¹ SIG 814.34, 798.3. After Nero’s death, his famed Colossus was rededicated as a portrait of Helius (so Plin. Л» 34.45; Suet. Vesp. 18; Mart, de spect. 2.1; Dio 65.15), and the statue may have made visual reference to Helius even in its original form, since the earlier Colossus – that of Rhodes – was an image of the sun-god.

² An earlier claimant for the title of sun-king may be Alexarchus, the little-known brother of Cassander of Macedon, on whom see Gattinoni, F. Landucci, L'arte del potere: Vita e opere di Cassandre di Macedonia (Stuttgart 2003) 78-9, 137-8.Google Scholar He founded (no doubt under the aegis of his brother) a city named Uranopolis (Athen. 3.98e = Heraclides Lembus, Mueller FGH 3.169 F5; Plin. NH 4.37; Strabo 7 F35), and styled himself Helius (Clem. Alex. Protr. 4.54 = Aristus Salaminius FGrH 143 F4); his coinage bears astral symbols, on which see Mørkholm, O., Early Hellenistic Coinage (Cambridge 1991) 60Google Scholar with Plate V, nos. 74-5. Alexarchus was a curious figure, the creator of (among other things) a new language, and it would be hazardous to venture too precise an understanding of his intentions; undaunted, Tarn, W.W., Alexander the Great and the Unity of Mankind (London 1933) 23Google Scholar suggests that the image of the sun – the leader of the universe - implied world dominion for the king, and that Alexarchus’ city was the embodiment of a Utopian vision. If Alexarchus’ founding of Uranopolis occurred c.300 BC, it might even have been encouraged by recent celestial phenomena: see Mamor Parium FGrH239 B16 (312/11) and B25 (303/2).

³ Estimates of the date range between 292 and 289: see Green, P., ‘Delivering the Go(o)ds’, in Boegehold, A.L., Sickinger, J.P. and Geoffrey, W. (eds), Gestures: Essays in Ancient History, Literature and Philosophy Presented to Alan L. Boegehold (Oxford 2003) 258-77, 260 n. 11 for bibliography on the issue.Google Scholar

⁴ The concluding lines (21–34) are given below, p. 92. The text is uncertain in a number of places. L3: γαρ Δήμητρα καί> add. Toup; Δημήτριοι Casaubon; δημήτριος A L4: παρήγ’ Porson; παρήν A L9: TL Meineke; οθι A LIO: αϋτός С; αύτοίς α LII: δμοιον Meineke; όμοιος α; μεν С: με A. The addition of Demeter in 1. 3 is plausible in terms of metre and content, given the indications of her presence in 11. 5–6.

⁵ Antigonus reportedly scoffed at this piece of flattery, although arrogance and ambition are features of his character in many of the other ancient traditions – traditions which Billows, R.A., Antigonos the One-Eyed and the Creation of the Hellenistic Stale (Berkeley 1990) 3Google Scholar suspects to be the product of anti-Antigonid propaganda. This rejection of Hermodotus’ praise may perhaps be the product of pro-Antigonid counter-propaganda. (For an analogous case, one might compare the variant traditions on the exchange between Alexander and Anaxarchus (or Callisthenes in one version) on a similar piece of flattery: see Bosworth, A.B., ‘Alexander, Euripides and Dionysus: The Motivation for Apotheosis’, in Wallace, R.W. and Harris, E.M. (eds), Transitions to Empire (Norman and London 1996) 140-66, 142.)Google Scholar

⁶ The nature of the image is debated. Duris may be taken to intend that Demetrius was shown riding on a globe, but Weinstock, S., Divus Julius (Oxford 1971)42Google Scholar labels anachronistic such use of the globe as a political symbol and interprets the image as one of Demetrius ‘driving his chariot towards Oikoumene, a female personification probably in a reclining position’; while more readily reconciled with most comparable artistic exempla (for which Weinstock 47 n. 8 gives references), this latter view demands a strained reading of the Greek, for one would expect to govern the thing being ridden, and a figure of Aphrodite Urania does bestride a globe on a coin minted for Alexarchus (above, n. 2) that must be nearly contemporary with the image from the Athenian theatre. On either view of the composition of the painting, however, the allusion to Helius remains (cf. Weinstock 42 n. 5).

⁷ See too LIMC 2.1 s.v. Helios/Sol, nos 291–301, esp. 301 (a torso of Helius adorned with zodiac figures). The star-spangled garment is not, however, the vestment of Helius exclusively, and is worn by others including Dionysus and Aphrodite Urania: see Eisler, further R., Weltenmantel und Himmelszelt (Munich 1910).Google Scholar

⁸ Cf. e.g. the notion of Lamia as city-taker at Alciphron, Ep. 4.16.3Google Scholar with Plut, . Demetr. 27.4Google Scholar the latter citing ‘a contemporary poet’.

⁹ Ehrenberg, V., Aspects of the Ancient World (New York 1946)194-6.Google Scholar On the impact of eastern solar imagery on Hellenistic representations of kingship, note Goodenough, E.R., “The Political Philosophy of Hellenistic Kingship”, YCS 1 (1928) 55–102Google Scholar, 78-82; also Kornemann, E., ‘Zur Geschichte der antiken Herrscherkult’, Klio 1 (1901) 90-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Yet while the possibility of eastern influences must be admitted, their scope may be questioned - just as, in a similar vein, Morrow, G.R., Plato’s Cretan City (Princeton 1960) 448Google Scholar n. 164 harbours reservations about the extent of the eastern borrowings which have been perceived in the ‘astral theology’ present in Plato’s Laws.

¹⁰ For Thales and Aristarchus, see Heath, T.L., The Copernicus of Antiquity: Aristawhus of Samos (London 1920) esp. 12–13Google Scholar, 299 ff. Even in the realm of astronomical observation Ehrenberg perhaps overstates the extent of eastern influences, for the Greek natural philosophers were themselves interested in astronomical observations. Eudoxus was making readings from his observatories at Cnidus and Heliopolis in the first half of the fourth century (see Strabo 2.5.14.11, 17.1.30.807); there was a heliotmpion at Syracuse (Plut. Dion 29.2); Theophrastus (Sign. 1.4) mentions the use of Mt Lycabettus as an observation post by Meton’s teacher, the astronomos Phaenus.

¹¹ Plato Ap. 26d, Diog. Laert. 2.12, 9.34, Suda s.v. Anaxagoras with Derenne, E., Les procès d’impiété (Paris 1976) 13–43Google Scholar and Mansfeld, J., ‘The Date of Anaxagoras’ Athenian Period, Parts 1 and 2’, Mnemosyne 32 and 33 (1979 and 1980) 39–69 and 17-95.Google Scholar

¹² Cf. Plato Crat. 397d. Mikalson, J.D., ‘Unanswered Prayers in Greek Tragedy’, JHS 109 (1989) 81–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar, 98 argues that Hes. Op. 338-41 and Plato Symp. 220d, Ap. 26c-d, should not be taken as indications of widespread Greek cult for Helius or the sun.

¹³ Thus, for example, a priest of Helius in connection with the Skira (FGrH 366 F3); for Helius in connection with the Thargelia and Pyanepsia, see Schol. Ar. Plut. 1054, Equit. 729, Porphyr, de abstinent 2.7. These appearances of Helius are regarded by many as problematic, and perhaps as late products of the conflation of Apollo and Helius (on which see below, pp. 89 ff.); so Deubner, L., Attische Feste (Berlin 1956) 48, 190-2, 201Google Scholar; Mikalson (n. 12) 97-8. By contrast Farnell, L.R., The Cults of the Greek States 5 (Oxford 1909) 417Google Scholar, cf. 420 and Simon, E., Festivals of Attica (Wisconsin 1983) 23-4, 75–6Google Scholar, 108 view Helius worship as a very ancient institution that may have dwindled in the classical period, only to be revived in Hellenistic times.

¹⁴ The author of the Athenian ithyphallic could conceivably be the Hermippus or Hermocles named as the composer of a paean by Philochorus FGrH 328 F165, but the identification is purely speculative.

¹⁵ The sixteen-point star, emblematic of Macedonian royalty, appears on a number of grave goods from the so-called ‘tomb of Philip’ at Vergina published by Andronicos, M., Vergina: The Royal Tombs (Athens 1984)Google Scholar: see, most notably, the gold larnax (168-70, with fig. 136) and the gold discs (177-8, with figs. 143-4).

¹⁶ See Burkert, W., Greek Religion, trans. Raffan, J. (Oxford 1985) 175Google Scholar, who interprets the sacrifice with reference to the myth of Phaethon. The relationship of the island with the god was given a mythological explanation: thus Pind. Olymp. 7.3–4Google Scholar; Diod. 5.56.3; see also Ov. Met. 7.365 ff.

¹⁷ Corinth: Paus. 2.1.5 cf. 2.4.5; Sicyon: Paus. 2.11.1. The location in Corinth of significant portions of the myth of Medea, granddaughter of the sun, may well be linked to the worship of Helius there. A number of other Helius cults are documented throughout the Peloponnese. Elis: Paus. 6.24.6; Argolid cults: Paus. 2.18.2, 2.34.10; Lacedaemonia: Paus. 3.20.4, 3.26.1. For temples of Helius at Hermione and on Cos, see Farnell (n. 12) 418 ff.

¹⁸ Diod. 20. 82-88,91-100; Plut. Demetr. 21-22.

¹⁹ Diod. 20.102.2-3, Paus. 2.7.1, Strabo 8.6.25. Although well attested in the literary tradition, the name change may not have lasted long, and only one possible attestation has been found in the inscriptional record (SEG 31.351). Sicyon continues under its usual name in Agora XVI 115, an alliance between Athens and Sicyon that surely dates from soon after Demetrius’ taking of the city.

²⁰ Note, however, the caution of Moreno, P., ‘Cronologia del colosso di Rodi’, Arch. Class. 25/26 (1973/74) 453-63Google Scholar against interpreting the Colossus as a fundamentally anti-Antigonid statement. Lysippus’ quadriga may also have had some relation to the victory over Poliorcetes, but the date of its commission and hence its context is debatable: thus Rice, E., “The Glorious Dead’, in Rich, J. and Shipley, G. (eds), War and Society in the Greek World (London 1993) 224-57, 235-9.Google Scholar On the contentious issues of the construction and positioning of the Colossus, see Höpfner, W., ‘Der Koloss von Rhodos’, AA (2000[1]), 129-53Google Scholar, also his Der Koloss von Rhodos und die Bauten des Helios (Mainz 2003).

²¹ The name, given here as the emended Siron, is debated: see Gattinoni, F. Landucci, Duride di. Samo (Rome 1997)124-5.Google Scholar

²² The Demetrius fragment numbers here given are, together with the English translations, those of the collection by Fortenbaugh, W.W. and Schiitrumpf, E., Demetrius of Phalerum: Text, Translation and Discussion (New Brunswick and London 2000).Google Scholar

²³ So laments Men. Rh. 378. lOff, cf. 378.22 ff.

²⁴ Cf. Diog. Laert. 5.76 = Dem. Fl SOD.

²⁵ One might, perhaps, translate rather Demetrius ‘ was amusingly called Radiant…’

²⁶ Cf. e.g. the Homeric Hymn to Helius 31; Orphic Hymn to Helius 8; Aesch. PV 22; Pind, . Paean IX (= Rutherford, I., Pindar’s Paeans [Oxford 2001] A1)Google Scholar; Soph. Antig. 100 ff.; Arist. Ay. 563. Demetrius of Phalerum’s eyes are also emphasised in other contexts. He is said, for example, to have lost his sight at Alexandria, only to have it restored by Serapis (Diog. Laert. 5.76); for Demetrius’ own comment upon the importance of the eyes, see the apophthegm attributed to him at Diog. Laert. 5.82: ἔλεγε μὴ μικρὸν εἶναι μέρος τὰς ὀφρῦς ὅλῳ γοῦν ἐπισκοτῆσαι τῷ βίῳ δύνασθαι.

²⁷ Some of Duris’ report is repeated by Aelian (VH 9.9 (= Dem. F43b SOD), who transposes the material to Demetrius Poliorcetes; for discussion see Landucci Gattinoni (n. 21) 123-4. It is noteworthy that Duris quotes Siron’s lines immediately after his treatment of Demetrius’ attentions to his personal appearance: Duris’ juxtaposition may be intentional rather than fortuitous. Mikalson, J.D., Religion in Hellenistic Athens (Berkeley 1998) 57-8Google Scholar understands heliomorphos as an allusion to Demetrius’ rotund physique, but this is problematic. While Demetrius was criticised for the lavishness of his dinners, there is no reference to any ensuing obesity. Further, it is not clear that roundness is an attribute for which the sun was particularly noted in antiquity, beyond the description at Apoll. Rhod. Argon. 3.1228 of Helius’ ‘round face’.

²⁸ For the religious significance of luxuriant and golden hair, and its application to Helius, see L’Orange, H.P., Apotheosis in Ancient Portraiture (New York 1982) 32-8.Google Scholar L’Orange is concerned chiefly with the relationship of the Helius-type to posthumous portraits of Alexander, in which the monarch’s face is framed by a halo of hair. He further notes (110 ff.) the importance of radiance and prominence of eyes in representations (both literary and sculptural) of kings and rulers, e.g. Plin. NH 11.143 (of Augustus).

²⁹ Aelian VH 12.43 (= Dem. F4 SOD), cf. Diog. Laert. 5.76, based on Favorinus (= Dem. Fl SOD), with Davies, J.K., Athenian Propertied Families (Oxford 1971) no. 3455.Google Scholar

³⁰ Diog. Laert. 5.75 (= Dem. Fl SOD); Strabo 9.1.20 (= Dem. F19 SOD); Nep. Milt. 6.3-4, Ampelius Liber Mem. 15.19 (= Dem. FF 24a and b SOD); Plut. Mor. 820e (= Dem. F25b SOD).

³¹ Thus Moreno, P., ‘Vita e Opere di Lisippo’, in Chanay, J. and Maier, J.-L. (eds), Lysippe et son Influence (Geneva 1987) 11–55, 14 (for Lysippus’ work in Athens), 30 (on the Rhodian Helius), 47 on other quadriga groups and Phalerean portraits. If the chariot-types of Demetrius had portrayed him with a halo of hair and with radiant eyes, the Rhodian Helius may have been called even more pointedly to mind: Libanius Ecphr. 4.1120 shows that an Alexandrian chariot-statue of Alexander, his hair framing his face in a halo, could call to mind Helius with his radiate locks.Google Scholar

³² Ehrenberg (n. 9) 190 ff. Any perceived Dionysian overtones are strengthened if we posit a relationship between this song, with the offerings of incense, crowns and libations that accompanied it (so Demochares FGrH 75 F2), and the report in Plutarch (Demetr. 12.1) of an Athenian proposal to receive Demetrius ‘with the hospitable honours paid to Demeter and Dionysus’ whenever he visited the city. Poliorcetes’ beauty need not, however, be understood purely in Dionysian terms, and belongs more generally to the Greek belief that linked physical excellence with political power. Notably Duris (FGrH. 76 FIO) employs very similar terminology of beauty to Demetrius of Phalerum when he describes the efforts of the latter to be την όψιν ιλαρός και τοίς άπαντώσιν ηδύς φαίνεσθαι.

³³ See esp. Mikalson (n. 27) 82.

³⁴ Demochares FGrH 75 Fl for cult recognition of Adeimantus, Burichus and Oxythemis, Poliorcetes’ subordinates (on whom see Billows [n. 5] appendix 3, nos 1, 26, 86). The posthumous heroic cult awarded to Alexander the Great’s favourite, Hephaestion, offers a precedent: Arr. 7.14.6-7; Plut. Alex. 72.3; Hyper. Epitaph. 21. A stele found at Pella (Voutiras, E., ΉΦαιΣτιοΝ ηϱΩΣ’, Egtiatia 2 [1990] 123-73)Google Scholar confirms the existence of Hephaestion’s cult, which Diod. 17.115.6 and Justin 12.12.12 err in describing as divine rather than heroic. On Hephaestion generally, see now Heckel, W., Who ‘s Who in the Age of Alexander the Gwat (Maiden, Mass. 2006)133-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁵ For the Dioscouroi: Eratosth. Catast 10, p. 86 f. Rob.; Eurip. Or. 1629 ff. gives Helen a place in the stars with her brothers. Addressing Demetrius’ associates as ‘stars’ in the context of the Eleusinian procession (the dramatic context hinted at in the text of the ithyphallic itself-see below, p. 95) might further have been evocative of the Dioscouroi who (with Heracles) were among the most illustrious initiates of the Mysteries: Xen. Hell. 6.3.6, Plut. Thes. 33. For visual representations of the Dioscouroi as Eleusinian initiates see Parker, R., Athenian Rehgion: A History (Oxford 1996) 99 n. 133.Google Scholar

³⁶ Thus Parmenides and Empedocles, Diels-Kranz Vorsok. 28 A20, 31 A23; the identification appears to have been made in Orphic doctrine too, if Aeschylus’ Bassarai is any guide (cf. below, n. 37). On the early history of the association, see further Boyancé, P., ‘L’Apollon solaire’, in Mélanges d’archéologie, d’épigraphie et d’histoire offerts à J. Carcopino (Paris 1966)149-70.Google Scholar Plato places a temple of Apollo and Helius at the heart of the city of his Laws 945e; at 947a the chief officials are to be priests of Helius and Apollo. On the relationship of the two deities in Platonic thought, see Morrow (n. 9) 445-8.

³⁷ Aeschylus may have known of the association (see Suppl. 212-14, also the Bassarai, on which see S. Radt, Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta 3 [Göttingen 1985] 138) but the evidence is ambiguous: so Rutherford (n. 26) 198 n. 32. The identification of the two gods may be present in sculpture of the mid-fourth century, if Praxiteles’ Apollo Sauroktonœ does include solar aspects as some have suggested: see Ajootian, A., ‘Praxiteles’, in Palagia, O. and Pollitt, J.J. (eds), Personal Styles in Greek Sculpture. YCS 30 (1996) 91–129, 120.Google Scholar

³⁸ See Ion 82 ff., with Rutherford (n. 26) 54, 111-2.Google Scholar

³⁹ Porphyry de Abstinent. 2.7: . On the scholia, Porphyry and the connection with the Apollonian festivals, see Deubner (n. 13) 190-2; Simon (n. 13) 76-7.

⁴⁰ Cf. above, n. 13, on whether worship of Helius was a revived ancient rite, or rather something that gained currency first in the Hellenistic period.

⁴¹ For the Macedonians’ ready familiarity with Euripides, see Bosworth (n. 5) 142-6. Euripidean witticisms are applied to Poliorcetes at Plut, . Demetr. 14.3, 45.5.Google Scholar

⁴² Jacoby, in his commentary on Philoch. FGrH 328 Fl66, with n. 4, wrongly identifies the ένη και νέα as the first of the month. For the honorific day, see too Plut. Demetr. 12.2. Implementation of the name change has not been confirmed in the epigraphical record, but this need not prove that the change was not voted: see further Chr. Habicht, Gottmenschentum und griechische Städte (ιτιά ed., Munich 1970) 52.

⁴³ In this case, however, Demetrius was not necessarily assuming any share in the identity of Apollo directly; he justified the move by appeal to the long and close relationship between Athens and Apollo, on which see esp. Hedrick, C.W., “The Temple and Cult of Apollo Patroos in Athens’, AJA 92 (1988) 185–210, 200 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁴ See Mikalson (n. 27) 97.

⁴⁵ Celebration of the Demetrieia (during which the painting of Demetrius was displayed) ceased with the city’s rebellion against Demetrius in 288/7; its introduction may be dated in the 290s. See Habicht (n. 42) 52, and below, n. 63. For further on the date of the painting, cf. Landucci Gattinoni (n. 21) 130 n. 228.

⁴⁶ Inscriptional evidence from Delphi suggests that the fierce hostilities between Demetrius and the Aetolians were ended, and freedom of access to Delphi restored, in a treaty drawn up in late 289: see Lefèvre, F., ‘Traité de paix entre Démétrios Poliorcète et la confédération étolienne,’ BCH 122 (1998) 109-41, esp. 133-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁷ L24: περικρατοῦσαν Casaubon; περιπατοῦσαν A С L25: Αἰτωλὸς A; αἰτωλίδ’ С L26: παλαιά Casaubon; πάλαι A С L31 : κόλασον Toup; σχόλασον A С L34: ᾽ ς πίνον Green ( = n. 3, 261); σπεῖνον A; πεινῆν С; σπίλον Meineke; σπίνον Schweighaüser; σπόδον Wilamowitz.

⁴⁸ Parke, H.W., Festivals of the Athenians (London 1977)147.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ For differing accounts of the Skira see Parke (n. 48) 156 ff.; Simon (n. 13) 22-4.

⁵⁰ The relevant lines 224-6 are as follows: ώ καλλιφίλλέΐ “ηλι fis μ’ άπώλεσαΐ I καΐ τόνδ’. απόλλων δ’ έν βροτοις όρθώΐ καλή I ÖOTIS τα σιγώντ’ όνόματ’ ol8e δαιμόνων.

⁵¹ Noting that Apollo means ‘Destroyer’ according to some Greek etymologies (e.g. Aesch. Ag. 1080-2), J. Diggle, Euripides Phaethon (Cambridge 1970) 147-8 seeks to understand the lines thus: ‘You are called Apollo rightly by men who know (the implication of) the divine names which keep (their true implication) silent.’ Euripides may well have this etymology in mind, but Diggle has difficulty in explaining why Helius’ naming as Apollo should be secret. For the use of alternative names for gods in the Mysteries, see Simon (n. 13) 32-3 on Iacchus/ Dionysus.

⁵² Demochares FGrH 75 F2 specifies that the song was performed by processional ithyphallic choruses. This is not incompatible with an Eleusinian context, given the presence of Dionysian processional elements in the Mysteries (on which cf. below, n. 65).

⁵³ Eurip. TGF vol. 5.2 F477; Aesch. TGF vol. 3 F341, with Stewart (1982) 208 n. 34, Rutherford (n. 26)133.

⁵⁴ CID i, nos 9, 43-45 (fifth century); Plut. Mor. 293c-d, cf. 389c; see further Stewart, ‘Dionysos at Delphi: The Pediments of the Sixth Temple of Apollo and Religious Reform in the Age of Alexander’, in Borza, E. and Barr-Sharrar, B. (eds), Macedonia and Greece in Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Times (Washington 1982)205-27,Google Scholar 208 n. 32. A relationship between Apollo and Dionysus in that other prime centre of Apollonian cult, Delos, similarly seems to have become more visible in the late fourth and early third centuries, for the Delian Dionysia has left behind a series of late fourth-century choregic monuments on the island, and an altar for Dionysus was established there in 281 BC: Mikalson (n. 27) 211. Relations between these two gods are traced by Burkert (n. 16) 223-5; for visual conflation, see LIMC 2.1 s.v. Apollon nos 473-84.

⁵⁵ Stewart, (n. 54) and Croissant, F., ‘Les Frontons du Temple du ГУе Siècle a Delphes: Premiers Essais de Restitution’, RA (1980) 172-9.Google Scholar In LIMC2.X s.v. Apollon no.101, however, Palagia expresses doubt about the association of the Dionysius-type head with the body fragment of the statue, and classifies the piece simply as an Apollo Kitnarodos.

⁵⁶ Kappel, L., Paian: Studien zur Geschichte einer Gattung (Berlin 1992) 243 ff.; Rutherford (n. 26) 131-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵⁷ The ithyphallic hymn for Demetrius may have engaged in similar generic play (if indeed it is to be classed as a paean, as is usually assumed), for the ithyphallic metre has associations with Dionysian phallic processions: West, M.L., Greek Metre (Oxford, 1982)97.Google Scholar Cf. Plato Laws 700a7-e4 on the blurring of distinctions between poetic genres.

⁵⁸ Helius’ presence here is not easily read as a framing device, in the way that Helius and Selene are paired to frame the day – and the universe – on the east pediment of the Parthenon (on which see Harrison, E.B., ‘Athena and Athens in the East Pediment of the Parthenon’, AJA 71 [1967] 27-58, 45CrossRefGoogle Scholar), for Pausanias mentions no counterpart for the declining Helius on either pediment of the sixth temple of Delphi. It must be noted, however, that Stewart (n. 54) 207 posits such a framing ‘Selene’.

⁵⁹ Thus Croissant (n. 55) 179, who concludes that ‘le problème [of the Helius at Delphi] est actuellement sans solution.’

⁶⁰ Text and translation of Philodamus’ hymn is conveniently accessed in Stewart (n. 54) 216-20.

⁶¹ Demetrius ‘the sun’ is encircled by his friends ‘the stars’: see Duris FGrH76 F13, quoted above, p. 79. In S. 1.7.24-25 Horace employs this same topos of Brutus and his associates to satirise the fawning Asiatic style: solan Asiae Brutum appellai, stellasgue salubres/appellai comites.

⁶² The identification of the sun and Dionysus may have been part of Orphic beliefs (Macr. Sat 1.18.18 = F239 Kern), as may the identification of Helius and Apollo (above, n. 36).

⁶³ IG ii2 649 1. 42: [Διονυσίων τῶν ἐν ἄστ]ει καὶ Δημητριε[ί]ων τρα[γωιδῶν τῶι ἀγῶνι. Plutarch (Demetr. 12.2) errs in his claim that the Demetrieia replaced the Dionysia.

⁶⁴ See Ehrenberg (n. 9) 190 ff. on the identification of Demetrius and Dionysus in the song.

⁶⁵ For Iacchus at the Eleusinian procession, see Ar, Ran. 316 ff. with Dover, K., Aristophanes Frogs (Oxford, 1993)61-2;Google Scholar on his identification as Dionysus, Soph. Ant. 1146 ff., also Schol. Ar. Ran. 479, with Simon (n. 13) 32-3, although K. Clinton in OCDs.v. Iacchus questions the identification of Iacchus and Dionysus in the Mysteries. For Iacchus’ stellar quality, Soph. Ant 1146 ff. (leader of a chorus of stars) cf. Ar. Ran. 342 (Iacchus himself a star); the latter, interestingly, comes in a passage in which the behaviour of the chorus is heavily imbued with Eleusinian elements, and the songs they sing may be reminiscent of the singing in the Mystery procession.

⁶⁶ Cf. Horn. II. 3.277,11.109,19.259.

⁶⁷ Their identification is ascribed to Pherecydes by Lydus de mens. 4.3, an ascription accepted as plausible by Schibili, H.S., Pherekydes of Syros (Oxford, 1990) 44Google Scholar n. 92 (listing other evidence for a pre-Hellenistic conflation). Hellenistic evidence is collected by Cook, A.B., Zeus 1 (Cambridge 1914) 186 ff.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ For the Alexander-Helius in sculpture, see L’Orange (n. 28) 34-3 with figs. 14-17; he similarly interprets the type in terms of vision of world-wide rule. Stewart, , Faces of Power (Berkeley 1993)178Google Scholar ff., 334 suggests the type may have been encouraged by the Hydaspes episode. An example of the type is the Alexander with radiate-crown from Cyme in Aeolis, on which see Stewart 336-7 with figs. 137-8; further examples are listed by Weinstock (n. 6) 382 n. 3. L’Orange’s additional claim (34) that Rhodian Helius informed the early representations of Alexander (and in particular dictated the halo of flowing locks on Alexander’s portraits) has not found universal acceptance: cf. Hölscher, T., Ideal und Wirklichkeit in den Bildnissen Alexanders des Grossen (Heidelberg 1971)37Google Scholar. In some instances, the influence may have been as much from Alexander to Helius as vice versa: Weinstock, , ‘Victor and Invictus,’ HThR 50 (1957) 211-47,Google Scholar 47 suggests that Helius/Sol may have acquired the epithet ‘invictus’ in Alexander’s wake.

⁶⁹ Text and translation are those of Stewart (n. 68) 394 (= his Tl 17), cf. 334 for discussion of the sun-imagery inherent in the rays and the blazing eyes in these lines.

⁷⁰ Diod. 18.47.5, 50.2; PKöln no. 247 col. 1 11. 18-26. For the image as a claim to world domination, Weinstock (n. 6) 42.

⁷¹ IG xii.2.526.

⁷² On this see Mikalson (n. 22) 165-6, who sees here an instance of a ‘characteristically unsuccessful introduction of a new cult figure (Helius)’.

⁷³ Cf. Mikalson (n. 22) 138-9.

⁷⁴ For the dedications, cf. IGii2 3168,4678,5000.

⁷⁵ Given that Demetrius was not explicitly recognised in cult as Helius or the sun, one would not expect so significant an impact on subsequent cult as the one resulting from his cult as Soter. Rosivach, V.J., “The Cult of Zeus Eleutherios at Athens’, PP 42 (1987) 262-85Google Scholar has argued that when the cult of the Soteres (instituted by the Athenians in 307/6 for Antigonus Monophthalmus and Demetrius) became politically redundant upon the collapse of Antigonid fortunes, the Athenians did not dismantle the cult as such; by transferring Athena Sotereia to join Zeus Soter in the agora, the Athenians instead simply devoted the cult to a new pair of saviours. The iconographie association of Demetrius with Helius will not have demanded such elaborate maintenance after his fall.

⁷⁶ The sun features also as a motif in Utopian treatises: see Tarn (n. 2) esp. 21 ff. For its use as a political emblem, one might note that in the rebellion of Pergamum against Rome in 133, the Pergamene leader Aristonicus united his diverse followers by labelling them heliopohtar. Strabo 14.646.