Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros33Chronique des activités scientifi...Epigraphic BulletinEpigraphic Bulletin for Greek Rel...

Chronique des activités scientifiques
Epigraphic Bulletin

Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion 2017 (EBGR 2017)

Angelos Chaniotis
p. 203-242

Texte intégral

In memory of Jean-Louis Ferarry

1The 30th issue of the EBGR was written under difficult circumstances. Because of new heavy administrative duties and the obligation to publish a large group of inscriptions from Aphrodisias I could not dedicate to the EBGR the time that this task usually requires; the lockdown of academic institutions and their libraries has also presented a challenge. Therefore, this issue presents only a portion of the epigraphic corpora, new epigraphic finds published in 2017, and other epigraphic publications; but there are also some additions to earlier issues of the EBGR (2009–2016). I hope to be able to cover the gaps in the future. The work of our colleagues who prepare the Année Épigraphique, the Bulletin épigraphique and the Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum is always of great assistance, and now a new epigraphic bulletin, the Inscriptiones Asiae Minoris, published since 2018 in the Acta Classica Mediterranea by H.S. Öztürk and H. Şahin, provides information on Turkish publications that I would have otherwise missed.

2In this issue, I summarize the content of new corpora and large epigraphic collections from Athens (32), Lydia (68), Hierapolis in Phrygia (90 and 91), and Kyrene and Kyrenaike (41). There are a few new cult regulations, an Archaic regulation from Olympia concerning the cult of Kronos (98), an unpublished text from Iasos with a reference to τὰ ἔνθρυπτα (21), and a purity regulation from Thyateira (68). The newly published inscriptions include several significant texts, such as a metrical inscription from Halos that lists mythical figures associated with Thessaly and legendary migrations (54), an inscription from Rhodes that provides information on cult associations in the Rhodian countryside (50), a dossier of texts concerning honors for a Pergamene statesman instructed by Apollo, including the composition of a hymn in his honor (73), an inscription from Halikarnassos that attests the introduction of the cult of Artemis Leukophryene and several priesthoods (27), metrical oracles of Apollo Didymaios (68), a funerary inscription from Charakipolis that attests the deification of deceased individuals by members of their family (68), and numerous funerary endowments from Hierapolis (90). Records of divine punishment from Asia Minor are extremely important sources for the religious mentality of the Imperial period; a significant number of such texts from Lydia has now become available (68). A metrical dedication from Kyrene shows that viewing gladiatorial combats and the shedding of blood was a cause of pollution for the sanctuary of Apollo (41). Another inscription from Kyrene now links revenues from the sale of puppies (for purification rituals?) with the sanctuary of Apollo (41). According to an inscription from Lissos (Crete), the Cretans established monthly prayers for the child-begetting of Tiberius (14). The recently published epigrams from Thebes that refer to the discovery and rededication of votives dedicated to Amphiaraos for Kroisos continue to attract a lot of attention, because of their significance both for the cult of Amphiaraos and for the reliability of Herodotos (87. 104. 105). Finally, an inscribed kylix from the Athenian Acropolis (112) tells the adventures of an object originally dedicated to Athena, damaged during the sack of the Acropolis by the Persians, used by the workers of the Parthenon, and dropped by accident to be discovered 2500 years later. I also note the hitherto unattested term σεβαστοβάφοι (56), the expression ἱερεὺς πολιτικός in an inscription from Macedonia (12), and unusual imprecation formulas (6)

3The principles explained in Kernos 4 (1991), p. 287–288, and Kernos 7 (1994), p. 287, also apply to this issue. For periodicals, I use the abbreviations of L’Année Philologique, for epigraphic publications those recommended by the Association Internationale de l’Épigraphie Grecque et Latine (https://www.aiegl.org/​newsreader/​grepiabbr.html). A few additional abbreviations are listed below. If not otherwise specified, dates are BCE. I am grateful to Eric Hensley (NYU) for proofreading and improving the English text.

Abbreviations

AENAig

P. Triantaphyllidis (ed.), Τὸ Ἀρχαιολογικὸ Ἔργο στὰ Νησιὰ τοῦ Αἰγαίου. Διεθνές Ἐπιστημονικὸ Συνέδριο, Ρόδος, 27 Νοεμβρίου – 1 Δεκεμβρίου 2013, Mytilini, 2017.

IAM 2018

H.S. Öztürk and H. Şahin, “Inscriptions of Asia Minor 2018”, in Acta Classica Mediterranea 1 (2018), p. 80–216.

KST 38

38. Kazı Sonuçlari Toplantısı, 23–27 mayis 2016, Edirne, Ankara, 2017.

Scritti – Alfieri Tonini

S. Struffolino (ed.), Ἡμέτερα γράμματα. Scritti di epigrafia greca offerti a Teresa Alfieri Tonini (Aristonothos 12), Milan, 2016.

Selected Topics

Geographical areas (in the sequence adopted by SEG)

4Attica: Athens: 23–24. 32. 38. 40. 53. 57. 78. 100. 111–112. Argolis: Argos: 74. Kleonaia: Nemea: 113. Lakonia: 66. Eleia: Olympia: 98. Boiotia: 31; Oropos: 92; Thebes: 87. 104–105. Phokis: Elateia: 94. Thessaly: Halos: 54; Pharsalos: 114. Epeiros: Kassope: 42. Macedonia: 12. 60; Amphipolis: 76–77; Idemene: 99; Stobi: 18; Thessalonike: 75. Thrace: Kabyle: 97; Maroneia: 60. Moesia Inferior: Durostorum: 37; Tomis: 9–10; Zaldapa: 34. Dacia: 72. North Shore of the Black Sea: 101; Olbia: 16–17. 59. Rhodes: 50; Lindos: 50. Lesbos: 93. Kalymnos: 22. Kythnos: 4. Naxos: 82. Paros: 83. Chios: 26. Thasos: 60. Crete: Lissos: 13–14. Sicily: Gela: 115; Segesta: 39. Moesia Superior: 62; Viminacium: 48. Gallia: 36. Karia: Halikarnassos: 27; Iasos: 21; Kaunos: 69. 95; Mylasa: 58; Stratonikeia: 109; Tripolis: 52. Ionia: Ephesos: 51. 55–56; Klaros: 25; Metropolis: 11; Miletos: 33. 43–45; Smyrna: 107; Teos: 71. Lydia: 3. 68; Maionia: 68; Philadelphia: 103; Saittai: 106; Thyateira: 68. Mysia: Apollonia on the Rhyndakos: 15; Pergamon: 73. 89. Bithynia: Nikaia: 1. 2. 79; Nikomedeia: 1. 7. Galatia: 72; Ankyra: 20. Phrygia: Hierapolis: 35. 90–91. Pisidia: Kremna: 46; Pogla: 85. Pamphylia: Lyrboton kome: 81. Lykia: Olympos: 80; Patara: 116; Phaselis: 108; Xanthos: 110. Isauria: 6. Kilikia: 65; Elaioussa Sebaste: 19; Pompeiopolis: 102. Kappadokia: 8. 30. 61. Syria: 5. Jordan: Gerasa: 49. Egypt: Saqqâra: 88. Kyrene: 41

5acclamation: 42

6account: 83

7afterlife: 63. 68. 73. 103

8altar: 1. 8. 19. 29. 41. 52. 61. 68. 72. 80. 81. 110

9amphiktyony, of Delphi: 94

10amulet: 5. 36. 37. 62–63. 96

11anatomical votive: 68

12angel: 28. 68

13animals: piglet: 68; puppies (sale by sanctuary): 41

14association: 56; cult a.: 50. 52. 68. 83. 106

15banquet: 68; funerary: 90

16basin, lustral: 41. 110

17burial: 68. 90; burial club: 106

18‘confession inscription’: 68

19crown, of priest: 41; crowning of grave: 90

20cult, introduction of: 27. 72. 89; cf. s.v. funerary cult, imperial cult, ruler cult

21cult personnel: agonothetes: 55. 76. 90; archiereia: 103; archiereus, of the civic imperial cult: 76. 90. 91; of the provincial imperial cult in Asia: 91; areter: 41; diakonos: 11; hermas: 11; hiereia: 11. 26–27. 68. 90; hiereus: 5. 11. 41. 49. 52. 68. 85; hiereus politikos: 12; hiereus pro poleos: 68; hieronomos: 68; hierophylax: 39; hieros: 68; hierotamias: 109; hymnodos: 56. 68; kleidouchos: 68; lampadarches: 56; neokoros: 68; neopoioi: 68; prophetes: 68; semeiaphoros: 90; symbolaphoros: 68; theokolos: 98; cult personnel serving for life: 55. 90

22cult regulation: 21. 26. 41. 68. 74. 98

23curse: 16. 58. 71. 78; curse tablet: 17. 23–24. 31. 38. 78. 101. 115; cf. s.v. funerary imprecation

24death: 27. 68; deification after death: 68

25dedication: 32; damaged and reused: 112; found: 87. 104–105; rededicated: 87. 104–105; stolen: 87. 104–105

26dedication, by crew of a ship: 19; by Kroisos: 87. 104–105; by priest: 9. 11. 68. 85; by priest upon entry in office: 109; by former priest: 15; by soldier: 49. 81. 97. 99

27dedication, of anatomical votive: 68; of child: 68; of footprint: 85; of incense-burner: 68; of tithe: 22. 41. 108; of weapon: 81. 87. 104–105; paid from revenues of sanctuary: 41

28dedication, after a military victory: 8; for recovery from illness: 68; for rescue: 1. 68; for well-being: 29. 64. 68. 97; for well-being of emperor: 49; for the well-being of a mule: 68; in expression of gratitude: 9. 29. 34. 68. 97; in fuflillment of a vow: 18. 29. 35. 44–46. 64. 65. 67–68. 84. 99. 103; in response to oracle: 68. 85; upon divine command: 5. 29; upon dream: 29. 32. 68. 92. 103; upon vision: 54

29deification of deceased family members: 68

30deities: Aion: 7. Amphiaraos: 87. 92. 104–105. Aphrodite: 20. 41. 43–45. 68; Pandemos: 100. Apollo: 22. 25. 32. 33. 41. 68–69. 90. 93; Apotropaios: 40; Archegetes: 90; Delios: 50; Didymaios: 68; Ismenios: 87. 104–105; Tyritas: 66. Ares: 8. 20. Artemis: 41. 68. 111; Ephesia: 85; Kalliste: 32; Kombike: 110; Leukophryene: 27; Soteira: 32. Asklepios: 13. 32. 50. 89. 97. Athena: 6. 32. 58. 61. 82. 94. 95. 112; Polias: 74. 108. Demeter: 1. 41. 54. 83. Dionysos: 12. 52. 68; pro poleos: 68. Eileithyia: 26. 100. Elpides: 33. Enyalios: 8. Erinyes: 24. Eudotes: 64. Hekate: 3. 68. Helios: 20. 68. Hephaistos: 66. 80. Hera: 15. Herakles: 86. 99; Kallinikos 116: Kyrios: 9; Soter: 42. Hermes: 10. 20. 24. 41. 68; Agonios: 116; Eriounios: 38. Hestia: 95. Hosios kai Dikaios: 68. Hygieia: 92. 97. Kerdos: 97. Kore: 1. 65. Kronos: 20. 98. Mene: 68. Mes: 5. 65. 68; Tiamou: 68. Meter: 29. Meter Menos: 68. Meter Oreia: 46. Meter Theon: 29. 68. Moirai: 24. Nemesis: 27. 35. 68. Nymphs: 48. 49. 114. Pantes Theoi: 1. Parthenos: 27. Persephone: 24. Plouton: 24. 65; Eudotes: 64. Poseidon: 50. Selene: 6, 20. Telete: 68. Thea Rhome: 49. Theion: 68. Theoi Katachthonioi: 68. Theoi Patroioi: 116. Theos Hypsistos: 68. Tyche: 5; Agathe Tyche: 49; Basilissa: 79. Zeus: 5. 20. 41. 68. 113; Aerios 68; Agathios: 79; Amalos: 50; Basilikos: 102; Karios: 109; Keraunios: 68. Meilichios: 32; Polieus: 57; Soter: 15. 41. 50. 83. 107

31deities, Anatolian: Agdistis: 29; Apollo Axyreos: 68; Apollo Kissauloddenos: 68; Apollo Nazileus: 68; Apollo Syrmaios: 68; Iupiter Optimus Maximus Dolichenus: 97; Mes Axiottenos: 5. 68; Mes Petraites: 68; Meter Menos: 68; Meter Tazene: 68; Prietos: 1; Sorapsitos: 6; Thea Larmene: 68; Thea Manetene: 29; Thea Philis: 68; Theos Aularchenos: 97; Zeus Dalenos: 84; Zeus Drymon: 81; Zeus Erosenos: 72; Zeus Heptakomikos: 72; Zeus Kananeirenos: 68; Zeus Krezimos 11; Zeus Maspalatenos: 68; Zeus Poteo: 68; Zeus Touromasgadis: 19; Dalmatian: Aptus: 48 Egyptian: Isis: 18. 27. 41. 47; Sarapis: 64; Iranian: Artemis Anaitis: 68; Roman: Iupiter Optimus Maximus: 48; Iupiter Optimus Maximus Tutor: 79; Silvanus: 84; Syrian: Zeus Heliopolites: 5; Thracian: Apollo Kendrisos: 97; Apollo Tadenos: 97; Dinithias: 34; Zeus Zbelthiourdos: 97

32deities, intervention in politics: 73; patron of fertility: 1; planetary: 20; river-god: 68; cf. s.v. divine punishment, personification

33disease: 36. 68; as punishment: 68

34divine punishment: 6. 68

35dream, epiphanic: 29. 32. 68. 92. 103

36ear, of god in relief: 18. 44–45. 67

37endowment: 2. 49. 55. 58. 68. 90

38festival, funding of: 55. 68. 90

39festival, agonistic: 90; Dionysia: 71 (Teos); Hadrianeia: 51 (Ephesos); Nemea: 113; Olympia: 55 (Ephesos); Oualentea: 90 (Hierapolis); Pythia: 94 (Delphi)

40festival: 91. 98: Boukopia: 50; Panathenais: 53; Theodaisia: 50

41finances, sacred: 69. 83. 90. 109

42food offering: 21 (enthrypta)

43footprint, of deity: 85

44foundation, funerary: 58

45funerary cult: 1. 58. 90; endowment: 2; foundation: 58; imprecation: 5. 30. 65

46gem: 28. 47

47gladiatorial combat: 41. 91

48grave, protection of: 58. 80. 90

49grove: 58

50gymnasion: 116

51healing: 65. 68

52health: 5. 47. 68

53herm: 100

54hero: 54; Oxylos: 42; Propylaioi: 68; Sases: 97

55homicide: 68

56hope: 68

57hymn: 33. 68; for mortal man: 73

58identity, and myth: 42. 54

59imperial cult: 14. 15. 49. 52. 56. 59. 68. 76–77. 80. 91. Herakles; emperor identified with god: 15 (Hadrian-Zeus; Sabina-Hera)

60incantation: 78. 115

61incense: 68

62incubation: 92

63Jews: 90. 92

64lamp: 88

65libation: 10. 107

66magic: 5. 16. 23. 28. 36. 37. 47. 62. 96. 101. 115; backward writing: 101

67manumission: 13. 92

68medicine: 36

69mystery cult: 68

70myth: 42. 54

71oath: 71

72oracle: 33. 68. 73. 85. 87. 104–105; metrical: 25. 68. 73

73‘Pantheos’: 37

74perirrhanterion: see s.v. basin

75perjury 68. 71

76personifications: Aion 7; Gerousia: 27. 90; Kerdos: 97

77pollution: 41. 68

78prayer: 10. 68; addressed from the grave: 1; prayer for justice: 24. 31

79priesthood: 26; ateleia for p.: 71; crown of priest: 41 families of priests: 27; for life: 27. 68; hereditary: 68. 85; iteration: 27; payment of summa honoraria: 49; perquisites: 26; sale of p.: 21; unmarried priestess: 27

80purification: 41. 68

81purity: 68

82ritual: see s.v. funerary cult, hymn, libation, prayer, rosalia, sacrifice, song

83rosalia: 1. 2

84ruler cult: 60

85sacrifice: 14. 26. 33. 50. 58. 68. 71. 98; consumption of meat on the spot: 26; funding of s.: 41. 58. 68. 90; of castrated animal: 26; song as s.: 33

86sanctuary, boundary stone of: 68. 82–83; recipient of fine: 80. 90; revenues: 109; revenues from the sale of puppies: 41

87slavery: 92

88song: 33

89statue: 1. 15. 22. 68. Herakles; offerings placed in the hands of s.: 26; touching of s.: 68; xoanon: 100

90table for offerings: 68. 111

91tribe: Augustiana: 91; Hiera 1

92virginiy: 27. 68

93vow: 18. 29. 35. 44–46. 64. 65. 67–68. 84. 99. 103

94war, epiphany in: 42

Greek Words (a selection)

95afterlife: ἀποθεόω 68; ἡρωΐς 1

96association: ἀρχιφράτωρ 68; θιασεῖται 52; θυσιασταί τῶν Καισαρήων 68; Καλόκαιροι 68; σεβαστοβάφοι 56; φιλόκαισαρ φρατρία 68

97cult: θρησκεία 68

98cult objects: θυμίατρα 68; θυμίητρον 68; τράπεζα 68

99cult personnel: ἀρητήρ 41; θεσπιστάς 105?; ἱερεὺς πολιτικός 12; κλειδοῦχος 68; ὁσίων πρέσβυς 94; σημιαφόροι 90

100curse: ἀξιῶ καὶ δέομαι 31; ἀπόλοιτο ἄρρητος καὶ ἄφυλος 6; δήσω τὸγ γ᾽ ἐμὸν ἐχθρὸν ἐν αἵματι καὶ κονίαισιν | σὺμ πᾶσιμ φθιμένοις 78; καταγράφω 24. 31; κατάρατος 58; κατορύσσω 101; παρακατίθημι 31

101dedications: ἀκουσθεῖσα 68; ἀνάθεμα 61; ἀπὸ αὐτομάτου ἰδών 54; δεκάτα 22. 41. 108; δῶρον 68; εὐλογοῦσα 68; εὐξαμένος/η 68. 97. 104. 108; εὐχαριστήριον 29. 34. 97; εὐχαριστῶ 68; εὐχήν 18. 29. 35. 44–46. 64. 65. 67–68. 84. 103; εὐχαριστῶν/οῦσα 68; εὐχὴν ἀπέδωκα 68. 69; εὐχῆς χάριν 102; εὐχωλῆς χάριν 68; θεραπευθείς 68; κατ᾿ εὐχήν 99; κατὰ τὴν κέλευσιν τοῦ ἁγίου ἀγγέλου 68; κατὰ τὴν τῆς θεοῦ πρόνοιαν 68; κατ᾿ ἐπιταγήν 29. 68. 86; κατ᾿ ὄναρ 29. 32; κατ᾿ ὄνειρον 103; κατὰ παράστασιν 68; κατὰ χρηματισμόν 85; ὑπὲρ ὁλοκληρίας 68; ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας 1. 49. 68; χαριστήρια 68; χαριστήριον 9. 68; ὡς ἐκέλευσεν 5

102divine punishment: ἀπειθέω 68; ἀρνοῦμαι τὴν θεόν 68; δείκνυμι τὰς δυνάμεις 68; δύναμις 68; ἐγλυτρόω 68; εἱλάσκομαι 68; ἐπιζητέω 68; εὐλογῶ καὶ εὐχαριστῶ 68; θυμολητέω 68; ἱκανοποιέω 68; κολάζω/ομαι 68; λύτρα 68; λύω 68; μαρτυρῶ τὰς δυνάμεις 68; ὁμολογέω 68; παρελκύω 68; στηλογραφέω 68

103epiphany: παρέστη ἐν τῷ ὕπνῳ 68

104epithets (a selection): ἀγάθιος 79 (Zeus); ἅγιος 68 (angelos); ἀγώνιος (Herakles); ἄναξ 68. 87. 105 (Apollo); ἀποτρόπαιος 40 (Apollo); ἀρχηγέτης 90 (Apollo); βασιλικός 102 (Zeus); βασίλισσα 79 (Tyche); δέσποινα 24 (Hekate); ἐπήκοος 54 (Artemis), 68 (Artemis Anaitis), 85 (Artemis Ephesia?), 86 (Herakles), 79 (Zeus); ἐπιφανές 68 (Theion); ἑρπετοφάγος 24 (Hekate); εὐδώτης 64; εὐείλατος 10 (Hermes); καλλίνικος 116 (Herakles); καλλίστη 32 (Artemis); καταχθονία 24 (Hekate); κεραύνιος 68 (Zeus); κερδοποιός 10 (Hermes); κρατερόφρων 8 (Enyalios); κράτιστος 79 (Zeus); κύριος 9 (Herakles); μέγα 68 (Theion); μεγάλη 68 (Meter Menos). 103; μέγας 11 (Zeus). 68 (Mes); μέγιστος 79 (Zeus); μειλίχιος 32 (Zeus); μήτηρ 68 (Anaitis), cf. supra s.v. deities; μονοπρόσωπος 24 (Hekate); νεικαφόρος 8 (Ares); οὐρανία 24 (Hekate); παρακλητήρ 68 (Apollo); πατρῶιοι 116 (Theoi); πολιεύς 57 (Zeus); προεστώς 68; προκαθημένη 68 (Artemis Anaitis); πρὸ πόλεως 68 (Dionysos); προπύλαιοι 68 (heroes); σώζων 97 (Apollo); σώτειρα 32. 54 (Artemis); σωτήρ 77 (Augustus), 42 (Herakles), 15. 41. 50. 83. 107 (Zeus). 80 (Nero?, Domitian?); τριοδεῖτις 24 (Hekate); τριπρόσωπος 24 (Hekate); φροντιστής 79 (Zeus)

105festival: ἡμέραι ἔντειμοι 14; θεωρία 91

106funerary cult: ἀποκαυσμός 90; ἀποκαυσμὸς τῶν παπῶν 90; ῥοδίζω/ομαι 1–2; στεφανωτικόν 90

107magic: ἅγιος, ἅγιος, ἅγιος, ἅγιος 96; διάκονος 24; Ιαω 5; καρδιοτομέω 24; καταγράφω 24. 31; κατατίθημι 24; Κύριε βοήθι 5; μεσάνγελοι 28; πρωτάνγελοι 28; σφραγὶς Θεοῦ 5; σφραγὶς Σολομῶνος 96; τελεάνγελοι 28

108purity: ἁγνείη 41; ἁγνεύεται 68; καταλούω 68; λούομαι 68

109rituals: βουκόπιον 50; τελεσφορία 41

110sacrifice, bloodless offerings: γλῶσσα 26; δίκρεα 26; ἐκτόμιος 26; ἔνθρυπτα 21; θυηλαί 68; θυηπολίη 68; σπλάγχνα 26

111sanctuaries; ἄβατον 57; λυχνάπτιον 88

1121) M. Adak, “Weitere epigraphische Denkmäler im Museum von Adapazarı, Philia 3 (2017), p. 49–68 [BE 2018, 444–445]: Ed. pr. of inscriptions from the territories of Nikomedeia and Nikaia in the Museum of Adapazari (2nd/3rd cent.). Nikomedeia: 1) P. Aelius Severiuanus dedicated an altar and statues to Demeter and Kore for his rescue and that of his sons. 2) An anonymous dedicant dedicated an altar to Demeter, Kore and all gods and goddesses for the rescue (ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας) of Puplius Catullianus Straton [Straton was a Roman citizen (contra A.); Κατυλλιανός is not attested as a nomen gentile, but cf. Catullienus (Solin-Salomies, Repertorium, p. 50); for dedications to ‘all gods and goddesses’ in the Imperial period see F. Jacobi, Πάντες θεοί, Halle, 1931, 48–61]. 3) Timokrates erected a statue of Theos Prietos (Θε̣ὸ̣ν̣ Πρ̣ε̣ί̣ε̣τον κατέκτισα καὶ ἀνέστησα) together with an altar as a gift to the tribe Hiera and the gods (καθιέρωσα φυλῇ ἱερᾷ, θεοῖς). Preietos was regarded as a patron of fertility; the tribe Hiera was already attested (TAM IV 258). 11) An epitaph commemorates a heroized 15-year old girl (νύμφη ἡρωΐς) who died thirty days after her wedding. 15) The fragmentary epitaph TAM IV 89 probably refers to the funerary rite of the rosalia (line 2f.: [ῥοδί]|ζ̣εσθαί μοι); cf. infra no. 2. [This is certain. [Βού]λομαι (line 1) clearly suggests an endowment; κατὰ ἔτος refers to an annual ritual (line 4).] Nikaia (Pamukova): 19) An interesting grave epigram presents the deceased man praying from his grave that his three sons flourish (εὐξάμενος τούτους ἐπὶ γῆς αὔξεσθαι ἀταρβεῖς) [for a blessing for one’s children from the grave cf. EBGR 2002, 54 (on Peek, GVI 1875)].

1132) M. Adak and H.S. Öztürk, “Eine neue ῥοδισμός-Inschrift aus dem Hinterland von Nikaia”, Philia 3 (2017), p. 44–48 [BE 2018, 445]: Ed. pr. of an epitaph from the village of the Geoupenanoi (territory of Nikaia, 3rd cent. CE). The deceased man endowed to his village two vineyards and an uncultivated plot, under the condition that the village uses the revenues to perform the ritual of the rosalia for the deceased, his family, and his foster child (ἅπερ προσοδεύοντε πρὸς τὸ ῥοδίζειν αὐτούς).

1143) E. Akyürek Şahin, “The Cult of Hecate in Lydia: Evidence from the Manisa Museum”, Gephyra 13 (2016), p. 1–48: The author assembles epigraphic, numismatic, and iconographical evidence for the cult of Hekate in Lydia (mainly hekateia and reliefs): Philadelphia, Maionia, Satala, Thyateira, and Kollyda. There are a few inscriptions, all published (TAM V.1.523 = 6; TAM V.1.367 = 16; SEG XLIX 1554 = 8; IGR IV 621 = 18; uncertain: I.Ephesos 3228 = Va; I.Mus.Manisa 161 = Vb).

1154) A. Alexandridou et al., “Pottery and Clay Figurines from the Sanctuary of Kythnos”, in A. Mazarakis Ainian (ed.), Les Sanctuaires archaïques des Cyclades, Rennes, 2017, p. 135–192: The finds from a sanctuary at the site Vryokastro on Kythnos include fragments of Attic pottery studied by A. Alexandridou and D. Paleotheodoros (p. 149–159). Three Attic black-glazed shapes bear the graffito ἱερά inscribed after firing. A.‑P. regard this as a plural form and interpret the inscriptions as dedicatory and not a text that designate the vases as part of the ceremonial equipment of the sanctuary (as suggested by A. Mazarakis Ainian, in C. Prêtre [ed.], Le donateur, l’offrande et la déesse. Systèmes votifs dans les sanctuaires de déesses du monde grec, Liège, 2009, p. 290). [Ἱερά is not plural, but feminine; cf. IG II2 1492 A lines 60–61: οἰνοχόη ἀργυρὰ [ἐφ ἧι ἐπιγέγραπται] ἱερὰ Ἀθηνᾶς; these vases were the property of a goddess.]

1165) J. Aliquot and J.‑B. Yon, “Inscriptions grecques et latines du musée de l’American University of Beirut”, Berytus 56 (2016), p. 149–200: A. and Y. (re)publish 126 inscriptions, mostly from Syria, now in the Museum of the American University of Beirut; the inedita are marked with an asterisk. Dedications: to Mes Artemidorou Ἀξιοττα κατέχων (112, Lydia), the Tyche of Petra (4, Berytos), Zeus Heliopolites for the well-being of the emperors (2, Afqa), Iupiter Optimus Maximus Heliopolitanus (3 and 11, Berytos), and Zeus (103, Baalbek). Cult personnel: A building was erected in a village during the priesthood of Nasieos, possibly upon divine command ([ὡς] ἐκέλε[υσεν?]; 107, Anti-Lebanon). Magic: 4 amulets of unknown provenances with the texts Ιαω (*121), σφραγὶς Θεοῦ (*122), ὑγία (*123), and a prayer for the protection of a Jewish woman (124; Κύριε βοήθι Σαλόμῃ…; the verb πινῶ, ‘I am hungry’, is written on the reverse, next to the representation of a bird eating a snake).

1176) M. Alkan and M. Kurt, Asağı Akın. Isauria Bölgesi’nde Bir Kale Yerleşimi, Istanbul, 2017: Ed. pr. of an epitaph from Asağı Akın in Isauria (p. 10–14, Imperial period). The text ends with an unusual funerary imprecation: ἀπόλοιτο ἄρριτος καὶ ἄφυλος καὶ κεχολωμένο[ς] Σοραψ̣ιτος καὶ Σελήνης καὶ Ἀθηνᾶς ἱ[ε]ρ[ᾶ]ς̣ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων θεῶν τύχοιτο [‘may he perish unspoken of and without a tribe, and may he draw the anger of Sorapsitos?, Selene, the sacred Athena, and the other gods upon him’].

1187) N. Atik, “Kocaeli Müzesi’nde Bulunan Korkuluk Babaları”, in H. Selvi, B. Çelik et al. (eds.), Uluslararası Gazi Süleyman Paşa ve Kocaeli Tarihi Sempozyumu III, Kocaeli, 2017, p. 261–282: Ed. pr. of a marble statue of a young male figure identified by a label as Aion (p. 282, Nikomedeia, ca. 200 CE).

1198) F. Avcu, “Nevşehir Müzesi’nde Yeni Yazıtlar”, in A.V. Çelgin et al. (eds.), Eskiçağ Yazıları 11, Istanbul, 2017, p. 113–126: Ed. pr. of an altar of unknown provenance in Kappadokia, now in the Archaeological Mueum of Nevşehir (3rd cent. CE). Sabinos dedicated the altar to Ares/Enyalios: Βωμὸν Ἐνυαλίῳ κρατερόφρονι θῆκα Σαβεῖνος, νείκης εἵνεκ᾿ ἑμεῖο κλυτῆς· Ἄρει νεικαφόρῳ [‘I, Sabinus, set up the altar for stout-hearted Enyalios, for Ares, who brings victory, for my glorious victory’. The dedicatory epigram probably commemorated the victory of a local military official (eirenarches?) over bandits.].

1209) A. Avram, “Sur quelques inscriptions possiblement tomitaines”, in G.R. Tsetskhladze, A. Avram, and J. Hargrave (eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress on Black Sea Antiquities (Belgrade, 17–21 September 2013), Oxford, 2015, p. 183–188: A. presents an improved edition of a dedication to Theos Kyrios Herakles, as χαριστήριον by two priests (I.Capidava 272, 2nd cent. CE) and attributes it to Tomis.

12110) A. Avram, C. Chera, and V. Lungu, “Deux inscriptions céramiques de Tomis”, in Studia Classica Serdicensia V. Monuments and Texts in Antiquity and Beyond. Essays for the Centenary of Georgi Mihailov (1915–1991), Sofia, 2016, p. 27–32: Ed. pr. of a skyphos found in a cemetery in Tomis (ca. 100–50 BCE). A prayer addressed to Hermes was inscribed on the exterior before firing: Ἑρμῆς ὁ κερδοποιὸς | Φιλίσσκῳ εὐείλατος | ἐφ᾿ ἔτους (‘may Hermes, who brings profit, be merciful towards Philiskos all year long’). Hermes’ epithet is unattested (cf. κερδέμπορος and the Latin lucrorum potens). [The vase was probably used for libations to Hermes.]

12211) S. Aybek, O. Gülbay, B. Arslan, and Y. Balım, “Metropolis Arkeolojik Araştırmaları, 2015”, KST 38.1 (2017), p. 439–456: The authors present two recent finds from Metropolis (1st cent. CE). 1) An inscribed column drum with a list of cult personnel in the service of Great Zeus Krezimos (Metropolis, 1st cent. CE; p. 443/444) [because of a typographical mistake, the Greek text is misrepresented with a mixture of Latin letters and signs; the text is reconstructed in IAM 2018, 097. I reproduce this text, but with two changes: lines 3f.: [ἱέρει]|α (not [ἱερέ]|α); lines 4f.: no comma after Ἑρμᾶς; this is an office held by Apollonios, not a name; cf. I.Ephesos 3414 line 7 and 3415 line 6; lines 7f.: διάκον[οι Πρι]|μιγένης, Ῥοῦφ[ος] (not διάκων[ος Πρι]|μιγένης Ῥούφ[ου]); since most relevant texts list more than one diakonos (I.Ephesos 3414–3416a), it is more likely that we have two individuals; only I.Ephesos 3416a line 8 has one διάκονος. The text reads: ἱερεὺς Μεγάλο[υ Τει]|μαγένης Τειμαγέ[νους] τοῦ Εὐκράτους, [ἱέρει]|α Πῶλλα, ἡ μήτη[ρ αὐτοῦ, Ἑρ]|μᾶς Ἀπολλώνιος γ΄, ὑ[δρο]|βάφος Στρατο[νίκη, δι]|άκων Τύχη, διάκον[οι Πρι]|μιγένης, Ῥοῦφ[ος]. The god is referred to simply as Μέγας as in I.Ephesos 3414 lines 12/13: ἱερεὺς Μεγά|λου. 2) Ed. pr. of a dedication to Zeus Megas by a priest (ἱερητεύων; 444f.).

12312) S. Babamova, “ΗΡΩΣ ΧΑΙΡΕ. New Grave Inscriptions from Macedonia”, Acta Musei Tiberiopolitani 1 (2016), p. 44–53 [BE 2018, 260]: Ed. pr. of the epitaph of a ἱερεὺς πολιτικὸ[ς] Διονύσου (no. 9; valley of Tikveš, 16/17 CE). [As P. Paschidis, BE 2018, 260, observes, the attribute πολιτικός distinguishes the priesthood of a civic cult from that of private cult associations.]

12413) M.W. Baldwin Bowsky, “Prolegomena to a Dossier: Inscriptions from the Asklepieion at Lissos (Crete)”, Electrum 23 (2016), p. 127–153: B. gives an overview of the finds from the Asklepieion of Lissos. The mostly unpublished inscriptions from Lissos include two building inscriptions, a decree of the Cretan Koinon concerning Tiberius [see infra no. 14], grants of proxeny, a cult regulation (SEG XXVIII 750), 24 inscribed bases of statuettes dedicated to Asklepios, six dedications, and three manumission records. In an Appendix, B. presents a useful catalogue of inscriptions found in cult places of Asklepios on Crete.

12514) M.W. Baldwin Bowsky, “Tiberius and the Asklepieion at Lissos (Crete): Petition and Response, Image and Power”, Mediterraneo Antico 20 (2017), p. 395–444: Ed. pr. of an important but fragmentary and weathered inscription found in 1959 in Lissos (Crete). The text is written on a doorjamb of the entrance to the temple of Asklepios. B.’s edition is based on a transcription made by N. Platon in 1959, her squeeze, and her own transcription [the text presents us with many puzzles; perhaps the application of new technologies of photographing and studying the surface, that has deteriorated in the last sixty years, may provide more accurate readings]. B. provides a very detailed commentary on the rituals of the imperial cult, the dedication of specific days to the emperors, and the historical context; she also collects the evidence for the imperial cult in Crete. The inscription consists of a decree, most probably of the Cretan Koinon, concerning Tiberius (lines 1–16), followed by a subscriptio of the emperor (lines 16–20) and a date (lines 20–22). The beginning of the text refers to festive days dedicated to the imperial cult (lines 3f.): ἐπειδ[ὴ..]ΕΥ ἡμέρας κα̣ὶ [- - c. 11 - -] τὰς ἡμέρας ἐντειμοὺς ἀφιερώμ[εν καὶ θύ]ωμεν. [At the beginning, Platon’s dr. suggests ἐπεὶ Σ̣[…5..]Υ ἡμέρας, possibly a reference to festive days for Augustus (Σ̣[εβαστο]ῦ) or to a day named ἡμέρα Σεβαστοῦ. The repetition of ἡμέρας in the next line shows that there is a second set of festive days, this time perhaps for Tiberius. Perhaps ΤΑΣ is not an article, but the ending of an adjective; Platon’s dr. has ΑΦΙΕΡΩΙ (the last letter being unclear) and ΟΜΕΝ; I wonder whether the text reads [Σεβασ]τὰς ἡμέρας ἐντείμους ἀφερώσ̣[αντες θύ]ομεν. But this remains speculative.] Then the text refers to monthly celebrations for the emperor: διὸ κατὰ πάντας μήνας τὴν [θιότ]|ητα τοῦ Σεβα̣στοῦ [- - -] καλανδᾶν ἑκάστου μηνὸς [..]να ἱερὰ̣ς ἀ̣π[ὸ..]|ΠΑΚΗΣ πάσης ἀπεχόμεθα (lines 5–8). The reference to a certain day of each month (καλανδᾶν ἑκάστου μηνὸς) is connected with the praxis of dedicating certain days to the emperor [e.g. the day of every month that corresponds to his birthday. In the case of Augustus this would be πρὸ θ΄ καλανδᾶν, but B. (p. 421) points out that there is little room for such a formula; the first day of each month is usually referred to as καλάνδαις, but the expression α΄ καλανδᾶν is also attested (e.g. IG XII.5.132 line 11). The reading ΠΑΚΗΣ seems doubtful; I suspect that the text reads [τα]|ρ̣αχῆς πάσης ἀπεχόμεθα; cf. the decree of Messene concerning a celebration for Caius Caesar (SEG XXIII 206): στεφαναφορεῖν τε πάντας διέταξε καὶ θύειν, ἀπράγμονας ὄντας καὶ ἀταράχους]. Then the text finally becomes legible (lines 8–11). The Cretans, together with their wives and children pray for the eternal and successful child-begetting of the emperor: εὐχάς τε τελῶμ[εν] | μετὰ τέκνων καὶ γυναικῶν ὑπὲρ τῆς ἀϊδίο[υ] | καὶ εὐτυχε[στά]της τεκνοποιήσεως Τιβερί[ου] | Καίσαρος τοῦ ἡ[γεμόν]ος ἡμῶν. This decision was probably prompted by the birth of Tiberius’ twin grandsons, the sons of Drusus (21 CE). With his response, Tiberius instructs the archons of every city to have the decree and his response published.

12615) F. Battistoni, “Two New Inscriptions from Apollonia on the Rhyndakos”, ZPE 200 (2016), p. 277–281: Ed. pr. of a dedication from Apollonia on the Rhyndakos (ca. 129–136; p. 280f.). A former priest of Zeus (ὁ ἱερησάμενος τοῦ Διὸς τῷ L θσ΄ ἔτει, i.e. in 124/5 CE) dedicated a few years after his priesthood a statue of Hera to Hadrian Zeus Soter Olympios and Hera Sebaste Sabeina, Hadrian received the epithet Olympios in 129 CE; this may have prompted the dedication in a region dominated by Mt. Olympos.

12716) A.V. Belousov, “Toward a New Edition of a Magical Ostrakon from Olbia”, in ΕΛΕΝΕΙΑ. Litterulae chartulaeque ab amicis et discipulis ad Helenam Leonidae f. Ermolaeva pro munere natalicio missae, St. Petersburg, 2014, 63–67 [in Russian; BE 2015, 521; SEG LXIV 686]: B. presents a new edition of I.dial. Olbia Pont 108 (Olbia, 4th/3rd cent.): τὰμ πάρμηνν Σιττυρᾶ τὴν γλῶσσαν τὰμ πάρμην καὶ Θεμιστᾶ καὶ Ἐπικράτευς καὶ τὴν δύναμιν (Ταμπαρμη, I.dial. Olbia Pont ). He recognizes the Thracian word πάρμη, ‘shield’. The defigens curses his opponents’ shields and their strength [A. Avram, BE 2015, 521, is concerned about the Doric form of the article τάμ, unusual at Olbia in that period; but A.V. Belousov, Aristeas: Philologia Classica et Historia Antiqua 12 (2015), p. 200f. no. 17, points to the mobility between Greek colonies in this region. I should add that the article would not be the only Doric form in this text; the genitive Ἐπικράτευς is also Doric].

12817) A. Belousov and D. Dana, “Une nouvelle defixio du territoire d’Olbia du Pont”, ZPE 204 (2017), p. 162–164 [BE 2018, 316]: Ed. pr. of a judicial curse tablet from Olbia (ca. 350–300). The defigens curses four men, obviously witnesses in a trial (ἄ̣πρακτα οἱ τὰ {Ι} πάντ̣[α] {Μ} μαρτυρέοσιν ἄν).

12918) S. Blaževska and J. Radnjanski, “The Temple of Isis at Stobi” in A. Nikoloska and S. Müskens (eds.), Romanising Oriental Gods? Religious Transformations in the Balkan Provinces in the Roman Period: New Finds and Novel Perspectives. Proceedings of the International Symposium, Skopje, 18–21 September 2013, Skopje, 2015, p. 215–256 [BE 2018, 259]: The authors give an overview of the architecture of the Isis temple at Stobi and its finds. They present the ed. pr. of a votive relief representing an ear. It was dedicated by Oppia to Isis, and Sarapis in fulfillment of a vow (εὐχήν; p. 235).

13019) M. Blömer and M. Facella, “A New Altar for the God Turmasgade from Dülük Baba Tepesi”, Asia Minor Studien 84, Bonn, 2017, p. 99–121: B.‑F. republish of an altar dedicated to Zeus Touromasgadis by the crew of the ship Homonoia (Elaiousa Sebaste, reign of Hadrian; cf. AE 2007, 1540; SEG LIII 1736; EBGR 2004, 28).

13120) I. Bultrighini, “Notes on Days of the Week and Other Date-related Aspects in Three Greek Inscriptions of the Late Roman Period”, ZPE 201 (2017), p. 187–196: B. republishes an inscribed altar from Ankyra (SEG LIII 1439; I.Ancyra 196, 3rd cent. CE) and convincingly argues that it was dedicated to the gods of the planetary week. The sequence of their names corresponds to the order of the days in a planetary week: [Kronos], [Helios]. Selene, Ares, Hermes, Zeus, and Aphrodite.

13221) E. Borgia, “Iasos 2011–2013, Scavi e ricerche”, DHA 43.2 (2017), p. 231–254: B. mentions the discovery of a cult regulation of the Hellenistic period in Iasos (p. 242f.). [On the ph., one recognizes the word ἐνθρύπτων, as in the regulation concerning the sale of the priesthood of Zeus Megistos from the same city (LSAM 59; I.Iasos 220).]

13322) D. Bosnakis, “Ἐνεπίγραφος ἐνδεδυμένος κοῦρος ἀπὸ τὴν Κάλυμνο”, in G. Kokkorou-Alevras and W.‑D. Niemeier (eds.), Neue Funde archaischer Plastik aus griechischen Heiligtümern und Nekropolen, Munich, 2012, p. 157–186 [SEG LXV 750]: Ed. pr. of the dedicatory inscription on a marble statue of a kouros with chiton, mantle, and himation (Kalymnos, ca. 530). The statue was offered to Apollo as a tithe: Ἀνάσχε[τ]ός μ᾿ ἀ[ν]έθηκε δεκάταν | τὀπλονι [τὀπλονι is A.P. Matthaiou’s reading (infra no. 70), instead of τὀπόλōνι. M. discusses the script of this dedication].

13423) C. Campedelli, “Magie und Gesellschaft im spätantiken Athen”, ZPE 203 (2017), p. 157–163 [BE 2108, 203]: 25 defixiones found in the wells of the Agora in Athens (SEG XXXV 213–227) date to Late Antiquity (4th/5th cent.), not to ca. 250 CE; all, except for one, use the same formulas and were written by the same ‘magician’ and possibly one or two of his ‘pupils’. The curses are mostly addressed against wrestlers; only two defixiones concern love affairs. One defixio explicitly mentions an ephebe (SEG XXXV 216; cf. SEG XXXV 218), thus, attesting the existence of the ephebeia after the Herulian invasion of 267 CE.

13524) C. Campedelli, “Bemerkungen zur athenischen defixio SEG XXX 326”, ZPE 201 (2017), p. 201–207 [BE 2018, 202]: C. presents an improved edition of an Athenian ‘prayer for justice’ (SEG XXX 326), which she dates to the 3rd/4th cent. He prays to be liberated ([ἐ]ξξ[ε]ρ̣οῦ … [ἐξ]ξεροῦ μὲ δὲ τὸν καταγράφοντα κὲ τὸν ἀπολέσαντα) [D. Ackermann, BE 2015, 202, prefers to translate this as ‘save me’, ‘épargne-moi ’]. He justifies his actions by mentioning that he was the victim of theft: ὅτι οὐκ ἑκών, ἀλλὰ ἀναγκαζ[όμεν]ος διὰ τοὺ[ς] κλέπτα[ς] τοῦτο ποιεῖν [justifications are a common feature of prayers for justice, but it is very unusual that the defigens provides a justification explicitly for the use of magic]. He binds (καταγράφω) those who wronged him to Plouton, the Moirai, Persephone, the Erinyes, and ‘every evil’ (παντὶ κακῷ). He delivers his opponent (κατατίθεμ̣ε) to Hekate ‘who eats creeping creatures’ (ἑ[ρπ]ετοφάγῳ), to the gods and goddesses of the underworld, and to Hermes διάκονος. The victims of his curse are the people who had stolen various items and those who knew about the theft and denied it (συνειδότας τῇ κλέψει κὲ
ἀρν[ουμ]ένους). He invokes Hekate with six epithets (δέσποινα, οὐρανία, καταχθονία, τριοδεῖτις, τριπρόσωπος, μονοπρόσωπος) and aks her to cut out the thieves’ heart (καρδιοτόμησον).

13625) B. Capuzza, “L’Apollo di Klaros e la poesia epigrammatica: la struttura polimetrica degli oracoli epigrafici di Kaisareia Troketta e Kallipolis”, Historiká 7 (2017), p. 199–228: C. presents critical editions of the oracles given by Apollo of Klaros to Kaisareia Troketta (Steinepigramme 04/01/01) and Kallipolis (I.Sestos 11) [EBGR 2014, 30], analyzing their metrical structure and comparing it to that of contemporary epigrammatic poetry (grave and dedicatory epigrams), stressing the literary character of the Klarian oracles.

13726) J.‑M. Carbon “Notes on Two Inscriptions from Chios”, Grammateion 5 (2016), p. 37–41: 1) Based on a dr. made by A.P. Matthaiou, C. presents a new critical edition of a cult regulation from Chios concerning the priestess of an unknown deity (heavily restored in LSCG 120). The text concerns the perquisites of a priestess from a sacrifice; they include the entrails that were placed on the knees and hands of the cult statue (lines 2–3: γίνεσ[θαι σπλ|άγχνα τὰ ἐς χεῖρ]ας καὶ τὰ ἐς γόν̣[ατα]) and possibly the tongue of the victim (line 3: [γλῶσ]σ̣α; contra LSCG: [δίκρεων μερί]δα). In lines 8–9, C. restores ἡμυσ[υ|κτέως] (as in SEG XXXV 923 A lines 3–4 and SEG XXXV 924). For lines 9–10 he considers ἐκτομιῶ̣[ν] (i.e. the sacrifice of a castrated animal), but this requires heavy emendation of the transmitted text. 2) C. proposes minor improvements in the text of a cult regulation concerning the priestess of Eileithyia (Chios, ca. 400; SEG XXXV 923). He discusses the perquisites of the priestess and the parts of the sacrificial animal that were to be consumed on the spot.

13827) J.‑M. Carbon, S. Isager, and P. Pedersen, “Priestess Athenodote: A New Piece of Evidence for the History and the Cults of Late Hellenistic Halikarnassos (I.Halikarnassos? *294, with an Appendix on I.Halikarnassos *297)”, ZPE 201 (2017), p. 165–186 [BE 2018, 411]: Ed. pr. of an important inscription for the development of the religious life in Halikarnassos in the 1st cent. BC. An inscription on a funerary altar commemorates the honors that Athenodote had received. Member of a prominent family and a relative of priests of Poseidon, Athenodote was the first priestess of Artemis Leukophryene ([ἱέρειαν] πρώτην γενομένην Ἀρτέμιδος Λε[υκοφρυηνῆς]), whose cult was introduced from Magnesia on the Maeander possibly in the context of the first Mithridatic War. This is the first attestation of this cult outside of Magnesia on the Maeander. Still as an unmarried woman, Athenodote served as priestess of Parthenos ‘for the duration of the priesthood’ (τὸν [τῆς ἱερατεί]ας χρόνον), i.e. for more than a year. [This is an odd formulation; it is more likely that Athenodotes’ priesthood coincided with a period of some significance (cf. expressions such as πάντα τὸν τῆς στρατείας χρόνον in TAM II 264, and πάντα τὸν τοῦ πολέμου χρόνον in IGLS 3.1.718 line 82). This makes the alternative restorations τὸν [τῆς κορεί]ας or rather [τῆς παρθενεί]ας χρόνον, considered by the authors (p. 177 note 28) far more plausible.] Parthenos was an obscure goddess worshipped in Halikarnassos, Chersonesos (Rhodian Peraia), and Leros. Later, Athenodote served as priestess of Artemis Leukophryene for a second time, priestess of Isis for life and priestess of Nemesis for life; both cults were already attested in this city. Finally, when the cult of the Gerousia was established, the members of this council elected her as the first priestess (ἱέρειαν π[ρώτην τῆς] Γερουσίας κατὰ δόγμα τὸ τοῦ συν[στήματος τῶν] γερόντων). She served in this priesthood for life, covering the expenses herself (δωρεὰν ἐπὶ ζωιῆς); this priesthood was hitherto unattested. As a priestess, Athenodote officiated in ceremonies connected with the cult of a personification of the Gerousia. Under this inscription that commemorates honors that she may have received during her lifetime and were probably recorded in a decree, a short epigram states that she was led to Hades by a god (εἰς Ἀΐδαν ἱέρειαν [Ἀθ]ηνοδότην θεὸ[ς ἦγεν]). In an Appendix, the eds. present a fragmentary honorific inscription for a woman who occupied several priesthoods for life, among them the priesthoods of Nemesis and Isis. [On line 7, the eds. read ἱ̣ε̣[ρ]ε̣ί̣α̣ς̣, but it is unlikely that a priesthood was mentioned in this part of the text. In this section, the woman is praised with various attributes (lines 5–7), restored by the eds. as τεκνο̣τ̣[ρ̣ό|φου] (or τεκνοπ̣[οι|οῦ]), εὐσεβοῦς [.]| [δικ]αίας, φιλοπ[ά|τρι]δος. After φιλοπάτριδος one expects a further attribute, not an office; after a study of a ph., kindly sent to me by J.‑M. Carbon, I suspect τ̣ε̣λ̣ε̣ί̣α̣ς̣ | [ἀρε]τ̣ῆς.]

13928) P.A. Carozzi, “Prodromi di gerarchie angeliche in una gemma magica di età imperiale Romana”, in Scritti – Alfieri Tonini, p. 269–286: C. republishes a chalcedony gem of unknown provenance now in Budapest (ca. 150–250 CE; SEG LXII 1692; EBGR 1992, 156). On the obverse, an eagle holds a crown with his beak. With the inscription, the owner of the stone invokes all the angels to give him success, power, fortune in love affairs, and health. The most interesting feature of this text is that it distinguishes three groups of angels: πρωτάνγελοι, μεσάνγελοι, and τελεάνγελοι. C. comments on the concept of the hierarchy of angels, possibly of Iranian/Chaldean origin, and its diffusion in the Eastern Mediterranean in the Imperial period and Late Antiquity.

14029) K. Çibuk, “Doğu Marmara’da Ana Tanrıça (Kybele) Kültü ve Tasvirleri”, in H. Selvi, B. Çelik et al. (eds.), Uluslararası Gazi Süleyman Paşa ve Kocaeli Tarihi Sempozyumu III, Kocaeli, 2017, p. 165–192: Ed. pr. of dedications of unknown provenance, now in the Kocaeli Museum of Archaeology and Ethnography. They are addressed to Thea Meter in fulfillment of a vow (εὐχήν; 1, 1st/2nd cent.), Meter Agdistis upon divine command, in expression of gratitude (κατ᾿ ἐπιταγὴν εὐχαριστήριον; 2, 1st cent. CE), and Meter Theon upon divine command (κατ᾿ ἐπιταγήν; 3, 2nd–3rd cent.). A man dedicated an altar to Thea Manetene for his own well-being after a dream (ὑπὲρ αἱαυτοῦ κατ᾿ ὄναρ; 5, 155/56 CE).

14130) T. Corsten, “Zu zwei neuen Inschriften aus Kappadokien”, Tyche 32 (2017), p. 269: C. recognizes a common imprecation formula in an epitaph from Kappadokia (S. Dinç and T. Efendioğlu, “Kirşehir Müzesi’nden Yeni Yazıtlar”, in Eskiçağ Yazıları 9, Istanbul, 2016, 187f. no. 5): μήτε γῆ καρπὸν δότω.

14231) J. Curbera, “Six Boeotian Curse Tablets”, ZPE 204 (2017), p. 141–158: C. presents new editions of six defixiones from Boiotia. His corrections mainly concern a better reading of personal names. I only note the most important new readings: 1) I.Oropos 745 (SEG LXVII 509; EBGR 1997, 296): small changes, mainly in names. 2) Audollent, Defixiones 85 (erotic defixio): lines 3f.: παρ᾿ γυνῆκα | καταμένειν; lines 6f.: φιλείματα κὴ | ἔπια καταγράφω; lines 9f.: τὰ ἐπ᾿ | ἀλλάλως συναλλάγματα. 3) I.Oropos 745a (SEG XLVII 510; EBGR 1997, 296) [a very important prayer for justice (ca. 200–150)]: line 2: Θεόξενο (not [ἀ]πήγυτον); lines 11–18 (only partly read in the ed. pr.): ‘I pray and beg (ἀξιῶ καὶ δέομαι) from you all these things be heard (γενέσθ[αι πάντ]α ἐπήκοα): and expel (ἐκτρῖψαι) all and receive those evil and miserable people; and make their life forever childless, and that nobody [takes care] of them; and produce no offspring; nor bring them up, and if (any) has children, let these be pitiable and miserable. Being wronged I pray (ἀδικούμενος ἀξιῶι) you that all these things are heard. And remember the prayers (μνήσθητι λιτάς) that I have written down. I curse them to be unmarried (παρακατίθεμε ἀτελέστους), pitiable and miserable, all of them; and I bind the written ones down, they and all their things.’ 4) Audollent, Defixiones 84: lines 37–39: ‘Let him fade deprived of his companion [and his youth?]; down with him!’ (στερ̣η̣θ̣έ{Ι}ντα τῆς | ἥλικ[ο]ς κ̣[αὶ ἥβ]ης? ἀπαθ|εῖν, for ἀπανθεῖν) [this restoration is not supported by the dr.; one reads ΗΛΙΚ[.]Ι[..]Ν̣ΗϹΑΠΑΘ̣|ΘΕΙΝ]. 5) Audollent, Defixiones 76: lines 1f.: καταγρφει Φιλ|ωτέρη ὥστε (not καταγράφω ΕΙΑΧΧ|ΩΙΤΕ
ἥ[ρ]ωσί τε). 6) Audollent,
Defixiones 87 (erotic defixio): Improved readings of A lines 4–10: ‘I commend … what she eats (τὰ βρωτά, not βρώματα), what she drinks, her sleep, her laughing, her intercourse, her shouts (τὰς κραυγάς, not κιθ{ΦΕ}άρισ[μα]), and her path, her shame (τὴν αἰδών, not τὴν ἡδονν), her arse, her thoughts.’

14332) J. Curbera, Inscriptiones Atticae Euclidis Anno posteriores, Voluminis II et III editio tertia. Pars IV, Dedicationes et tituli sacri. Fasciculus II. Dedicationes privatae, Berlin, 2017: The new addition to the Athenian corpus contains 1075 private dedications. Most of texts were already included in IG II2, Agora XVIII, I.Eleusis, I.Rhamnous and SEG, but C. provides updated bibliography and, in numerous cases, new readings or restorations. There are only very few inedita, dedications to Asklepios (733), (Artemis) Kalliste (967), Artemis (1064), (Artemis) Soteira (1070), Apollo (1192), Zeus Meilichios (1304; no text), Athena (1408), and to an anonymous god (1719), as well as a dedication κατὰ ὄναρ (1670).

14433) G.B. D’Alessio, “Didymaean Songs (on SEG 58.1301, 60.1150)”, in L. Battezzato and G.B. D’Alessio (eds.), Κόσμος ἐπέων. Studi offerti a Franco Ferarri, Pisa/Rome, 2016, p. 197–212: D. presents three contributions to the role of ritual singing in Miletos, adducing the epigraphic evidence. 1) D. briefly discusses the cultic and political role of the molpoi, in the light of the cult regulation of this board of singers (Milet I.3.133; cf. EBGR 2008, 66). He suggests that they were involved in the rituals accompanying the insertion of the young citizens within their tribes; they also set up the choral performances through which the tribes paraded themselves before the whole city; one of the stations along the route to Didyma was the Φύλιον, a shrine of a god or hero whose epithet is related to the tribes (p. 202). The public role of the molpoi continued into the Hellenistic and Imperial periods. 2) D. comments on the importance of ritual songs in the religious life in Miletos as this is reflected by oracles concerning the singing of hymns. He discusses an oracle with which Apollo prescribes the singing of hymns, instead of blood sacrifices, and explains that he is pleased by all songs, although he prefers the old ones (I.Didyma 217 = Steinepigramme 01/19/01, 2nd/3rd cent.); such things were to be performed while the oracles were being issued (ὅταν μέλληι φάτιν ἄξων | [φαίνειν ἐξ ἀδ]ύτων; D.’s restoration, instead of [ἀμφαίνειν ἀδ]ύτων). D. interprets this oracle as the response of traditional religiosity to new philosophical and traditional attitudes; he points out that the idea that the offering of a song is an alternate kind of sacrifice goes back to Kallimachos (fr. 494 ed. Pfeiffer: ἄκαπνα γὰρ αἰὲν ἀοιδοὶ | θύομεν). [An analogous phenomenon is the perception of intellectual work as a ‘first-fruit offering’ to a god; e.g. the lectures that a grammarian gave for free in Delphi (Hellenistic period, F.Delphes III.3.338) are described with the words ἀπαρχὰν ἐποήσατο ἀπὸ τοῦ μαθήματος.] In the 3rd cent. CE, a prophet asked the god to determine the appropriate epithets for a hymn to Kore Soteira. 3) Finally, D. presents an improved edition of an oracle concerning the singing of hymns for the Good Hopes (3rd cent. CE; SEG LVIII 1301; LX 1150; EBGR 2010, 205). The ed. pr. [followed by SEG and EBGR) thought that the oracular inquiry concerned the cult of the Horai. D. shows that it concerned the cult of Elpides, the daughters of the Horai. His convincing reading of lines 14–16 is: χρὴ τείεσθαι κούρας Διδυμηΐσι (not διδυμήισι) μολπαῖς, ἃς καιροῖς (not ἀσκαίροις) ἐρατοῖς Ὧραι τέκον ἄφθιτα τέκνα, Ἐλπίδας (not ἐλπίδας), etc. (‘it is necessary to honour with Didymaean songs the girls whom the Horai begot on lovely occasions [or to the lovely Kairoi, or for the lovely Kairoi], eternal offspring, the Hopes’). The heading of the inscription reads Ἀγαθῶν̣ [Ἐλπίδων βωμός?] (not Ἀγάθων̣ [ὁ προφήτης σου ἐρωτᾶ]). With innovative cults such as this, the sanctuary responded to philosophical stimuli and contemporary religious trends.

14534) D. Dana, I. Valerief, and D. Moreau, “Un théonyme et des noms thraces nouveaux dans une dédicace grecque découverte à Zaldapa (Mésie inférieure)”, ZPE 202 (2017), p. 158–162 [BE 2018, 297]: Ed. pr. of a dedication to θεὸς Δεινειθείας made in expression of gratitude (εὐχαριστήριον, Zaldapa, 3rd cent. CE). The theonym Dinithias is new, but -din is a common part of Thracian names and the ending -ithias is found in the names of other names of gods in Moesia Inferior (Θεὸς Ἥρως Βορκηιθιας, hero Ebisithia, Diana Totobisia).

14635) F. D’Andria, “Phrygia Hierapolis’i (Pamukkale) 2015, Yılı Kazı ve Restorasyon Çalişmaları”, KST 38.1 (2017), p. 353–370: D. mentions a dedication to Nemesis made by a woman in fulfillment of a vow (εὐχήν; Hierapolis, 2nd/3rd cent.; p. 355).

14736) T. D’Angelo, “Medicine, Religion, and Magic on Two Inscribed Bronze Tablets from Ticinum (CIL V 6414–6415)”, ZPE 202 (2017), p. 189–207: D. presents improved editions and detailed commentary of two Latin magical texts written on bronze tablets (Ticinum, 3rd cent. CE; CIL V 6414–6415). I present D.’s translations: ‘A mysterious illness sent by the fate is soothed with the help of the gods. Be the care cautious. Propitiate Zeus, Minerva, Valetudo. Once you have done this, pound myrtle berries, myxa (fruits?), and laurel leaves in oil. Use (the ingredients) until (the ointment) becomes better. (Take) boiling (?) honey-water (?). Use eleven denarii of good quality styrax. Carry with you (the remedy) fastened with a bandage.’ And: ‘A mysterious illness is soothed with the use of medicine. Honour and propitiate Asclepius, Bona Valetudo, Mars. Once you have done this, grind valerian, betony, dill in boiling (?) honey-water (?). Use nine denarii and one semisse of all the ingredients. Pound laurel berries, dry myrtle, violet roots in oil. Use grains of salt. Carry with you (the remedy) fastened with a bandage.’ The recipes, which reveal influence from contemporary medicine, probably come from a rural shrine in Gallia Cisalpina. The recipes require the gods’ support in order to be effective. The plaster mentioned in the formula fascia ligatum porta did not have an exclusive medical purpose; it may have served as an amulet. Thus these texts show an interdependence of medicine, magic, and religion.

14837) D. Deac and R. Petcu, “A Magical Amulet from Durostorum (Moesia Inferior)”, Tyche 32 (2017), p. 7–14: Ed. pr. of an amulet of lapis lazuli (Durostorum, 2nd/3rd cent.); on the obverse a representation of ‘Pantheos’ (or the ‘Polymorphic deity’), a scorpion, and the inscription ΜΟΥΝ//ΤΟΥ (the name of the Sun at mid-day); on the reverse, the text Ἀμοῦν | χεντε ι̣ε̣υ̣ει (‘Ammon, the chief of …’, in Egyptian).

14938) E. Dettori, “Su ἐριγούνιον: ZPE 199, 2016, p. 112, l. 5 e 12”, ZPE 204 (2107), p. 136–137 [BE 2017, 37]: D. confirms the reading ἐριγούνιον in an Attic defixio [EBGR 2016, 39] and discusses the phonology of the form Ἐριγούνιος for Hermes’ epithet Ἐριούνιος.

15039) S. De Vido, “Hierophylakes a Segesta. Un’interpretazione di IG XIV 291”, in Scritti – Alfieri Tonini, p. 227–248: The author gives an overview of the involvement of the hierophylakes in the restoration of public buildings in Segesta (cf. IG XIV 290; I.dial.Sicile I 215/216; II 89); the focus of their activity may have been the prytaneion.

15140) C. Di Nicuolo, “Apollo Apotropaios. L’inviolabilità dei confini e la tutela dei passagi”, ASAA 89 (2011) [2013], p. 25–49: An overview of the epigraphic evidence for the cult of Apollo Apotropaios suggests that this cult originates in Attica (IG I3 255; II2 1358, 4852, 5009; SEG XXI 541) and was later adopted by other cities (IG XIV 2464; SEG IX 72; XX 719; LXV 911 B, 912; LV 1113 B; Tit.Cam. 119; I.Erythrai 61). The sanctuaries of Apollo Apotropaios were usually located near city gates and along a road that links Delos, Athens, and Delphi.

15241) C. Dobias-Lallou, Inscriptions of Greek Cyrenaica, in collaboration with A. Bencivenni and H. Barthelot, with help from S. Antolini, S.M. Marengo, and E. Rosamilla, and Greek Verse Inscriptions of Cyrenaica, in collaboration with A. Bencivenni, with help from J.M. Reynolds and C. Roueché, Bologna, 2017 [online resource: https://igcyr.unibo.it/​] [BE 2018, 2]: This online publication makes hundreds of inscriptions of Cyrenaica available in reliable editions, translations into French, Italian, English, and Arabic, and good commentaries; I am only afraid that the complicated system of references (with six-digit numerals) will be the source of mistakes. The new corpus includes, of course, the Cyrenean sacred regulations (LSCG 115 = IGCyr016700; LSCG 116 = IGCyr100200; LSCG 117 = IGCyr016800; LSCG 133 = IGCyr100300; IGCyr051900 = SEG IX 728; IGCyr100100 = SECir 157; IGCyr109200 = SEG LIII 2029; IGCyr109400 = SEG LVII 2012; IGCyr100400 = SECir 160 + 160 bis; IGCyr032900 = SEG IX 345). For reasons of space, I mention here only the previously unpublished texts pertaining to religious matters. All texts are from Kyrene. Dedications: One of the more substantial texts is a metrical dedication to Apollo and Artemis that refers to the construction of a wall that would prevent view of the gladiatorial arena from the sanctuary of Apollo (GVCyr031, ca. 150–200): Ἁγνείης ἀνάθημα μέλον Φοί[βῳ καὶ ἀδελφῇ] | ἀρητήρ Νεικόδαμος ἔδειμα̣ [πρὸς ἀμφιθεάτρῳ] | τεῖχος ἀναστήσας ἱροῖς κτ[εάτεσσι ˘ | ˉ ±] | μουνομάχοιο θέης ἀποκ[λείσας ἄλσεα θεῖα] (‘an offering aiming at purity for Phoibos [and his sister], I, priest Nikodamos, built [close to the amphitheater], erecting a wall [- -] for the sacred [estates], shutting out of the view of gladiators [the divine bushes]’) [the reference to ἁγνείηι indicates that viewing the gladiatorial combats was a source of pollution; for ritual pollution by seing, see EBGR 2014, 109]. A fragmentary text commemorates the offering of a sacrifice to Apollo ‘from the revenues of the puppies’ (IGCyr125600: [- - ε]υ̣ς ἱερι[τεύοντος? - -|- -] [ἀπὸ] σκυλα[κίων - -|- -] [ἐθύθ?]η τῶι Ἀπ[όλλωνι - -|- -] [δραχμᾶ?]ν Ἀλεξα[νδρείων - -]). Dedications made ‘from the revenues of puppies and birds’ are mentioned in two other inscriptions (IGCyr020800 = SEG IX 123: ἀπὸ σκυλακίων, ἀπ᾿ ὀρνίχων; IGCyr020900 = SEG IX 124· ὀρνίχων, [σκ]υλακίων). [Since the other relevant texts refer to dedications, not to sacrifices, [ἀνετέθ]η or a similar expression is more likely than [ἐθύθ?]η. The revenues from puppies and birds had previously been associated with the cult of Hekate (A. Laronde, Cyrène et la Libye hellénistique. Libykai Historiai de l’époque républicaine au principat d’Auguste, Paris, 1987, p. 103). However, now a connection can be established between the σκυλάκια and Apollo. Since Apollo was a patron of purifications, for which puppies were used (Theophr., Characters 16.13: ἢ σκύλακι κελεῦσαι αὑτὸν περικαθᾶραι; Plut., moralia 280b–c, 290d; Romulus 21.10), it is conceivable that Apollo’s sanctuary had revenues from the sale of puppies (and birds) for purifications. Puppies and birds are mentioned together in Hippocratic recipes (σκύλακος ἢ ὄρνιθος ἑφθά: de affectionibus 41.9 and 43.3; de morbis 2.44.17; 2.56.11). But it would be far fetched to associate this medical recipe with Apollo as a god of healing.] Two more fragments can be added to a metrical dedication to Isis (RICIS 701/0102, Kyrene, 1st cent. CE; GVCyr025). Most of the remaining dedications are addressed to Apollo (late 5th cent. BCE-2nd; IGCyr030700, IGCyr096100, IGCyr119100, IGCyr119300, IGCyr124800, IGCyr126800, IGCyr127400, IGCyr127500, IGCyr127600, IGCyr130300, by a priest, IGCyr130400, IGCyr131700). There are also dedications to Aphrodite (?, IGCyr135200), Demeter (?, IGCyr128300), Hermes (IGCyr120400), Zeus Soter by a king Ptolemy (IGCyr064500, ca. 150–100), and undetermined recipients (IGCyr124400, IGCyr124500, IGCyr128400, IGCyr128600, IGCyr128700, IGCyr129400, IGCyr129800, IGCyr132600). In three cases the dedicatory objects were lustral basins (IGCyr120000, 3rd cent.; IGCyr120300, 2nd cent.: [λωτ]ῆρα; IGCyr120400, 2nd cent.: to Hermes). Seven dedications are designated as ‘tithes’, δεκάτα (IGCyr119200, IGCyr119600, IGCyr123600, IGCyr130500, IGCyr124600, IGCyr128600?, IGCyr130500, IGCyr130700, IGCyr130900, Classical and Hellenistic periods), and several dedications were made by people who performed the τελεσφορία (IGCyr126600, IGCyr128400, IGCyr130200, IGCyr130800?); in one case (IGCyr131900), the tithe was a statue of a man, dedicated by his son (ca. 300). [IGCyr132000 is tentatively interpreted as a dedication of a telesterion. But the letters ΤΟΤΕΛΕ might be part of the name [Ἀρισ]τοτέλε[υς]]. IGCyr031050 is an altar of Zeus (4th cent.). Cult personnel: A small fragment of an epigram mentions the words στέμμα φ[έρε?]|ιν ἱερὸν ΛΟ[---], probably a reference to a priestly crown (GVCyr057, Imperial period). An epigram honors the son of a priest (GVCyr058, 2nd/3rd cent.). There is also a fragment of a list of priests (IGCyr129600).

15342) A.J. Domínguez, “Constructing an Eleian Ethnic Identity in Southern Epirus: the Inscription of Cassope (SEG 36, 555) Reconsidered”, ZPE 204 (2017), p. 79–88: A dedicatory epigram from Kassope (shortly after 129) reports that three men, who participated in the Aristonikos War dedicated a statue of Herakles Soter, who stood by their side in the battles. D. focuses on the claim of these men of Bouchetion that they were descendants of Oxylos. He argues that the idea that Oxylos was an old inhabitant of Kassope is an invented tradition aiming to make Kassope an Eleian foundation; he speculates that a tomb on the south-west edge of the city was that of Oxylos, worshipped as a founding hero. [There is no doubt that colonization legends were often invented traditions; but in this case, the evidence is limited to the phrase Ὀξ[ύλ]ου τε τοῦ παλαίχθονος, which is not enough to support D.’s conclusions. I note that his translation of this inscription (p. 79 note 2) has inaccuracies: τὸν ἐγ Διὸς βλαστόντα παῖδ̣’ Ἡ̣ρακλέα | Σωτῆρ’ ἀνηγ̣ό̣ρ̣ε̣υ̣σαν is not ‘to Heracles the Saviour, the son coming from the lineage of Zeus a public proclamation was made’; Ἡ̣ρακλέα is the accusative object of ἀνηγ̣ό̣ρ̣ε̣υ̣σαν. The correct meaning is: ‘they publicly proclaimed Herakles, the son whom Zeus brought forth, as their Saviour’; this is a reference to an acclamation. D. understands ὃν κρατήσαντες δορὶ | Ῥώμην ἄγουσιν οἵδε Βουχετίων ἄπο βλαστόντες Ὀξ[ύλ]ου τε τοῦ παλαίχθονος as a reference to the fact that the three men led Aristonikos to Rome (‘the latter [Aristonikos], caught with the spear, was carried to Rome by these natives of Bouchetion, from the lineage of Oxylos, the ancient inhabitant’); although in poetry an accusative can denote the limit of a movement, one can understand ῥώμην as the object of ἄγουσιν (‘having defeated him [Aristonikos] in battle these men of Bouchetion, the descendants of Oxylos, the old inhabitant of the land, bring back home strength’), with an intentional word play of ῥώμη/Ῥώμη. Finally, ἀνιδρύσαντο τόνδ’ Ἡρακλέα is not ‘dedicated (this statue) to this same Herakles’ but ‘dedicated this statue of Herakles’.]

15443) N. Ehrhardt, “Archaische Vasengraffiti aus dem milesischen Aphrodite-Heiligtum in Oikus”, in G. Kalaitzoglu et al. (eds.), Petasos. Festschrift für Hans Lohmann, Paderborn, 2013, p. 119–127 [SEG LXIV 1103–1107]: E. gives an overview of the more than 300 graffiti on vases dedicated to Aphrodite and found in her sanctuary in Oikous (Miletos, Archaic period). The texts name the dedicants (both men and women) and use standard dedicatory formulas (e.g. Ἀφροδίτης ἐμί, NN μ᾿ ἀνέθηκεν τῆι Ἀφροδίτηι). The finds also include four cups with dipinti, dedicated by the same man (Alsios, a Koan?) to Aphrodite in Oikous, Apollo, and an anonymous deity. A Karian man dedicated a bronze omphalos cup (Υλιαμις ὁ Μανδρώνακτος μ᾿ ἀνέθηκεν τἠφροδίτηι).

15544) N. Ehrhardt, W. Günther, and P. Weiß, “Funde aus Milet XXVI. Aphrodite-Weihungen mit Ohren-Reliefs aus Oikus”, AA (2009.1), p. 187–203 [SEG LIX 1363]: The authors assemble 42 inscribed and uninscribed votive panels and stelai that represent one or two ears found in the sanctuary of Aphrodite at Oikous (near Miletos). The inscriptions designate them as dedications of women to Aphrodite in fulfillment of a vow (NN Ἀφροδίτῃ εὐχήν; 2nd cent. BCE – 2nd cent. CE); the ears allude to the property of Aphrodite as ἐπήκοος, a goddess who listens to prayers [for newer finds, see infra no. 45].

15645) N. Ehrhardt and P. Weiß, “Die Ohren der Göttin. Neue Votive aus dem milesischen Aphrodite-Heiligtum von Oikus und ihr religionsgeschichtlicher Kontext”, in H. Schwarzer and H.‑H. Nieswandt (eds.), “Man kann es sich nicht prächtig genug vorstellen!” Festschrift für Dieter Salzmann zum 65. Geburtstag, Marsberg, 2016, II, p. 681–695: 12 more votive reliefs with representations of ears, on plaques and stelai dedicated to Aphrodite (Ἀφροδίτῃ εὐχήν) have been found in her sanctuary at Oikous near Milet (see supra no. 45). Four objects combine an inscription and a representation, 4 only have a representation, and another four only have an inscription. The authors present the ed. pr. of these dedications and adduce numerous parallels for similar dedications of representations of ears.

15746) H.A. Ekinci and Y. Zenger, “Inarasi Magarası Kutsal Alanı Kurtarma Kazısı 2016”, Müze Kurtarma Kazilari Sempozyumu 26 (2017), p. 131–142: The authors mention a rock-cut dedication from Kremna, possibly to Meter Oreia (2nd cent. CE): ΑΡΤΕΜΙΣΙΑΣΤΑΙ…//ΕΥΧΗΝ [cf. IAM 2018, 303: Ἀρτεμισία Στασ[ιθέμιος?]| εὐχήν].

15847) C.A. Faraone, “Some Magical Gems in London”, GRBS 57 (2017), p. 403–430: F. presents 54 magical gems in the collections of the British Museum, the Institute of Archaeology, and the Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology of University College London, most of them unpublished. The gems have magical words and names, sequences of vowels, palindromes, and texts that indicate their use (e.g. 6: ἡ χάρις; 2: δικαίως δέεσαι, ‘justly you have been bound’, referring to Eros tied to a pillar; 24: εὐκαιρίαν, ‘prosperity’; 25 and 41: ἰσχίων, ‘for the hips’; 28: νικᾷ ἡ Εἶσις; 35: διαφύλασσε; 46: ὑγία), and the name of an owners (21).

15948) S. Ferjančić, M. Korać, and M. Ricl, “New Greek and Latin Inscriptions from Viminacium”, ZPE 203 (2017), p. 235–249: New epigraphic finds from the capital of Moesia Superior, Viminacium, include dedications to the Dalmatian god Aptus (1; cf. AE 2003, 1501), Iupiter Optimus Maximus (2), Nymphae Augustae (3; the eds. note the accusative form: Nymphas Augustas).

16049) F.R. Forster, “Von Kaisern und Veteranen — Neue Inschriften aus Gadara/Umm Qays”, Chiron 47 (2017), p. 57–93: Ed. pr. of new inscriptions from Gadara. 1) A veteran centurio left an endowment for the construction of a Nymphaion for the wellbeing (pro salute/ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας) of Emperor Trajan. 2) A column in this Nymphaion was dedicated by a veteran beneficiarius (ἐκ ἰδίων ἀνέθηκε). Since this was not a free-standing column, F. assumes that the soldier paid the expense for the setting up of this column during repair works (2nd cent.) [another possibility is that he gave an amount of money for the Nymphaion, which was commemorated on an existing column]. 5) A dedication to Emperor Antoninus Pius. 6) An inscription on a marble plaque records donations made by a former soldier, councilor, and priest of Thea Rhome and a councilor for [‘für ’] their children who served as priestess of the Agathe Tyche of the city (ἱερασαμένης τῇ τῆς πόλεως Ἀγα̣[θῇ Τύχῃ τὸ? … ἱερασαμέν[ου - - ca. 15–20 - - Ἡρ]α̣κ̣λ̣ε̣ῖ̣ · τ̣ὸ̣ · ι) and Herakles respectively. Both individuals served as priests for more than one year (early 3rd cent. CE). [F. assumes that they were former priests; however, P. Weiss has recently argued that expressions such as ἀγορανομήσας etc. do not designate former magistrates, but magistrates who have entered their office (“Öffentliche Leistungen: nach, am Ende oder während der Amtszeit? Zum Fomular des Typs ἀγορανομήσας ἀνέθηκεν”, ZPE 200 [2016], p. 274–276). F. does not explain the nature of the ‘Stiftung für ihre Kinder ’. It is possible that we are dealing with summa honoraria. The parents, instead of paying money to the city, promised to dedicate a building or another construction, on which the plaque was placed, on behalf of their children.]

16150) V. Gabrielsen, “A New Inscription Attesting to Associations from the Necropolis of Rhodes”, Tyche 32 (2017), p. 15–40: Ed. pr. of the inscribed base of a funerary altar for an anonymous man and Berenike from Phrygia (eastern necropolis of Rhodes, 2nd/1st cent.). The man, who had served as choregos, had been honored with a golden crown by a series of cult associations: the Poseidoniastai, the Asklapiastai in Salakos, the Soteriastai Pheidanakteioi in Phanai (i.e., an association of worshippers of Zeus? Soter, founded by Pheidianax), the Asklapiastai Boukopidai in Aigileia/Aigelia, and the [--]daliastai in Phanai (possibly [Pan]daliastai, i.e., worshippers of Apollo Delios). The association of the Asklapiastai Boukopidai (‘those engaged in oxen-cleaving’) may be related to the festival (or ritual) of βουκόπιον/βουκοπία in Lindos; the Boukopion may have been a biennial festival, alternating with the Theodaisia (p. 22f.). G. briefly discusses the cult regulation I.Lindos 26, which concerns a sacrifice to Zeus Amalos, and the location of Aigileia/Aigelia, within the territory of Lindos or Kamiros (p. 24–29). An interesting feature of these associations is the fact that they were located in the Rhodian countryside. The altar may have stood within the burial ground of an association.

16251) R. Gordillo Hervás, “La primera celebración de las Hadrianeia de Éfeso”, DHA 43.1. (2017), p. 213–236: An analysis of the letters of Hadrian to the Dionysiac technitai in Alexandreia Troas (SEG LVI 1359, 134 CE) leads G. to the conclusion that the first celebration of the Ephesian Hadrianeia took place in 131 CE. In an Appendix, G. assembles the epigraphic evidence for this contest.

16352) F. Guizzi and B. Yener, “An Inscribed Altar from Tripolis ad Maeandrum”, in B. Duman (ed.), Tripolis Araştırmaları: Tripolis ad Maeandrum I, Istanbul, 2017, p. 75–81: Ed. pr. of an altar dedicated to Nero and Dionysos by a cult association (θιασεῖται) chaired by the priest Rouson (οἱ πε[ρὶ Ῥ]ούσωνα ἱερῆ θιασεῖται καθιέρω[σαν]).

16453) K. Hallof, “Der Beginn der attischen Panathenaïdenära”, Tyche 32 (2017), p. 41–43: An improved reading of an Attic inscription (now: IG II3.4.1397) shows that the first Panathenais of the Imperial period should be dated to 120 CE. The era of the Panathenais is mentioned, in addition to the aforementioned text, in the following inscriptions: I.Aphrodisias 2007 12.920 II 21; I.Magnesia 80; IG II2 2235, 2241, and 2245.

16554) A. Harder, O. van Nijf, and E. Nikolaou, “Inscriptions from Halos”, Pharos 23.2 (2017), p. 33–65: Ed. pr. of six inscriptions from Halos in Thessaly, three of which are of interest for myth and religion. 1) The most important text is a fragmentary metrical inscription (early 3rd cent.) with a list of mythical figures and attributes that characterize them: ‘[- -] arrogant Antaios [- -] Byzes [- -] Gordios and the exceedingly mighty Metaios [- -] and the lord Koryphaios and Kelainos, [- -] Arkios and Antimenes and Euagoras [- -] and the great Asterias and Alastor and [- -] and Daiochos and Eyribios and Phradios [- -] and Nestor and Aretos and Epilaos and Stratios [- -] and Periklymenos and Perseus, Echephron [- -] Antilochos, Schedios, Peisistratos, [- -] Boros, Tisamenos and [- -] and the lord [- -] and Iphitos and [- -] Knopos and Medon, Kodros and Nauklos [- -] redhaired Leokritos and Damasiphron and [- -] Anchialos with them and Alkimos and Diokles [- -] Daiochos and Boros and Hippasos and Orchilochos [- -] Aphareus, Krithon and Euphrenor and Kreon [- -] and the lord Lykomedes and Kaletor [- -] and the unconquerable Lokritos and Eurymedon [- -] and the lord Amythaon and Aison and Pheres [- -] and Admetos with them and godlike Eumelos [- -].’ The list seems to include mythical figures associated with Thessaly — sons of Poseidon, founders of cities, the sons and descendants of Neleus, the sons of Tyro and Kreteus, etc. — and the migration of Thessalians to Messenia, Athens, and Asia Minor. According to H., this text places emphasis on the mythical genealogy of the Thessalians. 2) A Hellenistic dedication to Artemis Soteira Epekoos by a man, apparently after an unsolicited vision (ἀπὸ αὐτομάτου ἰδών, Hellenistic). 4) A dedication to Demeter by a woman (ca. 300–250).

16655) V. Hofmann, “Hadrian und die Finanzierung von Siegerstatuen für Trompeter und Herolde bei den ephesischen Olympia (SEG 56, 1359, ZZ. 40–43)”, Philia 3 (2017), p. 79–96 [BE 2018, 367]: Hadrian’s letter to the Dionysiac artists from Alexandreia Troas (SEG LVI 1359, 134 CE) refers to a controversy in Ephesos concerning the erection of statues of victorious heralds and trumpeters at the Olympia (lines 40–43: περὶ τῶν σαλπικτῶν καὶ τῶν κηρύκων· ἔγραψα Ἐφεσίοις, ὡς μὴ ἀνανκάζεσθαι αὐτοὺς ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων ἐγείρειν ἀνδριάντας, εἰ καὶ τούτοις ἐξ ὧν Νύσιος ἀπέλιπεν χωρίων ἀνίστασθαι), which the emperor resolved by sending a letter to Ephesos. The formulation is ambiguous: were the Ephesians or the victors forced to set up the statues at their own expense? The revenues from the endowment of Nysios would be used by Ephesos or by the victors for this purpose? In H.’s interpretation, the victors had complained that Ephesos was not honoring them with statues. Hadrian freed Ephesos from the obligation to do this at public expense, since a good management of the endowment of Nysios would provide sufficient funds for these statues. Claudius Nysios was agonothetes δι᾿ αἰῶνος of the Olympia and his name can be restored in I.Ephesos 1155.

16756) V. Hofmann, “Neue und alte Inschriften aus den Nekropolen von Ephesos”, JÖAI 85 (2016) [2017], p. 211–232 [BE 2018, 378]: Ed. pr. of inscriptions from the cemeteries of Ephesos. The sarcophagus of a certain Kognitos was placed under the care of the
[Σε]β̣αστοβ̣άφοι (8, 2nd/3rd cent.). This word is unattested. H. tentatively suggests that it designates an association of tanners that was named in honor of the emperor, or an association of tanners who used purple dye (cf. πορφυραβάφοι). H. presents an improved edition of the epitaph of a member of the gerousia, who served as ὑμνῳδός and λαμπαδάρχης (13–14 =
I.Ephesos 2446+2404, early 3rd cent. CE).

16857) T. Iliopoulos, “Διὸς Πολιέως ἄβατον παρὰ τὸν Ἰλισσό;”, AD 67/68 Mel. (2012/13) [2017], 369–398 [BE 2018, 181]: Ed. pr. of a boundary marker of a sanctuary of Zeus Polieus (Διὸς Πολιέως ἄβατον) found in the area of Kynosarges (ca. 450–400). I. argues that this sanctuary is not the one on the Acropolis, but a different sanctuary in the area of Ilissos.

16958) S. Isager, “A Hellenistic Foundation from the Area of Mylasa”, Opuscula 7 (2014), p. 185–192 [BE 2015, 632; SEG LXIV 960]: Ed. pr. of a block inscribed on the front and on the right side (area of Mylasa, ca. 200–150). The text on the front is the final part of a funerary foundation containing the curses against those who would violate the donor’s testament. From the list of possible violations, one may infer the purpose of the foundation. The donor (and his wife) had founded a kinship or familial association (συγγένεια) that was to meet on certain prescribed days (σύνοδοι), perform funerary rites (cf. ἢ μὴ ποιοῦντας ἐπὶ τ̣ῶν τά̣[φ]ων̣ τὰ ἐπιτεταγμένα), take care of the burial precinct (cf. ἢ τοῦ περιβόλου μὴ προνοοῦ̣ντας), and use the funds for sacrifices and for the meetings of the relatives (μὴ πᾶσαν̣ κατα̣δαπανῶντας εἰς τὰς θυσίας καὶ συνόδους τῶν συγγενῶν). The meetings were to take place in the ‘grove of Athena’ (cf. ἢ ἐν ἑτέρωι τόπωι σ̣υ̣νάγοντας κα[ὶ μὴ] ἐν τῶι ἄ̣λ̣σει τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς). The association had rites for the introduction of new members (cf. ἢ τὰ εἰσιτήρια συνκόπτοντας). The violators of the testament are cursed with infertility (καταράτους αὐτοὺς εἶ̣ν̣α̣ι̣ [καὶ γένος] τ̣ὸ ἐκ̣είνων καὶ μὴ φέρειν γ̣ῆν αὐτοῖς καρποὺς καὶ ἐ̣γ̣ό̣ν̣ω̣ν στέρεσ[ι]ν αὐτοῖς εἶναι). The text on the side is very fragmentary; one recognizes references to the fοunders of the association and their burial place, sacrifices, the consecration of a house or building, and financial matters.

17059) A.I. Ivantchik, “A New Dedication from Olbia and the Problems of the City Organization and of Greco-Barbarian Relation in the 1st Century AD”, ACSS 23 (2017), p. 189–209: Ed. pr. of a dedication to Augustus, his grandson Caius Caesar (Θεῶι Καίσαρι Σεβαστῶι καὶ Γαΐωι Καίσαρι, θεοῦ Σεβαστοῦ υἱῶι), and the People (Olbia, ca. 1 BCE–4 CE).

17160) T.S.F. Jim, “Private Participation in Ruler Cult. Dedications to Philip Soter and Other Hellenistic Kings”, CQ 67 (2017), p. 429–443 [BE 2108, 95]: J.’s starting points are a private dedication to Zeus and Philip Soter (Maroneia, SEG XLI 559) and an altar of Philip Soter (Thasos, SEG LXV 736, attributed by P. Hamon to Philip II). The identity of Philip (II or V) in these and similar dedications is disputed. After a detailed discussion of the possible contexts, J. prefers an identification with Philip V [but see the criticism of P. Fröhlich, BE 2018, 95]. J. assembles evidence for private dedications to kings in the Attalid, Seleucid, and Ptolemaic kingdom. While outside of Macedonia the seemingly private dedications were made following instructions by royal or civic authorities, this is not certain in the case of Macedonia.

17261) C. Jolivet-Lévy, La Cappadoce, un siècle après G. de Jerphanion, Paris, 2015 [BE 2016, 600; SEG LXV 1546]: Ed. pr. of an altar dedicated to Athena (ἀνάθεμα τῆς Ἀ[θ]ηνᾶς), seen by the author in Başköy (Kappadokia, 3rd cent. CE; p. 255f.).

17362) M. Korać and M. Ricl, “New Gold and Silver Amulets from Moesia Superior (Serbia)”, ZPE 203 (2017), p. 164–176 [BE 2018, 299]: Ed. pr. of three amulets. 1) Gold tablet rolled and inserted in a silver capsule (Viminacium, 3rd cent. CE). The tablet is divided into twelve columns; the two on the sides are uninscribed; on the bottom, there is the drawing of an object that looks like a boat. The letters, distributed in the 10 columns, form a magical logos also known from two other amulets from Hermoupolis Magna (R. Daniel and F. Maltomini, Supplementum Magicum I, Opladen, 1990, no. 42) and Gelduba in Germany (R. Kotansky, Greek Magical Amulets, Opladen, 1994, no. 4). 2) Gold lamella with magical charakteres, rolled an inserted in a bronze capsule (Viminacium, ca. 350 CE). 3) Silver tablet with magical charakteres, rolled an inserted in a bronze capsule (area of Viminacium, ca. 350 CE).

17463) R. Kotansky, “A Gold Lamella for ‘Blessed’ Abdalla”, Acta Classica Univ. Sc. Debrecen 52 (2016), p. 7–20: Ed. pr. of a gold sheet of unknown provenance (Turkey?, 1st cent.) with the Αρταου(α)ν Αβαλαλα Χρυσοχεχ. K. recognizes in Αρταου(α)ν an Old Persian adjective (‘righteous, blessed’) which here may denote a blissful state after death. Χρυσοχεχ seems to be composed of the Greek χρυσο- and a suffix; it may be the epithet of a Sun-God (Mithra-Helios?). K. argues that this sheet had a similar function as the ‘Dionysiac-Orphic’ lamellae and was placed in the grave of Αβαλαλα, a man of Semitic origin, ‘as a post-mortem talisman’.

17564) C.B. Kritzas, “ Ἀναθηματικὴ στήλη Κωκάλου”, in S. Vlizos (ed.), Ἑλληνικὴ καὶ Ρωμαϊκὴ γλυπτικὴ ἀπὸ τὶς συλλογὲς τοῦ Μουσείου Μπενάκη, Athens, 2004, p. 198–199: Ed. pr. of a stele with the dedication Κώκαλος ὑπὲρ | Νικάνορος Εὐ|δώτηι εὐχήν (Kafr-el-Dawar, 50 km south of Alexandria, ca. 300; now in the Benaki Museum). The cult of Εὐδώτης (Plouton?) is attested in the area of Laureion (SEG XLVI 260); in the area of Alexandria, it may be an epithet of Sarapis. Similar epithets are attested for a variery of gods (Ἐπιδώτης for Zeus, a Daimon, Hypnos, and companions of Asklepios; Εὐδωσώ for Aphrodite; Δωσία for Demeter; Εὐδοσία for a heroine).

17665) E. Lafli, “Funerary and Votive Monuments in Graeco-Roman Cilicia: Hellenistic Roman, and Early Byzantine Examples in the Museums of Mersin and Alanya”, AS 67 (2017), p. 145–180: Ed. pr. of inscriptions from Kilikia. 6) A votive stele shows Mes standing in front of a bull. L. read the inscription as follows Αρ. Ἀτείμητος | [Λ]Α[Τ]ΡΕΙΑΣΙΣΑ θεῶ | Μηνὶ εὐχή[ν]; he speculates that the text might be ἰα[τ]ρείᾳ εἶσα θε [on the ph., one reads on line 2 [-]\ΙΑ vΡΕΙΑΣΙΣΑΘ̅Ε̅]. 7) A votive relief representing the abduction of Persephone by Plouton is dedicated to Plouton and Kore in fulfillment of a vow (εὐχήν; Augea or Aunesis, Cilicia, 2nd cent. CE; no. 7). 10) A funerary imprecation from Soloi (3rd/4th cent.): [ἐ]ὰν δέ τις ἀδικῇ [-] τοῦτο, μὴ τύχοι τάφου.

17766) N. Lanérès and G. Grigorakakis, “Le cavalier de Tyros, une figurine de bronze laconienne du vie s. a.C.”, REG 130 (2017), p. 327–346 [BE 2018, 214]: Ed. pr. of an important bronze figurine, product of a Lakonian workshop (Tyros in Kynouria, ca. 550). It represents a male with a kantharos and a drinking horn, ridding an ithyphallic mule, i.e., Hephaistos returning to Olympus. The figurine was dedicated to Apollo Tyritas ([- -]ς̣
ἀν
θεκε το͂ ᾿ν Τύροι Ἀπέλλονι) and provides the first attestation of the place name Tyros. [This statuette is mentioned in EBGR 2016, 52; the figure was originally identified as Dionysos. On Apollo Tyritas see IG V.1.1521 and EBGR 2016, 20.]

17867) H. Malay, “A Dedication to Some Goddesses and the Name Τορυλλίων”, EA 50 (2017), p. 25–26 [BE 2018, 34]: Ed. pr. of a dedication to unidentified goddesses: Θεαῖς εὐχὴν Ζήνων | Τορυλλίων ἀνέθηκεν (unknown provenance; now in a private collection in Izmir). A relief shows a fruit garland and a pair of ears (an allusion to the willingness of the goddesses to listen to Zenon’s prayer).

17968) H. Malay and G. Petzl, New Religious Texts from Lydia, Vienna, 2017 [BE 2018, 388–392, 394–397, 399, 402]: This important volume presents the ed. pr of 213 inscriptions from Lydia that are related to religious practices. The largest group of inscriptions come from the sanctuary of Artemis Anaitis and Mes Tiamou at Esenyazi (south-east of Maionia, 24–106; cf. TAM V.1.574–577 and possibly 317–332; Hellenistic and Imperial period). Except for a hymn (90), the rest of the texts are dedications made to Artemis Anaitis alone (24–37) or jointly to Artemis Anaitis and Mes Tiamou (38–77, 81–82); there are also two dedications to Theos Hosios kai Dikaios (91) and Theos Hypsistos (92; see also below). The goddess is addressed as Artemis Anaitis (36, 40–77, 81–82), Thea Anaitis (24–29), and Meter Anaitis (30–35, 39); she is praised as προκαθημένη of a settlement, whose name is not preserved (84) and as ἐπήκοος (24, 26). The dedications were made for the well-being of the dedicants and family members (24, 29, 33, 40, 45, 49–54, 60, 62–63, 91–92), in one case for a mule (84), usually in fulfillment of a vow (εὐχήν: 24–25, 27, 30–34, 36, 43, 45–46, 50, 54, 60, 63, 68, 72, 74, 84, 88, 91–92; cf. εὐχὴν ἀπέδωκα/ε: 28, 41); there are some dedications after a prayer (εὐξαμένη: 72), in expression of gratitude (χαριστήριον: 38–39), upon divine command (κατὰ ἐπιταγήν: 40, 86), upon the appearance of gods in the dreams of the dedicants (42 and 49; see below), for recovery from illness (ὑπὲρ ὁλοκληρίας: 37, 43, 70); ὑπὲρ τῆς ὁλοκληρίας τοῦ σώματος: 51; θε[ραπευθ]εὶς εὐχαριστῶν ἀνέ[θηκε
χ]ρ̣ηστη̣ρ̣[ι- -]; the eds. suggest a dedication recommended by an oracle ([χ]ρ̣ηστη̣ρ̣[ιασθείς] or [χ]ρ̣ηστη̣ρ̣[ίῳ κελευσθείς]). The dedicated objects are usually votive reliefs, including anatomical votives with images of the diseased part of the body: eyes (26, 46, 89), legs (44), and female breasts (57, 64). One dedication is a statue of Telete (93). In an appendix, the eds. present photos of unepigraphic dedications from this sanctuary, among them the image of a man putting his arm around a cult statue (Appendix 3), the image of a crying boy (or sick in his eyes; 17), and two anatomical votives (8–9: a leg and a squatting nude male figure) [a boy?]. Some dedications were made by cult personnel: priestesses (42 and 69), a priest (91), and συμβολαφόροι (bearers of sacred symbols; 79) [cf. σημειαφόροι; see
infra no. 90]. A few texts provide more details about the dedicants’ motivation: ὅτι με ἐξ ἀνελπίστων ἤγαγον εἰς ἐλπίδας καὶ ἐποίησάν με μετὰ γυναικὸς οὕτως καὶ τέκνων (‘because they brought me from hopelessness to hopefulness and did that to me together with my wife and children’) [alternatively, if μέ is the object of ἐποίησαν, ‘they made me be thus, with a wife and children’; on the role of elpis in the epigraphic evidence in connection with religiosity see A. Chaniotis, “Elpis in the Epigraphic Evidence: From Rational Expectation to Dependence from Authority”, in D. Spatharas and G. Kazantzidis (eds.), Hope in Ancient Literature, History, and Art, Berlin, 2018, p. 361f.]. A priestess set up a stele together with her children ‘according to the command of the gods given through epiphany, praising them’ (42: κατὰ παράστασιν τῶν θεῶν εὐλογοῦσα μετὰ τῶν τέκνων; cf. 49: κατὰ ὡς παρέστη ἐν τῷ ὕπνῳ; παρίστημι suggests an epiphanic dream; cf. Petzl, Beichtinschriften 1 and 106; TAM V.1.361). A man dedicated an anatomical votive after recovering from a wound or a disease of his legs (44). The meaning is clear, but the text is corrupt: [.]ΞΟΜΗΝ (eds: [ηὐ]ξόμην?, [ἑ]ζ̣όμην?) πληγεὶς πόδα ΕΙΣΟΜΕ|[..]ΓΙΣ (eds.: [ἀ]γίς or ἐ|[α]γίς) κέ θαραπευθείς εὐξάμε|νος στήλλην ἀνέθηκα. [I tentatively suggest [ηὐ]ξόμην … εἰ σομε
[ὑ]γι
ς; for the syntax cf. Petzl, Beichtinschriften 62: εὔξετο … εἰ ἔσται ὁλόκληρος; cf. no. 130: εὐξαμένη [εἰ με]νῶ ἐν τῷ τό[πῳ].] The most interesting group consists of records of divine punishment (also known as ‘confession inscriptions’); I discuss them below. A hymn (90) is unfortunately very fragmentary. It refers to the daughter of Zeus ([βλ]άστημα Διὸς θυγάτηρ) [i.e. Artemis], a bearer of a silver bow (Apollo?; [ἀργυ]ρότοξον ἀείδομεν), a torch-bearer (δᾳδοῦχε; Artemis, Hekate, or Demeter?), Hekate, Mes Tiamou, and possibly Nemesis (τροχῷ καθίσασα).I summarize the texts from other sites according to their content.

180Cult regulations: The most important text is a cult regulation concerning purity (Thyateira, 1, 2nd cent.), for which M.‑P. provide parallels. The eds.’ translation reads: ‘Someone keeps himself pure (ἁγνεύεται): from the death of a relative: 9 days, counted from the day when he buried (the relative) or became aware of, without being present (ἢ μὴ συνπαρὼν αἴσθηται), the decease; from a stranger’s (death) (ἀπὸ ὀθνείου): once he has encountered it (ἂν ἐπεισέλθῃ), 3 days; from a funeral feast (ἀπὸ περιδείπνου]: 2 days; having attended a burial (ἀπὸ ἐκφορᾶς): when having washed himself ([λ]ουσάμενος); having eaten garlic (he regains his purity) on the third day; having touched (garlic) (ἐὰν δὲ ἅψηται) he is, after having washed himself, allowed to enter (the sanctuary) at sunset. Whoever has voluntarily killed an inoffensive person ([ὃς] ἂν ἑκὼν φίλιον ἀποκτείνηι), [this (murderer)] is not allowed to enter (the sanctuary). If however somebody (has killed a person) unintentionally, (he may enter the sanctuary) [after having purified himself] following the customary procedure of purification (τῶι νομίμωι καθαρμῶι) and what (is prescribed on the?) stele. A man (is pure) from intercourse with a woman after having washed himself (and may enter the sanctuary) at sunset. A courtesan, after having purified herself completely with a piglet (π̣ε[ρικαθ]αραμένη χοιριδίωι) in the presence of [the] neopoioi holding the office of epimenioi (ἐνώπιον [τῶν ἐπ]ιμηνιευότων νεωποιῶν), (may enter the sanctuary). But should she enter (the sanctuary) without being completely purified, she will have to pay to the goddess a silver mina [or, if she is?] a servant, receive lashes, each of which corresponds to three oboloi.’ [It is interesting that the death of a family member makes an individual impure, even if he is not present; the period of impurity is the same as that following active participation in the burial. For ἂν ἐπεισέλθῃ see R. Parker, “The New Purity Law from Thyateira”, ZPE 205 (2018), p. 178–183: the death of a stranger is cause of impurity only if a person enters his house where the corpse had been laid out.]

181Oracles: Metrical oracles for Apollonis are inscribed under the heading χρησμοὶ Διδυμαίου Ἀπόλλωνος (3; 3rd cent. CE). Since in the Imperial period the oracle at Didyma was primarily approached by individuals, the oracles may be older (Hellenistic). [The plural form χρησμοί does not mean that this is a collection of oracles; one cannot recognize the beginnings of separate oracles. Χρησμοί may be used in the meaning ‘oracular pronouncements’ (e.g. IGR I 1312 lines 6f.: χρησμοῖς Ἀπόλλωνος … σπονδῶν καὶ θυσιῶν ἕνεκα ἐνθάδ᾿ ἵκοντες).] The god recommended the propitiation of Mene (the Moon-Goddess), Helios, Hekate, Hermes, and the Heroes Propylaioi for the rescue of the city from evil, but the rest of the text remains unclear. One recognizes references to sacrifices (θυηπολίη), incense offerings (θυηλαί) and hymns (ἀείσαιτ᾿). No. 13 is the rediscovered oracle of Apollo Klarios from Kaisareia Troketta (see supra no. 25).

182Dedications: One of the few Hellenistic texts is the dedication made to Zeus Kananeirenos by the priest Menogenes [probably Zeus’ priest], who identifies himself as son of the hereditary priest of Zeus Mesianos (16, area of Thyateira, 148 BCE); the dedication was in fulfillment of a vow (εὐχήν). The two new epithets of Zeus derive from local place names. Two dedications to Apollo Kissauloddenos (8–9) were found in Çaldaği. The god is also known from dedications in Smyrna, but they may be pierres errantes. A dedicatory epigram from Parloenoi addresses Apollo Syrmaios as Φοῖβος ἄναξ (109); a man dedicated an incense-burner to Apollo in expression of his gratitude for offering him comfort (εὐχωλῆς χάριν … παρκλητῆρι). A fragmentary dedication (?) from Nisyra mentions a prophetes, an action taken upon command given by the holy angel (κατὰ τὴ[ν] κέλευσιν τοῦ ἁγίου ἀγγέλου), and a priest (176). An interesting dedication from the sanctuary of Thea Larmene reports the wish (ἔταξε) of woman, who had been dedicated to the goddess as a child (cf. τῆς [θρ]εψάσης Λαρμηνῆς), remained unmarried until old age (παρθένος γηράσασα), and served as key-bearer and temple warden (κλειδοῦχος καὶ νεωκόρος). In accordance with the goddess’s providence (κατὰ τὴν τῆς θεοῦ πρόνοιαν), she asked for a statue of the goddess to be set up opposite the temple, apparently on privately owned land (158). Other dedications are addressed to Aphrodite (111), Apollo Axyreos (117, by a priest and a village), Apollo Nazileus (208), (Artemis) Anaitis (108), Dionysos (110), Hekate (? 23), Mes (Artemidorou) Axiottenos (122, 125, called μέγας; 126; 130), Mes Petraites (181–183), Mes and his mother (124: Μεγάλη Μήτηρ Μηνός; 127: Μεγάλη Μήτηρ Μηνὸς τεκοῦσα), Meter and Apollo (202), Meter Theon Tazene (179), Meter Tazene (180), Meter Theon (107), Mega Theion Epiphanes (190; cf. TAM V.3.1635), Thea Andene and Mes Tiamou (193), Thea Larmene (161–163, 165–167), Thea Philis (209), Theoi Katachthonioi (192), Theos Hypsistos (198, 204, 211), Zeus Aerios (19 = TAM V.1.616), Zeus Keraunios (203), Zeus Maspalatenos (196), Zeus Maspalatenos and Mes Tiamou (197), Zeus Poteo (213), the river-god Hermos (114), and anonymous deities (5, 6, 11: τὸν προεστῶτα θεόν; 135, 168: θεὰ ἐπήκοος; 212). The dedications were made for recovery from disease (113: πονέσασα ὀπθαμοὺς εὐχαριστοῦσα; 183: πασχόντων αὐτῶν δυσκώλῳ αἰσθενείᾳ καὶ ἐγερθέντων αὐτῶν τῶν ἀνθρώπων [‘after the people had suffered from a severe disease and stood up on their feet again’]), after a rescue from dangers (204: σωθεὶς ἐγ μεγάλων κινδύνων), in fulfillment of vows (εὐχήν: 22, 107, 114, 135, 164–165, 168, 180–181, 196, 198, 202–204, 208, 211, 213; cf. 130: εὐξαμένη … ἀκουσθεῖσα ἀπέδωκα τὴν εὐχή[ν]; 183: εὐξαμένη … ἀπέδωκα τὴν εὐχήν), for the well-being of family members (135, 161, 182, 190, 196, 198, 211; 164: ὑπὲρ σωτηρίας), upon divine command (212: κατ᾿ ἐπιταγήν), as expressions of gratitude (εὐχαριστήριον: 6, 209; χαριστήρια: 8, 108; εὐχαριστοῦσα: 209), and as a gift (193: δῶρον). The dedicated objects include altars (βωμός: 5, 110, 162, 193), a table for offerings (τράπεζα) and the burning of incense (θυμίατρα, 8; cf. 109: θυμίητρον), a statue of Zeus (112), and anatomical votives with the representation of eyes (161, 198). Among the unepigraphic dedications presented in an appendix, I single out an anatomical votive probably depicting male genitals (p. 153).

183Festivals: An inscription from Çaltepe (4, 2nd/3rd cent.) records the financial contributions of Magnesia on Sipylos to the mysteries of Artemis celebrated by a village ([εἰς θ]ρησκείαν καὶ μυστήρια προκαθημένης αὐτῶν Ἀρτέμιδος). In Pebaleis, a priest dedicated to the sanctuary of Zeus Keraunios vineyards and land plots, whose revenues were to be used for the sacrifice to Zeus (199, 1st. cent.). Sanctuaries: A boundary stone of the sanctuary of Artemis (21, border of Maionia and Sardeis). Imperial cult: An association in Maionia was dedicated to the emperor (197: φιλόκαισαρ φρατρία). In Pebaleis dedications were made to Domitian (200: καθιέρωσεν διὰ ἱερέως) and Domitian and Domitia (201). Cult personnel: A priest of Dionysos πρὸ πόλεως served for life (Thyateira, 2, 1st cent. CE); another one (near Phladelphia) was honored by a Dionysiac association (206). Hierokaisareia honored a man who served as hieronomos and also offered a banquet when his daughter served as priestess (15, Imperial period). The children of a priest of Zeus Sabazios and his wife erected their statues in a sanctuary of Artemis Anaitis (207). The ὑμνωδοὶ τῆς Ἀρτέμιδος honored, posthumously, a priest (115). Cult personnel appear among the dedicants of votives: a hereditary priest (112: ἱερεὺς ἐκ προγόνων), priests (117, 165, 192; cf. 205), and an ἱερός (168).

184Cult associations: An association of Καλόκαιροι (farmers?), chaired by an ἀρχιφράτωρ, probably worshipped the ‘Good Season’ (cf. TAM V.3.1520). A cult association worshipped Dionysos πρὸ πόλεως (206, area of Philadelphia). In Maionia, an association of sacrificers in honor of the emperor (θυσιασταί τῶν Καισαρήων; ‘the association of the sacrificers of the temples of Augustus’) gathered in the sanctuary of Zeus Arios (οἱ συνηγμένοι … παρὰ τῷ Διὶ τοῦ Ἀρίου) and honored ‘the priest of the temples of Augustus’ (τὸν ἱερέα τῶν Καισαρήων) by erecting a stele prescribing the offering of a crown to him and his descendants (στεφανοῦσθαι διὰ γένους καθ᾿ ἑκάστην θυσίαν) [Καισάρηα seems to me not to be ‘temples of Augustus’ but ‘festivals of Augustus’; first, it is unlikely that there were more than one temple (and served by one priest, at that); the name of the association and the periodical crowning of the priests and his descendants during sacrifices rather suggest that the association was dedicated to the celebration of τὰ Καισάρηα, festive days and sacrifices in honor of Augustus (or the emperors)].

185Records of divine punishment: The most important group of inscriptions from the sanctuary of Artemis Anaitis and Mes Tiamou are records of divine punishment. A woman explains that she set up the stele ‘after being punished on her eyes and released [saved] from the punishment … praising and thanking’ the gods (κο[λασθεῖσα εἰ]ς τοὺς ὀφθαλ[μοὺς καὶ
σ]ω̣θεῖσα τῆς κο[λάσεως ε]ὐλογοῦσα καὶ [εὐχαρισ]τοῦσα ἀνέστησε; 55). Four texts (61, 78–80) report the payment of λύτρα [payment of a fine to a sanctuary, in order to put an end to divine punishment]. Two men dedicated a stele ‘after having paid ransom for their own part’ (61: ἐγλυτρωσάμενοι κατὰ τὸ ἴδιον μέρος) [κατὰ τὸ ἴδιον μέρος: each man had paid his own part of the fine]. A certain Trophimos confesses his sin and presents extenuating circumstances (77). Unknowingly, he had touched something that he was not allowed to (perhaps the statue of the goddess), and the goddess punished him (κατὰ [ἄγ]ν̣υαν ἁψάμενος Τ[…
5..]ΕΙΔΙΤΟΥΕΝΠΥΛΙΟ̣[. κολα]σθεὶς ὑπὸ τῆς [θεοῦ ἀνέ]στησε στήλλ[ην]; for the fragmentary part the eds. tentatively suggest τ̣[ῆς Ἀμ]ειδίτου = ἀμειδήτου ἐνπυλίο[υ]; ‘the statue of the Gloomy one at the gate’) [on κατὰ [ἄγ]ν̣υαν see below]. In some cases, the nature of the text can be inferred from the use of expressions typical for this genre: ἐπιζητέω (66), which refers to the god’s requests after a sin, κολάζομαι (81–82), and εἱλασάμε[νοι] (83); cf. no 81: A man was punished and propitiated the gods (κολασ[θ]εὶς καὶ εἱλασάμενος εὐχὴν ἀνέστ[η]σεν). Many similar texts come from other sanctuaries: A man confesses his perjury (ὀμόσας Μῆνα Ἀξιοττηνὸν καὶ παρορκήσας), for which Mes Axiottenos punished him by killing (ἀπέκτεινε) his son and his daughter-in-law; he propitiated the gods and paid the fine (εἱλάσατο τοὺς θεοὺς καὶ ἀπέδωκε τὸ λύτρον; 116). A god (Apollo Axyreos?) appeared in the dream of the children of a sinner and demanded a dedication (118: [ἐν ὀν]ύρῳ ἀπῄτησεν τὰ τέκνα αὐτοῦ); a relief depicts a leg and a double ax. A man entered a sanctuary without following purity regulations: [δι]ὰ ἄγνοιαν τῶν ἡμερῶν ἄθετος [πα]ρήμην ἐπὶ τὸ ἱε[ρόν], ‘because I was ignorant of the days, I approached the sanctuary unsuitably’ (119) [perhaps one should read ἀθέτος for ἀθέτως. Here, [δι]ὰ ἄγνοιαν may not be an excuse (‘I did not know’), but part of the sin: ‘because I did not pay attention’; cf. Petzl, Beichtinschriften 10: διὰ τὸ ἀγνοεῖν αὐτὸν Διός]. A man violated a purity regulation and was punished by the Great Mother of Mes and Mes Artemidorou Axiottenos (123): he purified (καταλούσας) his own wife, but when he went home with her he violated a norm (οὐκ ἐτήρη[σεν - -]). An analogous violation is confessed by another woman, who took a bath on the 20th day (159: διὰ τὸ λούσασθαι τῇ ἰκάδι); after she had been punished in her eyes (represented in low relief) and healed (καὶ πάλιν ἔδωκέ μοι τὴν ὁλοκληρίαν), she thanks the goddess and testifies to her power (εὐχαριστῶ … καὶ μαρτυρῶ αὐτῇ τὰς δυνάμεις). A woman was punished in her eyes; she vowed to stay with the goddess if she were healed; but she delayed the fulfillment of her vow (παρελκύσασα) and was punished again in her eyes (131). A woman was punished in her entire body by Thea Larmene because of a sin of a relative, who ‘used the sacrifices (κεχρῆσθαι θύμασιν) of the Mother of Gods Larmene’ (160). Because of the sin of her mother, a woman was punished by the Theoi Tazenoi (ἐπιζη[τη]σάντων … ἐπεζήτησαν) with an internal disease (κολασθείσης … ἰς τὰ σπλάν[χ]να, 178). A votive relief depicting two legs is unique, because the confession is made in metrical form (188): ‘To you, Mother Andirene, I Lucius [Tati]anos, put up this votive offering (ἄνθεμα) describing on the stele a healthy step of foot, what I had, in the past, not returned. But behold: sculpturing two legs for your might I bring about a good condition (reconciliation). Accept, blessed goddess the fruit of my toil, through which I live, after having suffered tortures, in health; for you my gratitude is everlasting (σοὶ χάρις ἀθάνατη). You men, who, by, virtue of the blessed, are being devoured – –, learn never to slight (μηδέποτε ἀρνεῖσθαι τὴν θεόν) the goddess [or: ‘never to deny to obey the goddess’] but to worship her, for Andirene’s kin is divine. If anybody is disobedient (ἀπειθῇ), he will suffer six times what I have suffered — further evils.’ A very interesting text mentions the fact that a whole village and people living near a town contributed to the expense required for the propitiation of punishing gods (186: συνδρα[μόν]τες εἰς τὴν δα[πάνη]ν εἱλάσοντο [τοὺς] θεούς). In the case of several fragmentary inscriptions one recognizes their nature as records of divine punishment from the vocabulary: θυμολητέω (‘mitigate divine anger’, 120), λύω (187), στηλογραφέω (120, 177), ὁμολογέω (121), δύναμις (125), δείκνυμι τὰς δυνάμεις (177), ἐπιζητέω (177), εὐλογῶ καὶ εὐχαριστῶ (177), ἱκανοποιέω (with regard to the conflict between two women, 128: ἱκανοποιηθεῖσα ἐκ Τατίας), κολάζω (132 and 133); see also nos. 129 and 134. No. 169 = Petzl, Beichtinschriften 13 (with a few new readings).

186Afterlife: Two texts written on a funerary altar from Charakipolis (165–168 CE) provide important information for the deification of deceased individuals by members of their family (17). The first text is a dedication to Θεὰ παρθένος Velitia Furia Apphia by her parents; after his death, the father was deified by his family (ἀποθεοῦται); the eds. provide parallels for this idea (e.g. IGUR IV 1702: τέκνῳ γλυκυτάτῳ καὶ θεῷ ἰδίῳ ἐπηκόῳ).

18769) C. Marek, “Kaunos ehrt Protogenes”, in A. Diler et al. (eds.), Basileus: 50. Yılında Kaunos/Kbid, Istanbul, 2017, p. 123–127: Ed. pr. of an honorary decree for Protogenes (Kaunos, 3rd/2nd cent.). The stele was to be erected in the sanctuary of Apollo. The funds were to be provided by the politikoi tamiai from the sacred and civic revenues (ἔκ τε τῶν ἱερῶγ καὶ πολιτικῶμ προσόδων).

18870) A.P. Matthaiou, “Εἰς ἀρχαϊκὴν ἐπιγραφὴν Καλύμνου”, Grammateion 6 (2017), p. 21–23 [BE 218, 341]: See supra no. 22.

18971) L. Meier, “Der sogenannten Piratenüberfall auf Teos und die Diadochen: Eine Neuedition der Inschrift SEG 44, 949”, Chiron 47 (2017), p. 115–188 [BE 2017, 377]: M. presents an improved edition of the dossier of documents from Teos that contain the measures with which the city tried to collect the ransom necessary for its liberation from πειραταί who had occupied the city and the territory (SEG XLIV 949). The city imposed extraordinary contributions, requested loans, and collected all valuable objects. M. suggests identifying the ‘pirates’ with mercenaries serving in the army of Demetrios Poliorketes (after 287 BCE). The text is of religious interest because it is the earliest attestation of the Dionysia in Teos (lines 9, 31f.). Those who gave loans higher than a certain amount were to be honored with wreaths of olive at the Dionysia, together with the benefactors. They would also have the same ateleia as the one for priests. The citizens and the inhabitants of the city were to declare ownership of valuable objects under oath; the oath was to be taken after the sacrifice of a bull, a ram, and a boar (line 45: [ταύ]ρ̣ωι καὶ κριῶ[ι καὶ κάπρωι]). During the Dionysia and the Thesmophoria, the hierokeryx was to pronounce a prayer for those who kept their oath and a curse for those who perjured themselves (lines 60–62). [See now P. Hamon, “Tout l’or et l’argent de Téos : au sujet d’une nouvelle édition des décrets sur les pirates et l’emprunt pour la libération des otages”, Chiron 48 (2018), p. 333–374. According to H.’s restoration, the hierokeryx cursed magistrates and private citizens, who did not fulfill the decree although they were in a position to do so (lines 9–11: [ἀρᾶσθαι δὲ | τὸν] κ̣ήρυκα [πρὸς] ταῖς ἄλλαις ἀραῖς καθ̣᾿ ἕκαστον ἔτος ὥιτι|νι?
]ρχων μὴ̣ [κτε]λ̣[ο]̣η δυνατὸς ὢν τὰ ἐψηφισμένα, etc.].

19072) S. Mitchell, “Two Galatian Cults in Dacia”, Gephyra 14 (2017), p. 15–21: M. presents the ed. pr. of a dedication to Zeus Erosenos in fulfillment of a vow (εὐ[χ]ήν; Ankyra, 2nd cent. CE). The cult is attested through Latin inscriptions from Dacia: Jupiter Optimus Maximus Erusenus (Napoca, CIL III 859) and Jupiter Erusenus (Alburnus Maior, CIL III 7829). M. also presents an improved edition of the dedication SEG XXV 831 from Alburnus Maior. The altar was dedicated to Zeus Heptakomikos (of the Seven Villages) and not Ϲιττακωμικός. The cult of Zeus Ἑπτακωμητῶν is attested in Galatia (I.North Galatia 37). The cults of Zeus Erosenos and Zeus of the Seven Villages along with those of Zeus Narenos and Zeus Sarnendenos (Alburnus Maior), were introduced by Galatian miners, who migrated to Dacia.

19173) H. Müller and G. Staab, “Dion. Ein pergamenischer Politiker im Himmel”, Chiron 47 (2017), p. 339–365 [BE 2018, 371]: Ed. pr. of a posthumous honorific inscription for the statesman Dion from Pergamon (ca. 150–50). The text is inscribed on a plaque placed on his grave monument. It is decorated with four crowns that commemorate crowns offered to Dion by the province of Asia and the council, gerousia, and the people of Pergamon. The inscription consists of three texts: a hymn, a funerary epigram, and an oracle. According to the hymn, a divine power (δαίμων) placed Dion in the council, where he had a leading position [for divine providence placing statesmen in leading positions, cf. the decree of Asia for Augustus (I.Priene B-M 14 lines 33–35): [ἐπεὶ πᾶσαν ἡ διατάξασα τ]ὸν [βίον ἡμῶν πρόνοια σπουδὴν εἰσενενκα|μ]ένη [καὶ] φ[ιλοτιμί]αν τὸ τεληότατο[ν τῷ βίῳ διεκόσμησεν ἀγαθὸν] | ἐνενκαμένη τὸν Σεβαστόν (‘Providence, which disposes our lives, employing every zeal and ardor has made the most perfect arrangement for life by producing Augustus’); see also IOSPE I2 24 (honorific decree for Kallisthenes from Olbia, 3rd cent. CE): ὑπὸ θεῶν προνοίας παιδευθείς]. After his death, he did not glide into Hades (οὐκ ἐς Ἀΐδαν ὤλισθε). The representation of a lion and a crab (i.e. the zodiac signs for Leo and Cancer) suggest that Dio’s soul went to the sky; the eds. provide parallels for this idea. His sons decorated his corpse with their own hands (δισσῶν τέκνων χείρεσσι κοσμηθείς) [for texts that highlight the fact that relatives used their own hands to bury a family member see EBGR 2006, 26]. Even Solon would call him a fortunate man. Following upon the hymn, a grave epigram reveals the man’s name and his role as the council’s ‘Nestor’. The epigram concludes: τοῦτον Φοῖβος ἔλεξε μέγας τήνων ἀπὸ σηκῶν | φωνήσας χρησμοῖς, οὓς ἐχάραξε τάφωι. | Χρησμός: | Ἔσται τις μετέπειτα λόγος σέθεν ἄξιος ὕμνου, | ὅς κέ σε μανύσει τοῖς μετέπειτα νέοις (‘It is this man that great Phoibos meant, when from that [famous] temple he spoke with oracular verses that he engraved on his grave: “The glory that will follow you will be worthy of a hymn that will declare to the young men of the future who you were” ’). Staab thinks that the oracle was that of Delphi, Müller does not exclude the oracles of Didyma and Klaros [an oracle from distant Delphi might have been highlighted, e.g. as an oracle of Πύθιος; Didyma is far more likely]. M.‑S. provide parallels for oracles concerning proper honors for mortals, a rather rare phenomenon (e.g. Steinepigramme 06/02/03).

19274) E. Nieto Izquierdo, “À propos d’une nouvelle édition de la lex sacra SEG 11, 314 (Argos)”, ZPE 204 (2017), p. 97–99 [BE 2108, 212]: N. continues the discussion on the wording of an Archaic law from Argos (SEG XI 314 = LSS 27 = Nomima I 88, ca. 575–550), which prohibits the use of sacred property outside of the precinct of Athena Polias (see EBGR 2015, 108 and 123), defending his restoration hοῖζ δέ δαμιορ[γία λι],
ἀ[να]νκασσάτο (contra P. 
Probert and E. Dickey: hοῖζ δέ δαμιοργ̣ὸ[ς] ἐ̣π̣αν̣[α]ν̣κασσάτο).

19375) P.M. Nigdelis, Inscriptiones Graecae Epiri, Macedoniae, Thraciae, Scythiae. Pars II. Inscriptiones Macedoniae. Fasciculus I. Inscriptiones Thessalonicae et viciniae. Supplementum primum. Tituli inter a. MCMLV et MMXV reperti, Berlin, 2017: I note the publication of a supplement to the inscriptions of Thessalonike. The most important texts contained in this volume were presented in EBGR 2015, 109.

19476) P. Nigdelis, “A Honorific Inscription from Amphipolis for the Sappaean King Sextus Iulius Cotys”, Tyche 32 (2017), p. 139–149: Ed. pr. of an honorific inscription from Amphipolis. The young men from the gymnasium honored Sextus Iulius Kotys (the Sapaean king Kotyx IX), who had served as high priest of the emperors and agonothetes (38/39 CE); also king Rhoimetalkes II served in the same functions in Thessalonike (IG X.2.1.32).

19577) P. Nigdelis and P. Anagnostoudis, “New Honorific Inscriptions from Amphipolis”, GRBS 57 (2017), p. 295–324: Ed. pr. of two statue bases, the one dedicated to Augustus honored with the epithets σωτὴρ καὶ κτίστης τῆς πόλεως, possibly for giving Amphipolis the status of a free city, the other to L. Calpurnius Piso, the city’s patron (Amphipolis, ca. 11–9 BCE).

19678) P.A. O’Connell, “New Evidence for Hexametric Incantations in Attic Curse Tablets”, ZPE 201 (2017), p. 41–46: In a new curse tablet from Athens (see EBGR 2015, 82; SEG LXV 163; early 4th cent.) O. recognizes an incantation consisting of a complete hexameter and the beginning of a second one (if one removes the victims’ names): δήσω τὸγ γ᾽ ἐμὸν ἐχθρὸν ἐν αἵματι καὶ κονίαισιν | σὺμ πᾶσιμ φθιμένοις. These verses go back to a poetic tradition that shared formulae with early epic poetry; the curse tablet DTA 108 is another example of this tradition. Both tablets may have come from a longer poem that contained repetitive sections beginning with δήσω. The phrase σὺμ πᾶσιμ φθιμένοις has a double meaning: the victims should be bound ‘with all the dead’ but also the defigens would have all the deads as his helpers (cf. σὺν θ᾿ Ἑκάτηι χθονίαι). Blood and dust may have been used during the ritual.

19779) H.S. Öztürk, “Osmanelı’nin Antikçağ Tarihi”, in A. Akpınar and G.A. Aksu (eds.), Gelişim Sürecinde Osmaneli, Istanbul, 2017, p. 27–41: Republication of inscriptions from the Osmanelı district. According to the new edition of a dedication from the area of Nikaia (SEG LV 1338, 4th cent. CE), an image (εἰκών) of Zeus Agathios ἐπήκοος θεός was dedicated by the village of the Attalenoi (p. 35). Two Greek/Latin bilingual dedications to Tyche Basilissa/Fortuna Regina (p. 38; I.Nikaia 1142) and Iupiter Optimus Maximus Tutor/Zeus Kratistos Megistos Phrontistes (p. 39; I.Nikaia 1141) were made by Titus Marcius Gamos in fulfillment of a vow at the place where he was born (voto posito reddidit eo loco ubi natus est; εὐχὴν θεὶς ἀπέδωκεν τούτῳ τῷ τόπῳ οὗ καὶ ἐγεννήθη).

19880) H.S. Öztürk, “Yazıtların Işiğinda Olympos Tarihi (Likya)”, in Y. Olcay-Uçkan (ed.), Olympos I, Istanbul, 2017, p. 225–232: Ed. pr. of inscriptions from Olympos in Lykia (1st/2nd cent). 1) The city dedicated an altar (τὸν βωμὸν ἱδρύσατο) for a ‘rescuer and benefactor’ (τῷ ἰδίῳ σωτῆρι καὶ εὐεργέτῃ). His name was erased (1) [probably an emperor (Nero, Domitian?) or a provincial governor]. 3) An epitaph provides for a payment of a fine to Hephaistos for any violation of the grave.

19981) M. Oktan, “Dedications to Zeus Drymon from Lyrboton Kome”, Philia 3 (2017), p. 154–160: Three altars were found standing in front of a monumental building in Lyrboton Kome (area of Perge); two of them are inscribed. A veteran dedicated to Ζεὺς Δρυμών his lance ([Διὶ] Δρυμόνι … τῷ θεῷ τὴν λανκίαν ἀνέθηκα; 1, 3rd cent. CE.). A certain Sulla dedicated an altar (2). The epithet Δρυμών was hitherto unattested, but Ioannes Tzetzes (Schol. ad Lycophr. 93) mentions the cult of Ζεὺς Δρύμνιος in Pamphylia (cf. Lykophron, Alexandra 536f.). The epithet of Zeus may be related to δρυμός (woodland).

20082) Z. Papadopoulou, “ Ὅρος ἀπὸ τὴν Νάξο”, Grammateion 5 (2016), p. 29–32: Ed. pr. of a boundary stone of land dedicated to Athena (Ἀθην|άης), found in the area of the villages Γαλήνη and Ἐγγαρές in Naxos (ca. 450–400). A similar boundary stone of land (χωρίον) dedicated to Athena Polias was found near the village Ἄχαψη (IG XII.5.41); the sacred land of Athena was probably located in the area of the villages Γαλήνη and Ἐγγαρές.

20183) Z. Papadopoulou, “Οἱ ἐπιγραφὲς τῆς Πάρου”, in AENAig II, p. 337–346: In an overview of the epigraphy of Paros, P. mentions the following inedita (p. 344): 1) A regulation either of the city of Paros or of a civic subdivision that requires the payment of dues for the construction of tombs in a certain area (ca. 475–450). 2) The boundary stone of the sanctuary of the ancestral god of a kinship group. 3) An account of the treasurers of Demeter (ca. 400). Its discovery at the hill Psilos Mylos, above the Asklepieion, suggests that this is the location of the Thesmophorion, mentioned by Herodoros (VI. 134: κολωνὸς πρὸ τῆς πόλεως). 4) A contract concerning the purchase of a land plot by the cult association of the Soteriastai (3rd cent.) [probably devoted to the cult of Zeus Soter].

20284) S. Perea Yébenes, “El voto de un soldado a Silvano. — Zeus Dalbenus?”, Gerión 33 (2015), p. 311–324 [BE 2017, 136; SEG LXV 2033): Ed. pr. of a statuette (2nd cent. CE) representing a standing man, with fruits in his cloak; a column in the shape of a tree-trunk and a dog are behind the man (unknown provenance, now in a private collection in Barcelona). The statuette was dedicated by a soldier to Zeus Dalenos in fulfilment of a vow (εὐ[χ]ήν). The epithet suggests an origin in Asia Minor. The statuette may represent Silvanus.

20385) G. Petridou, “Artemidi to ichnos: Divine Feet and Hereditary Priesthood in Pisidian Pogla”, AS 59 (2009), p. 81–93 [SEG LIX 1533]: Ed. pr. of an inscribed column from Pogla (2nd/3rd cent.). An inscription written on the top of the shaft of a column and around the column reports that two priests dedicated a footprint to Artemis, following a local custom and in accordance with an oracle (A: Ἀρτέμιδ[ι?] | τὸ ἴχνος | κατὰ χρηματισ|μόν; B: [- - -]ω̣νιανὸς [- - -] | [Ἄρ]τεμεις Τροκονδου Σω[σ]ᾶ | ἱε[ρούμε]νοι Θεῷ [ἐπηκόῳ κατὰ] τὸ ἔθος | τῆς πόλεως) [the two priests may have been husband and wife]. Two holes between the second and third line of text A probably supported a votive object in the shape of a bare foot, footwear, or a footprint. P. adduces examples for dedications depicting the footprint of deities or worshippers. The goddess may have been Artemis Ephesia. P. considers the possibility of a hereditary priesthood, adducing I.Pisidia Central 31 (I.Mus. Burdur 21) which mentions a Trokondas and his daughter Artemis; he was hereditary priest of Artemis Ephesia, but in a different city (Kremna).

20486) B.A. Polat Becks, “Burdur Müzesi’nden Bir Adak Steli Işığında Pisidia’da Herakles Kültü”, in H. Metin, B.A. Polat Becks, R. Becks, and M. Fırat (eds.), Pisidia Yazıları. Hacı Ali Ekinci Armağanı, Istanbul, 2015, p. 111–121 [SEG LXV 1274]: Ed. pr. of a votive relief depicting Herakles (Keçili Köyü, Pisidia, Imperial period). A man dedicated it to Herakles Epekoos upon divine command (κατ᾿ ἐπιταγήν).

20587) L. Porciani, “Creso, Anfiarao e la nuova iscrizione da Tebe”, in Scritti – Alfieri Tonini, p. 101–112: P. discusses the epigram from Thebes concerning Kroisos’ dedications to Amphiaraos (cf. Herodotos I, 52; see infra nos. 104–105). In line 1 he suggests restoring Ἄπολλον ἄ[ναχς] (cf. the restoration by P. Thonemann [infra no. 105]). His most significant contribution concerns the object that was found with the help of Apollo’s oracle and was re-dedicated to Apollo Ismenios. According to P.’s restoration of line 3 (τὰ[γ χρυσ]οῖο φαεννὰν [ἀσπίδα]), the golden tip of a spear, dedicated by Kroisos and stolen, was found under the golden shield, also dedicated by Kroisos (εὑρὸν hυπὸ τὰ[γ χρυσ]οῖο φαεννὰν [ἀσπίδα] … […] αἰχμέν, ἃ ἐκλέφθε ΦΟ[- -]; the last word may be a form of φωράω/φώρια) [this restoration has the advantage that it explains the dedication to Apollo; what was dedicated to the god was the lost object whose whereabouts were revealed by his oracle; however, the restoration of Tentori Montalto (infra no. 104) seems to me more convincing: the shield (or shield and spear) was (were) stolen and found buried]. Concerning the difficult question of where Kroisos, whom P. identifies as the Lydian king, originally made his dedication to Amphiaraos, in Thebes or in Oropos, P. favors Oropos and speculates on the reasons why Kroisos votives were transferred to Thebes, where they were seen by Herodotos.

20688) G. Renberg, “I.GrÉgLouvre 11 and the Lychnaption: a Topographical Problem at Saqqâra”, ZPE 200 (2016), p. 215–218: An inscription from Saqqâra (I.Egypte Nubie Louvre 11, 3rd cent.) commemorates the dedication of a λυχνάπτιον, considered to be a station for those who tended sacred lamps. This building has been traditionally identified with a small structure in Saqqâra. R. convincingly rejects this identification. The location of the λυχνάπτιον remains unknown.

20789) G. Renberg, “Prosopographical Problems Associated with the Establishment of Asklepios’s Cult at Pergamon”, ZPE 201 (2017), p. 155–159: Archias, the man who according to Pausanias (II, 26, 8) introduced Asklepios’ cult to Pergamon is usually identified with a homonymous local statesman, who served as the first prytanis (ca. 366–360; I.Pergamon 613 A 1–3). Because of the lack of any evidence for Asklepios’ cult in Pergamon earlier than the construction of the Asklepieion around 270 BCE, R. suggests we dissociate the prytanis from the man who introduced the cult. The latter may have been his descendant. The family of Archias seems to have remain connected with the cult until the Imperial period (see esp. I.Pergamon 251 and 267; I.Pergamon Asklepieion 45–47).

20890) T. Ritti, “Per la storia sociale ed economica di Hierapolis di Frigia. Le fondazioni sociali e funerarie”, MAL Ser. IX, vol. 36.3, Rome, 2016, p. 421–657 [BE 2018, 437]: In this thematic corpus, R. collects the inscriptions that concern or refer to endowments in Hierapolis (2nd–3rd cent.). R. presents detailed commentaries on the administrative and financial aspects of these endowments as well as on the burial practices, the care for the grave, and the association in Hierapolis. The inscriptions concern the funding of contests (2–3) and the performance of rituals (1, 4–47; new texts are marked with an asterisk). A decree honoring Myndios for his endowment (1 = SEG LI 1783, reign of Hadrian) is partly preserved; the funds were used for a sacrifice offered by Myndios and 30 councilors, drawn by lot, for the prosperity of the city. Two endowments funded contests: the Oualentea, founded by L. Tullius Valens, who also served as agonothetes (2, ca. 200 CE), and an agon (for Commodus?) for which P. Aelius Zenon Ioulianos served as agonothetes for life (3). The evidence for funerary foundations is more abundant. A first group consists of funds endowed usually by members of the elite to the gerousia (7–13, *14, *15), the priestesses of the gerousia (4, 13), the council and the gerousia (5, *6), and the neaniskoi (? 16) for the crowing (στεφανωτικά) of the graves of the donors and family members and for money distributions to the gerousia or parts of it on that occasion (p. 442–481). The gymnasiarchoi of the gerousia are sometimes mentioned as the supervisors of the endowments (8, 11, *14). The donors include a priestess of the gerousia (4a, early 3rd cent. CE) and a high priest (5), but also a former gladiator (summa rudis, 8). In one case violation of the endowment resulted in the payment of a fine to the sanctuary of Apollo (11). A second, much larger group of inscriptions attests to endowments made to professional associations (p. 481–566). In most cases, the funds were to be spent for money distributions on the occasion of the crowning of the donor’s grave (στεφανωτικόν; *17, *18, 20, 21, 24, 26, 27, *28, *29, 30, 31 *32, *33, *35–38, 39, *40–44, 45, *46?, *47). This purpose is described in more detail in no. 43*: ἔδωκα στεφανωτικὸν ἐφ᾿ ᾧ καθ᾿ ἕκαστον ἔτος μη(νὸς) δ΄ λ΄ διανείμῃ ἐπὶ τὸ ἡρῷον μου πᾶσιν τοῖς ἐλθοῦσιν κτλ. (cf. *45). Endowed funds could also be spent for a banquet at the donor’s grave (25: ἵνα οἱ κληρωθέντες εὐφρανθῶσι ἐπὶ τὸ ἡρῷον μου; cf. *34) and for a rite that is described as ἀποκαυσμός (*19) and ἀποκαυσμὸς τῶν παπῶν (23b), to be performed on the customary date (23b: τῇ ἐθίμῳ ἡμέρᾳ). The latter rite possibly consisted in the burning of a plant (or poppies?) on the grave. P. Aelius Glykon Zeuxianos Ailianos additionally endowed funds to the associations of the purple dyers and the weavers for Jewish festivals (24: ἑορτὴ τῶν ἀζύμων, ἑορτὴ τῆς πεντηκοστῆς). In one case, the recipient was a cult association (48; σημιαφόροι τοῦ Ἀρχηγέτου Ἀπόλλωνος). The recipients remain unknown in 8 cases (*49–56). R. also republishes two funerary foundations for στεφανωτικόν from Laodikeia (I.laodikeia am Lykos 84–85) and Kolossai (MAMA VI 42).

20991) T. Ritti, Storia e istituzioni di Hierapolis (Hierapolis di Frigia IX), Istanbul, 2017. R. presents an impressive panorama of the history and institutions of Hierapolis, presenting numerous inscriptions that concern cults, contests, oracles, and the imperial cult (esp. p. 99–147, 168–189, 232–267). She republishes numerous inscriptions (with Italian translations). I only mention the inedita: 1) A dedication to Augustus (p. 340). 2) A decree of the Koinon of Asia in honor of Hadrian mentions spectacles (line 13: τὰς θεωρίας; line 14: [τὴν
γεγενη]μένην ἀπὸ τῶν θεωριῶν τέρψιν [p. 371–382]). 3) A building inscription of the stoa in the North Agora mentions the gods and the emperor (p. 427f.). 4) A dossier of three documents concerns the high priest T. Flavius Meniskos and the organization of gladiatorial events and
venationes (ca. 151–156): a letter of Antoninus Pius that gives permission for these events (p. 430–437), an honorific decree for Meniskos by the Koinon of Asia proposed by the high priest of Asia of the temple in Kyzikos (p. 437–448), and a letter of the emperor in response to the decree (p. 447–452). 5) A posthumous honorific decree for a high priest (p. 462). 6) An honorific decree for a high priest (p. 542). 7) An inscription that mentions a tribe named after Augustus (p. 557: φυλὴ Αὐγουστιανῶν ναΐκῆς Ἱεραπολειτῶν μητροπόλεως). 8) A priestess of Demeter dedicated a statue of an emperor (p. 558). 9) An honorific inscription for a hight priest of the temple in Smyrna (p. 568).

21092) F. Rocca, “La manomissione di un Giudeo a Oropos”, Mediterraneo Antico 20 (2017), p. 321–340: R. republishes an inscription from Oropos that records the manumission of a certain Moschos, a Jew (I.Oropos 329, 3rd cent. BCE?). The religious interest of the text lies in the fact that Moschos practiced incubation, during which Amphiaraos and Hygieia appeared in a dream and instructed him to dedicate the stele. Because of the ambiguous position of Oropos, the manumission was witnessed by both Athenians and Oropians. R. argues that Moschos’ incubation took place after his liberation; it was a right that resulted from his new status. [It is indeed very likely that the incubation took place after the manumission; however, there is no evidence that incubation was not allowed to slaves. See Aristophanes, Ploutos, 649–763: the slave Karion sleeps in the incubation hall.]

21193) K. Rougou, N. Douloubekis, and G. Kossifidou, “Νέα εὑρήματα ἀπὸ τὸ αἰολικὸ ἱερὸ στὴν Κλοπεδὴ Λέσβου”, in AENAig II, p. 111–122: In their report on excavations at an important sanctuary at Klopedi on Lesbos, at the border of Arisbe and Methymna, founded in the 8th cent. on the ruins of a Mycenaean settlement, the authors mention the discovery of a clay plaque with the inscription [Ἀπόλ]λωνος. This confirms the attribution of the sanctuary to Apollo.

21294) D. Rousset and J.‑Y. Strasser, “D’Élatée à Delphes : un Étolarque et un Xystarque”, REG 130 (2017), p. 1–22 [BE 2018, 235; SEG LXIV 479]: R.‑S. republish an honorific inscription from Elateia (see already EBGR 2015, 149). The honorand is T. Flavius Eurydikos of Delphi, secretary of the Amphiktyones, xystarches of the Pythia, and τῶν ὁσίων πρέσβυς; the man who dedicated his statue to Athena is the Aitolarches M. Aurelius Euagathos of Hypata. Both men are known from CID IV 164.

21395) B. Schmalz, “Ein ‘delikates’ Beispiel der ‘delicate class’ in Kaunos”, in A. Diler et al. (eds.), Basileus: 50. Yılında Kaunos/Kbid, Istanbul, 2017, p. 1–11: Ed. pr. of an inscribed skyphos from Kaunos (Archaic period). The inscription designates it as property of a goddess ([Ἀθαναί]ας or [Ἑστί]ας εἰμι).

21496) D. Sever-Georgousakis, “Rezan Has Müzesi’nden Yayımlanmamış Üç Muska ve Erken Bizans Dönemi’nden ‘Hipotetik’ Büyü Kitabı”, Arkeoloji ve Sanat 156 (2017), p. 223–228: Presentation of three amulets (two silver and one bronze) with the text σφρ[αγὶ]ς Σολομν(ος) and σφραγὶς Σολομν(ος), βοῆθι τ φορντι, and ἅγιος, ἅγιος, ἅγιος, ἅγιος, Σολομών, ἁμῖν (unknown provenance, ca. 6th cent. CE).

21597) N. Sharankov, “Inscriptions from Cabyle: New Readings and Interpretations”, Bulgarian e-Journal of Archaeology 7.2 (2017), p. 199–243 [in Bulgarian; English summary; BE 2018, 296]: S. presents improved editions of inscriptions from Kabyle (originally published in Kabile II, Sofia, 1991). 1) A bilingual Greek/Latin inscription concerning the dedication of the temple of Iupiter Optimus Maximus Dolichenus should be dated to 208 CE (10a; p. 208–213). 2) A Latin dedication to Asklepios and Hygieia (14; p. 214). 3) A dedication to Apollo Tadenos was made by iron-workers (ἐργασ̣τ̣α̣ὶ̣ ἐ̣[ν τοῖς σιδηρείοις?]; 18; p. 215f.). 4) A dedication to Θεὸς Αὐλαρχηνός, whose cult was probably introduced by Greek settlers (20; p. 216). 5) A dedication to Zeus Zbelthiourdos by a soldier (21; p. 217). 6) A dedication to Kerdos, the personification of gain, not to Apollo Kendrisos (22; p. 217f.). 7) A dedication to Heros Sases (24; p. 220f.). 8) A thanksgiving dedication (εὐχαριστήριον) of a man possibly on behalf of his son (25; p. 222). 9) A dedication by a couple (εὐξάμενοι; 26; p. 222). 10) A thanksgiving dedication of a man for his family ([ὑπὲρ τῶν ἰδί]ων εὐ[χαριστήριον] [31; p. 223]). 11) The dedication to Apollo ([Ἀγαθῇ] τύχῃ· | [Φοίβῳ σ]ώζον|[τ]ι; 42; p. 227).

21698) P. Siewert, “Hocharchaische Opfervorschrift für das Kronos-Fest in Olympia (BrU 7)”, Tyche 32 (2017), p. 189–223 [BE 2018, 226]: Ed. pr. of an important fragmentary cult regulation from Olympia (ca. 550 BCE), the first epigraphic attestation of the cult of Kronos. S. offers detailed commentary on the rituals, the connection between Zeus and Kronos in Olympia, and the possibly very early origin of the cult of Kronos. The text reads: [- -]ΜΟΝΟΝ ἐνέλθοι καθύσαις, ἄνατος κ᾿ ἔα α[ὐτὸς | πο᾿ τὸ]ν θεόν. ἀ ϝράτρα τῶν Κρονικν τοῖ θεοκόλοι | [- - -]ς ἐν ταῖς πέντ᾿ ἀμάραις καθύϝεν, πλὴν ἐν τὀλυμπιάδι· | αἰ δὲ μὰ καθύϝοι, ἄγαλμ᾿ ἔχεν. The first clause concerns the obligation of someone (a foreigner?) to offer a sacrifice upon entering the sanctuary. The next clause refers to the Kronos festival and the duty of the theokolos to offer sacrifices for the five days of the duration of the festival (‘an den fünf Tagen’); there are parallels for five-days celebrations in Olympia, Delphi, and Halai. The festival of Kronos seems to have coincided with that of Zeus Olympios. [‘When someone - -] enters, after he has sacrificed, let him be without punishment with regard to the god. The regulation of the Kronos festival for the theokolos [- -] he shall offer a sacrifice for five days, except during the Olympic festival. If he does not offer a sacrifice, soll (the god) receive a votive.’ See also the comments of S. Minon, BE 2018, 226].

21799) V. Sokolovska, “When Was the Roman Temple of Isar-Marvinci Built?”, in Folia Archaeologica Balcanica 3 (2015), p. 63–70 [BE 2018, 277; SEG LXV 475 bis]: A recent epigraphic find suggests that a temple excavated at Isar-Marvinci (Idomene?) was dedicated to the cult of Herakles, not Commodus. The inscription reports that a praetorian soldier had the temple built and a statue set up at his expense in fulfillment of a vow (Ἡρακλεῖ καὶ τῇ πόλει κατ᾿ εὐ|χὴν τὸ ἄγαλμα καὶ τὸν ναὸν | ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων ἐποίει; 79/80 CE). A statue of Herakles has been found in the temple.

218100) D. Sourlas, “In Search of Eileithyia and Aphrodite Pandemos: Two New Classical Reliefs from Athens”, in H. Frielinghaus and J. Stroszeck (eds.), Kulte und Heiligtümer in Griechenland. Neue Funde und Forschungen, Möhnesee, 2017, p. 163–79: Ed. pr. of two fragmentary votive reliefs from Athens. The iconography of the first relief is unique. It depicts three female herms, probably xoana of goddesses, wearing a polos (ca. 400–350). An inscription reveals that it was dedicated to Eileithyia by a woman from Thespiai ([Θε]σπικὴ Εἰλε[ιθυίαι]) [J.‑M. Carbon, points out (per litt.) that the representation of three deities suggests that this is a dedication to Εἰλε[ιθυίαις]; cf. e.g. SEG XXIV 226]. The second relief is round in shape and depicts a dressed woman riding sideways on a he-goat (Aphrodite Pandemos or Epitragia); there is a deer or stag under the he-goat. S. discusses the cult of Aphrodite Pandemos in Athens and the possible origin of the two reliefs (perhaps from the same sanctuary).

219101) V.F. Stolba, “Two Hellenistic Defixiones from West Crimea”, GRBS 56 (2016), p. 263–292: Ed. pr. of two curse tablets found in a rural area in West Crimea (Chernomorskoye district, ca. 320–270); they are the first texts of this kind from this area. They were written by the same individual. 1) Αριακον τὸν | Αρσατειος καὶ τοὺς | ὀρφανιστὰς | κατορύσσω | Α??. The victims of the curse have Iranian names; the context is probably that of a legal conflict involving the guardians of orphans. The last line is written upside-down. S.?suspects that the defigens intended to write the curse backwards but stopped, turned the tablet around, and inscribed the text regularly. 2)?The text is written backwards. The defigens requests from unnamed powers to bury (ρι. The victims of the curse have Iranian names; the context is probably that of a legal conflict involving the guardians of orphans. The last line is written upside-down. S. suspects that the defigens intended to write the curse backwards but stopped, turned the tablet around, and inscribed the text regularly. 2) The text is written backwards. The defigens requests from unnamed powers to bury (κατοράξαι[τε]) his opponent, Mata, and those who cooperate with her, and to make other men incapable to cooperate with Mata (ἐπίλαπτον ποιήσαιτε). [Interestingly, the cursed men are identified by the names of their fathers, not their mothers, as usually in curses.]

220102) L. Sümmerer, Pompeiopolis – Taşköprü: Başkentten Ilçeye 2000 Yıl, Istanbul, 2017 [non vidi; mentioned in IAM 2018, 275]: Ed. pr. of a dedication to Zeus Basilikos εὐχῆς χάριν from Pompeiopolis (2nd cent CE; p. 92).

221103) A.Y. Tavukçu, Z. Aydin Tavukçu, M. Ceylan, and S. Ağaoğlu, “Alaşehir – Philadelphia Araştirmaları 2013”, Araştirma Sonuçlari Toplantisi 32.1 (2014), Ankara, 2105, I, p. 310–312 [SEG LXV 1179–1187]: The authors briefly present new epigraphic finds from Philadelphia (texts in majuscules; p. 311f.) [on the basis of inaccurate transcriptions, the texts are tentatively read in SEG by T. Corsten]. 1) A dedication by a woman of senatorial rank (p. 311; SEG LXV 1180). 2) A funerary epigram refers to the idea that the sky received the soul of the deceased individual (οὐρανὸς εὐρὺς ἐδέξατο; SEG LXV 1183). 3) An honorific inscription for a high priestess ‘of the gods of the fatherland’ (τὴν ἀρχιέρειαν τῶν τῆς [π]ατρίδος θεῶν; SEG LXV 1184). 4) A dedication to the Great Goddess upon a dream (Θεᾷ Μεγάλῃ | Λίνδος κατ᾿ ὄ|νειρον; SEG LXV 1185). 5) A dedication to Hephaistos in fulfilment of a vow (εὐχή[ν]; SEG LXV 1186).

222104) M. Tentori Montalto, “Some Notes on Croesus’ Dedication to Amphiaraos at Thebes (BE, 2015, n. 306”, ZPE 204 [2017], p. 1–9): T.M. discusses in detail the epigram from Thebes concerning Kroisos’ dedications to Amphiaraos (cf. Herodotos I, 52; see supra no. 87 and infra no. 105), the text, the palaeography, and the historical context (p. 125–138). He proposes the following restorations: line 1, in fine: [τόδ᾿ ἄ]γ[α]λ̣μα; line 2, in fine: κα[ὶ εὐχσάμενος (κα[τευχσάμενος], ed.pr.); lines 2f.: εὑρὸν hυπὸ γᾶ[ς χρυσ]οῖο φαεννὰν [ἀσπίδα]; line 6, initio: [κεί]μεν᾿ or [κειμ]έν᾿ ([αἰχ]μέν, ed. pr.). In this interpretation, an oracle of Apollo had led to the discovery of the stolen golden shield (and spear?), dedicated by king Kroisos to Amphiaraos, buried under the earth [among the recent contributions to the text of the epigram, this is the most convincing]. T.M. discusses also the complex issue of the existence of a sanctuary of Amphiaraos in Thebes and the connection between Amphiaraos and Apollo Ismenios. [For an Italian version of this study see M. Tentori Montalto, “Erodoto e due epigrammi di recente scoperta: la deica di Creso ad Amphiaraos e la battaglia di Maratone”, in F. Camia, L. Del Monaco, and M. Nocita (eds.), Munus Letitiae. Studi miscellani offerti a Maria Letizia Lazzarini, Rome, 2018, p. 125–154. For the identification of Kroisos as the Lydian king, see now also M. Simonton, “Two Notes on the New Croesus Epigram from Thebes”, CQ 70 (2020), p. 10–15. He suggests that Kroisos’ dedication was made in the context of the consultation of the oracle of Amphiaraos; it is possible that the priests in Thebes provided a different motivation later (i.e. Amphiaraos’ valour and suffering). For a hero honored for his suffering S. adduces the case of Adrastos (Herodotos V, 67; cf. Pindar, Pythian 8. 49–52).]

223105) P. Thonemann, “Croesus and the Oracles”, JHS 126 (2016), p. 152–167: A late Archaic epigram from the sanctuary of Apollo Ismenios in Thebes, inscribed on a column and re-inscribed in the 4th cent. (EBGR 2014, 103), concerns a golden shield dedicated to Amphiaraos by Kroisos. The epigram reports that a priest (line 2: [κἐ]πιστὰς ἱαρ, according to N. Papazarkadas, the editor) dedicated to Apollo a shining shield that a certain Kroisos had originally dedicated to Amphiaraos (lines 4f.: [ἀσπ]ίδα τὰγ Ϙροῖσος κα[λϝ]ὸν ἄγαλ[μα θέτο? Ἀμ]φιαρέοι μνᾶμ᾿ ἀρετ[ᾶς τε πάθας τε]). The priest had found the shield (stolen, in Papazarkadas’ reading of line 6: ἃ ἐκλέφθε) upon consultation of the oracle of Apollo (line 3: [μα]ντοσύναις εὑρόν). Papazarkadas identified the Kroisos of the epigram with the Lydian king, whose consultation and testing of oracles in Greece is narrated by Herodotos (I, 52). Kroisos dedicated to Amphiaraos a golden shield and a spear ‘once he had learned of his virtue and his suffering’ (πυθόμενος αὐτοῦ τὴν ἀρετὴν καὶ τὴν πάθην). Herodotos claims that he saw these votives in the sanctuary of Apollo Ismenios. T. presents a new critical edition of the epigram (underlined letters are preserved in the 4th-cent. copy), suggesting a few restorations. Lines 1f.: [σοὶ] χάριν ἐνθάδ᾿, Ἄπολλο[ν ἄναχς, περικαλλὲς ἄγαλμα | θεσ]πιστὰς ἱαρ στᾶσε κ[ατευχσάμενος]. Papazarkadas had restored [κἐ]πιστὰς ἱαρ, but T. recognizes the dedicant as the sanctuary’s prophet. The epigram mentions the discovery of the votive (line 3: [μα]ντοσύναις εὑρὸν h[υπὸ ταῖ̣σι θεοῖο?) (Papazarkadas: h[υπὸτα….οιο) and identifies it (lines 3–5): [φαενὰν | ἀσπ]ίδα τὰγ Ϙροῖσος κα[λϝὸν ἄγαλμα θεοῖο? Ἀμ]φιαρέοι μνᾶμ᾿ ἀρετ[ᾶς τε πάθας τ᾿ ἀνέθεκεν] (Papazarkadas: [ἄγαλμα θέτο] … [πάθας τε - -]). T. suspects that these lines are a recasting of the original dedicatory epigram (p. 158 note 15: e.g. ἀσπίδα τάνθε θει Ϙροῖσος περικαλλὲς ἄγαλμα | Ἀμφιαρέοι μνᾶμ᾿ ἀρετᾶς τε πάθας τ᾿ ἀνέθεκεν, or a similar text in Attic). It is not certain where the original dedication to Amphiaraos was made, in Oropos or in an oracular sanctuary of Amphiaraos in Thebes (p. 159). The shield seems to have been stolen (line 6: ἐκλέφθε), but T. does not exclude the possibility of an unaugmented passive (ἐκλήφθη: ‘was received’; ἐκλείφθη: ‘was left’). It is likely that Herodotos copied the late Archaic epigram, but it is also possible that his narrative was influenced by local priestly propaganda. He mentions three tripods in the sanctuary of Apollo (V, 59–61), but two of them are fictive compositions (a dedication by Herakles’ father Amphitryon and a dedication by the legendary Laodamas) and the third one, a 7th- or 6th-cent. dedication by a victorious boxer is attributed to a mythical contemporary of Oedipus (p. 159f.). In view of these manipulations, T. suspects that Herodotos wrongly identified Kroisos with the Lydian king. T.’s arguments are these: 1) Kroisos was interested in Amphiaraos’ oracular capacities, not his life-story [this argument is relevant only if Kroisos’ dedication was made in connection with the testing of the oracles; the problem disappears, if we dissociate the dedication from the dubious story of the oracle testing]. 2) According to Herodotos, with the words μνᾶμ᾿ ἀρετ[ᾶς τε πάθας] the dedicant referred to Amphiaraos’ virtue and suffering (πυθόμενος αὐτοῦ τὴν ἀρετὴν καὶ τὴν πάθην). However, ‘when people in the Archaic Greek world set up dedications “as a memorial of such-and-such”, the phrase invariably refers to an event in their own lives, not in the life of the god or hero to whom they are dedicating’. [This is correct, if one only considers dedications to gods and heroes. In dedications in honor of deceased people and in honorific inscriptions it is very common that the expression μνῆμ᾿ ἀρετῆς et sim. refers to the properties of the honored individual, not of the dedicant. I limit myself to two examples that are contemporary: SEG XXVII 249: μνῆμ’ ἀρετῆς ἔθεσαν Πάριοι Τοκεο h[ού]νεκεν ἥβην [Ἠι]όνος ἀνφ’ ἐρατῆς ὄλεσι βαρνάμενος (epigram for Tokes, Amphipolis, ca. 500, cited by T. on p. 162); I.dial. Olbia Pont 44: [μνῆμ’ ἀρετῆς ἕστ]ηκα, λέγω δ’ ὅτι τῆλε πόλε̣[ως] | [οὐλόμενος κεῖτ]α̣ι Λέωξος ὁ Μολπαγόρε̣[ω] (epigram for Leoxos, Olbia, ca. 490/480); there are more similar cases later, e.g. SEG XLVII 2173 (Kyrene, ca. 300): Mνῆμα ἀρετῆς τόδε ἔθηκε | Φίλων Ἀρχοῖ συνομεύνωι. This is why Herodotos did not find a reference to Amphiaraos’ virtue and suffering surprising, and I would expect his knowledge of Greek and of dedicatory formulas to have been better than that of any modern scholar]. 3) Since there are many dedications that refer to the dedicant’s own arete, the Kroisos of the epigram could have been a post mortem memorial of the dedicant’s own valiant death in battle; post mortem dedications are attested, possibly made on the basis of a vow of the dedicant before the battle and fulfilled by relatives or the city (e.g. CEG 256, 272, 380). The dedicant might be the Athenian Kroisos, who fell in a battle around 530–520 (CEG 27); in that case, either Herodotos or his Theban guides misinterpreted a dedication on behalf of the Athenian Kroisos and attributed it to the famous Lydian king. [This is possible. C. Prêtre (see SEG LV 891, cited by T.) has shown that in Delian inventories the names of ordinary dedicants were changed in order to increase the sanctuary’s glory through reference to famous dedicants. However, T.’s examples of post mortem dedications are irrelevant. First, it is far from certain that CEG 272 and 380 are post mortem dedications (the dedicant’s death is not mentioned). Second, the dedication of Kallimachos (CEG 256) for the victory in Marathon was made on the basis of a vow for victory, not for a heroic death. All in all, there is no compelling reason to doubt that king Kroisos did make a dedication to Amphiaraos, not necessarily in connection with a testing of oracles; that this valuable dedication was somehow lost or stolen; and that a priest did what people usually did when they were looking for lost ‘treasures’: he consulted an oracle. This is often mentioned in the oracular tablets of Dodona (I.Dodone Evangelidi nos. 126, 194, 1034, 1609, 1938, 3851); see also A. Stramaglia, “Il leone, il tesoro e l’indovinello”, ZPE 91 (1992), p. 53–59. According to Tentori Montalto’s convincing interpretation (supra no. 104), the shield was found buried. There is no contradiction between the fact that the shield had been stolen (line 6: ἐκλέφθε) and the fact that it was found buried; those who want to hide valuable objects typically bury them. On this text see also supra no. 87.]

224106) P. Thonemann, “Three Notes on Lydian Saittai”, Philia 3 (2017), 188–196 [BE 2018, 398]: T. shows that two epitaphs from Saittai, both dating to 19 Peritios of the 252th year (167/168) were for the same person: Dionysios, son of Epaphrodeitos. They were set up by two associations, the Dionysiac podarioi (percussionists?) and a plateia (TAM V.1.91 and SEG XXXIII 1018). These inscriptions suggest the existence of co-operative burial clubs in Saittai (p. 192–194).

225107) E. Tül Tulunay et al., “Nuf (olympos) Dağı Araştırma ve Kazı Projesi”, KST 38.2 (2017), p. 331–358: Ed. pr. of an inscribed kantharos from Smyrna with the inscription Διὸς Σωτῆρος (p. 348). [For the reading see IAM 2018, 102. The inscription shows that the vase was used for libation for Zeus Soter; for such texts see A. Chaniotis, “The Epigraphy of the Night”, in N. Papazarkadas and C. Noreña (eds.), From Document to History: Epigraphic Insights into the Greco-Roman World, Leiden, 2019, p. 27f.]

226108) N. Tüner Önen and F. Yılmaz, “A New Athena Polias Votive Inscription from the Phaselis Acropolis”, Adalya 18 (2015), p. 121–131 [SEG LXV 1510]: Ed. pr. of a dedication to Athena Polias (Phaselis, 5th cent.) mentioned in EBGR 2016, 7 (SEG LXIV 1408). Euphanes dedicated a tithe making a vow (ἀνέθηκε χρημάτων | δεκάταν εὐξάμενος).

227109) H. Uzunoğlu, “Küçük Asya Kırsal Yerleşmelerinde Su ve Su Yapıları: Epigrafik Bir Inceleme”, in Ü. Aydinoğlu and A. Mörel (eds.), Rural Settlements and the Urban Centers in Mediterranean during Antiquity: Symposium Proceedings 04–07 April 2016, Mersin, Turkey, Mersin, 2017, p. 302–316: Ed. pr. of a building inscription from Stratonikeia-Londeis (ca. 100–150 CE). Two hierotamiai constructed a fountain and a Nymphaion upon entry to their office ([κ]ατασταθέ[ν]τες ἱεροταμίαι). They donated it to Zeus Karios and the Londeis. They used the ‘revenues’ (ἀπὸ τῶν προσόδων) [i.e. the sanctuary’s revenues, as we may infer from their office].

228110) B. Varkivanç, “2016 Yılı Ksanthos Kazıları”, in 39. Kazı, Araştırma ve Arkeometri Sempozyumu, Bursa, Türkiye, 22–26 Mayıs 2017, Bursa, 2017, p. 49–55: Ed. pr. of a lustral basin (1) and an altar (2) dedicated to Artemis Kombike (Xanthos, 2nd/3rd cent.).

229111) E.V. Vlachogianni, “Τμῆμα ἐνεπίγραφης τράπεζας στὸ Ἐθνικὸ Ἀρχαιολογικὸ Μουσεῖο”, Grammateion 5 (2016), p. 23–28: Ed. pr. of a marble offering table (of the type ‘Athenian Tray Design’) dedicated to Artemis (ἱερὸν Ἀρ[τέμιδος?], Athens, ca. 300).

230112) C. Vlassopoulou, “Χάλκινη ἐνεπίγραφη κύλιξ ἀπὸ τὴν Ἀκρόπολη”, Grammateion 6 (2017), p. 33–41 [BE 2018, 157]: Ed. pr. of a bronze kylix found near of the opisthodome of the Parthenon (Athens). The vase was originally dedicated to Athena (ca. 500–480) but was damaged during the sack of the Acropolis by the Persians. Later it was used by masons during the construction of the Parthenon; they placed red paint in it, used to mark the surface on which the south frieze was to be placed. However, a worker dropped it on the place where it was found.

231113) E. Voutiras, “Aristis, Son of Pheidon of Kleonai”, in D. Katsonopoulou and E. Partida (eds.), Philhellen: Essays Presented to Stephen G. Miller, Athens, 2016, p. 241–249: A dedicatory epigram from Nemea addressed to Zeus (CEG I 362; ca. 550 BCE) commemorates the four victories of Aristis of Kleonai in pankration, probably during the first celebrations of the Nemean games. His father cannot be identified with the homonymous tyrant of Argos but must have been a local aristocrat from Kleonai. V. comments on the close relations between Kleonai and Argos and the possible involvement of Argos in the foundation of the Nemean games.

232114) R. Wagman, “SEG I, 248 = IThess I, 73: A Retraction”, ZPE 202 (2017), p. 155–157: W. reprints the text of SEG I 248 (metrical inscription concerning the cave of the Nymphs in Pharsalos) and discusses the meaning of lines 10–11: ἄνδρα δ’ ἐποιήσαντ’ {α} ἀγαθὸν Παντάλκεα Νύμφαι | τῶνδ’ ἐπιβαινέμεναι χώρων καὶ ἐπίσσκοπον εἶναι. In his edition (summarized in EBGR 2016, 139), he took ἄνδρα ἀγαθόν to be the object of ἐποιήσαντ’; ‘the Nymphs who tread these places endowed Pantalkes with a noble hearted and made him their oversear’. He now recognizes in the form ἐπιβαινέμεναι an epic infinitive dependent on ἐποιήσαντ’: ‘the Nymphs made the noble-hearted Pantalkes tread upon these places and be their overseer’.

233115) P. Wilson and F. Favi, “Choragic Spells in Gela: A Textual and Exegetical Note on Apellis’ defixio, SEG LVII 905 B”, ZPE 204 (2017), p. 138–140: W.‑F. present a new critical edition of a defixio against choregoi, probably from Gela (I.Dial. Sicile II 134; SEG LVII 905 B; ca. 470). For lines 12f. they suggest the restoration: ὁς οὗτος βόλιμος, τὸς τέ|[νον? ἐπ]ο̣ιδ{ι}α̣ὶ̣ τιμὰν ἐρύσαιντο. The meaning is ‘as this lead tablet, so the spells against those men’ will draw away the honor from the choregoi, i.e. their hope of victory. This text, therefore, does not concern sympathetic magic but attests the parallel use by the defigens, Apellis, of a lead tablet and spells that were pronounced by him while writing or burying the tablet.

234116) M. Zimmermann, “Hermes Agonios, Herakles Kallinikos und der Hypogymnasiarch Daliades im Gymnasion von Patara”, E. Dündar et al. (eds.), Havva Işkan’a Armağan Lykiarkhissa. Festschrift für Havva Iskan, Istanbul, 2016, 895–905 [BE 2018, 423]: Ed. pr. of three inscriptions from Patara related to the gymnasion. 1–2) The demos dedicated statues of Hermes Agonios and Herakles Kallineikos on behalf of the neoi (1st cent. CE). 3) Dedication of a statue of Herakles to the Emperors, the Theoi Patroioi and the city of Patara by a deputy gymnasiarchos (2nd cent. CE).

Corrigenda

235EBGR 2015, 123: read Probert, not Robert.

236EBGR 2066, 5: A. Alonso Déniz, “Offrandes funéraires à Thespies : les ἐνπορίδια, ‘sacrifices par le feu’, dans IThesp. 215”, REG 129 (2016) 63–83: My summary of this article was misleading in one point. With regard to the expression παρ᾿ ἕτερον ἐνιαυτόν in I.Thespiai 215, the author did not argue that the sacrifice of the manumitted slave was offered ‘every second year’, but in alternating years (‘ “un jour anniversaire sur deux” des funérailles de ses anciens maîtres’). I now suspect that the sacrifice was offered every second year on the anniversary of the manumission.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Angelos Chaniotis, « Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion 2017 (EBGR 2017) »Kernos, 33 | 2020, 203-242.

Référence électronique

Angelos Chaniotis, « Epigraphic Bulletin for Greek Religion 2017 (EBGR 2017) »Kernos [En ligne], 33 | 2020, mis en ligne le 31 décembre 2022, consulté le 06 février 2023. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/kernos/3473 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/kernos.3473

Haut de page

Auteur

Angelos Chaniotis

Institute for Advanced Study
Princeton

achaniotis@ias.edu

Articles du même auteur

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Tous droits réservés

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search