Skip to main content

Full text of "The cults of the Greek states"

See other formats 


GSEGL710 LOLI € 


Wl 


UT 


OLNOWOL 4O ALISHSAIN 








at! Le in 









ieee OU in. 


OF 


THE GREEK SIATEG 


BY 


LEWIS. RICHARD FARNELL, M.A. 


FELLOW AND TUTOR OF EXETER COLLEGE, OXFORD 


IN THREE VOLUMES 
VOL | 


WITH ILLUSTRATIONS 


Orford 
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 
1896 


Orford 


PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS 


BY HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY 











IN MEMORIAM 
FRATRIS DILECTISSIMI 
ET 


NUPER AMISSI 








PREFACE 





—_—_—_—— 


Tuer present work, however faulty and defective it 
may be in method or statement, need not be prefaced 
by any apology for the subject with which it deals. 
A compendious account of Greek cults, that should 
analyze and estimate the record left by Greek litera- 
ture and monuments of the popular and public religion, 
has long been a desideratum in English and even to 
a certain extent in German scholarship. Until quite 
recent years the importance of Greek religion has 
been contemptuously ignored by English scholars. The 
cause of this neglect was perhaps the confusion of 
Greek mythology—that apparently bizarre and hope- 
less thing—with Greek religion; the effect of it is still 
apparent in nearly every edition of a Greek play that 
is put forth. Fortunately, this apathy concerning one 
of the most interesting parts of ancient life is now 
passing away; and since this book, the work of many 
years of broken labour, was begun, a new interest, 
stimulating to fruitful research, in Greek ritual and 
myth is being displayed in many quarters, especially 
at Cambridge. 

The comparative study of religion has received 
signal aid from the scie.ce of anthropology, to which 


viii PREFACE. 


England has contributed so much; we have been 
supplied—not indeed with ‘a key to all the mytho- 
logies, but with one that unlocks many of the 
mysteries of myth and reveals some strange secrets 
of early life and thought. The influence of such a 
work as the late Professor Robertson Smith’s Redzgzon 
of the Semites has been and will be very powerful in 
this line of research; I am glad to acknowledge my 
indebtedness to it, as well as to the valuable treatise 
recently published by Mr. Frazer, The Golden Bough; 
nor can the interest and importance of Mr. Lang’s 
pioneer-work in this field be ignored. My own book 
has, however, a different aim from any of these; 
I have tried to disentangle myth from religion, only 
dealing with the former so far as it seems to illustrate 
or reveal the latter, and have aimed at giving a 
complete account of the names and ideas that were 
attached, and of the ceremonies that were consecrated, 
by the Greek states to their chief divinities. 

In these two volumes that are now appearing I have 
proceeded from the account of the Zeus-cult to the 
examination of the worships of Hera, Athena, Artemis, 
and Aphrodite, and of certain subordinate personages 
associated with them. This order seemed a reasonable 
one to adopt, because it is natural to study the cults of 
Zeus and Hera side by side, and because it is con- 
venient to group the other goddesses with Hera in 
order to appreciate their traits of affinity and points 
of contrast. 

Partly to avoid the awkward accumulation of cita- 
tions at the foot of each page, partly to bring the literary 


PREFACE. ix 


evidence before the eyes of the student in a sifted and 
methodical form, I have appended to the account of 
each cult a table of ‘Schriftquellen’ or references to 
inscriptions and classical authors. Though these con- 
siderably swell the bulk of the work I am encouraged 
to think that the labour will not have been wasted. 
It is vain to hope that these citations include all that 
is relevant and that my research has been nowhere 
at fault, for, apart from other difficulties, nearly every 
month brings to light fresh inscriptions that may 
modify one’s views on important points; the utmost 
I can hope is that the chief data hitherto available are 
collected here, and that I have been able to exclude 
what is irrelevant. 

As regards the archaeological chapters, I have tried 
to enumerate all the cult-monuments, so far as any- 
thing definite is known about them; this is not so 
difficult a task, as these are comparatively few. In the 
chapters on the ideal types of each divinity my task 
has been mainly one of selection; I have tried to con- 
fine myself for the most part to those of which my 
studies in the various museums and collections of 
Europe have given me personal knowledge. 

It has been my object to restrict myself as far as 
possible to the statement of the facts, and not to 
wander too far into the region of hypothesis and con- 
troversy. One’s work thus incurs the risk of a dryness 
and coldness of tone; and the risk is all the greater 
because, while Greek mythology was passionate and 
picturesque, Greek religion was, on the whole, sober 
and sane. An emotional exposition of it may be of 


x PREFACE. 


great value for the purposes of literature; but for the 
purposes of science it is best to exhibit the facts, as 
far as possible, in a dry light. 7 

In the earliest days of my studies in this field, I was 
bred in the strictest sect of German mythologists; but 
some time before I contemplated writing on the sub- 
ject I had come to distrust the method and point of 
“view that were then and are even now prevalent in 
German scholarship; and I regret that hostile criti- 
cism of much German-work should take so prominent 
a place in my book. I regret this all the more because 
I owe a personal debt of gratitude, which I warmly 
acknowledge, to the German universities, that were 
the first to recognize the importance of this subject 
and that open their doors so hospitably to the foreign 
student. 

My best thanks are due to the Directors of various 
museums who have readily aided me in procuring 
many of the plates, and still more to the many per- 
sonal friends who have kindly assisted me in the 
revision of the proof-sheets, especially to Professor 
Ramsay of Aberdeen, to Mr. Macan of University 
College, Oxford, to Mr. Warde Fowler of Lincoln 
College, and to Mr. Pogson Smith of ‘St. John’s 
College. 

I regret that these two volumes should have 
appeared without an index, which it was thought 
convenient to reserve till the end of the third volume. 
I hope that the rather ample table of contents may 
to some extent atone for this defect. 

I may add one word in conclusion on the English 


PREFACE. xi 


spelling of Greek names. Objections can easily be 
raised against the over-precise as well as against the 
over-lax system; I have compromised between the 
two by adopting for the less familiar names a spelling 
as consonant as possible with the Greek, while for 
those that are of more common occurrence I have 
tried to keep the usual English form. 


LEWIS R. FARNELL. 


Exeter COLLEGE, OxForD, 
December, 1895: 











CONTENTS Obs Oi) 





++ 





INTRODUCTION i : : : ; I-12 


Object of the present work, 1, 12; value of the different methods 
applied to the study of Greek religion, 2-9; evidence of the monuments 
as important as the literary record, g-11. 


‘CHAPTER: 
Tue Aniconic AGE ‘ : ‘ : , ; : 13-18 
The religion completely anthropomorphic in the Homeric period, but on 


the whole still aniconic: the tree and the stone the earliest cult-objects, 
13-15 ; meaning of Bo@ms and yAave®ms, 16. REFERENCES, 16-18. 


CHAPTER I 


Tue Iconic AGE ; F % ‘ , ; ; 19-22 


Traces of ‘theriomorphism’ doubtful and slight, the idol regarded as 
the shrine of the deity, protests against idolatry in Greek religion, 
I9g-21. REFERENCES, 22. 


CHAPTER III. 
Cronos ; . ; - : ; ; So naae 23-34 


Cronos no abstraction, as Welcker supposed, but a real figure of very 
primitive religion in Greece, 23, 24 ; theory of his Phoenician origin doubt- 
ful, 24, 25; Cronos probably belongs to the pre-Olympian cult-period in 
Greece, the Titanomachy to be explained as a conflict of older and later 
cults, 25-27; ? Cronos a pre-Hellenic divinity of vegetation connected 
with the under-world, the feast of Cronos a harvest-ritual associated with 
a legend of human sacrifice, 27-30. REFERENCES, 32-34. 


CONTENTS. 


GHAPTER. IV. 


ZEUS. : : , : , ; , ; 35- 


The Zeus-cult the most manifold, importance of cult-epithets for the study 
of religious ideas, 35; Zeus-cult common to all the Hellenic tribes, 36 ; 
extraneous elements in the Cretan cult, the Zeus of Crete akin to Dionysos, 
36-38 ; Elean worship of Sosipolis to be compared, 38; primitive Hel- 
lenic cult at Dodona, Zeus associated there with the Earth-mother, 38-40 ; 
cults and cult-titles of the oracular god, 40; Arcadian.cult on Mount 
Lycaeum, human sacrifice to Zeus Lycaeus, the god of the wolf-clan, 40- 
42; human sacrifice at Alus and elsewhere, 42; cult-epithets of physical 
meaning, 42-48; ‘OAdvumos, ’Apdptos, Aeveaios, 43; his cult scarcely 
connected at all with sun-worship or star-worship, 44; the god of the 
rain, wind, and thunder, 44-46; Zeus Kammwras, 46; omnipotence of 
Zeus in the physical world, Zyvo-Iocedav, Zeus Tewpyds, Zeus EiBovdets, 
46-48 ; Zeus rarely regarded either in cult or literature as the creator, 48— 
50; cults on the mountain-tops, Zeus ’OAvpmos, 50-52 5 titles referring 
to social life and the state, 52-64; Marp@os, Tapyndcos, Tevé0dAros, ‘Epxetos, 
Sparpros, 52-56; Zeus MoAcevs, ritual at Athens, explanations of the ‘ ox- 
murder,’ 56-58, cf. 88; BovAatos, “Ayopaios, 58; Zeus as god of war, 59, 
60; Zeus Soter, 60, 61; ’EAevOépios, MaveAAjuios, 61-63 ; Zeus the god 
of the city, par excellence : titles of moral significance, 64-75 ; the cult of 
MeAixuos, ritual and significance, Madapvaios, ‘Inéovos, Kaddpovos, 64-67 5 
primitive conception of sin, shedding of kindred blood, 67-69 ; perjury, 
Zeus “Opxuos, 69, 70; extended conception of sin, Zeus in relation to Dike, 
71; Zeus the god of grace, 72, 73; Xenios and Philios, 73-75; doctrine 
of retribution in Greek religion, 75-77; protests against the current 
belief, 77, 78; relation of Zeus to Moira, Zeus Mopayérns, 78-82; ten- 
dencies towards monotheism in Greek cult very slight, but certain 
principles of order and unification in the polytheism: the circle of the 
twelve deities, 83, 84; Zeus as @eds, 85, 86; little influence of Greek 
philosophy on cult, 86, 87. 


APPENDIX TO CHAPTER IV: The rites of the Diipolia, Robertson Smith’s 


and Frazer’s theory discussed, 88-92; other instances of the ‘theanthropic’ 
animal in the Zeus-cult, 93, 94; sacrificial animals, the ram (Zeus- 
Ammon), the bull, 95 ; Zeus Alyopayos and the goat-sacrifice, meaning of 
the aegis, 96-100; higher view of sacrifice, IOI. 


CHAPTER. V. 


PAGE 
IOI 


THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS . . : ; . 102-121 


Aniconic period, 102, 103; earliest iconic, the triple Zeus, TprdpOadpos, 
103-105; representations of the thunder-god, 106, 107; of Zeus Kpyra- 
yevns, 108, 109; Zeus of Dodona and Aetnaeus, 10g, 110; type of Zeus 
Polieus doubtful, 111, 112; Zeus “Apevos and Nixnpdpos, 112-114; Zeus 
Tayhdcos, doubtful meaning of the veil, 115; Zeus "EAevOépios, TaveAAq- 
vios, ‘Opayupios, 116 ; monuments of Zeus MeAixcos and. Pidsos, 117-119 ; 
Mo:paryérys, 119, 120. 


CONTENTS. xv 


CHAPTER VI. 
PAGE 


(i) THe Ipzat Tyez oF Zeus. : : ; . 122-127 


. Standing and seated types, 122, 123; arrangement of drapery and treat- 
ment of the face in the pre-Pheidian period, 124 ; the youthful Zeus, 125 ; 
Zeus on the Bologna relief, on the friezes of the Theseum and the 
Parthenon, 126, 127. 


(ii) Toe Sratuz or Zeus Otymprus . . . . 128-139 


REFERENCES FOR CHapTERS IV-VI_. i : . 140-178 


CHAPTER Vib 
HERA . : ; ‘ ; ‘ Ss : . 179-204 


Prevalent throughout Greece, 179; in the earliest period Hera regarded 
as the wife of Zeus, and not as a personification of any part of nature, 
180, 181; Welcker’s theory discussed that Hera was the earth-goddess, 
Argive and Euboean cults, Hera the mother of Typhoeus, 181-184; 
prevalence and meaning of the fepds -yayos in Greece, not to be inter- 
preted as physical symbolism, but as a consecration of human marriage, 
with survival of primitive marriage forms, 184-192; ritual at Samos, 
Argos, Falerii, the feast of Daedala at Plataea, 185-190 ; Hera Map@évos, 
Tedela, Xnpa, 190-192; very few of the ordinary characteristics of an 
earth-goddess found in Hera, 192-194; Hera merely the married goddess 
and the goddess of marriage in Greek cult, 195-198. 


APPENDIX A: Discussion of the theory that the earliest cult of Hera did not 
recognize Zeus and belonged to a period of gynaecocracy, 199, 200. 


APPENDIX B: The Corinthian cult of Hera Acraea and the legend of Medea, 
‘200-204. 


CHAPTER VUE 
THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF HERA . ; . 205-219 


Aniconic period, type in Samos, 205, 206 ; Hera TeAeia of Praxiteles, 
207 ; monuments of the fepds yayos, terracotta group from Samos, metope 
of Selinus, Pompeian wall-painting, relief in Villa Albani, 208-211 ; 
Hera Lakinia, 212, 213; Polycleitean statue of the Argive Hera, as 
illustrating Argive cult, 213-219. 


CHAPTER IX. 
IpEaAL Types or Hera ; ; ‘ : ; . 220-240 


Difficulties in recognizing the representations of Hera, no special and 
peculiar attribute, 220-223; the Homeric ideal falls short of the ideal of 
Hera in art, 223, 224; earlier fifth-century works, Farnese head not 
inspired by the Homeric conception of Hera Bodms nor at all connected 
with Polycleitus’ work, 225-230; the work of Pheidias, 231, 232; head 
of Hera on Argive coin, 232, 233; probably inspired by the work of 





Xvi CONTENTS. 


PAGE 
Polycleitus, who created the ideal type, 233-236; fourth-century repre- 
sentations of Hera, Ludovisi head, 237-239; works of the later period, 


239, 240. 


REFERENCES FOR Cuapters VII-IX . : 2 - 241-257 
CHAPTER x: 
ATHENA ‘ ‘ , , : ‘ : ; . 258-320 


The worship aboriginal in Greece, and widely prevalent, 258-260; 
survival of primitive practices, human sacrifice, washing of the idol, 260- 
262; but the worship comparatively advanced, physical explanations of 
Athena erroneous, though she had some connexion with parts of the 
physical world, Athena ’Avep@ris, Napxaia, 262-265 ; her association with 
water, meaning of ‘ Tritogeneia,’ 265-270; Athena _and Poseidon, rivalry 
of cults at Athens (Poseidon-Erechtheus) and at Troezen, 270-273; Athene 
Alea, Hellotis, Amaria, OP@aApirs, 273-279; the ‘physical theory’ of the 
birth of Athena improbable, 280-283; possible explanations of the story 
of Metis in Hesiod, 283-286; Gorgon-myth throws no light on Athena’s 
original nature, for she has no original connexion with the Gorgon, 286- 
288; Athena associated occasionally with the eartb-goddess, “AyAaupos, 
Tldvdpocos, 288-290; Athena’s sacrificial animals, 290; agricultural 
festivals, MAvyrjpia, ‘Qoxopdpia, Mpoxapiorhpia, Athena Sciras and the 
Z«ippa, 291-293; her political character more prominent than her 
physical, the Panathenaea, 294-298; Athena Polias in the Greek cities, 
299; ‘Opodwis, “Ovya, "Irwvia, 300, 301; Athena connected with the clan 
and the family, Athena @parpia, Mytnp, 302, 303; BovaAaia, 303, 304; 
Athena connected with the law-courts and a more advanced conception of 
law, 304, 305 ; Athena IIpdvoa and Mpovaia, 306, 307; character and cult- 
titles of the war-goddess, 308-311 ;_ Athena-Nike, 311-313; the goddess 
of the arts, associated with Hephaestus, 313-316 ; Athena Hygieia, 316- 
318 ; general character of the worship, 318, 319. Note on ritual, Homeric 
reference to the Panathenaea, 320. 


CHAPTER XT. 


Monuments oF ATHENA-WORSHIP . : : : - 321-352 


The earliest reveal her not as a nature-goddess, but as a goddess of war 
and the city, 321, 322 ; monuments associating her with Poseidon and the 
sea, 322-326; with Dionysos, the deities of vegetation and the under- 
world, 326-328 ; no monumental evidence that Athena was ever identified 
with the moon or thunder-cloud, Athena Sciras, Auge, Alcis, Gorgo, 328— 
331; Athena Polias, two types, the Athena Polias of Athens probably 
of the erect and warlike type, 331-337; the same type in vogue in many 
other states, 337, 338; cult-form of Athena-Nike, 338-342; “Apxnyéns, 
XraGpia, *Ayopaia, Kovporpdpos, 342-344; representations of the art- 
goddess, 344-346; of Athena Hygieia, 346-348 ; monuments illustrating 
her connexion with the Athenian state, Parthenon frieze, mourning Athena 
on relief in the Acropolis, relief referring to alliances of Athens and to 
the civic life, 348-352. 


, CONTENTS. XVii 


PAGE 


CHAPTER XII. 


IpkAL Types oF ATHENA . : ; ; 353-382 


Pre-Pheidian types, 353-355; Portici bronze, 355, 356; earlier Pheidian 
works, Athena ‘ Promachus,’ 356-360; statue of Athena Parthenos, 
examination of the literary records and surviving copies, 360-370; 
Albani Pallas, 370-372; Lemnian Athena, 371-374; distinct type of 
Athena with Corinthian helmet, 375, 376. 


APPENDIX A: Discussion of Dr. Furtwingler’s theory concerning the Athena 
Promachus, 377, 378. 


APPENDIX B: Concerning the Lemnian Athena, 378-382. 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X-XII__. : ; . 383=423 


VOL. I. b 


LIST OF PLATES 1N Vou 4 


PLATE I. 


II. 


Ill. 


LV. 


Wi 


XV. 


XVI. 


XVII, 


(2) Vase of Ruvo, showing an aniconic éyaAya of Zeus, 
(4) Vase of Chiusi, with representation of the triple Zeus. 
(c) Statuette in British Museum: Zeus with Cerberus and eagle. 
(2) Relief with Zeus Meilichios. 

(4) Relief with Zeus Philios. 

(a) Relief of Zeus and Hera in Bologna. 

(4) Zeus and Hera on the Parthenon frieze. 

(a) Zeus on frieze of the Theseum. 

(4) Zeus of Ocricoli, 

(a) Head of Zeus in St. Petersburg. 

(4) Terracotta of Zeus and Hera from Samos. 


Head of Hera Lakinia in Venice. 


- (2) Statuette of Hera from Argos in Berlin. 


(6) Hera on patera in Munich. 


Head of Hera Farnese. 


. (2) Zeus and Hera on metope of Selinus temple. 


(6) Zeus and Hera on vase in British Museum. 
Hera on wood-carving from Kertsch—Judgement of Paris. 
Hera on wood-carving from Kertsch. 
Ludovisi head of Hera. 


. (@) Athena and Poseidon on vase of Amastris. 


(4) Gem with Athena and Hades. 


- (@) Cameo with Athena and Poseidon in the Cabinet des Méedailles, . 


Louvre. 
(6) Seated Athena on black-figured vase in Berlin. 


(a) Terracotta representation of Athena seated, Athens. 
(4) Athena on black-figured vase, British Museum. 
(¢) Athena on vase in Berlin. 


Athena-Nike in Lansdowne House. 


Athena Agoraia, statue in Louvre. 


XX LIST OF PLATES. 


PLATE XVIII. (@) Athena and Corcyra on Attic relief. 
(6) Athena and Hephaestus on gem. 
(c) Athena Hygieia on gem. 


XIX. Head of Athena Hygieia in Vatican. 
XX. Athena standing before column, Attic relief. 


XXI. (a) Athena with Parthenos, Attic relief. 
(6) Athena and Samos, Attic relief. 


XXII. (a) Athena from pediment of temple in Aegina. 
(6) Bronze statuette of Athena, Vienna. 


XXIII. (a) Bronze of Athena Promachus, British Museum. 
(6) Torso of Athena in Ecole des Beaux Arts, Paris. 


XXIV. (a) Bronze statuette of Athena from Portici. 
(6) Head of Athena on St. Petersburg medallion. 


XXV. Head of Athena Parthenos in Athens. 
b.. BA B Statuette of Athena Parthenos. 
AX VEL: Athena in Villa Albani. 


THE CULTS: OF Ton Cera 
STATES 





INTRODUCTION. 


THE history of Greek religion, so much neglected in our 
country, is often mistaken for a discussion concerning its 
origins. The main scope of the present work is not the 
question of origin, but a survey of the most important texts 
and monuments that express the actual religious concep- 
tions of the various Greek communities at different historical 
epochs. Such a study evidently concerns the student of 
the literature no less than the student of the archaeology of 
Greece, although the subject has been hitherto approached 
rather from the archaeological side. The question of origins 
may be put-aside, although it may be true that one does not 
fully and perfectly know the present character of a fact unless 
one also knows the embryology of it. Yet this dictum 
expresses more the ideal of knowledge than a practical method 
of working. In dealing with so complicated a phenomenon as 
the religion of a people, it is surely advisable to consider 
separately and first the actual facts, the actual beliefs in the 
age of which we have history, rather than the prehistoric 
germ from which they arose. Again, this is the only aspect 
of the problem that directly concerns the student of the 
Greek world pure and simple, for the other line of inquiry, 
touching the birth of the nation’s religion, can never be 
followed out within the limits of that nation’s literature and 

VOL. I. B 


=> 


2 GREEK RELIGION. 


monuments. And there are especial difficulties attaching to 
such an inquiry, for the origin is probably much more remote 
than is commonly supposed, and the inquirer is generally 
dealing with an age of which there is no direct evidence. To 
reconstruct the primitive thought requires all the aid that 
can be supplied by philology, anthropology, and the com- 
parative study of religions, and so far the reconstruction is 
neither solid nor final. Great results were expected when 
first philology, with new methods and new material, was 
applied to the explanation of Greek myths and divine 
personages. The result has been meagre and disappointing, 
and this is perhaps due to three causes. 

First, the philologist was working under the influence of the 
newly discovered Sanskrit language, and his point of departure 
for theological deductions was the Vedic literature, which was 
considered to be primitive, and to give the key to the myths 
and mythic religion of Greeks, Teutons, and Slavs’. But the 
Vedic religion is already comparatively advanced, and gives 
but little clue to the origins and development of the religions 
of the other Aryan peoples. 

Secondly, the philology of many of the interpreters of 
Greek myth and religion has been often unscientific, the 
earliest of them belonging to that period when the phonetic 
laws of vowel changes were not sufficiently understood, and 
when it was only an affair of consonants, and the later of 
them merely skirmishing on the ground in amateur fashion ». 


* Vide Maury, Hestotre des religions 
de la Gréce antique, vol. I. p. 32. 

b Apart from the etymological dis- 
coveries about the name of Zeus, the 
chief contributions of philology to our 
knowledge of the origins of Greek re- 
ligious personages have been supposed 
to be the identification of "Epis with 
Sanskrit Saranyu-s, and Hermes or Her- 
meias with Sadrameyas; these were first 
publicly put forward by Kuhn (Die Herab- 
kunft des Feuers, &c. 2nd ed. pp. 6-8), 
and have been widely accepted. They 
are condemned however by more recent 
philology ; the original form in Greek 


of Saranyus would have been cepemds, 
which would have become cepevis and 
then épexvvs: ’Epivis unaccountably lacks 
the rough breathing, and contains an 
unaccountable long 1s, which never in 
Greek takes the place of «. And the 
word Saranyus has the appearance of 
being a word of specifically Sanskrit 
derivation, which has not come down 
from the‘ Ursprache.’ Nor is there any 
foundation in Greek and Sanskrit my- 
thology for the identification ; for the 
story of Saranyus taking the form of 
a mare is not in the Rigveda, and may 
be a mere aetiological invention of the 


Gh MT Te yt oe vee 


Sila haat tak gla 


Da 
7 4 


‘are? Vieis ier Bh pe Paps 
ae vat 
n . 


“ ‘ 


a eg 
2 rs ° ; 3 


fa 





INTRODUCTION. 3 


Thirdly, the philologists have mainly devoted themselves 
to maintain the view that the myths are allegorical accounts 
of physical phenomena, and the mythic figures are the per- 
sonification of the elements and the powers of nature. It is 
often supposed that this process of interpretation is a new 
discovery of German science of the last generation; but in 
reality it is as old as the sixth century B.c.*, and was rife 
in the fifth-century philosophy, in the poetry of Euripides 
and the younger comedy, and is a constant theme of the 
later philosophies and the early patristic literature. Of course 
the modern writers’ have dealt far more seriously and fruit- 
fully with the theme, and by a comparison of the various 
groups of national myths, many luminous suggestions have been 
made of the way in which natural phenomena may be worked 
up into legends of personages. But as applied to the origins 
of Greek religion and the explanation of its development, the 
theory has produced only inconsequence and confusion; and it 
leaves little room for foreign influences, for the possibility that 
a deity might have been borrowed as a fully formed concrete 
person, having among his new worshippers no physical con- 
notation whatever. The assumption explicit or implicit of 
writers of this school is generally this, that each Greek divinity 
represents some department or force in nature’, and the formula 


commentator, and the myth which has much valuable material has been 


been supposed to correspond, about 
DemeterErinys being pursued by Kronos 
in the form of a horse, has nothing to 
do with the Erinyes proper. The theory 
that Sarameya-s is to be identified with 
“Eppeias founders on the first vowel: the 
Greek equivalent should be ‘Hpeyer-os. 
For the views expressed in this note, I 


~ am indebted to the kindness of my 
- friend Professor Macdonell. 


® Vide Schol. Ven. Z/. 20. 67; Thea- 


genes sees in the Homeric battle of the 
_ gods the warfare in the elements, and 


the opposition of certain moral ideas. 

» In such works as Kuhn’s Die Herad- 
kunft des Feuers, &c., and in Schwarz 
Der Ursprung der Mythologie, in spite of 
mistaken etymology and interpretation, 


gathered and sifted, though valuable 
more for the general history of folklore 
and ritual than for the study of Greek 
religion. Ofstill greater scientific value 
is Mannhardt’s Wald- und Feldkulte. 

© Welcker, Griechische Gétterlehre, 
I. p. 324, says ‘Aus Naturgottern... 
sind alle .. . persdnlichen Gétter 
hervorgegangen: the object of the 
history of Greek religion is, according 
to him, to discover the nature-origin of 
the divinity and to trace it out in the 
myths. The principle is accepted by 
Maury in his //istotre des religions de 
la Gréce antique, though his work 
is chiefly occupied with a statement of 
the historical facts. The method and 
subject-matter of Preller’s Griechische 


B2 


4 GREEK RELIGION. 


which they often put forward, or at least appear to take for 
granted, is that the deity is a personification of that sphere or 
department. But it is doubtful whether this formula is ever of 
any avail for explaining the origins of any religion; whether 
‘the personification of a natural phenomenon’ is a phrase 
appropriate to the process which gives birth to the earliest 
religious conceptions of a primitive race*. The words suggest 
the belief that, for instance, the primitive ancestor of the Greek 
was aware of certain natural phenomena as such, and then by 
a voluntary effort gave them a personal and. human form in 
his imagination. Something like this undoubtedly happened 
in the case of the personification of the mountain. Ordinarily 
when walking up Olympos the Greek knew well enough 
that he was not treading on the bones and flesh of a living 
being, and he was under no illusion ; then for purposes of his 
own he chose to personify it, knowing well that the natural 
phenomenon was one thing, the person another. But this 
was at quite the latest epoch of Greek religion, and exhibits 
probably a relatively late mental tendency or power. It is 
doubtful if the primitive mind could personify things thus, for 
it probably lacked this sense of the limits of personality, or 
the border-line between the sentient and the non-sentient, 
or the distinction between human natural or supernatural 
phenomena. The aboriginal Greek may have regarded the 
mountain, or the sky, or the stone as sentient», possessed with 
power to help him or to hurt him; and may have tried to 
appease it with certain rites, without believing in a definite 
and clearly conceived person who lived in the sky or in the 
mountain. The superstitious man in Theophrastus seems to 
have held this view about the sacred stones which he daily 


Mythologie is based on the same idea. 
Perhaps the best exposition of the 
historical facts of certain parts of Greek 
religion that has yet appeared, free from 
any theory about origins, is to be 
found in K.O. Miiller’s ellenische 
Stamme. 

® Schwarz, in his Der Ursprung der 
Mythologie, takes a more correct view 


than many writers of his school, when 
he says ‘ fiir unsere alteste Zeit existirt 
der Begriff einer sogenannten Symbolik 

. noch gar nicht,’ &c., p. 12. 

> Dio Chrys. Or. 12. p. 233 Dind. 
gore kal modAol Tav BapBdpwv Tevia 
Te Kal dmopia téxvns dpn Oeods érovo- 
patovar Kwai dévipa dpyd nal donpovs 
Aidous. 


INTRODUCTION. 5 


anointed with oil. A distinct stage would be that at which 
the man personifies the object, as the early Greek may have 
personified the Sun or the Moon, or as the late Greek personified 
Olympos: it is proper to this view that the definite person is 
supposed to be in or about the object, and has no action or 
life independent of it*. A third stage is that to which Greek 
religion, as we first know it, had attained: the object of worship 
is a personal divinity who may happen to reside in a certain 
sphere of nature and administer the laws of that sphere, but 
has a real complicated existence independent of it and not 
wholly to be explained in reference to the laws of it. Now 
those who have followed the physical interpretation of Greek 
divinities are rarely explicit as regards these distinctions. We 
are told that the etymological proof is complete that the 
various branches of the Aryan family worshipped the sky- 
god, because the various ethnic names of the chief god 
contain a root which means ‘bright’ or ‘sky’ (dv or dyu)”. 
But the question of great importance concerning the original 
‘dea still remains; does philology prove that the primitive 
Aryan tribes worshipped the sky as such-—as an animated 
thing, a fetish; or on the other hand as a personal being 
anthropomorphic and clearly defined, but with power and 
functions limited to the sky; or lastly as a personal god who 
lived in the sky, and was therefore called the sky-god (just 
as all the divinities living in the heavens might be called 
Odpaviwves), but as one who could be detached from his 
element and exercise moral or physical influences elsewhere ? 

It would seem that we must have some sort of answer to 
these questions, before we can say that we have found the 
primitive Aryan idea of divinity, even though we may be sure 
that that idea was physical or derived immediately from the 
physical world. But the mere presence of the root ‘div’ in 
the various names of the chief god does not tell us at all 

© Oceanos and Giaea are instances of p. 491, appears to be that the original 
such crude personifications. root dyu was applied first to God in 

> Welcker, Griechische Gétterlehre,i. a spiritual sense and then to the sky ; 
p-135-Preller-Robert, GriechischeMytho- but that the two meanings had become 


logie, 1. p. 115. Prof. Max Miiller’s fused in the divinity before the separa- 
view in the Science of Language, 2. tion of the races. 


6 GREEK RELIGION. 


in what sense the sky was worshipped. Otto Gruppe— 
a desperate sceptic in regard to other systems than his 
own—maintains that it does not even prove that the sky was 
worshipped in any sense whatever by all the tribes, but that 
the root may have originally signified ‘bright’ and could 
serve equally well to form the word meaning sky and the 
word meaning God ®. 

Now the name of Zeus is the only name in the whole of 
the Greek Pantheon upon which philology has anything 
certain to say, and what it says does not seem to amount to 
so much as was at first supposed. All attempts to explain 
the other Greek names of divinities, with the possible ex- 
ception of Semele and Dionysos, have been unsuccessful. 
Demeter was undoubtedly regarded by the Greeks at certain 
times as an earth goddess, and Aj is a dialect-form of 17, 
so that ‘mother-earth’ would seem to be a translation for 
Demeter in accord with etymology and ancient religious 
belief; but modern philology’ pronounces this to be an 
impossible compound, and we have no right to say that 
the name Demeter means mother-earth. And if we do not 
know the meaning of Demeter, the case seems desperate with 
such names as Apollo, Artemis and Athene. 

Deprived then of the aid of etymology, the writers of this 
sect have tried to fix the original meaning of the god or 
goddess by an analysis of the various myths attaching to the 
personage. And the result is disheartening enough, and 
might discredit the physical theory. The whole realm of 
nature has been ransacked ; Sun, moon and stars, storm-cloud, 
lightning, the blue sky, the dawn, the evening, have each 
in turn been taken as the substance of this or that divinity, 
and very recently a French writer M. Ploix in an extra- 
ordinarily wrong book has proved that every Greek and 
Latin deity is the twilight. What is most remarkable is that 
the storm-cloud and the blue sky are sometimes found to be 


of equal use in explaining all the myths and all the cult of the 
same personage. 


® Die Griechischen Kulte und Mythen, pp. 119-120. 
> Ahrens, Dor. Dial. p. 80. 


~_ 


INTRODUCTION. 7 


If we believe that in the background of all the various 
Greek religious personages, who in the clear light of Greek 
religion appeared as ethical ideal figures, there is a physical 
phenomenon, it may be useful to go on trying to find it. 
But though serious arguments may be urged for this 
belief, there are two errors that are often committed in the 
investigation. In the first place the distinction is often 
ignored between the primitive idea and the ideas that were 
in the mind of the Greek worshipper of this or that historical 
epoch : for instance the writer often fails to note that Athene, 
who originally may have been the air, or the storm-cloud, 
or the twilight, was certainly never one of these things, or 
a personification of one, for the Athenian who sacrificed to 
her in any age of which we have distinct record *. The other 
is a serious error in logic: it is often argued that because 
acertain divinity was originally merely an elementary power, 
therefore all the legends and all the attributes of that divinity 
can and should be explained in reference to that element of 
which the god or goddess is the expression. To what quaint 
results this method of reasoning leads we can best gather 
from Roscher’s article in his Awsfiihrliches Lexikon on Athene. 
Athene, according to him, was the thunder-cloud and her origin 
and career are thus explained: she is called Athene Salpinx, 
not because, as a goddess very inventive in the arts, she in- 
vented the trumpet, but because the thunder is loud and the 
trumpet is loud and a poet might call the thunder trumpet- 
voiced. By a parity of reasoning she becomes a goddess of 
war because the thunder is warlike, and she invented the ship 
and the chariot, because the thunder-cloud is often regarded 
as a ship and as a chariot. She also becomes a goddess of 
peace and the arts of life, owing to a very curious metaphor. 
The cloud was described as a woollen fleece ; and wool was 
spun; therefore Athene appeared as a spinning-goddess. Now 
spinning implies a certain degree of intellect, therefore the 
spinning-goddess becomes the goddess of wisdom, social, 
political or any other kind; and her whole character is thus 


® Aristoph. Pax 410, 411 jmels pev dpiy (rois Oeois) Pvopev, TovToLat Se (Sednvy 
kat ‘HAiw) of BapBapor Ovovar. 


8 GREEK RELIGION. 


deduced. One cannot help feeling the unreality of this, which 
seems the reductio ad absurdum of the physical-allegorical 
theory*. To preserve oneself from this, one may maintain that, 
even if we allow that a physical fact formed the background of 
the personal idea, the intellectual or moral concepts could be 
brought into it without any dependence on that fact, as the 
goddess might become the pre-eminent divinity of a progressive © 
race that would connect with her name the various stages of 
their progress. Granted this, it must then be allowed not 
only that the question of origins stands apart from the 
question about the later historical facts, but that the discovery 
of the origin will often throw but little light on these. 

The great merit of the writers of this school is that they 
were the first who attempted by scientific method to bring 
some order into the chaos of mythology. But the more 
recent study of anthropology has contributed much more to 
the explanation of mythology and some part of religion ; its 
pretensions are fewer, its hypotheses more stable and real, and 
its range of comparison wider. In the explanation of Greek 
religion by means of anthropological ideas and methods, 
English research has taken the lead; although there are 
many valuable suggestions tending to the same point of 
view in Mannhardt’s IVald- und fFeldkulte; and the article on 
Dionysos in Roscher’s Leribon is an important contribution 
to this inquiry. Taking Mr, Lang’s treatise on Myth Ritual 
and Religion or Mr. Fraser’s Golden Bough as instances of 
recent anthropological work bearing on Greek religion, one 
sees that they deal less with the question of origins, or with 
the primitive thing or the primitive thought out of which and 
by which the Godhead was evolved, than with the question 
of survivals, the inquiry how far a certain part of the ritual 
and mythology of the more developed nations can be explained 


“ As an instance of the confusion vepéda, a poetical description of the 


which might be introduced into the 
interpretation of classical texts, by the 
application of the solar theory of myths, 
we might take Paley’s absurd inter- 
pretation of Sophocles’ phrase in the 
Trachiniae (line 831) Kevravpow povia 


7 


shirt of Nessus which wrapt Heracles 
in a cloud of deadly smoke. Paley 
explains it as though Sophocles were 
unconsciously repeating the language 
of a lost solar myth. 


INTRODUCTION. 9 


by means of the ritual and mythology of savage or primitive 
society. The assumption is that primitive man spontaneously 
ascribes to his divinities much of his own social habits and 
modes of thought, and that mythology is not merely highly 
figurative conversation about the weather, but like ritual itself 
is often a reflexion of by-gone society and institutions. It is 
ritual that is chiefly the conservative part of religion. And 
in ritual the older and cruder ideas are often held as in 
petrifaction, so that the study of it is often as.it were the 
study of unconscious matter, in so far as it deals with facts of 
worship of which the worshipper does not know the meaning 
and which frequently are out of accord with the highest reli- 
gious consciousness of the community. The anthropologist 
does not pretend to do more than supply us with a new 
key for the interpretation of certain parts of mythology and 
ritual, but the results of this new science have been already of 
the greatest value for the student of Greek cults and much 
more may be hoped from it; it has done much to explain the 
strange contradiction that often exists between the ritualistic 
act and the more ideal view about the divinity, and the study 
of a very important chapter in the history of Greek religion, 
the chapter on sacrifice, depends almost wholly on its aid. 

The account of the historical period of Greek religion must 
deal equally with the literature and the monuments; it is 
from the combined testimony of both that we learn what the 
religion was in reality to the people themselves, what were its 
processes of organic growth, what were its transitions from 
lower to higher forms. Both are records, but of unequal 
value. The literature takes precedence of the monuments 
because its testimony begins at an earlier date. 

The poems of Homer testify to a highly developed 
structure of religious thought, showing us clear-cut personal 
forms of divinities with ethical and spiritual attributes. But 
the contemporary art, standing alone, would suggest that the 
Greeks had hardly arrived at the anthropomorphic stage of 
religiofi at all, but were still on the lowest level of fetishism. 
This of course only means that poetry attained a power of 
spiritual expression at a far earlier date than did painting or 


10 GREEK RELIGION. 


sculpture. But when Greek art was developed it became 
a truer record of the national and popular belief than the 
literature. For the painter and still more the sculptor was 
usually the servant of the state, executing state-commissions ; 
he could not then break away from tradition, but must 
embody in his work the popular view about the divinity, how- 
ever much he might refine and idealize. On the other hand 
the poet or the philosophic writer was far more free. He 
could express the aspirations of the few, could put forth 
religious conceptions such as are found in Pindar and 
Euripides reaching far beyond the range of the popular view. 
But the history of any religion is equally concerned with 
testimony such as this; for it has to deal with the twofold 
question, what was the average meaning of the religion for 
the nation, and what ideal expression did it occasionally 
receive. And the latter question must often be discussed 
before we can sufficiently answer the former. For instance, 
it is not impossible, as may afterwards be shown, that the 
later popular view about Ourania Aphrodite was coloured by 
the Platonic interpretation of the title. 

But the art and the literature were not mere records of 
the religion; they were forces that directly or indirectly 
assisted its growth. It is a saying partially true that Greek 
theology took its shape from Homer*, His poems were 
doubtless a great moment in that development from a stage 
of religious thought, at which the divinities were amorphous, 
vague in outline and character, lacking ethical quality, to the 
stage of clear and vivid anthropomorphism, of which the 
personal forms are plastic and precise. We need not regard 
Homer as a religious reformer, consciously setting himself to 
refine away the monstrous and primitive elements of the 
religion. The result is still the same; as the fruit of his 
poetic work and imagination the people inherited a higher 
and clearer religious view. The Greek epic poetry is probably 


* Herodotus in a well-known passage “EAAnos, kal roto. Oeoia Tas @owvvpias 
somewhat exaggerates their influence  ddyres, xal Tiyds Te Kal Téxvas dieAdvTes, 
when he says of Hesiod and Homer at et5ea adrav OnenvayTes 2. 53. 
obra b€ iow of monoavtes Oeoyovinv 


| 
| 
| 
' 
) 
f 
| 





INTRODUCTION. II 


the first national expression of the belief that the gods were 
concerned with the general interests of men; and to such 
a belief it was necessary that the gods themselves should 
assume a human aspect, in order that they should act in 
human affairs. We may believe that not only Greek poetry 
but Greek music played a part in this characterization of the 
divinities, this fixing of the types, as a particular mode of 
music, expressive of a certain ethical idea, became appropriate 
to a particular worship*. It was long before Greek art could 
exert such an influence; and the national mind must have 
become habituated to conceive of the divinities in clear 
human outlines before the national art could so express 
them. But when it had attained freedom and _ sufficient 
mastery over form, it probably reacted on the religious 
conception with a power greater and more immediate than 
any that the literature could exercise. It is here a question 
about the sculpture and painting that filled the temples and 
sacred places, and it is clear at once that no other product of 
the Greek imagination could be so public or so popular as 
these; if these then in any way transformed or refined Greek 
religion, the people in general would be reached by the 
change, and would be the less inclined to challenge it or 
view it with suspicion, because the sculptor and the painter 
in any public commission worked always within the lines of 
the popular creed. I may afterwards note some special 
instances in which their work can be proved to have 
ameliorated or in some way modified the current religion ; 
it is enough to say here that their refining influence appears 
in their choice of subject-matter, and as a result of a certain 
tendency of style. It appears in the former, inasmuch as 
the gross and barbarous elements in the myths and lower 
folklore intrude themselves but rarely even into vase-paint- 
ing, the lowest of all the Greek arts of design, and scarcely 
at all into monumental sculpture and painting. These dealt 


® Athen. 14. 626 mapd pdvos ’Ap- Oeors tyvodor. The vdpos opios was 
kacw of maides te vnniwv eifovrac kata ~— proper to Athena and Ares, Plut. de 
vépov Tovs bpvous Kal madvas, ois Exacta §=©—0s Mus. c. 29 and 33. 
kata Ta waTpLa Tods Emtxwplous Hpwas Kat 


12 GREEK RELIGION. 


with the highest forms of the Olympian religion, which were 
free from obscenity and almost free from superstitious and 
obscure mysticism. Also the mere formal development of 
style, though guided perhaps by an artistic rather than 
a conscious religious instinct, yet reacted on the religious 
feeling. The long continued schooling throughout the 
archaic and transitional periods had won for the perfected 
Greek sculpture of the fifth century its two primary 
qualities, its disciplined and ideal treatment of forms and 
its earnestness of ethical expression, the two qualities con- 
noted by the Greek term cepuvdrns. Such a style, avoiding 
mere naturalism and emotional exaggeration, was supremely 
fitted for the creation of religious types; and working upon 
these, it made the personages of the Greek polytheism more 
human and more real for the imagination, more ideal,in form 
and ethical content. And it was truly said of the masterpiece 
of Pheidias, that it added something to the received religion, 
and that no man could conceive of Zeus otherwise than as 
this sculptor showed him. | 

Taking then the monuments and the literature both as 
records and as formative influences in Greek religion, I 
wish to note the chief facts in the worship of each divinity, 
to distinguish when possible between the earlier and later 
stages, to mention the leading local cults and to give the 
general Pan-hellenic conception when such exists, taking 
account only of such myths as throw light on the religious 
idea, and finally to describe the main characteristic repre- 
sentations of each divinity in the monuments. 


“ 


COAPTE RAT 
THE ANICONIC AGE. 


THE Homeric poems, as has been said, present us with 
a group of divinities not at all regarded as personifications of 
the various forces and spheres of nature, but as real personages 
humanly conceived with distinct form and independent action. 
We have no clear trace in the literature legend and cults of 
Greece of that earlier stage which is often supposed to precede 
polytheism in the cycle of religious development, a stage of 
polydaemonism when the objects of worship are vague com- 
panies of ‘numina’ nameless and formless. There is no 
evidence of this, as regards Greek religion, in the statement of 
Herodotus that the Pelasgians attached no names to their 
divinities, for Herodotus is in the first place defending an 
unscientific thesis that most of the Greek divinities derived 
their names from Egypt, and may be only referring to the 
primitive custom of avoiding the name of the divinity in 
ritual*. Nor are Hesiod’s lines, that speak of the thirty 
thousand daemones of Zeus, the ‘watchers of mortal men,’ 
any proof that Greek religion had passed through that earlier 
stage ; for Hesiod is often perfectly free in the creation of such 
unseen moral agencies, or if there is some popular belief 
underlying this conception, it is that which was attached to 
hero-worship; but however old this may be it cannot be 
proved to be prior in the history of Greek religion to the 
higher cult. At the very threshold, then, of Greek history, 
the religion is already clearly anthropomorphic ; the ordinary 
Greek of the Homeric period did not imagine his God 


® Herod. 2. 52 vide Maury, Histoire des religions de la Grece antique, sub init. 


14 GREEK RELIGION. [cHap. 


under the form of a beast but under the form of a man®. 
He did not, however, as yet represent him in this form either 
in marble or wood, as a general rule. It is important to note 
that we have no express reference in Homer to any statue or 
idol in human shape, excepting the allusion to the idol of 
Athene Polias in Troy”. As to the reality of this there can 
be no doubt, for Homer tells us how the women bore the 
peplos in procession to the citadel to lay it on the knees of 
the goddess. She must, therefore, have been represented as 
seated, and with lower parts of human shape, and if the words 
in line 311, dveveve € Tladdas ’AOHvn, refer to the image itself, 
then the head also was of human semblance. We note also 
that temple-building, another sign of the anthropomorphic 
conception, is abundantly proved to have been known to 
Homer's age by Homeric passages. We hear of this very 
temple of Athene on the acropolis of Troy, fitted with doors 
and bolts, and the Adivos obdds of Apollo at Delphi. But on 
the whole the poems of Homer supply us with sufficient 
evidence that the worship of his age was still aniconic; and of 
this we have abundant positive evidence from other sources. 
Botticher in his Bawmcultus* has collected the proofs, that 
among the objects which had no human semblance. but served 
as dya\yara, or emblems of the divinity, the tree takes a very 
prominent place in many nations’ ritual. But we find in the 
earliest period of Greek religion of which we have any record 
that it is never the tree itself which is worshipped, simply in 
its own right, but the tree is regarded as the shrine of the 
divinity that houses within it; thus we may explain the epithets 
evdervdpos of Zeus}, and the legend of Helene Dendritis 2. 
Nor is it the tree as such that is the dyadua, but the stock or 
carved trunk, that is, the tree artificially wrought upon in 
some rude way. The dyadya of Aphrodite dedicated by 
Pelops was wrought out of a fresh verdant myrtle tree’. At 
Samos a board was the emblem of Hera®: two wooden stocks 
joined together by a cross-picce was the sign of the Twin- 
brethren at Sparta, and a wooden column encircled with ivy 


* Vide Note at the end of the chapter. © Vide especially the chapter entitled 
» 71. 6. 300. Umriss des Hellenischen Baumceultus. 


1] THE ANICONIC AGE. 15 


was consecrated to Dionysus at Thebes *®. But more com- 
monly the sacred aniconic object is the stone, sometimes in its 
natural state, untouched by any art, as the AOos dpyds of the 
Thespian Eros™; but still more usually it is the wrought stone 
that fulfils the religious purpose. Thus Apollon Aguieus was 
represented by a cone-shaped column, and Pausanias speaks 
of an Artemis Patroa ‘ fashioned like a pillar’'°. And from 
the fragment of the Phoronis mentioned by Clemens '*, we 
learn that the ancient emblem of Hera at Argos was a tall 
column. Other instances will be noted later. 

Now it is important to see that the view prevalent in the 
earliest historic period of Greece about these Aniconic objects 
is more advanced than the view of primitive fetishism ; for 
they seem never, except in a few isolated instances, to have 
been revered by the Greeks as objects of independent 
efficacy, of nameless divine power, producing, if properly dealt 
with, miraculous effect. This may have been their aboriginal 
character, but they came to be adopted by the higher poly- 
theism, and, when it was no longer understood why the 
stone in itself should be sacred, legends are invented attaching 
it to this or that divinity of the local cult *°. Thus the Omphalos 
at Delphi becomes the stone of Hestia, and another sacred 
stone was holy because it was that which Saturn swallowed. 
Lastly, these objects are usually not regarded as the actual 
divinity but as the sign of his presence; although in the 
Arcadian worship of Zeus Kazzoras, which will be noticed 
below, the stone appears to have been named as if it were the 
god himself. 


16 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


NOTE. 


The statement in the text would have to be modified if we supposed 
that the epithet Bodms of Hera and yAaveams of Athene meant in 
Homer ‘ cow-faced’ and ‘owl-faced,’ and that the goddesses were ever 
conceived by him as having the face ofa cow or the face of anowl. Now, 
certainly Boéms ought to mean cow-faced, rather than ox-eyed, on the 
analogy of tavpwmds, an epithet of wine in /oz (fr. 9, Bergk), and of 
Dionysos Orphic. Hymn 29. 4,and dp more usually means face than eye 
in Homer. A cow-faced Hera may have been a form indigenous in 
Greece or imported from Egypt, and need not be explained by any 
reference to a worship of the moon. But Schliemann’s archaeological 
evidence is inconclusive: he gives on Plates A, B, C, D of Mycenae and 
Tiryns reproductions of terra-cotta figures and cows-heads, and he 
thinks he has found females with cows-horns protruding at the side of 
their breasts, and he calls these images of Hera Bo@ms; but, as the writer 
of the article on Hera in Roscher’s Lexicon remarks, these terra-cotta 
figures may simply denote offerings taking the place of real cow-sacrifices 
(cf. images of little pigs to Demeter) ; and the horns at the sides of the 
female images are merely crude representations of arms. And Homer 
also applies the epithet to mortals, to a handmaid of Helen (//. 3. 144), 
to Phylomedusa wife of Areithoos (Od. 7. 10), and to one of the Nymphs 
of Thetis (cf. the name of the Oceanid in Hesiod, 7heog. 355 Madovrm 
Bodms). Now there is no reason why it should not mean the same in 
all these cases. But in what possible not uncomplimentary sense could 
women be called cow-faced? Either this original meaning had been 
forgotten, and Homer applies it to Hera mechanically from mere tradition, 
and thence it becomes a term of meaningless praise for mortal women 
because properly an epithet of a goddess, or it means for Homer ox-eyed, 
with large lustrous eyes. Ineither case then Homer does not consciously 
conceive of Hera as cow-faced. YTAavxémes stands on a different footing, 
for it need only mean ‘ bright-faced,’ and Schliemann’s ‘ owl-eyed ’ or ‘ owl- 
faced’ idols at Hissarlik are not owl-faced at all. 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER I. 


* Zeus: Hesych. s. v. évdevdpos* mapa ‘Podios Zevs, Ardvucos ev Betwria. 

2 Paus. 3. 22, 12 in Laconia 76 Sevdpov ere éxelvny o€Bovor thy pupoiryy, 
kal "Aprepuwy dvopagovot Swreipay, 

$Id. 3. 19, 10: the Rhodian women (Epwiow elxacpévac) Siada- 
Bovoa 81 tHv ‘EXévny amdyxovow emi devdpov: cf. Theocr. 18. 48 o€Bov p’, 
‘Edévas urdv eipt. 

* Festus, p. 37 Delubrum dicebant fustem delibratum, hoc est, 
decorticatum, quem pro deo venerabantur. 


1] THE ANICONIC AGE. 17 


° Clem, Alex. Protrept. p. 40 P. kat ré rijs Sapias "Hpas &yadpa mpédrepov 


‘ > LA 
pev nv cavis, varepov O€ emt IIpoxhéous apxovtos avOpwroeid€és éyevero. 


° Paus. 9. 40, 11 Oey b€ padtora Xatpwveis TysHor Td oKATpov 6 Toa 
Au hnow “Opnpos “Hpaorovr. 


" Id, 5. 13, 7 SiaBdvre 8€ rov "Eppoy mérapov adyaya ev Thy memouy- 
pevov ex pupoivns TeOnAvias. 


® Jd. 1. 27, 1, at Athens, ‘Eppijs EvAov b7d KAddov pupoivas od obvorrtor. 


* Max. Tyr. Diss. 8. 1 yewpyot Avdvucov timaor, méartes ev dpxdr@ 
avtopves mpépvov, 


> - 
70 Paus. 2. 9, 6 pera 1O ’Apdrov npaov ears Zevs Metdixeos Kat “Aprepts 
b] U] © B 
RA , , \ , Cd > ~ , ‘ ¢ ‘ 
a 
ovopafouern Ilarpwa, ovv texvy meTounmeva ovdeia, mupapids dé 6 MewAixu0s, 
n O€ Kiovi éotw eikacpern. 


1 Id, 9. 24, 3 év‘Ynrr@ vads éotw ‘Hpakdéous . . . dvros ovxi dydAparos 


‘ , , 4 ; “~ A ‘7 > Cal 
avy texvn, AiGov S€ dpyov Kata TO apyaioy, 


2 Td, 9. 27, 1 Ocdv b€ of Ceomeis tipdow "Epwra padiora €& apyis, 


kai o:htow ayadpa mradatatév €atw apyos Aibos. 


*% Td. 9. 38, 1, at Orchomenos in Boeotia, ras peév 87) wérpas (aydApara 
Xapirwv) céBovoi te pddiota Kat TH “Ereoxhei aitas meceiv ek TOU ovpavo 
, 
paciv. 


14 Td. 2. 21. 4 rov S€ €umpocbev Tov vaov AiOov Kadovpevov de fepov eivut 
ft p p 


A€eyouow ep ov more avdpes Tporknviwy evvéa ’Opeatny éxaOnpav. 


* Tertullian, Afolog. 16 Quanto distinguitur a crucis stipite Pallas 
Attica et Ceres Raria quae sine effigie rudi palo et informi ligno 
prostant. 


7% Clem. Alex. Stroma/. p. 418 P. mpi yodv dxpiBoOqva tas tev 
dyadpdtwv axéoes Kiovas ioravres of madatot eoeBov .. . ypaper yoor 6 tiv 
Popwvida noinoas, 

KadX66n kdevdodxos *OAvpmiados Bacueins 
¢ > , A , ‘ , 
Hpns ‘Apyeins 7) oréupact Kat Ovodvoice 
Tp@Tn exkdopnoev Tepl Kiova pakpoy avdacons. 
26, : Evpimidns ev Avtidan yoiv 
évdov b€ Cadapois BovkdAov 


“ ~ A t ed a 
Kopavra Kico@ atvddv Eviov Oeov, 


” Plutarch, De Frat. Amor. ad init. ra madkaa tév Avockovper adidpipara 
ot Sraptiara Sdxava Kadovow' eat dé Svo Eva mapdAAndAa bvoi mrayis éme- 
Cevypeva. 

VOL, I. Cc 


18 GREEK RELIGION. 


'® Athen. p. 614 (quoting from the Delzas of Semos) épxerar... 
cis Andov. .. #AGe Kal eis TO Ant@ov ... dav d€ avro (ro dyadpa) EvALvov 
dpoppov mapaddgas eyéhacer. 

19 Paus. 10. 24, 6 Aidos early od péyas’ TovTov Kai €avov donpepat KaTa- 
xéovet, kal Kata éopriy éxdotny epia émiriBéaor Ta apyd. 

2 Damasce. vila Isid. (Bibl. Graec. Script. Didot p. 137) rév Barvdwy 
@ov aro dvaxeioba GeG Kpov@ Aut ‘HAl@ kal Trois dAXovs. 

2 Harpocrat. s.v, ’Ayuias. "Ayueds d€ €ore kiav eis 0€0 Anyor, dy iaract 


mpd tov Ovpav' iBious Se civai paow adrovs “AmddAwvos. 


Re Pag PY 


CHAPTER ey 


THE BEGINNINGS OF THE ICONIC AGE. 


IT is important for the history of Greek cult to consider 
the question when the object first became iconic, or when the 
process of art had advanced so far as to make idolatry possible. 
The wooden eixdéy is at least as early as Homer's period; and 
while a certain artistic record begins from the latter half of 
the seventh century, the works of Daedalus belong to the 
prehistoric age, and may roughly be assigned to the ninth 
century. But according to tradition, the wooden idols 
attributed to Daedalus were not the most primitive in form. 
We may go then still further back for the beginnings of 
iconism in Greek worship. 

The uncouth human-shaped idols found on the ruins of 
Troy and Mycenae give us no clue for the present question, 
since we do not know their date even approximately, and we do 
not know whether in the remotest degree they were Greek in 
origin; the most developed is almost certainly Babylonian. 
The iconic impulse probably came from the East, for from 
the tenth century onwards the fame of the carved idols of 
Egypt and Assyria must have been spreading through the 
Greek world; the impulse may have come thence, but not the 
prevalent form, as I have elsewhere tried to show, though 
certain special types can be traced to an Oriental model.. 

Much of the idol-work of Egypt and Assyria was therio- 


-morphic—whereas the earliest image under which the Greek 


divinity proper was figured was the image of man. The 
instances to the contrary that may be quoted are of insufficient 


® Archaeol. Review, November 1888, p. 167. 
C 2 


20 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


weight to disprove this*, for we know nothing certain about 
any monument that showed Hera as cow-headed, or Athene 
as owl-eyed ; the bull-headed Dionysos-Zagreus is compara- 
tively late—or is at all events not the earliest conception of 
Dionysos. We have a doubtful record in Pausanias of 
a horse-headed Demeter at Phigaleia, the existence of this 
strangely-shaped idol being only attested by vague popular 
tradition”; and lastly a more certain account of the idol of 
Eurynome near Phigaleia, a mysterious goddess who was 
probably a primitive form of Artemis, and who was represented 
half-woman, half-fish. If we assume this to be a genuinely 
Hellenic divinity, this representation is the only real exception 
to the principle just mentioned. 

At the earliest stage of iconism, of which literature or monu- 
ments have left record, we find the form of the god darkly 
emerging from the inorganic block, the Al@os feords, but the 
features of this embryo form are human. 

It concerns the history of the people’s religion to know in 
what way the image was regarded. Was it regarded merely as 
a symbol bringing home to the senses the invisible and remote 
divinity? Probably this was never the popular view, nor was it 
the original. We may believe that for the early and uncultivated 
Greek, as for all less advanced peoples, ‘the nature and power of 
the divinity were there in the image®.’ It is hard indeed to find 
any passage that establishes the exact identity of the deity and 
the image in ancient belief, but many show the view that the 
statue was in the most intimate sense the shrine or the €os of 
the divinity, and often animated by its presence. The statue 
of Hera turned aside when the blood of the Sybarites was 
shed at her altar*?; and Iphigenia in Euripides’ play declares 
that the idol of Artemis showed the same aversion when the 


* Lenormant, Antiguités dela Troade, 
p- 21-23. Schliemann’s //zos, p. 288. 
Schomann’s Griechische Alterthiimer, 
2. pp. 174-175- 

> The view of Milchhofer (Anfange d. 
Kunst in Griechenl. pp. 60-62), that this 
Demeter is identical with a horse-headed 


Gorgon that appears on early vases, 
will be discussed in the chapter on 
Demeter. 

¢ De La _ Saussay’s 
schichte, vol. 1. p. 54. 

4d Athenae. p. 521. 


keligtonsge~ 


II. THE BEGINNINGS OF THE ICONIC AGE. 21 


matricide Orestes drew near *, and when the suppliants were 
dragged away to slaughter from the feet of the Palladion” of 
Siris, the goddess closed her eyes. The practice of chaining 
statues to prevent them abandoning their votaries illustrates 
the same conception. 

On the other hand, Greek literature is not wanting in 
passages that protest against the prevailing image-worship. 
The unreasonableness of prayer offered to idols was noted 
by Heraclitus! Antisthenes of the Socratic School? declared 
that the image could teach nothing of the true nature of God, 
and Zeno? went so far as to deny the propriety of statues 
and temples alike. Even Menander* seriously combats the 
belief that the divinity can be propitiated by image or sacrifice. 
Thus the great idea expressed by the Hebrew prophets and 
by the teaching of the earliest Christian Church had revealed 
itself also to the more advanced among the Greeks. But here 
it remained the idea of a few thinkers, and it developed no 
tendency towards iconoclasm in Greek religion. Down to the 
last days of paganism the image retained its hold over the 
people’s mind, and expressed for them more immediately than 
could be expressed in any other way all that they felt and 
believed about the nature of the divinity. 


a Tph. Taur. 1165. b Strabo, p. 264. 


22 GREEK RELIGION. 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER II. 


" Heraclitus, Clem. Alex. Profrept. P. 44 P. (Bywater, Frag. 176). 


TOLOLY dya\paot TOUTEOLOLY ev xovTat, OKOLOV el Ts TOLS Sdpoure Aeoynvevoiro. 


2 Clem. Alex. Str om. Pp. 714 P. 6 Sexparixds "AvticOévns . . . oddevi 
eouxévat not (rov Oedv) Sidmep adrdv oddels expabeiv e& eixdvos Svvara. CF. 
2b. quotation from Xenophanes : . 

cis Beds &v re Oeviow Kaui dvOporo.or peyiotos - 


a+ , fed e , > \ / 
ot te d€uas Ovyroiow dpuitos odd€ vdnpa. 


* Lb. 691 P. Ayer Kai Zyvov . . . ev T® THs ToAtTelas BiBrio pte vaods 
deiv moety pte dydApara, 
Me CN oe ae 
et tis b€ Ovolay mpoodépar, & Tlapduire, 
Tavpov te mANOS 4 *pidar . 
” , A \ ; , 
evvouv vopiCer Tov Oedv Kabeorava 


9 Cal 
memAdynt éxeivos Kal ppévas koupas exe. 


CHAPTER. 
CRONOS. 


It is generally believed that the worship of Zeus was 
primeval among the Hellenes, their ancestors bringing it 
from a common Aryan centre, and that in the popular 
religion no organized system of divinities existed prior to 
the Olympian. Stated thus, this belief is reasonable, and yet 
we must take notice of cults that were perhaps pre-Hellenic, 
or at least belonged to an earlier period than the developed 
‘Olympian’ religion and survived long in certain localities by 
the side of this. We have to account for the prevalent 
legends concerning Cronos with his Titan dynasty and the 
Titanomachia which overthrew them. The question of origins 
must here be glanced at, for on the answers will depend 
whether we shall consider Cronos as a real personage in 
tradition and worship. Welcker*, who maintains that Zeus 
is the starting-point of Greek religion, explains away Cronos 
very ingeniously: he arose from a misunderstanding of an 
epithet of Zeus—Kpovidns or Kpoviwv: this meant originally 
the Son of Time, a figurative way of naming the ‘Etermal: 
or ‘the Ancient of Days.’ Ata pre-Homeric period this was 
misinterpreted and understood as a son of Cronos, a mere 
nominis umbra. This theory, though accepted by some later 
writers, was born of false philology, a misleading theological 
bias, and an ignorance of what is really primitive in ancient 
religion. It is strange, as Mr. Lang has pointed out, that to 
this shadow should attach the most concrete and carnal 
myths in the whole of Greek mythology—myths that speak 


a Griechische Gotlerlehre, 1, p. 149. 


24 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


of a savage stage of thought, while the conception of the 
Eternal or the Ancient of Days belongs to a high range of 
metaphysic and religion. But the fatal obstacle is that Kpévos 
is thus made equivalent to Xpévos,—an impossible philological 
equation. The Greeks for the most part kept clear of the 
pitfall® into which Welcker and later writers have fallen, nor 
was the personification of time ever popular or ever received 
into the religion. 

Another explanation of Cronos is also based on false 
philology. He has been regarded” as identical with Helios, 
or as a kind of double of Zeus-Helios, and his name has been 
derived from xpatvw in the sense of ‘ripen. But the-laws of 
vowel-change forbid the derivation, and kpatvw is not used in 
the sense of ‘ripen, nor is there any proof at all that in the 
early religion he is identical with Helios °, or is the double of 
Zeus. There is yet another theory that saves the primitive 
Greek religious world from the presence of Cronos—the 
theory maintained by Bottiger in his Kunst-Mythologie 4, 
that Cronos is simply the Phoenician god Moloch, the 
devourer of infants, who gradually fades away westward 
before the light of the rising Hellenic religion. Now the 
Greeks themselves must have found a strong likeness between 
the rites or characrer of Cronos and Moloch, for they 
identified the two gods. But they also identified Cronos 
with other Semitic, and even, as it seems, with Celtic divini- 
ties 19-1815, And there is no proof or probable evidence 
that the Phoenicians brought this religion to Elis, where the 
god was worshipped on Mount Cronion, or to Athens, where 
we hear of a temple of Rhea and Cronos and the feast of 
Cronia; and it is merely begging the question to say that 


* Aristotle, de Mundo, 7 Kpévov 8é nats 
kat xpévou Aéyerai, seems to have been 
the first who brought the two words 
together. Eurip. Herac/. goo shows an 
uncertain reading. 

» Mayer, Die Giganten und Titanen, 
p- 71: in his later article on Kronos in 
Roscher’s Zexzkon he regards this deri- 
vation as doubtful. 


¢ His connexion with Helios is only 
attested by late and doubtful evidence; 
vide Ref. 8a. Such legends as the swal- 
lowing of the stone and the frequent 
consecration of meteoric stones to him 
cannot be made to support any solar 
theory about him. 

4 Vol. 1, pp. 221-222. 





111.) CRONOS. 25 


because the rites were sometimes savage and bloody, there- 
fore they were not indigenous in Greece. Besides, how did 
Zeus come to be considered the son of Moloch, and how did 
Moloch turn into an apparently mild divinity to whom was 
consecrated a festival that seems to have been a harvest-feast 
where masters and slaves rejoiced together? At least the 
theory that Cronos was Phoenician leaves much to be 
explained. Whether originally native or originally borrowed, 
the legend and character of Cronos have a flavour of very old 
religion. The Hesiodic theogony shows a certain speculative 
system, but it reflects many genuine and primitive ideas ; for 
instance, Cronos and Zeus, who are the heads of their dynas- 
ties, are both the youngest sons ; and this must be more than 
the caprice of the poet; it is probably a reminiscence of 
‘Jiingstenrecht,’ a practice that had vanished from Greek 
institutions, and seems alien to the moral sense of Homer. 
who holds strongly that the Erinys supports the eldest son, and 
that therefore Poseidon must yield to Zeus the eldest-born. 
Again, we have the legends of Cronos savouring of human 
sacrifice and savage morality, and we have no right at once 
to conclude that these are Oriental or foreign, since human 
sacrifice was an institution of the early Greeks, as of most 
Aryan tribes, and traces of it survived down to a late period 
of Greek history. Then we find him asa scarcely remembered 
harvest-god, from whom the Attic feast of Kpovia*, a harvest- 
feast held in July», is named ; lastly, we have the story of his 
overthrow by Zeus, and scant honour is paid him in historic 
Greece. These facts would be unique and inexplicable if 
Kpévos were an abstraction, a mere personification. They 
can be best explained if we suppose him to be one of the 
figures of a lost and defeated religion; if the myth of the 
Titanomachy, which has absolutely no meaning as a nature- 








® Buttmann (Mythologus, ii. p. 54) 
supposes that the Cronia was not 
originally a feast consecrated to Cronos, 
but that the god in some way grew 
out of the feast; but the Scholiast on 
Demosthenes says that the feast was in 
honour of Cronos and Rhea, and we 


have no other evidence, nor any other 
probable explanation of the name of 
the feast. 

b There is no sufficient reason for 
Mommsen’s view that the Cronia was 
originally a spring-festival (Heortologie, 
p- 79): 


26 GREEK RELIGION. [ CHAP. 


myth, that is, as a myth of thunder and lightning and earth- 
quakes and volcanoes®, is regarded as a vague record of the 
struggle of religions in the Greek world. This is undoubtedly 
part of the meaning of such myths as those concerning the 
sufferings of Dionysos, the hostility and the reconciliation of 
Apollo and Asclepios, the contest between Apollo and 
Heracles for the Delphic tripod, and the strange legend of 
the wrestling-match between Zeus and Cronos at Olympia °. 
One chief argument in favour of this view about the 
Titanomachy can be drawn from the myths concerning 
Themis, Prometheus and Briareus-Aegaeon. In the actual 
contest between the powers of Cronos and Zeus, these take 
a part favourable to the Olympians; and each of these 
personages was still honoured with cults in later periods of 
Greek history; Themis at Delphi, where her worship and 
oracular power preceded Apollo's, Prometheus at Athens, 
and Aegaeon at Euboea*. Now the myth that accounted 
for the disappearance of an older religion would naturally 
account for the survival in cult of some of the older cycle 
of deities by conceiving them as having acted against their 
own order, and as friends of the new dynasty. And when 
one traces the application of the word Titan, one finds 
the word as vague as the ethnic name ‘ Pelasgoi, and as 
the one denotes nothing more than the pre-historic people, 


* The part played by Briareus- Aegaeon 
is inconsistent with Preller’s interpreta- 


supposition that sometimes the Titan- 
name is only an older cult-name of an 


tion of the Titanomachy as a contest 
between the benign and destructive 
forces of nature, a light and storm- 
struggle; and many of the Titanic names 
are derived from roots denoting light 
or brightness. 

» Vide Ref. 1: this explanation of the 
legend has already been given by Prof. 
Robert in the new edition of Preller’s 
Greechische Mythologie, 1. p. 55, note 
2, sub fin. The view put forward in 
the text is more or less the same as 
was propounded by Leontiew in Arch. 
Anzeiger, 1851, ‘ De Jovis apud Graecos 
cultu’: and is not inconsistent with the 


Olympian deity: vide M. Mayer, Die 
Giganten und Titanen. 

¢ Solinus, 11, 16 Titanas in ea (Eu- 
boea) antiquissime regnasse ostendunt . 
ritus religionum. Briareo enim rem 
divinam Carystii faciunt, sicut Aegaeoni 
Chalcidenses: nam omnis fere Euboea 
Titanum fuit regnum. Dr. Mayer 
supposes Briareus-Aegaeon to be an 
older cult-title of Poseidon: but it 
appears more probable that Poseidon 
took the title occasionally of this older 
Euboean sea-giant: vide Callimach. 
Frag. 106. 


III. ] CRONOS. 27 


the other may be taken as a vague term for the pre-historic 
god 4 . 

Lastly, the slaves have certain privileges at the feast of 
Cronos : now the analogy of the pre-Hellenic Paliki-worship 
in Sicily and the privileges of the slaves that this cult 
guaranteed them, may explain this. The dispossessed god 
becomes often the god of slaves, or at least the slave, being 
frequently the aboriginal man, claims and is allowed his pro- 
tection’. The violence of the struggle between Zeus and 
Cronos may then be the religious counterpart of the struggles 
between the men of the religion of Zeus and the men of the 
older cults. Then Zeus having succeeded to Cronos’ supre- 
macy becomes his son, perhaps by the same sort of fiction 
as that which made Dionysos, the Thrakian-Phrygian god, 
the son of Zeus, or Asclepios the son of Apollo. This 
hypothesis in no way disturbs the cardinal belief of Aryan 
philology, that all the Aryan tribes worshipped a sky-god of 
cognate name to Zeus; for the evidence only seems to make 
probable the prehistoric existence in Greece of the worship 
of a leading god called Cronos. That the worshippers were 
primitive Greeks or Aryans we need not say. What sort of 
god he was we may partly gather from the legends; the 
stories about him swallowing his children, and mutilating his 
father Ouranos, whatever their cosmic meaning or physical 
symbolism may be, arose certainly from very low depths of 
the mythopoeic fancy, and Mr. Lang aptly compares certain 
Maori stories about the separation of Heaven and Earth*. 
As regards the ceremonies connected with his worship we 
know very little indeed. We are told that at Olympia’ 
certain priests called Basilae sacrificed once a year to Cronos 
on the hill named after him at the spring equinox. At Athens 


*® Dr. Mayer’s view that Titan is the 
singular name of a ‘ Haupt-gottheit’ 
appears to lack support: the name is 
found rather as an appellative of many 
divine persons. 

> Athenaeus, p. 639, quotes similar 
instances of the privileges of slaves at 
other festivals: at the Hermaea in 


Crete, at the feast of Poseidon at Troe- 
zen, and the Thessalian festival of Zeus 
called Peloria. The explanation sug- 
gested in the text would not so naturally 
apply to these. 

© Custom and Myth, p. 45, ‘Themyth 
of Cronos,’ 


28 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


a sacrificial cake was offered to him in the spring, on the 
fifteenth of Elaphebolion, but the feast of Cronia fell in the 
middle of the summer, and was regarded by Philochorus as 
a harvest-festival of ancient institution at which masters and 
slaves feasted together # 1%. The Roman poet, Accius, may 
be exaggerating when he speaks of the wide-spread pre- 
valence of this festival in Greece; we hear of it only at 
Athens, Rhodes®, and Thebes®, and at the last city of 
a musical contest that accompanied it. At Rhodes, if the 
Rhodian month Metageitnion corresponded to the Attic, it 
was a summer-festival, and it was about the same time of 
the year that offerings were made to Cronos at Cyrene‘ 
according to Macrobius, when the worshippers crowned 
themselves with fresh figs and honoured Cronos as another 
Aristaeus, as the god who taught men the use of honey 
and fruits. So far all this appears to be harmless ritual 
proper to a divinity of vegetation, such as the later Diony- 
sos, and the sickle, the ancient emblem of Cronos, would 
thus be most naturally explained. The darker aspect 
of the worship, the practice of human sacrifice, is scarcely 
attested by any trustworthy record concerning any Greek 
community except Rhodes; but is an inference legitimately 
drawn from legend and from indirect evidence. The Greek 
authors of the earlier period who mention it regard it 
as a barbaric institution !°- ™%; but if there were no 
ancient tradition connecting it with the Hellenic or Hel- 
lenized god, it would be impossible to explain why he should 
be so constantly identified with a Semitic and Celtic god to 
whom the cruel sacrifice was paid. And we have a detailed 
account given by Plutarch and Diodorus of the Carthaginian 
offering of children to Moloch, who was often regarded as 
Cronos*. The bronze idol stood with his arms extended and 
his hands sloping downwards, so that the infant placed upon 
them slipped off and fell into a pit full of fire that was placed 
beneath, and its wails were drowned with the noise of drums. 
This ghastly rite certainly travelled to Crete, where the 


* E.g. by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, 1. 38, Augustine, de C7v. Dei, 7. 19: vide 
Ref. 14. : 


III. ] CRONOS. 29 


myth of the brazen giant, Talus, who clasped strangers to 
his breast and sprang with them into a pit of fire, attests the 
worship of the Semitic god*. Now the only recorded worship 
of Cronos, in any Greek community, where human life was 
devoted, was the Rhodian, and the ritual of this bore no 
resemblance to the Phoenician if we may trust Porphyry ®: 
a criminal who had been condemned to death was led outside 
the gates at the feast of Cronia and having been stupefied 
with wine was sacrificed by the shrine of Artemis Aristobule”. 
There is no reason to suppose that there was here any 
borrowing from Semitic religion. The statement of Philo 
that Cronos offered his only-begotten son as a burnt-sacrifice 
to his father 17 can hardly be taken as a record of a genuinely 
Hellenic religious idea, but we find the tradition of child- 
sacrifice in the Cretan story about the Curetes!®, and, as 
the Cretan myth of the child-Zeus and the mother Rhea 
points to Phrygia, so we find both in Crete and Phrygia 
traces of the worship of Cronos under the name Acrisius **, 
and in the latter country also vivid reminiscence of human 
sacrifice in the stories concerning Lityerses the harvest-god. 
Possibly the sacrifice of Pelops is a Phrygian myth of the 
same origin °. 

If Cronos was originally a divinity of vegetation, as seems 
most probable, a primitive people might have frequently con- 
secrated the human victim to him as to other deities of the 
same nature, and the fairly numerous examples of the belief 
that the horse was the embodiment of the corn-spirit might 
possibly explain the stories of his transformation into a horse, 
and the Illyrian custom of sacrificing this animal to the god“. 

As an earth divinity we might also expect to find him con- 
nected with the lower world and with the rites paid to the 


® Vide Mayer, Roscher’s Lexikon, p. 
1505. 

> Mayer, 2d. p. 1509, gives a wrong 
account of this ritual, confusing it with 
the Cyprian sacrifice to Agraulos. 

¢ The association of Pelops with 
Cronos is doubtful; when Pindar, O/. 
3. 41, calls Pelops ‘Kpdénos,’. he need 


not mean the ‘son,’ as Mayer supposes, 
but only ‘the descendant’ of Cronos. 
Both Pelops and Cronos appear on 
coins of Himera, but there is no proved 
connexion between them there; Head, 
Hist. Num, p. 127. 

4 Ref. 21: Fraser, Golden Bough, 
vol. 2, pp. 24-26. 


30 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


dead; and the legend of his ruling over the isles of the blest 
and the departed heroes may be derived from this connexion 
of ideas. But it did not receive any expression in cult, so far 
as we know; we are told by Pausanias that the worshipper 
who descended into the grave of Trophonius at Lebadea, first 
made sacrifice to Cronos as to other divinities, but the con- 
text does not make the reason clear*. The attempt made 
to associate the worship of the dead at Athens and the Feast 
of Pitchers in the Anthesteria with an ancient cult of Cronos 
has been unsuccessful *; nor is there much better evidence for. 
the conception of Cronos as a dream-god, who slept a pro- 
phetic sleep below the earth; the only direct record of 
any such cult of him is the line of Lycophron, a doubtful 
authority, who speaks of ‘ the altar of the prophetic Cronos’ 
at Aulis**. A glimpse of the early chthonian character 
of the god is perhaps afforded us by the record of his sepul- 
chres in Sicily, where the idea of the entombed divinity 
appears to have prevailed ®. We find the same concep- 
tion in the worship of Dionysos; it may arise from the 
singular ritual of the god, who is slain in sacrifice, or from 
a natural belief about the god of vegetation who dies with the 
fall of the year. Such a divinity does Cronos appear to have 
been, when we review the scanty facts concerning his cult 
which have been put together, and which on the whole are all 
we can glean at present after rejecting much that is late and 
spurious in the record. 

Much remains still to be explained. The worship of Cronos 
must have been far more widely diffused throughout the 
primitive land of Greece than the records attest; else we 
could hardly explain how the affiliation of the primeval Aryan 
Zeus to this strange dispossessed god came to be an idea so 
widely prevalent among the Hellenic people before the time 
of Homer. Where and how this fusion took place has never 
been satisfactorily discussed. Some of the facts might justify 
the hypothesis that the figure of Cronos was originally Phry- 
gian-Cretan; and that the idea of the affiliation of Zeus and 


«» Vide Mommsen, /eortologie, p. 20 note and 22, 80; and Mayer in Roscher’s 
Lexthon, pp. 1517-1518. 


II. ] CRONOS. "gt 


of the fall of Cronos arose in that island and spread thence 
over Greece; at Athens, at least where the worship of Cronos 
is recorded, the prehistoric connexion with Crete is attested 
by many legends and cults, and recent discoveries prove the 
same of Olympia. The wide prevalence of the worship in 
Sicily? may be partly accounted for by the confusion of 
Cronos with the Carthaginian god. 

It seems then that at the outset of the history of Greek 
religion we must note, as an historic fact, the traces of earlier 
cults than those of the recognized Olympian cycle; some of 
which survive and take a subordinate place in Hellenic 
religion. 

The representation of Cronos on monuments is not a ques- 
tion of great interest for Greek archaeology proper; for the 
monuments are mostly late that deal with him *, and there is 
no orderly development of his type, and his form possesses 
no spiritual or ethical interest at all, having been handled by 
no great sculptor. He appears to have been sometimes 
depicted as white-haired or bald, and a dark and sombre 


character, with traits partly of Zeus, partly of Hades, 


often attaches to him on reliefs and vases. The veil about 
his head and the sickle or pruning-hook in his hand are 
the attributes by which we can generally discover him. 
Neither the cults nor the monuments recognize that aspect 
of him familiar in poetry, as the god of the golden age. 


® The most interesting example of coin of Himera: Head, H7st. Num. p. 
earlier representations is the fifth century 127; Roscher, Lexikon, p. 1553, fig. 5. 


age GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER III. 


1 Elis, at Olympia: Paus. 6. 20, 1 émt rod dpous (rod Kpoviov) rH Kopupy 
Gvovew of Bacidat Kadovpevor TH Kpdv@ kata ionpepiav Thy ev TO Apt Edahie 
pnvt mapa "Helos. Ib. 8. 2, 2 6 d€ dyov 6 ’OAvpmids, emavayovor yap 

\ + ae Y > eee 2 , A 22 , fe , ‘ , > , cal 
5) adrév és Ta dvwtépw Tod avOpamwv yévous, Kpdvov kai Aia avd madaioat 


AeyorTes. 


2 Athens: Paus. 1. 18, 7 (in the peribolos of the temple of Zeus 
Olympius) €orw dpxaia . . . Zebs xadkois Kat vads Kpdvov kai ‘Peas. 
Demosth. x. Tyoxp. p. 708 dadexarn (rod ‘ExarouBadvos pds)... Kal Tair’ 
dvtwv Kpoviov kai due tair’ aepméns trys Bovdns. Vide R. 20. 


® Delphi: Paus. 10. 24, 6 ére d€ Kai ddga €s adtov doOjvar Kpdve tov 
AlOov avti madds. Cf. R. 19, ch. 1. 


* Lebadea: Paus. 9. 39, 3 Ovet 6 kartoy (into the cave of Trophonius) 


’ id ; OA A 
Andd\A@vi Te Kal Kpdv@ kal Au émixAnow Bact kai “Hpg tre nuidxy. 


’ Thebes: pseudo-Plutarch, Veta Hom. (Westermann, p. 23) od toddy 
S€ ypdvov mr€wv eis OnBas emt Ta Kpdma’ dyav 8 obros ayerat map’ adrois 


povarkds. 


® Rhodes: Porph. de Adst. 2. 54 €Overo yap Kai ev “Pid pyri 
- a” e 4, > ~~ , a \ 2 ee A 4 

Merayerrmav extn iotapévov avOpwmos TG Kpdve’ 0 On emt modU kpatnoay 
a” , oa hcp} n S78 , , , A ‘ a 
€Oos pereBANOn’ eva yap Tay emi Oavat@ Snuooia KatakpiOevrwy pexpl pEev TOV 
Kpoviey cuveixov, evoraons S€ Tis €optis mpoayaydvTes Tov avOpwrov Ew muhav 
... Olvov ToTicavTes Eaarror. 

7 Cyrene: Macr. Sa¢. 1. 7, 25 Cyrenenses etiam, cum rem divinam 
ei (Saturno) faciunt, ficis recentibus coronantur placentasque mutuo 
missitant mellis et fructuum repertorem Saturnum aestimantes. 


® Alexandria: Macr. Sa/. 1. 7, 14-15 tyrannide Ptolemaeorum 
pressi (Aegyptii) hos quoque deos (Saturnum et Serapim) in cultum 
Alexandrinorum more, apud quos praecipue colebantur, coacti sunt. 
Cf. Athenae. 110 b (éykpugias dpros) dv kat ’AdeEavdpeis 7H Kpdvd agre- 
poovtes mporiOeaat eabiew TH Bovdopev@ €v TH TOD Kpdvov eps. 

8a Inscription at Beyrouth of (?) third century a.D. Kpdvov “Hiiov 


Bopds, Rev. Arch. 1872, p. 253: cf. Lt Mag. 426. 16 xowds core 
Bopos dpoiv (“HAlov kai Kpdvov) év ’OAvpmia. 


SO fe ae eA 
or ne Am 


I1I.] CRONOS. 33 


* Cic. De Nat. Deor. 3. 17, 44 Saturnum vulgo maxime ad 
Occidentem colunt. Philochorus, Frag. Hist. Graec. 184 Kpédvov dé 
emxetoOar Suxeia, Kat evravda airoy rerapba: cf. Arnob. Adv. Gent. 4. 
25 Patrocles Thurius . . . qui tumulos memorat reliquiasque Saturnias 
tellure in Sicula contineri. Diod. Sic. 3. 61 duvacredoa dé ace rdv 
Kpédvoy xara Sixediav kai AiBuny, re 8€ thy Iradlay Kai rd Gvvodov év Tois mpds 
éomépav téros ovotncagOa thy Bagideiav, Kata Te THY SiKeAlav Kal Ta Tpds 
€omépav vevovta peépn moddovs Tay b nav Tém@v am’ ékeivov Kpdvia mpos- 
ayopeverba. Cf. Plut. De Js. ef Osir. p. 378 E rots S€ apis éomépay 
oikovvras ioropet Oedmopmos iyyetoOat kai Kadeiv Tov pev xetua@va Kpdvov, To dé 
épos *Adpodirny, rd dé Eap Mepoepdrv® ex dSé€ Kpdvov Kai ’"Appoditns yev- 
vacOa mdvra. 

© Diod. Sic, 13. 86 ’Apidkas 6€... Kata TO marpiov eos TH pev Kpdve@ 
maida opayidoas. 


% Plutarch, De Superst. 171 ti 8é KapxnSovios od« €Avotredet pyre Tid 


Ocav pyre Sarpdvev vouifew i Tovatra Ovew ota TH Kpdve@ EOvov 5 
2 Soph. Frag. 132 (corr. Scaliger) : 


vopos yap eote toior BapBdpos Kpdve 
Ountodeiv Bpdtecov apynbev -yevos. 


*® Plato, Win. 315 C Kapynddmor S€ Ovovow | dvOpwrovs| ws Savor dy Kat 


, > - “a n - . a 
vopipoy avTois, Kal TaUTa Evol aUT@Y Kal TOUS aUTay vieis TH Kpdva. 


 Diod. Sic. 20. 14 jv 8€ map’ aitois avSpids Kpdvov yxadkois, éxteTrakws 
Tas x€ipas UmTias, eyKexAysevas emt THY ynv, Bote Tov emiteOevta Tay Taidwv 


>? , \ ‘ ” , fo , 
aroxuXieo Oat kal mire eis Te xaopa TANpES Trupds. 


© Dion. Hal. 1. 38 Aé€yovor S€ kal ras Ovoias emitedeiv Ta Kpdv@ tovs 
madaovs |“Popaious|, domep ev Kapxnddm réws 7 mods Siepeve, Kal mapa 
< > , / ‘ ‘\ ’ od \ ad ¢ , > cal > 
KeArois es tdd€ xpdvou yiyvera Kal ev GiAdots Tiol TOV EoTEpiwy evar, avdpo- 
édvous. 
- Frag. Hist. Graec.: Istros, frag. 47 “lorpos év th ovaywyh tev 
col ~ ‘A , ‘ ‘ - , , r 
Kpntixav Cvoray not tovs Koupnras To madawov T@ Kpdv@ Ovew raidas. 


7 Philo Bybl. fr. 2. § 24 (Hrag. Hist. Graec. 3. p. 569) rov €éavtod 


i «\ , > - -~ La al 
povoyevn vidy Kpovos Ovpav@ 7@ matpt dAoKavTot. 


*® Macrob. Sa/. 1. 10, 22 Philochorus Saturno et Opi primum in 
Attica statuisse aram Cecropem dicit . . . instituisseque ut patres 
familiarum et frugibus et fructibus iam coactis passim cum servis 
vescerentur; ld. 1. 7, 37, quotation from L. Accius: 


Maxima pars Graium Saturno et maxime Athenae 
Conficiunt sacra quae Cronia esse iterantur ab illis, 
VOL. I. D 


34 GREEK RELIGION. 


Eumque diem celebrant: per agros urbesque fere omnes 
Exercent epulis laeti famulosque procurant 
Quisque suos. 


'* Schol. Demosth. p. 113. 10 éopr7 dyouévy Kpdv@ kat pnrpt tov bear. 


°° C.L. Gr. 523, C. L.A. 3. 77 EkabyBoddvos et’ Kpdvo méravov dwdex- 
dppadoyr, 


*' Schol. Virg. Georg. 1. 12 Saturno cum suos filios devoraret, pro 
Neptuno equum oblatum devorandum tradunt, unde Illyrico quotannis 
ritu sacrorum equum solere aquis immergere. Cf. Paus. 8. 8, 2. 


* Phylarchus, Frag. Hist. Graec. frag. 34 (Io. Lyd. De Mens. p. 116, 
Bekker) év r@ xar’ adrov [Kpevov] iepd, &s dnot biAapyxos Kal Mévavdpos, 
ovTe yuvn ovTe KUwy ore pvia eionet. 


* *Axptolas Hesych. 6 Kpdvos mapa trois @pvgiv: cf. Ez. Mag. s.v. 


ado b€ haow airdv Kpdvov eipjoOa, bre mpatos Oedv eis xpiow énéBare. 
> a a , 

Li, Mag. ’Apéovov dytpov tis Kpntixjs “Idns . . . gaol tnd Koupntev 

5) a ¢ \ , 1c , er: >. n Loy. a 

dvopaaOnvar Ste Tov Kpdvov adrois pevyovar kal eis adtd Karadveiow émnpKecer 

A bh , > - \ A 

OUT@ Heviwv ev Tos rept Kpnrns. 


** Lycophron 203 of & dudi Bopdv tod mpopdyrios Kpévov. 


*° Diod. Sic. 1. 97 MeAduroda hace pereveyceiy €& Alybmrov ... Ta epi 

, , ‘ \ \ oes , ‘ \ -; \ ‘ \ 
Kpovoy pudohoyovpeva kai ta wept THs Teravopayxias Kat 7d civodov THY wept Ta 
ma0n tav Gedy ioropiay, 


*6 Hesiod, “Epya 5. 111 of peév ert Kpévov joap, or ovpav@ €uBacirevev" 
date Geot & eCwov axndéa Oupov exovres. 

*" Philodemus, zrepi edoe8. (Gompertz, p- 51 G.) kal ris émt Kpdvov Cons 
evdarpoveatdrns ovons, os eypayay ‘Haiodos kai 6 rv’ AXkpewvida moijoas. 


** Hom. J/. 15. 224 pada yap re payns émidovro Kal GAXor ofrep eveptepoi 
eiae Oeot Kpdvov dpdis éovres. 





CHAPTIAR ay. 


ZEUS. 


THE study of the cults of Zeus is perhaps the most 
interesting chapter of the history of Greek religion, for 
it includes the two extremes of religious thought, the most 
primitive ideas side by side with the most advanced; and 
nearly all the departments of nature and human life were 
penetrated with this worship. Although the figures of 
Apollo, Athene, Dionysos, and Prometheus are of more 
importance in the history of external civilization and of 
the special arts of Greece, yet no character in Greek religion 
has such wealth of ethical content, or counts so much for 
the development of moral ideas, as the character of Zeus. 
At times he seems to overshadow the separate growths of 
polytheism ; and at times in expressing the nature of Zeus 
the religious utterance became monotheistic. 

The study of this as of the other Hellenic cults must consist 
in great part of an examination of the cult-titles, which must 
be carefully distinguished from mere poetical appellatives, 
and which on the whole are our most direct evidence of the 
ideas embodied in the state-religion. And the importance 
of the title in the worship was of the greatest ; for public 


_ prayer and sacrifice were never made to God in the abstract, 


but to a particular divinity usually designated by some term 
that showed what sort of help the worshipper needed and 
expected ; unless he addressed the deity by the right title, 
the help might be withheld; and a great part of the function 
of the oracles in Greece was to instruct the worshipper to 
what deity under what particular name he should pray. 

We cannot begin an account of this worship by noting the 

D 2 


36 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


locality or tribe in Greece whence it originated and was 
diffused ; Crete, Arcadia, and Dodona are important centres 
of the primitive worship, and different places may have 
contributed different elements to the story of Zeus, but the 
personage and the cult are aboriginal and common to all 
the Hellenic tribes. 

As we have seen, it is hard to fix the root-meaning, the 
original exact import, of the name, but we can distinguish 
the more primitive from the more advanced stages of the 
cult, if we accept the most probable hypothesis that the 
physical aspect of the god is the earlier, and that the savage 
character which is preserved in cults and myths is prior to the 
more moral and spiritual. The Cretan cult of Zeus Kpyrayevis 
or Avxraios'~®, claims the first notice, for in Crete the 
religion of Zeus appears in a peculiar and embarrassing form, 
and the strange legend of the land maintained that Zeus was 
born there and died there: ‘Here lies great Zeus, whom _ 
men call God, says an epigram ascribed to Pythagoras ®. 
Bottiger, in his Kwnst-Mythologie, gives an excessive weight | 
to this legend, and draws from it a theory worthy of Euhemerus 
or Diodorus Siculus, in which Crete is maintained to be the 
cradle of his worship. It is impossible to prove and difficult 
to believe this; the value of the Cretan legend is that it 
illustrates very primitive ideas, though it may have little 
value for the history of the purely Hellenic religion of Zeus. 
A student of Greek history has to receive evidence from 
Crete with much suspicion; not for the reason that the 
Cretans were always liars, but because their cults and 
legends were often confused with influences from Phoenicia 
and Asia Minor. There are three chief points in the Zeus- 
legend in Crete; the savage quality belonging to that part of 
the legend which concerns Cronos and the swallowing of the 
stone: the Pyrrhic war-dance of the Curetes explained as 
a ruse to conceal the birth of Zeus: the prominence of 
the Earth-Mother and child, and the birth and death of the 
latter. It is this third point that most concerns us here. 
Have we here, as some have thought, the germ of the Zeus 
worship that grew and spread over the Hellenic world? or is 


8 


IV J ZEUS. 37 


this at all an integral part of the Hellenic Zeus-worship ? 
Probably not; the child-Zeus who dies, the son of Rhea, 
attended by the orgiastic rout of the Curetes, is probably not 
the Hellenic Zeus at all, but rather the Dionysos Atys of 
Phrygia—the child of the earth*, whose birth and death may 
typify the rise and fall of the year, and whose image, like that 
of Dionysos, was hung on a tree for sacrificial purposes’. 
This is Welcker’s theory’, based on many arguments and 
analogies: the Greeks from the mainland who came to the 
island found the child-god and his mother the chief figures 
in the native worship: the child was really Atys, akin to 
Dionysos, but the new-comers named him Zeus. We can 
find additional support for this view in certain features of the 
Cretan legend concerning the infant’s nurture; the goat that 
suckled him is especially associated elsewhere with the 
Dionysiac cult, and another Cretan legend, if we may trust 
the evidence of Cretan coins‘, regarded the cow as his nurse, 
and the bull-form of Dionysos was recognized in certain 
Greek cults. Stranger still is the Cretan story recorded by 
Athenaeus, that it was a sow that gave nourishment to the 
new-born god : ‘ wherefore all the Cretans consider this animal 
especially sacred, and will not taste of its flesh ; and the men 
of Praesos perform sacred rites with the sow, making her the 
first-offering at the sacrifice’ 1. Now the pig is nowhere else 
found in the ritual of Zeus, but was a sacred animal in the 
cult and legend of Attis-Adonis, Cybele, and the Aphrodite 
of Asia Minor, her counterpart ; and we may believe that it 
came into Crete from the same cycle, and was there attached 
to the child-god called Zeus. Lastly, we may note that 
Sardis also’ had the legend of the birth of Zeus, and 
claimed to be the nurse of Bacchus; and the same story gave 
rise to the late worship of Zeus Tovaios at Tralles '°. 

At least the Cretan legend has little to do with the mature 

® Possibly ‘the bald Zeus’ at Argos® from Cronos hung it on a tree: fab. 139. 


may also have been an image of the © Griechische Gotterlehre, 2, p. 218, 
god of the decaying year. &c. 
b This at least is the explanation a Eph. Arch, 1893, Wiv. 1. 16-25 ; 


I should suggest for the story in Hy- véde text, p. 8. 
ginus, that Amalthea to save the infant 


38 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


and omnipotent god of Hellas, and received but slight 
recognition in Greek cult. It was reflected on the Arcadian 
Mount Lycaeum, where the myth of the birth of Zeus at 
Cretea, a place on the mountain, may be due to the desire 
of the Arcadian priesthood to contest the pretentions of the 
Cretan or to a mistaken ® etymology. Also at Aegium in 
Achaea we find the legend of the goat that suckled Zeus, the 
name of the city itself being probably sufficient reason for 
localizing the Cretan story there. And we may believe that 
the mysterious child Sosipolis at Olympia*, who changed into 
a snake and terrified the invading Arcadian army, and was 
worshipped in the temple of Fileithyia with offerings of 
honey-cake, was the child Zeus-Dionysos ; for elsewhere Zeus 
bore this very title of the ‘Saviour of the City, and the 
image of the child in the Olympian temple bore the horn of 
Amalthea in its hand, and moreover we have clear proof of 
the early connexion between Crete and Olympia °. 

We can better study the very early and primitive phase of 
the Zeus-worship at Dodona and in Arcadia. The Dodo- 
nean'* is graphically described in Homer's lines: ‘King 
Zeus, Pelasgian God of Dodona, thou that dwellest afar, 
Lord of the wintry Dodona, and around thee dwell the 
Selli, the interpreters of thy will, who wash not the feet and 
who couch on the earth. This is the ‘ Pelasgic’ or pre- 
historic Zeus, and his priests, who seem to have been called 
Tomouri from Mount Tomarus on which the temple stood, 
evidently retained the tradition of a primitive fashion of life. 
It is noteworthy that one form of divination® at Dodona 

* Paus. 6. 20, 235 28 A 

> The view expressed in the text 
agrees with Prof. Robert’s view in the 
Athentische Mitthetlungen, 1893, p. LE 
who points out that Pindar appears to 
know of a local « Idean cave’ on the 
hill at Olympia, and that the snake form 


is attributed to Zeus in a Cretan story. 
° The only attested methods of divina- 


the oak, and the drawing of lots from 
a pitcher; the ‘Dodonaean caldron’ 
had nothing to do with divination, and 
there is no proof that doves played any 
part in it either ; when Sophocles speaks 
of the ‘two doves’ through which the 
oak spake to Heracles, he may be pre- 
serving a vague tradition of a talking 


tion at Dodona were the interpretation 
of the sounds in the leaves, of the 
bubbling of the stream that flowed by 


dove, which dimly appears in Herodotus 
and Strabo; but it is clear that the dove 
had ceased to talk in historical times 
(wide note on p. 39, and 8 fhp q), 


roe ae er. Ur 
7 


Iv.] ZEUS. 39 


preserved the lingering traces of tree-worship, and illustrated 
the conception of Zeus évdevdpos, the god who lives in the 
tree and speaks in the rustling of the leaves; also that the 
aspect of Zeus in this worship, so far as the evidence testifies, 
was a physical aspect. In the fertile valley below this moun- 
tain of Tomarus prayers and sacrifices were offered to Zeus 
Ndios, the god of the fertilizing rain and dew'*** And 
in the verses of the priestesses at Dodona, the idea of the 
eternity of Zeus was expressed as a physical idea and 
associated with the perpetual fruitfulness of the earth. 
‘Zeus is and was and will be; hail, great Zeus. The earth 
sends forth fruits, wherefore call on the name of mother 
earth 5. 

Nowhere else was Zeus regarded, as here he seems to have 
been, as the husband of the earth-mother, for the name does 
not properly belong to Hera. The Dodonean earth-goddess 
must surely be Dione, whose worship Strabo was probably 
right in regarding as attached to that of Zeus in a post- 
Homeric period; for there is no reference either in Homer 
or Hesiod to her Dodonean power nor to her priestesses *. 
And if, as the hymn seems to show, she was a local form of 
the earth-goddess, she would have a_ natural affinity to 
Aphrodite, and also to Bacchus, who comes to be afterwards 
associated with her. 

It was only at Dodona that Zeus was prominently an 
oracular god. We hear indeed from Strabo that there had 
been an oracle of Zeus at Olympia, and the Iamidae, a 
noble family of soothsayers, were famous there in Pindar’s 
time !*; and Trophonius the prophet, whose cave at Leba- 
deia became the seat of an oracle after his death, was 
identified with Zeus2°. But these are obscure or doubtful 


@ There is no proof that these 
priestesses, who seem to have become 
at a later time more prominent than the 
priests, were ever called Peleiades or 
Doves in any historical period. Herodo- 
tus merely tries to explain away the 
miraculous by supposing that the so- 
called ‘doves’ were once women; 


Strabo suggests that the name denoted 
‘old women’ in the Molossian dia- 
lect !21; Pausanias takes it for granted 
that the Peleiades were priestesses, but 
it is clear from his own statements that 
this was not a name used for them at 
Dodona at any period of which he had 
knowledge ** ¥. 


40 GREEK RELIGION. [cHap. 


instances. It was, however, always preeminently Zeus who 
sent signs and omens. The "Osca, the voice in the air, is 
his messenger™, and the sacred titles Ed¢yuos, which was 
attached to him in Lesbos '8, and jos 1” in Erythrae, must 
have alluded to the idea, just as yun or ‘rumour’ itself was 
sometimes personified. And this power and function of Zeus 
are also marked by the title of tavoyuatos, the god who hears 
all voices and speaks through signs, the title given him in 
the //zad"*” and in the fine epigram of Simonides 1#3 who 
dedicated a spear to Zeus of this name, probably because he had 
received some favourable sign for the battle. The god of omens 
was worshipped as onpadéos on Mount Parnes 21 and we have 
record of the title repdortos ®, But Dodona was the only famous 
place in Greece where Zeus spoke through a temple-oracle. 
Its fame paled before the fame of Delphi; but it enjoyed 
high and enduring repute among the North-western Greeks, 
The Dodonean Zeus was celebrated in a Pindaric ode; and 
we find Demosthenes referring to its utterance for political 
guidance, and the worship of Dione existed at Athens at 
least as early as the fifth century. The inscriptions discovered 
in the recent excavations at Dodona® throw an interesting 
light on the functions of the Greek oracle and on the con- 
fidential relations between the Greek and his divinity. The 
most important is that which contains the question of the 
Corcyraean state, weary of intestine strife and asking by 
what ritual or sacrifices they may attain concord and good 
government”. But usually the subjects of consultation were 
smaller matters, questions relating to health, doubts concern- 
ing the legitimacy of a child, or the desirableness of letting 
a house* Of spiritual prayer or questioning we have unfor- 
tunately no instance, and we have as yet only one example of 
the divinity’s answer, which is free of ambiguity, and short 


* Carapanos, Dodone et ses Ruines, the priests who dictated the peculiar 
Paris, 1878; Pl. 34-39, Pomtow, in form in which the question was put, 
Jahrb. fiir klass. Philol. (Fleckeisen) a form easier than any other for them 
1883, pp. 305-260. Collitz, Dialect-in- to answer. - 
schriften, 1557-1598. ° E.g. Collitz, 1581, 1586, 1590. 

> Itwas probably,as Pomtow suggests, 


Iv.] ZEUS: 41 


and® sensible 13*-» v-*, The oracle revived in later times 
through its connexion with Dione and the encouragement 
given to it by Pyrrhus, and the festival of the Nata was 
celebrated with theatrical performances at least as late as the 
second century B.C. 

The strangest, and, in some respects, most savage, was 
the Arcadian worship of Zeus on Mount Lycaeum *,— 
a worship that belonged to the pre-historic period, and con- 
tinued at least till the time of Pausanias without losing its 
dark and repellent aspect. In the first place, Zeus appears in 
it conspicuously as an elemental or physical power, namely, as 
a god who sends the rain; in times of drought the priest 
ascended the mountain and foretold and produced the rain 
by certain rites, the lofty summit from which the whole of 
the Peloponnese is visible serving as an excellent obser- 
vatory”2°. But it was chiefly as a god who demanded and 
received human sacrifice that Zeus Lyceius was known and 
dreaded. The king Lycaon offered a human child on the altar; 
and Pausanias seems to darkly hint at the survival of such 
a practice when he declares that he would rather not speak of 
the details of the sacrifice. The rite probably accounts for the 
myth that Lycaon set human food before Zeus when feasting 
him unawares at his table; and also the myth that Lycaon 
himself was changed toa wolf was the counterpart of the belief 
that attached to the cult—namely, that some one among those 
present at the rite always suffered transformation into a wolf, 
and could only recover his human shape at the end of nine years 
by abstaining during the interval from human flesh. The man 
who entered the precincts of the altar died within a year, 
and inside them no man or animal cast a shadow *? §-, 
There is much that is mysterious in all this. The theory of 
Prof. Robertson Smith? is probable, that we have here to 
do with the cult of a wolf-clan, and that Zeus Avxewos is the 
god of this clan. Lycaon, who sacrifices his son and who is 
transformed into a wolf, may darkly figure the god himself. 
The human sacrifice is a noteworthy fact of very rare occur- 


® Jb. 1587. compare ‘ Religion of the Semites,’ p. 
» Article on Sacrifice, Zucyc. Brit., 209. 


“ha| 


42 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


rence in the worship of Zeus; we seem to have a tradition of 
it in the cult of Zeus Ithomatas, to whom Aristomenes offered 
five hundred prisoners of war*, and the tradition, and perhaps 
even the practice, survived in the Athamantid family at Alus 
and in the worship of Zeus Phyxios there *°, and the legend 
recorded by Lycophron may be genuine, that a certain Molpis 
offered himself to Zeus Ombrios, the rain-god, in time of 
drought °° Finally we have an allusion to the practice 
in the legend of Meidias and Zeus Idaeus preserved by 
Elutarch *. 

The rite of human sacrifice on Mount Lycaeum, and at Alus, 
whatever its original significance may have been, seems to 
have become connected with a sense of sin and the necessity 
for expiation, that is, with the germ of a moral idea. 
We might perhaps be able to say how far this conception of 
Zeus Lycaeus, as a god who demanded atonement for Sin, 
advanced to any spiritual expression, if the ode of Alcman 
that commemorated this worship had been preserved. As it 
is, the records that survive of this Arcadian cult testify only 
to its physical and undeveloped character, and the cult 
appears to have remained always without an image. 

It is necessary to collect other evidence that proves the 
physical or elemental quality of Zeus; and it is enough for this 
purpose to notice some of the epithets attaching to him in the 
different cults of which the physical sense is obvious, without 
following the various localities in any order. In reviewing 
these, it is to be remarked that scarcely any testify to Zeus 
as being a mere personification of the bright sky. We find 
indeed the epithets Odpdvios and ai@pios ; but these need only 
denote the god who lives in the heavens or the upper air ; 
the personal sky pure and simple is Ouranos rather than 
Zeus. It has been supposed that the term ’Odvumus had 
some such reference, as though the word had nothing to do 
with any mountain, but contained the root Aauz, and 


* Moral. 306 f. Parall. 5. but he is not expressly called so as 

> The Zeus of Mount Lycaeum might Immerwahr (Die Kulte und Mythen 
be regarded as gvfios, the god of the Arkadiens, p. 23) wrongly supposes. 
exile who flees on account of bloodshed, 


Iv.] ZEUS. 43 


signified the ‘shining’ one*. The accuracy of this derivation 
is doubtful; but if we accept the derivation we need not at 
once allow that Zeus Olympius means Zeus ‘of the shining 
sky, for the word may have originally denoted the snow- 
mountain, and the divinity may have taken his name from 
the special locality in this as in countless other instances”. 
The meaning of the epithet dudpios, an important cult-term 
of Zeus and Athene at Aegium in Achaia, ought not to be 
doubtful *?. It would be an Acolic and Doric form for #yépt0s, 
and would denote the divinity of the broad daylight °, and 
may be illustrated by the epithet Havapépies attaching to 
Zeus at Stratonicea, where as a divinity of the light he was 
associated with Hecate by contrast 2°. It is possible that a like 
sense belongs to the word by which Zeus was designated 
at Lepreum in Elis, Aevxaios?*°, the ‘white god,’ which 
Pausanias seems to explain by reference to an ancient plague 
of leprosy; a myth that may have arisen from the people’s 
etymology of a name that had almost died out among them. 
But it is far more probable that the Zeus Aevxaios, whom the 
Lepreatae only faintly remembered in the time of Pausanias, 
was really Zeus Lycaeus, the national god of the Arcadian 


® This theory appears first in the 
treatise De Mundo, p. 400 B, where 
”Odvpmos is derived from dAoAapmfs. 

» For further discussion of the question 
vide p. 63. 

¢ An inscription of the Achaean 
league” contains the oath of federation 
swom by the Achaeans and men of 
Orchomenus in the name of Zeus 
Amarios and Athena Amaria. And 
Strabo speaks of the temple in Aegium 
as 70 ‘Audpioy, the meeting-place of the 
representatives of the Achaean cities. But 
Polybius mentions a temple of Zeus ‘Opa- 
ptos (Spudpios is a mis-reading), erected by 
the men of Croton, Sybaris, and Caulon, 
in imitation of the Achaeans, for delibera- 
tion in common, and again of the 
‘Opdproy, in which the inscription con- 
taining the terms of the amnesty brought 
about by Aratus between the rival parties 


in Megalopolis was deposited. Collitz 
seems to consider that ‘Opapios, which 
was evidently understood as meaning— 
and might by derivation really mean— 
the god of the confederacy, explains 
’Apapios; but neither of the two words 
could be a dialect-variant of the other. 
There can be no doubt that ‘Ayapios is 
the original and orthodox title, as it is 
vouched for by the inscription and is 
preserved almost correctly by Strabo, 
and it could more easily be corrupted 
into d6udpos than the reverse could 
happen ; for this ancient title of the sky- 
god would probably lose its clear sense, 
and as the temple was used for political 
meetings of the confederacy, the political 
title 6uapios might have come into vogue 
and partly displaced it, though the older 
term retained its place in the official 
documents. 


44 GREEK RELIGION. [ CHAP. 


community, to which they claimed to have originally 
belonged. 

Very rarely was Zeus brought into any connexion with 
the lights of heaven, and he had little or nothing to do with 
the sun. We have, indeed, an epigram of a probably late 
period in the Azthology on the death of Thales”, in which we 
find the invocation of Zeus-Helios, but it may be merely an 
instance either of later pantheistic theory or of the @coxpacia, 
the confusion of divinities, common to the Alexandrine and 
later period. In Crete, where the Phoenician element was 
strong, this confusion may have begun earlier, and given birth 
to such cult-titles as Zeus Talaios or Tallaios 156 ‘, a solar 
god, if Hesychius’ interpretation of Talos as Helios is correct. 
Whether some peculiar local syncretism or foreign influences 
led to the double-worship of Zeus-Helios in Amorgos”%, 
certified by an early inscription, is uncertain. Here and 
there Zeus may have attracted a myth or absorbed a cult 
that belonged to Helios, but in the main religion of the people 
his figure is entirely distinct, and solar mythology may 
endeavour to explain Apollo, Heracles and others, but must 
relinquish Zeus. Nor has his divinity anything to do with 
star-worship, which scarcely finds any place at all in Greek 
religion. The name Zeus ‘Aorépios at Gortys®, if the cult 
actually existed, belongs probably to the Phoenician worship 
in which the Minotaur figures ®. 

The phenomena in the physical world which Zeus had 
under his especial care were the rain, the wind, and the 
thunder. “OpBpuos, Naios, “Yérios, Ovpuos, Evdvepos, *Ikuatos 
are cult-names that denote the giver of rain, wind and dew, 
’Aotparaios, Boovréy, Kepavvios, the thunderer, and to these may 
be added a host of poetical epithets **-*°, Probably in every 
city of Greece men prayed to Zeus for rain in times of long 
drought, and the official Athenian prayer has been preserved : 
‘Rain, rain, dear Zeus, on the corn-land of the Athenians and 
their pastures’ ®3>, The myth associates the institution of 
the cult of Zeus Panhellenios with the blessing of rain, when 


® Prof. Robertson Smith regards Zeus__—Astarte; Religion of the Semites, p. 292. 
"Aorépos as the male counterpart of — 


sieht 
“~ 





\ 


IV.] ZEUS. 45 


Aeacus, at the petition of all Greece instigated by the Delphic 
oracle, ascended the mountain of Aegina and prayed for the 
whole nation; and the name and cult of Zeus Aphesios *®, 
the pourer-forth, became also, perhaps erroneously, connected 
with this beneficent function. It has been seen that the Zeus 
Naios of Dodona was a god of the fertilizing rain and dew, 
and there was justification in Greek cult for the poetical 
personification of the dew-goddess in Alcman’s verse *’ as 
‘the daughter of the sky-god and the moon.’ So also Zeus 
"Ikuatos was worshipped in Ceos as the god who sent the 
moist Etesian winds at the prayer of Aristacus *°. 

The most quaint of all these titles that refer to the physical 
functions of the supreme divinity is that of ’Aadmuios, under 
which he was worshipped at Elis®*. Zeus, as the god who sends 
wind and heat, is the lord of flies. The Elean legend said that 
Heracles, when sacrificing at Olympia, was much troubled by 
these insects, and was taught to sacrifice to Zeus ‘Azdpuios, 
who thereupon sent the flies away across the Alpheus. And 
the Eleans continued to sacrifice in the name of this god. 
A similar ritual occurred in the worship of Apollo at Leucas, 
and a hero called Myiagros, ‘the fly-catcher,’ in Arcadia. It 
is curious to note that it is not against the plague of flies in 
general that these precautions were taken ; these were merely 
preliminary sacrifices offered to secure the worshipper from 
being troubled in his devotions at the main sacrifice, to which 
swarms of flies were likely to be attracted by the savour of 
the flesh. It only illustrates the great care taken to avert 
anything offensive or distracting at the divine service. 

The thunder-god was worshipped as Kepadvvios in Olympia 
and KepavyoBedos in Tegea,as ’Aorpazatos in Antandros,and pro- 
bably every spot struck by lightning was consecrated by the 
same rite to him. An interesting worship, showing probably 


‘a very primitive view, is that of Zeus Kéepavvos *?” at Man- 


tinea, in which Zeus appears, not as the god who directs the 
phenomenon, but as the phenomenon itself: the thunder is 
regarded as personal, and in this, as in other cases, we find 
traces of a very undeveloped stage of belief in Arcadia, a land 
where men offered prayers directly to the winds and the. 


46 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


thunder, the elements themselves being viewed as sentient and 
divine. The same primitive thought appears in the worship of 
Zeus KaraiBdrns at Olympia*®'. The descending Zeus is the 
Zeus that descends in the rain or lightning, and we may 
compare the Latin phrase ‘ Iovem elicere,’ which was used for 
the process in Etruscan magic of ‘ procuring’ lightning. This 
naive belief that the god himself came down in the lightning 
or the meteor is illustrated by the story which Pausanias found 
in the neighbourhood of Gythium about a sacred stone, a AlOos 
apyds, on which Orestes sat and was cured of his madness, and 
which the country people called Zeus Kazzéras **?, interpret- 
ing the title as the ‘stayer,’ as if from xaramavw ; but there is 
much to be said for the view that the term means ‘ the falling 
god, from the root that appears in mwrdouar®. We are here 
touching on a stratum of thought infinitely older than the 
Homeric, and these instances have nothing to do with that 
later occasional tendency to identify the deity with the 
object, as, for instance, Dionysos with the wine, Ares with 
the battle, Hephaestus with the fire, which is merely inten- 
tional metaphor’; nor again with that later pantheistic 
conception expressed in Euripides, and more prominent in 
Stoicism, which regards Zeus and the other personal divinities 
as mere equivalents for the impersonal nature, the ai@jp or the 
whole cosmos. 

Though such primitive and naive thought is preserved in 
a few cults, yet most of them, so far as they dealt with the 
physical functions of Zeus, represented him as he is repre- 
sented in Homer, as a personal divinity having power over 
the whole realm of nature, not as a personification or a minister 
of a special department. | 

In Homer, indeed, there commonly appears the theory that 
the three realms of nature are ruled by the three brothers 
according to a sort of constitution, to which Poseidon appeals, 
and Homer might seem to reconcile polytheism with the 


® Vide Wide, Lakonische Kulte, p. 21. mpooaryopevovow “EAAnves, kal tov oivoy 
> Cf. Z2, 2. 381, 426; Clem. Alex.  Ardvucov ... xard Twa dvapopdv. 
Strom. 7. 863 P. ds rov otdnpov “Apny 





Iv.] ZEUS. 47 


supremacy of'a chief god in the same way as the poet quoted 
by Plutarch*: 
Zevs yap Ta piv Toadra Ppovrife Bporav 
7a puxpa 8 ddAdAos Saipoow mapeis é4. 

But even in Homer, Zeus can control the sea; and in the 
cults, which still better attest the popular belief, Zeus 
could absorb the most diverse functions in the physical world. 
The fortunate mariner could offer up thanksgiving either to 
Poseidon or to Zeus ’AtoBarnpios 4°” or Swrjp ; an inscription 
at Athens mentions a society of Swrnpiacrat devoted to the 
worship of Zeus the saviour of sailors, to Heracles Hegemon 
and the Dioscuri, and in another Attic inscription we have 
an account of the sailors’ festival of the Auowrijpia which 
was celebrated with trireme-races *°*. The man who wanted 
a wind could pray to the various wind-gods or to Zeus 
Otpios or Evaveyos *®* >. Prayers and thanksgiving for crops 
could be made equally to Demeter or Zeus under the title 
of Tewpyds, which was given him at Athens *®, or Kapzo- 
ddrns #2, as he was styled in Phrygia. In fact, in the Greek 
theory concerning the physical world and the powers 
that ruled it we find beneath the bewildering mass of cults 
and legends a certain vague tendency that makes for 
monotheism, a certain fusion of persons in one, namely, 
Zeus. This tendency is genuine and expressed in popular 
cult, and is to be distinguished from the later philosophic 
movement. Thus Zeus could be identified with Poseidon as 
Zevs évddwos °°, and in Caria as Zyvo-Iocedév*! ; he could 
be identified also with Hades, not only in the poetry of 
Homer and Euripides, but by the worshipper at Corinth or 
Lebadeia®®-*!. The oracular Zeus-Trophonios® was probably 
the nourishing earth-god, akin to Zeus Tewpyds in Attica, and, 
as the earth-god, gave oracles through dreams*. Perhaps 
the term Ykxor(ras, ‘the dark one,’ applied to Zeus who was 

* De Aud. Poet. 24 C. from Nemea and Argos, 

> The cult of Zeus Nemeios in Lo- ¢ This view of Trophonius, which has 
cris‘*°w may have been instituted in . Strabo’s support, seems more probable 
honour of the ‘ pastoral god’ who was _ than Preller’s, who regards Trophonius 


called elsewhere Népuos or Nepnios**; asa local hero who was given the title 
or it may have been directly borrowed _ of Zeus ‘to swell his style.’ 


aay 


GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


48 


worshipped in the dark oak-grove at Caryae in Laconia, was 
meant to designate the king of the lower world, and Zeus 
X@dvios was worshipped at Corinth as the counterpart of 
Pluto, and the Zeus Eubouleus of Paros and Cyrene and 
Amorgos is an euphemistic name for Hades®. As the 
functions of a god of the lower world and of a deity of 
vegetation and fertility were sometimes attached to Zeus, 
we are prepared to find him at times identified with Dionysos; 
and the worship at Acraephia of ‘Zeus the god of the vint- 
age’*’, and the ritual of Zeus Didymaeus®, in which those who 
made the libation were crowned with ivy, mark his association 
with the wine-god, which was also strikingly illustrated by 
a well-known monumental representation of Zeus Philius. 
Other monumental evidence, which will be noticed later on, 
is still more explicit as regards this trinity in which Zeus 
is partly fused with his brothers. 

Zeus becomes the supreme but never the sole god in the 
physical universe. The question arises whether he is ever 
regarded as the creator, either of the world, or of men, or of 
both? He is called by Homer zarijp avipdv re OeGv Te, and 
in a remarkable passage in the Odyssey, a complaint is uttered 
against Zeus that he does not compassionate men ‘ whensoever 
he bringeth them to birth’; but neither cult nor popular 
legend, nor the systematized mythology of Hesiod and writers 
of his school, bear out this view. In fact, Greek religion and 


religious myth, apart from Orphic teaching, have very little to 


say about creation, either on a large or small scale; and the 
statement is often inconsistent and singularly scanty, when 
one compares it even with savage mythologies, which some- 
times offer very quaint and explicit explanations of the origin 
of things. In Greek theology the universe was not the work 
of a pre-existing divinity, but rather the divinities were them- 


‘selves evolved out of the universe, or out of some physical 


* We have, for instance, clear allusions 
to worships that acknowledged him as 
the god of the olive-tree and fig-tree, as 
a god of cattle and cormn-growing *?-¢, 
“7, #; we have the cult-titles évdevdpos 
and doxpaios, the latter attested for the 


worship at Halicarnassus and _ being 
explained by the word doxpa, which 
meant, according to Hesychius, a barren 
oak-tree. 

PD’ Od. 20, 401. 











IV. ] ZEUS. 49 


element wrought upon by some physical impulse. Thus in 
Homer, in spite of Zeus [larjp, it is Okeanos who is the 
physical source of all things, gods and men included®; in 
Hesiod it is Chaos, and men and gods sprung from the same 
source. Yet in his strange myth of the five ages, the third 
and fourth are the creation of Zeus; on the other hand, men 
existed before Zeus attained the power. Again, it was not 
Zeus, but Prometheus or Hephaestus, who created Pandora, 
the mother of women; and it was Prometheus who, in later 
legend, was reported to have made men out of clay. Zeus 
indeed might be the creator or progenitor of a certain tribe of 
men, but this was a special distinction; and other tribes 
preferred the theory that they grew out of the earth or the 
trees or the rocks, or that they existed before the moon was 
made. Therefore the invocation of Zed warep expresses rather 
a moral or spiritual idea than any real theological belief 
concerning physical or human origins. 

Nor did Greek philosophy or poetry contribute much to 
the conception of a personal god as creator of the world. 
In the philosophers, the theory about the creative principle 
is usually pantheistic or impersonal. What Plutarch tells us 
of Thales” agrees with some of the utterances of Democritus* 
and later Stoicism*: the deity or creative power is immanent 
in matter. It is true that the belief that God created man 
in his own image is ascribed to the Pythagorean school by 
Clemens*, but the same authority also declares that this 
school regarded the deity, not as external to the world, but 
as immanent in it’. The Socrates of Xenophon speaks of 
a personal creator, but physical speculation played little part 
in Socrates’ teaching ; and it is difficult to say that the Platonic 
eds is clearly conceived as a personal creative being. 

Looking at Greek poetry we see that, where it touches 
on this theme, it is predominantly pantheistic. Very rarely 

® Jl. 14. 246: Hes. “Epy. 108 ds  p. 150) Zeus is rather the picews dpyn- 
bpd0ev yeydact Geol Ovnroi 7 dvOpwmor. és than its creator, though he is con- 

> Euseb. Pracp: Ev. 14. 16. ceived as the source of human life. 

© Cic. De Nat. Deor. 1. 120. © Strom. 5, p. 662 P. 


¢ J>. 1.37; cf. 2.45. In Cleanthes’ ‘ Protrept., p. 62 P. 
hymn (Mullach, Frag. Phil. Graec. 1. 


VOL, I. E 


50 GREEK RELIGION. [cHaP. 
was Zeus regarded as the creator of the world, the ‘noble 
craftsman,’ as Pindar calls him once*; and that fragment of 
Sophocles”, which maintains monotheism and a divine origin 
of the physical world and goes on to protest against ordinary 
Greek belief, is of questionable origin. 

The doctrine of Euripides, when it is not atheistic, is 
usually pantheistic; for him Zeus is commonly the ai@jp or 
avdykn or the inner spirit of man. And the tendency which 
this poet encouraged and which became dominant in the 
theologic theory of Stoicism, to resolve the divinities into 
physical phenomena evidently made against the develop- 
ment of a belief in a monotheistic personal first cause. It 
is interesting to see that in this matter there was little 
variance between the mythology of Greece and its philo- 
sophy and poetry*. 

Hitherto we have been dealing with the physical character 
of Zeus and the epithets that designate this. A large class of 
these that remain to be noticed are the titles that attest his 
worship on the mountain-tops ®*-*2,, Though we hear also of 
the temple of Hermes on the top of Cyllene, the highest 
mountain in Arcadia, and of Apollo on the hill of Phigaleia, and 
of other divinities whose shrines sometimes crowned the acro- 
poleis, it is only the supreme god of Greece who was habitually 
worshipped on the high places. The chief cult of Messene was 
that of Zeus Ithomatas “*, In Euboea Zeus took his name from 
the Kenean mount where, according to a legend, Heracles had 
founded his worship °*; in Boeotia from Mount Laphystos®, 
unless we suppose that in this case the mountain took its 
name from the god, Zeus being here regarded as the raven- 
ing god of winter?. On Mount Pelion Zeus, who was there 
honoured with an altar, was known as Zeus ’Axpatos °, a title 
which sometimes refers to the cult either on the mountain- 
top or on the acropolis of the city’. As we hear that 

* Pind. Frag. 29. Aan), to devour. 

» Clem. Profr. p. 63 P. ° Not deraios, as is read in a frag- 

° Orest. 884; Frag. 935; Frag. Pei- ment of Dicaearchus, Miiller, Frag. 
rithous, 596; Frag. 1007: cf. Aesch. Hist. 2. 262; inscriptions found in the 


Frag. Heliades, 65a. neighbourhood prove dxpaios. 
4 Aapvorios: from Aadtoow (root | 


IV.] ZEUS. 5! 


Aeacus ascended the mountain of Aegina to pray for rain, © 
and the Arcadian priest the Lycaean mount for the same 
purpose *°>, and the worship on Mount Pelion appears to 
have had the same intention, it is probable that this con- 
secration of the mountain-tops to Zeus expressed the primi- 
tive belief in his physical or elemental character, as the god 
who sent down rain or thunder from the heights, and who was 
therefore called dpéovs (according to the popular interpreta- 
tion of the name) in the cult on the mountain between Megara 
and Corinth. The title’Ymaros was originally given to denote 
the deity who was worshipped in high places, but it probably 
came to acquire the same moral significance as the cognate 
term “YWioros, both being cult-designations of the most High 
God 87, 88. 

In this list the only epithet that is difficult to interpret 
is OAvumios. We find the worship of Zeus Olympius at 
Athens*, Chalcis, Megara, Olympia, Sparta, Corinth, Syra- 
cuse, Naxos, and Miletus*®. The theory that the name 
expresses the ‘shining’ god is hardly credible. We cannot 
avoid connecting the word with the Thessalian Mount Olym- 
pus, and we must suppose that it spread from that region over 
the Greek world, either through the diffusion of cult or 
through some prevalent poetic influence. Unfortunately we 
have scarcely any direct historical record of a Zeus-cult on 
that mountain ; as probable evidence of it we can only point 
to the city at its foot, called Aiov, that took its name from the 
god. Still it is natural to believe that there was in very early 
times an actual worship of Zeus Olympius in North Thessaly ; 
for the foundation of this cult at Athens was connected with 
the legend of the Thessalian Deukalion, and Olympia, which 
took its name from the worship that at an early time was 
planted there, had a close legendary association with Thes- 
saly». But, as we can gather from the poems of Homer, the 


® The worship at Athens was ancient, chryselephantine statue and appointed 
being connected in legend with Deuka- an official to take charge of it called 
lion, but it only rose into prominence the parddvrns Aids’OAvpmiou ev dora’? *, 
in Hadrian’s time, who built the vast b Vide Preller-Robert, 1, p. 121, 
Olympicion, and dedicated the colossal note 3. 


E 2 


52 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP, 


name had spread much further than the actual cult, and the 
reason of this is probably the early celebrity of the Thes- 
salian-Aeolic poetry. We may believe that the name of Zeus 
Olympius was familiar in the local religious hymn, for the 
origin of this branch of poetic composition was placed in 
North Greece, and we hear of a cult of the Muses upon 
Olympus. But we must attribute most to the early heroic 
and epic lay which, arising in these regions, was the germ of 
the great Ionic epic; it is probable that from its first begin- 
nings down to the time of Homer the name Olympius was 
attached in this poetry as a permanent epithet to Zeus, who 
had long been associated either by cult or by the poetic 
imagination of the people with the great mountain whose 
snowy summit appeared to the people to be the proper home 
of the god. Even in the Homeric epic the term has come to 
lose its precise local significance; and passing into the sense 
of ‘celestial’ it comes later to be applied to Aphrodite and 
Hera, and even to Gaea as the divine mother of the gods. 

A higher class of cult-names are those which have a social 
or political significance. In Greek religion, as in others of 
the Aryan races, we may distinguish the cult of the higher 
divinities from the political or gentile cult of the dead ances- 
tor or eponymous hero, a religion not noticed in Homer but 
probably of ancient establishment in Greece. These are 
perhaps two originally distinct systems, or perhaps originally 
the one arose from the other; what concerns us here is to 
note where the two touch. This would happen, for instance, 
where Zeus was regarded as the mythic ancestor of the 
tribe and designated as Zeus *Iarpwos °°, This is the strict 
sense of the word, and in this sense, according to Plato, the 
title was not in vogue among the Athenians, who traced their 
descent to Apollo Ilarpwos. But the Heracleidae sacrificed 
to Zeus Patroos as their ancestor. And according to 
a fragment of the Mvobe of Aeschylus quoted above, the 
family of Tantalos worshipped Zeus under this title on Mount 
Ida®°°, and inscriptions prove the existence of the cult of 


“ The rarer title Mdzpos is found in Father, and occurs in late Roman and 
Diodorus Siculus, denoting Zeus the Carian inscriptions* @, 


pte oe ge 


wees 





ts 2: Belles Bias oe ale 


Iv.] ZEUS. 53 


Zeus Ilarpdéios at Tegea and Chios®*4, From the same 
point of view we may explain the titles of Zeus Agamemnon 
and Zeus Lacedaemon at Sparta, often misunderstood %~, 
These are ancestral or heroic cults given an Olympian colour ; 
the hero is deified under the name of Zeus*. Secondly, 
matpwos has a more general sense, being applied to the 
divinities that protect the family right, the honour due to 
parents. ‘Reverence Zeus, the Father-God, says Strepsiades 
in the Clouds of Aristophanes appealing to his son with a verse 
from some tragedy ; and the words of Epictetus express the 
Greek belief, ‘all fathers are sacred to Zeus, the Father-God, 
and all brothers to Zeus, the God of the family’ °°f. The name 
dudyvios can be taken together with a large group of cognate 
titles, all of which reveal that the supreme god was supposed 
to foster the marriage union, the birth of children, the sanctity 
of the hearth, the life of the family and the clan 9°—9%; 98~103, 
He is réAeos not only in the more general sense as the god 
who brings all things to the right accomplishment, the god 
to whom under this title Clytemnestra prays for the accom- 
plishment of her hopes *®; but specially in the sense of the 
matriage god, yapyAios or yeveOdAvos*8—a title which was 
common to him and associated him with other divinities, and 
which probably came to him originally from his marriage 
with Hera that was recognized in ancient cult and legend. In 
the Eumenides of Aeschylus, Apollo reproaches the Erinyes 
that they ‘dishonour and bring to naught the pledges of 
Zeus and Hera the marriage-goddess’; and the same 
poet speaks of the first libation at a feast as offered 
to Zeus the god of timely marriage and to Hera%®*®, 
Plutarch says, ‘those who marry are supposed to need five 
divinities, Zeus Teleios and Hera Teleia, Aphrodite and 
Peitho, and Artemis above all’; and in this, as in a parallel 
passage of Dio Chrysostom, we discern the universal activity 
attributed to Zeus, who on occasion could assume the special 
functions of nearly all the lower divinities®*. Thus, for instance, 


® Wide’s opinion that Agamemnon the evidence for the existence of the 
was thename ofan aboriginal god whom cult in Laconia is very late; Lako- 
Zeus displaced is scarcely plausible, as mische Kulte, p. 12. 


‘ 


54 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


it is the Erinyes who specially punish wrong done to parents 
and execute the father’s curse; but Zeus Genethlios, the god 
of the birthright, could assume this function also®. 

The most common title that denoted the whole family 
life which Zeus protected was Zetbs “Epxetos, whose worship 
we find on the Acropolis of Athens, at Olympia and at 
Argos, and whose altar stood in the middle of the courtyard 
of the house®’. His name could be used as an equivalent 
for the family-tie, by a process not uncommon in Greek 
religious speech, whereby the divinity with its epithet comes 
to have the value of a mere abstraction, or the personi- 
fication of an abstraction®8. Thus in Sophocles’ Antigone, 
Creon avers he will slay Antigone ‘ though she were nearer to 
him in blood than “roé ravros fyty Zyvos épxelov,’ the whole 
circle of kindred that God protects.’ No religion sanctioned 
more strongly than the Greek the duties of child to parent 
and parent to child. Unnatural vice and the exposure of 
children are spoken of as sins against Zeus, the god of birth 
and the god of kinship, though this deep feeling may have 
been late in developing. A passage in Euripides preserved 
by Stobaeus declares that ‘he who honours his parents is 
beloved by the gods in this world and the next’; and the 
compiler quotes a striking and similar passage from Perictione, 
the female philosopher of the Pythagorean school, concerning 
the sanctity of the duties to parents which were enforced by 
penalties in the other world. The parent must be honoured 
more than the statue of the god, according to Plato, who 
asserts that Nemesis accuses before the divine judge those 
who neglect such duties. And the religious character of the 
family is again well illustrated by a line of Euripides, who 
calls the sons the protectors or avengers of the household 


« The title Aexearns, by which Zeus 
was known at Aliphera in Arcadia %”, 
would belong to this group, if it could 
be supposed to denote the god who 
aided women in travail; but this is 
very improbable, as Zeus was never 
supposed to assume the functions of 
Artemis Aoxeia. The myth of the 


birth of Athena was prevalent in the 
neighbourhood of Aliphera, and the 
name must be understood as a naive 
popular designation of Zeus ‘in child- 
bed,’ and is an instance of what is very 
rare in Greek religious terminology, 
a cult-title arising directly from a myth. 


> 
- 
. 
a 
a 
x 
7 
¢ 





Iv.] ZEUS. 55 


gods and graves. We discover here an idea that is closely 
akin to that which dominates the ancient family-system of 
the Hindoos, namely, that a man must beget children to 
maintain the ancestral worship "™'. 

As the family was a unit of the dparpia at Athens, so at 
Athens was Zeus Herkeios coupled with Zeus Phratrios. ‘Zeus 
of the household, Zeus of the clan is mine, says a speaker in 
a comedy of Cratinus the younger, having just returned to 
his relations after a long war. It was from the altar of 
Zeus Pparpios that the @pdrepes brought their vote, when they 
were present at an adoption to give it sanction. And the 
part that Zeus @pdrpios played in the ancestral worship at 
Athens can be illustrated from more than one Attic inscrip- 
tion!?, In all matters in which the phrateres adjudicated, 
the oath must be taken at the altar of Zeus Pparpios, and 
a fine of a hundred drachmae to this god was incurred by any 
one who wrongfully introduced a person into the association ; 
at the great clan-festival of the Apaturia sacrifice was offered 
to Zeus under this title and to Athena. The same appellative 
occurs in Crete in a peculiar dialect-form, dparpuos, according to 
the most probable interpretation of this word '*”. 

Not only was he the guardian of kinship, but also the 
protector of the family property, and worshipped as Zeus 
Kryovos!°?, Originally this term, like that of Zeus Plousios, 
denoted the god who gives men the possession of wealth ; and 
the image of Zeus Krijovos stood in the store-rooms of houses, 
and his symbol was commonly an urn containing a mixture 
called dpfpocia'? i, compounded of water, honey, and various 
fruits. But the name passed naturally, as many of the other 
cult-names passed, into a more extended use; and we hear of 
the client of Isaeos going to the Peiraeus to sacrifice to Zevs 
Krijoios, to whose worship he was especially devoted, and 
praying that he would grant health and the attainment of 
good things to the Athenian people’**, This worship was 
especially Attic; we find the similar cults of Zeus TTAovovos 
in Sparta’°%, and Zeus “OdBws in Cilicia’. The god who 
protected property was worshipped also as “Opwos, the Hellenic 
counterpart om the Latin Terminus; and Plato lays it down 





56 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


as the first law of Zeus the boundary-god, that one’s neigh- 
bour’s landmark should not be removed !%, 

These are the leading titles of the god of the family; there 
are others that designate him as the god of the political 
community. Zeds KAdpios is he who sanctified the original 
allotment of land among the clans or divisions of the people. 
The high ground at Tegea was sacred to him, and there seems 
to have been the same cult at Argos, according to a passage 
in the Szwpplices of Aeschylus, unless the poet is using the 
title there in the wider sense, designating the god as the 
dispenser of all fortune '°¢”. 

A higher name in the civic religion is that of Zeus 
TloAvevs 1°", which must be carefully distinguished from Ta- 
Tpoos, aS it connotes not the bond of kinship but the 
union of the state. The statue and altar of Zeus TloAuevs 
stood on the Acropolis at Athens, and one of the strangest 
tales of ritual is told by Pausanias concerning it: stalks of 
barley and wheat were placed on the altar, and an ox 
which was kept in readiness approached and ate some of 
the offering ; whereupon it was slain by a priest who was 
called ‘the murderer of the ox,’ and who immediately threw 
down the axe and then fled as though the guilt of homicide 
were on him; the people pretended not to know who the 
slayer was, but arrested the axe and brought it to judgement. 
The story as told by Pausanias is very incomplete, and he 
wisely refrains from offering an explanation of what he 
certainly did not understand. A far more valuable and 
detailed account of the ritualistic act and legend is preserved 
by Porphyry, who seems to give us a verbatim extract from 
Theophrastus '°"*. A certain Sopatros, a stranger in the land 
of Attica, was sacrificing harmless cereal offerings to the gods 
on the occasion of a general festival, when one of his oxen 
devoured some of the corn and trampled the rest under foot ; 
the sacrificer in anger smote and slew him, and then, smitten 


* A later cult expressing the politi- in the Imperial period at the Phrygian 
cal union of the state is that of Zeus city of Synnada (Overb. Kunst-Mythol. 
Pandemos, which is attested by one 1, p. 222, Miinztaf. 3. 20, Head, Hist. 
Attic inscription *, and which existed Mam. p. 569). 





PSErTo 


eae 


ee a 





Iv.] ZEUS. 57 


with remorse, fled into exile to Crete, after burying the ox. 
A dearth fell upon the land, and the Delphic oracle declared 
to the men of Attica that the Cretan exile would cause the 


_trouble to cease, ‘but they must punish the murderer and 


raise up the dead, and it would be better for them if at the 
very same sacrifice in which it died they all tasted the flesh of 
the dead and refrained not.’ It was discovered that Sopatros 


_ had done the deed, and an embassy was sent tohim. Wishing 


to free himself from the burden of conscience, he volunteered 
to return, stating that it was necessary to slay an ox again, 


- and offering to be himself the slayer, on condition that they 


should make him a citizen and should all take part in the 
murder. The citizens agreed and instituted the ritual of the 
Bovddria, ‘the murder of the ox, which continued till a late 
period to be the chief act in the Diipoleia, the festival of Zeus 
Polieus. Maidens called water-carriers were appointed to 
bring water to sharpen the axe and the knife; one man 
handed the axe to another, who then smote that one of the 
oxen among those which were driven round the altar that 
tasted the cereal offerings laid upon it; another ministrant 
cut the throat of the fallen victim, and the others flayed it 
and all partook of the flesh. The next act in this strange 
drama was to stuff the hide with grass, and sowing it together 
to fashion the semblance of a live ox and to yoke it to the 
plough. A trial was at once instituted, and the various 
agents in the crime were charged with ox-murder. Each 
thrust the blame upon the other, until the guilt was at last 
allowed to rest on the axe, which was then solemnly tried 
and condemned and cast into the sea. Thus the bidding of 
the oracle was fulfilled; as many as possible had taken part 
in the murder; all had tasted the flesh, the murderous axe 
was punished and the dead was raised to life. The search 
after an explanation of this mysterious practice leads far back 
into the domain of primitive ideas that form the background 
of ritual. Whatever may be the final explanation, the story 
and the ritual reveal this at least, that the Zeus of Attica was 
originally a god of agriculture, and that the community of 
citizens was supposed to have been brought about and main- 


58 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


tained by eating the ox by way of sacrament; and we may 
conclude that the animal was regarded as of kin to the 
worshipper and the god. The special deity of an ox-clan 
becomes the god of the whole state; the ox-man, Bovrns, the 
mythic ancestor of the Bovrada, the priests of Athena Polias 
and Poseidon-Erechtheus, bequeaths his name also to the 
priest of Zeus Polieus'’*, and Athene herself promised pre- 
cedence to the Diipolia among the sacrifices on the Acropolis 
out of gratitude to Zeus who voted the land to her. Another 
instance that may here be quoted of the religious-political 
significance of the ox in Attic worship is afforded by two late 
Attic inscriptions, showing that the Zeus év [akvadio, the god 
who sat in the judgement-hall of Pallas, where cases of 
involuntary homicide were tried, was served by a priest who 
was called Bov¢¥yns, ‘the yoker of the ox,’ a name derived 
from the mythical first tiller of the soil % 

The worship of Zeus Polieus, which was in vogue in other 
parts of Greece '""-*, was apparently less prominent in the 
religion at Athens than that of Athene Polias; but the chief 
parts and activities of political life were consecrated to him 
by such titles as Bovdaios, the god who inspired council, to 
whom prayers were made by the members of the Bovdn 
before deliberation; his statue stood in the council-chamber 
near to that of Apollo and Demos*°, and Athena BovaAata 
was associated with him. The worship of Zeus ’ApBovAtos 12 
at Sparta had probably the same significance as that of 
BovAatos, which also was found in Laconia ». 

‘Ayopaios is an epithet that belonged to Zeus in common 
with many other divinities whose statues stood in the market- 
place". Under this title we must not regard Zeus usually 
as the god of trade, as was Hermes ‘“Ayopaios, though we 
have one instance of the honesty of a bargain being guaranteed 
by an oath taken in his name '*h; but as the god who pre- 
sided over assemblies and trials: it was he who, according to 


* Vide Appendix on Ritual, p88, form of Hades: vide 4, Probably 

> The name Eubouleus does not the title ‘ Mechaneus’ under which 
belong to this class, though placed in it | Zeus was worshipped at Argos, de- 
by Diodorus Siculus, but always desig- _signated the god who shows men ways 
nated the Chthonian Zeus, another and means "2 (suppl.). 


Iv.]} ZEUS. 59 


Aeschylus "3", awarded victory to Orestes in his trial for 
matricide: ‘Zeus who gives judgement in the court has 
triumphed®’ 
These titles all refer to the peaceful life of the city. As 
a war-god pure and simple Zeus scarcely appears at all, 
a fact which is somewhat remarkable, since the supreme 
god of a warlike people tends naturally to assume such 
functions, as the history of Odin shows; and we may regard 
this as a proof of the civilized quality of the religion of Zeus. 
It is only in the semi-Hellenic cult of Caria that Zeus 
appears preeminently as a warlike god, as Zeus Stratios, ‘the 
god of hosts,’ and as Zeus Labrandeus, armed with the 
double-headed axe, whose worship penetrated into Attica and 
was organized by a thiasos in the Peiracus in the third 
century 15,15¢s,y, Another appellative of the same divinity 
was Xpvadwp, the god of the golden sword or axe, whose 
cult was of great celebrity at the Carian Stratonicea. fhe 
worship of Zeus Srpdtws spread to Bithynia, and in a late 
period to Athens; but the latter city had admitted the worship 
of the Carian Zeus as early as the beginning of the filth 
century, if Herodotus’ statement is to be believed that it was 
specially observed by the family of Isagoras. Also in the 
ancient period and in the backward regions of Hellas proper 
we may suppose that Zeus had been worshipped directly as 
a god of war. The Eleans preserved the tradition, if not the 
altar, of Zeus Areios, to whom Oinomaos offered prayers before 
his deadly race, which may be regarded as a peculiar ritual of 
human sacrifice "7", And the Epirote kings at their accession 
_took the constitutional oath with their people at the altar 
of Zeus ’Apeios?7», In Laconia a military sense may have 
belonged to the titles ’Ayjrwp and Koopijras, which were 
attached to Zeus 1 12°, Zeus ’Ayijtwp was the leader of the 
host, to whom the king sacrificed, and from whose altar, if 
the signs were favourable, he carried fire away with him to 
the enemy’s frontier ; the second title is more doubtful, as it 


ee ee ee ae er 
a *. 


all 


ee ee a er ne nee pre 
: sie tal \ae- f 


® The 6eol dyopaio: have been by Pindar to Hermes as president of 
thought to be identical with those the games; it is no cult-title of Zeus, 
whom Aeschylus and others called and is only once applied to him, 
dyérior; the epithet dydvos is applied namely in a line of Sophocles '"*, 






‘+ 


GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


60 


may denote the god ‘who arrays the ranks, or in a more 
general sense the power that orders the world. The worships 
of Zeus Sthenios near Troezen 7! and of Zeus Strategos at 
Amastus in Paphlagonia™®4, of Zeus Opuaydpuos, the gatherer 
of the host, at Aegium !2%, belonged to the same class, and it 
is probable that the Zeus Charmon }*4 who was honoured with 
a temple near Mantinea was the god ‘who rejoiced in battle,’ 

especially as it stood near the grave of Epaminondas, and as 
x4pyn refers always to the delight of battle*. But generally 
and essentially for the religion of the developed Greek people 
he is not a war-god nor supreme with the mere physical 
supremacy of strength; he is rather the god of victory and 
victorious peace, after is triumph over the Titans and Giants, 
the god who has Nixn for his constant ministrant and who 
dispenses victory and holds the balance of the battle. In this 
respect Zeus Nixnddpos” and Athene Niky stand alone among 
the Olympians; the trophy itself was the sacred aniconic 
representation of Zeus Tropaeus, a name which occurred in 
the worship at Sparta and Salamis !7?4 3, 

The Homeric poems in which Zeus decides the fate of the 
combat, but sits aloof, present the actual view of Greek 
religion. No title so fully and feelingly describes the func- 
tions of Zeus, the Helper of men, as Zeus Soter!*8, which 
includes others such as dAcElkaxos, atotpdtatos, amjptos, ‘the 
warder-off of evil’; and just as Zeus "AmoBaripios was ‘the 
god who brings the ship to land,’ to whom Alexander offered 
thanksgiving on disembarking in Asia, so Zets Swryp was 
worshipped by the sailors of the Peiraeus #*8" as the god who 
could save in shipwreck as well as in war. The watch- 
word of the Greeks at the battle of Cynaxa was ‘ Zeus the 
Saviour’ #784; and in most localities the cult commemorated 
some deliverance from the perils of war. It was this divinity 
who inspired the Greeks at Plataea with the hopes of victory ; 


® The epithet is usually explained 
with less probability, as designating 
the god ‘who gives joy,’ through the 
harvest or at the feast; for instance by 
Immerwahr, Dze Kulte und Mythen 
Arkadiens, p. 30. 


b Zeus Nianpdpos, however, does not 
appear asa cult-name. The earliest 
literary statement of the connexion of 
Nike with Zeus is Bacchylides’ frag- 
ment!*7, In Himerius Ov. I9. 5 she 
is ‘the daughter of great Zeus.’ 





Iv.] ZEUS. 61 


to whom the Cyreans offered sacrifice at the close of their great 
march, and to whom the Mantineans the citizens of Megalo- 


polis and the Messenians raised shrines of thanksgiving for the 


freedom which Epaminondas victories had brought them. The 
festival with which the Sicyonians honoured the memory of 
Aratus was inaugurated by the priest of Zeus Soter, and we 
have records of his cult at Argos, Troezen, Aegium, Pharsalus, 
Pergamon, and Rhodes, in Ambracia, Aetolia and Lesbos ; 
but the Athenian monuments and ritual of this as of most 
other worships are best known to us. His temple stood in the 
Peiraeus and survived when most of the other buildings there 
had been destroyed; and the ephebi, who were specially 
under his care, rowed trireme-races in his honour at the 
festival of the Diisoteria. In the city itself, where he was 
worshipped in company with Athena Soteira, we hear of no 
temple but an altar and a statue only, near to which inscrip- 
tions commemorating Athenian successes appear to have been 
set up. Oxen were sacrificed in large numbers at the festival 
of the Diisoteria*, and the altar was decked with great pomp; 
and the priest of Zeus Soter, in the P/utus of Aristophanes, 
speaks of the numerous sacrifices habitually made by private 
citizens. It was perhaps through the ceremony of the Greek 
banquet that the title acquired a wider significance, as the 
Zevs Lwrnp was the god to whom the third libation was offered 
at the close of the feast, and he was regarded at this moment 
as. the god who dispensed all good things, as the dyads éatuwy 
of the life of man; so that we may thus understand the 
epithet with which Aeschylus described the prosperous life of 
Agamemnon as ‘that which poured the third libation,’ the life, 
that is, that was specially guarded by Zeus the Saviour. 

Many of the titles above-mentioned and the functions that 
they connote belonged to other divinities as well. But his 
worship has a political significance higher than any other, for 
he alone regarded the unity of Greece, and his cult was 
preeminently Hellenic and not merely local or tribal. As 
Zevs “Opvayd’pwos he gathered the hosts against Troy’?". As 
’EAcvdépios he saved Greece from Persia and was worshipped at 

® Mommsen’s /eortologic, p. 453. 


62 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP., 


Plataea after the battle, and a striking epigram of Simonides 
preserves the memory of this cult: 

‘Having driven out the Persians, they raised an altar to 
Zeus, the free man’s god, a fair token of freedom for Hellas.’ 

After the victory the Greeks purified the land, bringing 
fresh fire from the hearth of the Delphic shrine; and then 
raised the altar and a temple near the monuments of 
those that had fallen; at the same time the games called 
Eleutheria were instituted, which were still being held every 
fifth year in Pausanias’ time, and in which the chief contest 
was a race of armed men round the altar’!>, At Athens 
also we hear of a statue to Zeus ’EdevOépios, which in all 
probability took its name from the same great event as the 
Plataean cult, and not, as Hyperides explained, from the 
enfranchisement of slaves''*%. It stood, according to Pausa- 
nias, in the Cerameicus, near the Stoa Basileios, and near to 
it monuments were set up, such as the shield of the brave 
Athenian who had fallen in the battle against the Gauls at 
Thermopylae, and that important inscription recently found 
containing the terms of the second maritime confederacy of 
Athens, organized, as the decree declares, to free Greece 
from Sparta. The cult-title of Eleutherios appears to 
have become identified at Athens with that of Soter. 
The worship was found in other parts of Greece also, in 
Samos'*!¢, and, according to Hesychius!3!* at Syracuse 
Tarentum and év Kapias, or, as the Scholiast on Plato reads, 
ev Kapia; it is probable that the right reading is év Kapvas, 
and that the place referred to is Caryae, the town in the north 
of Laconia ; an inscription of early date attests the existence 
of the cult on Laconian territory. 

We are informed by Diodorus Siculus about ‘nee occasion of 
the institution of this cult at Syracuse!!; it was after the over- 
throw of the tyranny of Thrasybulus in 466 B.C. that a colossal 
statue was raised to Zeus ’EAevOépios and yearly games founded 
in his honour. We have numismatic evidence of this cult in 
other Sicilian cities, Aetna, Agyrium, and Alaesa, that re- 
gained their freedom through the victories of Timoleon?. 

* Head, Hist. Num. pp. 104, 109, 110. 


IV.] ZEUS. 63 


A cognate worship was that of Zeus Hellenios or Panhel- 
lenios in Aegina’, an ancient cult which was originally 
perhaps special to the Aeacidae or to the Hellenes in 
a narrower sense; but its significance grew with the extension 
of the Hellenic name. The pan-Hellenic character of the 
cult was already expressed in the story that Aeacus ascended 
the Aeginetan mountain to pray to this god in behalf of the 
whole of Greece for rain; but it was the Persian invasion that 
enhanced the value of this cult-title. The Athenian ambas- 
sadors declared at Sparta, according to Herodotus, that they 
had remained true to the Hellenic cause out of reverence to 
Zeus Hellenios. A temple was raised to him in Athens by 
Hadrian, and we find the head of this god with an inscription 
on fourth-century coins of Syracuse. But the worship was 
unfortunately rare in the Greek world; it expressed an ideal, 
recognized partially by the religion of the nation, but never 
attained by its politics. 

A review of the evidence proves that in Greek religion, 
though in certain localities more frequent prayer may have 
been addressed to local god or hero, Zeus possessed a 
political importance such as belonged to no other Hellenic 
divinity. The Cretan, the Messenian, the Arcadian, were each 
national and confederate worships, and the history of Messene 
and Arcadia was reflected in the cults and monuments of 
Zeus Ithomatas and Lycaeus. In Argos Zeus Nemeios was 
joined in worship with Hera Argeia, and the Nemea was 
partly an Argive military festival!’ *. In Sparta he received 
a title from the land itself and its ancient king, and it was 
the king’s prerogative to sacrifice to Zeus Lacedaemon and 
Zeus Ouranios; as a king-god he was revered in Lebadea, 
Erythrae and Paros!*’.. His name is of constant occurrence 
in oaths of alliance, and the kings of Epiros swore by him 
to observe the laws. The Carian worship of the war-god, the 
deity of daylight, becomes under Hellenic influences a political 
and national cult of Zeus. At Prymnessos in Phrygia, 
according to a late inscription found by Prof. Ramsay, Zeus 
was honoured as dpyxnyérns, the leader of the colony!”*. We 
may note in conclusion that no other Greek deity possessed 


64 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP, 


so long a list of cult-names derived from names of peoples 
and towns'*®. The Boeotian cult of Zeus ‘Opodduios, the god 
‘who held the people in accord,’ expressed the faith of 
Fiellas +. 

We have lastly to review the most important class of cults 
and titles that were consecrated and attached to Zeus as 
a god of the moral and spiritual life; and it is in reference 
to these that we can best consider how far the state-religion 
was in harmony with the ethical and religious feeling of the 
great writers and thinkers of Greece. It has been assumed 
that the physical and elemental character of Zeus was 
the earlier, for though the most civilized Greek commu- 
nities recognized this character, yet in its most primitive 
form it appears among the more backward races and in 
the earliest cults, and the assumption is in accord with 
analogies offered by other lines of human development. 
But this progress in the divine idea from the physical to 
the moral significance was remotely anterior to the period 
at which Greek history begins. We may note a trace of 
it in the worship of Zeus MeAéywos at Athens and else- 
where, 

The interpretation of the name MesAlyios is important for 
the right understanding of the religious idea. It certainly did 
not originally signify the ‘kindly’ god; for we gather from 
Plutarch and Hesychius that it was synonymous with patydk- 
7™s'°**, which designates the angry or troubled Zeus. Sacri- 
fice was offered to Zeus Meilichios at the beginning of 
winter, in Maimacterion, which according to Harpocration 
took its name from Zeus Maimd«rys, and again in the latter part 
of Anthesterion at the festival of Diasia, the great feast of 
Zeus held outside the city, which Thucydides calls a feast of 
Zeus Meilichios, and which, according to the Scholiast on 
Lucian, was kept with a certain degree of gloom. We gather 
also that the rites were piacular, that is, were regarded as 
atonement for sin. The sacrifices in Locris to the 0eo! MeAc- 
Xxtot, among whom we may include Zeus, were performed in 
the night, and all the flesh of the victim slain must be 
consumed before the morning; if the victim bears away with 





dts 
¥ 
= 
ow 
a 
“,. 


Iv. ] ZEUS. 65 


it the sins of the people, the meaning of the rule that it must 
not be exposed to the light of day becomes obvious. And 
we gather from Xenophon that the same feeling dictated thé 
ritual at Athens, where the swine that were offered had to 
be wholly consumed by the fire. We are told also by 
Eustathius that a ram was offered to Zeus Meilichios at the 
end of Maimacterion®, and his skin was used for the purification 
of the city, whose offences by some ceremonious means were 
cast out and passed over into certain unclean objects that 
were then taken away to the cross-roads. This skin was the 
‘fleece of God, which was employed for similar rites of 
purification at Eleusis and in the procession of the Sciro- 
phoria, being placed under the feet of those whose guilt was 
to be taken away. We need not see in this any survival of 
actual human sacrifice, or any hint of the idea that the man’s 
life was really due for which the ‘mild god’ accepted the 
substitution of the ram. We may explain the ceremony 
naturally if we suppose that the guilty or unclean person stood 
on the skin of the sacred animal in order to place himself in 
nearer contact with the god whose favour he wished to regain. 
From all this it seems clear that the title MesAéyos must 
either have signified ‘the god who must be appeased,’ and 
therefore alluded directly to the wrath of God, or that the 
angry deity was styled thus by a sort of euphemism, just as 
Hades was termed Eubouleus and the Furies the Eumenides. 
This latter view becomes the more probable, when we see that 
in this worship Zeus is clearly regarded as a god of the lower 
world. The powers below were specially concerned with the 
ritual for the purification of sin, and the swine is the piacular 
animal proper to them, and except in the rites of Meilichios 
and, according to Apollonius Rhodius, of Zeus ‘Ikéovos and 
perhaps of Zeus Piduos, is nowhere found in the worship of 
the Hellenic Zeus. We have also evidence from certain 
monuments that the serpent, the emblem of the earth and the 
dark places below, was the sign of Zeus Meilichios; and the 
nightly rites at Locris illustrate the gloomy significance of 


® From the evidence of a mutilated another state-sacrifice was offered to 
Attic inscription it would appear that Zeus Meilichios in Thargelion. 


VOL. I, F 


66 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


this epithet. It is for this reason that we find this god asso- 
ciated with Hekate, the goddess to whom the cross-roads were 
Sacred. 

This sombre character of Zeus was probably derived, in 
Attica at least, from his functions as a deity of vegetation. 
We hear of Zeus Tewpyds in Athenian worship, and cereal 
offerings were made to him in Maimacterion, the month of 
Zeus MeiAfytos. We may gather also from the obscure and 
probably corrupt passage in Thucydides about the Diasia, 
that by the side of the animal sacrifice oblations of the fruits 
of the country were allowed. Possibly, then, Zeus Maimactes 
or Meilichios was first conceived rather as a physical god of 
vegetation, who grew sombre in the winter months, and who 
must be appeased in order that the season of fertility may 
return. But the passage from the physical to the moral 
conception was here easy, and probably very early. For the 
changes in nature and the sky have always been supposed to 
correspond in the earlier and even later stages of religious 
belief to the varying moods of the divinity, and the varying 
conduct of man; and the sacrifices to obtain the season of 
growth and fertility might take the form of piacular offerings 
for sin. It is not improbable that in the earliest period of this 
cult the special sin for which supplication must be made to 
Zeus Meilichios was the sin of kindred slaughter, conceived 
as an offence against the gods at a time when ordinary 
homicide was only a trespass against men. Thus it was 
for the shedding of kindred blood that Theseus underwent 
purification at the altar of this god!8*, And it was to atone 
for civic slaughter that the Argives dedicated a statue of 
which Polycleitos was the sculptor to Zeus Meilichios !°8», 
The very ancient existence of the cult in Greece is suggested 
by the legend of Theseus and proved by the aniconic emblem 
of Zeus Meilichios in the form of a pyramid at Sicyon !°8», 

As regards his relation to human sin, the conception of 
Zeus is twofold: on the one hand he is zadapvaios, TLULWPOS, 
the god of vengeance and retribution, the god who punishes 
human guilt even in the second and third generation !2°-"! ; 
on the other, a larger class of epithets 14!-1** designate him as 





Iv.] ZEUS. . 67 


the god of the suppliant, to whom those stricken with guilt 
can appeal. Zeds ixrip, ixéoros, pvgios*, is he who helps the 
suppliant and to whom the criminal flees; mpoorpézatos, to 
whom the suppliant turns; xa@dpo.os, the god who purifies. 
It is interesting to note that in actual Greek cult the latter 
class of epithets were far more in vogue than the former, the 
‘retributive’ class. We have no inscriptions and no state 
records of the worship of the god of vengeance and retribution ; 
it is only in Cyprus, and only on the authority of Clemens ™’, 
that the cult of Zeus Tipwpds is attested. Naturally the 
public religion aimed rather at averting than invoking the 
divine anger ; and we hear of the worship of bvguos at Argos 
and in Thessaly, and of Ka@dpov.os in Olympia and Athens. 
The oath taken by certain public functionaries of the latter 
city, according to the Solonian formula which Pollux gives, 
was sworn in the name of the god of supplication, cleansing, 
and healing. The name of Zeus ‘Ixéovos occurs in a very early 
Spartan inscription, and the titles of Zeus Paian at Rhodes '*° 
and ’Azorpémauos 14, the averter of ill, at Erythrae express the 
same idea of the deity. The full account of these functions 
of Zeus touches on the earliest conception of crime, the 
earliest conscience of the race, and the prevalence of these 
cults in Greece proves the profundity of the moral thought 
concerning murder and sacrilegious sin. Examining certain 
legends we might conclude that it was the shedding of 
kindred blood which was the aboriginal sin for which the 
worship of Zeus ‘Ixéovos, the god of supplication, was established, 
this sin and perjury constituting perhaps the first conceptions 
of sacrilege. The first murderer in Greek legend was Ixion, 
and his crime was the treacherous murder of a kinsman ; 
visited with madness by the Erinyes, he was also the first 
suppliant who appealed to Zeus ‘Ixéovos, and probably it was 
in relation to him that Zeus is called by Pherecydes ixéovos 
Kal dAdorwp, the god of the suppliant and the guilty outcast. 
The offence of the Danaides who slew their husbands was the 
same in kind, and here also the legend regarded Zeus as the 

* Svgi0s appears to have possessed times the god who protects, sometimes 
an ambiguous sense, designating some- _the god who punishes the exile. 

F 2 


68 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


originator of the rites of purification. The divine punishment_ 
for this sin was madness, and the divine ministers who carry 
out the will of Zeus Tiwpds and Tadapvatos were the Erinyes, 
the powers who themselves came into being through the 
outrage committed by a son upon his father, who pursued ~ 
Orestes and Amphion for their act of matricide, and who 
were so closely interwoven with the tradition of kindred 
slaughter in the house of Laios. And perhaps the first 
need of purification arose from the same sort of acts, whether 
voluntary or involuntary, as the legends of Theseus, Belle- 
rophon, and Athamas and others illustrate, Here then we 
have the expression in religious myth and ritual of the 
striking fact in early Greek clan-usage and law, namely, that 
the shedding of kindred blood was originally an offence of 
an entirely different kind from the slaying of an alien, 
probably because the god himself was considered in the 
former case as akin to the slayer and the slain In early 
Greek society it is clear that to kill an alien was a secular 
matter which only concerned the kin of the slain, the avengers 
of blood, who might pursue the slayer or accept a weregilt ; 
it was no sin, unless the alien had been a suppliant or under 
the protection of the stranger’s god. But the slayer of his 
kinsman was a sinner under the ban of God; the legends do 
not seem to show that his fellow-kinsmen would at once 
punish him with death>, but that he must be outcast from 
the community and that Zeus and the Erinyes must deal with 


* The story in the Athamantid family own brother. Of the typical instances 


of the sacrificial slaughter of the king 
and the king’s son is probably in 
its origin no legend of mere kindred 
slaughter, but may have arisen from 
very early ideas concerning the sacrifice 
of the god or the divine representative ; 
but another legend given by Apollo- 
dorus (1. 9, 2) speaks of the mad 
Athamas being driven from Boeotia for 
slaying Ino’s son Learchus, and appeal- 
ing to Zeus to know where he is to 
dwell. The same author (2. 3, 1) nar- 
rates that Bellerophon fled from Corinth 
because he had involuntarily slain his 


that Ovid gives (ast. 2. 39) of purifi- 
cation for sin, all but one are concerned 
with the slaughter of kinsmen, and this 
may be said of nearly all those collected 
by Lobeck, Ag/aophamus, pp. 967-969. 

» Tlepolemos, who slew his kinsman, 
was threatened with death by the other 
members of his family (/7. 2. 665) ; but 
by a Boeotian law which, according 
to Plutarch, prevailed in the mythical 
period, the shedder of kindred blood 
‘must leave Boeotia and become a sup- 
pliant and a stranger.’ 





IV.] ZEUS. 69 


his guilt. But the god of vengeance himself provided the 
mode of escape through purification and sacrifice of sin. The 
legends tell us little concerning the nature of these rites, but 
speak only of the outcast wandering until some compassionate 
stranger receives him into his home and cleanses him. But 
the ritual of the historic period had probably been handed 
down from very ancient times, and we are supplied with some 
information about this, chiefly from the account in Apollonius 
Rhodius of the cleansing of Jason and Medea!**. The usual 
piacular victim was a young pig, which was held over the 
head of the guilty, as we see Apollo holding it over Orestes 
in a vase-painting that represents his purification*. And the 
blood of the slaughtered animal was then poured over his 
hands, with invocation of Zeus Ka@dpo.os. In some accounts 
bathing in the water of a river or the sea appears to have been 
a necessary part of the ceremony”. The latter practice is 
easily explained, as physical and moral purity are scarcely 
distinguished in ancient ritual; but it is not so easy to under- 
stand the pouring blood over the hands. We know that the 
pig was specially sacred to the lower deities, who no less than 
Zeus were outraged by wrongful homicide, and to whom Zeus 
Meilichios and for the occasion probably Zeus Ka@dpovos were 
akin, and we may suppose that the blood of this animal, like the 
fleece of the sacred ram in the lustral ceremonies at Athens, 
was supposed to bring the guilty into nearer contact with the 
estranged divinity and had power to win him reconciliation. 
The chief benefit to the purified person was the recovery of 
his right of fellowship with men, and, while in the legends he 
is represented usually as continuing to live in his new home, 
in the later period he could return to his native land under 
certain conditions, if the relatives of the slain consented. 

It is easy to imagine how vitally this religious usage in the 
Zeus cult might influence the growth of moral ideas of forgive- 
ness and reconciliation. 

Another signal act of sacrilege was perjury, the guilt of 
which was matter of cognizance for the gods of the lower 


*" Arch. Zeit., 1861, Taf. 137 and > Athenae. 410 a. and b. Cf. Zph. 
138. Taur. 1193. 


70 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


world and the Erinyes, but especially also for Zeus, whose 
name occurs in nearly all the formulae of the state oath. 
The statue of Zeus “Opxios stood in the council-hall of 
Olympia holding in each hand a thunderbolt, the most 
terrifying in aspect of all the statues of Zeus that Pausanias 
knew of'478, The strength of this belief in the religious 
character of the oath is shown by passages in Homer which 
speak of the punishment of the oath-breaker after death *, and 
by the lines in Hesiod’s 7heogony where the oath is already 
personified as a child of the lower world, born to be ‘the 
scourge of men’; while in Sophocles he is spoken of as the 
all-seeing child of Zeus!*"°. No doubt the oath was never a real 
concrete divinity either in early or late periods ; originally an 
abstract idea of a quality or function of the divine nature, it 
becomes personal because of the strength of the belief, and is 
partially separated from the divinity. The ceremony of the 
oath-taking at Olympia is strikingly described by Pausanias ?, 
and reminded him of the account in the //iad where Aga- 
memnon takes the oath over the boar,an animal sacred to the 
lower gods, which is then slain and cast into the sea*. The 
freethinkers of Greek literature scarcely deviate from the 
popular religious thought as regards the sanctity of oaths. 
Even Euripides, to whom loose morality in this respect has 
been wrongly attributed, strongly maintains in a striking 
fragment that the gods admit no excuse for perjury: ‘ Thinkest 
thou the gods are inclined to pardon, when by false swearing 


aman would escape death or bonds or violence...? Then 
either they are less wise than mortal men, or they set fair 
specious pleas before justice 4 . 


But we must not suppose that, at any period of Greek thought 
of which we have record, the sphere of sin against the gods was 


® JI. 3. 279; 19. 260. 

 §.:24, 10-11 

° Probably the animal consecrated by 
this ceremony was under a special taboo, 
and his carcase could not be disposed of 
in the ordinary way; or possibly the 
act was ‘mimetic,’ and expressed an im- 
precation that the perjured man might 


thus be destroyed from off the earth. 

4 -rag. 1030. Such sentiments as 
those expressed in H7pfolytus, 610, and 
lphigenia in Aulis, 394, must not be 
regarded as Euripides’ own; they are 
merely dramatic sophistries uttered by 
certain characters under stress of cir- 
cumstances. 


5 gg WARY £ say ade. + 


Iv. ] EUS, 71 


limited to perjury or kindred murder. Both as regards retri- 
bution and expiation the sphere of Zeus in Hesiod and Homer 
is as wide as human life. He is wavdzrns, ‘the all-seer,’ in 
a moral rather than a physical sense, and the term recalls the 
frequent utterances of the poets concerning the all-seeing eye of 
Aixn or Justice. The latter is the special ministrant, companion, 
and emanation of Zeus, although associated with the nether 
divinities also. And where she is given a parentage, being 
originally only an abstract idea, it is Zeus who is her father ; 
and it is with the weapon of Zeus that she overthrows the 
unjust 14°. 

With Aixn Themisis closely connected, and as Aixn proceeded 
from Zeus, so Themis herself, who was originally an independ- 
ent deity with a worship and oracle at Delphi, was absorbed 
by Zeus, when she had become a name significant of right in 
general. Thus in Aeschylus we hear of the Themis or right of 
Zeus KAdpwos, the god of allotments, and in Pindar of the Themis 
of Zeus Zévos, the god of hospitality. And Hesiod speaks of 
the daiuoves, the army of spirits who are the watchers of Zeus 
over the whole life of man ; and elsewhere in Greek literature 
there are not wanting hints of the profound idea that a moral, 
law, sanctioned by Zeus, prevails even in the animal world bias 
Even in its application to blood-guiltiness we see that the 
divine idea expands. Not merely the shedder of kindred 
blood has offended against Zeus, and is under the ban of the 
Erinyes : the latter dwelt on the rock of the Areopagus, where 
any case of murder could be tried ; and the homicide who was 
acquitted by this court had to offer sacrifice to the Eumenides, 
as though they had yet to be pacified, or as a thank-offering to 
them for letting him go. And according to the law of Solon, 
the judges at Athens must swear by Zeus, ‘the god of the 
suppliant, the god of purification, and the healer of guilt '*%’ 
As the political community expanded, all bloodshed, if the 
victim had any rights at all within the city, became a political 
offence, as well as a sin which needed purification®. There is 


® This extension of the idea of sinin the purification of Achilles from the 
regard to bloodshed is at least as early blood of Thersites; this may be an 
as the time of Arctinus, who described advance on the religious view of 


72 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


a curious passage in Antiphon, that has almost a modern 
tone, on the sacredness of human life. The murderer pollutes 
any sacrifice in which he partakes, and his presence exposes 
others also to divine wrath, a belief on which the orator 
attempts to establish an indirect proof of innocence*. Murder 
might still be sacrilege, even if the victim was not of the same. 
state, and Zeus b’fios became the god to whom any man 
would appeal who wished to clear himself of the guilt of any 
bloodshed, as Pausanias, the Spartan king, made sacrifice to 
him to atone for the death of the maiden whom he had in- 
voluntarily slain. Only, the older and narrower idea survived 
in the enactment of Attic law that the kinsmen might decide 
whether to prosecute or to forgive the involuntary homicide’, 
and even Aeschylus® seems to suppose that the Eumenides 
pursue, not any murderer, but only the slayer of his kin. 

Still wider is the conception of Zeus ‘Ikéovos in its fullest 
development. Not the blood-guilty only, but the man who 
fears any evil from his fellows could put himself under his 
protection ; and the reverence claimed for Zeus ‘Ikéovos is the 
text of the drama of Aeschylus: ‘We must needs respect the 
jealousy of Zeus, the suppliant’s god ; for the fear of him is 
deepest among mortal men‘**°.’ Here, as in other cases 
already noted, the god with his epithet seems to have been 
used almost as an abstraction to denote a certain right or 
duty ; and seems to have had a separate existence in and for 
each person who claimed his aid. ‘Thou hast escaped the 
god of my supplication, says Polyxena to Odysseus in the 
Hecuba of Euripides. To no other function or attribute — 
of Greek divinity does the conception of divine grace so 
naturally attach, and every altar could shelter the suppliant ; 
Homer. But it is too much to say © slain his cousin and who went as a sup- 
that the latter poet knows nothing even pliant to Peleus and Thetis (//. 16. 
of purification for the murder of kins- 574). In any case his silence would be 
men, as he makes clear mention of no argument, as none of the actual per- 


piacular sacrifices for sin in general, sonages in his epic commit this sin. 

a far more advanced idea (//.9. 495);  * Pp. 686 and 749; cf. Aesch. Ag. 
and there is probably an allusion to the 337. 

rites of Zeus Ka@dpouos, which are ‘cer- > Dem. mpds Maxapr. p. 1069. © 
tainly older than Homer, in the pas- © Lum. 605. 

sage which mentions the man who had 


1v.] ZEUS. 73 


so that the classification given by Pollux !#°* of the divine 
titles almost resolves itself into the distinction between 6eoi 
maXdapvaior and ixéovor, the gods of vengeance and of supplica- 
tion. Down to the end of paganism many shrines possessed 
the right of sanctuary, a right which often clashed with the 
secular law*. The legend of Ajax and Cassandra, the story 
about the Hera at Sybaris who closed her eyes when the 
suppliants were dragged away from her altar, illustrate the 
prevalent feeling of classical times. This broad conception 
of Zeus ‘Ixéovos appears also in the Homeric account of the 
Atrat », the personal powers of prayer, whom the poet calls 
the daughters of Zeus, and who plead for men against Ate, 
and who appeal to Zeus against those who neglect them. 
And this early spiritual idea which we find in the //ad gave 
rise to an actual worship of Zeus Acratos °, which the coins 
of the Bithynian Nicaea attest, and receives beautiful expres- 
sion in the drama of Sophocles: ‘ nay, but as mercy shares the 
judgement-seat of Zeus to judge every act of man, let mercy 
be found with thee too, my father.’ The suppliants’ fillets 
are called by Aeschylus ‘the emblems of the god of mercy ™*. 

A narrower, but cognate, conception is that of Zeus Xenios, 
who was worshipped throughout the Greek world!*®. This 
worship is rooted in very ancient moral ideas; the sanctity of 
the stranger-guest, who as early as Homer and _ probably 
much earlier was placed under the protection of Zeus, was 
almost as great as the sanctity of the kinsman’s life, and to 
slay him was a religious sin, for which, according to one 
legend, Heracles was sold into slavery to Omphale*. Originally 
the god of hospitality—for in primitive society the stranger 
must be the guest of some one—he becomes the god to whom 


eee ee Oey S 


® Tac. Ann. 3. 60-63. 

> Zl. 9. 498. 

© Bull. de Corr. Hell., 1878, p. 509. 

4 Frag. Hist. Graec. Pherecydes, 34: 
Aéyerar 5 ws ayavaxthoas 6 Zeds éni 
TH fevortrovia mpocéragey “Eppn da- 
Bévra tov ‘Hpakréa rwdARoa dSikny Tod 
¢évov. To explain this curious story of 
the hero being sold into slavery, we 
may note two other instances in legend : 


the slavery of Apollo to Admetus for 
the slaughter of the Cyclopes, and that 
of Cadmus to Ares for causing the 
death of the ‘Sparti,’ the descendants of 
the god; and we may believe that these 
legends arose from the occasional prac- 
tice of the kinsmen accepting the slavery 
of the homicide as an atonement for the 
bloodshed. 


74 GREEK RELIGION, [CHAP. 


any stranger is consecrated. According to Plutarch, the 
honours paid to Zeus Xenios were many and gsteat "= we 
have record or epigraphical proof of his worship at Sparta, 
where he was associated with Athena Xenia, at Rhodes, where 
a religious association existed called the Avds femacrat, the 
worshippers of Zeus Xenios, and at Athens, where, as we 
gather from an inscription, the metics and resident merchants 
formed a company for the purpose of this cult. As a city 
could confer €evia, the privileges of a public guest, upon any 
favoured stranger, so we read that Apollonius of Tyana was 
made the guest of Zeus by the public vote of the Spartans °°. 
Greek literature, early and late, is full of evidence of the deep 
religious feeling attaching to this cult. Charondas, the 
Sicilian legislator, insists on the duty of receiving the stranger 
reverently, ‘because the worship of Zeus Xenios is common to 
all nations, and he takes note of those who welcome and those 
who maltreat the stranger” ‘The stranger, Plato says 
in the Laws14°8,‘ being destitute of comrades and kinsmen, 
has more claim on the pity of gods and men: the power 
that is strong to avenge is therefore the more zealous to 
help him.’ 

Akin to this worship was that of Zeus Philios ’°', the god 
of friendship, who was honoured at Megalopolis, Epidauros 
and Athens, where an association was founded in his name, 
and his priest enjoyed a special seat in the theatre. Some- 
times this title only designated the god of the friendly 
banquet, and an inscription shows that the pérovco. at Athens 
observed this cult. And thus we can understand why he was 
invoked by the parasite of Diodorus, and how he came to be 
partially identified with Bacchus at Megalopolis in a work 
of the sculptor Polycleitus the younger. But the term had 
a deeper meaning, for Zeus Philios is essentially the god who 
fosters friendship, and to whom friends appeal ; and this con- 
ception is enlarged by Dio Chrysostom, who sees in the great 
Pheidian statue the Zeus Philios who would plant love and 
abolish enmity among the whole human race. The cult does 
not appear to have been ancient ; the first mention of it occurs 
in a fragment of Pherecrates. A term almost synonymous is 


a? 


ET OAL eee I 


A 


Iv.] ZEUS. ; oho 


éraupetos 12, denoting ‘the god of good comradeship’; some- 
times with allusion to the banquet, as we find in a fragment of 
Diphilus. But in Crete the cult may well have had a political 
or military significance ; and the festival of éraipidea, which 
was celebrated at Magnesia in North Greece and in Macedon, 
was associated with the name of Jason, who sacrificed to this 
god before setting sail in the Argo with his comrades. 

In certain parts of the popular religion of Zeus, so far 
as it has been examined, we can detect a high morality that 
strikingly contrasts with the character of many of the Greck 
myths ; though, of course, the same ideas that are expressed 
in cults are expressed in those myths that explain the cult. 
On the other hand, it is interesting to see that in certain cases 
the comparatively crude morality of the cults contrasted in 
turn with the deeper views of the poets and philosophic 
writers who thought and spoke freely concerning the relations 
of the gods to men. This is specially true of the doctrine 
of retribution, of which the simplest and least moral form in 
Greek popular belief is that even innocent excess of prosperity 
is of itself an evil thing, awakening the jealousy of the gods. 
Behind this is perhaps the cruder idea that the divinity is not 
the friend but the enemy of man, an idea that is dimly 
expressed in the primitive Hesiodic story of Prometheus’ 
favour and Zeus’ disfavour to man. But it appears con- 
spicuously in the childlike doctrine of Nemesis that lived long 
in the Greek mind ; and the legend of Bellerophon’s fall and _ 
melancholy wanderings, given in Homer without any hint 
of any sin committed by the hero but rather as a result 
of superhuman prosperity, the story of Polycrates’ ring, of 
Philip's prayer mentioned by Plutarch, that the gods would 
give him some slight misfortune to counterbalance his con- 
tinual success, are illustrations of this naive religious belief 
that lasted as long as the Hellenic race. Its plainest 
expression is in the lines of Aesopus, ‘if a man has some good 
fortune he receives Nemesis by way of compensation ®*’; the 
most foolish is in the epigram of Antiphilos Byzantios on the 


® Anth. Pal. 10. 123. 


76 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


danger of speaking of the morrow*. This is merely a religious 
form of the old superstition of luck, and it is natural enough 
that the religious thinkers among the Greeks tried to reform 
this doctrine. The story of Bellerophon becomes so to speak 
moralized, perhaps by the popular imagination, or perhaps by 
Pindar himself, who at least is the earliest authority for the 
more ethical version of the story: namely, that Bellerophon’s 
fall was due to his ambitious attempt to scale heaven ». 
The most outspoken writer on this subject is Aeschylus. 
At first, indeed, he expresses himself like an ordinary 
Greek: ‘excess of fair report is a burdensome thing, for 
the jealous eye of God hurls the lightning down’; but 
later on he gives the more advanced view as one peculiar 
to himself, maintaining that it was not a man’s prosperity 
but the evil use of it that brought Nemesis*. The actual 
cult of Nemesis as a concrete goddess will be examined 
later; as a moral personification, whether rational or irra- 
tional in principle, she is not a separate power from Zeus,. 
for it is through her that he acts, and in the Phoentssae 
of Euripides she is invoked as if she wielded his thunder- 
bolts °. 

Another idea in the Greek theory of divine retribution is 
common to it with the Hebraic, namely, that the sins of the 
fathers are visited upon the children, that the curse cleaves to 
the race, or that the community is punished for the sin of one. 
An historical illustration of this clan-morality is the view— 
held strongly by the Lacedaemonians—that the descendants 
at Athens of those who committed sacrilege in the Cylonian 
conspiracy were under a curse, especially Pericles. Such 
a doctrine was seen to have its questionable side as a religious 
axiom, not only by Hebrew prophets, but by Greek thinkers. 
We find a protest against its justice in Theognis, who prays 
that the gods would punish the guilty in his own person, and 
not avenge the sins of the fathers upon the children‘. But 
the doctrine held its ground even in the most religious minds: 


* Anth. Pal. 7, 630. © Agam. 466. © 184, 
> Isthm. ©. 44. 4 Tb. 759. f Bergk. 1. 731. 11. 


Iv.] ZEUS. di 


Aeschylus himself is full of it, although he occasionally tries 
to find a compromise between this and the doctrine of indi- 
vidual moral responsibility by supposing that the curse works 
through the generations because the descendants each commit 
new acts of guilt. 

These are special questions arising about the doctrine of 
retribution ; but the whole theory that the gods sent evil to 
man because of sin or of some other reason did not remain 
without criticism and modification. In the first place, the 
retribution theory did not always square with the facts of 
experience : this difficulty could be met by the profounder con- 
ception, that the ways of the divine agency are unscen, that 
‘God is not like a passionate man, inclined to avenge every 
small act *” that ‘ Justice moves along a silent path”, or that 
God’s retribution is purposely slow, so as to teach men to 
restrain their own wrath®. Secondly, the morality of the 
retribution theory became boldly and searchingly questioned : 
and native Greek thought can claim for itself the distinction 
that it not seldom rose to the conception that God could 
do no evil to any, not even by way of punishment for 
sin. According to the view of the old myth the slaying 
of Neoptolemos at Delphi was divine retribution, because 
his father had insulted Apollo; but Euripides places a 
daring phrase in the mouth of the messenger d_<“then the 
god remembered an ancient erudge like a base-minded 
man’—and an echo of this sentiment is faintly heard in 
Plutarch®. Euripides indeed is not consistent, though his 
inconsistency may be due to dramatic appropriateness. By 
the side of the profoundly Mephistophelean sentiment, ‘the 
gods have set confusion in our lives that in our ignorance 
we may reverence them‘, we have other utterances of 
his, in which he excludes evil or evil-doing from the notion 
of divinity: ‘it is men who impute their own evil nature to 
God; for I think there can be no evil in God®’ ; and again, 


® Solon. fr. 13. 25. © De defect. Orac. 413 B-D; and De 
b Eur. 7road. 887. Cohib. [ra 458 b. 
© Plut. De Ser. Num. Vind. p. 550E-F. t Hee. 939, 960. 


4 Androm. 1164. & ph. Taur. 389-391. 


78 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP, 


‘if the gods do evil, they are not gods®’ Bacchylides» 
declares that it is not Zeus, the all-seeing one, that is the 
cause of great troubles to men; and similarly Menander holds 
that every man at his birth has a good spirit ‘who stands by 
his side to guide him through the mystery of life, for that 
a spirit can be evil must not be believed °’. 

Such expressions are in accord with Plato’s view in the 
Republic, that the gods never do evil to men, and, if they 
send misfortune, it is for an educational or moral purpose; 
and Aeschylus had already given this thought powerful utter- 
ance in the Agamemnon, where he maintains that the object 
of Zeus is to bring men to dpdvnois or cwpPpocvvn through 
suffering ¢ 

A different attempt to reconcile the fact of evil in the 
world with the absolute beneficence of God was the curious 
theory put forward by the author of De Mundo*, that the 
divine power coming from a very distant sphere was some- 
what exhausted before it reached us. The problem of evil 
did not weigh very heavily on the spirit of Greek religious 
speculation, which contented itself with such solutions as 
those which I have mentioned, without taking refuge in the 
theory of a future life. And Greek cult, though little affected 
by philosophic inquiry, amply admitted this beneficent cha- 
racter of Zeus, while the conservative spirit of ritual preserved 
something of the darker aspect. On the whole, one might say 
that the bright and spiritual belief of Plutarch ‘, ‘that the gods 
do well to men secretly for the most part, naturally rejoicing 
in showing favour and in well-doing, though it rises above 
the average popular feeling, yet stands nearer to it than the 
temper of the superstitious man in Theophrastus. 

The relation of Zeus to Moj%pa, or destiny, has yet to be 
considered—a question that touches on the part played by 
free-will and fatalism in Greek religion. A cult-name of Zeus 
at Athens, at Olympia, and probably at Delphi and in Arcadia, 


* Belleroph. rag. 294. 4 Aesch. Agam. 165. 


> Bergk, 3. p. 580, 29. ® Aristotle, p. 397 b. 
© Menand. Frag. Fab. Jncert. 18. £ De Adul, c. 22, p. 63 F. 


(Meineke). 


ete, 43 45 = eM he % Ht ¥ 
Re eS Re 


Iv. ] ZEUS. 79 


was Moupayérns, ‘the leader of fate, with which we may com- 
pare the title of Zeus ’Evaicipos, ‘the controller of destiny,’ at 
Coronea 15%, 4, The question might be put thus—how did 
Greek religion reconcile a belief in fate with the omnipotence 
of Zeus as ordinarily believed? Looking at the growth of 
the conception we find that Homer rarely regards Moira as 
a person ; the word is used by him generally as an impersonal 
substantive signifying the doom of death. It is Zeus who 
dispenses this and the other lots of men; it is Zeus who holds 
the balance of life and death in the strife—who has on the 
floor of heaven the two urns of good and ill fortune from 
which he distributes blessing or sorrow. It is an anachronism 
in Plutarch when he says, wishing to defend the Homeric 
Zeus from the charge of sending evil to men, that Homer 
often speaks of Zeus when he meant Moipa or Tvyn*; when 
Homer speaks of Zeus he meant Zeus. Only thrice” in 
Homer do we find the Motpa: regarded as persons who at the 
birth of each man weave for him the lot of life and death. 
The question has been vehemently discussed whether in these 
poems there appears the conception of the overruling power 
of destiny to which even the gods must bow. This is strongly 
denied by Welcker °, and with reason: he points out that it is 
Zeus himself who sends the Moipa; that the phrase Motpa 
Aids, ‘the doom of God,’ is habitual with him, so that where 
potpa is used alone it may be regarded as an abbreviative for 
this ; that neither Homer nor the later epic poets ever refer 
the great issues of the war to potpa, but in the Cyprza it is 
Zeus’ intention to thin population, in the //zad it is his 
promise to Thebes that is the dé€oarov, the divine decision, 
which governs events. The casting the lots of Hector and 
Achilles into the scale cannot be interpreted as a questioning 
of the superior will of fate, for Zeus never does this else- 
where; the act might as naturally be explained as a divine 
method of drawing lots, or, as Welcker prefers, as a symbol 
of his long and dubious reflection. When Hera and Athene 

* De Aud. Poet. 23. most of the Homeric passages are col- 


> Jl, 20. 1273 24. 209; Od. 7. 196. lected. 
© Griech. Gotterlehre, 1, p. 185, where 


80 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


remonstrate with Zeus for wishing to save Sarpedon or Hector, 
‘who had long been due to death,’ this cannot mean that fate 
had decided against Zeus in the matter, but that Zeus ought 
not to interfere with the ordinary course of events which was 
making against these heroes, or with his own prior decision. 
And it is quite obvious that Zeus feels he could stop their 
fate if he liked. Motpa and the will of the gods are often ex- 
pressly given as synonyms; in the same breath the dying 
Patroclus tells Hector that Zeus and Apollo had over- 
come him, and then that Moira and Apollo had slain him®. 
And a striking passage at the beginning of the Odyssey” at 
once maintains the free action of men, and the identity of 
Moira and God’s will: Zeus complains that men wrongly 
accuse the gods of evil which they suffer through their own 
sins—suffering vmép popov, contrary to what fate or the gods 
intended. 

We arrive at the same conclusion when we consider what 
was the earliest character of the personal Mofpa., for, though 
Homer cared little for them, there were such personal figures 
in his age. As such they belonged to the cloudy and demo- 
niac company of the Kijpes and Erinyes. Hesiod speaks of 
certain older Motpar® who were the daughters of Night, the 
children of the lower world, the abode of death—probably 
goddesses of birth and death, perhaps more concerned with 
the latter, as Homer most frequently uses the term in reference 
to death and they appear on the Hesiodic shield as demons of 
slaughter. How very slight was their claim to omnipotence 
may be gathered from a very curious reference to them in the 
Homeric hymn to Hermes‘, in which they are described as 
winged, white-haired women. once the teachers of Apollo, and 
still giving men right guidance, if they could obtain sufficient 
oblation of honey. These are perhaps the faded figures of an 
older world of worship, personages whose power Apollo is 
accused by the Eumenides of supplanting*®. What relation then 
have these to the other Mofpa mentioned in the Theogony 


* 1. 16. 845, 849. In 2. 19. 87 Zeus d 549-561. 
Moipa and ’Epivis are joined. © Aesch. Zum, 173. 
Od. 4 33; © Theog. 217. 904. 


Et, ot oe ewe 


Iv.] ZEUS. 81 


who receive the names of Lachesis, Clotho, and Atropos, 
and are called the daughters of Zeus and Themis? Pro- 
bably they are the same, and we might explain the double 
account in this way: as the meaning of poipa was enlarged 
the Motpa: became more than goddesses of death, and were 
regarded as goddesses of destiny in general, supposing they 
were not this originally ; then a more reflective age became 
aware that such functions might clash with the power of Zeus, 
and therefore they are affiliated to him as Dike was; since to 
say they were his daughters was equivalent to saying that 
they were his ministers, emanations, or powers. 

But the sense of the possible conflict between Zeus and 
Destiny increased as abstract speculation on the nature of 
things advanced. It was probably through philosophy— 
perhaps the early physical Ionic philosophy—that the idea 
of an overruling necessity became prevalent; for we find 
eluappevn among the conceptions of Heraclitus, and the 
chorus of Euripides’ A/cestis confess that it was philosophical 
studies which taught them that there was nothing stronger 
in the world than Destiny or dvdyxn. At any rate, the idea 
grew in force and did not remain academic merely, but played 
a prominent part in the greatest drama of the religious 
mythology, the Prometheus of Aeschylus. His hero is sup- 
ported by the knowledge that there is a greater power than 
that of Zeus*: ‘Fate the all-fulfiller has otherwise decreed 
the end of these things. Who then holds the helm of neces- 
sity? The triple Fates and the mindful Erinyes.” It may 
however be said that this is the view of the opponent of Zeus, 
and that the knot is loosened by the reconciliation of Zeus with 
the Moipa ; but the difficulty remains that the supremacy of 
Zeus has certainly been represented as in danger». And there 
seems to be the same questioning of the divine omnipotence 
latent in the obscure passage in the chorus of Agamemnon, 


® Prom. Vinct. 511, 515. 
> Dronke, Die religiésen Vorstellun- 


_ gen des Aeschylos und Sophocles ( Jahr- 


buch fiir Philologie, 1861, No. 1), sup- 


: poses Prometheus to belong to the older 


System of Moipa and ‘Epes, against 
VOL, I. 


which Zeus is bound to contend at first. 
But he rather evades the difficulty about 
the real peril of Zeus. In fact, Aeschylus 
was under the dramatic necessity of the 
myth, which does not wholly agree with 
the cult-form of Zeus Mopayérns. 


82 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


el d& pulp TeTaypéva poipa poipay ex OeGv eipye pi) TA€oV pepe ®, 
which appears to speak of a higher power that overbears the 
@cdev Moipa, or the will of heaven; a doctrine which might 
be discovered also in the saying of Herodotus, ‘it is impossible 
even for a god to escape the destined fate,’ which is perhaps, 
however, only a rhetorical phrase. Certainly it is not the 
usual theory of Aeschylus ; in his view it is generally Zeus 
himself who maintains the order of the world, ‘ who by ancient 
law guides destiny aright”.’ It is Zeus himself who inspires 
Apollo with his oracles, the utterances of destiny °, ‘and in 
whose hands are the scales of fate*’ Even in Euripides it is 
Zeus himself who is conjectured to be the voids or the dvdyxn 
of the universe: ‘Oh thou that stayest the earth and hast thy 
firm throne thereon, whosoe’er thou art that bafflest man’s 
knowledge, whether thou art Zeus, or the necessity of nature, 
or the mind of man, to thee I raise my voice®.’ In the ode to 
necessity in the Alcestis it is Zeus who accomplishes by the 
aid of necessity whatever he decrees; just as, in the verses 
quoted by Eusebius, the powers of the Fates are said to have 
been delegated to them by Zeus‘. And in the summary of 
Zeus’ character at the end of the Aristotelian De Mundo, 
Zeus is described as absorbing in himself eiyapyévn, or 
Destiny, as he absorbs every other agency. In the prayer 
of the Stoic Cleanthes, Zeus and Destiny are invoked as 
twin powers. 

This then, on the whole, is the solution of the question 
put forward by Greek speculation, whether poetical or philo- 
sophical; the difficulty was always there for any one who 
chose to separate Zeus from Mojpa, and Lucian’s humour in the 
Zeus Tragoedus fastens on the antinomy. Within the domain 
of cult the contradiction scarcely existed, for the Motpac 
received but scant worship; the formula of Zeus Moupayérns 
unconsciously expressed the deepest views of Greek philosophy, 
while as a principle of conduct the idea of fatalism scarcely 
existed for the ordinary Greek. The Stoic view had but little 
to do with the average belief, and the astrological aspect 


* Agam. 1026, > Suppl. 673. a Suppl. 822. ° Troad, 884, 
» Frag. 82; cf. Eum. 618. Pratt, Go-2.3, 5- 





RV Et es . hes 


Pe ws2 
ss 


1v.] ZEUS. 83 


*. 


of destiny belongs mainly to the decadence of the Greek 
world. 

At the close of the investigation into the cults and religion 
of Zeus, it is necessary to ask how far his supremacy and 
predominance introduces a principle of order or a monotheistic 
tendency into the Greek polytheism. The answer will vary 
according as we regard the cults or the literature. Confining 
our attention to the period of Hellenism proper, we find in 
the state religions and in the popular worship a singular 
extent of function assigned and a very manifold ethical 
character attached to Zeus. Some of his characteristics and 
epithets belonged to other divinities also, but he is prominently 
the guardian of the whole physical and moral world, the god 
who protects the life of the family, the clan, the city, and the 
nation, the god of retribution and forgiveness of sins, and his 
voice was the voice of fate. Yet all this as regards cult 
made in no way for monotheism, for Greek religious conser- 
vatism was timid, and was much more inclined to admit new 
deities than to supplant a single one. Besides, the minutiae 
of cult were designed to meet the minute wants of the daily 
life, and Zeus was not so much concerned with the small 


particulars as Hermes or Heracles; just as in many villages 


of Brittany or Italy the local saint is of most avail. Therefore 
there were more statues to Hermes and more dedications to 
Athene at Athens, to Asclepios at Epidauros, than to Zeus. 
And it is difficult to mention a single Greek divinity whose 
worship perished before all perished at once. When Oriental 
ideas began to work upon the older beliefs, somewhat before 
and still more immediately after the conquests of Alexander, 
their influence is by no means monotheistic. Isis is introduced 
and fused with Hera and Artemis, Baal Serapis and even 
Jehovah with Zeus, Adonis and later Mithras with Dionysos 
and Sabazios; ideas become more indistinct, but no single idea 
of divinity clearly emerges. This theocrasia destroyed the 
life of religious sculpture and did nothing directly for mono- 
theism, but a great deal for scepticism and the darkest 
superstitions. 

On the other hand, within Greek cult proper in the purely 

G2 


84 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP, 


Hellenic periods, we have already noticed a strong impulse 
towards a certain organized unity. The most striking instance, 
which displays a germ of monotheism that had not vitality 
enough to develop itself, is the partial identity sometimes 
recognized between Zeus and the gods of the lower world and 
the sea, and again his occasional identification with Dionysos. 
The cult of a trinity of Zeus-figures seems to have been 
prevalent in Asia Minor at Troy, Mylasa, and Xanthos, and 
is presented to us on the Harpy tomb. It has been suggested* 
that Semitic ideas have been fruitful here, but it is not necessary 
to assume this, for we can illustrate such rapprochement of 
divinities cognate to Zeus in other parts of Greece. And 
what Semitic trinity was there besides the Carthaginian ? 
Again, the multiplicity of the Greek polytheism is modified 
by the tendency to group and classify divinities. We have 
the circle of the twelve Olympians 1°’, from which the merely 
local divine personages, and usually the deities of the lower 
world, were excluded. But the importance of this classification 
has been exaggerated. It is probably comparatively late, for 
Hesiod, the earliest theological systematizer, appears to have 
known no more of it than Homer knew. The first certain 
instances in cult are the dedication to the twelve gods 
at Salamis by Solon 74, and the altar erected by the 
younger Pisistratus in the dyopa at Athens; and Welcker 
supposes that Athens, where it was far more prominent 
than elsewhere, was the centre from which the worship 
spread. This worship can scarcely be supposed to have 
expressed any esoteric idea of any complex unity of god- 
head corresponding to a unity observed in nature; probably 
it was suggested by the ritualistic convenience of grouping 
together the leading Hellenic cults. It is not found diffused 
widely over the Greek world, and at many of the places where 
it occurred—as for instance at Megara, Delos, Chalcis*, on 
the Hellespont, and at Xanthos—we may ascribe something to 


* Vide an article by Paucker in the Megarians and Chalcidians on Leon- 
Arch. Zeit. 1851, p. 379. tini, vowed sacrifice to the twelve 

» Theocles, the leader of the Chal- gods; this may point to the Megarian 
cidic troops in the joint attack of the worship #1, 


Iv.] ZEUS. 85 


Attic influence. Nor had it much importance for Greek 
religious belief, since the circle failed to include Dionysos 
and the divinities of the lower world, who came to be the 
most prominent in the later period of Greek mystic worship. 
Earlier and less artificial than this is the classification 
of divinities according to their affinities or local connexion. 
On the latter ground we find the Theban tutelary deities 
grouped together: the chorus in the Septem contra Thebas 
speak of a ovvtéAera or Tarijyupts of gods, and they pray to 
a company of eight* In the Swpplices, the Danaides pray 
at the common altar of the Argive gods, Zeus, Helios, 
Poseidon, and Apollo. In Homer we find Zeus, Athene, 
and Apollo frequently named together in adjurations; and 
in Athens the same trio were often mentioned, a fact upon 
which some strangely mystic theories have been built’. At 
Athens there was a local reason for this connexion, and no 
other divinities were so important for Greek life and thought 
as these, who were specially called ‘the guardians of the 
moral law®.’ In accordance with their affinities of character 
we frequently find Greek deities falling into groups of three 
or two; we have the three or two Fates. the three or two 
Graces, the three Erinyes, the two Dioscuri or Anakes, the 
group of Demeter Persephone and Iacchos, of Aphrodite 
Peitho and Eros, and others besides. Further than this we 
cannot claim unity for Greek polytheistic cult, which shows 
quite as much tendency to multiply as to combine forms. 
But when we look at the religious literature, the answer 
is different. We have here to distinguish between the Zeus 
of legend and the Zeus as he appeared to the religious 
consciousness at serious moments. As Welcker? has well 
expressed it, Zeus is not only a god among other gods, 
but also God solely and abstractedly. In Homeric use 
©cés by itself is equivalent to Zeus*®. And the usage of 


® Sept. c. Theb. 220, 251. 4 Griech. Gotterlehre, 1, p. 181. 
* Mf. 2. 371; 4. 288; 7. 132; 16. 97; ¢ Fori nstance in //, 13. 730; Od. 4. 


Od. 7. 311; 18. 235; 24. 376. Dem. 236; 14. 444. In some passages it may 





Med. 198; Plato, Zuthyd. 302d. be merely a form of grammar, though 
© Max. Tyr. Déss. 11. 8. in these cases it may be said that the 


86 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


the lyrical gnomic and dramatic poets allows us to say that, 
in their expressions of earnest and profound ethical and 
religious thought, their diction has a tone of monothcism, 
and Zeus and the abstract Oeds become synonyms. 

We are not obliged to see in this any trace of a primitive 
monotheistic idea, as Welcker would; it may be a later 
development, due to increased power of abstract thought. 
And at most it amounts not to monotheism but ‘heno- 
theism ’—if a very awkward term may be used to denote 
the exaltation of one figure in the polytheism till it over- 
shadows without supplanting or abolishing the others. 

Nevertheless, as we have noted already, there are a few 
passages in Greek philosophy and poetry that seem to assert 
the principle of monotheism. Usually, indeed, when the 
term ©evs or 76 Oetoy occurs in the fragments of the pre- 
Socratic philosophers, it may be more naturally given an 
impersonal or pantheistic sense; and the words of Xeno- 
phanes, ‘there is one God, greatest among gods and men, 
savour more of ‘henotheism’ than monotheism*. But the 
concluding chapters of the De Mundo, the Stoic theory de- 
scribed by Plutarch, the sentiment found among the yvéua 
of Philistion—‘ believe that a single providence of higher and 
lower things is God and reverence him with allthy strength >’ 
—show the monotheistic idea, 

However, the doctrine never affected the popular religion, 
which went a different path from that followed by the poets 
and philosophers. While these maintained that no images 
or sense-forms could express the true nature of the divinity, 
they only could have succeeded at most in infusing more 
Spirituality into the people’s worship. The sacrifices and 
images rather increased than diminished, and in spite of 
Xenophanes’ protest against anthropomorphism, the Zeus 
Olympius of Pheidias, the masterpiece of Greek religious 
art, appeared to the whole Greek world as the full and 
triumphant realization of the divine idea in forms of sense. 


language itself is helping monotheistic “ Clem. Strom. 5.714 P. 
thought. > Mein. Frag. 4. 336, No. 16. 


lv.] ZEUS. 87 


There is no inner reform traceable in Hellenic religion after 
the fifth century. The great change came from the pressure 
of alien cults, Semitic and Egyptian. In the witty narrative 
of Lucian 8 Zeus pathetically complains that men neglect 
his worship, have deserted Dodona and Pisa, and have turned 
to the Thracian Bendis, the Egyptian Anubis, and the 
Ephesian Artemis. 


APPENDIX. TO-CHAPTER IV. 


THE RITUAL OF THE ZEUS-SACRIFICE. 


THE strange rites of the Diipolia, which have been briefly 
described in the text (p. 56), were regarded by Porphyry, who 
follows Theophrastus, as a mystic allusion to the guilty 
institution of a bloody sacrifice and to the falling away of 
mankind from a pristine state of innocence, when animal 
life was sacred and when the offerings to the gods were 
harmless cereal or vegetable oblations !°"°, It is the explana- 
tion of a vegetarian defending a thesis. We do indeed find 
in the ritual of Zeus, as of other divinities *, an occasional 
distinction between the bloodless offerings and the sacrifice | 
which shed the blood of a victim. For instance, nothing 
but cakes, and not even wine, was allowed on the altar of 
Zeus “Imaros on the Acropolis; and Pausanias (1. 26, 5) con- 
trasts this with the dark and cruel rites in the worship of 
Zeus Lycaeus, just as he contrasts the worship of the Ka@apot 
Oeot, ‘the pure gods,’ on the crest of the hill by Pallantium. 
The vypdaAra, the ‘ wineless’ sacrifices, were perhaps‘ innocent’ 
in the sense of excluding the animal victim, for they are 
identified by Plutarch with peAtozovda or libations of honey 
(Symp. Quaest. 4. 6, 2); and these were offered to Zeus 
Tewpyds, the agricultural god, Poseidon, the Winds, Mnemo- 
syne, the Muses, Eos, Helios, and Selene, the Nymphs, and 
Aphrodite Ourania, and even to Dionysos». It is clear that 
this kind of sacrifice was not specially associated with the 
oldest period of the religion, for Dionysos and Aphrodite 

“-For instance, in the worship of Diog. Laert. 8. 13. 


Apollo, whose ritual in Delos was per- » Schol. Oed. Col. 100; Paus. 6. 20, 
formed without blood and without fire. 2; Marm. Oxon (Roberts), 21. 


ZEUS. 89 


Ourania are not the divinities of the primitive Greek. In 
Hellenic as in Semitic religions we have to recognize the 
distinction, which Prof. Robertson Smith was the first to 
emphasize, between the offering of the first-fruits of the 
harvest, which the worshippers laid upon the altar as a mere 
tribute, and the sacrifice at which, by means of a common 
sacramental meal, the whole tribe were brought into com- 
munion with their god (Religion of the Semites, pp. 218-227). 
The reasons he mentions are cogent for believing that the 
latter is the earlier of the two forms; we might believe this 
solely on the ground that the agricultural period was later 
thanthe nomadic. The erroneous supposition of Theophrastus 
was due partly to the vague popular conception of a golden 
age in which man was nourished by the spontaneous fruits 
of the earth and shed no blood, partly to the curious features 
that marked the ritual of some of the animal sacrifices, 
the lamentation, and the acknowledgement of guilt. It is 
only recently that some light has been thrown upon the 
ideas underlying this religious drama. In Mommsen’s 
Heortologie, only a very superficial account of the Bovdoria is 
given; he regards it as a threshing-festival for reasons that 
are by no means convincing. It fell indeed about the end 
of the Attic harvest, about the beginning of July, and may 
certainly be regarded as some kind of harvest-commemo- 
ration recognizing Zeus as a deity of tillage. But this does 
not explain the strangeness of the ritual. So far as I am 
-aware the only serious attempts to interpret the Bovdora in 
accordance with ideas known to prevail in early periods of 
human society have been made by Mannhardt, Prof. Robert- 
son Smith, and Mr. Frazer. In his essay on ‘ Sacrifice’ in the 
Encyclopaedia Britannica and in his Religion of the Semites 
(p. 288), Prof. Robertson Smith suggests that we have to 
reckon with the survival of early totemistic ideas in that 
mysterious sacrifice on the Acropolis. An essential feature of 
totemism is that the society claims kindred with an animal- 
god or a sacrosanct animal, from whose flesh they habitually 
abstain, but which on solemn occasions they may devour 
sacramentally in order to strengthen the tie of kinship 


go GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. lV, 


between them and the divinity or the divine life. Now 
this writer lays stress on the appellative Bovddves, the 
‘murderer of the ox,’ on the sense of guilt that rested on 
the slayers, on the exile of the priest who dealt the blow, and 
on the legend that connects the rite with the admission of 
a stranger into the tribal community, and draws the conclusion 
that the ox is so treated because he is regarded as a divine 
animal akin to the clan. Mr. Frazer’s view in his admirable 
treatise, Zhe Golden Bough (vol. 2, pp. 38-41), is somewhat 
different ; he regards the ox as the representative of the corn- 
spirit*, whose flesh is eaten sacramentally, and who is killed at 
the end of the harvest that he may rise again with fresher 
powers of production. But this explanation of the Bouphonia 
appears not quite so satisfactory as the former, though it may 
well be applied to certain details of the rite. Mr. Frazer has 
collected evidence showing that the ox has been regarded by 
some primitive people, and even now is so regarded in certain 
districts of China, as the representative of the deity of vegeta- 
tion (vol. 2, pp. 22, 23, 41, 42), and he quotes on p. 42 the 
Chinese practice of forming an effigy of the ox and stuffing 
it full of grain, which may appear to illustrate the Athenian 
pretence of making a live ox out of the skin of the slain one 
stuffed with hay or grass. Instances also are given of the 
habit of mourning for the victim that has been slain with rites 
that seem to point to the worship of the deity of vegetation. 
And Mr. Frazer adduces other reasons than those natural to 
totemism that may explain why a primitive tribe may regard 
an animal in some way as divine, and may endeavour to 
conciliate it and make all possible reparation to it for taking 
its life; this may be due, for instance, to a desire to avoid 
a blood-feud with the animal’s kindred (vol. 2, pp. 113, 114) ; 
and from the same feeling the slayer may try to persuade 
his victim that it was not he who slew him, but some one else. 
‘It was the Russians who killed you,’ the Ostiaks are reported 
to say to the slain bear; ‘it was a Russian axe, or Russian 
knife,’ &c. (vol. 2, p. 111). In fact, totemism itself, the belief 
in an animal-ancestor of the clan or of the tribal kinship with 
® This view was first expressed by Mannhardt, Mythologische Forschungen, p. 68. 


en mic 


i Se: he 
Gores igs 
me 


APP, ] ZEUS. : , OF 


a certain sacred animal, is only a special form of the larger 
fallacy peculiar to the savage mind of regarding animals as 
moved by the same feelings and thoughts as mankind. We 
are then at liberty to assume totemism as a vera causa either 
in the present or the past, not whenever any kind of venera- 
tion is paid to the slaughtered or sacrificed animal, but only 
when we can detect some belief, latent or expressed, that the 
animal is in some way akin to the tribe. Now some such 
belief seems naturally implied in the ritual of the Bouphonia. 
Mr. Frazer’s theory does not sufficiently explain why the 
slaying of the ox should awaken such a profound sense of 
guilt, as does not elsewhere seem to have been aroused by the 
slaying of the corn-spirit, when we examine the mass of 
evidence which he has collected; nor why the priest should 
be obliged to flee into temporary exile. On the other hand, 
the theory that we have here a survival of totemism would 
throw clearer light on these dark passages of ritual ; if the ox 
were of the same kindred as the worshipper, those who sacrificed 
him would feel as much sense of guilt as if kindred blood had 
been shed, and the same necessity that drove the slayer of 
a kinsman into exile would lie upon the Bovddvos. And this 
theory is confirmed by the legend that the admission of 
Sopatros into citizenship depended on his eating the flesh of 
the ox at a sacramental meal with the rest of the citizens, 
whereby he became of one flesh with them; it is further 
confirmed by the existence of the Boutadae, the ox-clan, at 
Athens, whose mythic ancestor was Bovrns, a name that was 
given also to the officiating priest of the Diipolia. This theory 
of the origin of the rite might be reconciled with Mr. Frazer’s, 
if we suppose that in this case the deity of vegetation, 
personified as the ox, has been taken as their totem by the 


_ agricultural tribe; it is clear at any rate that in this worship, 


as in other Attic cults, Zeus has an agricultural character. 
Both the above-mentioned writers have collected ample 
evidence proving the primitive custom of killing the god in 
the form of a divine animal, and the sacramental eating of his 
flesh. But Mr. Frazer considers that totemism is not proved 
to have existed among the Aryan tribes, and that the assump- 


92 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP, IV. 


tion that the ox is really the vegetation spirit gives us a verior 
causa (loc. cit. vol. 2, p. 38). Looking at the Greeks only, we 
must certainly admit that, if their society was ever based on 
totemism, they had fortunately left this system very far behind 
them at the dawn of their history; and we may admit that 
descent through the female, a fact that is usually found with 
totemism, cannot be proved to have existed at any time in 
any Greek community, though certain legends may lead us to 
suspect its existence. But an institution that has long passed 
out of actual life may still cast a shadow from a very remote 
past upon legend and practices of cult.. And where we find 
indication that the animal that is venerated and occasionally 
sacrificed is regarded as akin to the worshipper, the survival of 
totemism here is the only hypothesis that seems to provide 
a reasonable key to the puzzle. A curious parallel to the 
Diipolia, as explained by Prof. Robertson Smith, might be 
found in the sacrifices to the Syrian goddess which are 
described by the pseudo-Lucian (De Dea Syria, c. 58). The 
worshippers sacrificed animals by throwing them headlong 
from the top of the Propylaea of her temple, and occasionally 
they threw down their own children, ‘ calling them oxen. We 
are reminded of that curious story which will be noticed in 
a later chapter about the sacrificer in the Brauronian worship 
of Artemis, who offered up a goat ‘calling it his own daugh- 
ter. The same explanation may reasonably be offered for 
the strange ritual of Zeus Lycacus, the wolf-god of the wolf- 
clan of the Lycaonids, of whose legend and worship human 
sacrifice and ‘lycanthropy,’ or the transformation of men into 
wolves, are prominent features; and with the cult-legend of 
the Lycaonids Jahn has rightly compared the story about 
the origin of the worship of Zeus Lycoreios on Parnassus, 
which was founded by Deucalion, who landed here after the 
Flood and was escorted by wolves to the summit, where he 
built the city Lycoreia and the temple of Zeus *. 

But whether the ultimate explanation must be sought in 


* O. Jahn, Ber. d. Sachs. Gesells. d. N orse legend, but cannot be proved true 
Wiss. 1847, p. 423. His view that the of Greek. 
wolf symbolizes the exile may be true of 





} 
ae 


APP. | ZEUS. 93. 


totemism or in some other primitive fact, indubitable traces 
remain in the ritual of Zeus, as of other Hellenic divinities, 
of the ‘theanthropic’ animal, if this term invented by Prof. 
Robertson Smith may be used to denote the semi-divine 
semi-human animal of sacrifice. To the examples already 
given we may add one from Crete; the local legend of Mount 
Dicte spoke of the sow which nourished the infant Zeus and 
was held in especial sanctity by the Praisii™. 

The fairly numerous ritual-stories in Greece about the 
substitution of the animal for the human victim may well have 
arisen from the deceptive appearance of many sacrifices where 
the animal offered was treated as human and sometimes 
invested with human attributes. In a later chapter I have 
suggested this as an explanation for the sacrifice to Artemis- 
Iphigenia ; it may apply also to the Laconian legend 
preserved by Plutarch (Parallela, 35),that Helen was led to 
the altar to be sacrificed in order to stay a plague, when an 
eagle swooped down and snatched the knife from the hand of 
the priest and let it fall upon a kid that was pasturing near 
the altar. As the eagle is the bird of Zeus, the myth testifies 
to the feeling that Zeus himself desired the milder offering in 
place of the human life. There is no doubt that the human 
offering was at certain times actually found in the Hellenic 
cults of Zeus; but it was probably not the primitive fact*, but 
a development from the sacrifice of the theanthropic animal, 
when this latter was misunderstood, and the idea arose that 
the human victim was what the god really desired and must 
be given in times of peril and disaster. We are told, for 
instance, by Clemens (754 P.) that the uayo. of Cleona averted 
hail and snow by animal offerings, probably to Zeus, but if 
a victim were wanting they began the sacrifice with shedding 
their own blood. 

The strange legend of Athamas and Zeus Laphystius, 
recorded by Herodotus and others, well illustrates the 
double view of human sacrifice and the confusion between 
the human and the animal offering. There are many apparent 


* I see the same suggestion has been __ vol. 1, p. 329; cf. also Prof. Robertson 
made in Mr. Frazer’s Golden Bough, Smith, loc. cit. p. 346. 


94 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. IV. 


contradictions and some alien elements in the story; a few 
essential and salient points may be noted here*. The eldest 
representative of Athamantid family must at certain times be 
offered to Zeus Laphystius; and the legends preserve the 
record that not only Phrixus, but Athamas himself, was 
brought to the altar. The family, that is, has a royal and 
sacred character ; and the practice of periodically slaying the 
god in the person of his human representative has been amply 
illustrated by Mr. Frazer. The next point of importance is 
that both father and son are rescued by the ram, a semi- 
divine animal endowed with human voice and miraculous 
power, and the ram itself is sacrificed to Zeus @vgios. But 
the people of Halus in the time of Herodotus still maintained 
that the god was angry at missing his human prey, and that 
therefore this curse was laid on the descendants of the son of 
Phrixus, that each should be liable to sacrifice if he entered 
the prytaneum. The confusion in Herodotus’ account is too 
great to allow us to say positively whether the human 
sacrifice was actually carried out in his time or not; but 
Plato's statement in the A/izos (315 C.) seems to point to the 
reality of it. The opposite view about the righteousness of 
the sacrifice is presented by the legend in Pausanias, that 
Zeus himself sent the ram as a substitute, just as Jehovah 
stayed the sacrifice of Isaac. And Herodotus himself, at the 
beginning of his account, seems to imply that the members of 
this family were under a curse because Athamas sinned in 
wishing to sacrifice his first-born; but the historian is not 
responsible for the contradiction, which was probably rooted 
in the popular thought. We can detect in the legends the 
feeling that the human victim or the divine animal is due to 
the god, and also the feeling that the deity himself sanctioned 
the more merciful rite. 

In the Diipolia, as in the Laphystius cult, we see that the 
ideas of human and animal sacrifice are blended ; and we can 
discover in both an allusion to the divinity of the field or the 
pasture. For each legend represents the sacrifice as a means 


* Vide * and ®, and Apollod, 1. 9. 





APP. } ZEUS. 95 


of averting dearth, and the ram would naturally be the sacred 
animal of a pastoral tribe. The importance of the ram in the 
Zeus-ritual is attested not only by the legend of Athamas, 
but by the religious significance of the Avds ke@diov, ‘ the 
fleece of God,’ which was spread under the feet of those who 
were being purified in the scirophoria at Athens!**. We 
may believe that this use of it was dictated by the feeling 
that this contact with the sacred animal helped to restore 
those who had incurred pollution to the favour of the god. 
Somewhat similar was the custom of which we have record in 
the worship of Zeus on Mount Pelion, to whose altar, in time 
of excessive heat and drought, chosen youths ascended clad in 
the fresh skins of rams, probably to pray for rain*®?. 

It has been maintained by Overbeck, following Parthey 8, 
that even the figure of Zeus Ammon, the ram-god, was native 
Hellenic, and not derived from Egypt. But this theory was 
based chiefly on a mistake about the monumental evidence 
from Egypt ; it was supposed that the Egyptian god Amoun 
was never represented with ram’s horns or head. But Lepsius 
has shown that he was so represented on many monuments, 
and it is certain that the worship of the Egyptian ram-god of 
this name spread to the Libyan oasis of Siwa, and was thence 
adopted by the Greek colony of Cyrene towards the end of 
the seventh century, and travelled from Cyrene into Greece, 
at first only to Thebes and the coast of Laconia. The type 
of the god with ram’s horns would never have appeared in 
Greek art of the fifth century, as it did, except through the 
influence of Egypt ; the Hellenic sculptors of this age could 
never have represented their own native supreme god with 
any touch of theriomorphic character. But the type would 
seem the more natural, especially in Thebes and North Greece, 
because of the long-recognized sacred association of the 
animal and the god. 

The ram and the bull were the chief sacrificial victims, and 


® Vide Overbeck, Kunst-Mythologie,  Aegypt. Sprache, 1877, p. 8; ‘Ammon’ 
I, p. 273; Parthey, Adbhandl. Berl. in Roscher’s Lexikon by E. Meyer, 
Akad. 1862, ‘Das Orakel und die Oase Zfphem. Arch. 1893, pp. 178-191. 
des Ammon’; Lepsius, Zeitschrift fiir 


96 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP, Iv. 


more than others bore a sacred character in the ritual of Zeus. 
But in certain cults the goat also may have possessed some- 
thing of the same significance. The title alyopdyos, ‘ the goat- 
eater, is found among the titles of Zeus **, though we do 
not know the locality of the cult in which the name was in 
vogue; on the analogy of similar appellatives, we can certainly 
conclude that the name was derived from actual cult, from 
some sacrificial ceremony in which the god was supposed to 
partake of the flesh of one of his favourite animals. The 
goat was sacrificed at Halicarnassus to Zeus Ascraeus, and 
the record of the ritual recalls in one point the account of the 
Diipolia; the animal that approached the altar was -chosen 
for sacrifice **% The other evidence for the sacred character 
of the goat in the Zeus-ritual is mainly indirect ; we cannot 
lay stress on the part played by this animal in the story of 
the god’s birth, for this is a Cretan legend, in which Zeus and 
Dionysos are probably confused. The goat appears on the 
coins of the Phrygian Laodicea, and is there considered to be an 
emblem of Zeus “Aceis*; but this is probably a Graeco-Syrian 
divinity. Apart from the evidence supplied by the cult- 
term alyopdyos, the question whether the goat stood ever in 
the same relation as the ox and the ram to the god and his 
worshippers depends on the view that is taken of the aegis. 
The term aiyfoyos does not seem to have been in vogue in 
later Greek religion as an actual cult-title, but its prevalence 
in the Homeric poetry might lead us to suppose that once 
this significance had belonged to it. But if Zeus was ever 
worshipped or habitually regarded as ‘the holder of the aegis,’ 
what was the aegis? According to Preller and Roscher, .it is 
the storm-cloud fraught with lightning and thunder, which 
was imagined to be the weapon of Zeus, and which afterwards, 
perhaps by a false etymology, became misinterpreted as 
a goat-skin. A different explanation has been suggested by 
Prof. Robertson Smith in his article on ‘Sacrifice,’ namely, that 
the aegis on the breast of Athena is only the skin of the 
animal associated with her in worship. It is partly a question 


* Head, Hist. Num. 566. 


APP. | ZEUS. 97 


of etymology. That the word and its compounds had 
- a meteorological sense cannot be denied. Aeschylus uses it 
for the storm-wind in the Choephori (592), and we have the 
words xaratyis, xaraié and xaratylCew of the same meaning. 
On the other hand, we have clear proof that writers after 
Homer often used the term aiyis in the sense of goat-skin. 
Herodotus tells us that the Libyans wore goat-skins (atyeat), 
and that the Greeks borrowed the aegis of Athena from Libya 
(4. 189); Euripides makes his Cyclops recline on a shaggy 
goat-skin (SacvpddAdr@ ev aiyidi, Cycl. 360); Diodorus declares 
that Zeus was called aiyioyos because he wore the skin of the 
goat that suckled him (5. 70) ; and the pseudo-Musaeus, quoted 
by Eratosthenes (Cazast. 13, p. 102 R), also explains it as the 
skin of the goat Amalthea, which Zeus used as a battle-charm 
against the Titans, 6:4 To dtpwrtov atrijs cal poBepdv. Again, we 
are told by Hesychius (s. v.), on the authority of Nymphodorus, 
that the word was used by the Laconians in the sense of 
a shield, and this use may be illustrated by the statement of , 
Pausanias that the Arcadians occasionally wore the goat-skin 
for this purpose in battle ; lastly, we have the title peAdvaryrs 
applied to Dionysos, and, as this god has much to do with 
goats and nothing at all with whirlwinds, it could only mean 
‘the wearer of the black goat-skin,’ and it is so explained by 
the Scholiast on Aristophanes (Acharn. 146). It is important 
in judging of Roscher’s interpretation to note that the word 
is never used for a cloud. Can we now suppose that of the 
two distinct meanings noted above, one is in some way 
derived from the other? Could a word originally denoting 
‘whirlwind’ come by any logical development of idea to mean 


a goat-skin? It is difficult to say this. Or did the word 


which first meant goat-skin come to be used for a whirlwind ? 
One cannot see why it should; large waves were called 
goats (alyes), according to Artemidorus (2. 12), but that sug- 
gests no reason why whirlwinds should be called goat-skins, 
Possibly the two meanings really belong to two entirely 
_ distinct words. What seems clear is that in the post-Homeric 
_ period the sense ‘ goat-skin’ predominates over the other. 
It remains to examine the significance of the aegis in Homer, 
VOL. I, H 


98 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. IV. 


who is our earliest authority and who sometimes describes 
it minutely. There is nothing in the Homeric passages to 
show that the word connoted any meteorological or other 
elemental phenomena. The aegis, in his poetry, belongs 
especially to Zeus, but also to Athena; Apollo wields it only 
as the vicegerent of Zeus. In Book 2. 446, Athena stirs up 
the Achaeans, ‘bearing the revered aegis, the deathless and 
immortal, wherefrom a hundred all-golden tassels wave, all 
well woven (or well twisted, évzAexées), each worth in price 
a hundred oxen.’ In Book 4. 166, Agamemnon prophesies 
that Zeus will ‘shake the dark aegis against the whole city of 
Troy, wroth at their perjury.’ Again, in Book 5. 738, it is 
described as part of the accoutrement of Athena: ‘she cast 
about her shoulders the tasselled aegis, the thing of terror that 
is set all about with Fear, and wherein is Strife,and the might 
of Battle, and chill Pursuit, and the Gorgon’s head,... the 
sacred sign of Zeus the Aegis-holder. When Apollo bears it 
against the Achaeans, it is described (14. 309) as ‘ shaggy all 
about, and as wrought by the smith-god, Hephaestus, for 
Zeus to wield for the fear of men; when he shakes it in the 
face of the Danai, their hearts fail within them, as the hearts 
of the suitors sank in the hall of Odysseus, when in the midst 
of the fight Athena held up on high the sign of the man- 
destroying aegis. It serves as a covering for the body of 
Hector, which Apollo wraps in the aegis, that must be here 
regarded as some soft substance, to protect it from laceration 
when Achilles drags it about. Lastly, in the theomachia 
(21. 400), Ares hurls his spear against the aegis on Athena’s 
breast, ‘the dread aegis against which not even the thunder- 
bolt of Zeus can prevail, a poetical expression for its invin- 
cibleness. Evidently there is not the most distant allusion 
in all this to atmospheric phenomena, whirlwind, cloud, or 
lightning. The aegis is something that can be put round the 
body as a shield or breastplate, and something in which things 
could be wrapped ; it is shaggy and has metal ornament— 
golden tassels for instance ; above all, it is a most potent and 
divine battle-charm, which strikes terror into the enemy. 
It is not in Homer a symbol for the whirlwind, nor can we 


. 


ere etn taste 











“ 
= 
é 
ais, 
To 
“ 
ae 
ine 
my - 
a 
i 
a ; 
- 


APP.] ZEUS. 99 


imagine how such a thing as Homer describes ever could 
have been a symbol for it. There are only two passages in 
Homer where it is mentioned in any connexion with storm 
or cloud, and in neither of these is the connexion essential at 
all. In Book 17. 593, Zeus is said to take the tasselled 
gleaming aegis, and to cover Ida in clouds, ‘and having 
lightened, he thundered mightily, and shook the aegis, and 
gave victory to the Trojans and put fear in the Achaeans.’ 
But the aegis is not said to cause the cloud or the thunder ; 
it is only used here as elsewhere as a battle-charm to inspire 
terror. In Book 18. 204-206, it is said that Athena, when 
Achilles was going unarmed to the trenches, ‘ cast around his 
mighty shoulders the tasselled aegis. And about his head 
she set a golden cloud, and kindled gleaming fire therefrom.’ 
The aegis on his unarmed breast is evidently a battle-charm ; 
it is entirely distinct from the golden cloud about his head. 
It would be an appropriate sense for all the Homeric passages 
if we understood it as a magic goat-skin, endowed with 
miraculous properties, especially powerful to inspire terror 
and to protect the wearer in battle ; but occasionally wielded 
by Zeus when he wished to cause thunder or to gather clouds, 
just as Poseidon might take his trident when he wished to 
cause an earthquake. Now there is no reason why the aegis 
of Zeus should be different from the aegis of Athena, and 
the latter divinity has nothing especially to do with storm and 
lightning, but is pre-eminently a battle-goddess. Her aegis is 
represented usually as a shaggy fell; the fringe of serpents is 
added by the early artists to intensify its terrifying character, 
just as snakes were sometimes the badge on the warrior’s 
shield : they could not possibly have been added as the symbol 
of storm, in any case an inappropriate symbol for this goddess ; 
for the aegis as described by Homer has no serpents; and if 
the post-Homeric artist attached them to it for the purpose 
that Roscher (s.v. Aegis, Ausfiihrliches Lexikon) supposes, 
namely to symbolize the lightning, we must then say that 
the vase-painter mysteriously rediscovered a meteorological 
symbolism in the aegis of which Homer was ignorant, and 
which, if once there, had died out before the Homeric period. 
H 2 


100 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. Iv. 


There is every reason to suppose that the goat-skin had 
a ritualistic and not a meteorological significance. In certain 
cults in Greece, the goat possessed the mysterious and sacred 
character of a ‘ theanthropic’ animal, akin to the divinity and 
the worshipper ; namely, in the worship of Dionysos, ‘the god 
of the dark goat-skin, and of the Brauronian Artemis, to 
whom a mythical Athenian offered a goat, ‘calling it his 
daughter’ (Eustath. // p. 331,26). The goat had a sacred and 
tabooed character in the worship of Athena on the Acropolis, 
and once a year was solemnly offered her (Varro, De Agricult. 
I. 2, 19). It would be quite in accord with the ideas of 
a primitive period, when the divinity and the worshipper and 
the victim were all closely akin, that Athena should be clothed 
in the skin of her sacred animal, and that in this, as in many 
other cases which Mr. Frazer has noted in his recent book, 
the sacrificial skin should possess a value as a magical charm. 
Being used in the ritual of the war-goddess, it was natural 
that it should come to be of special potency in battle; but 
the skin of the sacred animal of the tribe ought also to have 
a life-giving power as well, and it is interesting to find that 
the aegis in an Athenian ceremony possessed this character 
also, being solemnly carried round the city at certain times to 
protect it from plague or other evil, and being taken by the 
priestess to the houses of newly married women, probably to 
procure offspring. The last practice is strikingly analogous 
to the use of the goat-skin of Juno in the Roman Lupercalia, 
where it was employed for the purification of women (Serv. 
Aen. 8. 343). Now this usage at Athens must certainly 
be pre-Homeric, for in recent times the close association of 
Athena with the goat had faded away. But if there is this 
evidence pointing to the belief that Athena acquired the aegis 
from some ritual, in which the sacred goat was sacrificed to 
her, it is a reasonable hypothesis that Zeus, who is once called 
‘the devourer of goats 14” acquired it from the same source. 
As his worshippers advanced, they tended to associate him 
with the more civilized animals; but we can best explain the 
facts examined on the supposition that in his ritual, as in 
Athena's, the goat was a sacred animal, and that therefore its 








APP.] ZEUS. IOI 


skin was a badge of his power, but that as the goat-ritual died 
out,the aegis in the hands of the supreme god becamea magical 
charm, an emblem of terror, of which the true meaning was 
concealed by much poetical and artistic embellishment, but 
was never entirely lost. 

Down to the close of Greek religion, the animal-sacrifices 
were the chief part of the ritual of Zeus, and there was no 
reform in the direction that Theophrastus desired. The god 
remained a devourer of entrails (c7Aayyvordyos), a feaster 
. (eiAamwaarrs), ass he was termed in Cyprus, who delighted in 
the blood of bulls and rams (Athenae. 174 D)*. It is true that 
the bloodless sacrifice, the offerings of corn and fruits which 
were occasionally made to him, appeared to certain minds to 
be the purer ritual ; the prayer contained in a fragment of 
Euripides, where appeal is made to Zeus and Hades as to 
one god, is proffered with a sacrifice which the poet feels 
to be the more acceptable—‘ the sacrifice without fire of all 
the fruits of the earth poured forth in abundance on the 
altar.” It is true also that among the Greek as among the 
Hebrew people the higher natures came to take a deeper and 
more spiritual view about sacrifice than that which was 
presented by the state-ritual ; in the Pythagorean philosophy, 
as elsewhere in Greek literature, we come upon the advanced 
reflection that righteousness was the best sacrifice. that the 
poor man’s slight offering, ‘the widow’s mite,’ availed more 
with the deity than hecatombs of oxen. But though these 
ideas may have penetrated the minds of some of the wor- 
shippers, the ritual remained unchanged till the end of 
paganism, even human sacrifices continuing in vogue in 
certain parts of the Roman empire, according to Porphyry 
(De Abstin. 2. 54-57), till the time of Hadrian. The Greek 
was more conservative in ritual than in any other part of his 
life, feeling, as Lysias felt, that ‘it was worth while to continue 
making the same sacrifice to the gods, if for no other reason, 
still for the sake of luck’ (Kara Nixopax. R. 854): 


* Cf. ‘ExatopuBaios, Hesych. s. v.: Zeds év Toprivy, wai mapa Kapot xai Kpnai. 


CHAP PERO, 


THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS. 


THE oldest worship of Zeus, as of all other Greek divinities, 
was without an image, and remained so on Mount Lycaeum 
and probably elsewhere for a longer time than the other 
cults. In Homer we have an explicit reference to an idol of 
Athene and an allusion to one of Apollo, but no hint that 
he ever knew of an image of Zeus. And the most archaic 
statues that have come down to us are representations of 
Artemis and perhaps Apollo, but not of the Supreme God. 
The reason why the most primitive religion, both of Greece 
and Rome, was destitute of images, was, of course, want of 
imagination and helplessness of hand rather than the piety 
that Clemens claims for the Pelasgians; but obviously this 
would not explain why, when the iconic age had begun, the 
cult of Zeus was later in admitting the iconic form than the 
other divinities. We may allow that the cause here lay in 
a certain religious reserve. 

For a long period he was worshipped on the mountain 
tops with altar and sacrifice only; in the next stage, or 
during the same period, certain aniconic objects were conse- 
crated to him. The strangest of these was the stone which 
Pausanias saw near Gythium in Laconia, upon which Orestes 
had sat and had been healed of his madness, ‘and which had 
been called Zeus the stayer in the Dorian tongue*.’ We may 
suppose that this was a meteoric stone which had become 
invested with magical and medicinal qualities, but its title is 
remarkable; the significance of the worship of Zeus Kepav- 


* See above, p. 46. 


. aera 


THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS. 103 


vos in Arcadia has been noticed, in which the god seemed 
altogether identified with the phenomenon; the same identi- 
fication appears in this local legend of Laconia, only that the 
level of the religious thought is here still lower as the stone 
is a more palpable and material thing than the lightning. 
Now there is a very great difference for religious thought 
between the consecration of the stone to Zeus and its identi- 
fication with him, but in language the difference would be 
only as between a nominative and genitive. And Pausanias 
may have made this slight mistake in recording the local 
term. But he is not usually careless in giving the popular 
designations of monuments, and accepting his account of it 
we may regard this stone, which probably exists still, as the 
oldest monument of Zeus-worship. 

There is less difficulty about his statement that the dyaApa 
of Zeus MewAixios was wrought in the form of a pyramid at 
Sicyon, standing near to a pillar-shaped Artemis '**». We 
must suppose that the pyramid was worshipped not as the 
god but rather as the emblem of the god; and in the same 
way we may interpret the pillar that stands in the middle 
of the scene on the vase of Ruvo, where Oinomaos and Pelops 
are taking the oath, the column of which is inscribed with 
the word AlOZ*. A religious monument of the same class 
is the conical stone that appears on coins of Seleucia, with 
the inscription Zeus Kdouos ?. 

When we consider the earliest human representations of 
Zeus, and enquire how far they express the various physical 
and moral conceptions that we have found in the oldest cults, 
we find that the earlier religious art, in dealing with the 
divine forms, had very little power of moral or spiritual 
expression. It was long before it could imprint ethical and 
personal character or any inner life on the features ; and the 
symbols that it employs are usually of physical meaning, such 
as the crown of flowers, or vine-leaves, or the thunderbolt, 
or are mere personal badges, such as the bow of Apollo or — 
Artemis, or the trident of Poseidon. It could, and did, help 


® Plate Ia. > Head, Hist. Num. p. 661. 


104 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP, 


itself out by means of inscriptions: but not till a later period 
could it become an adequate vehicle of expression for the 
manifold religious thought that was embodied in the literature 
and legends and cults. The monuments of the earlier period | 
could only illustrate part of the religion that has been 
described. The physical supremacy of Zeus in the three 
realms was quaintly expressed by that ancient &éavoy of the 
three-eycd Zeus, the dvd6jua on the citadel of Argos that was 
said to have been brought from Troy %, if we accept the 
explanation of Pausanias that this was the sky-Zeus united 
with the Zevs Karax@év.0s whom Homer mentions and the Zeus 
‘Evddwos to whom Aeschylus refers, and we May accept it until 
a more probable can be found*. The legend concerning the 
origin of the Trojan image would accord with the fact 
mentioned already of the prevalence of this conception of 
a triple Zeus in Asia Minor. The clearest illustration of the 
same idea in more mature art is given by a vase from Chiusi 
which displays three forms of Zeus, all carrying the lightning, 
and one the trident», Such a representation is exceedingly 
rare among genuinely Hellenic monuments; for we cannot 
include among these the representations of Zeus Osogos, the 


* Dr. Mayer in his Dre Giganten und 
Ttlancn, pp. 111-114, considers that 
this three-eyed idol could not possibly 
be Zeus, but must originally have been 
some Titanic nature-power allied to 
Cyclops. He thinks the symbolism 
too monstrous for Zeus, and wonders 
why the artist did not represent him 
with the lightning or eagle, trident or 
Cerberos, if he intended his figure for 
the triple Zeus, as Pausanias supposed, 
His arguments do not seem to me con- 
clusive; it is hard to say it was a very 
unnatural symbolism in the very primi- 
tive period to represent the being who 
saw in three worlds as a three-eyed 
person; and I do not see what more 
natural meaning Dr. Mayer finds in 
them if the three eyes really belonged to 
a Cyclops; anda three-eyed Cyclops is 
after all a very doubtful person. The 
primitive sculptor might have put a tri- 


dent and the lightning into the hands of 
this ¢davoy, if he had been able to open 
the hands and part the fingers at all; 
but in the very earliest xoana the hands 
are clenched at the side and the fingers 
are not yet parted. But what this figure 
was originally does not concern us here. 
It is clear that long before Pausanias 
the people had interpreted the idol as 
Zeus and had associated it with the 
legend of Priam; regarding it as Zeus, 
they may well have explained the three 
eyes as Pausanias did, for this triple 
character of Zeus was recognized in 
prevalent popular cults. Therefore there 
is some ground for still quoting the 
xoanon as a monument illustrative of 
that character of the god. 

» Pl. Ib: cf. gems published by 
Overbeck, Kunst-Myth., Gemmentaf. 3) 
nos. 7, 8, p. 259. 





Bm Se4i 4 Le * 























v.] THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS. 105 


Zeus-Poseidon of Caria, who is found on a coin of Mylasa, of 
the period of Septimius Severus, holding the trident with 
a crab by his feet*. But the chthonian Zeus undoubtedly 
appeared in the group of Zeus-Hades of Athene Itonia 
at Coronea,—which Pausanias and Strabo ® both mention, 
the one naming the god Zeus, the other Hades’. And we 
have a small statuette in the British Museum which shows 
the god in his double character with Cerberos on the one 
side of his throne and the eagle on the other (Pl. Ic). And 
through all the periods of Greek art this affinity is expressed 
in the close resemblance which the type of Zeus bears to that 
of Hades, the distinct character of the latter being marked 
by the more gloomy countenance and the more sombre 
- arrangement of hair®. 

It is obvious that many of the functions of Zeus in the 
physical world, which were commemorated in many of the 
cults, could not be easily expressed with clearness in the 
monuments. What, for instance, could have been the repre- 
sentation in the archaic period of Zeus “fervos? Even in the 
later period, when a far greater power of natural symbolism 
had been gained, we find only one or two monuments that 
can be regarded as a representation of the rain-god ; namely, 
a head of Zeus in the Berlin Museum4, wearing an oak-crown 
and with matted hair, as if dripping with water, which Over- 
beck, following Braun, interprets with good reason as a head 
of Zeus Dodonaeus, or more specially of Zeus Naios: and 
again, the type of Zeus on certain Ephesian coins of Antoninus 
Pius, that represent him enthroned near a grove of cypress- 
trees, with a temple below him, while rain-drops are seen 
descending from him upon a recumbent mountain-god below’*. 
Such a theme was obviously better adapted to painting 
or to relief-work than to sculpture. Of all his physical 
attributes none so frequently appear in the monuments as 


® Head, Hist. Num.529; Overb.loc. Serapis are more conveniently studied 


cit., p. 269. 

> For a probable reproduction of 
this group see Athena-Monuments, 
p- 328. 

¢ The cult and monuments of Zeus 


in connexion with the divinities of the 
lower world. 

4 Overb. Kunst-Myth. 1, p. 233. 

e D.A K.2.no.14; Overb. Kunst- 


Myth. 1, p. 226, Miinztaf. 3. 22. 


106 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


those of the thunderer. The thunderbolt appears in the 
oldest vase-paintings, and was probably his most common 
emblem in very early sculpture: for although Pausanias does 
not mention it in his record of the most archaic Zeus- 
statues*, his silence is inconclusive, for the symbol was so 
common that it did not always claim special mention; and 
the oldest art stood in the greatest need of so obvious a proof 
of personality. A very early bronze, found at Olympia», 
presents a type of Zeus Kepavios striding forward and hurling 
the bolt which must have been widely prevalent, as it appears 
on an archaistic coin of Messene and is found in a large series 
of coins of other cities*. The thunderbolt itself seems to 
have been worshipped as an emblem of Zeus at Seleucia near 
Antioch, for we find it represented by itself on a throne on 
the coins of this city4; and coins of Cyrrhus preserve the 
figure and inscription of Zeus KaraBdrns, seated on a rock 
holding the lightning with his eagle at his feet®. In the 
peaceful assemblages or processions of the gods—a common 
theme of ancient vase-painting—in scenes such as the birth of 
Athene, the apotheosis of Heracles, as well as in such dramatic 
and violent subjects of archaic relief-work as the battle with 
the giants on the Megarian treasury, or the contest with 
Typhon on the gable of the Acropolis, the thunderbolt is the 
weapon and mark of Zeus. The other sign which has been 
supposed usually, though on insufficient ground, to indicate 
the thunderer, the aegis or goat-skin, appears on the arm of 
Zeus in the representations on the Pergamene frieze, where he 
is warring against the giants, but it is extremely rare in 
public monuments. The coins of Bactria show it, and late 


* The statue by Ascarus the Theban, 
at Olympia, which probably belonged 
to the late archaic period, held the 
thunderbolt in the right hand, Paus. 5. 
BAS 4, 

> Baumeister, Denkm. Klass. Alterth. 
p- 2134, fig. 2378. 

© Messene, Gardner-Imhoof-Blumer, 
Num. Com. Pl. P 4,5; Athens, BB1; 
Megara, A 4; Corinth, Ego; Patrae, R 
12; Aegium, Head, Hist. Num. p. 348 ; 


Cierium of Thessaly, Head, p. 249; 
Cyzicus, Mus. Hunter. 24, 16; Ambra- 
cia, Head, p. 270; Bruttium, 2d. p. 78 ; 
Petelia, zd. p. 91 ; Acarnania, 24. p. 283; 
Aegina, 2b. p. 334; Bactria, 2b. 702: 
cf. Zeus standing with lowered thunder- 
bolt on coins of Athens, Gardner, Vum. 
Com. B B 2, 3; Corinth, 2. E 89; 
Sicyon, 2d. H ro. 

4 Head, Hist. Num. p. 661. 

© Jb, p. 654. 


v.] THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS. 


coins of Alexandria*, and a few statues and gems, of which 
the most famous is the cameo at Venice, on which the 
aegis on the breast and the oak-crown occur together. The 
meaning of this conjunction of attributes has been much 
debated. The oak-crown would seem to refer to Dodona, 
being the badge of Zeus on the coins of the Epirot kings. 
But what does the aegis mean? Is it here an ensign of 
war and victory of the Zeus "Apewos who was worshipped in 
Epirus, or, as Overbeck regards it, a sign of the fertilizing 
cloud? Either sense would agree with the local cults of 
Dodona and the Epirote country, in which Zeus Ndios and 
Zevs “Apevos were indigenous. But the literary record fails to 
show that the aegis bore any direct reference to the cloud, 
and we ought not to assume that it had this meaning in the 
monuments. And those cult-names that express the warlike 
or victorious god—"Apeios, orpatnyds, or tpomatios, might be 
better applied to the aegis-bearing Zeus. 

But even in the archaic monuments, whether it is his 
physical or his moral nature that is represented, the pacific 
and benign character prevails, and the reason is not far to 
seek”. It was in the oldest and most primitive cults that 
the dark and sinister aspect of the worship was in strongest 
relief; but these on the whole remained without an image, 
and almost all the earlier representations of Zeus belong to 
the later archaic period, when gloomy and terrifying forms 
were beginning to be refined away. In the statues of this 
period at Olympia recorded by Pausanias we find two men- 
tioned in which, though the thunderbolt was held in his hand, 
his head was crowned with lilies or other flowers*. The more 
peaceful form of the god with the lowered thunderbolt is 
a type created in the archaic period and is found frequently 


107 


among the later monuments“ 


® Bactrian coin of third century B.C., 
Head, op. cit. 702: the tassels hanging 
down show that the covering of Zeus’ 
left arm is no ordinary chlamys. Alex- 
andrian coin with inscription, Zeds Né- 
pecos, and aegis on the left shoulder, 
Head, op. cit., p.719 ; Overbeck, Kusnst- 
Myth. 1, p. 218. 


And in the later periods of 


> Overb. op. cit. 1 Gemmentaf. 3; 
cf. pp. 243-250. 

©’ Paus; 5:93; & 5 5s84y. 2: 

4 Vide note c, p. 106, and cf, statuette 
of Zeus in Vienna, Overbeck, Awzst- 
Myth.1, p. 152, fig. 18 ; bronze statuette 
in Florence, 7d. Pl. 17. 


108 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


Greek art we can find monuments that express his benign 
influence in the physical world. The Hours and Graces, 
the powers of birth and fruitfulness, were carved on the 
throne of the Olympian Zeus; the form of Zeus Kapzo- 
dorns, the giver of fruits, appears on a coin of Prymnesos, 
holding ears of corn*; and ona coin of Aetna of the early 
part of the fifth century B.C.,on which Zeus is represented 
enthroned and holding a thunderbolt, his right arm is 
resting on a vinestock, possibly with some reminiscence 
of some cult of Zeus as god of the vintage’. Ona coin of 
Halicarnassus° of the imperial period we may see the figure 
of Zeus ’Ackpaios, of whose cult we have record there, in the 
strange type of the bearded divinity in long robes with 
a crown of rays about his head, who stands between two 
oak-trees. 

Lastly, there are sundry coins that illustrate the worship of 
Zeus ’Axpaios, the god who dwells on the heights; the repre- 
sentation on the coin of Aetna is very similar to the coin- 
type of Gomphi® of the third century B.c., where the rock 
on which he is enthroned may allude to his worship on 
Mount Pindus; and the inscription Zebs ’Axpatos occurs on 
late coins of Smyrna®. 

If we except the type of Zeus Olympius, which will be 
afterwards considered, scarcely any canonical monument has 
survived belonging to those cults that were of the greatest 
national importance. As regards the Arcadian worship, 
a small bronze in the Bonn Museum‘, representing Zeus with 
a wolf-skin around the back of his head, may allude to Zeus 
Lyceius; but this cannot have been an accepted national 
type, for that worship on Mount Lycaeum was in all probability 
always without an image, and the head of Zeus on certain . 
Arcadian coins® has no similarity to this. Nor again, if 
we look to Crete, is it possible to discover what was the chief 
cult-image of Zeus Kpyrayenjs. We have many representa- 


* Coin Pl. A 2. Vide Ramsay in Azz. Head, ). ant: 

d. a. Inst. Ath. 7, p. 135. "1020. £10, 
» Coin Pl. A 1; vide supra, p. 48. * Overbeck, Kanst-Mythol. 1, p. 266. 
© Head, p. 527. & Jb. Miinztaf. 1, Pl. 30. 


v.] THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS. 109 


tions* on reliefs and on coins of the infancy and nurture of 
Zeus, and various groups of the child and the goat that 
nourished him. But though the myth gained a certain 
national importance, so that ‘the community of Crete, the 
‘Kpntév kody, could take for its device the child seated on 
the round emblem of the world with the goat standing by », 
yet all these representations are late, and belong more to 
mythology than religion; and the monuments disclose a 
certain variation in the myth; for instance, on coins of 
Cydonia of the fourth century B.C.°, the child is being 
suckled not by a goat but by a bitch. There is, in fact, 
only very slight evidence for the belief that the child-god 
was ever an actual object of real cult. The Zeds Kpnrayenr}s 
mentioned in inscriptions 1~®, and on two or three coins, was 
evidently a title of the mature god. A coin of Hierapytna 
and one of Polyrrhenion*’, both of the time of Augustus, 
show the bearded head of Zeus with this inscription; and 
the whole figure, hurling a thunderbolt and surrounded by 
stars, appears on Cretan coins of the period of Titus® 
Neither is there any youthful representation of Zeus Dictaeus, 
whom we find on the fourth-century coins of Praesus in 
Crete‘ as a mature god enthroned and holding sceptre and 
eagle. A very striking and peculiar type is that of Zeus 
Fedxavés on fourth-century coins of Phaestus, who is seated 
on a stump under a tree holding a cock. and has the 
youthful form and much of the air of Dionysos, to whom, 
as has been pointed out, he closely approximates in Cretan 
worship 8. 

We have no record of any temple-image of the Dodonean 
Zeus; but the oak-crowned head on the coins of Thessaly 
and Epirus are rightly interpreted as referring to the oracular 
god of Dodona. The former were struck by the Magnetes 


* Overbeck, loc. cit., pp. 322-338. Num. p. 384. 


> Jb. Miinztaf. 5. 2. Coin PLA 3. 

© Eph. Arch. 1893, Pl. 1. 6. & Overbeck, Azzst-Mythol. p. 197, 

4 Overbeck, Kunst-Mythol.t, p.216, Miinztaf. 3. 3; Head, op. cit. p. 401, 
Miinztaf. rt. 38. Fig. 255. 


© Jb. Miinztaf. 3. 19; Head, Azs¢. 


110 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


and the Thessali in the first half of the second century B.C.*, 
and may show the survival in this region of the tradition of 
a Thessalian Dodona in Phthia. More important is the series 
of oak-crowned heads on the coins of Epirus», struck in the 
reigns of Alexander and Pyrrhus, and on the gold staters of 
the former king we may possibly detect in the countenance 
the expression of a mental quality proper to the god 
of divination. The oak-crown is not infrequently found in 
other representations of Zeus, not only on coins, but in works 
of plastic art °; probably borrowed from Dodona originally, it 
may have become a merely conventional symbol, and cannot 
by itself be taken to prove any direct association with Dodo- 
naean cult. 

The head of Zeus on the coins of Halus alludes no 
doubt to the cult of Zeus Laphystius, but does not at all 
reflect the character of the worship*. A few other local cult- 
names, which may be illustrated by representations on coins, 
may be here mentioned, such as Zeus Ainesios, whose head is 
seen on fourth-century coins of Proni®, Zeus Aetnaeos on the 
fifth-century coins of Aetna already mentioned, Zeus Sala- 
minios’ represented on Cypriote coins of the Roman period, 
erect and holding patera and sceptre with an eagle on his 
wrist. On late coins of Alexandria® we find the inscription 
Zeus Nemeios, and a representation of him lying on the back 
of his eagle, a purely fanciful type which certainly bore no 
special significance for Nemean cult. The seated Zeus who 
is seen on the Archemorus vase of Ruvo in converse with 
Nemea®, may be called Zeus Nemeios, but obviously the 
figure has not the character of a cult-monument. The only 
representation that may claim to be a monument of the actual 
worship of this deity is the device on an Argive coin of 
Marcus Aurelius, on which we see a naked Zeus standing 


® Head, Hest. Num. p. 256; Bret. 1, Head, p. 251. 


Mus: Cal, Thess; PR VU, -3,-3% e Jb. p. 358. 
Overbeck, I, p. 231. f [b. p. 267. 
> Coin Pl. A 11, 12. & Jb. p. 719. 
© Overbeck, I, pp. 234-239. h Published in Baumeister, Denk- 


4 Brit, Mus. Cat. Thess., Pl. XXXII. mdaler d. klass. Alterthums, 1, p. 114. 


ie ial he i ee Re is ae a 


la? ae 
e 


Pree 


v.] THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS. ca 


with his right hand supported on his sceptre, and his left hand 
behind him with an eagle near his feet. From the prevalence 
of this figure on the Argive coins, Professor Gardner concludes 
that we have here a copy of the statue carved by Lysippus 
for the temple of Argos*. The cult of Zeus Olympius was 


- widespread ®’, and his name is inscribed on many coins. But 


we cannot suppose that the inscription attests any connexion 
with the local worship of Olympia, as the name ‘OAvumuos 
came to have the most general signification. But no doubt 
the representations of Zeus under this title were often modelled 
on the great Pheidian masterpiece in Elis,as we find when we 
examine the type on the coins of Megara, Prusa®, Antioch 4, 
and other cities. 

Of the various political ideas attaching to the Zeus-worship 
there were comparatively few that were expressed in the monu- 
ments of religious art, and those works are still fewer which 
we can use as illustrations of public cult. For instance, many 
attempts have been made to discover the Zeus Polieus of 
Athens. The text of Pausanias has been interpreted as 
proving that there was an older and a later statue of this 
god on the Acropolis, the later having been executed by 
Leochares, who in some way modified the traditional form. 
This may be so, but the words of Pausanias are rather loose, 
and do not at all of necessity imply that the statue carved by 
Leochares was named Zeus Polieus. Jahn sees in the Attic 
archaic coins that display the god striding forward and hurl- 
ing the thunderbolt a preservation of the archaic type of the 
god of the city’. The motive reminds us of that of the 
archaic Athena Polias, and being more violent is probably 
earlier than the more peaceful representation of Zeus with 
the lowered thunderbolt which is found on another archaic 
coin of Athens‘, and which Overbeck is more inclined to 
regard as a copy of the early statue on the Acropolis®& We 


® CoinPl.A13. Mum, Comm. Paus., Fig. K. 


Pl. K. XXVIII. p. 36. ' © Nuove Memor. dell? Inst., A, p. 24, 
> Gardner, op. cit. A 3. Gardner, op. cit. B B 1. 
© Head, Hist. Num. p. 444. 12, DES, 


4 Miiller, Antigu. Antioch., Taf. 2, & Kunst-Mythol, 1, p. 55. 


GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


II2 


then find on another Attic coin this type of Zeus modified in 
accordance with the style of the fourth century *, and an altar 
is represented by his side over which the god is holding 
a libation-cup. This may well be a reproduction of the 
statue of Leochares which stood near the altar, but there is 
no direct proof that this statue ever usurped either the name 
or the worship of the image of Zeus Polieus. The same con- 
ception of Zeus as the guardian of the people appears in the 
group of Zeus and Demos that stood in the Peiraeus, the work 
of Leochares”. Of the forms of this group we know nothing, 
but it is interesting to note how the type of the personified 
Demos in certain monuments borrows much from the recog- 
nized type of Zeus; for instance, on certain archaic coins® of 
Rhegium of the transitional style a doubt has been felt whether 
the seated figure whose lower limbs are enveloped in the 
himation is the god or the personification of the people 4. 

The type of Zeus ’Ayopatos, the god whose altar stood 
in the market-place, and who guarded the righteousness of 
trials, cannot be recognized on any coin®, or in any statue. 
But his figure is seen on a Roman relief with an inscription 
to him, on which he appears erect and of youthful form, 
holding in his left hand a sceptre, and extending his right 
over an altar, and wearing a chlamys that leaves the right 
breast bare. 

As a god of war, Zeus was but little known in the genuine 
Hellenic cult, and was rarely represented in public monu- 
ments. It is true that a very common type in coin-repre- 
sentations is the thunder-hurling Zeus, but this may express 


* (cardner,. Db. B32. of Sybaris, Athenae. 541. We may 


PoPaus 1. 153007 

© Overbeck, Aunst-Mythol. 1, p. 
25; Head, Hist. Num. p. 93, Fig. 62, 
who inclines to regard it neither as 
Zeus nor Demos, but as Agreus or 
Aristaeus. 

4 The personal form of Demos was 
created at least as early as the close of 
the fifth century, as Demos was grouped 
with Zeus and Hera in the representa- 
tion on the famous mantle of Alcisthenes 


interpret the figure of Zeus on the 
beautiful vase published by Baumeister, 
Denkmiler, 1. 493, No. 537, represent- 
ing the birth of Erichthonius, the 
mythic ancestor of the Athenian people, 
as Zeus Polieus. 

e The inscription Zebs "Ayopatos occurs 
on a coin (of the Imperial period) of the 
Bithynian Nicaea; Head, Wrst. Num. 
p- 443, but only an altar is represented 
with it. 


ve] THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS. 113 


the legend of the Titans’ and Giants’ battles, or the mere 
physical conception of the thunderer. A helmed Zeus at 
Olympia is a fiction born of the corrupt text of Pausanias*; 
and only on rare and late coins of Iasos> does the armed 
figure of Zeus “Apewos occur. The warrior-god of Caria 
appears on the coins of Euromus‘, Mylasa‘4, and of the 
Carian dynasts, and the double-headed axe that is a device 
of the coinage of Tenedos may be his emblem. The most 
striking representation is that which is found on the coin 
of Mausolus®, on which Zeus Labraundeus is seen walking 
to the right clad in a himation that leaves his breast bare, 
and carrying a spear and bipennis; the style shows the 
impress of Attic art of the middle of the fourth century. But 
the actual cult-figure of the Carian temple is probably better 
presented by the type of the coins of Mylasa, on which we 
see the god in the midst of his temple, clad in chiton and 
himation that is wrapt about his lower limbs in stiff hieratic 
fashion, wearing a modius on his head and wielding axe 
and spear. The coin-types of Amastris‘ that illustrate the 
epithet of Zeus Xrparnyés show little or nothing that is 
characteristic of this idea, which does not enter at all into 
the canonical representations of Zeus. It is only the late 
coinage of Syracuse that represented the god whom Cicero 
calls Jupiter Imperator with the warlike symbol of the 
spear. . 

But of Zeus the Conqueror there are a large number of 
illustrations among the monuments, though these all belong 
to the period of perfected and later art; in literature Nike 
had been associated with Zeus at least as early as Bacchy- 
lides, but not in any conspicuous monument until the statue 


of Pheidias, who placed her on the hand of the Olympian 


Sey et eh 


Zeus turned partly towards him. Henceforth we have two 
modes of representing Zeus with Nike; the goddess is either 
facing him with a garland in her hand or a libation to offer 


m Pause. 6: 17, ¥. d. alt, Kunst, 2. 29. 

> Coin Pl. A 4. © Coin Pl. A 5. 

© Head, Hist. Num. p. 523. £ Overbeck, Miinztaf. 2.27, and 3. 21. 
4 7b, 529; Miiller-Wieseler, Denkm. ® Head, Hest. Num. p. 164. 

VOL. I. I 


II4 ‘GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


him*; or she stands in the hollow of his hand looking away 
from him and holding ‘out a crown to the worshippers ; such 
is frequently her pose on the coins of the Syrian kings» 
and of the Achaean league®. She was sometimes also 
present with Zeus Soter; for instance, in the shrine of Zeus 
in the Peiraeus, mentioned by Pausanias as containing statues 
of Athene and Zeus with Nike in his hand, and called 
the teodv of Zeus Soter by Strabo. In this case then, the 
epithet Swrip would refer to the dangers of war. But generally 
speaking the monumental evidence of this title and of the 
special expression given to the idea of Zeus Soter *** is very 
slight. Pausanias speaks of an archaic statue at Aegium 
of this name; a great group carved by Cephisodotus of Zeus 
Tvyn, and Artemis Séreipa, was dedicated at Megalopolis 
in the Temple of Zeus Soter; and at Thespiae we hear of 
a bronze figure of Zeds Yadrns, which was probably ancient 
because of the ancient legend attaching to it. But of none 
of these statues nor of the agalma at Athens, often mentioned 
in the state archives, nor of the two statues in Messene re- 
corded by Pausanias have we any explicit account or evidence. 
The only full representation that has survived is found on 
a coin of Galaria in Sicily*, which has for its device the 
seated Zeus, holding a sceptre on which an eagle is carved, 
with the inscription Yorer, written backwards. A youthful 
head of Zeus Soter with a diadem is found on a coin of 
Agrigentum ° of the third century. 

Of all the cult-names that we have examined that express 
the relations of the family and clan to the worship of Zeus, 
there is scarcely any that can be attached to any surviving 
monument. We do not know what distant form, if any, 
the ancients used for Zeus “Epxeios, ‘Opdyios, or Pparpios ; but 
an allusion to Zeus TaymjAuos, the marriage god, may perhaps be 
found in an interesting series of works. These are those in 
which the god appears veiled and with the veil wearing some- 


* For instance on an early fifth-century © Jb, Miinztaf. 2. 17 and 17 a. 
vase in Stackelberg’s Graber der Helle- 4 Coin Pl. A6. Head, Hzs/. Num. 
nen, Taf. 18. p. 121. 


» Overbeck, Kusmst-Mythol. 1, p. 59. © Head, 2d. p. 108. 





v.] THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS. Tis 


times an oaken crown*. The meaning of this symbol has 
been much disputed. The veil might express the chthonian 
nature of Zeus, and illustrate the idea of Zebs axotiras, whose 
oak-grove on the road near Sparta might be alluded to by 
the oaken crown; but the veil is not usually a symbol of 
the lower world, nor have any of these works features or 
expression that would be proper to the nether god. It 
may well be that in the case of some of them the veil alludes 
to the deity who hides himself in the clouds; for instance 
on the silver-cup from Aquilea>, where Zeus with half his 
form concealed and his head veiled is gazing down upon 
Triptolemos and Demeter who is giving him the corn, and 
on the Borghese relief of the Louvre where the veiled Zeus 
may be probably Zeus Maimactes, the winter-god*. But we 
have no sure authority for saying that the veil was a sign 
of the cloud; its only certain significance is its reference 
to the bridal, and it is the constant attribute of the bride 
and of Hera as the goddess of marriage. But could it have 
such a meaning on the head of the male deity? It is possible 
that on the sarcophagos-representation published in the 
Monumenti dell Instituto, which shows the birth of Dionysos 
from the thigh of Zeus, the veil around the head of the god 
might mean that Zeus is here fulfilling the functions of 
the mother—a quaint unintentional illustration of the very 
ancient practice of the Couvade. Again, in the picture of 
the icpds yduos from Pompeii ®, the bridegroom Zeus has the 
veil, which more probably symbolizes the Marriage-rite than 
the spring-cloud. Lastly, the terra-cotta group found in Samos 
_ and published by Gerhard‘, shows the veiled Zeus side by side 
) With the veiled Hera (Pl. Vb). Now the Hera of Samos is the 


_ goddess of marriage, and in such a connexion it is natural to 
_ suppose that Zeus also is here a cds yapnAws. We might 


then apply this interpretation to the doubtful instances of the 


* E.g. Overbeck, X. Af. 1, Fig. 20. * Vol 4, Tat ana. 


_ Fora list of the monuments vide Over- ¢ Baumeister, Denm. d. klass. Alter- 





a beck, 1, pp. 239 and 251. thums, Fig. 2390, p. 2133. 
| °» Mon. dell Inst. 3. 4. © Antike Bildwerke, Taf. 1; also in 
© Winckelmann, Monum. Jned. 11. Overbeck, K. M. 2, p. 25, Fig. 4a. 


I 2 


116 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


single representations of the veiled Zeus; only we must 
reckon with the possibility that the attribute was sometimes 
given for a merely artistic reason, as a becoming framework 
for the head. 

The other two cults of Zeus, that express a national or 
political idea, that of Zeus "EAevOépios and. IlaveAAjvios, are 
illustrated by no surviving monument of sculpture; but 
a fine series of Syracusan coins* show us the head of the 
former god laurel-crowned, and marked by a noble and 
mild earnestness of expression, and some of these bear 
on their reverse the device of the unbridled horse, the 
emblem of freedom. But these refer to the freedom won 
by Timoleon’s victories, and tell us nothing of the earlier 
colossal statue dedicated at Syracuse to Zeus ’EAevepios 
after the downfall of the tyranny of Thrasybulus.. Of 
Zeus ‘E\Advios, who was the same as Panhellenios, we have 
representations on coins belonging to two periods; the 
first a Syracusan coin of the fourth century about the time 
of Timoleon, the second a coin of the same city, struck 
near the beginning of the third*. In neither is there any- 
thing specially characteristic of the idea, but the later type is 
remarkable for the youthful countenance and imperious beauty 
of the laurel-crowned god. | 

Lastly we may mention in this series certain coins of 
Pallantium? and Aegium® in Achaea issued by the Achaean 
league, the type of which agrees with that adopted by other 
cities of the league, such as Messene and Megara‘; the god is 
represented facing towards the left, naked and erect, with 
his right hand raised high and supported on his sceptre, 
and with a Nike in his left hand turned towards him. There 
is good reason to suppose, as Professor Gardner argues, that 
this may be a copy of the statue of Zeus Homagyrius of 
Aegium whose statue is mentioned by Pausanias as next 


* Coin Pl. Ay. Head, Hest. Num. 4 Miiller-Wieseler, Denkm. d. alt. 


p. 156. Kunst, 2, No. 20. 
> Head, p. 157; Imhoof-Blumer, © Gardner, Vum. Comm. Paus. R15. 
Monnaie Grecque, Pl. B 21. f Overbeck, K. MW. 1, p. 155, Nos. 17 


¢ Coin Pl. A 14. Head, p. 160. and 17a. 


v.] THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS. ye | 


to that of Demeter Panachaia and whose cult was mythically 
associated with the gathering of the Achaean host against 
Troy, and whose title was appropriate to the patron-divinity 
of the Achaean league. 

Turning now to those cults to which some moral or 
spiritual idea attaches, we find the monumental record far 
slighter than the literary, and only in a few cases can we draw 
from both. Something has been said of the importance of 
the worship of Zeus MeAfyios, in which certain physical con- 
ceptions were blended with ideas of retribution and expiation. 
But it is difficult to illustrate this worship from existing 
monuments, for it is not allowable to discover in every mild- 
visaged head of Zeus a representation of this divinity, as some 
have been wont; for the cult and character of Zeus MewAcyuos 
were by no means altogether mild. Perhaps it is an act in 
his worship that is the representation on a vase published in 
the Archacologische Zeitung of 1872: blood is flowing from 
an altar, and on it a youth, wearing a chlamys and holding 
a club, is sitting in an attitude of sorrow; the scene may well 
be the purification of Theseus from the taint of kindred blood”. 
The only certain representations preserved to us of this Zeus 
are two reliefs of the later period found in the Peiraeus. The 
one shows us the god enthroned, with one hand resting on his 
thigh, another holding apparently a cornucopia; before him 
are several figures leading a pig to sacrifice. Most fortunately 
the inscription is preserved: ‘to Zeus Meilichios®.’ In this 
interesting work the god appears as a deity of the spring, if 
the cornucopia is rightly recognized, and as a god who claims 
piacular offerings for sin; for the pig was used in these rites 
of purification. The other relief represents three worshippers 
approaching the divinity, who is seated by an altar holding 
acup in his right hand and a sceptre in his left (Pl. IIa); the 
inscription proves the dedication to Zeus Meilichios 4. 

Greek religious sculpture has suffered much through the 
loss of the Zeus MewAfyios which Polycleitos carved for the 


® Pl. XLVI. 4 Bull. Corr. Hellén, 1883, p. 507; 
™ Peat. 37, 2. Taf. 18, Foucart. 
© Eph. Arch. 1886, p. 49. 


118 GREEK RELIGION. [cHAP, 


Argives to commemorate and to expiate a fearful civic 
massacre. Of everything that concerns this statue we are 
in the greatest doubt: we do not know what was the actual 
occasion of its dedication, for the history of Argos records 
more than one bloody faction-fight ; we do not know whether 
its sculptor was the elder Polycleitos of the fifth century or 
the younger of the fourth century, or what were the forms by 
which the sculptor represented the religious idea ®. 

The only other cult-title which was derived from the moral 
or spiritual character of Zeus, and which received distinct 
monumental illustration, is that of the Zeus PiAtos. The earliest 
representation of him that is recorded is the statue wrought 
by Polycleitos the younger for Megalopolis''. ‘He resembles 
Dionysos, for the coverings of his feet are buskins, and he has 
a cup in one hand and a thyrsos in the other, and on the 
thyrsos sits an eagle’ Pausanias evidently did not under- 
stand the reason of these dionysiac features of Zeus Philios. 
As this statue was a public work of the earlier part of the 
fourth century and intended for temple-worship, we ought 
not to seek for any recondite mystic reason for this strange 
representation: for the religious sculpture of the great age 
has little to do with mystic symbolism. We may connect 
this worship with that of Zeus Didymaeus, whose priests wore 
ivy during the ritual ; and we can illustrate in more than one 
way the rapprochement between Zeus and Dionysos’. At the 
feast the third cup was poured to Zeus Swrip, and Zeus Pirios 
was regarded in the fourth century as the god of the friendly 
feast. As the work of Polycleitos seems certainly to have 
been wrought especially for the city and temple of Megalo- 
polis, we may give it the political meaning which belonged to 
many of the monuments of the new foundation of Epami- 
nondas, and may interpret the epithet ids as referring 
partly to the political friendship which should bind together 
the Arcadian community. By what means Polycleitos was 
able to express the double nature of the god is a doubtful 


* The Zeus-statues recorded in Argos _ lished by Gardner, Vum. Comm. on 
are too many to allow us to recognize aus. K, 25. 
the Zeus Meilichios on the coin pub- > Vide p. 48. 


PLaTE II 








«Oey Bes 


v.] THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS. T19 


matter, but we may believe that it was shown in the features 
and inner character as well as in the external attributes; 
also in the pose and arrangement of the drapery. In the 
Archaeologische Zeitung of 1866 (pl. 208, no. 6) there is 
the-sketch of a lost antique, a representation of a seated 
Dionysos, posed and draped according to the usual type of 
the seated Zeus, and it is most natural to suppose that the 
Zeus Pidtos of Polycleitos was also seated. As regards the 
face we can say little: the sculptor must have borrowed 
something from the older type of the Dionysos heads, the 
type of the severe bearded god, and given the features 
a benevolent and smiling aspect. But no existing monument 
gives us any certain clue to the rendering of the idea. The 
Pergamene coins which give a representation of the head of 
Zeus Philios, and the full figure seated, have little definite 
character *. 

The only other surviving representations of the full figure 
of this deity are found on the two Attic votive reliefs of the 
fourth century, bearing inscriptions to Zeus Philios”, that 
have been mentioned above. On both the god appears 
seated on his throne; but on one the eagle is carved beneath 
the seat, and he seems to have held a cup in his left hand; 
on the other, which is reproduced by Schone’, there is no 
eagle, and he probably held the sceptre in his left, and two 
worshippers, a woman and a boy, are approaching him 
(Pl. IIb). Neither monument is of importance as regards 
style or as evidence of a widely prevalent type. 

This list of monuments may close with the mention of 


those that illustrated the cult of Zeus Moiragetes, none of 


which have survived. It has been already noticed that 
in the religion and the religious art the idea of fatalism had 
little or nothing to say, the difficulty being avoided by 
refusing to Motpa much independent recognition and by 
subordinating her to Zeus. 

In Delphi, by the side of the two fates, stood Zeus Motpayérns 


* Overbeck, KX. MZ. 1, p. 228, Miinztaf. © Griechische Reliefs, Taf. 25. 105. 
2 33. Cf. Heydemann, Dze antiken Marmor- 


> C. I; A. 2. 1330, and 1572. bildwerke zu Athen, No. 736. 


120 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


and Apollo Moipayérns; and at Akakesion in Arcadia, by the 
entrance to the temple of Despoena, was a relief of white 
marble representing Zeus Moupayérys and the Motpa 3, Per- 
haps the title might be mechanically drawn from the figure 
of Zeus preceding the fates; but obviously at Delphi it 
had acquired a spiritual sense, probably having also a special 
reference to the oracular functions of Zeus and Apollo. But 
the great statue of Zeus by Theocosmos of Megara, a pupil 
and fellow-worker of Pheidias, displayed no such special 
idea, but in the most general way the omnipotence of Zeus 
over the Motpa: ; for Pausanias tells us that the Hours and the 
Fates were wrought there above the head of Zeus, that is, 
on the back of his throne as subordinate figures ®. 

Besides monuments to which we can attach some definite 
cult-names, we find a rich illustration in mythic representations 
of many of the moral ideas that were expressed in the 
worship. In the group of Dontas carved on the treasury of 
the Megarians at Olympia, Zeus is present at the contest 
between Heracles and Acheloos, dispensing the fate of the 
action. In the group wrought by Lycios the son of Myron 
of Thetis and Eos pleading before Zeus for their children, 
the same idea appears as in the worship of Zeus Auraios. 
And the myth of Prometheus illustrates the ideas of recon- 
ciliation and mercy that can be found in the worship. But 
the greater part of the myths scarcely touch the temple- 
worship, which is purer and less fantastic than these. 

When we reckon up this whole series of monuments we see 
that the literary record is far richer and more explicit than 
the monumental in the display of the various cults and 
religious functions of Zeus. We see that very few of the 
cult-titles that are preserved in the literature are to be 
discovered in the monuments of religious art; and even 
these are usually attested not so clearly by the attributes 
or inner qualities of the work as by the inscription : without 
artificial aid we should not know a Zeus Lwryp or a Zeus 
"Edevdepios. Nor can we be at all sure that any special 
aspect of the god was always represented in the same way 


* Paus. I. 40, 4. 


re 


v.] THE CULT-MONUMENTS OF ZEUS. I2I 


and by the same forms. The numismatic evidence cannot 
always be used for other works, because the face on the 
coins is often characterless and expressionless, and often 
shows no congruity with the title: there is nothing warlike, 
for instance, in the coin-representation of Zeus =rpatnyos. 
Doubtless the great sculptors of the great age found ap- 
propriate expression for such widely diverging ideas as Zeus 
Piktos and Zeus “Opxios, as we know they did for the 
distinction between the Sky-Zeus and the Nether-Zeus; but 
we cannot understand by what power of expression they 
could impress upon any statue of Zeus the meaning of 
‘Epxetos or Kaédpouos without the aid of inscription, nor have 
we any right to say that these special figures of cult were 
a frequent theme of great religious art. The statues of Zeus, 
with which any famous name is associated, represented the 
god usually in the totality of his character, while his special 
functions were appealed to rather by altars and votive tablets. 
Most of the surviving statues, busts, and reliefs of Zeus do 
not admit of being specially named, and perhaps the originals 
themselves of which these are copies possessed no special cult- 
title. Butif the artistic monuments give us a less rich account 
of the manifold character of Zeus than the literature gives, 
they are far more palpable and living evidence of the forms 
in which the popular imagination invested him, and we have 
now to note the chief features of the type in art. 


CHAP LER V1, 


I SHE IDEAL TYPE OF ZEUS: 


AS regards the monuments of the earlier pre-Pheidian period 
the most interesting question is how far they contain the germ 
of the Pheidian masterpiece, how far the artists had antici- 
pated Pheidias in the discovery of forms appropriate to the 
ideal. But our evidence of the earliest archaic period is most 
scanty; no statues have survived, and probably very few 
existed ; we have to collect testimony from coins, vase-paint- 
ings, and reliefs, and most of these belong to the later archaism. 
The means of expression that the workers in this period ° 
possessed was chiefly external and mechanical ; character and 
personality were chiefly manifested by attributes. The most 
usual of these was the thunderbolt, whether he was repre- 
sented in action or repose; also on some archaic works, there 
was not only the thunderbolt in his hand, but on his head 
a garland of flowers, and the character becomes more manifold 
by the accumulation of attributes. Nothing is told us in the 
ancient literature about the form or pose of these representa- 
tions; but examining the series of archaic coins and vases, we 
gather that there were three commonly accepted types showing 
three varieties of pose: (1) we see the striding Zeus with the 
thunderbolt in his right hand levelled against an imaginary 
enemy or transgressor on Messenian tetradrachms, on later 
Attic coins, and in the very archaic bronze from Olympia, 
and the eagle is sometimes flying above his extended left arm 
or perched upon it ; (2) the standing figure of Zeus in repose— 
for instance, on the coin of Athens holding the thunderbolt in 


* Vide pp. 106, 107,111; Baumeister, Denkm. a. klass. Alterth. p. 2124, Fig. 2378. 


THE IDEAL TYPE OF ZEUS. 123 


his lowered right hand, and stretching out his left as though 
demanding libation. It is difficult to decide certainly between 
the comparative antiquity of these two types: the first, dis- 
playing in activity the power and functions of Zeus the 
thunderer, gratified the naive craving of archaic art for 
dramatic action; the second contains more possibilities of 
ethical expression, and is more in accord with the later con- 
ception of the peaceful unquestioned supremacy of Zeus. The 
third type with which we can best compare the Pheidian 
is that of the seated Zeus, as he appears, for instance, on the 
certain Arcadian coins of ripe archaism *, on many vase-repre- 
sentations—such, for instance, as the birth of Athene ’—in the 
relief of the Harpy-tomb, and on the metope of Selinus; in 
the coin-representation he holds the sceptre as on the Harpy- 
tomb, and the right arm is outstretched with the eagle flying 
above it or resting on it ; the feet are separated, and in one 
instance at least the legs are drawn up with some freedom, 
and in these motives and forms we recognize an affinity with 
the Pheidian work. As regards any spiritual expression in 
the pose of the limbs, the ceurdrns, the earnestness and majesty 
that was one quality of the Pheidian ideal, we may discern 
the germ of this in the seated figures of the Harpy-tomb, 
whose forms belong to genuine Greek art, and who are akin 
to the Hellenic supreme God, although we cannot with security 
name any one of them Zeus. 

The treatment of the body and rendering of the muscles as 
we see it in the naked figures does not in the earlier period 
contribute much to the distinct character of the god; we 
see the strong forms such as any mature man or god might 
possess, rendered in the usual archaic style, with great em- 
phasis thrown on the shoulders and thighs. The Selinus 
relief shows the beginning of that idea that guided the later 
perfected art, namely, that the forms of Zeus should be 
rendered so as to express self-confident strength without 
violent effort or athletic tension of muscles, a rendering which 
assists the idea of reposeful supremacy. 


* Overbeck, Miinztaf. 2, Nos. 1-3. b E.g. Mon. dell?’ Inst. 3. 44. 


124 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP, 


In the draped archaic type the treatment of the drapery 
varies. In the earlier vases Zeus is never naked, but wears 
sometimes only a chiton with or without sleeves, sometimes 
a himation or mantle thrown over the chiton; and on the 
figures of the Harpy-tomb the drapery is very ample, such as 
the older austerer worship of the gods required. The later 
tendency is to reveal the divine forms, and hence it came 
about that in the canonical representation of the seated Zeus, 
it is the lower limbs only that are covered by the himation, 
while the greater part of the breast is free and a fold hangs 
over the left shoulder. Now this arrangement of the drapery 
which allows the display of the rich forms of the torso, and 
attains a high artistic effect in the noble swinging wave of the 
lines, was supposed to be the creation of the ideal Pheidian 
sculpture. This is not the case. It was perfected by him, 
but it was an invention of the earlier period ; for we see it on 
one of the Arcadian coins*, on the interesting coin of the city 
of Aetna with a representation of Zeus Aetnaeus struck 
between 476 and 461°, and on the metope of Selinus. 

Lastly, as regards the countenance of the archaic period, 
we can scarcely yet speak of spiritual expression ®. The forms 
of the head show the usual marks of the archaic type, and we 
cannot by the features alone distinguish a Zeus from a Poseidon 
or any of the maturer gods“. The hair is generally long and 
sometimes bound in a crobylos, but it hangs down simply 
and leaves the forehead and ears usually free; it has nothing 
of the later luxuriant or leonine treatment, never rising up 
above the forehead, except in the archaic terra-cotta group of 
Zeus and Hera from Samos mentioned above, which Overbeck 
for this insufficient reason pronounces of later date. 

Most commonly in the pre-Pheidian as well as the post- 


® Overbeck, ZX. JZ. Miinztaf. 2. 2 a. 

RCo P). Act, 

¢ The Vatican relief, found in the villa 
of Hadrian at Tibur (Miiller-Wieseler, 
Denkm. d. alt. Kunst, 2, No. 19; Over- 
beck, Atlas, 1. 6), where Overbeck dis- 
cerns a solemn and noble earnestness in 
the head of Zeus, is probably archaistic, 


and in any case does not belong to the 
archaic period. 

4 For instance the very striking ar- 
chaic bronze head from Olympia (Olymp. 
Ausgrab.24) is sometimes called a Zeus- 
head (e.g: Baumeister, Fig. 1276a), but 
the name is very doubtful. 


* 


vI.] THE IDEAL TYPE OF ZEUS. 125 


Pheidian period he is bearded; for the maturer age better 


accorded with the Greek conception and the ancient idea of 


maTip avdpav Te OeGv Te: but it is important to note that both 
before and after Pheidias a youthful type of Zeus existed, the 
motive of which it is not always possible to explain. We find 
at least one beardless Zeus among the works of the Argive 
Ageladas, the predecessor and teacher of Pheidias, namely, 
a statue dedicated at Aegium in Achaea, where was localized 
the legend of the birth of Zeus and his rearing by the goat. 
The statue was kept in the house of the youthful priest, a boy 
annually elected for his beauty. And we find the same custom 
observed in regard to the idol of Zeus Ithomatas®*, another 
work of Ageladas: though here the priest is not said to 
have been youthful, and it is not certain® but only possible 
that this also was an image of the beardless god, as Ithome, 
like Aegium, possessed the legend of the birth. Now in these 
places this legend might explain the cult ; as also the Cretan 
legend might explain the cult of the youthful Zeus FeAyards”. 
The youthful Zeus of Pelusium, whose emblem was the pome- 
granate, may well be interpreted as the bridegroom Zeus, or 
as another form of Dionysos, the god of vegetation®; but we 
do not know for what reason the Zeus at Elis dedicated by 
Smicythos4 was beardless, or why the heads of Zeus Soter on 
the coins of Agrigentum and of Zeus Hellanios on the coins 
of Syracuse have the youthful form. In the earliest period, 
the male divinities one and all, with the exception of Apollo, 
are bearded ; but in the Pheidian and later work, the forms of 
other gods besides Apollo are rendered in accord with the 
Greek instinct. But we are not at liberty to say that the love 
of the youthful form for its own sake explains these rare 
representations of Zeus. 


* The Zeus Ithomatas on the Mes- ¢ At Pelusium, Ads fepdy dyadpa 
senians’ coins is always bearded, vide Kaciov veavioxos AméAAwvt pGAdAov €ot- 
Head, Hist. Num. p. 361. Cf.a bronze Kus ... mpoBéBdnrar 5 tiv xeipa kal 
of Zeus, bearded and hurling thunder- yee pordy én” abrh Tips 5e fords 6 Ad-yos 
bolt, in the Musée de Lyon, somewhat pvorinds. Ach. Tat. Erot, Script. 3.6. 
of this type: Gazette Archéol. 1880, Hirschig, p. 59. 

Pl. 11, p. 78. 4 Paus. 5. 24, 6. 

> Overbeck, XK. JZ Miinztaf. 3. 3. 


126 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


Of the features of the usual bearded type there is little 
more to say; neither in forehead, mouth, nor eyebrow do the 
works of even the later archaic period show much of the 
distinct character that is impressed upon the perfected idea of 
Zeus. In the period before Pheidias no doubt the whole 
countenance came to express a certain solemn dignity 
and earnestness ; the Cyrenaic coins with the representation of 
Zeus-Ammon, which perhaps preserve the style of the work 
of Calamis, and which display something of the impressiveness 
of brow which belongs to the Pheidian ideal, belong to this 
transitional period ; and near to this period we may assign the 
relief of Zeus and Hebe in Bologna which has sometimes been 
regarded as spurious, but without good reason, although the 
inscription is not genuine*. As it stands it is one of the most 
remarkable representations of Zeus belonging to the earlier 
period of the perfected style. The himation conceals the 
lower limbs, and displaying the forms of the torso hangs over 
the shoulder; the sceptre shows him as the king. The 
features are very earnest and richly moulded, the cheeks are 
broad, the eye-sockets rather deep. The Pheidian ideal, if 
this work is really earlier than the Olympian Zeus, is fore- 
shadowed here. 

There are two works of the Pheidian period that may serve 
as comments on the masterpiece of the Pheidian sculpture : the 
relief-figures of Zeus on the Parthenon and on the Theseum 
friezes®. As regards chronology both these figures are probably 
earlier than the great temple-statue, and both are almost of 
the same date (circ. 440 B. C.); both show the best features 
of Attic sculpture, of which at this time Pheidias was the 
unrivalled head ; so that they come into the account of the 
type of Zeus which Pheidias chose or created. 

But we must bear in mind the great difference between the 
character of the frieze-figures and the temple-image: the 
latter, being set up for worship, must have been more solemn 
and severe, and could not have possessed the same freedom of 
forms or the same dramatic expression in the pose of its 


* Pl Illa. Vide Kekule, Arch. Zeit. 1871, Taf. 27. 
> Pl. IIIb. © Pl. IVa. 


he el —" 


Pirate III 









































FLAIE iv 


! 


ae if 
U 
ef 


\ 











VI. ] THE IDEAL: TYPE OF- ZEUS. 127 


limbs as the frieze-figures show. In both scenes the god is 
the interested spectator of a special drama: in the Parthenon 
group the Zeus is seated on his throne with a half-negligent 
but noble freedom, while in the scene on the Theseum he 
appears to be moving in his seat through the lively emotion 
which the combat caused in him. In both, the design of the 
arrangement of the drapery is on the whole the same—namely, 
to conceal the lower limbs, and to display the upper parts of 
the body, in which the idea of divine energy and power can 
be best manifested. Of the Theseum figure, the’ himation 
covers the outstretched left arm. probably for artistic reasons; 
and this becomes the more usual arrangement of the drapery 
of the seated Zeus. But it is in keeping with the more 
restful attitude of Zeus on the Parthenon frieze, that here the 
mantle has fallen away from the shoulder. The latter repre- 
sentation is altogether more expressive of the peaceful majesty 
of the god, and has possibly more affinity with the temple- 
statue, which naturally would show less ease and abandon, 
but which might well have resembled this in the pose of the 
legs. Also the sphinx on the throne recalls part of the decora- 
tion of the throne of the Olympian god. As regards the ren- 
dering of the forms there is little that is specially characteristic 
of the supreme god, for the large style that appears in the 
treatment of the flesh and great surfaces of muscle, in the 
reserve and solemnity of the whole, is to be looked for in any 
work of Pheidias. The pose indeed speaks to the character of 
the god, as elsewhere in the frieze it is the pose that defines 
the divinity. As regards the countenance we can say little, 
for it is too defaced ; but probably much of the expression 
that was achieved in the countenance of the Olympian head 
was anticipated here. We can conjecture what we have lost 
when we note the extraordinary power of ethical and spiritual 
expression in the other heads of the frieze. But both here 
and on the Theseum it seems that the sculptor has scarcely 
indicated the flowing locks of Zeus as an essential feature, 


128 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


Il. THE STATUE OF ZEUS OLYMPIOS. 


The image of the god wrought by Pheidias at the zenith of 
his artistic renown for the temple of Olympia was regarded as 
the masterpiece of Greek religious sculpture, and the fullest 
and deepest expression in plastic form of the national worship. 
Of no other work of ancient art is the account that remains so 
detailed, varied, and emotional. The description left by Pau- 
sanias* is as usual the dryest but the most accurate and full. 
The deity was seated on a richly-carved throne, wearing a 
crown of wild olive-leaves wrought of gold, and in his right 
hand holding a Nike of gold and ivory, who also wore a crown 
and carried in her hand a garland, while his left hand was 
grasping a sceptre wrought of variegated metals and sur- 
mounted with an eagle. His face and the parts of his body 
that were bare were of ivory, his sandals and himation of gold. 
From the silence of Pausanias concerning any other garment, 
as well as from the general history of the type of Zeus, we can 
conclude with certainty that he was represented with the 
mantle only, which, we may believe, was wrapt about his 
lower limbs, and, leaving the torso bare, fell lightly over his 
shoulder: an arrangement most expressive of the dignity of 
the god, and affording the most striking interchange of light 
from the surfaces of gold and ivory. The garment was worked 
over with forms of animals and flowers, especially the lily, 
which we may probably interpret as the symbol of immor- 
tality’. The olive-crown, being the prize of the Olympian 
victor, expressed the great function of Zeus as the guardian of 
the Olympian games and of the unity of Greece. 

The figure of victory which here for the first time he holds 
in his hand, instead of the eagle his constant attribute in the 
older monuments, marks him as the god to whom victory 
belongs; for, as a later coin proves, she was not facing the 


oe ote © statue of Alexander in Cos on the night 
b Tfilies adorned the head of the of his death; the Coans called the lily 
archaic Aeginetan statue of Zeus men- ‘the immortal’ flower, 76 duBpootor, 


tioned by Pausanias, 5. 22; Athenaeus, and the story must allude to his apo- 
p- 684, quotes from Nikander the story _ theosis. 
that lilies bloomed from the head of the 


VI. J THE STATUE OF ZEUS OLYMPIOS. 129 


spectator as though passing from Zeus to the worshipper, 
but was seen in profile, half-turned towards Zeus and holding 
up the garland to him*. In fact, the idea of the victorious 
god was prominent in the whole figure, for groups of victories 
were carved in relief on each of the legs and feet of the throne. 
At the extremities of its back stood the free figures of the 
Hours and Graces, of such proportions that their heads were 
higher than his, and on the cross-pieces, barriers, and base- 
ment of the throne were carved or painted the great myths 
which the epos or drama had made Pan-hellenic : the battle of 
Heracles and Theseus with the Amazons, the punishment of 
the Niobids, the labours of Heracles, the deliverance of Prome- 
theus, the birth of Aphrodite from the sea. So far the bare 
record of Pausanias enables us to gather the manifold idea 
of the whole. The pose and attributes of the god revealed 
him in kingly repose with the Victory ever at his side, 
as the supreme moral deity whose worship, rising above 
the particularism of local cult and the political severance of 
tribes and cities, was one of the few bonds of the national 
union. To such an idea the mythic by-work carved on the 
throne gave content and depth. The Amazon-contest is the 
symbol of the struggle against lawlessness and barbarism, and 
is the mythic counterpart of the battle of Salamis, which is 
more clearly recorded on the throne in the persons of Hellas 
and Salamis holding the figure-heads of ships in their hands, 
Even the slaughter of the Niobids is no mere legend of 
destruction such as the primitive art loved, but through the 
genius of Aeschylus had gained the noblest poetical beauty, 
and a higher ethical meaning as a story of the divine retribu- 
tion for presumptuous sin, and now for the first time appears 
as a theme of great religious sculpture. But no scene that 
was wrought on the throne possessed such spiritual significance, 
or could contribute so much to the moral aspect of Zeus, as the 
myth of the Prometheus Unbound, unique as it was among 
Greek legends for the idea of mercy that underlies it, and for its 
handling of the dark problem of necessity conflicting with the 

“ For the artistic necessity of this arrangement vide chapter on the Phei- 
dian Athena, p. 366. 

VOL. I. K 


130 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP, 


supreme power of the divinity. This also is a new motive appro- 
priated by perfected Greek sculpture, though not discovered by 
it*; and here also Aeschylus had been beforehand interpre- 
ting the story and fixing it in the imagination of the people. 
The group that was richest in figures and offered most scope to 
the sculptor’s power was that which was carved on the base- 
ment of the throne, in which Zeus and the other leading 
divinities appeared as spectators of the birth of Aphrodite 
from the waves. The theme hitherto untried by art was 
derived from the older epic religious poetry. The Homeric 
Hymn describing the birth presents us with a subject full of 
genial physical and spiritual ideas, that could offer as many 
fine motives of sculpture as the birth of Athena, and its 
cosmic significance is shown by the presence of Helios and 
Selene, who appeared on the basement at either extremity of 
the group. The Graces and the Hours at the back of the 
throne have a higher significance than they possessed on the 
throne of the Amyclean Apollo, where they served chiefly as 
monumental supports. Here they express the character of 
the god as the orderer of the seasons, the dispenser of the 
fruitfulness and beauty of the year”. 

Thus the work upon the throne and about the person of 
Zeus helps the interpretation of the whole, completing or 
explaining the incomplete or vague accounts given by ancient 
writers of the meaning of the image. We can thus partly 
understand the moral analysis given us by Dio Chrysostom in 
his ecstatic description®. According to him the style and the 
forms gave clear illustration of the many cult-names of Zeus, 
of the manifold aspects of his worship; this was the Pan- 
hellenic god, the guardian of a peaceful and united Hellas, 
the giver of life and all blessings, the common father and 
saviour of men, Zeus the king, the city-god, the god of friend- 


a picture described by Philostratus 


*® The subject appears on a_black- 
(mag. 2) they are given golden hair, 


figured vase in Berlin; Otto Jahn’s 


Beitrage, Taf. 8. 

> The Hours are personages connected 
with the processes of life and birth as 
well as with time; they belong to the 
circle of the Moirae and Aphrodite. In 


which he supposes to be symbolical of 
the ripening corn. 

¢ Dio Chrys. Or, 12. Dind. p. 236, 
412 R. 


VI.) THE STATUE OF ZEUS OLYMPIOS. 131 


ship, the god of the suppliant and the stranger. ‘His power 
and kingship are displayed by the strength and majesty of the 
whole image, his fatherly care for men by the mildness and 
loving-kindness in the face; the solemn austerity of the work 
marks the god of the city and the law,... he seems like to 
one giving and abundantly bestowing blessings.’ 

The statement is perhaps over-analytical, but we may well 
believe that in the work of Pheidias the full and manifold 
ideal was perfectly shown—‘so that none of the beholders 
could easily acquire another conception*’—this being the 
express likeness of the god, the masterpiece of Greek reli- 
gious sculpture, ‘of all images upon the earth the most 
beautiful and the most beloved by heaven’ The account 
of Pausanias attests the moral imagination of Pheidias in his 
choice of attributes and symbols: he has rejected all imagery 
of terror; the thunderbolt nowhere appears®: his ideal is: 
the peaceful and benevolent god. But it is interesting to 
note that it is not the external attributes which helped Dio 
Chrysostom to find that wealth of meaning which the image 
possessed in his eyes; and that therefore we are dealing here 
with no monument of the archaic hieratic art which relied on 
certain signs and symbols to express its meaning. Symbols 
and attributes are not wanting to the work of Pheidias, but 
they are allowed no separate function ; they merely aid the 
expression, which is conveyed by the forms of the body and 
the face. 

No doubt his unique power in plastic spiritual expression 
was most manifest in his treatment of the countenance, which 
must have revealed in clear interpretation the ideas embodied 
in the whole form. The ancient writers are fortunately more 
outspoken than usual on this point. Macrobius records that 
Pheidias himself declared that ‘from the eyebrows and the 


* Dio Chrys. Or. 12. Dind. p. 230, Taf. 18) representing Zeus opposite to 
401 R. Nike, he bears no thunderbolt, which in 
> Jb. p. 220, 383 R. archaic art is his most common symbol, 
© This significant omission is probably and is frequently given him in quite 
not an innovation made by Pheidias peaceful representations of the later 
himself. On one of the vases published __ period. 
by Stackelberg (Graber der Hellenen, 


K 2 


132 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


hair he had gathered the whole face of Zeus*;’ and we have 
the interesting story in Strabo that, when asked what had 
inspired his conception, Pheidias replied that his imagination 
had been moved by the lines of Homer: ‘ The son of Kronos 
spake and he nodded assent with his gleaming eyebrows ; 
and from the immortal head of the king the deathless locks 
waved down, and great Olympus was shaken with his nod ;’ 
and Strabo, or the Scholiast, adds: ‘The poet incites the 
imagination to express some great type, some form of great 
power worthy of Zeus °.’ 

The story has more value than most anecdotes about 
artists; for, if not literally true, it proves what the Greek 
spectator himself saw in the countenance: it proves that for 
him it embodied the conception of Homer, and is testimony 
of the profound earnestness, the peaceful and_ reserved 
strength, the exalted life, manifested in the feature ; and we 
can believe, on the authority of Dio Chrysostom, that there 
was added to the ceuvdrns, or solemnity which was proper 
to every Pheidian work, the more specially characteristic 
expression of benignity and loving-kindness, the expression 
which corresponds to the cult-ideas of Zeus Philios and 
Soter. 

The passionate enthusiasm of the ancient descriptions 
cannot give us a full and concrete impression of this work, 
but serves to indicate that there was in it a great and strange 
power operative by processes which require a philosophic 
history of Greek art to explain. And the record also enables 
us to some extent to test the value of the claim of certain 
coin-figures to be regarded as copies of the Zeus-image of 
Pheidias. In his Kunst-Mythologie, Overbeck has urged many 
reasons for accepting three extant Elean coins of the period of 
Hadrian as the most faithful reproductions of the face and 
figure. The two that present the whole figure are found in 
the state collections of Florence and Stockholm, and have 
often been published*; we see the god on his throne in 
profile from right to left with the olive-crown upon his short 
and close-pressed hair, with the Nike in his right hand and 

® Saturn. 5.13, 23. b Strabo, p. 354. ¢ Coin Pl. A 8, 


ee ee ee OL eee ee 


VI. ] THE STATUE OF ZEUS OLYMPIOS. 


133 


sceptre in his left. Undoubtedly, then, the coin-stamper had 
the Pheidian original before his eyes, and tries to reproduce it 
in outline. Yet the value of this slight copy has been greatly 
overrated ; for except that it helps to establish that the Victory 
was turned partly towards Zeus, it teaches us nothing 
certain that we did not before know from the account of 
Pausanias, and it is entirely lacking in imaginative expression. 
Overbeck indeed admires the solemn simplicity, the freedom 
from all ostentation in the pose, and especially the position of 
the sceptre, which is held erect and rather close to the body ; 
but Stephani, in a long polemic in the Compte-Rendu*, of 
which the negative criticism is of more value than the positive 
theory, complains justly of the stiffness of the figure, and its 
want of free rhythm. And the general accuracy is open to 
suspicion when we see that the figure is almost certainly clad 
in a chiton”, and not in the himation which we have every 
reason to believe was the sole garment of the Pheidian Zeus. 
Now the chiton was the archaic vesture of Zeus, and the coin- 
stamper of Hadrian’s time may have had some temptation to 
‘archaize’ in his work as copyist. Another Elean coin of 
Hadrian’s time *, mentioned by Stephani, shows the figure of 
Zeus Olympios ex face, in head body and pose free from all 
archaism and stiffness, and clad in the himation alone, while 
the left arm with the sceptre is held much freer of the body‘, 
and the whole form is more in accordance with the style of 
the Parthenon frieze. 

Another coin of Elis® of the same period, published and 
described by Overbeck, and regarded by him as contributing 
most to our knowledge of the Pheidian masterpiece, bears 


® Compte-Rendu, 1875, pp. 160-193, 
and 1876, Wachtrag, p. 224. 

» Overbeck would make out the 
drapery of the coin-figure to be a 
himation gathered up in a large fold 
over the left shoulder; but a very 
similar coin, also of Hadrian’s period, 
published by Friedlander (Monats- 
berichte d. Kin. Akad. d. Wiss. Berlin, 
1874, p. 500, No. 5; Overbeck, Gesch. 
ad. Griech. Plast, 1, p. 258, Fig. 56), 


shows the figure seated from left to 
right, clearly wearing the chiton. 

¢ Coin Pl. A Io. , 

4 The simpler pose of the sceptre on 
Overbeck’s coin, stiff as it may ap- 
pear, is yet perhaps more suitable for 
a temple-statue some forty feet in 
height. ° 

e In the Paris collection: Coin PI. 
A 9. 


134 GREEK RELIGION. [cHAP. | 


upon its obverse the head of Zeus Olympios crowned with 
the wild olive. The countenance, according to that writer, 
possesses not only a remarkable nobility of expression, but 
also just those characteristic qualities which, according to the 
record of Dio Chrysostom, belonged to the Zeus of Pheidias. 
But Overbeck himself notes with much surprise the severe 
and simple arrangement of the close-pressed hair, in which 
even traces of the archaic stiffness appear to survive. And he 
actually attributes to the coin a unique value in that it 
alone discloses to us the astonishing fact that Pheidias in 
this, the master-work of his life, chose to hamper himself by 
obedience to the archaic tradition. Even a@ priori this is 
incredible. There is no archaism in the great sculpture of 
the Parthenon gable or frieze. There was none in the coun- 
tenance of his Athena Parthenos, if we may accept the 
testimony—as we surely may—of the beautiful fragment of 
the marble head found recently on the Acropolis*. Now the 
Olympian Zeus is of later work than these, and the crowning 
achievement of the greatest religious sculpture of Greece ; 
and we should require more than the evidence of a doubtful 
coin to convince us that Pheidias, in this work, fell back into 
a stiffand conventional manner, of which he, and even sculp- 
tors before him, had long abandoned the tradition. But there 
are other than a@ priori objections. Overbeck and those who 
have accepted his view about the coin either do not deal at 
all, or deal very insufficiently, with the question how it was 
that people who looked on the face of the god at Olympia 
were reminded of the great words of Homer about the waving 
immortal locks, if the locks of Pheidias’ statue were trim and 
straight and stiff. And Stephani does well to ask what 
prompted the later sculptor of the Zeus-head from Otricoli 
to arrange the hair violently about the head like a lion’s 
mane, if there was no trace or hint of such treatment in the 
preceding work of that sculptor who fixed for all time the 
ideal of Zeus. This trait in the Otricoli head is an exaggera- 
tion, but it is an exaggeration of something that we know to 
have been found in the Pheidian original, and which does not 
* Described in Athena Monuments, p. 368, 


VI. ] THE STATUE OF ZEUS OLYMPIOS. 135 


appear at all in the head on Overbeck’s coin, about which no 
one would dream of saying ‘the artist has conceived the whole 
face from the hair and the eyebrows.’ The illusion has been 
strengthened by the very deceptive reproduction of the coin 
in Overbeck’s plates. The photograph and the cast of it 
by no means bear out his enthusiastic account, but show 
a countenance that is not very impressive either for its artistic 
beauty or its spiritual expression, and is earnest and solemn 
rather than mild and benign. The tendency towards archaism, 
which has been overstated but is discernible in these two late 
coin-types of Elis, may be due, as Stephani supposes, to an 
archaizing affectation of Hadrian’s period. 

Surely the fourth-century coins of Elis that bear upon them 
the head of Zeus crowned with the olive are of more value, as 
probably preserving something of the form and the spirit of 
the countenance of the great statue*. The luxuriant treatment 
of the hair is slightly indicated. on the coin by a few free 
locks, the eye and the eyebrows are dominating features of the 
whole type, and some slight expression proper to the friendly 
god appears on the half-opened lips. But, in spite of this 
series, there is much in the literary record which no coin has 
been found to illustrate. Still slighter is the aid from vase- 
painting, though the form of Zeus on a beautiful Kertsch vase 
of the fourth century may show us something of the Pheidian 
ideal’. The Melian marble head in the British Museum is 
a masterpiece of Greek religious sculpture, showing the high 
imagination and abiding influence of the Pheidian school, of 
which it is probably a late product. And more than most 
surviving works of antiquity it enables us to understand what 
Pheidias himself is made to say about the moral and ideal 
side of his art in the treatise of Dio Chrysostom. But the 
belief that this is an Asclepios and not a Zeus is slightly the 
more probable °. 

Excavation may yet bring to light some work that will tell 
us as much of the Zeus Olympios of Pheidias as the discoveries 


® Head, Hist. Num. p. 355, Fig. ment of the hair. 
234; vide Professor Gardner, 7ypes of » Compte-Rendu Atlas, 1859, Pl. I. 
Greek Coins, p. 137, who objects to e According to Cavvadias a very 
this coin as too archaistic in the treat- similar head has been found at Amorgos 


136 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP, 


of the last few years have told us about Athena Parthenos®. 
Meantime we must be content with the literary record and 
with the works of later artists who modified but never 
entirely deserted the great canonical type. His own pupils 
were doubtless content to follow in their master’s steps, and 
the statue of Zeus by Theokosmos of Megara was evidently 
inspired by his teacher’s master-work. 

The next generation, the younger Attic school, achieved 
great results in a certain sphere of religious sculpture, by 
working out the types of Poseidon, Apollo, Eros, Aphrodite, 
Dionysos, and the kindred divinities of the Dionysiac circle, 
the forms with which passion and sentiment could mingle ; 
but Pheidias’ hands left the ideal of Zeus perfected, and the art 
of the fourth century, finding for it no further legitimate 
development, worked at other themes. The Alexandrine age 
lost the power little by little of reproducing the forms of the 
religious sculpture in the elder manner and spirit ; for the 
spiritual and political beliefs from which the older sculpture 
had drawn its best material were undermined and changed, 
and the ideas to which the later religious imagination clave 
were chiefly drawn from the Dionysiac or Eleusinian mysteries, 
or from foreign beliefs of which the forms were vague and 
mystic. 

We can note the change in the Alexandrine type of features, 
whether the head carved is human or divine ; we see stamped 
upon them the mental qualities that dominated the period of 
the Diadochi and Epigoni, voluptuousness and a restlessness 
that showed itself in exaggerated act and sentiment > it is 
these qualities appearing in the representation of divinities 
that change the forms and enfeeble the tradition. In one 


by the side of a head of Hygieia; much to our knowledge of the Zeus 


Deltion Archaeol. 1888, April. Cf. also 
Athen. Mittheil. 1892, Dp: 

* The head in the Villa Albani which 
has recently been brought into notice 
by Amelung (Rémische Mittheil. 8. 
1893, p. 184), as derived from a Zeus- 
' original of Pheidias and as closely re- 
sembling the head on the Elean coin of 
Hadrian, does not seem to contribute 


Olympios. In certain important respects 
its treatment of the hair differs from that 
which we see on the coin. The type of 
the head appears to agree with the coin- 
type in so far as the length of the skull 
is considerably more than its breadth. 
But the reverse is true of the heads of 
the Parthenon and of others that belong 
to the Pheidian School, 











ale oe 
ne Seay bee 


vie] THE STATUE OF ZEUS OLYMPIOS. 137 


respect the type of Zeus suffered less than those of others ; 
for on the whole it was preserved free from any manifestly 
sensuous expression, which appears only in the later develop- 
ment of the type of Zeus Ammon. Yet it suffers from the 
excessive emphasis of one or the other part of the Pheidian 
ideal, and much that was essential was changed: in the place 
of calm and still majesty we see in the later type an imperious 
self-assertion ; in place of the reserved power, the possession 
of strength without effort, we find a self-consciousness and 
a straining force. The bright but clear intellectual expres- 
sion becomes an expression of overwrought thought. But 
at first the influence of the great tradition remains strong. 
The Zeus of Otricoli is a Roman work®, being of Carrara 
marble, but more perhaps than any existing work of ancient 
sculpture it retains the impress of the Pheidian original, in 
spite of the changed forms. The majesty and worth, the 
inner spirit of the old sculpture is still seen, and the mild 
benevolence of the Pheidian ideal is expressed in the half- 
opened mouth. But the head has no longer the Pheidian 
depth, the centre of the face is broader and more deeply 
marked than in that older type; the forms of the skull are 
less clear, because of the masses of the luxuriant hair, which 
forms a kind of framework overshadowing the face. Doubt- 
less also in the Pheidian work the hair was ample and flowing, 
but the rendering of it could hardly have been so exuberant 
as this, as we may judge from other monuments of the Pheidian 
style. The other feature in the original of which we have 
evidence was the strong marking of the brow, which dominated 
the whole expression of the face ; it is the exaggeration of this 
that we see in the violent depressions and swellings about the 
forehead and eyes of the head of Otricoli. In fact the fore- 
head has something of a leonine character, which appears also 
in the raised tufts of hair above; just as in many heads of 
Alexander we see the allusion to the lion type in the treat- 
ment of the forehead and hair. The sculptor of the Otricoll 
head has made a study from the masterpiece of Pheidias, and 
hence the forms are rendered so as to produce their proper 
PL IN bs. 


138 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


effect when seen from below and at a distance; but he has 
given an excessive emphasis to the expression of mental 
force, and he has not succeeded in charging the countenance 
with that profound inner life which we see in the Parthenon 
heads, and which we must suppose in the fullest measure for 
the face of the Pheidian Zeus. 

This one quality of Zeus, the quality of intellectual force, 
was the favourite theme of the Graeco-Roman sculptors : they 
could best understand this, and could express it easily enough 
by the excessive marking of the forehead and the deep lines 
_on the face. The head of the Hermitage in St. Petersburg 
is a striking instance of this lower and narrower conception ; 
the forehead is higher and the cheek much less broad than in 
the older type, the eyebrows are very protruding and swollen, 
and the eye-sockets very deep. The face, in fact, is ‘ patheti- 
cally’ treated, and the god has no longer the character of one 
elpnviKos Kal Tavtaxod mpaos, but wears an expression of restless 
over-anxious thought. The influence of the Pheidian work is 
still traceable, but from a distance?. 

In the later representations of the god in action, as for 
instance on the Pergamene frieze, we note the difference in the 
rendering of the torso. The sculptors aim chiefly at express- 
ing the overpowering force of the muscles: the strength is no 
longer ideal, but partly physical. 

The spirit and tendencies of the later Alexandrine age are 
most manifest in the monuments of Zeus Ammon. The ear- 
liest representation of him in Greece was the statue by Calamis, 
carved for the shrine erected by Pindar in Thebes. The 
type, apart from the ram’s horns, was no doubt purely Hellenic, 
and the rendering worthy of the ‘Lord of Olympus,’ as he is 
called in a fragment of Pindar; and a coin of Cyrene of 
nearly the same epoch shows us the head of Zeus Ammon 
in the style of the transitional period before Pheidias—an 
impressive countenance, cold and austere, with a powerful 
marking of the eyebrow. And no doubt the genuine and 
wholesome tradition of Greek sculpture lingered for some 


* Pl. Va. Vide my article in the > Head, Hast. Num. p. 728, Fig. 
Lellenic Journal, 1888, PP- 43-45. 328. 


FrLATE V 








Vi.) THE STATUE OF ZEUS OLYMPIOS. 139 


time in the monuments of this adopted worship. But later, 
at some point in the Alexandrine period, the hint of the 
animal from which the god had grown began to appear in 
the face, as this age loved to try experiments in blending the 
animal with the human traits. A marble bust at Naples® 
preserves the older ideal in the rendering of the forehead and 
other features, and the power and function of the oracular god 
is strikingly expressed ; but the long nose and the curving line 
of the extremity are traits borrowed from the ram, and the 
mouth is unmistakably sensual. More bizarre and unnatural 
in effect is the head of Zeus Ammon in Munich”, a work 
probably of later origin than the last; the hair of the beard 
resembles a wild beast’s fell, but it is not so much the fusion of 
the animal and divine forms as the incongruity of the expres- 
sion that marks this work as alien to those of the earlier style. 
The face seems to express a bitter merriment, a mingling of 
care and laughter ; it is neither Zeus nor Dionysos, although 
the sculptor was possibly thinking of a certain affinity between 
Ammon and the latter god. In both these heads we can trace 


_ the evil effects of the Alexandrine Oeoxpaoia, which tended to 


blur and falsify the outlines of the older types*®. 

But none of these later works or types prevailed over 
or obscured the influence of the Pheidian image upon the 
imagination of the classical world. The last witness to its 
enduring impressiveness is Porphyry, who in a passage of 
wild symbolism 4, in which he gives a mystic meaning to all 
the details of the typical representation of Zeus, evidently has 
before his mind the figure wrought by Pheidias. 


* Overbeck, X.-M/. Adlas, 1. Taf. 3, a work of Graeco-Egyptian art, but the 
No. 5. non-Hellenic character and the animal 
® Atlas, 1. 3)-9- nature of the god prevail; the body is 
* An interesting figure of Zeus a herme ending in a serpent; the head 
Ammon has been recently published has the ram’s horns and scarcely any 
(Zph. Arch. 1893, Mv. 12, 13, p. 187), expression. 
which shows the last result of this ten- 4 Ap. Euseb. Praep. Evang. 3. 9, 5. 
dency; it is probably from Alexandria, 


140 GREEK RELIGION. 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-VI. 


Crete: 

1a Zeus Kpnrayeyrns: C. I. Gr. 2554 in treaty between the Cretan 
cities, Latus and Olus: 6pvim rov Zijva tov Kpntoyevia kal trav “Hpar. 

b On certain coins struck under Titus, Overbeck, Kunst-My/h. 1, 
Miinztaf. 3. no. 19 with inscription. “Ah. Arch. 1893, Mw. 1. no. 8. 


¢ Zeus Kpyrayeyns in Carian inscriptions near Olymus, J@/. d. d. 
Inst. Ath. 1889, p. 395. 


2 Io. Lyd. de Mens. 4. pp. 83, 84 Bekk. ’Eparos 


ev tH Kpntn texOnva. déyet, KakeiOev Sia tov Kpdvov 







~ye pny tov ia 
perevexOnvar eis 
Ndfov: Jb. 6 KopivOios (Etundos) rov Ala ev rH Kab’ quads Avodia rexOjvac 
Bovtdera, ... &rt yap Kal viv mpos TO SutiKG THs Tapdiavdv mddews pepet THs 
dkpwpeias Tov Tuwdov Témos eotiv, ds madat pev oval Ards ‘Yeriov (mpoonyo- 
pevero). 

° Eurip. Kpjres frag. 475 a. Dind.: 

dyvov bé€ Biov reivopev €& ov 

Awds “Idaiov porns yevdpnv 

Kal vuxtimrddov Zaypéws Bpovras 

tds T @popdyous Sairas teheoas 

pntpi tT dpeia dadas avacxov 

kat Koupntrev 

Baxyos exdAnOnv dsowbeis. 
Cf. Strabo 468 ev d€ ri Kpnrn kal... ra rod Atos lepa idiws émeredeiro pier” 
dpyragpod Kal TowovT@Y TpomdAwv oto Tept Tov Aidvuady eiow of Tatupor. 

* Diod. Sic. 5. 77 Kara tiv Kpntnv év Kvoo@ vopupov && dpxaiwv etvat 
avepas Tas TedeTds TavTas Tact mapadidocba. Apoll, Bibl. 1. 1, § 6 yewa 
dé (‘Péa) ev dvtp@ ris Aikrns Ata kai Todrov pev Sidwat tpépeoOat Kovpyot re 
kai tais . . . Nuudas *Adpacteta te xa “Idy. Strabo 478 tev *Ereo- 
Kpytav omnpxev 7 IIpacos kal... évtavOa 76 Tov Arxtaiov Avs tepdv' Kal 
yap 7 Aikrn mAnoiov, 

® Zeus Ackratos in oath of alliance between Hierapytna and 
Gortyna, C. L. Gr. 2555 Opvio ... Zava ppdrpiov kat Zava Ackraiov. 


6a Zevs Badakpds év”Apyet, Clem. Alex. Sérom. cto es 
b Anthol. Lpzt. 7. 746 °Q8e péyas xetrai Zav, bv Aia KuxAnoKover, 


i 
sola di. 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-—VI. I4I 


7 Hygin. Fad. 139 Amalthea pueri (Iovis) nutrix eum in cunis in 
arbore suspendit, ut neque coelo neque terra neque mari inveniretur. 

8 Athen. 9. 376a iNeomei 6 Kutixnvos xat "AyafoxAjjs 6 Banos 
pubevovow ev Kpyrn yeveo Bat Tv Tov Avos rexvoow emt ths Aixtns, ev y Kat 
dméppnros yiverar Ovoia, éyerar yap os dpa Au Ondrjv wnécxev bs Kai TO 
odetépm ypvop@ Tepiorxvevoa, Tov kvu(nopov tov Bpédeos, avendioroy Trois 
mapiovow eride. Aid tmdvres TO (ov ToOUTO TeploemTov add Kal ovK ay, 
not, Tov Kpedv SaicawwTo. TIpaicwor S€ kat iepa peCovow bi, Kal avty 


‘ > - ¢ , , 
mpoteAns avtois 7) Ovoia vevopiorat. 


® Anth, 9. 645: 
Sdpdies,  Avdav eEoxds eps modis™ 
pdptus éyo mpatn yevopny Ards ov yap edeyxetv 
AdOpiov via “Pens AOcdov nyerepys. 
ait Kai Bpopio yevopny tpodds. 

10 Paus. 8. 38, 2 xopa Té €oTW EV TO Avkaiw Kpntea KaXoupeyn, . . - 
Kat THY Kpntny évOa 6 Kpntav exer Aoyos Tpapnvat Ala TO xwpioy touto etvat 
kal ov tiv vagov audioByrovow oi “Apkddes. 

Na Strabo 387 Atyov S€ ixavds vixeirat, irropovor dé é€vravOa tov Ata 
im aiyos avatpapnvat. 

b Paus. 7. 24, 4 €oTe de kat G@Ada aad dydApata xaAKov TeTotn- 
para, Zevs Te HAtkiav muis Kat “Hpakdjs, ovde obTos €xov mw yevera, “AyeAada 
réxyn Tov "Apyetov. TovToIs KaTa Eros cepa sabia yivovrat kal €xaTepa TaV 
dyapdrey emi tais oikiais péver TOU iepoupevov, ta Oe ett madaidrepa Tr POeKe- 


KptTo €kK TOV maidwv iepacba To Aut 6 vik@v KaddXet, 


12 Strabo 648 7 marpis (Magnesia on the Maeander) & ixavas atrov 
nbénoe moppupay evdvcaca iepapevoy TOU cwotrdddos Avis. Pindar O/. 5. 40: 
Sorip wiwepes Zev, Kpdmdv re vaiwy Adpov 
ryav 7 "Addedv evpd peovr’ “Idaidy Te cepvoyv avTpov. 
18 Zeus Tovaios on coins of Tralles of Imperial period, Hest. Num. 
P: 555+ 
Dodona. 
m Ji 16.233: 
Zed ava, Awdwvaie, Meducyixé, THAGH vatwr, 
Awdarvns pedeav dvoxepépov, audi de DedAot 
got vaiovo’ inopirar avumtérodes Xapatevvat. 
b Od. 14. 327: 
rov & és Awddrvny haro Bnpevar, dppa Deoio 
—ék Spvds tyixdporo Aids Bovdny €makovcat. 


142 GREEK RELIGION. 


¢ Hesiod, ap. Strabo, p. 328 Awdauny dyydv re TMedaoyav edpavov 
jev: Lb. Awddvyn roivey ro pév madaidy imd Ocompwrois Hv Kai Td pos 6 
Tépapos 7) Tudpos ... vf @ keirat TO iepdy . . . amd d€ Tov Topdpov tovs Und 
“a wn 4 € , “a , , ‘ Xr 6n 
Tov ToUTOD Aeyopevous Umodnras Tov Aids . , . TOoMovpous act A€ExOnvat. 
dt Od. 56. 403: . 
ei pév K aivnowor Avos peyddoro Oemiores (v.01. ropodpor) 
aurés Te KTevew Tovs T GAdouvs mdvtas avate, 
> Wed > > ~ , if a 
ei 5€ K dmotpwraot Geol, mavoacGa avwya. 
e Strabo 329 kar dpxas pev ovv avdpes Hoav of mpodnrevovres’ vVoTepoy 
& amedelxyOnoav tpeis ypaia, emedy Kat ovvvavs TH Aut mpocanedeixOn kai 7 
Atovn. 
f Hesiod, apf. Soph. Trach. 1169 Schol. ri d€ Zevs epidrnoe kal dv 
xpynornprov eivar tipvoy avOpwmo.s, vaiev & ev mvOueu hnyyov, evOev emtyOovrioe 
pavrnia wavra pépovrat, 


& Steph. Byz. s.v. Awdavn’ Sovidas &€ gyno Syyavaiov Atds tepov eivar év 
GcooaNia. 


h Aesch. Prom. Vine. 829: 
emel yap ndOes mpds Modoooa yameda 
\ bed , ? > ‘ U a 
THY aimuveroy T andi Awdeavny, wa 
a Lele 4 > > ‘ A , 
pavteta Oakéds +t eoTi Geaompwrov Auds, 
tépas T amistov, ai mpoonyopot Spves. 
i Soph. Trach. 169: 
Towavr’ edppate mods Oewy ecipappéva 
€ A A A 27Qr £ 
as THY tadaayv dnyov avdjnoat wore 


Awdanu Sicoav €x medeiddov ey. 


k Paus. 10. 12, 10 rds HeAecddas .. . A€yovor, Kal Goat yuvatkev mporas 
Tade Ta En Zevs Hv, Zeds €ori, Zeds Egoerar’ @ peyddre Zev, Ta Kaprovs 


26 A ‘ , a 
aviet, 61d KAngeTe parepa yaar, 


1 Strabo 7. Frag. 1 tows S€ twa mrnow ai tpeis wepicrepal érérovro 
> , > ec (a 4 , , A ‘ ‘ A A 
eEatperov, €& dv ai i€perat mapatnpovpevat mpoebeanifov, act dé kat Kara Thy 
tav Modorray Kai Ocompwtav yA@trav tas ypaias medias KadeicOat Kal Tovs 
yépovtas meXiovs’ Kal tows otk dpvea joav ai Opvdovpevat TeAcuddes, GAda 
yuvaikes ypatat rpeis mept TO iepov cxoAaLove'at, 

m Dion. Halic. Hirst. Rom. 1. 14 (rd mapa Awdavaiors pvbodoyovpevor) 
x, A ‘ rps Y c a , ‘ a , 
€xei prev emi Opvos iepas xabeCopern mepiotepa Oeomiwdeiv edéyero, 

n Herod. 2. 55 rade S€ Awdwvaiwv paclv ai mpopavties’ .. . iLopevny S€ 
puv (tiv medecdda) ent hyydv adrdagacba hava avOpannin, ws xpeav cin 
pavtnioy avtébr Avs yeverba, Cf. 54-56. 


Liv ae 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV—VI. 143 


© Ephorus, ap. Strabo, p. 402 &x 8€ rovTwy Bowwrois pdvors avdpas 
mpobeorivew ev Awdavn. 


P Cic. de Divin. 1. 76 maximum vero illud portentum isdem Spar- 
tiatis fuit, quod, cum oraculum ab Iove Dodonaeo petivissent de 
victoria sciscitantes, legatique vas illud, in quo inerant sortes, conloca- 
vissent, simia... sortes... disturbavit.... 


a Serv. Aen. 3. 466 (Dodona) ubi Iovi et Veneri templum a veteribus 
fuerat consecratum. Circa hoc templum quercus immanis fuisse dicitur, 
ex cuius radicibus fons manabat, qui suo murmure instinctu deorum 
diversis oracula reddebat ; quae murmura anus Pelias interpretata... 
narratur et aliter fabula: Iupiter quondam Hebae filiae tribuit duas 
columbas humanam vocem edentes, quarum altera provolavit in 
Dodonae glandiferam silvam. 


¥ Cic. de Div. 1. 95 (Lacedaemonii) de rebus maioribus semper aut 
Delphis oraclum aut ab Hammone aut a Dodona petebant. Cf. Plutarch, 
Lisan. 


8 Paus. 8. 11, 12 AOnvaiows b€ parrevpa ex Awda@rns SexeAtav nrOev oikicew 
.. . of 8€ od cwpPpovncarres TO elpnuevoy €s TE UrEpopious oOTpaTeias TponyOnaav 


\ > A ’ , 
Kal €s TOY Supakogiwy TrO\Epov. 


UJ 7. € 
t Demosth. cara Med. p. 531 Tas pavteias, ev ais amdcats avypnyévov 
evpynoere TH TOAEL Opolws ex AeAPav Kai ex Awdavrns, xdpovs iotavac: Lb, ’Ex 
Ada avreia’ to Snuw To AOnvaiwv 6 Tov Ais onpaiver aiperov 
wdavns pavteia’ TO Onpw TE nv nu . . aiperovs 
, , ‘ > , * , A ft Led » ~ 2 , 
mépmew Kedever Oewpovs evvea, Kai Tovtous dia Taxéwv TO Ai TH Ev Towap@ 
- ~ a , > cad “~ cal 
tpeis Bots Kal mpods éxdot@ Bot dvo ols, TH bé€ Acmvy Boiv Kadduepeiv, Cf. 


Fails. Leg. p. 436. 


u Schol. 7/7. 16. 233 6 6€ Awdwruios kai vaios* idpnra yap Ta exet 
xepia, 

v C. I. Gr. 2909 uknoas Naa ra ev Awdory: cf. inscription from 
Tegea, Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1893, p. 15. Bekker, Anecdofa 1, p. 285 


~ , + cr 
Naiov Auds* 6 vads tod Atds, ds ev And, Naiov Avs kaXeirat, 


Ww Carapanos, Dodone, pl. 34. 5: Collitz, Dralect-Inschrifien 1562 
émikowavrat Kopkupaion TO Ai to Nai cal 7@ Ar@vg tim Ka Oedy 7} poor 
Ovovres Kai evydpevot KaANoTA Kat GpioTa Kai viv Kal els TOv EmettTa ypdvoy 
Fowéouer, Carapanos, pl. 34. 4: Collitz 1563 eémxowayvrar tot Kopkvu- 
ae a ‘ , \ a ’ = , “~ Gas aD J , ‘ > , ; 
patio. T@ Al Nd@ kat 7G Atwvg" rin ka Oedv f Npo@wv Ovortes kai edxdpevot 


c ad >; vs > , 
dpovootey ent taryabdv. 


x C.I.A. 1. 34 rod Bopot rhs Atwyns: inscription of fifth century B.c. 
Cf. 2b. 3. 333. 


144 GREEK RELIGION. 


4a Zeus Mavoppaios: Simonides, Bergk 144: 
ovUT@ ToL ped€a Tavad ToT kKiova pakpov 
joo, mavoppaie Zyvi pévovo’ iepa. 
b 71. 8. 249: 
map Se Ads Baud mepixadréi KdBBadre veBpdr, 
évba travoppaia Znvi péCeoxoy *Axarot, 
¢ Ov. Met. 11. 190 Ara Panomphaeo vetus est sacrata Tonanti. 


a Inscription from Stratonicea in Caria (Roman period), Le Bas- 
Waddington, Voyage Archéol. tom. 3. no. 515 Aut ‘¥wiore kai ’Ayadd 
"AyyéA@ KAavdios .. . tmép owrnpias ... xapiotnpiov. 

BTL 93.933 

pera S€ odiow "Oooa dedner . . . Atos ayyedos. 

*6 Zeus-oracle at Olympia: @ Strabo 353 rv & emupaveav (ro icpor) 
éoxev €& dpyns pev Oia TO pavretov Tod OAvpmiov Ards’ exetvou & éxrerpOevros 

x PAs p 
ovdev Hrrov cuvepetvev 7) SdEa TOV iepod. 

b Xenoph. Hell. 4. 7 ’Aynotrods . . . €AOwv eis *OAvpriay Kai ypy- 
atnptatsuevos erepwta tov Gedy, et doiws dy Exor ait pn Sexopev@ ras omovdas 
Tay ‘Apyelov. 

¢ Pind. Ol. 6. 6 Bod re parrelo rapias Aws ev Mica: cf. Il. 
119-120. 

7 Zeus Syytos with Athena @nyia at Erythrae: inscription published 
in BBA, Move. Spzvpy. 1873, no. 108-109; Kev. Arch. 1877, p. 107. 

18 Hesych. Eddnuios' 6 Zebds ev AéoBwo: cf. Paus. 1. 17, I oice 
(AOnvaiois) Bopds €ore kal Bhyns. 

19a Zeus Tepdorios, Lucian, 77m. 41 & Zev tepdorie . . . wdOev rocovrov 
xpvalop ; 

b Eph. Arch. 1892, p. 58, inscription near Gytheum, Mojpa Aus 
Tepaoriov, referring to the territory of the temple. 

7° Strabo 414 AcBadera & eotiv dérov Ais Tpodwvriov pavreiov tdpurat. 
xXdopatos Umovépov KardBacw exov, kataBaiver & aitos 6 ypnatnptaCopevos. 

21 Zeus Snparéos: Paus. 1. 32, 2 ev Udpync. . . Bopos Sypadr€ou Acds. 

7 Zeus Avxaios: #Paus. 8. 2, 1 (Avkaiwy) ... Avxdcovpav . . . modw 
@kioev ev TH Oper TH Avkaiw kat Ala avdpace Avxaioy kat dydva Onke AvKaca, 

b Id. 8. 38, 6 répevis ear év aire (t@ Sper) Avkaiov Ais, €rodos dé od« 
€otw a’t@ avOparois* . . . éoedOdvta avaykn Taoa adtov émavtTod mpdow pi} 
Bidva’ Kai rdde Ere eéyero Ta evTds Tov Tepévous yevdpeva Guolws mavTa Kal 


6 , <5 6 , > , , »” V9 8 care -~ >? s 
npta kat avOpwmovs ov mapexeoGa oKiav.. . . €ott O€ emi TH akpa TH avwTdrw 


-. or oe ee 
gE 


PY by S Let he ae 
Pr ei 


ite 
mis 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV_VI. 145 


Tov dpous yijs xGpa, Ads Tov Avkatov Boyds, kal 4 WeAomdvynoos Ta Tod 
3 age ea > “ , " 2% , a a ~ , ‘ , 
€oTiv am avTov guvonTos’ . . . emt TovTov TOU Bwpmod TH Avkaiw Avi Odovory 
> 2? , = a ‘ ” §. 3 ‘ , €gr > bd A" € 
€v anoppnt@’ Tmodumpaypovnaa S€ od yor Ta és THY Bvaiay Adv jy, exeT@ O€ ws 
exer kal os Exyxer €€ dpyiis. Cf. Polybius 16. 12, quoting Theopompus. 
© Paus. 8. 38, 3 rijs d€ ‘Ayvois 4 év Td per T@ Avkai@ try)... iv Oe 6 
> \ , $2 , a e€ \ a , \ , 
auxHOs Xpovov emexn Todvy, . . . THrikadTa 6 lepets Tov Avkaiov Auws mpocevéd- 
pevos €s TO Vdwp, kai Ovoas .. . Kabinor Spuds Kraddy emumodis Kai odk es Bdbos 
a Ae > , .Y a of 4 >, iy > Cal ae 
THs THYyNS* avaxwnOevros Sé Tod Vdatos aveow dydvs eorxvia 6plyAn. 
d Strabo 388 riparas 8 émt puxpdv Kat 7d rod Avkaiov Auds iepdv Kata TO 
Avxawoy dpos. 


© Paus. 8. 53, 11 &k Teyéas dé idvre és thy Aakovkny €ott... Bopos... 
Avkaiov Aids. 


f Td. 8. 30, 2 (Megalopolis) memoinraé ogiow ayopa’ tepiBoros dé éoruv 
€v ravtn Aidwy Kal iepdv Aveaiov Aids. %aodos 8 és abd otk fort Th yap evros 
> 4 , ‘ , > a A ‘ , , ee Yi, ‘ . re 
€ort 69 ovvorra, Bopoi ré elo Tov Oeod Kat tpdmetat Svo Kai derot Tais TparreCats 
ior, 

& Id. 8. 2, 3 Avedwy dé émi rov Bopdy rod Avkaiov Atws Bpédos nreyev 
> ee » ear A , %.. t Te ~ A A 7” ‘ ? \ 
avOporov Kai vce Td Bpéos, kai ~omeicev emi roo Bopod TO aiva, kat avtov 
avrixa eri 7H Ovoia yevéoOar Avxov Ghaciv dvyti dvOporov. .. . § 6 A€yovar yap 

‘ Lg , o beer 2 > > , , 4 > ae bod , Lea) 
81) ws Avkdovos vorepov dei tis €& advOpdmov NvKos yevotro emt tH Ovaoia Tov 
Avkatou Avs, yivortro S¢ otk és Gmavta tov Blov’ émére be ein AvKos, ef pev 

- > , > , a »” , ‘ > ay > ww 
Kpeav ardaxoito avOpwriver, votepov érer Sexdt haciv adirov adis dvOpwrov 
€€ AvKou yiverOa, yevodpevor Sé és del pévew Onpiov. Apollod. 3, ch. 8, § 5 
oi d€ (the sons of Lycaon) airév (Ziva) emi £evia kadécavtes obdgartes eva 
TaY emtxwpiwy traida, Tois iepois Ta ToUTOU omAayxva ovvavapigartes, mapebecay. 

‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ , 9<F 
» ++ Zevs d€ ryv pev rpdnelav avérpewer, 
h Clem. Alex. Protrepi. p. 31 Pp iyvde yap 6 Oeds, as apa Avkdwv 6 
ny Dol ’ P 
*Apkas 6 éotidtwp airod tov maida kataopagus tov avrov ... mapabein dwov 
TO Ati, 

. . - ‘ > 

1 Plato, Min. p. 315 c piv pev od vdpos eorw avOpa@movs Ovew ddrAr 
dvéotov. . . . kal pr) Ore BdpBapor avOpwror hav ddots vomois xpa@vrat, aAdAa 


> ‘ - -~ oa , 
kal of €v 7H Avkaia obro. Kai of rod "Adpavros &xyovor olas bvaias Ovovow 


"EdAnves dvtes. 


k Porph. De Ads? 2. 27 dn’ apxjs pev yap al trav Kaprav eyivovto rois 
Bevis Ovoia... . ad’ ob PExpt TOU viv ovK év "Apxadia pdvov Tois Avkaioss ... 
dvOpwnobvrotew : from Theophrastus, vide Bernay’s Theoph. p. 188. 

1 Aug. De Civ. Det, bk. 18. ch. 17 (Varro) commemorat alia non 
minus incredibilia . . . de Arcadibus, qui sorte ducti transnatabant 
quoddam stagnum, atque ibi convertebantur in lupos. Cf. Pliny, 
8. 34, 8. 

VOL. I. L 


146 GREEK RELIGION. 


m Plut. Caes. 61 ) trav Aumepkariwy éoptn, mEpt fs modXol ypaovow, ws 
a P 1) ? 
Tomevav TO madadv ely, Kai TL Kal TpoonKer Tois "Apkadikois Avkaiots. 

n Jd. Quaest. Graec. p. 300 A dia ti Tovs €s TO Avkatoy eioeAOdvtas 
éxovolws katadevovow of Apkddes ; av & im dyvoias, eis "EXevOepas arooreh- 
ovow. .. . Kal yap €Aados 6 euBas Kadeirat. 

Sy a “ > a“ 

© Paus. 5.5, 3 and 5 eOédovor pev 51 of Aewpearat potpa evar rev “Apkador, 

... yeveobar S€ oi Aerpedral ohiow edeyov ev TH méder Aevkaiov Atos vadv kai 
¥, P d 


Avkovpyou rapov tov ’A)éov. 


3 Zeus Avkwpeios, Steph. Byz. s. v. Avewpeta kopn év Aehoois. €oTe Kat 
Avkapeios Zebs. Cf. Paus. 10. 6, 2: Lucian, 77m. 3. 


24 Human sacrifices to Zeus "Idepdrns, Clem. Alex. Pro/repi. p. 36 
P Apiotopévns yoov 6 Meaonmos tO “WOwpnty Au rtpraxocious aneopage. 
Cf. zb¢d. Avktiovs yap—Kpntav dé €Ovos cio ovror— Avtikreldns €v vdarots 
dropaivera avOpomovs amoapadrrew TH Att. 

25 Zeus Aadvorios, Herod. 7. 197 at Alus, ek Oeompomiov *Axatol mpo- 
ribeiou Trois éxeivov ('A@dpavros) dmoydvourw daéOhovs rowovad.. os dv 7 TOU 
yéveos rovTov mpeoBitaros, TovT@ émitagavres epycoOar Tov mputavniov, avrot 
pudakas éxovor ... hy S€ €€dAOy, ok EoTe dkws EFevoe mpiv 7) OvoeoOar perAn : 
cf. Lactant. Znsh. 1. 21 Apud Cyprios humanam hostiam Iovi Teucrus 
immolavit, idque sacrificium posteris tradidit, quod est nuper, Hadri- 
ano imperante, sublatum. 


%a Zeus AtOpios, Orpdvos, pseudo-Arist. De Aundo, p. 401 a. 16 
dotpamaids te kai Bpovraios Kai alOpios Kal aidépios Kepavvids Te Kai UéTLOS .. 
ka\etrat, 

b Herod. 6. 56 Tépea dé 84 rade roicr Baotetou Zraprijrar Sedoxacr’ 


id , . 
ipwatvas Ovo, Aids te AakeSaipovos kai Atos Ovpariov. 


© Zeus Aiéépios, Ampelius 9 loves fuere tres, primus in Arcadia, 
Aetheris filius cui etiam Aetherius cognomen fuit; hic primum solem 
procreavit: cf. Eurip. rag. 869 ddd’ aidnp ce riktes kdpa, Zeds Os 
avOparots dvopdcerat. 

27a Zeus ‘Apdpwos, Collitz, Déalect.-Inschrifien 1634 "Opvio Aia ‘Apa- 
ptov kai ’AOdvav ‘Apapiav kat Adpodirny kai tovs Beovs mdvtas, the Achaean 
federation-oath: vide Foucart, Revue Archéol. 1876, p. 96. 

b Strabo 387 Alyéov 8 orl... Kat 7d Tod Avds dAcos 7d ‘Apdptoy, 
mov curyiecay of "Axyatol Bovdevospevor wept tv kowov: cf. 385. Polyb. 
2. 39, 6 Kporwmarar SvBapirar KavAwnditar mperov pev améderEav Auos ‘Opo- 
piov Kowov lepdv Kai rémov, €v @ tds Te ouvddous Kal Ta diaBovdALa ovverédouv : 
cf. zd. 5. 93 TO ‘Opdpov near Aegium. 

28a Zeus Panamerios or Panamaros, C. /. Gr. 2715® inscr. from 


Cae) pre Seeey aoe 


Fee a ey Pe 


he 
thas 
a" 
re 
ot, ‘ 
fe 
~ 
7 
Ss 
; - 


RE hn ee ey ay 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV_VI. 147 


Stratonicea, rév peyiorav beady Aws Tov Tlavnpepiov kai “Exdrns (? time of 
Tiberius). 

> C.L. Gr. 2717: Le Bas-Waddington, Asce Mineure 518 Xpnorn- 
prov Ards Tlaynpepiov. ‘H médis épword... ef emiatnoovrat of adirnpioe BapBapor 
TH mode HTH XOpa eveorar eres, inscr. from Stratonicea in reign of Vale- 
rian or Gallienos, 24. 2719 inscr. on base of statue, Titov ®\aBiov 
» +. leparevoavtos tod Aws rod Havapudpov ev ‘Hpaiows : cf, 2720, 2721. 


© Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1884, pp. 373-391; 1888, pp. 82-104; 
1891, pp. 169-209, inscriptions nearly all of the Roman period, illus- 
trating the worship of Zeus Panamaros and Hera. 


d Zeus Panamaros connected with Zeus Narasos and Zeus AwvSapyos : 
vide inscription Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1888, pp- 83, 86, go, titles probably 
from villages near Stratonicea. 


*a Zeus Helios: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1882, p- 191, archaic inscrip- 
tion from Amorgus; cf. C. Z. Gr. 4604: Anth. Pal. 7. 85. 


b Zeus Savaios : ? cult-title, Eur. Rhes. ane: 
av pow Zed’s 6 Pavaios 


Kes Sippevav Bartaior odors. 


*° Zeus Aorépios : Corp. script. hist. Byzant. Cedrenus t, p. 217 "Aorepio 
Aui ev Toprivn médeu Ovodoowr (Mevedaos) : cf. Lycophron 1299-1301 : Z7. 
Mag. P. 710, 28 6 d€ ’Avtipayos ceipwa rov Aia &pn, did Td aor pov, 

* Zeus Myuriapos : on Lydian inscriptions of late period, C. J. Gr: 
3438, 3439. 

* Zeus Avayrip : on inscription from Thoricus, épos fepod Aids avavri- 
pos, Mitt. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1890, p. 443. 


8a Zeus “OuSpios: on Hymettus, Paus. 1. 32, 2 Bopot cai ’OuBpiov 
Atos kai ’AmddXwvds ciot Mpoowiou . . . 

b On Parnes, 23. fore 8€ ev 7) UldpynOe kat addos Bapds, Ovovor 8é 
én’ avrod tére pev “OuBpiov tore dé "Annjpiov Kadodvtes Alia. Cf. Marc. 
Antonin. ray eis éaurdy 5, 7 doov, & ite Zev, Kata tis dpovpas trav 


2 a ’ 
AOnvaiay kai rev rediov. 


© C. I. Gr. 2374, Parian Chronicle 6 AevxaAlav rovs 6uBpous epvyey 
€k Avkwpeias cis.’AOnvas mpos Kpavaov kat rod Aws tov ’OuBpiov ’Amnyiov 
iSpicaro kal ra cwrnpia Ovcev. 
4 Lycophron Cass. 160 10d Znvi SaitpevOevros OpBpio Scuas. 
** Zeus ‘Yéros : ® at Argos, Paus. 2. 19, 7 Bopds ‘Yeriov Auds. 
b On Mount Arachnaeum, between Argos and Epidaurus, 7d. 2. 
L2 


148 GREEK RELIGION. 


25, 10 Bapot dé elow ev aire Aids te kal "Hpas’ Senoav dy8pov shiow 
evtavéa Ovovct. 

c At Lebadea: Paus. 9. 39, 4 €v 7 dAce: Tpopeviov .. . Zevs “Yérwos ev 
vralOpo. 

d At Cos: Ross, Znscr. Inéd. 2. 175 1d kowdy tev cvpmopevopEerav 
map Ala ‘Yérwv. Cf. Paton and Hicks, Zuscriptions of Cos, No. 382. 


85 Zeus "Ikuaios in Ceos: Apoll. Rhod. 2. 524 (Aristaeus) kat Popoy 
roinoe péyav Avds Ikpaioo tepd 1° ed eppekev ev otpeow aorept Keiv Zerpic 
aire te Kpovidy Aud: roio & éxnre yatav émupvyovow eérnoa é€k Atos adpat 
pata tecoapdkovra: cf. Clem. Alex. Strom. p. 753 P- 

6 Zeus Laveddguos and ’Adéows: Paus. 1. 44, 9 in the Megarid, 
eri tod Bpous TH akpa Acs €orw Adeotou Kaovpévov vads' haci b€ emt row 
cupBdvros moré Tois"EAAnow adxpod Ovcavros Aiakod Kara dn Te Adyov TO 
TlaveAAnvio Avi év Alyivy ... Kopicavta d€ adeivat, Kat dua totro ’Adectov 
kareioba tov Ala: cf. 2. 29, 8 and Clem. Alex. Strom. 753 P. 

87 Alcman in Plut. 940 B Avs 6vydrnp, “Epoa, kai Sehavas. 


8a Zeus Ovpos: Arrian Perzpl. 27; Mill. Geogr. Graec. Min. 1, 
P. 401 é« S€ Kuavéwy emi 76 ‘Iepdv tov Aids rod Ovpiov, ivarep TO oTdpa TOU 
Idvrov, orddir rexoapdkovra. Cf. Demosth. mpos Aemr. § 36 ; Cics Verr: 
4. 57. Vide other references collected by Boeckh, C. 1 Gr. 2, 
p- 975. Cf. 2. 3797 inscrip. found near Chalcedon, Odpiov ex mpdpyns 
ris OOnynthpa Kadeir@ Ziva on base of statue. 

b Zeus Evdveyos: at Sparta, Paus. 3. 13, 8 Acds iepdv eotw Evavepov. 

8° Zeus Kepatvmos: ®at Olympia, Paus. 5. 14, 7 €vOa d€ Tijs oikias ta 
Gepédud ote tH Olvopdov, dvo0 évradOa eior Bopol, Ards Te “Epkeiov .. . TO de 
Kepavvi Aut dorepov emoujravro, éyol Soxeiv, Bapdy, or’ €s Tov Oivoudou tiv 
olkiay Katéoknev 6 Kepauvos. 

b Altar at Pergamon, Adi Kepavrio, Conze, Ergebnisse des Ausgra- 
bungen zu Pergamon, p. 78. 


¢ In Cyprus, C. Z. Gr. 2641 Ati Kepavvig ’Adpodirn dedication of 
Imperial period. 


d In Lydia, 3446, late period. 

e Near Palmyra, 4501, dedication in Trajan’s reign. 
f Near Damascus, 4520. 

g Altar on the Alban Mount, Att Kepavvip, 5930. 


h On coins of Seleucia of the Imperial period, Head, Hzs#. Mum. 
p. 661. 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-—VI. 149 


i Zeus KepavyoBddos at Tegea: C. L. Gr. 1513 €&v dyaor trois *OAupTi- 
akois TO peylat@ Kai KepavvoBdrm Aut dvareOevévors, fourth century B.C. 


k Zeus ’Autpamaios: Rev. Arch. 1854", p. 49; at Antandros ofe 7H 
Bovryn kat ro Syup Avtavdpiov orepavacat Tohveparny . . . TH TpoTn THS 
éopris Aws "Aorpamaiov. At Athens, Strabo 404 9 é€oxdpa Tov * Aotpa- 
matiov Atds. 

1 Zeus Bpovrav: Milt. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1888, p. 235 Mnvodwpos 
dpxtepeds Ait Bpovravte kai "Aotpanrovvte edxqv, Inscription of Laodicea 
published by Ramsay ; cf. Hell. Journ. 1884, p. 256: Gi di GE Bore: 
inscription from Dorylaeum in Phrygia, Aud Bpovréyre evxnv, late 
period; cf. 3817 b 23., 3819 2. In Galatia 4135, late period. 


m Zeus karaBdrns at Olympia: Paus. 5. 14, 10 Tov d€ kxaraiBatov 
Awds mpoBéBAnrar pév mavtaxydbev mpd Tod Bwpod Ppdypa. €ott O€ mpos TH 
Rope tO dnd tis Téppas tO peydry. At Athens, inscription found on 
Acropolis, Delt. Arch. 1890, p. 144: at Nauplia, Mitt. d. ad. Inst. 
Ath. 1890, p. 233 Atos Kparai8ara, 

n Zeus Képavyos: inscription from Mantinea, AlOS KEPAYNO, Bull. 
de Corr. Hell. 18478, p. 515: 

© émdrvow: Pollux g. 41 odrws advopdgero eis a karaoknere Bedos €& 
ovpavod . . . kal Tov Ala Tov em avT@ kata(t)Barnv. Cf. Polemon, Frag. 93. 

p Zeus Karmeras: Paus. 3. 22, 1 TvOiou d¢ rpeis pedduora dméxer oradious 
dpyds dibos* "Opéotny héyovor kabecOevta em’ avrov mavoacba THs pavias’ Ova 
roiro 6 hibos dvopdabn Ze’s Kanna@ras kata yAoooar ty Awpida. 

40 Zeus, a maritime god: Zep at the Laconian Epidaurus, Paus. 
3. 23, 10 mpd Tod Atmévos (vads) Atds émik\nrw Zwrnpos. In Athens, 
C. I. A. 2. 471 Auowrnpra festival in the Peiraeeus, vide ue, 


b Zeus "AnoBarnpios: inscription of Roman period at Methana, Avws_ 


‘éxoBarnplov Rev. Arch. 1864, p. 66. Cf. Arrian, Hxp. Alex. 1. 11, 7 


héyouow .. . (AdeEdvSpov) Bwpovs iSpvodcba Gbev te €oTrddn ex THs Evpwmns 
kal Grou e&€Bn tis "Actas Aws amoBarnpiov. 

© Zeus Amevooxdmos: Callim. Prag, 114 moti re Zavos ixvevpat Aupevo- 
oKOrrov. 

d Zeus Bods: Anth. Pal. Ana/h. 164 TAave@ cai Nnpije kai ‘Ivoi cat 
MeAtképry Kat Budi Kpovidy cat Sapobpags Geois. 

e Zeus ’EvdAws : Proclus, Plat. Cra/. 88 6 8€ devrepos Svadixas Kadeirat 
Zebs *Evdduos kat Mocedav. Paus. 2. 24, 4 Aioxvdos b€ 6 Evopiwvos xahet 
Aia kai rov €v Oadagan. 


41 Znvo-Iocedov in Caria: Athenae. p. 42 a Tov €v Kapia (orapév) map’ 


150 GREEK RELIGION. 


© Znvorocedavos iepdy eort (from Theophrastus) ; cf. 337 c, d. Vide 
Mitt. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1890, p. 260 Sippaxos Taiov Wrwrivoy Suppdxov 
vids iepeds Atos “Ocoy@ Znvorocedavos: cf, 1° b, 

“ Zeus as god of vegetation: Zeus Kapzoddrns at Prymnesus in 
Phrygia; inscription published by Ramsay in Mz#. d. d. deutsch. Inst. 
Ath. 7. p. 135 Aut peylor@ Kaprodérn edyapornpiov. 

a Cf. Zeus ’Acxpaios, Plut. Animine an corp. aff. sint pejor. p. 502 A 
“Aokpaio Ati Avdiov kaprav drapxas pépovres: Hesych. “Acxpa’ Spis dikapros. 

*° Zeus ’Emxdpmos in Euboea, Hesych. s.v. Zeds év E’Boia. Cf. late 
inscription from Paphlagonia, Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1889, p. 310 Ad 
emikaprrio evxns xapwy. 

* Zeus "Emdorns at Mantineia, Paus. 8. 9, 2 Mavrwetor 8€ éote Kab 
ahha iepa 7d pev Swrnpos Aids 7d dé ’EmiSwrov kadoupévov. 


*° Zeus ’Omwpevs at Acraephia: Mitt. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1884, p. 8, archaic 
inscription, 76 Adi 7 "Omepe: cf. Zeus "Evderdpos, ' to chapter 1. 

* Zeus Teopyds in Athens: C. L.A. 3. 77, vide ¥84, Cf. Roberts, 
Marm. Oxon. 21. 


*7 Zeus Mépwos, Soph. Oed. Col. 704: 

6 yap elaaevy épav Kixdos 
Aevooes mv Mopiov Atds. 

** Zeus Néuwos, Archytae Frag.: Mullach. Frag. Phil. Graec. 1, 
Pp. 561 Zevs Népuos kai Neunios xadéera. Apoll. Duscol. § 13 & ‘AX 
Kapvaco@ Ovatas twos ouvredovpévns dyeAnv aiyav ayecOar mpd Tod iepov 

. mpoBaivery piav atya bm pndevds ayopévny Kal mpooépyerbat TO Bove, 
tov € lepéa NaBdpevov airs Kaddepeiv (cf. £7. Mag. s.v. Atyopayos 6 Zevs, 
ws mapa Nixavop@ év Onprakois). 

49 Zeus Svkdows, Eustath. Hom. Od. 1572 Aéyerar S€ Kai Suxdouos 
Zevs mapa Tois madatois 6 Kabdpowos* TH yap oui €xpavro, paciv, év Kabap- 
pois. Hesych. s.v. rapameroinra mapa 7d cvKoparteiv. 

°° Zeus Mydwos on coins of Nicaea of Imperial period, Head. H7s/. 
Num. p. 443. 

Zeus Mndeows in Corcyra, C. J. Gr. 1870 Aw&s Mndaviou, inscrip- 
tion on boundary stone. In Naxos, 2418 “Opos Ais MyAaviov, early 
period. 

*? Zeus egw on Attic inscription of Hadrian’s time, C. Z. A. B22 
iepoxnpv& Avs Ted€ovtos. 

53 Zeus ’Apioraios, Schol. Ap. Rhod. 2. 500 Zebs ’Aptoraios &kA7On Kat 
"ArrdAXav *Ayuieds Kat Ndpuos. 


ee es TTS 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-VI. I5I 


54 Zeus Kénos, the god of dust: at Athens, Paus. 1. 40, 6 Atos 


, * 
Koviov vads ovK €xav opoov. 


55a Zeus EvBovdets: Hesych. s.v. edBovdevs’ 6 WAovtwv, mapa S€ ois 
moddois 6 Leds Somep ev Kupnyy. Cf. inscription in Paros, ’Epacinmn 
IIpdcwvos "Apy Anuntpe Oecpopdp@ kat Kipy kat Au EvBovdet kat BaBoi, 
Athenaion 5, p. 15: Diod. Sic. 5. 72 (mpooayopevOrvat Ziva) EvBovdێa 
kal pntierny Oia Thy ev TG BovdeverOar Karas aiveow, Cf. Eubouleus at 
Eleusis. 


b At Amorgus, Wi##. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1, p. 334 Anuntpe Képy Au 
EvBovvrei. 

66 Zeus Bovdevs: at Myconos, Dittenberger, Sy//. 373 umép Kapmov 
Anunrpe bv éyxipova mpwrotdkoy, Képy xdmpov rédeov, Aut Bovdet xoipor. 

57a Zeus XOdnos : at Corinth, Paus. 2. 2, 8 (dydApara Awos ev imalOpe) tov 
8¢ abt&v XOdnov Kai roy Tpirov Kadovaw “Yyorov. At Olympia, vide '**. 

b Hesiod "Epy. 465 EvyeoOa b€ Adi XOovip, Anpunrepi O ayrij éxtedéa 
Bpidew Anunrepos tepov axrny. 

88 Zeus Skoriras: near Sparta, Paus. 3. 10, 6 Zebs émikAnow Skortiras, 
kai Zari ev dpiotepa ths Sod lepdv Skorira Auds (6 tér0s obtos amas Spvar 
mAnpns). 

59 Zeus KataxOdvos: Hom. J//. 9. 457: 

Oeot & erédevov mapas 
Zevs te KarayOduos Kal érawn Tepoepovera. 
60 Zeus Tpoparos: vide ™. 
6 Eur. Prag. 904: 
gol T@ TavTav pedeovtTe Xonv 
médavéy te hépw, Zevs eit’ *Aidns 
dvopatopevos orepyes, av S€ pot 
Ovciay amupov tayKapreias 
dé£ar mAnpn mpoxvOeiaar. 

6& Zeus Avdvpaios: Macrob. 5. 21, 12, quoting Nikander’s AlroXukd : 

év tH feporoin tov Advpaiov Aws koog orovSorroteovrat. Zeus Baxxvos, 


C. I. Gr. 3538, at Pergamon in late oracle. 
6 Zeus "Amduuos: Paus. 5. 14, 1. At Olympia, qaci dé “Hpaxdret 


Ovovrs ev ’Odupmia 80 byAov pddiota yevécOa Tas prias’ éLevpdvra ody avTov 
# kal im G@rdov didaxbévra "Amopvie Oica Ai, Kai odrws amotparjvat Tas 
pulas mépav tod ’Addeod. Aé€yovrac S€ kata tadta Kai "Hreior Ovew To 
"Aropuig Ad. Cf. Aelian, His¢, An. 10.8. Paus. 8. 26, 7: Sacrifice 
to Myiagros. 


152 GREEK RELIGION. 


6 Three-eyed Zeus at Argos on the Acropolis: Paus. 2. 24, 3. 
evrava , . . Zevs Edavov Svo pev 7 mepuKkapev Exov dPOadrpors, rpirov Se ext 
Tov petomov. Tovrov rov Ala Ipidpo daoly civae ... matp@ov ev traidpo 
ris avAns ipupévov. Cf. Schol. Eur. Zroad. 16 rov d€ épxetov Aia addrot 
icroptxot idiav twa cxyeow wept avrov ioropodytes, tpialv opOarpois avrdv 


a , e € tat , \ , 
KexpnoOat pact, ws oi mepi “Ayiav Kat Aepkudop. 


* At Coronea, Paus. 9. 34, I év S€ tO vag (ris “Irwvias *AOnvas) 

, ? Alay fae ‘ L > Ser , U8 , 
merrounuéva AOnvas “Irwvias Kat Auds é€otw aydApata’ téxvn Oe ’Ayapoxpirov. 
Strabo 411 ovyxabidpura d€ ti AOnva 6 Audys Kata twa, ds pact, pvotiKny 


ee 
aliTlay. 


Zeus-cult on mountains. 


6 Zeus "IOwudaras: ® Messenia, Paus. 4. 3, 9 rod Atos td emt TH 
an a. -s , > ” \ - Sip , a > ¢ 
Kopupn THs ldwpys ... ovK €xov mapa Tots Awptevoi mw Tipas, TAavKos Hv oO 
kat tovrous o¢Bew kataotnodpevos. Ld. 4. 27, 6 ws dé eyeydver ta mavra ev 
éroiu@ (for the recolonization of Messene) ... Mecojwor Aui re lOapdra 
kat Avooxovpos (€vov): 7d. 4. 33, 2 TO S€ ayadpa tod Ards (rod "IOwpdra) 
’ U f > a+ > , Sao 2! > a o LL > , 
Ayeddda pév eotuv epyov, emouOn de €€ apxns rots otknoaow ev Navrakt@ 
, € \ ‘ € A \ + 4 +” ane g > eam a sees 
Meconviwy. iepeds d€ aiperds xara éros exaotov €xet TO Gyadpa emt Tis oikias. 
yf ‘ b, ¢€ A 7 4 > Cofekey A a 2 Lal A > col Jee 
dyovot S€ kal €optnv érérevov "IOwpaia’ 1d dé dpxaioy Kat dyeva €ridecay 
povorkns. ..T@ yap "ldwpdra xatabvaios émdero Moica ‘A kalapa kul €hevOepa 


capBanr’ ¢yooa. 


b In Laconia, 7d. 3. 26, 6 (év 17 mpds Oaddoon xopa Ths Aeverptkis) .. . 
” - > vA > x \ SF o42 fs a ie: ¢ S73 , \ 
dvepos TUp és VAnY eveykav Ta TOAAA Nhance ta Sevdpwv' ws Se avedvyn Td 
xwploy Wirdy, adyadpa evravda idpupevoy evpeOn Avds "lOwpdra* rtovTo ot 


, , Ud 2 , A A aS) a , > 
Meconuiot pace paptuptov evvat odhiot Ta AcvKtpa TO apxatov Meoonvias etvat, 


¢ Le Bas-Waddington, Jegar. ef Pélop. 328 A “Opkos rév Mecoariwv’ 
"Opvio Ala "lOwparav, Vide a, 


d Zeus “Idwparns: on coins of Thuria of Imperial period, Head, 
List. Num. p. 363. 


8a Zeus Knvaios : in Euboea, Aesch. Prag. 27 EvBoida xapmiv api 
Knvaiov Aws. Cf. Soph. Zrach. 237 and 757. Apoll. Bibl. 2. 7, 7 
mpocoppicbels Knvai@ ths EvBoias, én dxpwrnpia Ais Knvaiov Baopoy idpv- 
caro (‘Hpakhjjs). 

b At Athens, C. J. A. 1. 208 Aids Knvaiov (fifth century B.c.). 


8 Zeus Aapvotios: Paus. 9. 34, 5 és d€ Td dpos Td Aadvarioy Kal és 
tov Aws tov Aadvortiou Td Ténevds eiow ex Kopoveias orddior pddvora €ikoot' 
AiOov pév 76 Gyadpd €otw. *AOduavros Sé Bvew Bpigov kat "EAAny évradéa ped- 
Aovros mepPOjvat kpiov Trois mai pacw ims Aws. Also at Alus, vide *. 


ee i Re ge ee Al ee 
(emer t ° i - 


ig, cil ek 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV_—VI. 153 


*° Zeus ’AraBvpws: *in Rhodes: Pind. O/. 7. 87 Zeid mdrep vatroow 
‘AraBupiov pedéav. Cf. dedication of second century s.c. (?), Rhodian 
inscr. C. J. Gr. 2103b. Diod. Sic. 5. 59 Smep ert cal viv tipdrar dia- 
pepsrvtws. Apollod. 3. 2. 1 (’AA@nuérms, the grandson of Minos), avaPas 
b€ emi 7d ’AtaBupiov .. . rev matpgwv tmounobeis Oedv iSpvero Bapdy ’Ara- 
Bupiov Ards. 

b At Agrigentum, Polyb. 9. 27, 7 émt ris kopupns "A@nvas iepov extucrat 
kai Aids ’AtraBupiov kabamep kat mapa ‘Podiots. 

® Zeus Aivjows in Cephallenia, Strabo 456 péyorrov 8€ dpos ev adry 
év @ 1d Aids Aivnoiov iepdy: from Mount Aenus, Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 
2. 297. 

“! Zeus Arkraios in Crete, Strabo 478. Vide *. 

@ Zeus KivOws in Delos: Dittenberger, Syl/. 249; C. L. A. 2. 
985 D iepeds Atos KuvOiov. 

© Zeus “Idaios ; Aesch. Frag. 155 of Oedv dyyxiomopor of Znvds eyyus, Ov 
kat’ “Idatov mayor Aws ratpwov Bwpds ear év aidep. Vide °. 

“4a Zeus Kdowos : from Mount Casium of N. Syria, Ammian. Marcell. 
22.14,$43 on coins of Seleucia of Imperial period, Head, H7zst. Num. 
p- 661. 

b Also from the mountain between Arabia and Egypt, Strabo 760 
Aids €orw iepdv Kaciov ; at Pelusium, vide note, p. 125. 

© On coins of Corcyra of Imperial period, Head, Hzs/. Num. p. 277. 
Awés Kaoiov, on bronze seal in Leyden, C. 7. Gr. 7044 . 

d At Epidaurus, Eph. Arch. 1883, p. 87 inscription, Ad Kaoio. 

® Zeus ‘Yvvape’s: Hesych. s.v. dad rod ‘Yvvapiov épous, 

© Zeus ’Ayxéopuos: Paus. 1. 32, 2, in Attica, "Ayxeopos dpos éeariv ob 
péya Kai Adds a&yadpa ’Ayxeopiov. 

™ Zeus ’Amecdvrws: Paus, 2. 15, 3 “Opos "Anéoas éotly tmép tiv 
Nepéar, €vOa Tlepoéa mparov Ari ica déyovow *Anecartio. 


* Zeus ‘Yunrris: Paus. 1. 32, 2 €v ‘Yunrr@ d€ dyadpd éorw ‘Ypyrriov 


Aws. 

Zeus Mapyydios: Paus. 1. 32, 2 ev IlapynOt Tapynbios Zeds yxadkois 
éori. | 

80 


Zeus Uedvvaios : Hesych. s.v/ év Xig—from the mountain. 
? KiBatpomos: Paus. 9. 2, 4 6 d€ KiBaipay rd dpos Ards fepdv KiOatpo- 
viov eoriv: ? an interpolation. 

* Zeus Koxxvyos : on the ‘ Cuckoo-mountain’ in the neighbourhood 


154 GREEK RELIGION. 


of Hermione, Paus. 2. 36, 2 icpd d€ kat és réde emi axpov rev épav émi 
pev TO Koxxvyio Adds, ev d€ rH Tpovi éorw “Hpas. 

*° Zeus ’Axpaios; ®at Magnesia in Thessaly, inscription in W/7#. d. d. 
Inst. Ath. 1889, p. 52 6 iepeds rod Atds rod ’Axpaiov: cf. zd. 1890, 
Pp. 314. 

b On Mount Pelion, Heracleides, Frag. Hist. Graec. 2. 262, frag. 60 
én’ dxpas S€ THs Tod Spovs kopypis omndaidy ote Td Kadovpevoy Xipdnov kat 
Awds dkraiov (leg. dxpaiov) icpdv, ep’ 5 kara Kuvis dvatodjy Kata TO dkpaidra- 
Tov Kadpa avaBaivovot Tov TodTey of émupavéararot Kal Tats HAtKiats akpwdCov- 
Tes, eve(wmopevor k@dia TpiToKa Kawa. 

© Near Smyrna, C. J. Gr. 3146 ék« rod eloaybévros Bdaros emt rov Ala 
Tov ‘Akpatov emi OvAmiov Tpaiavod rod dvOumdrov, 

*ta Zeus ’Emdxpios: worshipped on Hymettus and Parnes, E7/. Mag. 
S.U. enakpios* quoting fragment of Polyzelus, iepdv yap dv rerdxnkas 
emakpiou Aus. 

b Hesych, s.v. Emdxpios Zeist 6 emt trav axpov rev épav iSpupévos, ém 
yap TaY dpav rovs Bapods adte@ iSpvov ws emi Td Todd, 

*°a Zeus Kopudaios: in late inscription from Philadelphia, Bull. de 
Corr. Hell. 1. 308. 

b C. LZ. Gr. 4458, inscription from Seleucia in time of Seleucus 
Philopator, iepeis Acds "OAvpmiov kai Auds Kopudaiov. 

*° Zeus Kapaws: Hesych. s. v. Zeds mapa Bowwrois ofr@ mpocayopeverat, 
ws pév Twes haci, mapa bWnrds etvat. 

*T Zeus “Yraros: 2 in Boeotia: Paus. 9. 19, 3 imép 8¢ Tdoarrds éorw 
épos “Yraros kaovpevoy, emi dé avT@ Avds “Yrarov vads kai dyadpa. 

b In Athens, Paus. 1. 26, 5 mpd rijs eodd8ou (rod ’"EpexGeiov) Ards éore 
Bopos ‘Ymrarov, évOa euypixou Ovovow oddév, méupara dé Oévres oddév ert owe 
xpnoacda vopigovar. Cf. 72d. 8.2, 2; C. L.A. 3. 170 (late period). Vide 
oracle quoted in Demosth. pos Maxdprarov 1072 cuppéper ’AOnvaiors rept 
TOU OnpElov TOU év TH ovpave yevouevou Ovovras kadduepeiv Adi ‘Yrat@, “A@nva 
(¢ , c a. '3 , = Avie , > Vat eae A 
umaty Hpakhei, “Amd\\o@ve owrnpe kal dmoréurew audi dvncet. 

¢ In Sparta, Paus. 3. 17, 6 ris xaAKioikov év defa Auds &yadya ‘Yrdrov 
TeTrointat, maairarov TavTwY érdca €oTL xadKod. 

* Zeus "Yyioros : *at Corinth: vide 7, 

b At Corcyra, C. LZ. Gr. 1869 Ati iwlore edyny, 

¢ At Olympia, Paus. 5. 15, 5 dv0 Bwpol epeéns Atos ‘Yypiorov. 


d At Thebes, /d. 9. 8, 5 mpos 8€ rais ‘Yypioras (midas) Ards fepov ént- 
kAngoiv cote ‘Ywiorov. 


q 
4 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-VI. 155 


€ In Athens, C. J. A. 3. 146, 148-155 (of late period). Cf. inscrip- 
tion at Miletus: and Athen. Mittheil. 1893, p. 267. 


f In Mylasa, C. J. Gr. 2693 € iepéws Atds tiorov: at Stratonicea, 
vide *. 

& Pindar, Vem. 11. 2 ‘Eoria, Znvos ‘Yiorov kacryyyra. 

© Zeus OdAvpmos: ®at Athens, C. /. A. 1. 196, 198 (fifth century 
inscr.); Paus. 1. 18, 6 ’Adpiavis 6 ‘Papaiwy Paoideds tév Te vadv aveOnke 
kal Td dyadpa Oéas aEwov, ob peyéOer pev, Ste pty “Podtows Kai ‘Popaiors eiolv ot 
Kohogool, Ta Aouma GydApata Gpoiws dmoAetmerat, TeTroinras S€ Ex TE eA€havTos 
kal xpuood, Kat €xee Téxvns €0 mpds TO peyebos dpaow. § 8 rod S€ ’OAvpriov 
Aws Aevkadiwva oikodoujacas Aéyovor Td dpxaiov iepdv: cf. Thuc. 2. 16. 
C. I. A. 3. 291 Badvvrod Auds ’OAvpriov ev aarer: 2b. 243 iepéws Ards 
"OAvpriov on seat in theatre. 

b At Megara: Paus. 1. 40, 4 Mera raira és 1d trod Aids Teyevos eveh- 
Ootar Kadovpevov OAvumceiov vads éatt Oéas dks: cf. Lebas, Wégar. 26-34. 


¢ In Naxos: C. Z. Gr. 2417 Acds ’OAvpmiov ‘ terminus sacri fundi.’ 
d At Miletus: C. 7. Gr. 2867 Acos ’OAvpriov Tewcai(ov), late period. 


e At Chalcis: C. 7. A. 4. 274, oath of alliance between Athens 
and Chalcis, ? end of fifth century B.c., 6s d€ dp py opdon, atipov avtov 
elvat , . . Kal Tou Aids Tod ’Odvpmiov TO emidéxatov iépdoy oT TeV XpnudTov. 

f At Sparta: Paus. 3. 14, 5 Avds emixdnow Odupmiov iepdv: cf. zd. 3. 
12, Il. 

g At Corinth: Paus. 3. 9, 2 KopivOsor pev odv . . . karaxavOevros oiow 
eLaibyns vaod Aids émixAnow ’Odvpmiov (just before the Asiatic campaign 
of Agesilaus), 

h At Olympia: Paus. 5. 10 and 11 temple and statue: 7d. 5. 13, 8 
altar. 

i At Patrae: Paus, 7. 20, 3 gore S€ ev TH dyopa Ads vads ’Odupmiov, 
airés te emi Opdvov kai éotaoa AOnva mapa tov Opdvor, 

k At Aegira: Paus. 7. 26, 4 Uapetxero d€ 9 Atyeipa és avyypapny iepdv 
Atos kai dyaApa Kabnpevov Aibov Tov MevreAnaiou, "AOnvaiou de épyov Evkdeidov. 

1 At Syracuse: Paus. 10. 28, 6 "A@nvaiot, nvixa eihov "Ovpmiov Ards ev 
Supakovoas iepdv. C. I. Gr. 5367, formula of public oath, ’Opriw rav 
‘Ioriav kai rov Zava Tov ’Odvpmor, end of third century B.c. Jb. 5369 Avis 
*Odvpriov, inscribed on a seat in the theatre, of same period. 


m At Agrigentum: Diod. Sic. 13. 82 1d 8 odv ’OAvpmov peéddov Aay- 
Bavew riv dpodpiy 6 médepos exorucev ,, . peyiotos 8 dv (6 veds) Trav &v 


SixeXig kal rois éxrds ovK dAdyws dv ovyxpivorro kata Td péyeOos THs bnoTTATEws. 


156 GREEK RELIGION. 

n Near Nacoleia in Phrygia: C. J. Gr. 3847 b, late inscription 
mentioning 176 ’OAvpmeeiov. 

© In Seleucia: C. /. Gr.-4458, vide *. 


P Zeus ’OAvpmos inscribed on coins of— 


Hipponium Head, Hest. Num. p. 85, fourth century. 
Prusa ad Olympum - 3 * 444, Imperial period. 
Ephesus 93 > *3 498 9 ” 
Antiochia ad Maeandrum ,, ie " 520 ze is 
Briula ” 29 ” 548 ” ” 
Maeonia ” ” ” 55° eB) ” 
Alexandria ” ” 9 719 ” ” 


°° Zeus Watpgos: ® Plato, ELuthyd. 392D Zeds qpiv marpdos pév od 
kakeirat, épxetos O€ kat hparptos kat "AOnvaia pparpia. 

b Apollod. 2. 8, 4 émed) éxpdrnoay MeAorovynoov (of “HpakAetdar) tpeis 
iSpvoavro Bapols tmatp@ov Atéds, kal emt rovr@v ebvaar, 

¢ At Tegea: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1893, p. 24, inscription of late 
period, 

d At Chios: A@i#t. d. d. Inst. Ath. 3. 203 (fourth century B.c.) dé06 
Kduridais xiAlas dpaxpas iepas rod Avs rot Tlatpaou. 

e€ Aesch. frag. Niobe 155: vide 7. 

f Arist. Vub. 1468 

vai vai kataidéoOnre marpaov Aia. 
Epictetus, Avarpi8. 3. ch. 11 od pow O€us marép’ ariypjoat, mpds yap Ards 
clow Gmavres TOU TaTp@ov., 

*a Zeus Udrpwos in Italy: C. Ll. Gr. 5936 at Rome, Adi Marpie ex 
oraculo, very late: cf. 6014 b Aci Tarpim «ai Aprivraca in reign of 
Trajan. In Caria, late inscription from Laodicea, Avi Marpio Mitt. d. d. 
Inst. Ath. 1890, p. 258. 


b Diod. Sic. 4. 14, Olympian games dedicated by Heracles, ré Avi 
7® Iarpio, 

*? Zeus Uanias in Phrygia: C. LZ. Gr. 3817 Anpas «ai Vdios imép Body 
iSiov Hania Aut cwrjpe edyny. In Scythia: Herod. 4. 59 Zeds dpOdrara 
KaTa yvopny ye THY euny Kadedpevos Ilaraios. 

* Zeus *Ayapéuvov: Athenag. Leg. 1 6 d€ Aaxedaydvios ’Ayapépvova 
Ata... o¢8er: Schol. Lycophr. 1369 Aamépoat dSipos ris Arrixqs (leg. 
Aakxwvns) évOa Atos Ayapépvovos iepdv ear, 

* Zeus Aaxedaivwv: vide *b, 


% Zeus ‘Opdynos: Epictetus, Acarpi8, 3. ch. 11 kai yap ddeAdoi mpds Auds 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-~-VI. 157 


elow dpoyviov: Plato, Laws 729 c ovyyéveray Sé kai poyviov OeGv Kowwviay 
dragav...Tiuav tis Kat aeBdpevos edvous dy yeveOdiovs Oeods eis madav avrov 
oropav tayo: Eur. Andr. 921 aN dvtopai ce Ala Kadoivo’ dudynov: cf. 
Plut. 679 p. 

6a Zeus Tédecos: Plut. Rom. Quaest. 2, p. 264B mévre Scicba Oeav 
Tovs yapovvras olovrat, Avs Tedelov Kai “Hpas Tedeias Kat “Adpodirns Kat Tlet- 
Oovs emi mac dé "Apréewdos. 

b At Tegea: Paus. 8. 48, 6 memotnra S€ Kat Atds TeXelov Bopds kai 
dyahpa Tetpayavoy, 

e At Athens: C. J. A. 3. 294 lepews Awds TedXeiov Bovgvyov. 

d Aesch, Lum. 213, 214: 

 Kapt aria Kai map ovdev eipyacw 
"Hpas tedelas kat Aws muotmpara, 

e Aristoph. Zhesm. 973 Schol.”Hpa reAeia kat Zeds réAetos eriwvro év 
Tois ydpots, Ss mputdvers ovres TOV yapov. 

f Aesch. Frag. 52: 

AowBas Aids pev mpatov wpaiov yapou 

A 

Hpas te 

thy Sevrépav dé Kpaow jpwow veya, 

tpitny Aws Swtnpos everaiay iBa. 
GES, 

” Zeus Aexedrys at Aliphera in Arcadia: Paus. 8. 26, 6 Aus iSpicavro 
Aexedtouv Bwpoy are évrava tiv ’AOnvav rekdvtos. 

* Zeus TeveOdvos: Dio Chrys. Or. 7: Dind. 1, p. 139 alcyxvvdpevor 
ovte Aia yevéO\ov ore “Hpay yapndiov ovre Moipas teAeapdpovs 7) Aoyiav 
“Aprewy 7) pntépa ‘Péav ovd€ tas mpoectwoas avOpwrivns yevéerews Eidevbvias 
ovde ’Adpodirny : Plut. Amazs. p. 765 yovéwy dpas 6 TeveOdt0s SidKer, 

a Zeus ‘Epxeios at Athens: Philochorus, “rag. 146 b Kvov eis rév 
THs TloAuddos vedy cicehOodca kai Sica eis 7d LlavSpdatov, émi tov Bwopov ava- 

a ae , , ‘ curs ~ » , , , 2° 3 \ a 
Baca tov ‘Epxeiov Aids, tov td rf éAaia, Katéxetto. Tlatpiov © éori rots 
*AOnvaiows Kuva pt) dvaBaivew eis dxpdmotw. C.J. A. 2. 1664, altar Acds 
“Epkeiov. 

b At Olympia: Paus. 5. 14, 7 évOa 8€ ris oikias Ta Oepédid eore Tis 
Oivopdov, dvo évravOa eiot Bwpoi, Aids Te ‘Epxeiov. . . . 

¢ At Argos: Paus. 8. 46, 2 "INiov ddovons kal vepopevwv ta Adpvpa 
‘EAAnvev Oevedo 7H Karavéws 1d Edavov rod Aids €866n Tod ‘Epxeiov. 

4 At Sparta: Herod. 6. 67, 68 (Anpapnros) Ove rH Aci Boiv" Ovcas dé 
THY prepa exddece. "“Amikopevy S€ tH pytpl Exbers és tas xeipas of Tay 


158 GREEK RELIGION. 


omddyxvov, KaTiKéreve, Aéyov Toidde’ 7O pnrep, Oedv oe TaY Te GAXwv Kabar- 
a a , \ he , 
Topevos, ikeTevo, Kat TOU ‘Epxeiov Aids Tuvde, Ppdcat por THY GAnOninv, Tis pev 
€otl matnp 6p0@ Adyw 
np p t Ps rite 
© Hom: (07.23.3934: 
7) exdds peyapoto Ais peyddou tort Bapov 
e , a td * “Q 4 AY 
épkeiov ifoiro teruypevov, év8 apa moAda 
Aaéptns ’Odvaeis te Body emi pnpi’ exnay. 


f Harpocrat. épxeios Zevs, & Bapds évtds Epxous év thi addj ipurat, 


Hesych, s.v. perépxtov’ Atos éniderov. 


& Soph. Ans. 486: 

GAN’ cir adeddijs 6 Spaipoveorépa 
TOU mavTos nulv Znvos Epkeiov Kupel. 

700 Zeus "Edpéottos: Herod. 1. 44 (Kpoioos) éxddee b€ ’Emiotidy re kat 
‘Eraipniov (Ala), rov adtov rovtov dvopdtwv bedy, 

*! For the religious conception of family duties cf. Euripides in 
Stob. Floril. 3, pp. 78 and 83 (Meineke): quotation from Perictione, 
2). p. 90: from Musonius, 2d. p. 74: Plato’s Laws 930 £, 717 B, 927 A-B. 

1a Zeus Sparpis: Meineke, rag. Com. Poet. 3. p. 377 from the 
younger Cratinus, Zebs é€ori poe épxeids eote hparpios ... Ta TéAN TEAS, 
Schol. Aristoph. Acharn. 146 €6vov Au dparpio kai ’AGnva (at the festival 
of Apaturia). Dem. mpos Maxapr. 1078. I of dparepes . . . AaBdvres Thy 
Wipov, katopevov Tv icpeiwv, ard Tod Bopod dépovres Tod Awos Tov hparpiov. 
Eph. Arch. 1883, p. 73; 7. 1888, p. 1: C. L.A. 2.841 b (B.c. 396-5) 
Avs pparpiov iepets . . . dvéypawe kal eornoce THY oTHANY, 

b Zeus ’Oparpios in Crete: ? a dialect-variant for ppdrpios, C. I. Gr. 
2555 Oprio trav ‘Eoriay kat Tava Opdrpiov kat Tava Ackraiov... oath of 
alliance between the Hieropytnii and their cleruchs: cf. Cauer, 
Delectus, 2. 117. 

8a Zeus Krjovos: Harpocr. p. 115, S.v. ‘Yrepions &v 1G mpds ’Amed- 
Aaiov, Krinorov Ala év rots tapteiois iSpvorto. 

b At Athens: C.Z. A. 3. 3854 (late period): cf. decree in Demosth. 
21. 53 Act krnoio Body Nevkdv, 

¢ At Phlya: Paus. 1. 31, 4 vads d€ érepos éxer Bapods Anuntpos ’Avnot- 
Swpas kai Aws xrnoiov in the Peiraeeus. 

d Tsaeus, 8. 16 r@ Adi dav rh Krycio wep iv pddior ekeivos Ovoiav 
€omovdate . .. nixero july bylerav diddvar Kai kriow dyabnv. Cf. Antiph. 
p. 612. 

e At Anaphe: C. Z. Gr. 2477, doubtful inscription. 


se. ee an 


REFERENCES FOR. CHAPTERS IV-—-VI. 159 


f At Teos: C.Z. Gr. 3074 Avs krnoiov Aids Kamerwdiou “Papns Ayabod 
Aaiuovos. 

g Plut. Szoic. Rep. 30. p. 1048 6 Zevs yedoios ef KtHOLos xaiper Kal 
’Emixdprios kat Xapiroddérns mpocayopevdpevos (if all fortune is worthless). 


h Aesch. Ag. 1036: 
émei o° @Onxe Leds dunvirws Sdpors 
cy > , a \ 
Kowovov eivat xepriBwv, TmohA@v peta 


, ~ “~ 
SovAwy orabeicay Ktnviov Bapod médas. 


i Athenae. p. 473 b Kadioxos dyyeidy eatw ev @ Tovs xtnoiovs Aias 
éyxabidptovow, os ’Avrixdetdns pyo év tO EEnyntixd . . . eo Oeivar ore ay 
eUpns Kai eioxéar dpSpociar, 1) 5€ auBpocia viwp dxpadves, Edaroy, maykapria, 

104a Zeus HAovowws near Sparta, Paus. 3. 19, 7 mpiv de 7 StaBnvae rov 
Eiparar, driyov imp tis 6xOns iepsv Seixvurat Avs TlAovaiov. 

b Zeus WAovroddyns on coins of the Lydian Nysa of Imperial period, 
Head, Hist. Num. p. 552. 


10 Zeus “OABws in Cilicia, inscription circ. 200 B.c. Fell. Journ. 
1891, p. 226 Au ’OABio iepeds Tedxpos Tapkudpios. C. LGH: Sore mM 
Thracian Chersonese KdAXtoros (?) imép tod viod "AdeEdvdpou Aut ’OABio 
evyaptoTnptoy. 

10a Zeus “Opios: Demosth. Halonnes. p. 86 Xeppownaov oi spor ciciy, 
ovk "Ayopd, GAAa Bwpds Tod Aws Tov dpiov. Plato, Zaws 842 E Avs dpiov 
mparos pév vopos Ode eipnrOw—pi) Kwveirw yhs Spa pydeis— . . . TOU pev yap 
(rov modirov) opdpudos Zevs paptus. 

b Zeus KAdpws at Tegea: Paus. 8. ro O€ ywpiov TO ty ynddv 

P ’ x@P i ha 
é’ of Kal of Bapoi Teyedrats eiaty of modXol, Kadeirae pev Atos Kdapiov, djAa 
S¢ ds éyévero H enikAnows TO Ged Tod KANpov TOY Taidwy Evexa Tov ’ApKdbos. 
? At Argos, Aesch. Suppl. 359 Worro dyr’ dvarov guyav ixecia Bemis Ards 
KAapiov. 

107a Zeus Hodevs on the Acropolis of Athens: Paus. 1. 24, 4 kat Acds 
> Ey , , \y £3 , , * ‘ , 
éorw dtyadpa 76 te Aewxdpovs Kai 6 dvopatopevos TloAteus, » Ta kaGeotnkora 
és tv Ovoiav ypapev Thy er’ avrois Aeyoperny airiav od ypadw* tov Atos Tov 
Tlodéws xpiOas karabévtes emt tov Bopoy peprypevas mupois ovdeplay Exovor 

iA € = s ¢ > ‘ , ¢ , , ef cal 

gudraknv. 6 Bovs dé dv és tHv Ovordy Erousdoavtes Hvddocovew anrerat THY 
oneppdtrev doray én tov Bopdrv. Kadovor S€ twa Tov iepewr Bovdsvor, kat 
ratty Tov médexuy piyas, oUT@ yap éativ of vdpos, oixerar Pevywr" oi de 
ef \ > a ad , # > O7 > , ¢ , ve 

dre rov dvdpa, bs edpace Td epyov ovk eiddres, és Sixnv imdyoucr Tov TEhEKUM. 
Cf. zd. 1. 28, 10 "A@nvaiwv Baowrevovros "EpexOéws, tére mparov Bovy Exretvev 
6 Bovddvos emi rod Bapovd rod Tlodtéws Atds. 


b Schol. Ar. Wud. 981 1a 8€ Bovpdma madara opti jy paow ayeo Oat 


160 GREEK RELIGION. 


pera Ta pvornpla, Gre Kal Body Avovow eis imduvnow Tod Tpdrov hovevbévros 
Bods ev axporddet, dyyapévov rod meAdvou ev TH éopti Tov Aurodiav. . . Cav- 
Awva S€ Twa, as elye TH TeAEKEL ArroKTeivas Tov Boor. 

¢ Porph. De Adst. 2. 29, 30 from Theophrastus: cuvéra€ay otro thy 
mpagiv, imep Kat viv Stapéver trap’ adtois. tdpopdpovs mapbévovs karédeEav* 
ai € dap KopiCovow, Oras Tov médeKvY Kal THY pdxalpav akovnToveW. akovn- 
gdvrav Sé emedwxev pev tov médexvy Erepos, 6 Sé éematake tov Body, dAdos bé 
eopagev’ trav d€ pera tadra Sewpdvrav, éyevoavto tov Bods mdvtes. TovTav 
dé mpayOevtrwv tv pev Sopay tov Bods payavres kal xdpt@ émoykocavres 
e€avertnaay Exovta TavTov Omep Kal Cav éoyev oxnpa, Kai mpooelevéav dporpov 
ws epyafopevm. . . kal yévn TOY TovTO Spwrrev éore viv’ of pev dd Tod maTd= 
Eavros Bout’mot kadovpevor mravtes, of 8 awd Tod mepeAdoavros Kevrpiddat’ rods 
8 dvd tod emapd€arros Sarpods dvoudCovow did Ty ek Tijs Kpeavopias yryvopevny 
daira, mAnpwoavtes dé thv Bipoay, dray mpos TH Kpiow axdcu, Katerdvtaoay 
THY paxatpay, ovTews ove TO mahatoy Savoy HY Ta GuVEepya Tois Biows Hyer Coa, 
viv O€ rovTwy pvAakréov éoti mparrev. 

d Varro, &. R. 2. 5 ab hoc (bove) antiqui manus ita abstineri 
voluerunt ut capite sanxerint si quis occidisset. 

eC. . Gr. 140, 141, 150 mentioning sacrificial utensils of Zeus 
Polieus in the Parthenon-treasury. 

f Bovrns: Hesych. s. v. 6 rots Avirodtors ra Boupdna Spar : cf. inscription 
on stone found by the Erechtheum, iepéws Butdrov, C. J, A. 2. 1656. 

& Bovrns: Suidas s. v. obros rv iepwovynv éoxe, kat of dm adtod Bourddat 
exAnOnaav. 

nC. L. A. 3. 71 bepeds Avds ext TWaddadiov wal Bovtiyns: cf. 273 
Bouguyou iepews Avds ev addadio, 

i Hesych. Avs Oak... . gact dé, ... dre nugisBnrovy *AOnva Kat 
Tlocedav, thy “A@nvav Avds SenOqvac brép adtns tiv Wiov éveykeiv, kat 
imorxérOat avti Touro Td Tod Io\éws tepdv (leg. icpetov) mparov OvecOat emt 
Bopod. 

k Plato, Laws 782 c 1rd... Ovew dvOpdrovs GddpAous re Kal viv mapa- 
Hevov dpGpev rodXois* Kal Tovvavriov dxovopev ev GAXors bre Ode Bods éroApapev 
yeverOa Oipara re ovk iy Tois Oeociot Cea, médavot 8 Kal pedure Kaprrot dedev- 
pevou kal Towadra G@Aa ayvd Ovpara, 

1 Luc. De Dea Syr.§ 58 orépavras ra ipja, (oa ek tév mporvdaiay 
amiaot, Ta S€ KareveryOevra OynoKkovar, évcor Sé Kal maides Eavtav évredOev amace 
. + + €& mnpny evO€uevor Xeipt Katdyovow, dua S€ aditéovow emikepropéovres 
A€yovor dre ov maides GAAa Boes cicty. 

m Hesych. Avs Bots’ 6 r@ Ati dveros Bods 6 iepds* %are Sé opr) MiAn- 
civ. 


7 WES shay es 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-VI. 161 


n At Paphos: C. 7. Gr. 2640 Adpodirns kai Avds Todtéws xal “Hpas. 


° At Sardis: C. LZ. Gr. 3461 Acvxiov IovAov Bovvarov . . . iepéa peyiotou 
TloAcéws Ards in time of Tiberius. 


P At Ilium: C. LZ. Gr. 3599 mpobvecba TO Act r@ Todt ra meppara: 
second century B.c. 


4 In Ios with Athena Polias(?): Aw. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1891, p. 172 Ad 
T®@ Todtet Kai ri) AOnva tH. . . decree concerning alliance with Rhodes. 


™ In Rhodes with Athena Polias: Rev. Arch. 1866, p. 354. ‘Cf. 
Athena *°. 


8 At Physcos in Caria: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1894, Pp. 31 lepéws ras 


> an a » , 
A@avas tas Awdtas tod Atos Tod HoXtéas. 


108 Zeus ToAwovxos: Plato, Laws 921 C Ala mododyov Kat ’AOnvav Koww- 
vous Twodirelas atipatwv : cf. Theogn. 757: 
Zevs pev tiade modnos imeipeyoe aldépe valwv 
det Se£irepiy xeip’ em’ dnnuoctyn. 
9a Zeus Wodrdpxns at Olbia in Scythia: C. Z. Gr. 2081 én dpyévrav 
TeV Tepl Twoimatpov Nixnpdrov Avakipérns TootSnov pera tov adehav éroincev 
Tov mupyov Ail modidpxn Kat T@ Onu@ en’ edrvyia, (?) third century B.c. 
b Zeus Aaoirns in Elis: Paus. 5. 24, I mapa b€ tov Aaoira Awds kat Hocet- 
daves Aaoira tov Bapdr. 


© Zeus dpxnyérns: late inscription from Prymnessos, M77. d. d. Inst. 
mon. 7, Dp. 135 (Ramsay) Geo apynyéern evxny. 


0a Zeus Bovdaios at Athens, with Athena BovaAaia : Antiph. 6, p. 789 
€v ait@ TO Bovdevtnpia Aws Bovdalov Kai "AOnvas Bovdaias tepdv éore, kat 
cigidvtes vf Bovevrai mpocedyovra. Paus. 1. 3, 5 Bovdaiov d€ ev aire (14 
Bovdeurnpie) keirat Edavoy Aids Kal ’ATdA@Y Téxyn Hecoiov Kai Afjpos épyov 
Avowvos, C. I. A. 3. 683 rdv iepéa Awds Bovdaiov kal "AOnvas Bovdatas. 
Cf. zbed. 272, 1025. 

b In Laconia: C. J. Gr. 1245 Ala Bovdaioy éau(rnpa?). C.L. Gr. 1392 
9 Aaumpa trav Tvbeatev TAs Mapkov Avpndwy Kadoxdéa . . . Tov iepéa TOV 
enipavertatav Oeav Aids Bovdaiov Kat ‘HAlov Kal DeAnvns. 

© In Caria: C.L. Gr. 2909 @okev "laver rH Bovhy. . . . wept tis iepareins 
tov Avs tod Bovdaiov Kal rhs “Hpns. 

d At Mitylene: on coins of Imperial period, Head, Hist. Num. 
p. 488. 

© Plut. 819 Ero Baya . . . TO Kowwdy iepov Atos Bovdaiou Kat ToAtéws kat 
Gépdos Kai Aixns. 

VOL. I. M 


162 GREEK RELIGION. 


11 Zeus EmPhuwos: Hes. s. v. év Sipv@, the god of the orator’s plat- 
form. 

42a Zeus ’ApBovdos at Sparta: Paus. 3. 13,6 mpos rovr@ Ais ’ApBovdiou 
kai Anvas eotv ’ApBovrias Bwopds Kai Avockovper kal TovTav ’ApBovdiov. 

b Zeus Mnyaveds at Argos: Paus. 2. 22, 2 Avéas pev ody ev trois emeow 
éroinae Mnyavéws 7d dyadya elvar Aids, kai ’Apyeiov én tovs ent” TAvov otpa- 
revoavtas évraiOa éudcat mapapévery Todeporvtas, €or dy 7 TO” I\toy EAwow 
i} paxouévous tereuthn odas emddBy: cf. Collitz, Dialect. Inschr. 3. 3052 %, 
the month Maydveros at Chalcedon, ? sacred to Zeus Mayavevs. 

13a Zeus ’Ayopuios at Athens: C. /..A. 1.23: Hesych. s. v. “Ayopaiou 
Ads Bwpos ’AOnvynct. 

b In the Agora at Sparta: Paus. 3. 11, 9 rotrav d€ ob méppw Ts iepov 
kai Aids eorw ’Ayopaiov, 

¢ At Olympia: 7d. 5.15, 4, near the altar of Artemis ’“Ayopaia, a Bwpos 
"Ayopaiou Aids. 

d At Selinus: Herod. 5. 46 of ydp pu SeAwovoror emavacravtes arextewway, 
katagvuydvra emt Ais ayopaiov Bapdv. 

e At Thebes: Paus. 9. 25, 4 xara tiv 6ddy dnd Tév TUA@Y Tay Nniotev 
TO pev O€uidds eorw fepdy Kai dyadpa Aevkod AiBov 7d S5€ epeEjs Moupar, To dé 
"Ayopaiou Avs. 

f In Crete: Cauer, Delect. 2. 121 duvtw trav ‘Eoriay . . . Kai Tov Anva 
roy "Ayopaiov ...: alliance between Dreros, Cnossos and Lyctos, third 
century B.C. 

& Zeus ’Ayopaivs: on coins of Nicaea of Imperial period, Head, 
Hist. Num. p. 443. 

h Theophrastus ep) ovpBoraiwr, Stobaeus, Flori. 44. 22 (vol. 2, 
p. 167 Meineke) (év rots Aiviwy vépors) . . . dei. . . Overv Tov dpKov €mt TOU 
Aus Tov ayopaiov. 

1 Eur. Heracl, yo: 

ixérar 8 Svres ’Ayopatov Atos BratéperOa Kal oredy puatvera, 
Kk Aesch, Lumen. 973: 
GAN’ éxpatnoe Zevs ayopaios. 

1 Plutarch 789 c (oi yépovres) imnperat tod BovAaiov ’Ayopaiov Todéws 
Ais. 

14 Zeus "Ayonos: Soph. Trach. 26: 

tédos 8 eOnxe Zeds ayoviws Karas. 
Eust. J7, , 1 dyov, 7 ayopd, dOev kai dywviovs Beobs AiaxvAos Tovs ayo- 


paiovs, 











REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-_-VI. 163 


5a Zeus Srparws in Caria: Herod. 5. 119 of duapvydvres (rév Kapay) 
katewAnOnaav es AdBpavda, és Ads Srpatiov tpdv péya te Kai dyov adgos 
mrataviorwv, podvor S€, dv jpeis per, Kapés elow ot Ati Srpario dvaias 
dvdyovo., Cf, 6x, 

b Jd. 1. 171 dmodexvior S5é €v MuAdcoot Avos Kapiov ipdy dpxaiov, tod 
Mugoiot peév kai Avdoiot péereatt, as KacvyyyToiat €ovot ToioL Kapai, 

© Jd. 5. 66, at Athens, Ioayépns 6 Tirdvdpou, oikins pev eav Soxipov, arap 
Ta avexabev ork exw hpdoar’ Ovovar dé of avyyeveis adrod Au Kapio. Zeus 
Zrpdrws in Athens, C. /. A. 3. 141, 143, 201, of late period. 

4d In Pontos: Appian, MWi¢hrad. p. 215 (ed. Steph.). 


e Plut. Lumen. 17 tpeis € mpos Aids Srpariov kai Gedy dpkiwy évradOd pe 
80 abrav xreivate. 

46 Zeus Srparnyds ®at Syracuse: inscription on coin of Syracuse, 
Annali dell. Inst. 1839, p. 62 Jupiter Imperator: Cic. Zz Verr. 4. 
58 Tria ferebantur in orbe terrarum signa Iovis Imperatoris uno in 
genere pulcherrime facta; unum illud Macedonicum quod in Capitolio 
vidimus; alterum in Ponti ore et angustiis, tertium quod Syracusis 
ante Verrem praetorem fuit: > on coins of Amastris, Head, Hist. Num. 
P- 433: 

"NT Zeus “Apes ®at Olympia: Paus. 5. 14, 6 rov 8€ ‘Hqaiorov rov 
Bopdv ciow "Hrciov of dvopdfovow *Apelov Aids’ éyovot S€ of avrol odror 
kal @s Olvdpaos emi Tov Bwpod Tovrou Ovo TH ’Apeio Aut. | 

b In Epirus: Plut. Pyrrh. 5 eldbevrav of Bactheis ev Haccapau xwpiw 
THs Modorridos ’Apeim Ati Ovoavtes Spxwporeiv trois "Hmetpwrars Kal dpkicew 
avrol pev apkew Kata rovs vopous, exeivous d€ tiv Baorelay SiadvAdkew xara 


Tovs vdpous. 

¢ On coins of Iasos of Caria, Imperial period, Head, 7st. Mum. 
p. 528. 

18 Zeus ‘Omddomos *in Arcadia: inscription of Achaean league in 
Rev. Arch. 18767, p. 96. 

b At Methydrion: Lebas, A/égar. 353 mep[i d€ ras rpamé{a|s ras 
xpvoéus Tod Aiws tov ‘Omdoopiov dy Kkarabevres évéxvpa of Mebu| dpreis of 
peraotn |oavres cis Opxopevdr dieiAovro rd dpyvpiov. 

© In Caria: Arist. Part. Anim. p. 673 A. 18 mept S€ Kapiay otra 1d 
roovrov dueriorevoar’ rod yap iepéws Tov ‘Omdocpiov Ards aroGavdvtos. .. . 

"9a Zeus Aynrop in Laconia: Xen. Rep. Lac. 13. 2, 3 Over (6 Baorreds) 
pev yap mp@rov olkor dv Ait ’Aynrope Kai trois atv aire fv dé evtaida 
kadAtepnon, AaBdv 6 muppdpos mip amd rod Bwpod mponyeirat emi ra dpa ris 

M 2 


164. GREEK RELIGION. 


xepas* 6 d€ Bacideds éxet ad Overar Ari kai AOnva’ Grav b€ audow rovrow 
roi Oeoiv KaddrepnOn, téte SiaBaiver ra dpia ris x@pas. 

b At Argos: Schol. Theocr. 5. 83 rév atrdv kai Ala kai “Hynropa 
Kadovow ot "Apyetot. 

20 Zeus Koopnras at Sparta: Paus. 3. 17, 4 és de tv mpos peonu- 
Bpiav oroay Koopnta te émikdknow Atos vads kat Tuvdapéw mpd avtov pyjpa 
eote. 

21 Zeus Lemos: Paus. 2. 32, 7, between Troezene and Hermione, 
terpa Onoéws dvopatopéevn, ... mpdrepov dé Bawpds exadetro BOeviov Ards 
(cf. Athena Séevias in Troezen, Athena R. 17 >). 

22a Zeus Tpomaios at Sparta: Paus. 3. 12, g rod d€ Tporaiov Avs 

A: Oe A > / € ” , , cd > ‘ ‘ ‘ 
TO iepov emotnoayv ot Awptets moAeu@ Tous Te GAAovs Axatous... kat Tous 
"Auvkdaleis Kpatnoavtes. 

b At Salamis: C. 7. A. 2. 471 dvémdevoay S€ Kal emt rpdmacov kat 
édvcav T@ Avi TO Tporraio. 

23 Zeus Tporawdxyos at Attalia in Pamphylia: C. /. Gr. add. 
4340 f. g. lepéws Atds tpomaovxov, early Roman period. 

#24 Zeus Xdppov at Mantineia: Paus. 8. 12, 1 rod rddov d€ Tov 
"Erapewovda padriotd mov oradiov pykos Aiws adéornkey iepov emikdknow 
Xadppovos, 

25 Arist. Lgutt. 1253 Zed, cov rd vexntyprov. 

26 Zeus ‘Opayvpws at Aegium: Paus. 7. 24, 2 lepdv ‘Opayupio Au: 

. ‘Opayvpios b€ éyévero TH Aut emixAnots, bre "Ayapeuvov fOpocev €s TovTO 
TO xwpiov Tovs Adyou padiora év TH EAA a€ious. 

7 Bacchylides, frag. 9, Bergk: 

Nixa yAuxudepos 
év tmoduxptom & *OAvpm@ Znvi mapiotapeva Kpivet TéAos 
"AOavaroici te Kal Ovarois dperas. 

28a Zeus Swrnp: Plut. Arist. 11 rév Wdaraéwv 6 orpatnyos *Api- 
punotos edo€e Kata Tovs Umvous td TOU Aids Tov Swrnpos éemepwTapevoy aitov, 
6 te 8 mpatrev SéSoxrac trois “EXAnow. Xen. Anab. 1. 8, 16 Zeds 
Swrnp cal Niky, watchword at the battle of Cynaxa. Cf. Diod. Sic. 
14, 30 at Trapezus adroit dé (of Kuperot) tO Te “Hpaxdei kai Ai cornpio 
Gvaiav eroinaay, 

b In the Peiraeeus: Strabo, 395, 396 of 8€ modAol moreno... Tdv 
Ilespaa cuvéoreday eis ddcyyy Kato.kiay tiv wept rods Ayévas Kai Td fepdv 
rod Aws tov Swrnpos. Paus. 1. 1, 3 Oeas S€ akiov ray év TMeipaet padiora 
"AOnvas é€oti Kai Ads réuevos’ xadkov pev audpdrepa ta aydApara, exer b€ 6 


So bat, eS ee 


PP aE a eee 


‘;', eco 


" Firs Oke i Sind Te ery 
Stet ua elie ide 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-VI. 165 


pév oximrpov Kat Nikny, 9 dé AOnva Sdpv. "EvraiOa Aewo Bern bs ’APnvators 
‘ a a ¢ - , , ” re | , , ‘ 

kal Tois maow “EAAnaow Hyovpevos Maxeddvas év te Bowwrois exparnoe waxy kat 

aibis t@ CeppomvrGv . . . TovTov Tov AewaOévny Kai rovs maidas eypayev 

> ‘ 

ApxectAaos. 


¢ In Athens: Aristoph. Plut. 1174: 

améd\@X amd Ayov... 

Kal Tavta Tov Swrhpos iepeds Sv Avs... 

Ovew ér ovdeis aésot 

. . . kalTou TOTE, 

ér etxyov ovdev, 6 pev av fkwv propos 

COvoev iepeidv te gwbeis, 6 SE Tes ay 

Sikny aropuyav, 6 & av éxaddeepeiro tis 

Kapé y ekadet TOV iepea, 
Plut. Dem. 27 elwOdres yap év ri Ovaig Tod Avs Tod Swrjpos apyupiov redew 
rois Katackevafovet Kat Koopovot Tov Bapov... . Cf. inscription referring 
to the Lamian war, Delt. Arch. 1892, pp. 57-59 TH Ev (orHAny) €v’ Akpo- 
moder tiv € mapa Tov Ala rv Swrqpa. Cf. Isocr. 9. 57 Tovs eikdvas avra@v 


, ‘ > , > , = ‘ - ‘ a» A -~ 
(Kévevos Kal Evayépov) €aTnoapev, ov mep TO TOU Ads ayadpa TOU TwTNpos. 


C.1..A.3.281 (on a seat in the theatre) ‘Tepéws Atds (Avds) Sernpos kai’ AOnvas 
Sereipas (Momms. Heorsol. p. 453). C. L. A. 2. 741 ék ths Ovoias To 
Au 7@ Zoripe: 7. 446% raipov TO Avi TH Zornpe: 16. 4697! rois Aucw- 
rpios TS Aci rH Vorhpt kai tH *AOnvG TH Zoretpa: 7b. 47 1°° reperAevoav SE 
kai Tois Mounyios eis toy Aypéva Tov eu Mourixia dpidAdepevot, dpoiws dé Kat 
Aucernpios: 7b. 326 ered) d€ 6 iepets EOvoe Ta eEioiTNpia.. . TO Au 
TO Vorhpe kal TH "AOnva tH Zoreipa: 26. 3. 167 EpnBor avéecay Au wrnpe 
épnBor. Rev. Arch. 1865, p. 499 Zeus Soter, worshipped by ¢pavorai. 

d At Sicyon: Plut. Arat. 53 Qvovoew aire (‘Apar@) Ovoiav ri pev 7 
ri médw annddake tis Tupavvidos nuépa... TH OE ev n yeverOa tov avdpa 
Stapynpovevovor. Tis pev odv mporépas Tod Auws tov Zwrnpos Katnpxeto Oun- 
moXos. 

e At Messene: Paus. 4. 31, 6 Meconvios S€ év ti ayopa Atds eottv 


| @yadpa Ywrijpos. At Corone in Messene, 4. 34, 6 Atos SwrTnpos xadxovv 


@yaApa ént rhs ayopas meroinrat. 

f At Argos (by an Argive cenotaph): Paus. 2. 20, 6 kai Aws éorw 
évravéa iepov Swthpos. 

e At Troezen: 7d. 2. 31, 10 €ote 8€ kai Atis iepor enikAnow Sornpos. 

h At Aegium: 7d. 7. 23, 9 fort S€ Kai Avds émixhyow Swrnpos €v 7H 
ayopa Tépevos. 

i At Mantinea: 7@. 8. 9, 2 Mavrweiorrdé éors wai ddda icpa 16 pev 
Seripos Aids, ro d€ "Emid@rov Kadovpévov. 


166 GREEK RELIGION. 


k At Megalopolis in the agora: Paus. 8. 30, 10 iepév Swrnpos émikdnow 
Avs, Kexdopntat O€ mepé Kioot. Kabefopéva d€ t@ Aut ev Opdvm mapeorykact 
TH pev 1) Meyddn modus, ev dpiotepa S€ "Aprémidos Swreipas dyadpa. tadra 
prev RiBov rod TevreAnoiov *A@nvaior Kngioddoros kai Zevopav eipydcavto. 
Cf. C. £. Gr. 1836, second century B.c. 

1 At Acraephiae: C. 7. Gr. 1587 iepatetovros tod Aus tod Sarqpos, 
time of Sulla. 


m At Agrigentum: inscription on coins of third century, B.c., 
Head, Azst. Num. p. 108. 


n At Galaria, a Sikel town, on coin of fifth century, 2d. p. 121. 

° At Ambracia: C. Z. Gr. 1798 dedication Ywrjpe Ati. 

p At Aetolia: C. Z. A. 2. 323 eed) 1d Kowdy rd tev Airo\av . . . 
en prota tov ay@va tov tév Zatnpiov riOévae Te Att rH Vorhpe kai ro 
‘Ar ou TH WvGio vrdpympa tis udyns Ths yevouerns mpds tovs BapBdpovs, 
circ. 276: Bc, 

a At Pharsalos: Cauer, Delect?. 396 [®apoddx Jou dvéBetxacy [edéap Jevor 
Au Sovretpe. 

r Rhodes: C. Z. Gr. 2526 Zivav Naovtpou ’Apddios mpdEevos Act Sarhpe. 

s At Lesbos: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1880, p. 435. 

_t At Pergamon, vide Conze, Svtzungsber. d. Berl. Akad. 1884, s. 12 
orjoa, O€ avrov Kal eikdva ... Tapa Tov Tod Aws Tod Swrhpos Bapdy, dros 
imdpxn 1) eikOv ev TO enupaveatdt@ Tér@ THs ayopas. 

u At Miletus: C. 7. Gr. 2852 Képas émvyeypappévoy Act carhpe éy, in 
a letter of Seleucus to the Milesians. 

vy At Eumenia in Phrygia: C. 7. Gr. 3886 rév dd mpoydvev dayra- 
dapynodvrwv Ads Swrnpos Kal "ArdAwvOS. 

w Soph. frag. 375: 

Zev mavotdume Kat Ads owrnpiov 
omovdn tpitov Kpatinpos. 
Cf. Athenae. 692 E mAciorar trav pév adyabod Salpovos airotvrov ToTnptov 


trav b€ Aws carnpos, ddov dé iyetas: see other passages collected 
there, 692 E and 693 a-—c. 


9a Zeus Tarys: Paus. 9. 26, 7 Geomedor d€ ev rh médec Sadrou Ards 
€oTt xadkovr ayadpa, 
b Zeus Swcimods: at Magnesia on the Maeander, ””. 


® Zeus *Amorpémas: Erythrae, Rev. Arch. 1877, p. 115, inscription 
concerning sale of priesthoods, Avs drorporaiov kali "AOnvas anorporaias. 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-—VI. 167 


181 Zeus ’Edevdépios : Simonides, Bergk 140 
Ilépoas e€ehacavres €hevOepov “EAAaSt Kécpov 
iSptcavro Aws Bopoy édevbeptov. 

a At Syracuse: Diod. Sic. 11. 71 (after the overthrow of the tyranny 
of Thrasybulus) eynpicavro Avis pev eevdepion koNoTTiatoy avdpiavra KaTa- 
oxevdoa, kar’ énavrov dé Ovew édevbépia Kal dydvas éemupaveis Tocely, 

b At Plataea: Strabo, 412 A idpicavrd re éevOepiov Avs tepoy kai 
dyava yupuxdy atepavirny drédegav, *EXevbepra mpoaayopevaarres. Cf. 
Plut. Arist, 20 mept S€ Ovoias epopévors adrois dveihev 6 IvOtos Avos €Aev- 
Oepiov Bapov ipvcdcOa, Otoa dé py mpdrepov i) TO KaTa THY Xwpav TIP 
droaBécavtas ws imd trav BapBdpov pepracpévor évatoacba Kxabapdv eék 
Aadgay ard ths xowhs éorias. Paus. g. 2, 5 at Plataea, ov méppe amd 
Tod Kowod Tav ‘ENAnvav Ads éativ Edevbepiou Bopuds ... Tov Aids d€ rov re 
Bopor kat 7d &yadpa éroinoay AevKod AiBov' ayovar de Kat vov ére ayava Sv 
Zrovs méunrov, Ta Edevbepia, ev @ péytora yépa mpoxeirat Spdpov' Ogovar dé 
Sadopévor mpd Tod Bopod. C.J. Gr. 1624, inscription at Thebes of 
Roman period, mapa 1 ’EdevOepig Au kai rH ‘Opovoia tov “EMAjvov TAa- 
Tatewy méALs TOV EauTHs EvepyeTny. 

© Zeus ’EdevOépios at Samos: Herod. 3. 142 émed) yap of eEnyyedOn 6 
Tlodukpdreos Odvatos . . . Atos ’EdevOepiov Bopoy iSpvoaro Kal Téwevos Tept 
avrov ovpire TOUTO TO VUY EV TO mpoaoTnio earl. 

d At Larissa: Lebas, Mégar. 42 b’ENevOépia ta €v Aapion. 

e At Athens, near the orod Bacidews in the Ceramicus: Paus. I. 3, 2 
évravba earnxe Zevs dvopatdpevos €devOépos Kai Baowdevs *Adptavds (ef. 
C. I. A. 3.9): Paus. 10. 21, 5 admoBavevros de ind trav Tadaray (in the 
battle at Thermopylae) tiv domida of mpoonxorres avébecav TO EXevOepin 
Au... Tovro pev 81 ereyéypatro mpiv i) Tos 6pod SvAAg kal adda tov ’AGn- 
not kal Tas €v TH oTOa Tov EdevOepiov Avs Kadedeiv donidas. Harpocrat. 
5.0, Erevbépios Zeis’ 6 dé AiSuvpds hynow dpapravew Tov pnropa (‘Yrepidnv) 
éxAnOn yap édevbépios Sia TO Tov Mydix@v aaddaynvat Tous ea soaai 2 ore de 
émuyéyparrat pev Swrnp, dvopaterar Se kat édevbepios, Snot Kat Mévavdpos. 
Hesych. s. v. EXev€pios Zevs' Tav Mydwv expvydvtes (?) iSpvoavro Tov *EXev- 
Béptov Ala’ rovrov S€ nor Kal Sorqpa haov ryarar 6€ Kat év Supaxovaas Kal 
mapa Tapavrivos kat ev I\arewais kat ev Kaptas (1. Kapvats) : cf. Schol. 
Plato in Eryx. 392 a (who quotes from the same source as Hesychius, 
reading: é€v Kapiga). Schol. Aristoph. Plut, 1176 & dote. Ata owtnpa 
ryaow, évOa Kai cwtipos Aus €otw iepdv' Tov avrov dé gor kal eAevOEpidv 
gact. C.J. A. 2. 17 (containing the terms of alliance of the second 
Attic confederacy), 1. 63 1d Whdiopa tdd_ 6 ypappareds 6 tHe Bovdns 
dvaypadro év arin Abivy Kai katabérw mapa tov Aia Tov *EdevOeptov : 


cf. 26.1. 9 and 26. 


168 GREEK RELIGION. 


f In Laconia: Rochl, Juscr. Graec. Ant. 49a add. Acoixéra Atwdev- 
cpin: Le Bas-Foucart, 189 Zavi Edevdepip *Avraveivor Zwtipe (vide Wide, 
Lakonische Kulte, 5. 4 and 17). 

s At Olymus in Caria: iepéa AvdsEXev6epiou, inscription in A/7i#. d. d. 
Inst. Ath. 1889, p. 375: 


32a Zeus ‘EAAdmos: Herod. 9. 7, 4 mets d€ Ala re ‘EAAqnov aideaOertes 


kal thy ‘EAAdda Sewvoy tovedpevor mpodovvat ov Katawéeoaper. 


b In Aegina: Pind. Wem. 5. 15 tdv mor evavdpdy te Kat vavoikduTay 


Oéccavro Tap Bwpoy marépos “E\Aaviov oravres, Aeginetan inscription, 
C. I. Gr. 2138 b Aci MavedAnvio (? first century B. c.). 


e At Athens: Paus. 1. 18, 9 ’Adptavos 5€ xateoxevacato kal Ga ’AGn- 
vaiots vaov "Hpas kat Avs TavedAnviov, 


d At Syracuse: Gardner, Zypes of Greek Coins, 11. 25. 


188 Zeus ‘Opodwos: Suidas, s.v. év OnBas kat ev Gddats wdAeot Botwrt- 
Kais kal ev Ococadia..."Iorpos 5) ev tH UB THs Zvvaywyyns bia Td map’ 
AloAedat To Spovontixoy Kal eipnviKdv duodrov éyerOar, "“Earti dé kai Anunrnp 
‘Opotola ev OnBas: cf. inscription from Assos, C. /. Gr. 3569 Kaioape 
SeBaotd . .. 6 lepevs Tov Ads Tov ‘Oporwov. 

184 Zeus Idvdnpos, at Athens: C. J. A. 3. 7, mutilated inscription of 
the time of Hadrian, mentioning a Aids Havdnpou iepov, At Synnada 
in Phrygia: ZEYC IANAHMOC on coin of the Imperial pene. Head, 
List. Num. p. 569. 


185 Zeus ’Emxoimos : Hesych. s. v. Zeds év Sadapin. 


Local titles from cities or districts. 


ea Zeus ’ABperrnvds: from Abrettene, a district of Mysia, Strabo, 
574: 

b Zeus ”Aows: Steph. Byz. s.v."Acos, wodtxwov Kpntns .. . 6 Zevds eet 
Tysarar Kat "Agtov Atos iepdv apxaidraroy, 

© Zeus Bavroxacxevs, from Baetocaece, a village near Apamea in Syria : 
C. I. Gr. 4474: in letter of King Antiochus, mpoceveyOévros pou rept 
tijs evepyeilals Ol o0 dylov A|ds Barroxatk(éws) expi[@|n ovyxeopnOqvar adr@ 
cis dmavra tov xpdvor, [ep H |v kai 7 Svva[ p|is rod Oeod Kur| é|pxerat, kopny 
tiv Bacroxai| knvav |. 

d Zeus Bévmos,? from Benna, a city in Thrace: C. /. Gr. 3157 | 
bmép ths Avroxpdropos Nepova Tpaiavod Kaivapos 3<Baorov veikns Ati Bevvio 
Mnvotpavns .. . Bwpov avértnocay timép Bevverconvar, 

€ Zeus Aodtxnvos : inscription of Roman period in Comm, Arch. Com. 
d. Roma, 1885, p. 135: cf. Steph. Byz. s. v. 











REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-VI. 169 


f Zeus “Exados, at the deme Hekale near Marathon: Plut. Zhes. 14 
€Ovov yap ‘Exadnovov of mépr& Spor ovvidvtes ‘Exdd@ Aut. 


& Zeus ’Edevoinos: Hesych. s.v. Zeds ’EX. rap’ "Ilwot. 


bh Zeus Evpopevs: on coins of Euromus near Mylasa, Head, A7s/. 
Num. p. 525. 

i Zeus “Idaios ’Ikéwy: on coins of Ilium and Scepsis of Imperial 
period, Head, Ast. Num. pp. 473, 474- 


k Zeus Kedawevs at Apamea: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1893, p. 309 4 Bovdy 
kai 6 Onpos éreiunoav TiBepiov KAavduov .. . iepea did Biov Ards KeAauveos : 


cf. Head, Hs, Num. p. 558. 

1 Zeus Kpapwnvds : on inscription from Mysia, Afi. d. d. Inst. Ath. 
1889, p. go. 

m Zeus Kapiws: vide x and ™. 


n Zeus Kpoxedrns: Paus. 3. 21, 4 Emi Oddacoap kai és Tvetov karaBaivovri 
€ott Aaxedatpoviois ) Kopn... (Kpoxeai)... Oedv b€ ard mpd pev tis 
k@pns Ards Kpoxedta didov pev remoinpevoy ayakpa €atyke. 

© Zeus Kuvaevs, from Cynaetha in Arcadia: Schol. Lycophr. 400: 
Paus. 5. 22, I. 


P Zeus Kepvpos, ? from district near Halicarnassus : Tzetz. Lycophr. 
459 Kepupos 6 Zeds ev ‘Adixapvacoe tipata: vide Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1891, 
p- 174: 1887, p. 385. 

4 Zeus Aapioaios or Aapiserv's at Argos: Paus. 2. 24, 1 thy d€ dxpdmodw 
Adpicav pév kadovow . .. § 3 "Em adxpa b€ éote tH Aapion Atos emikdnow 
Aaptoaiov vads, ovk Exwv dpopor, 1o S€ dyadpa Ev\ov Teronpévov, Strabo, 
440 kai €v tH ’Artixn b€ €ote Adpioa’ Kai tay TpdddX\ewv Ovexovda Kopn 
Tpidkovra oradious . . . taws b€ Kai 6 Aapiowos Zeds exeiOev émwvdpacra, 
Steph. Byz. Adpuoa wédes ¢ ... Kal 6 moins Aaptoaios Kai Aapioeds 
Zevs. Cf. Zeus Aapdowos at Tralles: vide 1°}. 


r Zeus Aaodixev’s on coins of Imperial period of the Phrygian Lao- 
dicea, and other cities of Phrygia, Head, Hs. Num. p. 566, &c. 

® Zeus Avédwos on coins of Sardes and Cidramus of Imperial period : 
1b. PP. 523; 553- 

t Zeus Madetaios at Malea: Steph. Byz. s.v. Madea. 

u Zeus Méyoros of Iasos: C. J. Gr. 2671: cf. Zeus ” A pews on coins 


of lasos, Head, Ast, Num. p. 528: inscription on altar in Oxford, 
Aids AaBpaivdou kai Aws peyiorov, from Aphrodisias in Caria, C. Z. Gr. 


2750. 
Vv Zeus Meooanecis : Steph. Byz. Meooaréa’ xwpiov Aaxwrxis’ 16 €Ovixdr 


170 GREEK RELIGION. 


ar 4 \ ¢ ‘ Eo - , a e , 
Mecoameevs* ovTw yap 6 Zevs éxet Tiuarat, Oedmopuros TevTnKooT@ EBddpue. 
el Palls-<3. 20) 4, 


Ww Zeus Néuvewos: Paus. 2. 15, 2 ev b€ ary (77 Newéa) Nepeiov re Ards 
vads eatt Oéas Eos . . . Ovovar dé’ Apyeion TH Aci kal ev TH Neuea kal Nepeiov 
Avs iepéa aipotyrat, Kai 57 Kai Spdpou mpotiBéaow ayava avdpdow amdtopévors 
Nepelov mavnyvpes tav xeyuepwav. Ld. 2. 20, 3 in Argos: Nepeiouv Aus 
eotw iepov, dyadpa opOdv xadkovy, tTéxyvn Avoinmov. Ld. 4.27, 6 Apycion bé 
TH Te "Hpg th ’Apyeig kai Nepei@ Aci é6voy (at the restoration of Messene) : 
cf. C. Z. Gr. 1123. In Locris: Thuc. 3. 96 iepov rod Aws rod Nepeiov. 
In Caria: inscr. JZ. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1890, p. 261 fepéws Ards 
Nepetov. 


x Zeus ’Ocoyas AaBpavvdnvés at Mylasa in Caria: Strabo, 659 ¢youce 
& of MvaAageis iepa dv0 tod Aids, rod Te "OTwyaa kadovpévov Kai AaBpavvdnvor, 
TO pev ev TH TOA, Ta SE AdBpavvda Kopn cot ev TO dper. .. evTavOa vews 
eotwv apxaios Kai Edavov Avs Srpariov. rtiyarar imo tev KiKA@ Kal dd TOV 
MvAagéwy, dds te Eotpwrar oyeddv te kal éEnxovra otadiov péxpt THs TOAEws 
iepa Kadovpen, d:¢ fs mourootoAeirar Ta lepd... Taita pev ovv idia tis 
m0Aews, tpitov Se €ativ iepdy tov Kapiov Ards, Kowdy admavrav Kapaov, ob 
pereote kai Avoois kal Mucois ws addehdois. C. Z. Gr. 2691 £, inscription 
in the time of Mausolus, mentioning the iepdv rod Ats tod AapBpavvdou 
at Mylasa. C. /. Gr. 2693, inscription from Mylasa first century 
B.C.? Aws *Ocoy@: cf. 2700. Zeus AaB8paivdys: inscription from 
Olymos in Caria, AZ/#t. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1889, p. 375. Zeus AaBpavieis, 
Thiasos and temple in the Peiraeus: inscription beginning of third 
Cony pc. sev. Arch 1864, p. 399. C. 7.A. ii. 613. 


y Zeus WeAtnvds: from Peltae in Phrygia, on coins of first century 
B.c.. Head, Hrst. Num. p. 567: cf. C. Z. Gr. 3568 f, ? third century B.c., 


> col na A un a 
€v T@ iep@ Tov Atos Tov IleATnvov. 


z Zeus Xpvodwp or Xpvoaopevs: Strabo, 660 Erparovixera 8° eoti Karot- 
kia Makeddvav . . . eyyds b€ ris méAEws TO TOD Xpvaaopéews Ards Kowvdy dmrdvT@v 
Kapor, eis 6 ouviace Oicovtes Kai Bovrevodpevor mepi Ta Kowdv' Kadeira dé 
To GvoTHWAa aiTav Xpvoaopéwy cuveotynkds eK KoMaV... Kal Srparovixeis Se 
Tov GuoTHpaTos peTexovow, ovK dvTes TOU Kaptxod yevous. C. I, Gr. 2720, 
inscription from Stratonicea of Roman period, mentioning the iepeds 
Ads Xpvoaopiov, Paus. 5. 21, 10 ra de madatdrepa i] Te xopa Kal  TOds 
€xadeito Xpvoaopis. In Iasos: Rev. d. Htudes Grecques, 1893, p. 167, 
inscription mentioning a orepaynpepos tov Xpvadopos. 


aa Zeus Iurdmwos: from Pitane in Aeolis, inscription in Smyrna, 
BiBAwo8. Kai Movo. 1873, p. 142. 














REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV_—VI1. 171 


bb Zeus Sadapinos: on Cypriot coins of Imperial period, Head, 
Hist. Num. p. 624. 


ce Zeus Sorvpevs: on late coins of the Pisidian Termessus, 2d. p. 
594: cf. C. 7. Gr. 4366 k. : 


dd Zeus Tadpovos = Baaltars on coins of Tarsus of Imperial period, 
Head, 2d. p. 617. 


ee Zeus "Ev Otnvacos at Venasae in Cappadocia: Strabo, 537 ev de 
TH Mopipnvy ro iepdv tov év Oinvacots Atos iepodovAwy Katotkiay Exwv TpLoXE- 


, 
Av oxeddv Te kal yopav iepav evxaprov. 


7 Zeus Baowhevs ®at Lebadea: Paus. 9. 39, 4-5 (ev To adver Tpopw- 
viov) Avs Baowéws vads ... Over... 6 KaTiov aiT@ TE TS Tpopario... Kal 


» ee n 
Au exixAnow Baowdei, kal "Hpa tre ‘Hudyn. 


b At Erythrae: Rev. Arch. 1877, p. 107 Zwobévns . . . 5 lepeds rod 


Aws tov Baotews kai ‘Hpaxdéous Kadduwixov, Aut kal “Hpakdet. 


¢ At Paros: C. 7. Gr. 2385 6 iepeds rov Ais rod Bacihéws kat “Hpa- 
kAéous, third century B.c. 


d Arrian, 3. 5, Alexander at Memphis, Ove r@ Ad rG Baodet. Dio 
Chrys. 1, p. 9 (Dind.) Zeds pdvos Oedv marjp kat Bacireds erovoudgerat Kai 
Tlo\uevs. 


188 Zeus Mediyios ®at Athens: Thuc. 1. 126 éori xat "A@nvaios Acdova 
@ xaXetrat, Aws €opti Mewdtxlov peyiotn Ew tis wddews, ev 7) Travdnpuet Ovovar 
ToAXol ov» iepeia GAA Oipara émiywpia. Schol. Lucian, “Ikapopev. 24 Araona, 
€opri) iy éemeréhouy peta twos atvyvdrntos, Ovovres ev adtn Art pedtxio. 
Schol. Aristoph. Vud. 408 €opri) Metyiov Aids’ adyera dé pnvos ’AvOeorn- 
pidvos i) POivovros. "AmoANdmos b€ 6 Ayapve’s Ta Ardara Stakpives ard Ths TOU 
Mewtxiov éoptis. Xen. Anab. 7. 8, 3 6 b€ elev, Epmddios yap cou 6 Zevs 
6 Meiriyids éort, kai ennpeto ei On Ovdoeer, Gotep olka, ey, ci@bev eyo 
bpiv Overba Kal Sdoxauteiv ... 7H S€ torepaia 6 Zevopav... eOvero kal 
@dokavrec xolpovs to matpio vdum Kat éxaddeper. Lucian, Xapidnp. 1 
*Avdpoxdéous Ta émivixia tebvkdros ‘Eppa, dre 87 BiBAiov avayvovs évixnoev év 


Auoios. Luc. ‘Ikapoper. 24 npota (6 Zets)...8¢ hv airiav €ddeimrovev 


O AP 
’AOnvaion ra Aidota rosovrav éerav, C.J, A. 1. 4 LIXIOI. Jd. 2. 


1578 ‘Hdioriwv Ad Maryio, ‘in parte inferiore lapidis imago ser- 
pentis sculpta fuit’ Cf. 2. 1579-1583. Jd. 1585 ‘HAl@ wal Au 
Medixio Mappia. Eph. Arch. 1886, p. 49 Kpt|roBdrn Adi Mediyig. 
Paus. 1. 37, 4 AtaBaor 8é€ rdv Knynquodv Bopds éotw dpxaios Methixiov 
Ads’ emi rovT@ Onoeds id Tay droydvwv Tv buTadov kabapaiwy Ervxe AnoTas 
Kat GAXovs drokreivas kal Simy ra mpds Turbos ovyyern. Plutarch, De 


172 GREEK RELIGION. 


Cohib. Ira 9. p. 458 Aw kat tdv Oedv rov Baciréa petrixtov, AOnvain Se 
pamdktny, otuat, Kadovor: cf. Hesych. s.v. Marpdktns’ Metdiyvos kat KaOap- 
ows. Suidas, 1.1, p.1404 Avs xc@di0v' od 7d fepetov Act réOura’ Ovdovar dé 
TO Mehixyio kal rH Kryoi (? ‘Ikeci@), xpavrat & avtois of te SKippopopiwy 
THY mopmny oTeddovTes, Kat 6 Agdodxos év ’EXevoin kai GAXot tives mpods Tovs 
xaOappovs, trooropyuvres atta Tois mooi tov évayov. Eustath. p. 1935, 8 
Aiov é€xddovv k@dcov iepeiov tudévros Aut Methixi év trois Kabappois POivovros 
Matpakrnpi@vos ore ifyero Ta Topmata Kal Kabappav éxBodal és Tovs tpiddovs 
eyevorto. C.L. A. 3. 77 Matpaxrnpidvos Adi Tewpyd « nénavov. Bull. 
de Corr, Fell. 1889, p. 392 Avi Medixioxat ’Evodia kai wéAe. Harpocrat. 
S$. U. Matpakrnpiov, 6 € pry rap’ ’A@nvatos . . . @vdpacrat amd Avs paymakrou, 
paaktns © €or 6 evOovoiwdns Kat Tapakrikds. 

@cot Mevdixior at Myonia in Locris: Paus. ro. 38, 8 ddcos kat Bopuds 
Geav Mewsxiov eori’ vuxrepival b€ ai Ovoia Geois rois MesAtxiows eiai, Kai 
ava\éoa Ta Kpéa até mpl i) Lov émiayxeiv vopiovor. 

b In Sicyon: Paus. 2. 9, 6 ure Zebs Meidiyios kat "Aprewes dvopatopevn 
Ilatpaa, adv téxvn memompéva ovdenia’ mupapids S€ 5 Mewdiytos, 4 Sé Kiovi 
€or elkagpern. 

¢ At Argos: Paus. 2. 20, I a@yakud éore kabnpevov Atos Metduxlov, Atbov 
Aevkov, TloAvkAeirou dé épyov . . . Varepov dé adda Te émnyayovto Kabdpowa ws 
emi aipate eupvdri@ Kal dyadpa avéOnkay Mewdixiou Acs. 

d At Orchomenos: C. /. Gr. 1568, Inscr. Graec. Septentr. vol. 1. 
3169 a modus Add Mevdexiv (third century B.c.). 

e At Chalcis: C. Z. Gr. 2150, doubtful inscr. 


f At Andros: Jit. d.d. Inst. Ath. 1893, p. 9 votive inscription, 
Atos MeAtyiov, 


& In Chios: inscr. Avs Miacxlov Mizz. d. d. Inst. Ath, 1888, p. 223. 
h (?) At Alaesa in Sicily: C. Z. Gr. 5594, inscription of pre-Roman 
period mentioning ro Mewacyretov. 


9a Zeus Tiywwpds in Cyprus: Clem. Alex. Profrept. P. 33 odxi pevroe 


Zevs adakpos ev” Apyet Tinwpds dé GAdos ev Kump@ reripyabor ; 
40a Pollux 1. 24 Ocot Avowor KaOdpovor dyvirar pvéior . . . mwadapvaior 
TpooTpomatot. 


b Pherecydes: Miill. Frag. Hist, 114 a 6 Zeds dé Ikéoros kat "AXdoropos 
kadeirar: Cf. 103 Avoca b€ evémece TH “IEion Sua rodro (the murder of his 
father-in-law) kai ovdeis adrov #Oedev dyvicat ote bev ovre dvOparar 
IIp@ros yap éuhudov avdpa dméxrewev. "EXenoas 8€ airov 6 Zevs dyvicet, 

¢ Aesch. Lum. 441 oepvds mpcoiktap év tpdmos “IEiovos: Lb, 710 
mpwtoktdvact mpoorportrais *1Eiovos, 


= ee a.” | 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV_VI. 173 


d Apollod. 2. 1, 5 kai airds (ras Aavaod Ovyarépas) éxdOnpay ’AOnva te kai 
“Eppns Aids KeAevorarros. 


41 Zeus Svés ® at Argos: Paus. 2. 21, 2 mpd 8€ abrod memoinra Atos 
Dvgiov Boyds, kai mrnoiov ‘Yrepuvnotpas pvijpa ’Audiapdov pntpds, rd de 
Erepov “Yreppynorpas ths Aavaovd. Ld. 3.17, 9 (riv maida Te dxwvdky maiet)... 
TovTO TO ayos ovK eeyevero aroduyeiv Tavaavia, kabdpo.a tmavtoia Kal ixecias 
SeLaper@ Ards vgiov (? at Sparta or in North Greece). 


b In Thessaly: Schol. Ap. Rhod. 2. 1147 vétov S€ rdv Aia of Geaaadot 
Eeyov, frou Gre emt Tov Aevkadiwvos kataxhvopod Karépvyov eis adroy i Sid TO 
tov Ppigov xarapvyeiv eis airév. Ld. 4. 699 Bvét0s pev Zeds 6 BonOav rois 
pvyact. 

© On Parnassus: Apollod. 1.7, 5 Aevxadioy 8€ . . . 7 apvacoé mpoo- 
loxet, kdKet TOY 6uBpwv maidav aBdvrar, eKBas Bier Art Svéio: zd. 1. 9, 66 de 
(pigos) rov xpvodpaddAoy xpi Aut Over béim. Cf. Apoll. Rhod. 2. 1 150. 


42a Zeus KaOdpows at Olympia: Paus. 5. 14, 8 Ka@apoiov Ads kai 
Nixns (Bwpds), kat adits Avds émwvupiar XOoviov. 


b Herod. 1. 44 6 d€ Kpoioos, 76 Oavdt@ Tov madds ovvrerapaypévos, padddv 
> , o eee) san , wer * , \ a 
Te eOewwodoyeero, Ort puv Gnéxrewe Tov adrds pdvov exadOnpe’ Tepinuextéwy S€ TH 
auphopy Sewas, exddrce pev Aia Kabapouor, 
¢ Apoll. Rhod. 4. 698 : 
T@ kal OmiCopern Znvds OCéuw ‘Ixeviao, 
é , ‘ , , > > 8 te ae 
$ peya pev Kote, peya 6 avdpopdvorow dpnyer, 
L tw Ue a > > Ld 
pee Ounrodinv, oin tr amoAvpaivoyrat 
r cal ¢..# a? > , ’ 3 
vnAneis ixérat, Ot edeotion avtidwow 
~ ‘ >? , , = i 
Mp@ta pey atpento.o AvTNpwy Hye ovoro 
7 , ‘ 7 x a ‘ 
Tewapern KaOurepbe ovds téKkos, hs ert patot 
, , > , 
amAnpupov Aoxins ex vndvos ... 
xa@dpowoy ayka\éovca 


Zynva tadapvaiwv tinopoy ikecidwv, 
d Pollux, 8. 142 rpeis Oeods dprivar Kxedever VAwv, ixéotov Kabdporov 
e€axeoThpa, 
48a Zeus ‘Ikéovos: at Sparta: Paus. 3. 17, g Aaxedapdno . . . Saipova 
tindow "Endarny, 76 emt Mavoavia rod ‘Ikeciov pnviya anorpémew roy ’Em- 
Barnv A€yovtes toirov, Roehl, /. G. A. 49: inscription at Sparta 
ATIAIBOIA = Ai ixéra. 
b Od, 13. 213: 
Zevs oheas ticaito ixernotos, ds te Kai dAdous 
avOparous eopG Kal rivuTa, ds tis dudprp. 


174 GREEK RELIGION. 


¢ Aesch. Suppl. 385: 
pever Tor Znvos ixtiov Koros ’ 
dvomapdbedxtos maOdvros oikrots. 
BO 45S pnr ev Oeav eSpacw OS idpupéevas 
exOdvres tuas Tov mavadeOpov Oedv 
Bapiv auvoixov OnodpecO addortopa, 
ds ovd ev ‘Aidouv tov Oavdvr’ édevOepot, 
LOL AO; avaykn Znvos aideic@at Kdrov 
ixtnpos* vuotos yap ev Bporois pdBos. 
44 Zeus ’Arorpdraos with Athene drorporaia at Erythrae: inscription 
of third century B.c. at Smyrna Rev, Arch. 1877, p. 115. Epidaurus: 
Cavwvadias Lipidaure 119. 


45 Zeus Iadv, Hesych. s. v. Zevs’ trysarar év ‘Pdde. 


146 Zeus ’Emxovpios: on coins of Alabanda, Imperial period: Head, 
Hist. Num. p. 519. 


47 Zeus “Opxios ®at Olympia: Paus. 5. 24, 9 6 dé ev r@ Bovdevtnpio 
gdvtov éndca aydApata Aws pddiota és exmAnkw adikov avdpav meroinrat, 
emikAnots pev “Opkids eat ata, exer Oe ev Exatépa Kepavvdr yxeupl. 

b At Tyana: Aristot. p. 845 Adyerae wept ra Téava vdwp etvat ‘Opxiov Acds. 

© Soph. Oed. Col. 1767 x@ mdvr’ diwy Atds épkos. 


148 7b, 1382 Aixn civedpos Znvds apxaioas vopos. Aesch. Choeph. 950 
Aikn Aws xépa. Arist. De AZundo sub fin. r@ S€ (Zyvi) det ouvererat 
dikn. Soph. Frag. 767 xpvo pakedAn Znyvos ekavaorpépyn (Aixn). 
Archilochus, “vag. 88 Bergk & Zed, mdrep Zed, ody pév ovpavod xpdros, 
av © épy én avOparwr dpas, Aewpya Kal Oepotd, aot dé Onpiov vBpis 
re kat Sikn pede. Plut. ad princ. inerud, p. 781 6 Zevs ove Exeu THY Aixny 
mdpedpov GAN adros Aikn kai O¢uis éoti. Soph. Oecd. Col, 1268: 

GrAN €ore yap Kal Znvi atvOaxos Opdvev 
Aidas én’ Epyors mat, Kat mpds gol, marep, 
mapacrabnre. 


Aesch. Suppl. 191: 
Aevkooredets 
ixtnpias, adydApar aidoiov Aids, 
genvas €xyovoa did xepav evavipor, 
49a Zeus Hémos: Plut. De Lxzl. 13 (p. 605) kat Reviov Acds ripat moddal 
kai peyada. Od. 14. 283: 
GAN dd keivos épuxe, Aids 8 a@mifero phvyw 


fewiov, ds Te pdadtota vepeooarat Kaka epya, 


or nthe Be 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-VI. 175 


b At Athens: C. 7. A. 2. 475 Atéyynros rapias vavedAnpwv Kal éumdpov 
rav hepdvtav tiv civodov rod Aids Tov Zeviov (first century B.c.). C.Z. A. 
3. 199 inscription of late period on altar found on Acropolis: révd_ 


Avxos kai... kar’ dvpov To keivav epdp@ Bopdv Bevro Ati, 
bb At Epidaurus: Cavvadias EZpcdaure 99 Uvpopopnoas Avds Reviov. 


e At Sparta: Paus. 3. 11, 11 fore kal Zeds Hémos kat AOnva Revia, Cf. 
Philostr. Vit. Apoll. 4. 31 mepiordvtes dé adrov (’AroAAG@MOY) of Aakedatpudrior 
Eévoy te mapa TO Att erroovyto, 


d In Rhodes: Atds €evacrai, Foucart, Assoc. Relig. pp. 108, 230, 
No. 48. Roman period. 


e In Cyprus: Ov, Mes. 10. 224 Ante fores horum stabat Iovis 
hospitis ara. 


f Plut. Arat. 54 Alkas ye py 6 Pidummos od peumras Aut Eeviw kai pirio 


THs avociovpylas TavTns Tivev duerédece, 


& Plato, Laws, p. 729 E épnuos yap dv 6 E€vos Eraipwy Te Kal ovyyevov 
Eeewdrepos avOpamas Kai Oeois, 6 Suvdpevos odv Tipwpetv paddov Bonbet 
, e , ’ , € 4 e. 2 , ‘ \ - 
mpobvpdrepov’ Suvara b€ duapepdvrws 6 Feros éxdotav Saipwv Kai Geds TO 


, + 
Eevio ovverrdpevor Aut. 


h Charondas mpooiuta vopov: Stobaeus, 44.C. 40 (vol. 2, p. 181 Meineke) 
éévov , . . edhnuws kal oixeiws mpoadexerOat kal dmoaredXeLv, penvnpevous Atos 
Eeviov as mapa maow iSpupevov Kowod Oeod Kai bvtos émioxdmov purogevias te 


x , 
Kali Kakuێevias, 
0 Zeus Meroixios: Bekk. Anecd. 1. 51 6 td Trav peToikwv Tipapevos. 


1a Zeus bidws at Athens: C. J. A. 2. 1330’Epamorat Aut bidio avebecav 
颒 ‘Hynatov apxovros (B.C. 324-3), on a seat in the theatre at Athens: 
C. I. A. 3. 285 lepéws Aids SiAlov: private dedications at Athens C. Z. A. 
2. 1330, 1572, 15728 (of fourth century B.c.). 


b At Megalopolis: Paus. 8. 31, 4 rod mepBddou b€ eotw evrds BidAtov 
Auds vads, ToAvedeirov pév Tov Apyeiov To &yadpa, Atovtow S€ euepes* Kd8opvoi 
re yap trodnpard éotw aire, kai exer TH xetpl Exmopa, TH Se érépa Bvpaoy, 
kdOnrat dé detos emi TO Ovpog, 7 

¢ At Epidaurus: Zph. Arch. 1883, p. 31 Aut GiAi@ Tvpoios kar’ dvap 
(late period). 

4 On coins of Pergamum of Imperial period: Head, Hest. Mum. 
p. 464. 

© Pherecrates, Mein. Frag. Com. Poet. 2. p. 293 vm tov Bidwoy: cf. 
Menander, 2d. 4. 85. Diodorus, 23. 3. 543 7d yap mapaccreiv ebdpev 6 Zeds 


176 GREEK RELIGION. 


6 Pidtos 6 tév Dedy péyioros spohoyoupevws. Dio Chrys. Or. 12 (Dind. 1, 
P- 237) ®idwos € kai “Eraipeios (Zeds emovopdterac) dre mavras dvOpdmous 


, 3 
auvayer kai Bovderar Pidous eivar ddAndAors. 


2 Zeus ‘Eratpeios: ® Hesych. s. v. “Eraipeios* 6 Zebs ev Kpntn: Athenae. 
p- 572 D from Hegesandros rnp rév éraupideiwv eoptnvy cvvredovae Mayvntes* 
igtopovat be mp@rov Idgova tov Aigovos auvayayévta Tovs *Apyovavras eratpel@ 
Att Odoat kai rHv éoptiy érapidera mpooayopedoa Ovovar dé Kal of Maxedsvav 
Baoweis ta érarpidera. 

b Herod. 1. 40: Diphilos, Mein. Frag. Com. Poet. 4. p. 384 "Eyxeov 
Heath, TO Ovntov mepixddumTe TO OG" TiO’ tadTa yap map’ Huey Ards ératpeiov, 
TWaTeEp, 

8 Zeus Mowpayerns * at Olympia: Paus.5.15, 5 Idvre 8é emi rv dpeow 
Tay inmwv €oTr Bonds, exiypapya S€ én’ ait Mowayéra’ diya obv eotiv émi- 
kAnow eivar Ads, ds Ta avOparov older. 

> Near Akakesion in Arcadia: Paus. 8.37, 1 év 76 roix@ dédou AevKod 
TUTOL TEMoMpPEvoL, Kal TO pév claw emeipyaopéevae Moipar kai Zevs érikAnow 
Moupayérns. 

¢ At Delphi: Paus. ro. 24. 4 &v d¢€76 vag . . . ore... dyd\pata 
Motpav dvo* avti b€ adray tis tpitns Zevs Te Murpayérns kal “Amdhdov ohict 
mapéatnke Mopayerns. 

d At Athens: C.Z. A. 1. 93 Avi Moipayérp (fragmentary inscription of 
fifth century B.c.). 


14 Zeus “Evaiowos: Hesych. s. v. Ev Kopaveia. 

5 ‘Opdduros: epithet of Zeus and Hera at Camirus: Foucart in Rev. 
Arch. 1867, p. 31 tepeds Atos kai “Hpas ‘Qpodtrav év Tovrepeta, inscription 
of Roman period. 

“sa Titles of doubtful meaning: Zeus ’AcBayaios: Strabo, 537 fepo- 
gun Aws ’AcBapaiov (in Cappadocia). j 

b Zeus Biddras: C. J. A. 2. 549, inscription belonging to Cretan 
city of Lyctus (? second century, B.c.) duviw. .. Tiva Biddrav, 

© Zeus Béfios: on coins of Phrygian Hierapolis, Head, Ast. Num. 
Pp. 565. 

d Zeus TeAxavds or Fedxavés in Crete: Hesych. s.v. Zeds mapa Kptoio 


(? wap’ ’Axpici Or mapa Kpyoi), on coins of Phaestos, Ov. Kunst- 
Mythol. 1. p. 197, Miinziaf. 3. 3. 


€ Zeus ’Ediwvdpevos: Hesych. s.v. Zeds €v Kupyvy (? referring to the 
festival holidays). 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS IV-VI. 177 


f Zeus ’Empvirios: Hesych. s.v. Zeds év Kpnrn. 


& Zeus ’Epidjuwos: Hesych. s.v. Zeds év Péda* (?) referring to Zeus of 
the popular assembly ; cf. Mdvdnyos. 


h Zeus Aapdows: on coins of Tralles, perhaps from a place called 
Larasa in the vicinity, Head, Hist. Num. p. 555 fepeds tod Aids rod 
Aapaciov, inscription from Tralles, AZ. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1886, p. 204. 


i Zeus Macdadarnvss in Lydia: C. J. Gr. 3438, 3439- 


k Zeus Movvirios in Crete: Cauer, Delect.” 117 “Opkos ‘Ieparutviov* 
"Opvia ... Ziva Movviriov Kai”Hpav. At Olymos in Caria, inscription 
in Mitt. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1889, p. 375. 


1 Zeus ‘Opkapaveirns: Inscr. BiBdt08. kat Movo. Spdpuns PS73, P. 725 
23 ’Emixrnros Aut épxapaveitn evynv. 


m Zeus Uorjos: on coins of Dionysopolis in Phrygia of Imperial 
period, Head, /7zs/. Mum. p. 562. 


n Zeus Sroxevs at Sicyon: Bekk. Amecd. 2. 790 Suxvadmoe Kara 


A e ‘ / ‘\ > , A ¥ € \ € , 
gvadas €avtovs td£avtes Kai apiOunoavres Aws Sroryéws iepov iSpvoavro. 


© Zeus SvdAAdmos at Sparta: Plut. Lycurg. 6 pavrecav ex Aepav 
kopicat (Avkotpyov) . .. qv pnrpay Kadovow' "Exe b€ otws* Awos SudAdaviov 
kai “A@nvas SvAdarias iepov iSpvcdpevov pudras dvdakavta kai wBas wBak- 
GyTa. ... 


P Zeus Svpydorns: On coins of Tium on the Euxine of Imperial 
period, Head, Hist. Num. p. 444. 


a Zeus Taddaivs at Olus in Crete: Cauer, Delec/?. 120 (inscription 
about arbitration between Latus Olus and Cnossus) Oéuev orddav .. . 
ev d€ OAdrte ev TO iap@ TH Zyvds TH Taddaiov: cf. 121 "Opvi@ trav ‘Eoriav 
» +. Kal Tov Anva tov ’Ayopaiov Kat tov Anva tov Taddatov. Cf. Tadetitns at 


Sparta, Wide, Lakonische Kulle, p. 4. 
87a Worship of the twelve gods at Athens: Thuc. 6. 54 Iewwiorparos 


6 ‘Immiov tov tupavvevaartos vids ... 0s Tav dadexa Oedv Bwpov Tov ev TH 
ayopG dpxov dvéOnxe. Xen. Hipparch. 3, 2 kai ev trois Aroyvvoias dé oF 
Xoprt mpooemtxapiCovrar G@Adots Te Gevis Kai tois Swdexa yopevovres. Herod. 
6. 108 “Aénvaiwy ipa moetvta@v toict dwdexa Oeoior, ixérar ECopevor emt Tov 
Bopdv, ediSocav oéas avrovs (of MAataeées), Paus. 1. 3, 3 Sroa d€ dmucbev 
@xoddunra ypadas Exovaa Beods rods SwHdexa xadovpevovs. Val. Max. 8. 12 
cum Athenis duodecim Deos pingeret (Euphranor). C. J. A. 2. 57> 
eb£acOar rov knpuxa...7T@ Act TS Odvpmio kai rH ’AOnva rH Wodrdd: cai 7H 
Anunrpt kai tH Képn kai tois SHdexa Geois (just before the battle of Man- 
tinea). Jb. 3. 284 lepéws Sddexa OeSv On a Seat in the theatre. Archaic 
VOL, I. N 


178 GREEK RELIGION. 


inscription from Salamis, C. /. A. 1. 420 rois dadexa Oeois. Cf. C. 1. 
Gr. 452 Sadapinor reixos (?) rois dadexa Geois ZAwvos. 


b In Megara, in the temple of Artemis Soteira: Paus. 1. 40, 3 tay 
SHdexa dvopalopevwrv Oedv early dydApata, épya eivat Neydpeva LpagcréAous. 

¢ At Delos, Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1882, p. 28. 

d At Thelpusa in Arcadia: Paus. 8. 25, 3 @edv icpov rav dadexa, 

e At Olympia: Pind. O/, 2. 50 6 & ap’ ev Ilica.. . Ards aAkimos vids 
otabuaro (abeov ddoos marpi peyiov@ . . . Tiydoas mépov ’AAdpeod pera 
dadex dvaxrov Oedv. Cf. OL. 5. 5. 

f In Aeolis near Myrina: Strabo, 622 ’Ayav Ayjv, dmov of Bopol 
tav dodexa Oeov: on Cape Lecton, Strabo, 605 Boyds trav dadexa Oeov 
decxvuTat, kadovoe & "Ayapeuvovos iSpupa. 

&€ Near Ephesus: C. /. Gr. 3037 tepebs 8adexa Oedy (late period). 

h In Xanthos: C. /. Gr. 4269, (?) early fourth century B.c., oddets 


mo Avkiov orndnv todvd avéOnkev SaHdexa Oevis ayopas év kabap@ Tepeve. 

i On the Bosporus: Apoll. Rhod. 2. 534 é« dé réev paxapeoot dve0- 
Sexa Swpnoartes Bopov Gros pnypin népnv kat ed’ iepa Oevres: Hellanicus, 
Frag. 15 dabexa bedv Body iSptouro (Acvkadior). 


k In Crete, at Hierapytna: A/z#t. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1893, p. 275 "Amod- 


Awve Ackatapdp@ kai Tots Owdeka Oeois Kat *A@avaia Todd. 


1 At Leontini: Polyaen. 5. 5, 2 ¢av kpatnowper tis médews dopadas 
duce trois Swdexa Oeois. 


5 ba € > , . 
8 Lucian, ‘Ikapopev. C. 24 fv yap mote xpdvos, Gre Kai pdvtis éddKour 
a > an Ps 
avrois kal larpds kat mavta Odws Hv ey (Zevs) ... €& ob S€ ev Aedois pev 
> a , PS 
A7dé\Awv TO pavteiov KateotHaaTo, ev Ilepydum Se rd iarpetoy 6 "AokAntis, 
‘ MM > if > , 
kat 70 Bevdidevov eyevero ev Opaky, kai TO ’AvovBiderov ev Aiy’mr@ kal rd 
> ld > > vA na 
Aptepiovov ev Epéog, emi tavta pev anavtes O€ovar .. . eve S€ GomEp Tapn- 
B / € A & , A re) A , o } Wace - > 
Byxora ikav@s Tetipnkevar vopuifovot, dv ova mevte dav erav Gvwow ev 


*OAvpria. 





CHAPTER: wii 
HERA. 


THE cult of Hera is less manifold and less spiritual than 
many other Greek cults, but possesses great historic interest. 
It can be traced in most parts of ancient Greece, and had the 
strongest hold upon the sites of the oldest civilization, Argos, 
Mycenae, and Sparta; we can find no trace of its impor- 
tation from without, no route along which it travelled into 
Greece; for in the islands, with the exception of Euboea 
and Samos where the legend connected the worship with 
Argos, it is nowhere prominent, nor does it appear to have had 
such vogue in Thessaly and along the northern shores as it had 
in Boeotia, Euboea, Attica, Sicyon, Corinth,and the Pelopon- 
nese!—93, We may regard the cult then as a primeval heritage 
of the Greek peoples, or at least of the Achaean and Ionic 
tribes ; for its early and deep influence over these is attested 
by the antiquity and peculiar sanctity of the Argive and 
Samian worship. Whether it was alien to the Dorians in their 
primitive home, wherever that was, is impossible to decide; 
in the Peloponnese no doubt they found and adopted it, 
but they may have brought it with them to Cos and Crete, 
where we find traces of it. The Hera TeAywia of Rhodes, 
like the Spartan and Argive Hera, was probably pre-Dorian. 
And while her worship shows scarcely any hint of foreign 
or Oriental influence, it is also comparatively pure of savage 
rites and ideas—containing, for instance, certain allusions 
to primitive customs of marriage, but no native tradition of 
human sacrifice*. 

* Among the divinities to whom Hera, but the Egyptian goddess whom 


human sacrifice was or had been offered, he chooses to call Hera; De Adstin. 
Porphyry nowhere mentions the Greek 2. 55. 


N 2 


180 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


In the earliest period to which by record or monument 
we can get back Hera was worshipped as the wife of Zeus, 
and the goddess who protected the institution of marriage 
among men*. No doubt in her favourite sites her religion 
was so predominant that it cast other cults, even that 
of Zeus, into the shade; but in the myth and most ancient 
ritual of Plataea, Samos, and Argos, we can discover the 
recognition of the husband-god by her side. The antiquity 
of the iepds yduos in many parts of Greece !” would by itself 
be sufficient proof of the very primitive conjunction of the 
two divinities; and there is no reason to say that the fairly 
frequent union of their cults of which we have record belongs 
in all cases to a later period. On Mount Arachnaion altars 
were erected to Zeus and Hera‘, at which men prayed for rain; 
and sacrifice was offered in Argos to Zeus Nemeios and Hera 
the Argive together*. At Lebadea? Pausanias found the joint 
worship of ‘King-Zeus’ and Hera the ‘holder of the reins, 
a-curieus title-that will -be-referred to later.. In Crete the 
name of Hera is coupled with that of Zeus ‘the Cretan-born™’ 
in the formula of the public oath, at Cyprus she was wor- 
shipped with Zeus Polieus and Aphrodite ®, and in Caria she 
is united in the inscriptions with Zeus Panamaros and Zeus 
BovaAaios °. 

The worship of Hera, as it is presented to us in Homer 
and in the cults, has become divested of the physical meaning 
or symbolism, whatever that was, that may have formed the 
original groundwork of it. We have seen how various were the 
physical functions of Zeus, and we may in some sense call him 
a god of the sky; but we cannot award to Hera any par- 
ticular province of nature. Of course many departments have 
been claimed for her: for Dr. Schliemann and Herr Roscher 
she is obviously the moon—for M. Ploix ‘the double one,’ 
that is the twilight—for Empedocles and Welcker the earth *. 
What she may have been at the beginning of time is not our 
present concern: we have only to ask whether for historical 
Greece she was ever worshipped as the moon, or the air, 
or the earth, or some other physical element, function, or 

® See Appendix A at the end of the chapter and R. I-11. 


VII. ] HERA. 181 


power. Now a review of the evidence leads to the conviction 
that the ordinary Greek did not think—although certain 
philosophers may have said—that Hera was the moon. She 
is not necessarily the moon because Homer calls her cow- 
faced or ox-eyed, and because Dr. Schliemann found some 
little cow-shaped dvaOjyuara at Mycenae; nor because she 
protected marriage and aided or retarded childbirth, or 
because at Nemea she was on friendly terms with Selene ®, 
or because occasionally she rode in a chariot. All this might 
have happened merely because she was the lawful wife of 
Zeus, and the cow was a prominent animal among her earliest 
tribe of worshippers. The torch, which in some doubtful 
representations a figure supposed to be Hera is carrying, 
might be the marriage-torch, and is not necessarily the symbol 
of the moon’s light’; the crown of rays about her head on 
late coins of Chalcis ®** is a rare and doubtful sign, proper 
to her as a celestial divinity; the goat sacrificed to her at 
Sparta and Corinth need have had no celestial significance’, 
but was probably the earthly food of a tribe who imputed 
to the goddess tastes like their own, and naively called her 
aiyopayoy *°* 504, The only arguments for the theory that 
she was the air are the false etymology“ and the tradition 
that she was often angry with Zeus, and the air seems often 
angry in Greece as elsewhere. 

But more serious and real is Welcker’s theory‘ that 
she was originally an earth-goddess and that the Greeks 
themselves were at times aware of this’. It is well to 
notice the arguments that might be urged for this, 
apart from any attempt to give the etymology of the 
name. If she were an earth-goddess, we should suppose that 
she would be regarded at times as the giver of fruits and 
especially of corn. Now there is an interesting Argive legend 
which told of the king of the country who first yoked oxen 
to the plough and dedicated a temple to Hera ‘the goddess 
of the yoke, and who called the ears of corn ‘the flowers 
of Hera!®*’. From whatever source the legend was taken, 


* Miiller, Frag. Hist. Graec. 2. p. 30. ¢ Cf. Hesych. s. v. Odpavia aif. 
> Vide p. 211. 4 Griech. Gotterl. 1. pp. 362-370. 


182 GREEK RELIGION. [ CHAP. 


part of it seems genuine—namely, the statements that Hera 
was called Zevéidia in Argos, and that the ears of corn 
were called ‘the flowers of Hera.’ We gather also that in 
Argolis the cult-title of ‘ Euboea,’ the ‘goddess rich in oxen, 
was attached to her; for Pausanias declares that Euboea, 
Prosymna, and Acraea were nurses of Hera,and we know how 
apt was Greek legend to create new and separate personages 
out of mere epithets of a divinity detached from the proper 
name and then misunderstood. We know also that ‘Prosymna, 
‘the goddess to whom the hymn was raised,’ and ‘ Acraea,’ 
‘the goddess worshipped on the heights,’ were actually cult- 
titles of Hera in Argolis, and the latter was in vogue also in 
Corinth *5¢, 304, We may conclude then that ‘Euboea’ also 
designated Hera, and that the island itself, which was full of 
the legend of Zeus and Hera’s marriage and of Io her other 
form, received its name from the goddess worshipped there ®”, 
But this is not by itself sufficient proof that the goddess was 
worshipped as earth-goddess at Argos: these cults and legends 
allude to the beginnings of civilization and the introduction 
of corn-growing. Now Athene revealed the use of the olive 
to the Athenians and Zeus himself is called pdpios, but 
neither Athene nor Zeus are personifications of the earth, 
although the olive grows from the earth. It is an important 
principle to bear in mind for the interpretation of Greek or 
other myths, that all which a divinity does for its worshippers 
cannot always or need not be explained by reference to some 
single idea, physical or other, of that divinity: as a tribe 
advances in civilization it will impute its own discoveries to 
its patron god or goddess. And Hera was the tutelary 
deity of Argos. 

Again, we need not conclude that she was an earth-goddess 
because she had the epithet ’Av@ela, nor because flowers were 
especially used in her religious ceremonies at Sparta and 
we hear of female flower-bearers in her great temple near 
Argos. The flower was an occasional symbol of other god- 
desses and might be appropriate to a spring feast or marriage- 
rite: and certain flowers were sacred to her that possessed 
medicinal virtue with a view to offspring 1° > °8. 


vil] HERA. 183 


We have to deal also with the myth that Hera was the mother 
of the earth-born Typhoeus, the last enemy that threatened 
Olympus, a monster who seems to have had some connexion 
with volcanoes and subterranean forces’’*. Now if this myth 
were ancient and genuine we should say that Hera was here 
regarded as the earth-goddess or chthonian power. But it does 
not seem at least to have been known to Hesiod, who makes 
the earth-goddess, Ge, the parent of Typhoeus: it is only 
recorded by the author of the Homeric hymn to Apollo ®, and 
by Stesichorus : in the former we hear that Hera, being jealous 
of the birth of Athene, resolved to emulate Zeus by producing 
a child independently, and after praying to the heaven and 
earth and the Titans to grant her an offspring that might be 
stronger than Zeus, she gave birth to Typhoeus—a creature 
‘like neither to the immortal gods nor to men.’ It may well 
be that Stesichorus borrowed this strange legend and brought 
it also into connexion with the birth of Athene, a theme 
which we know was celebrated in one of his poems. But can 
we account for the version in the Homeric hymn—a version 
which seems altogether inconsistent with the Olympian charac- 
ter of Hera—by saying that the poet supposes her to be the 
same as mother-earth? If so, it is a very inexplicable fact 
that this conception of Hera, which according even to Welcker 
had faded away from the religious consciousness, and of which 
Hesiod, who makes Ge the mother of the monster, seems 
ignorant, should have been rediscovered by the author of 
the hymn and by Stesichorus. 

But is there no other explanation? We cannot reject the 
eccentric myth simply because it is an obvious interpolation 
in the text where it occurs—for it is a genuine though a mis- 
placed fragment, and we have also the authority of Stesichorus. 
Now we see at once that the author of this passage in the 
hymn, so far from confusing Ge with Hera, is explicit in 
distinguishing them, for Hera herself makes appeal to the 
Earth. In their genealogies the poets sometimes seem capri- 
ciously to depart from the popular tradition, and we need 
not always suppose that they are in such cases putting on 


* Il. 350-354. 


184 GREEK RELIGION. [cHaP. 


record some primeval and half-buried idea or some foreign 
myth. oe 

It may be in this case that the poet gives this strange 
account of Typhoeus’ birth simply because of the part that 
Hera plays in the epic drama, because in fact of her hostility 
to Zeus which appears also in the singular legend of Briareus 
Aegaeon. We may compare with this the legend given by 
Hesiod that Hera cherished the Lernaean Hydra and the 
Nemean lion; to explain this we need not go back to any 
prehistoric conception of Hera the earth-goddess, the mother 
of monsters: the explanation may suffice that as Hera was 
hostile to Heracles, and these animals were destined to give 
him trouble, she was naturally thought to have been answer- 
able for their breeding. A slight touch of affinity between 
two ideas is enough for the constructiveness of the Greek 
mythic fancy. Again, in one of Sophron’s mimes Hera was 
made the mother of Hekate, who there appeared as a nether 
goddess under the name of "AyyeAos*; but the whole version 
is a naive burlesque, and proves nothing about Hera’s 
original character as an earth-goddess. In Pausanias’ 
account of Boeotia we hear of an archaic statue at Coronea, 
carved by Pythodorus of Thebes, showing Hera with the 
Sirens in her hand**. Now the Sirens are most commonly 
sepulchral symbols, emblems of the lower world, and called 
‘daughters of the earth’ by Euripides”; and if Hera were an 
earth-goddess, the Sirens would be thus naturally explained. 
But they also were regarded as the personifications of charm 
and attractiveness, and on the hand of Hera they may simply 
denote the fascination of married life. In the same sense, in 
later mythology ° Hera is called the mother of the Charites, 
which is not a physical, but an ideal genealogy. 

Again, it is said by Welcker, and not without some show of 
probability, that in certain cults her primeval character as 
earth-goddess was vaguely remembered; especially in the 
solemn festival of the iepds ydywos, prevalent from the most 
ancient times in very many parts of Greece. We have record 


® Schol. Theocr. 2, 12. » Fel. 167. 
© Cornutus 15. 


Vile] HERA. 185 


direct or indirect of the ceremony, or of a myth that points to it, 
in Plataea, Euboea, Athens, Hermione, Argos, Arcadia, Samos, 
Crete, and in the Italian Falisci, and we may believe that it 
existed in other sites of the Hera-worship than these’®® 17, 614, 
This iepds yduos of Zeus and Hera is supposed to be the personal 
expression of the marriage of earth and heaven in spring, 
‘when the tilth rejoices in the travail of the corn-ear. The 
Homeric description of the union of Zeus and Hera on Mount 
Ida is often interpreted as an echo of some ancient hymn that 
celebrated the mystery; and the cloud in which he shrouds him- 
self and the goddess, and the flowers that spring up beneath 
them, are regarded as obvious symbols of the spring ; while at 
Argos we have the legend of Zeus pursuing Hera in the form 
of a cuckoo, and the name of the mountain, Koxxdvy.ov, on 
which they were first united, to suggest that the bridal was in 
this land associated with the spring-time. It may well have 
been associated with it; but must we therefore say that the 
Argive tepds yduos was a mere impersonation of the spring 
union of earth and heaven? The cloud on the mountain-top 
might be a sign of the presence of the god, and the flowers 
on the mountain-side might be thought to betoken his nuptial 
rites; but did the people of Argos therefore of necessity 
believe that their Zeus and Hera were personal forms of the 
fertilizing cloud and the spring-earth, or was Jehovah a per- 
sonification of the cloud for the Jews, because ‘clouds and 
darkness were round about Him’? If this were the complete 
meaning of the tepds yduos at Argos it could scarcely have 
been so in Attica if the Attic month Gamelion, our January, 
took its name from the marriage of Zeus and Hera, as there are 
some grounds for supposing. Besides, in whatever countries 
the rites of the iepds yduos are described for us, we see no 
reference to the fertile growths of the year, but rather to the 
customs of human nuptials. In Samos® the custom was 
sanctioned—as it has been in many parts of Europe—of the 
betrothed pair having intercourse before marriage ; therefore 
the Samians boldly declared that Zeus had similar intercourse 
with Hera before wedlock: the Samian priestess at a yearly 
ceremony secretly made off with the idol of Hera and hid it 


186 GREEK RELIGION. ; [CHAP. 


in a lonely place in the woods by the shore®, in the midst 
of a withy brake, where it was then re-discovered and cakes 
were set by its side, possibly as bridal offerings °: in all this 
we have an allusion to the secret abduction of the bride, and 
we see the anthropomorphism of a people who made the life 
of their god the mirror of their own. The whole island was 
consecrated to Hera, and, as far as we have record of the 
ritual, to Hera the bride of Zeus. ‘Bring wine and the 
Muses’ charmful lyre,’ sings a Samian poet, ‘that we may 
sing of the far-famed bride of Zeus, the mistress of our island.’ 
Its ancient name, indeed, had been Parthenia, but this was in 
the Carian period’, and was derived‘not from Hera Parthenos, 
but from the Parthenos or unmarried goddess, whose cult can 
be traced along the coast of Asia Minor to the Black Sea. 
After the Hellenic settlement, the legends and the rites 
seem almost exclusively to point to the marriage-goddess. 
Even the legend of the birth of Hera in the island under 
a withy-bush may have been suggested by the use of the 
withies in the annual ceremonial, when the goddess’s image 
was wrapped round in them as in a sort of bridal bed, and by 
the supposed medicinal value of the withy for women. After 
lying some time on its secluded osier-couch, the idol was 
purified and restored to the temple; the sacred marriage was 
supposed to have been complete. As the married goddess 
she became, in Samos as elsewhere, the divinity who protected 
marriage and birth, as we learn from a prayer in the Antho- 
logy: ‘O Hera, who guardest Samos and hast Imbrasos as 
thy portion, receive these birthday offerings at our hands 16+’ 

The Samian worship was connected by the legend with the 
Argive'7% %)%8; but in Argolis the functions of the goddess 
were more manifold, for Argos alone among the Greek com- 
munities, so far as we have record, recognized her in some sense 
as the foundress of its civilization, as the power who taught 
them to sow the land, and who for this and for other reasons 
was gratefully styled the Benefactress ; also as the goddess of 

* In the passage from Athenaeus tion dfayvifecOa: accepted by Meineke 


given R. 65°, the reading dpavifec@ar misses the point. 
should certainly be retained ; the correc- » Vide Artemis, R. 37. 


Vil.) HERA. 187 


religious song, to whom a special kind of melody was con- 
secrated, and who took one of her titles, IIpoovpvata, from the 
hymns of praise addressed to her. The Argive festival in 
fact reflected more of the people’s life than any other of which 
we hear, except perhaps the Samian. In both there seems to 
have been some allusion to her as a goddess who aided her 
people’s warfare; for as in the Samian sacrifice the people 
marched in armed procession, so in the Argive we hear of 
the armed march and of the contest for the shield of Hera. 
As regards the nature of this, Schoemann® describes it 
as a contest of spearmen, who, running at full speed, threw 
their spears at a brazen shield that was hung up, the man who 
struck it down winning and bearing it as his trophy. This is 
somewhat more than we know; but we know that the feast of 
Hera at Argos, or ‘the feast of the hundred oxen,’ was also 
called the ‘brazen contest, or the ‘feast of the shield,’ and 
that the pride of the man who took down and won the shield 
passed into a proverb. The rest of the festival bore reference 
to the bride. In describing the rites of Falerii'®°, which were 
similar to the Argive, Dionysios of Halicarnassus speaks of 
the chaste maiden with the sacrificial vessels upon her head 
who began the sacrifice, and the choruses of maidens who 
celebrated the goddess in ancient songs of their land. The 
messenger in the Electra of Euripides summons her to the 
Argive festival, where ‘all the maidens are about to go in 
solemn order to the presence of Hera**.’ And we have scat- 
tered indications showing that the performance of the sacred 
marriage was a necessary part of the yearly ceremony at Argos 
as at Samos ; and by a probable combination of the various 
statements we may get the following outline of the ritual. A 
car drawn by white oxen conveyed the priestess from the city 
to the temple, probably to play the part of the vuugevtpia or 
attendant on the goddess at her nuptials, whose image was 
possibly borne in the car by her side. The actual solemnity 
may have taken place outside the temple, where a couch of 
Hera was seen by Pausanias, and the Aexépva mentioned by 
Hesychius as a sacrifice performed by the Argives to their 
® Griechische Alterthiimer, 2. p. 491. 


188 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


goddess may have referred to the strewing the couch with twigs, 
before the puppet-image which was possibly the little wooden 
idol of the seated goddess from Tiryns was placed upon it; 
for we gather from the lines in Theocritus about the tepds 
yapos '’* that the preparation of the marriage-bed was part of 
the rite. And some allusion was conveyed in this mystery-play 
to the perpetual renewal of the virginity of Hera**. Finally, 
the cult of Hera Eileithyia in Argos arose from the prevailing 
aspect of her as the goddess of wedlock **. In this vague record 
of the ritual there is little express reference to Zeus, but 
evidently he is implicitly associated with her, and it was pro- 
bably her union with him that gave her the title in Argos‘? of 
‘Hera the queen®’, as the ‘King-Zeus’ was worshipped at 
Lebadea in conjunction with Hera ‘the charioteer,’ a strange 
epithet ® that might be naturally explained if we suppose that 
there also the figure of Hera was borne in the chariot in some 
performance of the iepds ydpos 3°, *°°. 

If legend and some express statements of ancient writers 
are to be trusted, the cult and probably the ritual of Argos 
spread to other Greek communities and beyond the Greek 
world. Not only at Samos, but at Aegina also, Sparta, Locris, 
Alexandria, on the north shores of the Adriatic, on the 
south coast of Italy, and at Falerii we find traces of this 
worship > 50>, 21, 62, 87,88. Probably the mystery-play was 
borrowed also. It is specially recorded that the Aeginetans 
brought with them from Argos the feast of the Hekatomboea, 
and the curious description preserved by Ovid of the rites 
of the Falisci suggests that there also the performance of 
the sacred marriage was part of the sacrifice'®*. The 
festival was celebrated by games, sacrifices, and a solemn 
procession. The image of Hera was borne, probably in 
a chariot drawn by. white heifers, down ways that were 
hung and strewn with drapery, while flute-players followed 

® We hear of Hera BaoiAis or BaciAeia _—siit is once applied to Aphrodite (Athenae. 
at Lebadea, Athens, Lindos and Ter- pp. 510) and once to Cybele (Diod. 
messus, R, 1, 60, 69; inalaterperiodthe Sic. 3. 57). 
name is merely a translation of Juno b We may compare the title of Hera 


Regina (vide C. 7. G. 4040 and 4367 f.);_ Hippia at Elis, R. 46°. 
the title is hers par excellence, though 


Vil. | HERA. 189 


and maidens bearing the sacred vessels on their heads. An 
interesting part of the ceremony was the slaying of the female 
goat; youths threw spears at her, and he who struck her got 
her as a prize, and the practice may have been derived from 
the competition for the shield at Argos. But more important 
is the story explaining why the goat was killed. The goddess 
hated her, because when Hera had fled to the woods and con- 
cealed herself the animal revealed her lurking-place, and she 
had to return to her people. ‘The fashion of the procession 
is Argive. We have here a link between Argos, Samos, and 
Falerii, for the goat-story points to some ceremony of hiding 
the image of Hera in the woods and bringing it home again. 
In the other places where the Argive Hera was worshipped 
similar rites may have survived. 

We gather from Pausanias and Plutarch that ceremonies 
of the same meaning were performed at Plataea in the feast 
of Daedala. Both these authors record a humorous Plataean 
legend, which told how Hera had become irreconcilably 
angry with Zeus, had deserted him and hidden herself on 
Mount Cithaeron; but Zeus bethought himself of a ruse to 
bring her back. He gives out that he is going to marry 
again, and prepares his marriage with much ceremony: he 
gets some one to carve a puppet and dress her up as a bride, 
and her name is Daedale, and she is carried in bridal pomp 
along the roads near Cithaeron. WHera hears of it, flies to 
the spot in a furious fit of jealousy, and sees Zeus escorting 
his bride. She falls on Daedale to demolish her, and then 
discovers the joke; whereupon she is reconciled to Zeus, and 
pays certain honours to the puppet, but in the end burns her 
through jealousy ”, 1", 

The interpretation of all this is easy enough, and there is no 
better instance of an aetiological myth, invented to explain 
a rite. The myth implicitly tells us that the Plataeans had 
preserved from prehistoric times the processional ceremony of 
the iepds yauos, in which the puppet of Hera, adorned asa bride, 
was carried along, and in some way or other married to Zeus. 
Then the original religious sense of this becomes obscured, 
and the puppet is called AaédAn, and the naive story invented. 


190 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP, 


The rites of the great Daedala, celebrated by all the cities of 
Boeotia, appear to have been almost identical. A large num- 
ber of daféada or wooden idols were prepared ; but only one 
special image of the goddess was adorned as a bride and taken 
to the banks of the Asopus, washed, and thence escorted to 
the top of Cithaeron in a chariot, with a priestess attending on 
it as vuydedrpia, and the Boeotian people following with the 
bridal song and the music of the flute. A vast altar had been 
erected on the summit and strewn with brushwood, and at 
the close of the ceremony all the idols, together with the 
sacrifices, were burnt upon it. It is possible that the altar, 
which according to Plutarch was built in the style of a stone 
dwelling, had already played its part in the mystery as 
a nuptial chamber. | 

But where in all this is any allusion to the marriage of 
heaven and earth? At Olympia, the festival of Hera, of 
which the performance of the marriage drama may have 
been part, contained no allusion to the goddess of the earth or 
spring-time, so far as we hear. Young girls ran races in honour 
of Hera*, a custom instituted by Hippodameia as a thank- 
offering for her marriage and in commemoration of the race 
of Pelops and Oinomaos**-*. We hear of a temple of Hera 
Parthenos at Hermione, and the legend of the sacred marriage 
and probably the ritual were in vogue in the neighbourhood*?#”. 
And at Stymphalus in Arcadia three festivals were solemnized 
that celebrated the three stages of Hera’s career as [lap@évos 
or Ilats, TeAefa, and Xnpa, the latter epithet denoting a married 
woman who lives apart from her husband®!*. ‘Rouse thy 
comrades,’ Pindar exclaims to the leader of his chorus at 
Stymphalus, ‘to sing the praise of Hera the maid.’ Here the 
theory of physical symbolism has much to say: “Hpa yx7pa, the 
divorced goddess, is the barren earth in autumn and winter 
when there is no production, and we are reminded of the 
festival of Hera at Corinth 48, which was a wévO.pos éopt7, ‘a feast 
of lamentation,’ expressing perhaps that sorrow for the fall of 
the year which was part of the rites of Adonis and the Oriental 


« A charming statue in the Vatican, of Peloponnesian style, presents us with 
one of these girl-runners. 


VIL. ] HERA. IgI 


Aphrodite. There were many foreign elements in the state- 
religion of Corinth; but the Arcadian festival must be 
genuinely Hellenic. Now if Xypa, the widowed goddess, is to 
be identified with the winter earth *, how are we to interpret 
Ilap0€vos ? It would not naturally be a title of the young earth 
in spring ; for the earth is then wedded, nor are the seasons 
of sowing and ploughing naturally those in which the earth 
could be spoken of as maiden. The physical interpreta- 
tion of X#pa might be supported by the Homeric myth of the 
separation of Oceanos and Tethys, whom Hera wished to 
reconcile; in Homer Oceanos and Tethys are the creative 
principles of the world, and the myth of their separation may 
perhaps have been invented to give a reason why creation 
having reached a certain point seems to stop, and why new 
things are not constantly being brought forth; but the myth of 
Hera’s separation from Zeus could hardly have symbolized 
the cessation of the creative principles of the universe, for the 
wedded union of Zeus and Hera was not a cosmic force of 
creation at all, nor was the marriage particularly fertile. 

One might suggest more plausibly a more human explana- 
tion. Hera was essentially the goddess of women, and the 
life of woman was reflected in her; their maidenhood and 
marriage were solemnized by the cults of Hera Iap0évos and 
Hera Tedefa or Nuydevopern *, and the very rare worship of 
Hera X7pa might allude to the not infrequent custom of divorce 
and separation. That the idea clashed with the highest Greek 
conceptions of Zeus and Hera need not have troubled the 
people of Arcadia, and the audacious anthropomorphism of 
such a religious conception need not,make us incredulous, for 
‘man never knows how anthropomorphic he is.’ 

But a more special explanation is probably nearer the truth. 
A myth born from the misunderstanding of cult is a common 
phenomenon; but a peculiar cult arising from the misunder- 
standing of another is a fact harder to prove and yet perfectly 
credible, and one that would sufficiently explain the present 
difficulty. Both at Plataea and Stymphalus we have the 


* Welcker, Griechische Gotterlehre,t.  getrennte Gottin ist die im Winter ab- 
p- 367: ‘die von Zeus abgewandte  gestorbene Erde.’ 


192 GREEK RELIGION. [cHAP. 


legend of Hera being angry with Zeus and retiring to the 
mountain, and in the region of Cithaeron this is associated 
with the ritual of the marriage, and arose probably from the 
practice of concealing the image in some lonely place; and we 
may suppose the same origin for the Arcadian story. If the idol 
of the Stymphalian Hera were kept apart for a time and hidden 
in the woods, this would be enough to move the naive imagina- 
tion of the Arcadians to conceive that Hera was for a season 
living apart from her lord and to invent the cult of Hera Xjpa. 

Lastly, as against the theory of physical symbolism, we 
may bring into evidence the hymeneal chant of Aristophanes 
at the end of the 4zrds, which may echo an actual hymn 
sung at the tepds yayos, and in which we hear nothing of the 
fertilizing heaven and the growth of spring flowers, but of the 
very personal and human marriage of Zeus and Hera escorted 
by Eros in their chariot 174. 

In the records then of the fepds yduos we see rather the 
reflection of human life, than of the life of nature; and at last 
it would seem to have become little more than a symbol of 
ordinary marriage, if the statement in Photius were correct, 
that this rite was performed at every wedding by the bride- 
groom and bride"). 

These then are the chief arguments that might be adduced 
from cult and legend for the theory that the person of Hera 
was developed or detached from a goddess of the earth. No 
single one of them seems conclusive, and there is certain 
negative evidence making against the theory. If she were 
originally the mother-earth, why was her marriage so com- 
paratively unprolific, and why has she so little connexion 
with the Titan world or the earth-born giants? Her children, 
Hebe, Ares, Hephaestos, have nothing to do with the 
shadowy powers of the lower world, although in a legend of 
late authority, quoted from Euphorion by the scholiast of the 
Iliad, Hera was strangely said to be the mother of Prome- 
theus». It is not impossible that the legend arose at 
Athens, where Prometheus enjoyed an important cult and was 
brought into close affinity with Hephaestos, her genuine son. 
At any rate the legend itself implies a natural antagonism 


~ 


a 


VII. } HERA. 193 


between Hera and the Titan or giant world, for she was 
made the mother of Prometheus only through the violence 
of Eurymedon*. Nor on Welcker’s theory is it easy to 
explain her strong hostility to Dionysos, who through his 
affinity with the earth became intimately associated with 
such real earth-goddesses as Cybele and Demeter. At 
Eleusis, as Iacchos, he came to be united with Demeter and 
Kora—a trinity of chthonian deities ; but the religion of Hera 
was so antagonistic to the cult of Eleusis that her temple at 
Athens was closed when Demeter’s was open, and her feud 
with Dionysos was carried so far that, as it was said, the 
priestesses of the two cults at Athens did not speak when 
they met, and no ivy was allowed in the temple of Hera 284, 29, 

On Welcker’s hypothesis that she was another form of Ge, 
it becomes the more surprising that she took so little interest, 
except at Argos, in agriculture and the arts of cultivation. 
The sacrificial animals offered to her, the bull, cow, calf, pig, 
goat, are just those which a pastoral and agricultural people 
offers to its divinity. In the absence of other evidence they 
do not reveal any special view about the character and nature 
of the deity worshipped "°. 

Again, had she been an earth-goddess we might have 
expected that she would have retained some traces of an 
oracular function; for the earth was the mother of oracles 
and dreams, and in the person of Themis had her ancient 
seat at Delphi. But Hera had never any connexion with 
Delphi, nor had Dione (whom we may regard as a local 
form of Hera and who was identified with her by Apollo- 
dorus °) any concern with the oracle at Dodona in ancient 
times. Only once do we hear of a pavreiov of Hera, namely, 


~ on the promontory sacred to Hera Acraea, some few miles 


east of Corinth *4; but this worship stands apart from all the 
other Hellenic cults of Hera and must be separately discussed. 
Lastly, it is very rare to find Hera grouped with any of the 


* An earlier record of this legend has Prometheus, newly released, appears 
been supposed by Jahn to be given on receiving a libation from Hera. But 
a Volci vase (circ. 450 B.C.), published _ there is more than one explanation of 
in the Mon. dell’ Inst. 5. 35, on which __ this scene. 


VOL. I. O 


194 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


divinities of the lower world. At Lebadea the man who 
wished to descend into the oracular cave of Trophonius used 
to sacrifice to Zeus Basileus and Hera the charioteer ; but not 
necessarily as chthonian powers, for he sacrificed to Apollo 
also and to Cronos. It may be easy to guess but it is difficult 
to be sure of the reason. An inscription from Paros speaks 
of a votive-offering made by a woman to Hera, Demeter 
Thesmophorus, Eubouleus, Baubo, and Core. These others 
are divinities of the lower world, but Demeter Thesmophorus 
was also a goddess of marriage, and for this reason Hera may 
have been united with her. If the dedication were a thank- 
offering for escape from the dangers of childbirth we might 
understand this grouping together of the divinities of marriage 
and death 4 *°, 

It does not appear then that Welcker’s theory, which 
resolves Hera into an earth-goddess, explains the facts of her 
cult in the historic period, and with many of them it does not 
harmonize at all. 

The more important question is, what did the Greeks 
themselves say or think about Hera? Those who reflected 
on the myths—the early physical philosophers or the Stoics 
for instance—usually tried, as we have seen, to discover some 
physical substance into which each divinity could be resolved, 
thus gaining as they thought a real truth and meaning 
for an apparently irrational mythology ’*. But these ancient 
interpreters were no more skilled in this art than we are, 
and their utterances were quite as contradictory. Thus 
Empedocles seems to have thought that Hera was the earth, 
though in his scheme of the four elements she might as 
well stand-—and was supposed by some ancient critics to 
stand—for the air. Plato believed her to be the air’, 
and Plutarch the earth, as we gather from a passage in 
Eusebius who exposes Plutarch’s absurdities. The connexion 
between Hera and Leto in Boeotia”*”, where they shared 


@ The oracle that speaks of the the false interpretation of Hera as the 
‘queen-goddess who ranges o’er the air, or by her close affinity with Zeus 
earth with dewy showers’—if thisindeed _ the sky-god. 
is Hera—may have been inspired by 


ee a ae ee 


tl slat a a ce aa ln ll 


Vil. ] HERA. 195 


a common altar, was used by some ancient mythologists, who 
held the physical theory, as an argument to show that Hera 
was the earth; but that connexion was too slight and local 
to be regarded as essential, and if it were essential it would 
not help us; for the character and functions of Leto are 
themselves too indefinite for us to interpret Hera by means 
of them. But the majority of Greeks who did not reflect on 
their cults or myths knew her primarily as the wife of Zeus, 
from whom she borrowed such titles as Acraea, Ammonia 4, 
and probably Basilis and Olympia *°°, and by whose side she 
sat ‘sharing his throne’ and ‘holding the sceptre as she gazed 
down on Olympos?’ And they knew her secondly as the 
goddess who encouraged marriage and aided childbirth. 
Maidens offered their veils to her at the time of marriage *7* *. 
And the Charites belong partly to her, according to the idea 
that ‘Love and the Graces set up house*’ <A quaint 
custom of ritual recorded by Plutarch symbolized the 
peace of married life that Hera loved: he tells us that when 
sacrifice was made to Hera Tap7jAuos, the gall was extracted 
from the victim and not offered, so that the married life 
might be without bitterness 17". 

There are other deities of marriage, but Hera is pre- 
eminent. ‘Let us sing,’ says Aristophanes, ‘of the wedded 
Hera, as is meet, who is gay in all the bridal choirs, and 
guards the keys of wedlock’™’. And Apollo in the 
Eumenides upbraids the Furies who pursue Orestes with 
having no regard for the pledges of Hera TeAefa and Zeus 1". 
Before the wedding, sacrifice was made to Zeus Tédeos and 
Hera Tedefa 4, and this title of hers refers always to mar- 
riage and does not acquire a larger significance as it does in 


its application to Zeus. According to the law inserted in 


a speech of Demosthenes the magistrate who neglected to 
compel the relations to provide for the marriage of orphan 
girls incurred a fine of a thousand drachmae to Hera; and 
a fine to the goddess was to be exacted in Plato’s state from 
the man who was still unmarried at the age of thirty-five 1"". 

Thus we find her united with Aphrodite, receiving the 

® Plut. de Adulat. ch. 2.p.49: Xdpirés re kal “Ipepos oine’ EOevTo. 
O 2 


196 GREEK RELIGION. [cHaP. 


same sacrifice of goats and bulls, and worshipped at Sparta 
under the double name ®» 16», And it was still more natural 
that she should acquire the functions and character of 
Eileithyia **% ®, a name which at first perhaps was nothing 
more than an epithet of Hera, as we hear of Hera EivciOua 
at Argos and Athens, and which then came to denote a 
separate person who was regarded sometimes as the daughter: 
of Hera, but often as a goddess of the ancient world related 
in idea to Hera as well as to the Fates*. 

It is Hera who protects the newborn child, and possibly 
the Samian goddess ‘Kurotrophos’ was Hera, the chief 
goddess of the island. This function of hers appears in 
one or two rather striking myths. In spite of her feud 
with the parents she was sometimes supposed to have given 
suck to Dionysos and Heracles °, a legend that expresses not 
only the character of Hera Kovporpédos, but probably also is 
symbolical of reconciliation and adoption 1"¥. 

Perhaps it is because she protected child-birth that we 
find the Hours grouped with her in monumental represen- 
tations", for the Hours symbolized the destiny of man’s life; 
or the reason may be that like Zeus she was controller of the 
Hours, the times and seasons of the year, sharing the functions 
of Zeus and bearing like him at Camirus the title of ‘Qpddvros ®. 
Inahymn of Olen mentioned by Pausanias the Hours are said 
to be the nurses of Hera 1*‘. 

On the whole the functions of Hera were less manifold than 
those of Juno, her Latin counterpart, and scarcely ranged 
beyond the sphere already described. Though the state 
was based on the institution she protected, she was never, 
except at Argos and perhaps at Samos, pre-eminently a political 
divinity ; the Argives are called her people by Pindar‘, and 
we have some evidence of a Samian cult that recognized 
her as ‘Apynyérts, the leader of the original settlement®*. But 


® Vide Eileithyia '. © Vide Gerhard, Zirusk. Spiegel, No. 
b Herod. Vita Hom. 30. Theinter- 126. 4 Vide pp. 214, 217. 
pretation of the name in this passage as © Vide Zeus **, 
a title of Artemis-Hekate is rather more f Pind. Vem. 10. 36: “Hpas rov evavopa 


probable. Aadv. 





Vil. ] HERA. 197 


such titles as ®pdrpios or BovAaios were not for her, but for 
Zeus and Athena. We have faint glimpses in cult of a war- 
like Hera %—a doubtful Hera ’Apefa (perhaps ’Apyeéa or really 
the Latin goddess) worshipped near Paestum °°, and we discern 
the form of a battle-goddess in the Hera Prodromia of 
Sicyon *2», the goddess who ran before the host and showed 
Phalces the son of Temenos his way, and possibly in the 
Hera Alexandros *?»°, ‘the saviour of men, whose cult 
Adrastus founded in Sicyon*. The Hera ‘OzAocpia of Elis is 
only known to us through Lycophron and his scholiast *’. 

Though she was the mother of Hephaestos, she did 
little, except at Argos, for the arts of life, and among the 
various festivals and agones held in her honour it is only 
the Argive that seems to have been distinguished for artistic 
display. It is characteristic of the women’s goddess that the 
ayév of Hera at Lesbos included a contest of beauty. ‘Come, 
daughters of Lesbos,’ says the poet in the Axthology, ‘come 
to the bright shrine of Hera of the gleaming countenance ™’. 

The beauty of Hera was the theme of art, rather than 
of religion or cult: but the religion recognized it in the myth 
of Hera’s perpetual rejuvenescence and in the figure of Hebe 
her daughter. While expressing her mother’s immortality of 
youth, Hebe is yet a real figure of cult, being worshipped as 
Hebe Aia at Phlius and Sicyon, and being perhaps originally 
the same as Aphrodite the daughter of Zeus and Dione ”. 

Reviewing the main features of this worship we can see 
that there is much beauty and grace in it, and some strong 
expression of the lawfulness and order of life, but little 
morality of a high sort. 

The only moral law she was supposed to be careful about 
was the sanctity of her altar, but not more careful than other 
divinities were in this matter. She sanctioned marriage, and 
yet breaches of the marriage vow were not considered a 
special offence against Hera, which she was particularly 
concerned with punishing ; and though in one legend she took 
notice of the new and exceptional sin of Laius®, it was the 


® Cf. Gazette Archéol. 1883, p. 140. ¢ Schol. Eur. Phoen. 1760. 
» Strabo, p. 382. 


198 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. VII. 


Erinyes, according to Sophocles, who punished infidelity in 
marriage*, In fact she stands far below Athena for the part 
her idea played in Greek civilization: married life and its 
duties were not the highest Hellenic ideal, and Hera’s per- 
sonality reflects the life and character of the Greek matron. 
She is also more than this—the queen of heaven, full of 
solemn dignity and nobility. ‘The souls who followed Hera, 
says Plato, ‘desire a love of royal quality!*’ And the 


more exalted view of her was maintained by the monuments 
of Greek art: 


Filer AT. 


APP. | HERA. 199 


APPENDIX A. 


The view which I have expressed, that her association 
with Zeus is a primitive factor in the Greek worship of 
Hera, is entirely opposed to a theory recently put forward 
by Miss Harrison in the Classical Keview of 1893, p. 74, 
which may be briefly summarized thus—(a) the connexion 
of Zeus and Hera is late and the latter is pre-Achaean ; 
(4) Hera had a previous husband, Heracles, Argos, Helios, 
over whom she had complete control, because the primitive 
worshippers were in a state of gynaecocracy. The theory 
seems to me to rest on insufficient facts, some of which are 
erroneously stated, and on a nebulous and ineffectual article 
by Dr. Tiimpel (PAzlologus, 1892, p. 607). First, there is no 
proof that Hera is pre-Achaean. The Mycenaean people, 
among whom the worship of the cow-goddess prevailed, are 
not yet shown to be pre-Achaean; nor does Miss Harrison 
bring forward any authority for her statement that the 
Heraeon was a refuge for slaves, though, if this were true, 
we might draw the probable conclusion that it was the cult 
of a conquered pre-Hellenic people, like that of the Palici in 
Sicily : she seems in the context to be referring to the temple 
of Hera at Phlius, but Pausanias speaks of the temple of 
Hebe, not Hera, as the slaves’ asylum there; nor can I find in 
the cult of Hera in Argos Olympia or Cos any reference to the 


privileges of slaves; in fact as regards Cos we have evidence 


to the contrary preserved by Athenaeus, that at the sacrifice 
to Hera in this island no slave was allowed to enter the 
temple or to taste the offerings”, the natural conclusion 
being that the worship was the privilege of the conquering 
race. Secondly, there is no proof that the connexion of Zeus 
and Hera is late. ‘At Crete we hear nothing of Hera;’ the 
evidence given in 7,17% and " disproves this ; ‘At Samos we 
hear nothing of Zeus’: yet the rites of Samos clearly recognize 
Hera as the bride. In fact the very primitive character of the 
ritual of the fepds yduos makes for the belief that the union 


200 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. VII, 


of Zeus and Hera is not late but very early. And this is 
supported by the myth of Io, for we may assume, as Miss 
Harrison does, that the cowheaded Io of Argos is another — 
form of Hera; and as the myth is very ancient the period 
at which Io was really known to be Hera was still more 
ancient, and yet in the earliest form of the myth Io is the 
beloved of Zeus. But Miss Harrison holds the view that 
in a still earlier period Argus was her real husband, and 
there is no harm in this belief: only if it were true the theory 
of gynaecocracy seems to lose a point, for Argus certainly 
does not seem to have been oppressed by Io. Again, if 
it were true, why should not Argos the bull-god be an 
old name for Zeus, since the sky or the lightning is bright 
as well as the sun? And in this case we should have only 
got back to Hera and Zeus again. It is noteworthy that 
the island Euboea, which was full of the myth of Io, also 
contained a very primitive Zeus-worship and a local legend 
apout tie .mattiace ‘of Zens and Herat’ 4, 8% Thirdly 
there is no evidence to suggest even as a valid hypothesis 
that the earliest period of Hera’s cult was a period of 
gynaecocracy. Miss Harrison believes that Hera is really 
the wife of Heracles and persecutes him; but to prove this 
she should show (1) that Hebe, his wife in the Odyssey, is 
really Hera also ; (2) that the marriage of Hebe and Heracles 
belongs to the most primitive period of religious legend ; or (3) 
that Omphale was really Hera. There is scarcely any attempt 
to prove the first point; Hera was indeed called Iais, but 
so was Persephone; and Hebe was named Dia in Sicyon and 
Phlius, but this title would accord as well with Aphrodite 
as with Hera, and Hebe's feast of the ‘ivy-cuttings’ in Phlius 
seems more in favour of interpreting her as akin to Aphro- 
dite-Ariadne than as Hera, who elsewhere objected to ivy. 
Nor is there any attempt to prove the second point, that this 
marriage of Heracles and Hebe belongs to the primitive story 
of the hero or god, yet to prove this is essential to the theory. 
Lastly, Miss Harrison relies much on the legend about the 
effeminacy of Heracles in the story of Omphale and in the 
curious Coan ritual that Plutarch describes (Quaest. Graec. 58), 


cre 


APP. | HERA. 201 


but nothing that she urges brings gynaecocracy any nearer 
to the cult of Hera. Plutarch tells us that the priest at the 


sacrifice to Heracles in Cos wore feminine robes, and that 


bridegrooms put ona similar costume to receive their brides 
in; the reason being, according to the legend that he gives, 
that Heracles when hard pressed took refuge with a Thracian 
woman, and concealed himself with her in woman’s dress. 
In all this there is no reference to Hera at all, for it is not 
Plutarch nor any ancient author who says ‘the priest wore a 
yuvatkelay €o Ora Or a oToAHy avOlynv for Hera of the flowers’; and 
neither ancient nor recent evidence, such as the collection of 
Coan inscriptions by Messrs. Paton and Hicks, shows a con- 
nexion between the cult of Heracles and of Hera in Cos. 
The last refuge for the theory must be Dr. Tiimpel’s com- 
bination by which the Thracian woman becomes the ‘ 7vachi- 
nian’ Omphale-Hera. But his attempt to transplant Omphale 
from Lydia to Trachis is scarcely successful; the fact that 
the inhabitants of Malis were under the thrall of women, 
according to Aristotle, is not relevant, unless we can put 
Omphale and Heracles there ; and the only reason for doing 
that is drawn from two passages in Stephanus in which the 
‘Oppadtjes appear as a legendary tribe near Thresprotis, and 
Omphalion is mentioned as a place in Thessaly (Steph. s. v. 
Ilapavaion and ’Oudddtov), and even if this were sufficient, the 
last and most difficult task remains, to show that Omphale is 
Hera, and for this identification Dr. Tiimpel offers no shadow 
of proof. In this case the able writer of the article in the 
Classical Review has carried too far the always hazardous 
process of mythological combination ; and the evidence of a 
pre-Achaean period, which knew nothing of the union of Zeus 
and Hera, has still to be discovered. 


APPENDIX B. 


The cult of Hera Acraea at Corinth *° has been reserved 
for a separate discussion, as it stands apart from the other 
Hellenic cults of the goddess and opens some perplexing 
questions. It must be studied in connexion with the 


202 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. VII. 


legend of Medea, of which the ancient form is far other 
than that which Euripides gave to it. Towards the close 
of his play he alludes to the solemn festival and rites per- 
formed at Corinth in memory of the slaughtered children, 
and to their burial in the temple of Hera Acraea; and 
this is explained by other records which show the tale of 
their death to be a religious myth that colours the whole 
of the cult. The oldest authority for the story of Medea is 
Creophylus of Samos, quoted by the scholiast on the 
Medea, according to whom Medea did not slay her 
children, but, when she herself had to flee to Athens to 
escape the wrath of the king, she put them under the pro- 
tection of Hera Acraea: the Corinthians did not respect 
the sanctity of the altar and slew them upon it. The same 
scholiast gives us another and fuller account of the tragedy 
as recorded by Parmeniscus. The Corinthians disliking the 
rule of the barbarian queen plotted against her and her 
children, who numbered fourteen, and who took refuge in 
the temple of Hera Acraea and were slain at her altar: 
a plague fell upon the land and the oracle bade them atone 
for the pollution; the Corinthians in consequence instituted 
a rite which survived till the fall of Corinth: each year 
seven girls and seven boys of the highest families were 
selected to serve a year in the temple in a sort of bondage 
to the goddess, and to appease the wrath of the dead with 
sacrifice. The ‘feast of mourning,’ as the scholiast of Euri- 
pides calls the Corinthian Heraea, must refer to these rites, 
since we gather from Pausanias that the hair of the conse- 
crated children was shorn and they wore black raiment. 
In another passage, the latter writer tells us that Medea 
concealed each of her children at their birth in Hera’s temple, 
wishing to make them immortal, and a stranger story is pre- 
served by the scholiast on Pindar, to the effect that Hera 
promised her children immortality, and the promise was ful- 
filled in the sense that the citizens immortalized them after 
their death with divine honours. We have also ancient and 
direct testimony to the divinity of Medea herself, given by 
Alcman, Hesiod and a later Musaeus. 


APP. | HERA. 203 


The conclusion to which these facts inevitably lead is that 
which O. Miiller and Sch6mann have drawn®*, namely, that 
Medea is a divinity closely connected with Hera and that 
the sacrifice of children was part of her primitive sacrifice. 
We can understand thus why in some legends the people, 
and in others the goddess herself, was made responsible 
for the slaughter; in a certain sense both accounts might 
be true. If Medea then was an integral part of the cult of 
the Minyan-Corinthian Hera, as Miiller maintains, and also 
a divinity indigenous in Corinth, it could no longer be 
said that the religion of Hera in Greece was innocent of 
all traces of human sacrifice. But there are strong reasons 
against Miiller’s view of her autochthonous origin. In Iolchos 
itself no traces of a Hera-worship survived at all in historical 
times. Yet the Odyssey gives us an early proof of the close 
association of the goddess with Jason, and we may believe 
that she was revered by the Minyan people as well as by the 
Achaeans; but the Medea-cult belongs not to Iolchos but 
to Corinth. And the record seems to make clear that a 
foreign goddess had settled there, borne up by some wave 
of Minyan migration, and had fastened upon an ancient cult 
of Hera. It would be erroneous to argue that the practice of 
human. sacrifice proves a foreign origin for the cult; for 
we find clear traces of it in undoubtedly Hellenic worships. 
The strikingly foreign trait in the service of Hera Acraea is 
the ritual of sorrow and mourning, the shaven head and the 
dark robe. There is nothing in the character of the Greek 
goddess that can explain this; but at Byblos men shaved 
their heads for Adonis, and we find grief and lamentation 
mingled with the service of the Oriental Aphrodite at Cyprus, 
Naxos and Athens. In the face of these facts, we must 
assign some weight to the legend of the foreign and barbaric 
origin of Medea. Her father, Aeetes, may be genuine Corin- 
thian, as O. Miiller maintains ; but this would prove nothing 
about the daughter, for in the confusion and syncretism of 
myths and cults, paternity is a slight matter. We have also 
more than mere legend; the Corinthians themselves, while 

* Orchomenos, p. 267; Griech. Alterth. 2. p. 491. 


204 GREEK RELIGION. 


honouring the children of Medea as divinities, called them 
pr€oBdpBapo.*°4, Medea stayed the famine in the land by 
sacrificing to the Lemnian nymphs, and, according to the 
statement of the Pseudo-Plutarch*, built the temple of the 
Oriental Aphrodite on Acro-Corinth. The scholiast on Euri- 
pides found in these Corinthian rites something that reminded 
him of Adonis2°*; and it is difficult to explain his allusion, 
unless he is referring to the rites of mourning common to 
Phoenicia, Phrygia and other parts of Asia Minor. It is 
a curious fact also that the legend of Medea is haunted 
- with stories of people being boiled alive in cauldrons; some 
such practice seems actually to have occurred at Carthage in 
connexion with the rites of Baal or Moloch; and the other 
traces of human sacrifice at Corinth are associated with the 
rites of the Graeco-Phoenician Melicertes. The cauldron- 
stories may be a legendary reminiscence of a savage Oriental 
ritual ; but be this as it may, it is notable that they are never 
told of any known Greek divinity or heroine, but only of 
Medea and the Asia-Minor goddess Rhea who boiled Pelops. 
These are reasons for believing that the Medea who was 
ingrafted upon the Hera of Corinth was one of the many forms 
of that divinity whose orgiastic worship we can trace from 
Phoenicia to the Black Sea, and from Phrygia and Caria on the 
coast far into the interior, and who appears in Greece chiefly 
in the form of Cybele and Aphrodite. The Minyan settle- 
ments in Lemnos were probably the result of the earliest 
Minyan colonization which, as O. Miiller rightly maintains, 
took the north-east of the Aegean for its route. It may 
have been from this island that they brought the Oriental 
worship to the shores of Corinth, and Lemnos seems to have 
been remembered at that city in the religious legend of Medea. 


" De Herod. Malign. 39. 


— 





CHAPTER VIII. 


CULT-MONUMENTS OF HERA. 


WE may believe that all the important centres of the 
worship of Hera possessed a temple-image, though this is not 
always recorded. But only very few of the ideas which we 
have found in this religion appear to have been definitely 
expressed in specially characteristic monuments. The record 
of these, so far as it is explicit, shows that she was usually 
represented as the wedded wife of Zeus, the goddess who 
cherished the lawful union of men and women; and this 
accords with the main idea of the cults and with her 
general character in Greek legend. Her earliest dya\para or 
symbols were, like those of most Greek divinities, aniconic and 
wholly inexpressive. A stock cut out from the tree was her 
badge at Thespiae*® her first sacred emblem at Samos 
was a board %, at Argos a lofty pillar in the primitive period °°. 
And of most of the earliest images mentioned by Pausanias 
and other writers, nothing significant is told us. The most 
interesting is the archaic image of Hera, a €davoy or wooden 
statue, carved by Smilis* for the temple in Samos, probably 
about the middle of the seventh century B.c.°’ This sup- 
planted an older idol, and retained its place in the island 
worship down to the latest period. The words of Varro, 
quoted by Lactantius, about the bridal character and ap- 
pearance of the Samian image must apply to this work of 
Smilis®°4, and this must be the Apéras which, according to 


® Overbeck’s view about the historic accepted as the most probable, Azst- 
character of Smilis and his date may be AMythol. 2. 1, p. 13. 


206 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


Athenaeus, was taken down to the sea and hidden in a wood, 
a rite that probably has reference to primitive marriage cus- 
toms; for both writers appear to be speaking of the chief 
image of the temple-worship, and in historical times there was 
never any other than the statue carved by Smilis. We can 
gather something about the form and character of the temple- 
statue of Samos, from a series of Samian coins that have 
come down to us, ranging from the period of Hadrian to that 
of the younger Valerian (Coin Pl. A 15). The most im- 
portant of these have been published by Overbeck in his 
Kunst-Mythologie, and in the British Museum catalogue®. 
From an examination of these we gather that the image 
‘was an upright wooden figure overlaid with drapery, wear- 
ing a calathus and an ample veil on her head, and holding 
a libation cup in each hand, from which what appears to 
be a sacred fillet is hanging down. All these are natural 
emblems of the goddess of marriage and fruitfulness. On 
one of these coins the lower parts of the goddess have the 
same stiff almost aniconic appearance as the Samian statue 
of Hera in the Louvre, and as it is probable that this very 
archaic marble work preserves some reminiscence of the 
wooden temple-image, it may well be, as Overbeck suggests, 
that the wealth of drapery seen on most of the coins does not 
represent what was really carved upon the idol, but rather the 
sacred garments with which the worshippers from time to 
time may have draped it, possibly thank-offerings of married 
women?. 

The image of Aphrodite-Hera at Sparta?” * must be ranked 
among the archaic monuments of the marriage-goddess, and 
the statue at Coronea of Hera bearing in her hands the 
Sirens 2* is the only other monument of the same significance 
which we can quote from the barren record of this earlier 
period; for in the account of some of the most interesting 
cults, such as that of Hera the maid, wife, and widow at 
Stymphelus we have no mention of any representation at 


® Overbeck, 2. 1, Pl. 1; Brit. Mus. taining an inventory of the drapery that 
Cat. Jonia, pp. 370-374. Pl. 37. 2. was used for the statue; J/it¢. d. deut. 
b We have Samian inscriptions con- ws¢. (Athens), 7. 367. 


VIII. | CULT-MONUMENTS OF HERA. 207 


all. The two temple-statues that explicitly represented 
her as the bride or the goddess of wedlock, belong to the 
period of perfected art: the Hera Nuudevopérn at Plataea 
by Callimachus, and the Hera TeAefa in the same city by 
Praxiteles*. The first title seems to denote that the god- 
dess was represented as at the moment of her marriage; 
and TeAeia may be an epithet of the married goddess or 
the goddess who brings marriage. Both these statues are 
obviously cult-monuments of the wife of Zeus, and evidence 
has already been given that shows how ancient and how 
prevalent in the city of Plataea and the neighbourhood were 
the myth and ritual of the sacred bridal. Of the form and 
type of the figure carved by Callimachus we know nothing at 
all. The Praxitelean statue, as we are told by Pausanias, 
was of Pentelic marble, representing the goddess as erect 
and of colossal stature. An attempt has been made by 
Overbeck®, following a suggestion of Visconti, to discover the 
type of the Hera TeAcia in a small series of statues of which 
the Hera Barberini in the Vatican is the chief. But the 
attempt must share the fate of most hypotheses which try to 
establish the connexion between existing works and lost 
originals of which no description, or only the vaguest, sur- 
vives. That the Vatican statue represents the marriage- 
goddess is very probable, but only certain if we allow that 
a very close relationship exists between her and the goddess 
who appears on a Roman sarcophagus in St. Petersburg”, 
bringing a married pair to the altar, and that this is certainly 
a Juno Pronuba and in form descended from some Greek 
original of Hera TeAeia. But it is still somewhat doubtful 
whether the relief-figure with the half-bared breasts can be 
a Juno Pronuba: and even if we allow this, her relationship 
with the Vatican figure has been greatly exaggerated ; her 
drapery is very different, and her pose does not strikingly 
resemble that of the statue. And finally, if we can reasonably 
interpret the Barberini statue as a representation of the 
goddess of marriage, and if the not infrequent repetition of 
the type suggests a Greek original of some celebrity, there is 
* Kunst-Mythologie, 2. 54. > 76. p. 57, fig. 6. 


208 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


little force in the theory that this is the Praxitelean Hera of 
Plataea; we must wait in the hope that more may be dis- 
covered concerning both his representations of the goddess. 
The wide celebrity of the ritual of the iepds ydywos is amply 
attested ; yet we hear of no cult-monuments in which it found 
expression. It was more naturally a theme for religious 
drama than for temple-sculpture, being performed in the 
open air more usually than in a temple, and it is probable 
that the only representations of it which were designed for 
religious ceremonial were puppet-like forms which might be 
carried in procession and used in the sacred mimes that 
commemorated the event in different parts of Greece. The 
curious Plataean story noticed above, that Zeus, to win back 
the jealous Hera, dressed up a straw figure as a bride and 
had it borne along in bridal procession, seems to show that 
the figure of Hera was actually borne through the streets in 
the celebration of the marriage, and that a misunderstanding 
of the ritual gave birth to the irrelevant story. But it is 
almost certain that no one of the art-representations of the 
tepds yapos which have come down to us were designed 
originally for the purposes of the religious ceremony ; and 
the number of monuments that can be proved to refer to 
this ritual is very small, though many have been quoted as 
belonging to this group on the ground of a false or very 
doubtful interpretation. One of the most interesting is the 
small terracotta group from Samos, already mentioned, pre- 
senting Zeus and Hera seated side by side in solemn and cere- 
monious attitude and both wearing the veil (Pl. Vb). This has 
been quoted by Forster* as the oldest extant monument of 
the sacred nuptial rite; but Overbeck inclines to regard it as 
a mere votive offering representing the divinities seated by each 
other in the permanent union of married life. The strongest 
argument for Forster’s interpretation is the veil on the head 
of Zeus, which, as we have seen before, is very difficult to 
explain except as a symbol of the bridegroom. Also the 
‘provenance’ of the group is somewhat in favour of the same 
view, because the ritual of the marriage played so prominent 
® Die Hochzeit des Zeus und der Hera, p. 24. 


PLATE IX 








~~ 





VIII. } CULT-MONUMENTS OF HERA. 209 


a part in the religious service of the island. On the other 
hand it cannot be proved that any of the numerous vase- 
representations in which the two divinities are grouped 
together have any real reference to the actual sacred cere- 
mony or even to any public common cult of Zeus and Hera. 
The only monuments which, after much debate, have been 
admitted to be representations of the sacred Marriage, are 
three: (a) the relief on the metope of the most recent temple 
at Selinus, (4) the Pompeian wall painting, (c) the relief in the 
Villa Albani designed for the basis of an altar or a statue. 
The chief question for the student of Greek cult is how far 
the artist and sculptor has borrowed and reproduced certain 
traits or motives from the religious mimes that were in vogue 
in different parts of Greece. The Selinus relief (Pl. EX. a) or 
which the art displays the archaic style passing into the tran- 
sitional period, shows us the figure of Zeus on the right seated 
on a rock, with the himation flung about the middle of his body 
and lower limbs as if one end had just slipped down from his 
left shoulder. With his right hand he is grasping the left 
wrist of Hera, who stands before him arrayed most cere- 
moniously as the bride, gazing on him with a very earnest 
and solemn expression, while her whole figure and pose are 
full of shame and reserve. Her form has entirely the style 
of hieratic art, and might really stand for a cult-figure of 
Hera the bride. Above her woollen chiton she has put on 
a second robe that falls in stiff folds to her feet, and the 
ample veil which she is just lifting away from her face 
envelops her head and falls low behind. There is no move- 
ment or life in the form. The attitude and expression of the 
god is just the contrary: he is seated with an ease that is 
rarely found in the figures of this period of sculpture; his 
drapery is very freely treated and there is an expression of 
Strong passion in the features which corresponds with the 
energy of his action. Such a figure could certainly not be 
derived from any ancient cult; and it is surprising enough to 
find it on any Greek temple of the fifth century. We can 
suppose that the whole motive may have been derived from 
the religious drama, which may have been well known in the 
VOL. I. P 


210 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


neighbourhood, and which may have justified the sculptor in 
using it for the purposes of temple-sculpture. But it is more 
probable, from the slight evidence that is recorded, that these 
dramas or mimes were carried on not so much by living 
actors as by puppets that were borne in procession, and at 
last perhaps placed side by side on the bridal couch, as in the 
marriage-festival of Venus and Adonis at Alexandria; and 
certainly the Zeus on the metope does not resemble the 
figure in a religious dumb-show. 

The Pompeian painting*® resembles the metope in many 
essential respects. The appearance of Zeus is very similar, 
except that here he wears the oaken crown and the veil as 
bridegroom, and his bearing is more tranquil and cool. Hera 
approaches him, wearing the same rich attire as before, and 
with the same expression of bashful hesitation. She is here 
accompanied by Iris, who may have played an actual part in 
the dramatic ritual,as she is mentioned in Theocritus’ descrip- 
tion of the ‘sacred marriage.’ Both the sculptor and the 
painter have laid the scene in the open air, and the picturesque 
landscape of the picture has been supposed by Overbeck ” to 
contain allusions to Crete, where there was at least one cele- 
bration of this ritual. In this, then, as in the former work, 
there may be some reminiscence of the ceremony as performed 
in Sicily, Cnossus, and elsewhere ; but it would be far too 
hazardous to say that they reproduce with any exactness the 
forms and movements of the personages of the religious 
drama. 

The third representation, the relief in the Villa Albani °, 
takes the form of a procession of divinities, in which the chief 
personages are Zeus and Hera, he bearing the sceptre with an 
eagle on the top, and she represented as the shamefaced bride 
delicately lifting the border of her veil. The god and the 
goddess are unnaturally separated, but Welcker 4 ingeniously 
explains this as a blunder of the copyist, who had to transfer 
the scene from a round to a flat surface. Among the other | 
figures can be recognized Artemis Hegemone, ‘the leader of 


* Overbeck, Atlas, Kunst-Myth. 10. 28. © Overbeck, Atlas, 10 29. 
» Kunst-Myth, 2. 240. 4 Alte Denkmiiler, 2. p. 25. 


ea OS 


© 


VIII. | CULT-MONUMENTS OF HERA. 2I1 


the bride,’ Poseidon, Demeter, Dionysos, and Hermes, and the 
person of whom slight traces remain in front of Artemis must 
have been none other than Apollo, who in other bridal 
representations is seen at the head of the procession with his 
lyre. All are crowned, and there can be no doubt as to the 
meaning of the whole. But it is difficult to say that the scene 
reproduces the actual procession that was part of the per- 
formance of the iepds ydyos in the different parts of Greece, 
for there is some reason to suppose that the image of Hera or 
the person representing her was usually borne in the bridal 
chariot *. The sculptor may in this case have availed himself 
of the usual type of the procession of the twelve divinities, 
and by altering the number and by other modifications have 
given it a special meaning. 

Besides these, there are very few direct traces in the Greek 
art that have survived of the common cult of Zeus and 
Hera; the vase-representations cannot be regarded as cult- 
monuments, and there are very few coins’ that present the 
two divinities together. 

The marriage-goddess is necessarily connected with the 
goddess of childbirth, and the worship of Hera-Eileithyia in 
-Argos has been mentioned. But no sure representation of 
Hera under this aspect has survived. On a Berlin vase° we 
see the figure of Io seated by a pedestal on which stands the 
image of a goddess clad in a long chiton with hair streaming 
over her shoulders and holding a torch in the right hand and 
a bow in her left ; and Overbeck‘ maintains that this must be 
the idol of Hera Eileithyia, as there is no other goddess to 
whom Io could appeal for pity, and Hera may bear the bow, 
because Homer speaks of the arrowy pangs of women in 
travail, the ‘shaft that the Eileithyiae send.’ This reasoning 
has been accepted, but it will not bear criticism. A  vase- 
painter might well allow Io in the distress of travail to appeal 

® The Hera ‘Hvidyn, ‘the holder of | carnassus; Overbeck, Kumnst-Mytho- 
the reins,’ who was worshipped at Le-  /ogie, 2, Miinztafel 2. No. 38, and 3. 
badea by the side of Zeus Basileus, may No. 6. 
have got her name from the bridal © Overbeck, AZ/as, 7. No. 9. 


chariot in which she drove. 4 Kunst-Mythologte, 2. p. 19. 
> E.g. the coins of Capua and Hali- 


P 2 


GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


212 


to Artemis, especially as this goddess was even more concerned 
with childbirth than Hera. But Hera was Io’s relentless 
enemy in the ordinary myth; and though a poet might speak 
in a figurative sense of the shaft of Eileithyia, yet no 
artist would consider this sufficient reason for giving Hera 
the symbol of the bow. Moreover every Greek artist would 
know that if he drew the figure of a goddess with torch and 
bow, to whose aid a woman was appealing, every spectator 
would conclude that the goddess was Artemis; and this 
is the strongest argument for believing that it was Artemis 
whom this vase-painter intended to represent *. 

The only other special worships of Hera to which we can 
attach certain representations that survive are those of Hera 
Lacinia and Hera of Argos’. As regards the image in the 
temple at Croton, dedicated to the former, we have no 
information; but that an image existed there we can con- 
clude from the epigram in the Azthology™ containing the 
prayer of the women who offer a linen garment to her, which 
was no doubt intended to be laid upon the statue; and in 
any case we could not believe that a cult of such celebrity 
lacked the temple-idol. It is undoubtedly the face of this 
goddess that is found on certain coins of Croton of the fourth 
century B.C., and the type is borrowed with slight modifi- 
cations for the coinage of Venusia. Neapolis, Pandosia, Hyria, 
and Veseris Campaniae (Coin Pl. A 20). In some of these 
instances the goddess wears a veil, and in most the stephanos, 
which on the coin of Croton is richly decorated with an anthe- 
mium in front and two griffins at the sides symmetrically dis- 
posed, a peculiar symbol which appears on many of the coins. 
There can be no doubt that the head on the coin of Croton is 


® This is also Furtwangler’s inter- 
pretation, Berlin. Vasen-Sammlung, No. 
3164. 

b We have the vague and doubtful 
authority of Lycophron for an armed 
Hera ‘OmAocpia at Argos; but there is 
no cult-figure to which we could attach 
this name; a seated figure of Hera 
bearing the spear on a black-figured 
vase (Miiller, D. d. A. A. 1. 10; Over- 


beck, Az/as, Taf. 9. 16), cannot be ac- 
cepted as any illustration or corrobora- 
tion of Lycophron’s statement. There 
is more to be said for the belief that we 
find the cult-figure of Hera A:ppia * ¢ 
on a coin of Chalcis © **, as the type 
evidently points to some statue and the 
rock on which she is seated would 
naturally refer to her worship on the 
neighbouring mountain. 


2 ea = ee x 
ReGen > weve ee a i 


PLaTE VI 





VIII. | CULT-MONUMENTS OF HERA. 213 


that of the tutelary goddess of the state, and the celebrity of 
her worship explains and is attested by the frequent use of this 
type of the Hera Lakinia in the coinage of the other cities of 
Magna Graecia. The crown and the veil, the earnest and 
proud expression combined with the matronal forms of the 
face, are specially characteristic of Hera, but neither the litera- 
ture nor the coins attest what particular aspect of her, if any, 
was prominent in thiscult. Wecannot explain the griffins nor 
the very striking arrangement of the hair, which waves about her 
head almost as if tossed by a wind. It has been maintained 
that Lakinia is an epithet derived from an Oscan word Lakis, 
meaning earth, and that Hera was identified in Magna Graecia 
with a local earth-goddess*. If the Greek worshippers were 
really conscious of this we might explain this singular treatment 
of the hair as borrowed from the usual representations of Gaia, 
whose hair generally flows in long tresses about her neck. This 
trait is not found in the colossal marble bust at Venice (Pl. V1), 
which Overbeck rightly considers a representation of Hera 
Lakinia on the ground that the stephane above the forehead 
has the same decoration of anthemium and griffins as appears 
on the coins of South Italy. Disfigured as it is, the countenance 
has yet preserved something of the exalted type which we find 
on the marble coins, although the later copyist who wrought 
the head has brought a different expression into the face by 
giving it the rather narrow eye of Aphrodite. From the bust 
and the coins we may gather something of the character and 
form of the temple-statue, about which history is silent. The 
sculptor, being the later and inferior artist, would no doubt be 
the more faithful copyist of the two as regards the external 
forms which he could reproduce ; but it is probable that he has 
falsified the sentiment, and that the coin-stamper has embodied 
in his work more of the expression of the original, although the 
wild and luxuriant hair, more difficult to render in marble and 
bronze, may have been specially designed for the coin-device. 
The place of this Lakinian head among the ideal types of 
Hera will have to be noticed afterwards. 

As the Argive was the most celebrated worship of Hera in 

® Fell, Journ. 1886, p. 10. 


214 GREEK RELIGION. [cHap. 


Greece, so her image in the temple of Argos by the hand of 
Polycleitus takes precedence of all other cult-monuments of 
her, and must be regarded as the fullest and highest embodi- 
ment of the goddess as she appeared in legend and worship. 
We gather most about it from the words of Pausanias * : ‘the 
statue of Hera of colossal size is seated on a throne. It 
is of gold and ivory, the work of Polycleitus. She wears a 
crown upon which are wrought the figures of the Graces and 
Hours, and in her one hand she bears the fruit of the pome- 
granate, in the other her sceptre .. . and they say that the 
cuckoo sits on the top of her sceptre, declaring that Zeus, 
when he was in love with Hera before marriage, transformed 
himself into this bird . . . and the statue of Hebe, also of 
gold and ivory, that stands by the side of Hera, is said to have 
been wrought by the hand of Naucydes.’ Most of the other 
records left by ancient writers of this great work add little to 
this description®—1°8, The scholiast on Theocritus corroborates 
the statement about the cuckoo on the sceptre, and Strabo in 
a very dull passage praises the technique of the work, in which 
it surpassed even the great masterpieces of Pheidias, ‘ while 
inferior to them in expensiveness and size. We can gather 
from the epigram of Parmenion—what would really go without 
saying—that the main part of the body was covered with 
drapery. ‘The Argive Polycleitus, who alone of all men saw 
the goddess with his very eyes, has revealed to us as much of 
her beauty as it is lawful for mortal eyes to see!” Of more 
interest and weight is the summary account of the form and 
character of the image, left us by Maximus Tyrius, who says 
that ‘ Polycleitus revealed Hera to the Argives as a goddess of 
the white elbow and forearm of ivory, fair of face and clad in 
noble raiment, in queenly fashion seated on a golden throne 1°!’ 
It is clear from this sentence that the arms were uncovered, 
at least from the elbows downwards, and that the artistic 
impression was mainly produced by a certain majestic treat- 
ment of the drapery combined with a striking beauty of face. 
But the artistic questions concerning this ideal representation 
of the goddess will be noticed later, as we are chiefly con- 
cerned here with the relation of this statue to Argive cult. 


VIII. | CULT-MONUMENTS OF HERA. 215 


In the first place we may note that the description of 
Pausanias and the others is illustrated and in some ways supple- 
mented by certain Argive coins of the Imperial period ; a coin 
of Julia Domna and one of Antoninus Pius (Coin Pl. A 16). 
On both of them we see the goddess seated on her throne, 
wearing the stephanos and holding the pomegranate in her 
extended right hand and grasping the sceptre near the top with 
the left: her drapery consists of a chiton which leaves the 
arms bare and a himation which passes over the middle of her 
body and falls over her left shoulder, arranged just in the same 
way as is usual with the mantle of Zeus. She wears no veil: the 
writers mention none, and the fact is important. The pose has 
no stiffness in it, but is majestic and suitable to the solemnity 
of a great temple-statue : the left arm is held high and free of 
the body, the right foot is drawn slightly under the throne, so 
as to avoid the look of constraint. There is no reason to doubt 
the general fidelity of the copy, and on one of the coins the 

‘figure of Hebe is given, awkwardly indeed and on far too 
large a scale. 

When we examine the attributes and symbols and what 
else is told us or shown us of the statue. we see that Poly- 
cleitus, a true national sculptor, has given faithful and imagina- 
tive expression to the ideas contained in the cult of his land. 
She was worshipped there as Hera the queen and as the wife 
of Zeus, united to him in the ceremonial of the sacred mar- 
riage ; and it is as the queen-goddess, as Maximus Tyrius 
declares, that Polycleitus revealed her to his countrymen, 
displaying this character of her in the majesty of the pose 
and drapery, in her richly ornamented crown, and in her 
imperious grasp of the sceptre. Her union with Zeus is no 
doubt allusively expressed by the symbol of the cuckoo, and 
still more clearly by the subordinate figure of Hebe, their 
daughter, which the later sculptor added in the early part 
of the fourth century. She was worshipped also in Argos 
preeminently as the goddess of marriage and childbirth ; and 
the image of the wife of Zeus would be also naturally an image 
of the goddess of these functions. Direct allusion to this 
character of hers is probably conveyed by the symbol of the 


216 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


pomegranate. We can hardly determine the significance of the 
whole work, unless we can discover with some certainty the 
symbolic meaning of this fruit which she bears in her hand. 
Pausanias is piously averse to giving an explanation; he 
regards it as a mystery ~not lightly to be revealed. Most 
modern interpreters consider the pomegranate in Hera’s hand 
to be the emblem of fruitfulness in marriage, having this signi- 
ficance on account of the large number of its seeds.. But 
Botticher, in an able article*, argues against this interpretation 
and proposes an entirely different one. He declares that the 
pomegranate played no part at all in the Greek marriage rite ; 
that in Greek symbolism it was no emblem of fertility, but of 
strife, and bloodshed, and death—by reason of its blood-red 
colour ; and certainly it appears to have this meaning in some 
few legends. But when Botticher maintains that the goddess 
of Argos is holding forth the pomegranate to display her 
triumph over her rival Demeter, whose daughter Persephone 
through eating the pomegranate was held a prisoner in the 
world below, he is asking us to believe a difficult thing. Greek 
temple-sculpture of the fifth century is not prone to symbolism 
so far-fetched and so quaint; nor would the great image of 
Hera, ‘the benefactress of the land’ as she was called, be 
likely to embody the idea of strife and hatred. And if Poly- 
cleitus intended this meaning he must have lost his labour, 
for no Greek spectator would be likely to have understood 
his thought. 

The hand of the idol in a Greek temple is extended usually 
to dispense gifts or to display some permanent attribute of the 
power, some symbol of the functions of the divinity. . The 
pomegranate is by no means the peculiar and constant token 
of Persephone ; but even if it were, the statue of Hera would 
be no more likely to hold it in its hand as an emblem of 
triumph over a rival than to wear the vine-crown or the 
grape-clusters by way of expressing her hatred of Bacchus. 
If it were desired to mark the hostility of divinities in 
ritual or representation, it would surely be by excluding the 
badge or the ministrant of the hostile divinity from the worship 


® Denkmiler und Forschungen, 1856, p. 170. 


abd. 
rs 


Vir. ] CULT-MONUMENTS OF HERA. 217 


of the other: as we hear that ivy was tabooed in the service 
of Hera at Eleusis as the badge of her hated stepson. 

The Argive goddess holding forth the pomegranate must 
have been regarded as the goddess who gives that fruit to 
men, either for nourishment or for a sign of fruitfulness in 
marriage. For in spite of Botticher’s arguments there are 
reasons for believing that it had this double significance in © 
Greek symbolism; it is found in the hands of the Hours, 
being there perhaps no more than a sign of the season’s bless- 
ing and of the year’s increase, and it is found in the hand of 
Aphrodite, surely as a sign of love and offspring. In the 
Argive cult Hera was clearly recognized not only as the 
marriage-goddess but as the beneficent power that gave the 
fruits of the earth ; and, as we see from the worship of Demeter 
in Attica, the two functions were closely connected in the 
Greek religious thought. Both may have been symbolized 
by the pomegranate in her hand, and both were beautifully 
suggested by the groups of the Hours and Graces on her 
crown. 

The popular belief as shown in literature, legend, and cult 
gave the sculptor sufficient reason for associating these figures 
with Hera. They had already appeared as the ministrants of 
Zeus on the throne of the Pheidian image, and Hera as his 
consort could borrow them from him or claim them by right 
of her own nature and character. Statues of the Charites had 
- already been dedicated in the archaic period in the Heraeon 
of Argos*; and in her temple at Olympia the Hours were 
represented on thrones, works of the early sculptor Smilis?; 
and a shrine was raised to them in the Argive territory °% 
Mythology also associated her with them, a legend being 
recorded by Pausanias from Olen’s poetry that the Hours were 
the nurses of Hera. Throughout Greece the Hours were 
worshipped as the powers that brought the fertilizing rain and 
wind and the blessings of fruit and corn and wine, also as 
charged with the due recurrence of the seasons, and therefore in 
some way with the destiny of man, and especially with child- 
birth and with the ceremony of marriage. Hence they were 

eee a, 5S Fe. 6 FY; ¢: © 10,4. 20, 5, 


218 = GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


frequently associated with Aphrodite and Dionysos, and in 
Argos most naturally with the chief goddess, who played the 
part there of Demeter and Eileithyia. 

The Graces are very kindred personages to the Hours, 
being nature-powers of the same significance, but having 
gained a more ethical and human character. They bring the 
flowers of the spring, and are thus joined with the Argive 
Hera the flower-goddess ; they personify besides the charm 
and beauty of life, and as the constant companions of Aphrodite 
the ideas of the sweetness of love and married life were attached 
to them. Their presence was necessary to complete the idea 
embodied in the work of Polycleitus. 

As we can discover so clear an allusion to the goddess 
of fruitfulness in this famous temple-image, we need not 
wholly reject the statement of Tertullian that her statue at 
Argos was crowned or in some way adorned with a vine- 
spray. He may be speaking of some other, but he ought natur- 
ally to be referring to the great statue of the city. Wecannot, 
of course, believe that the latter was permanently decorated 
with an artificial garland of vine-leaves wrought in metal, for 
Pausanias would certainly have mentioned so very remarkable 
an emblem; but Tertullian may be carelessly referring to 
some ritual of crowning the goddess with the vine-garland at 
the time of the wine-harvest. The explanation offered by 
him that she wore this as a proof of her dislike of Bacchus is 
of course ridiculous; we should rather say that at Argos the 
fruit of the vine was offered her because she was there believed 
to have given man the blessing of the vine as she had given 
him the gift of corn. 

One last question remains about the conception of the work. 
In the Peloponnese and elsewhere Hera was worshipped as 
the maid as well as the wife; and in Argolis a stream was 
shown where Hera bathed each year, and thus periodically 
renewed her maidenhood. The statue of Polycleitus gives 
ample indication of the bride and the wife. Can we believe 
that in the absence of the veil, and perhaps in the flowing 
maidenly locks, such as we see on the Argive coins, the 
sculptor alluded to the mysterious nature of the goddess 


VIII. | CULT-MONUMENTS OF HERA. 219 


who was maid as well as wife? He was a sculptor who 
loved to reconcile in one figure two different systems of 
forms—the forms of the boy and the man in his Doryphorus, 
of the female and the male in his Amazon. If by some subtle 
mode of expression he could combine in his work a touch of 
maidenliness with her character as queen and bride and 
mother, we may say that in this case at least his imagina- 
tion was equal to his marvellous power over form. It is true 
that the ideal of Hera was not so spiritual or ethical as the 
ideal of Zeus or Athene; and in the sentence of Maximus 
Tyrius the epithets refer mainly to qualities that are physical, 
formal, or external. Yet there was great beauty and worth 
in this Argive worship with its conception of a supreme god- 
dess whose power worked in the genial fresh life of the earth, 
and in the grace and peace of human life. And if the statue 
wrought by Polycleitus embodied the leading ideas of that 
cult, as we find that it did, and if the forms of the head and 
countenance were rendered in accordance with what was 
expressed in the whole figure, then his work was the most 
masterly and ideal representation of the Greek Hera, as it 
certainly was the fullest and most profound reflex of her cult. 


COAPTER: 1X, 
IDEAL TYPES OF HERA. 


IN searching through the religious monuments that survive 
of this worship, the inquirer has to be on his guard against 
the frequent false interpretations that confront him. There is 
no Greek divinity so difficult to recognize as Hera; for her 
figure has often been disguised by false restoration, and on the 
other hand the name has been applied to representations to 
which it cannot be proved to belong. 


This ambiguity arises chiefly from the lack of any signi- | 


ficant and peculiar attribute which may at once reveal her as 
clearly as Athena is revealed by the aegis, Artemis by the bow, 
or Demeter by the corn-stalks. Of all the various symbols, 
badges, attributes, fashions of drapery that have been supposed 
to be specially characteristic of Hera, there is none that is 


invariably found; and none that is not found with other. 


divinities also, with the one exception of the peacock; but 
this comes too late into the artistic representations to be of 
much service. The veil might be supposed to be proper to the 
matron-goddess, the bride and the wife of Zeus; and she 
wears it sitting by his side in the terra-cotta group found 
at Samos®*; it appears in the Argive statuette of early fifth- 
century style, and on the Selinus metope, but rarely, if ever, 
on the archaic vases, and only occasionally in works of per- 
fected and later art ; and the veiled head of Hera is exceptional 
on coins, the devices of Capua and the Boeotian Orchomenos 
being among the few instances from the Greek period §° 7”. She 
is veiled in representations of the sacred marriage, yet on the 
coins of those places where this rite was regularly performed 
* PL V.b. > Pl. VIL a. 


a a a ee 


Pe Eg es ee 





al HB iS 


IDEAL TYPES OF HERA. 221 


in her honour, Plataea, Argos, Cnossus, Samos, she wears 
nothing but the stephanos or smaller crown. Again, as regards 
this latter attribute on her head, we may believe that its 
earliest form was the calathos, the emblem of fruitfulness, the 
proper emblem of the Argive goddess who gave the fruits of 
the earth. And wherever Hera was the chief divinity it would 
be natural to attribute this gift and power to her. Yet the 
calathos in its proper form is by no means common in the 
representations of her; the only coins that present her with it 
are the Samian coins that reproduce more or less freely the 
type of her ancient image. It is not unfrequently found 
in the vase-representations of the black-figured and red-figured 
style, for instance on the beautiful Munich patera that will be 
mentioned below. More usually it appears under the form of 
the stephanos or diminished calathos, which has no other 
intention probably but to express dignity or majesty, the 
change in form being due merely to artistic reasons. It is this 
more shapely emblem that is seen on so very early a work as 
the limestone Olympian head *, which is possibly a fragment 
of the temple-statue of the Heraeum, on the Argive statuette, 
and on the coins of Argos and those other cities whose 
coinage resembles this type, and on some of the heads of 
Hera Lakinia on Croton coins». But the stephanos is by no 
means so frequently found as the half-diadem or stephane, 
which is her common attribute on coins. On the other hand 
some of her most certain and most striking representations, 
such as the Parthenon relief-figure and the Farnese head, 
show neither crown nor diadem. Even the sceptre which 
from the fifth century onwards designated the queen of the 
heavens is rare on the black-figured vases. 

And even if all these were constant and necessary attributes 
and emblems of Hera, they would not be peculiar to her, 
and therefore would fail in certain cases to distinguish her. 
A goddess with the veil and calathos may be Artemis or 
Aphrodite as well as Hera, and the head that wears the 
stephanos on the coin of Zeleia Troadis, quoted and published 


* Roscher’s Lexicon, p. 2118. 43; cf. Tyrtaeus (Bergk, 2): Kpoviwy 
> Overbeck, A.-4Z, Miinztaf. 2, No. «addArorepdvov méots “Hpas. 


222 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


among the Hera-heads by Overbeck, is quite as probably 
a representation of Artemis*. Many divinities wear the 
stephane, and any one of them can carry the sceptre. Nor, 
as we have seen, was Hera so closely associated in the general 
worship with any part of the natural world or with the arts of 
life that any special flower or animal, weapon or implement, 
could be given her asa sign. The pomegranate is as natural 
to Aphrodite as to Hera, and very rarely found with either. 
The cuckoo might have been used as the obvious and peculiar 
symbol of Hera, but by some strange perversity it was not ; 
it figures only in the description of Polycleitus’ statue, and 
possibly on one vase-representation °. 

Nor is there any precisely characteristic handling of the 
drapery which alone could distinguish her from any other god- 
dess. Character is indeed sufficiently expressed in the drapery 
of the most imaginative representations of Hera, the character of 
the stately and imperial goddess, the wife of Zeus. She is essen- 
tially evetwv, ‘clad in comely dress.’ Certain negative rules 
might be given; she could not be unclad like Aphrodite, nor 
draped in the short tunic of Artemis, nor is it probable that in 
her temple-images she could wear nothing more than the open 
Doric chiton of Athene. But, like other goddesses, she changes 
her fashions with time and place. The Argive terra-cotta 
statuette shows her with the double-sleeved chiton and veil, 
on the Parthenon frieze she wears an ample veil and the Doric 
double chiton without sleeves, and also, on many of the later 
sarcophagi, the veil and chiton only. The girdle seems 
indifferent to her; sometimes she has it and sometimes not. 
In such details the artist appears to have been guided by 
artistic fashion merely, not by any fixed conception about her. 
Her standing epithet in Homer is AevkoAcvos, the white-armed 
goddess, and one might have supposed that the constant 
association of this poetic term with her would have impelled 
the artist and sculptor to show her arms bare of drapery. And 
the greatest sculptors have represented her thus; but here 


* Overbeck, A.-M. 2, Miinztaf. 2.27. | was also consecrated to her (De Adstin. 
Vide Head, Hist. Num. p. 475. Ek. 3, 5), but as far as I know it has 
> According to Porphyry the stork no place in her representations. 


i 





IX. ] IDEAL TYPES OF: HERA. 223 


also the practice varied, and we cannot deny that a particular 
statue is Hera’s because the arms are draped, or affirm that 
it is simply because they are not. The best works, indeed, 
show a tendency to invest her with a peculiar wealth and 
magnificence of drapery, to place the himation above the 
chiton, and to draw the outer robe across her body with 
a view to the most imposing effect of majestic fold and line. 
But the question will arise whether this gives us a sure clue, in 
the absence of other evidence, to discover Hera in a particular 
statue, or whether, supposing that a very effective and solemn 
arrangement of drapery had been devised originally for Hera, 
a Greek sculptor would hesitate to borrow it for his representa- 
tion of any other austere divinity, say Demeter or Themis *. 

It seems then we have no speaking emblem or symbol of 
Hera, no indubitable external mark. It is generally by means 
of the peculiar type of countenance and expression, either in 
itself or combined with becoming drapery and appropriate 
attribute, that we recognize her in various works of the per- 
fected and later art. But in the archaic period, when the face 
was expressionless and there was no separate system of forms 
for the maidenly and the maternal divinity, and the drapery 
was conventional not characteristic, we can sometimes only 
distinguish a Hera from an Aphrodite or an Artemis by the 
situation or the myth represented, or by the presence of Zeus ; 
or the provenance of the object may decide, as for instance it 
is reasonable to recognize Hera in the terra-cotta image of the 
throned and veiled goddess from Argos or Samos (PI. V. b, 
VII. a). 

It remains to mention the few surviving works in which the 
ideal form or countenance of the goddess is manifested or 
which contribute certain elements to it. What that ideal is 
we can partly gather from the Homeric poetry, and from one 
or two passages in later Greek literature. The Homeric 
account depicts her as the majestic queenly goddess, stern, 


* Perhaps the only certain instance sufficient to identify the two personages, 
of a ‘Mera recognizable by her drapery but it is only for the representation of 
alone is the figure on the metope of Hera the bride that such drapery would 
Selinus ; the situation itself of course is be used. 


224 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


proud, and self-asserting, with certain harsh and sombre traits 
in her character. There is some force and grandeur in the 
picture, but very little moral or spiritual quality. The Argive 
cult, not to mention others, knew her as something more than 
this, and her portrait in Greek art is richer and deeper than the 
Homeric. The best Greek sculptors were indebted to Homer 
for the epithets Bodas and deveddAevos and for the austerity 
of her type. But there is more in the picture of her conveyed 
by the words of Dio Chrysostom, who describes a woman ‘ of 
shapely and lofty stature clad in white raiment and holding 
a sceptre, with a countenance radiant and at the same time 
solemn, being such as painters are wont to paint Hera 4” It 
was long before Greek art had attained to this presentation 
of her. . 

Among the monuments of the fifth century before Pheidias 
there are two works that claim special mention among the 
ideal forms of Hera. Inside a very beautiful patera in the 
Munich collection of vases we see the form of the goddess, 
painted in various tints, standing in a very solemn pose, with 
the right hand holding the sceptre, and the left hand concealed 
under the drapery of the upper garment which is drawn over 
her chiton ; the left elbow is bent in such a way as to show 
that this hand is resting on her hip*, On her head is a golden 
stephanos, above which the top of her skull is shown, and her 
_ golden hair streams down from her shoulders in rich curls. 
The face is full and matronly, very calm and earnest, but 
without severity; the lips are slightly open, the under: lip 
being very slightly advanced. This is a rich and bright 
representation of the goddess-queen. 

Whether the popular imagination usually conceived her as 
yellow-haired, as she here appears, is uncertain; it would 
seem so from the story preserved by the Scholiast in the //iad» 
that Hera, Athene, and Aphrodite bathed in the river Xanthus 


to give their hair a golden colour ; but she is dark-haired in 


the Pompeian picture of her marriage. 
One of the most important monuments of fifth-century 


sc os bea 2 Be cs > Schol. //zad, 21. 1. 


™ eee C . 








Pirate VIII 











IX.] IDEAL TYPES OF HERA. 225 


religious sculpture is the Farnese head of Hera in Naples ®. 
The theories put forward concerning its date and origin are 
very conflicting; and before a judgement can be formed con- 
cerning them the features and expression must be carefully 
analyzed and defined. It is a colossal head of severe and 
impressive style, resembling some of the heads on the Par- 
thenon frieze in its exceeding depth, and in the great breadth 
of cheek and in the rendering of the bone-structure. The 
hair is pressed with a narrow band, and is parted above the 
forehead and drawn to each side in rippling lines in more 
accordance with the style of bronze-work than marble; above 
the band it is drawn so closely over the head that the contour 
of the skull is impressively shown, and behind it is gathered 
in a crobylos on the neck. The austere simplicity of this 
arrangement is almost archaic, but the concealment of part of 
the ear beneath the hair is a mark of a later period of style, 
a trait that begins to be found in the heads from the temple 
at Olympia. A striking characteristic of the whole head is 
its display of straight lines and flat surfaces: the forehead 
is exceedingly broad and strong, and is only slightly modu- 
lated in the part above the eyes ; the cheeks are flat surfaces 
that do not slope much towards the centre of the face, and 
the eyebrow is almost a straight line at right angles to the nose, 
of which the bone is broad and flat. Thus the whole head 
has somewhat of a rectilinear appearance and mathematical 
quality, and yet one must say also that the bone-structure is 
not strongly marked, but only, so to speak, shadowed beneath 
the flesh, to which due attention is paid in places. The 
corners of the lips are softly treated, and the flesh about the 
mouth and nose is warmly modulated with lines that aid 
greatly the impression of character. The upper lip is beauti- 
fully carved, and the lower protrudes noticeably in the centre, 
and is slightly flattened outwards. Beneath the lips is a deep 
depression, and then a strong broad chin that springs slightly 
forwards. 

The question must now be considered, before any further 
analysis of the forms, as to the personality. It is evidently 
* Fa, VIE 

VOL. I. Q 


226 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


a representation of divinity, and the almost unanimous verdict 
of archaeologists pronounces it to be Hera*. There can be 
little doubt that this judgement is correct ; for though the 
head does not wear the usual crown, but only a narrow band, 
which we find indeed on the head of Hera on Elean coins, 
but which any goddess might wear, the expression is cer- 
tainly more suitable to Hera than to any other divinity. It 
resides chiefly in the eyes and the lips and in the parts about 
the mouth, though all the other features convey it and are 
in perfect accord with each other ; but in defining it we are 
in danger of imputing too much to the conscious intention 
of the artist and too little to the laws of plastic form- 
rendering to which his generation was devoted. We are 
struck at once with the energy and powerful will that is 
written on forehead, chin, and mouth; with the dark and 
sombre mood revealed in the eyes that are shadowed by very 
thick eyelids, and in the drooping corners of the lips ; and the 


countenance exercises such fascination on those who look at_ 


it long, that one writer, who has made a special study of the 
types of Greek heads, speaks of its ‘elemental demoniac force, 
its untameable power’. The phrase is too strong perhaps, 
but the head certainly produces something of this effect upon 
us ; only it must be borne in mind that other heads of the 
period to which this in all probability belongs are marked 
with something of the same expression. And *it is very 
doubtful if the sculptor intended to represent Hera as a 
‘demoniac force,’ as one who ‘ would devour Troy and Priam 
raw’; he is to some extent following or reproducing the style 
of the short-lived period of sculpture, the period of transition 
from the archaic to the perfected work. That generation which 
began its work shortly before the destruction of Athens by the 
Persians, and which lasted until the zenith of Pheidias, broke 
away from the older school even more in regard to the spiritual 
expression which they gave to their work than in their formal 
treatment of the features. The forms of the countenance 
become much nobler, and the expression that they convey 


® Dr. Furtwangler inclines to call it question (A/eisterwerke, p. 223, 1, Engl. 
Artemis, but he does not discuss the  Ed.), » Kekulé, Hebe, p. 67. 





nad 


: 


IX. ] IDEAL TYPES OF HERA. 227 


is over-serious and often sombre and dark, contrasting utterly 
with the weak affected smile upon the later archaic faces. 
And the expression does not vary for the individual repre- 
sented ; the countenances of Apollo and Demeter would be 
stamped with the same stern severity as that of Hera. The 
strange and almost repellent look on the Farnese face is there- 
fore not necessarily due wholly to the conscious aim of the 
sculptor and his conception of the nature of the goddess, nor 
need we see in it the Homeric portrait of the stormy and 
sullen wife of Zeus. It may be sufficient to say that the 
sculptor, to represent the severe and dignified goddess of 
marriage, has intensified a type of expression prevalent in 
his day. 

It might be thought that the slimness of the cheeks is more 
maidenly than matronly ; and it has been supposed that 
the sculptor wished to allude to the maidenly character of 
Hera in Argive and Arcadian worship. But the broad flat 
cheek is not necessarily part of the individual expression, but 
a characteristic of a style of sculpture which did not distin- 
guish between the youthful wife and the maid*. The indi- 
viduality of the head is imprinted in the middle of the face, 
especially in the lines about the mouth, which without marring 
the beauty speak of experience and mature life. It is this and 
the imperious sombre look, which is too marked to be wholly 
explained by the general tendencies of contemporary art, that 
_are the sole valid reasons for giving the name of Hera to the 
statue of which this is part. 

Much has been said indeed about the eyes, and the strange 
marking of the eyelids; according to the view of Brunn, in 
which he has been followed by Kekulé and many others, they 
have been carved so as to convey the quality expressed by 
the Homeric epithet Boéms; and this they regard as the 
leading trait in the ‘canonical ideal’ of Hera’s face. No 
doubt the eyes were a striking feature of her countenance 
as the people imagined it ; for the poetic term of Homer must 


* For instance, in the Eleusinian relief period, it is hard to discern from the 
of Demeter, Iacchus, and Persephone, faces which of the two is the mother 
a work perhaps of the earlier Pheidian and which the daughter. 


Q2 


228 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


have had its influence, and it is said by a poet of the 
Anthology, in praise of a maiden, that ‘she had the eyes of 
Hera?.’ It is a question whether each one of the typical 
heads of Hera can be called Boéms; there is no question 
what the term means, and unquestionably it does not apply to 
the Farnese head. 

It certainly does not mean ‘bull-eyed, as Brunn and 
others have interpreted it, finding in the word an allusion 
to the ‘wild terrific power’ latent in the eyes of the bull and 
of the goddess*. As applied to Hera, it can only mean ox- 
eyed or cow-eyed, and the eye of the cow is not threatening, 
nor does it ‘cause a certain inquietude in the mind of him 
who finds himself opposite it’... The eye of the cow is 
large, round, and somewhat prominent, and has a dark light 
in it: and this is the sense in which Homer applies it 
to more than one goddess and lady, as he had noticed 
that human eyes are often striking and beautiful through 
a certain resemblance to that animal’s. The ancients inter- 
preted the word rightly as large-eyed and dark-eyed 1%; 
a painter would convey the impression by painting the eye 
dark and round and large, such as the eye of Hera in the 
Pompeian picture of the Holy Marriage; a sculptor would give 
the eyeball a certain size and shape. Now the eyes of the 
Farnese Hera are narrow and long, in their shape as unlike 
a cow’s as any human eye can be. But they are set between 
very extraordinary eyelids, both of which are abnormally thick 
and the lower drawn away from the ball and turned down and 
outwards, It is by this curious method that the sculptor has 
been thought to indicate Hera Boéms. If so, he was more 
ignorant of nature than most Greek sculptors and painters, if 
we may judge from the representation of cows in classic art. 
A walk through the fields will convince us that the cow’s eye- 
lids do not fall away from the eyeball as those of the Farnese 
Hera; on the contrary they form a close firm rim; and 
anything like the lower eyelid of that goddess, if seen at all in 
human beings, is only seen in disease and old age. It is hard 


® Brunnin the Bull. del Ann. 1846, pp. 122-128; cf. Kekulé in his Hebe, p. 64. 
> Brunn, op. cit. 


IX. ] IDEAL FYPES OF HERA. 229 


to believe, then, that the sculptor carved such eyes in the hope 
that they would remind the Greek spectator of the ox-eyed 
goddess. Probably his sole aim was to give a striking ex- 
pression to the eyes by such a treatment of the eyelid as 
would cast the deepest shadow upon them, and he merely 
carried somewhat further a technical method which had 
become usual in the plastic work of the age. The thick 
lids are found in the Apolline head in the British Museum, 
a copy as is supposed of a bronze-work of Canachus ; in the 
heads from the temple of Zeus Olympius, and some of the 
Lapith heads of the Parthenon metopes. But the best 
instances to compare with the Farnese are the heads of 
Harmodius in the Neapolitan group of the tyrannicides, of 
the nymph on the Olympian metope, and of Heracles on the 
relief from the same temple that represents the cleansing of 
the Augean stables. In all these cases the eyelids are not 
only thick, but the lower one is turned slightly down and 
away from the eye. This method has been exaggerated by 
the sculptor of the Farnese head, whose colossal statue raised 
on a pedestal may have towered above the spectator, and who, 


wisely reckoning with the height, may have pursued a conven- 


tional method of treating the eyelid by which the eye as seen 
from below appeared shadowy and full of warmth. This 
technical process is more natural to bronze-work than to 
marble-carving *. 

And the Farnese head is no original production » (the bust- 
form alone, a product of Alexandrine art, would prove that), 
but a copy of a bronze original which in all probability was 
wrought about the middle of the fifth century, at the very 
close of the transitional period. The reasons of this view have 
already been given by the way ; to recapitulate, the slightly 


® Overbeck, in his Avzsst-Mythologie 
(2. pp. 66, 71, 72), has done good ser- 
vice in exposing the absurdities of the 
Bo@ms theory, and in suggesting that 
much in the Farnese head may be ex- 
plained better by the general history of 
plastic style than by special reference to 
Hera’s character. 


> This is also the view of Overbeck, 
Kunst-Myth. 2. p. 73; and Conze, 
Beitrage zur Geschichte der griechischen 
Plastik, p.6. Though a copy, it belongs 
probably still to the Greek period ; the 
surface is rather damaged, but the treat- 
ment of hair and mouth shows good 
Greek style. 


230 GREEK RELIGION. [cHap. 


protruding chin and lower lip, the great breadth of cheek, the « 


ear placed a little too high, the conventional treatment of the 
eyelid, and still more the dark and sombre expression, are 
the marks of an ideal style of sculpture that flourished before 
the zenith of Pheidias. 

This view is of course inconsistent with the theory of Kekulé 
and Brunn and others, who maintain that the head is a copy 
more or less direct of the famous Hera of Polycleitus. Before 
the theory becomes a valuable hypothesis, there ought to be 
some direct evidence for this, derived from the resemblance of 
the Farnese head to some recognized work or copy of a work 
of Polycleitus or to the description left us of the great Argive 
image. Now the above-mentioned writers maintain that there 
is the very nearest affinity between this head and that of the 
Doryphorus*; while others of equal authority deny that there 
is any resemblance at all. It is strange that opinions should 
so conflict about a matter of fact that can surely be decided 
by a close comparison of the works. My own conviction is 
that the resemblance is only very general, such as we might 
expect to find in any two heads representing Peloponnesian 
art from 460 to 420 B.C., and that the differences are far 
more weighty. The cheeks of the Doryphorus slope more 
towards the centre of the face, which thus becomes narrower, 
the nose is less broad in the ridge, the chin protrudes less, 
and the eyes are quite differently treated. But those who 
maintain the Polycleitean origin of the head rely most on 
the argument that this surpasses all existing representations 
of Hera in ideal conception ; and they ask, if it was not Poly- 
cleitus but’ some earlier sculptor who produced this type, 
what was there left for Polycleitus, to whom the voice of 
antiquity ascribes the greatest representation of Hera, to do 
further in the development of the ideal? The answer is easy, 
that still much remained to be done. If Polycleitus produced 
the type of the Farnese Hera, then in his conception of the 
goddess he fell far below—not perhaps Homer—but the artist 
who a little later carved the head of Hera on the coins of 


® Conze, op. cit.; Overbeck, .-AZ. 2. p. 50. 


ee ee “ee 





— 


Pe ie eel Ae i 
fa ’ @ 


1X.] IDEAL TYPES -OF HERA. 2a 


Argos, and the sculptor who in the fourth century wrought, 
the original of the Ludovisi head. 

For the Farnese bust, effective as it is by the intensity of 
its expression, gives by no means the full ideal of Hera ; it is 
not the benign Argive goddess ‘ of good works,’ not the god- 
dess in whose face and person, according to Dio Chrysostom ™, 
brightness appeared by the side of majesty. The sculptor of 
this head could give us the majesty under a dark and sombre 
aspect ; neither he nor his age could represent 1d pavdpov. 

It was in the following period that the ideal of Hera 
received full and satisfying expression. In perfecting the type 
the work of Polycleitus was chief, but the part played by 
Pheidias and his school was not unimportant. There is no 
authority for attributing to Pheidias himself, the greatest 
creator of divine types, any free statue of Hera, and none 
has survived that can be ascribed to this school*. But her 
figure wrought by his hand appeared among the other divini- 
ties on the base of the throne of Zeus Olympios, and the 
Parthenon frieze shows us how he would probably represent 
her’. She is there seated between Zeus and the winged 
figure, who is Iris or Nike. Clad in a Doric chiton, which 
is fastened over her shoulders so as to reveal her neck and 
arms, and is drawn down over the concealed girdle to form 
the beautiful fold common in Pheidian drapery, she turns 
to Zeus and raises with both hands the veil from her face, 
as the bride might on the day of her wedding. The face 
is unfortunately much disfigured, but enough remains to show 
the full oval outline and the laurel crown on her head, which 
alludes perhaps to her nuptials as well as to the Attic festival 
she was witnessing. The treatment of the flesh shows the 


® The attempt of Petersen to discover 
the Hera of Aleamenes—a very doubt- 
ful work—in a series of statues called 
Demeter by Overbeck has led to nothing: 
vide Mitt. d. d. Inst. Rom. 4. p. 68, and 
Overbeck, K.-AZ. 3. p. 461. I have 
not dealt in the text with the head 
of ‘Hera of Girgenti’ in the British 
Museum, which Overbeck and others 
would place next after the Farnese 


in the development of the type. The 
more that head is studied the more 
suspicion it arouses, and Furtwangler’s 
grounds for rejecting it as a forgery are 
very strong (Arch. Zeit. 1885, p. 275). 
If genuine, it would be of little value 
on account of its singular lack of 
character. 


» Pi; TEL b. 


232 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


delicacy and grandeur of the Pheidian work, and, apart from 
the formal beauty of the surface, the whole pose is perfect in 
its expression of the chastity, dignity, and grace of the youth- 
ful wife of Zeus. Though the attitude has some reference to 
the particular occasion, yet the figure has a permanent value 
as a monumental and characteristic type of Hera, and as the 
earliest great representation of the whole person of the god- 
dess. Nor did Pheidias forget, in his arrangement of the 
drapery, that Hera should appear as Hera AevxoAevos, with her 
white arms bared. 

Among the monuments of this age may be mentioned 
a very beautiful cylix of the British Museum that contains 
a representation of Hera full of character and expression ®*. 
Holding a sceptre and wearing a Doric chiton and veil, with 
her hair bound in a stephane, but partly falling over her fore- 
head, she is seated opposite to Zeus, who is holding out his 
hand to her, and her lips are parted and seem moving in 
speech ; her form is almost virginal. 

The fifth-century electrum coinage of Phocaea” displays 
a striking head of Hera, wearing a diadem ornamented with 
the honeysuckle ; the face is set in thick clusters of hair, and 
the deep eyes and half-opened lips give it a very earnest 
expression. 

In the monuments that may next be quoted a great change 
is noted in the representation ; the features and expression 
become softer, more benign, and a touch of brightness, the 
datdpétys that Dio Chrysostom speaks of, appears in them. 
The first of these that claims attention is the Argive coin 
that has been several times published and is unsurpassed in 
beauty of style*. The head of Hera upon it shows more 
grace and purity of feature and more profound and spiritual 
conception of character than any of her surviving monuments 
in stone, except perhaps the Ludovisi head. She wears no 
veil, but the stephanos richly ornamented with floral design, 
and from beneath it the long wavy clusters of hair fall down 
her neck and over part of the cheek, which is less broad and 


aPl1 Xb » Coin Pl. A 19 (Brit. Mus. Cat. [onia, p. 209). 
Coin PLA 17. 


ae 


IX. ] IDEAL. TYPES OF HERA. 233 


flat than that of the Farnese head. The forehead is broad 
and strong, and, rising somewhat over the eyes, bears the 
impress of power. The eyebrows are straight and noble, and 
the eyes are round and somewhat protruding, as if they would 
suggest the Homeric epithet, and are set between very thick 
lids. The nose is rather long and forms an angle with the 
forehead; the chin is firm and well rounded. The bone-struc- 
ture of the face is well marked, and yet there is no severity 
except in the clear sharp outline, and the lips that are parted 
with a smile give to the whole countenance a fascinating 
expression of brightness and benevolence. Therefore, impos- 
ing and majestic as the type certainly is, it is a very pure and 
true representation of the benign goddess of Argos, and one 
may discover in the traits some hint of the maidenliness that 
was ever renewed in the wife of Zeus, and certainly the decor 
super verum, the solemn beauty, that was seen in the works 
of Polycleitus. 

If we search for a name with which we may associate this 
new type of Hera there is no other than his. A few years ago 
this association would have been accepted without argument ; 
but it has been said more recently that, as the coin artists of 
the great age did not copy, it is doubtful whether the Argive 
coin-stamper has reproduced in his Hera head anything of 
the expression and any of the traits of the masterpiece of 
Polycleitus*. There must, of course, be some doubt where 
positive reasons are few; and as regards these we can only 
say that the coin agrees with what is recorded or otherwise 
known about the statue in the symbol of the decorated 
stephanos, the floral ornament being an allusion to the Hours 
and Graces, and in the absence of the veil. Also the necklace 
_and earrings might be taken as pointing to the richness of 
chryselephantine technique. 

And the type that appears on this coin is found with some 
modifications on coins of Cnossus Himera and, still more 
modified, on coins of Samos. Now we cannot suppose that 


* See Gardner, 7yfes of Greek Coins, coin; and Overbeck, X.-J/. 2. p. 44, 
p- 138, who does not wholly deny the who hesitates. 
Polycleitean character of the Argive » Coin of Cnossus, Overbeck, A.-1/. 


GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


234 


the same great artist wrought all these, especially as the coins 
of these other cities are inferior in depth of expression, and 
the face on them has lost its radiancy and retained only its 
beauty and seriousness. What then is the natural explanation 
for the prevalence of this type on coins that were struck at 
various places near to the beginning of the fourth century? 
There is no political reason to explain it, and one inclines to 
believe that all these coin-devices were struck under the 
influence of some great work, well known throughout the 
Greek world. At this time this must have been the Hera of 
Polycleitus. 

There are other more general reasons for this view. The 
Argive coin shows a type of head of far higher imagina- 
tion than the Farnese head, and challenges comparison with 
the Ludovisi bust itself; in fact, as regards expression it 
embodies more than the latter work the description of Dio 
Chrysostom. The coin’s date is at least a generation earlier 
than the period of Praxiteles, and if such a type of Hera as 
this was in vogue towards the beginning ofthe fourth century, 
it is difficult to see what was left for that sculptor to do 
by way of perfecting the ideal of the goddess ; to infuse more 
mildness and soft delicacy into the face would destroy its 
power and character. Either, then,an unknown coin-stamper 
working in Polycleitus’ own city a short time after the great 
temple-image of that sculptor was set up produced indepen- 
dently a rival type of Hera, perhaps the most beautiful that 
antiquity has left us of the goddess, or he worked under 
the dominating influence of the gold and ivory statue, the 
expression of which he had sufficient skill and imagination 
to reproduce. 

The latter theory is all the more probable, as there is every 
reason for saying that it was Polycleitus and no other who 


Miinztaf. 2. No. 23; Himera, No. 22; 
Samos, 1-4. The coins of Elis (Over- 
beck, X.-JZ. Miinztaf. 2. No. 14; Gard- 
ner, Zypes of Greek Coins, Pl. VIII. 15; 
Brit. Mus. Cat. Pelop. Pl. XII. 13, 14, 
and Pl. XIV. 1-6) do not appear to me 
to belong to this class: the finest of 


them, struck towards the end of the 
fifth century, might be the work of an 
original artist who preserved the older 
expression for his ideal of Hera, and. 
gave her face the severe stern look; 
the lips droop at the corners, and there 
is no smile upon them (Coin Pl, A 18). 


IX. ] IDEAL TYPES OF HERA. 235 


perfected the ideal. Recently much has been ascribed to 
Praxiteles in this matter by Overbeck and others, who, feeling 
the superiority of the Ludovisi to the Farnese head, assign the 
former with its deeper expression to Praxiteles, and fail to 
note sufficiently what the Argive coin proves—namely, that 
the perfection of the type was achieved nearer to the end 
of the fifth century than the middle of the fourth. Now, 
as regards Praxiteles, we hear only of a Hera Teleia at 
Plataea, and a Hera in a group at Mantinea by his hand: 
we know nothing of either of these works, in spite of the 
attempt to detect copies of the former in a small series 
of statues*; and the coins of Plataea that may be con- 
temporary with the earlier period of Praxiteles display 
a head of Hera far poorer in expression than that on the 
Argive coin. Nor do these works of this sculptor appear 
to have been celebrated or much commended ; and there is 
no reason a priort for supposing that the ideal of Hera, into 
which a solemnity and a certain imperiousness in pose and 
expression largely enter, would have been best dealt with by 
the genius of Praxiteles. The hypothesis that he did deal 
with it effectively and finally rests on no ancient statement 
and on no modern discovery. 

On the other hand, the ancient record, so far as it goes, is 
clear in favour of Polycleitus ; and the value of this record 
is somewhat under-estimated by Overbeck in his treatment 
of the problem. He puts a wrong question in asking, ‘Who 
wrought the canonical ideal of Hera?’ For this implies 
that there was one, that is, that there was some accepted 
system of rules about her form and expression that might 
serve as a canon to which later works should always conform. 
Now we must not insist too much on finding a ‘ canon’ as so 
understood for any and every Greek divinity. It is only in 
the representation of Zeus that we find anything like it, the 
Pheidian type dominating to a certain degree each succeeding 
generation ; but there is no ‘canon’ of Athena and none of 
Aphrodite, although there were certainly representations of 
these divinities which the Greek world regarded as perfected 

® Vide supra, p. 207. 


236 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


and ideal, and when they wished to imagine them in the form 
that best corresponded to their nature, they thought of the 
Athene Parthenos of Pheidias and the Cnidian Aphrodite of 
Praxiteles, though there were many different types wrought 
by independent artists. 

Similarly, so far as the records go, the only statue of Hera 
that appears to have been ‘ the ideal,’ in the sense that it fully 
satisfied the popular imagination about her, was the Hera of 
Polycleitus. Maximus Tyrius puts it by the side of the 
Athena Parthenos of Pheidias when he is distinguishing 
between the actual existence of the divinities and their 
traditional representation in art; and Philostratus mentions 
it among those great works that illustrate the power in the 
artist of gavtacta, which is something ‘wiser than mere 
imitation, the power of conceiving a fitting ideal* The 
epigrammatist '°° declares that Polycleitus ‘alone of all men 
contemplated Hera with his eyes, that is, that he alone carved 
her in that perfect form which must be supposed the actual. 

In one case, then, in the great monument of his country’s 
worship, the sculptor, who ‘ gave to the human form an almost 
superhuman beauty, but did not worthily express the majesty 
of the gods, rose above himself and created the only image 
of Hera that was extolled by the voice of antiquity, which 
is silent concerning the merits of the Hera of Praxiteles, of 
Callimachus, and of Euphranor. The late Roman coin shows 
us the full figure, and proves the queenly dignity of the pose 
(Coin Pl. A, 16); as regards the head, if the earlier Argive coin 
gives us no evidence, then we have none at all, for the head 
recently found by the American excavations at Argos cannot 
be proved to be a Hera”. If the Argive coin be accepted 
as a free reproduction of the great temple work, it proves 
that the words of Dio Chrysostom about the ideal of Hera 
really record the qualities of the Polycleitean work, for the 


® Vit. Apoll. Tyan. vi. 19. Hera TWap@evos. Overbeck (Berichte 
® Waldstein, Excavations of the  Sdchs. Gesell. Wiss. 1893, p. 31) accepts 
American School at Argos, 1892. The the name of Hera for it, but points out 
head has a marked maidenly character; _its unlikeness to the Farnese head. 
it would be too hazardous to name it 


ee 











PLATE X 





———~ 


ANS 














IX.] , IDEAL TYPES OF HERA. 237 


head on the coin displays at once ‘the brightness and 
solemnity’ of the countenance. 

Among the later monuments we cannot trace clearly the 
Polycleitean influence. Looking at the representations of the 
beginning of the fourth century we note a type of Hera 
prevalent on the coins of South Italy, which was used with 
some modifications of detail for the Hera Lacinia of Croton 
(Coin Pl. A 20) and the Hera Areia of Posidonia and Hyria?. 
The head is presented ex face, crowned, and with richly flowing 
locks; the face is a high broad oval, the features are full and 
large, and there is a certain exuberance in the whole treatment. 
It is a striking type, but quite unlike the Argive, and has no 
very profound expression of individual character. The coins 
of Thermae also®!, and Capua ®, show a head of Hera of some 
power, with serious expression and characteristic rendering of 
the eye, but none of these preserve the Argive type or add 
anything new. 

Near to the beginning of the fourth century must be placed 
the representation of the Judgement of Paris incised on wood 
in St. Petersburg, which contains a representation of Hera 
of great power and originality’. The drapery is arranged 
so as to display her arms, and her figure is almost as maidenly 
as Athena’s, but her face is fuller. She wears the veil and 
a crown of leaves around her head: the expression of her face 
is very profound, and there is a searching gaze in her eyes 
that are fixed on Paris. The treatment of the limbs and the 
forms of the face recall the Pheidian style; but the figure of 
Eros is too small to allow us to date the work as early as that 
period. 

Another wood-carving, in the same museum’, of approxi- 
mately the same date as the former, presents an equally 
striking type of Hera, erect and standing in very majestic pose 
with her left hand resting on her sceptre and her right on her 
hip; her arms are bare, and she wears a Doric diploidion 
without sleeves and with no girdle visible, and a himation 

® Head, Hist. Num. p. 82, Fig. 57; cf. coins of Phistelia and Neapolis. 


Overbeck, X.-M. Miinztaf. 2. Nos. 43, » PL: 
44; Head, 2d. pp. 68 and 32, Fig. 16; oF AL 


238 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


which is fastened on her left shoulder. The folds of drapery 
about her right leg are severe and columnar, and give the aspect 
of a temple-statue to the representation; but the left leg is 
drawn back and the toe is lightly resting on the ground. 
She wears ear-rings and a stephane which secures the hair. It 
is the figure of Hera the queen, an independent product of 
ethic ark. 

The greatest monument that has survived to show us the 
type of Hera in the later fourth-century art is the bust of the 
Ludovisi Hera*. It belonged to a colossal statue, and it pro- 
duces its best effect when it is placed high and the spectator 
meets from below the downward gaze of its eyes. The large 
proportions of the head, the crown with its rich floral design, 
the somewhat severe arrangement of the hair that is drawn 
carefully over the forehead and reveals the form of the skull, 
the straight and simple line of the eyebrow and the breadth 
of forehead and cheek, are traits that recall the best style of 
the fifth century, and accord with the expression of solemn 
nobility in the countenance. But the hardness and gloom of 
the Farnese face is nowhere seen in this. The surface of the 
flesh is rendered with great softness, and the dignity and 
imperial character of the whole is softened with a benign 
and gentle expression. The look of brightness which we 
see in the face on the Argive coin is not quite attained 
here; the lips do not smile but indicate serious gentle- 
ness. The religious aspect of the head is enhanced by the 
fillet that passes round the head parallel with the crown and 
falls down by the two long curls on each side of her neck; 
for this rather curious decoration may well have been sug- 
gested by the sacred fillets with which her images were hung 
in her temple. There has been much discussion as to the 
date of this work ; most archaeologists would assign it to the 
younger Attic school; and this is the most probable view, for 
though there is nothing specially Praxitelean in the features, 
still less any trace of Scopas’ style, yet the particular 
expression, the very soft treatment of the flesh, and the 
deeply hollowed eye-socket point to that period rather than 

* PIX, 











PLATE Al 








1X. | IDEAL TYPES OF HERA. 


239 


to any other. It has been proposed indeed by Helbig to 
place the work in the beginning of the Alexandrine era®, 
though he allows the influence of the style of the younger 
Attic school upon it. But the head has much more of the 
grandeur of the older period of religious sculpture than the 
elegance of the later courtly age, and the severity of the 
profile and the absence of all self-consciousness in the face 
suggest a better age than the Alexandrine. The rather high 
and triangular forehead is no mark of the later period, for 
we see it in the statue of Eirene in Munich. It is the most 
expressive marble head of Hera that has been handed down, 
but it does not permit us to say that the perfection of her type 
was the achievement of the fourth century; for the Argive 


coin shows an even more intense expression of character ”. 
The later heads reveal by the side of much elegance and 


grace a falling away from the true idea of the goddess. 


For 


instance, the later Ludovisi head displays at once the merits 


and defects of Alexandrine sculpture. 


® Ann, dell’ Inst. 1869, p. 149, and 
Helbig, Dze offentlichen Sammlungen 
classtscher Alterthiimer in Rom, No. 
866. 

>’ The strange theory recently ad- 
vanced by Dr. Furtwangler (J/eister- 
werke, p. 557) that the Ludovisi head 
represents a Roman lady of the Claudian 
period idealized as a goddess is not 
likely to win acceptance. As there is 
not the faintest trace of portraiture in 
the face, his theory depends on what he 
calls external evidence, namely, (1) the 
arrangement of the hair on the neck, 
(2) the sacrificial fillet. He quotes 
from Bernouilli (Rdmésche Lconographie, 
OI, Tal.14,°18, 21,. Figs, 30,33). 1n- 
stances of portrait-statues of the Clau- 
dian period with a similar treatment of 
the hair. He declares that the locks 
hanging down the neck and gathered 
together with a band was a fashion 
never used for a goddess, and belongs 
merely to the Claudian era: this posi- 
tive statement is as positively refuted by 


Though the forehead 


the Farnese Hera-head, the Pallas of 
Velletri, the Caryatid of the Erech- 
theum in the British Museum, the 
Pheidian torso of Athena in Athens 
(Wolters, 472), all of which works, 
even the last-named as we can gather 
with certainty from what remains of the 
hair, had the locks gathered on the nape 
of the neck by a baad and plaited or 
unplaited. The fashion comes down 
from old Attic sculpture. As regards 
the fillet, portrait busts and statues 
show that ladies of the Claudian period 
affected it. But it was used in the 
Greek period without affectation for 
sacred personages: we find it on 
Euboean coins of the fourth century 
(Brit. Mus. Cat. Central Greece, pp. 
119, 113; Pl.-xx:-35, 16). ‘The: * Mes 
salina’ in Munich (Bernouilli, Fig. 32) 
tries to make herself look like Hera by 
wearing the head-gear of the Ludovisi 
goddess; she fails and cannot be quoted 
as proving that the Ludovisi Hera is a 
Roman lady. 


240 GREEK RELIGION. 


and the lines about the mouth slightly recall the Farnese bust, 
and the veil and polos-shaped crown and the imperial air 
make the personality certain, there is nothing more in the 
expression than a certain queenly pride, and in fact it is not 
so much the goddess as the queen that appears here. The 
features are small and delicate by comparison with the former 
heads, and the curve of the neck and the fall of the veil show 
the striving after elegance and effect. From the Pentini head 
the dignity and stateliness have almost entirely disappeared, 
and the countenance and pose are overfull of sentiment and 
tenderness ; but in the later and Graeco-Roman period some- 
thing of the earlier ceuydrns returns, and the imperial ee 
Regina is the only prevailing type. 


Pirate XII 








REFERENCES. 241 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS VII-IX. 


Common cult of Zeus and Hera. 


*@ At Lebadea: Hera ‘Huéyn with Zeus Basileus, Paus. 9. 39, 4 
at the shrine of Trophonius, vide Zeus 1%7@, 


> Cf. Paus. 9. 34, 3, near the shrine of Trophonius é ETEP® vag 
— Kpdvou kai "Hpas kai Aids €otw dydApura. 

© At Lebadea: Hera Baoiis: C. I. Gr. 1603 "Hpa Bactdid: kai 17 
mddet AeBadéwv (probably of first century a.p.). 


Cf. Plato, Phaedr, 253 4 6001 ped "Hpas eirovto Bacwikdy Cytrovoe Tov 
€p@pevov, 


In Boeotia. 


* At Plataea: Paus.9. 2, 5 vads eotiy “Hpas . .. thy Oe “Hpav 
TeXeiav Kahovot : statue Of “"Hpa vupqdevouern there: 720. 9, 3, feast of 
Daedala at Plataea, commemorating the iepos yapos: 76. 3, 4, sacrifice 
on Cithaeron at the Daedala NMepala: ai pev 61) modes Kai Ta TEAN oem 
Ovoavtes TH "Hypa Bovv €xaortou Kat Tavpov T@ Ai: cf. Eus. Praep. PIP ae Dy 
from Plutarch. 


* At Argos on the Larissa: Paus. 2. 24, 2 €xera: 1d orddwov ev 
_ @ tov ayova T@ Nepeim Ai kui ra ‘Hpaia dyovow, cf. zd. 4. 27, 6 
"Apycion Sé €Ovov 7H Te “Hpa 7h ’Apyela kal Nepeto Au: cf. inscription 
giving Cassandros the Gewpodoxia tov Avs tod Nepeiov kai ths “Hpas ris 
“Apysias, Arch. Zett. 1855, 39. 


* Between Argos and Epidauros, on Mount Arachnaion, Paus. 2. 
25, 10: vide Zeus *, 


* Olympia: Paus. 5. 17, 1 ris "Hpas d¢ éorw ep T@ va@ Atos... TO 
b€ "Hpas ayadpa Kabnpevdy éarw emi Opov@, mapéeotynke Se yéverd te €xav Kai 
€mtkeivevos Kuviy eri th kepada’ epya S€é éotw ama. 

* Schol. Odyss. 3. 91 ds Kai  “Hpa Avy avopacbn mapa Awdevaiois, 
as "ArroAAdSapos, 


" Crete: mentioned together in the oath of alliance between Olus 
and Latus (third century s.c.), C.Z. Gr. 2554 ’Opviw ... tov Ziva rv 
VOL. I. R 


242 GREEK RELIGION. 


Kpyroyevia kai trav “Hpav: in the similar oath taken by the men of 
Hierapytna, C./. Gr. 2555 Cpviw .. . Zava Arxratov kai "Hpav. 


® Cyprus: ona wall of old Paphos: C. /. Gr. 2640 ’Adpodirns kai 


Ads Tlo\éws kal "Hpas. 


® Caria: at Stratonicea with Zeus Panamaros, C. /. Gr. 2719: 
cf. 2722 wtmepraros map jpav ebynv “Hpn kat Au... wepdoas, tHy érnoiav 
xdapw (inscriptions of Roman period): cf. 2820: Zeus*¢; Bull. de 
Corr. Fell. 1891, p. 426 Zevds Tlavayapos with Hera Tedeia. 


0 At Lebedos in Caria, common priestship of Zeus BovAaia and 
Hera, C. /. Gr. 2909 (pre-Roman period?): vide Zeus "°°. 


™ Pind. Wem. 11. 1 ‘Eoria Znvis tyiorou caotyynta Kal époOpdvov"Hpas : 
fragment quoted by Clemens, Strom. 5, p. 661 (? Pindar) vai rav 


4 a 
Oduprov Karadepkopevay oxatTodyov “Hpay, 


% Hera Pelasgis: in Iolchus (?), Apoll. Rhod. 1. 14, sacrifice of 
Pelias, "Hpns b€ Hedacyidos ovk adéyifev. Dionys. Perieg. 534 kai Sdpos 
€ , , e o 
iwepdecoa Iedacyidos edpavov” Hpas. 

Physical allusions in epithets and cults of Hera. 

Ba Ht. Mag. s.v. Cevéidia, ‘H”Hpa otra tiara év “Apye’ act yap 
oe + A SNe OW, bd ” 4 , (ee ees. 
ott “Apyos petavaotas ano “Apyous eis Atyumrov, émeue Bdas Ta €v” Apyet 
Bacidevortt, kal THv Tov ondpov epyaciay edidakev" 6 S€ CevEas eni TO oTdp@ 
Tas Bots “Hpas iepov avéOnxe’ re S€ tovs oraxyus ovveBawe BAaordvew kat 


avOeiv, avOea “Hpas éxddece. 
b Hera ’Avéeia, vide infra *, 


e¢ Athenae. 15, p. 678 A muAewv’ ovTws Kadeirat 6 orédhavos dv TH ”Hpa 
mepitiOéaow of Adkxaves: cf. the fragment of Alcman’s Hymn to Hera, 
Bergk, frag. 16 xai riv etyouar péporca tév8 EXtxpvow TuACoVa KNpaTe 
kutaipw: Cf. Anthol. 9. 586 dvOcea toiwv eici OeGv' “Hpns kai “Podins 
Iagins: cf. Pollux, 4. 78 pédos rd’Apyodixdy 6 €v rais dvOerpdpors ev” Hpas 


émnvdouv. 


4a Eus. Praep. Lv. 3. 1, 4 of b€ huorkas paddov kai mpendvras trro- 
apBdvovtes tov piOoy ovtas és TO aitd TH Antot auvdyovot thy “Hpav* yA 
pev eot 7) °Hpa «.t.A. from Plutarch. 

b Plutarch, De plactt. philos. 1. 3 tércapa tév mdvrev pitapata mperov 
dkove’ Zevs apyns, "Hpn te hepéaBuos 78 ’Aidaveds Naatis 6, vide Krag. 
Phil. Graec., Mullach, 1, p. 39. 

¢ Porphyry, wept tis ek Noyiwy girocodias: “Hpn & evkedkad~ padaky 
xvots Hépos bypis (yédera): frag. quoted Eus. Praep, Ev. 5. 7, 4. 


WR ieH a9: 


2 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS VII-LX. 243 


d Plato, Craz. P. 404C tows petewpodoyav 6 vouobérns Tov aépa "Hpav 
ovdpacey enixpumTdpevos. 

e Oracle in C. I. Gr. 3769 Kai thy bdpoBrowr Spdcos mépdorrov 
dvagoay seems to refer to Hera. 

f Paus. 2. 13, 3 Qiu 8é ep “Hpas €orly tuv@ memoumpéva tpapjvar thy 
"Hpar bro ‘Opav, cf. Hera ‘Opérvros : Zeus 1, 

Ba Ky, Mag. 772, 49 Tupwedts: ‘Hotodos adrdv Ys yeveadoyet, Srnoixopos 
dé,"Hpas pdvns xara pynowkakiay Ards texovons aitév: Bergk, fr. 60 Stesich. 

b Scho]. 72, 14. 295 “Hpav Tpepowerny mapa ois yovedow els tay 
yeydvrav Eipypédav Biacdpevos %yxvov émoinaer* y S€ Ipopnbéa éyévvnoev 
- +. lotopia mapa Eiopion. 


Sacrificial animals. 

a Anth. Graec. 6. 243: ' 
i Te Zdyov ped€ovoa kai # Adyes “IuBpacoy “Hpn 
d€fo yeveOdudiovs, mérva, OunroNX{as, 


~ w 
daxav iepa taita td cor moAv iArata mdvrov Lo Mey, 
p He 


b Cows: vide Cic. De Div. 1. 24. Bulls: Theocr. 4.20. Goats: 
vide Hera Alyopdyos ©. Pigs: Ov. Amor. 3. 13, 16. 


Sacrifice and ritual. 


© Ov. Amor. 3. 13, at Falerii: 

Casta sacerdotes Iunoni festa parabant 
Per celebres ludos indigenamque bovem. 

Hinc ubi praesonuit solemni tibia cantu 
It per velatas annua pompa vias. 

Ducuntur niveae, populo plaudente, iuvencae 
Quas aluit campis herba Falisca suis ; 

Et vituli nondum metuenda fronte minaces, 
Et minor ex humili victima porcus hara. 

Duxque gregis cornu per tempora dura recurvo. 
Invisa est dominae sola capella deae. 

Illius indicio silvis inventa sub altis 
Dicitur inceptam destituisse fugam. 

Nunc quoque per pueros iaculis incessitur index, 
Et pretium auctori vulneris ipsa datur. 

Qua ventura dea est, iuvenes timidaeque puellae 
Praeverrunt latas veste iacente vias. 


RZ 


244 GREEK RELIGION. 


More patrum Graio velatae vestibus albis 
Tradita supposito vertice sacra ferunt. 


Argiva est pompae facies. 
Cf. Pliny, Wat. Hist. 3. 5, 8 Colonia Falisca Argis orta (ut auctor est 
Cate). ect. *: 


Hera as goddess of marriage. 

17a The fepds ydpos: at Athens: Photius s. v. iepds yduos* "A@nvator 
Eoptiv Aids é&yovor kat ”Hpas, cf. Menander “ Mé6n,” Frag. Com. Graec. 
Ao De 102; 

KouWoraros avdpav Xapepar iepov yapov 
dackwv moncew Sevtépav per eixada 

kad’ abrév, iva th tetpdds Seumva map’ €ér€pots 
TO THS Ocov yap twavrax@s Exetv Kaha@s. 

b At Plataea: Paus. g. 3, I obros KeAever Tov Ala dyadpa Evdov Tomodpevoy 
dyew eri Body Cevyous éyxexaduppevov, Aéyew S€ @s Ayoro yuvaika IAdravay 
Ti "Acwmov. 16, § 5 Aadddov dé €optiy tev peyddov kai of Bowwtot oduct 
cuveopragovot ...§ 7 7d dé dyadpa Koopnoavtes .. . Tapa Tov “Agawmoy kal 
avabévres emi Guakav, yuvaika eficraor vuppevtpray. .. 7d O evrevdev tas 
dpdtas ard Tov moTapod mpos akpov rov Kibatpava édAavvovor, edtpEemorat dé 
odiow ent th Kopuph tov dpovs Bopuds...§ 8 ra iepeia... Kal Ta daidada 
duod kabayifovor émi rod Bopod: cf. Euseb. 3, ch. 1 (p. 104 Dind.) from 
Plutarch: repdvras abrods etkréavoy Kai maykadny Spiv poppacai te avrny 
Kat kataoTetAat vupdikas AaddadAny mpocayopevoartas" eita oUTws avapeAtres Oat 
pev tov tpévaov, Noutpa dé KopiCew tras Tpirwvidas vipas, addovs d€ kat 
K@{LOUS THY Botwriav Tapac yew, Choad, p. 102, 3, ch. I, § 3 avepav dé 
Tov ydpwv yevouevov, Kal mepi tov KiOaipava mpatov évravOa kal Tas 
Tareas ths dpuidias avaxadupbeions, “Hpav tedelay Kal yaundvov avriy 
mpocayopevOnvat. 

ec At Argos: Paus. 2. 17, 3 év d€ ro mpovdw tH pev Xapites dyda\para 
éotw apyaia ev SeEa dé Kin tus ”"Hpas. Herod. 1. 31 eovons optns TH 
“Hpn rotow *Apyelowt, eee mavtws thy pytépa aditav (of Cleobis and 
Biton) Cevyes koto Ojvat €s 76 iepdv. 

d Euboea: vide infra *, and cf. Schol. Arist. Pax 1126 KadX- 
atpatés gnaw Toroy EiBoias 7d Edvpriov. "Amoddaonos S€ vady pyar eivat 
mAnciov EvBolas* vupdixdy S€ twes aitéd acw, dre 6 Zebs tH” Hpg exet 
GUVEYEVETO, 

e Hermione: vide infra %, Cf. Schol. Theocr. 15. 64 ‘Apiororédys 
8€ icropet év rH mepi “Eppudyns icpa, ididtepov mepi rod Avs kal rips “Hpas 
yapou... (Mount Thornax) érov viv éoriy iepsv “Hpas Tedeias, 








——- = =. 


See ee ee ee. a ee 


_ 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS VII-IX. 


f Hera Mais Tedefa and Xijpa at Stymphalos "8, 


&® Cnossus: Diod. Sic. 5. 72 Aéyovor S€ Kal rods ydpous Tovs re Aids kat 
ths “Hpas ev ty Kvaciov xopa yevéobar xara twa trérov mAnoiov Tod Onpnvos 


~ > A > ? > , a 
motapov, ka@’ bv viv ‘Iepéy €orw, ev @ Ovolas Kat emavTov dylouvs md Tar 


€yxepiayv cuvtedciobat Kai Tovs yapous amopipetoba : cf. Samos ® 4, 


245 


h Posidonia: inscription on small tablet, ras Oe ras Tadds jp. 


Collitz, Dealect. Inschrift., No. 1648 ? Persephone. 


i Arist. Birds 1731: 
"Hpa tor ’Odvpmia 
tav nAiBarav Opdver 
Gpxovta Oeois péyav 
Moipat ouvekoipioav 
€v ta@d tpevaio, 
‘Yunv, & “Ypéva’ &* 
6 8 dpdidadis "Epws 
xpuodmrepos vias 
nu@uve madwtdvous 
Znvis mapoxos yapey 
kevdaipovos “Hpas. 
k Theocr. Jd. 17. 131: 
dde cai abavdtwy iepds yapos eferedeoOn, 
ods téxero Kpeiowwa “Péa Baowdnas "Odtprov, 
ev b€ A€xos aTdpvvcow iavew Zynvi cai “Hpa 


xeipas hoSnoaca pupos ere mapbevos *Ipis. 


1 Lex. Rhetor. Photius, vol. 2, p. 670 (Porson) ‘Iepds yduos : 


yapovrtes movovat TH Ati kai tH “Hpa iepovs yapous. 
m Arist. Zhesmoph. 973: 
"Hpav re thy tedelav 
peAYopev Gorep eikds 
i) Maou Tots xopoiow eumaifer Te Kat 


kAndas yapou pvdarret, 


n Dion. Halic. Ars Rhet. 2. 2 Zeds yap kat "Hpa, mp@ro Cevyvivres re 


‘ , - o ¢ ‘ ‘ \ bes , ¢ \ , 
kal auvdvd{ovtes* ovt@ Tor 6 pev Kal maTnp Kadeira wavtT@y, 7 Se Zvyia, 


© Dio Chrysostom, Or. 7. Dind. 1, p. 139 dxoAdorous dvOpamous ovk 
aigxuvopevous . . . ovte Alia yevebd\cov ovre “Hpav yapunAtoy ovre Moipas 


teheodpovus 7) Aoxiay “Aprepwy 7) pntépa “Péav. 
P Aesch. Eumen. 214: 
7 Kapt Gripa Kat map’ ovdev HKé vot 


"“Hpas redeias kat Avos muor@para, 


246 GREEK RELIGION. 


a Diod. Sic. 5. 73 mpoOvovox mpdrepov aravres tH Atl TO Teel Kai “Hpa 
redeia Sia TO TOUTOUS apxnyovs yeyovévat Kal mdvT@v evperds. 
r Laws concerning marriage in the Greek médis connected with 
Hera, Demosth. mpds Makapr. 1068 and Plato, Laws 774 a. 
8 Pollux, 3. 38 ravry ("Hpa) rois mporedelors mpourédovy tras Képas kal 
"Aprepids Kal Moipats* kai ris Kduns dé téTe dmnpxovro Tats Oeais ai Kdpat. 
t Anth. Graec. 6, Anathem. 133, epigram ascribed to Archilochus: 
"AAKLBin TAOKduwY tepnv avéOnke KadUmTpHy 
"Hpn, kouptdiov edr’ éxvpnoe ydapov. 
u Plutarch, Cony. Praec. 141 E of rH yapndio Ovovres”Hpa thy xoAnY ov 
avykabayiCovat Tots GAXots iepots. 
v Hera Eileithyia at Athens and Argos: vide *¢ and *. 
WJ -5 4, 370% 
ElAe(Ourae 
@ , \ 2 Qn 4 
Hpns Ovyatépes, mixpas wdivas €xoveat. 
Cf. Hesiod, Zheog. 922: Paus. 1. 18, 5 Kpires 8€ rhs xopas tis Kvooias 


a , “ > 
ev "Apnod yeverOat vouifovow EideiOviay kal traida “Hpas «iva. 


x Hera Aphrodite at Sparta, vide 5d: at Acrae, C. J. Gr. 5424, 
common priesthood of Hera and Aphrodite. 


y Eratosth. Kavaster. 44 ov« e&qv rtois Atds viois tis odpaviov rtimis 
petacyxel ef pn Tis attay Onoace Tov THs ”“Hpas paorov. Cf, Anth. Graec. 
yg. 589 Adrnv pnrpuiay Texvnoaro’ Totvexa patdy eis vddov 6 mAdaTHS Ov 
mpooeOnke yada, 

8 Warlike character of Hera incult: armed procession at Samos ®e, 
feast of ’Aomis at Argos **b, Hera Tporaia, Lycophron 1328 1@ ondoavts 
dnias Muotn Tpomaias paorév evOndov beads (referring to Heracles, whom 
Hera was supposed to have nourished) ; cf. 47 ®. 

Localities of Hera-worship. 

19 Thrace and Dacia: coins and exvoto reliefs of the Roman 
Imperial period, Imhoof-Blumer, Wum. Zettschr. 1885, 16; Head, 
List. Num. p. 244; Roscher, Lexicon, pp. 2082, 2083. 

North Greece. 

© Thessaly: Minyan legend of Pelias, Apollod. 1. 9, 8 Sdnpa de 
péacaca eis To THs “Hpas répevos xarépvye, Iedias b¢ én’ aitay tov Bayar 
avtny katechake. 

@ Phocis, at Crissa: Roehl, Jus. Graec. Ant. 314, inscription of 
sixth century B.c. on altar: rdode y’ "Adavaia ... Once "Hpa re, ws kal 
keivos Exot KA€os APErroy aiei, 


ee te eS ee 


oe et 


=: 1. 


ee ee ee ee Se ee Be 


“re 
or 





BES 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS VI-IX. 247 


*% Locris, at Pharygae: Strabo, 426 ‘pura: airoé: “Hpas ®apvyaias 
iepov amd tis €v Papvyas tijs ’Apyeias kal 57 Kat Arorkol pacw «ivat Apyeior. 

Boeotia. 

2 Orchomenos: Brit. Mus. Cat. Central Greece, p. 56, Pl. 8. 18, 
head of Hera (?) with stephanos and veil, first century B.c. 

8 Plataea: vide® 7b. @ Coins, Brit. Mus. Cat. Central Greece, p. 58, 
Pl. 9. 3, circ. 387-374 B.C. 

b Eus. Praep. Ev. 3, ch. 1, § 3 (p. ro2 Dind.) 19 Anrot xdpw 
dropynpovevovaay ("Hpav) duoBapiov Oéca kai ovvvaoy Sore kai Antot puxia 
mpobver Oa (from Plutarch). 

#4 Coronea: Paus. 9. 34, 3 Katwrépw d€ ddtyov "Hpas €oriv iepdv kat 
dyadpa dpxaiov, IvOodmpov réxvn OnBaiov' péeper de emi TH Xetpl Teepivas. 

*% Thespiae: Clem. Alex. Protrepi. p. 40, P. rijs KiOatpwvias “Hpas 
év Gcomia mpéuvov éxxexonpéevov. On Cithaeron: Eur. Phoen. 24: 

Aetpav’ és “Hpas kai KiOarpa@vos déras 
didwat Bovkodorow exOctvac Bpépos. 

% Thebes: Plut. De Genito Socrat. p. 18 Ap’ od Xdidwva déeyers.. . 
Tov KéAnte Ta ‘Hpaia wx@rra mépvaow. 

27 The Perrhaebi: on coins, circ. 196-146 B.c., head of Hera veiled 
and seated figure of Hera, Head, Ast, Num. p. 258. 

Central Greece and Peloponnese. ; 

*%a Athens: C. J. A. 2. 1099. Paus. 1. 1, 5 "Eote d€ kara thy dddv 
riv és AOnvas é« Badrnpod vads “Hpas ore Oipas Exwv otre Bpopov. Mapdd- 
ndv pacw adirov éumpjoa , . . Td b€ d@yadya 7d viv On, Kaba Aeyovow, *Adka- 
pévous eat epyov. 

b Hesych. s.v. Oedéwiat “Hpa tysarat rap’ ’AOnvaioss (? Oedéuvsn). 

¢ Inscription found near Thoricus, Téyevos "Hpas Eider6vias : Roscher, 
p. 2091; Philologus, 23. 619. 

d Eus. Praep. Ev. 3. 83 from Plutarch, odd€ afsovor xowwviav eivat 
mpos Ardvucov “Hpa* puAdooovrat S€ ouppeyvivar ta iepd kal ras ’AOnynow 
iepeias dmavrdcas aciv GdAndovs pu) Mpooayopevew pnd€ OAws KiTTOV és TO 
tis “Hpas cioxopiler Oa répevos. 

e Hesych. Tapndidv 6 rev pnvev ris “Hpas iepds: vide 7a, 

At Eleusis: Serv. Virg. Aen. 4. 58 Cum Eleusine Cereri sacrum 
fit, aedes Iunonis clauditur, item cum Iunoni Eleusine fit, templum 
Cereris clauditur. 

8a Corinth: Hesych. s. v. Até* KopivO:ot 6volav redotvres "Hpy alya Th bed 
bvov' rav 8 Kopiordvrey pocbwrav Kpuipavray Thy paxatpay, kal oKyTTOpEVaY évOa 


248 GREEK RELIGION. 


anéBevro, 4 al€ trois moo dvackadOicaca dvédyvev kal Thy pév oKw 
avrav OunreyEev, éauty S€ tis opayis airia yeyovev. 

b Zenob. 1. 247 KopivOcor Ovoiav redodvres "Hpa émavovov tH trd Mydeias 
€ t + ee] ’ , - a“ ~ + 
iSpuvOeion Kai axpaia kadoupevy aiya tH bed eOvov. 

¢ On Acrocorinthus: Paus. 2. 4, 7 rd rs Bouvaias éorlv “Hpas fepdv. 


d Hera Acraea: Apollod. Bibl. 1. 9, 28 Aéyerae (7) Mndeia) .. . ikéras 
kabicaca (rots maidas) emt tov Bopoy ras “Hpas tas ’Axpaias. Cf. Schol. 
Eur. Med. 10 ru b€ BeBacinevke ris KopivOov 4 Mndeca Evpndos toropei cat 
Ttpovidys’ dre dé kai aOdvaros jv 7 Mndeva Movoaios év tO wept “loOpiov 
ioropet, Lb, 273 taira (ra réxva Mndelas) Karadvyeiv eis rd THs ’Akpaias 
"Hpas iepov kat emt rd icpdv kabicat' Kopwbiovs 8& airav ovd€ ottws an- 
exerGat dX’ ent rod Bopod mdvta tradra dmoopdéat’ dood dé yevouévou eis 
THY TOAW TOAAA Gopata ind THs vdcov Siapbeiperbat’ pavrevopévois Sé adrois 
xXpnop@dnaa Tov Oedv iAdoKecOa Td THs Mndeias Téxvov ayos, dOev Kopwwiors 
BExXpt TOV Kaipdv Tdv Kal? jyas Kal Exactov evavrov émta Kovpous Kal énra 
Koupas Tov emionpotdrey avdpav ameviavticey év TO THS Oeas Tepéver, Kal peTa 
Ovovmy ihaokeoOat Thy ekeivoy payw (the whole quotation from Parmen- 
isCOS) ... yeyovévat S€ mapamAnotov prOeverar Kai mept tov "Adouy: cf. 
Paus. 2. 3, 7, after the destruction of Corinth, ovkére éxeivar kadeoryxacw 
avtois ai Ovaotat ovd€ drokelpovrai ogiow of maides, ovd€ péAavav hopodow 
éoOnra. Lb. § 1% Mybeia maidas pév yiverOa rd S€ dei tixrdpevoy Kata- 
Kpumtew avTdo €s TO tepoy hépovoay rijs “Hpas, xataxpimrew d€ dbavdrous 
éoecOar vopifovcay, Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. c. 14 ’Adkpav kal 
‘Hatodos Mydeay,. . . kal NudByv Kidtxes (iSpuvrae Geovs). Strabo, 380 
ev T® petagv Tov Aexaiov kai Ilayav 1d tis ’Akpaias pavreiov “Hpas imnpyxe 
76 mahay. Eur. Med. 1379 épovo’ és “Hpas répevos axpalas Oeod. 
Schol. 26. “Hpata b€ révOinos éopty mapa Kopwhiors, Schol. Pind. O2. 13. 
74 (Mndea) ev KopivOe xat@xer Kal &ravoe Kopibiovs Atw@ KaTexXopevous 
Oicaca Anpyrpe kai Nuppats Anpvias. eket dé adris 6 Zeds Apdobn. ork émet- 
Gero dé Mydeva tov tis “Hpas exkdivovea xddov' S16 Kai 4 “Hpa brécyero abth 
adavdrovs movjoar tovs maidas' drobardvras 8€ rovrous riysdow Kopivéror, 
KaXdovvtes prEoBapBapous. 


"Megara: Plut. Quaest. Graec. 17 7d madadv  Meyapls dkeiro 


kaTa Kopas, ekadodvto dé ‘Hpaeis. Vide s. Byzantium *, 

*’ Sicyon: ® Paus. 2. 11, 1 "Enwméa 5¢ kal Aprépids kal "Ardddovt 7d 
mAnaoiov iepov motjoat eyovat, Td Sé per’ adtd “Hpas “Adpacrov' dyddpara be 
bmedeimeto ovdeTEep@. 

b Td. 2. 11, 2 rovrov (rév vadov tis Ipodpopias "Hpas) Gadxns iSpicare 
6 Typevov, tis 6000 of Tis és Sixveva “Hpav papevos ddnydv yevécGat. 


© Schol. Pind. Mem. 9. 30 Mévaxpos 6 Svdmos obra ypaper . 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS VII-IX. 249 


"Adpactos . . . puyav ndOev és Suxvava, . . . Kat THs “Hpas tis *AdeEdvdpou 
kadouperns iepov . . . iSpvaaro. 

a In the neighbourhood of Hermione, Paus. 2. 36, 2 iepa én’ 
wa cal > cal pee ‘4 - , , > ‘ ~ “ , > A 
axpov Tav Opay, emi pev TO Koxxvyio Atds, ev b€ TO Ipavi eorw “Hpas. 

b Hermione: Steph. Byz. s. 0. ‘Eppumy: ‘Eppimy 5€ dd rot roy Aia 
kat thy “Hpav évradéa amd Kpitns adixopevovs dppicOnva . . . dev Kai iepov 
“Hpas IapOevov nv év adrn. Vide *” ©, 

5 Epidaurus: Paus. 2. 29, 1 7d 8€ (iepdv) mpds TO Aye én” axpas 
dvexovons és Oddkacaay Aéyovow “Hpas etvac: cf. Thuc. 5.75. Cavvadias, 
Epidaure 61, dedication to Hera. 


8. Argos: Pind: Wem, 10. 1; 
Aavaovd rdAw ayaobpdvav te mevtnKovTa Kopav Xapires, 
“Apyos “Hpas Sapa Ocompenes vpvetre. 
Aesch. Supp. 291: 
kA»Sodxov “Hpas dact Swparwv tore 
"Iam yeverba Hd ev ’Apyeia xOovi. 
Bt, 0; 
b Paus. 2. 15, 5 ev TH viv Apyodids dvopalopery "Ivayov Bacidevovta rév 


> , € a , > 4 fo) -~@ 
Te Totapov ap’ avrov A€éyovow dvopacat kat Gioa 77 “Hpa. 


¢ Jd. 2.17, 1, description of the Heraeum near Argos: ’Aorepiov 
yevécOut TG ToTrap@ Ovyarépas, EVBo.ay kal Updovpvay kai ’Axpaiay, eivar b€ 
apas tpopois tis “Hpas: probably cult-titles of the goddess. Cf. 
Strabo, 373 Upeovpva in the Argolid iepdv ¢xovoa "Hpas. Plutarch, 
De Fluv. 18 ev rd repever ris Wpoovpvaias “Hpas, xabws ioropet Tipdbeos 
ev Tois "ApyoA:kois. 

‘6a Palaephatus, 51 Apyetor Tododxov avrois tyotvto" Kai Ova TovTO Kal 
marnyupw ait teraypévny a&yovaor’ 6 S€ tpdmos ths é€optys Gyaka Body ro 
Xp@pa Nevdv. "Ard Se ris dudéns eivac Sei rHy ieperav. 

b Cf. Strabo, 372 ro ‘Hpaiov ecivat xowor tepdiy 1d mpds tais Muknvacs 
duoiv €v @ ta Hodvkeirov Edava TH pev TéexvN KAAAOTA TOV MdvT@Y TOAUTEhELA 
d€ kal peyéber rev Hediov Nemspeva. Festival of Hera in Argos called 
the ’Aomis, C. J. Gr. 234. 1068: cf. Hesych. dyav xadkeios* ra €v "Apyet 
‘ExarouBaia. Aeneas, Zact. 1. 17 éoptis yap mavdnpouv ew Tis Toews 
"Apyei@v yevouérns, eiyov moumyy ov Srros Tov ev TH HAtKig ovXVOr. 
Schol. Pind. O2, 7. 152 ’O 7 év “Apyes xadkés ... Tovrectiv, 7 doris ” 
xarKh 4 Sdouevn ev “Apyer... mavyyupis eott THs “Hpas ra “Hpata 7a kal 
“ExarduBaa Aeydpeva’ Ovovrat yap Exatov Bes 7H Gea’ 148 erabdov Trav dyavev 
XaAKy Gomis kat orépavos éx pupaimns. Cf. Zenob. Proverb. 6. 52 os thy 
év"Apye domida kabehov cepvivera, Dionys. Halic. Anfigu. Roman. t. 


250 GREEK RELIGION. 


¢ 


ry ¢ a“ 
21 6 rys Hpas vews ev Sadepip xatecxevacpevos os év”Apyer' @vOa kal trav 


cal ¢ > ° , ‘ 
Ountohev 6 tpdros byowos Hy Kai yuvaixes iepal Oepametoveat Td TEMEVOS, | TE 


Acyouern Kavnpdpos ayvi) ydpov mais Katapxopévn rev Ovpdrwy yxopoi re 
mapbevov tuvovody tiv Oedv @dais marpios. Eur. Elec. 171: 
vuv TpiTai- 
av Kapvacovow Ovaiav 
"Apyeiow’ maca Sé€ map “H- 
s ee | i 
pav pedAovaot tapGerikal oreiyer. 
Pind. Wem. 10. 24: 
> , , 
ay@v Tot yaAKeos 
Sapov orpvver mort BovOvoiav "Hpas déOhwv re Kpiow. 

*7 Paus. 2. 17, 5, in the Heraeum ro apxatérarov ("Hpas ayaa) 
merroinrat pev € axpddos, avetéOy és TipvvOa bro Metpdcou rod “Apyous, TipurOa 
O€ aveddvtes Apyetoe kopifovow és 7d “Hpatov' 6 8) Kai adris eiSov Kkabipevov 
dya\pa ov péya. Clem. Alex. Protrepi. p. 41 P. 


°° Paus. 2. 22, 1 rhs de”Hpas 6 vads tis AvOeias éart rod fepod ris Anrods 
ev dea: cf. Be, 


°° EideiOua : Hesych. s. v. "Hpa év “Apyet. 


* Evepyeoia: Hesych. s. v."Hpa év”Apyer: cf. Hera Zevéidia! @, 


*! A€xepva: Hesych. s. v. tnd ’Apyeiov 4 bvcia emiTedouuern TH Hoa. 


* Hera Baowhis at Argos, Kaibel, Zpigraph. 822. C.I.A. 3.172: 
inscription of second or third century a.p. adrd6i (év"Apyet) yap KdeSod- 


xos eu Baowhnidos “Hpns: cf. Clem. Alex. Strom. p. 418 P., fragment 
from the Phoronis, KaA\c6dn krecSodyos ’OAupmiddos Baodeins”Hpns’Apyeins. 


*% Paus. 2. 24,1 dudvrav és thy axpdrodw (Adpicav) gore per tis Axpaias 
"Hpas 70 tepdv, 

* Id. 2. 38, 2: near Nauplia, my) Kdvabos xadovpévn’ évraiba tiv 
"Hpav gacly ’Apyeion kara éros Rovpévnv mapbévov yiverOar' obros pev OH 
ogiow ek rehetis, hy &yovor th “Hpa, Adyos rév dmopphrav éariv. 

* Nemea: Schol. Pind. Wem., Boeckh, p. 425 Nepéa... of d€¢ dad 
tov Body trav ind ”Apyou véesopéevav ev TS ywpio, at Aoav “Hpas fepai. 

PY M be t X p t? 1 P P 

*©a Elis: in the Altis: Paus. 5.15, 11 Oeois 8¢ od rots ‘ENAnViKois pdvov 
GANA kai TS €v AtBin onévdover kai “Hpa re “Appovia cat Mapdupon. 

b Paus. 5. 15, 5: in the inmov adeows, €v pev TH brralbp@ ths apécews 
kata pécov mov pddiota Tocedavos ‘Inmiov kat “Hpas eioly ‘Immias Bopol. 


© /d. 5. 14, 8: near the altar of Olympian Zeus, eict 8€ kai Oedv 
mavrav Bopoi, kai “Hpas émixhnow ’Oduumias merompévos réppas Kal obros. 


fox 
ne a ee : 
— aa ip Ne 


A 

b 
2 
ier 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS VII-IX. 251 


‘7 Temple of Hera ‘OmAcoopia in Elis: Lycoph. Cass. 613. Cf. 
Tzetz. Lyc. 858 éniderov “Hpas tipopevns ev” Hd.. 
8 Clem. Alex. Protrept. p. 31 P. rv “Hpav rv fuyliay ioropet (rogev- 


n ~ re , , 
Givat) bd Tod avrod ‘Hpakheous 6 avros Marvacrs ev TvA@ npabdevte. 


* Olympia: Paus. 5. 16, 2 dia méumrov idaivovow érovs ry "Hpa 
mémdov ai éxxaidexa yuvaixes* ai dé adral tiWéace kal ayéva ‘Hpaia’ 6 d€ ayov 
éorw dpadda Spdpov mapbévos: festival founded by Hippodameia. Vide’. 
Schol. Pind. O27. 5. 10 "OAvpmiact Bopot eiow EF Sidvpor . . . Sevrepos 
"Hpas kal ’A@nvas. 


49a Patrae: Paus. 7. 20, 3 rhs tre “Hpas To ayadpa Tod ’Odvpriov mépav 
meroinra: figure of Hera on coin of Hadrian, Brit. Mus. Cat. 
Peloponnese, Patrae, p. 26, Pl. 5. 18. 


b Aegae: Paus. 7. 23, 9 Alytetor dé ’AOnvas te vads kat”Hpas adXos 
... ts 6€ “Hpas 76 dyadpa Ore py yovaki, ) dv thy iepwovmy Exn, GAdA@ ye 


1) ovdevi €ort Oeavac ba. 


Sparta. 

6a In the Agora: Paus. 3. 11, 9 fepdy "AmddANavos kai “Hpas. 

b Paus. 3. 13, 9 Tod d€ np@ov (rod TAevpSvos) Ados eotiv ov méppa, Kai 
"Hpas émi r@ dp vars ’Apyeias...”Hpas dé icpov ‘Ymepxetpias kata 
pavteiov énoinOn, Tov Eipwra rodv ths yys opiow emixdvCovros* E§davov de 
dpxaiov Kadovow *Adpodirns “Hpas* emt dé Ovyarpi yapoupevyn vevouixace tas 
pytepas Th Oem Overy. 


© Hom:./7,4: 60: 
tov 8° npeiBer erecta Booms mora “Hpn 
> > \ “ ‘ ‘ , > , 
#} ToL euot Tpeis pev word idrrarai elou woAnes, 
“Apyos te Smdptn Te Kal edpvayuia Muknyn. 

d Alyopdyos: Hesych. s.v. “Hpa év Smdprn. Paus. 3. 15, 9 Movors 

8¢ ‘EAAHvav Aaxedaipoviors kabéornxev “Hpav émovoudtew Aiyopdyov kal aiyas 
-~ , 3 ‘ > ‘ c , n , € , > , 

TH Oe Ovew ... aiyas 8€ adrdov (‘Hpakdéa) Odcat pao iepeiwy amopnoavra 

G\Xoiwy ; also at Corinth, vide supra °°. 

Sta Arcadia: Paus. 8. 22, 2 év ti Ztupdnro tH apxaia Thpevdy hnow 
olkijoa tov Tedacyod Kat”Hpav ind trod Typévov tpadpjvat tovrov kai avrov 
iepa tH OG rpia iSpicacbat Kai emixdyoets Tpeis em’ aith OécOa, mapbéve pev 
ére oon Uadt: ynpapéevny d€ tO Adi exddecer adriy Tedeiay dievexOecioay be 
ep’ Srq di} és tov Aia kal éravnxoveay és thy Zrvppydrov wvdpacer 6 Tnpevos 
Xnpav. Cf. Pind. O/. 6. 88 (ode sung at Stymphalus) : 

drpuvoyv viv éraipous, 


Aivéa, mparov pev “Hpav Tapbeviay xedadjoat. 


252 GREEK RELIGION. 


b At Mantinea: Paus. 8. 9, 3 Kai Hpas mpos ré Oedrp@ vady eOcacdunr 
IIpakiredns S€ ra dyddpata aitny te KaOnpérmy ev Opdv@ Kai mapecrw@oas 
éroinaev A@nvav kat "HBnv waida”Hpas. 

e At Megalopolis : Paus. 8. 31, 9 vads éorw "Hpas redeias, dpoiws Kat 
Tava €peinea, 

°° Heraea: Brit. Mus. Cat. Pelop. p. 181, Pl. 34. 1-5: head of 
Hera on coins of Heraea, circ. 480 B.c. Paus. 8. 26, 2 tis dé “Hpas 


TOU vaov kai GAXa epeimia Kat of Kioves Ett EAEiTOVTO. 

Asia Minor. 

°° Kandara: Steph. Byz., xwpiov Tadpdayovias . . . kat “Hpas Kavdapnvis 
iepov. 

** Amastris Paphlagoniae: on coin of Antoninus Pius, HPA 
AMACTPIANOQN, Hera standing with her right hand on a sceptre, her 


left hand extended, with a peacock at her feet, Overb. A.M. 2. p. 123, 
No. 4. 


°> Lydia, Dioshieron: coin with Zeus and Nero on the obverse, on 
the reverse Hera standing with sceptre, 2d. p. 124, No.5; Head, Hist. 
Num. p. 549. 


°° Byzantium: Dionysius Byzant. excerpta in Geogr. veter. Script. 
Graec. Minores, Hudson, vol. 3, p. 2 Duae aedes Plutonis et Iunonis 
quarum solum nomen extat...Iunonia acra dicitur: ubi quotannis 
victimam primo anni die mactat gens Megarica. 


*™ Phocaea : head of Hera on coin of fifth century, Brzt. Mus. Cat. 
Ele dy Ps 206 


eC vines: itt. Opi. 127, 134, 370. 


°° Halicarnassus: Hera, with phiale and sceptre, standing near 
Zeus on coin of Caracalla and Geta, Overbeck, K. JZ. 2, p. 124, No. 6; 
Miinztafel 3. 6. Cf. *® Hera and Zeus Panamaros at Stratonicea: at 
Lebedos *. : 

6° ‘Termessos in Pisidia: priestess of Hera Baowis, C. Ll. Gr. 4367 f. 
Cf. Bull. de Corr. Hell. 3, p. 336, No. 5 “Hpa emykd edxiv Atoundns. 

1 Cyrene: C. /. Gr. 5143, list of priestesses of Hera. 

® Alexandria: Hesych. Miles. Miiller, Wragm. Hist. 4, p. 161 
Aemidas xpvoas KNént@v Tov év ’AdeEavdpeia ths "Hpas adyddpatos epwpdabn. 
Head of Hera ’Apyeia on coins of Alexandria of time of Nero: rit. 
Mus. Cat. Alexandria, p. 17, Pl. 1. 


a Inscription in time of Ptolemy Euergetes II, C. 7. Gr. 4893 
Saree TH kai “Hpg, found on island of the Cataracts. 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS VII-IX. 253 


The Islands. 

*° Euboea: @ Chalcis: (1) Head of Hera (?) on coins circ. B. c. 369- 
336, encircled with disk, Head, Hist. Vum.p. 304. (2) Head of Hera 
veiled and wearing stephane on coins circ. 197-146 B.C. ; 28. p. 304, 
fig. 203. (3) Brit. Mus. Cat. Central Greece, Pl. 21. 1, p. 114, circ. 
196-146 B.c., Hera with sceptre in quadriga; 2d. Pl, 21. 12, p. 118, 
coin of Septimius Severus, Hera seated with patera and sceptre, wearing 
small calathus : cf. Gardner Types, Pl. 15. 27, p. 177. 

b Carystus: Steph. Byz. s.v. Iddis ind rH “Oxy Bper ris EdBolas.. . 
€xA7njOn Sé€ 1rd dpos amd ths... Tv Oedv pikews Atos xai”Hpas. On fifth 
century coins of Carystus, the cow and the calf and the bull may 
refer to the worship of Hera on Mount Oche, Head, Ast. Num. 
p- 303. Veiled head of Hera on coins of Carystus, second century 
B.C., Brit. Mus. Cat. Central Greece, Pl. 19. 5. 


© Dirphys: Steph. Byz. s.v. dpos EvBolas kat Appia 7 “Hpa tiparar, 

a Paus. 9. 3, 1 Hpav ef” érw 8) mpos tov Ala apyiopérny és E’Boudv 
pacw avaxwpjca, 

e¢ The name of the island connected with Io the priestess of Hera 
and the birth of Epaphos, Strabo, 445. 


Perinthus : vide *h, 

“ Aegina: Pindar, Py/h. 8. 79 (ode to Aristomenes of Aegina) “Hpas 
T aya” émty@piov vikats tpiocais, & ’poropeves, Sdpagoas épyw: cf. Schol. 
2b. €v Aiyivy “Hpaiwy dyopévav cara piunow tov év”Apyet dyavos* arotKoe yap 
"Apyctov Alywirat Aidupos b€ hyo ra ‘ExatduBaia avrov viv héyew emtydprov 
dyava bia Thy ovyyéveray. 

®a Samos: Roehl, J/uscr. Graec. Ant. 384 Xnpaptns p’ dveOnkev rh 
"Hpn @yadya, inscription on very archaic statue of Hera. 

b Paus. 7. 4, 4 70 0€ kepdv 7d ev Sduw ths “Hpas elo ot idpicacbai pact 
Tovs €v TH “Apyot méovras, emdyecOar dé avrovs TO GyaApa e& "Apyous’ Sdpuor 
8€ avroi texOijvar vopifovaw ev tH vow THy Gedy mapa 7 "InBpdow moraye 
kal U0 TH AVy@ TH ev TO “Hpaie’ eivae 8 otv 1d lepov TodTo ev Tois pddiora 
pxaiov ody Fxora dv tis Kai emi T®@ dydApare rexpatporro. Herod. 3. 60 
tpirov 8€ odu (Sapior) eF€pyarrat vnds péyioros Tavta@v yndv Tov hyeis Wpev" 
Tov apxitéxtwy mparos éyéveto ‘Poikos, Strabo, 637 7d ‘“Hpatov, dpxaioy 
iepov Kal veds péyas bs viv mivaxobnkn éoti... ekadeiro d€ (1) Saylor v7joos) 
TapOevia mpérepov oixovvtwv Kapav. Paus. 5. 13, 8 Tédpas yap 67 éore Kai 
7h "Hpa tH Sapia Bopds. 

© Hera ’Apynyéris: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 2, p. 180, inscription found 
near temple of Hera, praising a citizen, edoeBeias Evexa €s Te THY apxnye- 
tiv “Hpay kai Kaicapa Teppanxod vidv. 


254 GREEK RELIGION. 


d Lactantius: /st. 1.17, quoting from Varro, simulacrum in habitu 
nubentis figuratum et sacra eius anniversaria nuptiarum ritu cele- 
brantur. 

e Athenae. 526 wept rhs Saplov rpupis Aodpis isropav mapariderat Actov 
mompata, Ore epdpovy xAWavas tept Tots Bpaxioot kal Thy Eoptiy ayovres TOV 
“Hpalav €Bddifov karexreviopevor Tas Kdpas emt Td petdpevoy Kal Tovs Hpovs. 
Id. 672 xa@ &xaorov éros droxopiCerOa tb Bpéras és thy ndva Kat adavi- 
CecOa aiord te ad’r@ mapariber Oa Kai KadeioOa Tévera THY EopTHy Gre Tévots 
ouveBn mepterdnOjvat td Bpéras ind tSv thy mpatnv adrod Cyrnow Toinoa- 
pevov. Polyaen. S/raé. 1. 23 pedAddvrwv Sapiov Gvoiav rovety ev TO iep@ Tis 
"Hpas mavOnuov ev 7 peO drwy exdumevov. Aug. De Civ. Det 6. 7 sacra 
sunt Iunonis et haec in eius dilecta insula Samo celebrabantur, ubi 
nuptum data est Iovi. 

f Schol. //. 14. 296 act rov Aia év Sau AdOpg trav yovéwv dmomapbe- 
vedoa THY Hpav’ d0ev Sapwoe pynotevortes tas Képas AdOpa ovykotmifovew, 
eira mappyoia movoder Tovs ‘yapous. Athenae. 673 C Oupnpes mivorres drrws 


Avs evkr\éa vipny MéAt@pev vynoov Seondrw nperépys. Hera "IuBpacin, 
Apoll. Rhod. 1. 187. 


& Steph. Byz. ‘Invois, yopiov év Sdu@ ev @ iepdv "Hpas ‘Invouvridos. 

h Samian Hera on coins of Perinthus:. Overbeck, AK. W% 2. 1, 
Fi. x, 30, 

® Paros: Anth. Pal. 7. 351, epigr. of Dioscorides, *Apxidoxov, pa 
Geos kat Saipovas, or’ év dyuais Eidouev 086 "Hpns ev peydd@ Tepevet, 
Inscr. publ. A@nvaov 5, p. 15 "Epacimmn Updowvos “Hpy Anunrpt Gecpo- 
pop@ kat Képn kat Avi EvBovdet kat BaBot. 

7 *Aorumadela: C.J. Gr. 2491 € "Aptoréxdeva Kupiov iapacapéva “Hpg. 

6& Amorgos: Mitt. d. d. Inst. Ath. 1, p. 3423; Ditt. Syl. 358. 

6° Rhodes: ® Diod. Sic. 5.55 mapa S€ Iadvoiows”Hpav kai vipas TeAXt- 
vias (mpooayopevOijvar) mapa S€ Kapecpedow “Hpav Tedxwiav, » At Lindos: 
Hera Basileia: Foucart, Rev. Arch. 1867, 30, No. 71 Hpa Baovtela 
€Onxe Tov Bwopdv: at Ialysos Hera ‘Qpdrutos, zbzd. 

7” Crete: C. Zl. Gr. 2584, 1. 179, 2555, head of Hera on fourth 
century coins of Cnossus and Tylisos, Brzt. Mus. Cat. Crete, pp. 21 
and 80, Pl. 5. 11 and 1g. 15; vide Cnossus "8 and ”. 

™ Cyprus: Paphos, C. /. Gr. 2640; Amathus, 2d. 2643. Hesych. 
5.0. ‘Edeia’ “Hpa év Kump: cf. ° 

™ Cos: on coin of Antoninus Pius, Hera wearing veil, with sceptre 
and phiale in her left and right hand, standing on car drawn by pea- 
cocks, Overbeck, K. MZ, 2, p. 124, No.6. Athenae. 262 c ¢dnot yap 











— ee 








REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS VII-IX., 255 


Makapevs ev th Tpitn Kwakav dre éndrav Th “Hpe Oiwory of Kou ove eloerow 
> van: \ a » , U a , Ly be 

€ls TO Lepov dovAos ovTe YEVETAL TLVOS TMV TAPED KEVATHEVOY, Lnscriptions of 
Cos, Paton and Hicks, No. 38 "Hpa ’Apyeia ‘EXeia Bacula cHHeias Kpirda: 
2b. No. 62 “Hpa Ovpavig. 


8 Lesbos: Schol. Z/. 9. 129 mapa AcoBious dydv dyerat Kdddovs yuvat- 
Koy €v TO THS "Hpas tepever, eydpevos kaddoreia. Anthol. 9. 189 édAbere 
Mpos Téyevos yNavxamdos aydadv “Hpns AeoBides. 

% Delos: Ditt. SyZ2. 358 

% Thasos: Littré, Oeuvres Completes d’ Hippocrate, 2, p. 716 4 


kaTéketTo Tapa TO THs “Hpas iepdv. 


 Corcyra: on coins of fifth century B.c., Bret. Mus. Cat. Thessaly, 
&c., p. 119, Pl. 2x. 18; Thuc. 1. 243 3. 75, 81, the Heraecon: men- 
tioned where the suppliants take refuge. 


™ Jthaca: Roehl, Zuscr. Graec. Ant. 336, sixth century inscription 
referring to the cults of Hera, Rhea and Athena. 


Italy. 


* Roehl, 543, sixth century inscription from Calabria to Hera, 4 év 
medio; Kaibel, Zuscr. Ital. Sicil. 643. 


a Crotona: Hera Lacinia, Paus. 6. 13, 1; Arist. De MWirad. 96 
T Tavnyipe. tis “Hpas, eis fv oupropevovra mavres ‘Iradki@ra. Cf, 
Brit. Mus. Cat. Italy, p. 353, coin with head of Hera Lacinia ; 
vide Livy 24. 3, description of the grove round the temple with the 
sacred flocks. 


b Anth. Graec. 6, Anathem. 265: 
"Hpa tipnecoa, Aakinov & 1d bvaddes 
TodAdkis ovpavdbev vewroueva Kabopns 
deEar Bioowov civa, rd row pera mardos dyavas 
Nogaidos vpavey Oevdirls & Kdedyas. 
¢ ? Styled ‘Omdocpia in the Lacinian temple, Lycoph. 856: 
"Héet S€ Sip Kat Aakwiov pvxors, 
€v oiot méptis dpxarov tevéer Oca 
‘Omdocpia putoiow éEnoxnpevov 
referring to Thetis making a grant of the Lacinian territory to Hera 
(cf, line 614). 


*° Capua: Brit, Mus. Cal. Staly, p. 83, head of Hera on coin 
veiled and wearing stephane, with sceptre, ? fourth century B.c. 


® Venusia: 7d. p. 152, head of Hera Lacinia on coin, with stephane 
and veil. 


256 GREEK RELIGION 


*® Hyria of Campania: Brit. Mus. Cat. Ttaly, p. 92, head of Hera 
with stephane, Lacinia ? fourth century. 


8° Neapolis?: 20. p. 94, head of Hera Lacinia, ? fourth century. 

** Pandosia: 726. p. 370, head of Hera Lacinia, ? fourth century. 

6 Phistelia (?near Cumae): Head, Ast. Num. p. 35, head of 
Fiera, circ. 400: B.C. 

8a Sybaris: Ael. Var. Hist. 3. 43 °Ev SuBdpe .. . év rh dyovia fy 
éretéhouv TH "Hpa: cf. Athenae. 521 e: Steph. Byz. s. v. SvBapis. 

6 Metapontum: Pliny 14. 9 Metaponti templum Iunonis vitigineis 
columnis stetit. 

87 Strabo, 215 mapa trois ’Everois dv0 dhon To pev”Hpas *Apyetas Setkvurat 
To O€ "Apreudos AitwAidos. 

8 Posidonia: Strabo, 252 Mera d€ 7d ordpa tod Surdpidos Acveavia 
kal TO THS "Hpas iepov ths “Apyedas "Idcovos pupa, kal mAnoloy év TevTHkovTa 
oradios 4 Tlocewwvia. ¢ Hera Areia or Argeia, vide Pliny, 3. 70. 

Sicily. 

8° Syracuse: Ael. Var. Afrst. 6. 11 év r@ ths Sixedias”Hpas va@ €oryKev 
avtod (éAwvos) eikav: cf. C. L. Gr. 5367. 

* Hyblae: Steph. Byz. s. v. "YBdau' rpeis movers SuxeAias. . . 7 be 
eAatrwy ‘Hpaia kadeirat, 

*' Thermae, head of Hera Lacinia with stephane circ. 405- 
S50 Boc.e Head. Z7isi.dVum. p. 128. 

*° Himera: head of Hera of Argive type: Overbeck, Avwmst. 
Mythol. vol. 2, Miinztaf. 2. 22. 

*% Selinus: inscription containing a prayer to Hera found in one 
of the temples: Juscr. Graec. Sicil. et Ital. 271. 

a At Acrae: C. /8Gr. 5424, list of names rév mpootarevodvtwr “Hpa 
kat ’Adpoditn. 

Monuments of Hera-worship. 

** Clem. Alex. Pro/rept. 4. 40 P. rijs KiOatpwvias "Hpas ayadpa év Ceoria 
nv mpéuvov exxexdpuevov: cf. Arnobius, Adv. ation. 6. 2 ridetis tem- 
poribus priscis . .. coluisse ramum pro Cinxia Thespios. 

° Id. Strom. 1.25 (p. 418 P.) ypaec yoov 6 rv Bopwvida moinvas Kad- 
ALOdn Kecovxos ’'OAvpmiddos Bactreins”Hpys Apyeins, } oTéppact kai Ovodvowwt 
TpOTN EKdTMNTEY TEP Kiova pakpoy avdcons. 

°° Td. Protrept. 4. 40 P. ro rhs Sapias “Hpas (a&yadpa), ds now AgOALos 
mpotepov pev nv aavis, votepov dé emi Lpoxdéous apxovtos aydpiavroewes 
éyévero: So also Callimachus in Eus, Praep. Lv. 3. 8. 


ee 


is tac rae ai aes 
ne es eee Se oe a a 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS VII-IX. 257 


* Archaic statue of Hera at Samos: Paus. 7.4, 4 €ore yap dy dvdpds 
€pyov Aiywnrov Spidwdos tod Eikdeidov.  Eus. Praep. Ev. 3. 8 “Hpas 8é 
kai Zapior EvAwov elyov dos, Ss hyor KadXipayos, 

ovm@ Spidikdv epyov ed€oov, aX emi TeOu@ 
Snvard yAvpdavwv aoos Roba cavis. 

Clem. Alex. Protrept. p. 41 P. ro 8é ev Say ths “Hpas Edavov cpirn 
TH Zpididos rod Evkdeidov meroqoba "Odvpmixos ev Sapsaxois icropet: 
cf. Lactantius, quoted *4, 

%° Paus. 2.17, 4 7d b€ dyahpa ths "Hpas emt Opdvou kdénrar peyéder peya, 
Xpvoov pev kai ehéhavros, Todvkdeirou b€ épyov' &meate Oé of arepavos Xdpiras 
€xov kai “Opas émeipyaopevas Kai Tov XElpov TH pev Kaprrov Géper potas, TH Sé 
oxnmtpov .. . Kdxkvya b€ emi TO oxyntp» kabjobai gact, Aéyovres Tov Ala, dre 
ijpa mapbevov ris ”Hpas és rovrov tov dpriba a\ayjvar thy S€ are matynov 
Onpaca . . . déyerar S€ mapeatyKévat TH “Hpa téxyn Navkidovs a&yadpa “HBzs, 
ehéhavros kal TviTo Kai ypvaod. 

*® Schol. Theocr. 7d. 15. 64 kai map’ ‘Apyeious of peéeytota Toy ‘EAnvev 
Tiu@or thy Oedv 7d ayadpa tis “Hpas év T@ va@ KaOnpevoy ev Opdve tH xeipi 
Exel TKTTpOV Kal em” a’Ta Kdkvé, 

10° Anthol. Planud. 4. 216: 

‘Qpyeios TlodvkXerros, 6 Kai pdvos 6ppaciy "Hpav 
aOpnoas Kai donv cide ruTwodpevos 

Ovntois Kdddos ederEev Soov G€uis* ai 8 id KéAros 
ayrootu pophai Zyvi pvdracodpeba. 

wm Max. Tyr. Diss. 14.6 "Hpav deer "Apyeiors ToAvkdecros Aeuk@devor, 
eheharténnxy, evarw, eveipova, Baordixyy, pvpéevny emi xXpvaov Opdvev. 

® Tertullian, de Corona 7 Iunoni vitem Callimachus induxit. Ita 
et Argis signum eius palmite redimitum subiecto pedibus corio leonino 
insultantem ostentat novercam de exuviis utriusque privigni. 

18 Martial 10. 89: 

Iuno, labor, Polycleite, tuus et gloria felix 
Pheidiacae cuperent quam meruisse manus. 

*4 Dio Chrys. Or. 1, p. 67 R. yuvaixa ederd Kai peyddny, eo Oye eveF 
Kekoounuevny, oKImTpoy Exovouy, dmoiay padiota tiv “Hpay ypdpovat’ ro dé 
mpdowrov paidpov 6pod kai wepvor, 

26 Anthol. Graec. 5, Erotica 94 "Oppar’ execs “Hpns, MeXirn. 

% Booms métma “Hpy: Hesych. Booms peyadrdpbados. Plutarch, 
Quaest. Graec. 36 Booms 6 mouths tov peyaddpOadpov (Aéeyer) cf. Varro, 
de Re Rust. 11. 5 Novi maiestatem boum, et ab his dici pleraque 
_ magna, ut... boopin. 


VOL. I. S 


CHAPTER  X. 
ATHENA. 


THE meaning of the name remains unknown, and the 
different attempts of philologists to explain it and to base 
different theories as to Athena’s origin on their explana- 
tions need not be here discussed. The word varies slightly, 
but the form ’A@jvn appears to be.as old as any ; hence comes 
the feminine plural Athenae, the name of the Attic city, and 
’"AOjvar Arades ©, the name of a place in Boeotia*; then by 
a reverse process the Attic city gave to its tutelary goddess 
the longer name ’A@nvaia, properly an adjective denoting the 
goddess of Athens. That this longer form is common in 
Homer is a sign of the great antiquity and celebrity of the 
Attic cult, 

As in the earliest times we find the worship of Athena 
in very various parts of the Greek world, we can conclude 
that she was a primitive Hellenic divinity of the ‘Achaean’ 
period, and originally worshipped also by the Dorian and 
Ionic tribes, or adopted by them in their new settlements. 
This very antiquity and her singularly Hellenic character, 
which is scarcely tinged at all by any discoverable Oriental 
influence, are reasons that are strong against the theory that 
in Athena we have a disguised Oriental goddess imported 


from anterior Asia. As illustrations of the universality of her — 
cult we have the testimony of Homer and many of the heroic — 
legends, and the records” of local cults afford ample proof. 


a Cf. many other similar forms of from the local cult; it is possible that ~ 


town-names in the Greek world: Alal- such names as Thespiae, Syracusae, are 
comenae, Potniae, Eleutherae, Apellae, derived from forgotten cult-terms. 
which illustrate the origin of the city > Vide Geographical Register. 


——e 











ATHENA. 259 


Her worship was primeval in Attica, and it is here that we 
can best trace the primitive forms as well as the higher 
developments of her religion; in no other city of Greece 
was the character of her worship so manifold as at Athens, 
and in many of the demes, Colonus, Acharnae, Sunium, 
Phlye, special cults were consecrated to her, recognizing her 
under various aspects. At Sparta, before the Dorian inva- 
sion, there was the brazen house, or the temple of Athena 
Chalcioecus, a name derived from the Mycenaean style of 
wall-decoration; and she continued to be the war-goddess, 
the goddess of the council, the law-court and the market- 
place, in the Lacedaemonian state. In Argolis we hear of 
her temple on Mount Pontinus and on the Acropolis where 
Acrisius was buried in her shrine. She protects the Argive 
heroes in the Theban and Trojan war, and the story and the 
cult of Diomed is interwoven with this Argive religion. One of 
the chief personages of ancient Arcadian worship was Athena 
Alea. The cults of Athena Napxaéa in Elis and "Auapia in 
Achaea reveal the more primitive aspects of her, and the same 
may be said of her worships at Mothone in Messenia and on 
the Megarid coast, while her cult-title Aiantis in Megara seems 
to have connected her there with the Achaean period. At 
Corinth we find the legend of Bellerophon and the yoking of 
Pegasos associated with the worships of Athena Xaduviris and 
Hippia; and the mysterious cult-title Hellotis was attached to 
her there. In North Greece, Thebes and Alalcomenae were 
famous centres of her worship ; Athena Itonia protected the 
Boeotian league, and her name was the watchword of the 
Thessalians in battle. We find traces of Athena-cult in Phthi- 
otis, Pallene, Macedon, Abdera and Byzantium ; and probably 
before the time of Homer it had taken root in Ithaca and the 
western islands. There is record of its existence in Thasos, 
Lemnos, Samos and many of the Cyclades, in Crete, which was 
one of the countries that claimed to be the birth-place of the 
water-born goddess, in Cyprus, Carpathus and Rhodes. The 
last mentioned island, according to Pindar’s beautiful legend, 
stood only next to Athens in the favour of the goddess, the 
Rhodians having through carelessness in their first act of 
$2 


a 


260 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


ritual offered davpa tepd, a sacrifice without fire'’. On the 
coast of Asia Minor we have not far to look for the early 
traces of this religion. The Trojan women offer their prayers 
and a woven peplos to the goddess on their Acropolis, whom 
Homer and his contemporary Greeks identified with Pallas 
Athena, and whose cult doubtless belonged to the Mycenaean 
period. The legends concerning the heroes’ disastrous return 
and the consequent migrations of families attribute much of 
their troubles to the wrath of the Trojan goddess whose temple 
had been profaned by Ajax, and we have sufficient evidence 
afforded by the Locrian rites that are mentioned below of 
the early influence of this Asia Minor worship in the Greek 
world. Also it was from Troy that two widespread primitive 
types of Athena-idols, the type of the Palladion and of the 
seated goddess, were supposed to be derived. Her cult became 
predominant in the later kingdom and city of Pergamon, and 
it was established in very many of the coast cities, and in 
some inland settlements of Asia Minor, both north and south. 
It travelled to Sicily, Magna Graecia, and even to Spain; 
and the cities and places that are recorded as possessing it, 
numerous as they are, are probably far fewer than the actual 
sites of her worship. This religion was too old for its birth- 
place to be remembered, and none of these cities or places 
can be regarded as its original seat, nor can we trace anywhere 
any definite line of its diffusion. 

In dealing with the religious ideas of this worship, we find 
very few that are notably primitive or savage. The legend 
of the birth of Athena preserves some touches of a very early 
and rude imagination, such as the swallowing of Metis, and 
we have the record in Porphyry that at Laodicea human 
sacrifices were once offered to Athena?*, but it is probable 
that the goddess to whom this ritual belonged was the 
semi-oriental Artemis. Also the story at Athens of the 
daughters of Cecrops, who were driven mad by the wrath 
of Athena, and who flung themselves down from the rock of 
the Acropolis has been with much probability interpreted as 
a legend of human sacrifice in her worship *; for we have other 


* Mommsen, Heortologie, p. 12. 





x.] ATHENA. 261 


evidence of the leap from a rock being part of such ritual 
in other Hellenic cults. The same primitive fact may be 
discerned in the Locrian rites of atonement with which they 
tried to appease the wrath of Athena on account of the 
outrage done to Cassandra. From early times till about the 
middle of the fourth century, maidens were sent yearly from 
Locris to the Trojan shore, wearing only a single garment 
and no sandals, and with their hair shorn, to become 
priestesses and handmaidens in Athena’s temple, where they 
performed secret rites by night. The first that were sent 
were met by the inhabitants and slain; their bones were 
burnt in a peculiar ceremonious way, and their ashes cast 
from a mountain intothesea!». It is clear that this is no mere 
story of murder, but a reminiscence of certain piacular rites. 
But the Hellenic worship of Athena had long been purified 
from this taint of savagery, and it was only in certain harm- 
less ceremonials, such as the washing of the idol, that her 
religion preserved a primitive character. The Scholiast on 
Callimachus informs us that once a year the Argive women 
took Athena’s image and bathed it in the Inachus®, and 
Callimachus’ poem gives us a secular version of that religious 
act*, -At Athens the image of Pallas was yearly escorted by 
the Ephebi to the sea-shore at Phaleron, and brought back 
to the city with torches and great pomp*. There can be 
little doubt that the object of the journey was to wash it 
in sea-water, just as Iphigenia in the play of Euripides 
takes the Tauric image to the coast under this pretext, 
saying that ‘the sea cleanses away all the ills of mortal 
life’’ The image that the Ephebi escorted must have been 


the Palladion from the Attic court éwi IlaAadim; for it is 


called by Suidas and in the Attic inscriptions ) HaAdas **?, 


a name appropriate to the Palladion, but not applied to the 
idol of Athena Polias. And this view is confirmed if we 
combine the evidence given by the Attic ephebi-inscriptions 
with the legend narrated by Pausanias concerning the origin 


® Possibly also the representation of Berlin, is an artistic motive drawn from 
Pallas bathing before the Judgement of the same source. 
Paris, on a fine fourth century vase in » Tph. Taur. 1193. 


262 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


of the court. We may reasonably suppose that the image 
was washed in the sea at Phalerum to wipe off the stain of 
homicide, and that it was borne along with an escort of 
armed youths and brought back in a torch-light procession to 
commemorate the night attack of Demophon and the armed 
Athenians upon Diomed and the friendly Argives, when the 
Palladion was captured by mistake. We must then dis- 
tinguish this ritual from the Plynteria?, about which we are 
only imperfectly informed, but which clearly referred to the 
Athena Polias and the cult of Aglauros on the Acropolis. 
The name does not refer to the washing of the idol*—we do 
not hear that this ceremony took place at all on this occasion 
—but to the washing of Athena’s peplos and other apparel 
by the official women called the Loutrides or Plyntrides?4% 
The solemnity was mournful and mythically connected with 
the death of Aglauros, the story being that out of sorrow 
for her the women of Attica went for a year with unwashed 
garments?* ‘8, The approaches to the temple were roped 
off, the idol was stripped of its raiment and muffled up, and 
the chief day of the feast was an unlucky one on which no 
important business could be done. It was this ominous day 
when Alcibiades returned from exile, and, as was afterwards 
believed, the veiled goddess turned her face from him?* °, 


Originally the ceremony of cleansing the idol and its robes — 


may well have been merely part of a fetish-ritual, in which 
the fetish-object is washed, oiled, and clothed as though it 
were a living person; but it was almost certain to acquire 
a moral significance, and Artemidorus explains all such rites 
as necessitated by human sin, which pollutes the temples or 
the images ©. 

On the whole there is no other leading Greek divinity to 
whom so little of crude and savage thought attached as to 
Athena, and though the moral ideas in her worship did not 


® The word mAvvew properly refers in the Plynteria, which is not told us 
to clothes; the account given by though very probable, and was taken 
Mommsen (/feortologie, p. 429) of the down to Phaleron; he combines the 
Plynteria goes far beyond the evidence; Plynteria with the procession of the 
he assumes that the idol was washed  Ephebi without warrant. 


x.] ATHENA. 263 


altogether advance so far as those in the worship of Zeus, her 
ritual was wholly free of impurity and orgiastic extravagance 
of any kind. In fact, as will be noticed later, we observe 
a purifying tendency in the myth to preserve the maidenly 
character of the goddess. We may note as another possible 
reason of the comparative purity of her legend and rite, that 
there is in it little or no physical symbolism, although writers 
both past and present on Greek religion have found a super- 
fluity of it. I have already tried to show the futility of any 
endeavour to deduce the whole of Athena’s characteristics 
and functions from any one original physical concept, for 
one may grant that she was originally a_ personification 
of air, earth, water or thunder, and yet maintain that she 
acquired the various traits of her moral or human character 
independently. And we need not discuss at length all the 
reasons for and against Welcker’s? theory that she was 
aether, and Roscher’s theory that she was thunder”, and 
Ploix’s theory that she was twilight®: for these various 
theorists refute each other sufficiently. Such discussion is 
blocked by the larger question, is there any proof that 
Athena, as a goddess of the Hellenic religion, ever was 
a personification of some part of the physical world? To 
answer this we may inquire whether this was ever the view of 
the Greeks of any historic period ; secondly, whether, in the 
hieroglyphics of ancient legend, or in the crystallized thought 
of ancient ritual, such an aspect of her is disclosed to us. 

The first inquiry is easier than the second. In no historic 
period of actual Greek religion was Athena ever regarded as 
a personification of any physical element. It is interesting on 
other grounds to know that Aristotle regarded her as the 
moon‘; but this view has nothing to do with the people's 
creed, and Greek philosophy was even more reckless than the 
modern science of mythology in interpreting the figures of the 


" Griechische Gotterlehre, 1. p. 300. ch. 16: Minervam vel summum aethera 
b Ausfihrliches Lexikon, s. Athena. vel etiam lunam esse dixerunt: in a 
© La nature des dieux, p. 213. context where he is ridiculing the physi- 


4 According to Arnobius, 4dv. Gent. cal interpretation of Greek religion. 
3. 31: ef. Aug. de Civitate Dei, 7. 


264 GREEK RELIGION. | (CHAP. 


Hellenic Pantheon. In the ordinary legend and worship 


there is no department of nature with which Athena was. 


especially concerned, though she might be active on occa- 
sion in a great many, availing herself of her privilege as 
a leading Olympian. She showed men the use of the olive, 
but she was not therefore the earth that produced nor the 
dew or heat that nourished it: else we might have to say 
that Apollo was the personification of mephitic gas, because 
he taught men a particular mode of divination. 

At Mothone in Messenia we hear of a shrine of Athena 
"Avewotis™, but Athena was never regarded either by ancients 
or moderns as a wind-divinity, Such as Aeolus or Boreas; 
any powerful deity, as in the mediaeval religion any leading 
saint, could give or avert a wind as easily as the witch 
in Macbeth, If that temple, which appears by the legend 
to have been prehistoric, stood on a windy promon- 
tory, as it seems to have stood, then in that locality the 
goddess would be specially consulted on the matter of winds. 
All that the legend says is that this part of the coast 
was troubled by frequent tempests, until Diomed prayed to 
Athena, placed an image in her shrine, and gave her the 
title “Avey@ris. He probably did all this because she was his 
tutelary goddess, not because she signified for him the blue 
ether or thunder or dawn and therefore might be more or less 
remotely connected with tempest. Again we hear of an Athena 
Napxaia® in Elis; and those who resolve her into ether might 
say that this epithet refers to the numbing effects of frost 
beneath a midnight sky in winter; and those who say that she 
is thunder and lightning might derive it from the petrifying 
effect of the lightning-flash. If Napxafa means the goddess 
who petrifies, this would denote the goddess who wore the 
gorgoneium in her aegis, and we need not go further for an 
explanation. But in the locality of Elis the people did not 
so translate the word, but told of a hero Napxaios, a son 
of Dionysos, who built a temple to Athena Napxaia. It is 
possible that here, as in many other instances, a fictitious 
hero has grown out of a misunderstood cult-name, or that 
on the contrary, Athena absorbed in this region the local 


ao | ATHENA. 265 


honours and title of a Dionysiac hero, whose name might 
have reference to the stupefying effects of drink®. 

Thirdly, in certain cults Athena has some obvious con- 
nexion with the water. In Strabo we hear of an Athena 
Nedovoia, whose temple stood on the banks of the river Nédwx, 
that flowed from Laconia into the Messenian gulf; and she 
was worshipped by the same name in the island of Cos”. 
And Athena Itonia at Coronea perhaps gave her name to the 
brook that flowed beneath the hill!®°, which Alcaeus calls 
‘the brook of the maiden,’ but which according 
to Strabo was called by the Boeotian settlers Kovdp.os, a name 
that need have nothing to do with the goddess. Buta lake 
Kopyota, and the worship of Athena Kopyota 4, are mentioned 
by Stephanos as existing in Crete”; and a lake in Lydia 
is said by Eustathius to have given her the name Ivyaia™. 
These facts give no proof at all that she was ever in his- 
toric or prehistoric times essentially a water-deity, though 
she may sometimes have been worshipped on the sea-coast 
as at Sunium, Calabria, and other places?® } 4%, 97, They 
merely illustrate how a local cult could give as well as owe 
a name to surrounding objects of nature, whether hill, river or 
tree. The sea-gulls about the rock might account for the 
curious name Ai@via’®, which attached to Athena on a crag 
of the Megarid coast, where possibly the goddess was in some 
way identified by the people with the bird, as Artemis was 
occasionally identified with the quail. But Athena is far less 
a water-goddess than Artemis, who much more frequently had 


Kwpaduos, 


»*® We have examples of both processes 
in Greek religion: e.g. Iphigenia de- 
veloped from Artemis, Peitho from 


Aphrodite; on the other’ hand Zeus- 


Agamemnon, Athena Aiantis % », 

> Another illustration that has been 
given of the same point of view is the 
passage in Cicero, De Nat. Deor. ce 
quarta (Minerva) Iove nata et Coryphe, 
Oceani filia, quam Arcades Coriam 
nominant, et quadrigarum inventricem 
ferunt: the whole context shows an un- 
fortunate speculative attempt to apply 
the principles of logical division to 
mythology. If there is any genuine 


myth here, it is full of foolish confu- 
sion: Pausanias” speaks of a shrine 
of Athena Kopia émi dpovs kopupis, near 
Clitor; and Athena sprang from the 
Kopupy Ards. Hence came the mother, 
Kopupn. This may have been the name 
of an Oceanid ; or there may be here a 
faint reminiscence of Tritogeneia, or of 
the Homeric theory that Ocean was the 
origin of all things. We find partly the 
same confusion in the genealogy given 
by the author of the Ltymologicum 
Magnum“'', who makes Athena the 
daughter of Poseidon and the Oceanid 
Koryphe. 


266 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


to do with rivers and running water. Still more absurd would 
it be to say on these slight grounds that Athena was the 
watery thunder-cloud or watery blue ether. 

We have then to consider the evidence of the word 
Tptroyévera*, a term occurring in poetry as early as Homer, 
and explained by many local myths, but scarcely found at all 
in actual worship '®*. That the name caused some embar- 
rassment even to the ancients, is indicated by the fictitious 
explanation of the grammarians that the word meant ‘ head- 
born, and the assumption of a Boeotian word Tpiro meaning 
‘head. This word has no analogies in Greek, and is probably 
a grammatical figment. From the analogy of such words 
as Triton, Amphitrite, and the name Tritonis applied to 
a nymph, and Triton to rivers and lakes, we may believe that 
the root of the word means water. And from a passage in 
Aristophanes we can be fairly certain that the term Tputoyéveva 
meant for the ordinary Greek ‘ born near or from some kind 
of water.’ In the Lysistrate 16°, the women call to Tritogeneia 
to help them in bringing water, and the point of the mock 
invocation is clear. But the grammarians’ attempt to show 
that the word meant ‘head-born’ is of some interest, because 
in the first place it indicates that they did not see why in 
the nature of things the word should mean what it probably 
did, namely, ‘born from the water’; and, secondly, that they 
regarded the word as of Boeotian origin. Accepting, then, 
the ordinary explanation of the word as meaning ‘ water-born,’ 
we have still toask why this name was given to her. Accord- 
ing to Preller it contains an allusion to the Hesiodic and 
Homeric theory that Ocean was the origin of ail things. 
But why, then, were not all the divinities equally termed 
Tpuroyeveis, just as they were named Ovtpaviwves ?- 

A more far-fetched solution is that of Welcker’s», who 
regarding Athena as the ether-goddess, explains the word 

* The article by F. Lenormant in the concludes that there was once a mon- 
Gazette Archéologique, 1880, p. 183, is strous Athena with fish extremities, 
full of wild symbolism. Onthe strength the sign of the crab alluding in some 
of the name Tpiroyéverca, and the rare dexterous way to the Moon and the 


sign of the crab on her casque and her _ Gorgon. 
worship at certain maritime places, he > Griechische Gotterlehre, 1, p. 312. 


em) ae. 


ATHENA. 267 


as ‘born from ethereal water,’ and sees in it an anticipation 
of a Heraclitean doctrine that light and water were cognate 
elements. But it is hazardous to interpret ancient cult- 
names through the medium of later philosophy, and it is 
first necessary to convince us that Athena was a personifica- 
tion of ether. Scarcely more convincing is Roscher's inter- 
pretation, which is devised to suit his theory about the 
thunder-cloud, that Tritogeneia denotes the goddess sprung 
from the far western watery limit of the world. He adds by 
way of confirmation that thunder-storms in Greece come 
generally from the West. One would like to know, however, 
from what meteorological report this latter observation is 
made: also where the proof is that ‘ Trito’ ever in Greek had 
this fanciful geographical sense, and finally whether there is 
any valid reason for supposing that Athena was the thunder- 
cloud at all; for Roscher’s interpretation of the doubtful 
word only meets the case if this last point is conceded. 
At the best any explanation of Tpiroyévera can only be 
probable; and the most probable appears to be that it was 
a cult-name that spread from Thessaly or Boeotia, Athena 
having been in prehistoric times worshipped in locali- 
ties of those countries by water of that name. For the 
ordinary Greek associated the word usually with this part 
of Greece or with Libya: the Scholiast on Apollonius 
Rhodius mentions three rivers called Triton, one in Boeotia, 
one in Thessaly, and one in Libya, and it was in the Libyan 
that Athena was born !@4, When Pausanias is describing 
the ruined temple of Athena at Alalcomenae in Boeotia he 
mentions as near it the small winter-torrent named Triton, 
and implies that according to the popular belief this stream 
was really the place of her birth, and not the Libyan river ’®°. 
Again, when he speaks of the altar and worship of Zeus 
Aexedtns, ‘the God in child-bed’ at Aliphera in Arcadia, 
he gives the local legend that Athena was born there, ‘and 
they call the fountain Tritonis, appropriating the legend of the 
river Tritonis 1*‘” The first of these passages in Pausanias 
shows that for him, as for Aeschylus 1° 8, ‘the river Triton’ ~ 
meant properly the Libyan stream; and the second implies 


268 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 4q 


that the Arcadians at Aliphera merely appropriated the 
Libyan legend. In this case, as in their legend of the birth 
of Zeus already noticed, we may suppose that, proud of 
their aboriginal antiquity, they were jealous to assert their 
country’s claims to be the birth-place of Hellenic divinities. 
Now the belief which the passages just quoted express that 
Libya was the land with which the name Tputoyévera was 
properly associated, is quite consistent with the theory that 
the term came into vogue first from Boeotia. For it is prima 
facie absurd that Homer should have called the goddess Tpiro- 
yeveta because of her association with a river in Libya: but he 
may well have given her this name because of the celebrity 
of her worship at Alalcomenae, where this was a sacred title 
arising from the stream Triton that flowed near her temple * 
It would appear from Homer that for the North Greeks the 
title “AAaAxowevnis *A@jvn had an especial sanctity, and the 
no less famous worship of Athena Itonia flourished not far 
from this stream”. The fame of these two worships may 
have spread the name Tpiroyévera over the rest of Boeotia, 
and then it may have been carried by the settlers of Cyrene, 
some of whom were mythically connected with the Minyae and 
Thebes, to their new city in Libya; and it is evidently from 
Cyrene that the tale of the Libyan Athena ‘ Trito-born’ was 
diffused over the Greek world. For it is clear from Herodo- 
tus '®? that the colonists found among the Libyans a worship | 
of a goddess who was served by armed maidens and who was 
probably of a warlike character. This and her maidenhood 
suggested to them to identify her with their own goddess, She 
was also apparently a water-divinity like the Syrian Atergatis, 
or—as the Cyrenaic Greeks may have expressed it—a daughter 
of Poseidon and the lake Tritonis*. Whether the lake or 
river already had some Libyan name that recalled to the 


* Cf, the name of a fountain in Arca- 
dia— AAadxopeveias myyn Paus. 8. 12. 7. 

» So closely associated was this par- 
ticular stream with Athena that there 
was an ancient tradition of a city that 
once existed on its banks named ’A@jvau 
—Strabo, 407 oi 8’ ’EXevaiva «at ’AOjvas 
mapa. tov Tpitwva noTapiv (vmedapBavov 


oixeta@a:)— founded, according to the 
legend, by Cecrops, when he ruled 
Boeotia, and afterwards swallowed up, 
This seems like a fiction of the Athen- 
ians who recognized the great antiquity 
of Athena’s worship on the Triton and 
desired to connect their own with that 
river. ¢ Paus. 1. 14. 6. 








x.] ATHENA. 269 


colonists the name ‘ Triton’ familiar to them in their own 
country, or whether, finding there a native goddess akin to 
Athena and worshipped by the water, they at once applied to 
the goddess and the water the names that were associated 
with Alalcomenae, is a question of slight importance. In either 
case the Greco-Libyan Tritogeneia would be an offshoot of 
the Boeotian*. We may even believe that if any country was 
associated with any legend of Athena, the name Tritonis or 
Triton would tend to attach to any lake or river there: as 
for instance we hear of a Tritonis in Pallene, the land of the 
Gigantomachy 1**; and when a city or locality claimed to 
be the birth-place of the goddess, a lake or river of this name 
would probably be found in the neighbourhood, from a desire 
to emulate Alalcomenae. Or the process may have been the 
opposite to this: in many parts of Greece water may have 
been so named from an old word that at any early time had 
disappeared from the ordinary language: then, when the river 
Triton and the worship at Alalcomenae had given rise to 
a celebrated sacred name of Athena, other localities would 
associate themselves with the legend of Athena where this 
common name for water occurred. To the instances already 
given others may be added; the Cretans, according to 
Diodorus Siculus, claimed that Athena was born from Zeus 
in their land in the sources of the river Triton, and was there- 
fore called Tritogeneia, and the historian declares that there 
still existed a temple of this goddess by the fountain of the 
Cretan stream?*!, And we may suppose that the legend of 
Tritogeneia prevailed. at a remote time in Achaea, where the 
city Triteia was associated by the local myth with Triteia 
a priestess of Athena, daughter of a certain Triton ; probably 
the priestess was none other than Athena herself '°?. It may 
be that occasionally the title suggested some connexion with 
Poseidon ; on the Acropolis of Pheneos in Arcadia, Pausanias 
found aruined temple of Athena Tpitwvia, and on the same spot 
a bronze archaic statue of Poseidon Hippios; the legend said 
that the latter had been dedicated by Odysseus, who came to 


® This is more or less the view briefly suggested by C. O. Miiller, Orchomenos, 
P- 355- 


270 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP, 


this neighbourhood in quest of some horses which he had lost 
and which he found again there!®™. Pausanias does not 
suggest that there was any local connexion between the 
worship of Athena and Poseidon. But it is possible that 
the presence of Poseidon’s statue suggested the title of 
Tritonia for the goddess. 

In no part of actual Greek religion was there any connexion 
between Pallas and Poseidon that points to an original affinity 
of character. Where their cults existed side by side, as on 
the Acropolis at Athens, at the deme of Colonus and possibly 
at Sunium, at Troezen, Sparta, Asea, and probably Corinth 1, 
we may suppose that in some of these places there had been 
a final reconciliation of two cults that were often in conflict at 
first. To say that the strife of Athena and Poseidon for the 
Attic land is a symbol of physical changes, an allusion to the 
sea encroaching or the sea receding, is very plausible but 
untrue: we have the analogy of the contest between Helios 
and Poseidon at Corinth, where the physical explanation 
appears even more natural and likely: but we know it to be 
wrong; for in the first place the territory in dispute between 
the two divinities was Acrocorinthus, a height which 
never in the memory of any Greek had been flooded or 
threatened by the sea, and secondly we have abundant 
evidence of the prevalence of a very ancient Helios-cult at 
Corinth, which paled before the later Ionic worship of 
Poseidon. No doubt there were physical reasons why 
Helios and why Poseidon should be worshipped at Corinth ; 
but the Corinthian legend of this strife, the Delphic legend of 
the contest of Apollo and the Python, of Apollo and Heracles 
for the tripod, the Attic legend of the rivalry of Poseidon and 
Athena, and many other similar theomachies, probably all 
contain the same kernel of historical fact, an actual conflict 
of worships—an earlier cherished by the aboriginal men of 
the locality, and a later introduced by the new settlers. 
Athena was the older goddess of Attica, Poseidon the 
great god of the Ionians*: the strife and the friendship 


_ 8 Vide Revue des Etudes grecques, Atitque, R. de Tascher. A view which 
1891, pp. 1-23; Les cultes Joniens en is the exact opposite of that taken in 











oa 








x.] ATHENA. 271 


between the two deities on the Acropolis may have been the 
religious counterpart of the conflict and union of the old 
Attic and Ionic elements of the population. 

It is interesting to note how the compromise with the new 
religion was there carried through. The older cult was too 
strong to suffer displacement: Poseidon ranks below Athena 
in the Attic religion. But he is reconciled and made of kin 
to the Athenians by a sort of adoption. Erechtheus was 
a figure that personified the ancient birth and growth of the 
State; and his cult was the heart of the city’s life. Before 
the Erechtheum was an altar of Poseidon on which men sacri- 
ficed also to Erechtheus. The god also is present in more 
than one vase representation at the mystic birth of Erich- 
thonius, the ‘double’ of Erechtheus, as a sympathetic observer ; 
lastly, by a bold fiction, he is identified with Erechtheus*, and 
the Boutadae, an agricultural clan who had probably already 
been charged with the worship of the land-hero Erechtheus, 
acquired the new priesthood of Poseidon-Erechtheus, which 
they maintained throughout the history of Athens 1743-4, 
Thus, as Erechtheus in the form of Erichthonius is in a 
mystic sense the child of Athena, the worship of Poseidon is 
justified by affiliating him also to the goddess: and we can 
illustrate this process of adoption by the myth about the intro- 
duction of the worship of Asclepios and Dionysos. Moreover 


the text appears to be held by Miss 
Harrison in Mythology and Monuments, 
p. lix: ‘Poseidon had been in all pro- 
bability established in Athens long 
before Athena came. One of the names 
of the great Ionian sea-god was Erech- 
theus,’ cf. Ixxvii, &c. I regret that I 
cannot find her arguments convincing. 
We do not know when Athena came to 
Athens; it is more reasonable to believe 
that there never was an Athens so called 
without Athena ; and the fair interpreta- 
tion of all the evidence is that she 
was there very long before Poseidon 
came. Nor is there any evidence that 
Poseidon was ever called ’Epex@evs in 
his own right or anywhere else except 


at Athens, for the mention in Homer of 
a King Erichthonius, son of Dardanos, 
‘richest of mortal men, who owned 
mares that Boreas loved’ (//. 20. 222), 
is too doubtful to be called evidence. 
If Erechtheus was the old agricultural 
god or hero of Attica, who afterwards 
lent his name to Poseidon, we can 
understand why he should be buried, 
as Dionysos and Adonis and other di- 
vinities of vegetation were; but why 
should he be buried, if he were Posei- 
don? 

® Vide Hesych., ’EpexOeds Mooedayv év 
*AOnvas : Lycophron,158, 431; Apollod. 
3. 15. 1; C.L. A. 1. 387 Mooedann 
"EpexOet, cf. 111. 805 ; Strabo, 9, p. 397. 


272 | GREEK RELIGION. [oHAPs 


the traditions that made Poseidon the father of Theseus and 
of Eumolpus seem to reveal him as an alien and immigrant 
god. For the Eumolpidae were regarded as an alien clan from 
North Greece bringing a new cult; and that there attached to 
this legend the consciousness of a rivalry between Pallas and 
Poseidon is shown in the strange fragment from Euripides’ 
Erechtheus: the Attic king sacrifices his daughter to gain 
the victory over Eumolpus, saying, ‘ Eumolpus shall not plant 
on the city’s foundations, in place of the olive and the golden 
gorgon, the upright trident, nor shall it be crowned with 
chaplets by the Thracian people, and Pallas nowhere be held 
in-honourt* **, 

The joint cult of Pallas and Poseidon at Colonos, ‘the land 
of fair steeds, where Poseidon Hippios and Athena Hippia 
were worshipped at a common altar 1746, is the most noted 
instance in the land of Attica of this union of divinities. 
Welcker curiously* explains this as though she borrowed 
this name from Poseidon, because of that natural connexion 
of hers with water expressed in the name Tpuroyéveva, and as 
though the latter title had been displaced by Hippia. This 
seems in the highest degree improbable: his reasoning might 
lead one to expect that any of Poseidon’s appellatives could 
be casually used for the goddess, whereas this is the only one, 
besides Soter, that they have in common. Again, in the 
myths that explain Athena Hippia, there is rarely a reference 
to Poseidon. We read in Pausanias an Arcadian legend that 
makes no mention of Poseidon, but asserts that she won 
this name because she yoked horses to the chariot in her 
combat with Encelados in the battle of the Giants %*. 
At Olympia, Athena Hippia shared an altar not with 
Poseidon but with Ares Hippios °**. In Attica men said that 
she had taught Erichthonius the use of the chariot >, and that 
though Poseidon, in that trial of their creative power which 
was to decide the issue between the two deities, had produced 
the horse with a stroke of his trident, Athena had yoked him 


® Gotterlehre, 2.291: ‘Hippiaist an p. 62 (Dindf.) & ry ’Axpotdre détiow 
die Stelle der Tritogenia getreten.’ THs Ocod 5 "EpexOeds yéypanra Gpya 
_> Vide Aristides, Panathenatca Schol. éravvev. 








X.] ATHENA. 273 


and bridled him. In the story of Corinth, the land of Poseidon, 
it was not the god but the goddess that bridled Pegasos or 
taught Bellerophon the art, and hence in Corinth she was 
worshipped as xaAuwiris °°. We may believe then that she was 
regarded as powerful in this craft entirely in her own right 
either as a war-goddess or as the most skilled divinity in the 
arts ; and as Poseidon, for independent reasons, was also called 
Hippios, it was natural that their worships should occasionally 
mingle. 

At -Troezen we have the same legend as on the Athenian 
acropolis of the rivalry of the two divinities, and the same 
explanation readily occurs ; the reconciled divinitics received 
common worship, Poseidon as Basileus, and Athena as Polias 
and Sthenias 7». The titles themselves seem to show that the 
whole story is innocent of any physical symbolism, and has 
merely a political and historical sense. The association of 
Athena ’Ayopaia and Tocedév ’Acpddios* in the temple at 
Sparta ‘74, and of Athena Soteira and Poseidon in the pre- 
historic shrine on Mount Boreion near Asea in Arcadia! °. 
is obviously not based on natural identity or affinity of 
character; and in the monuments to be noticed later which 
bring Poseidon and Athena together, or which represent 
the latter with some badge that alludes to the water, no 
recondite physical reference need be sought ; these representa- 
tions may simply allude to the fact that Athena was some- 
times called Tritogeneia, that she was sometimes worshipped 
in the islands and by maritime peoples, and that her temple 
Stood sometimes on the coast, or that her worship occasionally 
displaced or was reconciled with the cult of the sea-divinities. 

If there had been any general sense of a natural affinity 
between Athena and Poseidon, it would have been strange 
that neither in the temple nor the precincts of the temple of 
the sea-god at Corinth, the most famed place of his worship 


* Mentioned by Pausanias among 
other temples held in common at Sparta 
by divinities who had no close natural 
affinity one with the other. Such com- 
mon temple-holdings may often be ex- 
plained by a merely local coincidence of 


VOL. I. 


worship or by the dedication of a deity’s 
statue for some special occasion in the 
temple of another, and have too often 
been used to prove this or that physical 
theory about the origin of Greek di- 
vinities. 


274 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP, 


in Greece, where common reverence was paid to so many 
divinities of Poseidon’s circle, is there any mention of Athena 
under any name®*. 

Other cult-names, found in different centres of her worship, 
that have been supposed to have had originally a physical 
sense, are ’Adéa, ‘EAAwris, "OpOadpiris, and “Oyya. The wor- 
ship of Athena Alea was in high repute in Arcadia'®; her 
temple at Tegea was built and embellished with sculpture 
by Scopas, and remains of great worth have in recent years 
been discovered there. We hear of a monument erected to 
her near Amyclae, and of her shrines at Mantinea and Alea; — 
_and Pausanias gives many instances of the respect paid to her 
asylum. | 

The usual explanation of the word is that it means mild — 
warmth, as dAéa is used for a sunny corridor, and that it was — 
derived from a root that is found in efAy; but this doubtful 
derivation would only have weight if we found anything in © 
the rites or legends of Athene ’Adéa that corresponded to this 
conception. As regards the rites, we know nothing except that — 
she was served by a boy-priest, and that games called ’Adeaia — 
were held in her honour. But the legend of Auge Heracles © 
and Telephos is connected partly with Athena Alea, and is sup- — 
posed by Welcker and Preller to contain some allusion to the 
powers of light. This physical interpretation, however, is in 
the highest degree doubtful and confused, and as usual is dis- — 
covered by etymological speculation on names; and the only © 
connexion between Athena and this Arcadian legend of the 
birth, exposure, and migration of Telephos is the fact that 
Auge was her priestess and incurred her wrath by bearing © 
a son in her temple. Now, granting that possibly some — 
forgotten solar or astral meaning lies hidden in the legend, 
we can easily see how Athena could be brought into the 
myth about these personages without having any part in 
this physical symbolism. Telephos, whatever his original 
function may have been, came to be regarded at an early 
time as a national hero, the leader of an Arcadian migration: 
it was necessary then that he should be patronized in some 


® Vide Paus. 2. chs. 1 and 2. 











x.] ATHENA. 275 


way by one of the great goddesses of Arcadia, and so he 
was born in the temple of Athena Alea. At any rate, it 
is quite clear that the Arcadians in historical times did not 
consciously associate her with divinities of the sun or the 
moon or stars. In her own temple, which Pausanias describes, 
they grouped her with Asclepios and Hygieia, whose statues, 
carved by Scopas, stood close by the temple-image?8 «. 
Among all the passages in Pausanias and other writers that 
refer to her this is the only one that gives us any clue as to 
the character of Athena Alea; for it is clear that the goddess 
is regarded as having some relation with the divinities of 
health, and it may be that the title expressed this idea®. 
From the same point of view we may with some probability 
explain her relations with Auge; it may well be that the 
latter was more than a mere daughter of the ancient royal 
house at Tegea, and was in fact an aboriginal goddess of 
Arcadia, connected possibly with Artemis. But why, because 
the word means in some sense ‘light, was she necessarily 
the moon? It is true that she was put into a boat by a 
ruthless parent and sent over the sea, and perhaps savages 
living near the sea have imagined that something like this 
happens to the moon. But if a moon-goddess, why was 
Auge identified with a goddess of child-birth, and why did 
her most ancient idol possess the form of a kneeling woman 
supposed to be in the act of bringing-forth, so that the Tegeatae 
named Eileithyia Atyn ev yévao.”? Very uncouth statues 
have been found a few years ago of this kneeling divinity ¢, 
and if one such image was at any early period dedicated in the 
temple of Athena, this dedication, and the form of the image, 
_ and the desire to affiliate Telephos to some ancient goddess 

of the land, may have given rise to the aetiological myth 
_ of Auge bearing Telephos in the temple of Athena’. And 


_* Or ’AAéa may have no character- © Vide Eileithyia, p. 614, note b. 

istic sense at all: Aleos was an abor- ¢ The myth in its further course may 
iginal hero of this locality, and Athene also be aetiological : the Arcadian mi- 
may have taken his name in order to gration bears the worship of Auge across 
adopt him and his children; vide Paus. the sea to Mysia, and the myth tries to 
(8. 4. account for Auge traversing the sea, 
> Paus. 8. 48, 5. Vide Aphrodite-chapter, p. 638, note a. 


T 2 


276 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP, 


the goddess of child-birth would naturally be regarded as 
a ministrant of Athena Alea interpreted as Athena ‘Yyée.a, 
For some interpreters of Greek religion, a goddess of child- 
birth is inevitably also a moon-goddess. But in the case of 
Auge, a cautious person might abide by the lower and 
terrestrial sense, which has the advantage of being vouched 
for by some ancient authority. At least we are safe in saying 
that Athena Alea, so far as she is known to us, reveals none 
of the traits of a goddess of light. 

Are these found in her worship. as ‘EAA@ris at Corinth, 
where under this name she was honoured with a torch-race*°*”? 
It has been thought by Welcker* to belong to the same root 
as Eldevia, or ElAnvia, a name attached to Athena at Meta- 
pontum in a worship connected by legend with Epeios or 
Philoctetes. The cult of Hellotis appears to have existed also 
at Marathon, and we might think that the epithet was here 
derived from the marshes’. Another explanation connects 
these cult-names with the root of oéAas and efAn, denoting 
warmth and light, as we hear of torches in the ritual of 
Athena Hellotis. The explanations given by the scholiast 
on Pindar *°* are instructive. He tells us that the games 
“EAAotia were held at Corinth in honour of Athena Hellotis, 
and that a torch-race formed part of them; for when the 
Dorians took Corinth, a maiden named Hellotis took refuge 
in Athena’s temple ; the conquerors set fire to it and she 
perished in the flames; the angry goddess sent a pestilence 
and demanded a new temple and propitiation. Hence 
originated the temple and games to Athena Hellotis. We 
have here the common process of a myth being fashioned to 
explain a name or rite. The scholiast suggests the alternative 
explanation that the worship came-from the marshes of 
Marathon. Others referred it to the legend that Bellerophon | 
captured (é\eiv) Pegasus near this temple at Corinth. | 

The name EiAevia is no less mysterious”!. It appears in 
the present text of Aristotle in the form of “EAAnvia, a very 
intelligible epithet of the Hellenic goddess; but this must be 
due to a change made by a later copyist who found the word 
® Welcker, Griechische Gotterlehre, 1. p. 307. > Cf. ’Adpotirn év Edous. — 


s.] ATHENA. ai7 


unintelligible as Aristotle wrote it, for Aristotles own 
explanation proves that he wrote EiAevia or EiAnvia, since he 
derives it from «tAew or eiAetoOau in the sense of being cooped 
up in a place, and he tells a story about Epeios being kept in 
Metapontum against his will and founding the temple. The 
same explanation of EiAevia and much the same legend are 
given by the author of the Etymologicum Magnum, quoting 
from Lycophron, except that Philoctetes is the founder in this 
version. | 

One thing that is made quite clear from all this is that the 
Greeks themselves were quite ignorant of the meaning of these 
words: so that it cannot help us to answer in the affirmative 
the more important question whether in any historic period of 
Greek religion Athena was regarded as a light-divinity. Nor 
can it much increase our belief that she had originally some- 
thing to do with the celestial lights. For even if the deriva- 
tion from céAas were sure, the words may refer to the fire kept 
burning in her temple, or to the use of fire in the handicrafts. 
The temple of EiAevia at Metapontum seems to have been 
consecrated to the goddess of the arts, the legend recording 
that Epeios, the builder of the Trojan horse, raised it to 
‘propitiate Athena when she demanded from him the imple- 
ments of his work. The use and attribute of fire in some way 
connects her with her fellow-craftsman Hephaestos ; to find 
for it any non-terrestrial sense, we must travel beyond the 
limits of historic Greek religion. The most important of 
the torch-races at Athens were those run in honour of 
Prometheus Hephaestos and Athena, the divinities of the 
arts being honoured thus in the same fashion. It is safest, 
then, to consider that the fire of Athena refers usually to her 
arts or to her ritual*. Or Athena might possibly have 
acquired this name ‘EAAwris by taking over the ritual of some 
sun-worship indigenous in Corinth; and thus the name, even 
if we were convinced that it designated the goddess of light 


® Note the passage in Aristides(Dind. Rhodians in Pindar shows: cf. Plutarch 
I, p. 50): wal phy wal Eumupds ye Gua  Quaest. Graec. 3, the priestess of Athena 
"AOnva Kal “Hpatorw yevdpevos (Aidvv- called émexxavortpia, bri Tovetrar Tas 
gos). The offerings to Athena were  Ovaias xal iepoupyias drorporaious. 
usually éumupa, as the legend about the’ 


278 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


and heat, need not have arisen from anything proper to the 
character of the goddess. But it is quite possibly non- 
Hellenic. Athenaeus and the author of the E¢tymologicum 
Magnum connect the name and the feast with Europa, and 
the latter writer suggests that a Phoenician name éddoria, sig- 
nifying maiden, is the source of the word; and there seems some 
force in Baethgen’s theory* that Athena ‘EAAwris represents 
the Syro-Arabian goddess Allat, the Phoenician Elloti, who 
is elsewhere identified with Athena. Non-Hellenic elements 
in the early religion of Corinth have already been noted ; 
possibly the story of the maiden burnt alive in the temple 
preserves a vague reminiscence of human sacrifice by fire in 
the worship of Athena Hellotis, a rite derivable from Moloch- 
worship. 

The title “Auapia, which was once attached to Athena in 
Achaea, may have been derived from the association of her 
worship with Zeus ’Aydpios, and need not in the first 
instance have been applied to her as a goddess of the bright 
sky. Even as an appellative of Zeus the term seems to have 
lost its physical sense at a comparatively early period ». 

Other arguments for interpreting Athena as originally a 
goddess of the light, or of the moon, are slender enough. The 
curious view attributed to Aristotle, that she was a personal 
form of the moon, appears also ina passage, that is scarcely 
meant to be taken seriously, in Plutarch’s rep! rod tpoodrov THs 
ZeAjuns*. This only illustrates what any philosopher might 
possibly say, and uncritical physical explanations of the per- 
sonages of the Greek religion were common enough among the 
Stoics. According to Suidas the same view was held by the 
historian Istrus 1°" on the ground of some connexion between 
Athena and the Attic month, Tprroyévesa being connected 
with the third day of the month, and with the three phases of 
the moon; but no serious argument could be derived from 
such philology. | 

Of still less value for the purpose of this theory are the 
arguments drawn from the worship of Athena Ofviepxys at 


* Bettrage zur semit. Religionsgeschichte, Pp. 59. > Vide Zeus *’, p. 43. 
© P. 938 b SeAnvny ’AGnvay Acyouévny Kal odcar. 





- the sun or moon. 


X.] ATHENA. 279 


Argos and ’O¢@aApiris at Sparta, epithets referring to the 
‘keen-eyed’ goddess**:*4, The legends about these cults 
show no trace of any belief that the ‘eye’ was the eye of 
The piercing brightness of the eye is 
part of the purely human conception of the goddess; and 
has nothing more to do with celestial phenomena than has 
the languishing eye of Aphrodite. And it is probable that 
"Opdadpiris and ’O€vdepxis are cult-names derived from the 
appearance of the idols, which may have had the same yAavuka 
éupara as were seen in an archaic statue of Athena at Athens. 
The light-blue flashing eye seemed to Cicero to belong to the 
artistic ideal of Minerva®*. The explanatory legends would 
arise naturally from the cult-names themselves. 

Actual evidence then of this lunar theory from ritual and 
worship does not exist*; and the archaeological facts that 
Welcker quotes in support of it are quite trifling : for instance, 
a black-figured vase, on which Athena is depicted wearing 
a peplos embellished with stars, or certain coins of Athens 
showing the head of Pallas on the reverse and the ow! with 
the crescent-moon. But the star pattern on the peplos is 
4 mere mechanical device, and the crescent with the owl 
tells us nothing about the character of the Pallas on the other 
side of the coin, and may be merely a symbol of the bird of 
night. To say that it expresses the belief that Pallas was the 
moon-goddess? is to contradict all the overwhelming negative 
evidence derived from the monuments and the literature of 
the fifth century. 

It may be asked, why did this belief arise in certain later 
writers of antiquity, if there was nothing in native Greek 
literature cult or art to support it? It might naturally 
have arisen from the @eoxpacia of the last three centuries 


® Some conclusions have been drawn 
from the identity which two scholiasts 
assert (Schol. //, 2. 722; Schol. Soph. 
Phil. 194, 1326) of Athena and Chryse 
the Lemnian goddess. But Chryse, in 
spite of her name, is not proved to have 
been a moon-divinity ; and in any case 
she may have been a foreign goddess, 


perhaps resembling Athena only in her 
warlike or maidenly character. 

» This view of Welcker’s about the 
meaning of the crescent on Attic coins 
has not yet been wholly abandoned ; 
M. Svoronos in the Bull. Corr. Hell. 
1894, p. 121, maintains it still, but 
without any criticism. 


280 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP, 


B.C., that most unscientific tendency in Greek theory, and 
possibly from the confusion of Athena with Isis. Plutarch @ 
speaks of the temple of Athena in Sais, #v cal "low vouicove, 
and the goddess at Sais seems to have been conspicuous for 
her wisdom and purity. Now Isis was sometimes regarded 
as the goddess of the lower world, but more often as a 
moon-goddess, and Plutarch explains her dydAyara Kepaoddpa 
in reference to the moon, and this lunar aspect of her is very 
obvious in the fervid descriptions of Apuleius’. 

It is interesting to read Eusebius’ condemnation ® of the 
theorists of his day, who were always translating mythic 
personages into physical facts, BeBiacpévov Kad odk adnO7n 
Tov pvOwY Tov KaALwTLCpdY EelonynodpevoL. 

The stronghold of the physical theory has always been 
the two myths of the birth of Athena and the slaying of 
the Gorgon. The treatise of the Stoic Diogenes Babylonius 
de Minerva, in which according to Cicero he gave a phy- 
siological explanation of the birth, separating it from 
myth“, has not come down to us. We need regret it only 
because it might have been interesting to see whether he 
was more successful in the ‘ physiology’ of this matter than 
modern writers have been® What chiefly puzzles the 
unprepossessed inquirer, as Mr. Lang has observed, is the 
pliancy with which the myth of the birth can be adapted 
to suit many different ‘interpretations. Whether Athena is 
regarded as the thunder or the lightning, the aether or 
the dawn, she can leap from the head of Zeus with equal 
appropriateness. But let any one take whichever he pleases 
of these various hypotheses and then work it out rigorously 
through point to point of the myth, and he will stumble 
on hopeless inconsistencies, 

Now if, without any hypothesis to start with, one looks at 
the descriptions of the birth in the ancient poets and mytho- 


* De Isid. et Ostr. § 9. who says that Zeus hid the unborn 
> Metam. 11. 3. Athena in a cloud and then split it 
© Pracp. Ev. 2. 16. open with the lightning, is intended also 
° De Nat. Deor. 1. 15, 41. no doubt to express a physical symbo- 


° The form of the myth given by _ lism. 
Aristocles (Schol. Pind. O/. 7. 66), 


; 
} 





X.] ATHENA. 281 


graphers, one is soon assured that they are not conscious of 
using language that could be taken to convey any allusion to 
a thunderstorm or to any other of the striking phenomena 
of nature. If we notice first the more embellished recitals 
of the great event, we find some fervid lines in the Homeric 
hymn to Athena: she is born from the holy head of 
Zeus ‘holding the golden-gleaming weapons of war’; the 
gods stand astonished ‘as she springs from the immortal head 
brandishing her keen spear’; heaven and earth are troubled, 
the sea rises up like a wall, and the sun stays in his course: 
until she lays aside from her shoulders the godlike weapons, 
and Zeus rejoices. The poet does not mention thunder, which 
would be a strange omission if he were trying to give a highly 
imaginative picture of a thunderstorm in personal metaphor. 
Of far higher poetry is Pindar’s terse narrative, ‘ when through 
Hephaestus’ arts and his bronze-bound axe, Athena sprang 
down the crest of her father’s head, and shouted with an 
exceeding great cry, and heaven and mother earth shuddered 
before her’ (O/. 7. 38). 

This is full of Pindaric splendour ; but where is the remotest 
allusion to a phenomenon of nature, unless whenever a deity 
is said to cry aloud with an exceeding great cry, the speaker 
must be supposed to mean only that it thundered? Later on 
Pindar records the legend that at the goddess’ birth Zeus 
snowed gold upon the Rhodians, who placed the miracle in 
their island and may well have explained their prosperity 
by saying that Zeus distributed largesse on the occasion. 
A lost poem of Stesichorus treated of this theme, as we 
are told by a scholiast on Apollonius Rhodius (1. 1310) that 
Stesichorus was the first who spoke of Athena springing in 
full panoply from the head of Zeus*. 

In Lucian’s account the new-born goddess ‘leaps and 
dances a war-dance and shakes her shield, and brandishes 
her spear, and is filled with ecstasy ?,’ but there is no accom- 
paniment of a storm. 

Even Philostratos, in his turgid account of the picture of 


® The scholiast was either ignorant of the poem of ‘Homer,’ or considered 
it as a later work, b @e@y Arddroyo, 8. 


282 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


the ’A@nvas yovai*, fond as he is of finding remote allusions in 
his subjects and of searching after effective imagery, gives us 
hardly any meteorological phrases. He says, indeed, that — 
her panoply was like the rainbow, but he fails to discover the 
secret. All the divinities are bidden to attend the birth, even 
the rivers and the nymphs, and they all stand astonished : 
Zeus pants with pleasure: even Hera shows no indignation. 

In the dry account of Apollodorus there is clearly no 
symbolism intended. 

I have dwelt at some length on this absence of any inten- 
tional second meaning in these accounts, because this is not 
made sufficiently clear in Preller and Roscher’s comments. 
In the frequent artistic representations of the scene a physical 
symbolism is still less easy to discover: and if we raise a ques- 
tion about the imagination of the average Greek, there is not 
the faintest sign that he ever associated a thunder-storm 
when it occurred, or the blue sky when the weather cleared, 
with Athena or Athena’s birth. 

It may be admitted then that these poetical descriptions 
do not consciously express the physical fact to which they 
have been supposed to allude. Therefore, to make them serve 
Preller and Roscher’s theory, we must regard their highly 
wrought phrases as mere survivals of an ancient poetical 
symbolic diction that did more clearly express it. 

But what traces are there of any primitive account con- 
taining this symbolism and becoming stereotyped? Homer 
knew that Zeus was the sole parent, but he does not dwell on 
the occurrence. Hesiod gives a rather full narrative which 
will be noticed in detail directly, and which is altogether 
destitute of the imagery of the Pindaric ode or the Homeric — 
hymn: there is no reference to the axe of Prometheus or of 
Hephaestos, none to the leaping forth of the goddess in full 
armour and with ‘an exceeding loud cry.” In fact the sym- 
bolical language on which modern theorists partly rely is not 
found before the date of the Homeric hymn. Have we any 
right, then, to say that the phrases in that hymn or in the 
Pindaric ode are a survival of an older symbolism, or that 


° Imagines, 2. 27. 


ee ae ee, a ee SN ee ee ee ee 





LTTE CaN OT ee I PRT a ee eee ee 





tye | - ATHENA. 283 


these poets were graced with a special revelation? It is more 
natural to say that, as the Greek imagination dwelt on the 
great epiphany of Athena, the poets tended to embellish it 
with the richest phraseology, to represent it as a great cosmic 
incident in which the powers of heaven and earth were 
concerned. 

The form in which Hesiod® presents the myth is the most 
instructive. He begins with the story of Zeus swallowing 
Metis, who is described merely as mAciota Oedv eldviav ide 
OvntGv avOpomwv. In this Zeus was following the advice of 
Ouranos and Gaea, who warned him that Metis, who was 
then pregnant with Pallas, would bear after her a son who 
would be king over gods and men. Then Zeus, having per- 
suaded Maris ‘ by means of subtle words, deposited her in his 
maw. It seems that Hesiod is alluding to some story that 
Zeus, by means of his subtle words, persuaded Metis to 
assume some form convenient for swallowing. According to 
a later legend she complacently took the shape of a fly. 
We hear nothing further of Metis, but Pallas Athena 
developed and sprang out through Zeus’s head, no doubt 
in the older story without her weapons. 

Now this very naive, and, on the face of it, primitive 
recital, is the great stumbling-block in the way of such 
theories as Preller’s and Roscher’s; for no sane interpreter 
can find any phenomenon in the natural world corresponding 
to this drama of the primeval ways of Greek providence. 
And only a person ignorant of primitive folk-lore would 
maintain the Hesiodic version to be later than that of the 
Homeric hymn and the Pindaric ode. The swallowing story 
is a yeu desprit of very savage imagination”, and comes from 
a period older than the Olympian religion. But it does not 
follow that in the very oldest form of this particular Greek 
story Zeus swallowed Metis without a motive, or for no 
other reason than because it was such an act as might be 
expected from a savage god. The clue to a possible explana- 
tion of the growth of this strange tale is given by the word 


® Theog. 886-goo. . 
» Vide Mr. Lang’s chapter in Custom and Myth on Cronos, p. 53. 


284 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


Metis. In what sense was this term used? As regards 
Hesiod himself, it is obvious that this name, personal as it 
is, connoted the abstract sense of thought, as he calls her 

—‘the most knowing of the gods and men.’ But Preller refuses 
to believe that this was the original meaning, partly because 
the primitive language does not deal with philosophic or 
abstract terms, and the physical and concrete precede the 
immaterial and abstract. This latter dictum may be true of 
the gradual human development from the beginning of time; 
but to apply it off-hand to the earliest period of Greek life, 
and to maintain that, by the time that the Greeks had become 
a distinct race, their ideas and speech were still confined to 
the range of the physical and concrete, is hazardous enough. 
The data are of course very scanty, but what there is should 
be allowed its weight. It is a mistake to suppose that 
in the mythology of primitive or savage people one must 
not expect any metaphysical or abstract idea underlying 
the personification ; instances are rare, but are forthcoming. 
A very early pre-Homeric Greek was capable of imagining a 
being named ‘Counsel’ or ‘ Wisdom,’ as he was of imagining 
a deity called Themis or Charis or Nemesis. The various 
stages in this process in Greek religion of personifying ab- 
stractions may be afterwards noted. For the present the 
undoubted antiquity of Themis is sufficient proof that to 
the pre-Homeric Greek Mijris might be a vague being whose 
name meant little more than Thought *. 

In the myths that mention her, it is as Thought or Counsel 
that she appears and operates; and Preller’s belief that in 
the earliest story she is a purely physical being, a divinity of 
the water, so that after all it may be interpreted as a cloud- 
myth or sky-myth, is quite baseless. In the ancient records 
she is nowhere said to be an Oceanid ; and we have no right 
to say that she is a being of this element because there is 
a sea-nymph called by the adjectival name ’lévia, ‘ the knowing 
one. The fact that in this earliest and half-savage form of 


“ Perhaps originally a Ge-Metis, as wisdom. In Hesiod it is Gaea who 
we hear of a Ge-Themis: the earth as helps Zeus against Cronos; in Apollo- 
the fount of oracles is the source of  dorus (1. 2, 1) it is Metis. 





x.] | ATHENA. 285 


the legend Athena is the daughter of Metis is a sign that for 
these primitive mythopoeic Greeks their goddess was no mere 
personification of a part of nature, but was already invested 
with a moral and mental character, and especially with the 
non-physical quality of wisdom ; and of course her worship had 
long been in vogue, before it occurred to them to tell a myth 
about her origin. Again, her birth is assisted by Prometheus 
or Hephaestos ; if this detail belongs to the first period of the 
story we have another indication that Athena was already 
a goddess of the arts of life as she was associated with these 
divine artists. Lastly, the swallowing of Metis, inexplicable 
on any physical theory of the ’A@nvas yovat can be possibly 
explained from the other point of view. Suppose that Athena 
was already, before this story grew, the chief goddess of 
wisdom, as in the most primitive legends she always appears 
to be: and was also the maiden-goddess of war, averse to 
love: also the goddess that protected the father-right rather 
than the mother-right: and that then like all the other 
Olympians, whatever autonomy each one of them may have 
once enjoyed, she had to be brought into some relation with 
Zeus. Then upon these pre-existing ideas the Greek imagina- 
tion may have worked thus: she has abundant Metis, and is 
the daughter of Metis; she has all the powers of Zeus, and is 
the very daughter of him ; and she has no feminine weakness, . 
and inclines rather to the father than the mother ; therefore 
she was not born in the ordinary way; this might have 
been if Zeus swallowed her mother. Afterwards, as this 
swallowing-story gained ground, it received a new explana- 
tion, namely, that Zeus swallowed Metis to prevent her 
bearing any more children, as a son would else be born 
stronger than he. It seems very unlikely that this prophecy 
was part of the original story, leading up to the swallowing 
process ; for there would have been other and easier ways of 
cutting short the child-bearing career of Metis. But if the 
fact of Zeus swallowing her was already fixed in the imagina- 
tion, then the story of the prophecy, which was floating about 
the paths of various myths, would do passably well as an 
explanation. It could be taken over from the Cronos-legend 


286 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP, 


where it was much more in place, and it was used again in the 
drama of Peleus and Thetis, where it was perhaps an epic 
addition to the Thessalian myth which only told of their 
national hero winning Thetis on his own account ®. 

The above explanation is of course only given as a 
hypothesis: but it has the advantage over the other of 
being suggested by the most ancient form of the legend 
and the most ancient ideas concerning the goddess. 

The other myth that is supposed to prove that Athena was 
originally some physical power is the Gorgon-myth. We 
need not raise the question whether the ordinary Greek, 
when telling this story, was aware of its hidden physical 
meaning, or had the moon or the thunder-cloud in his mind ; 
for I believe no theorist has asserted or implied this. It is 
only asserted and generally believed that the story in pre- 
historic times had a meaning asa nature-myth. And Roscher 
maintains that the legend of the slaying of Medusa tells us of 
something which the primitive Greek believed to have hap- 
pened to the thunder-cloud, and Preller thinks that it conveys 
to us some ancient opinion about the moon, though ‘not the 
moon in its ordinary significance”. We may admit or reject 
any of those physical theories, without modifying our view 
concerning the original nature of Pallas Athena. For there 
is no proof at all derivable from the legend as given in the 
most ancient authorities that she is essentially and directly 
concerned with the slaying of Medusa. Hesiod is our first 
authority, and he does not mention Athena’s presence or 
participation in the feat; nor did she appear in the represen- 
tations of Medusa’s death on the chest of Cypselus and the 
throne of Bathycles ; though some of the earliest vases show 
her standing behind Perseus as he flies. Perseus is one of 
her favourite heroes, and she may be there merely to encourage 
him, as she is interested in all heroic achievements. In fact, 
the story of her interest in Medusa’s death, and of her 


* Vide Mannhardt, Wald- und Feld- possible that in some of the late pic- 


kulte, 2. p. 46. turesque representations of the Gorgon’s 

> Clemens Alexandrinus, Strom. 5. head, the face is meant to have some 
676, also thought that theGorgon meant _ faint resemblance to the face of the 
the moon, and so did Plutarch. It is moon. 


a4 ATHENA. 287 


a | 


. receiving the head from Perseus, is very probably an aetio- 
logical myth, invented to explain her wearing the Gorgoneum 
| as a badge. Prof. Furtwangler, in his excellent article in 
Roscher’s Lexicon on the types of the Gorgoneum in art, 
. mentions the fact that this does not strictly appear in monu- 
| ments earlier than the seventh century, and he doubts whether 
there is any earlier literary evidence than this that Athena 
wore it as a badge, or that it was ever used as an emblem 
of terror before the seventh century. For he regards the two 
passages in the //zad, the one in Bk. 11. lines 35-36, where 
the Gorgoneum is mentioned on Agamemnon's shield *, the 
other in 5. 741, where it is described as on the aegis of Athene, 
as interpolations though of comparatively early date. There 
| are other reasons besides those which he urges against the 
claim of these passages to belong to the earliest form of 
the poem”. Still the passage in the eleventh book must have 
been worked into the //zad before the construction of the 
-chest_of Cypselus, for the artist who carved the figure of 
Agamemnon on this work appears to have been inspired by 
the Homeric description. In any case the view I have put 
forward about the reason of Athena’s association with Medusa 
is tenable, for we have evidence that the Gorgoneum was used 
as an emblem of terror and was worn by Athena at least 
as early as the seventh century B.c. And we have no trace 
of any earlier legend or cult in which Athena was called 
Topyopdvos or Topyéms or brought into essential connexion 
with Medusa before she could have begun to wear her head 
as a badge on her breast. 

That the Gorgon was originally merely the double of Athena 
herself, personifying the darker side of her character, is a view 
held by O. Jahn® and recently maintained by Dr. Mayer 4, 
It rests on no other evidence than that Athena and Gorgo 
have some relations with Poseidon, and that Athena was once 
possibly called Topyé—namely, in a passage in the Helene ° of 
Euripides, 1315, of which the reading has been doubted. 





® Topyw BAooupams tatepavwro, Aei- ©¢ Annal, dell Instit. 1851, p. 171. 
voy Sepxopévn, wept 5¢ Acids re SdBos Te. 4 Die Giganten, p. 190. 
> Vide Bergk, Lzteraturgeschichte, © a 8 éyxe: Topya mavondos. 


p- 600, 





288 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


If the reading were proved sound, we could regard the 
word as an abbreviation of Topyéms ; or we could say that 
the badge has been put for the goddess, as in the fragment 
quoted above from the Lvechtheus. Yopyéms would be a 
natural epithet of the goddess who wore the Gorgon’s head, 
which was originally given her by the early artists probably 
as an emblem of terror, because she was pre-eminently the 
war-goddess and the guardian of the city walls, on which 
similar emblems were sometimes hung. Thus we may 
explain the story that was told by the men of Tegea, a 
favourite city of the goddess, that Athena had given to their 
ancient king, the son of Aleos, a lock of Medusa’s hair, 
whereby the city became impregnable?. 

The epithet Topyoddvos, which was never a cult-title, a 
the legend, recorded by Euripides” and not known to be 
earlier than the fifth century, that Athena herself had slain 
the Gorgon, might naturally have arisen from the constant 
occurrence of the Gorgoneum on her breast, and from the 
patriotic pride of the Athenians who desired to exalt the fame 
of their goddess and ignored the Argive legend of Perseus. 
A vase-painting of the fifth century°® has perhaps been rightly 
interpreted by Heydemann as the pursuit of Medusa by 
Athena. Another legend which obviously arose from the 
mere artistic representation said that Athena’s anger was 
kindled against Medusa because the goddess was jealous of 
her beauty ; but this story could not be earlier than the latter 
part of the fourth century, when Medusa’s countenance had 
become invested with an ideal beauty, and was no longer an 
image of mere physical terror. 

The aegis of Athena is another badge that has been 
supposed to allude to the thunder-cloud, but reasons have 
already been given against this supposition 4, and in favour 
of the belief that in the Athena-cult it was regarded merely 
as a battle-charm, and was a sacred object that was used for 
the purification of temples and as an aid to childbirth ®. 


* Roscher interprets this as a kind of © Lenormant, Ziite Cér. 1. 75, and 
‘thunder-magic’: vide Paus. 8. 47, 5. Arch, Zeit. 1868, p. 6. 
b Vide Eur. Jon 987. 4 Vide Zeus-chapter, pp. 97-100. 


Ae oP Ea ee Fey PET iy OR Re eel OE me he aT Pe Ee eee umn ee ye ey Ne as 


: 
: 


¥.] ATHENA. 289 


There appears, then, no evidence to convince us that Athena 
was ever worshipped merely as a nature-goddess, personifying 
or controlling a special part of the physical world. But it is 
also evident that at Athens she came into some contact with 
the earth-goddess, and acquired certain functions as a deity 
of vegetation. For in the first place, the epithets "AyAavpos ® 
and ITdvdpocos were sometimes attached to her 7°* 769, These 
are also the names of the daughters of Cecrops, who had 
been appointed to nurse the infant Erichthonios: the earth 
was his mother, and “AyAavpos and I[ldvdpocos are natural 
descriptive titles of the earth-goddess, who certainly enjoyed 
an ancient worship on the Acropolis of Athens. To reconcile 
her cult with Athena’s, it may well have happened that the 
latter goddess was given two of her titles, and there is no 
reason to say that originally Pandrosos and Athena were 
the same. These daughters of Cecrops, whether originally 
nymphs of the earth or forms of the earth-goddess, are 
brought into religious connexion with Athena in more ways 
than one. The Arrhephori or Hersephori’, the maidens 
trained in the service of Athena, and living near the temple of 
Athena Polias, ministered to her as well as to Pandrosos *°* 
And in the sacred rite which they performed for Athena, to 
whom they brought a mysterious offering by an underground 
passage from the temple of Aphrodite év Kijmors °, the fruits of 
the earth appear to have been in some way consecrated to 
her 724, In the shrine of Aglauros on the Acropolis, the 
Athenian ephebi took the oath of loyalty to the state, and 
thus the cult of Aglauros mingled with the city-cult of 
Athena Polias*. And the curious ritualistic law mentioned 





® It is sometimes doubted whether the 
word is “AyAavpos or “Aypavdos: both 
names could equally well refer to a god- 
dess or nymph of vegetation ; but there 
seems better authority for “AyAaupos, as 
the inscriptions only give this form: 
vide Corp. Ins. Gr. 7716, 7718, but 
cf. Steph. Byz. ’Aypavan Spos tis 
"EpexOnidos pags. 

> Miss Harrison’s view expressed in 
the Hellenic Journal of 1891, p. 351, 


VOL. :e 


that Herse is an unreal] personage de- 
veloped from the title of the ‘Epanpdpo., 
is probable enough. 

© In Mythology and Monuments of 
Athens (Harrison and Verrall, pp. xxxiv, 
XXxxv) it is suggested, for good reasons, 
that the sacred things which the maidens 
carried in the box were little images of 
the young of animals (€po7)—offerings 
to the earth-goddess to secure fertility. 

4 Different forms of the oath or 


290 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP, 


by Harpocration %*” illustrates once more the close connexion 
between Athena and the earth-goddess or the earth-nymph : 
‘if any one sacrifices an ox to Athena, it is necessary also to 
sacrifice a sheep to Pandora, and this sacrifice was called an 
éxifo.ov. Pandora was a title of the earth-goddess ; but 
Bekker proposes the reading Havipdo for Havéepq, which is 
a probable emendation, for we have no other mention of 
Pandora in Athena’s cult, and according to Aristophanes *° ? 
the sacrifice to Pandora would be the first rather than the 
second act in ritual. This double offering of oxen and sheep 
on the Acropolis is mentioned in the //zad, and appears as 
_ part of the Panathenaic festival on the frieze of the Parthenon. 

The bull and the cow, sheep, swine and goat are animals 
naturally offered to the agricultural goddess, and these were 
all sacrificed to Athena, the goat being usually tabooed but 
chosen as an exceptional victim for her annual sacrifice on 
the Acropolis’. The familiar serpent of Athena, occasion- 
ally identified with Erechtheus, may be supposed to have 
been a symbol of the ancient earth-goddess, whose worship 
was merged in that of Athena; and we may support this view 
by the legend of the Kvxpetdys épis, the serpent that was 
driven out of Salamis and entered the service of Demeter, 
the later form of Gaia 

These then are some of the reasons for supposing that the 
worship of Athena at a very early date absorbed many of the 
rites and ideas proper to the very ancient worship of Gaia in 
Attica’; and this could happen without an original affinity 
of nature existing between the two goddesses but through 


different parts of it are given by Pollux 
and by Plutarch®°*. According to the 
former the formula was, ‘I will not dis- 
grace the arms entrusted me, I will not 
desert my comrade, I will defend the 
temples and holy things of the land alone 
and with others, I will obey the estab- 
lished ordinances, . Plutarch’s 
formula includes some curious words 
referring to the maintenance of agricul- 
ture, an oath appropriate enough in the 
worship of the earth-goddess. 

* Strabo, 393. Similarly, the Apolline 


religion may have dispossessed a worship 
of the earth-snake at Delphi, where Gaia 
and Ge-Themis had reigned before 
Apollo, and religious atonement con- 
tinued through later times to be made 
to the Python. 

b This is also the opinion forcibly 
expressed in Mommsen’s /eortologze, 
pp. 5, 9, 10, and this is the least assail- 
able part of his theory, which sometimes 
carries the physical interpretation of 
the Erechtheus-worship far beyond the 
evidence. — 





‘ 
gq 
) 
| 


x.] . ATHENA, . . 291 


external historical causes. It is noticeable at the same time 
that none of the savage or cruel ritual commonly practised in 
primitive earth-worship to ensure fertility was ever associated 
with Athena. This agricultural character of hers is entirely 
at one with her civilizing function ; according to Aristides ® it 
was she who taught men the use of the plough, and the 
rhetorician could have appealed to certain cults and cult- 
names to support his statement. He mentions the functionary 
called Bov@yns, ‘the ox-yoker,’ as belonging to the service 
on the Acropolis; and we are told by Aeschines that the 
priestess of Athena Polias was taken from the family of 
the Eteobutadae. According to a scholiast on Lycophron *, 
an Athena Boarmia, the yoker of oxen, was worshipped 
in Boeotia °. 

Lastly, the details given us about some of the ancient festivals 
at Athens, the [TAvrtipia, the Qoyoddpia, and the religious rite 
of the [Tpoxapiorypra, afford many illustrations of the primitive 
agricultural life of Attica under the patronage of Athena. And 
we see how naturally her worship touches at many points with 
that of Demeter Persephone and Dionysos. 

The ’Qoeyxogdpia, about which we hear something from 
Athenaeus and Hesychius, appears to have been a ritual 
performed in the worship of Athena Sciras at Phaleron. 
‘Aristodemos tells us that at the feast of Sxippd there was 
a running-contest of youths at Athens: and they ran having 
in their hands a vine-spray with grapes, and the course was 
from the temple of Dionysos to that of Athena Sciras*.’ This 
is the statement of Athenaeus*’?!. According to Hesychius, 
the spot at Phaleron* where the temple of Athena Sciras 


® Vol. I. p. 20 (Dindorf ). 

> Cf. the epithet TavpomdAos attached 
to Athena”. 

¢ Aristodemus appears to have con- 
fused the S«:ppa with the Oschophoria ; 
the latter could not have been part of 
the former festival, as they were held at 
different times of the year. 

4 The temple at Phaleron may have 
been an offshoot of the temple and 
worship of Athena Sciras on Salamis?”°, 
Most probably the name refers to the 


white chalk rock, and according to 
Strabo (393) the ancient name of Sala- 
mis was Spas. These are the only two 
temples of Athena Sciras that can be 
proved to have existed. The supposed 
temple of Athena Sciras at Skiron on 
the sacred way to Eleusis has been 
shown by Prof. Robert, after a careful 
examination of the evidence, to be a 
fiction (Athena Skiras und die Skiro- 
phorien, Berlin). The best authorities 
are silent concerning it *74, and it is only 


U 2 


GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


292 


stood was called the Oschophorium. That this rite in honour 
of Athena had a Dionysiac character may have been one 
reason that gave rise to the legend in Plutarch *, who refers 
its institution to Theseus and Ariadne. Perhaps the epithet 
Kiooaia, by which Athena was known on the Acropolis of 
Epidauros*”’, may also refer to some conjunction of Athene 
and Dionysos. The zpoxapiotnpia, if the records are correct, 
reveals this agricultural character of the goddess still more 
clearly. According to Suidas, ‘at the end of winter, when the 
ear was beginning to grow, all the magistrates of Athens 
sacrificed to Athena, and the sacrifice was called mpoyapiornpta : 
Lycurgus in his speech on the priestly office speaks of “the 
most ancient sacrifice commemorating the return of the 
goddess, and called zpoxapiotypia*®.”’ The dvodos ris beod 
must refer to the return of Persephone, yet no doubt Suidas 
is right in connecting the sacrifice with Athena, for his 
statement is confirmed by the author in Bekker’s Anecdota® ; 
Lycurgus only gives the occasion or season of the sacrifice 
to Athena, namely, ‘the resurrection of Persephone,’ that is, 
the sprouting of the corn. 

During the feast of the Plynteria, the festival of Athena 
which has been already described, it was the custom to bear 
through the streets a string of figs, a ceremony called 


mentioned by Pollux ”*" and by Eusta- 
thius (Od. 1397. 10), both drawing from 


the same source, probably Suetonius 


mept madia@v; and it is mentioned by 
them as a resort of gamblers who played 
dice there. The statement is in itself 
incredible; Stephanus of Byzantium 
speaks only of the place called Skiros 
as a haunt of these bad characters, but 
does not mention any temple of Athena 
Sciras there; it is probable that Sue- 
tonius has confused the name of this 
place on the Eleusinian Way with the 
name of the temple at Phaleron. Prof. 
Robert further tries to show that there 
is no sufficient authority for connecting 
Athena Sciras directly with the Skiro- 
phoria or Skira festival at all: the 
scholiast on Aristophanes?’ *!, who is the 


only writer who explicitly connects her 
with it, admits that others regarded the 
Skirophoria as a festival of Demeter and 
Kore: his own opinion, and the more 
doubtful statement of Photius *”**, weigh 
little against the authority of Lysima- 
chides, whom Harpocration quotes ?"*?, 
and who nowhere speaks of Athena 
Sciras in his account of this festival, but 
only of the priestess of Athena Polias who 
took part in the procession. The Skiro- 
phoria had certainly some connexion 
with Demeter and Persephone *7', ® 1); 
and it appears that Athena Polias played 
her part in this as in other ceremonies 
connected with the divinities of vegeta- 
tion, 
© Thestus,.23, 


Xs] ATHENA. 293 


“Hynrnpia 21; and the cultivation of the fig-tree, elsewhere 
regarded as a gift of Demeter to Phytalos*, appears to 
have been here attributed to the teaching of Athena. 

But no art of cultivation is so closely bound up with the 
ancient Attic worship of Athena as the cultivation of the 
olive. No reason need be drawn from symbolism, such as 
Welcker attempts, or any other esoteric source to explain this; 
the produce of the olive-tree had an almost religious value for 
the men of Attica, and the physical side of Greek civilization 
much depended on it; also the wild olive grew on the 
Acropolis, the chief site of her worship. Therefore its cultiva- 
tion was naturally considered as the boon of Athena to the 
people of the land, just as the other agricultural and civic arts 
of life were imputed to her. And the discovery of the olive 
furnishes a theme to one of the very few myths in Greek folk- 
lore that are really myths of creation ; for Athena is supposed 
not only to have revealed the use of the olive to man, but to 
have created it *4, whether on the Acropolis or at Academia, 
or according to Euripides in Salamis, ‘where Athena first 
revealed the spray of the grey-green olive, a divine crown 
and glory for bright Athens”.’ Outside Attica there are few 
places in Greece where the olive was so associated with the 
goddess°, if we except those that may have borrowed the 
tradition from Athens. 

So far the inquiry into the meaning of these feasts and 
ceremonies reveals the prehistoric life of the people of 
Attica, and exhibits Athena as the goddess to whom they 
offered sacrifice at the times of sowing, harvest and vintage. 
And a strong conservative feeling attached to this side of 
her religion; so that the enemies of Themistocles were able 
to urge against his projects of maritime extension the time- 
honoured traditions of the worship of Pallas. 

Of more importance to Greek civilization than these primi- 
tive ideas that were concerned with the physical wants of 
life was the political and civil character of Athena’s cult. 
She is par excellence the political divinity ; she alone shares 


© Pe: t. 375.4; > Troades, 798. 
¢ For instance at Sicyon, vide Geogr. Register. 


294 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


with Zeus the function of Polieus as Athena Polias ; and the 
morality expressed in her legends or cult-names, or in the reli- 
gious utterances of poetry and prose, is always that of political 
or civil society. Nowhere else was this religion so inter- 
woven with the city’s life as at Athens, the very name and 
the growth of the city probably being due to the union of 
villages that worshipped Athena. Pausanias tells us that 
‘the whole city and the whole land was sacred to Athena, 
and that, whatever other worships were established in the 
demes, they all none the less held her in honour*®®’ ; we have 
record of the cult in Academia, Colonus, Acharnae, Peiraeeus, 
Sunium, Phlye, Pallene and Oropus, and no doubt it belonged 
to every district in Attica. Her most ancient statue was 
supposed to have fallen from heaven, and stood in her temple 
on the Acropolis ‘that was formerly called the wéAus.’ As the 
fire of Vesta was maintained at Rome, so the lamp was per- 
petually burning in the shrine of Athena Polias, as a symbol 
of the city’s perpetual life. As Athena ’Apynyéris she was 
the founder of the state and leader of colonies, to whom at 
certain times the cleruchs sent tokens of gratitude and wor- 
ship *°'. The same political sense attaches to the legends 
concerning her adoption of Erechtheus, the primeval ancestor 
of the race, who shared her shrine and worship on the 
Acropolis, and was supposed to be buried in her temple? o4. 
and to the story of Theseus, who is at first the votary of 
new divinities, of Poseidon and Aphrodite, and attacks the 
Pallantids, the men of Pallas, but who in later myth becomes 
the founder of a new Athens and the friend of Athena. 

The hope of Athens was the hope of Pallas; and in the 
Supplices of Euripides Theseus exhorts his men in the battle 
against the Theban Sparti with the words, ‘ Sons, if ye stay 
not this stubborn spear of the earth-born men, the cause of 
Pallas is lost*’ When the citizens deserted their city on the 
approach of the Persians, it was committed by the decree of 

Themistocles to Athena, ‘the guardian of Athens *5°. 
_ The foundation of the civic upon the primitive agricultural 
community was the great event commemorated by the greatest 
* Suppl. 711. 


a Te 





reer oe |. 


ee 


&] ATHENA. 295 


of the Athenian festivals, the Panathenaea; and the Svvotkia 
attributed by Thucydides and other writers to Theseus ®, the 
feast of civic union at which a bloodless sacrifice was offered to 
Peace, was perhaps a ceremony that initiated this, as it certainly 
preceded it*’. The earliest names of the mythic Attic com- 
munity, Erechtheus and Theseus, were connected with the 
state festival of Athena, Pausanias ascribing to Theseus both 
its name and its political significance. And this significance 
was enlarged when Athens became an imperial city, when the 
Metics were obliged to perform certain menial services at the 
Panathenaea, and the allied cities were expected to send offer- 
ings*°%, In the time of Pericles, when to the older athletic 
and equestrian contests had been added Homeric recitations 
and musical competitions, the festival stood high above all 
others as the full and perfect ritual consecrated to the civic 
goddess of war and the arts, and as the expression of the 
imperial power and artistic pre-eminence of Athens. Perhaps 
in its earliest institution it may have been also a thanksgiving 
festival for the crops, for it was celebrated at the close of the 
Attic year after the gathering-in of the harvest; the whole 
ceremony lasted four days or more, and the chief day was the 
twenty-eighth of Hekatombaeon ». But in its later form there 
is scarcely any more allusion to this*® than the custom of the 
old men carrying evergreen olive-branches in the procession, 
and of awarding an amphora of olive oil as a prize in the 
contests 2**. We may here discern a reference to the sacred 
gift of Pallas. But we cannot interpret the whole festival 
as originally a funeral solemnity held in honour of the dead 


® A. Mommsen is inclined to date the 
institution of the ovvoikia or suvoKéora 
after the time of Peisistratus; but Thu- 
cydides seems to assign its origin to a 
more remote time. 

b The date of the peydAa Mavaéjvaa, 
which took place every four years, is 
fixed; and Mommsen (Meortologie, 
p- 129) gives convincing reasons for 
believing that the smaller yearly Pana- 
thenaea took place on the same day. 
No doubt the original festival was yearly, 
and the peydaa, of which the institution 


is attributed with some probability to 
Peisistratus, was only an extension of 
the yearly one on a more magnificent 
scale *¢, 

© The scholiast on Clemens* de- 
clares that the elpeoiwvn, a cluster of 
fruits and cakes, &c., fastened together 
with woollen fillets and hung up before 
the doors of the house, was offered to 
Athena Polias at the Panathenaea; but 
this is contrary to what the scholiast on 
Aristophanes (P/ut. 1055) tells us. 


236 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


corn-god Erichthonios, which, according to Mommsen, was its 
earliest form and meaning. This view rests on the single fact 
that, according to Lucian, the men were not allowed to wear gar- 
ments of dyed colour during all or part of the festal period * **°. 
In fact, Mommsen appears to exaggerate greatly the reference 
to Erichthonios in the ritual; none of the rites are known to 
have referred to him, and it is useless to quote the later 
mythographers, who mention him as the founder of the 
Panathenaea or of one of the dyéves**", The passage in Lucian 
does not prove that the citizens wore mourning-garments ; 
and if we knew that they did we should be only able to guess 
at the cause. The interpolated passage in the Jad **° would 
be of more importance for Mommsen’s theory, if we were 
sure of the interpretation”. The two paradoxical views of this 
writer, that the festival commemorated in some way the death 
of Erichthonios, and in some way the birth of Athena, are 
both equally remote from the facts. But whatever its agri- 
cultural character may have been, it lost this at a remote 
date, and it must have always had an important political 
aspect. The countrymen from Attica gathered together to 
the sacred hill of Pallas, bringing with them the peplos to lay 
on the statue of Pallas¢; for we may believe that this rite, 
which seems to have little to do with a harvest festival, goes 
back to the earliest times. The Trojan women in the //iad 
bring the same offering to their Pallas. In the earliest form 
of the Panathenaea, the goddess was therefore already con- 
ceived as the patroness of the weaving arts. The weaving 
and embroidering the robe was the function of the épyacrivat, 
among whom were the ’Appn¢dpo. 26% 10h; the function was 
of public importance, and skilful workwomen sometimes 
received a public vote of thanks’. Doubtless they had slaves 
to work under them, as the captive Trojan women in the 
flecuba look forward to embroidering the scenes of the 

* Heortologte, p. 37. for the latter only; the authorities are 

» Vide note on ritual, ps 320; at variance about this *°™, but it is more 


© It is doubtful whether the zézAos probable that it was always a yearly 
in later times was woven every year and custom, 


was used for the puxpd as well as the @ Vide Deltion Archaiologikon, 1889, 
Heyaha Tai abqvaca, or every four years Dp, 25. 


——e oe 


CP Os te 
Sat 


- 
A 
2 
4 
- 
% 
4 
ca 
a 
: 
2 





x.] . ATHENA 297 


_ Gigantomachy on the robe of Pallas in Athens. When the 


city had lost its freedom and its self-respect *, it sank so low 
as to weave on the peplos the figures of its Macedonian 
masters ; and we hear of a decree being passed that the forms 
of Demetrius and Antigonus should be embroidered in the 


company of the deities *°*. 


Both the smaller and greater Panathenaea were essentially 
religious ceremonies, of which the central acts, performed 
doubtless every year ***, were the solemn procession to the 
Acropolis and the sacrifice offered there. The roumy began at 
sunrise after a festal night and was ordered by the hieropoei, 
who appear to have been charged with all that belonged to 
the annual celebration, while what was peculiar to the quin- 
quennial was arranged by the athlothetae*®**.. The whole 
people took part, marshalled by their demarchs and, at least in 
the earlier period, marching with shield and spear*°*. The 
procession appears to have set forth from the Ceramicus 
to Eleusis and, returning thence, to have followed a course 
which is difficult precisely to determine’, till it reached the 
Acropolis. The peplos was spread like a sail above a car 
that afterwards was constructed in the form of a ship, 
an innovation which was introduced perhaps in the fifth 
century in the time of the Athenian maritime supremacy ©; 
the image which it was designed to clothe was the ancient 
statue of Athena Polias in the Erechtheum. Cows were 
sacrificed on the great altar of Athena on the Acropolis, and 
special sacrifices were offered to Athena Hygieia and Athena 
Nike **; at the same time prayers were proffered in behalf 
of the whole people, including the Plataeans out of gratitude 
for their aid at Marathon. Possibly also a simultaneous 
sacrifice was performed on the Areopagus. The flesh of the 
victims was then divided among the officials and the rest of 
the people. 


* The passage in Arist. Eg. 566, >’ Mommsen, Heortologie, p. 190, vide 
dgioc Tod mémdov, has been wrongly ‘*°. 
interpreted as meaning that this practice ¢ It is first mentioned by Strattis, 
prevailed even in the days of the first a comic poet of the latter part of the 
Athenian empire. fifth century *", 


298 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


These were the chief religious acts in the ritual. But 
many of the agones possessed a religious character, or 
were connected by mythology with the cult of Athena. 
The pyrrhic dance, performed in her honour, was supposed 
to have been her own invention*®4, The contest of the 
apobatae, the armed hoplites who sprang from the chariots, 
an athletic practice peculiar to the Athenians and Boeotians, 
was said to have been instituted by Erichthonios %*". The 
lampadephoria was performed, probably on the evening before 
the procession, by competing chains of runners, each passing 
the torch down its line *, and was consecrated to Athena as 
one of the divinities of the arts for which fire was used *°™, 
The xv«Akol xopol, the singing choruses, the competitions on 
the lyre and flute, were introduced by Pericles °*™; the 
rhapsodical recitals of Homer were a fruitful innovation 
ascribed by Plato to Hipparchus *°§, 

The recognition which we find in the Panathenaea of the 
goddess as the ideal incarnation of the many-sided Athenian 
life finds expression also in many striking passages of the 
poets. ‘Sucha watcher,’ Solon says, ‘ holds her hands above 
our city, Pallas Athena, the great-souled daughter of a mighty 
sire. And in Aristophanes and Euripides we have the fullest 
lyrical utterance of this idea. ‘O Pallas, the holder of our 
city, guardian of a land most holy of all lands, and surpassing 
all in war and poesy and power, sing the chorus in the 
Knights; and a lyrical passage in the Heracleidae of 
Euripides, in a still higher key, has an unmistakable allu- 
sion to the Panathenaea. ‘O lady, thine is the basement of 
our land, thine is the city, whereof thou art mother, mistress, 
and guardian; for rich service of sacrifice is ever fulfilled for 
thee, nor do the last days of the waning month pass by in 
silence, nor are the songs of the young and the choral strains 
unheard, and on the windy hill-top the maidens’ voices in holy 


* Pausanias describes it differently ties and certain inscriptions prove to 
as a race between single runners; it have been the rule in the earlier period, 
had probably come to be this by his had been abandoned, perhaps because 
time, when the competition between of its expense. 
companies, which all the older authori- 


FEO ee Ae 








x.] ATHENA. 299 


acclaim ring out while the feet beat the earth in the nightly 
dance *8,’ 

Public resolutions of great import, the cementing of an 
alliance or the declaration of a war, were often accompanied 
by prayers or vows to Athena Polias. The ephebi sacrificed 
to her at the conclusion of their military service ; slabs incised 
with state decrees were set up near her temple, and fines 
incurred by certain public offenders were paid over to her. 
And the Athena of the Parthenon, who was also Athena 
Polias, was theoretically the guardian of the public treasury, 
from which sums were paid to support the other cults of the 
state and the naval and military administration °° ¢. 

In many other Greek states besides Athens, the title of 
TloAtads or [loAvodyos was attached to her, and her cult was 
often combined with that of Zeus Polieus. The goddess ‘of 
the brazen house’ at Sparta was styled according to Pau- 
sanias* the ‘ holder of the city, and perhaps was worshipped 
also under the title of Apynyéris as its founder*®; and we 
hear of the Athena Polias of Megalopolis, of Troezen, and of 
Tegea, the city which she was supposed to have rendered im- 
pregnable by the gift of a lock from Medusa’s hair; at Daulis 
enfranchised slaves were consecrated to her; her city-cult 
existed at Phalanna in Perrhaebia, in Cos, Amorgos, and Ios ; 
the island of Rhodes acknowledged her as Polias and gave 
her cult-titles derived from the names of its cities, uniting 
her with Zeus Polieus. The same _ political importance 
attached to her worship in Crete, and the treaty of alliance 
between Hierapytna and Lyctos was sworn in the name of 
Athena Polias. Many cities of Asia Minor possessed this 
cult, and it was in special repute at Pergamum and Ilium, 
where a yearly Panathenaic festival and games were held in 
her honour. We find it also at Heraclea in Magna 
Graecia *°, 

Besides the civic worship of Polias there are others that 

* The inscription found at Amyclae suggests that the two latter titles were 
of the Roman period, mentioning the _ theoretically distinct, but Pausanias may 
priest who performed the religious be right on the whole in maintaining 


services of Poseidon Asphalios, Athena that the two worships were identical, 
Chalcioecos, and Athena Tod:dxos *», 


300 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


were consecrated to her as the guardian of the land or of 
the people’s union. At Anaphe we find in an inscription 
mention of the worship of Zeus Patrios and Athena Patria, 
and the cult-names ‘Oyodeios and ‘Opodwils, attached to Zeus 
and Athena in Boeotia, may have signified the divinities of 
public concord **.. In the precincts of the temple of Artemis 
Laphria, the great goddess of Patrae, there was a shrine of 
Athena T[avayais, a title which probably alludes to the 
Achaean league *!, as did her title "Awapia in Achaea, which she 
derived from Zeus, and which, originally possessing a physical 
meaning, was changed into the form ‘Oyapia, and was given 
a political sense designating the goddess of the confederacy *. 
The functions of the city-goddess were probably much the 
same in these places as in Athens ; she inspired counsel, and 
her cult was the pledge of the continuity and security of the 
state, her temple the storehouse for the state archives. In 
certain localities other worships might come to possess the 
same political character; but it belonged to Zeus and Athena 
alone by the essential right of their nature. 

Two Boeotian cults belonging to this class remain to be 
considered. At Thebes Athena was honoured as a divinity 
of the city under the name ’A@nva "Oyya or “Oyxa?, the mean- 
ing of which word is unknown. During the attack of the 
Argives, the chorus pray to her as ‘ Onka, holy queen, whose - 
home is so near our gates.’ We learn from Pausanias that 
there was no temple erected for this cult, but an altar and an 
image in the open © ; and her worship there was not accord- 
ing to the legend indigenous, but introduced by Cadmos, who 
slays the serpent and then does penance for the slaughter, as 
Apollo did for the Python’s. We have probably here, as 
in so many other legends, an allusion to a conflict of two 
worships, an older worship of the earth with that of Athena; 
for the serpent, although spoken of as the child of Ares, is 
a symbol of the earth © 


® Vide Zeus-cults, p. 43. Thebes no association with Poseidon 
' > The name may contain the same can be discovered (vide Wilamowitz, 
root as the Boeotian town ’Oyxnords, Hermes, 18gI, p. 235). 
where a Poseidon-cult existed; but at © One might fairly conjecture that the 


a 


x.] ; ATHENA. 301 


Of the political significance of the cult of Athena Itonia, 
whose temple at Coronea was the meeting-place of the 
Panboeotian confederacy and festival, something has already 
been said; and we have some ancient evidence of the 
special character of this worship®'. It associated Athena in 
some mystic manner with the god of the lower world who 
is called Hades by Strabo, but in Pausanias, who must be 
speaking of the same cult, is named Zeus. If this association 
is not due to some local accident, it may be that Athena 
Itonia had at Coronea something of the character which in 
her primitive worship she had at Athens, and that she was 
a goddess who fostered the growths of the earth and who 
therefore had some affinity to the chthonian deities. Also 
we may conclude from a fragment of Bacchylides that 
Athena Itonia was not only a war-goddess, but a goddess 
of the arts of peace, especially poetry. The poet, who is 
preparing for the musical contest of the Itonia, exclaims, 
‘It is not a task for sitting still or tarrying, but we must 
fare to the well-carved temple of Itonia of the golden aegis 
and show forth some delicate device of song.’ We hear of 
her festival at Crannon, and her worship was indigenous in 
Thessaly, whence it probably travelled to Boeotia, and where 
she was the chief divinity of war; it was in her temple 
between Pherae and Larissa that the shields were hung which 
were won from the Gauls in the last victory of Greece over 
barbarism. Finally the prevalence of the cult of Itonia is 
proved by its adoption at Athens and Amorgos %'%*. 

This survey of the political religion of Hellas explains why 
Plato consecrates the Acropolis of his ideal state to Athena 
Hestia and Zeus*, and why in Aristides’ summary of her 
character it is said that cities are the gifts of Athena*’. The 
Palladia that guard the cities’ heights are among the oldest 
idols of which Greek tradition tells ; and her title ’Axpta °° 
refers to her temples on the Acropoleis®. Among the many 
serpent was here an ancient totem; the b As she was not by nature a goddess 
four survivors of the Sparti are named of the wilds, it is rare to find the lonely 
after the serpent; and Cadmos and mountain-top consecrated to her, as it 


Harmonia are changed to serpents. often was to Zeus. 
® Laws, 745 B. 


302 GREEK RELIGION. | [CHAP, 


instances recorded of these one of the most prominent was 
the temple near Elatea of Athena Kpavaia*®, the goddess 
worshipped on ‘the head’ of the hill; her temple-statue 
was carved by the sons of Polycles, and represented her in 
warlike pose and guise, her shield being carved in imitation of 
that of Athena Parthenos in Athens. A peculiar trait in her 
ritual is that she was served by boy-priests. We have two 
inscriptions referring to this cult, the one containing the 
decree of an alliance between Elatea and Tenos which was to 
be preserved in her temple. 

As a city-goddess she is also interested in the life and 
growth of the family; the Athenian bride was led up to the 
Acropolis and consecrated to her ®*, Hence comes her name 
‘Anarovpia or Pparpia, containing a reference to the feast of 
anatovpia solemnized by the ¢parpia of the Ionic tribes 6°, 
At Athens, indeed, it would appear that Zeus stood ina still 
closer relation to the ‘gentes’ than did Athena; but at 
Troezen Athena seems to have been specially regarded as the 
goddess who protected the clan and who gave offspring in 
marriage; for this must be the meaning of the custom re- 
corded by Pausanias ®” that maidens on the eve of marriage 
dedicated their girdle to Athena ’Azarovpia. The name was 
misunderstood and connected with dadrn, and a legend in- 
vented that told how Athena had deceived Aithra; just as 
a similar story based on the same misunderstanding was told 
to explain the worship of Aphrodite ’Adrovpos at Phanagoria *. 
The Athenian rite which we may compare with the Troe- 
zenian custom was the visitation of the priestess of Athena 
bearing the aegis to houses of newly married people. The 
cult of Athena Phratria with Zeus ®pdrpuos is recorded also 
at Cos e". 

Another title which presents Athena in the same light, and 
by which she appears as one of the 6eo! xovporpédor, is AOnva 
Myrnp °°, the strange name by which she was honoured in Elis. 
When the land was barren of men according to the story, the 
women prayed to Athena, and, owing to the goddess’s favour, 
their marriages became most prolific. The title gives no hold 


® Strabo, 495. 





a Ss ee ae eee 
is ae e 


a SS ee ee eS Sl ee Oe ee eee = 


aS " eee eS: h 


—_— arte > 


a. i 


SH ESNE STEVE ES oe ee ree ee 


) ATHENA. 303 


to a theory which some have maintained, that the goddess’s 
maidenly character was a later development, and that in 
certain myths, such as Aithra’s union with Poseidon, Auge’s 
with Heracles, and in the story of Erichthonios’ birth, we have 
an ancient view of Athena asa goddess-mother. But the theory 
breaks down at every point. There is no proof that Aithra 
and Auge are doubles of Athena, unless we can prove that 
they are names for the Aether and that Athena is the Aether- 
goddess; the legend about the birth of Erichthonios shows 
clearly that the primitive conception of Athena’s maidenhood 
was too strong to allow of the Athenian imagination having 
its way completely in its desire to affiliate the mythical parent 
of the ’Epex@cida: to their country’s goddess; and the story 
about Aithra is a later aetiological story. Although Athena 
may have received no public worship under the name of 
Parthenos*, yet the dogma that maidenhood was essential 
to her nature was rooted in myth and popular feeling; this 
prevailed, not so much because the goddess, like Artemis, 
embodied the ideal of chastity, but probably because of her 
masculine and warlike temperament, which kept her free from 
the ties and weakness of womanhood. Athena Mnjrnp need 
mean little more than Athena the nurse or fosterer of children, 
just as the nurses who reared the infant Zeus in Crete 
were worshipped under the name of Mijtepes”. She protects 
children because of her interest in the state, but she is not 
directly concerned with assisting at child-birth, and the epithet 
Aoxfa is only metaphorically applied to her by Aristides in 
connexion with the probably late myth that she provided for 
the safe delivery of Leto®. A passage in Hippocrates that 
mentions Athena Kryofa by the side of Zeus Krjowos may 
refer to some actual cult, in which she was worshipped as 
the guardian of the family property, taking her name from 


Zeus ®, 
Her political character is further shown in her power of 


® An inscription records a private The Parthenos worshipped at Halicar- 
dedication to Athena Parthenos in the nassus and elsewhere in Asia Minor is 
fifth century ; and # Map@évos is her title not Athena. 
in one state decree about 420 B.c.®. > Diod. Sic. 4. 79. 


304 GREEK RELIGION. rcHAP. 


inspiring counsel and in her title BovAaia’’. In the tepdv of 
the council-chamber at Athens men prayed to her and to 
Zeus BovAaios, and the terms ’ApBovAvos” and ’ApBovdta, which 
were applied to the two divinities at Sparta, must have desig- 
nated the deities of wise deliberation. At the latter city 
they were known and worshipped also as ’Ayopato.!"4, a word 
that refers probably to their shrines in the Agora, and in- 
directly to the presidency of the law-courts and the power 
of persuasion. The aspect of Athena as the counsellor is 
vividly presented in the Odyssey and in Greek mythology 
generally. 

Her worship is also of some importance for the develop- 
ment of legal ideas, at least in regard to the law of homicide. 
As Zeus IIpoorpémavos and MetAiytos seems to have been 
specially concerned with the moral ideas about the shedding 
of kindred blood, so Athena protected the involuntary or 
righteous homicide from the blood-feud of the kinsmen 
and from the Eumenides. The whole trial of Orestes is an 
illustration of this: the goddess institutes the court and the 
humane rule that if the votes were equal the accused was 
acquitted, and abolishes the old retributive principle™. The 
constitution and the legend about the foundation of the court 
called 76 émt TlaAAadim at Athens illustrate the same ameliora- 
tion in the law of homicide, which again is indirectly connected 
with Athena. It was instituted to try cases of involuntary 
bloodshedding ; and Pausanias gives us the legend that explains 
why this court was put under the patronage of Pallas. Diomed, 
who was bringing home the Palladium from Troy, landed by 
night and ignorantly on Attic territory. Demiphon attacked 
them, not knowing who they were, slew some of them and 
captured the Palladium; and on his return he happened to 
trample to death one of the Athenians under his horse: he 
was then put on trial for the deaths of the Athenian and the 
Argives, and the court was said to have been first i ai 
of fifty Athenians and as many Argives. 

The legend, of which a slightly different version has been 
preserved by Harpocration, has evidently been invented to 
explain the nature of the court at Athens and the presence 


ae 


= eee ae eee eee ee 





X.] ATHENA. 305 


in it of the image of Pallas. As Zeus was ultimately the 
source of justice and right, his worship also comes to be con- 
nected with this Palladium-court, and we hear of a worship 
of Zeus 6 ént Taddadiov **. Once a year the statue, which 
was certainly a wooden §davov, was taken down to Phaleron 
and dipped in the sea, a rite which probably had in the later 
period the moral intention of purifying the image from the 
miasma of the court of homicide, Miiller® collects many 
legends concerning these Palladia, that speak of outrage and 
wrong associated with them, and that attribute the origin of 
the Trojan image to the blind infatuation of the gods or of 
Athena herself”, who slew her playfellow Pallas and erected 
an image of her. The conclusion might seem to be that 
certain dark and cruel conceptions about the goddess herself 
attached to her most ancient idol. It is strange then that it 
should have given its name to a law-court of more advanced 
equity. Those legends in fact do not lead to that conclusion ; 
they are mostly aetiological: invented, for instance, to explain 
why the image had fallen from heaven upon the hill of Ate, 
why it was the image of Athena and yet called after Pallas, why 
it had closed eyes, why it was set up ina court to try involun- 
tary homicide; the stories of Cassandra and the suppliants 
only prove the extreme sanctity of the image, to which women 
and suppliants would naturally but often fruitlessly resort. 

There was also in all probability some religious connexion 
between Athena and the Eumenides of the Areopagus, where 
the most sacred of all the Athenian courts was held; at the 
end of the play of Aeschylus the goddess says to the 
Eumenides, ‘With my handmaidens, who guard my image 
righteously, I will escort you with the light of gleaming torches 
to your nether habitations.’ The reference is to their cave on 
the Areopagus, and almost certainly to some religious ritual 
in which the priestess of Athena Polias went thither in solemn 
procession “*°, 

The older view of Athena as a goddess of pure retribution 
may have been expressed by the title ’Afidmowwos 7, under which 
® Pallas Athena, Kleine Schriften, pp. 207-209. 

> Apollod. 3. 12, 3. 
VOL, I. Xx 


306 - GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


she was worshipped near Sparta. But the legend once more 
associates this cult with the idea of justifiable homicide, 
viewed in this case as lawful vengeance; and the epithet 
probably has a legal reference. At Athens, in the later 
period, she seems to have been identified with Themis, as the 
personification of Justice”. 

It was probably as the goddess who foresees and advises 
for the public interest that Athena won the name [povoua. 
The history of this word as an epithet of the goddess is 
peculiar. As applied to a divinity it could apparently mean 
either ‘prescience’ or ‘ providence’: but it inclined to the latter 
signification, although Sophocles * once uses it in reference to 
an oracle. In the Ocdipus Coloneus (\. 1180) the mpdvora rod 
6eot probably is an expression for God's providence, and it 
must have been often used to denote this either in philo- 
sophic or common language before zpévora could have denoted 
‘providence of God’ without any qualifying word, as it did in 
the Stoic vocabulary». In this sense, then, the word could be 
attached in a quasi-adjectival sense to Athena, so as to form 
a compound name like Athena Nike or Aphrodite Peitho; 
and as she was before all others the goddess of wise ordinance, 
the term and the cult might have arisen naturally. But it is 
almost certain that they were suggested by a confusion with 
IIpovata, which was one of the epithets of Athena in the 
worship of Thebes. This title can only have a local 
meaning, denoting the goddess that ‘stands before the shrine, 
and we learn from Pausanias7** that a statue of Athena 
IIpovaia, wrought by Scopas, actually stood before the temple 
of the Ptoan Apollo, where several fragments of pottery have 
been found with the inscription "A@dvas Hpovatas. At Delphi 
we hear both of an Athena [povata and Mpdvoia"*” 7, and it 
has been made a question which of the two is the original 
form of the name in this Delphic worship. Now we know that 


® Trach. 824; cf. Democritus, ée 77s — mpdvara dicitur;’ Cic. De Mat. Deor. 2. 
pavtikhs mpdvoiay épacay beiv ém(ynreiy £8. Perhapsalsoin Euripides: @ Tvxn, 
(Stobaeus, rept ppovna. 3. 51). Tpévoa 6 Hyun, coor obs éyw OéAw [ph. 

> “Mens mundi prudentia vel provi- Az. 864. 
dentia appellari potest. Graece enim 


a = 


ee! Be 


x.) ATHENA. 307 


there was a shrine of the goddess there, standing before the 
temple of Apollo, and we should expect the more obvious and 
natural title to be earlier than the more artificial. And the two 
earliest authorities who mention this Athena, Aeschylus and 
Herodotus, give us the form THpovata. Speaking of the local 
deities who were worshipped near the Pythian oracle, Orestes 
says ITaA\ds Upovata ‘has precedence in report,’ and Herodotus 
speaks of the [laAAdéos tpovnins ths év AeAdoior. But Demo- 
sthenes, or the author of the doubtful oration against Aristo- 
geiton, believes that the Delphic goddess was Ipévoua, saying 
that ‘near the Delphic Apollo stood a very large and beautiful 
temple of Athena Tpévo.a just as you enter the main shrine’ 
And Pausanias also calls this the temple of Athena [Ipévo.a, 
and the passage in Photius well illustrates the confusion of the 
two epithets: ‘Some think the epithet (IIpévoia) was given 
her because she stands before the shrine at Delphi, others 
because her providence provided for Leto’s delivery.’ The 
latter part of this curious explanation is illustrated by a state- 
ment in Macrobius that a temple was erected to Athena 
IIpévora in Delos because of her sagacity which aided the birth 
of Apollo and Artemis ‘**. This Delian worship may have 
been an offshoot of the same cult at Prasiae in Attica7 ©. 
That the title [Ipévora came into common use in later times 
seems clear, as in a fictitious account of Greek worships insti- 
tuted on the banks of the Hyphasis, given in Philostratus’ life 
of Apollonius ®, an altar to ’A@nva IIpévo.a is mentioned together 
with those of Apollo Delphos Zeus Ammon and others. It is 
probable that it was from Delphi that the name was diffused, 
and that it arose from zpovaia some time after the Persian 
wars. Perhaps the change of name was suggested through 
the part that Athena played in repelling the Persian attack 
on the temples; for it is noteworthy that Diodorus, after 
narrating the miraculous terrors which made the Persians 
recoil from the precincts of the temple of Athena Ipovaéa, 
goes on to say, Td pév otv év Aeddotor pavretov daipmovia tivi 
mpovola tiv avAnow diépvyev °. 


® Bk. 2, sub fin. > Diod. Sic. 11. 14. 


308 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


From the ideas contained or implied in apdévova, the power 
and function of prophecy might naturally have attached to 
Athena. She was worshipped at Erythrae as @yyia by the 
side of Zeus Pros, as the goddess of omens *'; but as 
far as we hear she had nowhere any pavretov, and Aristides, 
who evidently tries to give a complete account of the 
goddess, says no more concerning her prophetic character 
than that Apollo made her guardian of his own oracles and 
bade men sacrifice first to her ®®; he is obviously referring to 
Athena Ipovaia at Delphi. A certain kind of divination by 
means of pebbles was attributed to her, as a goddess of 
invention, by Zenobius, but this was not recognized by any 
cult, 

Her warlike character was inseparably blended with her 
political and social ; and it is hard to say which of the two was 
the original. Some of the Palladia mentioned belonged to 
pre-historic times, and they served as symbols of war and of 
the city’s security. In fact, the goddess under whom men were 
brought together into a community of villages or clans, and 
who guarded the wéAs, must have been a deity of battle ; and 
Alalcomenae in Boeotia, one of the oldest cities that cherished 
her worship and that arose by means of it, is itself a name 
derived from Athena ’AAaAxopueévn, ‘the helper in battle*’ The 
two divine aiders of Menelaos in Homer are the Argive Hera 
and Athena ’AdaAkouwernis ; and from the form of the latter 
word we may believe that it was derived immediately from the 
Boeotian town. Strabo records the legend of the birth of the 
goddess at Alalcomenae, and adds that the city, though small, 
and having no advantage of position, had remained always 
secure through the sanctity of the cult **. As a goddess of 
war she appears conspicuous in Homer and Hesiod: ‘The 
dread goddess, the arouser of the battle, the leader of the 
host, who delighteth in the din of strife and the contest”’ It 
is she who marshals the ranks in company with Ares in the 
relief-work on the shield of Achilles. The legend of the 
Gigantomachy, in which Zeus, Athena, and Heracles are the 


® The cult of Athena ’AAaAxopuévn is _ bable evidence of it in Ithaca *, * >. 
recorded also in Chios, and we have pro- > Theog. 924. 


x] ATHENA. 309 


chief combatants, and from which she won the poetical title 
ytyavropédvos, and, according to one version, the cult-name of 
‘Immia; the countless myths in which she is spoken of as 
befriending the heroes in their battles; and, lastly, the 
numerous public cults of Greece, bear testimony to the 
aboriginal prevalence of this aspect of her. We hear of 
a temple of Athena Ipoyuaxdppya, ‘who fights before the ranks, 
on the mountain of Bouporthmos, not far from Troezen ; of 
a temple at Plataea and of an altar at Athens dedicated to 
Athena Areia, mythically connected with the trial of Orestes 
on the Areopagus, but probably referring directly to the god- 
dess of war. The oath of alliance between the Athenians 
and Lacedaemonians (about 271 B.C.), and that between the 
Smyrnaeans and Magnesians, were taken in the name of 
Athena Areia; and the same title occurs in the oath sworn by 
Eumenes of Pergamon, where she is mentioned by the side 
of Ares®, The title Hippia found in the cults of Attica, 
Tegea, Corinth, and Olympia, belongs to this class*’, and to 
these we may add the Macedonian cult of Athena ’AAkiénpos, 
to whom Perseus sacrificed before the struggle with Rome*’. 
She is also the goddess who gives the spoil, and the epithet 
Aniris, that occurs in Homer and in the worship at Olympia, 
is illustrated by many inscriptions that dedicate to her the 
tithes of the spoil’’, and by the passage in Sophocles’ d7ax, 
where the chorus suggest that the cause of Ajax’ trouble may 
have been his remissness in offering spoil to the goddess. 

But there is a marked contrast between the character and 
worship of Athena as a war-goddess and of Ares, who, perhaps 
because of his Thracian origin, personified the savage lust of 
strife, at all times abhorrent to the Greeks, and with whom * 
Athena is very rarely associated either in poetry or cult. It 
is civilized valour and the art of war that was embodied in the 
goddess. Of much interest from this point of view is the story 
of the death of Tydeus before Thebes, whom Athena had 
befriended through all his career and intended to raise to 
immortality, but abandoned in his dying moments through 

@ For instances see ®* and %*; a statue of Athena stood in the temple of Ares 
in Athens, 


310 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


disgust at his savagery, when he fixed his teeth in the skull 
of his slayer. The old Greek myth-maker, to explain why 
Tydeus failed at last to obtain the reward of his great life, 
invents a motive which would have pleased Dante or a Norse 
saga-poet. The hostility between Athena and Ares, which 
appears in the /éad, is also alluded to in the legend of 
Cadmos, who with her help slays the serpent, the fosterling 
of Ares. Moreover, none of the arts of war were ascribed 
to Ares as their inventor, but many to Athena. For 
instance, the Pyrrhic dance, a measured movement in full 
armour, which at Sparta was considered a necessary part of 
military drill, and was said to be the discovery of a Spartan 
named [vppixds*, is in some accounts attributed to Athena2*4, 
When she has sprung full-armed from the head of Zeus she 
dances the Pyrrhic; or after the Gigantomachy she teaches 
it to the Dioscuri, a story which would accord with the 
claims of the Spartans that it originated among them. The 
Cretan legend of the Kouretes’ hoplite dance, which was part 
of the ritual of the Zeus worship in the island, is a close 
parallel to this, as in both an important advance in the art 
of war is explained by a religious myth®. Aristides, who 
usually advances beyond the popular belief, goes so far as to 
say it was Athena who had taught infantry tactics to the 
Athenians and Egyptians, and that there was a district in 
Egypt sacred to her, where shields were dedicated*. The 
thetorician may have had in his mind such a worship as that 
which existed in Epidaurus %», where the goddess appears to 
have been styled Sro.yefa, ‘ the marshaller of the ranks,’ if we 
may give to this name, as to that of Zeus Srowyeds, a military 
significance’. The epithet Zewornpfa, attached to her in one 
of her cults at Thebes and at Athens, and explained in the 
former city by the legend that Amphitryon armed himself 
for the war against Euboea near the temple where she was 
worshipped under this name, seems to express the belief that 
men girt themselves in the harness of war under her auspices 
* Athenae. Dedzpnosoph. 14. 7: in- > Vide Plato’s Laws, 796 B. 


vented as an dox«npa tav véav én ra © Aristides, vol. 1, p. 18 (Dind.). 
OTpaTiwrikd, 4 Vide Zeus 1% 0, 


x.] ATHENA. 311 


or at her teaching. The invention of the trumpet was some- 
times attributed to her, and a temple was dedicated to Athena 
DdrAmy€*! at Argos by the son of Tyrsenos; and Athena 
’EyxéAados may be interpreted as the goddess of the battle- 
shout or the battle-music °’. 

As gymnastic was considered, at least at Sparta, as a fore- 
training for war, in some legends and perhaps in one of 
her cults Athena was given a certain interest in it. Ac- - 
cording to one authority® she taught Theseus wrestling and 
she assisted Tydeus in his athletic contests at Thebes, and 
Odysseus in his quoit-throwing among the Phaeacians. These 
instances, however, only show an incidental concern natural to 
any divinity when a favourite hero was engaged ; and usually 
the Palaestra was under the patronage of Hermes and 
Heracles. At Sparta only was the worship of Athena con- 
nected with athletics. There were three temples dedicated to 
her there under the name of KeaAevOefa, standing near the road 
called ’Adéra, and both names were explained by the story of 
the foot-race that Icarios arranged so as to decide among the 
suitors of Penelope. Odysseus won, and consecrated these 
temples and a statue to Athena KeAevée/a, the divine ‘ starter’ 
of the race. It may be that the legend and the explanation are 
later, and the word originally had a military sense, applied to 
the goddess ‘ who gives the word of command, and we might 
then compare this cult of hers with that of Zeus Koopyras. 

Though he alone is the divinity to whom the trophy was 
erected, Athena shares with him the power of dispensing 
victory, and bears the title Nixnpdpos, by which the Athena 
Polias of Pergamon and of the Attalid dynasty was known far 
and wide ®™ 7, Her pre-eminence as a victory-goddess is 
specially attested by the fact that Nixn was a second name 
of Athena herself, and when personified as a separate being 
was her constant companion, being in all probability originally 
an emanation from her. 

The view expressed by Kekulé, that Nike is a mere creation 
of the formative art working at the trophy, can certainly not be 
defended », for the personified idea of victory existed before we 

® Istros, Schol. Pind. Vem. 5. 89. b Vide Kekulé, Athena Nike, p. 3. 


GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


312 


have evidence of the existence of the trophy. In Hesiod’s 
Theogony* Nike assists Zeus against the Titans, and she is 
called the daughter of the Titan Pallas. But Hesiod, in 
his sacred chronology, .is inclined to antedate these per- 
sonifications, and that Nike could not have figured in the 
older Greek religion seems disproved by Homer’s silence 
about her. We may explain the curious parentage that 
Hesiod assigns her in this way: it may have been that in 
the imagination of his contemporaries Nike was associated 
with Pallas, that is to say Athena, but he wished to find for 
her an earlier place in his theological system than he gave to 
the latter goddess ; therefore he could not present Nike as the 
daughter of Zeus or as another form of Athena, but he 
related her to the giant or Titan Pallas, who was perhaps 
merely a fictitious being brought into the theogony for 
a special purpose. If Nike were already related to Athena 
in the time of Hesiod, we can understand why the former 
should be prominent in the Titanomachy as the latter was 
in the battle with the giants ». 

We have at least some evidence that Athena Nike was 
known both to Greek religion and Greek art before the 
winged figure that personified victory became a prevalent 
artistic type. As regards this latter we can almost determine 
the date of its introduction if we accept the statement of the 
scholiast on Aristophanes’ Birds, ascribing the first repre- 
sentation of the winged Victory, that is, of the personification, 
to the archaic sculptor Archermus 125», Even if the winged 
Victory of Archermus was really Iris, as has been suggested °, 
yet the statement of the scholiast, which cannot be purely 
fanciful, implies that there were statues known to the later 
Greeks and regarded as earlier than the period of Archermus 
representing a personage whom they called Wingless Victory ; 


aged age 1 a 


» Since the above was written a mono- 
graph has appeared by Baudrillart on 
Les Divinités de la Victoire en Groce et 
en Ltale: his theory as to the origin of 
Nike agrees on the whole with mine. 
The arguments against M. Bandrillart’s 


position brought forward by Mr. Sykes 
in the Classical Review, 1895, p. 280, 
are not convincing. The latter does not 
seem to give sufficient weight to the 
evidence afforded by Hesiod and by the 
scholiast on Aristophanes. 

° Classical Review, 1895, p. 282. 


HO ATHENA. 313 


and this was no doubt only a name that described Athena 
Nixn; for the goddess Athena, whether in her character as 
Niky or in any other, was naturally regarded as wingless. 
This Athena Nike enjoyed many local worships, at Erythrae 
for instance, and on the Acropolis of Megara, where Pausanias 
found three temples, one to Athena, another to Athena Nike, 
and a third to Athena Aiantis; but the most celebrated cult 
was that on the Acropolis of Athens*®*. In Pausanias the 
name of Wingless Victory is given to the deity of the temple 
on the right of the ascent to the Propylaea; but her original 
and official name was Athena Nike. For Harpocration gives 
us a description of the type of the Nike Athena, ‘a wingless 
wooden idol, holding a pomegranate in her right hand, and 
in her left a helmet’; and he tells’ us that his account is 
derived from the first book of Heliodorus 6 mepimyntijs mept 
axpotdAews 15, This then is the €davoy of the little shrine 
mentioned by Pausanias ; and an inscription has been found 
near the Propylaea containing a decree about a sacrifice 
ordained rij ’AOnva rH MoAtdds cai rH ’A@nva tH Nixn *°%.  An- 
other inscription speaks of a crown offered to her from the 
spoil won in war; a third refers to the part played by the 
ephebi at her sacrifice, who assisted in a procession held in 
her honour ***. The goddess is invoked by these names 
by poets of the fifth century®®*; by Euripides in the /oz, 
and by Sophocles in the Philoctetes,; where Odysseus 
appeals ‘to Nike Athena Polias, who saves him ever.’ The 
worship and the title evidently express in part the peaceful 
character of the goddess, who has laid aside her helmet after 
battle. 

Asa goddess of peace she is pre-eminently a goddess of the 
arts, and it remains to consider her briefly under this aspect. 
In the earliest literature this side of her is presented as well 
as her warlike nature; in Homer the skilful craftsman is 
regarded as a man dear to her, ‘He whose hands had all the 
carver’s cunning, for Pallas Athene loved him above all men*.’ 
She was the goddess who taught the daughters of Pandareus 
to be accomplished in the arts”; it is she who was supposed 

* Zi. 5. 59- > Od. 20. 78. 


314 GREEK RELIGION. [cHap, 


to have added the soul to the clay out of which Prometheus 
fashioned men. And in the strange myth of Pandora, one of 
the few in which the Greek divinities are presented as creative 
powers, it is Athena and Hephaestus who fashion and embellish 
the form of the mysterious maiden ; and Athena again who 
gives her the gifts of the arts wherewith better to beguile the 
souls of men. There are many confused ideas in this story 
which it is not to the present purpose to try to disentangle. 
That the gods were not the friends of man, but begrudged 
him happiness, is an ancient view of the Divine providence 
which is here presented. But Athena’s disposition towards 
man is not in question here, because she has nothing to do 
with the moral purpose of this creation, but is merely the 
skilled artist that produces the marvel. And the story, 
which Hesiod could not have entirely invented, though he 
may have distorted its meaning, shows how early was the 
belief that it was Athena who taught women the arts in 
which they excel. Before the time of Homer she must have 
been recognized as the goddess of weaving, as the woven 
shawl was the offering specially meet for her, and it was she 
who wrought the peplos of Hera. At Athens she was the 
patroness of the potter’s art, and at Colonus and Academia 
she was worshipped in union with Prometheus and Hephaestus 
the fire-gods**»*. Hence she was given the title ‘Hdaioria 
at Athens, and Plato declares that the whole race of crafts- 
men were sacred to Hephaestus and Athena, and that he 
who defrauded a workman dishonoured Zeus TodAtodyos 
and Athena*. The feast of Xadxeta at Athens was conse- 
crated in later times chiefly to Hephaestus, but the Athena- 
cult played some part in it and probably was connected 
with it from the beginning, for another name for it was 
"AOjvaia, and on the day of this feast the embroidering of the 
peplos began 1°, Pausanias in many places mentions the 
cult of Athena ’Epydvy, and in one passage he says that 
the Athenians were the first to give her this title. The text 
is here mutilated, and it is supposed that he was going to 
speak of a temple dedicated to her under this name on the 
® Laws, p. 920 D, g2t C.. 


Xx. ] ATHENA. 315 


Acropolis 1», But Dr. Dérpfeld* has shown that this supposi- 
tion wants evidence and is improbable: inscriptions have 
indeed been found on the Acropolis to Athena ’Epydvy, but 
these may have been dedicated in the temple of Athena Polias”. 
But Pausanias records a temple of this goddess at Sparta, 
an altar at Olympia on which the guild that called themselves 
the descendants of Pheidias sacrificed, a Herme-statue at 
Megalopolis, and a group of Athena Ergane and Plutus at 
Thespiae ; and we have evidence of a cult of Athena ’Opyavy 
at Delos as well as at Athens, of “Epyatis at Samos and 
KadAlepyos at Epidaurus, of Maxaviris at Megalopolis!*. 
Perhaps the strange worship of Athena TeAxvia—interpreted 
as Athena Bdoxavos—may refer to the goddess of the arts, and 
the reputation for magic attaching to the primitive artist *°*. 
We have noticed how some of the arts of agriculture, the 
skill of the handicraftsmen, and some warlike inventions 
were attributed to her teaching or influence; but with the 
fine arts of music and poetry she had less concern. The 
music of the flute alone was, in the Boeotian myth, an art 
that Athena practised and taught, and Apollo himself was 
among her pupils according to Corinna. The titles “Andov 
and BouSvdta may have been attached to the goddess in 
Pamphylia and Boeotia 1° 1° as the inventress of the flute, 
and the legend recorded by Pindar in the twelfth Pythian 
ode® and explained by the scholiast, gives as usual a dramatic 
motive for the invention. The words réxvq trav wore Iadhas 
epedpe Opacerav Topydvwv ovdAtov Ophvoy diar€£auo’ ’AOdva refer 


® Mitt. d. deutsch. Inst. Ath. 1889, 
3. p. 305, and cf. Mythology and Monu- 
ments of Athens, Harrison and Verrall, 
pp- 414-418. 

b The only evidence of a recognized 
cult of ’Epydavn at Athens are the lines 
in the fragment of Sophocles’, who 
summons the people of the handicrafts 
into the public ways, ‘who worship 
Athena Ergane with winnowing-fans set 
upright.’ Miss Harrison is perhaps 
right in explaining the winnowing-fans 
as a memento of the primitive agricul- 


tural Athena; but I think she goes too 
far in saying that ’Epydvy could have 
been a name referring to the working of 
the land (Classical Review, 1894, p.270). 
Possibly by the time of Sophocles the 
Alevos, from its convenient form, had 
come to be used as an ordinary recep- 
tacle for cereal oblations. Hesychius 
defines Aixva as kava, which was a word 
referring to ritual rather than to agri- 
culture ', 
© ll. 6-12. 


316 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


to the curious story that the two Gorgons uttered various 
cries of Jamentation over their dead sister, and Athena in 
a callous way imitated their lugubrious sounds on the flute: 
hence a particular motive on the flute was called vomos 
moAvképados, the changeful air to which the sobbing of the 
Gorgon sisters was set; and Diodorus Siculus states definitely 
that Athena invented flute-music in general 1°? 4, 

This story admits of a very simple explanation; we may 
suppose that flute-playing was part of the worship of the 
Boeotian Athena, and that there was a pantomimic repre- 
sentation on the flute of the death of the Gorgon, just as 
we hear of musical representations of the slaughter of the 
Python at Delphi. Then the myth would arise that the 
goddess invented the instrument and discovered that par- 
ticular strain on it to commemorate the death of Medusa 
and her sisters’ lamentations. We are familiar with a rival 
myth at Athens. It appears from the story about Alcibiades 
that the Athenians had a natural dislike to flute-playing, 
because it was unbecoming to the features; they also had 
a still greater dislike of the Boeotians, who were fond of the 
flute. So they told a story how that Athena had practised 
a little on it, but had flung it away in disgust and laid 
a curse upon it; it then fell into the hands of inferior persons 
like Marsyas. In all this there is probably a malicious 
reference to Boeotian worship. 

The evidence of the recognition in cult of the artistic 
character of the goddess appears scanty, yet combined with 
the indirect evidence from the Panathenaic and Itonian festivals 
it is proof that the poetical phrase of Aristides, ‘The Graces 
stand around her hands?,’ is appropriate to her worship. 
An expression’ of this feeling was the statue of Minerva by 
Demetrius, mentioned by Pliny, ‘quae musica appellatur !2’, 
if the reading is sound. 

The last worship that need be mentioned here is that of 
Athena Hygieia!, which seems to have been in vogue in 
Athens before the close of the sixth century*. <A statue 


* The earliest monument that records _ dedicated by Callis to Athena Hy- 
it 1s the inscription on the potsherd  gieia®, The basis of her statue, 


X.] : ATHENA. 317 


bearing this title stood on the Acropolis dedicated by the 
Athenian people, and an altar at Acharnae was consecrated 
to this worship that seems scarcely to have existed outside 
Attica. The statue on the Acropolis was a cult-statue, for 
an oblong basis was placed in front of it for sacrificial pur- 
poses. The same idea is expressed in the epithet Tawvia, 
applied to her in Athens and at Oropus 110, of which the inter- 
pretation is made certain by the context in Pausanias. It is 
probable, then, that before the introduction of the worship of 
Asclepios at Athens, the chief divinity of health, by the side 
of Apollo, was Athena, the Athenians in this as in other 
matters attributing to their goddess all that tended to the 
physical amelioration of life. A sacrifice to Athena Hygieia 
was part of the Panathenic ritual °°’. It was Sophocles who 
first celebrated the praises of Asclepios in verse, and who was 
supposed to have introduced his worship, to which the con- 
servative Aristophanes manifests a certain repugnance ; and 
it may have been on the occasion of the great plague that the 
Epidaurian cult passed over to Athens. The new worship was 
then taken under the patronage of the goddess, and a temple 
to Asclepios was erected on the Acropolis, in which Athena 
was occasionally associated with him*. In the rest of Greece 
this affinity between Asclepios and Athena seems scarcely 
to have been recognized’; and in the temple near Epidauros 
and in its precincts the dedications to Athena are all of a late 
period. And even in Athens itself the importance of Athena 
for the art of healing seems to have declined before the great 
advance of the Asclepios cult®. But it may be that Hygieia, 
the daughter and constant companion of the god of health, 
dedicated according to Plutarch by We have also an inscription of the 
Pericles, is preserved with the inscrip- second century A.D. on the basis of a 
tion, which proves the monument to _ statue of Athena Hygieia from Hiero 


have been raised by the whole Athenian _ near Epidauros*”°. 

people and the sculptor’s name to have ® Vide Girard. Bull. de Corr. Hellén. 
been Pyrrhos (vide Lowy, Kvimstler- 1877, p- 164. . 

inschriften, 53; Journal of Hellenic b There appears to have been some 
Studies, 5.96). In the Mittheclungen, association between Athena and Ascle- 
16. pp. 156-160, Wolters shows on pios at Tegea’®*, and perhaps at Ali- 
architectural grounds that this dedica- _ phera ms 

tion was after the death of Pericles. © We have one late inscription referring 


GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP, 


318 


was merely an emanation from the Attic goddess, a part of 
Athena’s nature detached and personified ; in fact, if Koepp’s 
theory * could be proved that Hygieia arose first at Athens, it 
would be almost certain that she arose thus. The evidence is 
in any case only negative: we do not hear of her until a very 
late period in the circle of Asclepios at Epidauros”, and in 
most cases where her worship is mentioned in other parts of 
Greece there are reasons for supposing it to be later than the 
earliest cult of Athena Hygieia at Athens. 

The one myth of which I am aware that expresses the 
healing power of Athena is the myth about the daughters 
of Proetus, who were cured of their madness by Hermes 
and Athena®; and to some such virtue of hers in dealing with 
supernatural forms of disease we may suppose the words of 
Aristides to apply—‘ Priests and expounders of religion call 
her the cleansing goddess 12%.’ 

The character of Athena, both in the religion and in the 
myths, appears, then, to be the reflex of the civilized Hellenic 
polity. She was, it is true, sometimes identified with foreign 
goddesses—Egyptian, Asiatic, Colchian, or Iberian—probably 
because of the maidenly or warlike nature common to them 
with her; but we cannot say that her worship, like that of 
Artemis or Dionysos, was tainted with Oriental or barbaric 
ideas, with orgiastic excess, with impure symbolism or 
mystery. The great indictment of Arnobius, Eusebius and 
Augustine against paganism is drawn from other parts of the 
religion. The tradition of Athena remained pure and clear 
in spite of the Alexandrine confusion of religions, and in spite 
of the later Orphic literature. 


probably to Athena ‘Yyiea: Deltion > Thraemer (Roscher’s Lexicon, s. v. 


Archaiologikon, 1888, p. 206 : 

"AOnvaig Meveia avéOnrev 

“Oy idove’ dperiy tHs Oeod: 
which is interpreted with much proba- 
bility by Reinach, in the Bull. de Corr. 
ffell. 11. p. 261, as meaning that Mencia 
had seen a vision of Athena and been 
healed by her ‘ virtue.’ 

® Mitt. d. deutsch. Inst. Ath. 1885, 

p- 260. 


HYGIEIA) assumes that she must from 
ancient times have belonged to the 
Epidaurian Asclepios cult, but he fails 
to bring forward any real evidence or 
any stiong reasons against the theory 
of the Attic origin of Hygieia. Her 
worship at Titane was perhaps early, 
but cannot be proved to be as old as 
the Athenian potsherd (Paus. 2. 11. 6). 
© Apollod. #24, 2. 1, 5. 


*.3 ATHENA. 319 


And her religion is eminently political, growing and waning 
with the Greek wéAus: her mpdévora was the ‘ providence’ of the 
city-community in war and peace. The poets sometimes 
placed her, indeed, by the side of Zeus as his peer in 
power and works*, and she borrowed many of his titles 7; 
but her public worship and the religious utterances of the 
poets concerning her are less rich in spiritual content, less 
satisfying to the private conscience or to individual morality. 
The virtues she inspires and approves are, according to the 
panegyric of Aristides, the public virtues of political wisdom, 
courage, concord, discipline, and self-restraint. The latter 
term, cwdpootvn, conveys no meaning of ideal personal purity ; 
for though both in myth and religion she was the maiden- 
goddess, she had nothing to do with chastity as an ideal of 
conduct; the sin of the lesser Ajax she was supposed to 
punish merely as an outrage against her altar and asylum. 
In the Ajax of Sophocles, which embodies the average Greek 
conception of Pallas Athena, she demands a cwppoovrn or 
eo éBera, which was a cautious moderation of act and speech 
in regard to gods and men, and she is no goddess of forgive- 
ness or pity. Her worship, then, had elements of nobility 
as the incarnation of public law and of the virtues on which 
that rests. But any advanced thought or very profound 
religious consciousness. in Greek speculation, where it is not 
purely impersonal, is concerned rather with Zeus and Apollo 
than with the other personages of Greek polytheism. 


® Cf. Hom. Od. 16. 263, and Pindar, ‘yap Kpovidao vdou kpdvreipa TérTuKTat. 
Frag. 112, with the Orphic line, 5e:v7) b Aristides, vol. 1, pp. 27, 28 (Dind.). 


320 GREEK RELIGION. 


NOTE ON RITUAL. 


As a rule the Greek goddess was served by priestesses, and worshipped 
with sacrifice of female victims ; but in the ritual of Athena '"’, as of Aphro- 
dite, we find not infrequently the male victim and the priest. In the case 
of Athena this is probably due to her masculine character, and to her 
frequent connexion in cult with Zeus. We hear of the priest of Athena 
Tlohsaris at Tegea, at Phaselis and Amyclae, and Lindos, the boy-priest of 
Athena Kpavaia, at Elatea. As regards her sacrifice, it was rarely cereal 
or bloodless ; we may conclude that this was the case at Rhodes, where 
no fire was used in her ritual; but in other places the usual oblation was 
the slaughtered animal, the cow and sheep most commonly, but some- 
times the pig and the goat. At Ilium the sacrificial victims were both 
male and female; and we may conclude that the bull was sometimes 
offered her, as she was called ravporedos, and according to the legend 
Theseus sacrificed the bull of Marathon to her. Therefore there is no 
accuracy in the dictum of Eustathius and the scholiast on the /zad (2. 546) 
that the victims to Athena must be female. This dictum was used by 
them, and has been used by some modern critics, to show that piv in that 
important passage refers to Erechtheus and not to Athena; the facts 
show that this argument is valueless. My own view is that the sacrifice 
of bulls and sheep referred to there belonged to Athena and not to 
Erechtheus ; grammatically, and in respect of the rhythm of the sen- 
tence, one view is as tenable as the other; but it is strange that the 
interpolator should speak in the one line of the birth of Erechtheus, and 
then without a pause at once refer to his death; and if, as A. Mommsen 
holds, the interpolator was Peisistratus and the sacrifice is the Panathe- 
naic, then there is all the more reason for thinking that the sacrifice of 
bulls and sheep must be referred to the Athena-cult. For it would be 
very strange that in the time of Peisistratus the Panathenaic offering 


should be spoken of as a sacrifice to Erechtheus, and that in the © 


authorities and records from the fifth century downwards it is always 
regarded as consecrated to Athena, while Erechtheus is scarcely men- 
tioned. 





CHAPTER Soh 
MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 


AMONG the monuments that illustrate the worship of 
Athena, we find the coin-representations in some respects 
the most important. Not only do they give us manifold 
testimony of the character that belonged to her in the 
national religion, but they also prove more clearly than any 
other monumental evidence the very wide diffusion of her cult. 

The very large number of vases upon which her figure 
appears have more to do with mythology than with public 
worship ; perhaps the only type of the goddess, preserved in 
vase-paintings, which can be certainly recognized as con- 
nected with cult is that of the warlike Athena holding her 
shield and brandishing her spear, the type of the ancient 
Palladia and probably of the Athena Polias. 

As regards the works of sculpture, those to which any 
definite cult-name can be attached are very few; but many, 
_ and especially those that can be connected with the creations 
of Pheidias, are of very great value for the history of religious 
art. We have no proof of the prevalence of wholly aniconic 
images of Athena’, and it has been shown that the religion of 
Pallas contained comparatively few ‘survivals’ of primitive 
thought and primitive ritual. The earliest monuments 
that have come down to us express ideas that are already 
relatively advanced. So far as we can judge the most archaic 
images did not represent her as a nature-goddess, but were 
either of the type of the Palladia, embodying the war- 
goddess, or of the seated type characteristic of the goddess of 


* The words of Tertullian"* seem to of the existence of which we know 
refer to some formless @yaAya in Attica, nothing. 


VOL. T. y. 


322 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


the state, and Homer appears to have been aware of both 
forms. But the monuments that illustrate her association 
with the powers of Nature, though not demonstrably the 
most primitive, may be conveniently considered first. 

We cannot quote from the earliest period any assured 
representations that illustrate the cult-connexion of the 
goddess with Poseidon. The bronze-statue of Poseidon 
on the site of Athena’s temple at Pheneos appears to have 
been archaic !®™; and Pausanias informs us that the ancient 
coinage of Troezen bore for its usual device the trident of 
Poseidon and the head of Athena, with reference to the worship 
of the two divinities there!7». And it must surely be Athena’s 
head that we see on two fifth-century coins of Troezen, pub- 
lished by Professor Gardner in his Vumismatic Commentary *: 
the one has faint traces of archaism in the hair and lip; the 
other is a very noble work of fifth-century style (coin Pl. A 21), 
allied to the Pheidian; the broad cheek, the majestic eye- 
brow, and the large chin are forms that accord well with the 
masculine dignity and the deep earnestness of the expression. 
A few of these coins, according to Professor Gardner, show 
us the same head wearing earrings, and therefore they do 
not represent a male divinity, and of no other goddess is 
the countenance so characteristic as of Athena. ‘The god- 
dess of strength, as she was styled at Troezen, could scarcely 
be more vividly depicted than by such forms and such 
expression. 

On the Acropolis of Athens we know that Pallas and 
Poseidon were associated in the Erechtheum or its immediate 
vicinity by actual communion of cult as well as by religious 
myth and mythic representation. And this religious as- 
sociation is most strikingly presented by a black-figured 
vase of advanced archaic style, painted by the Athenian 
vase-painter Amastris®, on which the two divinities appear 
in solemn hieratic pose, standing over against each other, 
the goddess holding up her hand: the drawing is masterly 


oP, 47, Fl M, Ian 2. Die Griechischen Vasen mit Metster- 
> Lenormant, Zlite Céram.1. P1.78;  signaturen, p. 43. 
Arch, Zeit. 1846, Taf. 39, 4-5; Klein, 





& esi dba 4224 44 





rose, hor 

















XI.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 323 


in the delicacy of its detail (Pl. XIII. A). In at least one 
representation of the birth of Erichthonios Poseidon is 
present ; for instance, on a relief in the Louvre, of which the 
central figure is Athena receiving the infant from the arms 
of Ge, we can recognize the sea-god in the figure seated on 
the left with wild matted hair and half-bare body, holding 
a trident or sceptre *. 

It is hard to separate the cult of the two divinities on the 
Acropolis from the story of their strife for the land, and from 
the various monuments that represented that religious drama. 
A sacred spot in Athens, probably on the Acropolis and near to 
the place in the precincts of the Erechtheum where Poseidon’s 
trident was stamped on the rock, was called ‘ the voting-place 
of God’ The Greek title seems to suggest that here Zeus 
took the votes of the various divinities concerning the rival 
claims of Poseidon and Athena to the country. Such a version 
of the story is presented to us on the alabaster relief in 
Smyrna° of the first century A.D., on which we see on the 
left the figure of Poseidon with his left foot on a stone, his left 
hand on his thigh and his right resting on his trident: 
opposite him is Athena wearing a Corinthian helmet and 
leaning on her spear; above and behind each divinity are 
olive-trees. In the centre is an altar with Athena’s snake 
coiled round it licking her robe, and the twelve divinities are 
grouped on each side, while Nike is taking the votes from an 
urn that stands on the altar. 

The subject was differently rendered by certain monuments 
on the Acropolis of Athens. Pausanias saw, probably not far 
from the Erechtheum 4, a group of Athena and Poseidon, the 
goddess represented as creating the olive, the god as causing 
a salt spring to well forth. Also in the west pediment of the 
Parthenon he saw the great group of which only fragments 
have survived, and which he interprets as the strife of the 
two divinities. Whether it was the strife itself or the moment 


" Mon. dell? Inst. 1. xii. 1. sych. Zeus 1°71, 

b Ards YHpos or Aids Teoooi: vide © Mitt. d. deut. Inst. 1882, p. 48, 
Cratinus, Archilochoi Frag. 4 (Meineke Pi. 1. Fig. 2. 
2, p. 18), Suidas s.v. Ards Ynpos, He- 4) 3594.5. 


Y4 


324 GREEK RELIGION. [cHap, 


of triumph that was shown, what was the precise action of the 
two protagonists, who were the subordinate personages, are 
questions that have given rise to long and intricate discussion 
which may here be omitted. Our only trustworthy evidence 
—and even that is difficult to interpret—is Carrey’s drawing 4, 
made before the destruction of the central figures. And we 
can conclude from it that it was the moment of victory that 
was represented there, for the goddess is moving rapidly to 
the left with triumphant gesture, as if to claim her own, 
while Poseidon starts back in anger. By what token or by 
what beneficent creation the strife had been adjudged the 
drawing does not help us to decide. On the Acropolis of 
Attica, we can hardly suppose that the token of Athena's 
right would be anything but the olive, and it has been held 
that traces of the olive-tree survive in the centre of the 
pediment. 

In other representations of the same sacred myth, which 
have been supposed to afford a clue to the reconstruction 
of the Parthenon group, the olive appears as a significant 
emblem”. For instance, the well-known vase in St. Peters- 
burg* from Kertsch shows us the olive-tree in the centre 
between the two rivals, both of whom appear about. to 
strike downwards with their weapons, the spear and the 
trident. No final interpretation has as yet been given of 
this action of Pallas and Poseidon; it is very doubtful what 
he is striking and with what purpose, nor is it easy to 
say why she should be wielding her spear as she is after the 
olive-tree has already been produced, nor why Dionysos 
with his panther and thyrsos should apparently be running to 
her aid. The value of the vase as a clue to the motive of the 
Parthenon representation has been very much exaggerated ; 


* Miiller-Wieseler, Denkmdler der the loom, described by Ovid, Pallas 
alten Kunst, 121. weaves the story of her strife with 
> In her contest with Arachne at Poseidon: 
Percussamque sua simulat de cuspide terram 
Prodere cum bacis foetum canentis olivae 
Mirarique deos. Met. 6. 80. 
° Published by Stephani, Comfte- 3, p. 245; Baumeister, Denkmiler, 
Rendu, 1872, Pl. 1; Hellenic Journal, pp. 1395. 


ay 


ap 


a 


se, 





face page 325 
o 


XI.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 325 


but it may preserve certain reminiscences of the Pheidian 
group, especially in the figure and drapery of Athena. 

Of still more importance as a surviving copy of the Athena 
of the western gable is the statuette from Epidauros, now in 
Athens, representing the goddess moving rapidly to her right 
with her right arm outstretched and her shield on her left ; 
the gesture and the movement seem full of fire and life, and 
the Pheidian style appears in the drapery and forms ®. 

We have also a number of late Attic coins, which illustrate 
the public value and prevalence of this myth, but do not help 
much to settle the question about the figures on the Parthenon. 
They bear upon their obverse the figures of Poseidon and 
Athena, standing over against each other, the god on the left 
and the goddess on the right, and between them the olive-tree, 
upon which her owl is seated and around which coils her snake 
threatening Poseidon, who stands raising his right hand with 
a menacing gesture. Athena bears the spear and shield in 
her left hand, and holds out her right as if pointing to the 
tree as her sign. In composition the scene presents very 
little resemblance to the central motive of Carrey’s drawing, 
and it may, for all we know, be a reproduction of the free 
group that Pausanias saw on the Acropolis. 

In these representations the deities are at strife. On the 
black-figured vase mentioned above their meeting seems 
peaceful, and on two other coins*, where they are seen 
standing with the olive-tree in the middle, there is no sign 
of contest, but possibly a scene of reconciliation and concord, 
just as on a cameo published in the Gazette Archéologique" 
we find them jointly engaged in forming the vine (PI. 
XIV. a). | 

Besides her association with Poseidon, we have other 
monumental record of her relations with the water and sea- 
faring. On some of the coins of South Italy, Thurium, and 


® Published in Mythol. and Mon. Museum Catalogue of Coins: Attica, 
Anc. Ath., Warrison and Verrall, 17. 4. 
Pl. 46. © Num. Comm. Paus., Z. 15. and 
b Gardner and Imhoof-Blumer, Mum. 17. 
Comm. Paus. Z. 11. 12.14.16; British 4 1886, Pl. 3. 1. 


326 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP, 


Heraclea®*, the head of Athena is found wearing a helmet on 
which a Scylla, sometimes holding a rudder, is incised (Coin 
Pl. A 22). To explain these we need not follow Lenormant > 
in his strange fancies about an original monstrous shape of 
an Athena Tpiroyevera with a fish-tail; we do not even know 
that this coin-type represented Tpiroyévera at all. All that 
we need say is that in maritime localities Athena acquired 
occasionally a maritime character and symbols, as any other 
divinity might ; and we may vaguely apply the term Tpuro- 
yevea to the Pallas of the coin-types mentioned above. But 
though originally this was probably a cult-title, we do not know 
what the type was, if there was any, that was specially chosen 
for the images of that cult. The blue-eyed statue of Athena 
in the Ceramicus °°° certainly did not allude to the story of 
her birth from the blue water, as Pausanias imagined. The 
bronze statue at Aliphera?®, wrought by Hypatodorus, was 
probably a representation of Athena Tpiroyéveva, but Pausanias 
only remarks on its size and beauty, and saw nothing in it 
specially characteristic. The Rospigliosi statue in Rome, 
published by Gerhard’, shows us an Athena with her left 
hand enveloped in her large mantle and resting on her hip ; 
at her feet is a female Triton, at her left the owl; her aegis is 
adorned with stars, and her face wears a languid sentimental 
expression. But this is a late work, and scarcely to be 
regarded as a monument of public cult. And it is absurd 
to argue from this that every Pallas with a similar expression 
and with starry aegis or robe is Tritogeneia. The pose and 
the sentiment are merely the signs of the later age, and the 
stars may be simply a conventional decoration, or at least 
are no symbols of the water-born divinity. 

A few monuments may be quoted illustrating Athena’s 
association with the earth, with Dionysos, and the powers of 
fertility. The representation on the fine cameo quoted above, 
in which she is seen by the side of Poseidon assisting the vine 


® Guzde to the Coins of the Brit. Mus. ¢ Minerven Idole: Akad. Abhandl. 
3.C, 17; 4.C, 16; Head, Hest. Num. 24. 4. 


p- 59, Fig. 35; p. 72, Fig. 48. 4 As Hettner argued, Annali dell Inst. 
> Gazette Archéol. 1880, p. 183. 1844, pp. 115-132. 


x1.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 


327 


to grow, is a unique motive which illustrates the ocxodopia, 
the festival of the grape-cluster at Athens. On the vase of 
St. Petersburg discussed above, we find Dionysos coming to 
her aid, possibly as Dionysos Aevépirns, who was interested in 
her new-created olive-tree. 

We may regard the scene on certain black-figured vases 
in Munich* which represent Athena mounted in her chariot 
preceded by Apollo playing the lyre, and by Dionysos who 
looks back upon her, as alluding to some association between 
these divinities in cult and festival. Athena herself stands 
playing the lyre by Dionysos” on an archaic vase published 
by Gerhard, and possibly the vase-painter may have thought 
of the Oschophoria the festival in which Dionysos and Athena 
Sciras were jointly honoured °. 

This affinity of the goddess with the divinities of vegetation 
might explain the attribute of the cornucopia, which was some- 
times placed in her hand in later representations, although, as 
Miiller suggests, she may have acquired this from her later 
identification with Tyche, the Fortune of the state. But there 
appears to have been some representation belonging to the 
Greek period of Athena holding in her hand an apple, which was 
the usual symbol of fertility, for an epigram in the Azthology 
seems clearly to describe a statue of this kind’”°; and the 
female figures in terracotta recently found on the Acropolis, 
holding a shield on the arm and an apple or pomegranate in 
the hand, have been supposed with good reason to represent 
Athena, and belong to the archaic period. It has been sug- 
gested above that the cult of Athena Itonia may have regarded 
her partly as a divinity of vegetation, and for this reason have 
associated her with the powers of the lower world. We should 


® ©. Jahn, Vasensammlung, 112, 
353, 784, 1131. 

b Auserlesene Vasenbilder, 1. 37. 

© Gerhard’s further attempts to dis- 
cern a Dionysiac element in the wor- 
ship and festival of Athena Sciras are 
futile; the gems and terracotta relief 
which he publishes (Akad. Abhandl. 
25. 7, 8, Io, 13), on which he finds 


Maenads clasping or dancing before 
the image of Athena are wrongly in- 
terpreted (vide Miiller-Wieseler, Denk- 
maler, 2142): there is no evidence of 
an orgiastic character in the festival of 
Scirra, nor is it certain that it was 
consecrated to Athena, 
4 Athen. Mittheil. 1894, p. 491. 


328 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


possess an interesting monument of this cult if we could inter- 
pret the figures ona large gem published by Miiller® as those of 
the Coronean worship (Pl. XIII. b)}. We see an Athena seated 
on the left, and the god of the lower world with Cerberus on 
the right, and the goddess is pouring a libation over the flame 
of the altar that stands between them. That this is Athena 
Itonia and the Zeus-Hades of Coronea is the view of Overbeck” 
and other archaeologists, and Wieseler’s objections and his own 
interpretation lack weight. The representation is unique, and 
we have the literary record of the unique cult of the two 
divinities at Coronea. And as there is no other cult that 
explains the monument, the interpretation offered by Miiller 
and Overbeck is at least a valid hypothesis. | 

The local cults of Athena Alea at Tegea and Hellotis at 
Corinth, in which the goddess has been supposed without much 
reason to have been worshipped as a physical or elemental 
power, have left no monuments at all that might prove or 
illustrate the precise meaning of these terms. Of the Oriental 
Athena Hellotis of Corinth we have no representation, and 
the Tegean coins that bear on their obverse the head of 
Alea*® give us no way of distinguishing between this and 
any other type of the goddess. 

On a late vase of South Italy we see a comic rendering 
of the myth of Heracles and Auge‘: above them is the 
statue of a goddess on a column, holding a patera in her right 
hand and a garland in her left, and wearing a high-girdled 
chiton. As Auge was surprised in the temple of Athena Alea, 
we might suppose that we have here a reproduction of the 
temple-image; but the attitude is too foolish and the attri- 
butes too meaningless to allow us to take the figure seriously. 

The attempt to discover among the monuments some 
representation of Athena Sciras has been equally. unsuc- 
cessful. A statue of mysterious and ghostly form exists in 
the Villa Albani®, in which we can discern the outlines of 
an Athena armed with helmet and shield, and enveloped from 


® Denkmiler d. alt. Kunst, 2. 226. 4 Mon. dell Inst. 4. Taf. 12, 
» Kunst-Mythologie, 1. p. 47. © Gerhard, Akad, Abhandl. Taf. 24. 3. 
© Num. Comm. Paus. p. go. 


X1.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 329 


head to foot in an ample mantle. The explanation of this 
enigmatic appearance of the goddess which Gerhard gives is 
that the statue conveys an allusion to the procession of the 
Scirophoria, in which he supposes the image of Athena Sciras 
to have been covered and sheltered from the heat. The 
difficulty is that, so far as we know, a sunshade was used 
on that occasion, not a covering such as this; nor did the 
idol of Athena Sciras play any part in that procession. It is 
more probable that the sculptor was alluding to the veiling 
of the image of Athena Polias in the Plynteria. 

The cult-statue of Athena Sciras was probably a xoanon 
of archaic type, as it had to submit to the primitive fetish 
ritual of being daubed with white earth?’>°, which was 
supposed to be good for olives *. 

We hear of a process of divination, practised at Sciros on 
the Eleusinian Way, by means of dice or draughts ; and if we 
believe that a scene on a vase published by Gerhard ° repre- 
sents two warriors seated above a board and divining their lot 
in this manner, it might seem that he was justified in giving 
the name Athena Sciras to the goddess with the spear and 
the star-embroidered vestment that stands behind them; but 
even so we should not have discovered the type of the idol, 
for in another similar representation ® she has the form of the 
Pheidian Parthenos, and the connexion between the dice- 
players at Sciros and Athena Sciras is unproved and unlikely 4. 

It has already been said in anticipation that the monu- 
ments give no sign whatever that Athena in Greek religion 
was ever identified or by kinship connected with the moon or 
the lights of heaven. The stars on the robe mean nothing at all, 
for we find them also on the robe of Creon in one vase-scene. 
The half-moon on the coins of Athens in no way reveals 
Athena as a moon-goddess, as has been shown already ; 
the crescent moon is a not uncommon shield-device, and is 


® Cf, the practice of smearing the Taf. 19. s. 29, 13; also Raoul-Rochetté, 
statue of Artemis Alpheionia with clay Mon. lnéd. Taf. 56. 
from the Alpheus. © On a vase published /ahrd. a. a. 
> Akad. Abhandl. 26.9. Cf. Etrus- Inst 1892, 102. 
kische und Campanische Vasenbilder, 4 Vide p. 291, note 4, 


GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


33° 


sometimes found on the shield of Pallas; where it appears on 
the aegis it need only be regarded as a charm to avert danger, 
for which purpose it was sometimes used ®. 

Archaeological evidence has been found by Roscher to 
support his theory that Athena was the personification of 
the thunder-cloud, namely, in certain coin-types of Macedon, 
Athens, and Boeotia?, that show the goddess striding forward 
brandishing the lightning in her right hand. We can 
scarcely call this evidence, for these coins are all of the later 
period, and may all be influenced by the Macedonian coin- 
type, which represents Athena Alkis. But we do not know 
that this divinity was recognized as a thunder-goddess in 
Macedon ; on the coins of Pella she merely wields the spear°; 
and the coins of Antigonus and Philip V that give her the 
thunderbolt need only allude to the common idea expressed 
in Homer and Pindar that ‘Athena sat nearest to the 
lightning, that is to Zeus, and might sometimes wield his 
weapon ; but it is only in later art and for the sake of variety 
that the thunderbolt takes the place of the spear in the hands 
of Athena Alkis or Promachus. 

Nor, lastly, in the monuments that deal with the Gorgon- 
myth is there any suggestion of the various physical forces 
or facts that Athena has been supposed to embody. The 
archaeological evidence in support of the theory that Medusa 
personified the baneful side of Athena herself is even slighter 
than the literary. A bronze in Syracuse and a marble relief in 
Messina have been quoted representing an armed Medusa‘: 
but if these works are rightly interpreted they prove the 


® Hesych. s.v. cedAnviss pudantnprov 
Omep eyxpeuara Tots madios. Vide O. 
Jahn, Ueber den Aberglauben des bésen 
Blicks bei den Alten, Berichte d. K. 


shield and spear but the thunderbolt is 
in the field, Brit. Mus. Cat. Thessaly, 
&¢., Pl. 20. 12; on later coins of Boeotia 
we have a winged Athena Nike bran- 


Sachs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss. 1855, pp. 42; 
52. Wieseler’s discussion (Denkm. d. alt. 
Kunst, 2. p. 168) of this lunar symbolism 
applied to Athena is sceptical and sane. 

> Head, Hest. Num. p. 203, Fig. 146; 
on third-century coins of Athens, Brzz. 
Mus. Cat. Attica, Pl. 15. 2; on coins of 
Pyrrhus struck at Syracuse Pallas holds 


dishing the thunderbolt, Brzt. Mus. Cat. 
Centr. Greece, Pl. 6. 3; on certain 
coins of Phaselis she stands on a ship’s 
prow bearing the aegis as a shield and 
wielding the thunderbolt, Miill.-Wies., 
Denkm. d. alt. Kunst, 2. 223. 

¢ Brit. Mus. Cat. Macedon, p. 99. 

4 P. 287. 


ea, eee me Fee 


XI.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 331 


caprice of the artist, but do not prove that he or any one 
else believed Athena was Medusa. Even the larger view 
taken by O. Miiller in his Hyperboretsche Studien of a double 
Athena, a malevolent and benevolent goddess, lacks sound 
archaeological support *. 

The monuments that represent the city-goddess and the 
goddess of war are by far the most important. We cannot 
keep the two ideas always distinct, for the goddess who 
guarded the city, in far the greater number of the monuments 
that may be supposed to represent Athena Polias, appears to 
be guarding it with the spear and the shield. 

But there is an important distinction of type that divides 
the representations of Polias into those of the seated divinity, 
in peaceful and tranquil pose that might symbolize the 
stability of the state, and those of Pallas erect and threatening 
with her weapons. 

We can conclude from Homer that the earliest idol of 
Athena in Troy, to which the Trojan women bring the peplos 
to lay on the knees, was seated on a throne; the scholiast 
was struck with this, and the comments of Strabo imply that 
the usual images of Athena Polias were standing; but he 
adds that the seated form occurred in Massilia, Phocaea, 
Rome, and many other places!*'*, Pausanias™!° tells us of 
a seated statue of Athena on the Acropolis, the work of 
Endoeus, and mentions also the shrine at Erythrae of Athena 


« In a paper published in the ZpA- 
emeris Archaeologike, 1890 (pp. 1-6, 
Tliv. 1), another attempt has been made 
to show a sort of duality in the cult of 
Athena and other divinities by Mylonas, 
who quotes the worship of Polias and 
Parthenos (?) in Athens, of Polias and 
Sthenias in Troezen, of Alea and Hippia 
in Tegea, the 5vo dydApara ’AOnvas in 
Aegium of Achaea (Paus. 7. 23, 7), the 
two temples of Athena at Thebes. But 
how do we know that there were just 
two cults and no more than two in 
Thebes and Tegea? We know there 
were more than two in Athens and 
Troezen. The monuments he quotes 


and the relief he publishes show no dis- 
tinction between the forms that might 
correspond to a real duality of concept : 
the cases where the figure of Athena 
appeared twice on the same monument 
or in the same temple may be explained 
sometimes by the artistic desire of 
symmetry, sometimes by the dramatic 
necessity of reproducing the same per- 
sonage in different parts of the same 
scene, sometimes by the simple fact that 
there happened to be two dedications 
of two images. Nearly every Greek 
divinity had many sides, but neither two 
nor three is a holy number in Greek 
religion. 


332 GREEK RELIGION. [cHap, 


Polias and in it the temple-image of the enthroned goddess 
holding a spindle in each of her hands, and wearing a ‘ polos’ 
or upright crown, a work which he attributes to the same 
sculptor. 

Long discussion has been spent on the question whether 
the ancient image of Athena Polias in her temple on the 
Acropolis of Athens, carved from olive-wood , was of the 
sitting or standing type. The latter view was strongly main- 
tained by Jahn’, and held also by O. Miller” and Prof. Curtius 
and later archaeologists; but Prof. Furtwangler, in his article 
on Athena in Roscher’s Lexicon *, pronounces for the former. 
There is little value in his argument that because Phocaea 
and Erythrae mythically and questionably traced their origin 
to Athens, therefore the type of their city-goddess, who was 
seated on her throne, was borrowed from the mother-city ; 
but there is more weight in his contention that the seated 
figures of terracotta and marble found on the Acropolis and 
in Attic tombs reproduce Athena Polias: and he considers 
that this form of a peaceful maternal goddess is most in 
keeping with the ancient Pelasgic cult. This may be so, 
although Arnobius declares that the statues of Athena on 
the Acropoleis of her cities were always of virginal form 1} °, 
But even if there were no strong arguments against Prof. Furt- 
wangler’s view, as there are, there is too scanty evidence for 
us to pronounce positively in its favour. There is no proved 
connexion between Athena Polias and the Attic burial ritual, 
although Gerhard on general grounds thinks that there ought 
to have been; we only hear of the eccentric and probably 
exceptional death-tax levied by Hippias, who enacted that for 
each dead citizen a small sum should be paid to the priestess 
of the city-goddess by way of compensation ®*'. Again, 
the evidence from the Attic tombs is very slight indeed ; for 
some of the seated figures published by Gerhard? are not 
demonstrably Athena at all, or are not known to have been 
interred. One of the most striking of these, discovered in an 

* De Antiguiss. Minerv. Poliad. simulacris. 


» Miiller, Azczent Art, § 96, 24; cf. § 96, 9. 
¢ P, 689. a Akad. Abhandl. Taf. 22. 





‘at dea 6) non MO6ete e's . 
v pe HE a het te 


XI. ] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 333 


Attic tomb®, is a small coloured terracotta representation of 
the goddess, seated and clad in ample drapery that conceals 
her arms, wearing a blue polos on her head, and an aegis 
painted blue upon a red mantle(Pl. XV.a). But if far more of 
these figures were in existence, and were known to have been 
buried with the dead, why must they be copies of the ancient 
temple-idol? We might believe them to be so, if this type of 
the seated divinity were most common among the ancient 
monuments of Athens, and if we urged, as we well might, the 
argument that the ancient form of the Polias idol would fix 
itself most tenaciously upon the imagination of the people, 
and would be most frequently reproduced. But the argument 
fails, for this type is far less usual among the various existing 
monuments than that of the erect and energetic goddess of 
war’. Besides the few terracottas which may be mentioned, 
there is the marble statue, often described and often published, 
found on the north side of the Acropolis, which belongs as 
regards style to the sixth century° and might be the actual 
work of Endoeus, the image of Athena mentioned by Pau- 
sanias seated before the door of her own temple. But this is 
no cult-image. The only representation, so far as I am aware, 
in which the seated Athena is receiving sacrifice and worship 
is on a black-figured vase in Berlin, on which the goddess is 
seen on her throne wearing no aegis, and holding the helmet in 
her left hand and a cup in her right (Pl. XIV.b). This is an 
interesting type of the peaceful and beneficent divinity who, 
in her own city, can lay aside her helmet, but no one maintains 
that it is the image of Athena Polias: whether it could be 
supposed to reproduce in some measure the xoanon of Athena 
Nike, which was preserved in the shrine on the Acropolis, is a 
question that will be raised later. The seated idol, then, was 


* I cannot find a direct testimony as 
to its ‘provenance’; but Stackelberg 
tacitly vouches for it, Graber der Hel- 
lenen, Taf. 57. 

> Vide Jahrbuch d. deut. Inst. 1893, 
p- 142. 

© The two inscriptions containing the 
name of Endoeus belong to the latter 


part of the sixth century; M. Lechat 
finds reasons for assigning the seated 
Athena on the Acropolis to the period 
after the Persian invasion; but it is 
almost incredible that Pausanias should 
have connected a fifth-century sculptor 
with the mythic Daedalus. Rev. des Et. 
Gree. 1892, p. 386, and i893, p. 23. 


334 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


evidently in some vogue at Athens; and if it were the general 
custom, which is far more than we can say, to inter an idol of 
Athena with the dead, this tranquil type would accord better 
with the peace of the grave than the armed, erect, and threat- 
ening figure, though this latter were the form and pose of the 
very temple-image of the most ancient city-worship. 

And that the actual form of Athena Polias was the erect 
and armed figure is proved by cumulative evidence both from 
literature and monuments. We can draw a very probable 
conclusion from the words of Athenagoras, who contrasts the 
seated figure of Athena, carved by Endoeus at Athens, with 
the ancient city-idol of olive-wood ; there is no sense in the 
words unless they express a contrast between a seated and an 
erect Athena*, the latter being the ancient xoanon 1", There 
are also certain passages in the Greek dramatists which Jahn 
has collected, and which point clearly to the same conclusion. 
Two of the most striking are in the Electra of Euripides and 
the Birds of Aristophanes !%4, In the former Orestes, after 
his mother’s murder, is bidden to go to Athens to the sacred 
image of Pallas Athene, and clasp it in his arms—‘for she will 
keep back the Furies ...that they touch thee not, and will 
hold above thy head the round shield with the Gorgon’s face.’ 
The poet must be supposed to be speaking of the chief and 
most sacred Spéras of Athena, most familiar to all his audience ; 
the image of Athena Polias, who could hold her shield over 
Orestes’ head if she were erect with her shield raised on her 
left arm, but not if she were seated in peaceful attitude. Still 
more convincing is the passage in Aristophanes. The bird- 
city of the Clouds is complete, and they want a goddess to 
guard it (IloAvo8yos) : ‘for whom shall we card the wool of the 
peplos?’ asks Epops. ‘Why not allow Athena Polias her 
usual right? But how could a city be well-governed, when 
the goddess, being a woman, stands in full armour, &c.?’ 

How these words could have been written, unless the 
statue of Athena Polias at Athens were erect and armed, is 
hard to understand: for Dr. Furtwangler’s explanation that 


* Athenagoras seems to attribute both some corruption in the words, the force 
to Endoeus: granting there may be of the whole passage is not invalidated. 


2s SS eh se ee 


XI.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 335 


the Attic poets were always thinking of Homer’s energetic 
Pallas Athena, never of their own city-idol, seems very 
unnatural. The whole point of Aristophanes’ joke is lost, 
unless the goddess ‘standing in her panoply’ is the very 
Athena Polias of the temple on the Acropolis. 

The sacred temple-image of Athens was fabled to have 
fallen from heaven 1274, like the Trojan Palladium ; and it was 
probably easier, even for the naive imagination of early men, 
to conceive of a stiff log-like idol descending thence than of 
a seated divinity shot from the sky, throne and all. We may 
note also that in Alciphron Athena Poliuchos is addressed as 
IIpdépaxos ; the prayer would be naturally to Athena Polias, who 
is elsewhere called Poliuchos, and she could not well be styled 
Promachus unless she were erect and in warlike attitude '* °. 

Also there is forcible evidence supplied by actual monu- 
ments of cults. A black-figured cylix in the British Museum, 
of very archaic style (Pl. XV.b), has been published by 
Mr. Cecil Smith *, which contains a representation that he has 
interpreted as a bridal procession bringing a bull as an offer- 
ing to Athena Polias on the zporeAcia iyepa, the day of the 
preliminary marriage-rites. The interest taken by the goddess 
of the state in the marriages of her people has been already 
noticed ; and there can be no doubt of the name and character 
of the divinity who stands behind her altar, receiving her wor- 
shippers in warlike pose with uplifted spear and shield. If 
the vase-painter’s imagination had not been dominated by the 
form of the idol in the city-temple of the goddess to whom the 
sacrifice was due, it is inconceivable that he should have chosen 
a type so much out of accord with the peacefulness of the 
ceremony. Behind her the olive and her serpent are sketched, 
and her temple is indicated by a single Doric column; all 
these symbols placing beyond a doubt the reference of the 
rite to Athena Polias. 

Another representation, easier to interpret and pointing to 


* Hellenic Journal, 1, p. 202, Pl. 7. that does not appear quite so probable ; 
Dr. Murray (Classical Review, 1887, but in any case we have a sacrifice to 
Pp. 315) explains it as a sacrifice after the goddess of the city. 

a dithyrambic contest, an explanation 


336 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP, | 


the same conclusion, is found on a black-figured amphora of 
the Berlin Museum ®, that shows worshippers bringing a cow 
to an altar, behind which stands the shielded goddess with the 
spear uplifted in her right hand (Pl. XV.c). The altar is the 
large altar that stood before the Erechtheum, out of which 
Athena Polias must be supposed to have come to receive her 
sacrifice. 

A third sacrificial scene appears on a relief in the Acropolis 
Museum’. A group of worshippers are bringing a sow as 
an offering to the goddess, whose form is certainly different 
from that seen in the two monuments last mentioned; for 
there is nothing warlike in her attitude or attributes, except 
for the helmet on her head. What concerns the present ques- 
tion is the erect pose of the figure, by which the sculptor was 
able to convey a casual allusion to the type of Athena Polias. 
We may believe that the sow, an animal very rarely used in 
the ritual of Athena, is offered to her here because of her asso- 
Ciation in certain rites and festivals with the goddesses of 
earth ; and this votive slab may have been connected in some 
way with the Arrhephoria. 

We have then direct evidence from Attic monuments that 
the type of the erect and warlike Athena appears in cult- 
scenes that are most naturally connected with the worship of 
Athena Polias: and we have no such evidence as yet forth- 
coming as regards the goddess seated on her throne. Also 
the former type was far more in vogue than the latter in Athens, 
appearing on the very large group of Panathenaic vases, and 
also on Attic coins, and reproduced in some votive bronze 
figures found on the Acropolis, and on marble reliefs®. And, 
finally, there is much reason for Jahn’s view that the Dresden 
Pallas, an important monument of this type, is a copy of the 
idol on the Acropolis ; for alone among statues of Athena this 
is wrought with the embroidered peplos, in the small squares 
of which are scenes from the battle of the gods and giants, the 


® The vase has been well described © Vide Mythology and Monuments of 
by Miss Harrison in Mythology and Ancient Athens, p. 459, Figs. 55 and 56; 
Monuments of Ancient Athens, p. 457. Curtius, Arch. Zeit. 1882, Taf. 8. 

b Jb. Fig. 76, p. 519. 


CERT TN a Se ee ee 


X1.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 337 


myth which we know was woven on the actual peplos that the 
maidens wrought each year for the State-goddess. 

These are reasons then for believing that this was the form 
of the ancient idol in the oldest temple of Athena, which, 
according to Herodotus, was burnt by the Persians: and there 
is no evidence that before this, or by the side of this, there 
existed in the same temple the cult-figure of the seated 
divinity of more peaceful and maternal form. Nor is it sur- 
prising that the Polias-image should have borne so near a 
resemblance to the ordinary Palladium; for this latter was 
also in many places an image of the city-goddess, and in the 
Cyclic legend the sacred idol which Diomed and Odysseus 
bore away was the ‘luck’ of the state. 

Looking at the other Greek states, in which we can gather 
from numismatic and other evidence that the worship of 
Athena Polias existed, we find the type very wide spread of 
the armed goddess, striding forward or standing erect and 
threatening. 

Pausanias gives us some account of the statue of the Athena 
‘of the brazen house’ at Sparta, carved by Gitiadas *8: and 
he speaks of certain mythic scenes wrought in relief ‘upon the 
bronze. Looking merely at the text, we might be in doubt 
whether these were carved upon the bronze-plated walls of the 
temple or upon the surface of the statue itself. But a Lace- 
daemonian bronze coin of the period of Gallienus shows us the 
figure of the goddess armed with uplifted spear and shield, 
and clad strangely in a chiton of which the lower half is 
divided by horizontal parallel bands, and on which small 
figures are indicated in relief (Coin Pl. A 23). As Professor 
Gardner rightly observes *, this unique coin-device is explained 
by the text of Pausanias and helps to explain it. The city- 
goddess of Sparta then was armed and warlike, and of the 
type of the ancient Palladia. 

It is probable that the cult-statue of Athena Itonia of 
Thessaly, whose name was the war-cry of the Aleuadae, and 
whose worship fostered the political union of Boeotia, was the 
figure of the fighting Pallas, for we find this stamped on many 


® Num. Com. Paus. p. 58, N. 13. 
VOL. I. Z 


338 GREEK RELIGION. [cHaP, 


Thessalian coins (Coin Pl. A 24). Ona coin of Melos, and on 
a marble relief found in that island *, we see the armed goddess 
in the usual pose of the Palladion, but resembling the idol of 
the Ephesian Artemis in the Herme-shape of the lower part 
of the body. And the coinage of Pella, which has been men- 
tioned above, presents us with the form of Athena Alkis— 
striding forward with spear and shield—as she appears also on 
the coins of Himera, Camarina, and Mesembria?. Occasion- 
ally, as we have seen, the thunderbolt takes the place of the 
spear in her hand without much change in the pose or probably 
in the idea. 

We find at times a more peaceful pose or more peaceful 
attributes chosen for the city-goddess, although in the earlier 
monuments her warlike character is most marked. The idol 
of New Ilium, according to the description of Apollodorus 1” », 
held the spindle in one hand, while otherwise it preserved the 
forms of the older Palladia: and his account accords with the 
device of a later coin of this city on which Pallas appears with 
the widos or soft Phrygian cap on her head, with the spear 
held in her right hand on a level with her shoulder and with 
the spindle in her left °. 

At Priene, where we hear of a temple dedicated to Athena 
Polias by Alexander **}, the image carved for the worship 
probably presented her in peaceful attitude; for a coin of 
the city of the imperial period, bearing the figure of Athena 
standing with her serpent coiled before her, shows us probably 
the type of the temple statue’, The chryselephantine 
masterpiece of Pheidias, the Athena Parthenos, which will 
be afterwards described, may well have given vogue to the 
more peaceful type of the Athena Polias; but, so far as the 
evidence can decide, the militant must still be regarded as the 
dominant type of the city-goddess, even in the later period. 

A very kindred conception, but differently expressed in 
art, was that of Athena Nike. In considering the monuments 
to which this name can be given, we can put aside the 


® Vide Jahn, op. cit., Taf. 3. 7 and 8. © Gerhard, Akad. Abhandl. 24. 12. 
b Brit. Mus. Cat., Sicily, pp. 81, 4 Head, Hist. Num. p. 508. 
207 ; 2b. Thrace, p. 133. 


ae. 
in 


XI.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 339 


ingenious suggestion of Jahn*, that the trophy may be 
sometimes regarded as her Spéras or rude image; for none 
of his proofs suffice for the theory’, and we have noticed 
reasons for interpreting the trophy always as the dyadya of 
Zeus. Nike, the personification of Victory, was in all pro- 
bability an emanation from Athena herself, but in the monu- 
ments must be distinguished from her; nor is it difficult to 
distinguish them, for the goddess who personifies the abstrac- 
tion is usually winged, wears none of Athena’s attributes, and 
can be recognized generally by her action: she is pouring 
a libation to a warrior or a god, or is crowning the successful 
athlete, or decking the trophy, or leading animals to the 
sacrifice as a thank-offering for a triumph won. But it is 
more difficult to say by what marks we can recognize 
Athena Nike, the goddess revered by that name in actual 
cult in Megara, in Aegina, and on the Acropolis of Athens. 
We may, of course, say that the large group of representations 
of the goddess bearing the Victory in her hands, the great 
Pheidian statue of the Parthenon for instance, and its near 
or remote descendants present us with the idea of the vic- 
torious goddess. Yet none of these are actual cult-types of 
Athena Nike. But we have no reason to doubt® that the 
statue described by Harpocration of the goddess ‘ holding the 
pomegranate in her right hand and the helmet in her left,’ is 
the xoanon for which the chapel, called in later times the temple 
of Nike Apteros, was built on the top of the southern wall of 
the Propylaea at Athens. It is usual to explain the pome- 
granate in this case as the emblem of fertility, as Athena was 
revered at Athens as the giver of the kindly fruits of the 
earth; and this explanation is more natural on the whole 
than Botticher’s, who sees here, as always, an allusion in the 
pomegranate to bloodshed and death; for surely the goddess 
who has laid aside her helmet is more properly to be regarded 

® De Minerv. Simulac. pp. 23-24. bearing a trophy and the inscription 

b The slight resemblance that the 7A@nvas v«npdpov, may show that in 
wooden post with the helmet, shield, this case the trophy was a thank-offer- 
and spear upon it bears to the Palla- ing to Athena, not that it was regarded 
dion is accidental. The coin of Per- as her image. 
gamon, published by Jahn (2. 3. 4), ¢ Vide p. 313. 

Z 2 


GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


340 


as the peaceful dispenser of blessings. An unpublished black- 
figured vase, mentioned by Prof. Furtwangler*, has upon it 
the seated figure of the goddess holding the pomegranate but 
wearing the helmet ; and another, published by Gerhard and 
Jahn”, contains the scene of a sacrifice brought to Athena, 
who is seated and holding the cup in one hand and the helmet 
in the other. That any of these are reproductions of the 
statue in the shrine of Wingless Victory or Athena Nike, 
is somewhat improbable; not because they must be earlier 
than this°, but because the latter was probably a standing 
figure; since the statue of Athena Nike at Olympia by 
Calamis was of the same type, and we may conclude from 
the context in Pausanias, who mentions it, that the latter 
work represented the goddess erect °°*. Besides, a seated 
Nike is a most unusual type, and the figure of Athena Nike 
must in some way have resembled the standard form of Nike, 
else it is hard to see why men should have forgotten that it 
was the goddess herself, and have believed that it was the 
personification, and have commented on the winglessness. 
This, then, is the one well-attested representation of Athena 
Nike belonging to a public cult; and the question is what 
criteria it gives us to judge whether the name may be applied 
to other monuments that have survived. In no later work 
is Athena found bearing the symbol of the pomegranate ; 
and it is doubtful whether the figure of the bare-headed 
Athena is always to be interpreted as Athena Nike®. But 
where the helmet is held out in her hand there may be reason 





® Roscher, Lexicon, p. 689. 

b Auserlesene Vasenbilder, 242, 1-2; 
De Antiquiss. Minerv. Simulacr. 1. 1. 

¢ The term ¢éavoy which is applied 
to it raises the suspicion that it was an 
archaic wooden idol, but this term is 
also applied to the great chryselephan- 
tine works of Pheidias, which con- 
tained a kernel of wood. The motive 
of the work seems too elaborate for us 
to be able to impute to it a very remote 
antiquity; although it may well be 
older than the actual temple, as the 
chronological difficulty would be serious, 


if it were carved simultaneously with 
the construction of the temple, and if 
we accept the story that a statue at 
Olympia was wrought in imitation of 
this by Calamis, a sculptor whose 
‘floruit’ belongs to an earlier period. 

4 For instance, the bare - headed 
Athena on the Olympian Metope need 
have no special name given her; this_ 
is simply a natural type of the goddess 
in a peaceful situation, and appears 
also on vases of the earlier part of the 
fifth century: vide Furtwangler, Mezster- 
werke, p. 14 (Engl. ed.), note 5. 












PLaTE XVI 





~ 


x1] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 341 


for naming the figure as the xoanon described by Harpocration 
was named; and we may recognize an Athena-Nike on the 
beautiful relief of Pentelic marble in Lansdowne House, of 
which an illustration is here given (Pl. XVI). The figure has 
the measured stateliness of a temple-statue, the Doric chiton 
falling down into columnar folds after the manner of the 
austere religious sculpture of the fifth century. The owl and 
the olive seem to show the Attic origin of the work. The 
surface of the body is wonderfully warm, and the details of the 
flesh and the drapery are very carefully wrought. The cheeks 
are still broad, as in the fifth-century type of head, but are 
beginning to be rounded. The relief belongs to the earlier part 
of the fourth century, when the tradition of the older religious 
art was still strong, but when the features and form and drapery 
were beginning to be more softly and lightly rendered. The 
representation gives a profound expression of victorious peace. 

It may be that Athena Nike was sometimes characterized 
by the absence of helmet and aegis; a very beautiful 
relief* of Pheidian style and noble expression, now in 
the Acropolis Museum, shows us the fragments of three 
figures, a naked ephebos standing before a winged Nike, 
who raises her left hand to crown his head and rests her 
right arm round the neck of another goddess, who in such 
a group can scarcely be other than Athena though she lacks 
all the usual attributes; the Nike who is here almost one 
with her would probably give her own name to this Athena, 
and explain her peaceful garb. 

An entirely different but scarcely less certain representa- 
tion of Athena Nike is seen on the Boeotian coins mentioned 
above with the type of the winged goddess wielding the light- 
ning, and on an Attic drachm, probably of the earlier part of 
the fourth century”, that shows us the winged goddess wearing 
the helmet and carrying the Palladium. The goddess cannot 
be merely Nike, for representations of Victory, the mere 
personification, bear none of the arms or other attributes of 

® Harrison and Verrall, Mythol. and p. 136. Cf. Miiller-Wieseler, Denkm. 


Mon, Anc. Ath. p. 367. ad, A. K. 2, 220, 
>’ Num. Comm. Paus. Pl. AA, 24. 


342 GREEK RELIGION. [ CHAP. 


Pallas. And this rare type of the winged Athena was already 
known in the archaic period, for it is found on the treasury 
of the Siphnians at Delphi*. We can only account for the 
wings by supposing that she borrowed them from Nike. 

Of the other political conceptions that attached to Athena 
and were recorded in the literature, only a few can be illus- 
trated from surviving monuments. We might interpret 
a figure on the coins of Alexandria (Coin Pl. B 25) as that of 
Athena ’Apynyeris, the leader of colonies, because she carries 
an owl in her hand and this is the motive which, according to 
the scholiast of Aristophanes, was appropriated to the goddess 
bearing this title*°'. But as Wieseler has pointed out”, the 
description of the scholiast is too slight to help us to discover 
this cult-type with certainty. It is most natural that Athena 
should bear the owl ; and there are many such representations 
of her on Athenian coins, and among them we are not able to 
decide which of them, if any, is the special type of Athena 
"Apxnyétis. It may be that one in which she holds the corn- 
stalks in her other hand, or that in which she grasps the spear ; 
for both symbols would be appropriate to the goddess who 
planted the colony in the new land. 

The commerce of the state was protected by Athena under 
the name of raOuia™®, and on coins of Alexandria we find the 
goddess wearing helmet, aegis, and chiton, and holding the 
scales of ‘right measure,’ and the cornucopia °. 

It is an interesting question whether we have any character- 
istic representations surviving of Athena ’Ayopaia, the goddess 
who presided in the market-place over the assembly and 
council of the people. One such monument is elaborately 
described by the Byzantine historian, Niketas Chthoniata !*, 
a bronze statue of Athena thirty feet in height, that stood in 
the forum of Constantine at Byzantium. She was clad in a 
long and elaborately folded chiton, and wore aegis and helmet. 
Her long neck was bare, and produced, according to the 
historian, an ‘overpowering impression of voluptuous delight’ 


® Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1894, p. 190. discussed with negative result. 
> Miiller-Wieseler, D. d. A. K. 2. © Brit. Mus. Cat. Alexandria, P|. 4, 
219°, where the whole question is 643. 


mal 
_— 
> 
~ 
ea] 
& 
<q 
-] 
a 





xT.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 343 


(Auaxov els Hdovnv Ogaya jv); the lips were half open, as if her 
soft voice was passing through them, her eyes were languish- 
ing, her hair was luxuriantly arranged, and her left hand was 
pressed against her body and gathering together some of the 
folds of her garment, while her head was inclined in the same 
direction as her outstretched right hand was pointing. In 
spite of the vague verbiage of this account, we have no reason 
to doubt its accuracy. A clear type is presented to us of an 
Athena ’Ayopata, full of the incongruous and excessive senti- 
ment of the later Alexandrine period*. Now, the leading 
traits of this type, the one hand outstretched and the other 
pressed against the folds of the robe, the sidewards turn of the 
head, the parted lips, and the expression of languishment, are 
found together in one surviving work, the Athena ‘ Mediatrix, 
in the Louvre ”,a work of early Graeco-Roman period, but 
probably derived from an Alexandrine original (Pl. XVII). 
The statue in many essential respects strikingly agrees with 
that described by Niketas, only that here it is the left hand 
that is stretched out and the right is pressed against the side ; 
but its general character and sentiment are the same, and the 
reasons are strong for calling this also an Athena ’Ayopaia. 
And the small bronze statuette published by Miiller® is of 
the same type on the whole, and may claim the same title. 
The type of the Athena of the law-courts was certainly in 
one case at least that of Pallas in the traditional fighting pose, 
for one of the law-courts at Athens, as we have seen, took its 
name from the Palladium. But for monumental illustration 
of this function of the goddess we must go to the representa- 
tions of Orestes’ trial, of which the most important is perhaps 
the beautiful Corsini cup*. Among the figures wrought in 
relief upon it, Athena is recognized by her helmet, though she 
wears no aegis, and by her action. She stands over the urn 
@ The pose and expression make Clarac, Musée de Sculpture, Pl. 320, 


strongly against the identification, to 871; Miiller-Wieseler, Dewkm. d. A. 
which Mr. Stuart Jones inclines, of this Azwmst, 2, Pl. 20, 217. 


work with the Pheidian ‘ Promachus’ ¢ Jb, no. 207. 
(vide Ancient Writers on Greek Sculp- 4 Baumeister, Denkmdler des Class. 
ture, p. 78). Alterth. p. 1119. 


b Frohner, Sculpture Antique, 121. ; 


344 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


dropping into it the casting-vote. The cup is generally 
regarded as a copy of one of the two that bore the same 
scene carved by Zopyrus in the time of Pompey; but there 
is much in the style and forms of the figures that suggests an 
earlier period than this. 

Of Athena, who protected the union of the clan or family, 
Athena Apaturia or Kurotrophos, we have no certain monu- 
ment. The vase-representations, showing the goddess re- 
ceiving the infant Erichthonios, may convey an allusion to this 
function of hers; and the statue in the Berlin Museum of 
Athena bearing the child in her aegis, may be intended to 
express the same idea. But these are merely mythological 
representations % 

She appears more frequently in the monuments as the 
goddess of the arts, both of war and of peace. Athena 
Hippia, who taught the use of the chariot, was worshipped at 
Colonus, and though we cannot safely apply this cult-title to 
every representation in which she appears driving the chariot, 
we may attach it to the figure of the goddess on the silver 
cup and on the Attic coin published by Miller”, and on the 
Athenian relief published by Schéne*. As the last-named 
monument was found on the Acropolis, and represents her in 
solemn pose erect in her car, we may suppose that it does not 
refer to any myth, but is a monument of the cult. 


The goddess of the peaceful arts was worshipped, if not 


at Athens yet at Sparta and Olympia, under the title 
of ‘Ergane’; the spindle in the hands of Athena Polias 
at Erythrae and at Ilium alluded to this function. But 
we have no existing representations that can with security 
be connected with the actual cult. The representation 
on the gem, published by Miiller*4, of Athena riding on 








well Wies., 2d. Ad, 22336. It 
is impossible to interpret the Berlin 
statue as Athena ®parpia holding a 
new-born Athenian child, for it is 
evidently derived from the same source 
as the statue found in Crete, and not 
long ago acquired by the Louvre, which 
represents an Athena of almost identical 


form holding in her aegis the sacred 
chest from which the serpent Erichtho- 
nios emerges. Mon. Grecgues, 1895, 
pl. 12. 

> Op. cit 2. 240, 240°. 

© Griechische Reliefs, No. 136. 

4 D.d. A. Kunst, 2. 225. 


ee ee a ee 








FLAICN 4.Viil 





Pe) a aw 


. 


Me 
x 























X1.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 345 


the ram, has been supposed to allude to her interest in wool- 

‘work and the arts of the loom, but it more probably has 
a sacrificial reference. The statue in Florence * of an Athena 
standing with something rolled round her right arm, which 
has been taken for a snake but may be a skein of wool, is 
a work of doubtful interpretation. We have more than one 
representation of the goddess assisting at the fabrication of 
the ship”, but we cannot say that such scenes alluded inten- 
tionally to the cult or the name of Ergane. The potter who 
brings a thank-offering for success in his art, on a fifth-century 
vase of Athens, is making offering to an Athena whose form 
is that of the Pheidian Parthenos®; but had there been at 
Athens any cult-type or accepted representation of Athena 
’Epydvn, the goddess of the crafts, we should have expected 
to find it here. We have an allusion to the patroness of the 
potter’s skill on a rude vase in the Berlin Museum *, showing 
Athena standing by a potter’s oven; also perhaps to her 
interest in the lampadephoria, the ritual of fire consecrated 
to the three divinities who taught and fostered the arts of life, 
in a gem which contains the figures of Athena standing and 
Hephaestus seated under a tree®, both gazing earnestly at 
some spectacle (Pl. XVIII. b). Once the goddess herself 
appears as a potter, on a Berlin vase that represents her 
forming the clay model of a horse, possibly with some allusion 
to the work of Epeios, who constructed the wooden horse for 
the capture of Troy with the aid of her teaching. 

The most interesting monument showing the popular 
conception of the creative power of Athena is the beautiful 
and well-known cylix in the British Museum, on which 
Pandora appears as a scarcely animate figure between 
Athena and Hephaestus, while the goddess is adding the last 
touch to complete her dangerous beauty‘; and the idea 


® Gerhard, Akad. Abhandl. 37. 4. 4 Beschreibung der Vasensamml. 801. 
b E.g. Miiller-Wieseler, D. d. Aoi: © Miiller-Wieseler, D. d. A. K.2. 235: 
2. 238. this is Wieseler’s probable interpretation. 


¢ Published and described by Miss f Published in Harrison and Verrall, 
Harrison, Mythol. and Mon. Anc. Ath. Mythoi. and Mon. Anc. Ath. p. 450, 
p- 461, Fig. 58. Fig. 50. 


346 GREEK RELIGION. (cap. 


expressed in this is also illustrated by a sarcophagus-relief in 
the Capitoline Museum, on which Athena is presented insert- 
ing the soul in the form of a butterfly into a small human 
body that Prometheus is fashioning*. Lastly, the association 
of Athena with the art of the flute, which appears in Boeotian 
myth and cult, is illustrated by a series of monuments”; 
which, however, mainly refer to the myth of the goddess and 
Marsyas, who took up the flutes that she threw away and the 
curse with them; and in none of them has her figure any 
religious significance. 

We cannot then derive any type of Athena Ergane from the 
group of monuments just examined, or find in them any clear 
reference to the particular cult. And as regards the statue 
called Athena Musica !*’, attributed by Pliny to Demetrius, it 
is difficult to speak positively as to its type, and it would 
be useless to search for any copy of it among existing 
monuments. 

On the other hand, the cult of Athena Hygieia has left us 
two undoubted monuments. The first is the statue ° in the 
Central Museum of Athens, found at Hieron near Epidauros, 
upon the basis of which is the inscription mentioned in the 
former chapter. The goddess wears the helmet, and bears her 
shield on her left arm and her aegis on her breast ; her right 
arm is stretched out in front of her, and she is moving rapidly 
to the right while turning her head back. It is the type of 
Athena charging in front of the battle, and wholly inappro- 
priate to the goddess of health ; and we must suppose that the 
sculptor has chosen the first traditional representation of her 
that occurred to him, and he gives us no clue for discovering 
the type of Athena Hygieia among other existing works. 
Nor can we derive from the second monument? any special 
characteristic of the type; this is one of the ex-voto reliefs 


® Baumeister, Denkm. des Class. vase published in the Azmali dell’ Lnstit. 
Alterth, Fig. 1568. 1879, Tav. d’Agg. D. 

b Miiller-Wieseler, D. d. A. XK. 2. ¢ Published in WW7tt. d. deutsch. Inst. 
239 *e, and Overbeck, Geschichte der 1886, p. 314; and Harrison and Verrall, 
Griechischen Plastik, 1. Fig.50: cf. vase op. cit. p. 392, Fig. 23. 
in Berlin, Beschreibung der Vasensamm- 4 Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1877, p. 164, 
lung im Antiquarium, 2418; and the no. 34. 





3 
* 
a 
¥ 
a 
3 





PLaTE XIX 


Ie Ra ne OY ore ORS: 








10, 


BRR in AR 





x1.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 347 


found in the Asclepieion on the Acropolis, on which we see 
her by the side of Asclepios, and therefore we must name her 
Athena Hygieia; but she is armed in the usual way with 
helmet, aegis, and shield, on which her left hand rests; and 
there is nothing here appropriate to the idea of the worship. 
A statue* of Hygieia in the Belvidere of the Vatican has 
been wrongly restored with a head that probably belonged 
to a statue of Athena the health-goddess (Pl. XIX). The 
severity of the outline of the face, the arrangement of the hair 
in a long straight mass behind, the thoughtful expression, 
indicate an Athena; but instead of her helmet she wears 
a stephane with a gorgon’s head worked in relief in the centre, 
and two serpents symmetrically carved in horizontal position 
on each side of it, and we may most naturally regard these 
latter as symbols borrowed from Hygieia for this type of 
Athena, for they are found arranged in the same way on the 
stephane of an undoubted Hygieia formerly in the Villa 
Ludovisi®». The style of the Vatican head does not seem 
to be markedly Attic ; we see rather the severer and more 
maidenly type of Athena’s head with sharper lines and less 
rounded surfaces, that originated probably in the Peloponnese 
but penetrated also into Athens some time after the Pheidian 
period. We have no clue for testing the suggestion that the 
Vatican head is copied from the original statue carved in the 
time of Pericles by Pyrrhos. But the work is of great interest 
because it is the only monument in which the forms and 
expression proper to one ideal of Athena are combined with 
symbols of Hygieia, so that the double name is justified. 
Another though very inferior representation of the same 
divinity, that seems to be trustworthy, is found on a gem 
published by Miiller’, that shows the goddess wearing the 
helmet and holding a spear and in the same hand the serpent 
that Hygieia usually holds, and standing before the seated Zeus 
(Pl. XVIII. c); the same figure appears among the types of 
Etruscan art“, We may also give the name of Athena Hygieia 


® Mon. dell Inst. 9.49; Annalt, 1873, © Miiller-Wieseler, D. d. A. K. 2. no. 
Pp- 5- 226%. 
> Vide Helbig, Fzihrer, 870. 4 Gerhard, Akad. Abhandal. Taf. 34. 4. 


348 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


to the representation of the goddess that appears in relief on a 
candelabra of the Vatican*#; her helmet with its sphinx and 
Pegasoi recalls that of the Pheidian Parthenos, and she is hold- 
ing a cup for her serpent to drink from after the usual manner 
of Hygieia. The conjecture of Loeschke that we have here a 
copy of the Athena Hygieia of Pyrrhus is not wholly ground- 
less. The work of this sculptor might naturally have pre- 
served in certain details a reminiscence of the Parthenos, and 
it is not easy to say how he could have expressed the idea that 
he wished to embody otherwise than by associating Athena 
with the snake, the symbol of the divinities of health. The 
religious character of the Vatican relief has been pointed out 
by Wolters. 

But we may conclude from the paucity of the monu- 
ments that the statues of this cult of Athena were com- 
paratively rare, and the discovery of the numerous ex-voto 
reliefs in the Asclepieion may incline us to believe that the 
goddess who personified health, the daughter of Asclepios, 
took the place at Athens of Athena Hygieia. 

The monuments of Athena to which some definite cult- 
name may with certainty be attached are found to be few in 
number; but the record both of the literature and art is 
enough to prove her high importance for the national cult, 
especially at Athens, where her worship was linked most 
closely with the hopes and sorrows of the people, their 
fortunes and public life. The Attic monuments are most 
expressive of this, and it may be well to put together here 
by way of conclusion a few that illustrate some of the ideas 
already examined, and especially the character of Athena 
Polias and Boulaia. The Parthenon frieze-reliefs, though 
they do not belong to the group of cult-monuments, still 
afford the most striking monumental illustration of the most 
imposing ceremony of the state-religion in honour of the city- 
goddess. There can be no reasonable doubt but that the 


® Helbig, Fiihrer, 210-211; Hauser, b Bausteine, 2124-2129; he also notes 
Die Neu-Attischen Reliefs, p. 63, nos. that many of the figures including that 
92-93, pp- 151-154, 169; published in of Pallas stand ona separate basis, like 
Pistolesi, 77 Vaticano descritto, 5. 28. separate statues. 


3 SINS RI a 8 
chin eghrad a SCD pee BARD oe 
ne 


ane 
gees 


Uy 


~*~ 
~ 
a 
fH 
a 
4 
i 


> 
Pe erties 


ae Pte pee eo utters: 


aac tae Renee Perce ay THe aes omang 
= SA ry, 


ha eiebinns 
tis i leis 


AC 





x1] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 349 


subject represented is the Panathenaic procession treated 
with a due observance of certain artistic laws. The corre- 
spondence of certain scenes on the frieze with the written 
record concerning the details of the ceremony is, as Overbeck 
and others have pointed out®*, sufficiently conclusive. We 
find the sacrificial animals offered by the state and by the 
allies, the scaphephori and the carriers of the water-pots, 
the chariots with their armed apobatae (perhaps the most 
peculiar feature in the whole ritual), and possibly the ‘thallo- 
phori’ or the band of elderly men bearing branches; and 
although the representation is undoubtedly incomplete, we 
cannot prove that anything essential is omitted. Too say this, 
however, implies the conviction that the group which forms 
part of the centre of the whole frieze clearly alludes to the 
bringing of the peplos, the leading motive of the whole 
service. It would be out of place here to discuss the many 
divergent opinions that have been expressed concerning this 
vexed question. It may be sufficient to state the chief reasons 
of my own conviction, which are two: in the first place, it 
appears incredible that Pheidias, in a representation which 
we are compelled for many reasons to interpret as the Pan- 
athenaic procession, should have omitted the chief feature of 
that procession : secondly, it is inconceivable that the greatest 
sculptor of the city should have placed in the centre of his 
frieze next to Athena herself the figures of a priest and a 
boy, holding between them a garment or piece of drapery 
which is too large for human wearing and perfectly agrees 
with our conception of the sacred peplos, and which would 
inevitably be taken for the peplos by the average spectator, 
but was intended by the sculptor to be something quite 
different. The belief that it is the peplos gives a deeper 
national significance to the whole scene °. 

Turning to other Attic monuments illustrative of the part 
played by Athena in the public life, we may select as perhaps 


® Gesch. Griech. Plast. 1893, p. 438. | wangler, whose arguments against Miss 

b The most recent discussion of the Harrison’s theory that the object in 
question is an article in the Classical question is a oTpwuvyn appear to me 
Review (1895, p. 268), by Dr. Furt- convincing. 


350 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


the most interesting of all the reliefs found on the Acropolis, 
and certainly the most mysterious, that one which was dis- 
covered on the south of the Parthenon in 1888, and is now in 
the Acropolis Museum. A slab about half a metre in height 
contains the figure of Athena wearing helmet and Doric diplois 
in a strangely pathetic pose, and with an expression of melan- 
choly in her face (Pl. XX). She stands by a small column 
leaning on her spear, her head drooping, and her right hand 
resting on her hip. The drapery is arranged in rigid columnar 
folds and shows a slight touch of archaism, of which there is 
also a faint trace in the eye and the contour of cheek and 
chin. Such indications lead us to assign the monument to 
the middle of the fifth century or slightly earlier, and though 
such expression of pathos is very rare in the art of this age, 
yet other instances of this are found®. What is unique and 
unparalleled is that a work of this austere period should 
represent the sorrow of a divinity, and that divinity the 
conquering Athena. This can be no ordinary grave-relief: 
she cannot here be mourning over some single citizen. The 
belief forces itself upon one that some great national disaster 
is here commemorated, such as the battle of Tanagra or the 
fall of the Athenian citizens in Egypt; and that Athena is 
mourning over those whose names may have been written on 
the lower part of the slab now lost. The relief and the inscrip- 
tion with the names may have been dedicated on the Acropolis 
as a testimony of the public grief in accordance with a vote 
of the people. | 

We have also a series of historic reliefs that refer to alliances 
or political relations between Athens and other states; most 
of these are of the fourth century and filled the upper part 
of the stone upon which the inscription of the decree was 
written. The Athenian state is represented by Athena, 
in whose form we can usually trace the influence of the 
Pheidian masterpiece, the other city by the male or female 


* M. Cavvadias, Deltion Archaeol. ponnesian war (Journal of Hellenic 
1888, p. 103, assigns it to the period Studies, 1889, p. 267). The earlier 
immediately before Pheidias; Mr. E. date appears to me after examination of 
Gardner to the later years of the Pelo- the original far the more probable, 














Ro Re 


o> 


PLATE XXI 





x1.] MONUMENTS OF ATHENA-WORSHIP. 351 


figure that personifies it or by its tutelary divinity or hero. 
The most interesting and beautiful of this series is perhaps 
a relief that adorns an inscription ® dedicated on the Acropolis 
in the year 403-402 B.C. (Pl. XXI.b), and expresses the grati- 
tude of Athens in her last distress to those of the Samians 
who remained faithful to the Athenian democracy. Athena 
clad ina low-girt Doric chiton and mantle, and equipped with 
Attic helmet, aegis, spear, and shield, stands on the right, grasp- 
ing the hand of a stately female figure, who also wears chiton 
and mantle and holds a sceptre upright in her left hand. She 
wears the stephane above her forehead, but is more probably 
a personification of Samos than Hera the tutelary goddess of 
the island. The history of Athens in the first half of the 
fourth century is also illustrated by similar reliefs ; for instance 
the alliance of Athens with Corcyra about 375 B.C., by a repre- 
sentation» of Athena and a male figure personifying the demos 
of that island (Pl. XVIII. a); her alliance with the Arcadians 
and Eleans° in 362, by a relief on which she stands by Zeus and 
a maidenly figure who probably personifies the Peloponnese. 
On a monument of the same kind? published by Schone, 
we see her extending her hand to a goddess of lesser stature, 
wearing a calathos, whose name Ilap@évos, ‘the maiden,’ is 
inscribed above her, and the inscription refers to a treaty 
between Athens and Neapolis, the Thracian coast-city, or 
the city in Pallene, where the worship of ‘the Maiden’ must 
have prevailed (Pl. XXI. a). A decree offering hospitality, 
mpoéevia, to another city is commemorated by such a repre- 
sentation as that which Schone® has published of Athena in 
an attitude and form immediately derived from the Pheidian 
Parthenos, standing before a male figure who is half-clad in 
a himation and leaning on a staff, and who personifies the 
Demos of the friendly state. 

A few of these reliefs allude to her close connexion 
with the Boulé at Athens, and her title BovAaia as the 


® Sketched in De/t. Archaeol. 1888, © Arch, Zeit. 877, Tal. 18.3, 2. 
p- 124; for inscription vide 7d. 1889, 4 Schone, Griechische Reliefs, no. 48. 
pp. 27-29. _ Cf. 50, Athens and Methone. 

> Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1878, Pl.11,12. © Griechische Reliefs, no. 62. 


354 GREEK RELIGION. 


divine counsellor of the state. A majestic and matronly 
figure, whom the inscription proves to be a personification 
of Bovdy, is seen standing by the side of Athena*, while 
a citizen is raising his hand to them in prayer. This is an 
ex-voto relief, and the representation may refer to the ritual 
of the eiourjpia, the sacrifice and prayers that preceded the 
meeting of the council. On other reliefs it is Athena who 
appears giving the crown to the distinguished soldier, the 
victorious athlete, or to the girl-priestess who had fulfilled 
her duties well °. 

These Attic monuments prove then how deeply this 
worship was rooted in the hearts of the people, who con- 
secrated to her so much of their public and private life, and 
whose devotion invested her with a character deeper and 
more manifold than she possessed in the older literature. 


® Griech. Reliefs, 94. ey (a) Peo Ps 








CHAPTER. 2ok 


IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA, 


THE sculptor who surpassed all others in dealing with this 
type is Pheidias, and the greatest monuments of her worship 
are associated with his name. To understand these, it is 
necessary to remember what had been accomplished by the 
archaic and transitional period. Enough, perhaps, has already 
been said about her form in the archaic art ; her predominant 
character there is warlike, although the peaceful and even the 
maternal idea appeared in some of the monuments, such as 
the seated figures found on the Acropolis: and already the 
older art had depicted her as the goddess of victorious peace, 
and the fertility that peace brings, under the type of Nike 
Apteros. Within its own narrow limits of expression it had 
sometimes been able to show the maidenly aspect of the 
war-goddess; but usually the forms and proportions are 
scarcely distinct from those of other goddesses, and the face 
has rarely any clear or individual character. Nor does the 
drapery add much to the ideal; in the later archaic period 
she wears often an Ionic chiton with sleeves, and over this 
a mantle which is looped up on one shoulder, and falls down 
from beneath the aegis in stiff parallel zigzag folds, as we see 
it on the form of Athena from the western Aeginetan gable, 
a work that represents the utmost that archaic art could do in 
rendering this type (Pl. XXII.a). The girdling and the Doric 
chiton, which are used with significant effect in the Pheidian 
works, are scarcely known in the period before the fifth 
century. Sacken and Kenner® have published a statuette of 

® Broncen, Taf. 8. 1. 

VOL. I. Aa 


354 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


Athena at Vienna of the late archaic period (Pl. XXII. b), 
wearing a diploidion girded with a serpent under the aegis, so 
that the drapery down to the waist is divided into three fields, 
as we see it on the Pheidian Athena. We find a similar effect 
of girdling on a bronze of Athena Promachus in the British 
Museum, published by Dr. Murray *, which shows an archaic 
scheme of drapery and an archaic treatment of the hair, but 
a more advanced and noble type of features with broad sur- 
faces and serious expression; there is no sufficient reason for 
connecting it with the early art of Pheidias, as Dr. Murray 
does; it is probably of the pre-Pheidian period, retaining 
much of the archaic style (Plate XXIII. a). 

The earliest artists made their meaning clear simply by 
symbols and pose or action. As regards the period imme- 
diately preceding Pheidias, we have no great monumental 
work attributed to any well-known artist of this age, except 
the Athena Nike at Olympia carved by Calamis, which has 
been mentioned and discussed above. But a few works that 
have survived from the first half of the fifth century show 
us a marked advance towards ideal characteristic rendering. 
The earlier of the two coins of Troezen presents us with 
a type of features broad, strong, and earnest, and a severe, 
almost masculine, arrangement of the hair (Coin Pl. A 21); 
and on a red-figured vase of the Louvre of fine severe style 
we have a striking representation of Athena in peaceful pose, 
holding the spear and olive-branch. An interesting remnant 
of the sculpture of this age is the metope from the temple of 
Zeus Olympios at Olympia, on which Heracles is represented 
cleansing out the Augean stables in the presence of Athena. 
The goddess wears an ‘ Attic’ helmet, and her shield is on 
the ground by her feet ; there is little expression in her face 
except of sombre earnestness, and her eye has something 
of the triangular formation, and the centre of her face the 
flatness, of the archaic type. But it is in the drapery that 
a new and austerer style, aiming at simplicity and nobility, is 
manifest; she wears a Doric chiton, a diploidion, of which 
the upper fold falls from the shoulders to just above the waist, 

® History of Greek Sculpture, vol. 2. Pl. 10. 








PLATE saan ii2 


iF 
d 


ih 


Ut 


jp = 


f 


if 
a 


A 








X11. IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 355 


where there appears the delicately traced edge of the fold 
which is formed by a part of the chiton being drawn up 
over the hidden girdle. We have here one of the earliest 
instances of that beautiful and stately disposition of the 
chiton which we see on some of the figures of the Parthenon 
frieze and the Caryatids of the Erechtheum, and which con- 
tinued in use after Pheidias, chiefly for religious and ceremonial 
purposes?®. 

Another still more interesting monument of the pre- 
Pheidian period has already been mentioned: the relief on 
which Athena is represented in pensive attitude, and which 
shows more careful sculpture and far warmer rendering of the 
surface than the Olympian metope. No preceding sculptor 
had put so profound an expression of thought into the 
maidenly countenance ; and the drapery, a Doric diploidion 
girt about the waist. has a fascinating simplicity and lightness 
appropriate to the martial goddess. We find such an arrange- 
ment of the dress, though somewhat richer, on the masterpieces 
of Pheidias. 

One work that appears to belong to the period before 
Pheidias, and has even been thought to illustrate the earlier 
style of the great master himself”, is the small bronze of 
Athena from Portici, now in the Museum of Naples (PI. 
XXIV.a). She stands with her weight resting chiefly on her 
right foot, her right hand holds forth a libation-cup, and her 
head, that is guarded by the high-crested Attic helmet, is 
turned and slightly inclined to this side; her left hand is held 
up on a level with her head, and was grasping a spear. Her 
drapery is the same in its arrangement as that of the Olympian 
Athena, except that the Doric chiton here has sleeves and the 
fold overhanging the girdle is smaller. But in softness and 
richness of execution it is far superior. There is a trace of 
the old stiffness in the attitude, for, though the lower limbs are 
well posed and there is a distinction that produces a fine effect 
of balance between the leg that supports and that which is 

® We find it on one of the female the British Museum. 


figures, probably a divinity, carved on >» Conrad Lange, Arch. Zeit. 1882, 
the drum of the Ephesian column in _ p. 35, Taf. 2. 


Aaz2 


356 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP. 


free from the weight, yet this distinction is not carried out as it 
should be in the upper body and in the marking of the hips. 
But the face shows the broad surfaces, the strong chin, the 
large eyebrow and eye-socket of the Pheidian type; the few 
locks of hair that appear beneath the helmet on the temples 
are drawn back at right angles to the face, half revealing the 
ear. The face has no longer the sombreness that darkens the 
countenances of the transitional art, but is maidenly, thought- 
ful, and benign. The whole is most impressive for its reserved 
and stately beauty ; and we may believe that this is a miniature 
copy of a temple-statue that was consecrated to the peaceful 
Athena dispensing blessing *. 

We gather from the records of Pheidias’ work that no less 
than seven statues of the goddess are ascribed to him. If 
we may trust Pausanias, his earliest temple-image of her 
was the chryselephantine statue in a shrine near Pellene of 
Achaea !°4; but we can conclude from Pausanias’ words that 
it was only the local legend, no inscription or direct evidence, 
that ascribed it to Pheidias, and that he himself was struck 
by a certain archaic character that marked it. Now we find 
a type of Athena on Roman imperial coins of Pellene °, 
which show the goddess in warlike pose with uplifted shield 
and spear, but with her lower limbs tightly encased in 
a closely drawn chiton that is divided into different sections 
by means of horizontal bands. If this archaic type of idol 
reproduces the temple-image, the local legend that claimed 
Pheidias for its sculptor may well have astonished Pausanias. 
But his honesty saves us from the embarrassment in which we 
should be placed if we believed the story. 

We may regard as the earliest temple-image of Athena 
that can with certainty be ascribed to Pheidias, the Athena 


® Another work that appears to be except that the Doric diploidion is not 








of the same age may be compared with 
this, the small bronze statuette of Athena 
that is published in the Gazette Archéo- 
logique, 1881. Pl. 7; the pose of the 
limbs and the inclination of the head are 
much the same, and the drapery closely 
resembles that of the Portici figure, 


drawn up over the girdle ; her arms are 
held out rather stifly—the left might be 
holding a spear, the right a cup; the ex- 
pression of the face is earnest and pure. 

>» Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner, um. 
Comm. Paus. p. 91, Pl. S. ro. 


th i 


PLATE XXIV 





4 
vee | 






12 


ST a 
tag ee ethics 
ee 


as 























Sr] IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 357 


Areia dedicated in her temple at Plataea*’® in commemoration 
of the victory of Marathon; a tithe of the spoils defrayed 
the cost of the statue, of which the body was formed of 
a kernel of wood laid over with gold, and the head and 
feet of Pentelic marble, a unique combination of materials. 
No numismatic or other copy of this statue has survived, but 
as she was worshipped in her temple there as the goddess of 
war, and the dedication of her image commemorated the 
battle, she would probably be represented in warlike attitude, 
advancing with spear and shield. 

But the greatest of his works that presented Athena under 
this aspect was his colossal bronze statue on the Acropolis 1°° 4, 
which has been called by modern writers Athena Pao 
though there is no ancient authority for attaching this name to 
it, except that of the scholiast on Demosthenes. Error has arisen 
from the misunderstanding of a passage in the Byzantine 
historian Zosimus*, who recounts that Alaric when sailing to 
the sack of Athens saw the ‘fighting Athena moving upon 
the walls armed and as one about to charge the enemy, as 
one may see her in her statues.’ What Alaric was supposed 
to see, then, was no statue, but a vision of the actual goddess. 
In fact no ancient writer gives us any clear clue at all as to 
her pose»; we learn from Pausanias that she bore the shield, 
which was subsequently chased with a representation of the 
Lapiths’ contest with the Centaurs, and she was armed with 
helmet and spear, of which the crest and the point could 
be seen, according to Pausanias, as you sailed from Sunium 
to Athens. The proper designation of this famous work 
is simply ‘the bronze Athena on the Acropolis, where it 
stood in the open air between the Erechtheum and the 
Parthenon, immediately facing the old approach through the 
Propylaea. 

Now in discussing its motive and pose, one must discard 
the illegitimate title of Promachus, and the conclusions 
that might be drawn from it. One thing seems clear: 


« Hist. Nov. 5. 6, 2. statue, but it is doubtful whether this 
v The epigram of Julianus'** seems refers to the Polias or to the ‘ Pro- 
to allude to the warlike pose of the machus’ statue. 


358 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


the spear must have been held with its butt end resting 
on the ground, and its point in the air, for otherwise 
Pausanias could not have believed that the voyagers from 
Sunium could see in the distance the point and the helm- 
crest together. But was the shield poised on her arm or 
resting on the ground by her feet? The dimensions of 
the statue’s basement, which has been discovered, and of 
which the depth exceeds the breadth, makes for the former 
view; for if the shield had been originally placed on the 
ground, the breadth would at least have been equal, or—as 
was the case with the basis of the Parthenos—even greater 
than the depth. And these conclusions about the pose of the 
spear and shield are supported by evidence from late Attic 
coins. We have a small number from the age of the Antonines? 
that actually give us a rude sketch of the Acropolis rock, the 
steps leading up to it, the Parthenon and the Propylaea, and 
a colossal statue between the two buildings that certainly 
ought to be the bronze Athena. But the examination of 
them is most disappointing ; for the die-cutter has been too 
careless to distinguish between this statue and the Parthenos, 
and at least in two cases he puts the Nike into her extended 
right hand, which the Parthenos held and the ‘ Promachus’ 
certainly did not. All that we can conclude from these is that 
the right arm was held so that the forearm was at right angles 
to the body ; and they tell us nothing tangible about the pose 
of the spear or the disposition of the drapery. 

But we have a few other coins of a different type, on which 
Athena appears standing ex face, but with her head turned 
to her right, and holding the shield on her left arm at right 
angles to her body, and her spear on the ground, but not 
parallel with the body (Coin Pl. B 26). It is this figure that 
has with great probability been regarded by Lange ° as show- 
ing the type of the ‘ Promachus.’ For it agrees in all essentials 
of the type with the torso Medici‘? in the Louvre (PI. XXIII. b), 
with a torso in the Central Museum of Athens®, and with 


® Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner, Num. © Arch. Zeit. 1891, p. 197. 
Comm. Paus. Z. 3-6. 4 Mon. dell Inst. 3, Taf. 13. 
le 3 ey Ae ae © Mitt. d. deutsch. Inst. 1880, Taf. 5. 








—T 


— ee ee eee ee ee. 


Wye 


X1I.] IDEAL TYPES. OF ATHENA. 359 


a figure of Athena on a relief found on the Acropolis*. The 
goddess on these three last monuments wears, besides the 
aegis and girded Doric diploidion which we see on the coins, 
an under garment and a mantle over her shoulder, which on 
the coins are omitted probably from want of space; the 
general effect of the drapery with the long columnar folds of 
the chiton wodijpns is the same, and shows the special manner 
of Pheidias and the austere majesty that belonged to a temple- 
statue of his hand. The motive of the arms of the coin-figure 
agrees with the theory maintained above concerning the 
‘Promachus’; the shield is held up on the left forearm, and 
the butt end of the spear is on the ground ; its oblique position 
may be a trait of the original, or may be an innovation due to 
the desire better to fill up the field of the coin: the same 
position of the arms is seen on the relief, while the torsos in 
Athens and Paris might be naturally so restored, though of this 
we cannot speak with certainty. Again, we find on the coins 
the head turned aside to her right: and Lange interprets this 
as a trait derived from the ‘ Promachus, whose form fronted 
the Propylaea, but whose face was turned so that she appeared 
gazing down towards the Ceramicus; this motive is fainter 
but still discernible in the relief-figure and in the torsos, 
when we look at what remains of the muscles of the neck 
and at the inclination of the shoulders. The balance of the 
body is the same in all; the weight is thrown on the left 
leg, and the right is free and the right knee is bent. We 
can say then that these plastic works and the figure on the 
two coins are derived from the same original ; the drapery of 
the torso Medici suggests that this was of bronze, and the 
style of all of them points to some masterpiece of Pheidian 
sculpture. This could not have been the Parthenos, nor the 
Athena in the gables of the Parthenon. But next to the 
Parthenos, the most famous Pheidian representation of Athena 
in Athens was the bronze Athena, which would naturally have 
tempted later sculptors to copy it, and of which the records 
well agree with the belief that the works just examined are 
reproductions of it. Of these the only one of high artistic 
® Mitt. d. deutsch. Inst. 1880, Taf. 5. 


360 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. 


merit is the torso Medici in the Ecole des Beaux Arts; it 
preserves the breadth and large fullness of form, the strength 
and stateliness of pose, and the decor in the folds of the 
drapery, that would belong to a Pheidian original famous 
throughout Greece. 

There are strong reasons for believing that this: bronze 
Athena on the Acropolis was also called KAeidotyos, ‘the 
guardian of the gates,’ an epithet naturally applied to one 
who stood armed before the entrance. The statue called by 
this mysterious name is mentioned among the bronze works 
of Pheidias cited by Pliny *, and by all the laws of context the 
Cliduchus should certainly be an Athena, and if it is not the 
colossal work on the Acropolis, then Pliny is strangely silent 
about this great monument. An objection has been brought» 
against this interpretation of the word on the ground that 
no Athena could be represented holding a key, which is a 
symbol of the divinities of the lower world. But the objection 
vanishes if we understand the epithet—as we well may in 
accord with its constant usage in Greek—not literally, but in 
the sense of the ‘warder of the gate.’ Not only, then, is this 
a natural epithet for Athena ‘ Promachus, who stood before the 
Propylaea, but we have the express testimony of Aristophanes 
that it was applied to the goddess at Athens: ‘the maiden 
in whose hand alone is our city and visible power and might, 
and who is called the warder of the gate * 8,’ 

In the Pheidian statues of Athena hitherto examined the 
warlike character predominated. But in his masterpiece, the 
gold and ivory temple-statue of the Parthenon, the ideal 
form of Athena which was accepted by the whole Greek 
world, the expression was more manifold and profound. The 
statue was dedicated in the year 438 B.C.°; the most detailed 








* Pliny, 34. 54 ‘ Ex aere (fecit Phei- 
dias) ... Minervam tam eximiae pul- 
critudinis ut formae cognomen acceperit. 
Fecit et Clicuchum et aliam Minervam 

» By Preller in Ersch und Gruber 
Allg. Encyclop. sec. 3, vol. 22, p. 195, 
who considers the Cliduchus to have 


been a statue of a priestess of Athena 
Polias ; the word is applied to a priestess 
in AeSch. Supp. 299 (cf. /phig. Taur. 
1463). For the key borne by the priestess 
vide Callimachus, ym to Demeter, 44. 

¢ #6 Schol. Arist. Pax 605, accept- 
ing the correction @coéwpouv for TMvGo- 
Ewpou (apxovTos). 


XII. ] IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 351 


account of it that has come down to us is given by Pau- 
sanias '86> who tells us that it was an upright figure clad in 
a chiton that reached to the feet, and wearing a helmet, in 
the centre of which was a sphinx and under each of the side- 
crests a griffin: on her breast was the Gorgon’s head wrought 
of ivory, in her one hand was a Nike four cubits in height, in 
the other a spear ; a shield lay at her feet on the same side as 
her spear, and near it was coiled the serpent, the symbol of 
Erichthonios ; the birth of Pandora was wrought on the base 
of the statue in relief *. The flesh-parts would be of ivory, the 
drapery and the sandals of gold ; we learn from Plato that the 
pupils of the eye were of precious stones, so that the eyes gained 
a distinct expression, which at the height of nearly twenty-six 
cubits could not have been given them, had they been of the 
same material as the rest of the face. An inscription? proves 
that Nike herself was wearing a golden crown ; her form was 
probably of gold and ivory, as Athena's was, but constructed 
perhaps of thin plates upon a wire framework, so as to secure 
lightness®. We gather something more of the general 
impression of the work from the account in Maximus 
Tyrius, who describes the Parthenos as a ‘ beautiful maiden 
of high stature and gleaming eyes, wearing a crested helmet, 
girt with an aegis, and bearing shield and spear '*°”.’ 

Thus conceived and represented, the Athena no less than 
the Zeus of Pheidias was thought to realize the ideal of 
Homer, being, as Maximus Tyrius says, ‘in no way inferior 
to the goddess in Homer’s poetry. We might rather say 
that the Homeric portrait of her falls short of this by Pheidias, 
who gives us the ideal goddess of the Attic religion, and 


® Pliny’s description 1%” adds little 
and the text is evidently corrupt; ‘sub 
cuspide’ could only mean under the point 
of her spear, and this is an unnatural 
expression when no spear had _ been 
mentioned; and the serpent no more 
than the sphinx could be said to lie 
under the point of the spear; ‘aerial ’ 
sphinx is nonsense; the best emenda- 
tion is ‘sub casside’ and ‘auream.’ Pliny 
writes as if he had never seen the 


statue; all that we learn from him is 
that the battle of the Amazons was 
wrought on the convex side of the 
shield, and the contest of the gods and 
giants on the concave: ‘adeo momenta 
omnia capacia illi artis, ‘every inch of 
the material was to him an opportunity 
for art.’ 

LAE hee tee Cee Poet: 2 5 

© Vide Waldstein, Zssays on the Art 
of Phetdias, p. 280. 


362 GREEK RELIGION. [cHap. 


whose work possessed the minds of later writers and sculptors. 
The vision of Athena that Aristides* saw is a vision of the 
Pheidian goddess: her full and perfect form having been 
present, according to another ancient writer, to the imagina- 
tion of the sculptor and rendered with great art worthy of 
her. And the Parthenos was ranked among the great works 
of Greek religious sculpture next to the Zeus Olympios, that 
Pheidian masterpiece of which the creation was thought to 
have added something to the received religion. 

Yet, although we have high testimony to its surpassing 
merit, we have no distinct record, such as we possess concern- 
ing the Pheidian Zeus, of the spiritual qualities that he gave 
to the work or of the forms of the countenance by which he 
expressed the nature of his ideal. But we can gather much 
from a consideration of her attributes. The warlike character 
that could never be wanting to a complete presentation of 
Athena was there undisguised; the helmet, spear, and shield 
tell of it, and in the great battle of the gods and giants 
wrought on her shield she was certainly taking a prominent 
part. Yet this is merely accessory; the shield and spear lie 
‘at her feet, and her whole pose, as she stood holding the 
Victory in her hand, must have been peaceful; and we can 
gather that the whole work was dominated by the idea of 
triumphant peace won after battle against the powers that 
threaten order. For such is the meaning, in artistic sym- 
bolism, of the contest of the gods and giants, the Lapiths and 
Centaurs, the Greeks and Amazons. She was presented also 
as the goddess of hidden wisdom, typified by the sphinx on 
her helmet; and as the goddess of creation, whose power was 
shown in the scene of the birth of Pandora, and perhaps in the 
olive, her product, which may possibly have supported her 
right hand”: while in the Medusa head on her breast and the 
Pegasi, which, as will appear, Pausanias wrongly calls‘ griffins,’ 
we have an allusion to her sympathy with heroic achievement 
and possibly to the legend that she taught Bellerophon the 
art of bridling the horse °. 


® Vol. I, p. 475, ed. Dind. © It would be merely to commit an 
> Vide infra, p. 365. anachronism to search in this case for 








Mele ee el ae ee eee 
: ee src do thi é ah ik: 
Oe ET nr aL 
Set fe, cae ol ey vr, 
rie “Se >, Se. 
ad 5 Col re ys 





Pee! 
a 
v *. 
g 

ey 

Pa, 











PLATE XXVI 

















9 Ay 














eee 
2 OS oe rane 


Sar nn 





XII.] IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 363 


But most clearly did this monument reveal in her the 
character of guardian of Athens, the keeper of its imperial 
wealth that was stored behind her in the Opisthodomos, the 
treasure-chamber of the temple*. The serpent by her shield 
was regarded as a form of Erichthonios, the mythic ancestor ; 
and the worship of Athena in her relation to Erichthonios 
was, like the cult of Hestia, the religious symbol of the con- 
tinuous city-life. As his guardian and foster-mother, she was 
Athena Polias, whose archaic xoanon stood in the temple 
hard by, and whose name was sometimes attached to the 
Parthenos herself. In fact there is no distinction between 
the Parthenos and the Polias Athena, and the Parthenon 
was no mere treasure-house or festival-edifice, as was sup- 
posed by Botticher, but the shrine of the chief worship of 
the city. 

Most fortunately we have other than written records of this 
great work. In the first place we have the well-known marble 
statuette found in the Peiraeeus (Pl. XXVI), which can be 
proved to be a very faithful, though dull and unimaginative, 
copy of the Athena Parthenos of Pheidias: it is a miniature 
that almost entirely agrees with Pausanias’ account, and it has 
omitted none of the accessories except the relief-work on 
the base and on the shield; and the copyist has faithfully 
preserved the proportions of the original, as the Nike which 
she carries in her right hand bears to the whole figure the pro- 
portion of four to twenty-six, and on the back of the statuette 
are discerned three points for measuring. The helmet also 
shows the rich ornamentation natural to chryselephantine 
technique. The deep sharp-cut folds and edges of the chiton 
display the forms of metal work, and only the main lines and 
courses of the drapery have been given, the copyist having 
followed the original in avoiding the smaller more delicate 
cross-lines that would have been lost in the reflection of the 
any physical meaning or symbolism in @ Vide Boeckh, Economy of Athens, 
the sphinx or Pegasos or Medusa. The 3. 20: who shows that the Opistho- 
sphinx may have once in Egypt denoted domos which held the treasure of the 
the sun, Pegasos and Medusa may once confederacy must have been that of the 


have been the lightning or rainormoon; Parthenon, not of the Athena Polias 
but this had been very long ago. temple. 


364. GREEK RELIGION. 


dazzling material of gold. He has also tried to reproduce 
something of the splendid effect of colour which he saw in the 
original. We note traces of red in the hair of the plume, on 
the face of the sphinx and on the border of the shield ; and 
yellow colour on the hair of the goddess, of the sphinx, and 
of the Gorgon, as well as on the manes of the winged horses 
and on the edges of the drapery. The eyes are bordered with 
red, the iris is tinged a blue-black. The statuette also enables 
us to supplement, and in one respect to correct, the account of 
Pausanias. 
shows us winged horses under the two side-plumes; now 
the evidence of Attic coins and other works that reproduce 
more or less faithfully the helmet of Athena Parthenos proves 
that the copyist was correct in this detail*. Still Pausanias is 
not known to have been short-sighted, and though he omits 
much in his account, he would not positively state that he saw 
something on a statue which was not there ; and as some coins 
show the griffin distinctly”, and the foreparts of this fabulous 
animal are seen above the visor of Athena Parthenos on the 
medallion of St. Petersburg, which will be mentioned again 
later, it is probable that it was carved in low relief on the side 
of the helmet*®. In fact the helmet was laden most richly with 
imagery, for it is probable that over the visor other animal- 
forms were carved, namely, the foreparts of horses that may 
have alluded to her title of Hippia‘*: possibly even the owl 
found a place in this accumulation of ornament®. And, lastly, 
further to enhance the richness of the work, the neck and ears 
were no doubt adorned with necklace and earrings, as we see 


(CHAP. 


He speaks of griffins on the helmet, and the copy. 


® Vide Gardner, Num. Comm. Paus. 
p- 127; late silver coins, Pl. Y. 23; gem 
of Aspasios, Jahrd. d. deut. Inst. 3. Taf. 
10. 10; St. Petersburg medallion, PI. 
XXIV. b. 

> Beulé, Monnaie d’Athenes, p. 51. 

¢ The griffin is chiefly associated with 
Apollo and Artemis; it is doubtful if it 
has any symbolic meaning at all, or any 
other than a mere decorative value on 
the helmet of Athena. Boeckh men- 
tions the dedication of griffins to Athena 


in the Parthenon; Staatsh. d. Ath. 2. 
pi /aRa,y 1218. 

d We find them on the coins of Alex- 
andria (Mum. Comm. Paus. Y. 25), on 


’ the gem of Aspasios, on the visor of 


the Athena of the Villa Albani, and 
traces of them on the visor of the 
Athena Antiochus. 

¢ It appears on the St. Petersburg 
medallion, but this is in all probability 
a freedom that the goldsmith allowed 
himself, 








A pat ali a it i eat A] 


a Oe 


XII. ] IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 365 


them on the gem of Aspasios, the St. Petersburg medallion, 
and on the Minerve au Collier in the Louvre. 

Again, the statuette has been supposed to add something to 
our knowledge of the structure of the whole: it shows us the 
pillar, about which Pausanias and the other writers are silent, 
supporting the right hand of Athena. Now it has been 
thought that some such support under the outstretched hand, 
in the palm of which stood a statue of gold and ivory, was an 
architectural necessity ; and it is seen not only in the statuette 
but on more than one relief containing a reproduction of the 
Parthenos, as well as on a leaden tessera of Berlin *, where it 
is difficult to find an explanation for the support appearing 
under the hand of the Pheidian figure that is copied there, 
unless it had been seen in the original work. And it has been 
urged that some support would be artistically desirable also as 
some counterpoise to the weight of attributes on her left. But 
would Pheidias, if he found some support necessary, have been 
content with a mere architectural pillar, heavy and awkward 
in itself, and contributing nothing to the meaning of the 
whole? This would have seriously marred the perfection of 
his work ; and if the arm really needed something to rest on, 
we can advance a more attractive theory than that which 
accepts the pillar; for a coin of Cilicia of the fourth century, 
on which a fairly exact copy of the Parthenos appears, 
presents the support not in the form of a meaningless column 
but of an olive-tree®; and Dr. Murray maintains that this 
coin-representation reveals to us how Pheidias was able to 
combine architectural necessity with the ideal artistic prin- 
ciple of making each part of the whole significant. Certainly 
an olive-tree would be better than a bare unadorned pillar. 
But it is very singular that no ancient authority should have 
mentioned so conspicuous an object as the olive-tree, which 
must have been some sixteen feet in height: although it is 
open to us to say that it was mentioned in the text of 
Pausanias at that point in the description where there is an 
obvious lacuna in the MS. On the other hand we may fairly 


® Arch. Zeit. 1857, Taf. 105; Num. Comm. Paus. p. 127- 
b Num. Comm. Paus. Y. 22. 


366 GREEK RELIGION. (CHAP, 


maintain that Plutarch ’**” does actually refer to the pillar- 
support, when he says that Pheidias carved ‘the golden 
statue of the goddess’ and that his name was inscribed ‘on 
the pillar’: for the context suggests that this ‘stele’ was 
a part of the whole monument*®. Sir Charles Newton’s view, 
maintained and developed by Dr. Waldstein , that no support 
at all was necessary, as the figure of Nike might have been 
poised and secured on the hand of Athena by some mechanism 
of bars and weights hidden within the statue, is reasonable in 
itself; but these writers do not sufficiently explain Plutarch’s 
statement or the presence of the column in the copies. 

The last contribution of the statuette to our knowledge of 


the external motive of the whole statue is its evidence in — 


regard to the position and action of Nike. The written 
records leave us doubtful whether the Victory was turned 
towards Athena as if hailing her as the goddess of per- 
petual triumph, or turned away from her as if dispensing 
victory from her to her people. Either pose can be illustrated 
from the monuments” that reproduce the work: but there are 
very serious objections against accepting either as the real 
Pheidian motive. If she were fronting Athena, she would be 
turning her back on the spectator, and the effect would cer- 
tainly be ungainly ; and if she were standing with her back to 
the goddess, she would seem to be flying away from her, and 
the whole composition would lose in unity. The statuette 
shows, no doubt, the original position and testifies to the 
skill of Pheidias; for Nike is placed obliquely so that she 
could be looking up to Athena and yet not wholly turning 
her face from the spectator or from the successful athlete, 
whom it may have been the custom to bring up to the statue 








® That orndn could not be used by 
a late writer in this sense is not clear, 
though xiwy would be the more usual 
word. 

b Vide Newton, Journal of Hellenic 
Studies, 2. pp. 2-4; Waldstein, Art of 
Phetdias, pp. 275-281, who tries to 
account for the presence of the column 
on the reliefs and the marble statuette. 
The same explanation may be given for 


the balance of Nike on the outstretched 
hand of Zeus Olympios, where there is 
no hint of any external support. 

¢ Turned towards Athena on Attic 
coins, Vum. Comm. Paus. Y. 18, 20; 
also on fourth-century coins of Cilicia, 
Duc de Luynes, Mumismatique des 
Satrapies, Pl. 3. 5-6; turned away 
from Athena and crowning an athlete, 
Michaelis, Parthenon, Pl. 15. 7. 


— a Stes 


xu] IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 367 


to receive his crown. And, lastly, the statuette proves that 
in addition to the crown which, according to the Attic 
inscription already mentioned, Nike was wearing on her head, 
she held a garland in her hands, raising it towards the 
goddess as an emblem of her triumph. 

As regards the drapery, the statuette is no doubt an 
accurate copy: we see the same girded Doric diplois as 
appeared on the figure of the bronze Athena, and which is 
attested by the coins that reproduce the Athena Parthenos, 
and which belongs to the austere maidenly character of the 
goddess ; it is so arranged that the whole front-surface of the 
body is divided into four fields, and the heavy straight folds 
_ below perform the function of columnar supports, and give 
the solemnity or ceuvdtys proper to the temple-statue. 

We may gain also a fairly accurate idea of the proportions 
and pose of the original. The head is to the body in the 
normal ratio of one to seven, yet the massive helmet gives to 
the upper parts the appearance of some excess; but in the 
original this need not have been felt, for it was necessary for 
Pheidias to take into account the great height of his image, 
and to emphasize the upper parts, lest diminished by distance 
they should seem out of proportion with the lower. 

As regards the pose, the weight is thrown on the right and 
the left knee is bent, and the one side is as free as in the 
Polycleitean statue, and the whole form has something of the 
same quadrilateral or four-square outline that we see and the 
ancients noted in the Doryphorus. But the fine rhythm and 
supple balance discernible in the ‘canon’ is not found here ; 
for although the body leans its weight on the right leg, the 
hips are level and the left shoulder is only very slightly higher 
than the right. And here, too, we may believe that the 
copyist was accurately following his model, and that Pheidias, 
in determining the pose of his colossal temple-image, which 
was an architectural construction as well as a great work of 
religious sculpture, intentionally preserved something of the 
rigidity of the ancient style; of which a trace appears also in the 
symmetrical disposition of the locks of hair on the shoulders. 
It is incredible that this should be due to lack of skill or 


368 GREEK RELIGION. [cHaP. 


knowledge: the Parthenon frieze, the work of his genius if — 
not of his hand, would refute such a belief. The face also is _ 
of a somewhat more archaic type than the other Pheidian — 
heads, for its form is more four-square than the heads of the 
Parthenon, the central plane being as it were distinct from 
the two sides; and though the cheeks are full, the forms have 
a certain architectural severity ; the line of the eyebrows is 
very precise, and the parts about the nose and mouth lack 
modulation. These qualities might be thought to show an 
earlier style, or they might also show the judgement of the 
sculptor, who reckoned with the effect of height and with the 
nature of the material. But when we examine other reproduc- 
tions of the Parthenos head, we begin to suspect the accuracy 
of the statuette in its treatment of this part of the original. 

The copyist has, in fact, especially failed in his rendering 
of the countenance, which lacks spiritual expression and 
ethos, and is only a blank scheme of forms. Yet the 
statuette allows us to feel the austere solemnity of the 
original, the impressiveness of the measured pose of the 
limbs, and the purity of the drapery. 

To gather an impression of the face of the Parthenos, we 
should examine two other copies of far greater technique 
and imagination. | 

A head has recently been found in Athens (Pl. XXV), which 
has not yet been published, and which is the most remarkable 
instance yet known of a marble reproduction of a gold and 
ivory original; it is undoubtedly a head of Athena, although 
the helmet is wanting, and a copy of the Pheidian master- 
piece. The marble is polished so as to resemble ivory; and 
we note the traces of gold on the red-coloured hair; the 
eyeballs were of a different material and have fallen out. 

As regards the features, this fragment serves to correct 
the impression given us by the statuette: there is no 
mathematical scheme of four-square outlines here; the 
contour is a full, rounded oval, and the traits of the face 
are eminently Pheidian, an epithet with which the work on 
the Parthenon frieze furnishes us to describe the dominant 
type of the grandest style of Attic sculpture. The forehead 











PLATE X XV 














To face page 368 


jd 


xt] IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 369 


is broad and the hair drawn away from it ; the cheek is large, 


and also the chin; the lips are full and half opened, and with- 


out much curvature; the eyelids are large and thick. The 
expansive brow, the deep large eye-sockets, and the great 


breadth between the eyes contribute to the extraordinary 


impressiveness of this head, and perhaps no work of Greek 
religious sculpture is more striking for the expression of 
solemnity, earnestness, and inner life in the face. It is 
probably the work of a sculptor of high imagination who 
lived not long after Pheidias, and who aimed at reproducing 
the Parthenos in marble on the scale of ordinary life-size. 
The work next in importance to this is a representation of 
the Parthenos head on the St. Petersburg gold medallion ®, 
found in a grave in South Russia (Pl. XXIV.b). The face is 


given three-quarters full; and we can see the whole of the 


extraordinarily rich decoration of the helmet, with the sphinx 
and Pegasi beneath the three crests, the visor adorned with 
the foreparts of stags and griffins alternately. The spear rests 
on the left shoulder, and is kept in its place by the device of 
encircling it with one of the serpents of the aegis, a motive 
which, as the writer that publishes the medallion well argues, 
must be derived from the original. The hair falls upon the 
shoulders in two beautiful spirals of gold, and as this is the 
only style of treating the free locks proper to gold-work, we 
may believe that the artist has followed Pheidias in this also. 
The face closely resembles that which has just been described : 
the features are full and broad ; the chin rather large, the lips 


' just parted, the nose in a line with the forehead, the eyelids 


s. 
: 
: 
| 
a 


thick, the pupils marked. The expression of mild earnest- 
ness and tranquil power is masterly, and the view expressed 
by Kieseritzky that the artist has been trained in the Pheidian 
school is not without reason. 

The marble copy of the Parthenos head found in the 
gardens of Sallust, and now in the Berlin Museum ®, is only 
interesting as a specimen of polychromatic sculpture; it is 


* Reproduced in the Mzttheilungend. also in Harrison and Verrall, Myths 
deutsch. Inst. aus Athen, year 1883, Taf. and Mon. Anc. Ath. 
15, with a long article by Kieseritzky ; > Antike Denkmdler, 1886, Pl. 3. 


VOL. I. Bb 


370 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP, © 


a Roman work, false in forms and expression; the features 


are small and lack grandeur or breadth, and the teeth are — 


showing. The gem of Aspasios, a work of the later period, 
is important for the representation of the helmet, but the face 
lacks expression, although the forms of the face appear to be 
correctly reproduced. 


It might be expected that so great a work as the Athena — 


Parthenos of Pheidias would have left many copies of itself, 
and two statues at least may be quoted that may be regarded 
as free reproductions of it: the Athena formerly in the 
Villa Ludovisi, by a sculptor of the late Attic school, whose 
name may have been Antiochus®, and the statue known as 
the Minerve au Collier of the Louvre. The former agrees 
with the statuette in the pose of the lower and upper limbs, 
in the arrangement of the drapery, and, on the whole, in the 
contour of the face; the arms are restored, but doubtless the 
right hand was holding the Nike and the left resting on the 
shield ; the helmet has lost the adornment of figures which it 
originally had, and the style proper to metal-work does not 
appear so much in the drapery as in the arrangement of the 
hair, which is twisted into a series of concentric rings above 
the forehead. The statue in the Louvre shows the same 
balance and pose of the limbs”, and is probably nearer to the 
original in the motive of the arms. But the drapery, though in 
other respects the same as that of the statuette, is modified 
by the addition of the upper garment. The face has been much 
restored, and we can scarcely draw any conclusion from it as 
to the fidelity of the copyist; but the helmet retains part 
of the original rich decoration, and we see the symmetrical 
disposition of the curls over the shoulders. The statue has 
preserved something of the stateliness of the original, but the 
sculpture is cold and dull, and dates from the Graeco-Roman 
period. | | 

The Albani Pallas (Pl. XX VII) is a work that deserves 
notice among the ideal types of Athena; and the question 
arises how far it can claim affinity with the Pheidian original. 
It surely cannot be derived from a type created in the period 


® Mon. dell’ Inst. 3. 27. b Miiller-Wieseler, Denkmaler, 2. 22. 211. 
3- 37 








Ce a ee, Se 









PLATE XXVII 








XII. ] IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 


371 


before Pheidias, as has been supposed*. For the pose of the 
body shows some advance in the direction of greater freedom 
and ease beyond that of the Parthenos statuette, for though 
the weight is thrown on the same side, the motive is continued 
in the upper body as it does not appear to be in the statuette, 
the right shoulder of the Albani figure being lower than the 
left, and the head is turned to the side on which the weight 
is poised. She wears an Ionic chiton with sleeves, of which 
the delicately traced parallel folds appear at the feet, and over 
this a thick double himation, which is looped up over the 
right shoulder, and of which the large upper fold falls back 
again over most of the body, leaving the left breast free ; 
its open borders are marked with the wavy line of the older 
severe style, but this severity contrasts with the fine freedom 
of some of the other folds, and we have an effective distinction 
between a stronger and milder style in the drapery. But here 
the Pheidian idea is entirely lost: in the place of the girt 
Doric sleeveless chiton, so appropriate with its severe sim- 
plicity and columnar folds to the temple-image of the armed 
maiden goddess, we have an arrangement of costuine that is 
majestic and stately, but which aims at imperial display 
rather than expression of character ; it is mattonly rather than 
maidenly. The face, too, has little of the Pheidian form, but 
has the sharp mathematical lines and angles of the Pelopon- 
nesian type, and nothing of Pheidian expression. The 
countenance is severe, almost sombre, and this is énhanced 
by the lion’s muzzle, the curious and unique device on her 
head which takes the place of her helmet, an innovation of the 
sculptor, who may have been thinking of Heracles, or who 
wished to allude vaguely to her heroic character’. The whole 


® For instance by Dr. Furtwangler in 
Roscher’s Lexicon, pp. 695, 696. The 
examples he quotes merely prove that 
the peculiar arrangement of the drapery 
can be traced back to the late archaic 
period : we see it in germ on vase-figures 
of Athena of the red-figured transitional 
style, e.g. Gerhard, Auserlesene Vasen- 
bilder, 116. 147. 143. 18, but the effect 


is entirely different; the bronzes that 
show the same arrangement as the 
Albani statue are all of the post- 
Pheidian and some of the Roman 
period, e.g. Sacken and Kenner, Bron- 
cen, Taf. 8. 4 and 7, Taf. 9, Taf. 5. 4. 

> Dr. Furtwangler maintains in his 
Metsterwerke, p. 80 (Engl. ed.), note 1, 
that it is a wolf’s or a dog’s muzzle that 


Bb2 


372 / * = GREEK RELIGION. . (CHAP. 


figure has less effect of height than of squareness; at the same — 
time it impresses us strongly, and it has an historic interest — 
as the statue which, above all others, appears to have inspired — 
Winckelmann with his conception of the ‘grand style’ of Greek | 
sculpture. It is probably a copy of an original wrought at the © 
end of the fifth century, possibly under Polycleitean influence. 

A different and very interesting representation of Athena 
by Pheidias was the famous Lemnian statue, which was dedi- 
cated on the Acropolis by the inhabitants of Lemnos 1°4° 
Pausanias tells us merely that this was the most remarkable 
of the works of Pheidias, and that it was called the ‘ Lemnian’ 
Athena—dn6 rév dvabévtwy, that is, because its dedicators 4 
belonged to the island. These have been usually and very 
naturally regarded as the Attic colonists, who, as Prof. Kirch- 
hoff® skilfully argues from epigraphical and other evidence, 
were allotted cleruchies there between 451 and 448 B.c. Now 
the view put forward by Prof. Loeschke, that the monument 
was erected on the occasion of their departure, is probable, 
but cannot on the existing evidence be proved; it is a priori 
quite as likely that the settlers sent this token to Athens 
some years afterwards as a thank-offering for their prosperity 
in their new home. The ancient records about this work are. 
unfortunately vague. Besides Pausanias, the only other 
writer who explicitly mentions it is Lucian, who borrows traits 
from it for his type of the ideal maiden, praising in particular 
the ‘contour of its face, the tenderness of its cheeks, and the 
symmetry of its nose’; and he evidently regarded it as the 
most perfect achievement of Pheidias’ art. We gather from 
Pausanias that it stood on the Acropolis, not far from the 
Propylaea. This is all that we are expressly told about it. 
It seems, however, most natural to refer to this work the 
statement in Pliny that Pheidias ‘wrought a Minerva of 
bronze of such surpassing beauty that it received the title 
of “formosa” (?)’; and nearly every writer has assumed that 
this refers to the Lemnian Athena, who may have been 
styled KadAluoppos or some such name. We should gather, 


covers the head; and refers to the cap of Athena in the worship at Coronea. 
of Hades, and the chthonian character ® Abhandl, d. Berlin. Akad. 1873, p. 33. 








a, RY 


i - oot 


XII. | IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 373 


then, that the Lemnian was a bronze work. And we should 
at once accept this identification, assuming that Lucian’s 
judgement was also the judgement of antiquity, but for one 
difficulty: if the Lemnian Athena on the Acropolis was of 
bronze, how came it that the Athena Promachus was generally 
known as ‘the bronze Athena’ on the Acropolis, while there 
was there another statue of the same goddess by Pheidias also 
of bronze? We may still reckon the balance of probability 
in favour of the belief that Pliny, Pausanias, and Lucian are 
speaking of the same statue. But in any case we cannot say 
with absolute certainty that we know even the material of 
which the Lemnian Athena was carved, still less can we be 
sure of the form and motives of the statue, so far as the 
literary record can teach us. The quotation from Himerius, 
placed by Overbeck among the records of the Athena Lemnia, 
is mere hazy verbiage, and can give no scientific evidence: 
the rhetorician takes pains to inform us that ‘the natural 
powers of Pheidias were strengthened by the discovery of new 
forms. He did not always carve Zeus, nor cast in bronze the 
maiden with her arms, but devoted his art to other divinities 
and adorned the maiden-goddess, infusing a blush into the 
cheek, that instead of the helmet a blush might serve as 
a covering for her beauty.’ Is there any reality behind these 
words? If they signify anything they ought to mean that 
Pheidias carved a new type of the unarmed Athena without 
her helmet; it is far too much to conclude that this was the 
Lemnian. Lastly, we are supposed to have an allusion to 
a Pheidian type of Athena without her arms in the inscription 
found near the site of Paphos, of the second century B.C., 
mentioning a statue of Athena dedicated to Aphrodite **°*. But 
unhappily the text is corrupt just at those points where the 
theory might have been tested: the second line, by a probable 
restoration, would mean that she did not need her arms when 
coming to visit Cypris; but the first line mentions shield or 
aegis and Nike, and the dative yepé that occurs in it cannot be 
accommodated to any restoration of the text that would make 
this line mean that she had left behind her these tokens of 
war. Therefore we do not find here any sure allusion to an 


374 GREEK RELIGION, [CHAP. 


unarmed type of the goddess; nor any certain reference to 
a work of Pheidias at all, for the last line which describes the 
dedication as Pediat xdpira need merely signify that the 
monument possessed ‘a Pheidian grace.’ 

Therefore we learn nothing definite from literature about 
the Lemnian Athena, and it is for this reason difficult to 
pursue with any effect the question whether we can discover 
the type of it among existing monuments. All that we can 
say about the character of the work is that the quality of 
formal beauty which appeared in the ‘ Parthenos’ was 
evidently enhanced in the Lemnian statue, yet certainly, as 
Pheidias was the sculptor, without any excessive striving 
after effect®. The figure of Athena on the Parthenon frieze 
is another interesting type of Pheidias’ creation; for she is 
seated there as the peaceful goddess without her helmet, 
carved in forms of simple maidenly beauty; the arrangement 
of the drapery, a single ungirt Doric chiton, has nothing of 
the severity of the temple-image; the short unbound hair is 
in keeping with the waiveté of the figure». 

A terracotta statuette from Salamis in Cyprus has been pub- 
lished by Prof. Gardner and by Ohnefalsch- Richter, affording 
further illustration of the unarmed type°. The pose resembles 
that of the Parthenos, the weight falling on the right side, and 
the left knee being bent. Her left hand rests on the shield 
which lies on the ground, and the right is half enveloped in the 
himation and holding an Attic helmet. Her flowing locks fall 
on the shoulders, and there is no emblem of terror on her 
breast. Neither does the drapery suggest the war-goddess : 
above the chiton hangs the mantle, and no girdling is visible, 
but the light diploidion falls down to the waist, and the 
columnar folds of the drapery at her feet are softly modulated. 
The features seem large and full. The whole figure combines 
dignity with great delicacy, and might well be a copy of a later 
work of Pheidian style. 


@ See Appendix B. Dr. Waldstein in his Art of Pheidias, 
» We have an exact copy of the Par- Pl. 9. p. 214. 
thenon figure in a small terracotta of © Hellenic Journ. 2, p. 326, Pl. 16; 
the Louvre, noticed and published by  A@itt. d. deutsch. Inst. 6, p. 250. 








Ee nee ol 


XII. ] IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. . 375 


The chryselephantine work of Pheidias completely expressed 
the ideal that the Attic religion had developed of the victorious 
goddess of war and peace, the guardian of the city-life, whose 
maidenly form was combined by him with an almost maternal 
fullness of countenance, and with an expression profoundly 
earnest but still free of severity. But great as was the 
influence of this masterpiece, a different type, which origi- 
nated in the fifth century, had considerable vogue in the 
fourth, and became the most prevalent in the later periods. 
It is distinguished from the former externally by the taller 
and slimmer Corinthian helmet, and essentially by a different 
cast of features: the face is longer and thinner, the bone- 
structure is more strongly marked, the mouth is very firm and 
severe ; what is expressed in the face is austere, self-centred 
wisdom and strength; the power of intellectual thought and 
the virginal character, which had been sufficiently expressed 
by Pheidias, predominate in this other representation of her, to 
the exclusion of the deeper Attic conception of the beneficent 
goddess of the people. The Pheidian ideal was that of Athena 
Polias ; this other expresses the Parthenos, the maiden-goddess 
of war and wisdom. The idea is narrower, but rendered in 
forms of exceeding beauty and purity. The type originated 
in the fifth century, but its birthplace is not known. We 
find the Corinthian helmet on her head and a broad type 
of features and severe arrangement of the hair on a coin of 
Cyzicus of about 430 B.c. It is commonest in the coinage 
of Corinth and her colonies; but it cannot be called exclu- 
sively Doric; for it penetrated later into the coinage of 
Athens and of the Attic colony of Thurii, where the type of 
the goddess with the Attic helmet and the Attic countenance 
had prevailed *. 

Perhaps the most beautiful instance of it is on the silver 
coins of Syracuse, of which a specimen is here given (Coin PI. 
B 30); the same type is also strikingly presented on coins of 
Ambracia and Leucas (Coin Pl. B 27, 28). 

The most striking example in sculpture of this Athena with 


® Vide Carelli, 165-167, Athena of the later ‘Corinthian’ type on coins of 
Thurii. 


376 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. XII, 


the Corinthian helmet and the corresponding expression, is the 
statue from Velletri in the Louvre, which represented her with 
her right hand raised and resting on her spear, her left holding 
outa cup. The face is very slim and long, and Peloponnesian 
in the severity of its outlines and its rectilinear character, with 
which the arrangement of the hair accords. The surface of 
the face has lost its life from the working of a later chisel 


upon it, but the expression remains in it of high seriousness, 


purity, and intellectual force. 

In the later Alexandrine period, as the free city-life decayed, 
we can note a decay in the representations of the city goddess ; 
the face becomes charged with sentiment or with excess of 
thought, the Corinthian type being preferred : to this period 
the original of the Athena Agoraia of the Louvre may be 
referred. 


- 











io a ah ae Se ad er Tae st, 


APP. | IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 377 


APPENDIX A. 


SINCE the account given in the text of the Athena ‘Proma- 
chus’ was written, the statue itself and the records concerning 
it have received a searching analysis from Dr. Furtwangler in 
his Mezsterwerke (pp. 27-36, Engl. ed.). He has entirely 
abandoned the opinion which he cursorily expressed in 
Roscher’s Lexicon (p. 700) against the affiliation of the torso 
Medici with the ‘ Promachus’; his present view agrees in the 
main with that which I have been led to adopt. What is 
novel in his theory is that the elder Praxiteles and not 
Pheidias was the sculptor of the ‘Promachus.’ A writer of 
very doubtful authority, the scholiast on Aristides (Overbeck, 
Schrifigu. 640), ascribes the ‘ Promachus’ to Praxiteles, and 
Or. Furtwangler accepts this statement, understanding by 
Praxiteles the elder sculptor of that name, the contemporary 
of Pheidias ; the explicit statement of Pausanias that it was 
a work by Pheidias’ own hand he tries to invalidate on 
the ground that Pausanias was usually reckless in ascribing 
works to Pheidias. But this is hard to prove. Pausanias was 
cautious about the Athena of Pellene ; he maintains, as against 
Pliny, that the statue of the ‘Magna Mater’ at Athens was 
a work of Pheidias, and there is no reason for saying that he 
was wrong: he states that Pheidias carved the Nemesis of 
Rhamnus, and if he was in error here, he erred in company 
with greater authorities than himself. Dr. Furtwangler does 
not notice that Ovid and even Aristides himself implicitly 
corroborate Pausanias’ statement (Overbeck, op. cit. 639, 643). 
There is no reason at all for believing that the ‘ Promachus ’ 
was not inscribed with the sculptor’s name. Dr. Furtwangler 
presses Lucian’s statement about the Lemnian Athena, that 
Pheidias deemed this work worthy to inscribe his own name 
upon, into meaning that no other work of the sculptor, at least 
on the Acropolis, bore his signature ; but the phrase of Lucian 
may have been suggested merely by the literary gossip about 
great sculptors allowing their works to appear under other 


378 GREEK RELIGION. [cHap. XII. 


names. The whole theory about an elder Praxiteles appears 
very unsubstantial ; there is no valid reason why any one of the 
works ascribed by recent criticism to the supposititious elder 
Praxiteles could not have been carved by the famous sculptor 
of the fourth century as the ancients believed ; the Praxiteles 
of the younger Attic school could have replaced the charioteer 
of Calamis with a better designed figure, and could have built 
the statue for the Plataean temple of Hera after the restoration 
of the city by Philip; when the Thebans first destroyed 
Plataea in the early period of the Peloponnesian war, it is 
scarcely likely that they would have commissioned an 
Athenian sculptor to carve the image. We should never have 
heard of an elder Praxiteles, if it had not been for the 
mysterious statement in Pausanias (1. 2, 4) about an inscrip- 
tion written in pre-Euclidean letters on the wall of the temple 
of Demeter at Athens, ascribing to Praxiteles a group that 
was there consecrated ; but for many reasons the statement is 
altogether too eccentric to be used in evidence. If there was 
an elder Praxiteles who achieved all that in the last ten years 
has been imputed to him, the ancient authorities on the 
history of sculpture were either strangely ignorant of this 
distinguished man, or preserved ‘a conspiracy of silence.’ 

The rest of Dr. Furtwangler’s theory will probably be 
accepted, namely, that the ‘Promachus’ was a later work than 
the Parthenos. Lange had already maintained this; and 
Dr. Furtwangler, starting from the same evidence, the Medici 
torso, shows by a minute analysis the marks of a style that 
in respect of the drapery and in certain details of the pose 
was somewhat in advance of that which is revealed in 
the Parthenos. 


APPENDIX B. 


THE recent investigations of Dr. Furtwangler and his 
supposed discovery of the Lemnian type have given rise 
to a question of the very highest importance for modern 
archaeology to decide. By a very brilliant and fascinating 
combination, he has arrived at the conviction that the Bologna 





eek 


APP. | IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 379 


head, hitherto misnamed the head of Ephebos or Amazon, or 
even a modern forgery (Meisterwerke, Pl. 3), and the two 
statues in Dresden (zd. Pl. 1 and 2), are to be connected as 
copies from the same original, and that this is the Lemnian 
Athena of Pheidias. This theory has been accepted with 
enthusiasm, and certainly most would confess that they desire 
it to be true; but no one except Dr. Furtwangler himself 
appears yet to have tested it by searching criticism; an 
adverse article concerning it in the Monuments Grecs (1895) 
by M. Jamot is full of weak points, some of which Dr. Furt- 
wangler successfully exposes in a reply in the Classical Review 
of June, 1895. The theory in the Wezsterwerke involves two 
separate and distinct points. The first is a real and fruitful 
discovery, to which others have contributed something, but of 
which the greatest credit is due to Dr. Furtwangler ; he has 
proved, namely, that the head of the Dresden statue (Pl. 1) 
really belongs to the figure, that it is a replica of the Bologna 
head, and that the latter exactly fits into the torso of the 
second Dresden statue on Plate 2, from which an entirely 
alien head has been removed. The authorities of the Dresden 
Museum guarantee these facts after careful experiments made 
at Dr. Furtwangler’s suggestion; as there is no reason to 
suppose they have deceived themselves, we must accept the 
evidence as certain. The head of the first statue (Pl. 1) has 
been rightly restored and set again on the figure, and the 
whole appears to me, judging from the cast, to be in admirable 
harmony. We have then recovered, thanks to Dr. Furtwangler, 
a remarkable and beautiful type of a bare-headed Athena, and 
the original must have been a famous work, for we have at 
least four copies of it in sculpture—the two Dresden statues, 
the third to which the Bologna head belonged, and the ill- 
restored Cassel statue (Miiller-Wieseler, Denkmaler, 2. 210)— 
and Dr. Furtwangler has published a gem with an Athena 
bust of the same type, which suggests that the sculptor of the 
original work represented her holding her helmet in her right 
hand (Meisterwerke, p. 6, Fig. 1): the left arm was held out 
almost at right angles to the shoulder, and was no doubt 
resting on the spear. This is the type of the peaceful goddess 


380 GREEK RELIGION. [CHAP. XII. 


which was in vogue with the earlier painters of the red-figured 
vases, being especially used in scenes where Athena is greeting 
another person (Lenormant, Elite, 1. 80, 82, 86), and was 
evidently still popular at the close of the fifth century, as we 
gather from the Lansdowne relief. There is reason to believe 
that this isa specially Attic type, though it may have travelled 
to other art-centres. 

So far Dr. Furtwangler’s study of these works leads to 
scientific results of great value; and the Bologna head is no 
longer a waif among monuments. But the second point of his 
thesis is that this type is the type of the Lemnian Athena, 
and that the Dresden statues and the Bologna head are exact 
copies. Here the method of his research appears to me to be 
at fault. In that part of archaeology which consists in the 
discovery of lost antiques among existing copies, scientific 
certitude is almost impossible unless we are helped by clear 
literary record or by inscriptions. Now Dr. Furtwiingler 
assumes throughout that we know that the Lemnian Athena 
was without helmet, and that she was carved of bronze; as 
I have shown in the text, the last point is only probable, and 
of the first there is no evidence at all. In his reply in the 
Classical Review to M. Jamot, he is slightly less dogmatic ; 
he states his theory not as a proved certainty, but as a 
combination of most extreme probability, such as that which 
has led us to discover the Doryphorus of Polycleitus or the 
Apoxyomenos of Lysippus. It is doubtful if we can grant 
him quite so much as this; for we know at least that the 
Doryphorus was carrying a spear, and that the Apoxyomenos 
was using the strigil, and these are important clues: but no 
one tells anything so clear about the Lemnian Athena. 
‘ Beautiful contour, tender cheek, symmetrical nose,’ are found 
in many ancient heads, and are words therefore that give little 
clue: nor have we any right to conclude from Lucian’s words 
that she had or had not a helmet. 

Nor again can we argue by elimination, so as to prove, for 
example, that as these statues reveal a Pheidian type, and 
this cannot be the Parthenos or the Promachus, therefore it 
must be the Lemnian. Such argument is useless unless we 











po IRS ar? ‘¥ oa ee Ca Sore es es z : e 


APP, ] IDEAL TYPES OF ATHENA. 381 


know that we have a complete list of the sculptor’s works ; 
and of what ancient sculptor do we know this? And if all 
Pheidias’ works were mentioned by one writer or another, 
there is still the ‘alia Minerva’ mentioned by Pliny, evidently 
well known in Rome. 

Nor does Dr. Furtwangler make it clear that these monu- 
ments prove an original by the hand of Pheidias. The 
drapery resembles that of the Parthenos as regards the main 
forms and partly in the treatment of the folds, but he notes 
himself very important differences: the lower part from the 
knees downwards does not resemble the disposition of the 
drapery on the Parthenos statuette, or on the female figures of 
the Parthenon ; certainly there is a general style in the treat- 
ment that may be called ‘ Pheidian,’ but this may have been 
used by other artists in Athens, and even elsewhere. But the 
real test is the countenance ; and after a long study of the 
cast and of Dr. Furtwangler’s analysis of the features, which 
is penetrating and correct, I can only conclude that we have 
no right to attribute such a head to Pheidias’ hand. For our 
only direct evidence of his work are the Parthenon sculptures 
and—of less value—the Parthenos statuette. Now Dr. Furt- 
wangler admits that in its essential features this head in 
Bologna does not resemble these. It has an oval top, while 
the heads of the Parthenon tend to show at the top 
a horizontal line; its cheeks are not broad, while the breadth 
of theirs is conspicuous and imposing; the angle of the nose 
with the chin is different, and the chin slightly recedes, while 
theirs is firm and straight ; nor is there any mouth on the 
Parthenon frieze that resembles this, with its firm closed lips 
and its expression of cold reserve. The breadth of shoulders 
recalls the Parthenon style, but we should have expected 
more indication of the collar-bone. The countenance is very 
earnest and self-contained, and though there is an impress of 
Attic character upon it, yet it has not wholly the expression 
that is stamped upon the authentic Pheidian faces. — 

The ideal of the goddess presented to us in this type is 
narrower than that which the Parthenos embodied; it is 
the ideal of the young and half-developed maiden deity, 


- 


382 GREEK RELIGION. 


self-contained and cold; the face has neither the full rich life 
that the heads of the Parthenos reveal, nor the keen intellectual 
traits of the latter slimmer type. One might at first be 
tempted to place it after the Parthenos in point of time, and 
to regard it as pointing the transition from that to the later 
ideal. But Dr. Furtwangler’s argumentation is strong in 
support of the view that it preceded the Parthenos by some 
few years. A few details may indeed suggest a somewhat later 
origin; the visage of the Gorgon has less of the archaic erim- 
ness, the drapery at the back by the girdle and the flaps under 
the right arm are treated with much more softness and pliancy 
than is seen in the surface of the Parthenos statuette at these 
places, and there is more free rhythm achieved in the inclina- 
tion of the shoulders; but, as Dr. F urtwangler has pointed 
out, the Parthenos as a temple-statue required more austerity 
and solidity of pose. On the other hand, the rather broad 
centre of the face of the Bologna head, and the deep reserve 
impressed upon the countenance, remind us of the style of the 
earlier transitional period. And lest we should think that this 
girlish type could not be so old as 440 B.C., we may bear in 
mind the relief-figure of the mourning Athena, which is still 
earlier, and is almost as youthful and simple. 








REFERENCES. 383 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X-XII. 


? Primitive ritual or cult : 

@ Human sacrifice at Laodicea. Porph. De Adst. 2. 56 éOvero yap 
kai ev Aaodikeig Th Kata Supiav tH AOnva kar’ éros mapbévos, viv bé édagos. 
Cir a, 

b Schol. Tzetz. Lycophr. 1141 Oopa S€ kai Amos... exXe THY 
Aoxpida dia thy és Kaooadvipay dOepitopiEiav tod Atavros. "Eypnoe & 6 Oeds, 
iAdoKerOat “AOnvav tiv ev "IXtw én’ &rn xAua, dvo0 mapbévors méurovras ent 
KAnp@ kai Aaxnoet, Tepropevas b€ aitas mpovmavtaevres of Tpdes, ef Katéryor, 
davnpovy, kai kalovres dkdprots Kai dypious Evdos Ta 6oTa aitSv, amd Tpdpwvos, 
dpous ris Tpolas thy omoddv eis Odhaccay Eppittov, Kat mddw of Aokpol €r€pas 
anéareddov, Ei dé tives expiyouev, dvehOovoat AdOpa és rd THs ’AOnvas iepsv, 
i€pevae eyévovro* capo b€ aitd kal Eppawvov’ tH S€ Oe@ od mpoonpyxovto, oddé 
Tov tepod ovK eEnpxovto, ef py viKT@p., "Hoav b€ Kexappeévat, povoyitwves, Kal 
avuTrddnrou. . .. Xidiwy S€ erav mapedOdvray pera Tov Baxikdy médepov 
emavoavto ths To.avtns Ovoias, Ss gyno Tipaios 6 Suxedds, Mépyyrar d€ ris 
iatopias Kat 6 Kupnvaios KaAXipayos. 

? Feast of WAvvrnpia at Athens: 


a Xen. Hell. 1. 4,12 xarémdevoev és rov Tetpara quéepa 7 WAvvrnpia Fyev 
7% WOds, TOD ESous KaTakexaAvppevou THs AOnvas, 6 tives olwviCovto dvemiTnSetov 
eivat kal ait kai tH drew’ *AOnvaiwv yap ovdels ev tatty TH Hpéepa ovderds 

, ~ nd a oe 
arovdaiou épyou TtoApnoa dv ayac6a. 
. »” ‘ , a A. a ‘ oe) 

b Plut. Adib. 34 @paro ra Wrvyrnpia rh Geo? Spwar dé tra dpya 
IIpagtepyidat Gapyndtovos Extn POivovtos amdppynta tdév Te Kdcpov KabeddvTes 
Kai TO €O0s KataxadvWartes. 

© Hesych. s.v. Upagtepyidae’ of 1d 0s 1d dpyxaiov rhs *AOnvas 
dppvevvivtes, 

d Phot. Lex. p. 231. 11 Aourpides’ dv0 Kdpar mepi rd Edos tis ’AOnvas’ 
€xadouvro S€ abtrar kai mAvvtpides. ovtws ’Apiotopdyns. Cf. Lt Mag. 
Katavintns’ iepwovrn "AOnvynot, 6 Ta KaTw TOD mémdov THs ’AOnvas puTatvdpeva 
drom\ivar, 

€ Phot. Lex. p. 127 KadAvyrypia’ Kaddvyrnpta kal mdvytTnpia, Eoprav drd- 

cal ‘ , , 
para’ yivovra pev avrat Capyndtdvos pnvds, évvdtn pev emt d€xa KadAvvTNptA, 


384, GREEK RELIGION. 


Seurépa b¢ Pbivovros ra mhuvtipia’ Ta pev TAvYTHpLa Gynot dia Tov Odvarov THs 
“Ayavpou évtds eviavtod pt) mAVOHVaL eo OFras. 

f Hesych. s.v. WAvvrjpia’ éopri) "AOnrnow, hy éxt rh Aypato tH Kéxporos 
Ovyarpi (Tiny) &yovow. 

& Athenag. Leg. 1 kal ’Aypatho *AOnvaior pvoripia cab tederds ayovat 
kat Ilavdpdo. 

h Pollux, 8. 141 mepiryowioa ra iepa €deyov ev tais dmoppdot, Kai 7d 
tapappagat, otov TAvvrnpios. 

1 Hesych. s.v. ‘Hynrnpia’ madd6n obkwv' ev Th €opti) (mapa) wAvvTnpiar, 
hepovar rardOnv ovykeperny e& iaxddav. 

* TAvvrnpia in Paros C. /. Gr. 2. 2265. 

#2 C.J, Ay 2s 469; 10 €red). ‘ol epnBo . . . e&nyayov 8€ Kat thy 
Tahdda Pahnpoi kaxeilev Tddkw ovveonyayov pera Hords pera madons evkud pias, 
il 47. Us ara. TT: 

b Suidas, 4. p. 1273. 7 of 8€ vopodvAakes . . . Ty UladAade tHv tropmny 
exdopouv Ore KopiCoito 7d Edavov emt Tv Oddacaar. 

*a Schol. Callim. Zavacr. Pall. 1 & ru nemEpa @propevn €Oos elyov ai 
"Apyetat yuvaikes NapBdvew rd t&yadpa tis AOnvas Kat 76 Acopndous (cdkos) 
Kal Gye emt Tov "Ivaxov kaket amroAoveu. 

b Paus. 2. 23, 5 A€yovar yap ’Apyeion . . . dyadpa Keiobat Tapa opiow 
"AOnras 7d exxomoOev e& "IXiov kal ddGvat troupoav ”IAuov, 

® Artemid. Onerrocr. 2. 33 éxudoocew Oedr dyd\pata 7) adeihew 7 
kabaipew 7) capoty Ta mpd THY dyadpdTwv ... NuaprnKévar Te eis adTods Tovs 
Ocovs exeivovs onpaiver. 

7 "AOnva ’Aveyotis in Mothone: Paus. 4. 35, 8 év MoOadvy vads éorw 
"AOnvas *Aveparidos’ Atoundny b€ 1d dyadpa dvabeivar Kai ro dvopa TF beg 
acti b€0bai. 

® Athena Napxaia in Elis: Paus. 5. 16, 5 ®uokdav dé é« Atovicov rexeiv 
maida Napkaiov (Aéyovot)’ toirov, ws nvénbn, . . . “AOnvas tepdv éxixdnow 
Napkatas . . . iSpvoacOa. 

°a Athena Nedovoia in Laconia: Strabo, 360 mapa 8é @npas Nédov 
exBadr«r péav Oia THs Aakovixns .. . exes O€ icpov émionuov AOnvas NeSovucias, 
Kai €v Wougoon & éeoriv ’AOnvas Nedovoias iepdv. 

b In Ceos: Strabo, 487 ro THs Nedoveias "AOnvas iepdv, 

© Strabo, 411 kpatncavtes S€ ris Kopwveias év TS mpd adtis wedio rd TH 

» 411 kpatn s d€ ths Kopav D 1p 1 ‘ ns 
"Irevias “A8nvas iepdy iptcavro éumvupoy TH CeTTadtK@ kat Tov mapappéovra 
motanov Kovapioy mpoonydpevoay spopovas ta éxei, "Adkaios S€ Kadet 


Kapadiov. 





‘ 
: 
a 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X_XII. 385 


,. 

1 Athena Aapiaia: Paus. 7- 17, 5 “Axatois 8€ Spor cai "Hrelois THs 
X@pas mrotapds te Adpicos Kab ’AOnvas em ™@ ToTau@ vads éott Aapioaias. 

12 SN , , «en ~ 

Athena Sounds: Paus. 1. 1, 1 axpa Sovnov mpdkecrac yijs THs “ArtiKns 

kal Ayuny Te mapamdevoavTs Thy dxpay €oti, kai vads "AOnvas Soumddos em 
kopui ths akpas. 

8 Strabo, 281 évravda 8 earl kai rd Ts “AOnvas iepsv mrovody more 
tmdpay, kai 6 oxdmedos, bv Kadovcw akpav “larvyiay (on the Calabrian 
coast). 


* Athena Kopnoia: Steph. Byz: s:v. Képiov, témos ey Kpytn amo kdépns 
Twos... kat ivyn Kopnoia, kai ’AOnvas lepov Kopnoaias, 


© Athena Tvyaia, by the lake Gygaea in Lydia: Eustath. Z/. 2. 
864-866, p. 366 Erepor 8€ Kat "AOnvav Puyaiay aito&t tipacbai hacw. 

a Athena Tpitoyevera: Delt. Arch, 1889, p. 118 6 Seiva a |veAnke 
Bo....... eres Madddds Tpiroyevei. 


b Tpiroyévera in Lhad, 4. 5153 8. 39; 22. 183. 

© Arist. Lyststr. 346 Kai ce xaro oUppaxoy & Tpiroyévera. . . here 
vdep ped” Har. 

d Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 1. 109 Tpiravis 7 ’AOnva, bre ev Tpitar éyevrviiOn 
T@ AiBux@* Eiol 8€ kai Gddoe Sto Tpirwves, els pev Bowwrixos repos dé 
Gecoanikos. 

© Paus. 9. 33, 7, near Alalcomenae in Boeotia, pet kat morap)s 
evravOa ob péyas xeiwappos’ dvoudtovor dé Tpirwva aitdv, ore trv ’AOnvav 
Tpabjvat mapa Toran Tpitwn exer Adyos, os 67 TodToy Tov Tpirwva dvta Kal 
ovyxi Tov AiBvwv. 

f Jd. 8. 26, 6 *Adupnpedor Se... iepa O€ ’AokAnmod ré €ote Kat AOnvas, 
hv Oeav oeBovra pddiora, yevérbar kai Tpapjvar mapa odiow adtiy déyovtes" 
kat Aids te idpicavro Aeyedtov Bopudy are évravda thv ’AOnvav texdvros, Kal 
Kpnynv Kadovo. Tpirwvida, tov emi T® ToTaua 7H Tpitw oixeovpevou Adyov. 
THs d€ “AOnvas 1d dyadpa memoinrar yadkoi, ‘Yratodwpou epyov, Oeds a&Ewov 
peyebovs re Evexa Kal és ri réyvnv. dyovot S€ Kal ravyyvpw bre 87 bear" 
Boca dé oas dyew rh ’AOnra. | 

& Aesch. Kum. 292: 

GX’ ire xopas ev témos ArBvorikis, 
Tpit@vos audi xedpa yeveOdiov mépou, 
tiOnow dpOov 4 Karnpepy méda (’AOnra). 

h Apoll. Rhod. 4. 1306 dddgd odeas eXénpay dynyavin puwvOovras 
ipoaca, AwBins tynopor, ai wor’ "AChunv, fyos br éx marpds Kepadris Odpe 
maphaivovoa, dvtéuevat Tpirwvos ep’ vdace xvTAdaarTo. 


VOL, I. C2¢ 


386 . GREEK RELIGION. 


i Herod. 4. 180 (in Libya) of MdyAves mépE thv Tprrwvida dipyny 
oikéovot... ‘Opr® dé enavain ’AOnvains of mapbévor aitay Sixa dSiacraca 
padxovrat mpos dAAnAovs AiBosi Te Kai EvLorot, TH avOvyevéi He@ A€yovoat Ta 
matpia amoredeew, THv AOnvainv Kadé€opev. , . : mp dé dveivaa aitas paxeoOat, 
rade Tmovedon Kow)* mapbevoy THy KaAALoTEVoVTaY ExdoTOTE KOTPHTAVTES KUYI TE 
Kopw6in kat mavorAin ‘EXAnvixh Kal en appa dvaBiBdcavres, Tepiayovat THY 
Aiprny KUKA®. 

K Ov. D7e7. iF. 356; 

Esse viros fama est in Hyperborea Pallene 
Qui soleant levibus velari corpora plumis 
Cum Tritoniacam novies subiere paludem. 

1 Diod. Sic. 5.72 pvOodroyotar b€ Kai tiv ’AOnvav Kata tHv Kpytny é« Avs 
év tals mnyais Tov Tpitwvos motapod yevynOjva. 61d Kat Tpiroyéveray émrovopa- 
cOijva. eore Sé Kai viv ére mapa Tas mHyds TavTas tepdv Gy.ov THs Beod ravTns. 


Ci pcnols Pind, O/- 4. 66, 


m Paus. 8. 14, 4, at Pheneos in Arcadia: év tH dxpoméden vacs €or 
"AOnvas émikknow Tpitwvias’ épeimia Sé €deimero adrov pova, Kat Tooeday 
xadkovs EaTnkev erovupiay “Inmeos. 

n Suidas, s.v. Tperopnvis’ tiv rpitny rod pnvos... doxet dé yeyernoOa 
tore ) A@nva. “Iorpos b€ Kal Tpiroyéveray adrny nor éyeoOa, THY aithy TH 
LeAnvn vopicopevny. 

© Schol. J7. 8. 39 Tprroyevera . . . Ste tpitn pOivovros éréxOy. Cf. 
Callisthenes, /rag. 48 Geier rpirn rod pnvos eyervnOn’ 616 map’ *A@nvaiots 
n Tpitn iepa ths ’AOnvas. 

P Worship of Athena and legend of Triton in Triteia of Achaea: 
Paus. 7. 22, 8, g Tpureia Ovyatpi Tpirwvos’ iepacOa dé ths *AOnvas thy 


mapOévov .. . ev Tpiteia .. . €ore Se Kal "AOnvas vads, 


Athena-cult associated with Poseidon. 
“al In Athens: Paus. 1. 26, 6 (on Acropolis) gore 5¢€ kal otknpa 


"EpéxOerov Kadovpevov .. . eveAOovor S€é eiot Bwpol, Moaedavos, ep ob Kai 


? al , 2 a a 
EpexOct Ovover €x Tov pavrevparos. 


a? Plut. Quaest. Conviv. 9. 6 évratda (at Athens) kal ved Kxowovet 
(lover) pera ris "AOnvas, €v @ Kal Bands éore AnOns iSpupevos. 

a? Apollod. 3. 15, 1 tiv lepaovvny ris *AOnvas Kal trod Tocedévos rod 
’EptxOoviov Bovrns (AapBaver). 

a* Himer. Eclog. 5. 30 olos 6 tis Taddddos veds Kal td mdnolov Tod 
Toveidavos répevos’ cuvnapev did t&v dvaxrdépwy rods Geods adAndows dia THY 
dpodAar, 








REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X_XII. 387 


a Plut. Vet. X. Orat. 8438: Lycurgus’ family karjyov ré yevos and 
Bovrov kal "EpeyOéws ... kai ori» adrn 9 Kataywyi Tod yévous tay lepaca- 
Bévov Tov Tocedavos ev mivake TedEl@, OS dvdketrat ev "EpexOcio . . . Tov 
d€ mivaxa dvéOnxevABpwv, 5 mais adrod, Aaxav ek Tod yévous Thy iepwodyny, Kai 
mapaxwpnoas TO ddeAPS Avkddpore, kai did Todro meTroinrat 6 ABpav mpocdi8ovs 

> ced ‘ , 
avT@ Thy Tpiaway. 

a@® At Colonus: Paus. 1. 39, 4 Bwpos Mocedavos ‘Immiov kai ’AOnvas 
“Inmias. 


«7 Jn the Lakiadas deme: Paus. r. 37, 2 AOnva kai Hocedav zyovor 
Tids. 

a® At Sunium vide}, cf. Arist. Equit, 559: 

Bevp’ EG &s yopdv, & xpvoorpiaw, 3 
deAdivey pedéwr, Youvuipare. 

a° Eur. Frag. Erechtheus, 362: 

ovx of exovons tis evs Wuyns avip 
Mpoydvev mardaa Oéope Goris exBarei, 
oud avr’ éddas ypvaéas re Topydvos 
Tptawav dpOiv oracav ev rddews Badbpois 
Evpodros ovd€ Opak avacréwer Neds 
orepavoiot, Tdddas & ovdapod riynoerat. 

b At Troezen: Paus. 2. 30, 6 *A@nvav Kai Mocedava audioByraca 
Aeyovat mepl ths xwpas, audioByrnoavras dé Exe €v Koo mpoordéar yap 
ovr Aia odiot. kai did rodro "AOnvav re o¢Bover Hoddda kai SOendda ovopa- 
Covres rv adtnv, Kai Tlocedava Bacthéa exikAnow, xal Oy Kal Td vomirpa 
avrois TO dpxaiov éerionua éyer Tpiawav Kal AOnvas mpd wroy, 

© ?at Corinth: Pind, O/. 13. 115 (in the legend of Bellerophon and 
Pegasos) : 

érav 8 eipvobevet 
kaptaimod’ avepin Teadya, 
Oéyev ‘“Inmia Bopov edOds ’Abdva (xeAnoaro), 

d At Sparta: Paus. 3. 11, g 7d d€ (iepdv) "AOnvas *Ayopaias Kai 
Tovedavos bv erovoudfovow "Acdddorv, Cf. >, At Pheneos in 
Arcadia, vide 1m, 

e At Asea: Paus. 8. 44, 4 émi ri dkpq rod Spous onpeid eotu iepov" 
moujoar S€ Td iepdv "AOnva te Soretpe kal Moceddu ’Odvacéa ééyero dvako- 
puoberra €& "IXiov, 

f Et. Mag. p. 479. 30 ‘Immia’ ekd7On obras 4 ’AOnva. eet ek ris kehadns 
Tov Awds peO immey amdaro, as 6 én’ airs duvos Syroi. # Ste TocesdAvos 
oboa Ovyarnp Kai Kopudijs rijs ’Qxedvov, Zyovea dppa, obras éyevvnbn. i} Ere 
Cc2 


388 GREEK RELIGION. 


“Adpacros OnBnbev pevywv, eri Kohor@ ornaas tovs immous, Mocedova kai 
’AOnvav immiovs mpoonydpevoer. 

18 Athena ‘AdNéa: ®Paus. 8. 45, 3-4 Teyedras dé “AOnvas tis 
"AXéas TO fepdv 1d dpyatov émoinoev “Adeos. .. . 6 dé vaos 6 ef’ qyiv 
rddv 1) Tv vadv Gro1 TleXomovynciots eioiv, és KaTagKEUTY Mmpr€éxer THY GAAVY 
Kal és peyebos, 

b Paus. 8. 46, 1 tis dé "AOnvas TO dyadpa ths “Areas Td iipxaioy . . . 
édaBev 6 ‘Papaiwy Bacwievs Avyovotos . . . TodTo pev bx €vravOa avaxerra 
ehéhavtos did mravrés memompévov, téxvn S€ ’Evdoiov. Herod. 1. 67 ai de 
réOat atrat, év thow ed€deato ert kal €s eve Hoav oat ev Teyen, wept Tov vyov 
ths Adens ’AOnvains Kpepapevat. 

c Paus. 8. 47, 1 70 O€ dyadpa ev Teyéa 7d ef qpar exopio On pev x Sjpov 
Tov MavOoupéwy, ‘Inmia S€ mapa tots MavOoupedow eiyev erikhnaw .. . “Adéay 
pev Tow KadeioOar Kat tavtny €s te “EAAnvas Tovs GAdous Kal €s avTovs 
Hehomovvnotovs exveviknke. TO S€ dyddpate THs "AOnvas TH pev "AokAnmLOs TH 
b€ ‘Yyleua mapeoraod ott diOov Tov Tlevrehnoiov, Koma b€ Epya 
Ilapiov, 

d 1b. 3 ieparar d€ rH ’AOnva mais xpovoy ovk oida Scop tia, mpiv dé nBdoKey 
Kai ov mpd, THY iepwovrnv. . . . 

€ Ib. 4 rod vaov 8€ od méppw oradioy xopa yns €oTi, Kai Gyovow ayovas 
evtavOa, ’Adeaia dvopatovres amd ths "AOnvas. 

f Near Amyclae: Paus. 3. 19, 7 kara dé rv dddv ’AOnvas Edavdy eorw 
*AXeas. 

s At Mantinea: Paus. 8. 9, 6 3<Bovor S€ Kai "AOnvay ’Adéav kai iepdv 
re Kal dtyadpa ’AOnvas *Adéas €otiv adrtois. 

h At Alea in Arcadia: Paus. 8. 23, 1 Oedv dé iepa airdbt "Aprépidds 
eotw “Eqeoias kai AOnvas ’Adeas. 

2 Athena Ai@ua: Paus. 1. 5, 3 (Ilavdiom) mpds Oardoon pond ert 


év TH Meyapior ev ’A@nvas AiOvias kadoupev@ TKoTEA®. 


20 Athena ‘EAA@ris at Corinth: ®Z4. Mag. p. 332. 42 "A@nva 
ovUT@ Kadoupern, eriuaro ev KopivO@ kai éopri “EXN@tia® . . . 7) amd Tov mpds 
Mapubdva édouvs ev @ puta. Schol. Pind. O/. 13. 56 ‘EAAoria éopry 

AOnvas év Kopivde’ Aawpreis pera “Hpaxdedav émO€nevor KopivOiors kai KépwOov 
xXétpoodpevoe Tavtny Proyl exarov’ pvyovaat ovv ai Kopivbiav mapbévas eis rdv 
~ > a , ¢ = > , , A a ’ , > 
ths "A@nvas vadv, bras owbeterv, aiobopevay Awptéewv Kat wip €uBaddvrov eis 
tov vadv, ai pev Gra Tov mapbevav eduvyov, “EM@ria Sé .. . Karepdex On. 
Aosod b€ Varepoy yevopévov Expnoev "AOnva py mpdtepov mavioecbar Tov Aoimdy 

‘ \ -~ ~ , sy > , ‘ € A > “a 
mpilv Tas Tov Kataxaccoav tapbevav wryas é€iAdcovtae Kal iepdv *AOnvas 


‘EdA@rias iSpvoorrat. 





2 ae 


a=) ie a» bt.» Wel ae 
. ‘ ' 





PE ee ge ee ee ee 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X-XII. 389 


b Athenae. p. 678 a, b SéAcvxos d€ év rais yAdooas ‘EAN@ribda Kadeirbal 
nor tov €k puppimns mAekdpevoy orépavov, . . . mopmevew Te ev TH Tov 
‘Ehdoriov €opty. pact & ev aite ra ths Evpamns dora KopiterOa, iv 
exddouv ‘EdAarida® ayerOar S€ Kai év Kopivée ra “ENoria, 

© Lt. Mag. P- 332. 40 ‘EdN@ria® 7 Etpomn ro madaby éxadeiro' 7 OTe 
of Poinkes THY mapbevov €AXoTiav Kadovow. 

2! Athena ‘EAAnvia: ® Arist. fir. Ausc. p. 840a mepi dé rh 
"IraXiav thy Kadouvpérny Tapyapiav, é€yyds Merarovtiov, “AOnvas iepov eivai 
gaow “EdXyvias, €vOa Ta Tov 'Emevod Aéyovow avakeicOar dpyava. . . . favtato- 
pevny yap atte thy AOnvay xata Tov Umvov akiodv avabeivac Ta Spyava Kai 
dia rodro Bpadurépas tvyxavovta tis avaywyns cideioba ev TH TdT, jy 
Suvdpevov éxmArcdaa’ GOev “ENAnvias "AOnvas 70 iepdov mpoaayopevecr Oat. 

b Et. Mag. p. 298. 25 Eidevia, modes’ Kat Eidevia ’A@nva.  BidoxT HT ys 

‘ , ° > ‘ c , ’ , DT al ve , > \ nx > 
yap mapayevopuevos eis “Iradiav, Spuvcato Etievias “AOnvas iepdv' amd tov év 
exeiva ovykekheio bat TH Tém@. .. . Ev VTopynpate Avkddpovos. 

22 Athena ’Ayapia, vide Zeus 77. 

* Athena ’Ogvdepxns at Argos on the Acropolis: Paus. 2. 24, 2 
iepov “A@nvas ’O€vdepkots Kadoupevns, Aroyndovs avdOnpa, Gte of paxouerv@ 
mote ev IXi@ thy axddy adeidrev n eds ard Tv dpOarpar. 

24 Athena ’Op6adryiris at Sparta: Paus. 3. 18, 2 vads éorw ’AOnvas 
"Opbarpiridos’ dvabeivac S€ Avkoipyov éyovow exkonévra tov dpOarpav 
rov érepov. Cf. Plut. Lycurg. 11... rods yap dpOarpovs orrirovs of 77)de 
Awpteis kadovar. Cf. Cic. De Deor. Nat. 1. 83 isto enim modo 
dicere licebit Iovem semper barbatum . . . caesios oculos Minervae. 


2> Athena “AyAavpos: ®Harpocrat. s.v. 7 Ovyatnp Kékporos, €or 
d€ kai em@vupov ’AOnvas’ vide Suidas, s. v. 

b Philochorus, /rag. 14 iépeva yéyover 7 “Aypavdos ’A@nvaiwv (legendum 
’"AOnvas). Cf. Hesych. s.v.”"AyAavpos . . . tepera THs ”AOnvas. 

¢ Demosth. Yals. Leg. 438 tis 6... TOv ev To THs *Ayavpou tay epyBav 
dpkov (dvayryvooxar) ; cf. Pollux, 8. 105 kai Gprvor (of édpnBor) évAypavdov' 
od Katacyuve Ta Emda, odd KaTaretwo Tov mapagTdtyy, G dv oTOLX' apuve 
8¢ kal inép tepav Kal doiwy Kai pdvos Kai pera moAAOy. kal THY matpida ovK 
€kdtrw tmapadéow, ... Kal Trois Oeopois tuis ipupevors metcopat ... Kal Ta 
lepa ra mérpia Tiunow. toropes Geol, “Aypavdos, Evuddwos, ”Apys, Zevs, Barro, 
Avéd, ‘Hyeudm. Plut. Ale. 15 tis yas ovveBovdever dvréxeoOar Trois 
’AOnvaios, Kai Tov év’Aypavdov mpoBaddAdpevov dei Tois epnBois opkov epyw 
BeBaodv, "Opriover yap Spos xpyoacba ris “Arrixis mupois KpiBais dpureédous 
éXalais vixeiay rroveicOar Si8acKdpevor THY Huepov Kal Kapmopéspor. 


d Porph. De Adst. 2. 54 €& th viv Zarapim .. . pnvi kara Kumpious 


390° * GREEK RELIGION. 


‘Agpodiaia ebvero avOpwmros TH Aypavi@ ... tp’ Eva dé mepiBodov & Te ris 
*AOnvas vews kai 6 ths ’AypavAov kal Atoundovs. 


* THdvdpooos: ® Schol. Aristoph. Lys. 440 Ovyarépes Keékporos 
Ilavdpocos Kai *Aypavdyn, €k tHs Tavdpécov 8€ kai 4 *AOnva Tdv8pocos 


kaXeirat, 


b Philoch. “rag. 32 (Harpocr. s. v. éniBowov) : Piddxopos ev Sevrépo 
pnow otras . . . "Edv O€ tis tH AOnva Oin Bodv, dvayxaidy gore cal TH 
Tavdopa (Bekker Tavépéo@) Ovew dw (uera Bods), kat éxareiro rd Oopa 
éeriBouov. Hesych. s.v. Havdmpa’ 7) yi, ad’ oS Kal Cel8apos Kal avnoWwpa, 
Aristoph. Av. 896 mparov Mavddpa Sica: Nevedrpixa kpidv. 


© C.LA. 3. 887 ri éavtdv bvyarépa Navovorparny eppnpopncacary 
"AOnva Hodtdde kai Mavdpdo@ dvénxav. Cf. C.I.A. 2. 1383. 


d Paus. 1. 27, 3 1G vad S€ THs "AOnvas Lavdpécov vads ouvexns eore’ 
kat €ote Tldvdpocos €s tiv mapaxataOnkny dvaitios trav adeApav pdm. . . 
mapOevor Svo0 Tod vaod THs Toduddos oikotaw od méppo, Kadrodor dé AOnvaio 
apas dppnpdpovs' attrac xpdvov péev twa Siarav exovca mapa tH be@, 
mapayevouerns S€ ths éopris Spaow ev vurti todde, dvabeioal odiow én tits 
keadas & 7 THs ’AOnvas iépeca Si8wor pepe, ovre 7) Siovca brotdy tt didwow 
cOvia, ore Tais hepovoats émiorapévars—é€ore S€ mepiBoros év TH médeL TIS 
kahoupens év Knows ’Adpodirns ob méppa, kai i’ aitod KdOodos émdyatos 
avtoudatn’ tatty Katiagw ai mapOévor. Kdtw pév d) Ta epdspeva etrovor, 
AaBovoa dé GdAo te Kouifovow eykekaduppévoy, Kat Tas péev apidow Sn Td 
evTevOev, érépas b€ és rHv axpdrodw mapbévos &yovow avr’ abrar. 

® Schol. Arist. Zys. 643 ti yap “Epon roumevovor, ri Kéxporos Ovyarpi, 
as ivropei "Iotpos. Cf. Moeris, s.v. éppnddpa ... at rhv Bpdacov dépovea 
7 Epon. 
at oo ire eer 3. 318 ‘Eponpopor Tis O€utdos. 

 Seepopdpra and Athena Skupds. 

a1 Schol. Aristoph. Eccles. 18 Sktpors* Skipa €optn €utt THs SKipados 
'AOnvas.. Zxipohopidvos IG’, of S€ Anpuntpos kai Képns. év 7 6 kepeds rod 
"Epexbéws héper oxidderov Nevkdy 8 héeyerat oKipor, 


e 
@* Harpocrat. s.v. Skipov. Zxipa éopri wap’ AOnvaios, ag’ fs Kal 6 piv 
td ‘ a , , ~ 3 WH, 9 a cal > , 

Zxipohopiov. activ ot ypdayavres TEpt TE pyvav Kai €opTav Tav “AOnvnor.. . 
@s TO oKipov axidderdv eoTe pe ob hepsuevor €£ ’Akpomdrews @s twa Tpdrov 
Kahovpevov SKipov mopevovra jf re THs ’AOnvas tépea, kal 6 Tov Hocedavos 
iepets kai 6 rod “HXiov. Kopifovor 8€ rovro "EreoBovradat’ kat ’AOnvav dé 

; lal ? c 
S«ipada tin@ow ’AOnvaior. 


43° Photius, s.v. Sxipos" €optn tis ayopemm tH 'AOnva, Gre oKadeiov 








"” 
x 
oa 
rs 
A 
7 
K 
i» 


REFERENCES FOR .CHAPTERS X—XII. 391 


eppovri{ov ev akun Tov Kavuatos’ okipa dé Ta oxiddera, of S€ od Sia TovTo 
ao adda Ova thy ard Skipwov ’AOnvav. Lb. Sxipopopidv’ pv ’AOnvatwr 16. 
avopacOn Sێ ard ths SKipados "AOnvas. 

a* Suidas, s. v. Avs x@diov, vide Zeus 8, 

a° Paus. 1. 36, 4. On the sacred way ywpiov Skipov ext rode 
kadovpevov, "EXevowiots tohepodot mpds “EpexOa civip padvtis Oey ék 
Awdovns dvopa Skipos ds kai ths Tipddos iSpvaato ’AOnvas eni Badypo rd 
apxatov iepdv. 

a® Strabo, 393 Sxipas (ekadeiro Sadapts) . . . ag’ od pev ’AOnva re 
Aéyerat Sipas kal rémos Skipa ev rH ’Arrixy Kal emi Skipw teporoua tes. 

a7 Pollux, 9g. 96 Skipddea S€ ta KuBevtnpia wvdpacrae Siwre pddvora 
"AOnvnaw éxvBevov emt Skipm ev TH THs Tkipddos *AOnvas iepa: cf. Lz, 
Mag. 717.30; Steph. Byz. s.v. Skipos .. . taws S€ Kai rd oxipadeior, 
rep Sndoi tov Térov eis Ov of KUBevTai Guviact. kai 6 oKtpopdpos (ckipados 
Meineke) 6 onpatver rov dxddacrov kai KvBevtny, and tev ev Ekipw dSiarpiBdv- 
tov. Skipa de KexAnrat, Twes pev Ste emt Skipw AOnva (libri ’AOnvnor) bverar, 
Gro. S€ awd Tov ywopnevwy tepov Anuntpe Kai Kédpn ev th €optH tavtn emi 
Skip@ KéxAnrat (leg. dep oxipa xéxdnra). Harpocr. s. v. Sepadua édeyor 
ra kuBeutnpia, emetds) SuetpiBov €v Skip oi kuZevovres, ws Oedmouros ev THY 
bmoonuaiver, Photius, s.v. Zxipadia’ ev tO THs Tkipddos ’AOnvas tepe 
émarfov of kuBevtai: S.U. SKipov’ rémos "AOnvnow, ef’ ob oi pavres exabelovro. 

a® Schol. Lucian published by Rohde, Whe. Mus. 25. 548 Oecpodo- 
pia (sic) éopry ‘EAAnvev puotnpia mepiexovoa, ta S€ avta Kai SKppodopia 
kadeira, Cf. Clem. Alex. Profrept. 14 P ravrny rhv pvdodoyiay ai yovaikes 


motkirtws Kata TOV éoptrdfovor Oecpoddpia, Sxipopdpia, ‘Appyntopdpra modv- 


tpdérws tiv Depearrns extpaydovoa dprayny. 

@° Schol. Aristoph. Zhesmoph. 841 dupdrepac éoptai yuvakav Ta pev 
Sryma mpo dveiv rav Oecpopopiov Ivaveyiavos 0’, ra dé Bkipa A€yerOai havi 
ries Ta yewdpeva lepa ev Th éoprh tavtn Anunrpe Kal Képy. oi S€ dre emtoxupa 
(leg. emt Supp) Overar rH "AOnva. 

a0 C.J. A. 3.57 1H b€ Swdexdty tév Skipwv=rf Swdexdty Tov ZKupo- 
opravos (?). 

at Plut. Concug. Praecep. 42 "AOnvaior tpeis apdrous iepovs ayovow, 
mpa@tov emt Tkipw Tov madaordtov Tov ondpov Umdpyypa. 

b! Athena Sxipds at Phaleron: Athenae. 495 f ’Apsorddnuos év rpirp 
mept Iuwddpou rois Skips dnoly "AOnvyat dyava éniredeioba tav epnBov 
Spdpov' rpéxew S€ avtovs Exovras dumedov KAddov KaTaKaproy, TOV KaAOUMEVOY 
doxov, rpéxovar 8¢ ék Tod iepod rod Avovicou pexpi Tod Tis Txipados *AOnvas 
iepod, kal 6 wxnoas NapBdver KvAcKa THY Aeyouerny mevtamdéday kat kw pace 


peta xopov, 


392 GREEK RELIGION. 


b? Hesych. 5. v. acxopsprov' rémos ’AOnvnar Padnpoi evla rd THs ’AOnvis 
iepdv. Cf. Plut. Zhes. (vide Aphrodite 1), 

bS Paus. 1. 1, 4, at Phaleron, S«ipd8os ’AGnvas vads éort. Plut. 
Lhes. 17 Pir6xopos S€ mapa Sxipov pnotv é« Sadrapivos rov Onaga daPeiv 
kuBepyntny pev Navaidoov, mpwpéa dé Paiaxka .. . Maprupet d€ rovros npaa 
Navow8dov kai Paiaxos eicauyévov Onoéws Badnpoi mpos T@ TOU Sxipov lep@ 
(= ris ZKipddos ’AOnvas iepd). Schol. Arist. Vesp. 921 A@nva Skippas sre 
TH AevKH xpierat, 

¢ Athena Sxipds at Salamis: Herod. 8.94 ds d€ dpa hedyovras yiveoba 
THs Sadapivins Kata 7d ipoy ’AOnvains SKipddos. Cf. Plut. Solon. c. Q dxpoy 
TO Skipadioy in Salamis. 

* IIpoxaptorypia: Suid. s.v. Upoxapiornpia, fycpa ev 4 of év rH apxn 
mavres, Gpxopevav kaprrav pvecOa, Anyovtos Hy Tod xepavos, COvov TH "AOnva 
(Sauppe Képy). 79 8€ Ovoig bvopa mpoyapiornpia. Avkovpyos év Ta 
mept THS ipwovrns. THY Tolvvy dpxawrtarny Ovolay dia tiv avodov THs Ocod, 
dvopacbeioay 5€ mpoxaprotnpia. Bekk. Anecd. p. 295 mpooxaporipia (leg. 
Tpoxapiotypia)  pvotee Ovoia tis AOnvas bmép trav pvopevar kapTrov. 

* °A@nva Kuooaia on the Acropolis of Epidaurus: Paus. 2. 29, 1 
TH dé “AOnvay thy év Th axpordr« Edavov Géas dévov Kiooatay errovoudovow. 

8° Athena Tavporddos: Hesych. s. v. Tavpoméddat’ 7 “Aprepis Kai 4 AOnva. 
Cf, Suidas, s.v. Schol. Arist. Lyszstr. 448 vq riv Tavporddov : ovte tiv 
"Aptepw exddovy . . . €ote 5’ re Kai THY ’AOnvay ovTw Kadovow os Zevounodns 
iatopet. TavpoBdros Suidas, s. v. 9 "AOnva. 

3! Aesch. mapampeoB. § 147 ’EreoBourddas . . . bbev 1 THs AOnvas ris 
Tlo\uddos €otiy iepea, Cf. 78%, and @*, Cf. Aristid. Azz. 1. p- 20, Dind. 
Boutvyns tis tov €& dxpomddeas. 

** Athena Boappia: Schol. Lyc. 520 ovr d€ riwéra mapa Bowwrois. 

*° Athena Bovdea (?): vide Geograph. Register, p. 420. 

“* Schol. Arist. Wud. 1001 ai iepai edaiae ris ’AOnvas ev rH dkpotonet 
popiat ékadodvro. Suidas, s.v. Mopiac’ édaiau fepai ris ’AOnvas e& Sv 1d 
€Aaov erabXov Tots wKxa@ot ta TlavaOnvaa. Schol. Opn C... 705 epi 
"Axadnplay . . . TOV éket popiay mapa TO Ths *AOnvas tepov idpupever. 
Apollod. 3. 14, 1 pera d€ rovroy (HloceSdva) jixev ’"AOnva, kat Tomnoapevn 
THs KaTaknWews Kexpoma pdptupa, épitevoer édaiay, } viv év TO Tavdpociea 
decxvura, 

8° Athena THoduds. 

At Athens: vide *a, @ Paus. 1. 26, 7 iepa pev ris AOnvas eorly 9 Te GAAn 
mods kal 9 Taca Gpolws yj. Kal yap dcors Oeods xabéorynkev Gd ovs ey Trois d1)- 
pots o€Sev, ovdev Te haoov Tv AOnvav &yovow év Tiph’ TO be dyioraroy ev Kow@ 


~ , ‘ Bd a oy t Jee. “a , > ‘ > a 
mohAois Tpdrepov vomabev Ereow if ovvprOoy dad Tov Sypor, éoriv AOnvas 





~ 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X~XII. 393 


»” > Lal ~ > , a , = 
ayadpa €v Ty viv axporddet, tore S€ dvopatopevn wore’ Gnun O€ és adrd Exet 
€velv EK TOD OVpavod Avyvoy OE TH bed vy KaAdXi Tol 
T p » + « Avxvov 0€ 17 Oe xpvaodv KadXipnayos éeroincer. 
> , ‘ > , ‘ , ‘ > A bos , a > , 
eumAnoavtes d€ eaiov tov Adyvov, THY adTHY Tov péAXOVTOS eros avapevova tv 
¢ , - a+ , Wee oe A ‘ > ”~ , 7 , 5 ‘\ A > X > 
npepav’ €acov O€ exeivo tov perakd emapkei xpdvov TH AixVW KaTa Ta adTa év 
npepa kai vuxti haivorr. Vide 7°4, 
A fod ’ a“ ’ nw a“ 
b Strabo, 396 émi d€ 1H mérpa rd THs ’AOnvas iepov 6 Te apxaios 
2 


a , , 
veds 6 THs Todiddos ev & 6 GoBeoros Avxvos, Kai 6 mapbevdv dv emoincev 


> - 
Ixrivos, 


© Hom. //. 2. 546: 
at & dp’ ’A@nvas etxov, ed kripevov mrodiebpor, 
Onpov “EpexOnos peyadyrepos, dv mor "AOnvy 
Opewe, Atos Ovydrnp, téxe S€ CeiSwpos tipovpa, 
kad 0 ev "AOnvno ecivev €G evi rion va, 
evOd dé piv ravpotct Kat dpvevois iAdovrat 
Kovpot "A@nvaiwy mepire\Nopevwy eviavTar. 

d Herod. 8. 55 @ore ev rh dxpordd ravry "EpexO€os rod ynyevéos 
Aeyouévov eivar vyds, ev TH Edain Te Kai Oddagoa En. 5. 82 of 8e (AGn- 
vain) én roicde Saoew epacay édainv, em’ & and~ovow (of "EmSavpior) ereos 
éxdotou Tj ’AOnvain re 7H Todudds ipa cai ro ’Epexééi. Apollod. 3. 14, 7 
"EptxOoviov 8€ droOavdvros Kal tapévtos ev TH Tepéver tis AOnvas. Clem. 
Alex. Protrept. 39 P ri 8€ ’EptyOdnos ; odyxi &v tS ved THs Todsddos 
KexnOevTat. 

© Plut. Zhemist. c. 10  Whpirpa ypager (QewsorokArs) tiv pev modu 
mapakatabéo Oa Th ’AOnva TH ’AOnvdwy pedeovon. 

* C.I.A. 2.57 b, inscription referring to alliance of Athens with 
the Arcadians, Eleans, Achaeans, and Phliasians, before the battle 
of Mantinea, ev£acOa pév rov Knpuka aitixa pdda To Aci td ’OAvpTio Kal 77) 
"AOnva th UWodrdds kai tH Ajpnrpe Kai rH Képn kal trois dadexa Oeois Kal tuis 
cepvais Oeais, eay ovvevetyxn AOnvaiwy To dhuw Ta Sdéavta rept THs Tvppaytas, 
Ovoiav kai rpdco0dov moncecOa. Lb. 332 avaypdaya (riv cvppayiav) . .. 
€v oTmAn XaAKH Kal orHoat év dxpomdret Tapa Tov ved THs’ AOnvas THs TlodidOos. 
Cf. 464. Lb. 481. 59 eOvoay S€ of epnBor ra eéirnrnpia ev "Akporrdret 
Th te “AOnva rH Todidds nal ri Kovpotpop@ kat rh Iavdpéc@. 1. 32 
edofev ti) Bovdg cai ro Snuw . . . KaddXias eine’ drododva rots Oeois ra 
xpnpata Ta opeAdpeva, erevd) TH AOnvaia ta Tpioxidia Tddavra anevyveyKrat 
és mékw & eWndioro vopicparos jpedatod. amodiddva b€ ard TOY xpnudToy 
a &€¢ dmddooiv éotw ois Geois éenpispéva, ta te mapa Tots “EhAnvo- 
Tapias évta viv kai Tadd\a ... enedav dé amrodeSopéva 7 Tois Oeois Ta 
xpnhpata, és Td vedpioy Kal Ta Teixn Tois mMeptovar xpyaOac xpypaow., 2. II 
civ b€ exBiva Soxh Ta eydiopeva, dpethérw pupias Spaxpas tepas ri 
"AOnvaia, 


394 GREEK RELIGION. 


& Solon, ‘YroOjxat, 4 roin yap peydOvpos émicxoros oBptuorarpn adds 
"AOnvain xeipas dmepOev éxer, Arist. Lgut?. 581: 
@® tToAdwtxe IaAdds, © 
THs lepwtarns dma- 
gv Tod€u@ TE Kal ToLN- 
tais Ouvduer O tmephepov- 
ons pedeovoa yapas. 
Arist. Zhesmoph. 1136: 
IIadAdda thy diddyopov éeyuoi 
Sevpo kadeiv vouos és xopov 
mapOevov, a{vya Kovpny, 
7 wOkW Hperépay ~xet, 
kai Kpdatos avepov povn, 
kAnOovxds Te Kadeirat, 
Eur. Zeracl. 770: 
avn’, ® métma, ody yap oddas 
yas, oov Kat rédis Gs od parnp 
déomowd te kal prdag... 
emel got troAvOvaTos det 
Tia Kpalvera, ovdée Adder 
pnvav POuas npeépa, 
véov + aoidal yopav re podmal. 
avepdevte O€ yas én’ bxb@ 
OhoAVypata Travyvxiots imo Tap- 
Oévev iakxer modav Kpdrowor, 
Aesch. Lum. 997 : 
Xaiper’ dotiKds News, ikrap Auevor Ards, 
mapOevov diras pirow cadpovorrres ev xpdve, 
IIladdddos 8 tnd mrepois dvras a¢erae marnp. 

h Athena Iodvodxos at Athens: archaic inscription Zph. Arch. 1883, 
P» 35+ 5 Aexarny ’A@nvaia Tlodtovy@ ‘Tepoxdeidns pe dvéOnkev. 

i Athena ’Apxnyéns: C.Z. Gr. 666 add. Maddds ’EpexdedSav dpyayert 
adv kata vady de rot idpv6n &iATépa ‘Hpdkdeos inscription on base of statue 
of priestess dedicated to Athena Polias. C./. A. 3. 65 6 Oijpos dxé rev 
Sodecav Swpedv imd Taiov. Cf. 2b. 66 “IovAicv Kaioapos Oeod *AOnva 
"Apxnyérid. C.L. Gr. 476 ’AOnva Apynyérids . . . “Eppo . . . Tapynrrios 
tov (Sepédv), inscription on fragment of altar at Athens, ? second 
century B.c. Plut. Alc. c. 2 mpiv rois A@nvaios . . . dpxnyeris "AOnva 
kai matp@os ’AméAdov €ori. Cf, Schol. Arist. Av. 515 ths "Apynyéridos 
"AOnvas TO dyahpa yAavka elyev év TH xXEUpl. 

°° Panathenaea: ® Paus. 8. 2, I Mavadnvaa krnOnvai haow emi Onoéas, 
re id ’“AOnvaiwy éréOn ovveiheypévor és piay dmdvreay modu, 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X-XII. 395 


b Harpocr. s.v. Wavad, dirra TavaOnvaca ryero AOnvynar, Ta pev Kab? 
Exaotov evautdy, Ta dé dia revrernpidos, dmep kat peydda éxddour, .. . Hyaye 
6€ THy €optiy mp&ros ’EptxOdmos 6 ‘Hdaiorov, xabd now ‘EdAduikds Te Kai 
‘Avdporiov, éxdrepos ev a’ ’ArOi80s. mpd tovrou 8é "AOnvaia ékaXeiro, os 
dednAwxev "lotpos ev y rev ’Artikar. 

© Schol. Aristid. p. 323, Dind. ra de peyada (Tavadivaca) Ilevoiorparos 
€roinge. 

d Schol. Arist. Vu. 37 ovros dé (of Sypapyor) tHv moumiy rev Iava- 
Onvaiwy exoopotv. Thuc. 6. 58 pera yap domidos ka ddpatos eiwOecay Tas 
Tounas moeiv.— Avera for the peydda Mav. Pollux, 8. 93 aOdobéra 
deca pév elow, els kara pvdnv’ Soxacbévres dé apxovot téocapa ern, emi TH 
diabcivar ta Tavadnvaa, rév re povarxdy Kab roy yupviKoy kai Thy immodpoplay.— 
‘Ieporotoi for the puxpd, vide 2, Cf. Arist. Athen. Polit. c. 54. 

© Lucian, Wigrin. 53 év T@ ayavu tov Tavabnvaiwy Anpbévra . . . 
TWa TOY TOiTeY ayer Ou Tapa Tov aywvobérny Ere Bantdv ~yav ipdriov eOewpet. 

f Herod. 6. 111 Ovaius ’AOnvaiwv avaydvtwy Kal tavyyupias Tas év That 
mevreTnpiot yivouevas, Katevxerar 6 Knpv€ 6 ’AOnvaios dua te *AOnvaiouar, 
Aeyor, yiverOat ta dyaba Kat WAaraedor. 

& Schol. Arist. Wud. 385 év rois Mavabnvaios raoa al bro rev ’AOnvaiwy 
drrokicbeioa mérders Body TvOnodpevov exeprov. 

h Harpocr. s. v. cxadnpédpor Acivapxos ... pyai “ot avti cxadnpédper 
€pnBor cis tiv dxpdrohw dvaBicovra, ody ipiv exovtes yapw THs Tod«rTelas, 
GAAad TH TovTov dpyupia.” dvytt Tod péroKol... . Anyntpios yoov év y 
Nopobecias gyoiv bre mpooérarrev 6 vdpos trois perolkos ev rais mopmais 
avtous pev oxapas pepe, ras b€ Ovyatépas aitav idpeia Kat oxiddia. Cf, 
Pollux, 3. 55. 

1 Schol. Clem. Alex. Profrep/. p. 9 P. (Dindorf, vol. 1. p. 417) 
epi’ thy Aeyouérny elpeoiaryny yoy jv ovraws mepretdourtes Eepiows Kat Tatviats 
tpacpdrov Awewv—iv Sé KAddos awd tis Mopias éAaias—xal dxpodpvors 
Tavrotos meptapra@vres avipyov eis "Axpdmodu TH Wodudde "AOnvaior Mavadnvaca, 

k Xenoph. Sympos. 4. 17 Oadrdopédpovs yap rH *AOnva rods Kadovs 
yépovras ékéyovra. Schol. Arist. Vesp. 542 €v rots avabnvaios, oi 
yepovres Oaddovs Exovres emdurrevov. 

1 Schol. Soph. Oed. Col. yor 6 S€ "ApiororéAns Kai trois vuknoace Ta 
TlavaOnvaa, €daiov tov éx popiwy ywopevov didocbai now: so also Pindar 
Nem, 10. 65. 

m Harpocr, s.v.\aumds. tpeis dyovow ’AOnvaios €opras Napmadas, Tavaby- 
vaius Kat “Hpaoreios kai Lpopneiors. 


n Eur. Hec. 466: 
# Tladdddos ev modee 


ras Kadddidpov Oeas 


396 GREEK RELIGION. 


, > > 4 s 
vaiove ev Kpoke@ TéTA@ 
Cevéouar Gppate meHdovs, 
ev Saidadéaror rrotkiddove’ dvOoxpdxoiot mvacs, 
bal , , 
7 Titavev yevear, 
tav Zevs apdiripo 
e = ‘ 
Komuife. proyp@ Kpovidas ; 
Cf. Schol. 23. ob pévov yap mapbévar tpawov, Ss dnow’Amoddddepos . . . GAA 
kai Tedeae yuvaikes, as Pepexparns ev AovdodiacKdrA@ .. . TovTov S€ dviépour 
dia mevraernpidos €v tots Tavabnvaios, Harpocr. wémAos. rod mémdov Tod 
avayopevou tH ’AOnva tots peyddors Tlavabnvatos. Schol. Arist. Lg. 563 
idla mapa trois ’AOnvaios mémAos TO Gppevov + Ths Tlavabnvaikhs veds, hv of 
*"AOnvai iC 7 Geo Std iS Ns Kat THY VY amd TOU 
nvaiot katackevafovor TH Oe@ Sia Terpaernpidos. fs Kal THY TopmTY am 
aA ~ a , a 
Kepapetxov mowovoe péxpt Tov *EXevowviov.... OU eyéypamto *Eykédados, ov 
aveihev 7 Ana... emeakevaero obv 6 memos KaO’ Exacroy éenavtdv. Diod. 
Sic. 20. 46 of S€ "AOnvaion ypdavros Whdiopa Zrpatoxdéovs eynpicavro 
xpuoas pev eixdvas ep dippatos othoat tod te Avtuydvov Kat Anpntpiov .. . 
evupatvdvtwy avtovs eis Tov THs "AOnvas wémAov kar’ evavtév. Plut. Demet. 10 
> ‘ 4 - , \ nn na > A ¢ \ 3 / 
evupaiverOa S€ 7G méwr@ peta Tov Oedv adrods (Anunrpioy kal ’Avrtiyovor) 
evnpicavro. Hesych. s. v. "Epyacriva’ ai tov rémdov bpaivovea, 
0 C.L.A. 2. 314 Ated€xOn S€ Bidemmidyns cat iwep kepaias Kat iorod, 
tod r a , a , , 
omws av S067 ti Oe@ eis Ta Tavabnvaca TH mémd@ & exopicbn én’ Edxripovos 
apxovros. Strattis, Meineke, Prag. Com. Graec. 2. 772 Tov mérdov 
6€ Tovrov Edxovo’ dvevovtes Tomelois avdpes avapiOunror eis cixpov dSotep 
A ‘ , ~ 
iotiov Tov torov, Paus. I. 29, 1 Tod b€ ’Apeiou mayou mAnatov Setkvurat vais 


~ > A cal , , 
TomnOeioa €s THY TOY Llavabnvaiwy mopmny. 


P Philostr. Vila Soph. 2. 1, § 5 (Kayser, p. 236) xdkeiva mept trav 
Hava@yvaiwy tovtwy Akovov' mémhov pev avnpba tis vedas... Spapei d€ tiv 
vaivy ovK vmolvyioy aydvtwv, GAN’ troyelos pnxavais émoktcOavovaay, ék 
Kepapeckod d€ dpacav xiXia Kkamn apewar emt To EXevoinov kat mepiBadovoav 
avTd mapapeiat 7d IeXao-yixdv, KouiCopevny d€ mapa Td TvOcov edGeiv ot viv 
apuiora., Ar. Athen. Polit. c. 54 ta ’EdXevoivade Uavabnvaa. Thuc. 1. 20 
T@ ‘Inmdpx@ TepituxdvTes TEptTO Aewxdptov Kadovpevoy THY Tlavabnvaikny mopmny 
diaxkoopovvre. 

4 Schol. Arist. Vib. 984 ’Qpxodvro rois Mavabnvaioss év dmdots of maides* 
cf. 26. 985 Tpiroyeveins. eidos dpynoews f kadeirar évdmAuos* Sua S€ 7d is 
"AOnvav ravrnv tedeiobat Tptroyévera xadeira. Lysias *Arodoy, Awpodok. 
p. 700 R LavaOnvaios rois pexpois éxopyyouy muppixiatais dyeveiors. Schol. 
Pind. Pyth. 2. 127 6 "Enixappos tiv ’AOnvav dyot trois Aooxovpors tov 
évérdov voor exnavdnoa. Dionys. Halic. Antiqu. Rom. 7.72 ‘EdAnuixov 
d€ dpa kal TodvTo fy ev rois mdvy madawv émerndevpa, ev Omdas Bpxnows 7 


kaovupevn Ivppixn, etr’ "A@nvas mpaeryns emt Tiraveay apanope xopevew kai 





4 
; 
m 
: 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X~—XII. 397 


opxetoOar oiv drdos tamwikia ind xapas ap£apuévns, eire madatrepov ere 
Koupyrev atti xaracrycapever. Beulé, 7 Acropole @ Athénes, 2. p. 313 
IZTAIZ NIK .. . PBOZ=avppixiorais viknoas “AtapBos. Cf. 26. Pl. 4 relief 
showing two groups of four dancers with shields. Cf. C. Z. A. 2. 965 b 


maw tupptxiorais Bods. 


¥ Schol. Arist. Wud. 971 pins... Sonet mpatos KiOapioa trap’ 
"AOnvaiows Kai vixjoae Tavabyvaiors emi KadXiov apyovros (B.c. 456). Plut. 
Pericl. 13 6 epuxrs rére mpadrov évndpicaro HovoLKHs dy@va tots Tava- 
Onvaiois GyeoOa Kai diéragev adros aOdobérns aipeOeis Kabdtre ypy rovs 
aywvifouevous avdeiv 7 adev } KiOapiter. Heliod. Acth. 1. 10 TlavaOnvaiav 
TOV wy ayoue: 6 j bv “A@nvaion emt ys th AOnva re, 

peyaiov ayopnevov, ore Thy vaty AOnvaioe emt yis TH ’AOnva méurovaw, 

ee! ‘ > 4 ” \ \ ’ , al - a \ \ 
ervyxavoy pev épnBevav, doas S€ tov eiwbdra marava rH bed, kal Ta vevouio- 
péva Tporopmevoas, ws elyov aroAns, adTA xAapvdse Kal adrois orepdvors 
Epxouat oikase, 

8 Lycurg. kata Aewxpat. p. 209 R otra yap vrehaBov tyav of marépes 

~ ‘ EL: d of , ” ee ome 4 

omovdaioy eivac mounthy (Tov “Ounpov) dScre vépov eevto Kal’ éExdoryy TEVTAETN- 
pida tov Mavabnvaiav povov tav aXov ronrav pawdeicba ta ery. Plat. 
Liipparch. 228 B ‘Inmdpye, bs... ra ‘Opnpou ern mpa@tos exopucev eis Thy 
yay TavTnVi, Kai nvayKkace Tovs payrwdois TMavabnvaiors é& imornWeos epe€s 
aita duévat. : 

t Lysias, ’Avodoy. Aapodor. p. 698 éri Atoxr€ovgs Tavabnvatots rois 
pixpois KUKALK@ xope Tpraxocias (Spaxpas avnooa). 

u Pollux, 4. 83 ’AO@n»not S€ Kal cuvavdia Tis exadeiro cuppeavia tis avdn- 
Tay, €v Iavabnvains cvvavdovrtwr. 


Vv Harpocr. s. v.’AmoBarns .. . 6 dwoBdrns immdy te dyovopa . . . Ta O€ 
év alt@ ywoueva Sndot Oedppactos ev tH K tHVv vduav.  xpavra bé, pyoi, 
Tour pdvo tev “EAjvev *AOnvaiot kat Bowwroi. Cf. Eratosth. Cafaster. 13 
"Hyaye (6 "Epexéeds) 5€ émipehds ra Mavabjvaa cai dua jvloyos éyov Tapa- 
Barnv aoridiov €xovra kal rpirodiav emi ris Kehadjs. Dionys. Halic. Anz, 
Rom. 7. 73 érepov te, map’ ddLyas &re pvdarrépevoy médrect “EAAnviow év 
iepoupyiats tiolv apxaikais, 6 tay mapeuBeBynkdrav tots Gpuaoe Spduos. Cf. 
C. I. A. 2. 968 appari rorepeornpio (vixnoas). 

x Boat-races. C. J. A. 2. 965 mexnrnpia vedv dpiddns. Plato, 
Meineke, Com. Graec. 2. p. 679, referring to the tomb of Themi- 
stocles, 6 ods dé ripBos ... xamdrav dud’ 7 tev vedv Ocdoerat. 


y Time and date of the festival: Schol. Eur. Hec. 469 ra 8é Mava- 
Onvaca jv éoptn ’AOnvas, mavtav ’AOnvaiwv cundvtwv ékeioe Kal Tov dAdov 
‘EXAQvev téccapas Hyepas mayvyyupi(évrwv. Procl. 7 Zim. p. 9 ra yap 
peydda (Ilavabyvaa) rod “ExaropBaravos éyiyvero tpirn amidvros, &s Kat TovTo 


tots ¢umpoober iardpnra. Cf. Schol. Plat. Rep. 328 A. Demosth. 


398 GREEK RELIGION. 


Kara Tiwoxp. p. 708 dwdexdry (rod ‘ExaropBadvos pnvos) tov vdpov elanvey- 
kev. . . Ovampagduevos . . , kabiCerOar vopobéras Sid Wnhiopuaros én rt rev 
Tava6nvaiwy mpodacet, 


* C. 1. A. 2. 163 (Rang. 814), Panathenaic inscription—? during 
the administration of Lycurgus—émas dv... reNeo OF f opt Tapeckev- 
i € a “~ ? ~ 7° 4 > A e A a , “~ 
acne as apiora TH AOnvG kar’ exagtov tov éviavrov tmép rod Shuov Tov 
> L SN a e¢ - a ‘ \ > , “ ~ 
A@nvai ; l typ € 
nvaiwy Kat Tad\Aa ooa Sei Stouxnrat mept THY €opTyyv THY ayouevnv TH beg 
” € A ~ € “~ a le AY \ 
Kaas ind tov icporody, eWnpicba td Shuw... Ovew Se Tors iepororods 
\ a a an a a a 
tas pev dvo Ovaias thy te TH AOnVa TH ‘Yyceta Kal Thy ev TG ap (Pel Tayo 
, = lod - 
Avopevny OF dpxaio ved Ovopévnv) kabdrep mpdrepoy Kal veiwavtas Trois mpurd- 
‘eZ ‘ rv “~ ~ n 
veow mevTe pepidas kal Tots évvéa Apyovow... Kal Taulas THs Oeod pilav Kal Trois 
€ - , ‘ r Pa . a , \ ‘ , 
tepoTrolols play Kal Tols oTparnyois Kat Tots Takiapxyos ... Ta b€ GAdAa Kpéea 
>A6 , , ait . Fy 1s a , ‘ ‘ a 
nvaiots pepiCew .. . of ieporotol pera Tov Bowvaer téprpavtes Tip Tommy TH 
”~ i f: ry A ¢ , ce a“ a aA ’ ~ a“ VA 4 
Ge Ovdvrwv ravras ras Bots drdcas ém T@ Bou@ ths “AOnvas To Heyah@, pay 
ee ae) Sed a ~~ a a , a“ 
O€ emt TH ris Nikns mpoxpivavres ek Tv KaAdoTEvOVTSY Boar Kab Odcavres TH 
3 a a rn a aA ~ 
AOnva tH Todds kai rH ’AOnva rH Niky ... Tovs be iepomrotovs Tous Stokovy- 
tas Ta Ilavadnvaa ra Kar émavtdv troeiv Thy mavyuxiia ws KadXiortny TH bee 
‘ \ A , A A aA o 
Kal THY TonTHY Tepe dua Al avidvtTe Cyurodvtas Tdav pt) TeLOapyodvra Tais 


ex Tov vopov Cyulats. 


*” The feast of Suvoikta: Thuc. 2.1 5 vepopevous Ta avT@v ExdoTous airep Kat 
\ eats AE , a , , a ae , 75 \ , 
po TOU nvdykace (Onoevs) pua wddee ta’ xpjoba } drdvray #bn cvvredobvre@y 
> ay , “A a e \ -. a“ y+ ry ‘ , > 
€s auTnv peyahn ywvopévn mapedd6n tnd Onoéws rois emetta’ Kat ovvoikia && 
> ‘ a a a A a 
exeivou €rt kat vov ti bed éopriy SquoreAR mowodor. Plut, Zhes. 24 xara- 
, > \ by - > 4 ‘ , 
Avoas otv ra map’ éxdorots mpuraveia Kal BovAeutnpia Kal apxds, ev b€ momoas 
¢ \ > A im ‘ , ¢ a «@ 1» ’ 
amact kowov evravOa mpuraveiov kal Bovrevrnptov Smrov viv ipurae rd dorv, Thy 
, + 
Te modu “A€nvas mpoonydpevoe kat Tavabyvaca Ouoiav émotnce Kounv. “Edvoe 
“~ A n~ A , 
8€ kai Meroixia rh éxrn emi déka Tov ‘ExaropBadvos, fy éru kai viv Odvovor, 
. a ~ wn v - 
Schol. Arist. Pax 1019 gaol yap TH Tv ovvotkeciov éopti Ovotay redeiobat 
Denk \ a cal a 2 § , 
Eipnyy tov d€ Baopov pr aiparotoba, ‘ExatopBadvos pnvds extn emt déka. 
Steph. Byz. s.v. ’A@jvac.. . pyol Xdpagé dri 6 Onoevs ras evdexa modes Tas 


ev 77 “AtttKh ovvoiktoas eis "AOnvas avvoikia €optiy kaTeatnaaro. 
*® Athena, the city goddess. 
@ At Troezen, vide ">, At Tegea: Paus. 8. 47. 5 Teyedrats 8¢ éore 


kal G\Xo iepov “A@nvas HodidriBos* éxdorov d€ Gna€ érous tepeds és ado foe’ 

a a? , € \ b] , 4 = a a? a , 4 

To Tov Epuparos iepov dvopafovar, A€Eyovtes @s Knhet rH ’Adeod yévorro Swped 

859 a RY a > A , , > , A > aA X 

mapa 'A@nvas dvd\wrov és tév mavta xpdvov eivae Teyéav. Kab avT@ aciv 
€s hudakiy tis mews amorepovoay Tiyv bedv Sodva tpixav Tov Medovons. 
na 3 a ° 

b At Sparta: Paus. 3.17, 2 "Evrai0a ’AO@nvas iepov merroinrat, TloAcovyou 

kadoupevns kai Xudxtoixou ths avtis.... Teriddas 8€ épydcaro (rd dyadpa) avnp 


y+ 
émix@pios, ’Emoinoe 8€ kai dopata Adpia 6 Teriddas Ada re Kal Syvov és thy 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X-~-XII. 399 


Gedv. eneipyarra b¢ TH XadkG ToAA pev Tdv AOAwv ‘Hpakdéous. Cauer, 
Delect.2 17 Aapdvov dvéOexev ’APavaia Modrdxo vixdds tadta Gr odSés meroxa 
rod viv, Polyb. 4. 35 xara ydp tia Ovoiay mdrpiov eer rods pev ev Tais 
€ , \ Sal o / Eee \ a2 3 a a , 
Mdikiais peta TOV OmAwY Topmevew ent Tov THs AOnvas Ths Xadkwoikov vedv. 
Lph. Arch. 1892, p. 23: inscription found at Amyclae mentioning 6 
iepeds Tloawdavos ’Aodadiov ’APavas Xadktoixov ’AGavas TIodudxou. 


© At Megalopolis: Paus. 8. 31, 9 épeimia d€ "AOnvas fepod ToddSos emt 
auTo. 

d At Daulis: Collitz, Déalect. Inschr. 1523 pn KaradovArEacorw Sé 
pndeis Tovrous obs aveOnxe KaddXov kal Aapo rae ’AOavar rae Todudds. In 


Rhodes *°. 


€ Crete: at Hierapytna, inscription of treaty between Hierapytna 
and Lyctus: Cauer, Delect? 1147 (C. I. Gr. 2555) ‘Opvia rav *AOavaiay 
"Orcpiav ... kai "AOavaiav Todtdda kai ’AOnvaiav Sadpoviav. At Dreros: 
Cauer, Delect.? 121 ’Opvi rav ’A@avaiay trav Todwodyov. At Priansus : 
C. I. Gr. 2556 oracdvrev 5€ ras orddas .. . of pev “leparvrvioe ev T@ lep@ 
tas *A@avaias tas Todiddos, kat of Ipidvowe év TO fep@ tas "AOavaias ras 
Tlodrddos. At Cnossus: Paus. 9. 40, 3. 

f At Chios: Herod. 1. 160 évOcirev dé, && ipov ’A@nvains ToAtovyou 
adroonacbeis id Xiwv €€edd6n. 
_& At Amorgos: Bull. de Corr. Hell, 1891, p. 582 avabeivar és 7d 
iepov T@ Avi rat... kal ’AOnvae 77 Toduddu. 

h At Ios: Mitt, d. d. Inst. Ath. 1891, p. 172 Aut rH WWodet wat 77 
"AOnvG 1(9 MWodiadi?). Cf. C. Ll. Gr. 2263 ¢. 

i At Cos: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1881, p. 220 ’A@nva Todidds div 


Teeiav, 

k At Erythrae: Paus. 7.5, g “Eote dé €v EpvOpais kai AOnvas ToAddos 
vads, 

1 Priene: inscription in British Museum, C. 7, Gr. 2904 Bacwreds 
"Aré~avSpos avéOnxe tov vadv ’A@nvain odiddt. Paus. 7. 5, 5 nodeins & 


> a ~ > U - ~ 9 , oa 
dy . . . ‘A@nvas ro ev Ipinvy vad . . . rod dyddpwaros €vexa, 


m At Pergamum: Athena Todds kai Nixnddpos. Inscriptions in 
Ergebnisse d. Ausgrab. su Pergam. 1880, pp. 76-77 6 djpos *AckAn- 
midda EvdvOov tiv yevonerny igperay tis Tloduddos Kal Nixnpdpov ’A@nvas év 
Trois dxrwKaiderdrors Nexnpopios «iaéBevas evexa. Cf. C.L. Gr. 3553 7 
BovAy Kai 6 Sipos éreiunoav Kdavdiav ... pntépa KXavdias iepetas Nuxnpdpov 
kal Tloduddos "Abnvas, Cf. Polyb. 4. 49. 


n At Ilion: Dion. Halic. Ant. Rom. 6. 69 6 yap Hyepov avrav Tov 


400 GREEK RELIGION. 


yévous Navrios amd trav ovv Aiveia oreikdvtov tiv droikiay, hv "AOnvas iepeds 
TloAuidos. 
© At Phaselis: C. Z Gr. 4332 teparevdoavra tis mpoxaOnyériSos ris 


moAews Beds “AOnvas Toduddos kai trav bev SeBacray. 


P At Phalanna in Perrhaebia: Collitz, Dralect. Inschr. 1330 ’A@dava 


TloAcdde of mrodlapxou dveberxav. 


a At Heraclea in Magna Graecia: C. Z. Gr. 5774-5 ‘A@ava Modidds : 
on the Tabulae Heracleenses. 


r At Istros: C. Ll. Gr. 3048 dvaypawar 76 Sdypa cis 1d iepov TO Tas 
"A@avas ras oduddos. Macedonian period. 

°° Athena ’’Apxnyéres at Athens, vide *i, At Sparta: Arzstd. 1. p.608 
(Dindorf) 4 kown pev dpynyéris cupow raiv médcow (Athens and Sparta). 
? At Lemnos: C. /. Gr. 2155 according to Boeckh’s restoration. 

*© Athena Iarpia at Anaphe: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1892, 143, No. 247 
Znvos Iarpiov kai ’A@nvas Iarpias. 

*1 Athena Ilavayais at Patrae: Paus. 7. 20, 2 rov mepiBdrov 8€ éorw 
evtos ths Aadpias kal *A@nvas vads émikAnow Tlavayaidos. €Aéhavros ro 
dya\pa Kat xpvaod, 

* Athena ‘Opodrwis: Schol. Lycoph. 520 ‘Opodwis bS€ tiyarar mapa 
OnBaiors. 

* Athena Anpokpatia: C. 7. A. 2. 1672 "A@nvas Anpoxparias on altar, 
first century B.c.; 3. 165, same inscription on base of a statue (?) that 
stood near the Parthenon, period of Herodes Atticus. 

Titles from cities and localities : ua 

*4a *ApaxuvOids from the mountain in Boeotia (Geogr. Regzséer, 
p- 419). 

b Athena *Aconoia: Herod. 1. 19 vnod ’AOnvains . . . emikAnow ’Ao- 
onoins.... Lbid. rov vndv ths ’AOnvains, Tov évérpnoay xwopns Ths MiAnains ev 
"Agonoe. 

*© Athena "Iadvoia in Rhodes: Fev. Arch. 1867, p. 30, No. 71 
(iepeds "A@a)vas Awédias kai... A@dvas Iadvoias Todiddos Kai Aids Tohtéws 
Kapeipddos : imperial era. Athena Awdia at Physcos in Caria, Bull. de 
Corr. Hell. 1894, p. 31, No. 10. 

“6 Athena “Iuds: ® Herod. 7. 43 Hépéns és 1rd Upidpou IWépyapov 
aveBn . . . Geaodpevos dé... 77 AOnvain TH Icads €Ouce Bods xirias. Cf, Xen. 
Ffell. 1. 1, 4; Plut. Alex. 15; Strabo, 13, p. 593 tiv S€ rav "IWcéwy tov 
viv Téws pev Kopny eival hace TO lepdy éxoveay THs "AOnvas puKpov Kal evdredés, 
"AdeEavdpor b€ dvaBavra peta thy emt Tpavik@ vikny avaOnpaci te Koopjoa rd 


¢ , 
lepov, 


“ee te ee ee 
iE-se 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X_-XII. 401 


b C.L. Gr. 3595, decree in honour of Antiochus I, 8e5éy6ae 7 Bovdj 
kai T@ Snu@ thy pev i€pecav Kal Tods iepovduous Kai tols mpurdvers e’EacOa TH 
*AOnrG tH "Widds . . . TH AOnva ouvtehecdtwcary tiv voprComernv Kal mdrptoy 
6voiav. 

© Arch. Zeit. 1875, p. 153, inscription from Ilium containing 
a decree in honour of a citizen of Gargara, éru dp dyabds éore rept 
TO tepdv tis “AOyvas Kal thy mavyyuvpw Kai Td Kowdy tov Tédeov (third 
century B. c.). 

d ’T\lera: Hesych. s.v. éopri év "AOnvas' év "INio ’AOnvas "Iuddos kat 
Topmy Kal ayov. 

€ Panathenaea at Ilium: ra pxpd C. Z. Gr. 3601. Cf. 3599 amd be 
THs Mporddou yiverOat ava may ros év TH Mavabnvai ev tH éoprh Tov Tuakey 
mopmny Kat Ovoiav tH ’A@nva. 

f Appian: Mithrad. Bekk. 1. p. 365 ro ris ’AOnvas eos 5 Taddadiov 
kadovow Kai diomeres yyovvrar vouifovaw evpeOnvar téte AOpavoroy (in the 
destruction of Ilium by Fimbria). 


“1a Athena ‘Immodairs at Hippolas on south coast of Laconia: Paus. 
3.25, 9 modews epeima ‘Immddas €ariy, év 8€ aitois ’AOnvas iepov ‘Immonaitios. 

b Athena Kpaoria: vide Geograph. Register, p. 422. 

¢ Athena Kuppnotis: vide Geograph. Register, p. 423. 

8a Athena Awdia, vide “*, at Lindos: Strabo, 655 iepov d€ €ori ’AOnvas 
Awédias aird6t, emupaves Tov Aavaidwr pupa. C./. Gr, 2103 e’AOnva Awdia 
TogiSeos Moowdéov xaprotnpiov : Rhodian inscription in the Tauric Cher- 
sonese. 

b Athena Mayapois: vide Geograph. Register, p. 422. 

9 Aristid. vol. 1, p.17, Dind. eioiv ai wédets d@pa ’AOnvas . . . Hodsov- 
xos mace kéxAnrat, 

6° Athena Apia at Argos: ®Hesych. s. v. év “Apyet, emt twos axpas 
iSpupérn ad’ fs Kat ’Axpiowos dvopdabn’ gore b€ Kai 7 “Hpa Kat ”Aprepis Kal 
’"Adpodirn mpooayopevopérn év "Apyet kata TO dpovoy ém’ Gkp@ iSpupevar. 

b Paus. 2. 24,3 én’ akpa b€ €ore rH Aapion Awos éxixAnow Aapicaiov vads 
... kat A@nvas 8€ vads éott Beas Gatos. 

© Clem, Alex. 39 P & 1ré ved rijs ’AOnvas év Aapioon €v Ti axpomddet 
tapos éotiv ’Axpiciov, 

6 Aristid. vol. 1, p. 15, Dind, méAcwv 8€ macav tas Kopupas éyeu KaTa 
Kparos. 

2 At Agrigentum: Polyb. 9. 27 emt de rijs xopupys ’AOnvas iepoy exrio~ 
tat kai Avs "AraBupiov. 

VOL. I. pd 


402 GREEK RELIGION. 


88 At Scepsis: Xen. Hell. 3. 1, 21 6 8€ Acpkvdidas Ovoas ri *AOnra év 
TH TeV ZKnYiov akporonet, 

4 Paus. 6. 26, 3, in Elis, év dxpomdder 8€ ry "HAciwv eoriv iepdv *AOnvas* 
eéharvros S€ rd Gyadpa Kai ypvaod. eivat pev O17) Pevdiov daciv adrny, Memolnrat 
dé ddexrpudyv emi 7G Kpdver, bru mpoxerpdtara exovow és paxas ot adextpvdves, 

®© AtCorone in Messenia: Paus. 4. 34, 6 xaAxovv d€ Kal ev axpomddet 
tis ’A@nvas rd dyadpd éorw év iraibpw, kopayny dé €v TH xetpt Exovea, 

© At Megara: Paus. 1. 42, 3 @xoddpyrar Se emi rh Kopup7 THs akpo- 
médews vads "AOnvas, dyadua b€ éorw éenixpycoy mAiy xetpar kal dkpov Tobey’ 
ravra 8€ kal ro mpdcamdy éorw edépavros . . . Kai Ao Alavridos, 

7 Athena Kopupacia: Paus. 4. 36, 2, on the promontory of Cory- 
phasion in Messenia, fepév éoriv ’AOnvas émikAnow Kopvpagias. 

58 Athena Kpavaia near Elatea: Paus. 10. 34, 7 ’EXareias b€ door 
oTadlous eiKoo Ww apéornkev ’AOnvas emikAnow Kpavaias iepov, .. emt TOUT@ T@ 
Addh@ TO iepov Benotens ... Tov b€ fepéa ex maidwv aipovvra Tov avnBov... 
70 6€ dyaApa émoinoay peév Kat TovTo ToAvKA€ous maides, ote S€ eoxevarpévov 
Qs és pdxnv, kai énetpyaotat th domlde rev ’AOnvnoe pipnua emt TH donid: THs 
kadovpéerns bd "AOnvatoy Tapbévov. Cf. inscriptions in Bull. de Corr. 
Fell. 1887, p. 318 ’Ovnoidspov iepytedoavra *“AOnvg TH Kpavag, Ld, 
(decree of alliance with Tenos) dvaypaa S€ kal... TO paidiopa avabe- 
pev... &Y TO lep@ Tas "AOavas ev Kpavais (? fourth century B. Coy 

88a Athena Kumapicoia near Asopus on the Laconian coast : Paus. 3. 
22,9 AOnvas iepdv eorw ev Th akpoTodet Kurapiocias émikAnow. tis O€ axpo- 
médews mpos Tois ToT mbAEws EpelTia KaNoUpPEVNS "AXaLOy TOV Tlapaxurapio ctor. 

b At Larissa in Thessaly: Collitz, Déalect. Inschr. 345 (in letter 
from Philip V concerning extension of civic fr anchise) (ro Wadiopa) ev 
oTdAdas .. . dyypdarras kaTOepev év Tav axpémoAu ev Tov vady Tas ’AGavas. 

60 Athena “Oyka at Thebes: Aesch. Sep. 501: 

mparoy péev “Oyka Taddds 70° ayxinrodis 

mUXatot yeirov’ avdpos €xOaipova’ uBpe 

elpet. 
Lb. 164: 

ov te pdkap dvaco "Oya, mpoppoves 

éntdmurov médrews dos emppvov. 
Paus. 9. 12, 2, at Thebes, gore pev &v imaibpm Bopos kai cyahpa ’A@nvas* 
dvabeivat 5€ ard KdSpov Aéyovot. . .”"Oyya kata yhaooay THY buwikeov kadeirat. 
Steph. s.v. "Oykaia, mda OnBav .. .”OyKa yap 7 AOnva kata Hoivxas. 
Schol. Eur. Phoen. 670 6 pév Srnaixopos év Eipwreia thy ’AOnvav éomrapkevat 
tous oddvras yaoi. 

61 Athena Irevia, ® Near Coronea: Paus. 9. 33, 1 THs ‘Irwvias ’AOnvas. 
€ori rd iepdv... kai és rov Kowdy cuviaow évraiéa oi Botwrol avAdoyor, év dé TO 





: 


6 


ol ee ee he ee 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X_XII. 403 


va® xadkov memoumpéva ’"AOnvas “Irwvias Kat Ais éorw aydApara, Texyn be 
"Ayopaxpirov. Strabo, 411 Kparnoavres S€ (oi Botwrol) tis Kopwvelas év 
T mpd aitis medio Td THs "Irwvias ’AOnvas lepov iSptoavro épavupov ré 
Oerradtke kal tov mapappéovra morauov Kovdpiov mpoonydpevoav duopaves To 
éxei. AAxaios d€ kadet Kapddtov Aeywr, “ & ’vaoo’ ’APavaa rodepaddxos & mot 
Kopovias eri ricewy vato mapobev aupiBuivers Kopadio rorau@ map’ dyas.” 
(Bergk, Alcaeus, frag. 9) évradéa 8€ kab ra TlapBovwria ouveréhovy’ cvyxabi- 
Opurat b€ rH AOnva 6 “Audns Kara Tiwva, ds pact, protiKny airiav. Bacchylides 
frag. 23 ody &8pas épyov ov0 auBodas adda xpuoatyidos "Iravias xpy Tap’ 
evdaidarov vady édOdvras GBpdv te dei€at. 

b Athena ‘Ireria in Thessaly: Paus. 1. 13, 3 1a dvareOévra Sma Tov 
KeArixay &¢ 76 ris ’A@nvas iepdv tis "Irwvias Pepoav peragv cai Aapions, cat 
TO €miypappa TO én’ adbrois 

Tovs Oupeods 6 Modoaads ‘Iravids Sépov ’AOdva 

Ilvppos amd Opacéwv éxpéuacev Tadarar. 
Paus. 10. I, 10 70 yap ovvOnua... €diSoTo év rails payats Oeooadois pev 
’AOnvas “Irwvias. Schol. ap. Rhod. 1. 551 rijs ev Gcocadia Iravias mepi 
is “Exaraids re év rh mpotn Tav ioropidv eye. At Crannon: Polyaen. 
2.54 €oprijs ovons trav kadovpevoy "Iravioy, év 4 mdvtes Kpavvoror raifovow. 

© Athena Ireria worshipped at Amorgos: ’A@nva rf Inova and the 

festival ra Iréya mentioned in inscription found there, Bull. de Corr. 
Fell. 1891, pp. 589-590. 

d At Athens: C. J. A. 1. 210 ’A@nvaias “Irevias (latter part of fifth 
century B. C.). 

e At Thaumakoi in Phthiotis: Collitz, Déalect. Inschr. No. 1459 
Bnvos "Irwviov. 

® Steph. Byz. s.v. ’A@jvac médes* Kata peév Qpov wévre kata b€ Sidtova eé 
+.» €ktn E’Bouas . . . ravtas 8 ’AOnvas Arddas Aéyeo Oat, 


Cults referring to the family. 

* Photius, s.v. mporedelav Hpépav dvoudovaw, ev 5 eis THY axpdmodw THY 
yapouperny rapOevov ayovaw oi yoveis ws THY Bedv Kal Ovoiay emiTehovory. 

— Athena ’"Amaroupia Or ®parpia, ® At Athens: Schol. Arist. 
Acharn. 146 ararovpia %vov Att Bparpiw Kai ’AOnva. C. JL, A. 2. 844: 
inscription probably referring to the ’Ararotpa. Plato, Luthyd. p. 
302 D Zevs dé ji .. . épkeios 5é Kai Ppdrptos, kat A@nvain pparpia. 

b At Troezen: Paus. 2. 33, 1 (on the island just off the shore) 
Opvaato pev dia todro Alpa vadv évravOa *AOnvas *Amaroupias . , . KaTeoTN- 
garo d€ kal Trois Tporfnviay mapbevois avaribévat mpd ydpov thy Cavny TH AOnva 
Th ’Anaroupia. i 


Dd2 


404 GREEK RELIGION. 


© At Syros: C.l. Gr. 2347 q ’AOnvas bpa(rpias). 

ad At Cos: Bull. de Corr, Hell. 1881, p. 224 Aws ®parpiov ’APavaias 
Edpvavakriday (? fourth century B. c.). 

€ Herod. 1. 147 eiot S€ mavtes”Iwves, dour an’? ’AOnvay yeydvact kat 
"Ararovpia Gyovow éptnv. ayovor € mavtes TAY Edeciov kal Kodohovior, 

f Cf. Aristot. Oecon. p.1347 TH Te lepeia tH THs "AOnvas ths év axpomdret 
Umep Tov amobavévtos Héepev xvirika KpiO@y Kal mup@y Erépay kat 6Boddv, kal 
dt@ dv maddpiov yevntat, 76 ad’Td TodTO (ékeAevoer ‘InTias). 

® Athena Krnoia: Hippocr. mepi éevumviov: Kuhn, 2, p. 10 él pev 
trois ayaboiow “HXi@ Aut Otpavig Ari Krnoie, AOnva Kryoin, ‘Eppy ’AroA\dont 
evyer Oat. | 

®° Athena Mnrnp: Paus. 5. 3,3 tav bé Hreiwy al yuvaixes .. . evéao- 
ba tH °’AOnvG d€yovrar... kat » evyn odhiow ereheaOn, Kai “AOnvas iepdv 
érikknow Myrpds iSpvaavro. 

‘7 ? Athena Aoxia: Aristid. 1, p. 21, Dind. Cf. Suidas, s. v. aiyis: 7 dé 
iepeca “AOnvnot thy iepav aiyida pepovca mpos Tas veoyawous eionpxeTo. 

8 Pp Athena TevervAXis: vide Niketas Epitheta ea», Westermann, 
Myih. Grdaec. p. 386. 

°° Athena Tap@évos: C. I. A. 1. 374 UWapbéve "Expadvrov pé rarnp av- 
cOnke kal vios évOaS’ ’AOnvain priya mévev “Apeos ... Kpitios kai Nnowwtns 
eroujodtny, 1 IlapOévos in State-decree circ. 420 B.c., C. /. A. 1. 51. 

“© Athena Kopia near Cleitor in Arcadia: Paus. 8. 21, 3 memoinrat 
de kai emt Gpovs Kopudpys oradiots TpidkovTa dmwrépw THs méAews vads Kal 


atyadpa ’AOnvas Kopias. Cf. Kopnoia 1. 
Political titles. . 
7 Athena Elpnvoddpos: C. I. Gr. 6833, on base of statue, cult-title. 


™ Athena Bovdaia at Athens: Antiphon, p. 789 R é aire ro 
BovAeurnpio Ads BovAaiov kal "AOnvas Bovadaias iepdv éort. Cf. C. L. A. 3. 
272 tepéws Aids BovAaiov kat ’AOnras Bovdaias. Cf. 683. 

® Athena ’ApBovdta at Sparta: Paus. 3. #3, 6 Aus "ApBovdlov kai 
’"AOnvas éotiv ’ApBourtas Bonds. 

™ Athena ’Ayopaia, vide "7 4, 

2 ’AO@nva emi Taddadio and emi MWaddadio Anpioveio mentioned in fifth 
century Attic inscription containing schedule of religious funds, 
C. I, A. 1. 273. 10. 3. 71 iepeds rod Avds rod émi Taddadiov Kat Bovtiyns, 
xpnoavros Tov IIviov ’ArroANwvos, GTi xpn Erepov dos THs HadAddus KatacKevd- 
cacOa, €k Tay idiov monoas Trois te Oeois Ti Te moAee aveOnxev. ? Second 
century A.D. a 





Ee) ee eee 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X_—XII. 405 


» Paus. 1. 28, 8 éréca (Stkaornpia) emi rois povedoivy éorw, dda Kal emi 
Hahdadigo Kadovot, Kat Tois drokretvagw dkovolws Kpicrs kabéotnkev, Cf. 
Pollux, 8.118; Harpocrat. s.v. ési WaddaSio: Demosth. xara "Aptotoxp. 
$71. Cf. 42 and 4». 

¢ Aesch. Zum. 1022: 

Teno d€ péeyyer Naymddwv cedarhdpav 
és Tous évepbe Kat Kdtw xOovds rémrous, 
ov mpoomddraow, aire ppovpotaw Bpéras 


> ‘ , 
Toupov diKaiws, 


CE. Rang. Jnscr. 814. 8. 


d Eur. [ph. Taur. 1469: 
eEeowoa O€ 
kal mpiv ao ‘Apelos ev mays yipous ivas 
kpivao’, "Opéota, kai vopiop’ és todrd ye, 
vixav, ionpes doris dv Wrpous AdBn. 
® Athena ’Agidérowos at Sparta: Paus. 3. 15, 6 "AOnvas ’A€coroivov 
Kadoupevns iepdv, ws yap 57 duvvdpevos “HpakAjjs ‘Inmoxdéwvra kal tods maidas 
perndOe kar’ akiav, Sv mpotmypkav, iepdv "AOnvas iSpverat, 
© Athena SraOpia : Hesych. s. v. émiberov ’AOnvas. 


7 Athena Cégus: C. LZ. A. 3. 323 "OAnddpov (? Oirodsdpov) ’AOnvas 
Me Se Pp p 7 
O¢udos: On seat in Attic theatre. 


Athena povaia and Upévoca. 


a Athena Ipovaia at Thebes: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1887, p. 5 
inscriptions on fragments of pottery and bronze ’A@dvas Lpovatas. 
Paus. 9. 10, 2 éare d€ Adpos ev Seka Tay mvAdY iepss ’AmdAR@VOS' 
.». mpara pev dn AiBov kata Thy éxoddv eotiv *"AOnva kal ‘Epps dvopaCdpevor 
IIpévact, oujoat d€ adrov Beidias, rv Sé "AOnvay éyerat Sxdmas* pera S€ 6 
vads @koddsunrat, 

b At Delphi: Aesch. Zum. 21 

Tlad\as spovaia & ev Noyos mpecBeverar. 
Herod. 1. 92 Kpoiow 8€ @ort kai GAXa dvaOjpata ev rH “ENAdOL TOAAC . . . €v 
d€ Lpovnins ris év AeAhvion donis xpvoén peyadn. Aeschin. «. Krnoup, 108 
(499 R) dvaipet 9 TvOia modepeiv Kippaiors kai thy xopav . , . avabeivea .. . TH 


"Aron TO Tvbio kat "Aprépede kal Anrot kat AOnva IIpovaia. Hesych. s.z. 


IIpovaias’ "A@nvas répevos év Aedhois. Harpocr. s.v. avoudterd tis mapa 
Aedgois ’AOnva Upovaia dia 7d mpd rod vaod fdpicOu. Plut. Praec. Ger. 
Ret. p. 825 B ixeredovras év 7G iep@ tis Upovaias. Curtius, Anecd. Delphi. 
inscr. 43 and 45 ’A@ava 74 Lpova‘g, 


406 GREEK RELIGION. 


® Athena Upévoia, ® At Delphi: Paus. 10. 8, 4 6 rérapros 8¢ (vads) 
"AOnvas xaXeirat Mpovoias. Demosth. x.’Apioroy, A. p. 780 cial rats médcou 
macats Bapot kai vem tdvrav Tov Oey, év S€ TovTots Kat Ipovoias "AOnvas ds 
ayaOns Kai peyddns Oeod, kai mapa TH AndAAw ev Aedgois KdAdoTos Kal 
péyotos vews evOds elaidyte és 7d iepdv. Photius, s.v. Updvora AGnva’ of pév 
dua TO mpd Tov vaod Tod ev AeAois éearavar adryy, of Sé Ste mpovvénoey Sus 
téxy 1) Anta. Diod. Sic. 11. 14 of 8¢ (Iépaar) emi rv oddnow Tod pavreiou 
meupbevtes mpondOov pev péxpt TOU vaod THs Upovolas ’AOnvas ... Td pev ovv 


ev Aedgois parretoy Samovia twi mpovoia tiv avAnow Srepvyev. 


b At Delos: Macrob. 1.17, 54, referring to the birth of Apollo, 
diu intervenit Iuno ...sed divinae providentiae vicit instantia, quae 
creditur iuvisse partum. Ideo in insula Delo ad confirmandam fidem 
fabulae aedes Providentiae, quam vadv Lpovoias ’A@yvas appellant apta 
religione celebratur. 


¢ ? At Prasiae in Attica: Bekk. Anecd. 299 Upovaia ’A@nva: dyddparos 
dvopa Tov ev Aedois mpd Tov vaod Tod "AmdAX@vos iSpupevou' Ipdvora dé 


"AOnva év Upaccais tis ’Arrexns (pura bd Aroundovs. 


*® Aristid. 1, p. 23, Dind. 6 & ’Ardd\Awy trav abrod ypnope@didv rabrqv 
mpovoTngato kai mpobvew enéragev, Ld. p. 26 Movn S€ ’Epydvyn kai Updvoia 


KEKANT QL. 


* Athena Gnyia at Erythrae: Dittenberg. Sylloge. 370, 1. 27 Znvds 
Pnuiov kal ’AOnvas Pnpias . .. emanov T, 


** Zenob. 5. 75 E dddor 6€ Aéyouae ryv ’AOnvay ebpeiv tiv did Tov Wnpov 


? 
pavTekny, 


Epithets of the war-goddess. 


*° Athena ’AdaAxopévn: ® Hom. J7. 4. 7: 

Aotat pev Mevehdw dpnydves eict Oedwv, — 

"Hpn 1 ’Apyetn kai ’AXadkopevnis ’AOnyn. 
Paus. 9. 33, 4 "AdaAkopeval 5¢ Kdyun pev eoriw od peyadn ... yeverOar Se 
auTy TO dvopa of pév dd *Adadkopevéws, avdpds adtéxOovos, bd rovrou dé 
"AOnvav rpapjva Néyovow" . . . "Amwrépw dé THs Kopns emevointo €v T@ 
X9apar@ ris "AOnvas vads Kal Gyadua dpxaiov édépavros. Cf. Steph. Byz. 
5.U. "AdXadkopénov. Ael. Var. Hist. 12. 57 (wept tepdrev rots OnBaiors 
mpopawopevor, “AdeEdvdpou én avtods thy Suvapty ayovros) rd dé Tis "AOnvas 
THs Kadovperns *AdaAKopernidos dyadpa av’Toudrws KarepréxOn. Strabo, 413 
(‘AAaAkopevai) ... éxer 8 dpyxaioy iepdv "AOnvas opddpa Tipmpevov, kai haci 
ye THY Oedv yeyevnr Oa évOdde . ... Kal dmdpOnros dei duerédecev f mddus, ode 
peyddn odca ob’ ev evepket xapio Keipérn. 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X-XI1I. 407 


b In Chios: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1877, 82, No. 8 ’AOnva ’AdXadkopevn 
To Ouperpixdy mhypa avéOnkev Tod tepov mrepiBdAov KaTackevis. 

84 Athena Ipopaydppa: Paus. 2. 34, 8, near Hermione, ev Bourdpbpo 
dé menoinra peév lepdv Anuntpos Kat ths matdds, memoinra Sé "AOnvas’ emi- 
kAnows O€ €ore TH Oe mpopaxdppa. 

8 Athena ’Apeia. ® At Athens, on or near the Areopagus: Paus. 
I. 28, 5 Boyds €or "AOnvas *Apetas, bv dvéOnxev (Opéotns) dropuyay thy 
Sicny. C. LI. A. 2. 333 dpdcae A@nvaiovs pev Aaxedaipoviors “Hdxov, “Apn, 
"AOnvav Apeiay (circ. 271 B.C.). 

b At Plataea: Paus. 9. 4, 1 UWaAartaedou 5€ "AOnvas émikhnow "Apeias 
€otiv tepdv. @xodopnbn S€ amd Aahipov a ths paxns ohicw AOyvaior tis 
Mapaéan arévetpav. 

e¢ At Smyma: C. J. Gr. 3137, in the oath dictated by the Smyr- 
naeans to the Magnesians, Opviw Aia Tyv "Adcov”Apn *ACnvay *Apetav 
(period of Diadochi). Athena-worship at Smyrna, 7d. 3154. 

d At Pergamon: Frankel, Znschr. von Pergamon, vol. 1, No. 13, 
oath of Eumenes, éuviw Aia .. .”Apyn ’A@nvav ’Apeiar. 

8 Athena ’AAkiSnpos: Liv. 42. 51 Ipse (Perseus) centum hostiis 
sacrificio regaliter Minervae, quam vocant Alcidemon, facto. 

87 Athena Anires at Olympia: Paus. 5. 14, 4 Térapta kat méunta 
"Apréuid. Obovor wai Anirids ’AOnva, éxra ’Epyavy. Cf. Hom. L/. 10. 460 

kat ta y “AOnvain dnirids Sivs ’Odvoceds 
tWdo’ avécyebe xeupt Kai evydpevos Eros nuda. 

8 Collitz, Dialect. Inschr. 3001 Megara Toid’ ano alas tav Sexarav 
dveOnxev ’AOnvai (Circ. 450 B. C.). 

8a Athena Zwornpia at Thebes: Paus. 9. 17, 3 UWAnolov d€ *Apdu- 
rpvovos dv0 dyddpara AiOwa héyouow ’AOnvas émikdnow Zoornpias. aBetv yap 
Ta Oda adtov evravéa, 

b At Athens: C.J. A. 1. 273 ’A@nvaias Zwotnpias H.. . . TOKos (fifth 
century B.c.). Cf. Paus. 1. 31, 1 €v Zwornpe dé émt Oaddoons kat Boos 
’AOnvais Kal ’AmdAXwvos Kal Aprépidos Kal Anrods, Tekeiv pev obv Tovs Traidas 
évraida od act icacba S€ rdv (woThnpa as TeLoperny. 

¢ Hesych. s. v. Zooreipa’ *A@nvas ériberov év Bowwtia. 


%a Athena Srparia: Plut. Praec. Ret. Ger. 801 E "Apeos ’EvvaXiou kal 
Zrpartias ’AOnvas. 
b Srotyeia at Epidaurus: Cavvadias, Lpzdaure go, dedication ’A@avas 


Srotyxeias. 


408 GREEK RELIGION. 


* Athena Sddmy£ at Argos: Paus. 2. 21, 3 “AOnvas 8€ iSpicacba 
ZdAnvyyos iepdv haow “Hyédewr, 


* Athena "Eyxédados: Hesych. s. v¢ 4 ’AOnva. 


*8a Athena ‘Imma at Tegea: Paus. 8. 47, I 70 0€ dyahpa év Teyéa 1d 
ep’ npav exopicOn pév ex Shou rod MavOovpéwv, ‘Imria 8¢ mapa trois Mav- 
Govpetow cixev émixnow, Ste TO exeiver Ady@ ywopuerns rois Bevis mpds 
Diyavras pdxns enndacev Eykedddo immov 6 dppa, At Acharnae in Attica: 
Paus. 1. 31, 6 tiv d€ ‘Inmiay ’AOnvay dvonagover. Cf. inscription found at 
Menidi: C. 7. A. 2. 584 dvaOnpara aveOnxev tH AOnva tq ‘Inmia. At 
Olympia: Paus. 5. 15, 6 ris 8é mpos Tov €uBorov kaovpevoy éoddou TH pev 
"Apews ‘Inmiou tn Sé ’AOnvas ‘Inmias Boyds. Cf, 786 We I7g, 


b Athena KeAevOera at Sparta: Paus. 3. 12, 4 Tov O€ rev Bidiaiwr dpyeiov 
mépav eativ AOnvas iepdv Odvaceds dé Sptcacba 7d yada déyerat Kat dvopdoat 
KedevOevay, rovs Tnveddans pynotipas Spdum viknoas. iSpvcaro 8€ rs Kedev- 
Geias iepa apiOye rpia, diectnkdra dn’ ddAnAov. 

** Athena Tapeia at Sparta: Paus, 3- 20, 8 thy O€ én ’Apkadias 


lovow ék Smdprns ’AOnvas Eornxev énikAnow Tlapeias dyadpa év braibpy. 


°° "AOnva Xaduiris at Corinth: Paus. 2. 4, I Xadwiridos "AOnvas 
iepdv' "A@nvav yap... pact kai os rov Hnyacdy of (BeANepopdury) mapadoin 
Xétpwoapern kai evOcioa aitn TO inm@ xaridv. Td b€ @ya\pd of tovro Edavdv 


€oTl, mpdawmoy S€ Kal xeipes Kai dkpor wddes elat AevKod ibov. 


*° Athena Nix ®at Athens, called later "Amrepos: Paus. 1. 22, 4 Tov 
d€ mpomudaiov ev de£ig Nikns eotiv ’"Amrépov vads. Cf, 2a b, vide supra **z, 
C.I.A. 1, p. 74 ’AOnvaias Nikns arépavos yxpvaois. Th. 2, 471, 14 
ovv-edouperns O€ Kat ths Ovolas TH ’AOnva TH Niky cuvendumevoay kaos 
Kai evoxnpdvos Bovv oupreuiavres Hv kal COveav év axponore tH Beg. Tb. 
2.678 A I, 15 ’AOnvG Nikn orépavos amb Aniov. Soph. PA. 134 Niky 
T ’A@dva Wohuas } od{er pw det. Et. Mag. 605. 5O dOev kal 7 "AOnva Nixn 
mpooayopevera. Eur. Jon 1528: 

pa THY mapaori¢oveay dppaciv more 

Nixnv ’AOnvav Znvi ynyeveis Sm. 
Ci son 453: 

ena 

"AGavav ixerevo 

TIpopaGet Trav Noyev- 

Oeicav Kar’ dxpordras 

kopupas Aids, ® Idrva Nixa. 
Arist. £g, 581: 
® Tlokwvxe THaddds . . . 
Sedp’ dagixod AaBoioa tiv 


- 


ray sere 
: 


re Ya ae a, he ee 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X- Xi. 409 


€v otpatwais te Kal pdyats 
NMETEpay ouvepyov 

‘ 
Nixnv, 


b At Megara: Paus. 1. 42, 4 érepoy évraiéa tepov *AOnvas mremoinrat 
Kadovpérns Nikns kai dAdo Aiavridos. At Olympia: Jd. 5. 26, 6 mapa Se thy 
> cal , ‘ , ~ 2-8 , ‘ > ” 
AOnvav wemoinrat Nikn* tavrnvy Mavtiveis avébecar . .. Kakapis d€ ov« €xovoay 
MTEpa Toijcat Aeyerar arouipovpevos rd ’AOnvnot tis "Antépov Kadoupevns 
Edavoy, 


¢ At Erythrae: Dittenberg. Syl. 307. 27. 


* Athena Nexnpdpos at Pergamum, vide **™, cf. decree of the 
Aetolians: Collitz, Dralect. Inschr. 1413 xaOarep 6 Baorred’s Etpeévns 
dvakanei TO Tépevos Tas ’AOdvas tas Nexnédpov 76 ort Tepydpat aovdov kabos 


xa 6pién, svvaroded€y Oat tovs AirwAovs dovAov eiuev adto Ta an’ Airwhav. 


*° Athena as goddess of the arts. 


@ Schol. Soph. O. C. 56, at Colonus and in the Academia, cvrtyparac 
(6 Dpoundeds) rH AOnra, xabdrep 6”"Hpaoros, Kai Zorw adrod madady idpupa 
kai Boyds ev TO Tepever tis Oeod. Acixvutar dé Kai Bdows apyaia Kata Thy 
ciovdor, ev 7j Tov Te Ipounbéws €ort tumos Kal Tov ‘Hoaicrov (quoting from 
Apollodorus). Cf, Paus, 1. 30, 2 év ’AxaSnpia éort IIpopndews Bwpos kal 
Ocovow an’ avtod mpos Thy TrddwW, ExovTes Katopevas Aapmddas. 

b Plato, Laws g20 D ‘Hdaicrov kai ’AOnvas tepov 7d ta&v Snpuovpyar 
yevos. 

© Aug. De Civ. Det, 18, ch. 12 in templo Vulcani et Minervae 
quod ambo unum habebant Athenis. At Athens: Paus. 1. 14, 6 trép 
dé roy Kepaperkdy kai orody tiv Kadoupéevny Bacidreov vads éotw ‘Hdaierov' 
kat Ort pev ayadpa oi mapéotnxev ’AOnvas, ovdev Oadpa erorovpny Tov ent ’Ept- 
xXOovio emtoripevos Adyov' rd dé ayadwa Spay rs ’AOnvas yavkods éxov Tors 
6POarpovs, AwBiwv rov piOov dvra evpicKor. 

4 Solon, 13, 1. 49, Bergk: 

@ os *AOnvains te Kai “Hdaiorov moduréexvew 


épya Sacis yxetpoiy ovddéyerar Brordr. 
*° Athena ‘Hg@acria: Hesych. s.v.: cf. C. J. A. 2. 114 b. 
00 Athena ’Epydvn : * Diod. Sic. 5. 73 ’AOnva b€ mpoodnrovor rn TE 


~ cal , ~~ Lal > , A ‘ vin 
Tav éhatay nuepwow kai huteiay tmapadovvat tois avOpwrois , . . mpos d€ Tov 
v THs eoOn WY Kal TI yy TE ért O€ moda Tay ev 

Tos THY THS ExOnTOS KaTacKEUnY Kal THY TeKTOVIKTY TEXYNY, ETL Oe TT 
F - > , ( ee ‘ \ x a 
tais GdAas emornpas eionynoacba Tois dvOpomos, evpeiv O€ Kal THY TOV 
- A a 4 »* Cae le 
avA@y KatacKevyy ... Kai TO TUvoAOY OAK TaY iAdoTExvav Epywv, ap ay 


"Epydyny aithy mpocayopever Oat, 


410 GREEK RELIGION. 


b At Athens: Paus. 1. 24, 3 mpéroe pev yap (’A@nvaio) *AOnvay éravd- 
pacav “Epydymv. Soph. Frag. 724 Bar’ els 68bv 5) was 6 xEtpavaé ews ot 
thy Aws yopyamw *Epydyny oratois Nixvowot mpoorpemecbe. Hesych. s.v. 
Aeixvorot mpoorpererOa Aeikva... & ott kava ef) vis Ta Ania émerébero, 


is4 a Y 4 , 
aTrEep €lOl kKap7rot Tuplvol, 


© C. /, A. 2. 1434, inscription found on the base of a statue on the 
Acropolis, ? latter part of the fourth century B.c., Xepot re kal réyvacs 
Epyov TéApais te Suxaiars Opexpauevyn réxvwv yevedy dvéOnxe Médwva col THvoe 
penny, bed “Epyavn, &v éndvnoev poipav anap£apevn Kredvav, tTiwdoa ydpww 
ony. C.L, A. 2. 1329 Baxxwos 7H ’AOnva ret ’Opydvy amapxnv aveOnkev 
orepavwbcis td toy O.acwrey, inscription found near the theatre of 
Herodes. 


d At Sparta: Paus. 3. 17, 4 @ore 8€ kal érepov adrdh "AOnvas ’Epyavns 
iepov, 

© At Olympia: Paus. 5. 14, 4 era (Ovovow of "ANetor) "Epydvy. tavry 
7 “Epydvn kat of ardyovor Beiov, Kadovpevor de Padpurtai, yépas mapa 
"Hiciay eiknpdres tov Aids ré dyadpa dnd téy mpocifavdvtev KaOuipewv, odor 


, 5) a ee | , \ 2» A 
6vovow evravda ply 7) Naumpivew ro dyadpa d&pxovrat, 


f At Megalopolis: Paus. 8. 32, 3 «oi de... Oeoi, mapéxovrar b€ kai 
obror oxjpa Tetpiyovor, Epydrat dé eatwv adrois énikhynots, "AOnva re "Epyavn 
kat ’Amé\Awv *Ayutevs. 


& At Thespiae: Paus. 9. 26, 8 ri Sé’AOnvay thy "Epydyny kab adrip 
kat I\ovréy of mapeotnkdra énoince, Lt. Mag. p. 369. 51 "Epyam oj 
"AOnva’ mapa 16 Tov Epywv émorareiv, TavTns ebpayens Tas Téxvas. 


a . 9: , aA oa 
h Xadkeia: Suidas, s.v. €opry ’AOhvnot, & twes AOnvaia kadovow, ... Dore- 
pov de umd povev ifyero tev Texuray, dru”"Hpaoros év rh ArriKn yadKdv 
b , a be 4 A 4 a int a > @e Q ce? A av 
eipyacato. €ute O€ Evy kal veg Tov IIvaveyadvos, ev 7 Kal idpeca pera TO 
? a A 
appnpdpev rov rémov didovrar. . .. Bavddnpos dé now odk AOnva cvecOae Thy 


éoptqv, GAN’ “Hdaioro: cf. Harpocr. £4 Mag. s.v. 
* Athena ’Epydris at Samos: Hesych. s.v. mapa 8¢ Saptous } ’AOnva. 


' Athena "Opydmm at Delos: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1882, p. 351 
AOHNAHE OPPFANHS, ? fifth century. 


** Athena KadXiepyos at Epidauros: Eph. Arch. 1884, p. 28, Inscr. 72 
"AGnvas Ka)dXépyov ’AmohA@v0s Awpat (? Awpaiov) tupopopnaas (? = rupgo- 
pioas) 76 ZP! eros: imperial period. 

** Athena Tedywia at Teumessos: Paus. 9. 19, 1 kal’ AOnviais ev Tevpnoo 
TeAxwvias €or iepdv, dyahpa oik éxov. Cf. Stobaeus, /% lorileg. 38. 56 ék 
THs Nexoddov Gv auvaywyns. Tedyives avOpwmot ... rexvirar d€¢ dvres Kal 


REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X-_-XII. 41I 


A ~ , a“ nw 
Ta TOY TpOTEpwv Epya popunoduevor AOnvas Tedywwias &yarpa mparov idpv- 
gavto, domep et tis Néyor "AOnvas Backdvov. 


7 Athena ’Andov: Hesych. s.v. 4 ’AOnva mapa IlayvuaAlos. 


1°6 2 Movorxn at Athens: C. 7. A. 2. 69 rijs povotxns (AOnvas coniec. 
poeckh). Cf. 3%, 


77 Athena BouSudia: Hesych.s.v. 9 AOnva ev Bowwria. Plut. De Aus. 
1336 B 4 8 Képwva kai didaxOjval dnote tov ArddA@va br "AG@nvaias avdeiv. 
Schol. Pind. Pyth. 12, ll. 6-12 9 yap ’AOnva ebpe rd pédos rijs avAnrikis. 


*8 Athena Maxaviris: Paus. 8. 36, 5, at Megalopolis, gore dé ’AOnvas 
iepov emixAnow Mayaviridos drt Bouhevpdray éoriv 4) beds ravrolwy Kal émrey- 
mparov ebpéris. Arist. vol. 1, p. 24, Dind. Xdpires © adris rept xeipas 
ioravrat. 


Athena ‘Yyiea *at Athens: Paus. 1. 23, 5, on the Acropolis, 
Oeav ayddpard éorw ‘Yyeias te, hv ’AokAnmod maida etvar A€yovor, Kal 
"AOnvas emikAnow kai ravrns ‘Yyeias. Arist. vol. 1, p. 22, Dind. ’A@nvaley 
oi mpeoBvrara Kat ‘Yyeias "AOnvas Bapor iSpiaoavro. Mitt. d. d. Inst. Ath. 
1887 (xii), p. 388: cf. p.154 ®EN... VIEL... ALLIS EPOIES 
KAIANE@®=’A@nvaia ‘Yyreia KadAts éroinoe kai dvé6nke. Cf. fifth century 
inscription published in AeAriov ’Apxawd. 1888, p. 95. 3... av (H) 
vytea . . . Evppomos (pw avebexe)v (Ho) kepapevs amapyev mad. Awos peyado. 
C. I. A. 1. 335 AOnvaion rH ’AOnvaia 7H ‘Y-yeta Wdppos éroincev ’AGnvaios. 
Cf. Plut. Perzcl. 13 emi rovrm (on the occasion of the recovery of his 
workman) kal rd yadkotv dyadpa rhs “Yytelas AOnvas avéaryncev (6 Tepexdijs) 
€v dxpomédet mapa Tov Baopdy bs Kal mpdrepov jv, os Aéyovor. C.L. A. 2. 
163, vide **2, 

b At Acharnae: Paus. 1. 31, 6 ’A@nvas Boyds éorw ‘Yyeias. 


¢ At Hieron near Epidaurus: Cavvadias, Z~zdaure 49, inscription 
second century a.D., ’AOnva ‘Yyela 6 iepeds Tod Swrjpos "AcKAnmLod Mdpkos 
"Iovmos Aadodxos. 

"0 Athena Haevia at Athens: Paus. 1. 2, 5 évratéd éorw ’AOnvas 
» , 
ayadpa Tatwvias. 


1 At Oropus: Paus. 1. 34, 2 Qpwmios vads ré eoriwv ’Audiapdov... 
mapexerat Sé 6 Bwopds pépyn’... tetaptyn Sé eore Tov Bapod poipa ’Adpodirns 
kat Ilavakeias, €rt 5€ "lagovs kal “Yyteias kat "AOnvas Tlawvias. 


112? Athena Ka@apows: Arist. Dind. vol. 1, p. 26 mpopirar 5€ kat iepeis 
Ka@dpovov avriy émixadovvrat, 


U8 Athena ’Amorporaia “at Erythrae: Dittenberg. Sy//. 370. 1. 70, 
115 Avs drorporaiou kal ’A@nvas amorporaias. 


412 GREEK RELIGION. 


b At Rome: ’Aédva dmorporaia ex oraculo C. J. Gr. 5939. 

114 Athena Sorewpa *at Asea: vide e. 

b At Athens: C. 7. A. 2. 305 %uov rds re Ovoias T@ At r@ Swrqpe kat 
th 'AOnva th Swreipa. Cf. 325, 326, 469.21. Ld. 1387 ’AmodA@viav... 
Ovyarépa Kavnpopnoacay 6 marip Kai 7 pyTnp Au oorjpe Kal AOnva oareipa 
ave@nxav. Cf. inscription on seat of Attic theatre, C. Z, A. 3. 281. 

¢ Athena Sorepa in Delos: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1882, 22, 
inscription containing temple-accounts, 7G rovs oreddvous mdcEavre eis 
Ovaiav “Amdh\wm *Apréuide Antoit Ari Swripe ’AOnva Swreipa (second cen- 
tury B.C.). 


4° Athena Suirs near Lerna: Paus. 2. 36, 8 émi xopup@ rod spous 


(rod Ilovrivov) iepdv re "AOnvas Sairidos epeima ere pova. 

Cult-titles and cults shared with Zeus. 

16 a Athena SvAdavia at Sparta: Plut. Lyc. 6 Aus SvAXaviov kab’ AOnvas 
ZvAAavias iepov iSpvodpevoy. 

b Athena Zevia at Sparta: Paus. 3.11, 11 fore kul Zeds Hénos «al 
"AOnva Revia, 

¢ Athena ’Arorporaia with Zeus ’Amorpomaios at Erythrae 

d Athena ‘Yrepdeéia: Steph. Byz. s.v. ‘YrepSé£ov. yxwplov AéoBov, év 
@ Zeds ‘Yrepdéksos Kai AOnva ‘YrepdeEia. 

€ Zeus Swrnp and *AOnva Soreipa, 2°, 

f Zeus Krnows and Athena Kryola, © 

& Zeus Idrpios and Athena Tarpia at Anaphe, *°, 


h In the Peiraeeus: Paus. 1.1, 3 Oéas 8€ détov r&v év Metpacet padvora 
*"AOnvas €ori Kai Atos Tépevos’ yadkov pev dudtrepa ta dydAparta, exe dé 6 
pev oxnmtpov Kat Nixny 7 dé "AOnva Sdpv. 

1 At Delos: Zeus KivOios and Athena Kuvéia: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 
1882, p. 343 Baowréa Irodepaiov owrnpa . . . *Apetos Troepaiov ’Adeé- 
avOpevs Tov éavtod evepyérny Aut Kuvbio cai ’AOnva Kuv6ia. 

kK ’A@nva Awdia and Zeds TloAtevs, vide #; Athena Polias with Zeus 
at Amorgos, **8; at Ios, 3*h, 

1 Zeus @nytos and Athena &npia, * 


m Zevs ‘Opodoios and Athena ‘OpoAwis in Boeotia, *”. 


Ritual. 


"7 Diod. Sic. 5. 56 aot rovs pév “HAddas dua tiv orovdnv émiiabope- 
vous éveykeivy mip emOeivat Ta Ovpara, tov b€ rére BaciAevovta Tav ’AOnvaiwy 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X_XII. 413 


Kéxpora eri rod mupos bica vorepor. Oirep havi Siapevew péype rod viv rd 
kara THY Bvoiav iiov év Th “Pdd@ Kai Thy Oedv ev auth Kabidpioba. Cf. Pind, 
O/. 7.48. Worship of Athena Alea, *4; Tdv8pocos and the €ppnpdpou, *; 
Scirophoria, *; Upoyapiornpia, *; Panathenaic ritual, *n, 0,2; priest of 
Athena Modaérs at Tegea, **2; of Athena Lindia at Carpathos, Geogr. 
Reg. p. 421 ; priest of Athena at Phaselis, 90; at Amyclae, >; boy- 
priest of Athena Kpavaia at Elatea,**, Sacrificial animals, Ziad 11. 728 
Abrap ’A@nvain yhavkwrd: Body ayedeinv. Ovid, Mer. 4. 754 Mactatur vacca 
Minervae. Sow on votive relief, Eph. Arch. 1886, Hiv. 9. Schol. 
Ll, 2.547 Ondea 8€ TH ’AOnva Obovaw: cf. He SPF > Cf, Hust. 77 [i 20> 3a, 
Bull-sacrifice, Suidas, s.v. TavpoBddos: Paus. 1. 27, 10 rov &€ &v ra 
Mapalam tavpov vaorepoy Onceis és tiv dkpérodw eddoa Kal Gioat Aeyerae TH 
eG. Male and female victims in the sacrifice at Ilium, C. Z. Gr. 2. 
p- 889. Eust. //, p. 1752. 24 kal ri ipecay 8é, aor, tis “Abnvas 0s hv 
ov Ovew duvnv. Sacrifice of goats on the Acropolis, vide Zeus-ritual, 
p. 100. Varro, De re Rust. 1. 2, 19 ut Minervae caprini generis nihil 
immolarent propter oleam . . . hoc nomine etiam Athenis in arcem non 
inigi praeterquam semel ad necessarium sacrificium. 


Cult-monuments. 


"* Tertullian, Ad Nat. 1. 12 quanto distinguitur a crucis stipite 
Pallas Attica et Ceres Raria quae sine effigie rudi palo et informi ligno 
prostant. 


™ At Aliphera: Athena Tritogeneia by Hypatodorus, *f. Cf. *e, 
0 Anth. Pal. 9. 576: 


TlapOeve Tpitoyeveca, ti tiv Kimpw dpre pe dunes 
Tovpov 8 dpradréa dpov exes maddpy ; 

gov Odpu kai odkos eoriv® euov S€ td prov imdpyec’ 
apket TO pyro Keivos 6 mpw mdAEpos. 

Seated Athena. 

2” At Ilium: @ Strabo, 601 ris AOnvas 1d Edavov viv pév éoryxds Sparar, 
"Ounpos S€ KaOnpevov eudaiver ... woANa S€ THY dpyalwv THs AOnvas ~odvav 
kaOnpeva Seixvurat, kabdrep ev Pwxaia MacoaXia ‘Pon Xi dddais mrewdar. 

b Paus. 1. 26, 4, at Athens on the Acropolis, kaOjuerdy éorw ’AOnviis 
dyadpa, emiypaupa éxov ws KadXias péev avabein mounoese b€ "Evdov0s. 

© Jb. 7. 5, 9 "Eort dé év "EpvOpais xai "A@nvas Toduddos vads kat 
dyakpa Evdov peyeber peya KaOnpevdv te emi Opdvov kai nAakdtny ev éxatépa 
TOY xXeipav exer Kal emi THs Kehadns TOAoV, TodTO Evdoiov Téxyny erexpatpdoueba 
ceva, Cf, Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. c. 14 7d pev yap év Edév@ ris ’Ap- 


414 GREEK RELIGION. 


TépeSos kat 76 Tis "AOnvas ... Kat tTHv KaOnuéerny”Evdowos cipydoaro pabnris 
Aatdadouv, 

d Seated Minerva in Rome: Suet. Calg. 25 Iuliam Drusillam 
Minervae gremio imposuit, alendamque et instituendam commendavit. 

#22 Athena Polias’ image at Athens: ® Paus. 1. 26, 6: vide *, 

b Schol. Demosth, Androf. p. 597 R tpia yap dydd\para fv év th 
axporrodet Tis ’AOnvas év diahédpors témots, év pev e& dpyis yevouevov e& édatas, 
Omep ekadeiro Todrddos "AOyvas bia 76 adtns elvar THY mddLW. 

¢ Arist. Av. 826: 

EY: tis Oat beds 
ToALovxos €oTat, TH Eavovpev Tov mTemdor ; 

TIE. ti & ov« ’AOnvaiay éOpev Todrdda ; 

EY, kat m@s ay ere yevour’ dy evraxtes Todds, 
Grou: Oeds yur) yeyovvia mavor)iav 
eoTnk’ éxovca KXewobévns dé Kepxida ; 

Burp. Lic. t2K4% 

"ENav & ’AOnvas, Waddddos cepviv Bpéras 
mpdontvéoy’ eipker yap wv emtonpevas 
Sevois Spdkovow, Bote pn Wavew ober, 
yopyap wmepteivovtd aov Kapa KvKAoY. 

e Alciphr. Zp. 3. 51, 4 euol yevorro, mpdpaye ’AOnva kal rodwixe dureos 
"AGnyynat Kat (yoat kal Biov amodureiv. 

1% Palladia: ® Schol. //. 6. 88 act rd duomerés avdpis (? aiyds) Sopav 
jppréecOau, éxew S€ oréupara Kal Hrakdryy, év S€ rh Kepadrj modi (? wédrov) Kal 
€v tH SeEra xeupt Sdpv. 

b Apollod. 3. 12, 3 jv S€ (76 Siomeres TadAdduoy 7G peyéber tpimnxy, 
tois b€ moot cupBeBykds, kal th pev Sea Sdpv Sunppevov exov, tH Se érépa 
nAakaTny Kal aTpaktov. 

¢ Strabo, 264, speaking of Troike, the port of Heraclea, ris rap 

, , , A A a > an A 9 , , ¢€ 
Tpowv katoikias Texpnpiov movovvrat Td THs ’AOnvas ths ‘TAuidos Edavov idpv- 
pevov ato, Omep Katapica pvbevovow droor@pevev Tey ikerov ... Kal yap 
év ‘Paun Kat év Aaoviwi@ Kat év Aovuxepia xal év Supirids Weds ’A@nva Kadeira 
ws éxetOev Kopiobeica. 

d At Amphissa: Paus. 10. 38, 5 év d€ rij axporddes vads ogiow ’AOnvas 
kat dyadpa dpOov xadkov remoinpevor, KouroOnvar S€ Umd Odavtds hagw avrhy 

yarpa dpbdv x nnevov, Kopio Oh 7 
€& "IXiov Kal elvar Aabvpey tev ek Tpotas, 

e Arnob. Adv. Wat. 4. 16 Nonne vides in Capitoliis omnibus virgi- 
nalis esse species Minervarum et innuptarum his formas ab artificibus 
eunctis dari. 


i 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X~_XII. 415 


f Schol, Ar. Acharn. 546 Taddddia ev rais mpdpas rev Tpinpev jv 


dydApard twa EvAwa ris AGnvas kabiOpupeva Sv érepedovvto péddXovres THrEiv. 


™ Athena ’Ayopaia at Byzantium: Corp. Script. Hist. Byz. Niketas 
Chthoniata, pp. 738-739 16 éoros émi aTnAns &v Te Kovotartweiw pdpe tis 
"AOnvas ayadya’ dvéBawe pév rhv HdiKiav dpOtov ws és tpraxdda modav... 
modnpis 8€ fv ) oToAn pitpa & "Apeos ri ikty Svednpria ixavds adripy 
mepteadeyyev, tye b€ Kami Tois orépvos .. . alyWades erévdupa ... 6 dé ye 
avxnv dxirav dy kai mpds rd Bohixddeipov dvatewdpevos duayov els nSovny 
capa fv... ra xeihn ddEav mapeiyov ds et Mpoopever tus peihtyov aviv 
évatioerat... Tos dpOadpovs iuép@ mavti pedpevoy ... trmoupis 8 émxet- 
pen th Kehudrg Sewov kabirepbev evevev ... rev Oe XElp@v n pev Aaa Ta 
guvertvypeva Ths éaOjros dvéctedde, drépa & EKTELVOMEMN TpOS KNijLa TO VvOTLOY 
cixe THY Kehadyy npéua Toes €ykAtvopevny ékel. 


5 Nikn ’A@nva: ® Harpocrat. s. v. dre dé Nikns "A@nvas Edavov éimrepor, 
Exov ev pev 7H Seka pdav, év b€ TH EVOVUL® Kpavos, eryuato map’ ’AOnvaios, 
dednAwKev “HrLcdepos 6 mepinynris év a’ Tept akporroAews, 

b Schol, Arist. Av. 573 vewrepixov ro Thy Nixyy kai tov”Epwra énrepo- 
aba "Apxewov yap paow... of dé "AyAaohavra mrynmy épydcacba tiv 
Nixnv, 

126 Athena (? "Apeia) at Athens: Paus. 1. 8, 4 "Apeos eat lepdy, &vOa 
aydApara dv0 pév “Adpodirns Keitat, TO O€ ToU“Apews eroinoer ’ANkapeévns, THY 
d€ “AOnvav avijp Udpios, dvopa be avT@ Aoxpés. 

“T Athena Movorky: Pliny, 34. 77 Demetrius (fecit) Minervam quae 
musica? (libr. myctica) appellatur ; dracones in gorgone eius ad ictus 
citharae tinnitu resonant. 


“8a Paus. 9. 40, 3 &dava ev Kpntn ... A@nva mapa Kveoias, work of 
Daedalus. 

b At Cleonae: Paus. 2. 15, I €otw lepov AOnvas, ro b€ a@yadpa SKvAN- 
Bos réxvn Kai Auroivou, pabnras b€ etvar Aadddov odis . .. (€0€dovor). 

At Olympia in the temple of Hera: Paus. 5. 17, 1 ri ’AOnvav 
Kpdvos émiketpevny kai ddpv Kal dowida éxovcay Aaxedatpoviov A€yovowy epyov 
civaa Médovros (leg. pév Adrra). 

*° Athena Alea by Endoeus, ">, 


8" Athena 26ends by Callon: Paus. 2. 32, 8, at Troezen, aird 8é 


cipydcato ris Oeod 7d Edavov KdddNwv Aiywnrns. 
Lowy, Jnschr. Griech. Bildhauer, 38 Kaddilas kai ["0 ]pro(s) 
avebernv [rH "AO |nvaia amapxnyv Qabev. Kpirt los kal Nyo|t|orns emounodrny, 
“At Samos in the temple of Hera: Strabo, 637 rpia Mipwvos épya 


416 } GREEK RELIGION. 


Kohogatka iSpupeva ent pias Bavews .. . tTHv AOnvay kai tov “Hpakdea, tov dé 
Baal. 3% 


Pheidias’ works. 


8 Athena at Pellene in Achaea: Paus. 7. 27, 2 kata tyv ddd és 
aityy thy modw e€otiv “AOnvas Aidov pev emiywpiov vads, ehépavros dé Td 
» \ a , 4 9 i) > , ‘ , * a 3 
dyahpa kai xpuvood’ eidiav dé elvae tov eipyacpévov gaat mpdrepov ere i) ev 
- 3 £ 8 a's / ‘ bg “- a “~ > a \ 
Th akpordde te avtov tH AOnvaiwy Kat év WAataais wounoae tis AOnvas ta 


ayda\ ara, 


6 At Plataea: vide *>; Paus. 9. 4, 1 ro pev 89 dyadwa Edavdv €orw 
enixpvoov, mpdawmov O€ of Kat xeEipes Akpar kat mddes AiOov Tod TlevTeAnaiov 
eat’ peéyeOos prev ov ToAD On Tt dmodei THs ev axpomdAer xaAKns .. . Pedias 
d€ kal WAaraetow fv 6 ths AOnvas ro &yaApa nouoas. 

#6 At Athens: @ bronze Athena on the Acropolis: Paus. 1. 28, 2 
dya\pa’A@nvas xadkovy amo Mndav tv és Mapabdva droBavrav, téxvn Perdiov" 
kai of THY ént THs domidos AaTWHay mpos Kevtavpous (paxnv) kal doa adda eoti 
eretpyaopéeva Aéyovot Topevoa Mdv*. . . tavtns tis ’AOnvas 7 Tov Sdparos 
aixpn Kat 6 Ados TOU Kpdvous amd Sovviov mpoomd€ovaly earw #Sn cvvoTTAa. 
Demosth. /als. Leg. p. 428, § 272 °OAns ovens iepas ths dkxporddAews 
TAUTNOL ... Tapa THY XaAkHy Thy peydAny *AOnvav ex Sekvas eotnkev, Hv apt- 
atetoy 7 Tédts TOU mpds Tovs BapBdpovs mor€uov, SdvtT@v Tov ‘EAAnvey Ta 
xpymata Tair dvéOnxev, Schol. Demosth. Androt. p. 597 1o dmb xadkod 
povou (dyahya ’AOnvas) dep emoincay vixnoartes of ev Mapabdu éxadetro b€ 
tovto Ipouaxou ’A@nvas. Anthol. Graec. Planud. 4. 157: 

eis thy ev “AOnvais Evondov ’AOnvar' 
Timre Tpitvyevera Koptacea adore: peoo@ ; 


ei£e Tloceddwv" deidSeo Kexporins. 


b Athena Parthenos: Paus. 1. 24, 5 airé dé && re éhéavros 7d Gyadpa 
Kat xpugov Terolntal, péow pev ovv éerikettai of rH kpdver Spuyyos elkav .. . 
ka@’ éxdrepov S€ Tov Kpdvous ypimeés eiow éretpyacpevot ... TO O€ Ayadpa Tis 
’AOnvas opOdv eotw ev xitt@u Todnpet, Kai of Kata TO OTEpvoy H Keadry Medov- 
ons eheavtds €otiv éepmemompevn, Kat Nikny doov te tecaapov mxav, ev dé 
tH (érépa) xetpi Sdpu eyes, kai of mpds Tois Toow domis Te KeiTaL, Kat mAnoiov 
Tov Odparos Spaxwv eariv’ ein S dv ’EptxyOdnos obtos 6 Spakwv' eote S€ ra 
Babpw rod ayddpatos éreipyacuévn Tavdapas yéveots. Pliny, V. H. 36. 
18 Phidian clarissimum esse per omnes gentes, quae Iovis Olympii 
famam intelligunt, nemo dubitat, sed ut laudari merito sciant etiam 
qui opera eius non videre proferemus argumenta parva et ingeni tan- 
tum. Neque ad hoc Iovis Olympii pulcritudine utemur non Minervae 
Athenis factae amplitudine, cum sit ea cubitorum viginti sex,—ebore 
haec et auro constat — sed in scuto eius Amazonum praelium caelavit 





REFERENCES FOR CHAPTERS X_XII. 417 


intumescente ambitu parmae, eiusdem concava parte deorum et 
gigantum dimicationes, in soleis vero Lapitharum et Centaurorum, 
adeo momenta omnia capacia artis illi fuere. In basi autem quod 
caelatum est Iavdapas yéveow appellant, di sunt nascentes (? di adsunt 
nascenti) xx numero. Victoria praecipue mirabili periti mirantur et 
serpentem ac sub ipsa cuspide aeream sphingem. Plat. Hipp. Mar. 
p. 290 B 16 xadov . . . nyvde (Peidias) .. 23 bre rijs "AOnvas Tods opOarpovs 
ov xpvoois eroinoev oddé 1d AAXO mpdcwmov ... Add’ eXeparvtivov .. . Tod 
obv évexa ov kal Ta péoa tov dpbadrpav eehavriva eipydcato, adda Aibwa, 
as oidy Te hv Guoidtnra Tov Aidov TO eA€partt eevpov; Max. yt Diss. tat 
ef ToravTny yet THY ’"AOnvav otav Peidias ednurovpynoev, ovdev rev ‘Opunpov 
erav avdorépay, mapbévov Kadrny, yavaoru, dYnAnv, aiyida dveCooperny, 
képuv epovoav, Sdépu Exovcay (? avéxovoav) donida éxovoay. Clem. Alex. 
Protrept. p. 41 P rov pév ody OXvpriaot Ala Kai thy “AOnvynoe Toddda éx 
xXpvoov Kai €héavros Katackevdoa Pediav mavti mov capes. Paus, 1, 17,2 
ypapai d¢€ ciot mpds ’Auafdvas ’AOnvaior payspevot. memoinra dé opirw 6 
mOepos ovTos Kal THs AOnvas emi TH domids Kal Tod OAvpmiov Aids emi To 
Bape. Dio Chrys. Or. 12. 373 R Ilepuxhéa 5€ kai aitov Nabav eroincev 
(Pedias), Ss paow, ent ris dumidos. Arist. de Mirab. Ausc. p. 846 A 
A€yerat Tov dyadparoroiy HedSiav Katackevatovra Thy ev akporddeu ’A@nvav ev 
perdtnte TavTys THs aomidos TO €avTod mpdowror evtuTocacbat Kal ovvdnoat 
TO adydduare Sid twos apavois Snpoupylas, bar &é avaykns, el tis Bovd\ oro 
auto mepraipeiv, TO Giprrav ttyadwa Avew Te Kal avyxetv. Schol. Arist. Pax 
605 PAdxopos emt TvOodepov (leg. Geodwpov) apxovros taita gdyow. kal rd 
Gya\pa Td xpvaodr tis "AOnvas éatdOn cis Tov vedv Tov péyav, €xov xpuciou 
orabpov tardvrev pd’, Ileptxdéovs emioraroivtos, PeiSiov S€ mowmoavtos. 
Plut. Pericl. 13 6 8€ Bedias eipyateto pev ths Oeov tO ypvoovv edos Kat 


Tovrou Snusoupyos év TH athAn edvat yéypanra. 


© Athena Anuvia: Paus. 1. 28, 2, on the Acropolis, rav épyav ray 
Pediov Oéas padiora aor, "AOnvas dyadpa, and tOv dvabévTwv Kadouperns 
Anpvias. Pliny, WV. H. 34. 54 (Phidias fecit) ex aere vero praeter 
Amazonem supra dictam Minervam tam eximiae pulcritudinis ut 
formae cogndmen acceperit; fecit et cliduchum et aliam Minervam. 
... Lucian, Zmag. § 4 rav 8€ bediov épywr ti pddtora émiveoas; ti 8 dAdo 
i) TH Anuviay, 7 Kai émvypdyat robvoua edias AEiooev; ... § 6 ryv dé rod 
mavTos mpocawmou meprypapny Kai mape@v To dmaddv Kal piva cUppeTpoy 7 
Anpvia mapeEe cal Pedias. Himer. Oras. 21. 4 emei kai thy Pediov dvow 
kai Tas Tov GAwv Snuwovpyav réxvas, dv ai xeipes emi copia Oavpdfovra, 7 
TOY vewy Edpeots Epywr, ws Eros cineiv, exparuvev, ovK dei Aia Pedias €rdar- 
tev, ote oiv Snows dei THY AOnvay éxadk<vero, adda Kai é€s GAdovs Geods 
adie thy réxvnv Kai ty mapbevov exdopnoer, épvOnua KaTaxéas THs Tapelas, 

VOL, I. Ee 


418 GREEK RELIGION. 


iva dvtt Kpdvous id Tovrou Tis Geod 76 KdAXOS KpumToro. Inscription from 
Paros, Ross, VV. Rhein. Mus. 7. p. 521: 
"Aomi|Sa kai Neixny Iladdds xept Oc... at (? Ocio’ emi ain) 
“Omrov od xpytw mpos Kumpw épxopern’® 
Kexpo|midns po dvéOnxe marpns amo marpid’ és ahAnv 
Ge |idSoros Tapios Pediaxyy xdpira, 
Aristid. Dind. 2, p. 556 9 ’A@nvnow *AOnva, Néyw Todro pev thy €eheay- 
rivny, rovro dé, et Bovdet, Thy xadkqv, Kal vy Aia vy’, ef Bovde, Thy Anpviay, 
dmavra tadta imepBodny pev dperis TS Snutoupy@ Tois b€ Gearais ndovijs Exet. 
87 Pliny, V. H. 35.54 Panaenum qui clipeum intus pinxit Elide 
Minervae quam fecerat Colotes. 


188 Athena Lpovaia at Thebes, by Scopas: vide “4. 


89 Athena, by Praxiteles, at Mantinea: Paus. 8. 9, 3 «at “Hpas mpos 
To Oedtpw vadv ebeacaunv. Tlpakirédns S€ ra aydApara avrny Te kaOnpevnv 


, ad = @ 
év Opdve kat mapeotacas éroincay ’AOnvay kat “HBnv maida “Hpas, 


140 Athena Kpavaia, by the sons of Polycles: vide ™. 


ee Eek, Mn 


GEOGRAPHICAL REGISTER OF 
ATHENA CULTS, 


Attica: a Athens . 4a~b, 17q 1-4, e a ae ar os a oe ae Ps we, 61 d, = 
a oT 69 71, 72 74, 17 85 a 89 b, 96 a 98 C, 99 100, c, 106, 109. 110. 14h, U7 
a 121 b, = =, soak = 136. 

b Colonus, 174°, %, 

¢ Acharnae, %a, 1b, Athena yedupiorns? Serv. Aen. 2. 166 
dicunt sane alii unum simulacrum coelo lapsum, quod nubibus 
advectum et in ponte depositum, apud Athenas tantum fuisse, 
unde et yeduprorns dicta est. Io. Lydus, De Mens. 3. 21 év AOnvas 
TO mahat yedupaion mdvtes of mepl ra marpia icpa eEnyntat Kal dpytepeis 
- +. ovouaovro dia rd ent THs yepupas Tod Srepxeiov Torapov fepareve 
7® Iaddadio. Cf. Pherecydes, Miill. Prag. Hist. Graec. 101. 
Oropus, *’. 

d Pallene: worship of Athena Waddnvis: C./. A. 1. 222, 224, 273: 
Herod. 1. 62 TWaddAnvidos ’AOnvains ipov. Eur. Heracl. 849 UWaddAn- 
vidos yap oepvov éxrepov mayov Alas ’AOavas. Lb, 1031 Stas mdpoer 
Ilap@evov IadAnvidos. Cf. Hesych. s. v. Hapbévov TadAnvidos. 

© At Phlye: Paus. 1. 31, 4 Nads dé repos ¢xet Bopods .. . Atos Krnaiov 
kal TiOpwvns ’AOnvas. 

f Academia, *. 

§ Sunium, °°. 

Chalcis: C. J. A. 2. 17> inscription containing treaty of alliance 
between Athens and Chalcis in the second Attic confederacy, 
deposited év Xadxidi ev 7G icp tis ’AOnvaias. 

Aegina: C. J, A. 1. 528 pos repévous ’AGnvaias, dedicated by Athenian 
cleruchs. 

Boeotia, 3°, *?, 16d, 

Thebes, #2, ©, 78a, 8a, 

Alalcomenae, °°, ®°, 

Coronea, *. 

Plataea,: P28, 

At Thespiae, **s. 

At Teumessos, ), 

Thisbe: Roehl, Zuscr. Graec. Ant. 148. C. I. Gr. 1592 *AveOnkev 
"Aédva, fifth century B.c. 

Ee2 


420 GREEK RELIGION. 


Athena ’ApaxvrOids: Steph. Byz. s.v. dpos Bowrias, ap ob 4 ’AOnva 
“ApakuvOids, as “Puavds év tH Shun “KrvOr por edydwv *Apaxuvbias 
Eizarépe.a.” 

Phocis: Elatea, **. Stiris, inscription concerning the cupsodirea of 
Stiris and Medeon: Collitz, Dialect. Inschrift. 1539 ypaydvrev rav 
6podoyiay év orddav kai dvabévrwy év Td iepov ras ’AOavas. 

Daulis, *4; cf. Paus. 10. 4, 9 Aavdsedou S€ ’AOnvas iepdv Kai a&yadpd 
€utw apxatov' 7rd dé Edavoy rd ert madadrepov Aéyovsw énayayécbat 
IIpéxvnv €& “AOnvav. C. L. Gr. iepnrevotoas rH ’AOnva ? third 
century B.C. 

Delphi, 78>, 

Locris, 1»; Amphissa, 134, 

Trachis: Paus. ro. 22, 1 jv 8€ kal iepov ’AOnvas tére imep tis . . . Tpayn- 


vidos kai dvaOnuata év avto. 
Thessaly, °>. ’A@nva Botdea: Steph. Byz. s.v. wddts év Mayyyaia’ otto 
Tiparat Bovdera 7 ’"AOnva év OerraXia. 

farisa, ©", 

Phalanna, *P, 

Phthiotis, 4. 

? Pallene, 1° 

Macedon, *, 

Byzantium, ”°. Codinus de Origin. Constant. Bekker, p. 6 ’Apréysdos 
8€ Kal *AOnvas TEMEVOS mpos TO THS sees? opos. 

Abdera: Hesych, s.v. ’Emurupyiris 4 ’A@nva otras év ’ABShpots ities, 

Peloponnese. 

Megara, ™, 5, 8, %b, 

Sicyon: Paus. 2. 11, I amorparciow emi miAnv Kadroupérny fepdv, od 
méppo tis mvAns vads éotw ’AOnvas. At Titane: Id. 2. 12, 1 é&v 
dé Tirdvy kai ’A@nvas tepdv éotiw, és 6 tHv Kopwvida dviryovor év dé 
avt@ §davov *AOnvas éotiv dpxaiov, Id. 2. 6, 2 "Enamets.. . 
emwvikta €Ove Kai ’AOnvas gxodsper vadv, én’ é&eipyacpér@ d€ edEaro évdei- 
facba tiv Oedy, et of rereMeopévos eotiv 6 vads KaTa yvopunv’ pera b€ 
TH edxhv Eatov A€yovoer privat mpd Tov vaod. 

Gonnin,-”, ?4i¢. 

Cleonae, 128, 

‘TLroezen, *7b, b, 191. 

Epidanrus, *, 19%. 29, 

Hermione, *. 

Argos, °@, b, %, a,b,c, Paus. 2. 22,9 év 76 yupvaolo ro Kudapd- 
Bov icons eoTw adn’ kahoupern. Near Lerna, vag! 


Laconia, 12, 
Sparta, 174, %4, 8b, 99 73 7% 9b, 94 100 116g "i 





GEOGRAPHICAL REGISTER OF ATHENA CULTS. 421 


Amyclae, '*f, %b, 

Las: Paus. 3. 24, 7 éore 8€ év rois epeumiows vads ’AOnvas émikAnow ’Acias, 
motnoat dé Todvdevanv kat Kdoropd paow dvacwbérras ék Kédyov. 

Hippolas, *7¢, 

Near Asopus on the coast, *. 

Messenia. 

Mothone, 7; Corone, **; Coryphasion, ™. 

Arcadia : Albers. ef Palys: 4. 78 €xer O€ dkpav ev airy tH Kopupy 
rod ovpmavros Addov Kal xadkodv ’AOnvas avdpidvra, Kaddeu Kal peyéber 
diadéporra. 

Tegea, ae, 8a, 8a, 

Alea, **); Cleitor, Ws ASeaycre, 

Sarttines, O'. “near Aeatines: my? Adadkopeveias Paus, 8. 12, 7. 

Pheneus, °™, 

Megalopolis, *¢, 1f 198; Pali 2. 46 TO Kadovpevov ’AOnvatov ev TH 
TOV bicekontll ee xopa. 

Teuthis: Paus, 8. 28, 6 éyaApa éemowuncavro ’AOnvas exov rpadpa emt 
Tov pnpov. TovTo kai aitos Td dyadpua cidov, Tehapare moppup@ Tov 
pnpov KarewWnpevor, 

Triphylia: Strabo, 343 «ai rd rijs SKudAovrtias S€ ’AOnvas iepdv 1d rept 
SKiAdovrta trav emupavar eorw. 

ama,.*,,", *, % 9. At Olympia, altars to Athena: Paus. 5. 14, 5, 
5. 14, 9, and 5. 15, 6 (8). Athena Niky, %; ’Epydvy, '°e; 
Anites, * 

Pisa, Athena Kvdwria: Paus. 6. 21, 6 év raitn TH xdpa Adhos éestiv 
avnkwv és Ofv, emt 8€ ait@ médews Hpigas épeimia, Kat "AOnvas €otw emi- 
KAnow Kvdevias vads. idpvcacba dé tH Ged 1d iepov KAvperdy pacw, 
andyovov ‘Hpaxdéous Tov “Idaiov, mapayeverbat S€ avrov amd Kudwvias ris 
Kpnrixns. 

Achaea: Triteia, 'p, *2; Patrae, “'; Pellene, ™. 


Worship on the islands. 


Thasos: C. Z. Gr. 2161, decree concerning citizenship, dvaypdyas 
dé kat 158 rh Whghiopa rods Oeipovs emi rd THs ’AOnvains iepdv, ? fourth 
century B.c. 

? Lemnos, *: cf, 1c, 

Lesbos, ™°4, 

Chios, **f, 8b, 

Samos, ". 

Euboea, at Chalcis, vide ‘Attica’: at Geraestum, Bull. de Corr. 
Fell. 1891, p. 405 év r@ iep@ ras *A@avaias. 

Ceos, 3°, 


422 GREEK RELIGION. 


Delos, 7b, 102, 14e 116i, 

Paros, *, 

Amorgos, *88, ®c¢, 

Tos, *%4, 

Anaphe, *°. 

Astypalaea: C. Z. Gr. 2485, terms of alliance with Rome, dvabeivat 
avdOnpa ev TO lepad tis ’AOnvas. 

Cos, *i, %4, 

Rhodes, “’; Lindos, *, “. Herod. 2. 182 "AvéOnxe .. . 6 “Apaons 
... 7H ev Adm *AOnvain di0 te dydApara diOwa. 

Talysus, *. 

Carpathos: worship of Athena Lindia: Bull. de Corr. Hell. 1880, 
P. 278 Gcpourmos . .. ieparevoas’A(O)dvale Ac|vdia. Lb. 1884, p. 355 
orada... dvareOavre pia pev... pia dé ev Toridaip é&v To icp ras 
*"AOdvas Tas Awéias. 

Crete, 15, 161, 88e, 228a, 

Cyprus, 7°4, 

Sicily: Himera, Diod. Sic. 5. 3 pvOodoyotow pera tis Képns .. . AOnvav 
Te kal "Aprepuy cuvtpepouevas cuvayew per aitiis ra dvOn .. . Kat Naxeiv 
ExdoTyy avtev xdpav, thy pév ’AOnvav év Tois wept ‘Iuépay pépeow. 

Agrigentum, *, 

Selinus: Roehl, Z. G. A. 515 8: tos Oeds toad vivre Tol Sedwov- 
tot... Ov "Adavaay k.T.A. 

Ithaca: Roehl, Z. G. A. 336 ras ’A@dvas ras ‘Péas kal ras “Hpas ta éreta. 

Italy. | 

Calabria, *. Cf. Strabo, 281 rods d€ Sadevrivous Kpyrév droikous gaciy’ 
evtava & éori kal rd rhs ’AOnvais iepdv mAovatsv Tore SrapEar. 

Metapontum, ”'. 

Sybaris: Herod. 5. 45 Téuevds re kat vndv edvra mapa tov énpdv Kpdoruy, 
Tov idpycacGat ouveddvra thy médAw Apia Aéyovow ’AOnvain eravip 
Kpaotin. 

Heraclea, *°4, 125, 

Luceria, “. Strabo, 284 ev ré ris ’AOnvas tepd tis év Aovxepia madaa 
(Atoundous) dvabnpara. 

Siig 

Posidonia: Roehl, 7. G. A. 542, inscription on bronze statue of 
Canephora, TaOdva :AA® Xappvdida Sexdrav. 

Rome, 1b, 1c, 121d, 

Surrentum : Strabo, 22 én’ airg 76 ropOue@ To “AOnva.or. 

Asia Minor. 

Pontus: at Athenae, Appian, Perpl. 4. 1 gore... wat ev Udvr@ ro 











Coin PLateE A 


% 











End of Vol. I 





GEOGRAPHICAL REGISTER OF ATHENA CULTS. 423 


Evfeive xwpiov ottw Kadovpevov... Kai tr Kar "AOnvas iepdv éorw 
avTos “EXAnvixdr. 

Cios, near Prusa in Bithynia: C. 7. Gr. 372 3 dvayp |a[ yar] riv mpo- 
&er| fav ravrn |v és orpAnv AcOiv| nv Kai arjoa|. rovs ie[p Jo[trouods ev TO 
tis | ’AOnvas iepa. 

Sigeum: Herod. 5. 95 ré ’A@nvaov rd ép Deyei@. 

ilium, ©, *n, 

Scepsis, 5. 

Phocaea: Paus. 7. 5, 4 dv0 8é ddXous ev "Iwvia vaods éréXaBev bd Tlep- 
gv karakavOjva, tov Te €v Saye ris “Hpas Kal ev Poxaia rhs ’AOnvas. 

Istros, **F, 

Lydia, 1°», 

Pergamon, *m, *d, 97, 

Erythrae, °k, 81, 6b, 119 1216 

Smyrna, *¢, 

Ephesus: Strabo, 634 9 5€ dds fv 1d madady mept TO A@nvacoy TO viv 
e£w THs TOAEws OV, 

Miletus, **. 

Priene, *1, 

Pedasae, near Halicarnassus : Herod. 1. 175 4 fepein tis AOnvains. 

Halicarnassus: C. 7. Gr. 2660 ’A@nvaln Sexdrnv eroingoe Makedwv 
Atovvaiov “Hpaxdewrns, ? fourth century B.c. 

Phaselis, *°°9, 

Pamphylia, °. 

Perge: C. J. Gr. 4342 b igpecav ’AOnvas (Roman period). 

Side: Strabo, 667 Kupaiwv aro:kos’ exer 5€ AOnvas leper, Cl Cal -Gr: 
4352 Avpndiov . . . emitedodvros Ocuev Tapdudcakny émiBarnprov 
(?=émdnulav) Oedv ’AOnvas kai ’AndAdovos. Cf. add. 4 353- 

Cilicia: Appian, Azad. 2. 5,9 adros d€ (Ade~avSpos) . . . €s Mayapody 
fe kal TH ’AOnva rH Mayapoid: €bvcev. 

Cyrrhestica. Athena Kuppnoris: Strabo, 751. 

Syria. Laodicea, '. 

In Spain, near Abdera: Strabo, 157 év 19 épews Setxvurar Odiccea Kab 
70 iepoy ths AOnvas év aitH, ws Tlocedauds te eipyke Kat “Aptepidwpos 





kal “AokAnmiddns. 


END OF VOL. I. 


2 
e 
= 


i) 


——, 








SS hie 











PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE 
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET 





UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY 




















Me 4 
: bese! Paine’ 7 

desley ay i a afk a tes Sete ae 

: ae ory i Wal hcty 


abe Baise 
Ass 
Gage 











j 4 ry 
. sr Ate ee atta asics iy? 
itetnn pty ern ahh shuts me } 
yz atest shale hs mph phe 
oh: 
rns 


% 
SMD Rey 
a og bey VND: Swi 
Ras figs RS aie A, 
he an ity 


[sade te aed 





Oe 
z py ¥ 4 
WR thy 5, id aba 
a ark nen Y 
HBp bye sr FD i 
fhe a aH 





a oy \ rie cee : 
i ethno 4y We 
pease Uno suaterh Gre ry ‘s up pin. 
be t 4 , 
sora a Ney atalacaon teas ; ta ae , by Pa aS 
ee “ee ne Nb he’ Fane ak & ait yes 570k ney) REEL PMN te 
ae tae ray ST 7 rd wea ftw : 




















y wy ares 
. eee ee 2 fx er hth “; ' 
Sirat : 3 ais : Mic shatae metres! 
N FAD y we). ERD P AN, NNT as SON * 
Mae MeL AP Mb NORD RIN INN) yoy FAM Arete ; usen 
NU ASW SBI AVN Bh 4 “ ae es eS, > 
Sed Dp vayh ara Nae ; og eet tr 








anys 
Wares pr bx 








eye) 

We . ‘ . Toa 
poate ia naraces pea canes Ue 

pena Res Yb es PTAA Wt NBR opie rinsen, uy 

PO SSR AGRE Ragin an 

Sates * ; ty / 

cr sts 


oished 
Hats. 
a 








vibe 
Ur ih. Pate ae 
4 4 





























ee, 
ae 


ut 
‘ 
y is Py, Meds 
me Siete “/ Se ses 
TELE In 
ee aes ap aceon f wh aah F 


a / 
ce Sythe 
vette she SECS TE ee cide aus ay ce 
bh ie RE; 
cee ee pte avo ea eh oa 
a * iis 
$3 

















} ea 
* a ‘ Agree RW ES 
PH Patan t 3 TiN we Macrae ety 
iia, , wHi. y Dey a tig Piss 
7 ee ain aE eb sts peek 
We Far Ub Ee tay yet 
2 oe gee = 
‘se bAw ee anes 


4 b 
teh ets ven 5 Yeti AN 
Haro, dpa: SPE Pea ¢ sae ee 
fosen es ’s mae rN at WEA Rr ey vei rh : 
crates: tay hetgacate. AHO R ieheipaes sf iret FINS i as ee MEN: a Bd 
i eet ptiee } A aor saa auatt ca 
PAIN APUNSE PU eNawsSt ana ate Fit Hore etek Wi AA ae He Pehle ayes 
O35 Paghasra tan Geir atid theta “PP RLY a fey ys hap eM DY APE ESF A gw) vm theg Ey ty 
nhs ie NZ PAA POP, ENE CYA VIMAR Y 
ne eh SRB SAT my id ; } 


sas etn: : rete “ans Be oranye 
be Aaah ry ee Oo te : peynrs netes eats os * ” 
beestg iets a : 
‘ ake Pasi iP Bie eencinciat : pre, 
a tee 





hy A ¥. y 
yr Ronn EY Bassadae x Me at ay 
< s daeguad ae we wa vad by r 
Dah : ahah r 
aches PSEIg 5 > : | Dina 4 Seed 
tgeu gts 


ms croied Ee 
; , Ar Rete, i ip 
cu ne ; eer gitsramces ee se ae ae 
Tamanna ba Nob Bis a orien 
tes Wi We aaapresictaeees ; sedis see 
ers Nie 








iy 





Gl 
beta ‘deus Sau 
yharbete. 
; no 
i Me i 
AAD 





Leyes hans 
fu prep ¥ baie MAS fv 
ren Rpheghs Paahaynne 
Sa POMEL, Reriaee 
RS peri D ‘ 
pr sosks 



















































































: rete tre sent 
19 RP AY Ppayssy tata 
avian fet 4s WAN bod 


, Me yivge Im IN 
2B MK hsH.y\ beter aed Wri aan on 
‘ See on ; 
Medeor ‘ z 


pe ea ee eee 
Baca 











a5 RY , Pe 
oes oe es he eee 





serie 








cal 
Br 


Poe year hy 
bate ae dab 
td i 





ey 
4 











® A S, ATHY Wot y 
aia: i Serkan oa Sauer) 

AP yr ?¥ oF AB vos ghey Se NNA) Ya Ro ta 
rs ieee a4 vit VsbD 
eee rp seer a Mot nanos 











7 ion, Ape 
roa hyd ie 





‘ whOv ray 
ip etbee Saeee Marat vere 
Media ys 
5 seransia fi eee aM AG fy 
etl KE OE ee ity 
xa A, wns ; 3 7 
at ; PES La Baty uN 
ie era ty Nats : fi 
eee Pins Saban ih Poy i ; 
ease ASS ogy Ef ASE 


a 
Pe hsz he! Be Picea 
4 aces 
su 


the 
phe 




































































wieie i 
Nie 

% ye rhb Oa apie | iP 
TEU a ee Sey Gene rh 
ai aca Aang ark 
Boh he pts NyANy. en ; iets yori 

CAR in 
ere ie pve 


fist 























shes fey 
SS: 
f Rtgs 7 


yes 



























































Cary Waa) 
A! eer. yon 
oe ane a9 bi apt, 

An aed ay 














Sa “ 
At ace) Phare ne 
ab Ra Ke eth a ae re 
phi a 
a rhe Sac) 4 





? 





























2s bh ras As MAS ES Serr Cay 
ap tae 7 ta : c Sermons ‘3 
reat al 2: JA py bet V3") 

ri 4 ike canbe ive nN Fa ERs 

5 teas PES ee arena DEW ah i = "2 abs 3 ; in 

Me - 2 Peres a Vi a tn 

PAPLAT 7 tah naar OM Ark eyes a, we 

aes as ~ 








RI ERMA ATER Sagi ot} Dg 
“« VERY A SES EN 
: TS 





























CPL iets den Y) “y oo 
i eeaparpoons BAVA tet ene roe “A hee) 
q ie Mai 5 eee Case. Fase vt Sided VAdebehy ee 
35 Mintededca are 2 * rerey Ne bA ts 10h 
tory CAVTAE i PL: Toot ~ ed i 2e 
FO deT eS ASD. phe ea ph 4 
Wider; ine eee F 7 
SY os 























Ae 
Ph, eat) ahah PSs eee 
iM if . 

An Edie hoe , bs a Be gr b : sia! ‘*} 
habe 5 APE va VEN Hp ae bas STEM Rabat mA 
FED Ur ialek Non 8 a Aah eds Ye vik 3 
i; eee aaa nt A 
w PNA Mop 


Sens mh wad aii ue 
Acts, 
ae 









































f he u 
Roe the Gators bt ioe ef ee ! mh 
Beton << Press be bee ah Risin ute 
a ere Ay . AS! MACNN a cores Jeb! 3 EN be Whey Aj bady 
wa AN J SY I f te ucts akan pot i 
oe - a¥ ATS; AB AY Tone EN Are 
ty ae 73: ae eet rary Ma 
Peay thas, een 
Sit AH pirbenved atcaane eee 
bs Nbeee wy eae 
ihe 


we 
oa ea Be vai 
zy 














vi 
cd Bush nay each ee is 
itr z % ar 
patent ahh ¥ Lx te 





nt 
Nets ae rey ae a! 
i heer 





UNS ae j 
He 














7 at . ’ La a HH. ? yw 

oF hai ob 342 aaa to As, his ue Nek yt 
%, dears Oy sa pete ak 34 

eau yA bh ra ae NC oat coe an Aves 

3 NAS 0 wt a, ney ‘xt bitghs 
oes & " st yh fen ; i i a micigt 
ere N YARN UP hee > 
Son ton cdg ™ sat, Ys 


oe 
Pee acted 
fad 























. 




















































































’ * ~ . 7 2 . vb, 2 . J t 
’ ‘ : ¥ ¢: 4 ° , , ‘ . — ’ . ¥ r. 
oy : . " ns Pe < * 7 + A ve P : 
‘ . ee 2 ‘ 4 hy Pw * & bay ’ ’ 
7 " a at , 4 . 5 ‘ wt; P ‘ 
= r . t be x 
: . < ‘ 4 a : 
. > vs . & = : . ; y San r ; “ 
; = — > , a : 
* . = \ ; a d J fs : ee : 
4 . * . , as 4 : 
. : . : : . K x a gir me tg 
bs ’ * 7 . 4 . a 4 . 
n : * < % > . - ‘ 4 
2 » ro < Pn “f ? * « 3 a : ra 
" 7 . 4 ° ' ? * \ 3 ‘a , wt 
. . ys ; ‘ > ss ; a ‘ Z ‘ 
m " . at ap Fy f P c t 
te 2 orn thy ™ . 3 os “ 2 ih a, ~ wo 
* by : » “ ‘ he > z a ‘ an Oe . 
n . i : é - : F , ‘ 
n bi 4 5 od bs 5 . “ ®t 
> . oy F * ” f ® . 4 w 
" ’ . . : —_" 5 ‘ ’ % be P S % 
7 ., = : ‘ 4 q e ° 3 whe, ~ ae 
" % . > = ; hie os . ey < * 
yy ‘ ‘ 7 " r a ¥ p ¥ y % > * . 
| = i «eee Bod . % 5 * « * 1 
: x \ 7 rs P , ; 
‘ ‘ ‘ A =» ; : i : 
2 * * < ‘ 3 oe . m * 
. ’ u ay 4 . , - pw ast 
tes, be r x - . ae * ° ae < ¥ “a os : —_, Pad ye j % e 
2 Y y . ’ . ors - = . » * ¥ . ‘ és ; ¥ fy ~ * : ‘ - v p ol 
; * a ‘ B ; o % * , 
. be ’ = 2 & ~ ax y tial $ & 9 7 A te Pt ‘ , 
*> t ha ? ¥ ¥ > * . 
1 . : . . 4 ; « . .@ . * . 7 g ‘we te x 
te x ‘ ? 5 . « : 2% . ; ; = 
" N ‘ ry . % P i F 
oy ‘ : s ‘ ’ S , bl “ 
i 2 ® 4 . % $ wt ". « ¥ . x * 
* ». - = : ike iy J - P ait i s ¥ ‘ 
a : . ; ‘ , P y - 
* . < . , P * . " a 
=P. e + . we 
- 5 2 w) > Sis. : va F ye i 
. ‘ oh x Shee é x * pr "3 ; 
f 2 e = pa ‘ 7 A a 
. & : whe ; "4 & " 4 * ¥ Py & ‘e 
\ - ‘ ‘ S a % 4 % * » < 
‘. ak . 7 4 , - , ¥ + 4 ay an 
: P y : a" % 
i « : ¥ . 
vv, " i & re 
: ‘ ‘ ° ‘ A ud “< ~ - ~ wip 
= - oe ‘ 4 ” £ PS “ A oy Po ‘ x : ¢ 
> . . . » z r n ‘ 
< > : “ " * . Me y . 2 . . 3 % ae 
4 ‘ b ™ 2 % . 3 é # at 
“ . x ‘ £ . ao ¥ “ , 
oo . Fea 5 f - 
™ * . ¥ * : a 3 5 4 . 
° ‘ 7 ; \ ah wr gs : 
: ; : Sto > 3 ‘ ‘ f ye P ‘ 
” 7 = , @ 3 * Ps wf if F 
2, 4 ; " 4 »  o é 4 ... * 
= : * 2 = . ? . » . kre a : ‘ y 
y ’ ~ 2 Ps ‘ 3 ; J F’ “ e rt * ay a > t : 2 
ss = mh “ 5 he ot % : . ‘ Fe , 
: * . % “ ~ . 4 *: os z » * 
S é a : x 3 ‘ 2 ie ‘ © 
. 4 i 2 > . 
re > ¥ f . “ . ; * , ‘ ; ; 
= < : 7 s. St a : ? 
pS i : s 7 * ’ ‘ Pail - ‘ ¥ sf 1 
’ . — . rs “x . a 7 og i ‘ 2 : * i ie 
oa * % = ie, . % a on . a * wai - ‘ : 
‘ ‘ « * * Se S 45m ¢ % bas we r 
> ’ ‘ : “? . ? ‘ = . . . 
: . " 3 ki i “% 9 ’ ¢ 
he . 7 > q vi 4 43 F 7 a A 
4 ‘ : i, <4 me . * hes ~ je ae s i 
. % ‘ " > ts x ” ge ¥ oe, Et 
2 ~ ° - $ . : ; < * 3 d F, ne 
& » “ r rd - ‘ - . * - 
. a ’ i - » tae , © = * 
i % ¥ = . ” , y ‘ 4 . ad ei agi® 
t X . F i 
* b: © a : m , 7 
er 3 z " ¢ s ‘ mete A , rs we 
" - q 2 f 4 % 4 é en E 
. “ " % > a 4 
e OF ™ ae a 4 tg 2 - ord 
“ : : ef ¢ % : 
é 5 . z ". & 4 ei ' 
* > : . . a ve 5s : 
hee ; nag ae ar tee 
Bw ® 2 A z P 2 - v = 2 > r e ~ er * 
b ‘ : if pn 4" LS } me Se . 
‘ : . é 5 > s a 
- pa a F ‘ 
g <= ne “a a bose . ay ol , 
“om gt ae cr - a we, ot 
. —— * s ee ose e pr sheen $ 
Se we saree nd Tr ar - ‘ z coat 7 Or Sea. sill 
. ee ‘ pw ; or at gee 
&. - 4 . a ww > ‘s ~ feed J 
= ge eee, . . - e . ‘ a 5 es : 
2 “S « ; a ne Pe 
: ee “ . ‘ : : “ 5 
= Po . 7 ° - a ‘