1

Nameless Gods: Mystery Cults, Myth, Ritual and Greek Polis Religion

Hugh Bowden

Introduction

In this paper I want to explore what I think is an under-examined aspect of Greek

religion, the cult of gods without names. 1 There were in ancient Greece various

cults, some of them very significant, directed towards gods whose identity was

never clearly established, and who were always referred to by a descriptive term of

some kind. This is an important phenomenon for our understanding of Greek

religion in general, because current scholarship has tended to focus on the

interrelation of myth and ritual, and the ways in which these were used to

articulate important aspects of the Greek world.2 Gods who had no names, and

therefore no clear identity, could not therefore have myths told about them. And

the rituals associated with them could not have an established meaning in the

absence of myths to explain the meaning.

Modern scholars have tended to minimize this problem, and they have been aided

in this by ancient writers, who clearly felt a need to provide identities for these

gods, not always convincingly. As we will see, it is claimed of some gods that they

did have names, but these were secret, or that they did have myths, but these were

1
A version of this paper was given at the Euro-Japanese colloquium on Public Sphere
and Social Norms in Tokyo 2009. It was translated by Noboru Sato, and appeared as
「名無しの神々：秘儀、神話、儀礼とギリシアポリスの宗教」
『クリオ』第26 号 32-49. I am grateful to Dr Sato and all those involved in the
colloquium for their work in making both the colloquium and the publications
possible.
2
E.g. Gould (2001: 203-34).
 2

known only to a few. It is when we look at the phenomenon as a whole that we can

see that this may not be the best way of explaining it.

Nameless Gods

Let me start by making it clear what I mean by ‘nameless gods’. There are a number

of categories of gods which can be included here.

First there are groups referred to simply as ‘Great Gods’ (Megaloi Theoi). The best

attested of these are the Great Gods of Samothrace,3 but there is epigraphic

evidence for Great Gods at Megalopolis4 and Andania.5 We also have evidence for

Great Goddesses, although here matters become more complicated. ‘Great

Goddesses’ is a term used by Pausanias in particular to refer to the goddesses of

Eleusis, Demeter and Kore, although it can appear in other contexts.6 As we will see,

assumptions made by Pausanias about cult of Great Gods or Goddesses have

influenced modern interpretations considerably.

Second, there are gods who are members of a named group, but do not have clear

individual identities. Most significant here are the Kabeiroi,7 but there are others,

including Kouretes and Korybantes.8 These names offer little help in understanding

the gods – there is no agreement on the origins of the word ‘Kabeiroi’ or

‘Korybantes’.

3
Cole (1984).
4
IG 5.2.466 (not before first century BC).
5
IG 5.1.1390.
6
IG 5.1.1151 from Gytheion to [μεγάλαις] θ̣εα̣ῖς̣ [Δεσ]π̣οίνα̣[ις].
7
Hemberg (1950), Daumas (1998).
8
Ustinova (1992/98); Voutiras (1996).
 3

Thirdly there are individual gods whose names are simply titles or descriptions, for

example Despoina (‘Mistress’),9 Soteira (‘Saviour’),10 Meter (‘Mother’) and, we should

add for completeness, Kore (‘maiden’).

Now immediately there is something worth noticing about these various gods, and

that is that they are almost all associated with what is generally referred to as

mystery cult. Studies of mystery cult usually focus on cults where the god or

goddess involved is named, and has significant myths associated with them.11 At the

head of any list would come the Eleusinian Mysteries, in honour of Demeter and

Kore, and closely associated with the myth of the rape of Persephone.12 Just behind

Eleusis would come rites associated with Dionysus, and here modern scholars have

tended to pay close attention to the myth of the death of Dionysus at the hands of

the Titans.13 Then there might be Isis, whose myths relate to her relationship with

her brother and husband Osiris,14 Meter (but often referred to as Cybele, who is

associated in myth with Attis)15 and Mithras, who has a consistent iconographic

representation, even though there are no literary texts associated with it.16 In all

these cases, the myths are taken as the key to interpreting the mysteries. But where

there are no myths, this is not so straightforward.

Samothrace

9
Paus. 5.15.4, 8.27.6, 8.35.2, 8.37.1-10.
10
E.g. Paus. 3.13.2, 8.31.1-2.
11
E.g. Burkert (1987) with explicit focus on Eleusis (Demeter), Dionysus, Meter (the
one ‘nameless’ example), Isis and Mithras.
12
E.g. Clinton (1993).
13
E.g. Seaford (1981), but see Edmunds (1999).
14
E.g. Dunand (1973), Bommas (2005).
15
E.g. Vermaseren (1977).
16
Gordon (1996), Clauss (2000), Beck (2004), Beck (2006).
 4

Now we need to establish as clearly as we can what was known or understood about

these ‘nameless gods’. The scholiast to Apollonius of Rhodes’ Argonautica appears to

provide complete identities for the Great Gods of Samothrace:

The initiation at Samothrace is into the cult of the Kabeiroi, as Mnaseas says,

and the names of the gods, four in number, are Axieros, Axiokersa,

Axiokersos. Axieros is Demeter, Axiokersa is Persephone, and Axiokersos

Hades. Kasmilos, who is added as a fourth, is Hermes, as Dionysodoros

relates. But Anthenion says that Iasion and Dardanos were born of Zeus and

Elektra; and they are apparently called Kabeiroi after the Kabeira mountains

in Phrygia, since they were brought from over there. Others say the Kabeiroi

are two, Zeus the Elder and Dionysos the younger.17

I will come back to the individual names, but I want to start by commenting on the

claim that the gods worshiped on Samothrace were the Kabeiroi. This claim is also

made by Herodotus, who gives the impression that he was initiated into the cult at

Samothrace.18

Ancient opinion was not however quite so clear-cut. Strabo comments:

Many writers have identified the gods worshiped in Samothrake with the

Kabeiroi (although they cannot even say who the Kabeiroi themselves are)

(oὐδ’ αὐτοὺς ἔχοντες λέγειν τοὺς Καβείρους οἵτινες εἰσι), just as they do the

Kyrbantes and Korybantes and likewise Kouretes and Idaian Daktyloi.19

More significantly the epigraphic evidence does not support the identification. In

Samothracian inscriptions the gods are referred to as Theoi, Theoi Megaloi, Theoi hoi

17
Schol. Ap. Rhod. 1.917.
18
Hdt. 2.51. Cf. Plut. Marcellus 30.6 for the same identification.
19
Strabo 7 fr. 50 (331c)
 5

en Samothraikêi or, once, Theoi Samothraikes, and these terms are all found on

inscriptions from outside Samothrace as well. Nor do we find dedications to the

Kabeiroi on Samothrace.20 Why then did Herodotus and others make this

identification?

It is generally assumed that at Samothrace, and elsewhere, information about the

meaning of the cult was revealed to initiates in ‘sacred tales’ (hieroi logoi). Herodotus

himself says:

The Athenians, were the first Greeks to make images of Hermes with an

erect phallus, a practice which they learned from the Pelasgians. The

Pelasgians told a certain sacred tale (ἱρόν τινα λόγον) about this, which is

shown (δεδήλωται) in the mysteries in Samothrace.21

The verb δεδήλωται suggests that the story may have been enacted rather than

narrated, so it is not clear whether such hieroi logoi were a means of passing on

meaning. And Strabo notes an ancient commentator stating that there was no

mystikos logos about the Kabeiroi on Samothrace.22 Indeed we have reason to suppose

that initiates at Samothrace were kept confused. Diodorus Siculus notes that ‘The

first and original inhabitants [of Samothrace] used an ancient language which was

peculiar to them and of which many words are preserved to this day in the ritual of

their sacrifices.’23 Archaeological evidence for Greek cult at the sanctuary dates back

to the early seventh century, contemporary with the earliest evidence of Greek

20
Cole (1984).
21
Hdt. 2.51.
22
Demetrius of Scepsis: Strab. 10.3.20.
23
Diod. 5.47.3.
 6

settlement on the island; the idea that cult made use of pre-Greek languages and

rituals is therefore plausible.24

If we are right to doubt that the Great Gods of Samothrace were the same as the

Kabeiroi, then an important point emerges. Herodotus, it appears, was an initiate of

the cult on Samothrace, and was still able to believe that the Great Gods were the

Kabeiroi. This would indicate that the identity of the gods was not revealed even

during initiation into their cult, nor to initiates afterwards. And the simplest

explanation for why this should be is that the identity of the Great Gods was not

known to anybody. Even the priests who conducted the initiations and other rites –

some of which involved words they did not understand – could not say anything

about the gods they worshiped.

The Kabeiroi

But in any case, who were the Kabeiroi? As Strabo notes, this was not a question

that ancient writers could agree on. There were sanctuaries dedicated to the

Kabeiroi on the islands of Lemnos25 and Imbros, and near Thebes in Boeotia.26

Traditionally the name ‘Kabeiroi’ is explained as deriving from the semitic ‘kabir’,

meaning ‘lord’, a name not unlike Great Gods, but how a semitic name became

attached to the cult is not at all clear. An alternative proposal is that it is an Indo-

European ‘Pre-Greek’ word,27 and, although the meaning remains opaque, this

would point to an Anatolian origin for it.

24
Lehmann (1957-98).
25
Beschi (1997, 1998, 2000), Beschi et al. (2004).
26
Schachter (2003).
27
Beekes (2004).
 7

Strabo gives various stories about the Kabeiroi, referring explicitly to the cult in

Imbros and Lemnos and the Troad. These generally indicate that there were three

Kabeiroi, or possibly two groups of three. He adds: τὰ δ' ὀνόματα αὐτῶν ἐστι

μυστικά, which might mean that their names were a secret of the mysteries.28

Pausanias on the other hand, indicates that at the Boeotian Kabeirion there were

two Kabeiroi,29 and this idea receives support from the iconography of pottery

found at the site, including one vase fragment showing two probably divine figures

identified as Kabiros and Pais – names which emphasize the lack of specific

understanding of who these gods were. In a somewhat confusing passage, Pausanias

first states that he will not say who the Kabeiroi are, but then goes on to say that

they were mortals, a father and son named Prometheus and Aitnaios.30 These names

might both be thought of as being linked to the volcanic island of Lemnos, from

where Prometheus stole fire, and provide a tenuous link between the Boeotian

Kabeirion and those of the northeast Aegean. Cult on Lemnos appears to start in the

sixth century BC, while the earliest dedications from the Boeotian sanctuary date

from the later part of that century, with the earliest buildings dating to c. 500 BC.31

All this, together with the idea of an Anatolian origin for the name Kabeiroi might

suggest the following. Cult of the Kabeiroi spread initially from Anatolia to the

northeast Aegean, perhaps soon after 600 BC, and from there it was taken to Boeotia

during the sixth century. But what was taken? Boeotian Kabirion-ware includes

what one would in other contexts call Dionysiac imagery – there are figures dressed

in padded comic costumes, representations of grapes, and the god identified as

28
Strab. 10.3.21.
29
Paus. 9.25.6.
30
Paus. 9.25.5-6.
31
Lemnos: Beschi 2000; Beschi, Monaco, Zarkadas & Gorini 2006. Boeotia: Schachter
2003; Heyder & Mallwitz 1978; Cooper & Morris 1990: 66-8.
 8

Kabiros looks very much like Dionysus. This suggests that the cult may have arrived

in Boeotia with little or no accompanying iconography, and, if three Lemnian

brother Kabeiroi became a father and son pair on Boeotia, with no information

about who the recipients of the cult were either. All that the cults share, apart from

the name, is the initiation rites themselves, about which we know nothing.32

One other representation of the Kabeiroi should be mentioned here. A coin type

from Syros depicts two young men with stars on their foreheads.33 They are named

as Kabeiroi, but the image is clearly related to representations of the Dioskouroi.

The Dioskouroi in turn share with the Great Gods of Samothrace a role in protecting

seafarers.34 On Delos there is a sanctuary known initially as the Kabeirion, and later

as the Samothrakeion.35 Its priests are referred to in inscriptions by a number of

titles, of which the fullest is Theôn Megalôn Samothrakôn Dioskourôn Kabeirôn, ‘priests

of the Great Gods of Samothrace, the Dioskouroi, the Kabeiroi.’36 This should not, I

think, be taken as implying that the Delians considered these three groups to be the

same: the Dioskouroi had clear identities after all. Rather, I think that the line of

names should be understood as, ‘Gods of this sanctuary, whether you be the Great

Gods of Samothrace, or the Dioskouroi, or the Kabeiroi’: in other words, the title

expresses uncertainty about the identity of the gods in question.37 Representations

of the Kabeiroi as the Dioskouroi, or of Kabiros as Dionysus, are, I would argue,

attempts to clothe in meaningful garb gods who have no iconography of their own.

32
Bowden (2010: 54-63).
33
LIMC 8.2: 560.
34
Diod. 5.47-49.
35
Bruneau (1970).
36
ID 1562, 1574, 1581, 1582, 1898-1902; SEG 40: 657.
37
This form of address is found in Greek hymns, and one example relating to
mystery cult is to be found in Apul. Met. 11.47.
 9

Peloponnesian Cult

If we turn to cults in the Peloponnese we find other signs of uncertainty about

identity. The clearest comes in the case of the mysteries celebrated in Andania. The

earliest evidence for this festival comes from a long inscription from 91 BC.38 This

gives detailed instructions about aspects of the festival, and refers to ‘the gods for

whom the mysteries are celebrated,’ (τοὺς θεούς, οἷς τὰ μυστήρια ἐπιτ[ελε]ῖται 2-3,

cf. 29) and to the ‘Great Gods’ (Μεγάλοις Θεοῖς 34). It seems that the festival has

been revived – or possibly devised – by a local benefactor, Mnasistratos, who has

donated books and chests for the festival: the chests are probably those that were to

be used in the ceremonies to hold sacred objects, while the books may have

included instructions on how to carry out the rituals.39 The inscription is clearly

dealing with a local festival, but by the time Pausanias writes about, around 250

years later, it appears to have acquired a greater significance. Pausanias associates

the original foundation of the Andanian Mysteries with the original creation of

Messenia in mythical time,40 and also with the refounding of Messene under

Epaminondas in the fourth century.41 Neither of these stories appears to be an

explanation for the form of the festival or the ritual of the mysteries. Pausanias was

himself initiated into the cult, and claimed to consider it second only to Eleusis in

sanctity.42 And yet, just as Herodotus came away from Samothrace under the

impression that he had been initiated into the cult of the Kabeiroi, so Pausanias

believed that the cult at Andania was in honour of the Great Goddesses, and that

38
IG 5.1.1390: Deshours (2006), Gawlinsky (2012).
39
Guarducci (1934), Georgountzos, (1979), Zunino (1997: 301-34), Bowden (2010: 68-
71).
40
Paus. 4.1.5.
41
Paus. 4.26.6-8, 4.33.4-6.
42
Paus. 4.33.5.
 10

these should be identified with Demeter and Kore. Now it is true that at the festival

described in the inscription sacrifice was offered to Demeter and a figure called

Hagna, associated with a spring in the grove where the mysteries took place (25),

but this does not allow us to accept Pausanias’ interpretation of the festival as true.

We may note that Pausanias appears to have made the same mistake elsewhere. At

Megalopolis he talks of a sanctuary of the Great Goddesses, which he takes, wrongly,

to belong to Demeter and Kore,43 when we have a Megalopolitan inscription

referring to the Great Gods,44 but no unambiguous epigraphic record of Great

Goddesses. The description of the sanctuary, which contains a large number of

statues of gods and goddesses, not to mention several temples, does not necessarily

confirm Pausanias’ identification. We should note here and elsewhere that

Pausanias was quite capable of forcing his own understanding of cult matters on

others, rather than attempting to learn from them.45

I have one more nameless goddess to consider. At Lykosoura there was a substantial

sanctuary associated with the cult of Artemis Hegemone and Despoina, ‘The

Mistress.’ The buildings are dated to the fourth century, and it is unclear if cult was

practised there earlier. Terracotta figurines of men and women with animals’ heads

have been found in the area of the Megaron, apparently the main focus of cult

activity in the sanctuary; fragments of the cult statue survive, and the veil of

Despoina is decorated with a frieze that also depicts animal-headed figures, dancing

and playing musical instruments. Presumably they depict individuals wearing

43
Paus. 8.31.7-9. See Jost (1994).
44
IG 5.2.466: [— — — —]․α Ἀγὼ καὶ Ἀριστόδαμον | [τοὺς γο]νέας θεοῖς Μεγάλοις. IG
5.2.517 from Lykosoura refers to τῶν Μεγάλων θεῶν in the genitive only (3, 9, 18),
but refers also to τῇ περὶ τοὺς θεοὺς θρησκείᾳ (10).
45
Bowden (2007).
 11

animal masks, and it is assumed that the dances were part of mysteries celebrated

in honour of Despoina, though not necessarily of the secret part of it.46

Twice, Pausanias explains that Despoina is the daughter of Demeter and Poseidon,

adding in each case that her name should not be revealed to the unitiated.47 It is not

clear whether he claims to know the name himself, or indeed which initiates he

might be implying did know the name. And there is reason to suspect that there was

no name, or at least not one that was revealed exclusively to initiates. Pausanias

compares the case of Despoina’s real name with that of her half-sister:

The Mistress (Despoina) is her epiklesis among the many, just as they

surname Demeter’s daughter by Zeus the Maid (Kore). But whereas the real

name of the Maid is Persephone, as Homer and Pamphos before him say in

their poems, the real name of the Mistress I am afraid to write to the

uninitiated.48

This must be a reference to the Homeric Hymn to Demeter, where Demeter’s daughter

is referred to as Persephone. But, as we will see, the relationship between the story

of Persephone and the Eleusinian Mysteries is not straightforward. And the

assumption that because Kore was identified with the name Persephone, therefore

Despoina must have been identified with a proper name, is not a necessary one. And

there are no attempts in later authors to put a name to Despoina, in the way that

they try with the Kabeiroi.

46
Jost (1985, 2003).
47
Paus. 8.25.7: τὴν δὲ Δήμητρα τεκεῖν φασιν ἐκ τοῦ Ποσειδῶνος θυγατέρα, ἧς τὸ
ὄνομα ἐς ἀτελέστους λέγειν οὐ νομίζουσι; 8.37.9: τῆς δὲ Δεσποίνης τὸ ὄνομα ἔδεισα
ἐς τοὺς ἀτελέστους γράφειν.
48
Paus. 8.37.9.
 12

Let me sum up what I have shown so far. At the very least it is clear that there was

plenty of room for confusion about the identities of the gods that I have discussed.

Some authors, such as Herodotus and Pausanias, attempt to offer ways of resolving

this confusion, while others like Strabo are willing to leave the issue open. But I

think that a more powerful point emerges. The confusion is caused by the fact that

the identities of these gods was simply not known. These were not gods with secret

identities known only to the privileged few. They were gods whose existence was

accepted, and for whom there were rituals that had to be performed, but beyond

that there was nothing to say. We can see them as the extreme cases of one aspect

of Greek religion – to quote Christiane Sourvinou-Inwood – the ‘awareness of the

severe limitations of human access to the divine, of the ultimate unknowability of

the divine world, and the uncertainty of human relationships to it.’49

Nameless Gods and Polis Religion

What are the implications of this situation for our understanding of Greek religion?

I think that there are two related things that can be said.

The first is that some Greek ritual practices may have been carried on without

having any meaning attached to them. This is obviously more likely to have

occurred where the rituals are not witnessed by a large number of people, or

discussed widely – a situation that applied particularly to mystery cults, that is cults

whose central ritual was viewed only by initiates. I have suggested that hieroi logoi

are unlikely to have provided straightforward narratives that explained these

rituals, and the requirement of silence about mystery cults meant that there would

49
Sourvinou-Inwood (2000: 20).
 13

have been no occasion for developing mythological aitia for them. These same

circumstances will also have to a large extent protected the cults from external

influence that might have altered the way they were practiced.

What I mean by that can be explained by looking at a contrary case, that of ‘normal’

animal sacrifice. The sacrifice of an ox is described by Homer in the Iliad and

Odyssey,50 and such events would have been witnessed by large numbers of Greeks

not only in their own cities, but also at major panhellenic festivals. This must have

led to a high level of agreement about how it should be done, and some interest in

explaining its meaning and origins (as discussed by Hesiod for example).51 As a

result, distinct differences in practice – for example sacrifices with unusual victims,

or strict rules about who could attend, or what could be done with the meat

afterwards – were worthy of particular attention. In contrast the rituals of the

mysteries of the Great Gods of Samothrace were known to relatively few people,

who could only discuss them with their fellow-initiates, if they knew any.

Consequently, while sacrificial practices would tend towards a common panhellenic

type, mystery rituals would have remained individually distinctive.

This leads on to the second issue, which is the question of the origin of such rituals.

The hunt for origins has gone somewhat out of fashion,52 and I do not want to claim

that if we know the origins of a ritual then we can work out its meaning. In the

cases we have been examining there are added complications. Archaeology helps to

provide a date for the start of cult in some of the instances I have discussed, for

50
Hom. Il. 1.458-66; Od. 3.447-63.
51
Vernant (1989).
52
Despite e.g. Burkert (1996).
 14

example the Kabeiroi and the Great Gods of Samothrace. But about other cults we

can say much less. In the case of Andania for example, the sanctuary of the Great

Gods has not been identified, and it has been plausibly suggested the cult is a

creation of the first century BC.53 With these warnings in mind, we may proceed

with caution.

We can start by considering two approaches to ritual origins taken by respected

historians of Greek religion. The first is that of Walter Burkert, who has argued that

the origins of both myth and ritual lie far back in prehistory, and relate to

fundamental actions or events the human life-cycle.54 On this view the basic

elements of ritual are ahistorical, but like myth, they can be continually adapted to

meet current needs. The other is that of Christiane Sourvinou-Inwood, who sums up

the specific case of the rituals associated with the Eleusinian Mysteries like this:

Eleusinian cult was from the beginning [which she takes to be the eighth or

seventh century] an important agricultural “central polis” cult… it was

ritually and mythologically connected with the centre and help articulate

symbolically polis territory, the integration of the periphery… the nature of

the cult changed in the early sixth century, when an eschatological facet was

introduced, and the reshaped cult became mysteric…55

Thus myth and ritual both reflect contemporary concerns. The hypothesis that the

Mysteries gained an eschatological aspect in the sixth century fits with Sourvinou-

Inwood’s argument that there was a widespread change in attitude to death in

Greece in this period.

53
Piolot (1999), Pirenne-Delforge (2010); contra Gawlinsky (2012: 12-15).
54
E.g. Burkert (1979).
55
Sourvinou-Inwood (2003: 26).
 15

Now these apparently opposite approaches come in the end to the same thing. How

are Burkert’s rituals, with their origins in the dawn of time, actually enacted?

Presumably in ways determined by the kind of contemporary concerns that

Sourvinou Inwood identifies as fundamental. But can that work in the case of rituals

in honour of unidentifiable gods, unaccompanied by myths which can relate them

to aspects of individual or community life?

Conclusion

I want to end this paper by proposing where we should look for answers, without

venturing to say that we will find them there. We have already noted the possibility

of Anatolian, ‘Pre-Greek,’ origins for the cults of the Great Gods of Samothrace and

the Kabeiroi in the north-east Aegean. This would mean that Greek worshippers

adopted rituals from outside the Greek world, maintaining linguistic elements

which sooner or later became unintelligible. Perhaps in the Peloponnese, and even

elsewhere in Greece, there were similar ritual survivals from the Bronze Age. Here

there would be no issue of language-change, as Greek was spoken in the Bronze Age

Peloponnese, but rituals that had a function within Bronze Age society may have

become shorn of meaning in the different world of the Early Iron Age and beyond.

The requirements of secrecy may nonetheless have preserved the rituals into the

new age.
 16

Bibliography

Beck, R. (2004), Beck on Mithraism: collected works with new essays, Aldershot.

————— (2006), The religion of the Mithras cult in the Roman empire, Oxford.
Beekes, R.S.P. (2004) ‘The origin of the Kabeiroi,’ Mnemosyne 57: 465-477.

Beschi, L. (1997), ‘Cabirio di Lemno: Testimonianze letterarie ed epigrafiche’

Annuario della Scuola archeologica di Atene 74-75: 7-192.
Beschi, L. (1998), ‘Imagini dei Cabiri di Lemno’ in Capecchi (1998: 45-58).
Beschi, Luigi (2000), ‘Lo scavo del Cabirio di Chloi’ in Un ponte tra l’Italia e la Grecia:

Scritti in onore di A. Di Vita, Ragusa, Padova, 75-84.

—————, Monaco, M.C., Zarkadas, A. & Gorini, G. (2004), ‘Il Telesterio ellenistico del

Cabirio di Lemno’, ASAA 82, 225-341.

Bommas, M. (2005), Heiligtum und Mysterium: Griechenland und seine ägyptischen

Gottheiten, Mainz.

Bowden, H. (2007), ‘Cults of Demeter Eleusinia and the transmission of religious

ideas’, Mediterranean Historical Review 22: 71-83.

————— (2010) Mystery Cults in the Ancient World, London.

Bruneau, P. (1970), Recherches sur les cultes de Délos à l’époque hellénistique et à l’époque

impériale, Paris.

Burkert, W. (1979), Structure and History in Greek Mythology and Ritual, Berkeley.

————— (1987), Ancient Mystery Cults, Berkeley.

————— (1996), Creation of the Sacred: Tracks of Biology in Early Religions, Cambridge,

Mass.

Buxton, R. (ed.) (2000), Oxford Readings in Greek Religion, Oxford.

Clauss, M. (2000), The Roman cult of Mithras: the god and his mysteries, Edinburgh.
 17

Clinton, K. (1993), ‘The sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at Eleusis’ in Marinatos &

Hägg (1993: 110-124).

Cole, S.G. (1984), Theoi Megaloi: the cult of the Great Gods at Samothrace, Leiden.

Cooper, F.A. & Morris, S. (1990), ‘Dining in round buildings’, in Murray (1990: 66-85).

Cosmopoulos, M.B. (ed.) (2003), Greek mysteries: the archaeology and ritual of ancient

Greek secret cults, London.

Daumas, M. (1998), Cabiriaca: Recherches sur l’iconographie du culte des Cabires, Paris.
Deshours, N. (2006) Les mystères d’Andania: Étude d’épigraphie et d’histoire religieuse.
Paris.
Detienne, M. & Vernant, J.-P. (1989), The Cuisine of Sacrifice Among the Greeks, London.
Dijkstra, J., Kroesen, J. & Kuiper, Y. (eds) (2010), Myths, Martyrs and Modernity: Studies
in the History of Religions in Honour of Jan Bremer, Leiden.
Dunand, F. (1973), Le culte d’Isis dans la bassin oriental de la Méditerranée 3 vols, Leiden.
Edmonds, R.G. (1999), ‘Tearing Apart the Zagreus Myth: A Few Disparaging Remarks
on Orphism and Original Sin,’ Classical Antiquity 18: 35-73.
Gawlinsky, L. (2012) The Sacred Law of Andania: a New Text with Commentary. Berlin.
Georgountzos, P.K. (1979), ‘τὰ μυστήρια τῆς ᾿Ανδανίας’, Platon 31: 3-43.
Gordon, R. (1996), Image and value in the Graeco-Roman world: studies in Mithraism and
religious art, Aldershot.
Gould, J. (2001) Myth, ritual, memory, and exchange: essays in Greek literature and

culture, Oxford.

Guarducci, M. (1934), ‘I culti di Andania’, Studi e Materiali di Storia delle Religioni 10:
174-204.
Hemberg, B. (1950), Die Kabiren, Lund.
Heyder, W. & Mallwitz, A. (1978), Die Bauten im Kabirenheiligtum bei Theben (Deutsches

Archäol. Inst. Das kabirenheiligtum bei Theben 2), Berlin.

Jost, M. (1985), Sanctuaires et cultes d’Arcadie, Paris.

————— (1994), ‘Nouveau regard sur les Grandes Déesses de Mégalopolis:

influences, emprunts, syncrétismes religieux’ Kernos 7: 119-29.

 18

————— (2003), ‘Mystery cults in Arcadia’ in Cosmopoulos (2003: 143-68).

Lehmann, K. (ed.). (1957-98), Samothrace: excavations conducted by the Institute of Fine

Arts of New York University, 11 vols, Princeton.Marinatos, N. & Hägg, R. (eds.)

(1993), Greek sanctuaries: new approaches, London.

Murray, O. (ed.) (1990), Sympotika: a symposium on the symposion, Oxford.

Piolot, L. (1999) ‘Pausanias et les mystères d’Andania: histoire d’une aporie’, in

Renard (1999: 195-228).

Pirenne-Delforge, V. (2010), ‘Mnasistratos, the “Hierophant” at Andania (IG 5.1.1390

and Syll.3 735)’ in Dijkstra et al. (2010: 219-35).

Renard, J. (ed.) (1999), La Péloponnèse, archéologie et histoire, Rennes.

Schachter, A. (2003), ‘Evolution of a mystery cult: the Theban Kabiroi’ in

Cosmopoulos 2003, 112-42.

Seaford, R. (1981), ‘Dionysiac drama and Dionysiac mysteries’, Classical Quarterly 31:

252-75.

Sourvinou Inwood, C. (2000) ‘What is polis religion?’ in Buxton (2000: 13-37).

————— (2003), ‘Festivals and Mysteries: aspects of the Eleusinian cult’, in

Cosmopoulos (2003: 25-49).

Ustinova, Y. (1992/98), ‘Corybantism: the Nature and Role of an ecstatic Cult in the

Greek Polis’, Horos 10-12: 503-520

Vermaseren, M.J. (1977), Cybele and Attis: the myth and the cult, London: Thames and

Hudson.

Vernant, J.-P. (1989) ‘At man’s table: Hesiod’s foundation myth of sacrifice’ in

Detienne & Vernant (1989: 21-86).

Voutiras, E. (1996), ‘Un culte domestique des Corybantes’, Kernos 9: 243-256.

Zunino, M.L. (1997), Hiera Messeniaka. La storia religiosa della Messenia dall’ età micenea
all’età ellenistica, Udine.
19