς Ἀρ[σινόης θεᾶς νέας]

Ἀφροδίτης στ[εφανοθεῖς τὸ δεύτερον?]. 28 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

Ptolemaios IV Philopator (reign 221-204) was closely associated to Dionysos and perhaps unofficially held the title Neos Dionysos (Hölbl 2001: 171; Nock 1928: 30-38; Perdrizet 1910: 230– 231). The first securely identified contemporary occurrence of a New God appears however later, in the first century BC. Ptolemaios XII bore the name of New Dionysos as an official title (Hölbl 2001: 289),11 the denomination has been identified mostly in Egypt, but also outside of his kingdom proper.12 The epigraphic sources also identify Marcus Antonius as New Dionysos, in correspondence with literary evidence, which tell of Antonius’ conscious play on links with this particular god (Plutarch Anthony. 60.3; Athenaeus 4.148c–d.).13 In the context of an Attic honorary document, games of Antonius Theos New Dionysos are mentioned (IG II2 1043.). For the following discussion, it is important to underline that these Hellenistic New God inscriptions appear to show us how the ruler in question wanted to be seen. The initiative behind the appellation New Dionysos seems to stem from Ptolemaios and Antonius themselves (Nock 1928: 148). According to Dio Cassius, Antonius called himself Neos Dionysos and demanded that others do the same (Dio Cassius. 48.39.2).14 Ptolemaios is thought to have taken the title after 69/68 BC (E. Bernand 1992: 62, no. 20; cf. Hölbl 2001: 223), whereupon it is used as an integrated and part of the royal titulature. The name Neos Dionysos appears for example in honorary documents where the king is not the actual honor and likewise, Ptolemaios is called New Dionysos in the context of dedications to other deities and honorary statues of honorands other than the king himself.15 The title was so closely associated with Ptolemaios that he was still presented with the title of New Dionysos after his reign and death (IDidyma 218II). In one case, the proper name of Ptolemaios is even missing from the New God formula (A. Bernand 1969: no. 52; OGIS I no. 186; Strack 1897: 270, no. 152).

For various aspects of the worship of Aphrodite Arsinoë/ Arsinoë, Aphrodite see for example Ehrenberg 1969: 174; Fraser 1972: 239-246; Gutzwiller 1992; Hölbl 2001: 103-104; Carney 2000, 2013: esp. 98-100, 101; Barbantani 2005; Caneva 2012; Caneva 2014; Caneva 2015.

11 Nock stated that Ptolemaios XIII was the only known official Neos Dionysos Nock 1928 34, referring to Bevan 1927 344, but the reference seems to be wrong. The earliest attested case is however Ptolemaios XII, and dated to 76 BC (Hölbl 2001: appendix, year 76).

12 Hölbl 2001 223. The Egyptian translation understands Neos Dionysos as Young Osiris, Hölbl 2001 283. Outside Egypt: Didyma: IDidyma 218 GIBM 921a; IDidyma 394 Wiegand 1911: 50–51 believes this king to be Ptolemaios XIV. Inscriptions mentioning Ptolemaios Neos Dionysos: SEG 39 1705 & 1710; E. Bernand 1975, nos. 11 E. Bernand 1992, no. 20, 12 & 34; A. Bernand 1969, nos. 52, 53, 55; OGIS no. 741 =SB 5. 8933; A. Bernard 1970, 416, no.5 & 752-753, nos. 17–18.

13 Antonius furthermore played on his family ties to Herakles, although no epigraphical source known to me mentions Antonius as a New Herakles. For Antonius’ imitation of Dionysos, see for example Cerfaux & Tondriau 1957, 297–306 and Caneva 2016. Plut. Ant. 54 also tells that Kleopatra was called or took the name, LSJ s.v. Χρηματίζω III gives both translations Nea Isis. To the best of my knowledge, this has however not left any traces in the epigraphic sources.

14 See also Ath. 4. 148c-d; Sen. Suas. I.6-7; Hölbl 2001 291. Dio also reports that the Athenians responded to Antonius’ demands by betrothing him to Athena, whereupon Antonius asked for a substantial dowry.

15 IDidyma 218 & 394; A. Bernand 1970, 753, no. 18 a statue of the king’s wetnurse; E. Bernand 1992, no. 20; OGIS II no. 741 Dittenberger believed the New Dionysos to be Ptolemaios XIII. 29 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

We can furthermore note that the Hellenistic epigraphic material concerning New Gods relates to the New Deities only indirectly. No dedications to a New Dionysos have been identified, and a single inscription mentions a statue of Ptolemaios Neos Dionysos.16

3.2. Julio-Claudian Neoi and a change of initiative

The use of a New God title by subjects in various parts of the Roman empire seems to have become an established phenomenon during the first decennia of the Imperial period, when members of the Julio-Claudian family repeatedly were celebrated as New Deities. The epigraphic sources have preserved evidence of no less than 36 inscriptions referring to members of the Julio-Claudian family celebrated as New Deities (22 instances of New Goddesses and 16 of New Gods).17 In the extant material, the Imperial women thus dominate the Julio-Claudian New Gods, mainly due to Livia’s and Drusilla’s popularity as New Goddesses. Drusilla has especially strong (although not exclusive) ties to one deity, Aphrodite. She is honoured as Nea Aphrodite no less than 7 times.18 She was however not exclusively tied to this particular goddess; she was also called Nea Charis in the Samian Heraion, Nea Pythia in Delphi and possibly Nea Nikephoros in Pergamon, although Livilla might be a stronger candidate for the Julia of the three Pergamene inscriptions.19 In contrast, Livia does not seem to have been closely connected to one specific deity. She was known as Nea

16 Thus, out of eleven inscriptions testifying to Ptolemaios or Marcus Antonius as New Dionysos, only one actually focuses on the New Deity the wording on the base of the statue of Ptolemaios Neos Dionysos. Perhaps this lack of evidence for cult of specifically New Gods also speaks against the restoration of a priesthood of Arsinoë Nea Aphrodite? It should furthermore be noted that Arsinoë was connected to several goddesses, not exclusively to one as in the case of Ptolemaios and Antonius. Among the instigators of identified inscriptions including the mention of a New God, private citizens as well as magistrates can be found: Private: IDidyma 218 ?; SEG 39 1710= A. Bernard 1970:753 no. 18; A. Bernand 1969: no. 55; OGIS no. 741. Public: IDidyma 394; A. Bernand 1969: no. 52 adoration act and possibly E. Bernand 1992: no. 20 The text does not reveal the identity of the dedicators, the editor however believe that they probably were the local authorities acting in the name of the king; IG II 1043. SEG 39 1710, from “those from the polis” ὁι ἀπὸ τῆς πόλεως, the citizens ? is perhaps a fleeting case.

17 The geographical spread thereby also widens, with relevant documents identified from Asia Minor, Mainland Greece and the Aegean islands. Athens dominates the group through nine New God inscriptions, but substantial groups also stem from the region of Mysia and Troas seven inscriptions and the Aegean islands six, including Cyprus, eight. The represented islands are all located close to the coast of Asia Minor: Lesbos, Samos, Chios and Kos.. Examples have also been found in Ionia three, Egypt one, Central and north-western Greece two, Bithynia one, Caria one Peloponnese one, Phrygia one and Pisidia two. I thank an anonymous reviewer who points to the interesting fact that only one example has been identified in Egypt, where the first Neoi Theoi appear, and suggests that this may be an indication of a provincialisation of Egypt. The Epidaurian inscription Asklepieion 255 includes two Nea titles, and the Kyzikene IGRom IV 145 makes mention both of a Neos Helios and of a Nea Aphrodite, thus in total 38 Neoi in 36 inscriptions.

18 Drusilla Nea Aphrodite is known from various places in the Greek world: Athens, SEG 34 180, Epidauros, Asklepieion 255, Magnesia on the Meander, IMagnesia 156, Kos, NSER 467, Mytilene, IG XII.2 172, Kyzikos, IMT Kyz Kapu Dag 1439 and Miletos, Wiegand 1908: 27, 1 (Milet-bericht 111).

19 Nea Charis statue: IG XII.6 1 411 = IGRom IV 1721=Herrmann 1960: 118, 18a; Nea Nikephoros: IPergamon 403[1] IGRom IV 328, 497 IGRom IV 464, 498 IGRom IV 476. Nea Pythia: Pomtow 1921: 167–168, no. 153 Nea Thea; SEG 1 157; Jannoray 1936 (this text and comments on previous restorations), 382; Schörner 2003: Kat 1019. FdDelphes II: La terrasse du Temple, 269ff., FdDelphes III.4 257 and Jourdan-Ruwe 1995: 48 abb. 18 also on the impressive setting for the inscription. The difference between Neos/Nea + divine name and Neos/Nea+divine epithet is further disussed below. 30 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

Aphrodite, Nea Hera, Nea Demeter as well as Nea Isis and among these goddesses no one seems specifically singled out for honouring Livia.20 Other Julio-Claudian New Goddesses are known from single inscriptions. Julia, the daughter of Augustus was presented with the surname Nea Aphrodite, whereas Agrippina, wife of Claudius, was honoured as Nea Boulaia.21 Among the male Julio-Claudian Neoi, there are three appearances of New Ares (Gaius and Lucius Caesar).22 The twin sons of Drusus Minor were celebrated as New Dioskouroi in Ephesos.23 Nero was called New Helios, both on the Greek mainland and in Asia Minor and Gaius received the same denomination in Kyzikos and Chios.24 Claudius was surnamed Neos Zeus in Akmonia in Phrygia (MAMA 6 250). Apollo is however the most common choice for the creation of male New Gods during this period. Nero is called Neos Apollo five times in the Attic epigraphic sources.25 A sixth Athenian inscription restored as mentioning a New Apollo has been interpreted as involving either Augustus or Tiberius.26 The honorand is not mentioned by name: most likely the statue would have been key to the identification of the emperor.27

20 Nea Aphrodite: Mitford 1947: 227: no 11; SEG 54 1557 Cyprus, Palaipaphos; Nea Hera: IAssos, 43, no. 19 Assos; IPergamon no 385= IGRom IV 319 Pergamon. Nea Demeter: ILampsakos 11 Lampsakos; PHI Aphrodisias no 306=Spaeth 1996: 170, no. 1.3.; see also SEG 30 1244 Aphrodisias. Nea Isis: IGRom I.1150 Egypt, Athribis. Was Livia, as the wife of the emperor perhaps most often combined with the main deity of a city? It should be noted that the inscription is a dedication to the Great Goddess Thriphis.

21 Julia, in Plakados, Lesbos: IG XII.2 482 this text= IGRom IV 114. Agrippina, in Mytilene, Lesbos: IG XII.2 211. The numismatic material, not treated in this study, also name a second wife of Claudius, Messalina, as Nea Hera in Nikaia, Bithynia: Wroth 1889: 154. Two ears of corn before the bust of Messalina are pictured on the obverse.

22 Gaius: IG II2 3250 =SEG 21 702; Bodnar 1960, 164-165 Athens; IMylasa 135 Mylasa. Note that in the Mylasa inscription, both Gaius and Lucius are mentioned, but only Gaius receives a Neos title. Drusus: IG II2 3257 =Kyparisses 1927–1928, Parartema 51, no. 160 Athens.

23 IEphesos 4337. Again, the specificity of the Neos-title stands clear; two lines above the priest of the Neoi Dioskouroi, is mentioned the priestess of Sebaste Demeter Karpophoros. The IEphesos editors identifies her as Livia Augusta, which means that not all members of the Imperial house mentioned in one inscription by default gets a Neos-title.

24 Nero: IG VII.1 2713 Akraiphiai, Boiotia; SEG 57 1408; Ballance 1959: 128, 3; Kovács 2007: 99–107 (Prostanna, Pisidia); IGRom III 345 (Sagalassos, Pisidia). Gaius: IGRom IV 145 Kyzikos. IGRom IV 945 side b PHI Ionia, Chios 20; see also Fraser 1978: 362. Athenaeus 4.148d mentions that Caligula was called Neos Dionysos, and Philo Legatio ad Gaium 90.1 perhaps alludes to this, but I have found no traces of this in the epigraphic sources. I thank Stéphanie Wyler for bringing these references to my attention. It is perhaps noteworthy that Caligula was related to Marcus Antonius, he was the grandchild of Antonius’ daughter Antonia Minor see further Cerfaux & Tondriau 1957: 343ff.

25 SEG 32 252, two inscriptions; SEG 44 165; IG II2 3278; Peek 1942: 45, no. 60 Athens. A possible context for these inscriptions, on altars and statue bases is Nero’s tour of Greece.

26 Graindor 1927b: 255, no. 19; IG II2 3262; IG II2 4725; Peppa-Delmouzou 1979: 125-132 ph; SEG 29 167. The inscription is now in the Epigraphical Museum of Athens: EM 4561, 2844, 4929 & 3130.

27 Peppa-Delmouzou believes the inscription to have been carved on a base for a statue of Augustus as Apollon. The man who erected the statue states that he had been agonothetes and she suggests that the original setting of the statue was a gymnasion Peppa-Delmouzou 1979: 128, 131. Graindor suggests Tiberius, since he believes the writing to be post-Augustan. Peppa-Delmouzou believes that the letters indicate a date either in the first century BC or in the first 31 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

The character of the Julio-Claudian New God inscriptions is varied. In contrast to the preceding Hellenistic centuries, dedications to the New Gods have been identified in the material from this period.28 Several inscriptions come from statue bases carrying sculptures portraying Neoi and priesthoods were attached to the cult of Livia Nea Demeter, Drusilla Nea Aphrodite, Livilla/Drusilla Nea Nikephoros and the Neoi Dioskouroi.29 Importantly, the origin of the Julio- Claudian titles appears to have originated among the Greek subjects, who offered the names of different gods in different places and in different circumstances. There is thus a change of initiative visible in the epigraphic sources. The Julio-Claudian titles were not ordered on the imperial level and were never part of an official titulature.30 Nero Neos Apollo is perhaps a borderline case; he certainly wanted to excel in Apolline arts; did he demand this appellation (Suetonius Nero 20.1; Shotter 2008: 46.)? It is conceivable that he officially wished to be called a New Apollo, however, without further evidence from our sources, it is just as likely that this title, like the others stems from an initiative from below, from the Greek subjects. Further nuances can perhaps be seen regarding the initiative behind the Julio-Claudian New God inscriptions. The agents behind the setting up of these texts are known in 23 instances out of the 35. Only three or four private initiators (a private person, a former signifier, a former agonothetes and a cult association) and four priests have as yet been identified, whereas at least 14 magistrates or public bodies are known to have presented the inscriptions.31

3.3. The Flavian Era

Only two New God inscriptions datable to this period have been identified. Titus is honoured as New Apollo on a statue base from the Thessalian city of Demetrias, on the initiative of the Magnetes (SEG 23 450). The wife of Domitian, Domitia, received the title Nea Hera by the demos

century AD, but through a combination of indications she gives the more precise dating 21/20 BC Peppa-Delmouzou 1979: 132.

28 For example, IG XII 2, 172, 482; IG II2 3278; NSER 467; Peek 1942: 45, no. 60.

29 For example, Asklepieion 255; IPergamon 497, 498; SEG 30 1244; IEphesos 4337.

30 I thank an anonymous reviewer for pointing out that this generally holds true for all cultic honours for the first emperors. Perhaps the titles were born in the context of acclamations? For Neos acclamations in a later, Christian context, see Roueché 1989: 98ff.

31 Public: NSER 467 Demos; IGRom IV 145 Demos; IMagnesia 156 Boule and Demos; SEG 30 1632 Boule and Demos?; IPergamon 385 Pergamenoi; IAssos 19 this inscription possibly shows both public and private initiative, Demos and the Romans merchants; ILampsakos 11 Gerousia; PHI Aphrodisias, no. 306 = Reinach 1906: no 35, Gerousia and Demos, perhaps also Boule. Reinach also proposes that the Julia in question could be Julia Domna; IGRom IV 1721 Demos; IPergamon no. 497 Demos & Boule & 498 Demos; FdDelphes III.4 257 Koinon of Amphiktyony members; IG II2 3250 Demos; IG II2 3257 Boule & Demos; IG XII, 2, no. 211 Demos?. In IGRom I 1150, no dedicator is mentioned, but the dating formula suggests a public character; Priests: Asklepieion, 255; Holleaux 1888: 514ff; SEG 54 1557. Private: SEG 29 167 former agonothetes; SEG 57 1408; IGRom III 345; IEphesos 4337 ? The Demetriastai . The concept of a “private” actor is sometimes fleeting. In this study, I regard as private an initiative recorded in the epigraphic dossier without mention of a public title, or with a title but after the term in office i.e., a title recorded by an aorist participle.

32 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017) of Stratonikeia (IStratonikeia 1008=SEG 31 945).32 The inscriptions present statues of these New Gods, erected by public bodies.

3.4. From Hadrian to Commodus

In the period spanning from the reign of Hadrian to that of Marcus Aurelius, the number of identified New God inscriptions rises. 33 examples have been identified for this study, involving nine honorands: six men and three women. The empresses Vibia Sabina and is called New Goddesses eight times, whereas Faustina Major and Faustina Minor each receives a Nea title once. There is thus no apparent correspondence to the strong female presence among the Julio-Claudian Neoi.33 Hadrian strongly dominates this group of inscriptions, appearing as a New God possibly as many as 16 times. He is usually paired with Dionysos, but was also called New Asklepios and New Helios.34 Hadrian was furthermore tied to Apollo via the epithet Pythios (IG VII 3491).35 His wife Sabina received the title Nea Hera and Nea Demeter, whereas Hadrian’s favourite Antinoos is represented as New Hermes.36 Together the trio thus accounts for 26 out of 33 inscriptions. The other Antonines designated Neoi include Antoninus Pius and Commodus as New Dionysos, Faustina Major New

32 It is noteworthy that the statue of Domitia was found in an exedra in the Hellenistic gymnasion of the city, a space that has been interpreted as the ”cult room” of the gymnasion, together with a statue of Autokrator Titus Flavius Vespasianus Kaisar Sebastos IStratonikeia 1007 and an image of the Demos IStratonikeia 1026.

33 Could this be related to the success of adoptive succession, as an anonymous colleague has suggested?

34 Neos Dionysos: IG II2 1348, 3323; SEG 15 530; SEG 47 222; MAMA 8 418c; ISardeis 13 & 14; IAnkara 155, 128 & 166, 130; IG XIV 2495. SEG 41 143 =IG II2 3966a concerns either Hadrian or Antinoos. Follet makes a case for Antinoos since the Neos Dionysos title is separated from the other titles of Hadrian (BE 1989: no 405). I believe that Hadrian should be understood as the New Dionysos. Antinoos is not known as New Dionysos from any other context, and the Neos-titles he receives appears to be of a lesser status than that of Hadrian and the Emperors, see below. Neos Helios: IErythrai 513; IAmastris 9 see also Kalinka 1933: 62–63; SEG 57 1702 (Kestros, Cilicia). Neos Asklepios: IPergamon 365 =IGRom IV 341. IErythrai 223 is dedicated to an anonymous Philantropos Daimon New Asklepios: ἀγαθῇ τ[ύχῃ·]|Δαίμονι φι|λανθρώπῳ|νέῳ Ἀσκλη|πιῷ ἐπιφανεῖ. The IErythrai editor suggests that this may refer to Hadrian, in the likeness of IPergamon 365. He also gives the serpent god Glykon as a possibility. Keil 1910 argues for a local god understood as New Asklepios.

35 Pythios in the city of Megara. It is to be noted that the word Neos here clearly refers to the cult epithet of Apollo Pythios, one of the main deities of Megara, and not of the Apollo specifically of Pytho/Delphi. Apollo Pythios and Demeter were the main deities of Megara: Robu 2007 believes this is the reason behind the choice of Neos-title for the Imperial couple. Antinoos was honoured as Neos Pythios on a Tarsian coin, see below, n. 36.

36 Sabina Nea Hera: Isager & Pedersen 2012 (Halikarnassos); TAM II 2, 412=Sahin 2008, 605 n. 9b, Sahin 2008, 605 n. 9c (Patara); TAM II 560 (Tlos); IG XII, suppl 440 (Thasos). Sabina Nea Demeter: IG VII 73 ,IG VII 74 (Megara). Perhaps Sabina should be connected to an Amphipolis inscription, Collart 1931: 181 nr 9: νέ[α] |Ἥρα. With a restoration from Perinthos-Herakleia, Sayar introduces a Sabina Neotera Demeter: IPerinthos-Herakleia 37 =Dumont– Homolle 1892: 379, 69 + 69'= IGRom I 785. Antinoos New Hermes: IG XIV 978a =IGUR I, 143. Antinoos can be identified on Tarsian coins as Neos Iakchos and Neos Pythios: Meyer 1991: 150; Head 19112: 733. I have also counted SEG 51 335= Goette 2001: 89, which however might be the same as IG VII 73. Goette believes this inscriptions, on an architrave block, to be previously unpublished, but IG VII 73, with the exact words and layout as SEG 51 553, was according to the IG editors at some point taken to Aigina. This stone is however described as a base; further study is necessary. 33 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

Demeter (Deo), Faustina Minor Nea Hera and probably Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus jointly celebrated as New Dioskouroi.37 Lucius Verus furthermore received the title Neos Dionysos in Lydia and Neos Erythros in the Ionian city of Erythrai; a name recalling the founder of the polis (TAM V.1 542; IErythrai II, 224).38 Commodus Neos Dionysos appears in an Ephesian inscription (IEphesos 293). A second inscription from this city and datable to the reign of Commodus mentions a priest of Neos Dionysos without mention of a human element; Merkelbach however identifies the Neos Dionysos as Commodus (IEphesos 1600; Merkelbach 1979b: 156 n. 12). Altogether Dionysos is thus the most common old deity component of a New God during this period. The Antonine inscriptions stem from an extensive geographic area. It includes, apart from the previously represented areas, also Gaul (Nemausus, modern Nîmes), Rome and possibly Macedonia.39 The majority of the inscriptions in this group however stem from the Greek or hellenized cites of Asia Minor,40 however examples of Athenian, Megarian and Spartan New God documents also date to this period.41 The popularity of Dionysos during this period is closely connected to the visibility of a new group of worshipers: technitai, theatre associations that honour both the “old” Dionysos and the Neos Dionysos. Among the other identifiable individuals behind the creation of the inscriptions, only one private person is to be found: a man and a woman dedicating a statue of Aphrodite to Hadrian and Nea Hera Sabina (along with the Tateikometon katoikia, TAM II 560). Six inscriptions were put up on the initiative of public officials or organizations.42 Possibly an increase in dedications to the Neoi is detectible. At least 10 examples have been identified among the inscriptions of the period. 13 texts are honorary and in most cases probably belonged to sculpture bases of New God images,

37 Antoninus Pius: IG II2 1350. Commodus: IEphesos 293. Faustina Major: IG XIV 1389=SEG 29 999=IGUR III 1155, see also Peek 1979, 76–84. Faustina Minor: SEG 39 1497. Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus: IG V.1 447. Fuhrer 2011: 388 refers to IG XIV 2496 =IGRom I 18 as mentioning a Trajan Neos Dionysos, however, this Neos god is however not in the preserved text. See also Cerfaux-Tondriau 1957: 359.

38 The editors understands this unnamed Neos Erythros of IErythrai II, 224 as Lucius Verus. The inscription is an epigram from the sanctuary of the Sibyll.

39 Amphipolis: Collart 1931, 181 nr 9. Nîmes: IG XIV 2495. Rome: IG XIV 1389=IGUR III 1155; IGUR I 143=IG XIV 978a.

40 Ankyra: IAnkyra 155, 128 & 166, 130; Amastris: IAmastris 9; Aphrodisias, MAMA 8, no. 418c; Ephesos: IEphesos 293 & 1600; Erythrai: IErythrai 223; Halikarnassos: Isager & Pedersen 2012; Hierapolis-Kastaba: SEG 39 1497; Kestros: SEG 57 1702; Klazomenai: IErythrai 513; Maionia Lydia: TAM V.1, 542; Patara, TAM II 2, 412=Sahin 2008: 605 n. 9b; Sahin 2008: 605 n. 9c; Pergamon, IPergamon II 365; ISardeis 13 & 14; Tlos, TAM II 560. One inscription comes from Chios close to the coastline of Asia Minor and should perhaps be associated to the same area, Chios, SEG 15 530. 41 Attica: IG II2 1348, 1350, 3323; SEG 41 143 & 47 222; Megaris: IG VII 73, 74, 3491; Sparta: IG V.1 447

42 Technitai: IG II2 1348, 1350 & 3323; SEG 47 222; ISardeis 13 & 14; MAMA 8, no. 418c; IAnkara 155, 128 & 166, 130; IG XIV 978a & 2495, fr c. Public bodies: SEG 41 143 (Polis of Philadelphia in Lydia; SEG 15 530 (Demos; IG VII 3491 (Boule (? and Demos; IG VII, 73 & 74 (tribes of Megara. Private individual: IGRom IV 1492. Unknown: IErythrai 223; IPergamon 365; IErythrai 513; IGRom I 785 (perhaps private; SEG 29 999; IG XII suppl. 440; IGRom III 663; IG V, 1 447.

34 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017) while the title New Dionysos is featured in 11 documents related to technitai and their theatrical synodoi.43

The article will be continued in the following volume.

List of abbreviations

Asklepieion Peek W. 1969. Inschriften aus dem Asklepieion von Epidauros (Abhandlungen der Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Philologisch – Historische Klasse, Band 60, Heft 2). Akademie-Verlag, Berlin

FdDelphes II Bousquet J. 1952. Le Trésor de Cyrène (Fouilles de Delphes II. Topographie et Architecture). De Boccard, Paris

FdDelphes III.4 Colin G. et al. 1930–1976. Inscriptions de la terrasse du temple et la région nord du sanctuaire (Fouilles de Delphes, III. Épigraphie). De Boccard, Paris

IAmastris Marek Ch. 1993. Stadt, Ära und Territorium in Pontus – Bithynia und Nord Galatia (Istanbuler Forschungen 39). E. Wasmuth, Tübingen; pp.: 157–187, Anhang 5

IAnkara Bosch E. 1967. Quellen zur Geschichte der Stadt Ankara im Altertum (Türk Tarih Kurumu Yayinlarindan Ser. 7, no. 46). Türk Tarih Kurumu Basımevi, Ankara

IAssos Merkelbach R. 1976. Die Inschriften von Assos (Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien 4). R. Habelt, Bonn

IDidyma Rehm A. 1958. Didyma II. Die Inschriften. Gebr. Mann, Berlin

IEphesos Wankel H. et al. 1979–1984. Die Inschriften von Ephesos (Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien 11,1 – 17,4). R. Habelt, Bonn

IErythrai Engelmann H and Merkelbach, R. 1972–1973. Die Inschriften von Erythrai und Klazomenai (Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien 1 – 2), R. Habelt. Bonn

IG II2 Kirchner J. 1913-1940. Inscriptiones Graecae II et III: Inscriptiones Atticae Euclidis anno posteriores, 2nd edition., Parts I-III. Academiae Litterarum Regiae Borussicae, Berlin

IGRom Cagnat R. et al. 1911–1927 Inscriptiones graecae ad res romanas pertinentes. Ares, Chicago.

43 Dedications: IG II2 3323; ISardeis 14; IErythrai 223 & 513; IPergamon 365; TAM II 412 & 560; Sahin 2008, 605, n 9; IG V 1 447; IG XII, suppl 440. Honorary: IG VII 73, 74 & 3491; IGUR I 143; IAmastris 9; IEphesos 293; Isager & Pedersen 2012; SEG 15 530; SEG 39 1497; SEG 41 143; SEG 47 222; SEG 57 1702; TAM V.1 542. Technitai: see above n. 42. 35 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

ILampsakos Frisch P. 1978. Die Inschriften von Lampsakos (Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien 6), R. Habelt, Bonn

IMT Kyz Kapu Dag Barth M. and Stauber J. 1996. Inschriften Mysia & Troas (IMTLeopold Wenger Institut. Universität München. Version of 25.8.1993 (Ibycus), Packard Humanities Institute CD #7, 1996, Mysia, Kyzikene, Kapu Dağ, nos. 1401 – 1856)

IMylasa Blümel W. 1987–1988. Die Inschriften von Mylasa (Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien 34 – 35). R. Habelt, Bonn

IPergamon Fränkel M. 1890–1895. Die Inschriften von Pergamon (Altertümer von Pergamon 8,1 – 2. Spemann, Berlin

IPerinthos – Herakleia Sayar M. H. 1998 Perinthos – Herakleia (Marmara Ereğlisi) und Umgebung. Geschichte, Testimonien, griechische und lateinische Inschriften (Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch – historische Klasse. Denkschriften 269). Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna

IPtol.Alex. Bernand E. 2001. Inscriptions grecques d’Alexandrie Ptolemaïque. Institut français d'archéologie orientale, Cairo

ISardeis Buckler W.H. and Robinson D.M. 1932. Sardis, VII. Greek and Latin Inscriptions, Part I. Brill, Leiden

IStratonikeia Şahin Ç. 1981. Die Inschriften von Stratonikeia. Vol. I, Panamara (Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien 21). R. Habelt, Bonn

MAMA 6 Buckler W.H. and Calder W.M. 1939. Monuments and Documents from Phrygia and Caria (Monumenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua 6). Manchester University Press, Manchester

MAMA 8 Calder W.M and Ross Cormack J.M. 1962. Monuments from Lycaonia, the Pisido – Phrygian Borderland, Aphrodisias (Monumenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua 8). Manchester University Press, Manchester

Milet I 7 Knackfuss H. 1924. Der Südmarkt und die benachbarten Bauanlagen, mit epigraphischem Beitrag von Albert Rehm (Milet I.7). Schoetz und Parrhysius, Berlin

NSER Maiuri A. 1925. Nuova silloge epigrafica di Rodi e Cos. F. Le Monnier, Florence

OGIS Dittenberger W. 1903–1905. Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae. S. Hirzel, Leipzig

PHI Aphrodisias McCabe D.F. 1996. Aphrodisias Inscriptions. Texts and List (The Princeton Project on the Inscriptions of Anatolia, The Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton 1991, Packard Humanities Institute CD #7), Princeton

36 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

PHI Chios McCabe D.F. 1986. Chios Inscriptions. Texts and List. (The Princeton Project on the Inscriptions of Anatolia), The Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton,. Packard Humanities Institute CD #6) Princeton

PHI Ephesos McCabe D.F. 1991. Ephesos Inscriptions. Texts and List (The Princeton Project on the Inscriptions of Anatolia, The Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, Packard Humanities Institute CD #6,), Princeton

SEG Hondius J. et al. 1924- Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum. A.W. Sijthoff, J.C. Gieben, Brill, Amsterdam, Leiden.

TAM II Kalinka E. 1920–1944. Tituli Asiae Minoris, II. Tituli Lyciae linguis Graeca et Latina conscripti. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna

TAM V.1 Herrmann P. 1981. Tituli Asiae Minoris, V. Tituli Lydiae, linguis Graeca et Latina conscripti. Vol. 1, nos. 1 – 825, Regio septentrionalis, ad orientem vergens. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vienna

References

Barbantini S. 2005. Goddess of Love and Mistress of the Sea. Notes on a Hellenistic Hymn to Arsinoë – Aphrodite, Ancient Society, 35; pp.: 135 – 165

Bean G.E. 1965. The Inscriptions of Side. Türk Tarih Kurumu Basimeri, Ankara

Bernand A. 1969. Les inscriptions grecques de Philae I, Epoque ptolemaïque. Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris

Bernand A. 1970. Le Delta égyptien d’après les texts grecs, I. Université de Paris, Cairo

Bernand E. 1975. Recueil des inscriptions grecques du Fayoum vol I. Brill, Leiden

Bernand E. 1992. Inscriptions grecques d'Egypte et de Nubie au Musée du Louvre. Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris

Bevan E. 1927. The House of Ptolemy. A History of Egypt under the Ptolemaic Dynasty. Methuen Publishing, London

Bodnar E. W. 1960. Cyriacus of Ancona and Athens (Latomus suppl. 43). Latomus, Bruxelles

Botti G. 1900. Catalogue des monuments exposés au musée gréco-romain d’Alexandrie. Imprimerie Général A. Mourès et cie, Alexandria

Breccia E. 1911. Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée d’Alexandrie, nos. 1 – 568. Iscrizioni greche e latine. Institut français d'archéologie orientale, Cairo

37 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

Breccia E. 19762. Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée d’Alexandrie, nos. 1 - 568. Iscrizioni greche e latine. Otto Zeller, Osnabrück

Caneva S. 2012. Queens and Ruler cults in Early Hellenism: Observations on Festivals, and on the Administration and Ideological Meaning of Cults, Kernos, 25; pp.: 75 – 101

Caneva S. 2014. Ruler Cults in Practice: Sacrifices and Libations for Arsinoe Philadelphos, from Alexandria and Beyond, in Gnoli T. and Muccioli, F. (eds.), Divinizzazione, culto del sovrano e apoteosi. Tra Antichità e Medioevo. Bononia University Press, Bologna; pp.: 85 – 116

Caneva S. 2015. Costruire una dea. Arsinoe II attraverso le sue Denominazioni divine, Athenaeum 103.1; pp.: 95 – 122

Caneva S. 2016. Configurations publiques de Dionysos dans le cadre de l’hellénisation de Rome, in Bonnet C., Pirenne-Delforge, V. and Pironti, G. (eds), Dieux des Grecs, Dieux des Romains. Panthéons en dialogue à travers l’histoire et l’historiographie, Rome, 99 – 116

Carney E. 2000. The Initiation of Cult for Royal Macedonian Women, Classical Philology, 95.1; pp.: 21 – 43

Cerfaux L., Tondriau J. 1957. Un concurrent du christianisme. Le culte des Souverains dans la civilisation gréco-romaine. Desclée, Tournai

Dumont A., Homolle Th. 1892. Inscriptions et monuments figurés de la Thrace in Th. Homolle (ed.), Mélanges d'archéologie et d'épigraphie, par Albert Dumont. E. Thorin, Paris

Ehrenberg V. 1969. The Greek State, 2nd edition. Methuen Publishing, London

Fraser P.M. 1972, Ptolemaic Alexandria 1. Clarendon Press, Oxford

Fraser P.M. 1978, The Kings of Commagene and the Greek world’, in Sahin S., Schwerterheim E. and Wagner J. (eds), Studien zur Religion und Kultur Kleinasiens. Festschrift für Friedrich Karl Dörner zum 65. Geburtstag am 28 Februar 1976. Brill, Leiden; pp.: 359 – 374

Fuhrer T. 2011. Inszenierungen von Göttlichkeit. Die politische Rolle von Dionysos/Bacchus in der römischen Literatur, in Schlesier, R. (ed), A Different God? Dionysos and Ancient Polytheism. De Gruyter, Göttingen

Goette H.R. 2001. Kaiserzeitliches auf Aigina, in Brand, G., Andrikopoulou, J.–N. Strack, Dexheimer, D. and Bauchhenß, G. (eds), Rom und die Provinzen. Gedenkschrift für Hanns Gabelmann (Beihäfte de Bonner Jahnbuch 53). Philipp von Zabern, Mainz; pp.: 87 – 94

Graindor P. 1927. Inscriptions attiques d’époque romaine, Bulletin de Correspondence Hellénique, 51; pp.:45 – 328

Gutzwiller K. 1992. The Nautilus, the Halcyon, and Selenaia: Callimachus “Epigram” 5 Pf=14 G. – P., Classical Antiquity, 11.2; pp.:194 – 209 38 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

Hahn U. 1994. Die Frauen des Römischen Kaiserhauses und ihre Ehrungen im griechischen Osten anhand epigraphischer und numismatischer Zeugnisse von Livia bis Sabina (Saarbruckner Studein zur Archäologie und alten Geschichte 8). Saarbrücker Druckerei und Verlag, Saarbrücken

Head B.V. 1911. Historia Numorum. Clarendon Press, Oxford

Herrmann P. 1960. Die Inscriften römischer Zeit aus dem Heraion von Samos, Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung, 75; pp.: 68 – 183

Holleaux M. 1888. Discours de Néron prononcé à Corinthepour rendre aux Grecs la liberté, Bulletin de Correspondence Hellénique, 12; pp.: 510 – 528

Hölbl G. 2001. A History of the Ptolemaic Empire. Routledge, London, New York

Isager S., Pedersen P. 2012. Hadrian, Sabina and Halikarnassos – Some Epigraphic Evidence, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, 181; pp.: 95 – 101

Jannoray J. 1936. A propos de deux dédicaces delphiques de l’époque imperial, Bulletin de Correspondence Hellénique, 60; pp.: 374 – 385

Jourdan-Ruwe M. 1995. Das Säulenmonument: Zur Geschichte der erhöhten Aufstellung antiker Porträtstatuen (Asia Minor Studien 19). R. Habelt, Bonn

Kalinka E. 1933. Aus Bithynien und Umgegend, Jahreshäfte des österreichischen archäologischen Instituts in Wien, 28, Beiblatt, pp.: 45 – 112

Keil J. 1910. Forschungen un der Erythraia I, Jahreshäfte des Österreichischen archäologischen Instituts in Wien, 13; pp.: 6 – 74

Kovács P. 2007. A Pisidian Veteran and the First Mention of Pannonia, Tyche, 22; pp.: 99 – 107

Kroll W. 1958 (ed.). Pseudo Callisthenes, Historia Alexandri Magni. Weidmann, Hildesheim

Kyparisses N. 1927–1928. Παράρτημα τοῦ Ἀρχαιολογικοῦ Δελτίον. Ἐξ Ἀθηνῶν καὶ Ἀττικῆς, Αρχαιολογικόν Δελτίον, 11; pp.: 44 – 66

Merkelbach R. 1979. Die ephesischen Dionysosmysten vor der Stadt, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, 36; pp.: 151 – 156

Meyer H. 1991. Antinoos: die archäologischen Denkmäler unter Einbeziehung des numismatischen und epigraphischen Materials sowie der literarischen Nachrichten: ein Beitrag zur Kunst – und Kulturgeschichte der hadrianisch=frühantoninischen Zeit. W. Fink, Munich

Mitford T.B. 1947. Some Published Inscriptions of Roman Date from Cyprus, Annual of the Britisch School at Athens, 42; pp.: 201 – 230

39 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

Nock A.D. 1928. Notes on Ruler-cult, I – IV, Journal of Hellenic Studies, 48; pp.: 21 – 43

Peek W. 1942. Attische Inschriften’, Athenische Mitteilungen, 67; pp.: 1 – 217

Peek W. 1979. Zu den Gedichten des Marcellus von Side auf Regilla und das Triopion des Herodes Atticus. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, 33; pp.: 76 – 84

Peppa-Delmouzou P. 1979. A Statue Base for Augustus, IG II2 3262 + IG II2 4725, American Journal of Philology, 100; pp.: 125 – 132

Perdrizet P. 1910. Le fragment de Satyros sur les demes d’Alexandrie, Révue des Etudes Anciennes, 12; pp.: 217 – 247

Pollitt J.J. 1986. Art in the Hellenistic Age. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Pomtow H. 1921. Delphische Neufunde V: Zusätze und Nachträge, Klio, 17; pp.: 153 – 203

Reinach Th. 1906. Inscriptions d’Aphrodisias, Révue des Etudes Grecques, 19; pp.: 79 – 150

Robert L.1980. A travers l’Asie Mineure. De Boccard, Athens.

Robu A. 2007. Notes sur les dédicaces mégariennes pour Hadrien et Sabine, Dacia, n.s. 51; pp.: 171 – 176.

Roueché C. 1989. Aphrodisias in Late Antiquity: The Late Roman and Byzantine Inscriptions Including Texts From the Excavations at Aphrodisias Conducted by Kenan T. Erim (Journal of Roman Studies Monographs, 99). Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies, London.

Sahin S. 2008. Kaiserbauten und Kaiserehrungen in Patara, in Winter, E. (ed.), Vom Euphrat bis zum Bosporus: Kleinasien in der Antike. Festschrift für Elmar Schwertheim zum 65. Geburtstag (Asia Minor Studien, 65). R. Habelt, Bonn; pp.: 597 – 610

Schörner G. 2003. Votive im römische Griechenland. Untersuchungen zur späthellenistischen und keiserzeitlichen Kunst – und Religionsgeschichte (Altertumswissenschaftliches Kolloquium 7). Franz Steiner, Stuttgart

Shotter D. 2008. Nero Caesar Augustus. Emperor of Rome, Pearson Longman, Harlow, England, New York

Spaeth B.S. 1996. The Roman Goddess Ceres. University of Texas Press, Austin

Stewart A. 1993. Faces of Power. Alexander’s Image and Hellenistic Politics. University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles, Oxford

Strack M.L. 1897. Die Dynastie der Ptolemäer. W. Hertz, Berlin

40 CAES Vol. 3, № 4 (December 2017)

Strack M.L. 1903, Inschriften aus ptolemäischer Zeit. II’, in Archiv für Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete 2; pp.: 537 – 561

Wallensten J. 2014. Dedications to Double Deities. Syncretism or Simply Syntax?’, Kernos, 27; pp.: 159 – 176

Wiegand Th. 1908. Sechster vorläufiger Bericht über die von den königlichen Museen in Milet und Didyma undernommenen Ausgrabungen. Verlag der Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin

Wiegand Th. 1911. Siebenter vorläufige Bericht über die von den Königlichen Museen in Milet und Didyma unternommenen Ausgrabungen. Verlag der Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften, Berlin

Wroth W. 1989. Catalogue of Coins in the British Museum: Pontus Paphlagonia & Bithynia. The Trustees, London