PAN-HELLENIC FESTIVALS — OLYMPIC, PYTHIAN, NEMEAN, AND ISTHMIAN.
In the preceding chapters I have been under the necessity of
presenting to the reader a picture altogether incoherent and
destitute of central effect,—to specify briefly each of the two or
three hundred towns which agreed in bearing the Hellenic name, and to
recount its birth and early life, as far as our evidence goes,—but
without being able to point out any action and reaction, exploits
or sufferings, prosperity or misfortune, glory or disgrace, common
to all. To a great degree, this is a characteristic inseparable
from the history of Greece from its beginning to its end, for the
only political unity which it ever receives is the melancholy unity
of subjection under all-conquering Rome. Nothing short of force
will efface in the mind of a free Greek the idea of his city as an
autonomous and separate organization; the village is a fraction,
but the city is an unit,—and the highest of all political units,
not admitting of being consolidated with others into a ten or a
hundred, to the sacrifice of its own separate and individual mark.
Such is the character of the race, both in their primitive country
and in their colonial settlements,—in their early as well as in
their late history,—splitting by natural fracture into a multitude
of self-administering, indivisible cities. But that which marks the
early historical period before Peisistratus, and which impresses upon
it an incoherence at once so fatiguing and so irremediable, is, that
as yet no causes have arisen to counteract this political isolation.
Each city, whether progressive or stationary, prudent or adventurous,
turbulent or tranquil, follows out its own thread of existence,
having no partnership or common purposes with the rest, and not yet
constrained into any active partnership with them by extraneous
forces. In like manner, the races which on every side surround the
Hellenic world appear distinct and unconnected, not yet taken up into
any coöperating mass or system.
Contemporaneously with the accession of Peisistratus, this state of
things becomes altered both in and out of Hellas,—the former as a
consequence of the latter: for at that time begins the formation of
the great Persian empire, which absorbs into itself not only Upper
Asia and Asia Minor, but also Phenicia, Egypt, Thrace, Macedonia,
and a considerable number of the Grecian cities themselves; and
the common danger, threatening the greater states of Greece proper
from this vast aggregate, drives them, in spite of great reluctance
and jealousy, into active union. Hence arises a new impulse,
counterworking the natural tendency to political isolation in the
Hellenic cities, and centralizing their proceedings to a certain
extent for the two centuries succeeding 560 B. C.; Athens and Sparta
both availing themselves of the centralizing tendencies which had
grown out of the Persian war. But during the interval between 776-560
B. C., no such tendency can be traced even in commencement, nor any
constraining force calculated to bring it about. Even Thucydidês,
as we may see by his excellent preface, knew of nothing during
these two centuries except separate city-politics and occasional
wars between neighbors: the only event, according to him, in which
any considerable number of Grecian cities were jointly concerned,
was the war between Chalkis and Eretria, the date of which we do
not know. In this war, several cities took part as allies; Samos,
among others, with Eretria,—Milêtus with Chalkis:[101] how far the
alliances of either may have extended, we have no evidence to inform
us, but the presumption is that no great number of Grecian cities
was comprehended in them. Such as it was, however, this war between
Chalkis and Eretria was the nearest approach, and the only approach,
to a Pan-Hellenic proceeding which Thucydidês indicates between the
Trojan and the Persian wars. Both he and Herodotus present this
early period only by way of preface and contrast to that which
follows,—when the Pan-Hellenic spirit and tendencies, though never at
any time predominant, yet counted for a powerful element in history,
and sensibly modified the universal instinct of city-isolation.
They tell us little about it, either because they could find no
trustworthy informants, or because there was nothing in it to
captivate the imagination in the same manner as the Persian or the
Peloponnesian wars. From whatever cause their silence arises, it is
deeply to be regretted, since the phenomena of the two centuries
from 776-560 B. C., though not susceptible of any central grouping,
must have presented the most instructive matter for study, had they
been preserved. In no period of history have there ever been formed
a greater number of new political communities, under such variety
of circumstances, personal as well as local. And a few chronicles,
however destitute of philosophy, reporting the exact march of some of
these colonies from their commencement,—amidst all the difficulties
attendant on amalgamation with strange natives, as well as on a fresh
distribution of land,—would have added greatly to our knowledge both
of Greek character and Greek social existence.
[101] Thucyd. i, 15.
Taking the two centuries now under review, then, it will appear
that there is not only no growing political unity among the Grecian
states, but a tendency even to the contrary,—to dissemination and
mutual estrangement. Not so, however, in regard to the other feelings
of unity capable of subsisting between men who acknowledge no
common political authority,—sympathies founded on common religion,
language, belief of race, legends, tastes and customs, intellectual
appetencies, sense of proportion and artistic excellence, recreative
enjoyments, etc. On all these points the manifestations of Hellenic
unity become more and more pronounced and comprehensive, in spite of
increased political dissemination, throughout the same period. The
breadth of common sentiment and sympathy between Greek and Greek,
together with the conception of multitudinous periodical meetings as
an indispensable portion of existence, appears decidedly greater in
560 B. C. than it had been a century before. It was fostered by the
increased conviction of the superiority of Greeks as compared with
foreigners,—a conviction gradually more and more justified as Grecian
art and intellect improved, and as the survey of foreign countries
became extended,—as well as by the many new efforts of men of genius
in the field of music, poetry, statuary, and architecture, each of
whom touched chords of feeling belonging to other Greeks hardly
less than to his own peculiar city. At the same time, the life of
each peculiar city continues distinct, and even gathers to itself a
greater abundance of facts and internal interests. So that during the
two centuries now under review there was in the mind of every Greek
an increase both of the city-feeling and of the Pan-Hellenic feeling,
but on the other hand a decline of the old sentiment of separate
race,—Doric, Ionic, Æolic.
I have already, in my former volume, touched upon the many-sided
character of the Grecian religion, entering as it did into all the
enjoyments and sufferings, the hopes and fears, the affections and
antipathies, of the people,—not simply imposing restraints and
obligations, but protecting, multiplying, and diversifying all the
social pleasures and all the decorations of existence. Each city and
even each village had its peculiar religious festivals, wherein the
sacrifices to the gods were usually followed by public recreations of
one kind or other,—by feasting on the victims, processional marches,
singing and dancing, or competition in strong and active exercises.
The festival was originally local, but friendship or communion of
race was shown by inviting others, non-residents, to partake in its
attractions. In the case of a colony and its metropolis, it was a
frequent practice that citizens of the metropolis were honored with
a privileged seat at the festivals of the colony, or that one of
their number was presented with the first taste of the sacrificial
victim.[102] Reciprocal frequentation of religious festivals was thus
the standing evidence of friendship and fraternity among cities not
politically united. That it must have existed to a certain degree
from the earliest days, there can be no reasonable doubt; though in
Homer and Hesiod we find only the celebration of funeral games, by a
chief at his own private expense, in honor of his deceased father or
friend,—with all the accompanying recreations, however, of a public
festival, and with strangers not only present, but also contending
for valuable prizes.[103] Passing to historical Greece during the
seventh century B. C., we find evidence of two festivals, even then
very considerable, and frequented by Greeks from many different
cities and districts,—the festival at Delos, in honor of Apollo, the
great place of meeting for Ionians throughout the Ægean,—and the
Olympic games. The Homeric Hymn to the Delian Apollo, which must be
placed earlier than 600 B. C., dwells with emphasis on the splendor
of the Delian festival,—unrivalled throughout Greece, as it would
appear, during all the first period of this history, for wealth,
finery of attire, and variety of exhibitions as well in poetical
genius as in bodily activity,[104]—equalling probably at that time,
if not surpassing, the Olympic games. The complete and undiminished
grandeur of this Delian Pan-Ionic festival is one of our chief marks
of the first period of Grecian history, before the comparative
prostration of the Ionic Greeks through the rise of Persia: it was
celebrated periodically in every fourth year, to the honor of Apollo
and Artemis. It was distinguished from the Olympic games by two
circumstances both deserving of notice,—first, by including solemn
matches not only of gymnastic, but also of musical and poetical
excellence, whereas the latter had no place at Olympia; secondly,
by the admission of men, women, and children indiscriminately as
spectators, whereas women were formally excluded from the Olympic
ceremony.[105] Such exclusion may have depended in part on the inland
situation of Olympia, less easily approachable by females than the
island of Delos; but even making allowance for this circumstance,
both the one distinction and the other mark the rougher character
of the Ætolo-Dorians in Peloponnesus. The Delian festival, which
greatly dwindled away during the subjection of the Asiatic and
insular Greeks to Persia, was revived afterwards by Athens during the
period of her empire, when she was seeking in every way to strengthen
her central ascendency in the Ægean. But though it continued to be
ostentatiously celebrated under her management, it never regained
that commanding sanctity and crowded frequentation which we find
attested in the Homeric Hymn to Apollo for its earlier period.
[102] Thucyd. i, 26. See the tale in Pausanias (v, 25, 1)
of the ancient chorus sent annually from Messênê in Sicily
across the strait to Rhegium, to a local festival of the
Rhegians,—thirty-five boys with a chorus-master and a
flute-player: on one unfortunate occasion, all of them perished
in crossing. For the Theôry (or solemn religious deputation)
periodically sent by the Athenians to Delos, see Plutarch,
Nicias, c. 3; Plato, Phædon, c. 1, p. 58. Compare also Strabo,
ix, p. 419, on the general subject.
[103] Homer, Iliad, xi, 879, xxiii, 679; Hesiod, Opp. Di. 651.
[104] Homer, Hymn. Apoll. 150; Thucyd. iii, 104.
[105] Pausan. v, 6, 5; Ælian, N. H. x, 1; Thucyd. iii, 104. When
Ephesus, and the festival called Ephesia, had become the great
place of Ionic meeting, the presence of women was still continued
(Dionys. Hal. A. R. iv, 25).
Very different was the fate of the Olympic festival,—on the banks
of the Alpheius[106] in Peloponnesus, near the old oracular temple
of the Olympian Zeus,—which not only grew up uninterruptedly from
small beginnings to the maximum of Pan-Hellenic importance, but
even preserved its crowds of visitors and its celebrity for many
centuries after the extinction of Greek freedom, and only received
its final abolition, after more than eleven hundred years of
continuance, from the decree of the Christian emperor Theodosius in
394 A. D. I have already recounted, in the preceding volume of this
history, the attempt made by Pheidon, despot of Argos, to restore
to the Pisatans, or to acquire for himself, the administration of
this festival,—an event which proves the importance of the festival
in Peloponnesus, even so early as 740 B. C. At that time, and for
some years afterwards, it seems to have been frequented chiefly,
if not exclusively, by the neighboring inhabitants of central and
western Peloponnesus,—Spartans, Messenians, Arkadians, Triphylians,
Pisatans, Eleians, and Achæans,[107]—and it forms an important link
connecting the Etolo-Eleians, and their privileges as Agonothets
to solemnize and preside over it, with Sparta. From the year 720
B. C., we trace positive evidences of the gradual presence of more
distant Greeks,—Corinthians, Megarians, Bœotians, Athenians, and even
Smyrnæans from Asia.
[106] Strabo, viii, p. 353; Pindar, Olymp. viii, 2; Xenophon,
Hellen. iv, 7, 2; iii, 2, 22.
[107] See K. F. Hermann, Lehrbuch der Griechischen
Staats-Alterthümer, sect. 10.
We observe also another proof of growing importance, in the increased
number and variety of matches exhibited to the spectators, and in the
substitution of the simple crown of olive, an honorary reward, in
place of the more substantial present which the Olympic festival and
all other Grecian festivals began by conferring upon the victor. The
humble constitution of the Olympic games presented originally nothing
more than a match of runners in the measured course called the
Stadium: a continuous series of the victorious runners was formally
inscribed and preserved by the Eleians, beginning with Korœbus in
776 B. C., and was made to serve by chronological inquirers from
the third century B. C. downwards, as a means of measuring the
chronological sequence of Grecian events. It was on the occasion of
the 7th Olympiad after Korœbus, that Daiklês the Messenian first
received for his victory in the stadium no farther recompense than
a wreath from the sacred olive-tree near Olympia:[108] the honor of
being proclaimed victor was found sufficient, without any pecuniary
addition. But until the 14th Olympiad, there was no other match
for the spectators to witness beside that of simple runners in the
stadium. On that occasion a second race was first introduced, of
runners in the double stadium, or up and down the course; in the
next, or 15th Olympiad (720 B. C.), a third match, the long course
for runners, or several times up and down the stadium. There were
thus three races,—the simple stadium, the double stadium, or diaulos,
and the long course, or dolichos, all for runners,—which continued
without addition until the 18th Olympiad, when the wrestling-match
and the complicated pentathlon—including jumping, running, the quoit,
the javelin, and wrestling—were both added. A farther novelty appears
in the 23rd Olympiad (688 B. C.), the boxing-match; and another,
still more important, in the 25th (680 B. C.), the chariot with
four full-grown horses. This last-mentioned addition is deserving
of special notice, not merely as it diversified the scene by the
introduction of horses, but also as it brought in a totally new
class of competitors,—rich men and women, who possessed the finest
horses and could hire the most skilful drivers, without any personal
superiority, or power of bodily display, in themselves.[109] The
prodigious exhibition of wealth in which the chariot proprietors
indulged, is not only an evidence of growing importance in the
Olympic games, but also served materially to increase that
importance, and to heighten the interest of spectators. Two farther
matches were added in the 33rd Olympiad (648 B. C.),—the pankration,
or boxing and wrestling conjoined,[110] with the hand unarmed or
divested of that hard leather cestus[111] worn by the pugilist, which
rendered the blow of the latter more terrible, but at the same time
prevented him from grasping or keeping hold of his adversary,—and the
single race-horse. Many other novelties were introduced one after
the other, which it is unnecessary fully to enumerate,—the race
between men clothed in full panoply, and bearing each his shield,—the
different matches between boys, analogous to those between full-grown
men, and between colts, of the same nature as between full-grown
horses. At the maximum of its attraction the Olympic solemnity
occupied five days, but until the 77th Olympiad, all the various
matches had been compressed into one,—beginning at daybreak and
not always closing before dark.[112] The 77th Olympiad follows
immediately after the successful expulsion of the Persian invaders
from Greece, when the Pan-Hellenic feeling had been keenly stimulated
by resistance to a common enemy; and we may easily conceive that this
was a suitable moment for imparting additional dignity to the chief
national festival.
[108] Dionys. Halikarn. Ant. Rom. i, 71; Phlegon. De Olympiad. p.
140. For an illustration of the stress laid by the Greeks on the
purely honorary rewards of Olympia, and on the credit which they
took to themselves as competitors, not for money, but for glory,
see Herodot. viii, 26. Compare the Scholia on Pindar, Nem. and
Isthm. Argument, pp. 425-514, ed. Boeckh.
[109] See the sentiment of Agesilaus, somewhat contemptuous,
respecting the chariot-race, as described by Xenophon (Agesilaus,
ix, 6); the general feeling of Greece, however, is more in
conformity with what Thucydidês (vi, 16) puts into the mouth of
Alkibiadês, and Xenophon into that of Simonidês (Xenophon, Hiero,
xi, 5). The great respect attached to a family which had gained
chariot victories is amply attested: see Herodot. vi, 35, 36,
103, 126,—οἰκίη τεθριπποτρόφος,—and vi, 70, about Demaratus king
of Sparta.
[110] Antholog. Palatin. ix, 588; vol. ii. p. 299, Jacobs.
[111] The original Greek word for this covering (which surrounded
the middle hand and upper portion of the fingers, leaving both
the ends of the fingers and the thumb exposed) was ἱμὰς, the word
for a thong, strap, or whip, of leather: the special word μύρμηξ
seems to have been afterwards introduced (Hesychius, v. Ἱμάς):
see Homer, Iliad, xxiii, 686. Cestus, or Cæstus, is the Latin
word (Virg. Æn. v, 404), the Greek word κεστός is an adjective
annexed to ἱμὰς—κεστὸν ἱμάντα—πολύκεστος ἱμὰς (Iliad, xiv, 214;
iii, 371). See Pausan. viii, 40, 3, for the description of the
incident which caused an alteration in this hand-covering at the
Nemean games: ultimately, it was still farther hardened by the
addition of iron.
[112] Ἀέθλων πεμπαμέρους ἁμίλλαις,—Pindar, Olymp. v, 6: compare
Schol. ad Pindar. Olymp. iii, 33.
See the facts respecting the Olympic Agôn collected by Corsini
(Dissertationes Agonisticæ, Dissert. i, sects. 8, 9, 10), and
still more amply set forth with a valuable commentary, by Krause
(Olympia, oder Darstellung der grossen Olympischen Spiele, Wien,
1838, sects. 8-11 especially).
We are thus enabled partially to trace the steps by which, during the
two centuries succeeding 776 B. C., the festival of the Olympic Zeus
in the Pisatid gradually passed from a local to a national character,
and acquired an attractive force capable of bringing together into
temporary union the dispersed fragments of Hellas, from Marseilles to
Trebizond. In this important function it did not long stand alone.
During the sixth century B. C., three other festivals, at first
local, became successively nationalized,—the Pythia near Delphi, the
Isthmia, near Corinth, the Nemea near Kleônæ, between Sikyôn and
Argos.
In regard to the Pythian festival, we find a short notice of the
particular incidents and individuals by whom its reconstitution
and enlargement were brought about,—a notice the more interesting,
inasmuch as these very incidents are themselves a manifestation
of something like Pan-Hellenic patriotism, standing almost alone
in an age which presents little else in operation except distinct
city-interests. At the time when the Homeric Hymn to the Delphinian
Apollo was composed (probably in the seventh century B. C.), the
Pythian festival had as yet acquired little eminence. The rich and
holy temple of Apollo was then purely oracular, established for the
purpose of communicating to pious inquirers “the counsels of the
immortals.” Multitudes of visitors came to consult it, as well as
to sacrifice victims and to deposit costly offerings; but while the
god delighted in the sound of the harp as an accompaniment to the
singing of pæans, he was by no means anxious to encourage horse-races
and chariot-races in the neighborhood,—nay, this psalmist considers
that the noise of horses would be “a nuisance,” the drinking of
mules a desecration to the sacred fountains, and the ostentation of
fine-built chariots objectionable,[113] as tending to divert the
attention of spectators away from the great temple and its wealth.
[113] Hom. Hymn. Apoll. 262.
Πημανέει σ᾽ αἰεὶ κτυπὸς ἵππων ὠκειάων,
Ἀρδόμενοί τ᾽ οὐρῆες ἐμῶν ἱερῶν ἀπὸ πηγέων·
Ἔνθα τις ἀνθρώπων βουλήσεται εἰσοράασθαι
Ἅρματά τ᾽ εὐποίητα καὶ ὠκυπόδων κτυπὸν ἵππων,
Ἢ νηόν τε μέγαν καὶ κτήματα πόλλ᾽ ἐνεόντα.
Also v. 288-394. γυάλων ὑπὸ Παρνήσοιο—484. ὑπὸ πτυχὶ
Παρνήσοιο—Pindar, Pyth. viii, 90. Πυθῶνος ἐν γυάλοις—Strabo, ix,
p. 418. πετρωδὲς χώριον καὶ θεατροειδὲς—Heliodorus, Æthiop. ii,
26: compare Will. Götte, Das Delphische Orakel (Leipzig, 1839),
pp. 39-42.
From such inconveniences the god was protected by placing his
sanctuary “in the rocky Pytho,”—a rugged and uneven recess, of
no great dimensions, embosomed in the southern declivity of
Parnassus, and about two thousand feet above the level of the sea,
while the topmost Parnassian summits reach a height of near eight
thousand feet. The situation was extremely imposing, but unsuited
by nature for the congregation of any considerable number of
spectators,—altogether impracticable for chariot-races,—and only
rendered practicable by later art and outlay for the theatre as well
as for the stadium; the original stadium, when first established,
was placed in the plain beneath. It furnished little means of
subsistence, but the sacrifices and presents of visitors enabled
the ministers of the temple to live in abundance,[114] and gathered
together by degrees a village around it. Near the sanctuary of Pytho,
and about the same altitude, was situated the ancient Phocian town
of Krissa, on a projecting spur of Parnassus,—overhung above by the
line of rocky precipice called the Phædriades, and itself overhanging
below the deep ravine through which flows the river Pleistus. On the
other side of this river rises the steep mountain Kirphis, which
projects southward into the Corinthian gulf,—the river reaching that
gulf through the broad Krissæan or Kirrhæan plain, which stretches
westward nearly to the Lokrian town of Amphissa; a plain for the
most part fertile and productive, though least so in its eastern
part immediately under the Kirphis, where the seaport Kirrha was
placed.[115] The temple, the oracle, and the wealth of Pytho, belong
to the very earliest periods of Grecian antiquity; but the octennial
solemnity in honor of the god included at first no other competition
except that of bards, who sang each a pæan with the harp. It has been
already mentioned, in my preceding volume, that the Amphiktyonic
assembly held one of its half-yearly meetings near the temple of
Pytho, the other at Thermopylæ.
[114] Βωμοί μ᾽ ἔφερβον, οὕπιών τ᾽ ἀεὶ ξένος, says Ion (in
Euripidês, Ion. 334) the slave of Apollo, and the verger of
his Delphian temple, who waters it from the Kastalian spring,
sweeps it with laurel boughs, and keeps off with his bow and
arrows the obtrusive birds (Ion, 105, 143, 154). Whoever reads
the description of Professor Ulrichs (Reisen und Forschungen in
Griechenland, ch. 7, p. 110) will see that the birds—eagles,
vultures, and crows—are quite numerous enough to have been
exceedingly troublesome. The whole play of Ion conveys a lively
idea of the Delphian temple and its scenery, with which Euripidês
was doubtless familiar.
[115] There is considerable perplexity respecting Krissa and
Kirrha, and it still remains a question among scholars whether
the two names denote the same place or different places; the
former is the opinion of O. Müller (Orchomenos, p. 495). Strabo
distinguishes the two. Pausanias identifies them, conceiving
no other town to have ever existed except the seaport (x, 37,
4). Mannert (Geogr. Gr. Röm. viii, p. 148) follows Strabo, and
represents them as different.
I consider the latter to be the correct opinion, upon the
grounds, and partly, also, on the careful topographical
examination of Professor Ulrichs, which affords an excellent
account of the whole scenery of Delphi (Reisen und Forschungen
in Griechenland, Bremen, 1840, chapters 1, 2, 3). The ruins
described by him on the high ground near Kastri, called the
Forty Saints, may fairly be considered as the ruins of Krissa;
the ruins of Kirrha are on the sea-shore near the mouth of the
Pleistus. The plain beneath might without impropriety be called
either the Krissæan or the Kirrhæan plain (Herodot. viii, 32;
Strabo, ix, p. 419). Though Strabo was right in distinguishing
Krissa from Kirrha, and right also in the position of the latter
under Kirphis, he conceived incorrectly the situation of Krissa;
and his representation that there were two wars,—in the first
of which, Kirrha was destroyed by the Krissæans, while in the
second, Krissa itself was conquered by the Amphiktyons,—is not
confirmed by any other authority.
The mere circumstance that Pindar gives us in three separate
passages, Κρίσᾳ, Κρισαῖον, Κρισαίοις (Isth. ii, 26; Pyth. v, 49,
vi, 18), and in five other passages, Κίῤῥᾳ, Κίῤῥας, Κίῤῥαθεν
(Pyth. iii, 33, vii, 14, viii, 26, x, 24, xi, 20), renders it
almost certain that the two names belong to different places, and
are not merely two different names for the same place; the poet
could not in this case have any metrical reason for varying the
denomination, as the metre of the two words is similar.
In those early times when the Homeric Hymn to Apollo was composed,
the town of Krissa appears to have been great and powerful,
possessing all the broad plain between Parnassus, Kirphis, and
the gulf, to which latter it gave its name,—and possessing also,
what was a property not less valuable, the adjoining sanctuary of
Pytho itself, which the Hymn identifies with Krissa, not indicating
Delphi as a separate place. The Krissæans, doubtless, derived great
profits from the number of visitors who came to visit Delphi, both
by land and by sea, and Kirrha was originally only the name for
their seaport. Gradually, however, the port appears to have grown
in importance at the expense of the town, just as Apollonia and
Ptolemais came to equal Kyrênê and Barka, and as Plymouth Dock has
swelled into Devonport; while at the same time, the sanctuary of
Pytho with its administrators expanded into the town of Delphi, and
came to claim an independent existence of its own. The original
relations between Krissa, Kirrha, and Delphi, were in this manner
at length subverted, the first declining and the two latter rising.
The Krissæans found themselves dispossessed of the management of the
temple, which passed to the Delphians, as well as of the profits
arising from the visitors, whose disbursements went to enrich the
inhabitants of Kirrha. Krissa was a primitive city of the Phocian
name, and could boast of a place as such in the Homeric Catalogue,
so that her loss of importance was not likely to be quietly endured.
Moreover, in addition to the above facts, already sufficient in
themselves as seeds of quarrel, we are told that the Kirrhæans abused
their position as masters of the avenue to the temple by sea, and
levied exorbitant tolls on the visitors who landed there,—a number
constantly increasing from the multiplication of the transmarine
colonies, and from the prosperity of those in Italy and Sicily.
Besides such offence against the general Grecian public, they had
also incurred the enmity of their Phocian neighbors by outrages
upon women, Phocian as well as Argeian, who were returning from the
temple.[116]
[116] Athenæus, xiii, p. 560; Æschinês cont. Ktesiphont. c. 36,
p. 406; Strabo, ix, p. 418. Of the Akragallidæ, or Kraugallidæ,
whom Æschinês mentions along with the Kirrhæans as another
impious race who dwelt in the neighborhood of the god,—and who
were overthrown along with the Kirrhæans,—we have no farther
information. O. Müller’s conjecture would identify them with
the Dryopes (Dorians, i, 2, 5, and his Orchomenos, p. 496);
Harpokration, v. Κραυγαλλίδαι.
Thus stood the case, apparently, about 595 B. C., when the
Amphiktyonic meeting interfered—either prompted by the Phocians,
or perhaps on their own spontaneous impulse, out of regard to the
temple—to punish the Kirrhæans. After a war of ten years, the first
Sacred War in Greece, this object was completely accomplished, by
a joint force of Thessalians under Eurylochus, Sikyonians under
Kleisthenês, and Athenians under Alkmæon; the Athenian Solon being
the person who originated and enforced, in the Amphiktyonic council,
the proposition of interference. Kirrha appears to have made a
strenuous resistance until its supplies from the sea were intercepted
by the naval force of the Sikyonian Kleisthenês; and even after the
town was taken, its inhabitants defended themselves for some time on
the heights of Kirphis.[117] At length, however, they were thoroughly
subdued. Their town was destroyed, or left to subsist merely as
a landing-place; and the whole adjoining plain was consecrated
to the Delphian god, whose domains thus touched the sea. Under
this sentence, pronounced by the religious feeling of Greece, and
sanctified by a solemn oath publicly sworn and inscribed at Delphi,
the land was condemned to remain untilled and unplanted, without any
species of human care, and serving only for the pasturage of cattle.
The latter circumstance was convenient to the temple, inasmuch as it
furnished abundance of victims for the pilgrims who landed and came
to sacrifice,—for without preliminary sacrifice no man could consult
the oracle;[118] while the entire prohibition of tillage was the only
means of obviating the growth of another troublesome neighbor on the
sea-board. The fate of Kirrha in this war is ascertained: that of
Krissa is not so clear, nor do we know whether it was destroyed, or
left subsisting in a position of inferiority with regard to Delphi.
From this time forward, however, the Delphian community appears
as substantive and autonomous, exercising in their own right the
management of the temple; though we shall find, on more than one
occasion, that the Phocians contest this right, and lay claim to
the management of it for themselves,[119]—a remnant of that early
period when the oracle stood in the domain of the Phocian Krissa.
There seems, moreover, to have been a standing antipathy between the
Delphians and the Phocians.
[117] Schol. ad Pindar, Pyth. Introduct.: Schol. ad Pindar,
Nem. ix, 2; Plutarch, Solon, c. 11; Pausan. ii, 9, 6. Pausanias
(x, 37, 4) and Polyænus (Strateg. iii, 6) relate a stratagem of
Solon, or of Eurylochus, to poison the water of the Kirrhæans
with hellebore.
[118] Eurip. Ion, 230.
[119] Thucyd. i, 112.
The Sacred War just mentioned, emanating from a solemn Amphiktyonic
decree, carried on jointly by troops of different states whom we do
not know to have ever before coöperated, and directed exclusively
towards an object of common interest, is in itself a fact of high
importance as manifesting a decided growth of Pan-Hellenic feeling.
Sparta is not named as interfering,—a circumstance which seems
remarkable when we consider both her power, even as it then stood,
and her intimate connection with the Delphian oracle,—while the
Athenians appear as the prime movers, through the greatest and best
of their citizens: the credit of a large-minded patriotism rests
prominently upon them.
But if this Sacred War itself is a proof that the Pan-Hellenic
spirit was growing stronger, the positive result in which it ended
reinforced that spirit still farther. The spoils of Kirrha were
employed by the victorious allies in founding the Pythian games.
The octennial festival hitherto celebrated at Delphi in honor of
the god, including no other competition except in the harp and the
pæan, was expanded into comprehensive games on the model of the
Olympic, with matches not only of music, but also of gymnastics and
chariots,—celebrated, not at Delphi itself, but on the maritime
plain near the ruined Kirrha,—and under the direct superintendence
of the Amphiktyons themselves. I have already mentioned that Solon
provided large rewards for such Athenians as gained victories in
the Olympic and Isthmian games, thereby indicating his sense of the
great value of the national games as a means of promoting Hellenic
intercommunion. It was the same feeling which instigated the
foundation of the new games on the Kirrhæan plain, in commemoration
of the vindicated honor of Apollo, and in the territory newly made
over to him. They were celebrated in the latter half of summer, or
first half of every third Olympic year,—the Amphiktyons being the
ostensible agonothets, or administrators, and appointing persons
to discharge the duty in their names.[120] At the first Pythian
ceremony (in 586 B. C.), valuable rewards were given to the different
victors; at the second (582 B. C.), nothing was conferred but wreaths
of laurel,—the rapidly attained celebrity of the games being such
as to render any farther reward superfluous. The Sikyonian despot
Kleisthenês himself, one of the leaders in the conquest of Kirrha,
gained the prize at the chariot-race of the second Pythia. We find
other great personages in Greece frequently mentioned as competitors,
and the games long maintained a dignity second only to the Olympic,
over which, indeed, they had some advantages; first, that they
were not abused for the purpose of promoting petty jealousies and
antipathies of any administering state, as the Olympic games were
perverted by the Eleians, on more than one occasion; next, that
they comprised music and poetry as well as bodily display. From
the circumstances attending their foundation, the Pythian games
deserved, even more than the Olympic, the title bestowed on them by
Demosthenês,—“The common Agôn of the Greeks.”[121]
[120] Mr. Clinton thinks that the Pythian games were celebrated
in the autumn: M. Boeckh refers the celebration to the spring:
Krause agrees with Boeckh. (Clinton, Fast. Hell. vol. ii, p. 200,
Appendix; Boeckh, ad Corp. Inscr. No. 1688, p. 813; Krause, Die
Pythien, Nemeen und Isthmien, vol. ii, pp. 29-35.)
Mr. Clinton’s opinion appears to me nearly the truth; the real
time, as I conceive it, being about the beginning of August, or
end of July. Boeckh admits that, with the exception of Thucydidês
(v, 1-19), the other authorities go to sustain it; but he relies
on Thucydidês to outweigh them. Now the passage of Thucydidês,
properly understood, seems to me as much against Boeckh’s view as
the rest.
I may remark, as a certain additional reason in the case, that
the Isthmia appear to have been celebrated in the third year
of each Olympiad, and in the spring (Krause, p. 187). It seems
improbable that these two great festivals should have come
one immediately after the other, which, nevertheless, must be
supposed, if we adopt the opinion of Boeckh and Krause.
The Pythian games would be sometimes a little earlier, sometimes
a little later, in consequence of the time of full moon: notice
being always sent round by the administrators beforehand of the
commencement of the sacred month. See the references in K. F.
Hermann, Lehrbuch der gottesdienstl. Alterth. der Griechen, ch.
49, not. 12.—This note has been somewhat modified since my first
edition,—see the note vol. vi, ch. liv.
[121] Demosthen. Philipp. iii, p. 119.
The Olympic and Pythian games continued always to be the most
venerated solemnities in Greece: yet the Nemea and Isthmia acquired
a celebrity not much inferior; the Olympic prize counting for
the highest of all.[122] Both the Nemea and the Isthmia were
distinguished from the other two festivals by occurring, not once
in four years, but once in two years; the former in the second and
fourth years of each Olympiad, the latter in the first and third
years. To both is assigned, according to Greek custom, an origin
connected with the interesting persons and circumstances of Grecian
antiquity: but our historical knowledge of both begins with the sixth
century B. C. The first historical Nemead is presented as belonging
to Olympiad 52 or 53 (572-568 B. C.), a few years subsequent to the
Sacred War above mentioned and to the origin of the Pythia. The
festival was celebrated in honor of the Nemean Zeus, in the valley
of Nemea, between Phlius and Kleônæ,—and originally by the Kleônæans
themselves, until, at some period after 460 B. C., the Argeians
deprived them of that honor and assumed the honors of administration
to themselves.[123] The Nemean games had their Hellanodikæ[124] to
superintend, to keep order, and to distribute the prizes, as well as
the Olympic. Respecting the Isthmian festival, our first historical
information is a little earlier, for it has already been stated that
Solon conferred a premium upon every Athenian citizen who gained a
prize at that festival as well as at the Olympian,—in or after 594
B. C. It was celebrated by the Corinthians at their isthmus, in
honor of Poseidôn; and if we may draw any inference from the legends
respecting its foundation, which is ascribed sometimes to Theseus,
the Athenians appear to have identified it with the antiquities of
their own state.[125]
[122] Pindar, Nem. x, 28-33.
[123] Strabo, viii, p. 377; Plutarch, Arat. c. 28; Mannert.
Geogr. Gr. Röm. pt. viii, p. 650. Compare the second chapter in
Krause, Die Pythien, Nemeen und Isthmien, vol. ii. p. 108, _seq._
That the Kleônæans continued without interruption to administer
the Nemean festival down to Olympiad 80 (460 B. C.), or
thereabouts, is the rational inference from Pindar, Nem. x, 42:
compare Nem. iv, 17. Eusebius, indeed, states that the Argeians
seized the administration for themselves in Olympiad 53, and
in order to reconcile this statement with the above passage in
Pindar, critics have concluded that the Argeians lost it again,
and that the Kleônæans resumed it a little before Olympiad 80. I
take a different view, and am disposed to reject the statement of
Eusebius altogether; the more so as Pindar’s tenth Nemean ode is
addressed to an Argeian citizen named Theiæus. If there had been
at that time a standing dispute between Argos and Kleônæ on the
subject of the administration of the Nemea, the poet would hardly
have introduced the mention of the Nemean prizes gained by the
ancestors of Theiæus, under the untoward designation of “prizes
received from Kleônæan men.”
[124] See Boeckh, Corp. Inscript. No. 1126.
[125] K. F. Hermann, in his Lehrbuch der Griechischen
Staatsalterthümer (ch. 32, not. 7. and ch. 65, not. 3), and
again in his more recent work (Lehrbuch der gottesdienstlichen
Alterthümer der Griechen, part iii, ch. 49, also not. 6), both
highly valuable publications, maintains,—1. That the exaltation
of the Isthmian and Nemean games into Pan-Hellenic importance
arose directly after and out of the fall of the despots of
Corinth and Sikyon. 2. That it was brought about by the paramount
influence of the Dorians, especially by Sparta. 3. That the
Spartans put down the despots of both these two cities.
The last of these three propositions appears to me untrue in
respect to Sikyon,—improbable in respect to Corinth: my reasons
for thinking so have been given in a former chapter. And if this
be so, the reason for presuming Spartan intervention as to the
Isthmian and Nemean games falls to the ground; for there is no
other proof of it, nor does Sparta appear to have interested
herself in any of the four national festivals except the Olympic,
with which she was from an early period peculiarly connected.
Nor can I think that the first of Hermann’s three propositions
is at all tenable. No connection whatever can be shown between
Sikyon and the Nemean games; and it is the more improbable in
this case that the Sikyonians should have been active, inasmuch
as they had under Kleisthenês a little before contributed to
nationalize the Pythian games: a second interference for a
similar purpose ought not to be presumed without some evidence.
To prove his point about the Isthmia, Hermann cites only a
passage of Solinus (vii, 14), “Hoc spectaculum, per Cypselum
tyrannum intermissum, Corinthii Olymp. 49 solemnitati pristinæ
reddiderunt.” To render this passage at all credible, we must
read _Cypselidas_ instead of _Cypselum_, which deducts from
the value of a witness whose testimony can never under any
circumstances be rated high. But granting the alteration, there
are two reasons against the assertion of Solinus. One, a positive
reason, that Solon offered a large reward to Athenian victors at
the Isthmian games: his legislation falls in 594 B. C., ten years
before the time when the Isthmia are said by Solinus to have been
renewed after a long intermission. The other reason (negative,
though to my mind also powerful) is the silence of Herodotus in
that long invective which he puts into the mouth of Sosiklês
against the Kypselids (v, 92). If Kypselus had really been
guilty of so great an insult to the feelings of the people as to
suppress their most solemn festival, the fact would hardly have
been omitted in the indictment which Sosiklês is made to urge
against him. Aristotle, indeed, representing Kypselus as a mild
and popular despot, introduces a contrary view of his character,
which, if we admitted it, would of itself suffice to negative the
supposition that he had suppressed the Isthmia.
We thus perceive that the interval between 600-560 B. C. exhibits the
first historical manifestation of the Pythia, Isthmia, and Nemea,—the
first expansion of all the three from local into Pan-Hellenic
festivals. To the Olympic games, for some time the only great centre
of union among all the widely dispersed Greeks, are now added three
other sacred agônes of the like public, open, national character;
constituting visible marks, as well as tutelary bonds, of collective
Hellenism, and insuring to every Greek who went to compete in the
matches, a safe and inviolate transit even through hostile Hellenic
states.[126] These four, all in or near Peloponnesus, and one of
which occurred in each year, formed the period, or cycle, of sacred
games, and those who had gained prizes at all the four received the
enviable designation of periodonikes:[127] the honors paid to Olympic
victors on their return to their native city were prodigious, even in
the sixth century B. C., and became even more extravagant afterwards.
We may remark that in the Olympic games alone, the oldest as well
as the most illustrious of the four, the musical and intellectual
element was wanting: all the three more recent agônes included crowns
for exercises of music and poetry, along with gymnastics, chariots,
and horses.
[126] Plutarch, Arat. c. 28. καὶ συνεχύθη τότε πρῶτον (by order
of Aratus) ἡ δεδομένη τοῖς ἀγωνισταῖς ἀσυλία καὶ ἀσφάλεια, a
deadly stain on the character of Aratus.
[127] Festus, v, Perihodos, p. 217, ed. Müller. See the animated
protest of the philosopher Xenophanês against the great rewards
given to Olympic victors (540-520 B. C.), Xenophan. Fragment. 2,
p 357, ed. Bergk.
Nor was it only in the distinguishing national stamp set upon
these four great festivals that the gradual increase of Hellenic
family-feeling exhibited itself, during the course of this earliest
period of our history. Pursuant to the same tendencies, religious
festivals in all the considerable towns gradually became more
and more open and accessible, and attracted guests as well as
competitors from beyond the border; the dignity of the state, as
well as the honor rendered to the presiding god, being measured by
numbers, admiration, and envy, in the frequenting visitors.[128]
There is no positive evidence, indeed, of such expansion in the Attic
festivals earlier than the reign of Peisistratus, who first added the
quadrennial or greater Panathenæa to the ancient annual or lesser
Panathenæa; nor can we trace the steps of progress in regard to
Thebes, Orchomenus, Thespiæ, Megara, Sikyôn, Pellênê, Ægina, Argos,
etc., but we find full reason for believing that such was the general
reality. Of the Olympic or Isthmian victors whom Pindar and Simonidês
celebrated, many derived a portion of their renown from previous
victories acquired at several of these local contests,[129]—victories
sometimes so numerous, as to prove how wide-spread the habit of
mutual frequentation had become;[130] though we find, even in the
third century B. C., treaties of alliance between different cities,
in which it is thought necessary to confer this mutual right by
express stipulation. Temptation was offered, to the distinguished
gymnastic or musical competitors, by prizes of great value; and
Timæus even asserted, as a proof of the overweening pride of Kroton
and Sybaris, that these cities tried to supplant the preëminence
of the Olympic games, by instituting games of their own with the
richest prizes, to be celebrated at the same time,[131]—a statement
in itself not worthy of credit, but nevertheless illustrating the
animated rivalry known to prevail among the Grecian cities in
procuring for themselves splendid and crowded games. At the time
when the Homeric Hymn to Dêmêtêr was composed, the worship of that
goddess seems to have been purely local at Eleusis; but before the
Persian war, the festival celebrated by the Athenians every year, in
honor of the Eleusinian Dêmêtêr, admitted Greeks of all cities to be
initiated, and was attended by vast crowds of them.[132]
[128] Thucyd. vi, 16. Alkibiadês says, καὶ ὅσα αὖ ἐν τῇ πόλει
χορηγίαις ἢ ἄλλῳ τῳ λαμπρύνομαι, τοῖς μὲν ἀστοῖς φθονεῖται φύσει,
πρὸς δὲ τοὺς ξένους καὶ αὐτὴ ἰσχὺς φαίνεται.
The greater Panathenæa are ascribed to Peisistratus by the
Scholiast on Aristeidês, vol. iii, p. 323, ed. Dindorf: judging
by what immediately precedes, the statement seems to come from
Aristotle.
[129] Simonidês, Fragm. 154-158, ed. Bergk; Pindar, Nem. x, 45;
Olymp. xiii, 107.
The distinguished athlete Theagenês is affirmed to have gained
twelve hundred prizes in these various agônes: according to some,
fourteen hundred prizes (Pausan. vi, 11, 2; Plutarch, Præcept.
Reip. Ger. c. 15, p. 811).
An athlete named Apollonius arrived too late for the Olympic
games, having stayed away too long, from his anxiety to get money
at various agônes in Ionia (Pausan. v, 21, 5).
[130] See, particularly, the treaty between the inhabitants of
Latus and those of Olûs in Krête, in Boeckh’s Corp. Inscr. No.
2554, wherein this reciprocity is expressly stipulated. Boeckh
places this Inscription in the third century B. C.
[131] Timæus, Fragm. 82, ed. Didot. The Krotoniates furnished a
great number of victors both to the Olympic and to the Pythian
games (Herodot. viii, 47; Pausan. x, 5, 5–x, 7, 3; Krause,
Gymnastik und Agonistik der Hellenen, vol. ii, sect. 29, p. 752).
[132] Herodot. viii, 65. καὶ αὐτῶν ὁ βουλόμενος καὶ τῶν ἄλλων
Ἑλλήνων μυεῖται.
The exclusion of all competitors, natives of Lampsakus, from
the games celebrated in the Chersonesus to the honor of the
œkist Miltiadês, is mentioned by Herodotus as something special
(Herodot. vi, 38).
It was thus that the simplicity and strict local application of
the primitive religious festival, among the greater states in
Greece, gradually expanded, on certain great occasions periodically
recurring, into an elaborate and regulated series of exhibitions,—not
merely admitting, but soliciting the fraternal presence of all
Hellenic spectators. In this respect Sparta seems to have formed
an exception to the remaining states: her festivals were for
herself alone, and her general rudeness towards other Greeks was
not materially softened even at the Karneia,[133] or Hyakinthia, or
Gymnopædiæ. On the other hand, the Attic Dionysia were gradually
exalted, from their original rude spontaneous outburst of village
feeling in thankfulness to the god, followed by song, dance, and
revelry of various kinds,—into costly and diversified performances,
first, by a trained chorus, next, by actors superadded to it;[134]
and the dramatic compositions thus produced, as they embodied the
perfection of Grecian art, so they were eminently calculated to
invite a Pan-Hellenic audience and to encourage the sentiment of
Hellenic unity. The dramatic literature of Athens, however, belongs
properly to a later period; previous to the year 560 B. C., we see
only those commencements of innovation which drew upon Thespis[135]
the rebuke of Solon, who himself contributed to impart to the
Panathenaic festival a more solemn and attractive character, by
checking the license of the rhapsodes, and insuring to those present
a full, orderly recital of the Iliad.
[133] See the remarks, upon the Lacedæmonian discouragement of
stranger-visitors at their public festivals, put by Thucydidês
into the mouth of Periklês (Thucyd. ii, 39).
Lichas the Spartan gained great renown by treating hospitably
the strangers who came to the Gymnopædiæ at Sparta (Xenophon,
Memorab. i, 2, 61; Plutarch, Kimon, c. 10),—a story which proves
that _some_ strangers came to the Spartan festivals, but which
also proves that they were not many in number, and that to show
them hospitality was a striking distinction from the general
character of Spartans.
[134] Aristot. Poetic, c. 3 and 4; Maximus Tyrius. Diss. xxi. p.
215; Plutarch. De Cupidine Divitiarum. c. 8. p. 527: compare the
treatise, “Quod non potest suaviter vivi secundum Epicurum.” c.
16. p. 1098. The old oracles quoted by Demosthenês, cont. Meidiam
(c. 15. p. 531. and cont. Makartat. p. 1072: see also Buttmann’s
note on the former passage), convey the idea of the ancient
simple Athenian festival.
[135] Plutarch. Solon, c. 29: see above, chap. xi. vol. iii. p.
195.
The sacred games and festivals, here alluded to as a class, took
hold of the Greek mind by so great a variety of feelings,[136] as
to counterbalance in a high degree the political disseverance,
and to keep alive among their wide-spread cities, in the midst of
constant jealousy and frequent quarrel, a feeling of brotherhood
and congenial sentiment such as must otherwise have died away. The
Theôrs, or sacred envoys, who came to Olympia or Delphi from so many
different points, all sacrificed to the same god and at the same
altar, witnessed the same sports, and contributed by their donatives
to enrich or adorn one respected scene. Nor must we forget that the
festival afforded opportunity for a sort of fair, including much
traffic amid so large a mass of spectators,[137] and besides the
exhibitions of the games themselves, there were recitations and
lectures in a spacious council-room for those who chose to listen
to them, by poets, rhapsodes, philosophers, and historians,—among
which last, the history of Herodotus is said to have been publicly
read by its author.[138] Of the wealthy and great men in the various
cities, many contended simply for the chariot victories and horse
victories. But there were others whose ambition was of a character
more strictly personal, and who stripped naked as runners, wrestlers,
boxers, or pankratiasts, having gone through the extreme fatigue of
a complete previous training. Kylon, whose unfortunate attempt to
usurp the sceptre at Athens has been recounted, had gained the prize
in the Olympic stadium: Alexander son of Amyntas, the prince of
Macedon, had run for it.[139] The great family of the Diagoridæ at
Rhodes, who furnished magistrates and generals to their native city,
supplied a still greater number of successful boxers and pankratiasts
at Olympia, while other instances also occur of generals named by
various cities from the lists of successful Olympic gymnasts; and the
odes of Pindar, always dearly purchased, attest how many of the great
and wealthy were found in that list.[140] The perfect popularity
and equality of persons at these great games, is a feature not less
remarkable than the exact adherence to predetermined rule, and the
self-imposed submission of the immense crowd to a handful of servants
armed with sticks,[141] who executed the orders of the Eleian
Hellanodikæ. The ground upon which the ceremony took place, and even
the territory of the administering state, was protected by a “Truce
of God,” during the month of the festival, the commencement of which
was formally announced by heralds sent round to the different states.
Treaties of peace between different cities were often formally
commemorated by pillars there erected, and the general impression
of the scene suggested nothing but ideas of peace and brotherhood
among Greeks.[142] And I may remark that the impression of the games
as belonging to all Greeks, and to none but Greeks, was stronger
and clearer during the interval between 600-300 B. C., than it came
to be afterwards. For the Macedonian conquests had the effect of
diluting and corrupting Hellenism, by spreading an exterior varnish
of Hellenic tastes and manners over a wide area of incongruous
foreigners, who were incapable of the real elevation of the Hellenic
character; so that although in later times the games continued
undiminished, both in attraction and in number of visitors, the
spirit of Pan-Hellenic communion, which had once animated the scene,
was gone forever.
[136] The orator Lysias, in a fragment of his lost Panegyrical
Oration preserved by Dionysius of Halikarnassus (vol. v. p. 520
R.), describes the influence of the games with great force and
simplicity. Hêraklês, the founder of them, ἀγῶνα μὲν σωμάτων
ἐποίησε, φιλοτιμίαν δὲ πλούτῳ, γνώμης δ᾽ ἐπίδειξιν ἐν τῷ καλλίστῳ
τῆς Ἑλλάδος· ἵνα τούτων ἁπάντων ἕνεκα ἐς τὸ αὐτὸ ἔλθωμεν, τὰ μὲν
ὀψόμενοι, τὰ δὲ ἀκουσόμενοι. Ἡγήσατο γὰρ τὸν ἐνθάδε σύλλογον
~ἀρχὴν γενέσθαι τοῖς Ἕλλησι τῆς πρὸς ἀλλήλους φιλίας~.
[137] Cicero, Tusc. Quæst. v, 3. “_Mercatum_ eum, qui haberetur
maximo ludorum apparatu totius Græciæ celebritate: nam ut illic
alii corporibus exercitatis gloriam et nobilitatem coronæ
peterent, alii emendi aut vendendi quæstu et lucro ducerentur,”
etc.
Both Velleius Paterculus also (i, 8) and Justin (xiii, 5), call
the Olympic festival by the name _mercatus_.
There were booths all round the Altis, or sacred precinct of Zeus
(Schol. Pindar. Olymp. xi, 55), during the time of the games.
Strabo observes with justice, respecting the multitudinous
festivals generally—Ἡ πανήγυρις, ἐμπορικόν τι πρᾶγμα (x, p. 486),
especially in reference to Delos: see Cicero pro Lege Maniliâ, c.
18: compare Pausanias, x, 32, 9, about the Panegyris and fair at
Tithorea in Phokis, and Becker, Chariklês, vol. i, p. 283.
At the Attic festival of the Herakleia, celebrated by the
communion called Mesogei, or a certain number of the demes
constituting Mesogæa, a regular market-due, or ἀγοραστικὸν, was
levied upon those who brought goods to sell (Inscriptiones Atticæ
nuper repertæ 12, by E. Curtius, pp. 3-7).
[138] Pausan. vi, 23, 5; Diodor. xiv, 109, xv, 7; Lucian, Quomodo
Historia sit conscribenda, c. 42. See Krause, Olympia, sect. 29.
pp. 183-186.
[139] Thucyd. i, 120; Herodot. v, 22-71. Eurybatês of Argos
(Herodot. vi, 92); Philippus and Phayllus of Kroton (v, 47; viii,
47); Eualkidês of Eretria (v, 102); Hermolykus of Athens (ix,
105).
Pindar (Nem. iv and vi) gives the numerous victories of the
Bassidæ and Theandridræ at Ægina: also Melissus the pankratiast
and his ancestors the Kleonymidæ of Thebes—τιμάεντες ἀρχᾶθεν
πρόξενοί τ᾽ ἐπιχωρίων (Isthm. iii, 25).
Respecting the extreme celebrity of Diagoras and his sons, of
the Rhodian gens Eratidæ, Damagêtus, Akusilaus, and Dorieus, see
Pindar, Olymp. vii, 16-145, with the Scholia; Thucyd. iii, 11;
Pausan. vi, 7, 1-2; Xenophon, Hellenic. i, 5, 19: compare Strabo.
xiv, p. 655.
[140] The Latin writers remark it as a peculiarity of Grecian
feeling, as distinguished from Roman, that men of great station
accounted it an honor to contend in the games: see, as a
specimen, Tacitus, Dialogus de Orator. c. 9. “Ac si in Græciâ
natus esses, ubi ludicras quoque artes exercere honestum est, ac
tibi Nicostrati robur Dii dedissent, non paterer immanes illos
et ad pugnam natos lacertos levitate jaculi vanescere.” Again,
Cicero, pro Flacco, c. 13, in his sarcastic style: “Quid si etiam
occisus est a piratis Adramyttenus, homo nobilis, cujus est fere
nobis omnibus nomen auditum, Atinas pugil, Olympionices? hoc est
apud Græcos (quoniam de corum _gravitate_ dicimus) prope majus et
gloriosius, quam Romæ triumphasse.”
[141] Lichas, one of the chief men of Sparta, and moreover a
chariot-victor, received actual chastisement on the ground, from
these staff-bearers, for an infringement of the regulations
(Thucyd. v, 50).
[142] Thucyd. v, 18-47. and the curious ancient Inscription in
Boeckh’s Corpus Inscr. No. 11. p. 28. recording the convention
between the Eleians and the inhabitants of the Arcadian town of
Heræa.
The comparison of various passages referring to the Olympia,
Isthmia, and Nemea (Thucydidês iii, 11; viii, 9-10; v, 49-51;
and Xenophon, Hellenic. iv, 7, 2; v, 1, 29) shows that various
political business was often discussed at these Games,—that
diplomatists made use of the intercourse for the purpose of
detecting the secret designs of states whom they suspected, and
that the administering state often practised manœuvres in respect
to the obligations of truce for the Hieromenia, or Holy Month.