GODS AND GODDESSES OF SMYRNA

Leonard L. Thompson

Lawrence University (Emeritus)

Sometime in the second or early third centuries A.D., Apollonios Sparos

dedicated a sanctuary at Smyrna complete with icons and furnishings for sacrifices,

dedications, and communal meals. In return, the cultic association affiliated with the

sanctuary granted Apollonios permission to set up an inscription inventorying his gift. 1

(lines 1-7). This dedicatory inscription is worth examining in detail, for the gods and

goddesses of Smyrna presented themselves differently in different settings and their

relationships changed from setting to setting. The same was true for gods of other

cities. Greek gods operated locally and made themselves known through “local frames

of awareness.”2 Statements about gods and goddesses, exclusive of specific locale and

setting, are vacuous and, for the most part, devoid of substance.

To establish the sanctuary at Smyrna, Apollonios Sparos had to follow publicly

recognized, previously established conventions. First of all, he had to receive divine

authorization, in this instance, through his son, Apollonios, who had been a priest of

Helios Apollonios Kisauloddenos. 3 Second, a new sanctuary gained sanctity by being

built on a sacred site. This sanctuary was built on a slope of Mt. Pagos which by its

elevation had natural features of sacrality. Further, it was said that the goddesses

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 2

Nemeseis revealed themselves to Alexander the Great when he lay asleep in front of

their temple on Mt. Pagos. 4 Third, the hieron had to be furnished with statues and altars

(temples were optional). Finally, a hieron or sanctuary had to be marked off from the

area around it by a temenos, a boundary marker.

Yet, as Roy Rapapport has pointed out, while conventional, publicly recognized

procedures are necessary, they are not sufficient for creating a sanctuary. 5

Sacralization also requires ongoing performances. 6 Performances--performative rites

and performative language done in the right way by authorized persons--create the

condition of sacrality as a fact just as, when done in the right way by authorized

persons, performative rites create a queen or a knight or a married person as a fact. 7 If

there were ever to come a time when sacral performances no longer enlivened

Apollonios Sparos’s sanctuary, then it would become simply a curiosity of

archaeologists, classicists, and historians of religion. 8 But as long as performances

occurred, the sacrality of the sanctuary was secured.

According to Apollonios’s dedicatory inscription, six deities disclosed themselves

in the confines of the sacred temenos at Smyrna, with Helios Apollo Kisaulodd ēnos as

the principal deity. 9 Kisauloddēnos, with the gentilic suffix, -ηνο ς, must refer to an area

in or around Smyrna. 10 Variants on Apollo Kisauloddenos occur in two other

Smyrnaean inscriptions, but without Helios.

In the inventory, Apollo, in contrast to the other five deities, is not named. 11 He is

αυ το ς ο θεο ς, “God himself” (line 8) or simply θεο ς (line 33). Further, in contrast to the

five other deities, the inscription does not mention any statue or other representation for

“God himself.” The inventory says simply, “God himself on a marble pedestal” (line 8).

Adjacent to “God himself” was a table of lesbian stone, with sculptured feet of a griffon,

an animal sacred to Apollo. 12 In front of the table was a marble dish for the use of those

sacrificing and a square incense-altar made of stone from Teos with an iron vessel for

containing fire.13 Those are the furnishings for incense and bloodless sacrifices. 14

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 3

Standing beside Apollo was a marble statue of Artemis on a παραστα ς, a

column, made of millstone (lines 14-15). By using the term παραστα ς, “stands beside,”

a close connection was made between her and Helios Apollo. When closely associated

with Helios Apollo, as here, she was virtually always Artemis Selene, Apollo’s moon to

his sun.

The third deity mentioned in the inventory is Mēn (lines 15-16). His statue stood

on a marble base (ε πι βα σει μαρμαρινη

 ) alongside of which was a many-colored,

square table. Mēn is not mentioned in any other text or artifact from Smyrna, but

elsewhere in western Asia Minor, Mēn was a popular, albeit subordinate deity in “private

cult associations.”15

Next, a marble altar with an eagle on it (lines 17-18). The eagle is an emblem of

Helios, the sun, but also, as here, of Zeus, though the term Zeus appears in the

genitive case, almost as an afterthought. In this sanctuary Helios Apollo, not Zeus, was

the dominant deity.

Finally, Plouton Helios and Koure Selene are hidden from view, inside a wooden

temple with a tiled roof and locked doors. Their statues were clothed ( ε μπεφιεσμε να),

and on a pedestal (ε πι βη ματος) (lines 18-21). They held (εχοντα) an elaborate wooden

case (παστη ον) in the form of a shrine which contained a linen embroidered curtain

(παστο ς) for the bridal bed (lines 22-23). 16 A key (to the door of this temple?) was

gilded and covered for use in taking up collections in processions of the gods (lines 24-

26).17 The last item in the inventory (lines 32-33) comes full circle back to god:

Instruments (ο πλα) adjacent to God for the world-order (του κο σμου χα ριν), made of

iron, eight in number. 18

This inscription provides the following information about the association affiliated

with that sanctuary. Apollonios’s son had been a priest of Helios Apollo. The

association gave permission for Apollonios to put up his dedicatory inscription. 19 Line

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 4

26 refers to a ritual procession of the gods. 20 Most attention is given to Helios Apollo,

the principal deity, but consideration is also given to Plouton Helios and Koure Selene.

Notice is also given to the table beside Mēn. Artemis and Zeus are represented, but of

lesser importance. The number eight, the last word in the inscription, is given

prominence. Perhaps it had symbolic signicance.

There are no facsimiles, no other text that brings together those six deities.

Helios Apollo is not mentioned in any other inscription from Smyrna. Neither Plouton

Helios nor Koure Selene is mentioned in any other inscription that I can find. More

information about the cultic association can be recovered by adapting an approach that

Quentin Skinner took in analyzing texts on early European politics: collect a circle of

texts with sufficient family resemblances to this inscription to permit comparison of

conventions such as vocabulary, point of view, taken-for-granted assumptions, or

conceptual distinctions. 21

With the invaluable help of the TLG I began by collecting 59 texts that mentioned

Helios with Apollo, Artemis with Selene, Plouton with Helios, Koure with Selene, or the

god Mēn.22 Given Zeus’s minor role in the inscription and his ubiquitous presence in the

literature, I did not take him into account. Tabulated by deity the results are as follows:

Forty-nine mentioned Helios as Apollo and Artemis as Selene (a commonplace in the

literature), seven mentioned Mēn, five associated Koure with Selene, and five linked

Plouton with Helios. Tabulated by type of literature or ideology: (1) Four Stoic, 23 six

ancient lexicons,24 six Christian,25 11 scholia, mostly on Homer and Hesiod. 26 All of the

foregoing refer only to Helios Apollo and/or Artemis Selene. Thirteen belong to a

scattered miscellany of types. 27 Nineteen texts either reflected or referred to

Pythagorean-Platonic-Orphic conventions. 28

For those 19 texts, it was not necessary, probably not possible, to separate out

Pythagorean conventions from Orphic or Platonic. Pythagoreanism and Orphism were

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 5

intertwined from the beginnings of Pythagoreanism at Kroton, Italy, in the sixth century

B.C..29 Plato integrated Pythagorean-Orphic features into his dialogues, and later

Platonists incorporated even more of those Pythagorean-Orphic features, especially

with the renewed interest in Pythagoreanism that occurred by the Roman imperial

period.30

Of the total 59 texts, those that share the most conventions with Apollonios’s

inscription fall in the Pythagorean-Platonic-Orphic orbit. Most of the others only allude in

passing to one or the other of those five deities. That plus the fact that one-third of all

the texts collected around Apollonios’s inscription fall in the Pythagorean-Platonic-

Orphic camp warrants a testing of the hypothesis that Apollonios and the private

association moved within that ideological orbit.

In what follows I will examine only three texts that share the most conventions

with Apollonios’s inscription. Writings of Plutarch, a Platonist from Chaeronea who

flourished at the end of the first Christian century and the beginning of the second; The

Orphic Hymns, a collection of 87 hymns used during the second and third Christian

centuries by a cultic association (θιασος) in western Asia Minor around Smyrna; 31 and

writings of Porphyry, a devoted disciple of Plotinus, flourishing in the second half of the

third Christian century. From those three texts, then, what can we learn about how the

members of the association at Smyrna might have “read” the monuments in the

sanctuary?

The statues in the Smyrnaean sanctuary were material, physical objects,

tangibles such as marble, dark stone from Lesbos, millstone, multicolored veined stone

from Teos. That material was sculpted according to iconic features of gods and

goddesses fixed by social habit and cultural convention. Within the confines of the

sculptor’s studio, those statues could be and probably were admired for their pleasing,

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 6

aesthetic qualities. When, however, moved to the sacred temenos, delight in the beauty

of the tangible, physical ágalma disclosed something more: The sculpted stone became

a sign.

So Porphyry opened his comments on statues first by a quotation: ‘I speak to

those for whom there is established custom (θε μις); you profane ones [βε βηλοι], shut

the door behind you.’ That statement, says Porphyry, displays the thoughts of a wise

theologian. For god and the powers of god are disclosed (ε μη νυσαν) through images

(ει κο νων), that belong to the same class as perceptions (αισθη σεις); men represent

(α ποτυπω
 σαντες) the unseen (τα α φανη ) by visible images (φανεροις πλα σμασι). So
one can read statues (α γα λματα) as one reads books. 32

When moved to the sacred temenos at Smyrna, the statue, the ágalma, became

a sign, an aspect of a god or goddess, just as much as lightning is an aspect of a storm.

The statue was, to be sure, a construction, a cultural artifact, not natural as lightning,

but, as Rappaport has argued, the connection between constructed signs is no less

than among natural indicators. 33

Only, however, for those who know how to read the signs. For the unlearned [the

βε βηλοι, the profane ones], as Porphyry goes on to say, “consider statues as nothing

but wood and stone, just as those who do not understanding letters view writing tablets

as pieces of wood and books as woven papyri.” 34 Or, in the language of the American

pragmatist, Charles Peirce, a statue “is only a sign to that mind which so considers and

if it is not a sign to any mind it is not a sign at all.” 35 (So, when minds lose the capacity

to read signs, a whole dimension of reality is lost.) For those, however, who prayed,

offered dedications, and sacrificed in the Smyrnaean sanctuary, the statues were

indexical signs, indicating the presence of the god, like a demonstrative pronoun that

forces attention to the noun that it indicates.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 7

The combination of Helios with Apollo assumes that natural objects, like the sun,

also signify, that is, the Sun is also a sign. In “The E at Delphi,” one of Plutarch’s

interlocators says that “practically all the Greeks identify Apollo with Helios, the Sun.” 36

A few exchanges later, Ammonius (who was Plutarch’s teacher) clarifies. It is

appropriate to speak of Helios Apollo, so long as the nature of their relationship is

understood. He explains: Apollo is Being Itself, το ο ν). He is Unity, One, eternal and

changeless, without past or future, as the name A-pollon makes clear (alpha privative,

“not” + an Ionian form of πολυ ς, many, i.e., “not many”). Being Itself can only be

apprehended through thought, δια νοια. Helios, the Sun, on the other hand, belongs, not

to Being, but to that which appears to be, το φαινο μενον, apprehended through

perception, αισθησις.37 That is, Helios, the Sun, belongs to the same class as

Porphyry’s agálmata. In Porphyry’s account of statues, he makes much the same point:

Helios is Apollo, that is, Helios is a symbol (συ μβολον) of φρο νησις, something like

“intellectual contemplation.” 38 Apollo cannot be perceived through the senses. Is that

possibly why he has no ágalma in the Smyrnaean sanctuary?

The singer of the the Orphic “Hymn to Apollo” (number 34) also addresses

Apollo in solar language: you are the “eye that sees all and brings light to mortals” (line

8). At night it is Helios Apollo who passes under the earth: “In the quiet darkness of a

night lit with stars you see earth’s roots below” (lines 13-14). 39 According to the notation

alongside the title, this hymn was to be sung while offering θυμιαμα μα νναν, “powdered

incense.”40 In Orphic and Pythagorean cult, no blood sacrifices were offered. That fits

with the marble dish and incense-altar before “God himself,” as described in

Apollonios’s inscription.

In the body of the Orphic Hymn, Helios Apollo is praised for keeping the universe

harmonized and in tune, striking the lowest notes (ει ς υ πα τας) in winter, the highest

(νεα ταις) in summer (lines 16-19). 41 That is pure, Pythagorean language. In

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 8

Mathematics Useful for Understanding Plato, written around the middle of the second

century, Theon of Smyrna elaborates in detail the heavenly music of the sun and other

planets. The low and high tones struck by Helios Apollo are, according to Theon,

themselves signs, sensory data, indicating the mathematical ratios conceived only in

thought. That Orphic Hymn could have been sung in the sanctuary of the association at

Smyrna--perhaps it was. If so, it would fit with what we know about Theon and the

Platonic school at Smyrna. 42 In sum, Helios Apollo was the principal deity in the

Smyrnaean sanctuary, as he was in Pythagoreanism. 43

After Helios Apollo, Helios Plouton and Koure Selene, the two deities hidden

from view in their temple, receive the most attention in the inscription. In “The E at

Delphi,” after Ammonius described the relationship between Apollo and Helios, he

contrasted Apollo with Plouton. Whereas Apollon is A-pollon, the One, eternal and

changeless Being, Plouton is “abounding,” implying many. In contrast to bright and

clear Apollo, Plouton is dark and unseen (a-idos = Hades). As the abounding one,

Plouton is responsible for the changes--dissolutions and generations--that take place in

Nature (φυ σις).44

Plutarch does not designate Plouton as Helios, though the notion of the sun in

the underworld is widespread in Egypt, Babylon, and Greece, at least for the brave and

the just.45 Porphyry does identify Plouton as Helios, passing under the earth, “traversing

the unseen world at the time of the winter solstice.” Moreover Kore is linked to Plouton

Helios by means of an allegorical interpretation of the Demeter-Kore myth: Kore is the

fertile power in seeds cast onto the earth. Helios (Plouton) draws down that fertile

power at the time of the winter solstice, as Helios passes round to the lower

hemisphere. So it is said that this Helios Plouton carried off Kore, whom Demeter

laments, while she, Kore, is hidden beneath the earth. Kore is not explicitly called

Selene by Porphyry, but he says that the moon supports Kore in her activity. 46

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 9

Regarding the god Mēn in the sanctuary: According to both Diogenes Laertius

and Iamblichus, Pythagoras prohibited touching (Laertius) or sacrificing (Iamblichus) a

white cock (α λεκτρυω

 ν λευκο ς), for it is sacred to Mēn.47 In the introduction to The
Orphic Hymns, Mēn is invoked along with the Phrygian Mother of the immortals and

Attis.48 It thus fits that Mēn should be represented in the west-Asian, Smyrnaean

sanctuary reflecting Pythagorean-Platonic-Orphic elements.

Finally there are the enigmatic implements that lay beside God in the Smyrnaean

sanctuary, eight in number. If read in the Homeric tradition, those ο πλα are shields and

arms taken in battle and hung in Apollo’s temple. 49 The phrase, του κο σμου χα ριν,

would then be translated, “for ornamentation.” In Pythagorean writings, however, those

implements, especially given the emphasis on the number eight, invite cosmological

relationships. The number eight was significant, for in Pythagorean number theory,

“eight is all” (πα ντα ο κτω

 ). As Theon of Smyrna observed, the spheres circling round
the earth are eight in number and they join together harmoniously. 50 In that

Pythagorean context, the phrase, του κο σμου χα ριν, should be translated “for the

benefit of the world order.”

From the evidence presented, it seems to me likely that Apollonios’s inscription

should be located in the Pythagorean-Platonic-Orphic ideological orbit. The centrality of

Apollo, emphasis on incense offerings, the hidden presence of Helios Plouton and

Koure Selene, the presence of Mēn, and the enigmatic eight instruments before god all

point to that ideology. If this inscription was written sometime around the middle to end

of the second Christian century, the presence of a Pythagorean-Platonic-Orphic

ideology in the sanctuary would not be surprising. That period was the heyday of

Pythagorean Platonism in Smyrna’s museion (a college and library). For example,

Galen, when a young man in his 20s (c. 150), left Pergamon to study Plato with Albinus

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 10

at Smyrna.51 There even may have been some overlap between members of the

Smyrnaean cultic association and those who participated in the Smyrnaean school of

philosophy.

For those who viewed the universe from that orbit, the world was open and alive.

Not only did the statues disclose the gods for those who entered the sanctuary at

Smyrna. They were also reminded that the sun and the moon were signs. Sign, symbol,

allegory, icon, impress, stamp--those terms opened the things of the universe to new

dimensions. There was also a connectedness and unity to the cosmos. Sun, moon,

earth, mind, soul, body, Apollo, Artemis, Gē--cosmology, anthropology, and theology

come together in homologies and analogies and proportions. Further, with the

supremacy of Apollo as the One, there was an incipient monism or monotheism for

those who entered the sanctuary. Before him lay the eight instrument, and πα ντα ο κτω
,
“eight is all.”

The profane ones, of course, saw only sculpted stone and carved wood, woven

papyri, and fire and crators--perhaps beauty, but a beauty that did not crack open to the

sacred. Yet in occasional moments even they might have: Suddenly seen the world lit

differently, and a deeper memory, a deeper recognition return, as they heard

themselves say, “I don’t know how-- / the palm trees opened up my greedy heart.” 52

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 11

Notes

1. Ψη φισμα in line 6 could refer to either the cult association or the city of Smyrna. Cecil John

Cadoux, Ancient Smyrna: A History from the Earliest Times to 324 A.D. (Oxford: Basil

Blackwell, 1938), 187, note 5 proposes the city. This inscription, however, involves a private

association, see Pierre Debord, Aspects Sociaux et Économiques de la Vie Religieuse dans

L’Anatolie Gréco-Romaine (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1982), 401, note 49. For the inscription, see W.

Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum (Chicago: Ares, 1915, repr 1999), No. 996 or

Georg Petzl, Die Inschriften von Smyrna: Teil II,1, Inschriften Griechischer Städte Aus

Kleinasien (Bonn: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GMBH, 1987), No. 753 or E. N. Lane Corpus

Monumentorum Religionis Dei Menis, Études Préliminaires Aux Religions Orientales dans

L’Emire Romain (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1971–78). Lane also includes a photograph of the

inscription on Plate 16. The inscription was found in about 1875 at Sibile Tepe, on the northeast

slope of Mt. Pagos. Dittenberger, Syll3 996, proposes as a guess the first Christian century. On

the basis of the present study, I think that second or third century AD is more likely. For other

inscriptions with inventories, see Debord, Aspects Sociaux et Économiques, 216–25.

2. Clifford Geertz, Local Knowledge (New York: Basic Books, 1983), 6. Global collections of

references to a particular deity, such as Mēn or Sarapis, are valuable resources, but only if the

locale for each reference is first considered.

3. In a first century BC inscription from Philadelphia (Dittenberger, Syll3, 985, lines 4 and 12),

Zeus initiates Dionsios’s dedication, and at Thessalonike, also first century BC, Sarapis led

Xenainetos to establish a Sarapion at the Lokrian town of Opous. The latter is published in G.

H. R. Horsley, New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity: A Review of the Greek Inscriptions

and Papyri Published in 1976 (North Ryde: Macquarie University, 1981), 31. In the Sounion

inscription from Attika (second or third Christian century), Xanthos says simply that the god Mēn

chose him: text, translation, and discussion in G. H. R. Horsley, New Documents Illustrating

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 12

Early Christianity: A Review of the Greek Inscriptions and Papyri Published in 1978 (North

Ryde: Macquarie University, 1983), 20–26. Though it is not explicitly stated, Helios Apollo

Kisauloddenos apparently inspired Apollonios Sparos by means of his son who was a former

priest of god. For whatever reason, at the beginning of the imperial period, Apollo disappears

from coinage minted at Smyrna, see Dietrich O. A. Klose, Die Münzprägung von Smyrna in der

Römischen Kaiserzeit, Antike Münzenund Geschnittene Steine (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter,

1987), 24.

4. see Pausanias 7.5.1 and coins.

5. See Roy A. Rappaport, Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1999).

6. Cf. Walter Burkert, Greek Religion, trans. John Raffan (Cambridge: Harvard University

Press, 1985), 92: “The sacred spot arises spontaneously as the sacred acts leave behind

lasting traces.” There was no special consecration ceremony for dedicating a sanctuary. Simon

Price comments that dedication sacrifices for a temple were apparently not common (Simon

R.F. Price, Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor [Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1984], 134). See, however, Burkert, Greek, 85, 89, 383 note 59 with

references to Aristophanes, Peace 922, et al. A dedicatory inscription from the second Christian

century, in which Chrēsimos makes a dedication by order of Apollo Kisalaudenos (Χρη σιμος

Απο λλωνι Κισαλαυδηνω

 ι κατ ε πιταγη ν) may have been offered in this sanctuary. See Petzl,

Inschriften, No. 755.

7. For suggestive comments on the relationship between performance and fact, see the

important work, Rappaport, Ritual and Religion, esp. 124–26.

8. Re-ligion assumes re-iteration, as Peter Jackson notes in his perceptive article, “Retracing

the Path: Gesture, Memory, and the Exegesis of Tradition,” History of Religions 45, no. 1

(August 2005): 1–28.

9. Since the association voted to permit Apollonios to set up his inscription, we may assume

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 13

that the inscription describes accurately the monuments in the sanctuary. The name, Helios

Apollon Kisauloddenos, appears only in reference to the priesthood of Apollonios’s son. The

dedication is simply τω
 ι θεω
 ι.

10. For gentilic suffix, see Herbert Weir Smyth, Greek Grammar, rev. Gordon M. Messing

(Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1956), 844.3. The suffix, -ο[υ]δδα, is also found in

Lydian-phrygian place names (Petzl, Inschriften, p. 254 note 4). Cadoux thinks that

Kisaloudēnos referred to a local god identified with Apollo (Smyrna, 207). A variant, Apollo

Kisaloudēnos, occurs in Petzl no. 754 and Kisalaudēnos in Petzl no. 755. Kisauloddēnos may

thus be comparable to Ηλιου Πυθιου Τυριμναιου Απο λλωνος in inscriptions from Thyatira

(IGRR IV.1238, cf. 1213; 1215, et al.) and Ηλιω Απο λλωνι Λυαρμηνω
 / Λαιρμηνω
 in

inscriptions from Phrygia (e.g., MAMA Asia Minor 4:270, 4:276A). Those inscriptions, especially

at Thyatira, deserve further analysis.

11. He is named only once in the inscription, in connection with Apollonios’s son who was

formerly a priest of Ηλιου Απο λλωνος Κισαυλοδδηνου (line 4).

12. See Franz Cumont, After Life in Roman Paganism (New York: Dover, 1922, repr

1959), 156; Lewis Richard Farnell, The Cults of the Greek States, vol. I-V (Oxford: At the

Clarendon Press, 1896–1909), III.313–15. The table was probably used to deposit offerings to

Apollo, see David Gill, “TRAPEZOMATA: A Neglected Aspect of Greek Sacrifice,” Harvard

Theological Review 67 (1974): 117–37. According to Philostratus stone from Lesbos was dull

and dark (Lives of the Sophists 556),κατηφη ς δε ο λιθος και με λας.

13. On stone from Teos, see Dio Chrys. 79.2, λιθων ευ χρο ων και ποικιλων,”beautifully colored

and variegated marbles.”

14. Gill, “Trapezomata,” 120.

15. Horsley, New Documents 1978, 30, 22. Eugene N. Lane has collected the evidence:

CMRDM. In the second Christian century, a Phrygian at Coloi (south of Sardis?) dedicated a

votive offering jointly to Men Tiamos and to Artemis Anaites for the healing of his feet. It is not

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 14

clear just how Men and Artemis happened to be brought together in this inscription: perhaps as

two moon deities or perhaps at Coloi Artemis was the local Mother of the gods and Men was

her consort. Syll31142. See Konrat Ziegler and Walther Sontheimer, Der Kleine Pauly: Lexikon

der Antike, vol. 1–5 (Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch, 1979), 3.1195.

16. Chantraine notes that παστο ς and παστα ς were often confounded (Dictionnaire

Étymologique de la Langue Grecque [Paris: Klincksieck, 1999], 861). At each of the entrances

to the temple was an altar of Phokaian stone. A key, presumably to that temple, is gilded and

covered for use in collecting money and in the processions of the gods.

17. τη ν λογη αν: The same term for collection is used in 1 Cor. 16.2. For other examples of

λογεια, see Adolf Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East, trans. Lionel R. M. Strachan (Grand

Rapids, MI: Baker Book, 1978), 104–07.

18. Or “Shields adjacent to god for ornamentation, made of iron, eight in number,” see Dio

Chrysostom, Discourse 2.34 and Iliad 7.83. Prior to the last item, the inscription describes the

leveling out of the slope of Mt. Pagos, the material for the stoa where the temple personnel

lived, and the temenos wall (lines 26-32).

19. Apollonios Sparos dedicated the sanctuary to Helios Apollo Kisauloddēnos and to the

 ρτε μιδι Εφεσιαι και

polis, Smyrna. Compare, among others, IEph460, for a dedication to [Α

Αυ τοκρα τορι – και τη ι πρ]ω

 τ[ηι και μ]ε. γ. .ις. [τηι – Εφεσιων πο λει.

20. Cf. SIG3 900.14, a brother and sister who were descendants and offspring of priests and

high priests and asiarchs of the temples in Ephesos ... provided oil along with the procession

and the festival of the Panamareioi and (the) κλιδο ς α γωγη

 (procession of the key?) [n.8 of

Dittenb: procession in which a κλειδοφο ρος carried or wore a sacred key].... SIG 3 996, n. 16

(this inscription). Burkert refers to a kleidouchos [holding the keys, i.e., having charge of the

place], “a constant attribute of temple iconography” (Walter Burkert, “The Meaning and

Function of the Temple in Classical Greece,” in Temple in Society, ed. M.V. Fox [Winona Lake,

IN: Eisenbrauns, 1988], 35).

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 15

21. See James Tully, ed., Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and His Critics (Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 1988), especially Tully’s first essay, pp. 7-25.

22. Luci Berkowitz and Karl A. Squitier, Thesaurus Linguae Graecae: Canon of Greek Authors

and Works (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990).

23. Chrysippus, Cornutus, Dio Chrysostom and Diogenes of Babylon.

24. Harpocration, Hesychius, Lexica Segueriana, Orion, Suda, and Pseudo-Zonaras.

25. Athanasius, Clement of Rome (Homily), Cyril, John of Damascus, Origen, and

Theodoretus.

26. Anonymous exegesis on Hesiod, Callimachos, Eustathus, Joannes Galenus,

Heraclitus,Pseudo- Nonnus, Philochorus, Scholia on Aristophanes, Scholia on Lycophron,

Scholia on Odyssey, and Theagenes.

27. Virgil, Artemidoros, popular poetry, Euripides, Georgius Monarchus,Himerius, Joannes

Malalas, Lucian, Pausanias, Philo, Pindar, Strabo, Themistius.

28. Alexander (ii AD), Apollonios, Apuleius, Diogenes Laertius, Empedocles, Epicharmus,

Heliodoros, Iamblichus, Joannes Laurentius Lydus, Julian the Emperor, Macrobius, Maximus,

Orphic Hymns, Parmenides, Plato, Plutarch, Porphyry, Proclus, and Sallust.

29. On the relation between Orphism and Pythagoreanism, see W. K. C. Guthrie, Orpheus

and Greek Religion (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1966), 216–21. Common ground

includes certain habits of living, for example, abstention from meat and purification of the soul

which would free the soul from transmigration and the circle of birth. For the sectarian character

of the two movements, see Walter Burkert, “Craft Versus Sect: The Problem of Orphics and

Pythagoreans,” in Jewish and Christian Self-Definition: Volume Three, Self-Definition in the

Greco-Roman World, ed. Ben F. Meyer and E.P. Sanders (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982), 1–22.

The Pythagorean-Orphic movement influenced Empedocles and Parmenides, two pre-socratics

tabulated in the 59 texts. Strabo (Geography 6.1) calls Parmenides a “Pythagorean

philosopher,” as Simplicius does Empedocles (Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics 25.19).

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 16

Plutarch says that Epicharmus, another pre-Socratic, was also Pythagorean (Numa 8).

30. Cf. Guthrie, Orpheus and Greek Religion, 238–44, 256 plus references; Larry J. Alderink,

Creation and Salvation in Ancient Orphism, American Classical Studies (Chico, CA: Scholars

Press, 1981), esp. 55–85, 256; John Dillon, The Middle Platonists: 80 B.C. to A.D. 220 (Ithaca:

Cornell University Press, 1977), 341.

31. For a brief discussion of the issue, see Guthrie, Orpheus and Greek Religion, 259–60 and

Apostolos N. Athanassakis, ed. and trans., The Orphic Hymns, Graeco-Roman Religion Series

4 (Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1977), ix-x.

32. Porphyry, On Statues, fragment 1 = Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 98A.

33. Rappaport, Ritual and Religion, 63: “Constructed Indices nevertheless qualify as True

Indices in that the relationship of sign to object among them is, no less than among Natural

Indices, that of effect to cause or as part or aspect to whole.”

34. Porphyry, On Statues, fragment 1 = Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 98A.

35. There are then three aspects to a sign. Peirce wrote: “A sign is an object which stands for

another to some mind. . . . it [the sign] must have qualities which belong to it whether it be

regarded as a sign or not. . . . Such characters of a sign I call its material quality. [Secondly] a

sign must have some real connection with the thing it signifies so that when the object is

present or is so as the sign signifies it to be, the sign shall so signify it and otherwise not. . . . I

shall term this character of signs their pure demonstrative application. . . . [Third] it is only a

sign to that mind which so considers and if it is not a sign to any mind it is not a sign at all. It

must be known to the mind first in its material qualities but also in its pure demonstrative

application. That mind must conceive it to be connected with its object so that it is possible to

reason from the sign to the thing (James Hoopes, ed., Peirce on Signs: Writings on Semiotic by

Charles Sanders Peirce [Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1991], 141–42).

36. 386B, cf. 400D.

37. 392E-393. Ammonius’s speech begins at 391E.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 17

38. Porphyry, On Statues, fragment 8 = Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel, 113C. Proclus,

in his commentary on the Timaeus, calls Apollo the sun’s νου ς, which places Apollo at least one

notch higher on the ontological ladder: ο Απο λλων Ηλιακο ς νου ς (In Platonis Timaeum

commentaria 1.159.25).

39. Athanassakis, Orphic Hymns.

40. For a discussion of the various offerings, see Anne-France Morand, Études sur les

Humnes Orphiques, Religions in the Graeco-Roman World (Leiden: Brill, 2001), esp. 120-123.

41. In the Orphic “Hymn to the Sun,” Helios is also identified with Apollo, “Yours the golden

lyre and the harmony of cosmic motion” (8.9).

42. Albinus wrote at least two school texts on Plato as well as commentaries on the

dialogues, see Albinus, The Platonic Doctrines of Albinus, trans. Jeremiah Reedy (Grand

Rapids, MI: Phanes, 1991). Theon wrote a handbook for students: Theon of Smyrna,

Mathematics Useful for Understanding Plato, trans. Robert and Deborah Lawlor (San Diego:

Wizards Bookshelf, 1979). They both flourished in the middle of the second century, and they

were both influenced by Neopythagoreanism. Theon’s pistache of quotations are almost all

from pythagorean writers. It is in the “physics” that Albinus reflects pythagorean influence, see

Dillon, Middle Platonists, 283. More recently, Dillon has raised question with Albinus’s

authorship of the Didaskalion, cf. OCD, 3rd ed, under “Albinus” and “Alcinous (2).” From an

inscription at Pergamon (IGRR 1690, n.d.), we learn of another philosophy teacher. A mother

proudly wrote on her tombstone that her son, Herodotos, taught philosophy at Smyrna--or

perhaps the son directed the stone mason to incise that on her memorial.

43. According to Iamblichus, some followers even celebrated Pythagoras as the Pythian or the

Hyperborean Apollo (On the Life of Pythagoras 6).

44. In “Live Unknown,” a further point is made about generation and destruction: “For to

become is not to pass into being, as some say, but to pass from being to being known; for

generation does not create the thing generated but reveals it, just as destruction is not the

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 18

transfer of what is to what is not, but rather the removal from our sight of what has suffered

dissolution” (1129F). In “Isis and Osiris,” a tract written to Clea, a priestess of Isis, Plutarch

explains that the Pythagoreans, by naming Apollo the monad and Artemis the dyad, draw a

resemblance to the statues, sculptures and paintings of Egyptian deities. In some Pythagorean

number theory, the dyad is called Nature and involves transformations, changes, dissolutions,

and generations.See, for example, Iamblichus, The Theology of Arithmetic, trans. Robin

Waterfield (Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes, 1988), 46. So far as I know, Plutarch does not develop

that relationship between Apollo and Artemis.

45. See Erik Peterson, ΕΙΣ ΘΕΟΣ : Epigraphische, Formgeschichtliche und

Religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1926), 307,

note 2. For Greece and Rome: Pindar, Frgm 129 (re the pious in Hades: “For them shines the

might of the sun | below during nighttime up here . . .”, 130 for the unholy and criminal, “from

there sluggish rivers of gloomy night | belch forth an endless darkness.” Aenead 6.641, the just

and brave have their own sun [solemque suum]). Apuleius, Metamorph. xi.23, in connection w/

initiation, “about midnight I saw the sun brightly shine (nocte media vidi solem candido

coruscantem lumine).

46. εστι συνεκτικη τη ς Κο ρης η σελη νη. For the whole discussion of Plouton Helios and Kore:

Porphyry, On Statues, fragment 7 = Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 109C-113D. Joannes

Laurentius Lydus (sixth century A.D.) says much the same thing in de Mensibus 4.137.1-8.

47. Diogenes Laertius, Life of Pythagoras VIII.34.10-12; Iamblichus, Life of Pythagoras 18.

Also Pythagoristae Testimonia et fragmenta c3.9-11.

48. See the directives that Orpheus gives to Mousaios, line 40. On the relationship of Mēn to

the Mother of the Gods and to Attis, see Lane, CMRDM, III.81–82. The epigraphic evidence

indicates some kind of relationship among the three, but it is not clear that Mēn is a consort of

Mother.

49. See Iliad 7.83, cf. Dio Chrysostom, Discourse 2.34.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 19

50. Theon, Mathematics Useful for Understanding Plato 105.11-106.2 Τιμο θεο ς φησι και

παροιμιαν ειναι τη ν "πα ντα ο κτω

 " δια το του κο σμου τα ς πα σας ο κτω
 σφαιρας περι γη ν

κυκλεισθαι, καθα φησι και Ερατοσθε νης: ο κτω

 δη τα δε πα ντα συ ν α ρμονιη
 σιν α ρη ρει, 106

ο κτω
 δ ε ν σφαιρη
 σι κυλινδετο κυ κλω ι ο ντα .................... ε να την περι γαιαν. Iamblichus, cf.

Theology of Arithmetic 75.5-6, η περιε χουσα τα πα ντα σφαιρα ο γδο η, ο θεν η παροιμια

<2"πα ντα ο κτω

 ">2 φησι.<

51. Galen, De libris propriis liber 19.16.10-15).

52. Adam Zagajewski, Without End: New and Selected Poems, trans. Clare Cavanagh (New

York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2002), 220–21.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 20

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 21

Bibliography

Albinus. The Platonic Doctrines of Albinus. Translated by Jeremiah Reedy. Grand

Rapids, MI: Phanes, 1991.

Alderink, Larry J. Creation and Salvation in Ancient Orphism. American Classical

Studies. Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1981.

Athanassakis, Apostolos N., ed. and trans. The Orphic Hymns. Graeco-Roman Religion

Series 4. Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1977.

Berkowitz, Luci, and Karl A. Squitier. Thesaurus Linguae Graecae: Canon of Greek

Authors and Works. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.

Burkert, Walter. “Craft Versus Sect: The Problem of Orphics and Pythagoreans.” In

Jewish and Christian Self-Definition: Volume Three, Self-Definition in the Greco-

Roman World, edited by Ben F. Meyer and E.P. Sanders, 1–22. Philadelphia:

Fortress, 1982.

------. Greek Religion. Translated by John Raffan. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,

1985.

------. “The Meaning and Function of the Temple in Classical Greece.” In Temple in

Society, edited by M.V. Fox, 27–47. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1988.

Cadoux, Cecil John. Ancient Smyrna: A History from the Earliest Times to 324 A.D.

Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1938.

Chantraine, Pierre. Dictionnaire Étymologique de la Langue Grecque. Paris:

Klincksieck, 1999.

Cumont, Franz. After Life in Roman Paganism. New York: Dover, 1922, repr 1959.

Debord, Pierre. Aspects Sociaux et Économiques de la Vie Religieuse dans L’Anatolie

Gréco-Romaine. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1982.

Deissmann, Adolf. Light from the Ancient East. Translated by Lionel R. M. Strachan.

Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book, 1978.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 22

Dillon, John. The Middle Platonists: 80 B.C. to A.D. 220. Ithaca: Cornell University

Press, 1977.

Dittenberger, W. Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum. Chicago: Ares, 1915, repr 1999.

Farnell, Lewis Richard. The Cults of the Greek States. Vol. I-V. Oxford: At the

Clarendon Press, 1896–1909.

Geertz, Clifford. Local Knowledge. New York: Basic Books, 1983.

Gill, David. “TRAPEZOMATA: A Neglected Aspect of Greek Sacrifice.” Harvard

Theological Review 67 (1974): 117–37.

Guthrie, W. K. C. Orpheus and Greek Religion. New York: W. W. Norton & Company,

1966.

Hoopes, James, ed. Peirce on Signs: Writings on Semiotic by Charles Sanders Peirce.

Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1991.

Horsley, G. H. R. New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity: A Review of the Greek

Inscriptions and Papyri Published in 1976. North Ryde: Macquarie University, 1981.

------. New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity: A Review of the Greek Inscriptions

and Papyri Published in 1978. North Ryde: Macquarie University, 1983.

Iamblichus. The Theology of Arithmetic. Translated by Robin Waterfield. Grand Rapids,

MI: Phanes, 1988.

Jackson, Peter. “Retracing the Path: Gesture, Memory, and the Exegesis of Tradition.”

History of Religions 45, no. 1 (August 2005): 1–28.

Klose, Dietrich O. A. Die Münzprägung von Smyrna in der Römischen Kaiserzeit. Antike

Münzenund Geschnittene Steine. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1987.

Lane, E. N. Corpus Monumentorum Religionis Dei Menis. Études Préliminaires Aux

Religions Orientales dans L’Emire Romain. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1971–78.

Morand, Anne-France. Études sur les Humnes Orphiques. Religions in the Graeco-

Roman World. Leiden: Brill, 2001.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 23

Peterson, Erik. ΕΙΣ ΘΕΟΣ : Epigraphische, Formgeschichtliche und

Religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,

1926.

Petzl, Georg. Die Inschriften von Smyrna: Teil II,1. Inschriften Griechischer Städte Aus

Kleinasien. Bonn: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GMBH, 1987.

Price, Simon R.F. Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984.

Rappaport, Roy A. Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Smyth, Herbert Weir. Greek Grammar. Revised by Gordon M. Messing. Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 1956.

Theon of Smyrna. Mathematics Useful for Understanding Plato. Translated by Robert

and Deborah Lawlor. San Diego: Wizards Bookshelf, 1979.

Tully, James, ed. Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and His Critics. Princeton:

Princeton University Press, 1988.

Zagajewski, Adam. Without End: New and Selected Poems. Translated by Clare

Cavanagh. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2002.

Ziegler, Konrat, and Walther Sontheimer. Der Kleine Pauly: Lexikon der Antike. Vol. 1–

5. Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch, 1979.

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 24

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com

 25

PDF created with FinePrint pdfFactory trial version http://www.fineprint.com