kernos 1559 23 manteis magic mysteries and mythography

Kernos23 (2010)Varia

................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Jan Bremmer

Manteis, Magic, Mysteries andMythographyMessy Margins of Polis Religion?................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

AvertissementLe contenu de ce site relve de la lgislation franaise sur la proprit intellectuelle et est la proprit exclusive del'diteur.Les uvres figurant sur ce site peuvent tre consultes et reproduites sur un support papier ou numrique sousrserve qu'elles soient strictement rserves un usage soit personnel, soit scientifique ou pdagogique excluanttoute exploitation commerciale. La reproduction devra obligatoirement mentionner l'diteur, le nom de la revue,l'auteur et la rfrence du document.Toute autre reproduction est interdite sauf accord pralable de l'diteur, en dehors des cas prvus par la lgislationen vigueur en France.

Revues.org est un portail de revues en sciences humaines et sociales dvelopp par le Clo, Centre pour l'ditionlectronique ouverte (CNRS, EHESS, UP, UAPV).

................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Rfrence lectroniqueJan Bremmer, Manteis, Magic, Mysteries and Mythography, Kernos [En ligne], 23|2010, mis en ligne le 10octobre 2013, consult le 11 octobre 2013. URL: http://kernos.revues.org/1559; DOI: 10.4000/kernos.1559

diteur : Centre International dEtude de la religion grecque antiquehttp://kernos.revues.orghttp://www.revues.org

Document accessible en ligne sur : http://kernos.revues.org/1559Ce document est le fac-simil de l'dition papier.Tous droits rservs

Kernos23(2010),p.13-35.

Manteis, Magic, Mysteries and Mythography: Messy Margins of Polis Religion?

Abstract: In recent decades it has become customary to assume that in the classical

periodthepoliscontrolledreligioninallitsaspects.Itisonlyrecentlythatthisviewisbeingquestioned.Althoughthemoremarginalaspectsofpolis religionhavealreadyreceived thenecessary attention, the study of these marginal aspects remains dominated, to a certainextent,byoldprejudicesofpreviousgenerationsofscholars,whichinturnweresometimesfedbytheprejudicesorrepresentationsofancientauthors.IwillconcentrateonthoseareasofGreek, especially Athenian, religious life in which books andwritingwere particularlyimportant, as thewrittenword enabledpeople to take amore independent stance inpolisreligion.Subsequently,Iwillmakeobservationsonmanteis(1),magic(2),mysteriesandOrphism (3) andmythography (4), andendwith some remarkson thenatureofpolisreligion(5).

Rsum:Cesderniresdcennies,ilestdevenuhabitueldeconsidrerquelapolisdelapriodeclassiquecontrlaitlareligionsoustouscesaspects.Cenestquercemmentquecepointdevueatmisenquestion.Mmesilesaspectsplusmarginauxdelareligiondelapolisontdjreulattentionncessaire,leurtuderestemarque,dansunecertainemesure,parlesprjugsdessavantsdesgnrationsantrieures,eux-mmesnourrisdesprjugsetdesreprsentationsdesauteursanciens.Cetarticleseconcentresur les lieuxdelaviereli-gieusegrecque,etplusparticulirementathnienne,odeslivresetdelcrittaientparticu-lirement importants, dans lamesure o lcrit permet aux gens de prendre une positionplus indpendante en regard de la religion de la polis.Mes observations concerneront lesmanteis ( 1), la magie ( 2), les mystres et lOrphisme ( 3), la mythographie ( 4), enterminantparquelquesconsidrationssurlanaturedelareligiondelapolis(5).

With the passing away of Christiane Sourvinou-Inwood (1945-2007), my

generation has lost its most personal voice and, perhaps, its most powerfulintellect.Christianehadstillmuchtoofferandherdeathisanirreparableloss.Iknewherforthirtyyears,andshealwayswasaveryloyalfriend.Iwouldnevervisit Oxford without having lunch with her and her husbandMike Inwood,ofteninTrinityCollege,andthoseoccasionsaresomeofmybestmemories.Itisalsofairtosaythatfrommygenerationshewasoneofthemostpolemicalscholars.Onecontradictedheratonesperil,asseveralofherpublicationsalltoo clearly show.1 That is why my contribution is delivered not without acertainfeelingofambivalence.Certainly,whileshewasstillalive,itwouldhave

1 See, for example,C. SOURVINOU-INWOOD, Reading Greek Death to the End of the Classical

Period,Oxford,1995,p.413-44.

14 J.N.BREMMER

been very hard to disagreewith her in print at length.Yet thememory of agreat scholar is never served by hagiography, and it is in the spirit of thegreatestadmiration that Iwould like toasksomequestions regardingChristi-anesseminalandhighlyinfluentialarticlesontheideaofpolisreligion.2

It isasignofherpersuasivenessthatcriticismsofChristianesmodelhavelongbeenfewandfarbetween,andthatasustainedcriticalanalysisappearedonlylastyear.3InmycontributionIwilltakeacloserlookatthemoremarginalaspectsofpolisreligion.AlthoughthesehaverecentlybeenadmirablystudiedbyRobertParkerandEstherEidinow,4itmaystillbepossibletoaddafewmoretouchestotheirgeneralpicture,asthestudyofthesemarginalaspectsremainsdominated, to a certain extent, by old prejudices of previous generations ofscholars,whichinturnweresometimesfedbytheprejudicesorrepresentationsof ancient authors. I will concentrate on those areas of Greek, especiallyAthenian,religiouslifeinwhichbooksandwritingwereparticularlyimportant,asthewrittenwordenabledpeopletotakeamoreindependentstanceinpolisreligion. Subsequently, Iwillmake observations onmanteis ( 1),magic ( 2),mysteriesandOrphism(3)andmythography(4),andthenendwithsomefinalobservationsonthenatureofpolisreligion(5)

(. Manteis

Let us start with theGreek seers. It is clear that in the Archaic Age theoldestseersstilloperatedwithout theuseofwritingor texts.Infact, the ideathat oracles speak and are spoken lasted well into the fifth century. In avaluable study of Greek holy tales and holy books,5 Albert Henrichs hasrecentlystressedthatoraclesareintrinsicallyoral,thatistosaytheyspeaktothehumanrecipientintheirownvoicebyaddressinganissue,asatBirds962f.:Thereisanoracle(chrsmos)ofBakisexplicitlyspeakingabout(legn)Cloudco-cuckoland.6Andindeed,asthelateOlivierMassonhasargued,Bakisactuallymeans Speaker.7This oral character started to change from the late seventh

2 Iquoteher What isPolisReligion? (1990)and FurtherAspectsofPolisReligion (1988)

fromthereprints inR.BUXTON (ed.),Oxford Readings in Greek Religion,Oxford,2000,p.13-37,38-55.

3 J.KINDT, PolisReligionA criticalAppreciation,Kernos 22 (2009), p. 9-34; note alsoM.H.HANSEN,Polis: an introduction to the ancient Greek city-state,Oxford,2006,p.119-122.

4R.PARKER,Polytheism and Society at Athens,Oxford,2005,p.116-35;E.EIDINOW,Oracles, Curses, & Risk Among the Ancient Greeks,Oxford,2007.

5 A.HENRICHS, Hieroi Logoi andHierai Bibloi: the (Un)writtenMargins of the Sacred inAncientGreece,HSCP101(2003),p.207-266at220.

6NotethesameexpressioninAr.,Eq.,128.7Suda,s.v.Bakis;schol.Ar.,Pax,1071,cf.W.BURKERT,ApokalyptikimfrhenGriechentum:

ImpulseundTransformationen,inD.HELLHOLM(ed.),Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean world and the Near East,Tbingen, 1983, p. 235-254 at 248-249; O. MASSON,Onomastica Graeca Selecta III,

Manteis,Magic,MysteriesandMythography 15

centuryonwardswhenoraclesandpropheticutteranceswerefixedintowriting.Ouroldestexampleistheso-calledskinofEpimenides,apparentlyaparchmentsheetwithoraclesofthatgreatbutelusivepurifier.8EpimenidesgravewasintheofficialbuildingoftheSpartanephors,whoalsoregularlyconsultedanincubationoracle in Thalamae, a hamlet south-west of Sparta,9 whereas each of the twoSpartankingshadtwoPythioi,officialswhocouldconsulttheDelphicoracle,theresultsofwhichtheypreservedinanarchiveforfutureconsultation.10Weseehereclearly the combination of seers, power and literacy in the area of the godsmessages.

PoweroverthesemessagesmusthavebeenconsideredsoimportantthatthePisistratids too kept oracles on the acropolis, and Pisistratus son Hipparchusexpelledthemanwhohadbeenofficiallychargedwithcollectingoracles,Onoma-critus,whenhewasseizedintheveryactoffalsifyingoneoftheseoracles.11Whenin510B.C.,theSpartankingCleomenesoustedthePisistratids,hetooktheora-cleshomeintheprocess,tobestored,presumably,intheSpartanroyalarchives.12ThiscloseconnectionbetweenoraclesandtherulingpowersisalsosuggestedbyHerodotusstorythattheSpartanDorieuswasadvisedbytheseerAntichareswhocitedanoracleofLaios(V,43).ItwasapparentlynotconsideredstrangethattheThebankingsownedoraclesandthis,presumably,addedtotheauthorityoftheoracularsource.Infact,Pausanias(IX,26,3)mentionsthatLaiosrevealedtotheSphinxanoraclethatwasknownonlytothekingsofThebes.Itfitsthissituationthat many kings of archaic times were also known as seers, such as Anios ofDelos13,PolyidosofArgos,whowasthesonofKoiranos, Ruler,14Mounichos,

Geneva,2000,p.207-208;add tohismaterialL. JONNES,The Inscriptions of Heraclea Pontica,Bonn,1994,p.128(Bakides).

8ForEpimenidesandhisskin,seeJ.N.BREMMER,TheskinsofPherekydesandEpimenides,Mnemosyne46(1993),p.234-36;fororaclesonparchmentsheets,notealsoEuripides,fr.627(ed.KANNICHT).

9Plut.,Ag.,9;Cle.,11,3-6;Agis and Cleomenes,28,3;Cic.,Div.I,96;IGV1,1317;Tert., An.,46;JACOBYonFGrH596F46.

10Hdt.,VI,57;Xen.,Resp. Lac.,15,5;Cic.,Div.I,95;K.ZIEGLER,Pythioi,RE24(1963),col.550-552.

11 Hdt., VII, 6; H.A. SHAPIRO, Oracle-mongers in Peisistratid Athens, Kernos 3 (1990),p.335-345;J.DILLERY,ChresmologuesandManteis:IndependentDivinersandtheProblemofAuthority,inS.I.JOHNSTON,P.STRUCK(eds.),Mantik,Leiden,2005,p.167-231.

12Hdt.,V,90,2.OraclesinstatearchivesduringtheheydayofAtheniandemocracy:Dem.,21,51-54;43,66.

13 Anios:Cypria, fr. 19 (ed. DAVIES) = 20 (ed. BERNAB); Pherecydes,FGrH 3 F 140 =fr.140(ed.FOWLER);SEG32,218;41,80and129;44,682;Ph.BRUNEAU,Anios,inLIMCI.1(1981),p.793-794;A.D.TRENDALL,ThedaughtersofAnios,inE.BHR,W.MARTINI(eds.),Studien zu Mythologie und Vasenmalerei,Mainz,1986,p.165-168;M.HALM-TISSERANT,DeDloslApulie:lesfillesdAniosetlepeintredeDarius,Ktema25(2000),p.133-142;N.HORSFALLonVerg.,Aen.III,80.

14 Il. V, 148 and schol. (king), XIII, 663-670 with R. JANKO ad loc.; Pind.,O. 13, 74-75;Pherecydes,FGrH3F115=fr.115(ed.FOWLER);Soph.,ManteiswithRADTad loc.;Paus.,I,43,

16 J.N.BREMMER

TenerosandPhineusofThrace.15Asimilarcombinationofpoliticalauthorityandoracles prevailed in Rome where the Senate anxiously guarded the Sibyllineoracles,whichwereevenclassifiedashiddenbooks,libri reconditi.16

Literacy,however,isagreatdemocratiser.Inthefifthcenturywefindallkindsof oracle collections and collectors.17 Our earliest known example is probablyPolemainetos,whobequeathedhisbooksondivinationtohisfriendThrasyllosinthe middle of the fifth century (Isocr., 19, 5-9), but Aristophanes repeatedlymentions the collections ofBakis andMusaeus, the latter anAthenian and theformeraBoeotian.18Theseoracleswereprobablyusedindebatesintheassemblyandthusliabletotheapprovaloftheaudience,19butthatwasonlyoneplaceweretheywerequotedorchanted.20Thebookswillalsohavebeenusedinmoreprivategatherings, as in AristophanesBirds (980-989), where they were not subject topublic scrutiny. They were peddled by men and women,21 and Once we arealertedtotheirpresence,wefindthemeverywherethroughoutoursources.22AsBurkertwellnotes,theseseersanddivinersremainedsomewhatmarginaltoPolisreligion, and could never even think of authoritarian organization of belief, ofdogmatomonopolizethecreationofsense.23

2. Magic

Asimilar increasingvisibility, even ifnot in thepublic sphereor the literarysources,isthecaseofmagicalspellsandcurses.Inthelasttwodecadesthestudy

5;Apollod., III, 3, 1.Koiranos etymology:A.HEUBECK, Koiranos, korragos undVerwandtes,Wrzb. Jahrb. Altert. NF 4 (1978), p.91-98; E. KACZYSKA, Greek (Hesychian) kros GreatNumberofMenandRelatedWords,Emerita75(2007),p.273-278.

15Mounichos:Ant.Lib., 14;L.PALEOCRASSA, Mounichos, inLIMCVI.1 (1992), p. 655-657.Teneros:Pindar,fr.51dand52g.13(ed.MAEHLER);Strabo,IX,2,34;Paus.,IX,26,1;schol.Pind.,P. 11, 5 and Lycophron, 1211; I. RUTHERFORD,Pindars Paeans, Oxford, 2001, p. 343f.Phineus: A. KISLINGER, Phineus, Diss. Vienna, 1940; L. KAHIL, Phineus I, in LIMC VII.1(1994),p.387-391.

16J.LINDERSKI,TheLibriReconditi,HSCP89(1985),p.207-234,reprintedinhisRoman QuestionsI,Stuttgart,1995,p.496-523,669(addenda).

17J.FONTENROSE,The Delphic Oracle,Berkeleyet al.,1978,p.158-165;W.K.PRITCHETT,The Greek State at WarIII,Berkeleyet al.,1979,p.320.

18HENRICHS,l.c.(n.5),p.216-222;MusaeusT64-71(ed.BERNAB).19 As persuasively argued by H. BOWDEN, Oracles for Sale, in P. DEROW, R. PARKER

(eds.),Herodotus and His World,Oxford,2003,p.256-274at270-274.20ForthechantingoforaclesseeSoph.,fr.573(ed.RADT);Eur.,fr.481,16(ed.KANNICHT);

Eupolis,fr.231(ed.KASSEL-AUSTIN).21SeemostrecentlyEIDINOW,o.c.(n.4),p.26-32;add,forfemaleseers,M.FLOWER,The Seer

in Ancient Greece, Berkeley et al., 2008, p. 211-5, to be supplemented by J.N. BREMMER,Greek Religion and Culture, the Bible and the Ancient Near East,Leiden,2008,p.149-150.

22EIDINOW,o.c.(n.4),p.27.23W.BURKERT,Kleine SchriftenI,Gttingen,2001,p.24.


of ancient magic has been a booming business.24 Yet this study has remainedmainlylimitedtothesmallcrowdofafficionadosofancientmagicandhashardlyenteredthestudyofpolisor,forthatmatter,Greekreligion:thereisnodiscussionofmagic inthehandbooksofNilssonandBurkertandneither isthereanentrymagic in the indices of Christianes books. Yet in some respects this is anexcellent opportunity to compare polis religion with what Robert Parker callsunlicensedreligion,25atermwewillhavetocomebackto.

Evenifwelimitourattentiontomagictodaytothecursetablets,itisclearthatthesewerepartofalllayersofAtheniansociety.ThementioninthesetabletsofthepoliticiansLycurgusandDemosthenes,butalsoofPhocion(tonoteonlythemost famousones)26 suggests that thepracticepervaded thewholeofAtheniansociety, from top to bottom, aiming mainly at males, but sometimes also atfemales,althoughthelatterwerestigmatisedaslaikastriai,aGreektermtowhichtheEnglishtranslationtartinEidinowdoesnotreallydojustice.27Inpassingwenote thatwomenwere already the target of very early Selinuntine defixiones butwithoutattractingsuchmalice.28Onceagain, it is literacythatmusthavemadearealchangeinthisrespect.

Our oldest curse tablets derive from Sicily andMagnaGraecia, where theyemerge in thesixthcentury,29whereas inAttica theyarrive in thecourseof thelater fifthcentury.FritzGrafhas suggested twopossibleexplanations.First, theearlyAtticspellswerewrittenexclusivelyonperishablematerialsandonlylateronlead;30or,secondly,thedefixionesoriginatedinSicilyandMagnaGraeciaandwerebrought fromthere toAthens. It is true thatPlato (Leg.,933a)mentionswaxenimagesattachedtodoorsandspellsdepositedoncrossroads,whichinbothcaseswouldhardlyhavesurvivedtheravagesoftime.YetthetimedifferenceseemstospeakunequivocallyforthepriorityofItaly.Nowtheancestorofthecursetablet

24ForanexcellentsurveyseeR.GORDON,F.MARCOSIMN,Introduction,ineidem(eds.),

Magical Practice in the Latin West,Leiden,2010,p.1-49;D.FRANKFURTER,H.S.VERSNEL (eds.),The Brill Guide to the Study of Magic,Leiden,2010.

25PARKER,o.c.(n.4),p.116-135.26C.HABICHT,AttischeFluchtafelnausderZeitAlexandersdesGrossen,ICS18(1993),

p. 113-118, reprinted in his Athen in hellenistischer Zeit (Munich, 1994), p. 14-18; A. NISOLI,Defixionespoliticheevittimeillustri.IlcasodelladefixiodiFocione,Acme 56(2003),p.271-286; F. MARCO SIMN, Execrating the Roman Power: Three Defixiones from Emporiae(Ampurias),inGORDONMARCOSIMN,o.c.(n.24),p.399-423at413.

27EIDINOW,o.c.(n.4),p.415(translatingSGD48),cf.D.BAIN,SixGreekVerbsofSexualCongress,CQ41(1991),p.51-77at 74-77.

28M.DELAMORLOPEZ JIMENO,Las tabellae defixionis de la Sicilia griega,Amsterdam, 1991,p.223-4;addL.BETTARINI,Corpusdelledefixionesdi Selinunte,Alessandria,2005,p.1-7(no.1):Kleonn.

29 See,withbibliography,A.WILLI, Sikelismos. Sprache, Literatur und Gesellschaft im griechischen Sizilien (8.-5. Jh. V. Chr.),Basel,2008,p.317-321.

30ThissuggestionisfollowedbyG.BOHAK,Ancient Jewish Magic,Cambridge,2008,p.154.

18 J.N.BREMMER

probably derives from theAssyro-Babylonianworld, asGraf has argued,31 andNearEasterninfluencehasalsobeenclaimedfortheenumerationofthedifferentbodyparts inanatomicalcurses.32GiventheCarthaginianruleofWesternSicilyfrom the sixth century onwards and the occurrence of the Carthaginian nameMagoon an earlier fifth-centurySelinuntinedefixio,33NearEastern influenceonSicily via Carthage seems impossible to overlook and very plausible.34 Such aninfluence would also account better for the fact that Pythagorean or Orphicinfluenceisnotnoticeableintheearliestcurses.

Having looked at their origin, let us now turn to their connectionwith polisreligion.Ifanywherestrictreligiouscontrolwasimpossible, itwasintheareaofeschatology.Thecursetabletsthereforepresentaninterestingcasewherewecancomparepolisreligionwithitspossibleopposite,admittedlyarathervaguetermtowhichIwillcomebackattheendofthispiece(5).Asweknow,literaturealwaysmakescertainchoicesdeterminedbygenre,audienceorpersonalpreferenceoftheauthor.Thuswehardly findasingle traceofOrphicandPythagoreanbeliefs inGreektragedy,andthestatementofacharacterinEuripidesMeleagros(fr.532Kannicht) that after death every man is earth and shadow: nothing goes tonothingmightevensuggesttheabsenceofanybeliefinanafterlife.However,these words clearly demonstrate that we cannot simply extrapolate to generalbeliefsorcollectiverepresentationsfromoneliteraryorartisticmedium,since,asweknowfromvasepaintingsandtheHomeric Hymn to Demeter,theAthenians,liketheotherGreeks,believedintheusualafterlifesuspects,suchasCharon,Hades,CerberusandPersephone.Infact,someofthesefiguresmustbeprettyold:adogalreadyguardstheroadtotheunderworldinancientIndian,PersianandNordicmythology,35andaferrymanispartoftheeschatologyofmanypeoples.36Finally,Persephonesnamehasrecentlybeenetymologizedasshewhobeatstheearsofcorn,anexplanationthatfitstheactivityofgirlsinmanylessdevelopedareasand probably predates the first millennium.37 The antiquity of these figures,then, well guarantees their presence in the Greek belief system, even if an

31F.GRAF,Magic in the Ancient World,CambridgeMass.andLondon,1997,p.170-174.For

anearlyforerunnerseeW.S.FOX,OldTestamentParallelstoTabellae Defixionum,Am. J. Semitic Languages30(1913-14),p.111-124.

32H.S.VERSNEL, AnEssayonAnatomicalCurses, inF.GRAF (ed.),Ansichten griechischer Rituale. Geburtstags-Symposium frWalter Burkert,Stuttgart/Leipzig,1998,p.217-267at256-259.

33BETTARINI,o.c.(n.28),no.23.34SimilarlyWILLI, o.c. (n.29),p.317-318; lessprecise,H.S.VERSNEL,Fluch und Gebet,Ber-

lin/NewYork,2009,p.27.35M.L.WEST,Indo-European Poetry and Myth,Oxford,2007,p.392.36 L.V.GRINSELL, The Ferryman andHis Fee:A Study inEthnology, Archaeology, and

Tradition,Folklore 68 (1957), p. 257-269; B. LINCOLN, The Ferryman of theDead, J. Indo-European Stud.8(1980),p.41-59.

37R.WACHTER,reviewofLexikon des frhgriechischen Epos,Bd3,p.1009-1678,inKratylos51(2006),p.136-144.


elementofdoubtseemstohavealwaysbeenthereandwouldcontinuetodosowellintotheByzantineperiod.38

Do we find the eschatological inherited conglomerate of Charon, Hades,CerberusandPersephonebackontheAtticcursetabletsoftheClassicaleraordowe find different divine figures? Let us first note that we do not encounterCharon.This isnot really surprising,but it also shows that it isnot thenormalunderworldthatwehavehere.ThisisalsodemonstratedbythescarceinvocationofHadeswho ismentionedonlytwice (DTA102;SGD44).HadesnamealsohardlyappearsonAtticvasepaintingandmaywellhavebeenfelttooinfernaltoinvoke.39ThemostpopulardeitybyfarisHermes,whoismentionedwithjusthisownname (8), but also asKatochos (14), hewhoholdsdown,HermesChthonios (8), of theEarth,Eriounios (3: unknownmeaning),Dolios (2),Cunning, andonce asLordKatochos (DTA 94) andasGodKatochos (DTA95),thelastperhapsbeingexamplesofthesoftAttictabooonthepronunciationofnamesofunderworldpowers.40Interestingly,then,wefindinthesetabletsnotonlythenameofthegodHermesbutalsoHermeswithvariousdifferentepithets.

FromtheseepithetsonlyonecanbefoundinAtticaasacultepithetoutsidethecursetablets:HermesChthonios.DuringtheChoestheAthenianssacrificedtoHermesChthoniosbuttononeoftheOlympiangods,accordingtoTheopompus(FGrH115F347ab).Forthestudyofepithetsthisisaveryinterestingpassage,asHermes was of course one of the Olympian gods. We can see here that inparticularcircumstancestheGreekscouldcompletelyisolateagod+epithetfromthesamegodwithoutepithet.41Fromtheotherepithets,Katochosisclearlythemostpopular,becauseHermes isoften asked tobind theobjectsof the curse(DTA89,100,102,DT50,etc.);Eriouniosisanoldepicepithet,whichwasnolonger understandablebutwasprobably chosen for its poetic effects,42whereasDoliosindicatesthetrickinesswhichishopedfortodefeattheopponents.Unlike

38J.N.BREMMER,The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife,London/NewYork,2002,p.8;PARKER,o.c.

(n.4),p.363-368.39K.CLINTON,Myth and Cult,Stockholm,1992,p.63note200.ForHades,seemostrecently

J.N.BREMMER,Hades,inDer Neue PaulyV(1998),p.51-3;forhisetymology,C.J.RUIJGH,Scripta minoraI,Amsterdam,1991,p.575-6;R.BEEKES,HadesandElysion,inJ.JASANOFFet al.(eds.),Mir curad: studies in honor of Calvert Watkins, Innsbruck, 1998, p. 17-28 at 17-19; A.HENRICHS,Hades,inOCD,Oxford,2003,p.661-662.

40 Cf. Il. XIV, 274; Hes., Th., 767; Soph.,Ajax, 571; El., 292; OC, 1548; Eur., Or., 37,probably parodied by Euboulos, fr. 64 (ed. KASSEL-AUSTIN); [Eur.], Rh., 963; A. HENRICHS,Namenlosigkeit und Euphemismus: Zur Ambivalenz der chthonischen Mchte im attischenDrama,inH.HOFMANN,A.HARDER(eds.),Fragmenta dramatica,Gttingen,1991,p.161-201at178-181.

41 For cult epithets, see R. PARKER, The Problem of theGreekCult Epithet,OAth 28(2003), p. 173-183; P. BRUL,La Grce d ct, Rennes, 2007, p. 313-332; F.GRAF, Gods inGreekInscriptions:SomeMethodologicalQuestions,inJ.N.BREMMER,A.ERSKINE(eds.),The Gods of Ancient Greece: Identities and Transformations,Edinburgh,2010,p.55-80.

42ForitspossiblemeaningseeRICHARDSONonHomeric Hymn to Demeter, 407.

20 J.N.BREMMER

Katochos,DoliosdoesoccurasanepithetofHermesintragedyandcomedy,butinAtticaitwasnotacultepithet.43

The prominence of Hermes is somewhat striking, as he hardly figures, forexample, on Sicilian curse tablets. Yet Hermes was important on the funerarywhitelekythoi,whichwerethemostpopularAtheniangravegiftsfromthemiddleofthesixthtotheendofthefifthcentury.Giventhatthelekythoiwereplacedongraves of recently deceased Athenians, the presence of Hermes as the greatpsychopomp,often in thecompanyofCharon, isnot surprising,buthis role isalwayslimitedtoleadingthedeceasedtoCharon:heseemstobeabsentfromtheunderworldproper.44Inshort,theprominenceofHermesistypicalofthecursetablets.

Moreover, Hermes is several times invoked with Persephone,45 who is thesecondpopulardivinityinthecursetablets.Herpresenceishardlysurprisinganddoesnotreallyaddnewaspectstohermorepublicpersona.Inonecasetheformof her name, Persephoneian (SGD 42), suggests an (ultimate) origin in dactylicpoetry,suchaswealsofindinsomecursetabletsfromSicilyandBoeotia.46IntwoothercaseswefindtheformP(h)errephatta(DT68-9),whichisthenormalAtticoneincomedy,inscriptionsandothernon-tragicliterature.47ThestrangestcasesurelyisthementionofShewithPersephone(DT68).Couldthisbeareferenceto Demeter? Whatever the answer, the mention shows that the cursers couldpersonalize their cursesanddidnotwhollydependon the inheritedconglome-rate.ThisisalsoclearfromthefrequentmentionofGe,whowasnotparticularlyhonoured inancientGreece,even though inAtticashe receivedseveralcults,which, whatever their purpose, do not seem to have been connected to theunderworld.48

Other interesting examples are Tethys and Lethe. Tethys (DT 68) is theGreektranscriptionofAkkadianTiamat,asBurkerthasshown,49whoappears

43Soph.,Ph.,133;[Eur.],Rhes.,217;Ar.,Thesm.,1202;Plut.,1157;Aen.,Tact.,24,15;Paus.,VII,

27,1(Pellene);SEG37,1673;PARKER,l.c.(n.41),p.176.44 SOURVINOU-INWOOD, o.c. (n. 1), p. 353-356; J.H. OAKLEY, Picturing Death in Classical

Athens,Cambridge,2004,p.137-141.45DTA103;DT50;SDG1,44(HermesKatochos).46D. JORDAN,TwoCurseTablets fromLilybaeum,GRBS38 (1997),p.387-396at393-

394;C.FARAONE, Gli incantesimi esametrici ed ipoemi epicinellaGrecia antica, QUCC 84(2006[2008]),p.11-26.

47Ar.,Thesm., 287;Ra., 671;L.THREATTE,The Grammar of Attic Inscriptions, 2vols,Berlin/NewYork,1980-1996, Ip.450-451, II,750; theplacecalledPherephattion (Dem.,54,8;Hes.s.v.).

48F.GRAF,Nordionische Kulte, Rome,1985,p.360;M.B.MOORE,Ge,inLIMCIV.1(1988),p.171-177;S.GEORGOUDI,Gaia/G.Entremythe,culteetidologie,inS.DESBOUVRIE(ed.),Myth and Symbol I,Athens,2002,p.113-134;PARKER,o.c.(n.4),p.416.

49 W. BURKERT, The Orientalizing Revolution, Cambridge Mass., 1992, p. 92-3 and Babylon, Memphis, Persepolis, CambridgeMass., 2004, p. 30-31, doubted byM.L.WEST,The East Face of Helicon,Oxford,1997,p.147note20,butacceptedbyJANKOonIl. XIV,200-207.


firstintheIliadwherewehearofOkeanos,begetterofthegods,andmotherTethys(XIV,201).ThecoupleappearsseveraltimesinGreekmythology:notonlyinHesiodandEumelus,butalsoonawell-knownAtticdinosofSophiloson the marriage of Peleus and Thetis (SEG 35, 37) and in a, presumably,OrphicTheogonyquotedbyPlatoinhisCratylus: ThehandsomeriverOkeanoswas the first tomarry, hewhoweddedhis sisterTethys, the daughter of hismother.50EidinowquoteswithassentAudollentwhoquotedWnschthatshewas conceived as MutterErde also chthonisch,51 but there is noproofofthat. It rather seems that she was chosen because of her strange name andhoarypast.52AnothercurioushapaxisarelativelyearlytextfromtheKerameikos(ca.375BC)thatmentionsLetheasapersonalpower(SEG51,328).Itfitsthisunique content thatLethewas less popular among theGreeks than among theRomansandwasmoreofageneralunderworldcharacterthanafixedidentity:itisnotariverbeforePlatosRepublic (X,621a-c).53

Our final example is a third, possibly fourth-century, curse tablet fromAttica (DT 72),whichmentions anumberofpeople, amongstwhomare theintriguingfiguresBakchisandKittos,twoDionysiacnames.Itconcludeswith(Ibind) theirhopes frombothgodsandheroesandall theirbusinessbeforeHermestheBinderandbeforeHekateandbeforeGeandbeforeall thegodsand the Mother of gods. Is the appearance of Mother here unique andaberrant, as has recently been claimed?54 I argue unique, certainly, but alsoaberrant?TheGreeks,theAtheniansincluded,hadidentifiedGaia/GeastheMotherofGodsfromanearlytimeonwards.WeseethisintheHomeric Hymn to Gaia (17) as well as in Solon (36, 4-5West2) and Sophocles (fr. 269a, 51Radt). It seems tomeplausible that thisqualityofGehasplayeda rolehere.Alternatively,shemighthavebeenadducedasasymbolofgreatantiquitylikeTethys.A third possibility, however, is that the scribe or buyer of the tabletwantedtobeabsolutelycertainandaddedtheMotherofGodstoallthegodsinordertobeabsolutelysuretohaveadducedthewholepantheon.

Inanycase,isthenotionaberrantjustifiedinregardstothesecursetablets?We have seen that the infernal divinities that we find in them do not allconformto the inheritedconglomerate,butconstituteamotleyofdivinities,someofwhomwedonotfindineithercultorliterature;otherexampleswouldbe Hekate Chthonia (DTA 105-7) and the Praxidikai (DTA 109; SGD 14).

50Hes.,Th., 337,362,368, fr.dub.343,4 (ed.MERCHELBACH-WEST);Eumelus, fr.1B (ed.

DAVIES) = 1 (ed. BERNAB); Acusilaus, fr. 1 (ed. FOWLER); Pl., Crat., 402b = OF 22 (ed.BERNAB);notealsoPl.,Tim.,40e;BREMMER,o.c.(n.21),p.2.

51EIDINOW,o.c. (n.4),p.291note53.52ForthenameseeE.LHTE,Typologiedesanthroponymesen,inM.B.HATZOPOULOS

(ed.),Phns charaktr ethnikos,Athens,2007,p.271-294at278,291.53M.P.NILSSON,Opuscula selectaIII,Lund,1960,p.85f.54PARKER,o.c. (n.4),p.126note40.

22 J.N.BREMMER

Athenians could use formulaic enumerations of deities as provided by theprofessionalsellingthemthetablet,ortheycouldpersonalizetheirdivinities.IsitnotpreciselyintheareaofmagicthatwewouldexpectapantheondifferentfromthenormalOlympianone?

3. Mysteries and Orphism

Theunderworldalsoplayedanimportantroleinaphenomenonthatcannotbeneglected in adiscussionofpolis religion, theworldofOrphism.ButwhowasOrpheus,whatdidhewrite,whatdidheteachandwhowerehisfollowers?Thedebateaboutthesequestionshasalreadyragedfortwocenturies,anditwillbehelpfulforourdiscussiontotakeabrieflookatwhatthemainhandbooksofGreekreligionfromthetwentiethcenturyhavesaidaboutthesequestions.

Inthesummerof1931theagedWilamowitz(1848-1931)workedfeverishlyonhislastbook,Der Glaube der Hellenen,knowingthathewouldhavelittletimeleftforcompletingthisworkthatclearlywasclosetohisheart.55OnOrpheusand Orphism he was pretty sceptical. He admitted that there had been anOrphicTheogony,but,asheargued,thisdidnotproveabesondereReligionunderst rechtkeineGemeinde, an orphischeSeelenlehre soll erst einernachwei-senandtheGoldLeavescertainlywerenotOrphic.Ontheotherhand,therewasvegetarianism,andWinkelpriester administered teletaiwith theirbookswithmagicalformulas,butthesewerenomorethanSchwindler.RatherstrikingishisrejectionoftheideathatPlatonsHadesbilderundzugleichdiePetrusapo-kalypse vonOrpheus stammen.56 Although he does notmention any nameshere,itisclearthatheaimedatAlbrechtDieterichsNekyia,57buthisrejectionmusthave also struckEduardNorden,whosecommentaryonAeneidVIhadappearedinathirdeditiononlyafewyearsearlier,andwhichWilamowitzhadenthusiasticallywelcomedwhenitwasfirstpublishedin1903.58

Only adecade later,MartinNilsson (1874-1967) turnedPrussian scepticismfullyon itshead.HisdiscussionofOrphism,whichWilamowitzhadstillcalled

55A.HENRICHS, DerGlaubederHellenen:Religionsgeschichte alsGlaubensbekenntnis

undKulturkritik, inW.M.CALDERIII et al. (eds.),Wilamowitz nach 50 Jahren,Darmstadt,1985,p.262-305; R.L. FOWLER, Blood for theGhosts:Wilamowitz inOxford, Syllecta Classica 20(2009);J.N.BREMMER,TheGreekGods intheTwentiethCentury, inBREMMERERSKINE,o.c. (n.41),p.1-18,at7-10.

56Forthequotes,seeU.VONWILAMOWITZ-MOELLENDORFF,Der Glaube der Hellenen,2vols,Darmstadt,19593,IIp.191-202.

57A.DIETERICH,Nekyia, LeipzigandBerlin,1893,19132.58E.NORDEN, P. Vergilius Maro Aeneis VI,Leipzig,19031,19273.Forhischangingapprecia-

tioncompareWILAMOWITZS lettersof11June1903and25August1926inW.M.CALDERIII,B.HUSS, Sed serviendum officio The Correspondence between Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff and Eduard Norden (1892-1931),Berlin,1997,p.18-21and235-236,respectively.


das neueWort,59 acceptedmost of what the latter had rejected a soberinglesson for anybodyengaged in the studyofOrphism.Nilssondistinguished itsheyday in the archaic age from its decline in the fifth and fourth centuries toeinerverachtetenSekte,whenithadfallenintothehandsofBettelpriesterandScharlatane.YetthetieferBlickende,suchasPindarandPlato,werereceptiveto its grosseGedanken.AselementsofOrphism,NilssonacceptedaTheogony,of which he considered the anthropogonical part themost original and to beconnected to the doctrine of reincarnation, vegetarianism, and books aboutOrpheus descent into the underworld, which pictured the penalties for theuninitiated;inhissurvey,healsomentionedNordensscharfsinnigenVersuchtoreconstructthese.Finally,butnotuninterestingly,NilssonwonderedwhetherweshouldspeakofOrphic-DionysiacmysteriesratherthanDionysiacmysteries.60

AfterNilssonstwenty-pagediscussion,itisratherstrikingtoseethatWalterBurkertdiscussesOrphisminrelativelyfewpages,andmostly incombinationwithPythagoreanism,despitetherecentappearanceoftheDervenipapyrus,theGoldLeafofHipponionandtheboneplatesfromOlbia.Heacceptsmetemp-sychosis, vegetarianism and a Theogony, a poem about Demeters arrival atEleusis,andanOrphicKatabasis,whichrelatestheblessingsandpunishmentsinthehereafter.Sofar,thisisnotagreatstepforwardfromNilsson.However,inthelightofourpreviousobservationsitisnoteworthythatBurkertstressestheimportanceofbooks.Ashenotes:thenewformoftransmissionintroducesanewformofauthority,towhichtheindividual,providedthathecanread,hasdirectaccesswithoutcollectivemediation.Theemancipationofthe individualandtheappearanceofbooksgotogether inreligionaselsewhere.Yet, intheend,heconcludes:Orphism,likeothersects,probablyappealedtotheclassofthesmallmanmostofall.61

WhatdidChristianethinkofOrphism?Inherwork,thereareafewreferen-ces,bothimplicitandexplicit,whichgiveaprettyclearideaofherthoughts.Inher seminal article she stated that in a religionwithout a canonical body ofbelief,withoutrevelation,withoutscripturaltexts(outsidecertainmarginalsectswhich did have sacred books but are irrelevant to our present discussion),withoutaprofessionalanointedclergyclaimingspecialknowledgeorauthority,withoutachurch, itwastheorderedcommunity, thepolis,whichassumedtheroleplayed inChristianitybytheChurchtouseonemisleadingcomparison(for all metaphors derived from Christianity are inevitably misleading) tocounteract and destroy alternative, implicit models. The only exception she

59WILAMOWITZ-MOELLENDORFF,o.c.(n.56),IIp.200.60M.P.NILSSON,Geschichte der griechischen ReligionI,Munich,19411,19673,p.678-99;notealso

thatDIETERICH,o.c.(n.57),p.84alreadyspeaksofpythagoreisch-orphisch-bakchischenGemein-denundMysterien.

61W.BURKERT,Greek Religion,Oxford,1985,p.296-303(quoteson297and302).

24 J.N.BREMMER

allowedforthemediationbypolisreligionofallreligiousdiscoursewas,assheputit,somesectariandiscourse.62

Inherlastbook,Hylas,shemadeafewmoreobservationsonOrphism.Soshe argued that the dying Dionysos most dominantly inhabits sectarian,Orphic,beliefs;butthesebeliefsseemtohaveinvolvedmorethanonestrand,and also, and most importantly, they eventually came to interact with, andultimatelyinfiltrate, exert influenceon,poliscults.After all, forChristiane,Orphism was the broad multifarious current of sectarian teaching that wascontainedinOrphicbooks.63

Now the first thing thatmust strike any studentofOrphismandofChris-tianeswritings isheruseofChristianlanguageinthesepassages.Althoughsheherself added the warning that all such metaphors are misleading, one maywonder towhat extent her ownGreekorigin and socialisation at a timewhenvirtuallyeveryGreekwasatleastnominallyGreek-OrthodoxhaveplayedaroleinherobservationthatthepolisassumedtheroleoftheChurch inChristianity.Surely,anybodyraised inaProtestantchurchshouldknowthat, inthisrespect,therealreadyisabigdifferencebetweenProtestantismandRoman-Catholicism,andthatProtestanttheologymightbeinfluencedbutcertainlyisnotmediatedbytheChurch.

More worrying, though, is her use of the expression sectarian discourse.OnceagaintheunderlyingstandardisChristianitywithitsestablishedchurches,suchasAnglicanisminEngland,LutheranisminGermanyandScandinaviaorthevarious Orthodox churches in Eastern and Southern Europe. The distinctionbetween church and sect was popularised at the beginning of the twentiethcenturybythegreatGermansociologistsofreligionMaxWeber(1864-1920)andErnstTroeltsch(1865-1923),whohadbothbeenveryimpressedbythereligiousdevelopments in America with its lively sects. However, the trouble with theexpressionsectariandiscourseisnotonlythatitsuggeststheexistenceofasectandaChurch,butalso that thisdiscourse isofa somewhat less respectableormarginalcharacter.Neithersuggestionisjustified,aswewillseeshortly.

Having looked at the various opinions aboutOrphism, let us now try toanswersomeofthequestionsIraisedatthebeginningofthisparagraph.Iwillstartwiththefollowingquestions:1)whichOrphicbookscanweestablishwithsomecertainty for the fifthcenturyand2)whichof thosewerecomposed inAttica?Thesequestionsarenot thateasy toanswer,as thereareanumberofbooksamongtheOrphicwritingsthatarecloselyconnectedtoPythagorasandPythagoreanism. And indeed, the great scholars of the ancient underworld,AlbrechtDieterich(1866-1908)andEduardNorden(1868-1941),usedtheterm

62SOURVINOU-INWOOD,l.c.(n.2),p.19-20.63C.SOURVINOU-INWOOD,Hylas, the Nymphs, Dionysos and Others. Myth, Ritual, Ethnicity,Stock-

holm,2005,p.169and173,respectively;notealso187:Orphismanditspenetrationofmainstreamreligionand188:sectarianreligionandOrphicmaterialeventuallypenetratedpoliscults.


Orphic-Pythagorean.64TheirinheritanceisstillclearlyvisibleinBurkertsclosecombinationofOrpheusandPythagoras,andthereisnodoubtthatastrandinOrphicwritingworkedonPythagoreanthemes.MartinWesthaswellidentifiedthese, most of which carry very brief names:Net, Robe, Crater, Lyre, Sphere.There is very little left of these cosmological poems, and we can hardly sayanythingabouttheircontents,letaloneabouttheirdatesandplacesoforigin.65

Itisdifferentwithsomeotherpoems.PrideofplacemustgototheOrphicTheogony.Unfortunately,neither itsdatenorplaceoforigin isknown. It isverylikelythattherewasmorethanone,buttheoldestexamplethatallowsustohavesomeideaoftheOrphictheogony(ies?)istheDervenipapyrus.ItsquotationoftheOrphicpoem,though,isincompleteduetotheburningofthepapyrus,butalsotothefactthattheauthormayhaveleftoutwholepassages.Anyreconstruc-tionofitsoriginalcontentshould,therefore,behandledverycarefully.66BoththeIonian-epic character of the Orphic hexameters and the influence of Hittitematerial seem to point to Ionia as its original place of composition, but thesprinklingofAtticfeaturesinthetextsuggestsapresence,eveniftemporary,oftheauthorof theDervenipapyrus inAthens,regardlessofhisoriginalorigin.67Thereis,however,oneotherlikelyremnantofAtticOrphictheogonicalpoetry.InAthensPersephonesnamewaswrittenininscriptions,comedyandothernon-tragicliteratureasPherephattaanditsvariations(2),whereasP(h)ersephassaisthe spelling in tragedy;68 Timaeus already identified this spelling as the morepoeticalforminhisPlatoniclexicon.69NowTatian(Or.10.1=OF89F)usestheform Phersephassa in an enumeration of divine metamorphoses, when sayingthat Zeus became a serpent because of Phersephassa. Consequently, thisindicatesanultimateoriginfromanAttic,poeticandOrphicsource.Fromthisevidence, I conclude thatOrphic theogonies were probably also composed inAtticainthefifthcentury.

Besides an Orphic Theogony, the second big poem must have been theOrphic Katabasis, whose existence was doubted by Wilamowitz, as we haveseen.However,therecanbelittledoubtthatNordenwascorrectinhisrecon-structionofelementsoftheOrphicKatabasisonthebasisofAeneidVI,astheappearance of the Bologna papyrus (OF 717) in 1954with its picture of theunderworldhasonlystrengthenedhisposition.NowinGreekandLatinpoetry,

64DIETERICH,o.c.(n.57),p.84;NORDEN,o.c.(n.58),p.22.65OF403-420,cf.M.L.WEST,The Orphic Poems,Oxford,1983,p.7-15.66BURKERT, o.c. (n. 49),p. 89-90; see also id.,Kleine Schriften III:Mystica, Orphica, Pythagoric,

Gttingen,2006,p.95-111(DiealtorphischeTheogonienachdemPapyrusvonDerveni).67Forthelinguisticnatureofthetext,seeT.KOUROMENOSet al.,The Derveni Papyrus,Florence,

2006,p.14.68Persephassa:Aesch.,Cho.,490;Eur.,Or.,964(corrupt);Phoen.,684;Archemachus,FGrH

424F6;A.HOLLMANN,ACurseTabletfromtheCircusatAntioch,ZPE145(2003),p.67-82,line27.Phersephassa:Aesch.,fr.(dub.)451s,70(ed.RADT);Soph.,Ant.,894;Eur.,Hel.,175.

69TimaeusSoph.1006b,37-38=ThomasMagister,Ecl.378.

26 J.N.BREMMER

Orpheus descent into the underworld is always connected to his love forEurydice.70Infact,atthebeginningoftheOrphicArgonautica,Orpheushimselftellsusinthefirstpersonsingular:ItoldyouwhatIsawandperceivedwhenIwentdownthedarkroadofTaenarumintoHades,trustinginourlyre,71outofloveformywife.NordenalreadynotedtheclosecorrespondencewiththelinethatopensthekatabasisofOrpheusinVirgilsGeorgica,Taenarias etiam fauces, alta ostia Ditis, / ingressus (IV, 467-469), and persuasively concluded that bothlinesgobacktotheDescent of Orpheus.72AsreferencestothemythofOrpheusandEurydicedonotstartbeforeEuripidesAlcestis(357-362)of438BC,ared-figure loutrophoros from440-430BC, and thedecorated reliefsof,probably,thealtaroftheTwelveGodsintheAthenianAgora,datingfromabout410BC,thepoemaboutOrpheuskatabasisthatwasusedbyVirgilprobablyarrivedinAthensaroundthemiddleofthefifthcenturyBC,anditsusebyAristophanesshowsthatitwaswellknowninAthens.73

On the other hand, the use of Orphic eschatological material by Pindarsuggeststhathealreadyknewanearlierversionofthispoemoradifferentone.Onthesametopic,onecouldconsidertheDescent into HadesascribedtoOrpheusfromSicilianCamarina(Sudas.v.=OF708,870,1103).Heseemstobeafictitious person, as Martin West has noted,74 but the mention is remarkable.Surely, he owed his name to the fact that he also told his descent in the firstperson singular (above). As Camarina was a townwith close ties toAthens,75influencefromthatquarterisnotunthinkable.

AmuchlessknowntextistheOrphicPhysica,whichmustdatetothesecondhalf of the fifth century.AsRenaudGagnhaspersuasively argued, thishexa-metric poem, in which the Tritopatores played a prominent role, combinedtheogonicandanthropogonicnarrativeswithatheoryofthesoulandPresocraticphysicaldoctrine.Unfortunately,thescarcityoffragmentsmeansthatwecannotsayanythingmore.76

OurnexttextsaretheOrphicHymns,whicharementionedintheDervenipapyruswherecolumnXXIIsays: And it isalsosaid in theHymns:Demeter,

70WILAMOWITZ, o.c. (n.56) IIp.194;F.GRAF, S.I. JOHNSTON,Ritual Texts for the Afterlife:

Orpheus and the Bacchic Gold Tablets, London/NewYork,2007,p.172-174.71NORDEN (ad loc.) comparesAen.VI,120:Threicia fretus cithara; seealsohisKleine Schriften

zum klassischen Altertum,Berlin,1966,p.506-507.72SeealsoNORDEN,o.c.(n.71),p.508f.ForOrpheusaccountinthefirstpersonsingular,

WILAMOWITZ,o.c.(n.56),IIp.194-195alsopersuasivelycomparesPlut.,M.,566c(=OF412).73IarguethisinmoredetailinJ.N.BREMMER,TheGoldenBough:Orphic,Eleusinianand

Hellenistic-JewishSourcesofVirgilsUnderworldinAeneidVI,Kernos22(2009),p.183-208at193-196.

74WEST,o.c.(n.65),10note17.75F.CORDANO,Camarinacittdemocratica?,PP59(2004),p.283-292;S.HORNBLOWER,

Thucydides and Pindar,Oxford,2004,p.190-192.76R.GAGN,WindsandAncestors:ThePhysikaofOrpheus,HSCP 103(2007),p.1-24.


Rhea,Ge,Meter,Hestia,Deio (11-12).77DirkObbinkhasargued thatPhilo-choros,whoquotesotherOrphicpoetry(FGrH328F77=OF810),thereforemusthaveknowntheDervenitext,sincehealsoquotesthisverseasbeingbyOrpheusandashavingstoodintheHymns(FGrH328F185).Butthisisnotreally necessary. If the text from which the quote was taken belonged to acollectionofhymns,itmayindeedhavebeenknownastheHymns.78Obbinkison firmer ground when he argues that, originally, the line must have beenwritten in Attic,79 a suggestion supported by themany divine identifications,whichpointtoAtticpoetryofthe lasthalfofthefifthcentury.80ReferringtoPausaniasmentionofOrphichymnsintheritualsoftheAtticLykomids(IX,30, 12 =OF 531), the family of Themistocles, Obbink plausibly suggests aconnectionbetween theHymns and familymysteries.TheLykomidsmet in aclub-house,andinthisconnectionwemayperhapsdrawattentionagaintothefamousbeginningoftheOrphicTheogony:Closethedoors,youuninitiated(OF1)whichsuggestsaperformanceindoors,asopposedtotheperformanceofthegreat epics andHesiodic poems at festivals.Another connection ofOrpheuswitharespectableAthenianfamilybecomesvisible inEuripidesHypsipyle (ca.411-408BC),whereEuneos,theancestoroftheEuneids, is instructedonthelyrebyOrpheus(fr.759a,1619-1622Kannicht);theplayevenseemstocontaintracesofanOrphictheogony(F758a,1103-1108withKannicht).81

OurlasttextistheOrphichymnonDemetersentryinEleusis,whichhasbeenreconstructedinoutlinebyFritzGraf.82ThishymncelebratedtheculturalachievementsofAthenswithintheframeworkof theHomeric Hymn to Demeter butwithsome importantalterations,suchastheintroductionoftheswineherdEubouleus.Itprobablyalsocontainedanaitionof theThesmophoria inordertofacilitatetheadoptionofEubouleusbyEleusisfromhisoriginalHeimatontheCycladic islands.ThisaitionhasbeenpreservedbyClementofAlexandriaandascholiastonLucian(OF390).ItssourcewasaHellenisticAtticantiquar-ian, as appears both from themention of the Attic Skirophoria andArreto-phoriainClementandthescholionaswellasfromClementcallingKore(thename inLuciansscholion)Pherephatta, theAtticversionofhername,aswehavealreadyseenabove (2).Thedateof thehymnseems tohavebeen the

77Forthespelling DeioseeJ.N.BREMMER,RescuingDeioinSophoclesandEuripides,

ZPE 158(2007),p.27.78SeealsothedoubtsofG.BETEGH,The Derveni Papyrus,Cambridge,2004,p.98-99note20.79SimilarlyBURKERT,o.c.(n.66),p.116-7.80W.ALLAN,ReligiousSyncretism:theNewGodsofGreekTragedy,HSCP 102(2004),

p.113-155.81 D. OBBINK, A Quotation of the Derveni Papyrus in PhilodemusOn Piety,Cronache

Ercolanesi24 (1994),p.110-35; seealsoBURKERT,o.c. (n.66),p.112-119 (AtticOrphicHymnsandEuneids),overlookedbyKOUROMENOS,o.c.(n.67),p.254f.

82F.GRAF,Eleusis und die orphische Dichtung Athens in vorhellenistischer Zeit,Berlin,1974,p.151-186.

28 J.N.BREMMER

thirdquarterofthefifthcentury,givenitsindebtnesstotheculturaltheoriesofProdikos and the mention of Eubulos in the famous Athenian First Fruitsdecreeof422/1BC,whereheiscombinedwithTheosandThea(IG378,39).83

Do we also haveOrphic sects, asNilsson, Burkert and Christiane suggest?Thereissimplynotatraceofitand,infact,itisveryimprobable.TheChristianimage of a sect conjures up small-minded, lower-class people, as does indeedBurkerts class of the smallmen.Yet the visitsofOrphic initiators towealthyAthenians,asattestedinPlatosRepublic(364b-365a),precludeanyacceptanceofBurkerts surprising statement, as does the fact thatwell-to-dowomen seem tohaveconstitutedthegreatmajorityofrecipientsoftheGoldLeaves.Andindeed,in themost recent studyof the socialoriginof theGoldLeavesRobertParkerrightlyconcludesthatinitiatestendedtoberelativelywealthy.84

Moreover,wenowherehearofOrphicgroupsorcongregations:itistoooftenforgotten thatOrphikoi on theOlbian bone plates is not a secure reading andwouldbethefirstandonlydesignationofthefollowersofOrpheusasOrphics.85The itinerant,probablyvegetarian, life styleof the orpheotelestai,which is increas-inglydocumentedalsobythewidegeographicalspreadoftheGoldLeaves,hardlyfavourstheformationofsects.Theearliestknownorpheotelests,Philippus,wasstillreceivedbytheSpartankingLeotychidasinthefirstdecadesofthefifthcentury(OF653),andChristophRiedweghasinterestinglyarguedthatEmpedoclesstyledhimselfasakindoforpheotelests;GborBeteghhasgoneastepfurtherbysuggest-ing that the constellation of functions and abilities thatmake up the image ofEmpedoclesfindsitsmostimmediateprefigurationinOrpheus.86Empedoclesisindeedoneofthe lastofthewanderingWundermnnerofthelaterArchaicera,agroup which includes the likes of Epimenides, Abaris, Aristeas and, to someextent,Orpheushimself,87but,ofcourse, adapted tohisowndayandage.Theorpheotelestai(OF653-664),Isuggest,arefurtherinheritorsofthistradition.Inthecourse of time, societymoved on, and Plato and other philosophers started tolookdownonthem.YetthereisnoreasontoseethemascharlatansorSchwindler.Suchjudgmentsneedbetterargumentsthanmoderncontemptforreligiousentre-preneurs:thehistoryofreligionhasshownushowcomplicatedtheevaluationofreligiouspractitionersoftenis.

83 For a fuller discussionofEubouleus andhis origin seemy forthcoming Divinities in the

OrphicGoldLeaves:Eukls,Eubouleus,Brimo,Kybele,KoreandPersephone,intheproceedingsofthe2006OhioconferenceontheGoldLeaves.

84BREMMER,o.c.(n.38),p.17-18(wealthandwomen); R.PARKER,M.STAMATOPOULOU,ANew Funerary Gold Leaf from Pherai,Arch. Ephem. 2004 [2007], p. 1-32 at 21 (affluency:quote),28-31(women).

85GRAFJOHNSTON,o.c.(n.70),p.185;HENRICHS,l.c.(n.5),p.213note15.86C.RIEDWEG,OrphischesbeiEmpedocles,A&A41(1995),p.34-59at39-40;BETEGH,

o.c.(n.78),p.370-372;seealsoWILLI,o.c.(n.29),p.260-262.87ForthesemiracleworkersandpurifiersseeBREMMER,o.c.(n.38),p.36-39.


Itisclear,then,thatbooksplayedanimportantroleinthespreadofOrphicthought,88butcanwecallthesebookssacredasChristianedoes?Idoubtit.HolybooksinoursenseofthewordisatypicallyJewishandChristianinventionthathas managed to infiltrate even Islam and modern Judaism, neither of whomtraditionally knew a HolyQuran or a HolyTorah.89Moreover, an importantqualityofholybooksisthattheirtextsarefixed.ThisisofcoursenotthecaseinOrphic literature, whichwas extremely fluid in its texts.Wemay evenwonderwhetherwecanactuallycall this literature religiousbooks.90What is thediffer-ence between the mid-sixth-century epic of Heracles katabasis and that ofOrpheus?Istheoneliterature,theotherreligion?OrtheOrphicTheogony?Isthatclassed as religious, but Hesiods one literary? Admittedly, Euripides TheseusscoldsHippolytushonouringthesmokeofmanywritings,butthatonlyshowshimupasabookishintellectual,justlikeAristophanesassociatesthesophistswithbooks.91 However this may be, it is clear that in fifth-century Athens Orphicbookscirculatedandwerecomposed,booksthatdidnotconformtothestandardideasofAthenianpolisreligion.

4. Mythography

BeforeItrytodrawsomeconclusionsletusconcludebylookingverybrieflyatmythography.Thechoiceofsubjectmaybesurprising inadiscussionofpolisreligion. Yet it should be clear that Greek myths were important media forconveying informationongods,heroes andother supernaturalbeings thatwereworshipped by theGreeks. FormanyGreeks, theirmental images of the godsmusthavebeenformedbythegreatpoemsofHomerandHesiod,anditisnotunexpectedthataccordingtoHerodotus(II,53)itwasHomerandHesiodwhogavethegodstheirepithets,chosetheirhonoursandskills,andpointedouttheirforms.Startingatabout500BCweseetheriseofauthorswhocollectedGreekmythsandbegantosystematize them.Theywerenot,however, justputtingthemythologicalhouse inorder,sotospeak,butalsochangingthetradition.Thoserationalisations, suchasHerodorus replacementof thedragon thatguarded theGoldenFleecewithamazinglybigsnakes(FGrH31F63bis=fr.**52AFowler)or,moresubtly,Pherecydesprobableomissionofanytheogony,arewellknownandneednotoccupyushere.Nevertheless,wemustnot fail tonote that these

88OnOrphismandwritingseealsoM.DETIENNE,The Writing of Orpheus,Baltimore/London,

2003,p.131-136.89SeeJ.N.BREMMER,FromHolyBookstoHolyBible:anItineraryfromAncientGreeceto

ModernIslamviaSecondTempleJudaismandEarlyChristianity,inM.POPOVI(ed.),Authoritative Scriptures in Ancient Judaism,Leiden,2010,p.327-360.

90R.PARKER,Athenian Religion,Oxford,1996,p.55.91Ar.,fr.506(ed.KASSEL-AUSTIN),cf.R.THOMAS,Oral Tradition & Written Record in Classical

Athens,Cambridge,1989,p.19-20.

30 J.N.BREMMER

rationalising changes also will have contributed to the secularisation of theinheritedmythologicaltradition.92

For us, the important question is on whose authority the mythographersintroducedtheirversionsandchanges.Iseeatleasttwodifferentstrategieshere.FirstwehavetheoneemployedbyAcusilaus,whowas,byallaccounts,oneoftheoldestmythographers.Hesaid,presumablyintheproemofhisGenealogies,93thathehad foundhishistoryonbronze tablets,whichhis fatherhaddugup inhishouse.The strategyof authentificationby findinganoldmanuscriptwaswellknowninantiquityandalsoemployedbyEuhemerus.94Admittedly,oneofthetestimonia (T 7 Fowler, from the Suda) claims that Acusilaus works wereforged, and, on this basis, Jacoby (ad FGrH 2 T 1, 7) claimed there was aforgeryincirculationinImperialtimes.Yetthereisnootherevidencefortheexistenceofthisforgery,andthelikeliestexplanationofT7isacommentatorsscepticism about the story of the tablets in Acusilaus himself.95 In fact, theappeal to ancient tradition seems to have worked so well that some peopleincludedAcusilausamongtheSevenSages(FGrH2T11ab=fr11abFowler).Thiswouldhardlyhavehappenedifhisworkhadjustbeenanenumerationofgenealogies.Inanycase,itisinterestingtonotethattheauthorityinAcusilauscase no longer is divine inspiration by one of theMuses but tradition in theformofthehoarypast.

The secondstrategy is toboastonesownsuperiority.Letus listen to thechest-thumpingbeginningofacompetingauthorofGenealogies:HecataeustheMilesian speaks (mytheitai) as follows: Iwritewhat I think to be true, for thetalesoftheGreeks,astheyappeartome,aremanyandridiculous(FGrH1F1=fr.1Fowler).ItisalsotypicalofthisargumentativecontextofearlyGreekintellectualstocriticisethecompetition.96ThusHellanicus(FGrH4T18=T18Fowler)criticisedAcusilaus,whointurnhadcriticisedHesiod(FGrH2T6=T6Fowler).97Inneithercaseisthereanyreferencetothepolis.98

92Forthemythographers,seeR.L.FOWLER,HowtoTellaMyth:Genealogy,Mythology,

Mythography,Kernos19(2006),p.35-46.93R.L.FOWLER,HerodotusandHisContemporaries,JHS116(1996),p.62-87at78.94A.J.FESTUGIRE,La Rvlation dHerms Trismgiste,vol.I,Paris,19503,p.319-24andtudes de

religion grecque et hellnistique, Paris, 1972,p. 272-4;W.SPEYER,Bcherfunde in der Glaubenswerbung der Antike,Gttingen,1970;P.PIOVANELLI,TheMiraculousDiscoveryoftheHiddenManuscript,ortheParatextualFunctionoftheProloguetotheApocalypse of Paul,inJ.N.BREMMER,I.CZACHESZ(eds.),The VisioPauli and the Gnostic ApocalypseofPaul, Leuven,2007,p.23-49.

95Unlessoneacceptsanadventuroussupplementinfr.11,9(ed.FOWLER,not9,11ashisapparatusadT7says).

96 Cf. FOWLER, o.c. (n. 93), p. 69; J.BREMMER, Rationalization and Disenchantment inAncientGreece:MaxWeberamongthePythagoreansandOrphics?,inR.BUXTON(ed.),From Myth to Reason? Studies in the Development of Greek Thought,Oxford,1999,p.71-83at78.

97SeealsoA.CAMERON,Greek Mythography in the Roman World,NewYork,2004,p.94f.


5. Final observations

Before I come, at last, to the subjectofpolis religion, letme first say a fewwordsregardingreligioningeneral.Inherdiscussionofpolisreligion,ChristianeofferedanexcellentdefinitionofGreekreligion,which,tothebestofmyknowl-edge,hasnotattractedanyinterest,eitherinsideoroutsidetheworldofclassics.Itdeservestobebetterknown.ForChristiane,Greekreligionisaboveall:

awayofarticulatingtheworld,ofstructuringchaosandmakingitintelligible;itisamodelarticulatingacosmicorderguaranteedbyadivineorderwhichalso(incomplexways) groundshumanorder,perceived tobe incarnated above all in theproperly ordered and pious polis, and providing certain rules and prescriptions ofbehaviour,especiallytowardsthedivinethroughcult,butalsotowardsthehumanworld.99

Ifweleaveoutthesentenceaboutthepolis,whichundulylimitsGreekreligiontothepolisasiftherewasnotalsothesizeableworldoftheGreekethn,100weareleftwith a definition of religion in general,which clearly has been inspired byJohnGould.He,inturn,wasinspiredbytheperhapsmostfamousdefinitionofreligion at that time, which was developed by Clifford Geertz (1926-2006).Geertzdefinesreligioninthefollowingway:

A system of symbols which acts to establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by formulating conceptions of a generalorder of existence and clothing these conceptionswith such an aura of factualitythatthemoodsandmotivationsseemuniquelyrealistic.101

It is interestingtonotethatChristianesdefinitionalsomentionsthehumananddivinepartsof the equation and their interaction in cult,whereasGeertzsdefinitionremainsrathervagueregardingthesepoints,althoughintheexpositionof his definition he becomesmuchmore specific.This differencewithGeertzshows the influence of another very influential modern definition of religion,which is, in thewordsofMelfordSpiro, an institution consistingof culturallypatterned interaction with culturally postulated super-human beings.102

98 For Hecataeus beginning and the secularising role of the mythographers, see R.L.

FOWLER,ThoughtsonMythandReligioninEarlyGreekHistoriography,Minerva(Valladolid)22(2009),p.21-39.

99SOURVINOU-INWOOD,o.c.(n.2),p.19.100SeeespeciallyH.-J.GEHRKE, Jenseits von Athen und Sparta. Das dritte Griechenland und seine

Staatenwelt, Munich, 1986; R. BROCK, S. HODKINSON (eds.),Alternatives to Athens. Varieties of Political Organization and Community in Ancient Greece, Oxford,2000.

101C.GEERTZ,The Interpretation of Cultures,NewYork,1973,p.87-125at90;J.GOULD,Myth, Ritual, Memory, and Exchange,Oxford, 2003, p. 203-234 (OnMakingSenseofGreekReligion,19851).

102 M. SPIRO, Religion: Problems of Definition and Explanation, in M. BANTON (ed.),Anthropological Approaches to the Study of Religion,London,1966,p.85-126,reprintedinB.KILBORNE,

32 J.N.BREMMER

Christiane, then, combined themost prominent functionalist and substantivistdefinitions.

ChristianewasverymuchaDurkheimian.Thisisclearfromtheconcluding,nearly rhapsodic, sentencesofher seminalarticle: Theroleof thepolis in thearticulation of Greek religion was matched by the role of religion in thearticulationofthepolis:religionprovidedtheframeworkandthesymbolicfocusof the polis. Religion was the very centre of the Greek polis. In fact, sheconfessed,ifthatistheword,herselftobeaDurkheimianinapassageofherReading Greek Death,inwhichshestressedthenecessitynottofallintothetrapof reductionist tendencies.103 And indeed, as appears from the words justquoted, she did not take the road, so often taken by neo-Durkheimians, ofdescribingsocietyashavingareligiousnature.Rather,sheargued,forreligionhaving a social nature or, in a more poetical formulation, theGreek polis ashaving a religious heart.104Now it iswell known thatDurkheim (1858-1917)cametoreligionrelativelylateandinhisopusmagumLes Formes lmentairesof1912heconcentratedinparticularontherelativelyundifferentiatedsocietiesoftheAustralianAborigines.CanweapplyhisthoughtstoareallybigandliteratecityaslateclassicalAthenswas?

Although the main lines of Christianes argument are convincing, even anon-reductionistDurkheimian approach has some disadvantages. By concen-tratingoncivicreligion,wegetamoreharmoniouspictureofreligiouslifeasawhole thanwasthecase inreality.Moreover, thefocusonand inspirationbyDurkheimian thought perhaps lead to a certain overvaluationof public culticpractice above private activities and of religious performance above religiousthinkingandspeculation.Forthelatter,thearrivalofliteracywasundoubtedlyanimportantfactor,eventhoughreligiousthinkingwascertainlynotlimitedtoliterate societies.105 Inbothciteddefinitionsof religion,we lack theaspectofpower,ashasbeenpointedoutbyTalalAsadinhisfamouscritiqueofGeertzsdefinition of religion.106 Religion is a social phenomenon, and every socialphenomenonhastodealwithhierarchiesandpower,evenifareligionlacksanestablishedclergy,aswasmainly thecase inancientGreece.Moreover, inthecaseofChristiane it is striking that shenotescultbutdoesnotmentionany-thingaboutreligiousthought,belieforspeculation.

L.L. LANGNESS (eds.), Culture and Human Nature: Theoretical Papers of Melford Spiro, Chicago, 1987,p.187-222.

103SOURVINOU-INWOOD,o.c.(n.1),p.31f.104 ForDURKHEIMS view on the religiousness of society, compare I. STRENSKI,The New

Durkheim,NewBrunswick,2006,p.18-21.105ComparetheclassicstudyofP.RADIN,Primitive Man as Philosopher,NewYork,19572.106T.ASAD, Anthropologicalconceptionsof religion: reflectionsonGeertz,Man NS 18

(1983),p.237-259.


Itisthesetwoaspects,religiousthoughtandauthority,thatIwouldliketoconcludewith in light ofmyprevious discussion.First, religion ismore thancult.RegardingtheChristiantraditiononecouldfairlysaythatmanybooksonitshistoryconcentrateon itsbig thinkersand theologians. It isonly in recenttimesthatresearchhasstartedtoconcentratemoreoneverydayChristianlife,afocuswhich,ofcourse, ismoredifficult themoreoneretreats intime.InthestudyofGreekreligionitisratherthereverse.Althoughthemajorhandbooksdopayattentiontothereligiousroleofpoetsandphilosophers,onenevergetsthefeelingthatthisisseenasanimportantpartofthehistoryofGreekreligion.It isprobablysymbolic thatbothNilssonandBurkert treat themtowards theendsoftheirhandbooks,whereasWilamowitzdoesnotgivethemanyspecialattentionatall.107

Theconceptofpolis religion,however,cannotbeusedwithoutalsoaskingwhoexertedauthorityinthisreligion.Whoactuallyhadthepowertoshapeandcontrol that religion? In general, we can say that the polis community oftenexerts control. The case of Socrates is perhaps themost obvious example,108but we might also think of the banishment of Diagoras and the reports ofattacks on other fifth-century intellectuals because of their atheism.109 On amorepositivenote,thestatecalendaroffestivalscomestomind.Weknowthatcirca401BC,forexample,thesecretaryNicomachusdrewupanewcalendarforpublicsacrifices,whichseemstohaveomittedsomeoftheoldersacrifices.Therecanbelittledoubtthatsuchmatterswereunderthecontrolofthepolis,eventhoughwedonothavedetailedinformationaboutthepublicscrutinyofhisproposals.110

This,though,isonlyonesideofpolisreligion.Theothersideistheshapingofnewideasorthetestingofoldones,asideofreligionthatwasalwaysproblematicfrom the perspective of the Durkheimian approach with its stress on thehegemonyof traditionandritual.111Hereweshoulddistinguishbetweenpublicperformanceandmoreprivatereading.ThetragediesortheOdesofPindarwereperformed inpublic,be it in frontof largeror smaller audiences.Here toowecouldperhapsstillspeakofthecontrolofthepolisor,inlessdemocraticones,ofits rulers. For example, Pindar may well have thought about what religiosityTheronfavouredbeforehecomposedhisSecond Olympian Ode.Moreover,how-

107NILSSON,o.c.(n.60),p.741-783;BURKERT,o.c.(n.61),p.305-337.108For the charge and theprocess seePARKER, o.c. (n. 90),p. 199-207;P.MILLETT, The

TrialofSocratesRevisited,European Review of History12(2005),p.23-62;J.N.BREMMER,Pere-grinusChristianCareer, inA.HILHORST et al. (eds.),Flores Florentino. Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Early Jewish Studies in Honour of Florentino Garca Martnez,Leiden,2007,p.729-747at734f.

109PARKER,o.c. (n.90),p.207-210;J.N.BREMMER,AtheisminAntiquity, inM.MARTIN(ed.),The Cambridge Companion to Atheism,Cambridge,2006,p.11-26at12-19.

110PARKER,o.c.(n.90),p.218-20.111AsnotedalsobyH.S.VERSNEL,Transition and Reversal in Myth and Ritual,Leiden,1993,p.9.

34 J.N.BREMMER

everfarEuripideswent,hewillalwayshavehadinthebackofhismindthattheaimofhiscompositionswasalsotowin,nottolose.

Thisisdifferentwithbooksororalpoems.WedonotknowhowtheoldestOrphicpoetrywas spreadoverGreece, but theDervenipapyrusdemonstratesthataround400BCpeoplecouldreadthispoetryandevenstudyitscommentar-ies.112 Orphic poetry was clearly very influential in some areas of thought,especiallythosehavingtodowiththeafterlife(asiswellillustratedbyPindarandEmpedocles),anareahardlycontrolledbythepolis.ItsauthoritymusthavebeenthenameofOrpheus.AsthewordsofHerodotusaboutHomerandHesiod(4)demonstrated,poetscouldhaveanenormousinfluence.ThatiswhyintheearlierfifthcenturypeoplestartedtospreadnewideasunderOrpheusname.ThelossofmostofthatpoetrymakesusforgetthattheprestigeofOrpheusaspoetwasenormously high in the fifth century. According to a set of fifth-centuryhistorians,which includePherecydes andHellanicus,Homerwas a descendentfromOrpheusaswasHesiod.113AndwhenPlatoenumeratesthegreatpoetsofthepast,heputsOrpheusfirst.114

Buttowhatextentcanwestillcallpoetryunderhisnameexpressionsofpolisreligion?Thisishardlypossible,Iwouldargue,forpoemslikeOrpheusTheogonyandKatabasis,whichderivedtheirauthorityfromthenameoftheirsupposedpoet,notfromaparticularpolis.ItisOrpheusnametoothatshouldforbidustocallhispoetry sectarian discourse. There is nothing in our fifth-century tradition thatpoints into thatdirection.Orphicpoetrywaswell-known inAthens in the fifthcentury,andacceptedinthebestcirclesoftheAthenianpopulation.Someofitsfigures (e.g. Eubouleus, Brimo) were even incorporated into the EleusinianMysteries.115ItisclearthatinthefourthcenturyPlatolookeddownontheOrphicinitiators. Sure enough, compared to him they undoubtedly were second-ratetheologiansandhadtoreallyworkforaliving.Yetnothinginoursources(exceptPlatoscontempt)warrantsmodernopinionsofthemascharlatansorswindlers.Orphicviews(3),mythography(4)andsophistictheories(3),suchasthoseofProdicus,allspreadviabooksandthereisnoreasontocallthemexpressionsofpolisreligion.

Indeed,writingalsoenabledthespreadofprivateoraclesanddefixiones.Inthecase of the former, Cimon, Nicias and Alcibiades all employed private seers,

112AlsonotethementionofOrphicbooksbyClaudian,Epith.,232-234andCarm. Min.,23,

11;31,25-33, towhichDIETERICH,o.c. (n.57),p.159callsattention,butwhichseemstohavebeenoverlookedbyBERNABinhissplendidneweditionoftheOrphicfragments.

113Pherecydes,FGrH3F167=fr.167(ed.FOWLER)=OF871;Hellanicus,FGrH4F5=OF871(HomerandHesiod);Damastes,FGrH5F11=fr.11b(ed.FOWLER)=OF871;Charax,FGrH103F62=OF872.

114Pl.,Apol.,41a(=OF1076);Ion,536b(=OF973);notealsoAlexis,fr.140(ed.KASSEL-AUSTIN)(=OF1018);Hecataeus,FGrH264F25(=OF55).

115SeeBREMMER,o.c.(n.83).


sometimesevenanumberofthem.116Thisuseofprivateseersbyleadingpoliti-cians goes back at least to the beginning of the fifth century, since Aeschylusalreadymentionstheseersofthehouse.117Thereisnoreasontothinkthattheseseersortheirmorehumblecolleaguesonthestreetswerecontrolledbythepolisorwerealwaysconcernedwithexpressingtheviewsofthepolis.Thesamemustbetrueoftheprofessionalsthatwroteandsoldmagicalformulae.Asnotedbefore,RobertParkerdiscussestheseunderthetitleunlicensedreligion,butthatsuggeststhattherewasadichotomyinthepolisbetweenlicensedandunlicensedreligion.This introduces a distinction that is modern and not warranted by Athenianevidence.Intheend,wewillhavetoacceptthatreligioninurbanizedGreecewasindeed mainly polis religion, as has been presented to us in Robert Parkerswonderful books on Athenian religion. Themargins of that religion, however,wereperhapsmuchmessierthanChristianelikedtothink.118

JanN.BREMMERTroelstralaan,78NL9722JNGRONINGENE-mail:[email protected]

116Cimon:Plut.,Cimon,18.Alcibiades:Plut.,Nic.,4,2;13,1;FLOWER,o.c.(n.21),p.177.117SeeFRAENKELonAesch.,Ag.,409.118 This is the slightly revised and annotated versionof a keynote lecture at theConference

PerceptionsofPolis-Religion:Inside/Outside. ASymposiuminMemoryofChristianeSourvinou-Inwood,Reading,6July,2008;Ihavekeptitsoralnature.ThetexthasalsoprofitedfromaudiencesinMontreal,TorontoandNewYorkaswellasfromcommentsbyBobFowler,AlbertHenrichsandVincianePirenne-Delforge.SuzanneLyekindlycorrectedmyEnglish.

kernos 1559 23 manteis magic mysteries and mythography

Documents

portail de revues

polis religion

become customary to

religion grecque antiquehttp

the study

in recent decades it

proprit intellectuelle

org1559ce document