Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T04:36:39.620Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Joint Sacrifice’ at Iasus and Side

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 February 2012

Christopher P. Jones
Christopher P. Jones
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The institution of sunthusiâ, ‘joint sacrifice’, appears in many forms in Graeco-Roman antiquity, but takes a special shape in the period of the Roman empire. After a brief outline of the practice, I address particular problems in inscriptions of Iasus in Caria and Side in Pamphylia.

In the Hellenistic period, the verb sunthûein and its related nouns, sunthutês, sunthusiâ, are mainly used in two senses. In the private sphere, devotees of particular gods or groups of gods may form standing associations of ‘joint sacrificers’, sometimes with common ownership of property.

Type
Shorter Contributions
Information
The Journal of Hellenic Studies , Volume 118 , November 1998 , pp. 183 - 186
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 I have used the following special abbreviations: ANRW = Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt; IGSK = Inschriften griechischer Städte aus Kleinasien; OMS = Robert, L., Opera Minora Selecta 1–7 (Amsterdam 1969-1990)Google Scholar; Bull, épigr. = Bulletin épigraphique, appearing annually in REG. This subject was an abiding interest of L. Robert, whose last and fullest discussion is in CRAI (1982) 228-9, 232-5 = OMS 5.791-2, 795-8; the most important additions are by Price, S.R.F., Rituals and Power (Cambridge 1984) 126–8Google Scholar, Wörrle, M., Stadt und Fest im kaiserzeitlichen Kleinasien, Vestigia 39 (Munich 1988) 198–200Google Scholar, and Weiss, P., Chiron 21 (1991) 362–4Google Scholar; the article by Karwiese, S., ‘Synthysia’, LIMC 7.1 (Zurich & Munich 1994) 829–30Google Scholar, is incomplete. I am grateful to Glen Bowersock and to two anonymous referees for JHS.

2 Hermione: Curty, O., Les Parentés légendaires entre cités grecques, Hautes études du monde gréco-romain 20 (Geneva 1995) n. 2Google Scholar (IG iv.679.14-17; Syll 3 1051). Cf. Michel, C., ‘Théôroi’, Daremberg-Saglio 5 (1912) 208–11Google Scholar; Poland, F., ‘συνθύται’, RE 4A.1462–3Google Scholar; L. Ziehen, ‘θεωροί’, RE 5A.2239-44. Sacrifice: Robert, L., BCH 102 (1978) 465CrossRefGoogle Scholar = Documents d'Asie Mineure, Bibliothèque des Écoles françaises d'Athènes et de Rome 139 bis (Paris 1987) 161Google Scholar, ‘Le sacrifice est l'élément, essential de la fête, le seul qui ne puisse manquer’.

3 In the charter of the Iobacchoi of Athens, of the second century AD, the genitive συνθυσίας surely means ‘appointment as a (public) sunthutês’, not ‘appointment to a college of sacrificers’: Syll 3 1109.134 (Oliver, J.H., Marcus Aurelius: Aspects of Civic and Cultural Policy in the East [Hesperia Suppl. 13, Princeton, New Jersey 1970] n. 17Google Scholar, with further bibliography).

4 Thus in third century Aphrodisias: Roueché, C., Performers and Partisans at Aphrodisias (JRS Monographs 6, London 1993) 182–7Google Scholar.

5 Thus at Pergamum under Marcus, Aristid. 53; C.P. Jones, Arch. Anz. (1991) 111-13.

6 At least, it seems likely that this is the occasion behind a celebrated letter of Antoninus Pius to Ephesus, Syll 3 849 (Börker, C. and Merkelbach, R., Die Inschriften von Ephesos 5 [IGSK 15 (Bonn 1980)] 1489–90Google Scholar; Oliver, J.H., Greek Constitutions of Early Roman Emperors [Philadelphia 1989] 135 A-BGoogle Scholar). Ephesus appears to have acquired this title early in the reign of Pius: Bowersock, G.W. in Bonner Historia-Augusta-Colloquium 1982-83 (Bonn 1985) 78 n. 7Google Scholar = Studies on the Eastern Roman Empire (Goldbach bei Aschaffenburg 1994) 374Google Scholar. Note also the Ephesian coin struck under Pius, and depicting the personified Synthysiâ: Hecht, R.E., Num. Chron. ser. 7, 8 (1968) 28Google Scholar with pl. 8.4; Weiss 363 (n.1) with pi. 3.3.

7 Curty (n.2) n. 80 (IGRR iii.489; OGIS 566). Cf. the foundation of Julius Demosthenes at Oenoanda, SEG 28.146-2.68-87.

8 For the texts, Curty (n.2) n. 70; on this dossier see also L. and Robert, J., Claros I: décrets hellénistiques (Paris 1989) 53–5Google Scholar.

9 Woodward, A.M., ABSA 26 (1923-1925) 166–7Google Scholar B9 (SEG 11.494). Actia: E. Reisch, RE 1.1213-14; Robert, L., Hellenica 7 (Paris 1949) 121Google Scholar; Moretti, L., Iscrizioni agonistiche greche (Rome 1953) 205–6Google Scholar; Caldelli, M.L., L'Agon Capitolinus: storia e protagonisti dall'istituzione domizianea al IV secolo (Studi pubblicati dall'Istituto italiano per la storia antica 54, Rome 1993) 24–8Google Scholar.

10 Woodward, A.M., ABSA 27 (1925-1926) 234Google Scholar (SEG 11.501; Oliver, Marcus Aurelius [n. 3] n. 20). On the Sebasta: Robert, CRAI 1970.9 = OMS 5.650, with earlier bibliography; Caldelli (n.9) 28-37.

11 Woodward, A.M., ABSA 27 (1925-1926) 226Google Scholar (SEG 11.500). Eusebeia: Robert, Rev. Phil. ser. 3,4 (1930) 37 = OMS 2.1137; M.W. Frederiksen, RE 23.2052; Caldelli (n.9) 43-5.

12 IG v.l.47 = Oliver, Marcus Aurelius (n.3) 48. Pius and Rhodes: Hist. Aug., Pius 9.1; for an inscription mentioning him as the city's ‘founder and saviour’, Jones, C.P., CQ 40 (1990) 514 n.4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Kontorini, V., Aνεκδοτες Eπιγραϕες Pοδου (Athens 1989) 2 no. 65Google Scholar (SEG 39.752; Ann. epigr. 1991.1515); Erskine, A., ZPE 88 (1991) 273Google Scholar. For the agôn at Nicopolis by Alexandria, Cass. Dio 51.18.1 (6.48 Cary); A. Balland and C. le Roy, Rev. Arch. (1984) 345; Huzar, E.G., ANRW ii.10.1 (Berlin & New York 1988) 630, with further bibliography.Google Scholar

14 Blinkenberg, C., Lindos: fouilles de l'acropole, 1902-1914: inscriptions (Berlin & Copenhagen 1941) 2 n. 384 BGoogle Scholar; a further fragment was added by Habicht, C., ZPE 84 (1990) 113–20Google Scholar (SEG 30.668).

15 IGRR iv.870; the translation in the text follows the supplements of Robert, L. in Gagniers, J. deset al., Laodicée du Lycos: le Nymphée, Campagnes 1961-1963 (Québec & Paris 1969) 277–8Google Scholar, είς κυριακάς [χρείας εύχρηστος γενόμεν–ος?] κ(αί) συνθύσας τῶι δευτέρῶι να[ῶι τῶν ∑εβαστ–ῶν έν ′Eϕεσωι?].

16 First published by Carratelli, G. Pugliese, Rendic. Accad. Line. ser. 9.4 (1993) 265–9Google Scholar; the best texts and discussions are now SEG 43.718-19 (R.A. Tybout and H.W. Pleket).

17 I restore έπ[ιϕα]νῶς (line 13) in place of έπ[ικοινω]νῶς (Pugliese Carratelli) or έπ[ικοι]νῶς (Pleket), of which the first is unattested, the second exceedingly rare: compare for example IGRR iii.382 (Nollé, J. and Schindler, F., Die lnschriften von Selge [IGSK 37, Bonn 1991] 20aGoogle Scholar, άρχιερ–ασάμενον τοϋ οίκου τῶν ∑εβαστῶν έπιϕανῶς. On στεϕανηϕορ ίας, see below.

18 I take έκ τῶν έαυτῆς to refer to the Council's funds, not to the honorand's.

19 Wilhelm, A., Neue Beiträge 4 (Vienna 1915) 49–52Google Scholar = Akademieschriften zur griechischen Inschriftenkunde (Leipzig 1974) 1, 223–6Google Scholar; Robert, L., REG 70 (1957) 362–3Google Scholar = OMS 3.1479-80. The inscription is now Blümel, W., Die Inschriften von lasos (IGSK 28, Bonn 1985) 248.12–15.Google Scholar

20 PTeb 35.3, cited by Mayser, E., Gramm. Gr. Pap. ii.2.1 (Berlin & Leipzig 1933) 192Google Scholar. For similar genitives in inscriptions, Nachmanson, G., Eranos 9 (1909) 31–43Google Scholar; Wilhelm, A., Glotta 14 (1925) 70–1, 74-5Google Scholar (‘zur Bezeichnung der Bestimmung und Zugehörigkeit’).

21 Bean, G.E., Side Kitabeleri: the inscriptions of Side (Ankara 1965) 189Google Scholar, with pl. 25.83, whence Ann. épigr. 1966. 480. For other texts naming the honorand in the nominative at Side, Bean, 111, 112, 127, 146. Bean gives the letters before ∑παρτιατικός; in line 1 as iota phi, without further comment; Ann. épigr. resolves them as ′I(ουλιος) Φ(λάουιος); for T(ίτος) Φ(λάουιος), Inscr. Cret. 1, Lyttos n. 55 (CIG 2583; IGRR i.979).

22 On this person, Robert, L. in Stele: Tomos eis mnemen N. Kontoleontos (Athens 1977) 10–20Google Scholar = OMS 7.578-88.

23 Bean (n.21) 70.

24 J. and L. Robert, Bull, épigr. 1968.545.

25 In the index of Moretti (n.9), the only Panathenaea are those of Athens.

26 Cyzicus: IGRR iv.144, as revised by Wilhelm, A. in Buckler, W.H. and Calder, W.M. (eds.), Anatolian Studies Presented to Sir William Mitchell Ramsay (Manchester 1923) 419–27Google Scholar and JOAI 24 (1929) 188–91Google Scholar = Abhandlungen und Beiträge zur griechischen Inschriftenkunde 1 (Leipzig 1984) 664–7Google Scholar. Ilion: Robert, L., Rev. Phil. ser. 3, 3 (1929) 130Google Scholar = OMS 2.1096 (SEG 17.628B; first century AD); possibly CIG 3620 (after 212). Sardis: J. and Robert, L., Hellenica 9 (Paris 1950) 8Google Scholar. Note also the ‘Panathenaic themis’ at Selge in Pisidia: Nollé and Schindler (n.17) nn. 46-50. Supposed Panathenaea at Demetrias in Thessaly are due to a misreading of the text: SEG 29.340.

27 On these, Robert, CRAI 1970.7-8 = OMS 5.648-9; Caldelli (n.9).

28 Suet. Dom. 4.4, on which see the useful discussion of Mooney, G.W., C. Suetoni Tranquilli De Vita Caesarum Libri vii-viii (London, New York, Toronto & Dublin 1930, repr. New York 1979) 527–8Google Scholar; Cass. Dio 67.1.2, 8, 316 ed. E. Cary (Loeb). In his only other use of the expression τά Παθήναια (54.28.3,6, 356 ed. Cary), Dio again means the Latin Quinquatria; cf. Habicht, C., CP 86 (1991) 226–8Google Scholar = Athen in hellenistischer Zeit (Munich 1994) 261–3Google Scholar.

29 For the coins, Mattingly-Sydenham, , Roman Imperial Coinage 2 (1926) 151Google Scholar; Mattingly, , Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum 2 (1930) lxxxv–lxxxviGoogle Scholar; Scott, K., Rev. Arch. ser. 6, 6 (1935) 69–72Google Scholar; Morawiecki, L., Klio 59 (1977) 185–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Girard, J.-L., ANRW ii.17.1 (Berlin & New York 1981) 233–45Google Scholar. His legio I Minervia belongs in the same context (E. Ritterling, RE 12.1420-1), as does his archonship of Athens (IG ii2. 1996; cf. Syme, R., Tacitus [Oxford 1958] 509–10Google Scholar, on the ‘startling novelty’). On his Quinquatria, O. Hentschel, RE 24.1159-60; Morawiecki, 188; Girard, 239-40. Theatre and ampitheatre: Lugli, G., Bull. Comm. Arch. 45 (1917) 68–70Google Scholar, with map facing 78; Lugli, , Bull. Comm. Arch. 46 (1918) 40–57Google Scholar.

30 TAM ii.3.1186 (the best text). For the omission of Germanicus, Martin, A., La Titulature épigraphique de Domitien (Beiträge zur klassischen Philologie 181, Frankfurt am Main 1987) 185–6Google Scholar.

31 Note that Heliodorus makes Theagenes lead a theôriâ of the Aenianes to Delphi: Aeth. 2.34.

32 SEG 28.1566.81-2 (J.H. Oliver, Greek Constitutions [n. 6] 124).