¹ The archaeological evidence concerning the tombs of the Hyperborean maidens has been most recently discussed by Long, Charlotte, “Greeks, Carians, and the purification of Delos,” American Journal of Archaeology 62 (1958), 297 ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar. and by de Santerre, Hubert Gallet, Delos, Primitive et Archaique (Paris, 1958)Google Scholar.

² Die Ilias und Homer (Berlin, 1916) 451. He was partly anticipated by O. Crusius in Roscher's Lexikon der Griechischen und Romischen Mythologie, s.v. Hyperboreer.

³ In accordance with the principle set forth, among other places, in 2.99: Αἰγυπτίους ἔρχομαι λόγους ἐρέων κατὰ τὰ ἤκουον. προσέσται δέ τι αὐτοῖσι καὶ τῆς ἐμῆς ὄψιος.

In 4.11–2, for instance, Herodotus gives in indirect discourse what he considers the most reliable account of the coming of the Scythians, that they replaced the Cimmerians. In direct discourse he adds confirmation from observation — the tomb of the Cimmerian nobles, the Cimmerian walls, etc. — and further speculations on the Cimmerians' departure. These last we reject, but as much of the rest as Herodotus really confirms — that the land was once held by a pre-Scythian race known as “Cimmerians” — we have no reason to doubt (see Godley, A. D., Herodotus, Loeb Classical Library rev. ed. (London, 1938), II, p. xvGoogle Scholar. Minns, Ellis H., Scythians and Greeks (Cambridge, England, 1913), 41 ff.)Google Scholar.

⁴ The Greeks and Their Gods (Boston, 1950) 78, n. 2.

⁵ I have translated the text of Karl Hude, Oxford Classical Texts, 3 ed. (Oxford, 1927), and have made use of Powell, J. E.'s A Lexicon to Herodotus (Cambridge, England, 1938)Google Scholar, and his translation (Oxford, 1949).

⁶ Picard, Ch. and Replat, J., “Recherches sur la Topographie du Hiéron Délien,” Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique 48 (1924), 251 ffGoogle Scholar.

⁷ Griechische Feste (Leipzig, 1908) — abbreviated Gr. Feste — 207 ff.

⁸ That the boys' offering was a rite de passage in Callimachus' time is indicated by his description, παῖδες δὲ θέρος τὸ πρῶτον ἰούλων … ἀπαρχόμενοι ϕορέουσιν (4.298). And nothing hinders, at least, our applying his testimony to the fifth century as well.

⁹ Wilamowitz says that the Delian rite well suits “vergötterten paredroi der Artemis, die selbst den Namen Opis oder Upis oder übernahm, wie der einzige sicher ungriechische Name lautete” (Der Glaube der Hellenen I [Berlin, 1931],— abbreviated GdH—p. 103).

¹⁰ For the companion see, e.g., Virgil, Aeneid XI, 532–533; for the epithet Cicero De Natura Deorum 3.58 and Et. Magn. s.v. Οὖπις.

¹¹ Cf. Vallois, R., “Topographie Délienne I,” Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique 48 (1924), 435 ffGoogle Scholar. He goes on to speculate that the γενέθλιος olive of Callimachus (Hymn 4.262), near which Apollo was born, is the one growing on the sema, which would obviously further connect Eileithyia with Hyperoche and Laodice. Unfortunately he hypothesizes in addition a post-natal rite honoring the maidens, identifying it with a rite de morsure which Callimachus said was performed by sailors (Hymn 4.316 ff.). “Les jeunes mères déposaient-elles une offrande sur le séma, mordaient-elles l'olivier sacré, le faisaient-elles toucher à leur bébés, c'est ce que nous ne pouvons deviner maintenant, mais le rite dont nous sommes invités à admettre l'existence devait suivre l'accouchement, et non le précéder.” It seems unlikely that the maidens possessed this unattested postnatal rite in addition to the well-attested premarital one.

¹² Picard, Charles, in “La Crete et les Legendes Hyperboréennes,” Revue Archéologique, series 5, vol. 25 (January–June, 1927), 349–360Google Scholar, tried to prove that the original Hyperborean home was Crete, and he is followed by Gallet de Santerre, Delos (note 1). Since Eileithyia is probably originally Cretan, it would suit my theory very neatly were the Hyperborean tribute once hers alone, and were it transferred to Apollo and Central Greece later, with Delphi's coöperation; but Picard's thesis is too conjectural.

¹³ When and why the names “Hyperoche” and “Laodice” were given these maidens seems unanswerable. Should it be felt that they belonged to “Hyperborean tradition” (cf. the names of the Hyperborean Heroes Hyperochus and Laodicus, Pausanias 10.23.2), then I would argue that the occupants of the sema can easily have got these names only after becoming Hyperboreans.

¹⁴ Powell, in his Lexicon (note 5) understands the phrase to mean “in company with the gods” — rightly, in my opinion. But if it is taken temporally, it has to mean “at the same time as the gods' arrival,” not “birth.” The rule seems to be this: when ἅμα used temporally, is followed by a word not denoting a period of time (where the participle is so easily understood as to be superfluous), we are (a) to supply in thought the participle of the verb on which the ἅμα-phrase depends (or, occasionally, the participle of a nearby verb to which the ἅμα-phrase is clearly related?) unless (b) the noun itself is verbal. For example:

a. ἀλλ᾽ οὔτε Αἰγυπτίους δοκέω ἅμα τῷ Δέλτα τῷ ὑπὸ ᾽Ιώνων καλεομένῳ γενέσθαι 2.15.3; similarly 5.58.1, 5.85.2, 7.51.3, 7.73.

b. τὸ ᾽Αττικὸν ἔθγος ἔὸν Πελασγικὸν ἅμα τῆ μεταβολῆ τῆ ἐς ῞Ελληνας καὶ τὴν γλῶσσαν μετέμαθε I.57–3 Similarly 2.36.1, ἅμα κήδει, “when in mourning.” Clearly neither of these uses permits ἅμα αὐτοῖσι τοῖσι θεοῖσι to mean “together with the birth of the gods.”

¹⁵ Macan, Reginald W., ed. Herodotus (London, 1895) ad loc.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Legrand, Ph.-E., “Herodotea,” Revue des Etudes Andennes 40 (1938), 230–231Google Scholar, and adopted in his edition (Paris, 1950). His remarks constitute an excellent presentation of the difficulty.

¹⁷ Opis was apparently made a Hyperborean after Olen's time: Pausanias 5.7.8.

¹⁸ Exceptions, apart from the editors of Herodotus, include O. Crusius (note 2) and R. Vallois (note 11). The confusion is at least as old as Müller, K. O.: “… the Hyperborean priestesses, who brought the rites to Delos, Arge and Opis, according to others Hecaerge and Loxo” (The Dorians, 2 Eng. ed. [London, 1839], I, 373)Google Scholar.

¹⁹ In RA (see note 12). See too his “La route des processions hyperboréennes en Grece,” Revue de l'Histoire des Religions 132 (July-December, 1946) 99 ff.Google Scholar: “Pour Hérodote les premières Hyperboréennes avaient été Argé et Opis, venues s'acquitter d'un voeu fait ὰντὶ τοῦ ὠκυτόκου (103n.). Gallet de Santerre is content to associate all four maidens, including Arge and Opis, with the birth of Apollo, apparently accepting Picard's notions (Délos — see note 1 — p. 166).

²⁰ Geschichte der Griechische Religion I, 2 ed. (Munich, 1955) pp. 548–549Google Scholar.

²¹ Hymn 4. 278–299. Callimachus does not believe in the Hyperboreans any more than Herodotus did. But he can hardly argue the question in a poem, so he simply replaces them with the Arimaspi. He shows, however, that he is talking about the people ordinarily thought of as Hyperboreans: the present senders of the annual tribute (who must surely be the same as the first-senders whom Callimachus calls “Arimaspians”) dwell “beyond Boreas” (281–282); and Upis, Loxo and Hecaerge are daughters of Boreas.

²² Cf. Branchus, quoted by Clem. Alex. Strom. 5.8: μέλπετε ὦ παῖδες ἑκάεργον καὶ ἐκαέργαν; other references in Lewis R. Farnell, The Cults of the Greek States II (Oxford, 1896) p. 578. Loxo is of obscure origin; derivations from λοξίας and from λοξῶπις have been proposed (see Hōfer in Roscher's Lexikon s.v. Opis).

²³ Gallet de Santerre, Delos (see note 1) p. 153. By 250 the Eileithyiaeum is no longer listed in the temple archives; see Homolle, Th., Les Archives de l'lntendance Sacrée (Paris, 1887), p. 129Google Scholar.

²⁴ The objections of E. Maass in Pauly-Wissowa's Realencyclopaedie s.v. Olen are superficial, failing to allow for changes which can easily have occurred if Artemis eventually absorbed the ritual.

²⁵ Schol. Ap. Rhod. 1.972, Athen. p. 619b.

²⁶ It is not possible to date this information; the subject of “they say” is indefinite.

²⁷ The birth date is given by Diogenes Laertius 3.2 (Nilsson, Gr. Feste 146). Other arguments favoring the arrival of the Hyperborean gifts after 7 Thargelion are given by Farnell, Cults IV (Oxford, 1907) 287 ff. (his dating of the Delia-Apollonia is probably not correct, see Nilsson Gr. Feste 144 ff.).

²⁸ The Delians must have had some reason for wanting to say that Opis and Arge came first, and a likely reason is that they were expressing a cult fact. Vallois (note 11) raises the same question somewhat differently: “Les Déliens ont affirmé devant Hérodote que Laodiké et Hyperoché étaient arrivées après la naissance d'Apollon. Comment l'auraient-ils sû, si cette chronologie n'avait pas été justifiée par un rite vivant?” (p. 442). Vallois is surely right in basing the myth on a ritual. But his “living rite” is the post-natal rite de morsure (see note 11) whose existence is questionable; a much more likely rite is the arrival of the tribute soon after the birthday.

²⁹ The Homeric Hymn to Delian Apollo suggests that the hymn to Opis and Arge was sung immediately after those to Apollo and his family during the panegyris (vv. 144–164), and therefore — if the panegyris always came in Hieros — not during the birthday festival. This would certainly mean that Opis and Arge came before Hyperoche and Laodice — i.e., that their festival came earlier in the year, which began around January — but would make it harder for the Delians to have interpreted ἅμα αὐτοῖσι τοῖσι θεοῖσι as meaning “at the birth of the gods.” Still, it is clearly a good deal less necessary that this myth — which is after all but a misinterpretation of the phrase — should harmonize with the calendar, than that the myth of Hyperoche and Laodice, who came with the tribute after the birthday, should express the fact that in the fifth century the gifts came after the 7th of Thargelion.