William Mitchell Ramsay, The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, being an Essay of The Local History of Phrygia from the Earliest Times to the Turkish Conquest, volume 1 The Lycos Valley and South-Western Phrygia (Oxford: Clarendon 1895). [[Electronic form prepared for educational and scholarly use, including updating in separate annotations as appropriate, by Robert A. Kraft, Ross S. Kraemer, and graduate students at the University of Pennsylvania, October 1998. Participation by others is invited and will be acknowledged.]] [[NOTE: this is still in process of verification and editing for optimal electronic use. Transitional codes include: [[##]] = original page numbers \#/ = footnote number (renumbered consecutively) ||...| = ... = Greek text |||...| = ... = Latin text #...| = ... = German text +...| = ... = titles of various sorts The aim is ultimately to represent these in SGML/HTML compatible form.]] --- CHAPTER 3 HIERAPOLIS\1/: THE HOLY CITY § 1. Situation and Origin . . . . . . . . . . . [[84]] § 2. Religious Character . . . . . . . . . . . [[85]] § 3. Mother Leto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [[89]] § 4. Leto and Kora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [[91]] § 5. The God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [[93]] § 6. Matriarchal System . . . . . . . . . . . . [[94]] § 7. The Brotherhood . . . . . . . . . . . . . [[96]] § 8. Religion of Burial . . . . . . . . . . . . [[98]] § 9. The God as Ruler and Healer . . . . . . . [[101]] § 10. Trade-Guilds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [[105]] § 11. History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [[107]] § 12. Magistrates and Municipal Institutions . . [[109]] § 13. The Gerousia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [[110]] Appendices : I. Inscriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [[115]] II. Bishops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [[120]] III. Phrygia Hierapolitana . . . . . . . . . . . [[121]] /--- \1/ Dr. C. Humann told me that a party directed by him explored Hierapolis carefully in 1887 (some months after my last visit) and copied over 300 inscriptions. These are certain to add much additional knowledge at some future time, when they are published. [[Find out if they were published, add info. here]] Mr. Hogarth's article on 'The Gerousia of Hierapolis' in Journal of Philology XIX p. 69 f is referred to in this chapter as 'Hogarth p. --.' \--- § 1. SITUATION AND ORIGIN. Facing Laodiceia at a distance of six miles to the north was the 'Holy City,' Hiera Polis, situated on a shelf, about 1,100 feet above the sea and 150-300 above the plain, close under the mountains that bound the Lycos valley on the northeast; and twelve miles north-west of Hierapolis, on the west bank of the Maeander, three miles above its junction with the Lycos, was Tripolis, founded by the Pergamenian kings to counterbalance the Seleucid proclivities of Laodiceia. Hierapolis, in contrast to these two Greek cities, which lay one on each side of it, was the centre of native feeling and Phrygian nationality in the valley; and the character of the three cities, each representing a different influence, makes them a representation in miniature of the development of Phrygia throughout the many centuries during which European influence struggled to conquer and hold Phrygia. But, of the three, Hierapolis is best calculated to show us what the Phrygian spirit became under the influence of Greek literature and Roman organization. Addend. 28. Lydia, Phrygia, and Caria met in the Lycos valley. Strabo p. 629 [[85]] and Herodotus VII 3 considered that the boundary between Lydia and Phrygia lay east of Hierapolis, so that this city was Lydian. But Xenophon, Anab. I 2, 6, puts the boundary west of Hierapolis, at the crossing of the Maeander, including the city in Phrygia; and this was the generally adopted view, which we shall follow\2/. Hierapolis is marked by its very name as a religious city. On the analogy of such phrases as 'the Holy City of the Olbians\3/,' we must interpret Hierapolis as the Holy City of the tribe or race which inhabited the district; and this title gradually fixed itself as the name of the city which grew up around the hieron. The tribe as a whole was called Hydreleitai\4/, and they appear to have had also another central city, Hydrela or Kydrara, which originally commanded the whole territory bounded by Colossai on the east, Laodiceia on the south, tud Mossyna on the north. But the priestly village round the hieron grew into a city which under the Empire quite overshadowed Hydrela. Both struck coins; both were in the Cibyratic conventus; but the Holy City became one of the greatest centres of Phrygian life, while Hydrela sank into a mere adjunct of Hierapolis and was subject to the bishop of that city in Christian time. But in older times Kydrara was the chief city. Xerxes passed by it on his march from Colossai by the direct road to Sardis. At Kydrara, (i.e. in its territory) an inscribed pillar marked the bounds of Lydia and Phrygia. Here the road towards Caria went off to the left (crossing the Lycos, and passing by the temple of Men Karou and the hot springs of Karoura), while that towards Sardis crossed the Maeander and passed by Tripolis and Kallatebos\5/. § 2. RELIGIOUS CHARACTER. The history of Hiera-Polis-Kydrara, was determined by the natural features of its situation. In no place known to the ancients was the power of Nature more strikingly revealed. The waters of almost all the streams in the Lycos valley deposit limestone; but the splendid hot springs at Hierapolis surpass all the rest in this quality. If a tiny jet of water is made to flow in any direction, it soon constructs for itself a channel of stone\6/. The /--- \2/ Even Ptolemy, who retains the old classification of Laodiceia and Tripolis to Caria, ranks Hierapolis in Phrygia. \3/ On coins 'OX)3f'wv @g t(pav (7r6XEw@) see Ch. I § 6. \4/ See Ch. V § 9. \5/ M. Radet takes a different view, BCH 1891 p. 376f, which contradicts our whole scheme of topography of the Lycos valley, and makes Xerxes march by a circuitous path over more difficult ground for no apparent reason. On the topographical question see pp. 6, 37, 52, 160, 164, 173 n, 174. \6/ Vitruvius, VIII 3, 10, describes the process; and he is confirmed by Strabo, p. 629, and by the eyes of every traveller. \--- [[86]] precipices immediately south of the city, about 100 feet or more in height, over which the water tumbles in numerous little streams, have become 'an immense frozen cascade, the surface wavy, as of water in its headlong course suddenly petrified' (Chandler p. 287). The gleaming white rocks, still called Pambuk- Kalessi\7/,arrest the attention of the traveller from the west, at the first glance which is opened to him over the valley\8/. Even more remarkable than this was the Ploutonion or Charonion (Strabo pp. 580, 629), a hole just wide enough to admit a man, reaching, deep into the earth, from which issued a mephitic vapour, the breath of the realm of death. In the fourth century the hole had disappeared\9/, and the poisonous character of the exhalations was a tradition of the past. But Strabo had seen the place, and had experimented on sparrows, and he assures us that the vapour killed living things exposed to it. There is other evidence to the effect that not merely in Hierapolis, but also in many places in Phrygia, the mephitic vapour from holes in the earth drew down birds flying over them\10/; this is perhaps only an exaggerated statement of the facts as mentioned by Strabo. Between A.D. 19 and 380 the Charonion had disappeared\11/. What was the reason? I think we must attribute it to the action of the Christians, who had deliberately filled up and covered over the place, the very dwelling-place of Satan. Christian tradition has preserved /--- \7/ I.e. Cotton-Castle. The name is often corrupted in the peasants' language into meaningless forms like Tambuk; and this his led some recent travellers, who show a praiseworthy accuracy, but are not familiar with the extraordinary tendency of the peasants in Turkey to distort names, to doubt the reality of the name Pambuk. \8/ The name Chrysoroas, applied to a river-god on coins of Hierapolis, must designate the hot-spring, whose abundant water has formed the very surface of the ground on which the city stands, and was the cause of its attractiveness and of its religious importance. My friend Mr. Walker told me that its waters, after tumbling over the cliffs, flow for a short distance south through the plain until they reach a hole in the ground into which they disappear. I have not seen this phenomenon, which is unknown to all the travellers; but Mr. Walker is a perfect authority on such a point. The Chrysorrhoas is given, as it were, by 'the God' to enrich Hierapolis, and is then taken back to himself. See Ch. VI § 1. \9/ 'Foramen apud Hierapolim Phrygiae antehac, ut adserunt aliqui, videbatur: unde emergens ... noxius spiritus perseveranti odore quidquid prope venerat corrumpebat, absque spadonibus solis.' Ammian. XXIII 6, 18. \10/ , @@v- - - - -.@ Lirti)rt-roliE'vovv rcoi, !ULO-7r@IAEVO OPVL'OWV V, '8c!t, Z)g 'AO@P,7o-L' @ i E'(TTLY ip 7rpo86p(p - ro@ rlapOEYCovov KnL 7roX-XUXIIO 'r@V -DPVYCOV K. ' t Av8@vy@s-, Philostr. vit. Apoll. II 10. \11/ Some scholars quote Ammianus as saying merely that the Charonion had lost its poisonous properties; but he says clearly that it was no longer visible. \--- [[87]] a distorted memory of the facts. The Apostle Philip was described as the evangelist of Tripolis, and as closely connected also with Hierapolls. There his chief enemy was the Echidna, in which form Satan deluded the inhabitants of Hierapolis. John, who had already expelled the aboininable Artemis from Epbesos, visited Philip in Hierapolis, and the united efrorts of the two Apostles drove away the Echidna\12/. It lay in the character and nature of tradition to attribute the expulsion of the Echidna to the Apostles; but history, if materials for writing it survived, would show the Echidna surviving as the chief enemy of Christianity throughout the second and third centuries. It is probable that the Christians took advantage of the victory of Constantine over Licinius to destroy the Charonion: that would imply that the new religion was the ruling power within the city in 320 A. D., which is probable from other reasons. Now let us consider the character of the Anatolian religion. Its essence lies in the adoration of the life of Nature -- that life subject apparently to death, yet never dying but reproducing itself in new forms, different and yet the same. This perpetual self-identity under varying forms, this annihilation of death through the power of self-reproduction, was the object of an enthusiastic worship, ebaracterized by remarkable self- abandonment and immersion in the divine, by a mixture of obscene symbolism and sublime truths, by negation of the moral distinctions and family ties that exist in a more developed society, but do not exist in the free life of Nature. The mystery of self-reproduction, of eternal unity amid temporary diversity, is the key to explain all the repulsive legends and ceremonies that cluster round that worship, and all the manifold manifestations or diverse embodiments of the ultimate single divine life that are carved on the rocks of Asia Minor, especially at Pteria (Boghaz-Keui). Hierapolis was marked as a seat of such a religion, and a place of approach to God; and a great religious establishment (hieron) existed there. As Greek manners and language spread, a Greek name for the city came into use. At first it war called Hiero-polis, the city of the hieron; and on a few coins of Augustus this name appears. But as the Greek spirit became stronger in the Lycos valley, the strict Greek form, Hiera Polis, established itself\13/. Under the Roman /--- \12/ See M. Bonnet Narratio de Mirac. Chonis patr. 1. This document, as we have it, was written in the eighth or ninth century (Church in Emp. Ch. XIX). If we possessed the Acta Philippi complete, we should probably find an older tradition, which had taken shape before the Charonion disappeared. Add. 15. \13/ Throughout the hellenized East the same rule holds. Such cities are originally called Hiero-polis, the city round the hieron; when the city becomes more thoroughly grecized, the name becomes Hiera-Polis. Often we find that literary men used the correct term Hiera-Polis, where the city officials and the vulgar used Hieropolis. See p. 107. \--- [[88]] Empire, Hierapolis was penetrated with the Graeco-Roman civilization, as is natural from its geographical position, and as is proved by the personal names in the inscriptions, few of which are Anatolian, while Greek and even Latin names abound\14/. Greek became the sole language of the city, and a veneer of Greek civilization spread over it; but the veneer was much thinner than at Laodiceia or Apameia. Hierapolis maintained its importance through its religious position; and its remains and history bear witness to the strength of the religious feeling in it. The religion continued to be Lydo-Phrygian, and even Greek names for the gods were used less in Hierapolis than in many other cities. Even on coins, which usually show the hellenized spirit most strongly, many traces of a native religious character appear, the gods AAIPBHNOC, APXHRETHC, ZEYC.BOZIOC\15/, ZEYC-TPniOC, and the heroes MO+OC and TOPPHBOC\16/ (the former probably symbolizing the prophetic power, and the latter the priestly office; Mopsos is widely known as a prophet from Colophon to Cilicia; Torrebos, clad in a long cloak, holds a statuette of the goddess, and leans on a lyre). Such types as Hades-Serapis with Kerberos, Men, Rape of Proserpina, Men standing or on horseback (called generally an Amazon), head of the Sun-god radiated, Apollo bearing the lyre, Dionysos, Asklepios, Nemesis, and Selene in biga, illustrate the character of the cultus; and the type of a bull's head, surmounted by a crescent and two stars, is also connected. /--- \14/ The following are of the native type: Akylas, Apphios, Attadianos (a hybrid formation; Hogarth, perhaps rightly, alters to Attalianos), Attiakos, Molybas, Motalis, Myllos or Moulos (both on one sarcophagus), Tatios. On Passtillas see no. 25. \15/ On the title Bozios see Ch. IV § i i. \16/ TOPPHBOC is the correct reading, as Mr. Head now informs me; it is wrongly given TOPPHCOC in his Hist. Num. (a letter on the coin being blurred). Torrebos introduced the Lydian style of music (Plut. de Mus. 15), which is naturally connected with the representation on this coin: as the representative of the priestly function (and doubtless as the first priest at the hieron), Torrebos introduced the music which was employed in the Lydian ritual. Torrebos was son of Atys (Xanthus ap. Dion. Hal. Antiq. Rom. I 28); in other words he was a Lydian form of Atys, the first priest of the Phrygian goddess. When Knaack (Berl. Philol. Wochenschr. 1890 p. 1643, to whom I am indebted for the quotations from Plutarch and Dion. Hal.) says that on this coin die gegenu%berstellung hat keine tiefere Bedeutung, he hardly catches its meaning. The prophetic and the priestly functions of the hieron are put side by side as equally important at Hierapolis. Whether this be a deep meaning or not, it is at least a very important one, as showing the character of Phrygian religion. \--- [[89]] § 3. MOTHER LETO. There is a deep gorge in the mountains, two or three miles north of Mandama, a village about six miles N.W. of Hierapolis\17/. In this gorge there is a large rude cave with no trace of artificial cutting, on the roof and sides of which many graffitti are rudely inscribed. Only one of these could be deciphered, a dedication by Flavianus Menogenes to 'the Goddess,' no. 17\18/. We may compare the account given by Pausanias X 32 of the cave Steunos at Aizanoi, sacred to Cybele (see also Ch. VIII § 9). The deity to whom Flavianus addressed himself was 'The Goddess' of the district, the tutelary deity of the mountains, whose sanctuary was this rude cave. She is the great goddess of Hierapolis, Leto or Mother Leto, who was worshipped also beyond the mountains at Dionysopolis, just as the 'Mother of Sipylos' was the tutelary deity both of Smyrna on the south and of Magnesia on the north of Mount Sipylos. The Mother-Goddess had her chosen home in the mountains, amid the undisturbed life of Nature, among the wild animals who continue free from the artificial and unnatural rules constructed by men. Her chosen companions are the lions, strongest of animals, or the stags, the fleetest inhabitants of the woods. As Professor E. Curtius says, 'the spirit of this naturalistic cultus leads the servants of the goddess, while engaged in her worship, to transform themselves into the semblance of her holy animals, stag, cow, or bear, or of plants which stand in relation to her worship.' Hence we find that 'the baskets danced' before Artemis Koloe%ne beside the Gygaean Lake, near Sardis (Strabo p. 626), and women wearing crowns of reeds danced before the Spartan Artemis. Lakes, like mountains, were often chosen by the goddess as her home. But her life was seen everywhere in Nature, in the trees, in the crops, in all vegetation, in all animal life, and in many beings intermediate between men and animals, Seilenoi, &c., who were closer to her because they retained the free life of Nature. The great religious festival of Heirapolis was the Letoia, named after the goddess Leto. She was a local variety of the Mother- goddess, who was worshipped under many names but with practical identity of character in all parts of Asia Minor. The epithet 'Mother /--- \17/ Ak-Tcheshme (White Fountain) is another name for the village: Mandama is perhaps an ancient word. The village, which lies on the direct road from Serai-Keui to Tchal Ova, may perhaps be in the territory of Hydrela, but there can be no question that the religion of Hydrela and Hierapolis was the same. \18/ With time and appliances probably others might be read. \--- [[90]] Leto' has not actually been yet found at Hierapolis, but may be confidently assumed from the analog of Dionysopolis (Ch. IV § 9). The votive formula from the cave of the goddess, no. 17, was specially connected with the worship of Leto. The goddess of this name can be traced in the following districts: (i) In the Lydian Katakekaumene, Mous. Sm. no. TKZ' (where the text is faulty), 'A7roX(D'vios- A paxiv 8vvaT,q- OE@ c-@Xapto-rCo A?ITCZ. But in this district Leto was more frequently called by the Greek name Artemis, or by the Persian name Anaitis; the latter was introduced by the colonists whom the Persian kings settled in eastern Lydia\19/. (2) Along the whole line of Mount Messogis to the sea. Strabo (p. 6 -29) considers Messogis as the same range with the mountains behind Hierapolis, and this is so in the sense that Messogis is a prolongation of the plateau of which the Hierapolitan range is the rim. A festival at Hierapolis (and also one at Tripolis) was called AHT fl E I A - TT YO I A, uniting the two great deities, Leto and Apollo. At Dionysopolis and Motella examples are given in Ch. IV. A coin of Tripolis, with the legend AHTII - TP II Tr[OAEnN, shows the goddess sitting, seeptre in hand. The type of Leto fleeing before Pytho with the infants, Apollo and Artemis, occurs on coins of Tripolis, Attouda, Mastaura, and Magnesia Mae.; also at Ephesos with the legend AHTR - E@E5'InN (Imhoof-Blumer MG p. 285). At Magnesia on the Maeander the river Lethaios, which flows out of Messogis, was probably the river of Leto, grecized in accordance with the false derivation from X'077. In Ephesos we find the same votive formula as in no. 17 E@XaptO- TCO T,@ 'APTE,UL81 ZTgoavoy (Inscr. Brit. Mus. DLXXIX), c@Xapto-r6 o-ot, Kupta\20/ 'Ap-rEut, F. EKd7r-rLOg (ibid. DLXXVIII). (3) Further south we find Leto before-the-city at Oinoanda (BCH 1886 p. 234). In Lycia, generally, Leto was worshipped as a national and family deity and as the guardian of the tomb (Benndorf Lykia i p. 118; Treuber Gesch. d. Lykier p. 69 f). (4) In Western Pisidia and Milyas we find Leto as the guardian of the tomb (no. 194), and a dedication 'to Apollo and Apollo's Mother' (no. 100). (5) In Pamphylia we find at Perga a priest of Pergaean Leto (t'.EpE'a 8t,4 plov Oeiiv A77-roOT -riv nepyal(Op ro'xEcoT), where she seems to be the same as the Queen of Perga (Avao-o-a flepyat'a), usually known by /--- \19/ Their aim, doubtless, was to plant these Asiatics along the Royal Road, leading from Sardis to the governing centre of the Empire of Susa, to keep it secure under their faithful guardianship. \20/ Compare the epithet ku/rios given to Lairbenos at Dionysopolis, p. 150. \--- [[91]] the Greek name Artemis\21/. A Messapian inscription has the expression Artemis-Leto, where Deecke errs in separating the names by a comma (Rh. Mus. 1887 p. 232)- In this enumeration we observe that the traces of the name Leto point to the south coast and an influence radiating from it, coming probably from Cyprus throuah Persia. The Leto of this district is ultimately the same as the Cybele of northern and eastern Phrygia; and she is accompanied by the male deity, her son, Savazos-Sabazios-Sozon (Ch. VIII) or Lairbenos, as Cybele is by Attes or Atys. The two pairs probably sprang from the same origin; and after travelling along different roads, they met in Ephesos and in the Lydian Katakekaumene. My friend Prof. Robertson Smith's suggestion that Lato is the old Semitic Al-lat ('AXL,\a"r in Heiod. I 131, III 8) agrees well with the geographical facts; and the name Lato would then be due to Semitic influence exerted on Asia Minor\22/. § 4. LETO AND KORA. Further, in the list which has just been given, we observe that Leto is identified with Artemis; the mother and the daughter are only two slightly differentiated forms of the ultimate divine personality in its feminine aspect. The daughter is the mother reappearing in the continuity of life; the child replaces the parent, different and yet the same. Leto, the Mother, and Kora, the Maiden, are the divine prototypes of earthly life; the divine nature is as complex as humanity, and contains in itself all the elements which appear in our earthly life. But how does Kora originate? There must be in the ultimate divine nature the male element as well as the female, o) Qeo/s- as well as h( Qeo/s. From the union of the two originates the daughter-goddess. But even this is not sufficient: the son also is needed, and he is the offspring of the daughter-goddess and her father. The story of the life of these divine personages formed the ritual of the Phrygian religion. In the mysteries, the story was acted before the worshippers by the officials, who played the parts of the various characters in the divine /--- \21/ In publishing this inscription (BCH 1883 p. 263), I did not observe that this goddess of Perga, Leto, must be the same as the Artemis of Perga. Treuber takes the same incorrect sense as I did: Gesch. d. Li .Ikier p. 76. \22/ I had thought of connecting Leto with the Lycian lada, 'woman,' understanding Leto Meter as 'the protowoman, the mother'; but Prof. Smith's suggestion seems Preferable. Leda is, doubtless, the Lycian lada. Al-l&t or Al-ilh,t is usually explained as Al-115,hat. 'the Goddess,' as Allah is for Al-Ilah, 'the God.' Professor Sayce, however, makes Alilat the feminine of helel 'the shining one' (on Herod. 1 13 1); though acknowledging that there are difficulties in this derivation, he thinks there are more serious difficulties in the other. \--- [[92]] drama. The details of the mystic play are very fully described by Clement of Alexandria\23/. There is no reason to doubt the accuracy of the description which he has given, for many of its details, repulsive as some and trivial as others are, are proved from independent evidence. Clement describes them as Eleusinian, for they had spread to Eleusis as the rites of Demeter and Kora, crossing from Asia to Crete, and from Crete to the European peninsula. Fundamentally the same, this ritual was developed with slight differences in detail in the different bomes to which it spread in Asia Minor and Greece. The different peoples who adopted it imparted to it some of their national character; and especially the Greeks toned it down, imparted to it some of their moderation and artistic feeling, and set it before the initiated amid far finer and more magnificent surroundings; but still it remained everywhere fundamentally the same\24/. This 'fundamental identity' must not be pressed too far. It seems indeed beyond a doubt that the Phrygo-Orphic mystic ritual was adopted in the Eleusinian Mysteries; but the change of spirit and effect was immense. At Eleusis\25/ 'the Mysteries were an attempt of the Hellenic genius to take into its service the spirit of Oriental religion' and its enthusiastic self- forgetfulness in the contemplation of the divine nature. But the Greeks must have found in their Oriental model the essential idea of the Mysteries, that 'the multitude of deities in the polytheistic system were merely forms of the ultimate single divine nature.' The literary attempt (in the Homeric poems especially) to make polytheism a conceivable rystem to a rational mind by the theory that the multitude of gods formed a sort of bureaucracy, which shared among the different members different parts of the duties naturally belonging to God, under the general superintendence of a chief God and Father Zeus, had no real religious feeling about it; and degenerated into a comedy first and then a farce. The Oriental, and especially the Phrygian Mysteries, met the natural and overwhelming desire for a rational system by their /--- \23/ Clem. Alexandr. p),ot),ept. c. 2. \24/See especially Foucart Associations Religieuses chez les Cr)"ecs p. 72 f. Many authorities consider that Clement is wrong in describing the ritual as Eleusinian, and that it is only Phrygian and Orphic. Lenormant, in his important series of articles in the Contemporanj Berietv (i88o), took the view that the Eleusinian Mysteries were contaminated with the Phrygian and Orphic rites at a late period. I may be permitted to refer also to my article Mysteties in the Encyclop. Bitannica ed. IX. \25/ In this paragraph I make some extracts from my article on 'Mysteries' loc. cit., which, though requiring some improvements and modifications, expresses approximately the view that is required by the facts collected in this work. \--- [[93]] teaching of the divine unity-in-multiplicity. The social side of the Phrygian cult was rejected by the Greeks; the acts and ceremonies remained to a considerable extent the same, with the meaning and spirit changed, just as the Aphrodite of Praxiteles retained the attitude and gesture of the rude Phoenician image of Astarte. 'All that gave elevation and ideality was added by the Hellenic genius' to the Phrygian Mysteries and to the Phoenician idol. But, with all their ugliness, the Phrygian Mysteries must always remain one of the most instructive and strange attempts of the human mind in an early stage of development to frame a religion, containing many germs of high conceptions expressed in the rudest and grossest symbolism, deifying the natural processes of life in their primitive nakedness, and treating all that veiled or modified or restrained or directed these processes as impertinent outrages of man on the divine simplicity. § 5. THE GOD. In the public form of the religion, as it appears in the municipal ceremonies and on the coins and in public documents, we find that in some cities the goddess is made more prominent, in other places the god is put more forward. The difference is merely incidental and external; and there is no reason to think that it corresponds to any difference in the esoteric and mystic ceremonial. On the whole Greek influence tended to lay more stress on the god, to regard him as the chief and lord and father; and accordingly he is more prominent in the religion as associated with municipal government. The connexion of political and religious organization was far more close and intimate in ancient than in modern times; social and political union were merely different aspects of religious union, and the one could not exist, or be thought of as existing, without the other (Church in Emp. p. i go f). Another point of importance remains to be noticed in the Hierapolitan religion. The eunuch priests of the hieron were able to defy the poisonous influence of the Charonion and live in its divine atmosphere unharmed. These priests, having separated themselves from the world, already possessed some of the divine nature, and could support unharmed the terrors of the world of death. What light does this throw on the nature of the religion? It implies that the annihilation of the distinction of sex brings the man closer to the divine life. The distinction of sex, therefore, is not an ultimate and fundamental fact of the divine life: the god and the goddess, the Son and the Maiden, are mere appearances of the real and single divine life that underlies them. That life is self-complete, self-sufficient, continually existent; the idea of change, of diversity, of passage from form to form, i. e. of death, comes in with the idea of sex-distinction. [[94]] Hence it is part of the religion to confuse in various ways the distinction; to make the priest neither male nor female, and to make mutilation the test of willingness to enter the divine service. § 6. MATRIARCHAL SYSTEM. The male deity seems to be codsidered as a companion of the Mother-goddess of inferior rank to her. In this cultus there was no holy marriage to form the central rite in the cultus, the prototype of human marriage and the guarantee of family life on earth. The impregnation of the Mother-goddess formed part of the sacred ritual enacted in the Mysteries; but it seems everywhere to have been an act of violence, or stealth, or deception. This first act, the birth of the daughter, is followed by the second act, the generation of the son, which again is an act of deception and violence, enacted by the god in the form of a serpent (the Echidna of Hierapolis)\26/. The religion originated among a people whose social system was not founded on marriage, and among whom the mother was head of the family, and relationship was counted only through her. Long after a higher type of society had come into existence in Phrygia, the religion preserved the facts of the primitive society; but it became esoteric, and the facts were only set forth in the Mysteries. When, then, had the change from the old social system to the new occurred? On this we possess no evidence, merely general presumptions, which will be stated in a more suitable place. But it is clear that in the Roman period the old system had not entirely disappeared; it still existed as a religious institution, permitted by the popular opinion, and recognized by law. The inscriptions reveal to us cases in which women of good position felt themselves called upon to live the divine life, under the influence of divine inspiration. The typical case is recorded in an inscription of Tralleis (no. 18). /--- \26/ This incident is widely spread in ancient religion, ritual, and mythology. In Rome the Bona Dea was deceived in that way by her father Faunus (Macrob. I I2, 24; Plutarch Vit. Caes. 9). In the Phrygian mysteries, the incident is represented sometimes as occurring between the God and the Mother-goddess (Athenag. leg. pro Christ. p. 295 d), sometimes between the God and the Daughter (Clem. Alex. 1. c.). In the ritual women imitated the divine action, see e.g. a relief in the Louvre, described by M. Heuzey in his Mission Archeol. en Mace/doine, and M. Foucart Assoc. Relig. p. 78. In mythology the birth of heroes, and even historical persons such as Alexander the Great, was accounted for in this way. The serpent, e'Xt8va in Hierapolis, was usually the species with swoln cheeks (irapetav); and he impersonated Sabazios; hence, when the superstitious man of Theophrastus saw a 7r(ipetav o'q)tf in his house, he invoked Sabazios. See Dieterich on die Go%ttin Mise in Philologus LII 1893 p. 1 f, where much information about the character of the Phrygian cultus is to be found; also the additional article by Bloch in the same volume p. 577. \--- [[95]] The commentary on this inscription is contained in Strabo's account, p. 532, of the social customs which existed in Akilisene in his own time, and which, as he says, formerly existed in Lydia. 'They dedicate (to Anaitis) male and female slaves, and this, in itself, is not strange; but even the highest nobles consecrate their daughters while virgins, and among them the rule is that they live as courtesans before the goddess for a long time before they are given in marriage, while no one thinks it unworthy to dwell with a woman of this class.' The inscription shows that the custom survived in Lydia as late as the second century: the person here concerned is of good rank, as is proved by the Latin name of her family\27/. She comes of ancestors who have served before the god with asceticism (unwashed feet) and prostitution; she has served in the same way in accordance with the express orders of the god; and she records her service in a public dedication\28/. This is not likely to have been an isolated case, for it appears, from the publicity given to it, to have involved no infamy. Strabo seems to imply that at Komaria Pontica this kind of service was confined, as a rule, but not absolutely, to the class of persons called Hierai\29/. Other persons, however, besides the Hierai occasionally performed the service; and the Trallian inscription gives a typical case of such voluntary service. This inscription enables us to understand many other inscriptions. Suppose L. Aurelia Aemilia had had a child during her service, what would have been its legal status? Were such children reckoned legitimate or illegitimate? The answer to this question is important, as determining the attitude of the country law towards the custom. I think that at least in the cities where Greek civilization had not thoroughly established itself, they were reckoned legitimate and took the rank of their mother. They are mentioned in inscriptions with the mother's name in place of the father's, and even with the formula 'of unknown father\30/.' The ancient social system had, therefore, /--- \27/ She is not of an Italian but of a Lydian family; an Italian woman would not be named L. Aurelia Aemilia, for the name offends against Latin rules of nomenclature. \28/ The marble column on which it was inscribed supported some offering. \29/ 7r'XiOos- -yvvagKZP -rrop epyatouiv&)p airo' ro@ a,41jarov, Z)v at 7rXttovr ei(Ap tepai, Strabo p. 559. The Hierai were bound to the divine service (see pp. 135, 147). \30/ It is possible to explain away some of these cases, and in particular to say that there was not always a very strict scrutiny of the qualifications of citizens, since, e.g., freedmen were allowed as full ordinary citizens (Bj7p6rat) and as members of Gerousia at Sidyina; but we also find senators and strategoi quoted with the mother's name in place of the father's, and the scrutiny in such cases was necessarily strict. It must be remembered that the statement of the father's name is required as part of the formal designation of a citizen in political and legal documents, and the cases of descent reckoned through the mother are so numerous that we must admit that law and custom admitted such birth as legitimate. Examples are quoted on inscr. 21. \--- [[96]] never been abolished, but simply decayed slowly before the advance of Graeco-Roman civilization. It lingered longer in remote districts than in the cities of the west\31/. It is, in fact, probable though with our present knowledge not susceptible of proof, that the term Parthenos in connexion with the Anatolian system should be rendered simply as 'the Unmarried,' and should be regarded as evidence of the religious existence of the pre-Greek social system. The Parthenos-goddess was also the Mother; and however much the Parthenoi who formed part of her official retinue\32/ may have been modified by Greek feeling, it is probable that originally the term indicated only that they were not cut off by marriage from the divine life. Incidentally we note that the discrepancy between the religious ritual and the recognized principles of society contributed to the extraordinarily rapid spread of Christianity in Asia Minor. The religion was not in keeping with the facts of life; and in the general change of circumstances and education that accompanied the growth of Roman organization in the country, the minds of men were stimulated to thought and ready for new ideas. In the country generally a higher type of society was maintained; whereas at the great temples the primitive social system was kept up as a religious duty incumbent on the class called Hierai during their regular periods of service at the temple, as is proved by the inscriptions found at Dionysopolis. The chasm that divided the religion from the educated life of the country became steadily wider and deeper. In this state of things St. Paul entered the country; and, wherever education had already been diffused, he found converts ready and eager. Those who believe that the tale of St. Thekla\33/ is founded on a real incident will recognize in it a vivid picture of the life of the time, helping us to appreciate the reason for the marvellous and electrical effect that is attributed in Acts to the preaching of the Apostle in Galatia (p. 137). § 7. THE BROTHERHOOD. The God at Hierapolis is styled Lairbenos (on which name see Ch. IV) and Archegetes on coins, and Apollo Archegetes on inscriptions. The title Archegetes marks him as the /--- \31/ See the large proportion of cases in the little Isaurian city of Dalisandos (Headlam JHS 1892 p. I). \32/ For example ttpatet(tv rapO;Yot at Teos CIG 3098. \33/ See Church in the Roman Empire Chapter XVI. \--- [[97]] originator and teacher of the mysteries and ritual to his worshippers\34/: in Greece Apollo Archegetes was the adviser and guide of the emigrants and colonists who went forth from its shores to find homes and food in more productive lands. The most remarkable point which we find in the inscriptions is the institution of Semeiaphoroi of Apollo Archegetes no. 19, who have been explained by Hogarth p. 80 as a class of professional wonder-workers, like those eastern dervishes in modern times, who cut themselves with knives, and do other wonders under the influence of religious excitement. It is, however, more probable that the Semeiaphoroi are to be compared with the Xenoi Tekmoreioi, who will be described more fully in a later chapter\35/. The latter had a secret sign (TE'Kucop), whereby presumably they recognized members of the Brotherbood, and the Bearers of the Sign (0-77,UEiOll) may be identified with them. To judge from their name Xenoi, the Guest-friends, they must have made hospitality one of their duties. Like all ancient societies, they united under religious forms, in Hierapolis in the worship of Apollo, near Pisidian Antioch in the worship of the Great Artemis of the Limnai. They made voluntary contributions towards a common treasury, from which works of architecture and sculpture were constructed for the good of their common religion. Considering that religion was fundamentally the same over the plateau of Asia Minor, we should expect to find this institution widely spread over the country; and an interesting passage in the travels of the Arab from Tangier, Ibn Batuta, enables us to trace similar societies in the Moslem cities of the Seljuk empire. These cities were peopled to a large extent by the old races, who had adopted the Mohammedan religion, but maintained many of their old social forms and among others that of the Brotherhood. Ibn Batuta mentions this institution as existing in the Anatolian towns which be visited. He saw the Brothers at Antalia\36/, Burdur, La^dhik, Kunia (Iconium), and implies that they existed generally in the Seljuk towns. His words are 'in all the Turkoman\37/ towns which I visited /--- \34/ Strab. p. 468 'IaKXdV 7-6 KaL T4P AL4,vva-o,v [oL'E,\Xylver] KakOO(Tt Ka'& T6V jpxllY@Tliv T(;iv /Lvff7-9p"(Ov, 'rig Ai/Ai7rpor @aLlAopa. \35/ On them see Hist. Geogr. p. 409 f \36/ This is a common form of Attaleia in Paniphylia, now called Adalia. It is given as Anatolia in Lee's translation p. 68; time is about 1333 A.D. \37/ Though he says Turkoman, he evidently uses this term for the Seljuk towns in Anatolia. Many facts combine to show how little change was introduced into Asia Minor by the Seljuk rulers (as distinguished from the Ottoman Turks); and the remaining buildings prove that they maintained a high standard of art and magnificence (very unlike the slovenly disrepair and meanness of almost everything due to the Osmanli sultans). \--- [[98]] there is a brotherhood of youths, one of whom is termed "My Brother." No people are more courteous to strangers, more readily supply them with food and other necessaries, or are more opposed to oppressors than they are. The person who is termed "The Brother" is one about whom persons of the same occupation or even foreign youths, who happen to be destitute, collect and constitute their president. He then builds a cell, and in this he puts a horse, a saddle, and whatever other implements may be wanting. He then attends daily upon his companions, and assists them with whatever they may happen to want. In the evening they come to him, and bring all they have got, which is sold to purchase food, fruit, &c. for the use of the cell. Should a stranger happen to arrive in their country, they get him among them, and with this provision they entertain him; nor does he leave them till he finally leaves their country. If however no traveller arrive, then they assemble to eat up their provisions, which they do with drinking, singing and dancing. On the morrow they return to their occupations, and in the evening return again to their president. They are therefore styled the Youths," their president "the Brother."' The Brothers invited Ibn Batuta to a feast at Adalia, where the Brotherhood was a society of 200 silk merchants. At Burdur they invited him to a feast in a garden without the town. At La^dhik different societies of youths contended for the privilege of entertaining him, and divided the duty among them by lot. § 8. RELIGION OF BURIAL. Naturally we turn to the graves and monuments of the dead to find there evidence of the deepest-lying fee]ings and religious ideas which come out in the presence of death. Among primitive people, the monuments are almost exclusively sepulchral; and this is to a great extent the case at Hierapolis, where the road that leads to Tripolis and the west is still lined with hundreds of inscribed monuments, some of large size and imposing appearance. The care which was taken of the graves was remarkable. There was a guardian of the graves along the road\38/, who shared sometimes in the money that was left for distribution annually among those who went on the anniversary of death to place a garland of flowers on the tomb (Stephanotikon). But the most remarkable feature here and in every part of Phrygia is the anxiety to prevent the interment of unprivileged persons in the grave. It is not simply desire to prevent the monument being destroyed; that feeling sometimes appears, but the danger was not so pressing, and in many cases the only offence pro- /--- \38/ 6 Ka-rA -r4irop 'rl7pqTig TO@ gp-yov Wadd. i68o (cp. no. 192 below). In Petronius 71 Trimalchio says praeponam unum ex libertis sepulcro meo custodiae causa. \--- [[99]] vided against is the intrusion of a corpse. In the inscriptions the offence is made punishable by fines of varying amount, payable to the city, the imperial treasury, the deity of the city, the senate, or more frequently the Gerousia, the chief city of the conventus\39/, some official, &c. (the hope being that the reward would ensure the prosecution of offenders); in other cases, the offender is merely cursed in more or less strong terms, or consigned to the divine judgement or wrath. In Greece we find little trace of this feeling; the few examples of such epitaphs in Greece are probably of foreigners. But in Asia Minor it is so widespread and deep-seated that it must have a religious foundation. Intrusion of an illegal participator must have involved some loss to the rightful dwellers in the grave. This implies that belief in a future existence was part of the Phrygian religion, and also that the actual monument and tomb was connected with the future lot of the deceased. What meaning, then, had the tomb to the native mind? Under the Roman Empire two kinds of sepulchral monument were commonly used in Phrygia, where the primitive customs were far more thoroughly preserved than in Lydia\40/. One is a slab of marble or other stone cut to imitate a doorway; the door-posts, the two valves, the lintel, and generally a pointed or rounded pediment above, are all indicated; one or two knockers usually appear on the door, and symbols are often carved on the panels or in the pediment. On such a tombstone there is no suitable place for an inscription; but an epitaph is usually engraved on some part of the stone. The door as an accompaniment of the grave is found in Phrygia from the earliest period to which our knowledge extends; in the tomb of Midas and many others the door is part of the elaborately carved front. Now many graves in Phrygia, Lycia, Pisidia, &c., have the form of small temples. Even the sarcophagi are frequently made like miniature temples. The door- tombstone we may take to be an indication of the temple, the part being put for the whole. The second kind of tombstone has the form of an altar -- a square pillar (very rarely a circular one) with pedestal and capital, usually of very simple type, but sometimes elaborately decorated. In the inscriptions the name 'altar' is commonly applied to the monuments of this form; but in several cases the word 'door,' and in one ease 'the altar and the door,' is engraved on a different side of the altar- /--- \39/ So at Aigai (Pergamos) and Lagbe (Cibyra), see Ch. VlIl § 11 and p. 272. \40/ Lydia had become almost completely hellenized, and the Lydian language had entirely disappeared from use in the country before A. D. 19, though it was still spoken in Cibyra (Strabo p. 631). \--- [[100]] stone. These inscriptions show how important an idea in the tomb the door was reckoned. These classes of monuments constitute 90 per cent. of the existing gravestones in Phrygia; and, of the remaining 10 per cent., five can be explained as developments of the idea of a temple. The dead man is therefore conceived as living on as a god, and as receiving worship; and the door is intended as the passage for communication between the world of life and the world of death, giving him freedom to issue forth to help his worshippers. On the altar the living placed the offerings due to the dead. Further, many inscriptions, which will be given in due course, show that the dead person was conceived to be identified with the divine nature. The life of man has come from God, and returns to Him. One single monument in Phrygia shows the door of the grave opened, and we are admitted to contemplate -r'a iep'a uvT"'pta; inside we find no place or room for a dead body, only the statue of the Mother-Goddess accompanied by her lions. So in Lydia before the time of Homer, the Maeonian chiefs, sons of the Gygaean lake (Il. II 865), or of the Naiad Nymph who bore them by the lake (Il. XX 384), are buried in the mounds, which we still see in numbers on its shores. For these heroes death is simply the return to live with the Goddess-Mother that bore them. Hence a very common form of epitaph represents the making of the grave as a vow or a dedication to the local deity. Addend. 24. The tomb, then, is the temple, i.e. the home\41/, of the god, and he who gains admission, even by fraud or violence, to the tomb gets all the advantages which the rightful owner intended for himself. The deification of the dead, whether generically under the name of Di Manes, EEOL' KaraXOO'viot (at Nakoleia), &c., or specifically as identified with some particular deity, is one of the most widespretd facts of ancient religion. In the Roman world the conception of the dead as Di Manes gave rise to a standing formula of epitaphs: the formula appears on many thousands of tombstones, and had indeed become such a pure formula that its meaning was no longer present to the minds of the persons that composed the epitaph, and thus it is used occasionally even on Christian tombstones\42/. The identification of the dead with a particular deity is not so common; but examples occur in all ages. We shall find many epitaphs which show that the erection of a gravestone was conceived and expressed as a vow to some /--- \41/ Compare the use of otk.g in the sense of tomb at Cibyra BCH 1878 p. 610 f, Magnesia BCH 1894 p. 11. \42/ Le Blant Inscr. Chre/t. de la Gaule I p. 264, II p. 406; Wadd. nos. 2145, 2419. \--- [[101]] deity who is named on the stone; and it is highly probable that many so-called votive inscriptions are really sepulchral. In this way the class of votive inscriptions to the god Sozon are explained Ch. VIII § 9, and those to Zeus Bronton in the neighbourhood of Nakoleia\43/ are of the same character. The erection of a gravestone is also conceived as a distinction and prerogative (7tu') of the dead man and living god; and the formula stating that the erector of the tomb did honour to (E,rL,u?7o-cv) the dead person is widely used, especially on the southern side of the great plateau of Asia Minor. Such tombs were frequently erected by a city or corporate body, and the tombstone is then expressed in forms similar to those of an honorary inscription to a living person. A very clear example occurs in no. 85. § 9. THE GOD AS RULER AND HEALER. In studying the antiquities of the various cities and bishoprics of Phrygia, and in a less degree of other districts of Asia Minor, we shall find numberless traces which enable us to fill out in detail this brief sketch of the religion of Hierapolis and of the old social system to which it bears witness. Dionysopolis especially shows a type of religion that agrees in the names and probably in the minutest details with that of Hierapolis; and everything that we shall have to say of the former may, no doubt, be taken as applying to the latter. But Hierapolis was so much under Greek influence that the Phrygian ritual was more strictly esoteric and private there than in some other places. In particular, not a trace survives there of the old system of government on the village- system which struggled all over Asia Minor against the Greek city-system. The Anatolian village-system mas almost a pure theocracy. The god of the central hieron, revealing his will through his priests and prophets, guided with absolute power the action of the population which dwelt in villages scattered over the country round the hieron. The chief priesthoods seem to have been originally hereditary in one family or in a small number of families; but no evidence remains as to the rules of succession. The highest priests and priestesses played the parts of the great gods in the mystic ritual, wore their dress, and bore their names; they, as a body or perhaps the chief priest alone, controlled the prophetic utterances which guided the action of the community. Alongside of this theocratic government of the various districts, there was originally an imperial government of the whole country; but the nature of this central government is still a matter for investigation. Nothing positive can be stated about it at this stage, though its existence seems certain. /--- \43/ See an article on "Sepulchral Customs in Phrygia" in JHS 1884. \--- [[102]] In the following chapter we shall study in more detail the traces of the old system of society which survived in more backward and remote parts of the country even under the Roman Empire. But at this point we may make some general remarks about the theocratic character of the Anatolian system. Besides the land which was originally, apparently, the property (probably communal property) of the free population, there was also a considerable, or even a very large estate, actually the property of the god and called X6pa lepa'. The rents or crops of this land were enjoyed by the priest of the god\44/. It seems to have been generally let on hire; and analogy would lead us to suppose that the rent was in many cases a proportion of the produce. Besides this Sacred Ground there was a tract of land round the hieron which was inhabited specially by hieroi (Ch. IV § i2 (c)), worshippers, &c., and which seems to be originally the same as the !Ep'a Ka')IA?7, L'EP'OV XO)PL'OV, 'Xtop. At Stratonicea those who inhabited the peripolion were distinguished from the inhabitants of the city. Narrower still than this was the Sacred Precinct (-YrEpt',6oXov), where, as a rule, probably the priest and the priestess alone lived\45/. It is an interesting but difficult study to trace the change through which the Anatolian system passed in contact with the freer Greek civilization. The population round the ancient Anatolian hiera consisted of both freemen and hiero-douloi. The latter were serfs, attached to the soil, and under the rule of the priest except that he was not allowed to sell them\46/. What was the condition of the free population? It has sometimes been assumed that the priest-kings had always been the rulers of the free population also; but this seems to be an error. Strabo p. 672 seems perhaps to imply that the priests of Olba were dynasts only after the expulsion of the pirates by Pompey\47/; and he says that Pompey, when he made Archelaos priest of Comana Pontica, ordered the population of the country around to obey him, which seems to imply that previous priests had not possessed this authority over the free population\48/. The fact seems to be that an influence /--- \44/ Strab. p. 535 X@pa 't.Epil "?p 6 acL LEpE@r Kap7TOOraL. Cp. Heller, quoted n. 5. \45/ Strab. p. 575. \46/ Strab. p. 558 says of the priest of Comana Pontica ('V) Ku/rLOg TCOV LCPO306-XWV 7rXiV TOO irtirpeLO-KELV, cp. 535 Kt'lpt6g I(TTL KaL -rcop L-FpoaovX(.)v. \47/ I hope to discuss the subject of Olba more fully in a paper in the Numismatic Chronicle at an early date. \48/ Had it been recognized as part of the regular powers of the priesthood, there would have been no reason to state it, as Heller de Lydiae Cariaeque Sacerdotibus p. 219 rightly argues. \--- [[103]] which was naturally exercised by the priest over the free population without any formal legal authority was converted by the Romans into an express and formal sovereignty, so that the priest was leader of the free population (Strab. pp. 535, 558) and master (K@PIOT, dominus) of the hierodouloi. Originallv the influence of the priest accrued to him partly as interpreter of the will of the god to people who guided their action greatly by that will revealed in dreams or prophecies, partly in virtue of his superior knowledge and education among a simple and primitive population. Such informal influence, exercised de facto but not de jure, was not properly understood by the formal Romans, who wished to make explicit the constitution of these half-independent states and to have a central authority formally responsible to them\49/. The temple of Zeus Chrysaor near Stratonicea may be taken, perhaps, as a fairer specimen of the old native system: the Carians assembled there to sacrifice and to delib50erate about the political situation\50/. When the immense, yet informal, influence of the priest was thus regarded as a formal and express authority, it followed that, after the government passed out of his hands into those of the Roman state or the Emperor, the power and property which had belonged, according to the Roman view, to the priest passed to the new government\51/. It is an analogous fact that in many hellenized cities of the western coast-valleys, a magistrate called Stephanophoros succeeded to the political influence which had been exercised by the priest, while the latter seems to have been restricted to the strictly religious duties of his office, which were of course still great and important, Ch. II § 9. There is also great probability that the Greek kings acted in the same way as we suppose the emperors to have done\52/, making themselves the successors to the priests as owners of the land which belonged to /--- \49/ A similar change occurred in the Scottish Highlands, when the half-patriarchal and informal authority of some chiefs over the land and property of the clan was converted by lawyers and legislators into a formal ownership of the land. \50/ Allowance ought to be made for a certain amount of hellenization of Carian institutions; but this probably showed itself in affecting details and giving freedom to the states in practice and less weight to the priest rather than in altering the theory of the common government. \51/ It is probable that there would be some difference in the treatment of such property according as it was taken under the republican or the imperial government. Evidence must be sought for bearing on this point; but, as a general rule, the Romans, when they took a province, found that the existing rulers were not the old priests, but more recent kings or governors. \52/ See Ch. I § 6, IV § 9, VIII § 4, 5 and IX § 3, 5. \--- [[104]] the temples ('Xd)pa t'Epa'), and they in turn were succeeded by the Roman emperors. It is quite probable and natural that a distinct agreement was made in some or all cases with the priest of the temple, and certain privileges and property and rights were guaranteed him. It would be the easiest and most useful policy for the Greek kings to secure in this way the support and goodwill of the priests. All this was done at the expense of the uneducated native population; but we find in almost every case that the priesthood was in alliance with the monarchs and tyrants, and opposed to anything like the Greek-city system, which was likely to emancipate and educate the people. Some signs remain that rents for lots of the temple-land were paid to a hierotamias, who sometimes at least represented the interests of the municipality. This seems to have been the case at Aizanoi\53/, where, as we may suppose, part of the temple-land had been left to the priests when the most of it was taken from them and converted into an estate which we find long afterwards owned by the emperors (Hist. Geogr. p. 177-8). On all these points we must seek for evidence in each locality, as we investigate its antiquities. It is probable that details varied in different places; and we should avoid drawing universal conclusions from single cases. An interesting side of this religion was its connexion with the healing art. The god was the Physician and the Saviour (- YWT' .Zc6@(ov) of his people\54/. He punished their faults and transgressions by inflicting diseases on them; and, when they were penitent, he taught them how to treat and to cure their diseases\55/. Hence we found that a school of medicine grew up round the hieron of Men Karou (Ch. II § 7 c), and almost everywhere we find dedications to and worship of the god Asklepios. Such dedications to Greek gods occur in bewildering variety. The worshipper appeals to the god on that side of his manifold and all-powerful character which suits his special needs; and, as all educated persons used Greek, each designated the god by the Greek name which seemed to suit his special case, and express the reason that led him to seek for divine aid\56/. /--- \53/ Wadd. 860. \54/So, e.g., we find a deity, probably Men, represented carrying a staff wreathed with a serpent, not unlike the staff of Asklepios, or accompanied by a serpent. Sabazios is especially closely related to the serpent. \55/ As the lord of life, the god both gives it and takes it away: hence he is both god of graves (§ 8) and of medicine, nos. 95, 194. \56/ The view taken by Roscher that these various deities were all distinct conceptions with a different meaning and origin (Men the moon, &c.) and that in later time they were confused and mixed up ('verschmelzung des Men mit Mithras, Attis, Sabazios, Asklepios, und Hekate') is one that I cannot sympathize with (see his paper 'LNirov ipoT47Tovv in Berichte Verhandl. Leipzig 1891 p. 96 f). I grant that different history, tribes, and places, had given a certain degree of individual character to Men and to Sabazios; but I believe that it was their fundamental similarity of character that led them to pass into one another as they do. Roscher may collect examples of Men; but for almost every attribute and type it would be easy to find an exact analogue in the case of Sabazios. \--- [[105]] It is remarkable that, though prophets and physicians formed part of every priestly establishment in Asia Minor, yet we have no proof that the prophets developed their religion in the way that the early prophets of Apollo developed the Greek religion, introducing moralized ideas and adapting the old religion to be the divine guide of a higher system of society. It is however clear that, if we have rightly described the character of their religion, they had given it a philosophic and highly elaborated system. But it lies far beyond the limits of the Hierapolitan hieron to enter on this wider subject. Only after collecting all the scattered evidence bearing on each centre of Anatolian religion can we face such a large question. § 10. TRADE-GUILDS. As to the municipal divisions of the city, whether into tribes, or otherwise, no distinct evidence exists. But in CIG 3924 the 'trade-guild of dyers' (4pyao-ia -rcoi, 8aoE'o)t,) is mentioned\57/, and in no.26 the 'trade-guild of wool-washers.' In some cities of Asia Minor such trade-guilds are often mentioned, while tribes are never alluded to, e.g. Thyateira, Philadelpheia, Smyrna, Apameia, Akmonia\58/. It is probable that in these cities there was no division into tribes, but only into trade-guilds; at least, it seems highly probable that the division into tribes was an institution of the Greek period, and that the odly pre-Greek classification of citizens was according to trades. In cities where both classifications occur, we may understand that a Greek foundation introduced the tribes, and the older stratum of population retained the guilds. As there is no evidence known of a Greek foundation in Hierapolis, we should /--- \57/ Compare CIG 3912 a, Wadd. 741, where Papias son of Papias and grandson of Straton dedicates a statue of Herakles T- (TVI'Epyao-ia. \58/ Thyateira is best known: here numerous e'pya (a term apparently equivalent to the more usual EpyaaiaL), which are enumerated by M. Clerc de rebus Thyat. p. 92, @PTOK6701, KEpalAfiV, XUXKEIV, xaXKOTLVOL, OVPUCZS', (rKUTOTOIA01, Xajjpto,, XtVOVPYO9', 1,UUTEVOILEVOL (makers of garments, see Ch. II § 4), eaoEir. But such guilds existed in cities where tribes are known (Laodiceia no. 8, Ephesos (rvvfpyao-ia Xni,(ipL(.)v Wood gr. th. 4 oL ' ip 'Eoifr(o c'pycirat iri)o7rvXEirat CIG 3208); and it is quite possible that tribes may yet be found in the cities mentioned in the text. Menadier Ephes. p. 28 gives a list of the trade-guilds that are known. See also a paper on the Street-porters of Smyrna in Amer. Journ. Arch. 1885. \--- [[106]] not expect to find tribes there; and no trace of tribes has as yet been discovered. The trade-guilds were governed by presidents, called in Thyateira @7ria-ra'7-at\59/ and in Hierapolis 4pyaT77YOt no. 26. The institution has survived in at least some cities of Asia Minor to modern times: the example best known to me is at Angora (Ancyra Gal.) where we could not hire muleteers except through the chief of the guild, who apportioned work to the various muleteers at his sovereign will and pleasure. M. Radet rightly suggests that these guilds date from the earliest historical period in the country, and finds a reference to them in the account given by Herodotus I 93 of the building of the tomb of Alyattes by the merchants, artisans, and courtesans: he considers their action as the result of a requisition laid by the sovereign on the guilds\60/. Under the Empire these guilds were, of course, so far romanized as to bring them within the category of collegia legitima (Dig. 47, 22), and were registered under the name of their president. It is a proof of the elasticity of Roman rule that their otherwise fixed principle prohibiting collegia was so completely relaxed in a country where the institution was of old standing. The Dyers were no doubt numerous and rich at Hierapolis, where the waters were, as Strabo p. 629 says, exceedingly useful for dyeing. The water of the hot-springs seems to be rich in alum (judging from the taste), which is much used in the dyeing- process. We cannot leave the subject without mentioning Flavius Zeuxis EpyaaT'7v who sailed round Malea\61/ to Italy seventy-two times, and made a grave for himself and his sons Flavius Theodoros and Flavius /--- \59/ EirLT79(r4lACVOV 7-00 e'p-you -rZv 6a4pe(ay iro - yipour CIG 3498: the last phrase implies only birth in a family which had supplied presidents previously, and not hereditary presidence (Ch. II § 7). In CIG 3912 a (note 1 p. 105) Papias was jpX6vqv [6]v[opl-rO@ T6 iT, and evidently he was an officer of an c'pyaoi'a. This title is obscure, and perhaps corrupt (one would look for apxwv f-r]@r . . . 7- ov). A Xystos was a covered colonnade, and @pX6iy7v was a farmer-general of a tax: and the two ideas do not go well together. It is possible that inscr. 28 gives further information about these guilds, in case it is not Christian (as I think it is). \60/ M. Clerc Thyatira p. 90 has very confidently asserted against M. Radet that the trade-guilds were a purely Roman institution. But the Roman government was exceedingly strict in enforcing the prohibition of such guilds (Church in R. Emp. pp. 215, 359); and, if they permitted guilds on such an extensive scale in Asia, this must in all probability have been due to their ancient standing, and the danger of tampering with a national habit. An example of the danger to peace and order that was inherent in such guilds occurs at Magnesia (Church in R. Emp. p. 200). \61/ MaXiap S@ K4144laV E7TLXat9oO TZv o!KaBe Strabo p. 378. \--- [[107]] Theudas and for all to whom they give leave\62/. It is strange that a merchant resident in an inland city should have taken so many voyages. § 11. HISTORY. Hardly anything is known of the history of Hierapolis in the Greek and Roman periods. It grew by slow stages; and in the time of Strabo seems to have been far from great or important; but in the peace and prosperity of the empire its hotsprings must have made it a great resort for invalids and valetudinarians. Its coinage is rich and varied in type, and it must have been very important in the social as well as the religious point of view. A series of coins struck under Augustus in the last decade B.C. shows the name of the city in a transition period, see p. 87. The reverse type of the following is a tripod, with the inscriptions [RT]ATTIAM - ARFEAAIAOY - IEPOTTOAE ITNN AyrKEY5'. @IAOrrATPIX - IEPArrOAElTnN ,& l@IA03;' - & l@ IAOY - APXNN - To - B - On a coin of the proconsul Fabius Maximus (c. 5 B.C.), the type is a bipennis with the legend ZIIXIMOX - 4)IAOTTATPIM: - IEPOTTOAEITn N - EX APA @(EV)\63/. The imposing triple gateway by which the road to Tripolis and Saidis issued from the city was dedicated perhaps to Commodus\64/. The title Neolcoros was conferred on Hierapolis probably about the end of the second or beginning of the third century (at latest under Caracalla); but the circumstances and the exact date are unknown\65/. Of the state of society and education at Hierapolis hardly any evidence remains except what is stated about L. Septimius Antipater (p. 45). In an inscription of the British Museum, DXLVIII, T. Claudius P. Callixenus of Hierapolis is mentioned as a pupil of the sophist Soteros at Ephesos\66/. Epictetus was a native of Hierapolis; but probably did not owe much to the education of his native city. /--- \62/ The names of the sons have a Christian appearance, and the unusual freedom in granting the use of the tomb seems unlike Pagan feeling, and very like Christian freedom and usage in regard to common sepulture. Compare inscr. 27. \63/ Zosimus evidently paid the expense of these coins, as Apollodotus did at Lounda (no. 86). Mr. Head compares at Tripolis @t@' 0 '@ll (116810POr ff xip-(@-), and at Ephesos 6 vfw(K4p.r) E7reXIIP(-$e), Catalogue of Coins of Ionia p. 76. \64/ CIL III 7059. Caracalla or Severus are not absolutely excluded: the fragment belongs to one of the three. \65/ Coins of Caracalla and of Julia Domna have the title, p. 59 n. \66/ Soteros of Ephesos is mentioned by Philostratos Vit. Soph. II 23 as a very inferior sophist. \--- [[108]] The following festivals or games are known at Hierapolis: AK T IA quoted by Eckhel from an autonomous coin. AK(TI A) - n(YOI)A, Annia Faustina, T81ionnet III 3o6\67/. AK T I A and TTYO I A each on an urn (type Demos) Br. Mus. nyo IA Gallienus Imhoof MG p. 403; Elagabalus Eckhel\67/. A H Tn E I A n Yo I A in a crown (type Demos) Br. Mus. AHTNE I A nyo I A CIG 3910. ATTOAANN I A - nYO I A CIG 3428 (Hadrianeia mentioned). The Actia were of course founded in honour of the victory of Actium. That event seems to have been hailed with joy in Lydia, several of whose cities took it as an era to reckon from\68/. These games therefore attest the Lydian connexion of Hierapolis. Tripolis must apparently have been favoured by Antonius, and his popularity seems to have been great in the Cibyratic conventus and along the Maeander, to judge from the frequency of the name afterwards. The Actia Pythia, if the name be a real one, must be identified with the Actia\67/. The Pythia, Letoi%a-Pythia, Apollonia-Pythia, and Letoia, must probably be taken as four different names for the great festival of the city-cultus. Mr. Head mentions games Chrysanthina at Hierapolis; but I find no certain proof of this. Alliance coins of Hierapolis and Sardis show the games Pythia (representing the former) and Chrysanthina (representing the latter); and Sardian coins boast of the Chrysanthina. The name is probably derived, as Mr. Head suggests, from the use of the corn-marigold (Xp6o-avOoy) in the victor's wreath. The flower, in that case, must have been sacred to Cybele; and the games were held in her honour. It would be quite natural that the same custom and the same name should exist at Hierapolis as at Sardis; but the coins in the British Museum that bear the names of both festivals are all alliance coins. It was probably the old-standing religious importance of Hierapolis that led Justinian, some time before A. D. 553 (perhaps in 535), to make it a metropolis for ecclesiastical purposes, if not also for civil purposes. A district of Phrygia, Pacatiana, was separated from the rest of the province and placed under it\69/. This new district may be /--- \67/ The coin is said to read AK-TTA: ought we not to read AKTIA and eliminate the games Actia Pythia? In ClG 3910 Actia and Letora-Pythia are distinguished. \68/ Palaiapolis, Philadelpheia, and Tralla, Ch. V App. IV. \69/ At the Council of 680 Sisinnios of Hierapolis, signed Lvip tliaVrO@ Kat riv LW ca@ avvisou; and the division is doubtless older than the Council of 553, where Hierapolis ranks as a metropolis. \--- [[109]] termed Phrygia Hierapolitana. The lists vary as to its extent; some assign to it a district on the south-west frontier of Pacatiana, containing Attouda, Mossyna, Dionysopolis, Anastasiopolis, and Metellopolis; while others add a second district in the north-west, including Ankyra, Synaos, Tiberiopolis, Aizanoi and Kadoi. It is certain that at the second council of Nikaia, A. D. 787, both districts were under Hierapolis; while it is equally certain that at the Quinisextan Council in 692 the northwestern district was under Laodiceia and only the south-western under Hierapolis. It is therefore clear that between 692 and 787 A. D. a district including five cities in the north-west of Pacatiana was taken from Laodiceia and assigned to Hierapolis\70/. This change may be assigned to one of the early iconoclast emperors, when re-organizing the empire, after the disorder of the seventh century; but the new arrangement had only ecclesiastical, not political, significance, for the themes had already come into existence, and the provinces had no political meaning. A table showing the list of bishoprics subject to Hierapolis in the Councils and Notitiae is annexed as App. III. § 12. MAGISTRATES AND MUNICIPAL INSTITUTIONS. The Greek political institutions seem not to have taken deep root in Hierapolis. The inscriptions mention the Senate, but only as a receiver of sepulchral fines; they mention the Record-office as containing copies of sepulchral inscriptions; they mention the Gerousia as guardian of graves; and they mention an annual gymnasiarch, and an agoranomos. On the coins, which are a thoroughly political institution, we find Senate, Demos, Gerousia, Archons, Strategoi, Grammateus, and Prytanis\71/; also Euposia and Eubosia, the former an impersonation of the public banquets, and the latter of the fertility of the soil (as in CIG 3906), both being forms of the mother-goddess of the city in her civic aspect\72/. In one case we find a date by a magistrate Stephanephoros\73/. On the analogy of Iasos and other cases (Ch. 11 § 9), we understand him /--- \70/ Incidentally we have a proof that the lists of bishoprics were not always corrected up to date. Notitia I of Parthey (more correctly given by Gelzer, Georg. Cypr., who dates it about 820- 840) does not give this new arrangement of Phrygia, though it gives the re-arranged district Amoriana, which was cut out of Phrygia and Galatia about 820-829 (it is Not. Basilii p. 121). \71/ The Epimeletes, Claudius Pollio Asiarch, belongs to Hieropolis in Phrygia Salutaris. \72/ M. Imhoof-Blumer (MG p. 402) considers the two forms to be mere variants in spelling, but they are distinct terms. At Smyrna the public banquets were directed by a Euposiarch (CIG 3385), Eubosia was a goddess at Akmonia. \73/ CIG 3912a -F'lr't aTfOaiql)jpov 2@tTov T6 j. \--- [[110]] to be the civic representative of the supreme power which had once belonged to the chief-priest of Leto and Lairbenos, wearing the garland which marked him as holding the place of the god. Just as the old title aO-LXEV'g often persisted in Greek cities as a municipal office after the ancient kingly power had fallen into disuse, so apparently the Stephanephoros continued as an official of many cities after the old priestly authority had been destroyed. See pp. 56, 103. § 13. GEROUSIA\74/. The only municipal institution about which we learn anything from the inscriptions of Hierapolis is the Gerousia. The Gerousiai of the Asian cities under the Empire were bodies of great importance; but their character is rather obscure. It is, on the one band, clear that the Gerousia was broadly distinguished in its nature from the Senate. The Senate was the politically administrative council of the city: the Gerousia was not a council for administering the municipal government. On the other hand the Gerousia was more than a mere club for the older citizens; it had various powers, and performed various duties which gave it considerable influence, and the Senate, the Demos, and the Gerousia often united in the preamble to honorary decrees\75/. It is not certain that its character was the same in all Asian cities; probably it varied a little, though without any serious difference. The Gerousia and the Neoi are so often associated together that there must have been a certain correspondence in character and purpose between them. The Neoi, again, are undoubtedly closely connected with the Epheboi, though neither /--- \74/ Opinion among scholars differs widely about the character of the Gerousia. Menadier, Hicks, Hogarth, Th. Reinach, consider that it was a political body, whereas Mommsen and Waddington hold that under the Empire it was merely an old men's club for social purposes (the latter view seems to me to be nearer the truth, allowing for the natural influence in the city acquired by a body containing all the most experienced and the richest citizens): Reinach holds that the Presbyteroi and the Gerousia were different bodies, Hicks and Menadier that they were the same: Reinach holds that the Presbyteroi of Iasos were indubitably a mere social union, Hicks p. 77 considers that the powers and duties of the Presbyteroi at Ephesos prove them (i.e. the Gerousia) to have been a political body: Reinach holds that the Presbyteroi at Magnesia were not the Gerousia, Cousin and Deschamps say that they were obviously the same, BCH I 888 p. 211. \75/ But no stress can be laid on this juxtaposition of the three bodies as an argument that all were political in character; for we find occasionally the Senate, Demos, Gerousia, and Neoi united in such honorary decrees (BCH 1885 p. 74); and the Neoi were merely the grown men of the city meeting for exercise and pleasure as a club in a gymnasium. Such an expression as the title at Miletos -yvpvaotapxi(rapra -rit YEPOvat'if Kat -r6p vi(op (Ath. Mittyl. 1893 p. 268) seems a clear proof that the Gerousia at Miletus was a social club like the Neoi. \--- [[111]] of these bodies came near the Gerousia in importance\76/. What, then, were these three bodies? The Epheboi were young men who were associated together according to certain rules, under teachers in classes\77/, for purposes of physical and moral training. Where the Epheboi award honours or pass decrees, no more can be meant than would be implied in a compliment paid by a whole college class to a benefactor or teacher. But the education of the citizen was not considered complete when he passed out of the Epheboi (about the age of 20), and moreover, by association in clubs, various pleasures and advantages could be gained which individuals could not get for themselves. This led to the organization, general in Asian cities, of the men over twenty in associations called Neoi. These associations were closely connected with the Gymnasia; and the Gymnasiarch, who regulated the public training of the Epheboi, was also closely connected with the Neoi\78/. The Neoi formed in each city a corporate body; they possessed funds managed by their own officials (probably under the oversight of the Gymnasiarch or the Nomothetes); they erected statues, had sometimes a gymnasium appropriated to their own use, passed decrees, &c. It is uncertain whether any of the members contributed individually to the funds; probably bequests, benefactions, and municipal aid kept them up without much contribution, especially in great cities. They even parodied the government of the city by having a Senate and Demos of their own\79/; but these assemblies are more frequently mentioned among the Epheboi, in which case obviously they could not be much more than our Parliamentary Debating Societies. The Gerousia was developed, probably, out of the association of older men for mutual advantage; but naturally their needs and wishes differed from those of Neoi. Being composed of older men the Gerousia had necessarily from the first much greater weight, /--- \76/ The Gerousia is far more widely spread and more frequently mentioned than the body of Neoi, and the latter than the Epheboi. The latter occur only where the Greek organization has taken deep root. \77/ @E(Aqiiot P,6repot,,uioo,, and 7rpfo-,66- ,rfpot at Chios (CIG 2214). \78/ The irai8er also assembled in a Gymnasium, where they were grouped in classes and instructed; and where they were under the general surveillance, in Iasos at least, of a magistrate termed 7ratBop4lAos-. Probably Iasos may be taken as a fair specimen of the educational arrangements of an Asian Greek city: there were in it four Gymnasia (three for ZgSY)19oz, viot, and 7rpeog@repoi, each under a gymnasiarch). Ephebarch was a mere honorary title (like princeps iuventutis), not an office. Neoi and presbyteroi at Iasos were also directed by committees of 810&Kqrat. See M. Th. Reinach in Rev. E/t. Gr. 1893 p. 161 f. \79/ E.g., at Pergamos, where they had a gymnasium: Hermes 1873 Pp. 42, 45. \--- [[112]] arising from the superior influence and wealth of individual members. A resolution of the Gerousia had some analogy to a senatus auctoritas, a decree vetoed by a tribune and therefore devoid of legal force, yet having the weight naturally attaching to the mere opinion of a body so influential and respected. Numerous inscriptions attest that it was entrusted with the disposal of large sums of money, sometimes presented or bequeathed for definite purposes, or on condition that the Gerousia arranged for the performance of certain duties. Especially the Gerousia was trusted in many cases with the charge of tombs and of solemnities at regular intervals performed beside them. Penalties for the violation of the tomb were often made payable to the Gerousia, to give it a motive for attending to the matter; and often a bequest (o-TEOaVWTLKO'V) was made to it, the interest of which was payable annually to those members who placed garlands on the grave of the testator. Naturally, the Elders were the body which was thought most likely to interest itself in such matters as the guardianship and preservation of tombs. The inscriptions show what importance was attached in Asia Minor to the care of tombs, and the Gerousia, as the body most trusted in these cases, became very wealthy corporations. The charge of such large revenues was a serious matter, and besides a TauL'av (appointed by the members) there was often a \OYLOT'g, or public auditor and controller of their accounts. Considering what care the Imperial government bestowed on the finances of the cities we are not surprised to find Hadrian appointing a logistes for the Ephesian Gerousia (CIG 2987 b, BM CCCCLXXXVI). The money owned by the Gerousia, of course, was lent out at interest. This is specified as the intention of many bequests; and the vouchers for money lent (by the Gerousia) are mentioned at Ephesus (BM CCCCLXXXI 206, cp. CCCCLXXXVI). The Gerousia had, as a rule, some building as their centre, a clubhouse and meeting-house combined. In Sardis the palace of Croesus was appropriated to the use of the Elders, and in Thyatira a basilica in the forum of Hadrian\80/; in Nikomedeia the building was termed Gerousia (Plin. ad Traj. 33); in Sidyma and in many other places it was a gymnasium; at Teos it was a stoa; at Nysa it was called Gerontikon. The O-VV98PLOV 7-@V yepovo-iav was not a committee or council of the /=== \80/ Croesi domus quam Sardiani civibus ad requiescendum aetatis otio seniorum collegio Gerusiam dedicaverunt Vitruv. II 8, 10. oLKov 13ao,&XIKOZ TOO e'v 7-tL 'Aapta-Pfgq), OLKoi9a(TL),IKOV TOU T179 'YEPOV(rar Clerc de rebus Thyatirenorum p. 20, CIG 3491, BCH 1887 p. 100). \--- [[113]] Elders, but denoted the entire body. Other equivalent terms are ,Tvo--r?71ia, O-VV98PLOV T@v -rpfo-,8uTE'po)v\81/, or ovvE'8piop simply. As to officials, besides 'raulag and Xoyia-,r's,, we find 7rpoa--rdr-qg, ypauuaTE69. The Gymnasiarch was, at Hierapolis, the controller of the funds of the Gerousia. So far the Gerousia might seem to be only a club of the older citizens; but the following facts point to the existence of restrictions on the number and to conditions of admission. The rank of Senator and Elder is often mentioned, evidently with the implication that each title denoted a grade of honour. When a Gerousia was formed at Sidyma about the end of the second century, there were exactly one hundred members in it. At Sillyon, in the third century, a certain Menodora distributed to each senator eighty-six denarii, to each elder eighty, to each demotes seventy-seven, to each ordinary citizen nine, and each freedman three. This proves that the Senate, Gerousia, and Demos were assemblies limited in number, and shows the comparative rank of each. The large revenues of the Gerousia alone would suffice to raise it above the rank of a mere club, and make it a great and influential institution. At Hierapolis the Gerousia seems to have been arranged in groups or classes, and a list of the members in each class was given in a separate tablet (Pyxion). There were at least eight such classes. Bequests were sometimes left, not to the whole Gerousia, but to the particular pyxion in which the testator might be. In inscr. 20 the deceased, Apollonios, had left to the eighth pyxion three hundred denarii; in other two cases the testator, while still living, bequeaths three hundred denarii to whatever class he may be in at his death. The person who was living did not know in what class he would be at the time of his death\82/; therefore there must have been some rule, /--- \81/ M. Th. Reinach distinguishes between the 7rpeTS@fpot and the Gerousia, Rev. E/t. Gr. 1893 p. 162; but I cannot believe he is right. MM. Cousin and Deschamps rightly remark BCH 1888 p. 211 that the a6,r,ripa 7-Cop irpc(rl3VTE'P(os at Magnesia Mae. is proved by their inscription to be the same as the Gerousia. The irpe(rft@fpot at Ephesos were certainly the Gerousia, see Hicks 77, Menadier 57. Reinach rightly says that the rPt,o-iS6repog at Iasos are clearly proved by the inscriptions to be a mere association of elderly citizens without any political character; but he is not right in inferring that they were different from the Gerousia. So far as I can gather, his sole argument for distinguishing the two bodies is that the Presbyteroi were social, the Gerousia political. But when we find that the Gerousia is fundamentally social, the argument loses all weight. Add. 35. \82/ irvtt'co o7rov a'p ivxaTaXq(hOrA or @v ' a'p --XIOL (CIG 3912, 3919, Wadd. 1680, 1681). The idea that these bequests are made by persons who were not yet Elders, but expected to become so in due course, need not be considered. \--- [[114]] whether seniority or otherwise, whereby the Elders passed on from class to class. The members of the Gerousia, then, were not arranged according to tribes, as we saw that the members of the Laodicean senate were during the first century at least; but some other system of classification prevailed. ** [[115]] APPENDIX 1. INSCRIPTIONS OF HIERAPOLIS. 17. - (R- 1883)- (1),kaBtav'og O' KaL MOVOYOVLV E' aPL(rTro Ti oEa Probably we should read Movoyf'Vqg or Mqvoyf'vl7v. 18. (R. i88i). Found at Tralleis in Lydia: published ill-oug. Sin. no. ,utY, with some slight differences. 'AyaO' Ti;X-q. A. Av'pqXLa [Ajt'[a]&,Xt'al 4E'K ?rpoydv&)v irakkaKL'8(OV Ka't av&7rro7rdb(A)v, Ovy4T71p A. Av'p. MEKOV'VBOV E?I[LIOV, waXXaicEv'a-ac-a Ka'& Kara' Xpqo-iAov - Att I insert this, though not a Hierapolitan inscription. The name Y-qLov is very doubtful. 19. (R- 1887). Hogarth in Journ. Philol. i888 vol. XIX p. 77 f, no.!Z. o-op6g Ka' 6 B(j)IA'v 'Iov,\L' v Max4E80VLKO@ 'V v & 0 0 c o' MaKE80VLK'og KaL "/A)3&og aV'Toii 'Ap[fL.] ' 'lov,\&'a - Kal lAnb[EV'tj @TE'PW @fO'V Kl?bevO@vat - &v ov', a7TOT.E(C-ft Ta 4)"O'Kip (8-qvApta) 0 - [c'bloo-av b@ o' MaKfbOVLJCO[@], roiv 'F77,uta- 4,o'pot ro@ 'ApXIyE'Tov 'ArdXXwvov 0-TEOaV(OTIK'OV IA'q(vav) &'3 (bilva'pta) CO-O' Ka't [fA?7(v'og)] a', Y', (bilp4pLa) Co-O'. I give the reading suggested by my friend W. R. Paton: Hogarth has p', 7'7 O'@ av @6E'oL. After the death of Macedonicus his sons gave-to the Semeiaphoroi of Apollo (probably because their father had been one of them) two sums Of 72o8 den., to recompense them for laying garlands on the grave on two days in each year, i.e. on the anniversaries of the death of Macedonicus and his wife. The Semeiaphoroi of Apollo occur only here. They might be taken as workers of wonders, a class of persons corresponding to the modern dervishes, who gashed themselves with knives and did other strange things in a state of ecstasy@a natural accompaniment of the mysteries and the enthusiastic ceremonial of the Phrygian religion. But I prefer to interpret them as bearers of the sign,' a society with a secret signal, like the Xenoi Tekmoreioi (see Ch. III § 7).. /--- \1/ Not AtiAtXLa (tribe). \2/ With this doubtful restoration, com- pare Arm. Elpine in Wadd. i688 (also of Hierapolis). \3/ The dav of the month seems to be omitted by a fault of the engraver. \--- [[116]] 20. (R. j887: Hogarth no. i). ['EvOa'6e 'A7roXj,\W'vtog O' EL- rvXoOg MOXV,BEL E'VJCEK46EvraL a@ro'y - K-q64EVO?'(TE-rat 6@ Ka'L [Th TE'Kva aZ]-ro@ 'A7ro,\Xwv'Ls I 'A7rok,\W'vtog - aXX(o 6@ iEEa-Tat ov'bevt- 7' ' og COV T(a KaL IaKOT [bi TO@ 'A7roX]Xo)v' oyb4(o ?rvet'q) riig yepov(Ttag (8'qV.) T[P]Laic4o-tal 7rp6g T'o 8L'boo-OaL [a'7r'o -r]oO I TiKov aLT@v -roig E',\OoOo7t Kat 0-T4EOav(t')o-a(Ft T'o YELVDIAEPOV @Ka'07T(t) av'r@v Uqvag ic 4E v a E TLg TCOV Ka[r' E'T]os- yviAvaG-LapX@V T6 o--rEoav(A)TLK6V U@ 8,avEL'IA[-,q, IFI(r7-at Z7r.EV'Ootvov T@ 'A7ro',\(,)P, (bi7.v. -) KAO(.)g i 'a7roX7'1 7rEp,E'xt i @ta TCov apXELcov boOEZ(Ta - 7r@OVO '(TOVCTIV 8E' 1101 Ta\ T4E'Kva 'A 7rO,\X&)V\tg Ka\L 'A7ro,\,\(t')VLOT T@g 7raTpLK@ig (TOPO@ @g 07TL'C-(d K-EL/AgV7lS - TOV'T?ig T@g E'7rLypaip@g a'v-rL'ypa(pop a7r,E-rc'Oq 4EL'g Th a'pXEta. Apollonios had died on the twentieth day of the eighth month; and those Elders of his class who annually came on that day to lay a garland on his tomb 2 are to divide the interest accruing from his benefaction (which at nine I)er cent. would be 27 den.). The gymnasiarch of the year is to distribute the gift, and if any gymnasiarch fails to do so, he must pay as a fine to Apollo the sum prescribed in the Apocha (reeeipt) passed through the record- office. Until their death, the two children are to be guardians of their father's sarcophagus, which is the one furthest back. 21. (R. 1887: Hogarth no. 9). ' o-op'og NLKoji 'bvs. 'A7roX,\o)vL'Ov Mora-71 71 ,\&'809, E'V " K'qbEVO 'a-ET-at alriv - @TE'P(p b@ oZbEv& f'64E'o--raL Kil84EvO@vat - Et' 8@ Iq 71 "7 frep (t) to' /A , 6 K?I&E'aav ov 6 '(TIC-L 7-@ (P' K]q) 8'qV. TO@TOV a'vT&'ypa(pov a7rETE'Oil @L'v -rh a'pxfia. The name Motalis (probably connected with Motalla or Motella) is the feminine of a Cilician name Motales, which, as Sachau has shown, is the grecized form of Mutallu, the name of an old Hittite king; see Ch. IV § 13. Apollonios is designated by his mothers name, see § 6, and compare EV'Tv'xqv 7raTpo'v ab',kov, a member of gerousia, and Neiketes, son of Parthena, a member of senate and gerousia at Sidyma (Beundorf Lykia I p. 74), Sterrett E. J. no. 2i, Headlam JHS i892 p. 29 f, and below, no. 92. Menodoros son of Euphemia, 8trategos at Attaleia of Lydia, is another excellent example, see BCH i 887 p. 4011 (wliere I cannot agree with M. Radet's interpretation, wliieh he himself says e8i embarra8sant) 3. See p. izg. For the iln'bvg compare K' pvg Hogarth 4-genitive form NLKO ob 22. (R. i884)- Published already in CIG 3go6. In large letters in /--- \1/ The error of the engraver has put -rEtaK6trLa On the stone. \2/ Compare oreoai,@Lo-ty oL avyyejicv nXevpc(i8a& in an epitaph of Myrina (Ath. Mittlt. i889 p. 89). \3/ The well-known Coan list, found in @long-grecized island, perhaps pens up questions different from those which concern us. Mr. Paton,. p. 256, differs from Rayet, who saw in it proof of matriarchal institutions in Cos: Toepffer, Att. Geneal. p. I93, agrees with Rayet. The question must remain an open one. \--- [[117]] the auditorium of the theatre. ('tkewv V'IAEZP O' 'ApX7?y@rqg 1. Compare iEt,kedg(!),uot 6 OEdg in Thrace A. F, 8 2 p.A,Iitth.1894P-99;seeBCHi 83P-32 . 23. (R- 1887: Hogarth 110. 2ii). A. i a-op'o['g AovKt'ov?] lep)37lvtov (AovxL'Ov ?) @oO rl(a),\art'va TEPTL'OV [Ka'L] - rf'Kvwv av'Toi) - avvxwp@ 'A-7roX,\wvt'fi) TIE0@VaL - K.T.,\. B. o-op6g'AXoXtov'AIA/AfLavoOMO,\V,3a iK 7rpOYOVIELK@g btaboy,@v. The father's name has been omitted by the engraver: errors in writing the unfamiliar Latin arrangement of personal names are common in Greek inscriptions. The tomb, which was used for [L.] Servenius Tertius, probably in this early second century, was appropriated by Acholios, son of Ammianos, son of Molybas, in the fourth or fifth century, who declares that he has it by hereditary succession. The assertion has all the appearance of being false, designed to cover the appropriation. Such appropriation of former tombs was often made in Christian times, and the process was called a'vavE'wo-tg, apapEoso-Oat. With Molybas ep. MOIYX p. 310- L. Servenius Tertius seems to have derived his name from a wellknown and influential family (see Akmonia), one member of which was legatit* pro praetore of the proconsul Aponius Satuininus 75-90 A. D. 24. (R. 1887: Hogarth no. I3). A. i o-ojp'ov ica't 6 7rfp'L aV'T7'IV 70'7rOg Av'p-qXL'Ov MAyvov [oZoET]epavo@ keyt@vov reo- (Y-apEo-KaLbEica-r?lv [rf/AL'V'qg- iV x7lbEvO?lo-cTat 6 Ma'YPOg Kai i a-v'v,3Lov av',-o@ 'IXa'pa. B. 7'7 aop'og Ka'L 6 7rEp'L av'rl'qv rO'7rov bLaq5' L Mipicov AZp[-q,\L'Ov] 'Ho-vXL'U) 8'Lg iK 7rapaXwp'o-fo)g 'ATTabLavo@ Ilawtov. This seems to be a case of double ownership and burial. There is no apparent connexion between the two inscriptions. The twelfth legion was stationed in Pannonia from A.D. 92 onwards, as late as the fifth century. Magnos seems to be of late third or fourth centtiry; and to be later than Hesychios. Another soldier, Hogaith DO. 4; a third, C. Seius Atticus optio leg. VI CIG 3932- 25. (R. 1887: Hogarth no. 8). ' o-op'og Ka'L O' irEpL azt@v - ro'7rog A@p7l-Xt'at MaPKL'av 'ATTa',\OV - e'V 7' lCnbEVO 'aftat A@p 'Xtov Kap7roojpog rlao-o-TL'kxag 71 71 AZp Kat -qXL'a MapKLa i yv@ a"UTo@ -roi; Kap7ro4pdpOV, KaO('ag 7rpoyE'Ypa7rTat, KaL Ta iraLbL'a @g MapKt'ag - la'V 8' e'rEP69 ' T&V K'qbtVOn^, b(t')O- 4EL T(; '&EpCt)TILTq) TaIAEC'(,t) L I /--- \1/ BCH i 886 p. 453 does not belong to Hierapolis. Ibid. p. 519 no. i6 belongs to HierApolis; and its attribution to Tralleis is quite erroneous. M. Kontole0n, who publishes it, has in this and in several other cases been deceived by careless collectors of texts. \2/ 'rfpdv 'rts xi4Re6irz would be more logical. \--- [[118]] bnv. q)'. The tomb belongs to the wife, who provides that children by a second wife -,hall Dot be admitted. The husband's names are remarkable. Karpophoros is an epithet of Demeter; and names from that cultus were therefore used in the family, so that we may explain Passtillas on the same principle. It is probably a diminutive form from Pastophoros, bearer of the _I)agtos or 'pasta8. The _pasto8 played an important part iii the mystic ceremonial (Clement Alex. 1)7-ot?-el)t. 2; Schol. on Plato p. 123, ed. Rubnken; Arnobius adv. Ceizte8 V 2o, quoted by F. Lenormant iii C,witenip. -Review i88o 11 p. 146); and 7rao-T- o-pipot bore small pa8loi in processions 1. 26. Published Ho?tv. 8m. no. v7rO'. The text is unsatisfactory. ?'I O-e/A-ZWTLK6[v] BoaTov (?) irpCOT-ov OEpya-Pora,rn cpya(Tia - r@v E'PL07TXVT6v Tto. KX. 0 t IE E ta T?ly [PI Ka' 4)LI\4TEL[LOP Ka'& 'aywvoO',r-qv ica'L ypalLaT'a va@v 7-@v E'v 'Ao-'. Ka'& 7TPCO-,6.EVT'nV E'p6oeov Ka't a'pXtEpf'a, - EZepyE'Tqv @v 7raTpL'bog. ffpovoqa-av-rwp T?IT I f avao-7-a'U- EWS' T@V 7TEP'L M. AZp. A7roXX(O'vtov 8'tv FIvXCova K7-,\. 27. (R. 1887: Hogarth no. 25). i o-op@g #car 6 'r47rOg KaO' 'OV K4EZTat ical 6 r.,Ep't AZT@V TO'7rOg KaO4'Wg 6 7rqXt(Y-IA6g bta' T@g ICT 'ITCWG bqXo[@]Tat, 'AulAtavo6 ALojcX,E'ovv To@ Mcpa'vbpov uvpo7rw'.kov 4'Ev I' K'qbEVO'O-ETat aZT'og Ka't i yvv' alko@ rIpOlp 'TLkXa Zwo-LiAov. r@g e'7rypa(p@g -raV'Tllg @vT-t'ypa-pov a'7ro')CELTat ip Toiv &pXEL'Otg. The plot round the grave was measured and fully described in the record of the purchase. The name Prophetilla is perhaps Christian, and if so it was bestowed on this woman during the time when womenprophets were a feature of the Christianity of Anatolia, i. e. in the Catholic Church before the latter part of the second century, and in the Mont,anist Church even after that time. There is nothing to mark this inscription as later than 200; but it is unlikely to be much earlier. The name Prophetilla occurs only here; it is formed on Latin analogy, ep. Falconilla, Septimilla, &c. 28. (R. i 887: Hogarth no. 26, p. 98). A. i O-Op@g Ka't 6 lrfp'L aZT7'lv ,rO7rOg (rVV TW V7TOKLiAEP(p 3aOpLK(; Map. A@. ALobo')Pov KOPL40-KOV i7r&K,\?IV 'Aa-,6j,kov v(E(t)TE, ov?) - C'V ICTIbEVO'O-.ETat av'T6g Ka'L i yvp' a@-ro@ ic@ Ta' rEKva p avTOO - 7TIEPLW'V TE K'qbEV'G-O) 'oV 'aV,80VX?IOCO Z7-E'P,W bi ov'bEv'L ceEo-Tat X'qbEvOivaL' I I - , I C' bi IA4, d'7rOTELO-L 7TPO(rTELIAOV T(t) LEP(A)TAT 'W 8'qV. 4p', Kai O-IEILVOT4T7 E I TAIAEL , I ' bi?v. 4)'- o'aov 'v iropt'o-,ng B' v, 4,aE 7rapob-El-ra, E'b'g 5TL r6 re')Lov yEpov(r&4? a LO 0) L)A@v -ro@ S&'ov -raOTa. /--- \1/ Meister's statement (reported in Ckm. Rev. 1893 p. 317; Berl. Philol. Woch. DeC. 24,1892) that pastoi in Greek temples were only used in connexion with shrines for the worship of Egyptian deities is not true of the temples at Eleusis and in Phrygia. \--- [[119]] B. KarE,\Et*a b@ ica't r@ a-vvEbpL'(d T@g 7rpOE6pL'a3 7'611 710ppvpa,6a'.Pov 6-qv. y ,'g a7rOKavo-iA'Ov TC)v TTATTNN TFI - lO",-Ip ip@pq ZK T.@ 7-dKOV AV'TC)II - 4E&' bc' TLV a,Af,\4o--EL AZT@V 76 JA@ a7TOKaOo-al, yEV90-OaL T'o KaTaXEI\IELIAIE'VOV T@g ' aolav ,ig OpelAlAaTIK@g - K'qbEVO 'U-(Tat bi Ka'& @ yV],@. IEPY This remarkable inscription has been published by M. Waddington, no. 1687, with differences'. The language is in many points so unusual, that like M. Waddington I have been led to interpret it as Christian (see Expogitor Dec. i 888 p. 414 f), understanding that the aim in inscriptions of this class was to keep up an appearance of legality. The ChristianS Were, as I think, the dominant class in most Phrygian cities after A. D. 200; they registered themselves as collegia tenuiorum (I)ig. 47, 22), and accommodated themselves in all permissible ways to the Roman law. Ideas and objects which were strictly Christian were indicated by terms of ordinary pagan use or by terms unknown and unintelligible to the vulgar, so that the document, read cursorily, should be like an ordinary epitaph-testament, though the more careful reader finds subtle differences. Pagan inscriptions require celebrations at the tomb on the anniversary of the day of death, but here the day is i OE'OLIAOV ipe'pa, i. e. some definite and customary day, which was familiar to those who understood the meaning of T7ArinN. Burning of objects, moreover, is not known to have formed part of the pagan sepulchral ritual. The language is here adapted to resemble pagan usage and formulas; but when scrutinized it is seen to be quite different in character. If I be wrong in tal-ing this text as Christian, it remains very important. The fpyao-ta OpEIAuarLc ' must be an organization for looking after foundlings (OpE',ulAaTa, Op4E7r-roL), and it is difficult to reconcile such an institution, with paganism except as influenced by Christianity. The 'council of proedroi of the Porpllyrabaphoi (or -pheis)' would, in a pagan inscription, prove that a trade-guild was directed not simply by an epiglate,v (§ i i), but also by a council of p@-oe,-Iroi'. But years of further experience only deepen my sense of the inconsistency between this text and the pagan inscriptions. /--- \1/ He gives the name as Kopiaicov and 'Ao-i9i[a,rjqp (sic, not in gen.). I have not perfect confidence in the reading 'Aai9dXov N, but the rest is I think certain. MychiefobjectinvisitingHieraPolis in 1887 was to recopy this inscription; and I worked long and carefully at it (aided by Hogarth's eye on some details of difficulty). \2/ I believe that the Porphyrabaphoi are the Christian Church, directed by the council of presbyteroi under presidency of the episkopos; and that the OpeulAa-rttc4 epyao-La is the charitable fund connected with the church. The money, if not applied entirely to purpose of ceremonial, is to be used for charity. \--- [[120]] APPENDIX II. BISHOPS OF HIERAPOLIS. Le Quien mixes up Hieropolis of Saliiiaris with this Hierapolis; and gives the bishops in a single list in Phrygia Salutaris. 1. Heros, appointed by St. Philip. 2. Papias. 3. Claudius Apollinaris. 4. Flaccus Conc. Aricae7i. 325 co?iveat. Phi["PPOp. 344- 5. Lucius is said to have been present at the council held in Constantinople in reference to Agapius and Bagadius, the rival claimants of the bishopric of Bostra, Leunclav. Jits G?-aeco- Rom. IV p. 247 (Le Quien). 6. Abeiieatios, Beneatios, Beneagas, Bennantius, 431- Paul the presbyter was present at the Council of Ephesos on his behalf. 7. Stephanus Concil. Ephes. 11 449- 7 A. Tatianits. 4ddenla. 8. PhilippUS 458- 9. AuxanOR 553- 10. Sisinnios 68o. 11. Ignatius 869, 879. I purchased in i883 a seal with the legend i r N AT I W M H T P 0 T7 I E P ATT, wliieh I gave as a marriage-gift to my friend Itev. S. S. Lewis of Cambridge. The custodian reports that it cannot now be found in his collection, which is the property of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. 12. Nicon transferred to Nicaea by Photius (Niceph. Callist- XIV 38)- 13. Arseber 997, Ju8 Graeco-Rom. p. 203 (Le Quieii). 14. Constantine, metropolitan of Hierapolis, pnrebased the Paris A Manuscript of Plato. Prof. L. Campbell, my informant, would date him about iooo. Sec p. 14. 15. Georgius, metropolitan of Hierapolis, was present in i ][ 66 at the second council held under the Patriarch Lueas Chrysoberga; and metropolitan bishops of Hierapolis were present at C'ouncils held in io66, 1143 and ii86. In all these cases it may be taken as certain that the Phrygian city and not the Syrian (metropolis of Eupliratesia Commagene) is meant; though Le Quien is doubtful. 16. Philippiis? See Schlumberger Sigillogralihie p. 255- A(Z(le2ida. [[121]] APPENDIX III. CITIES OF PHRYGIA HIERAPOLITANA (instituted c. 536, enlarged c- 74o, see p. T09). Revised editions of the list given in NOT. III. COUIVCXLS NOT. VII. Not. VII. NOT. DE BOOR NoT. LEONIS C. 1100. 553, 68o, 692. e- 700 A.D. NOT. c. 750-800. COUNCIL 787. 0. goo. NOT. X. NOT. IX. NOT. VIII. C. 1200. 1. Hierapolis Auxanon, 553 I I I 1 1 Sisinnios, 68o 2. Metellopolis 2 2 2 2 3 vices agens. 2 2 Eudoxios presb. et 3. Dionysopolis Alexander, 553 3 3 - 3 4 Basilios - - 4. Annstasiopolis Stephanus, 536 - - 3 4 5 5 Phoba 5 Phoba Hieron, 553 5. Attouda Stephanus, 692 4 4 4 5 7 3 3 6. Mossyna Joannes, 692 5 5 5 6 8 Theophylaktos 4 4 7. Ankyra - - - - - 6 Constans 6 6 8. Synaos - - - - - 10 Stephanos 7 7 9. Tiberiopolis - - - - - 2 Michael 8 8 10. Kadoi - - - - - 11 Theodoros 9 9 11. Aizanoi - - - - - 9 Joannes 10 10 /--- NOTES.-The numbered Notitiae after Parthey (Hiero & set Notitiae Gr. Ep., Berlin, i866). Not. Basilii and Leon is after Gelzer (Georgii @i Descr. Orb. Bo))t., '@ips.,i8go). Not.deBoorasinZeitschr.f.Kirchengesch.XII520. The dates are very rough. The foll owing spellings are notable:- 2. Mekovir6Xns in VII; ML,7akkovroxcws in X. 3. Aiopvaiov 7r@,\ews in VII. 4. 'A-ryov8cvt, in VIII; A6TO@BWY in III- 5. Mea4;,w;, in VII. 7. 'Aytcvpo. rvya@ in de B. io. KdX6ovs in de B.; Kay(Zy in III. ii. Zav&i, in III, X. S. @6,6vls at Concil. 879. //end, 5 Oct 1998 scan rak//