View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by OpenEdition Kernos Revue internationale et pluridisciplinaire de religion grecque antique 21 | 2008 Varia Daniel OGDEN (ed.), A Companion to Greek Religion Joannis Mylonopoulos Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/kernos/1683 ISSN: 2034-7871 Publisher Centre international d'étude de la religion grecque antique Printed version Date of publication: 1 January 2008 ISSN: 0776-3824 Electronic reference Joannis Mylonopoulos, « Daniel OGDEN (ed.), A Companion to Greek Religion », Kernos [Online], 21 | 2008, Online since 15 September 2011, connection on 21 April 2019. URL : http:// journals.openedition.org/kernos/1683 Kernos RevuedesL vres 319 2. Comptes rendus et notices 1i1liogr phiques Dan elO8DEN(ed.),A Companion to ree) Religion,Oxford,BlackEell,2007.1 vol.18×2Icm,097p.(Blac)well Companions to the Ancient.orld).ISBN:978+1+ 00I1+20I0+8. Recent scholarsh p n the f eld of Class cs s def n tely dom nated by compan ons, ntroduct ons,asEellasEinf-hrungen tol terallyalmosteveryth ng,and t sleg t matetoask hoEnecessarytheyreallyare,EhethertheyaddneE ns ghtstoourknoEledge,ordothey s mplyrepresenttheproductofaneEscholarlyfast+food+era?Itshouldbestressedfrom theverybeg nn ngthatth sneEcompan oncerta nlydoesnotbelongtothelastcategory, for the sheer Qcollect onR of renoEned contr butors guarantees the h ghest standards. Nevertheless,already nh s ntroductorynote,theed torrevealsthebook’smost mportant Eeakness2 although Ee may or may not agree – and I def n tely d sagree – upon the chronolog calframeEork(776+30BCE),the deaofacompan onconce vednotbasedon thetop c tself,butratheronQsub.ectsand ssuesgenerallyheldtobeof mportanceand nterestbycontemporary nternat onalexperts nthef eldof8reekrel g onRseemsqu te paradox cal5 after all, th s s meant to be a compan on to 8reek rel g on, and not a compan ontothecontemporaryForschungsgeschichteof8reekrel g on.NotE thstand ngth s perhaps all too cr t cal remark, every s ngle contr butor del vers Ehat h s/her reputat on prom ses2cog tat ve,althoughnotalEaysneE,appet 3ersforstudentsof8reekrel g onto furthercont nuethe rexplorat onofth sfasc nat ngf eld. S.B. Noegel’s ree) Religion and the Ancient Near East const tutes an example for the poss b l t es and pract cal l m tat ons of a compan on2 Noegel addresses fundamental quest onsabout(8reek)rel g onsuchasthe nterrelat onsh pbetEeenmythandr tual,the not onofcultural/rel g ous nfluenceand nterchangebetEeentheNearEastand8reece, espec ally dur ng the Bron3e Age, or the alleged oppos t on betEeen monothe st c and polythe st c rel g ous systems. The ansEers are of course all too short, but nevertheless extremely r ch and dense2 the perfect start ng po nt for further research. There are only m norpo ntsofposs blecr t c sm.1S nceEearenot nthepos t ontostudytheM noanand Mycenaean mythology based on em c textual ev dence, the establ shment of a model of rel g ous nfluencefromtheNearEasttoEards8reecebasedexclus velyonthecompar son betEeenBron3eAgetextsfromtheNearEastandthe4omer cor4es od ctextsshould rema n h ghly hypothet cal. In th s respect, Noegel r ghtly stresses the use of the term Q nterchangeR nsteadofQ nfluenceR. O.DoEdenbeg nsh scontr but ononOlympian ods2 Olympian PantheonE thabr efbut nvaluabled st nct onamongthed fferentsemant clevelsofcult,mythology,andthought/ QtheologyR.TheA.stressesthe mportantd fferencebetEeenQpantheonRandthenot onof QtEelvenessR n8reekrel g on,althoughhedoesnotadequatelyemphas sesthe mportance of local trad t ons. The example of the s x double altars at Olymp a s not only an llum nat ngcaseforthenot onoftEelvegods,asnotedbyDoEden,butalsoan mportant p eceofev dencefortheex stenceoflocalconceptsofthetEelvegods.DoEdenchoosesto exempl fyh sv eEsabout8reekgodsbyus ngApollonandArtem sascases npo nt.The 1Aorexample,theBabylon an(andnotAssyr an)vot vebron3ef gur nesofaprayerE thadogfound onSamosasev denceforaposs ble nterconnect onbetEeentheBabylon an8ulaandthe8reek4erahave been challenged, see E.A. BRAUN+4OLPIN8ER, QBron3e Ob.ects from Babylon aR, n C. CURTIS (ed.), Bron%ewor)ing Centres of .estern Asia c. 1000-539 B.C.,London,1988,p.127f.andead.–E.RE4M,Orientalischer Import in riechenland im fr-hen 1. 7ahrtausend v. Chr.,MUnster,200I,p.87+89. 320 RevuedesL vres Leto ds are ndeed tEo of the most nterest ng and pu33l ng d v ne f gures, but a br ef explanat onofthereasonsforth sseem nglyarb trarycho ceEouldcerta nlyhavebeenvery useful. InherA Land Full of ods: Nature Deities in ree) Religion,C.Larsonpresentsnopano+ rama of such d v n t es closely connected E th nature. Instead she concentrates on the Nymphs, Pan, the r ver gods, 8a a, 4el os, Pose don and h s thiasos – n th s context, Larson’s assumpt on that Amph tr te Eas venerated together E th Pose don at Pente+ skouph aappearstooconf dent,s nceAthenatooappearsonthevot vepina)esfromthe s te,–asEellastheW nds.OnemayaskEhyDemeter s so prom nently absent from Larson’saccount,buthercontr but on sneverthelessveryEellstructuredand nformat ve, espec ally nthepartded catedtotheNymphs. After stress ng the mportant methodolog cal problem of d st ngu sh ng betEeen person f cat ons as nvented l terary personae and such that play a role n cult act v ty, E.Staffordconcentrates nherPersonifications in ree) Religious Thought and Practiceonthose person f cat onsthatcanbesecurely dent f edthankstol teraryandep graph csourcesas f gures ofcult.4ercontr but on schronolog callystructuredanddemonstrates navery clear manner the developments n the cult of person f ed concepts. Bes des prom nent examplesasThem s,Nemes s,4yg e a,orE rene,Stafford llum natesseveralothercultsof person f cat onsl ke Pe tho,Eukle a,Phobos,or4ebe.Not ceably, nthecaseoftheso+ calledTycheofAnt oche a,oneshouldtake ntocons derat onM.Meyer’srecentre nforce+ mentofanolder deathatthefamousstatueEasor g nallyconce vedasaperson f cat onof the c ty Ant oche a.2 Arom the gu de to further read ng, I do m ss B. Borg’s h ghly soph st catedbookonallegor esandperson f cat ons.3 InThe Dead,D.Aeltonoffersanappeal ng ns ght nbothanc ent8reekr tualpract ces connectedE thandthemythologyofdeath.Theauthorbr eflysummar sesfest valsrelated tothedeadsuchasthe8enes aandtheAnthester a,thenatureofde t esandmytholog cal f gurestrad t onallyassoc atedE thdeath(4ades,Persephone,Thanatos,Charon,4ermes Psychopompos), hero c )atabaseis, the r tual pract ce of necromancy, and stor es about ghosts. M nor problems concern exclus vely the archaeolog cal data used2 lamentat on scenesoccuronAthen an8eometr cvasesofthee ghthandnotofthen nthcenturyBCE, Eh le the cemetery n the Athen an Agora Eas abandoned after the enlargement of the latter,thus,theAgoraEasnotsimultaneouslyusedasameet ngplaceandacemeteryasstated byAelton. Mak ngampleuseofthel teraryandespec allyoftheep graph cev dence,8.Ekroth offers n her (eroes and (ero-Cults a soph st cated overv eE on 8reek hero+cults, the mportance of heroes and hero nes n the panthea of 8reek c t es, the enormous formal var ab l ty of the r respect ve cult places, and the sacr f c al r tuals related to them. The author expl c tly refers to the amb guous, and thus problemat c 8reek term nology for address nghero cf guresandther tualsconnectedE ththem.Onecouldd sagreeE ththe nterpretat onoftheso+calledPol scaveonIthacaasaheroonofOdysseusorE thEkroth’s pos t veevaluat onofthe nflateduseofthetermheroon4ellen st ctombstones,butthese adm ttedlyarenegl g blepo ntsofcr t c sm. In h s Prayers and (ymns, W.D. Aurley d scusses the r tual frame and the rhetor c of prayersandhymns,beforeaddress ngthe rd fferenttypes.4eunderl nesthats ng ngand furthermus calfeaturesare ndeedformalattr butesthatd st ngu shthemoreperformat ve hymnsfromprayers.Aurleyr ghtlystressesthattheelaboratenam ng nthebeg nn ngof 2M.MEFER,Die Personifi)ation der Stadt Antiocheia. Ein neues Bild f-r eine ottheit,Berl n,2006. 3B.BOR8,Der Logos des 5ythos. Allegorien und Personifi)ationen in der fr-hen griechischen Kunst,Mun ch,2002. RevuedesL vres 321 prayers and hymns s not only a m ng at the greater glory of the gods, as not ced by S. Pulleyn,butservesalsothe dent f cat onofther ghtgodsasaddresseesoftherespect ve prayersandhymns. In h s ree) Normative Animal Sacrifice, C.N. Bremmer offers an account of the typ cal 8reekbloodsacr f ceand tsd fferentparts2thecho ceofthecorrectan mal,thetreatment ofthesacr f c alv ct m,theprocess on,ther tualacts mmed atelybeforethek ll ng,andthe actualk ll ngofthean mal.Unfortunately,Bremmerdec destocons derthesacr f c almeal n.ustfourl nes,thus,neglect ngthe mportanceofth slastpartofa8reeksacr f ce.IntEo further sect ons, the author d scusses br efly the em c and et c perspect ves on sacr f ce, concentrat ngma nlyontheep ctrad t onandthescholarlyEorksofO.Meul ,W.Burkert, andC.+P.:ernantrespect vely.ItEouldhavebeenprobablymorefasc nat ng fBremmer Eouldhavechosentopresentsomeofthe nnumerableQexcept onsRfromh snormat ve an malsacr f ce2thesphagion,orthesacr f cesofb rds,dogs,andevenhorses. P.Bonnechere nh sDivinationaddressesthreevery mportant ssuesrelatedto8reek d v natorypract ces,namelytheamb gu tyoforacles,thedangerofcharlatan sm,andthe forgery oforacularresponses.Bonnechere furtherd scussesd fferentformsofd v nat on e therbasedonthe nterpretat onofs gns0ordel veredbyprophets.TheA.br eflypresents some oracular sanctuar esI such as Delph , Dodona,6 Olaros, D dyma, and Lebade a. AlthoughIshareBonnechere’sscept c smabouttheh stor c tyofmostoracularresponses relatedto mportantpol t calevents,nevertheless,th sshouldnotchallengethe