¹ The substance of this paper was read to the Oxford Philological Society on November 13th, 1926. It has benefited from suggestions made then by the President, Mr. M. N. Tod, and by other members, as also from friendly hints from various scholars, in particular Prof. F. E. Adcock, Prof. W. M. Calder, Mr. E. S. G. Bobinson, Prof. H. J. Rose, Mr. F. H. Sandbach, and Mr. W. W. Tarn. I must apologise for any deficiencies in knowledge of the modern literature of the subject; it is now immense.

² Pseudo-Callisthenes connects Alexander with the founding of the cult of Sarapis; this tradition is almost certainly apocryphal. On the Babylonian Σάραπις consulted by Alexander shortly before his death according to his Journal as followed by Arrian and Plutarch, cf. Wilcken, U., Urkunden der Ptolemäerzeit, I. 79 ff.Google Scholar It must be a god whose name sounded like Σάραπις (perhaps the Sar apsi urged by C. F. Lehmann-Haupt in Roseher, IV. 338 ff., and Festschr. akad. Historikerclubs in Innsbruck, 1923, 69 ff.), or, more probably, some god thought to correspond in functions, perhaps Marduk. The name is possibly due to Ptolemaic redaction of the Journal (Wilcken, op. cit., 82; Kornemann, , Raccolta Lumbroso, 241 f.Google Scholar). In any case Sarapis is Egyptian.

We can hardly accept Pettazoni's, R. defence of the story (I misteri, 173)Google Scholar as referring to a god of Sinope, later the famous Sarapis; would the jest have had any point in Athens? The Diogenes saying is accepted also by Ferguson, Beloch, Berve, Schnabel, and Herter.

³ In Sparta, that he should be recognised as a god (according to Aelian, , V.H. II. 19Google Scholar).

⁴ cf. Aul. Gell. XV. 21. Still, Demetrius was hailed at Athens as son of Poseidon; and the bull's horn on coins of his struck at Ephesus may refer to this sonship (Newell, E. T., The Coinages of Demetrius Poliorcetes, 72 f.Google Scholar).

⁵ Cf. later, Simon ap. Clem. Homil. XVI. 15, The idea that Alexander was son of a god might be taken quite seriously in the city in which Speusippus claimed as much for Plato; cf. in general Usener, , Weihnachtsfest ², 71 ff.Google Scholar; Riewald, , Dissert. philol. Halens. XX. 3, 271 ff.Google Scholar For ἰσόθεος cf. a Heidelberg papyrus catechism (Bilabel, F., Philol. LXXX. 339Google Scholar), and the deprecation by Germanicus in his famous edict of (Wilamowitz-Zucker, , Sitzungsber. preuss. Ak., 1911, 819Google Scholar; Cichorius, , Römische Studien, 376Google Scholar; Wilcken, , Hermes, LXIII, 48 ff.Google Scholar).

⁶ Tarn, W. W., Cambridge Ancient History, VI. 418 ff.Google Scholar

⁷ For Philip cf. Diod. Sic. XVI. 92, who speaks of Philip as thus making himself (for συνθ. cf. its use of Antiochus of Commagene in Dittenb. Or. gr. inscr. sel. 383, and the description of Antinous as in inscriptions at Rome, Inscr. gr. ad res Romanas pert. I. 31, 32). For the ‘thirteenth god’ later cf. Weinreich, O., Lykische Zwölfgötter-reliefs (Sitzungsber. Heidelb. Ak. 1913, V.)Google Scholar and Triskaidekadische Studien (Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten, XVI. i.); Wissowa, G., Hermes LII. 92 ff.Google Scholar

The memory of Alexander was a living thing under the Empire (cf. Beurlier, , De divinis honoribus quos acceperunt Alexander et successores eius, 29 ff.Google Scholar), and the traditions about him naturally borrowed from the contemporary world (cf. Hirzel, , Der Dialog, II. 71 ff.Google Scholar).

⁸ Das Alexanderreich auf prosopographiacher Grundlage, I. 94; so think also Beloch and Ferguson. Since I quote Berve in this paper chiefly to express disagreement, I should like to say how indebted I feel to his book.

⁹ This could mean two pictures, one of Alexander, one of Pan; but cf. N.H. 35, 108, Apollinem ac Dianam.

¹⁰ Reinach, A., Recueil Milliet, 367Google Scholar; the error is Klein's.

¹¹ Cf. Baege, W., Dies. phil. Hal. XXII. i. 78 ff.Google Scholar for texts. Babelon, E., Rois de Syrie, XV. ff.Google Scholar, rejects the idea that the helmeted and horned head on certain coins of Seleucus Nicator represents Alexander as Dionysus, probably rightly, in spite of Schreiber, Th., Studien über das Bildniss Alexanders d. Gr. (Abh. sächs. Ges. Wiss. XXI. iii. 1903), 168₁₇Google Scholar; the horns do not resemble in shape those sometimes given to Dionysus, but are an Eastern symbol of power (cf. the horned horse, probably Bucephalus, on early Seleucid coins). The head probably represents Seleucus himself.

¹² Camb. Anc. Hist. VI. 416. Vines grew in Carmania (Megasthen. ap. Strab. XV. i. 58, p. 712); this may have contributed to the growth of the story.

¹³ This disbelief of Eratosthenes and ‘most people’ in the tales of Heracles and Dionysus in India is mentioned by Strabo, XV. i. 7, p. 687. Kaerst, J., Geschichte des Hellenismus,³ I. 456Google Scholar, argues that the tale of the finding of Nysa comes from Aristobulus, not from the official tradition, basing this view on the fact that it does not fit into Arrian's continuous story.

¹⁴ Clitarchus, fr. 17 (in Jacoby, , Fragmente d. griech. Hist. Vol. II.Google Scholar), speaks not, as ourother sources, of ivy, but of a plant like it called ακινδαψός. Dr. H. Godwin kindly informs me that in fact ivy grows commonly at a height of 6000–10,000 feet on the Himalayas.

That Siva was identified with Dionysus, Krishna with Heracles, has often been suggested; there are difficulties in the way of the first identification (Graef, B., De Bacchi expeditione Indica monumentis expressa, 3, 8Google Scholar).

The gigantic snakes seen in India according to Onesicritus, fr. 16 Jacoby (quoted by Strabo, XV. i. 28), are not by him associated with Dionysus; the one gigantic snake called in Maximus Tyrius, II. 6, p. 24, ed. Hobein, is not mentioned in any other extant text. It illustrates the power of absorption which the Dionysus story possessed.

¹⁵ W.W. Tarn, l.c., 405, has well remarked on the moral effect of this on the troops.

¹⁶ Anab. V. 2. 7.

¹⁷ Bacch. 302 ff.; Cycl. 5 ff. (he and Silenus fought against the giants). In Thrace and at Sparta he had attributes of a warlike kind (Farnell, , Cults, V. 308 f.Google Scholar). This idea may have added piquancy to his cowardice in the Frogs.

¹⁸ Arrian, , Anab. IV. 10. 5Google Scholar (the ascription of the remark to Anaxarchus is probably ‘tendencious’; cf. Berve, II. 34). A little later (presumably in 307) the Athenians voted that whenever Demetrius Poliorcetes arrived he should receive the hospitality accorded to Demeter and Dionysus (Plut. Dem. 12), both deities thought to visit or to have visited Attica. It may be remarked that Newell has shown that there is nothing clearly Dionysiac in the coins of Demetrius, (Coinages, 72 f.).Google Scholar

¹⁹ Quoted by Athenaeus, XII. p. 537 E. Apelles, by giving him the thunderbolt as an attribute, in effect represented him as Zeus, as does also the Porus medallion (Hill, Gr. F., British Museum Quarterly, 1926, 36 f.Google Scholar, Pl. XVIII b). The latter may well have been struck in his lifetime; Hill, however, prefers to date it as a little subsequent to Alexander's death.

²⁰ Fr. 3 Jacoby (Vol. II. 707), from Arrian, , Anab. VI. 24.Google Scholar

²¹ Alexander no doubt attached importance to that descent, which must have been remembered: it may be suggested that the picture of Alexander which Julius Caesar found in the temple of Heracles at Gades was there because Alexander was a famous descendant of the hero (Suet. Iul. 7. 1; Dio Cass. XXXVII. 52. 2).

²² Dittenberger, , Or. gr. inscr. 54. 8Google Scholar, cf. Otto, W., Priester und Tempel, II. 266Google Scholar; F.H.G. III. 164 fr. 21, cf. Perdrizet, , Rev. Ét. Anc. XII. (1910) 217 ff.Google Scholar (It is possible that the connection of Dionysus and Althaea is earlier; cf. Eurip. Cycl. 38 f.) Descent from Heracles and Dionysus is ascribed to Alexander in Ps.-Callisth., I. 46a. Philadelphus may have valued this connexion, to judge from the fact that images of Alexander and of Ptolemy Soter were carried in one part of the Dionysus procession described by Callixen. ap. Athenaeum, V. p. 201 D (not, as will be observed, the part representing the Indian conquests of Dionysus). At the same time, Theocr. XVII. 16 ff. (as Wilamowitz, remarked, Textgeschichte der griech. Bukol. 153Google Scholar₁) shows that descent from Heracles was the point then stressed. Arrian, quoted supra p. 24, remarks that Ptolemy I did not paint in Dionysiac colours Alexander's passage through Carmania.

²³ At Erythrae (Le Bas-Wadd. 57 ), at Bargylia (ib. 490 = O.G.I. 3 ); in a Ptolemaic text, O.G.I. 181, is thought an error by Bouché-Leclercq, , Histoire des Lagides III. 77Google Scholar₂. In general Alexander is not called θεός in inscriptions relating to the eponymous priesthood for the good reason that his personal name is a divine name; the Ptolemies are mentioned by epithetal titles, Ἀδεθφοί, etc., which need θεοί to complete the sense (Wilcken, , G.G.A. 1895, 141₁.Google Scholar

^23a So Bouché-Leelercq, , Rev. hist. rel. XLVI 23₂.Google Scholar The story of his speaking of the Parthenon as his summer residence, recorded in a diatribe of Teles, p. 8. 3 ed. Hense², is perhaps in contrast to the winter residence of Demetrius Poliorcetes there in 304/3.

²⁴ Perdrizet, l.c. 230.

²⁵ An interesting illustration of the identification of Dionysus and Sarapis is the Egyptian Petosarapis, who has the Greek name Dionysios (Diod. Sic. XXXI. 15a; he is of the first half of the second century B.C.).

²⁶ Quellenunt. z. Leben u. Phil. d. Diogenes (Philol. Suppl. XVIII, ii.), 27, 34; cf. Weinreich, , Neue Jahrb., 1926, 643.Google Scholar For this kind of later supposed contrast of two contemporaries or supposed contemporaries cf. the Homer-Hesiod, Solon-Croesus stories, also the tale in Malalas of how Augustus learns of Christ (Weber, W., Festgabe Deissmann, 36Google Scholar).

²⁷ Fr. 17 Jacoby (ii. 747, with his note, Komm. 492), from Schol, in Ap. Rhod. II. 906.

²⁸ This follows from the agreement of Diod. Sic. XVIII. 15. I, Q. Curt. IX. 3. 19, and Justin, XII. 8. 16 (E. Schwartz, Pauly-Wissowa, IV. 1873 ff.; F. Jacoby, ib., XI. 642).

²⁹ The triumph in Q. Curt. III. 12. 18 (cum Liberi patris imitaretur triumphum). It was represented in the great procession at Alexandria shortly before 270 (Callixen. ap. Athenaeum, 200 D ff.; dated in 274 by Bevan, E. R., Egypt under the, Ptolemaic Dynasty, 127.Google Scholar Note later Macrob. Sat. I. 19. 4 eum (sc. Liberum) primum ediderunt auctorem triumphi).

The ‘pillars of Dionysus’ in Q. Curt. III. 10. 5, VII. 9. 15, IX. 4, 21; those of Alexander in both Diod. XVIII. 55. 2 and Q. Curt. VIII. 11. 2, therefore probably in Clitarehus (an interesting discussion of the pillars oraltars of Dionysus and Heracles in Strabo, III. 5. 6, p. 171, after a remark on Alexander's imitation of them). The whole story is probably due to the Greeks having become acquainted with the Oriental monuments which record royal conquests (F. Jacoby, Pauly-Wissowa, VI. 963. 52 ff.).

³⁰ Against the ascription of this idea to Alexander cf. Tarn, W. W., J.H.S., 1921, 1 ff.Google Scholar (G. Radet's able reply in Notes critiques sur l'histoire d'Alexandre has still to face the difficulties raised by Tarn, in Cl. Rev., 1926, 68CrossRefGoogle Scholar).

³¹ Frag. Hist. Graec. II. 404 ff., ed. Müller, (from Diod. Sic. II. 38 ff.).Google Scholar Müller gives in fr. 21, p. 416 (from Arrian, Ind. 5), καὶ πρὸ Ἀλεξάνδρου Διονύσου μὲν πέρι πολλὸς λόγος κατέχει ὡς καὶ τούτου στρατεύσαντος ἐς Ἰνδούς καὶ καταστρεψαμένου Ἰνδούς, Ἡρακλέος δὲ πέρι οὐ πολλός. A glance at the original will show that the quotation from Megasthenes, given in oratio obliqua, has come to an end; these are Arrian's words. If Megasthenes is faithfully reproduced by Diodorus, l.c., he spoke of the Indians as unable to offer resistance, and thought of Dionysus as culture-hero rather than as conqueror (Wendland, , Hellenistisch-römische Kultur ²121Google Scholar), and as having received worship as the reward of more than human achievement, an idea applied to Heracles by Isoerates (cf. Elter, A., Donarem pateras, II. i., Bonn Progr. 1907Google Scholar, for full illustration). On city-founding as a typical act of the superman cf. Pfister, Fr., Reliquienkult im Altertum, 295 ff.Google Scholar

Megasthenes visited India between 302 and 291; when he wrote we do not know. In support of the view that he wroteafter Clitarehus cf. Meyer, Ernst, Klio, N.F. III. 183 ff.Google Scholar; contra Tarn, , J.H.S. 1923, 93 ff.Google Scholar

³² Ehrenberg, V., Alexander und Ägypten (Beih. zum ‘Alten Orient,’ VII. 1926), 37.Google Scholar

³³ Woodhouse, W. J., Enc. Relig. Eth. IX. 428.Google Scholar

³⁴ Numismatique de l'Afrique, I. 101 ff., supported by Cook, A. B., Zeus, I. 371 ff.Google Scholar, with cogency and candour.

³⁵ II. 29.

³⁶ Revue suisse de Numismatique, 1917: his arguments are reinforced by Robinson, E. S. G., B.M.C. Cyrenaica, ccxl. ff.Google Scholar

³⁷ Written shortly after Alexander's death if we accept Jacoby, plausible argument, P.W. VI. 961.Google Scholar

³⁸ H. was a pupil of Callimaehus, and seems to have written in the latter part of the third century B.C. The same version occurs in Nigid. ap. Schol, in Germanici, Caesaris, Arat. p. 401. 6Google Scholar, in Eyssenhardt's edition of Martianus Capella. The story was no doubt told in the Φαινόμενα of H. (Robert, C., Eratosthenis catasterismorum reliquiae, 222 f.Google Scholar).

³⁹ in Verg. Aen. IV. 196: liber memorialis, 2: Lact. Plac. in Stat. Theb. III. 476, cf. Myth. Vat. II. 80. A writer of the third century B.C., Phylarchus ap. Plut. Is. et Os. 29, p. 362 B, also speaks of Dionysus as coming to Egypt from India.

⁴⁰ Cf. Pfister, F., Reliquienkult im Altertum, 382.Google Scholar For a confusion of genealogies similar to that here discussed cf. Halliday, W. R. on Zeus-Picus, in Cl. Rev. 1922, 110 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴¹ Cf. Tarn, , Camb. Anc. Hist. VI. 377 f.Google Scholar V. Ehrenberg in his discussion (op. cit. 30 ff.) overestimates, I think, the immediate political significance of the act, but has done good service in emphasising Arrian's phrase and its frequent appearance in the tradition to denote Alexander's sudden impulses; Jacoby, has remarked (Gnomon, 1926, 462)Google Scholar that the equivalent is quoted by Arrian, Ind. 20. 1, from Alexander's subordinate Nearchus (in another context; more instances in Jacoby, , Fragm. II., Komm. 452Google Scholar). It is easy to neglect the enthusiastic side of Alexander's character. E. R. Bevan has remarked that it would have been strange if Alexander had missed an opportunity of visiting the oracle, which enjoyed a high reputation in the Greek world, and that the motive assigned by Callisthenes fr. 14 Jacoby (ii. p. 645; from Strabo, XVII. 1. 43, p. 814), imitation of Perseus and Heracles, may be the true one.

⁴² It may be suggested that the bronze coins struck for Mithridates at Bosporus with the head of Ammon, (B.M.C. Pontus, 44. 9, Pl. ix. 4Google Scholar; Minns, , Scythians, 617Google Scholar₆) were intended to herald Mithridates as an Alexander. But one would expect M. to strike a programme-coinage in silver or gold, not in bronze, and Ammonappears on later coins of Bosporus with no special connotation (Minns 602₁).

⁴³ For Leon of Pella this is very probable; for Hermippus cf. Heibges, Pauly-Wissowa, VIII. 845 f.; for Dionysius cf. Suet. De Gramm. 7, who testifies to his being in Alexandria though a native of Mytilene. Clitarchus had a Ptolemaic tendency (Jacoby, Pauly-Wissowa, XI. 623), and is called Ἀλεξανδρεύς by Philodemus (Jacoby, , Fragm. II. p. 743. 3Google Scholar).

⁴⁴ Dionysus only on a nickel coin of Pantaleon, (B.M.C. Greek and Scythic Kings, 9. 1Google Scholar, sq., Pl. III. 8), and on an almost identical coin of Agathocles (ib. 11. 6 sq., Pl IV. 8), both probably of the second century B.C., and with rev. panther. Heracles, on the other hand, is common enough (Macdonald, G., C.H. India, I. 443Google Scholar). The Seleucids (except Antiochus VI) do not appear to have been devoted to Dionysus asmuch as to Apollo of Daphne and to Zeus. He appears occasionally on their coinage. Bronze coins ascribed to Seleucus II with obv. hornless Dionysus rev. elephant (Imhoof-Blumer, , Monnaies grecques, 428, 45 f.Google Scholar) might appear to indicate the presence of the idea of D.'s conquest of India. This is, however, uncertain, since the elephant is a normal Seleucid type (Babelon, op. cit. XXVII ff.; from shortly before 306 in Babylon, , Imhoof-Blumer, , Num. Zeit. XXVII. 9Google Scholar). Whether the legend of Dionysus developed at all in Seleucid circles we cannot say.

⁴⁵ Cf. E. Schwartz, Pauly-Wissowa, V. 671. 42 ff., 674. 56 ff., on the agreement of Dionysius Scytobrachion, the source used by Diod. Sic. I. 17–20, and [Apollodor.] Bibliotheca. On the general diffusion of the story cf. Christ-Schmid, , Gesch. griech. Lit. ⁶ II. 967Google Scholar; the painting is reproduced in Licht, H., Sittengeschichte Griechenlands, III. 37.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Cf. Quandt, G., De Baccho ab Alexandri aetate in Asia Minore culto (Diss. phil. Hal. XXI. 2, 1913)Google Scholar; a striking illustration of

D.'s popularity is afforded by Rhodian coins of 43 B.C. and later, on which Helios is given his ivy-wreath (B.M.C. Caria, 263 ff., Pl. XLII. 3, text fig. 1).

Dionysus and Heracles continue to be closely associated; so, for instance, as founders of Nicaea (Quandt, 117).

⁴⁷ On the Nectanebus story as possibly legitimising Alexander's rule in Egypt, cf. Reitzenstein, R., Poimandres, 310Google Scholar; Weber, W., Ägyptisch-griechischen Terrakotten, I. 112Google Scholar (for the implied connexion of the Ptolemies with the last independent rulers of Egypt cf. Schur, W., Klio, XX. 270 ff.Google Scholar). For the determination of the date at which what must be the earlier legend of Alexander's physical divine sonship took shape it is important to note that it produced the story that Scipio Africanus was conceived by the union of a snake with his mother; that is told by Livy, 26. 19. 7, as a story current in Scipio's lifetime (cf. Elter, , Donorem pateras, II. i. 40, 17Google Scholar).

On the development of the iconography of Alexander in Egypt cf. Perdrizet, P., Terres cuites de la collection Fouquet, I, 104.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Cf. Plin. N.H. VII. 95: Pompei Magni titulos omnis triumphosque … aequato non modo Alexandri Magni rerum fulgore, sed etiam Herculis prope ac Liberi patris; XXXIII. 150, C. Marius post uictoriam Cimbricam cantharis potasse Liberi patris exemplo traditur. A connection of Julius Caesar with Dionysus is indicated by Serv. in Verg. Ecl. V. 29; that of Antony is peculiar and is discussed, p. 33, n. 61, later.

⁴⁹ Hellenistische Dichtung, I. 74. The point of view maintained in this paper is in effect assumed by P. Riewald in his excellent tract De imperatorum Romanorum cum certis dis et comparatione et aequatione (Diss. phil. Hal. XX. 3, 1912); but it has seemed to me worth while to define it a little more sharply.

⁵⁰ Cf. Weinreich, O., Neue Jahrb., 1926, 633 ff.Google Scholar Merit and strength and conquest and civilising activities were titles to this; so was beauty (cf. Journ. Eg. Arch. XI. 136₁; Charax fr. 13 Jacoby, Vol. II. p. 486, says of Expositio totius mundi, 44, speciosas esse et candidas nimis ut uisae deae esse putentur; Diog. Laert. X. 5, (sc. ). ).

Divinity is a prize; cf. Dessau, , Inscr. lat. sel. 7518Google Scholar, cuius spiritus inter deos receptus est; sic enim meruit (an epitaph at Rome). This helps to explain ἁρπαγμόν in Ep. ad Philipp. II. 5; cf. my note thereon in Essays on the Trinity and the Incarnation, ed. Rawlinson, A. E. J., 99.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Verg. Buc. I. 7, namque erit ille mihi semper deus; Ter. Ad. 535, facio te apud illum deum; Caecil. Com. 264, homo homini deus est si suum officium sciat; Epist. ad Diogn. X. 6, ἀλλ’ ὅστις τὸ τοῦ πλησίον ἀναδέχεται βάρος, ὅς ἐν ᾦ κρείσσων ἐστὶν ἕτερον τὸν ἐλαττούμενον εὐεργετεῖν ἐθέλει, ὃς ἃ παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ λαβὼν ἔχει, ταῦτα τοῖς ἐπιδεομένοις χορηγῶν θεὸς γίνεται τῶν λαμβανόντων, οὗτος μιμητής ἐστι θεοῦ(important as showing how commonplace this mode of expression was at the end of the second century A.D.); also a kindred usage in Cicero: Cum senatui gratias egit, 8; P. Lentulus, parens ac deus nostrae uitae; Post reditum ad Quirites, 11; P. Lentulus consul, parens, deus, salus nostrae uitae; Pro Sestio, 144, P. Lentulum, cuius ego patrem deum ac parentem statuo fortunae ac nominis mei; Plato is called deus quidam philosophorum (N.D. II. 12. 32) or deus ille noster (ad Att. IV. 16. 3; and cf. an inscription at Wisa in Thrace, , B.S.A., XII. 177Google Scholar, No. 2 (= Jahresh. XXIII. Beibl. 119), β]ασιλέα Κό[τυ]ν βασιλέως Ῥησκουπόρεως [υἱὸν] Ῥωμαῖοι οἱ πρώτως κατακληθέντες εἰς [ἀρ?]χὴν τὸν ἑατῶν θεόν; another at Philae, (Or. gr. inscr. sel. 195Google Scholar; dated 33 B.C.), Ἀντώνιον μέγαν κἀμίμητον Ἀϕροδίσιος παράσιτος τὸν ἑαυτοῦ θεὸν καὶ εὐεργέτην.

⁵² [Eur.] Rhes. 355, Plaut. Persa, 99, ο mi Iuppiter terrestris. Menecrates Zeus (known also from Ephippus and Hegesander ap. Athenaeus, VII. p. 289 B–D, etc.) is said by Clem. Alex. Protr. IV. 54, p. 42, Stähelin, to have deified himself; so also Aristus (as Helios), Nicagoras (as Hermes).

⁵³ Cf. Wilamowitz, , Reden und Vorträge ⁴, II. 171 ff.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Cf. my Sallustius, lxxxix. n. 210; liv. n. 71; the Ceyx story, etc.

⁵⁵ Six, J., Röm. Mitth. XIV. (1899), 81 ff.Google Scholar, anticipating, as Dr. G. F. Hill kindly informs me, his recognition of the fact in Anatolian Studies, 207 ff. For the series cf. B.M.C. Caria, Pl. XXX. 6–8; Babelon, , Traité, Pl. CXLVIII. 14–21.Google Scholar A list of similar Greek numismatic representations of deities with the features of kings and queens is given by Gruppe, , Griech. Myth. u. Rel., 1506₂Google Scholar; for queens cf. Kahrstedt, U., Klio, X. 314Google Scholar; I figure above (Fig. 3) one addendum, Ajax high-priest of Olba as Hermes (B.M.C. Cilicia, 120, 4, Pl. XXI. 10; cf. 119, 2, Pl. XXI. 8; beginning of our era), but feel that a list of other references would serve little purpose unless accompanied by a minute study of the detail of individualisation that is, I think, to be desired. For Roman instances see Mattingly, H., J.R.S. XIII. 105 ff.Google Scholar

In many cases there can be little thought of identification, as when the features of Demetrius are given to Pallas (Seltman, C. T., Num. Chron. 1909, 267Google Scholar, Pl. XX. 3), or those of Ptolemy to Athena (on a Cypriote gold Alexander, stater, Cat. Navilie, V. Pl. XLII.Google Scholar No. 1395 = Newell, , Coinages of Demetrius, Pl. I. 2Google Scholar; to this portraiture Mr. Robinson kindly drew my attention). The story mentioned, p. 25, supra, of Alexander dressing as Artemis, is of uncertain value; H. von Gärtringen, Pauly-Wissowa, II. 187. 12, explains it as arising from the Persian dress of Alexander.

The assimilation of the features of mythological personages to the deceased on sarcophagi and in sepulchral paintings does not mean more than do the mythological similes frequent in epitaphs (cf. Maass, E., Orpheus, 241 f.Google Scholar, and my forthcoming review of P. Styger's Altchristliche Grabeskunst in J.R.S.; for similes of this type in the Greek novel cf. Kerényi, K., Griechisch-orientalistische Romanliteratur, 100Google Scholar).

⁵⁶ Domaezewski, Von, Abhandlungen zur römischen Religion, 29.Google Scholar The normal relationship in the Emperor's life is that illustrated by the coins, which show a gigantic Jupiter holding a protecting hand over the diminutive Emperor (Mattingly, H., Salisbury, F., J.R.S. XIV. 10 f.Google Scholar); more exaggerated homage is to be found in the Greek East. Cf. Weinreich, , Lyk. Zwölfgötterreliefs, 8 f.Google Scholar (Hadrianos-Zeus in the centre of the gods on the gable of a temple at Cyzicus).

⁵⁷ Carmina latina epigraphica, 879 (Buecheler). Again, compare the coin of Dioshieron in Lydia published by Imhoof-Blumer, , Lydische Stadtmünzen, 63Google Scholar, Pl. III. 9, showing Zeus and Nero facing, with contemporary identification of the two (Cl. Rev. 1926, 18).

⁵⁸ Bell, H. I., Journ. Eg. Arch. XII. 247.Google ScholarGlotz, G., Rev. Ét. Gr. XXXIII. (1920), 173Google Scholar, thinks that Arsinoë associated her name with the festival of Adonis by way of preparing for her apotheosis as Arsinoë Aphrodite. We may doubt if popular susceptibility called for this precaution.

⁵⁹ Stähelin, Pauly-Wissowa, II. A, 1232. Cf. the appearance of Mithridates as his ancestor Perseus on coins of Amisus (Imhoof-Blumer, , Griechische Münzen, 38Google Scholar [= 562], Pl. III. 4, IV. 12), and possibly in a marble head, Collection Warocqué, 151, No. 263 (discussed by Cumont, , Rev. Arch., 1905, i. 180 ff.Google Scholar).

⁶⁰ Bevan, E. R., Egypt under the Ptolemies, p. 344.Google Scholarνέα Τύχη of Antiochus I of Commagene is a special case: it is probably the Greek equivalent of Iranian belief in the king's Hvarenó (Cumont, , Textes et monuments, I. 285Google Scholar). The texts cited by von Prott, , Ath. Mitth., XXVI. 164 ff.Google Scholar, do not bear out the view (accepted J.H.S. XLV. 94₈₄) that the Attalids were νέοι Διόνυσοι.

⁶¹ Jeanmaire, H., Rev. Arch. 1924, XIX. 241–61Google Scholar; cf. Milne's, J. G. discovery of a caricature of the divine pair (Journ. Eg. Arch., I. 99, Pl. XIV.)Google Scholar and H. J. Rose's of religious counter-propaganda by Augustus (the tales in Plut. Ant. 33 and 75; in the latter Dionysus is thought to leave Antony: Ann. Arch. Anthr. XI. 25–30).

Cleopatra had played her divine part before meeting Antony; when she bore Caesarion she struck coins representing herself as Isis with the child Eros (Stähelin, Pauly-Wissowa, XI. 754. 41 ff.). For her death cf. Spiegelberg, , Sitzungsber. bay. Akad., 1925, ii.Google Scholar

⁶² Augustus is associated with Mercury on Cos also; but on their supposed association in cult in Italy see now Scott, K., Hermes, LXIII. 15–33.Google Scholar

I note the parallel conception of the Cynic as an ἄγγελος of God, discussed by Breithaupt, G., Hermes, LXII. 253 f.Google Scholar; to the general question I hope to return elsewhere.

⁶³ ν. Δ. Posidon ap. Athen. VI. p. 212 D (fr. 36, II. 244. 28, Jacoby = fr. 41, III. 266, Müller). Δ. in O.G.I. 370 (Delos), and Cic. Pro Flacco, 60 (illum Euhium Nysium Bacchum Liberum nominabant); cf. p. 33 n. 59 supra, and possible representations of him as Heracles (Lawrence, A. W., Later Greek Sculpture, 122Google Scholar).

⁶⁴ ν. Δ. Eustath. in Il. IX. 558, p. 686, Bas. = p. 776. 30 Rom.; Vell. Pat. II. 82. Δ. in Socrates Rhod. ap. Athen., p. 148 D, fr. 1, F.H.G. III. 326. Also ‘descendant of Heracles’ (Preller, , Röm. Myth. II. 299Google Scholar).

⁶⁵ on coins of Alexandria; in papyri and inscriptions (P. Oxy. 1021. 8; O.G.I. 666. 2; Vogt, J., Alexandrinische Münzen, I. 28 f.Google Scholar; cf. Bilabel, F. in Cimbria, 63 f.Google Scholar).

⁶⁶ at Tarsus, (B.M.C. Lycaonia, etc., 189, n. 159)Google Scholar; ΙΑΚΧΟΣ at Adramyteum (B.M.C. Mysia, 4, n. 13). Note that in Lucian, Alex. 39, is used of Alexander playing the part of Endymion; might well have been expected. Again, in a fragment, possibly of Alciphron (ed. Schepers, p. 157. 10), ap. Etym. Mag. p. 438. 16, ὁ ἐκ Τροιζῆνο Ἱππόλυτος is used in the sense of ὁ νέος ὁππόλυτος.

⁶⁷ at Nicaea (Prott, von, Ath. Mitt. XXVII. 265Google Scholar; Weber, W., Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Kaisers Hadrianus, 129Google Scholar); at Aphrodisias in Caria (Le Bas-Wadd. 1619, an inscription of the actors' guild; so in another at Angora, Buckler, W. H., J.H.S., XLIV. 158)Google Scholar; Zeus, cf. n. 60; on a coin of Abdera, (Die antiken Münzen Nord-Griechenlands, II. i. 119Google Scholar; the reading is not certain).

Julia Domna is Virgo Caelestis, Selene, Artemis, Fortuna Felix, as well as Sharing Athena's temple at Athens (Premerstein, H. von, Jahreshefte, XVI. 261 f.Google Scholar), but her case is less striking as coming from the period of fully developed syncretism.

⁶⁸ Cf. Nos. 57, 65 supra; for Ἀ. κτίστης, a coin of Apollonia, (B.M.C. Thessaly, 62, No. 84 f., Pl. XIII. 4).Google Scholar Nero is represented as Mercury on a bronze found in Gaul, , Cat. Warocqué, 136Google Scholar, No. 238.

⁶⁹ N. Ἑ. at Rome, (Inscr. Gr. ad res Rom., I. 55)Google Scholar; ν. Π. at Tarsus, (B.M.C. Lycaonia, etc. lxxxix, 189, No. 159)Google Scholar; Dionysus or Iakchos commonly on coins (Mehlis, , Phil. Woch., 1926, 1375 f.Google Scholar); on Delphic coins (Blum, L., B.C.H. XXXVII. 323 ff.Google Scholar); in sculpture also as Apollo, Aristaeus, Vertumnus, Agathodaimon, and Osiris (Wernicke, Pauly-Wissowa, I. 2441).

⁷⁰ ν. Ἀσκ. I.G.R. IV. 341 (Pergamem); ν. Πυθ., Weber, W., Untersuchungen, 180Google Scholar (Megara); ν. Διον., n. 67 supra. At Larisa in the Caystros valley he is honoured jointly with Zeus Soter Olympios (Keil, J., Anatolian Studies, 241Google Scholar).

⁷¹ On Pergamene, coins (B.M.C. Mysia, 138, Nos. 238–241).Google Scholar

⁷² Cf. Moulton-Milligan, , Vocabulary of the N.T., 314.Google ScholarWeinreich, O., Arch. f. Rel., XVIII. 23Google Scholar, has noted the extension of the νέος-terminology to private persons; I have given two more examples, J.H.S., XLV. 94₈₄, and there is one in Picard, Ch., Xenia (Athens, 1912), 72Google Scholar, a hierophant on Thasos called νέος Βάκχιος.

⁷³ νέος, Heliodor. Aeth. I. 10, ὁ νέος Ἱππόλυτος of a chaste stepson. Alexander is νέος Ἡρακλῆς, νέος Σεσόγχωσις κοσμοκράτωρ, and Δαρεῖος νέος in Ps.-Callisth. Hist. pp. 16. 30, 37. 25, 97. 14, ed. W. Kroll. The magician Cyprian greeted by the devil as being νέος Ἰαμβρῆς, Confessio, p. 1114 A, Baluzius. Cf. also the naming of cities, Νέα Καρχηδών, Νέος Ἀγχίαλος.

ἄλλος. Photius, , Bibl. 82Google Scholar, p. 64a, 18 f. Bekker, calls Dexippus ὡς ἂν εἴποι τις ἄλλος μετά τινος σαϕηνείας Θουκυδίδης. St. Nicholas is described by Nicetas as ἄλλος τοῖς Χριστιανοῖς σωτὴρ ἀντάλλαγμα πιοτευόμενος Χριστοῦ (Anrich, G., Hagios Nikolaos, II. 497Google Scholar) δεύτερος. St. Basil, De spiritu sancto, XXIX. § 76 (xxxii. 206 C, Migne), says of St. Gregorius Thaumaturgus, ὃς τῇ ὑπερβολῇ τῶν ἐν αὐτῷ χαρισμάτων τῶν ἐνεργουμένων ὑπὸ τοῦ πνεύματος ἐν πάσῃ δυνάμει καὶ σημείοις καὶ τέρασι δεὐτερος Μωυσῆς παρ᾿ αὐτῶν τῶν ἐχθρῶν τῆς ἀληθείας ἀνηγορεύετο (cf. St. Greg. Nyss. De Vita G.T. xlvi. 908c, Migne: and the artistic representation of St. Peter as a second Moses, discussed by P. Styger, Altchristliche Grabeskunst).

Latin uses nouus, alter, alius in this sense (as Livy 21. 10, Hannibal is Mars alter; Apoll. Sid. Ep. V. 5. 3, nouus Burgundinus Solon in legibus disserendis; Ov. Her. 21.124, Hippomenes … alter), or such a specialising epithet as noster (Apoll. Sid. Ep. VII. 12. 8, noster Hippolytus). ille can likewise be so used (Apul. Met. III. 29, Iuppiter ille is used of the Emperor; so Robertson, D. S., Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc., 1926, 22Google Scholar). In Latin we often find a genitive so used, as in Sen. Apoc. 13. 1 Mercury is Talthybius deorum. Cf. Fränkel, E., Plautinisches im Plautus, 9 ff.Google Scholar for the Roman taste for description or designation by analogy.

Cf. also such phrases as Aristoph. Nub. 830, Σωκράτης ὁ Μήλιος(of Diagoras), Au. 1009, ἅνθρωπος Θαλῆς; Lucian, , Alex. 45Google Scholar, ἦ καὶ αὐτοὺς ἐναγεῖς ἔσεσθαι καὶ Ἐπικούρους κληθήσεσθαι; Epictet. III. 1. 14, οὐκ ᾤετό με Πολέμωνα ἔσεσθαι.

⁷⁴ Steph. Thes. V. 1437; cf. Delehaye, H., Mélanges Schlumberger, 205Google Scholar; Münsterberg, , Num. Zeit., LIX. 21.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Scott, K., Trans. Am. Phil. Soc., LVI. 82 ff.Google Scholar; Verus is as restoring the prosperity of Erythrae (A. Rzach, Pauly-Wissowa, II. A 2085).

⁷⁶ So Mattingly, H., Sydenham, E. A., Roman Imperial Coinage, II. 335Google Scholar, interprets a coin of his (ib. 404, No. 632, Pl. XIV. 303) with rev. Hadrianvs AVG. P.P. REN, taking REN to be renatus.

⁷⁷ Mayor's, J. B. edition of Cic. De natura deorum, III. p. 202 f.Google Scholar; Varro; ap. Serv. in Aen. VIII. 564.

⁷⁸ Ditt. Or. gr. inscr., 474.

⁷⁹ P. Oxy. 1380. 90, 85; 1449 (for Νεωτέρα, a return of temple property, dated A.D. 213–217. N. explained as Isis-Aphrodite by Grenfell and Hunt ad loc., Vol. XII. p. 142). Cleopatra was θεὰ νεωτέρα in her life; in Wilcken, , Chrestom. d. Papyruskunde, I. ii. No. 115, 1. 10, p. 145 f.Google Scholar we find under Severas Alexander, which is most naturally interpreted of a survival of the conjoint cult (cf. Wilcken, ad loc., and Stähelin, Pauly-Wissowa, XI. 780. 59 ff.). Perhaps the explanation is that where Cleopatra had in her life shared cult with Aphrodite–Isis, Cleopatra's personal epithet clung to the goddess. (Zέα and ώραία may have been applied to Isis as the goddess of woman's life, just as Hera is )

An interesting example of Νεωτέρα alone is a gem (Southesk Gems, I. 122) showing Isis Pharia and bearing the inscription

⁸⁰ Cf. Timoth. fr. 7 Diehl, and Nonnus, , Dion. I. 479Google Scholar, where Seth-Typhon anticipates being

⁸¹ Weinreich, O., Arch. f. Rel., XVIII. 24Google Scholar; Neue Jahrb., 1921, 145; Fr. Pfister, Pauly-Wissowa, Suppl. IV. 301. 5.

Parallel in a way to the text from Erythrae is the representation of Taras on Tarentine coins with attributes now of Poseidon, now of Apollo, now of Dionysus (Evans, A. J., Num. Ghron., 1889, 90Google Scholar).

⁸² Ap. Athenae., VI. 63, p. 253 D (cf. Weinreich, O., Neue Jahrb., 1926, 646 f.Google Scholar); Lundström, V., Anecd. Byz. I. 13Google Scholar, 1. 253. Note the use of of rulers (n. 79, and J.H.S., 1925, 94₈₄; add νέα θεά of the elder Agrippina on a coin of Mytilene, of Faustina on one of Delphi, of Plautilla on issues of Alabanda, Alinda, and Stratonicea, Münsterberg, l.c. 7b, 19a, 29a; of Drusus and Germanicus on coins of the κοινὸν Ἀσίας, B.M.C. Lydia, 251 f., Nos. 104–9, Pl. XXVI. 5, assigned to Pergamon by Gaebler, H., Z.f. Num. XXIV. 257 n.Google Scholar).

As Fränkel, H. remarks (Gnomon, 1927, 11)Google Scholar, what distinguishes gods from men is their perpetual power of self-renewal.

We must not forget the virtue in magic of a new object or vessel (Eitrem, S., P. Osloenses, I. 100Google Scholar, ad 1. 266).

⁸³ Plut. Pomp. 27; cf. Wilamowitz, , Reden ⁴, II. 182.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ P. Lond., 1912, 49 (Bell, H. I., Jews and Christians, 24Google Scholar);

⁸⁵ Siluae, IV. 3. 128. Cf. III. 3. 52, hanc (sc. Romam) ducibus frenare datum; mox crescit in illos imperium superis, and Dio Prus. I. 84 (Zeus entrusts Heracles with kingship over all mankind).

⁸⁶ Kahrstedt's, U. theory (Griechisches Staatsrecht, I. 126 ff.)Google Scholar, that the Spartan kings were considered to be incarnations of the Spartan heroes, does not seem to me proved or probable.

⁸⁷ Pauly-Wissowa, Suppl. IV. 30b ff. He argues that Ptolemy V took it under Seleucid influence as a result of his marriage with Cleopatra, daughter of Antiochus III. But (1) the title was not yet in use in the Seleucid house; (2) it is found before the marriage in 193 (though probably not, it is true, before the betrothal); (3) in one text subsequent to the marriage Ptolemy has the epithet and Cleopatra has not (Arch. f. Pap., III. 127, No. 3).

⁸⁸ Dittenberger, , Or. gr. inscr., 90. 5.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Revue Égyptologique, II. 106₅.

⁹⁰ Cf. Holleaux, , Rome, la Grèce, et les monarchies hellénistiques, 71Google Scholar₁; Meyer, Ernst, Unters, z. Chron. d. Ptol., 39 ff.Google Scholar

⁹¹ IV. 249.

⁹² Cf. Bouché-Leclercq, , Histoire oles Séleucides, 613.Google Scholar

⁹³ On their synods cf. Otto, W., Sitzungsber. bay. Ak., 1926, ii. 18 ff.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ So Bevan, E. R., Egypt under the Ptolemaic Dynasty, 260.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Polyb. XV. 25. 7.

⁹⁶ Cf. Beloch, , Griech. Gesch. ² IV. i. 380.Google Scholar Precedents are not frequent, since minors seldom reached the throne. The ceremony at Memphis in November 197 is described

1. 45 of the Rosetta stone as

⁹⁷ Kaerst, II². 339; Otto, W., Priester und Tempel im hellenistischen Ägypten, II. 272Google Scholar₂. The fact that new titles do not appear after Eupator, with the exception of Neos Dionysos, may be connected with a decline in initiative on the Greek side. The priesthood, with its more impersonal view of monarchy, has gained ground.

⁹⁸ Conveniently summarised by Foucart, G., Enc. Rel. Eth., VII. 712 f.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Pausan. I. 8. 6.

¹⁰⁰ A name apparently given to him before his accession; cf. P. Tebtunis, II. p. 407.

¹⁰¹ Cf. Otto, Priester, I.c., and Sitzungsb., l.c., 32.

¹⁰² Cf. Spiegelberg, W., Das Verhältniss d. griech. u. ägypt. Texte in d. ziweispr. Dekr. von Rosette u. Kanopos (Papyrusinstitut Heidelberg; Schrift 5, 1922).Google Scholar The general titolature apart from the epithet is Egyptian (Spiegelberg, 3 f.). Tarn, , Hellenistic Civilisation, 49Google Scholar, regards Epiphanes also as here Egyptian in origin; its equivalent in the Egyptian text, ‘He who cometh forth,’ is certainly appropriate for a ruler who has come to the throne after a period of tutelage.

¹⁰³ Cf. the passage from Appian translated, p. 41; Pfister, l.c., 300 ff.; Picard, Ch., Xenia, 67 ff.Google Scholar; and Pausan. IX. 40. 11, καὶ εἶναι μέν τι θειότερον (sc.τὸ σκῆπτρον) οὐχ ἥκιστα δηλοῖ τὸ ὲς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους ἐπιϕανὲς ἐξ αὐτοῦ.

For the second sense cf. Pfister, 308.

¹⁰⁴ For healing cf. Suet. Vesp. 7; Dio Cass. LXV. 7. 1, and Alexander's dream-intimation of the cure for Ptolemy (Pauly-Wissowa, XI. 623. 5), and A. Bloch, Les rois thaumaturges. For weather cf. Pfeiffer, E., ΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΑ, II. 102 f.Google Scholar For war cf. Corp. Herm. XVIII. 16, ἤδη δὲ καϕὶ μόνη εἰκὼν ϕανεῖσα βασιλέως ἐνήργησε τὴν νίκην καὶ τὸ ἄτρομόν τε καὶ ἄτρωτον προὐξένησε τοῖς ἐνοικοῦσιν. The Emperor is on a line with other θεῖοι ἄνθρωποι, as Weinreich, points out (Neue Jahrb., 1926, 648 f.)Google Scholar; cf. in general Pfister, Pauly-Wissowa, XI. 2125 ff.

¹⁰⁵ Revillout, , Chrest. démotique, 336.Google Scholar For the numismatic glorification of a far from glorious ending to a war cf. Vogt, J., Alexandr. Münzen, I. 175Google Scholar (under Macrinus).

¹⁰⁶ Meyer, Eduard, Ursprung und Anfänge des Christentums, II. 139Google Scholar₁.

¹⁰⁷ Appian's explanation shows what is, I think, true feeling for the sense of Ἐπιφανης. So praesens means ‘making himself felt,’ as, for instance, in Horace, C.I. 35. 2, praesens uel imo tollere de gradu | mortale corpus uel superbos | uertere funeribus triumphos.

¹⁰⁸ The provisional sequence is illustrated on Pl. VIII. The coins of 170, thought by Svoronos to have been struck in Egypt, are now assigned by Newell, E. T., Am. Journ. Num., LI. (1917), 24 ffGoogle Scholar, to a Syrian mint.

The impression made by this successful invasion of Egypt appears from the Jewish, Oracula Sibyllina, III. 611 ff.Google Scholar; cf. A. Rzach, Pauly-Wissowa, II. A 2127. The rare coin bearing the inscription (Babelon, p. 68, no. 526, Pl. XII. 5) seems on grounds of style to be early, and to come from the Eastern part of the Empire.

¹⁰⁹ Or. gr. inscr., 253; cf. Mago, A., Antioco IV Epifane Re di Syria (1907), 102Google Scholar₁₇. No chronological indication is yet available from the foundation or re-foundation of cities as Epiphaneia; thus that in Coele Syria can only be dated as before 163 (Kahrstedt, U., Syrische Territorien, 87Google Scholar).

¹¹⁰ It has its full force for Caligula as Zeus Epiphanes Neos (Philo, , Leg. ad Gaium, 43Google Scholar, § 346). It is not often given to Emperors (Pfister, 307 f.; add Etruscus on a coin of Mopsus, Valerianus junior on one of Aphrodisias, Saloninus on one of Tabae (Münsterberg, , Num. Zeit., LIX. 42Google Scholar^a, 46^a)). Is the use of to be explained from the weakening of the epithet's force in use? (Examples in Steinleitner, F., Die Beicht, 1913, 15 ff.Google Scholar; Pfister, 301.)

¹¹¹ On the formation of the epithet Augustus, ‘relating to Augustus,’ from the title Augustus, cf. Wackernagel, J., Vorlesungen über Syntax, II. 59 ff.Google Scholar; on the equivalence of genitive and adjective, Latte, K., Arch. f. Rel., XXIV. 255.Google Scholar

¹¹² Δεξικρέοντος Ἀφροδίτηνon Samos (Plut. Q.G. LIV. p. 303 C); Ἡρακλῆς Διομεδόντειος on Cos (Paton-Hicks, , Inscriptions of Cos, 36Google Scholar = Dittenberger, , Sylloge ³, 1106.Google Scholar This is a pious foundation made by Diomedon); Ζεὺς Μηλίχιος τῶν περὶ Πολύξενον, and Ζεὺς τῶν περὶ Λάκιον, Ζεὺς τῶν περὶ Ὀλυμπιόδωρον on Thera, and similar combinations of ἡρώων, Ζηνός or Ζηνός Μηλιχίω, and Εὐμενίδων with the genitives of the names of dead men at Cyrene (Ferri, S., Contributi di Cirene alla storia della religione greca, 13 ff.Google Scholar; I do not believe that there is here any question of identification of the deceased and the deity). Examples are more plentiful outside Greece, as, for instance, in Syria, where the usage continues in Christian times (Peterson, E., ΕΙΣ ΘΕΟΣ 210 ff.Google Scholar), in Caria (Διὶ Πα]νημέρῳ Ἀργύρου καὶ Ἥ[ρᾳ; Roscher, III. 1496). I have referred in J.H.S. XLV. 91 to Μὴν Τιάμου, etc. It is clear that some of these apparent genitives are, as Prof. Calder reminds me, Anatolian nominatives; τιαμας (genit.) seems to mean ‘tomb’ (Mon. Asiae Minoris Antiqua, I. No. 406). Yet it may appear from a text published by Zingerle, Jahresb. XXIII. Beibl. 5 ff., containing the phrase, 1. 16, τοῦ κυρίου τοῦ Τιάμου, that Τιάμου was sometimes thought to be a genitive, and Μὶς Ἀρτεμιδώρου (Premerstein, Keil-Von, Zweite Reisebericht, p. 103 ff.Google Scholar, No. 204, with full references to earlier literature; in Denkschr. Ak. Wien, LIV. ii.) is clearly a formation made by analogy on this assumption. To the question why similar genitives are not common I would reply that all these forms are local; Μὴν Τιάμου is very restricted in range (Buckler, W. H., B.S.A., XXI. 180Google Scholar). The genitive use did notdevelop far; possibly it was alien to Greek feeling, as Farnell, suggests (Greece and Babylon, 195 f.).Google Scholar

¹¹³ Premerstein, Keil-von, Zweite Reisebericht, p. 101Google Scholar, No. 200. Cf. also A. B. Cook's restoration of an inscription from Lagina in Caria, (Zeus, II. 879)Google ScholarΔιὶ ὑψίστω καὶ θείω τ[ῶ βασιλ]ικῶ.

¹¹⁴ They refer to their first Bericht (Denkschr. LIII. ii.), p. 20, No. 27 B, 1. 20 for a puzzling coming after which postulates an like the and s uppos e that the s ame Zeus was there honoured. I cannot explain the fes tival except on the rather des perate as s umption that it was in honour of the deified S eleucus , who had been in clos e alliance with Ptolemy more than once, and who may have had s ome s mall ἀγών founded in his honour which happened to s urvive; it may be noted that in the Alexander-romance S eleucus plays an important part, and a repres entation of him is in one vers ion s aid to have been put in a high tower in the eas t of the newly-founded Alexandria (S tähelin, F., Pauly-Wis s owa, II A, 1233 f.Google Scholar).

¹¹⁵ Cf. Dittenberger, , Or. gr. ins cr., 245. 10Google Scholar; Cl. Rev., 1925, 63. It may be s ugges ted that Σελεύκιος refers to the well-known Zeus of S eleucia Pieria (cf. Ἀλεξανδρεῖος, meaning ‘of Alexandria’; even s o the connexion with the S eleucids would remain;they founded S eleucia.

¹¹⁶ P. 36, n. 79.