[46\9: See Eur., _IT._ 1234 ff. Oracles of earth-divinities were

always given by _Incubation_. Even Cicero (_Div._ i, 38, following

Chrysippos it seems) refers to vis illa terrae, quae mentem Pythiae

divino afflatu **concitabat (as something that has disappeared). It

is often referred to by later authors. The placing of the tripod

over the chasm from which the vapour of inspiration came, is

certainly, with Welcker, _Götterl._ ii, 11, to be regarded as a

reminiscence of the ancient method of the earth-oracle which was

thus continued in the direct inspiration of Apollo. (The

~enthousiasmo/s~ does not exclude other stimulants. The Pythia

drinks from the inspired spring--like the ~ma/nteis~ at Klaros:

_Ath. Mitth._ xi, 430--and thereupon becomes ~e/ntheos~: Luc.,

_Herm._ 60. The prophetess of Apollo Deiradiotes at Argos by

drinking the sacrificial blood ~ka/tochos ek tou= theou=

**gi/netai~: Paus. 2, 24, 1. The Pythia chews the sacred

laurel-leaves to become inspired: Luc., _Bis Acc._ 1; also {312} the

~da/phnê, hê=s pote geusa/menos peta/lôn ane/phênen aoida\s auto\s

a/nax skêptou=chos~: _H. Mag._ ap. Abel, _Orphica_, p. 288. The holy

plant contains the _vis divina_ which one absorbs into oneself by

chewing. This is the crude, primitive idea underlying such actions,

as plainly appears in a similar case mentioned by Porph., _Abs._ ii,

48.)]

[47\9: e.g. in Sparta: ~e/stin eponomazo/menon Ga/sêpton hiero\n

Gê=s. Apo/llôn d' hupe\r **auto\ hi/drutai Malea/tês~, Paus. 3, 12,

8.--The legend of Apollo and Daphne symbolizes the overthrow of the

earth-oracle by Apollo and his own kind of prophecy.]

[48\9: See above, chap. iii, p. 97. Welcker, _Götterl._ i, 520 ff.]

[49\9: See above, p. 260 ff.]

[50\9: At Amphikleia in Phokis there was an oracle of Dionysos:

~pro/mantis de\ ho hiereu/s esti, chra=| de\ ek tou= theou=

ka/tochos~, Paus. 10, 33, 11. The words of Cornutus probably refer

to Greece (chap. xxx, p. 59, 20 Lang): ~kai\ mantei=a e/sth' ho/pou

tou= Dionu/sou e/chontos . . . ~ cf. Plu., _Smp._ 7, 10, 17, p. 716

B: ~hoi palaioi\ to\n theo\n~ (Dionysos) ~mantikê=s pollê\n e/chein

hêgou=nto moi=ran~.]

[51\9: Dionysos the first giver of oracles at Delphi: Arg., Pi.

_Pyth._, p. 2, 7 Drch. (see above, n. 36). Voigt ap. Roscher, i,

1033-4, regards Apollo at Delphi as the heir of the Dionysiac

_mantikê_; but he considers Dionysos to have been in the same

condition as the Python who was overthrown and killed by Apollo--a

view that can hardly be justified. My own view is that Apollo, after

destroying the chthonic (dream) Oracle adopted from the _mantikê_ of

Dionysos the prophecy by _furor divinus_ which had been hitherto

unknown to him.--No one can seriously claim to have a clear certain

insight into the intricate and kaleidoscopic changes of power and

authority that finally led to the supremacy of the composite

Apolline cult in the violently disputed centre of Greek religion.]

[52\9: ~. . . ho/sous ex Apo/llônos manê=nai le/gousi~ (i.e. the

ancient ~chrêsmolo/gous~), Paus. 1, 34, 4. ~mani/a tou=

chrêsmolo/gou~, Diogen., _Pr._ 6, 47. So, too, ~epi/pnoia~: Sittl,

_Gebärden der Gr. u. R._ 345. ~ho enthousiasmo\s epi/pneusi/n tina

thei/an e/chein dokei=~, Str. 467.--~hoi numpho/lêptoi kai\

theo/lêptoi tô=n anthrô/pôn, epipnoi/a| daimoni/ou tino\s hô/sper

enthousia/zontes~, _Eth. Eud._ i, 1, 4, 1214a, 23.]

[53\9: Ecstatic condition of the Pythia: D.S. xvi, 26; misconstrued

in a Christian sense, Sch. Ar., _Plu._ 39 (see Hemsterh. ad loc.).

~ho/lê gi/gnetai tou= theou=~, Iamb., _Myst._ 3, 11, p. 126, 15

Parthey. Description of a case in which the prophesying Pythia

became completely ~e/kphrôn~: Plu., _Def. Or._, 51, p. 438 B.]

[54\9: In the inspired _mantikê_ the soul becomes "free" from the

body: animus ita solutus est et vacuus ut eo plane nihil sit cum

corpore, Cic., _Div._ i, 113; cf. 70. (~kath' heautê\n gi/gnetai hê

psuchê/~ in dreaming and ~mantei=ai~: Arist. ap. S.E., _M._ 9, 21

[_fr._ 10 R.]. ~e/oike hê archê\~ (of ~nou=s) apoluome/nou tou=

lo/gou **ischu/ei ma=llon~ in _enthousiasmos_, _EE._ 1248a, 40; cf.

1225A, 28.) This is ~e/kstasis~ of the understanding itself: see

above, p. 260 ff. At other times it is said that the god enters into

men and fills their souls; whereupon the man is ~e/ntheos~: see

above, chap. viii, n. 50; cf. _pleni et mixti deo vates_, Minuc. 7,

6. The priestess at the oracle of Branchidai ~de/chetai to\n

theo/n~, Iamb., _M._ 3, 11, p. 127, 7 Par.--~exoiki/zetai ho en

hêmi=n nou=s kata\ tê\n tou= thei/ou pneu/matos a/phixin, kata\ de\

tê\n metana/stasin autou= pa/lin esoiki/zetai ktl~: Philo, _Q. rer.

div._ 53, i, p. 511 M., speaking of the ~e/ntheos katochôtikê/ te

mani/a, hê=| to\ prophêtiko\n ge/nos chrê=tai~ (p. 509 M.); cf. also

_Spec. Leg._ i, p. 343 M. This also was the idea prevailing at

Delphi. Plu., _Def. Or._ 9, p. 414 E, rejects as ~eu/êthes, to\

oi/esthai to\n theo\n auto/n, hô/sper tou\s eggastrimu/thous, {313}

enduo/menon eis ta\ sô/mata tô=n prophêtô=n hupophthe/ggesthai,

toi=s ekei/nôn sto/masi kai\ phônai=s chrô/menon orga/nois~. But

this was evidently the ordinary and deep-rooted opinion (~to\n

theo\n eis sô=ma katheirgnu/nai thnêto/n~, Plu., _Pyth. Or._ 8, p.

398 A). The primitive idea is naively expressed by a late magic

papyrus (Kenyon, _Gk. Pap. in BM._ i, p. 116 [1893], No. 122 [fourth

century B.C.] l. 2 ff.): ~elthe/ moi, ku/rie Hermê= hôs ta\ bre/phê

eis ta\s koili/as tô=n gunaikô=n ktl.~--Neither in _mantikê_ nor in

~e/kstasis~ is any great distinction made between the out-going of

the soul and the in-coming of the god: the two ideas merge together.

The condition is regarded as one in which two persons are united and

become one; the human being ~hoi=on a/llos geno/menos kai\ ouk

auto/s, theo\s geno/menos ma=llon de\ ô/n~, no longer experiencing a

sense of division between himself and divinity ~metaxu\ ga\r oude/n,

oud' e/ti du/o all' he/n a/mphô~ (as the subtle mysticism of

Plotinos describes ~e/kstasis~, 6, 9, 9-10; 6, 7, 34-5). In the

above-mentioned magic invocation of Hermes the ~go/ês~ who has

conjured the god into himself says to the god (l. 36 ff., p. 117)

~su\ (soi~ MSS.) ~ga\r egô\, kai\ egô\ su/ (soi~ MSS.) ~; to\ so\n

o/noma emo\n kai\ to\ emo\n so/n; egô\ ga/r eimi to\ ei/dôlo/n sou

ktl.~ [Cf. Swinburne, _Songs before Sunrise_ ii, 74 f.]]

[55\9: So Bergk, _Gr. Lit._ i, 335, n. 58. The verses of the oracle

are regarded as the god's own: Plu., _Pyth. Or._ v, 396 C ff. Since

the god himself speaks out of her the Pythia can properly speaking

only give true oracles ~ouk apoda/mou Apo/llônos tucho/ntos~, Pi.,

_P._ iv, 5; i.e. when Apollo is present at Delphi and not (as he is

in winter) far away among the Hyperboreans. This was why oracles

were originally only given in the spring month _Bysios_ (Plu., _Q.

Gr._ 9) in which apparently the ~theopha/nia~ occurred (Hdt. i, 51).

Just as in the case of the old oracular earth-spirits (see above,

chap. iii, n. 12) who were confined to special localities, so in the

case of the gods who work through the ~enthousiasmo/s~ of an

inspired prophetess, their personal presence in the temple at the

time of the prophesying is requisite. This presence is thought of as

actual and corporeal in the primitive form of the belief (though it

was got over and reinterpreted in later times), and therefore in the

case of the gods can only be temporary. When, in summer, Apollo is

in Delos (Vg., _A._ iv, 143 ff.), no ~chrêstê/rion~ takes place in

the temple of Apollo at Patara in Lykia (Hdt. i, 182). And so in

general ~phugo/ntôn ê\ metasta/ntôn (tô=n peri\ ta\ mantei=a kai\

chrêstê/ria tetagme/nôn daimoni/ôn) apoba/llei tê\n du/namin (ta\

mantei=a)~, Plu., _DO._ 15, p. 418 D.]

[56\9: The cult of Zeus in Crete was held ~met' orgiasmou=~: Str.

468. The same applies to the cult offered in many places to the

various and very different female deities who were generally

combined together under the name of Artemis: Lob., _Agl._ 1085 ff.;

Meineke, _An. Al._ 361. In their case Asiatic influence was at work

sometimes, but by no means always: Welcker, _Götterl._ i, 391;

Müller, _Dorians_, i, 404 ff. The worship of Pan was also orgiastic.

Otherwise we find it principally in foreign worships that had made

their way at an early period into private cults: e.g. the Phrygian

worship of Kybele, etc. These easily combined with the Bacchic

worship and became almost indistinguishable from it; sometimes they

even allied themselves with true Greek cults, with that of Pan, for

example, which was closely assimilated both to the worship of Kybele

and that of Dionysos. It remains obscure how far the Cretan cult of

Zeus was affected by Phrygian elements.]

[57\9: A remarkable example is given by Herod. (ix, 94), who tells

us of the blind Euenios in Apollonia who suddenly became possessed

of {314} ~e/mphutos mantikê/~ (not acquired by learning). He is a

true ~theo/mantis~ (Pl., _Ap._ 22 C).]

[58\9: The ancients knew quite well that ~Ba/kis~ and ~Si/bulla~

were really _common nouns_ denoting inspired ~chrêsmô|doi/~: thus

the ~Si/bulla~ is the ~parônumi/a~ of Herophile, Plu., _P. Or._ 14,

p. 401 A, and ~Ba/kis~ an ~epi/theton~ of Peisistratos, Sch. Ar.,

_Pax_ 1071. The words are clearly used to denote whole classes of

individuals by Arist., _Prob._ 954a, 36: ~nosê/mata manika\ kai\

enthousiastika/~ are liable to attack ~Si/bullai kai\ Ba/kides kai\

hoi e/ntheoi pa/ntes~. And in general when the ancients speak in the

singular of "the Sibyl" or "Bakis", the word is generally meant as a

class-name; just as for the most part when ~hê Puthi/a, hê

**Puthia/s~ occurs it is not a particular individual Pythia who is

meant but the class-concept of "the Pythia" (or some particular

member of the class actually functioning at the moment). Hence it is

by no means certain that Herakleitos, etc., when they speak simply

of ~hê Si/bulla~, and Herod. when he says ~Ba/kis~ were of the

opinion that there was only one Sibyl and one Bakis.--It must be

admitted that we do not know the real meaning of these adjectival

words themselves, their etymology being quite uncertain. Was the

ecstatic character of these prophets already expressed in their

titles? ~sibullai/nein~, of course = ~enthe/azein~ (D.S. 4, 66, 7),

but the verb is naturally enough derived from the name ~Si/bulla~,

just as ~baki/zein~ is from ~Ba/kis~, ~erinu/ein~, from ~Erinu/s~

and not vice versa. Nor can we tell how far the personal names

attached to certain Sibyls and Bakides have real historical

significance. Sibyl names are Herophile, Demophile (abbreviated to

Demo, ~Phutô/~ or perhaps rather ~Phoitô/~; cf. ~phoita\s

agu/rtria~, A., _Ag._ 1273 (so Lachmann on Tib. 2, 5, 68): the

Arcadian Bakis was called Kydas or Aletes (cf. ~Phoitô/~) acc. to

Philetas Eph. ap. Sch. Ar., _Pa._ 1071. It is impossible to extract

from the by no means scanty materials any real element of historical

fact with respect to these stories of individual Sibyls. Most

untrustworthy of all in this as in all he says on this subject is

Herakleides Pont. and his story of the Phrygian (or Trojan) Sibyl:

we might be more inclined to believe what Eratosthenes reported acc.

to the _antiquis annalibus Samiorum_ of a Samian Sibyl (Varro ap.

Lactant., _Inst._ 1, 6, 9)--if it had not included so entirely

worthless a story as that preserved in Val. M. 1, 5, 9.--Clem. Al.,

_Str._ i, 21, p. 398 P., gives after Bakis a whole list of

~chrêsmô|doi/~ with names: they evidently do not all belong to

legend, but hardly one of them is otherwise known to us. The

following are possibly real persons belonging to the prophetic

period: Melesagoras of Eleusis who prophesied in Athens like another

Bakis ~ek numphô=n ka/tochos~: Max. Tyr. 38, 3 (there is not a

shadow of a reason for identifying him with Amelesagoras, the author

of an alleged ancient Atthis: Müller, _FHG._ ii, 21); Euklos of

Cyprus whose ~chrêsmoi/~ written in the old Cypriote language

inspire a certain confidence (M. Schmidt, _Kuhns Ztschr._ 1860, p.

161 ff.): unfortunately he wrote before Homer: Paus. 10, 24, 3;

Tat., _Gr._ 41, which makes his personality dubious again.]

[59\9: Of this description were the ~chrêsmolo/goi~ of the fifth and

fourth--even of the expiring sixth--centuries (Onomakritos belongs

entirely to this class). Lob., _Agl._ 978 ff., 932. It is very

rarely that we hear in these times of real prophets on their own

account, prophesying in the _furor divinus_, like that Amphilytos of

Acarnania who met Peisistratos as he returned from Eretria before

the battle ~epi\ Pallêni/di~ and prophesied to him ~enthea/zôn~

(Hdt. i, 62 f.; he is an Athenian in [Pl.] _Thg._ 124 D--where he is

mentioned side by side with ~Ba/kis te {315} kai\ Si/bulla~--and in

Clem. Al., _Str._ i, 21, p. 398 P.). In the same way occasional

"Sibyls" occur even in late times (Phaennis, Athenais: see

Alexandre, _Or. Sib._^1 ii, p. 21, 48).]

[60\9: Herakl. Pont. ap. Cl. Al., _Str._ i, 21, p. 384 P., seems to

have been the first to speak definitely of _two_ Sibyls, Herophile

of Erythrai and the Phrygian Sibyl (whom he identifies with the

Marpessian Sibyl or the S. of Gergis: Lact. 1, 6, 12, see Alexandre,

ii, p. 25, 32. Philetas ap. Sch. Ar., _Av._ 962, follows him except

that he adds a third, the Sardian). The Phrygian-Trojan Sibyl is

dated by Herakleides in the times of "Solon and Cyrus" (Lact.); we

cannot tell what date he assigned to the Erythraean. Perhaps it was

only after his times that the ~chrêsmoi/~ of Herophile first

appeared in which she prophesied the ~Trôïka/~. From these verses it

was now deduced that she lived before the Trojan war: so Paus. 10,

12, 2, and even Apollodoros of Erythrai (Lact. 1, 6, 9).

Thenceforward the name of Herophile was associated with the idea of

extreme antiquity. (The Libyan Sibyl of Paus. who is said to be the

oldest of all is merely an invention of Euripides and never really

obtained currency: ~Li/bussa = Si/bulla~ anagrammatically. See

Alexandre, p. 74 f.) Herophile was identified also with the ~prô/tê

Si/bulla~ who came to Delphi and prophesied there: Plu., _P.Or._ 9,

398 C; expressly so by Paus. 10, 12, 1, and Bocchus ap. Solin. 2, p.

38, 21-4 Mom. Acc. to Herakleides (ap. Clem. Al.) it was rather the

~Phrugi/a~ who calling herself Artemis prophesied in Delphi (so,

too, Philetas following Herakl. and see also Suid. ~Sib. Delphi/s~).

This is due to the local patriotism of the inhabitants of the Troad.

Their Sibyl is the Marpessian (= the ~Phrugi/a~ of Herakl.). The

artificial sort of interpretation and forgery that enabled a local

historian of the Troad (it cannot have been Demetrios of Skepsis) to

identify the Marpessian Sibyl, who also called herself Artemis, with

Herophile and turn her into the true ~eruthrai/a~, may be guessed

from Paus. 10, 12, 2 ff. (The same source as that of Paus. is used

by St. Byz. s. ~Mermêsso/s~, as Alexandre, p. 22, rightly remarks.)

The Erythraean claim to Herophile was also disputed from other

directions. The Erythraean is distinguished from Herophile as being

later by Bocchus ap. Solin. 2, p. 38, 24; and in a different fashion

the same is done by Mart. Cap. ii, 159. Acc. to Eus., _Chr._ 1305

Abr. (not Eratosthenes in this case) even the Samian Sibyl was

identified with Herophile--to say nothing of the Ephesian Herophile

in the fragg. of the enlarged Xanthos, _FHG._ iii, 406-8. From the

fable of the Marpessian Herophile was later invented the story of

her prophecy to Aeneas: Tib. 2, 5, 67; D.H. 1, 55, 4; Alexandre, p.

25.--In comparison with these different claimants to the name of

Herophile (even the Cumaean Sibyl was said to be the same as

Herophile) the rest of the Sibyls were hardly able to obtain a real

footing in tradition.]

[61\9: The Erythraean Sibyl was dated by Eusebius in Ol. 9, 3 (the

absurd addition ~en Aigu/ptô|~ belongs only to the author of the

_Chron. Pasc._ and not to Eus.: Alexandre, p. 80); he dated the

Samian in Ol. 17, 1 (it is quite arbitrary to refer this view to

Eratosthenes). Acc. to Suid. ~Si/bulla Apo/llônos kai\ Lami/as~ the

Erythraean lived 483 years after the fall of Troy: i.e. Ol. 20, 1

(700 B.C.). Herakleides put the Phrygo-Trojan Sib. in the times of

Solon and Kyros (to which Epimenides also belongs and to which

Aristeas and Abaris were supposed to belong). We can no longer

discover or guess at the reasons for these datings. In any case the

Chronologists to whom they go back evidently regarded the Sibyls as

later than the earliest Pythia at Delphi. Even the Cumaean Sibyl was

not to be distinguished {316} from the Erythraean: [Arist.] _Mirab._

95, which perhaps comes from Timaeus; Varro ap. Serv. _A._ vi, 36;

cf. D.H. 4, 62, 6. In spite of which she is a contemporary of

Tarquinius Priscus (this was enough to distinguish the _Cimmeria in

Italia_ who prophesied to Aeneas from the Cumaean Sibyl: Naev. and

Calp. Piso in Varro ap. Lact. 1, 6, 9). Naturally in these

chronological straits recourse was had to the favourite device of

such accounts--unnatural longevity. The Sibyl is ~poluchroniôta/tê~

[Arist.]: she lived a thousand years or thereabouts: Phleg., _Macr._

4 (the oracle of this passage was also known to Plu.; cf. _PO._ 13,

401 B; a similar source inspires Ov., _M._ xiv, 132-53. In this case

the Sibyl has already lived 700 years before the arrival of Aeneas,

and she will live another 300, which would bring her--by a rather

inexact calculation--to about the time of Tarquinius Priscus). In

the verses found at Erythrae belonging to a statue of the Sibyl

(Buresch, _Woch. Klass. Phil._ 1891, p. 1042; _Ath. Mitt._ 1892, p.

20), the Erythraean Sibyl is said to live 900 years--unfortunately

one cannot be sure that this means till the time of the inscr.

itself and of the ~ne/os kti/stês~ of Erythrai in the age of the

Antonines who is referred to at the close. If so the Sibyl would

have been born about the year 700 B.C. (as in Suid.) or a little

earlier. Perhaps, however, the lengthy period refers to the life

time of the long since dead Sibyl herself, while the ~au=this d'

entha/de egô\ hê=mai~ of l. 11 f. only applies to the statue. In

which case the commencement and end of the Sibyl's lifetime would be

unknown.--_Cumaeae saecula vatis_ became proverbial: Alexandre, p.

57. Finally the Sibyl was regarded as entirely forgotten by death,

as in the story in Petronius 48 (cf. also--probably referring to

Erythrai--Ampel., _LM._ viii, 15; _Rh. Mus._ 32, 639).]

[62\9: ~r~ 383 ff.]

[63\9: The Sibyl is overcome by the _furor divinus_ in such a way ut

quae sapiens non videat ea videat insanus, et si qui humanos sensus

amiserit divinos assecutus sit, Cic., _Div._ ii, 110; cf. i, 34.

~nosê/mata manika\ kai\ enthousiastika/~ of Sibyls and Bakids Arist.

_Prob._ 30, 1, 954a, 36. The Sibyl prophesies ~mantikê=| chrôme/nê

enthe/ô|~, Pl., _Phdr._ 244 B. ~mainome/nê te kai\ ek tou= theou=

ka/tochos~, Paus. 10, 12, 2. deo furibunda recepto, Ov., _M._ xiv,

107. There is in her divinitas et quaedam caelitum societas, Plin.,

_NH._ vii, 119. ~katochê\ kai\ epi/pnoia~ [Just.], _Co. ad. Gr._,

37, 36 A. So, too, in our collections of Sibylline oracles the S.

often speak of their divine frenzy, etc.; e.g. ii, 4, 5; iii, 162

f., 295 f.; xi, 317, 320, 323 f.; xii, 294 f., etc. Frenzy of the

Cumaean S.: Vg., _A._ vi, 77 f.--Bakis has his prophetic gift from

the Nymphs (Ar., _Pa._ 1071), he is ~kata/schetos ek numphô=n,

manei\s ek numphô=n~ (Paus. 10, 12, 11; 4, 27, 4), ~numpho/lêptos~

(cf. ~theo/lêptos, phoibo/lêptos, pano/lêptos, mêtro/lêptos~;

_Lymphati_: Varro, _LL._ vii, p. 365 Sp., Paul. Fest., p. 120, 11

ff., Placid., p. 62, 15 ff. Deuerl.).]

[64\9: ~Si/bulla de\ mainome/nô| sto/mati ktl.~: Herakleitos ap.

Plu., _Pyth. Or._ 6, p. 397 A. _fr._ 12 By. = 92 Diels (the words

~chili/ôn . . . theou=~ are not H.'s but Plutarch's. Cl. Al., _Str._

1, 15, p. 358 P. uses only Plu.). To regard Herakleitos' Sibyl as

the Pythia (with Bgk., etc.) is absurd apart from the fact that the

Pythia is never called ~Si/bulla~. It is excluded by the way Plu.

introduces the word in this passage, and connects chap. 9 with chap.

6. It is true, though, that Pl. draws a _parallel_ between the

nature of the Sibyl and that of the Pythia.]

[65\9: Homer knows Kassandra as one of the daughters of Priam and

indeed as ~Pria/moio thugatrô=n ei=dos ari/stên~, ~N~ 365; probably

that it why she is allotted to Agamemnon as his share of the spoil

and why she is slain with him, ~l~ 421 ff. The ~Ku/pria~ is the

first to tell of her {317} prophetic skill. Was it the narrative of

~Ô~ 699 which first suggested to the ~neô/teroi~ the idea of her

knowledge of the future? (In reality that passage alludes rather to

the ~sumpa/theia~ of the sister and daughter and not to _mantikê_:

Sch. B. ad loc.) Her prophetic gifts were elaborated later in many

stories: e.g. Bacchyl. xiv, 50 = _fr._ 29 Bgk. (Porph. on Hor. _O._

i, 15). Aesch. represents her as the type of the ecstatic prophetess

(~phrenomanê/s, theopho/rêtos~, _Ag._ 1140, 1216). As such she is

called by Eur. ~mantipo/los ba/kchê~, _Hec._ 121. ~phoiba/s~ 827.

~to\ bakchei=on ka/ra tê=s thespiô|dou= Kassa/ndras~ 676. She wildly

shakes her head like the Bacchants ~ho/tan theou= manto/sunoi

pneu/sôs' ana/gkai~, _IA._ 760 ff.]

[66\9: About the Arcadian Bakis (Kydas or Aletes by name)

~_Theo/pompos_ en tê=| th' tô=n Philippikô=n a/lla te polla\

historei= para/doxa kai\ ho/ti pote\ tô=n Lakedaimoni/ôn ta\s

gunai=kas manei/sas eka/thêren, Apo/llônos tou/tois tou/ton

kathartê\n do/ntos~, Sch. Ar., _Pa._ 1071. The story is closely

parallel to that of Melampous and the Proitides, see above, nn.

22-5.]

[67\9: Cf. e.g. Hippocr. ~p. partheni/ôn~ (ii, p. 528 K.; viii, 468

L.). Upon their recovery from hysterical hallucinations the women

dedicate valuable ~hima/tia~ to Artemis ~keleuo/ntôn tô=n

_ma/nteôn_~. This is the regular name for the ~ma/goi, kathartai/,

agu/rtai~ (cf. Teiresias ~do/lios agu/rtês~, S., _OT._ 388;

Kassandra is accused of being ~phoita\s agu/rtria~, A., _Ag._ 1273).

Hp. speaks elsewhere also of their manner of healing epilepsy, i, p.

588 K. (vi, 354 L.).]

[68\9: ~katharmoi\ . . . _kata\ tê\n mantikê/n_~, Pl., _Crat._ 405

AB. The _~ma/nteis~_ are able e.g. to drive away by magic the mist

that is so dangerous for the olive-trees: Thphr., _CP._ 2, 7, 5. The

~_ma/nteis_ kai\ teratosko/poi, hagu/rtai kai\ _ma/nteis_~ possess

the arts of ~magganeu/mata, epô|dai/, katade/seis~ and ~epagôgai/~

which compel the gods to do their will, Pl., _Rp._ 364 BC; _Lg._ 933

CE. These ~ma/nteis~ correspond in all essentials to the magicians

and medicine men of savage tribes. Prophet, doctor, and magician are

here united in a single person. A mythical prototype of these Greek

"medicine men" is Apis, of whom we hear in Aesch., _Sup._ 260-70.

(The ~ma/nteis~ also officiate as sacrificial priests, esp. where

the sacrifice is combined with a special sacrificial

_mantikê_--quite unknown to Homer--in which the will of the gods is

inquired: Eur., _Hcld._ 401**, 819; _Ph._ 1255 ff. and frequently.

Hermann _Gottesdienstl. Alterth._ 33, 9.)]

[69\9: The clearest evidence for this is Hp., _Morb. Sacr._ (vi, 352

L.). See below, n. 81. Assistance in the case of internal diseases

is naturally sought in ancient times from magicians, for such

diseases arise immediately from the action of a god: ~stugero\s de/

hoi e/chrae dai/môn~, ~e~ 396 (cf. ~k~, 64), is said of an invalid

who lies ~dêro\n têko/menos~. Cf. ~nou=sos Dio\s mega/lou~, ~i~ 411.

In such cases help is sought from the ~iatro/mantis~ (A., _Sup._

263) who is at once ~ma/ntis~ and ~teratosko/pos~ and ~kathartê/s~

like his divine prototype Apollo: A., _Eum._ 62-3. In a long illness

King Kleomenes I of Sparta resorts to ~kathartai\ kai\ ma/nteis~,

Plu., _Ap. Lac._ 11, p. 223 E.]

[70\9: ~A~ 313 f.; ~ch~ 481 ff. Kathartic practices, however much

they may contain a primitive core, were fairly late in attaining

popularity in Greece (or in regaining a lost popularity): as is

shown esp. by the all but total absence of any mention of such

practices and the superstitions underlying them from Hesiod, _Op._,

which otherwise preserves the memory of so much countryside

superstition (something rather like it is perhaps to be found in

_Op._ 733-6).]

[71\9: Nothing is said in Homer of the purification of the murderer

or the homicide: see above, chap. v, n. 166.]

[72\9: Thus at the ~amphidro/mia~ all who have had anything to do

with {318} the ~mai/ôsis, apokathai/rontai ta\s chei=ras~ (Suid.

s.v.). But even the child is lustrated: it is carried in the arms of

a grown-up who runs with it round the altar and the altar fire:

clearly a vestige of the ~apotropiasmo\s kai\ ka/tharsis~ of the

child by sacred fire of which so many relics have been observed: see

Grimm, p. 625; Tylor, ii, 430 f.--Uncleanness of the pregnant woman

until the fortieth day after the child is born: Welcker, _Kl. Schr._

iii, 197-9. At the birth of a child crowns of olive-branches or

woollen fillets (~e/ria~) were in Attica hung up on the house-door;

just as cypress-branches were hung on the doors of houses where a

corpse lay (see above, chap. v, n. 39): for kathartic purposes

strings of onions (squills) were suspended on house-doors; see

below): Hsch. ~ste/phanon ekphe/rein~. Both are lustral materials.

Use of olive branches at ~katharmo/s~: S., _OC._ 483 f.; Vg., _A._

230. When a mother gives her child that is to be exposed a crown

made of olive branches (as in Eur., _Ion_, 1433 ff.), this, too, has

an apotropaic purpose as also has the Gorgon's head on the

embroidered stuff that also accompanies the child (l. 1420 f.): see

on this O. Jahn, _Bös. Blick_, 60. The olive is also sacred to the

~chtho/nioi~ (hence its use as a bed for corpses: see above, chap.

v, n. 61; cf. ~toi=s apothanou=sin elaa=s sunekphe/rousin~: Artemid.

iv, 57, p. 236, 20 H. ~koti/nô| kai\ taini/a|~ the goddess crowns

Chios in his dream and points the man thus dedicated to death to his

~mnê=ma~: Chio, _Epist._ 17, 2). This makes the olive suitable for

lustration and ~apotropiasmoi/~. The house in which the child lay

was thus regarded as needing "purification". The "uncleanness" felt

to exist in this case is clearly expressed by Phot. ~rha/mnos;

ami/antos hê pi/tta; dio\ kai\ en tai=s gene/sesi tô=n paidi/ôn

(tau/tê|) chri/ousi ta\s oiki/as, _eis ape/lasin daimo/nôn_~ (see

above, chap. v, n. 95). It is the neighbourhood of these (chthonic)

~dai/mones~ that cause the pollution.]

[73\9: A., _Pers._ 201 ff., 216 ff.; Ar., _Ra._ 1340; Hp., _Insom._

(ii, p. 10, 13 K. = vi, p. 654 L.); cf. Becker, _Charicles_, p. 133,

n. 4 E.T.]

[74\9: Cf. Plu., _Sept. Sap. Conv._ iii, p. 149 D, and on this

Wyttenb. vi, p. 930 f.]

[75\9: Purification of houses (~ch~ 481 ff.); e.g. [D.] 47, 71. It

was customary to purify ~oiki/as kai\ pro/bata~ with black

hellebore: Thphr., _HP._ 9, 10, 4; Dsc. 4, 149 (hence the

superstitious details of its gathering, Thphr., _HP._ 9, 8, 8, and

Dsc.). The touching of the house by unholy daimones necessitates

purification: Thphr., _Ch._ 28 (16), 15, of the ~deisidai/môn; kai\

pukna\ de\ tê\n oiki/an katha=rai deino\s Heka/tês pha/skôn

epagôgê\n gegone/nai~.]

[76\9: Presence of a dead body in a house makes the water and fire

unclean; "clean" water and fire must then be brought in from

elsewhere. See Plu., _QG._ 24 (Argos), p. 297 A (see above, chap. v,

n. 38). At a festival of the dead in Lemnos all the fires were put

out (as unclean); "clean" fire was sought from Delos, and, after the

completion of the ~enagi/smata~ brought into the country and

distributed. Philostr., _H._ 19, 14, p. 206-8, 7 K.--Alexander was

following Greek, as well as Persian, customs when at the burial of

Hephaistion he allowed ~to\ para\ toi=s Pe/rsais kalou/menon hiero\n

pu=r~ to go out, ~me/chri a\n tele/sê| tê\n ekphora/n~, D.S. 17,

114, 4.]

[77\9: "When a Greek saw anyone using expiatory rites, he presumed

in that person the will to amend," Nägelsbach, _Nachhom. Theol._,

363. If this was really so it is strange that we never see this

"presumption" expressed in words. We do indeed read that the

~deisidai/môn~ mortifies himself and ~exagoreu/ei tina\s _hamarti/as

hautou=_ kai\ plêmmelei/as~, but in what do these ~hamarti/ai~

consist?--~hôs to/de phago/ntos ê\ pio/ntos ê\ badi/santos {319}

hodo\n hê\n ouk ei/a to\ daimo/nion~, Plu., _Superstit._ 7, p. 168

D: merely ritual omissions in fact, not moral transgressions at all.

It is the same everywhere in this domain. The conceptions underlying

purificatory practice certainly did not correspond to the refined

morality of later ages, but they continued in force so long as

_kathartikê_ remained popular: they are well expressed (though

disapprovingly) by Ovid in the well-known lines which we shall,

however, do well to recall: omne nefas omnemque mali purgamina

causam credebant nostri tollere posse senes. Graecia principium

moris fuit: illa nocentis impia lustratos ponere facta putat.--a!

nimium faciles, qui tristia crimina caedis fluminea tolli posse

putetis aqua, _F._ 2, 35 ff.; cf. Hp. i, p. 593 K., vi, 362 L.]

[78\9: We can only here allude to the remarkable parallel provided

by the purificatory and expiatory ritual of India, which is

completely analogous to the _kathartikê_ of Greece and had a similar

origin. Even in details Indian conceptions and procedure answer

closely to Greek. They are both as far removed as possible from all

idea of quieting a guilt-laden conscience and are directed solely

towards effacing, expunging, or expelling an external ~mi/asma~, a

pollution arriving from without, a taint arising from contact with a

hostile ~daimo/nion~ conceived as something in the nature of a

daimonic fluid. Indian sources are on this point very rich and full:

an excellent account of them is given by Oldenberg in his _Religion

des Veda_ (esp. Fr. tr. 243 ff.; 417 ff.). Greek and Indian

practices illuminate each other. It would be a valuable experiment

to take the highly elaborated kathartic ritual of the Avesta and

compare it with the history and technique of purification and

expiation in Greek religion. It would mean renewing Lomeier's old

book [_Epimenides s. de lustrat._ Zutphen 1700]: the materials are

very scattered and the ground has never been thoroughly gone over

since then. By the help also of the "comparative" method of

religious study, which in this case is quite justified, it would

then be possible to reconstruct a most important fragment of

primitive _religio_--a fragment which had become almost entirely

forgotten in Homeric times, which then recovered its ancient

influence and continued to develop and was even transmitted to the

ritual of the Christian church (cf. Anrich, _D. ant. Mysterienw._

190 f.). We must be careful, however, to shut our ears to the

otherwise very convincing people who are so anxious to introduce

purely _moral_ interests and conceptions into ancient _religio_.

Morality is a later achievement in the life-history of the children

of men: this fruit did not grow in Eden.]

[79\9: See Appendix v.]

[80\9: What the Greeks meant by ~mi/asma~ can be very clearly seen,

e.g. in the conversation between Phaidra and her nurse in Eur. _Hp._

316 ff. Phaidra's distress of mind is not derived from a deed of

blood: ~chei=res me\n hagnai/~ she says ~phrê\n d' e/chei mi/asma/

ti~. Does the Nurse think of any _moral_ disgrace or defilement of

the distressed woman in this ~phreno\s mi/asma~? Not at all: she

only asks, ~mô=n ex epaktou= pêmonê=s echthrô=n tinos?~ in other

words by "defilement of the mind" she can only conceive of an

enchantment, something from without that comes, by ~epagôgê\ tinô=n

daimoni/ôn~ (see below, n. 108), a stain derived from the polluting

neighbourhood of such daimones. This was the general and popular

conception. (Taken literally Plato's words also give expression to

the popular conception: ~pollô=n o/ntôn kai\ kalô=n en tô=| tô=n

anthrô/pôn bi/ô|, toi=s plei/stois autô=n hoi=on _kê=res_

epipephu/kasin, hai\ katamiai/nousi/ te kai\ katarrupai/nousin

auta\~, _Lg._ 937 D.)] {320}

[81\9: Diseases come ~palaiô=n ek mênima/tôn~, Pl., _Phdr._ 244 DE;

i.e. from the rage of departed generations of souls or of

~chtho/nioi~, Lob., _Agl._ 635-7. Esp. madness is a ~nosei=n ex

alasto/rôn~, S., _Tr._ 1325, a ~ta/ragma tarta/reion~, E., _HF._ 89.

Cure of such diseases is undertaken not by doctors but by

~kathartai/, ma/goi kai\ agu/rtai~, expiatory priests with magic

proceedings--this is well shown by the treatment of the "sacred

disease" in Hp., _Morb. Sac._, p. 587-94 K = vi, 352-64 L. Such

people, introducing themselves as magicians in the strict sense (p.

358 L.), use no regular medicinal treatment (356), but operate

partly with ~katharmoi/~ and ~epô|dai/~, partly with various

prescriptions of abstinence ~hagnei=ai kai\ katharo/têtes~. These

last are explained by Hp. on dietetic grounds but the _Kathartai_

themselves derived them from ~to\ thei=on kai\ to\ daimo/nion~

(358). And such they were evidently in intention. The account of

such prescriptions given on pp. 354-6 mostly refers to abstentions

from plants and animals supposed to be sacred to the underworld.

Noticeable also: ~hima/tion me/lan mê\ e/chein, _thanatô=des_ ga\r

to\ me/lan~ (all trees with black berries or fruit belong to the

_inferi_: Macr. 3, 20, 3). Other superstitions are found with these:

~mêde\ po/da epi\ podi\ e/chein, mêde\ chei=ra epi\ cheiri/; tau=ta

ga\r pa/nta _kôlu/mata_ ei=nai~. The belief is familiar from the

story of the birth of Herakles. See Welcker, _Kl. Schr._ iii, 191.

Sittl, _Gebärden_ 126. (Something of the kind in _P. Mag. Par._ 1052

ff., p. 71 Wess.) The source of the disease was, however, always

supposed to be the direct influence of a ~dai/môn~ (360-2) which

must therefore be averted. Acc. to popular belief it is always God

who ~to\ anthrô/pou sô=ma miai/nei~ (cf. p. 362). For this reason

the magicians purify, ~kathai/rousi~, the sick ~hai/masi kai\

toi=sin a/lloisi~ which are used to purify people ~mi/asma/ ti

e/chontas~ or on whom a curse has been laid. The ~katha/rsia~ are

buried or thrown into the sea (~kai\ eis ha/la lu/mat' e/ballon~,

_A_ 314), or carried away into a deserted mountain district (p.

362). Such ~katha/rsia~ are now the resting place of the ~mi/asma~

that has been washed off, and so the magician drives ~eis ore/ôn

kephala\s nou/sous te kai\ a/lgê~, Orph. _H._ 36, 16. Similarly in

India, Oldenberg 495.]

[82\9: _Epôdai_ used for stopping the flow of blood, ~t~ 457.

Frequently mentioned in later times: particularly used in the magic

cure of epilepsy, Hp. vi, 352-4; [D.] 25, §§ 79-80. When houses and

hearths are purified by being sprinkled with hellebore

~sunepa/|dousi/ tina epô|dê/n~, Thphr. _HP._ 9, 10, 4

(_comprecationem solemnem_ is Pliny's trans., _NH._ 25, 49). Pains

of childbirth prevented or alleviated by _epôdai_, Pl., _Tht._ 149

CD. (Much more of the kind in Welcker, _Kl. S._ iii, 64 ff.) The

essential meaning of such _epôdai_ is regularly an appeal or

exorcism addressed to the daimonic creature (clearly an appeal when

lions or snakes are appeased in this way: Welcker, iii, 70, 14-15).

_Epôdai_ accompanying ~rhizotomi/a~ are ~epiklê/seis~ of the

~dai/môn hô=| hê bota/nê anie/rôtai~: _P. Mag. Par._ 2973 ff. The

meaning of such "conjurings" addressed to diseases--when the daimon

is exorcised--is clearly seen in what Plotin. says of the Gnostics:

they claimed to heal the sick by means of ~_epaoidai/_, me/lê,

ê=choi~, and ~_kathai/resthai_ no/sôn, hupostêsa/menoi ta\s no/sous

_daimo/nia_ ei=nai, kai\ ta\ toiau=ta exairei=n _lo/gô|_ pha/skontes

du/nasthai~, 2, 9, 14.]

[83\9: Clashing of bronze used at ~apokatha/rseis~ to drive away

ghosts: see above, chap. v, n. 167; cf. also Macr. 5, 19, 11. Claud.

_iv. Cons. Hon._ 149: nec te (like Juppiter) progenitum Cybeleius

aere sonoro lustravit Corybas. The noise of bronze has a kathartic

effect simply as averting ghosts. In the process of driving out the

ghosts at the _Lemuria_, Temesaea concrepat aera, Ov., _F._ 5, 441.

Hence (?) ~chalkou= {321} auda\n chthoni/an, E., _Hel._ 1346. At

eclipses of the sun or moon ~kinou=si chalko\n kai\ si/dêron

a/nthrôpoi pa/ntes~ (cf. Plu., _Aem._ 17; Juv. vi, 443; Mart. xii,

57, 16 f., etc.) ~_hôs tou\s dai/mones apelau/nontes_~, Al. Aphr.,

_Prb._ 2, 46, p. 65, 28 Id. This is the object of the _crepitus

dissonus_ at eclipses of the moon: Plin., _NH._ ii, 54; Liv. xxvi,

5, 9; Tac., _A._ i, 28, and cf. Tib. i, 8, 21 f.; _ob strias_:

[Aug.] _Sacrileg._ v, 16, with Caspari's refs., p. 31 f.]

[84\9: ~pho/nô| pho/non ekni/ptein~, E., _IT._ 1233. Purgantur

<cruore> cum cruore polluuntur . . . Heraclit. (p. 335, 5 Schust. [5

D. = 130 B.]).]

[85\9: A.R. iv, 703 ff. ~katharmoi=s choirokto/nois . . .~: A.,

_Eum._ 283, 449, ~hai/matos katharsi/ou~; cf. Müller, _Aesch. Eum._

124. Representation of the ~katharmo/s~ of Orestes on well-known

vase-paintings: _Mon. d. inst._ iv, 48, etc.]

[86\9: The "purification" of the stain of blood in these and similar

cases really consisted in a "substitution" sacrifice whereby the

anger of the daimones was appeased: so much was, on the whole

correctly, observed long ago by Meiners, _Allg. Gesch. der relig._

ii, 137. The ~mi/asma~ that clings to the murderer is in fact just

the indignation of the murdered man or of the underworld spirits:

this is plain in Antiph., _Tet._ 3~a~, 3 (see above, chap. v, n.

176). The thing that makes the son who has not avenged his father's

murder "unclean" and keeps him away from the altars of the gods is

~ouch horôme/nê patro\s mê=nis~ A., _Ch._ 293.--In the case of

murder or homicide there is not only the contact with the sinister

other-world that makes men unclean (this applies to all cases of

"pollution"), but, besides this, there is also the anger of the

murdered soul itself (and of its protecting spirits). Hence in

_this_ case, besides ~katharmo/s, hilasmo/s~ as well is necessary

(see above, chap. v). It is evident, however, that it would be

difficult to keep the two processes distinct and that they would

easily merge into each other.]

[87\9: The ~pharmakoi/~ are put to death at the _Thargelia_ of Ionic

cities: Hipponax _fr._ 37. In other places on extraordinary

occasions, but regularly at the Thargelia in Athens. This is denied

by Stengel, _Hermes_, 22, 86 ff., but in the face of definite

statements from antiquity general considerations can have no weight.

In addition it was only a special mode of execution applied to

criminals already condemned to death. (Two men, acc. to Harp. 180,

19: a man and a woman Hsch. ~pharmakoi/~: the variation is explained

by Hellad. ap. Phot., _Bibl._, p. 354a, 3 ff. Bk.) The ~pharmakoi/~

serve as ~katha/rsia~ to the city (Harp. 180, 19 Bk.): Hippon. _fr._

4; Hellad. ap. Sch. Ar., _Eq._ 1136. ~pharmako/s = ka/tharma~,

Phot., _Lex._ 640, 8 Pors. The ~pharmakoi/~ were _either_ burnt

(after being put to death) like other propitiatory victims: Tz.,

_Ch._ v, 736, prob. following Hippon. (the burning of the ~pharm.~

at Athens seems to be alluded to by Eup. ~Dê=m.~ 120 [i, 290 K.]);

_or_ stoned: this form of death is implied (in the case of Athens)

by the legend of Istros ap. Harp. 180, 23. Analogous customs

(indicated by Müller, _Dorians_, i, 345) at Abdera: Ov., _Ib._ 465

f. (which acc. to the Sch. is taken from Call., who evidently

transferred to Apollonios the pious wish directed by Hippon. against

Boupalos); at Massilia (Petr. _fr._ 1 Bü., where the ~pharmako/s~ is

either thrown down the cliff or _saxis occidebatur a populo_: Lact.

ad Stat., _Th._ 10, 793). Apollonios of Tyana was clearly following

ancient custom when he made the people of Ephesos stone an old

beggar, who was evidently nothing but the plague-daimon itself, for

the purification of the city: ~kathê/ras tou\s Ephesi/ous tê=s

no/sou~, Philostr., _VA._ 4, 10-11. Was the stoning a sort of

counter-enchantment? See Roscher, _Kynanthropie_, 38-9.] {322}

[88\9: Among the ingredients of a ~Heka/tês dei=pnon en tê=|

trio/dô|~ was an ~ôo\n ek katharsi/ou~: Luc., _DM._ 1, 1; or the

testicles of a sucking pig that had been used as a victim: D., 54,

39. The ~oxuthu/mia~, sacrifices to Hekate and the souls of the dead

(see above, chap. v, n. 176), are identical with the ~katha/rmata

kai\ apolu/mata~ which were thrown out at the crossroads in the

~Hekatai=a~: Did. ap. Harp. ~oxuthu/mia~; cf. _E.M._ 626, 44.

~katha/rsia~ is the name of the purificatory offerings:

~katha/rmata~ of the same when they are thrown away: Ammon., p. 79

Valck. The dead bodies of dogs which had been used as victims at the

"purification" were afterwards thrown ~tê=| Heka/tê| meta\ tô=n

a/llôn katharsi/ôn~, Plu., _QR._ 68, p. 280 C. Even the blood and

water of the purificatory sacrifice, the ~apo/nimma~, is also

dedicated to the dead: Ath. 409 E ff. The fact that the

~katha/rmata~ are made over to the invisibly present spirits at the

cross roads might be derived also from the necessity for throwing

them out ~ametastrepti/~ (see below, n. 104). Even the Argive custom

of throwing the ~katha/rmata~ into the Lernaean lake (Znb., iv, 86;

Dgn., vi, 7; Hsch. ~Le/rnê theatô=n~) shows that these kathartic

materials are intended as a sacrifice to the underground spirits

since the Lernaean lake was an entrance to the underworld (see

above, chap. viii, n. 28).]

[89\9: Annual ~teletê/~ to Hekate in Aegina reputed to have been

founded by Orpheus. Hekate and her ~katharmoi/~ were there regarded

as valuable against insanity (for she can remove what she herself

has sent): Ar., _Ves._ 122; Lob., _Agl._ 242. This initiation

festival lasted on into the fourth century A.D.--Paus. refers to

only one other temple of Hekate in Argos: 2, 22, 7.--Indications of

a rigorous worship of Hekate in Kos: _GDI._ 3624, iii, p. 345 fin.

Hekate was patron-goddess of the city of Stratonikeia: Tac., _A._

iii, 62. Str., 660, and in other cities of Karia (as is known from

inscr.). Possibly Hekate is there only a Greek title of a native

Karian deity. The ancient cult of the ~chtho/nioi~ at the Triopion

in Knidos was, however, Greek: Böckh on Sch. Pi., p. 314 f.; _CIG._

i, p. 45.]

[90\9: ~chthoni/a kai\ nerte/rôn pru/tanis~: Sophr. _fr._ 7 Kaib.

ap. Sch. Theoc. ii, 12.--She is actually queen in Hades, sharing the

throne of Plouton it seems: S., _Ant._ 1199. She is often called

~chthoni/a~. She is ~Admê/tou ko/rê~ (i.e. of Hades, K. O. Müller,

_Introd. Scient. Myth._ 245): Hsch. She is called ~admê/tê~ herself

in _H. Mag. Hec._, Abel, _Orph._, p. 289. She is the daughter of

Euboulos, i.e. Hades: _Orph. H._, 72, 3 (elsewhere of course she has

other origins). As ~chthoni/a~ she is often confused with Persephone

(and both, as they are all thus united in several particulars, with

Artemis). In the transcript of a metrical inscr. from Budrum

(Cilicia) in _JHS._ xi, 252. there appears a ~Gê= Heka/tê~. This

would certainly be very remarkable but on the stone itself the

actual words are ~_tê\n_ sebo/mesth' Hek[a/tên]~. [But cf. _Tab.

Defix._, p. xiii, a 13.]]

[91\9: Hekate goddess of childbirth: Sophr. _fr._ 7. worshipped in

Athens as ~kourotro/phos~, Sch. Ar., _V._ 804. Samian worship of the

~kourotro/phos en tê=| trio/dô|~ (i.e. as Hek.), [Hdt.] _V. Hom._

30; Hes., _Thg._ 450: ~thê=ke de/ min~ (Hek.) ~Kroni/dês

kourotro/phon~. (Even as early as this ~kour.~ is the epithet of

Hek. and not the name of an independ. feminine daimon which it may

have been to begin with, and in isolated cases remained.)

~Genetulli/s~ goddess of childbirth is said to be ~eoikui=a tê=|

Heka/tê|~: Hsch. ~Gen.~ The goddess Eileithyia to whom dogs were

sacrificed in Argos is certainly a Hekate (Sokr. ap. Plu., _Q. Rom._

52, p. 277 B--she was Artemis elsewhere). A consecration to Hekate

~hupe\r paido/s~: inscr. from Larisa, _Ath. Mitth._ xi, 450. Hek. is

also a goddess of marriage: as such (~ho/ti gamê/lios hê Heka/tê~,

Sch.) she is called upon with Hymenaios {323} by Kassandra in Eur.,

_Tr._ 323. Hekate is ~gamê/lios~ simply as ~chthoni/a~: the

~chtho/nioi~ frequently take part in marriage as well as birth: see

above, chap. v, p. 64 ff.; Gaia: see Welcker, _Götterl._ i, 327.

Offering made ~pro\ pai/dôn kai\ gamêli/ou te/lous~ to the Erinyes:

A., _Eum._ 835.]

[92\9: Hekate present at funerals (rushing ~pro\s a/ndras nekro\n

phe/rontas~, Sophr. _fr._ 7) ~erchome/na ana/ t' êri/a kai\ me/lan

hai=ma~ Theoc. ii, 13. ~chai/rousa skula/kôn hulakê=| kai\ hai/mati

phoi/nô| en ne/kusi stei/chousa kat' êri/a tethnêô/tôn~, _H. Hec._

ap. Hipp., _RH._ iv, 35, p. 102, 64 f. D.-S.--Hekate present at all

infamous deeds: see the remarkable formulae ap. Plu., _Superst._ 10,

p. 170 B (Bgk., _PLG_^4 iii, p. 680).--Hek. regarded as devouring

corpses (like Eurynomos, etc., above, chap. vii, n. 24):

~haimopo/tis, kardio/daite, sarkopha/ge, aôrobo/re~ are said of her

in the _Hymn. Magic_, 5, ll. 53-4 (p. 294 Ab.). ~phthisi/kêre~

should be also read, ib., l. 44 (~kê=res = psuchai/~, see above,

chap. v, n. 100); cf. ~ômopha/goi chtho/nioi~, _P. Mag. Par._ 1444.

~Heka/tê akrourobo/rê~ on a _defixio_ from Megara ap. _Tab. Defix._,

p. xiii_a_, l. 7 Wünsch. Probably ~aôrobo/rê~ should be read (Wünsch

differently, p. xx_b_).]

[93\9: See above, chap. v, nn. 66, 132.]

[94\9: Medea in E., _Med._ 385 ff.: ~ou ga\r ma\ tê\n de/spoinan

hê\n egô\~ (as magician) ~se/bô ma/lista pa/ntôn kai\ xunergo\n

heilo/mên, Heka/tên, muchoi=s nai/ousan hesti/as emê\s.--Dê/mêtros

ko/rê~ is addressed as ~_puro\s de/spoina_~, in company with

Hephaistos, in E., _Phaeth._, _fr._ 781, 59. Probably Hekate is

meant being here as frequently combined or confused with Persephone

the daughter of Demeter (cf. _Ion_, 1048).]

[95\9: The pious man cleans and decorates every month ~to\n Hermê=n

kai\ tê\n Heka/tên kai\ ta\ loipa\ tô=n hierô=n ha\ dê\ tou\s

progo/nous katalipei=n~, Theopomp. ap. Porph., _Abs._ ii, 16 (p.

146, 8-9 N.). Acc. to this Hekate and Hermes belong to the ~theoi\

patrô=|oi~ of the house.--Shrines of Hekate before the house-door

(Lob., _Agl._ 1336 f.); cf. the sacella of the Heroes in the same

place: above, chap. iv, n. 135.]

[95a\9: The late interpolation in Hes., _Th._ 411-52, in praise of

Hekate leaves out the uncanny side of her character altogether.

Hekate has here become so much the universally revered goddess that

she has lost all definite personality in the process. The whole is a

telling example of the sort of extension that might be given to a

single divinity who had once been the vital cult-object of a small

locality. The name of this universally known daimon becomes finally

of little importance (for everything is heaped upon one

personality). Hence there is little to be learnt of the special

characteristics of Hekate from this Hymn. (In any case it is time we

gave up calling this Hymn to Hekate "Orphic": the word is even more

than usually meaningless and conventional in this case.)]

[96\9: Hekate (~nai/ousa~ at the crossroads, S. _fr._ 492 N.) meets

men as an ~antai/a theo/s~ (S. _fr._ 311) and is herself called

~antai/a~ (_fr._ 311, 368; cf. _EM._ 111, 50, where what precedes is

from Sch. A.R. i, 1141). The same adj. applies to a ~dai/môn~ that

she causes to appear: Hsch. ~antai/a, antai=os~, in this as in most

cases with the added sense of hostile. Hek. ~phainome/nê en

ekto/pois pha/smasin~, Suid. ~Heka/tên~. (from Elias Cret. on Greg.

Nz. iv, p. 487 Mg.). She appears or sends apparitions by night as

well as by day: ~Einodi/a, thu/gater Da/matros, ha\ tô=n nuktipo/lôn

epho/dôn ana/sseis kai\ methameri/ôn~, E., _Ion_, 1048 ff. Meilinoe,

a euphemistically (cf. above, chap. v, n. 5) named daimonic

creature, either Hekate or Empousa, meets ~antai/ais epho/doisi

kata\ zophoeide/a nu/kta~, Orph. _H._ 71, 9. Hek. appears at midday

in Luc., _Philops._ 22. In this midday vision she opens the earth

and ~ta\ en Ha/idou ha/panta~ become visible (c. 24). This reminds

us of the story told by Herakl. {324} Pont. of Empedotimos to whom

Plouton and Persephone appeared ~en mesêmbri/a| stathera=|~ in a

lonely spot and the whole world of the spirits became visible (ap.

Procl. _in _Rp.__ ii, 119 Kroll). Lucian is probably parodying that

story. Elsewhere in the same pamphlet he gives an absurd turn to a

fabulous narrative of Plutarch's (_de An. fr._ 1 Bern. = _Philops._

25).]

[97\9: See Append. vi.]

[98\9: See Append. vii.]

[99\9: Hekate herself is regarded as having the head of a dog:

undoubtedly an ancient conception of her (she has ~skulakô/dea

phônê/n~, _H. Mag._ 5, 17 Ab.). She is sometimes even a dog herself:

Hsch. ~Heka/tês a/galma~, and partic. _AB._ 336, 31-337, 5; Call.

_fr._ 100 h, 4. She is identified with Kerberos: Lyd., _Mens._ 3, 8,

p. 42 W. She is actually invoked as a dog in _P. Mag. Par._ 1432

ff., p. 80 W.: ~kuri/a Heka/tê einodi/a, ku/ôn me/laina~. Hence dogs

are sacred to her and are sacrificed to her (earliest witness Sophr.

_fr._ 8 Kaib.). The hounds with whom she flies about at night are

daimonic creatures like Hekate herself. Porph. (who was specially

well informed about such things) said that ~saphô=s~ the hounds of

Hekate were ~ponêroi\ dai/mones~: ap. Eus., _PE._ 4, 23, 7-8. In

Lycophron's account (ll. 1174-80) _Hekabe_ is represented exactly in

this way, i.e. as a daimonic creature who appears to men as a hound

(cf. _PLG._ iii, 721 f.). She is transformed by Hekate (Brimo) into

one of her train (~hepôpi/da~) who by their nocturnal howling strike

terror into men who have neglected to make offering to the

goddess.--Dogs occur as symbols of the dead on

grave-reliefs?--above, chap. v, n. 105. (Erinyes as hounds; Keres as

"Hounds of Hades": A.R. iv, 1665; _AP._ vii, 439, 3 [Theodorid.],

etc. Ruhnken, _Ep. Cr._ i, 94.)]

[100\9: See Dilthey, _Rh. Mus._ 25, 332 ff.]

[101\9: The Italian Diana who had long become identical with Hekate

remained familiar to the Christianized peoples of the early Middle

Ages (allusions in Christian authors: Grimm, pp. 283, 286, 933, 949,

1161 f. O. Jahn, _Bös. Blick_, 108). She was, in fact, the meeting

point of the endless mass of superstition that had survived into

that time from Graeco-Roman tradition. The nocturnal riding of a mob

of women (i.e. "souls" of women) _cum Diana, paganorum dea_ is

quoted as a popular superstition by the so-called _Canon Episcopi_,

which in the controversies on witches was so often appealed to. This

document, it seems, cannot be traced back further than Regino (end

of ninth century). He seems to have got it out of [Aug.] _De Sp. et

Anima_ (probably written in the sixth century). It was rescued from

oblivion by Burkhard of Wurms, used in the Decretals of Gratian, and

became very well known in the Middle Ages. (The passage from

Burkhard is printed in Grimm, p. 1741. That the whole is a Canon

(24) of the Council of Ancyra, 314 A.D., is, however, only a

mistaken idea of Burkhard's.) This belief in the nightly hunt of

Diana with the souls may be regarded as a vestige of the ancient

idea of Hekate and her nocturnal crew. It was all the more likely to

survive in northern countries with their native legends of wild

Hunters and the "furious host" with which it could so easily

combine. ["Herne the Hunter," _Merry Wives of Windsor_, iv, 4; v,

5.]]

[102\9: ~hoko/sa dei/mata nukto\s pari/statai, kai\ pho/boi kai\

para/noiai kai\ anapêdê/seis ek tê=s kli/nês kai\ pho/bêtra kai\

pheu/xeis e/xô, Heka/tês phasi\n ei=nai epibola\s kai\ hêrô/ôn

epho/dous, katharmoi=si/ te chre/ontai kai\ epaoidai=s~, Hp., _Morb.

Sac._ vi, 362 L.; cf. Plu., _Supers._, 3, p. 166 A; Hor., _AP._ 454.

Hekate is ~maniô=n aiti/a~, Eust., _Il._, p. 87, 31 (hence also

releases men from madness in the initiations of Aegina, see above,

n. 89); cf. ~e/ntheos {325} ex Heka/tês~, E., _Hip._ 141. Dreams of

Hekate, Artemid., 2, 37, p. 139, 1 ff. H. The ~hê/rôes apoplê/ktous

poiei=n du/nantai~: Sch. Ar., _Av._ 1490. The ~hê/rôes~ are also the

source of nightmares, _Rh. Mus._ 37, 467 n. (like Pan as Ephialtes:

Didym. ap. Sch. Ar., _Ves._ 1038--where ~_Eua/pan_~ should be read,

from ~eu/a~ the noise of bleating goats and ~Pa=n~: Suid. and _CIG._

iv, 8382). The Lamiai and Empousai seem also to have been

night-terrors; cf. what is said of their amorous disposition and

desire for human blood by Apollonios ap. Philostr. _VA._ 4, 25, p.

145, 18; and what is said of Pan-Ephialtes, ~ea\n de\ sunousia/zê|~,

Artemid., p. 139, 21 H. General statement: ~oneirô/ssein~ comes

~apo\ _daimo/nôn_ energei/as~ Suid. ~oneiropolei=n~, p. 1124 Gaisf.

Seirenes: Crusius, _Philol._ 50, 97 ff.]

[103\9: The "Banquets of Hekate", besides the ~katha/rmata~ referred

to above (n. 88), included also the specially prepared dishes that

were made and put out for Hekate ~kata\ mê=na~ (Ar., _Plu._ 596) at

the ~triaka/des~ (see above, chap. v, n. 88) or else at the

~noumêni/ai~, Sch. Ar., _Plu._ 594: ~kata\ tê\n noumêni/an,

_hespe/ras_~; cf. the offering to Hekate and Hermes at each

~noumêni/a~: Theopomp. ap. Porph., _Abs._ 2, 16, p. 146, 7 N. These

banquets of Hek. are meant by Ar., _Plu._ 594 ff., S. _fr._ 668 N.;

Plu., _Smp._ 7, 3, p. 709 A.--It is possible that at the turn of the

month there was a "purification" of the house, in which case the

~katha/rsia~ and the ~Heka/tês dei=pna~ would be again

combined.--Ingredients of the offerings to Hek.: eggs and toasted

cheese (Sch. Ar.); ~tri/glê~ and ~maina/s~ Ath. 325 B.; flame-cakes

(of cheese, ~plakou=ntes dia\ turou=~, Paus. Lex. ap. Eust. 1165,

14) ~amphiphô=ntes~ (see Lob., _Agl._ 1062 f.).]

[104\9: The person ~katha/rmata ekpe/mpsas~ throws them away

~aostro/phoisin o/mmasin~: A., _Cho._ 98-9. The vessel filled with

the purificatory offerings was emptied ~en tai=s trio/dois~ and

~ametastrepti/~: Schol. ib. This was regular with ~katharmoi/~:

Theoc. xxiv, 94 ff., and at offerings to the Erinyes: S., _OC._ 490.

Even Odysseus is obliged at his sacrifice to the dead ~apono/sphi

trape/sthai~, ~k~ 528. Medea in collecting her magic juices turns

her eyes ~exopi/sô chero/s~: S. ~Rhiz.~ _fr._ 491 N.; A.R. iv, 1315;

cf. also Lomeier, _de lustrat._, p. 455 f. This remained the rule at

sacrifices to ~chtho/nioi~ and in magic ceremonies which regularly

had to do with the underworld. Even Marc. Emp. in giving directions

for the cure of ~phusika/~ often enjoins _nec retro respice_ e.g. 1,

54, likewise Plin., _NH._ 21, 176; 29, 91. In making an enchantment

~poreu/ou anepistreptei\ mêdeni\ dou\s apo/krisin~ _P. Mag. Lond._,

given in Kenyon _Greek Pap. in B.M._, i, p. 98. Modern superstition

agrees: cf. Grimm, p. 1789, n. 299; cf. nn. 357, 558, 890, 1137. The

eye must be turned away from the "furious host": Birlinger, _Aus

Schwaben_, _N.S._ i, 90. The precaution is, however, of primeval

antiquity. In the old Indian cult of the dead and worship of

formidable deities many of the proceedings must be performed

~ametastrepti/~, Oldenberg, 335 f., 487 f., 550, n. 5; 577 f., 580.

The reason for the precaution is not hard to see. If the person

looked round he would see the spirits engaged in taking possession

of the objects thrown to them, which would be sure to bring

ill-luck--~chalepoi\ de\ theoi\ phai/nesthai enargô=s~. Hence

Odysseus, when he is returning Leukothoë's wimple by throwing it

into the sea, must ~auto\s apono/sphi trape/sthai~, ~e~ 350. Hence

Orpheus must not look back at Eurydike while she belongs to the

lower world. (Cf. Hannibal's dream reported after Silenus and Cael.

Ant. by Cic., _Div._ i, 49.) ~hoi entugcha/nontes nukto\s hê/rôsi

die/strephon ta\s o/pseis~: Sch. Ar., _Av._ 1493. Very clearly put

by Ov., _F._ 5, 437; at the Lemuria the sacrificer throws away the

beans aversus . . . nec respicit. umbra putatur colligere et nullo

terga vidente sequi. At last when the Manes are {326} all driven

out, _respicit_ (444). One of the Pythagorean ~su/mbola~, those

invaluable fragments of Greek old wives' wisdom, runs: ~apodêmô=n

tê=s oiki/as mê\ epistre/phou; Erinu/es ga\r mete/rchontai~ (Iamb.,

_Protr._, p. 114, 29 f. Pist). Here the _reason_ for the

superstitious practice is clearly shown (cf. also Grimm, p. 1778, n.

14; cf. n. 360): the underworld spirits (wandering over the earth,

esp. on the fifth of the month, as in Hes., _Op._ 803) are following

the departing person: if he were to turn round he would see them.]

[105\9: Appearance of ~ei/dôla~ of the dead: not as in Homer in

dreams only, but openly before men's waking eyes. Stories of this go

back as far as the poems of the Epic Cycle; cf. appearance of

Achilles in the little Iliad (p. 37 Ki), in the ~No/stoi~ (p. 33).

How familiar this idea had become by the fifth century may be judged

from the frequency of ghosts in the tragedians: A., _Pers. Eum.

Prom._ ~Psuch.~; S., ~Polux.~; cf. _fr._ 795 N.; E., _Hec._; raising

of the spirit of a dead man, _fr._ 912; cf. also the stories of

Simonides and the grateful dead (Bgk. on Sim. _fr._ 129); of Pelops

and the ~ei/dôlon~ of Killos (see A. Marx, _Griech. Märchen von

dankbaren Thieren_, p. 114 f.).]

[106\9: Spirit-raising at entrances to the underworld at definite

~psuchomantei=a~ or ~nekuomantei=a~: see above, chap. v, n. 23.

There were, however, ~psuchagôgoi/~ who could compel individual

souls to appear at other places as well: E., _Alc._ 1128 f. Such

~psuchagôgoi/~ belonging to the fifth century and to be found in

Thessaly are spoken of by Plu. ap. Sch. E., _Alc._ 1128. People

~tou/s te tethneô=tas pha/skontes psuchagôgei=n kai\ theou\s

hupischnou/menoi pei/thein, hôs thusi/ais te kai\ euchai=s kai\

epô|dai=s goêteu/ontes~ occur in Pl., _Lg._ 909 B. Later literature

abounds in such spirit-raisings. Conjuring Hekate to appear was a

favourite magic experiment: A.R. iii, 1030 f., etc., recipe for

producing this illusion in Hipp., _RH._ iv, 35-6, p. 102 f. D.-S. A

~Heka/tês epagôgê/~ occurs as early as Thphr., _Ch._ 28 (16).]

[107\9: ~agu/rtai kai\ ma/nteis~ profess ~ea/n ti/s tin' echthro\n

pêmê=nai ethe/lê| meta\ smikrô=n dapanô=n homoi/ôs di/kaion adi/kô|

bla/psein, epagôgai=s tisi kai\ katade/smois tou\s theou/s, hô/s

phasi, pei/thonte/s sphisin hupêretei=n~, Pl., _Rp._ 364 C. And esp.

from _Lg._ 933 AE we get a good idea of the fear that the ~ma/nteis~

and ~teratosko/poi~ generally inspired with their ~katade/seis

epagôgai/, epô|dai/~, and other ~magganei=ai~ (we even hear of

wax-figures on house-doors, grave-stones, ~epi\ trio/dois~, as so

frequently later, with the same superstitious purpose. Plato himself

does not rule out the possibility of such magic incantations: at

least they did not conflict with his own daimonic theory: see _Smp._

203 A. ~epagôgai/~ are "evocations" of spirits or gods: see Ruhnk.,

_Tim._, p. 115. ~epipompai/~ have the same meaning: see above, chap.

v, n. 168. ~epipe/mpein~ frequently in this sense in the _Orph. H._

~_katade/seis_, _kata/desmoi_~ are the "bindings" whereby the

spirit-raiser magically compels the unseen to do his will.

Compulsion is regularly found to be necessary: the spirits do not

come willingly. The magician by his spells and ceremonies is their

master; he exerts over them that ~ana/gkê (ho epa/nagkos~ is

frequent in the magical books) or ~peithana/gkê~ of which Porph. ap.

Eus., _PE._ 5, 8, specially tells us (probably deriving it from

Pythagoras of Rhodos). ~pei/thein~ is Plato's weaker word: the most

extreme is ~biastikai\ apeilai/~ Iamb. _Myst._ 6, 5 [i.e. Porph.

_Ep. Aneb. fr._ 31 Parth.]; cf. ~to\ dei=na pra/xeis ka\n the/lê|s

ka\n mê\ the/lê|s~: refrain in a magic hymn, _P. Mag. Par._ 2252

ff.--Just as in these incantations the ~kata/desis~ affects the gods

themselves so in other cases the victim is the unfortunate person

whom the magician intends to harm: in this sense we have

~katade/seis, kata/desmoi~, _P. Par._ 336; Orph. _Lith._ 582, and

the {327} _devotiones_ or _defixiones_ written on metal tablets

which have been found in such numbers in graves; see Gothofred. ad

_Cod. Theod._ 9, 16, 3. These are now collected and edited by R.

Wünsch, _Defixionum tabellae in Attica repertae_ (_CIA._ App.),

1897, with those found outside Attica included in the _Praefatio_.

Here we find ~katadô= (katadi/dêmi to\n dei=na~ his tongue, limbs,

mind, etc. (nn. 68, 89, 95, etc.), i.e. a magical disabling,

paralysing, fettering of his faculties--and of all his efforts:

~atelê=, enanti/a pa/nta ge/noito~, nn. 64, 98. The carrying out of

this is entrusted to Hermes ~chtho/nios~ or to Hekate (~katadô=

auto\n pro\s to\n Hermê=n ktl.~) as the ~_ka/tochoi_ dai/mones~; cf.

nn. 81, 84, 85, 86, 101, 105, 106, 107. Sometimes the promoter of

the ~kata/desis~ says of himself ~katadô= kai\ kate/chô~ 109, etc.

The _defixio_ itself is called ~ho ka/tochos~, _Gk. Pap. in B.M._

(Ken.), No. 121, ll. 394, 429 = p. 97-8. ~katadei=n~ is therefore

here = ~kate/chesthai poiei=n~ (= disable him--not make him

"possessed") and implies the delivery of the victim into the power

of the infernal spirits.--The ~ma/nteis~ and ~kathartai/~ appear as

accomplished weather-magicians in Hp., _Morb. Sac._ vi, 358 L. They

are claimed to be able to draw down the moon (an old art of

Thessalian witches), make the sun go out, cause rain or drought at

will, etc. A ~ge/nos~ of ~anemokoi=tai~ at Korinth was able ~tou\

ane/mous koimi/zein~: Hsch. Suid. ~anemok.~: cf. Welcker, _Kl.S._

iii, 63. The claims made by these ~kathartai/~ for themselves were

made by later ages on behalf of Abaris, Epimenides, Pythagoras,

etc.; Porph., _VP._ 28-9 (Iamb. 135 f.); Empedokles promised them to

his own pupils; 464 ff. Mull., _fr._ 111 Diels; and cf. Welcker,

_Kl.S._ iii, 60 f.--These are all examples of magical arts from

early times: the overwhelming mass of evidence for such proceedings

in later ages cannot be mentioned here except as explaining ancient

accounts.]

[108\9: Abaris had been mentioned by Pindar (Harp. ~A/baris~); Hdt.

mentions him in iv, 36. There we hear of the arrow which he bore

along with him ~kata\ pa=san tê\n gê=n~ and of his complete

abstention from food (cf. Iamb., _VP._ 141). The arrow, a ~su/mbolon

tou= Apo/llônos~ (Lycurg. _fr._ 85, ap. Eudoc., p. 34, 10) is borne

by Abaris in his hand--the suggestion of Wesseling, recently

revived, that we should in Hdt.'s passage read ~hôs to\n oïsto\s

perie/phere~, has been shown to be linguistically impossible by

Struve, _Opusc. Crit._ ii, 269. The embellishment of the Abaris

story, whereby he (like Musaios) flew through the air on his arrow,

is later than Hdt. or than Lyk. (The arrow is presumably the same as

the one of which Herak. Pont. tells some strange things; ap.

[Eratosth.] _Catast._ 29.) The story sounds rather like Herakleides.

See Porph., _VP._ 29; Iamb., _VP._ 91, 136; Him., _O._ 25, 2, 4;

Nonn. _D._ 11, 132 f.; Proc. Gaz., _Ep._ 96. Abaris was regarded as

~e/ntheos~ (Eudoc.) as ~kathartê/s~ and ~chrêsmolo/gos~, as driving

away pestilences by magic arts (esp. in Sparta, where ~kôlutê/ria~ =

apotropaic sacrifices, were instituted and a temple of ~Ko/rê

sô/teira~ founded: Apollon., _Mir._ 4--prob. from Theopomp.: see

_Rh. Mus._ 26, 558--Iamb., _VP._ 92, 141; Paus. 3, 13, 2). He is

also said to have prophesied earthquakes, pestilence, etc.

(Apollon.), and to have given prescriptions against disease and

~epôdai/~ (Pl., _Chrm._ 158 CD); was a type of ~eukoli/as kai\

lito/têtos kai\ dikaiosu/nês~: Str. 301.--The figure of Abaris thus

left rather vague in ancient legend was elaborated from two sources:

(1) the Athenian cult-legends of the foundation of the _Proërosia_:

Harp. ~A/b.~, Suid. ~proêrosi/a~. Sch. Ar., _Eq._ 729; Lycurg.

~kata\ Menesai/chmou~; and (2) the Pythagorean legends. It is in

itself very probable that the story in Iamb., _VP._ 91-3, 147, of

the meeting between Abaris and Pythagoras goes back to the fabulous

"Abaris" of Herakleides {328} (the story in 215-17 of Abaris and

Pythagoras before Phalaris evidently comes from Apoll. Ty.). This

was suggested by Krische _de soc. Pythag._, p. 38, and has been more

definitely maintained by Diels, _Arch. f. Gesch. d. Philos._ iii,

468: it cannot, however, be demonstrated absolutely--there is not a

scrap of evidence to show that Herakleides did actually make Abaris

meet Pythagoras. (~Puthago/ras en tô=| pro\s A/barin lo/gô=|~,

Procl. in _Tim._ 141 D. may very possibly, but not _necessarily_, as

Diels thinks, refer to the _Abaris_ of Herakleides.)--In any case

the bringing together of Abaris and Pyth. is a late invention; it is

impossible to say whether it could have occurred or did occur as

early as the Aristotelian work ~peri\ tô=n Puthagorei/ôn~.--In any

case, the guiding conception in all this is that Abaris did not

belong to the primeval past but came to Greece in the daylight of

historical times. Pindar makes this happen ~kata\ Kroi=son to\n

Ludô=n basile/a~ (prob. about the time of the ~Sa/rdeôn ha/lôsis~,

Ol. 58, 3 = 546); "others" (acc. to Harp.) made it earlier, in Ol.

21 = 696. It is impossible to tell what the reasons were for either

of these particular dates. Abaris might still be regarded as a

contemporary of Pythagoras by those who, with Eusebios and

Nikostratos ap. Harp., put him in Ol. 53 (~kata\ tê\n [=]n[=]g

Olumpia/da~, for so the figure in Harp. should be read and not ~[=]g

Ol.~; the right reading is preserved from Harp. in Suid. ~A/b.~).

This view, however, is not, as Diels thinks, obtained by making

Abaris forty years older than Pyth. (The ~akmê/~ of Pyth. falls in

Ol. 62--see _Rh. Mus._ 26, 570--and that, too, is the date--not Ol.

63--given by "Eusebius _Chronica_", i.e. the Armenian, tr. and the

MSS. _PEMR_ of Jerome.) Perhaps Abaris was regarded as the

contemporary of Phalaris whose reign according to one of the

versions given by Eusebios began in Ol. 53, or 52, 3. Cf. _Rh. Mus._

36, 567.]

[109\9: _Ekstasis_ of Aristeas: ~tou/tou phasi\ tê\n psuchê\n,

ho/tan ebou/leto, exie/nai kai\ epanie/nai pa/lin~. Suid.

~Ariste/as~. His body lies as if dead ~hê de\ psuchê\ ekdu=sa tou=

sô/matos epla/zeto en tô=| aithe/ri ktl.~ Max. Tyr. 16, 2, p. 288 R.

(reperimus) Aristeae animum evolantem ex ore in Proconneso corvi

effigie, Plin., _NH._ vii, 174 (very similar stories from elsewhere,

Grimm, p. 1083 [and Baring-Gould, _Myths of M.A._]). So, too, the

~Arima/speia~ said that Aristeas reached the Issedones

~phoiba/lamptos geno/menos~ (Hdt. iv, 13); which at least means in

some strange way impossible for other men, i.e. in Apolline

**ecstasy (cf. above, n. 63, ~numpho/lêptos~, etc.; ~en eksta/sei

apophoibô/menos~, _P. Mag. Par._, p. 63 Wess.). So, too, Max. Tyr.

38, 3, p. 222 ff., makes Aristeas describe how his ~psuchê/,

katalipou=sa to\ sô=ma~ had reached the Hyperboreans, etc. These

accounts are not derived from Hdt. who on the contrary says that

Arist. _died_ in a fuller's mill at Prokonnesos and that his body

then disappeared and was seen by a man at Kyzikos. This would be

_translation_ of body and soul together _not_ ~e/kstasis~ of the

soul alone. In this case Hdt. is probably inaccurate. In such cases

of translation the point of the story, in fact its whole meaning,

lies in the fact that the translated person has not died but that he

has vanished without his soul being separated from his body, i.e.

without dying; for normally in death the soul alone vanishes. This

applies to all the cases of translation referred to in this book

(see e.g. the story of the Hero Euthymos: above, chap. iv, n. 116;

of Kleomedes, p. 129, above; and also to the legend of Romulus in

Plu., _Rom._ 27-8, in which Plu. rightly finds much resemblance with

the story of Aristeas as told by Hdt. It applies to the numerous

stories of translation which, evidently after Greek models, were

told of the Latin and Roman kings (see Preller, _Röm. Mythol._^2, p.

84 f., 704). It appears then that {329} Hdt, has combined two

versions of the legend: one acc. to which Aristeas "died" (not only

on this occasion but often), i.e. his soul separated itself from his

body and had a life of its own; another in which his body and soul

were "translated" together without his death. In either version

Aristeas might meet with the man in Kyzikos: if he were translated,

it would be his vanished body (cf. Romulus' meeting Julius

Proculus); but if his soul left his body behind as though lifeless

then it would be the soul as ~ei/dôlon~ of its body that appeared to

the man (as in the cases of Pythagoras and Apoll. Tyan. who were

seen at two different places at the same time). This last story seems

to be the real and primitive one; it is suggested by the

above-mentioned accounts of the ~e/kstasis~ of the soul of Aristeas

and it was so understood by the authority (apparently Thpomp.) whom

Apollon., _Mirab._ 2, is following.]

[110\9: Hdt. iv, 15, Thpomp. ap. Ath. 13, 605 C: the bronze laurel

was set up ~kata\ tê\n Ariste/a tou= Prokonnêsi/ou epidêmi/an ho/te

e/phêsen ex Huperbore/ôn paragegone/nai~. This is not said by Hdt.

but is compatible with his account. Acc. to Hdt. Aristeas told the

people of Metapontum that they alone of all the Italiots had been

visited by Apollo and that he, Aristeas, had been in the god's train

in the shape of a raven (sacred to Apollo). This last feature allows

us to conclude that Hdt., too, knew of the wanderings made by the

soul of Aristeas while his body remained at home as though dead. The

raven is clearly the soul of Aristeas: Plin., _NH._ vii, 174.--The

~epidêmi/a~ of Aristeas in Metapontum fell acc. to Hdt.'s own

calculation (~hôs sumballo/menos . . . heu/riskon~) 240 years (not

230) after the second ~aphanismo/s~ of Aristeas from Prokonnesos. As

Aristeas had in his poem spoken of the beginning of the Kimmerian

invasion (Hdt. iv, 13) his first ~aphanismo/s~ cannot have been

_before_ 681 (the first year of Ardys' reign, when the Kimmerian

invasion began acc. to Hdt. i, 15: Prokonnesos was, too, first

founded under Gyges: Str. 587). Taking this as a starting point (and

it is the earliest admissible terminus) and subtracting 240 + 7

years (Hdt. iv, 14 fin.) we should arrive at the year 434. This,

however, cannot possibly have been meant by Hdt. as the year of the

miraculous presence of Aristeas in Metapontum. We seem to have one

of Hdt.'s errors of calculation to which he is prone. We cannot

indeed make out when exactly he intended to date the various scenes

of the Aristeas story.--In any case, Hdt. never intended to make

Aristeas the teacher of Homer, as Bergk following others thinks. He

makes Homer's _flor._ about 856: see _Rh. Mus._ 36, 397; and puts

the Kimmerian invasion much later. Aristeas could only be regarded

as teacher of Homer (Str. 639; Tat. _Gr._ 41) by those who made

Homer a contemporary of the Kimmerian invasion, Thpomp. esp.: see

_Rh. Mus._ 36, 559.--We do not know what grounds those Chronologists

had who made Aristeas contemp. with Kroisos and Kyros and put his

_flor._ in Ol. 58, 3 (Suid.). The reason may possibly have been

"identification"--this is hardly likely--"or conjunction with

Abaris" (Gutschmid ap. Niese, _Hom. Schiffskat._, p. 49, n.).

Unfortunately nothing is known of such a conjunction with Abaris

(very problematical conjectures by Crusius in _Myth. Lex._ i, 2814

f.). Possibly those who favoured this view held that the

~Arima/speia~ had been foisted upon Aristeas; cf. D. H., _Thuc._ 23;

~p. hu/psous~, 10, 4. This work was certainly regarded as having

been composed at the time of the Kim. invasion. The historical

reality of Aristeas was never doubted in antiquity and in spite of

the many legends that gathered about his name there is no need for

us to do so. The stories of Aristeas' extremely prolonged lifetime

(from the {330} Kim. invasion to the evidently much later period in

which he really lived) appear to have been derived chiefly from

fictions in the ~Arima/speia~ which probably also gave reasons of a

mysterious kind for this marvellous extension of his existence. We

cannot tell whether Aristeas himself wrote the poem and provided his

own halo of marvel or whether someone else, coming later, made use

of this name so famous in legend. If there was any basis for the

account in Suid. ~Pei/sandros Pei/sônos~ fin. we might be justified

in attributing the composition of the ~Arima/speia~ to Aristeas

himself. In any case the poem was already in existence at the

beginning of the fifth century: it can hardly be doubted that

Aeschylus modelled upon it his picture of the griffins and Arimaspoi

in _Pr._ 803 ff.]

[111\9: Dexikreon in Samos, Plu., _Q. Gr._ 54.--Polyaratos of

Thasos, Phormion of Sparta: Cl. Al., _Str._ i, 21, p. 399 P.

Phormion is better known because of his marvellous experiences:

Paus. 3, 16, 2-3; Thpomp. ap. Suid. ~Phor.~: see Meineke, _Com._^2,

p. 1227 ff.--At the end of the above-mentioned enumeration of

~ma/nteis~ ap. Clem. Al., a certain ~Empedo/timos ho Surako/sios~ is

given. Varro ap. Serv. on _G._ i, 34, tells of the ecstatic vision

of this Empedotimos: after being a quadam potestate divina mortalis

aspectus detersus he saw in the sky _inter cetera_ three gates and

three ways (to the gods and the kingdom of the dead). Varro is

evidently quoting the account of some ancient authority not a work

of Empedot. himself; but in any case this vision is the source of

what Empedotimos had to say about the dwelling-place of the souls in

the Milky Way: Suid. ~Emped., Iouliano/s~: _Rh. Mus._ 32, 331, n. 1;

cf. Damasc. ap. Philop. _in Arist. Meteor._, p. 117, 10 Hayd. Suid.

~Emped.~ calls (probably a guess) the work in which Empedot. gave an

account of his visions ~peri\ phusikê=s akroa/seôs~. (Because E.

also brought back with him information about the future life, the

usual stories about the subterranean chamber, etc., are transferred

to him by Sch. ad Greg. Nz., _C._ vii, 286 = Eudocia, p. 682, 15.)

Apart from this no one gives us any information about the

personality of Emped. except Jul., _Ep._ 295 B., p. 379, 13 ff. H.,

who tells us how he was murdered but the gods avenged him upon his

murderers. This, however, rests upon a confusion (either Julian's or

his copyist's) with ~Hermo/timos~ whose murderers were punished in

the next world acc. to Plu., _Gen. Socr._ 22, p. 592 C. The

above-mentioned story of the souls and the Milky Way was also known

to Julian (see Suid. ~Ioul.~): his source being Herakleides Pont.

(who also probably supplied it to others, e.g. Noumenios ap. Procl.

_in _Rp.__ ii, p. 129 Kroll, Porph., Iamb. ap. Stob., _Ecl._ i, p.

378, 12 W., and even earlier, Cicero, _Somn._ 15-16). No older

source of this fancy is known: "Pythagoras" mentioned as its

authority by Julian, etc., only takes us back again to Herakleides.

All that we know up to the present about it suggests the suspicion

that the very existence and history of this remarkably little-known

"great Empedotimos" may have been a simple _invention_ of

Herakleides', who may have made use of him in one of his dialogues

to add interest and importance to some of his own fancies. But now

we come upon something more detailed about the story told by

Herakleides of the vision in which Emped. (~meta\ tou= sô/matos~, p.

122, 2) beheld ~pa=san tê\n peri\ tô=n psuchô=n alêthei/an~: Procl.

_in _Rp.__ ii, 119, 21 Kroll. From this passage it is quite clear

that Empedotimos is simply a figure in a dialogue by Herakleides,

and no more existed in reality than Er the son of Armenios or

Thespesios of Soli, or than their prototype Kleonymos of Athens ap.

Klearchos of Soli (_Rh. Mus._ 32, 335).] {331}

[112\9: Apollon., _Mirab._ 3 (prob. from Thpomp.); Plin., _NH._ vii,

174; Plu., _Gen. Soc._ 22, p. 592 C (~Hermo/dôros~--the same

copyist's error occurs in Procl. _in _Rp.__ ii, 113, 24 Kroll);

Luc., _Enc. Musc._ 7; Tert., _An._ 2; 44 (from Soranos; cf. Cael.

Aur., _Tard._ 1, 3, 5); Or., _Cels._ iii, 3; 32. The same Hermotimos

of Klazomenai is undoubtedly the person meant when a ~Hermo/timos~

is mentioned among the earlier incarnations of the soul of

Pythagoras, even when the country of the person in question is not

named (as in D.L. viii, 5 f.; Porph., _VP._ 45; Tert., _An._ 28) or

is incorrectly called a Milesian (e.g. in Hipp., _RH._ 1, 2, p. 12

D.-S.). A quite untenable theory about this Hermot. is given by

Göttling, _Opusc. Ac._ 211.--Acc. to Plin. the enemies who finally

burnt the body of Hermot. (with the connivance of his wife) were the

Cantharidae--probably the name of a ~ge/nos~ hostile to

Hermot.--There is a remarkably similar story in Indian tradition:

see _Rh. Mus._ 26, 559 n. But I no longer suspect any historical

connexion between this story and that of Hermot.; the same

preconceptions have led in India as in Greece to the invention of

the same tale. Similar conceptions in German beliefs: Grimm, 1803,

n. 650.]

[113\9: Hence the legend that Apollo after the murder of Python was

purified not at Tempe, as the story generally went, but in Krete at

Tarrha by Karmanor: Paus. 2, 7, 7; 2, 30, 3; 10, 6, 7 (the

hexameters of Phemonoë); 10, 16, 5. The ~katha/rsia~ for Zeus were

brought from Krete: Orph. _fr._ 183 Ab.; cf. the oracle ap. Oinom.

Eus., _PE._ 5, 31, 2: K. O. Müller, _Introd. Scient. Myth._

98.--Krete an ancient seat of _mantikê_: the Lokrian Onomakritos,

teacher of Thaletas, lived in Krete ~kata\ te/chnên mantikê/n~,

Arist., _Pol._ 1274_a_, 25.]

[114\9: See above (pp. 96 f). As one who had been initiated into the

orgiastic cult of Zeus in Krete (Str. 468), Epimenides is called

~ne/os Kou/rês~: Plu., _Sol._ 12; D.L. i, 115. He is called

~hiereu\s Dio\s kai\ Rhe/as~ in Sch. Clem. Al. iv, p. 103 Klotz.]

[115\9: Legend of the ~a/limon~ of E.: H. Smyrn. 18. D.L. i, 114.

Plu. _7 Sap._ 14. He was prepared for it by living on ~aspho/delos,

mala/chê~ and the edible root of a kind of ~ski/lla~ (Thphr., _HP._

7, 12, 1). All these are sacred to the ~chtho/nioi~ (on

~aspho/delos~, see partic. _AB._ 457, 5 ff., which goes back to

Aristarchos; and Hsch. s.v.), and were only eaten occasionally by

the poor: Hes., _Op._ 41.]

[116\9: ~hou= (Epimeni/dou) lo/gos hôs exi/oi hê psuchê\ ho/poson

ê/thele chro/non kai\ pa/lin eisê/|ei en tô=| sô/mati~, Suid.

~Epimen.~ This is possibly the meaning of ~prospoiêthê=nai (le/getai)

polla/kis anabebiôke/nai~, D.L. i, 114. Epimenides like others

~meta\ tha/naton en toi=s zô=si geno/menos~, Procl. _in _Rp.__ ii,

113, 24 Kr. The story of his prolonged sleep in the cave is an

example of a widespread fairy-tale motif; see _Rh. Mus._ 33, 209, n.

2; 35, 160. In the case of Epimenides it has been exaggerated beyond

all bounds and attached to him as a sort of popular mode of

expressing his long ~eksta/seis~. This cave-sleep is interpreted as

a state of _ekstasis_ by Max. Tyr. 16, 1: ~en tou= Dio\s tou=

Diktai/ou~ (see above, chap. iii, n. 23) ~tô=| a/ntrô| kei/menos

hu/pnô| bathei= e/tê suchna/~ (cf. the ~psuchê/~ of Hermot. which

~apo\ tou= sô/matos plazome/nê apodêmei= epi\ polla\ e/tê~,

Apollon., _Mir._ 3) ~o/nar e/phê entuchei=n auto\s theoi=s ktl.~

Thus his ~o/neiros~ became ~dida/skalos~ to him, Max. Tyr. 38, 3;

cf. Sch. Luc., _Tim._ 6, 110 Rb.]

[117\9: ~sopho\s peri\ ta\ thei=a (deino\s ta\ thei=a~, Max. Tyr.

38, 3) ~tê\n _enthousiastikê\n_ sophi/an~, Plu., _Sol._ 12. Epimen.

is put among the ~e/ntheoi ma/nteis~, Bakis and the Sibyl, by Cic.,

_Div._ 1, 34.--Prolonged solitude is a preparation for the business

of the ecstatic seer (cf. Plu.'s story of a sort of counterpart to

Epimenides, _Def. Or._ 21, p. 421 B). There {332} is still another

fragment remaining from the story of Epim. on this head in the

account given by Theopompos (though he makes too rationalistic a use

of it): Epim. did not sleep all that time ~alla\ chro/non tina\

_ekpatê=sai_, ascholou/menon peri\ rhizotomi/an~ (which he needed as

an ~iatro/mantis~); D.L. i, 112. We cannot help being reminded of

the way in which the Angekok of Greenland, after prolonged and

profound solitude, severe fasting and concentration of thought,

makes himself into a magician (Cranz, _Hist. of Greenland_, p. 194).

In the same way the North American Indian stays for weeks in a

solitary wood and consciously prepares himself for his visions. At

last the real world falls away from him, the imagined world of his

visions becomes the real one and seems almost palpable; till finally

in complete ecstasy he rushes out of his hiding place. Nor would it

be hard to find analogies in the religion of civilized peoples.]

[118\9: Epim. is credited with prophecies of coming events: Pl.,

_Lg._ 642 D; D.L. i, 114, and also Cic., _Div._ i, 34. On the other

hand, Arist., _Rh._ 3, 17, 10, has ~peri\ tô=n esome/nôn ouk

emanteu/eto, alla\ peri\ tô=n gegono/tôn me\n adê/lôn de/~ which at

least means discovering the grounds of an event--grounds known only

to the god and the seer; e.g. the interpretation of a pestilence as

the vengeance of the daimones for an ancient crime, etc. If only

rational explanation were meant there would be no need for a

~ma/ntis~.]

[119\9: Delos: Plu., _Sept. Sap._ 14, p. 158 A. (There is no need to

suppose that there has been any confusion between this ~me/gas

katharmo/s~ by Epimenides and any other purification of Delos that

happens to be better known to us--the Pisistratean or that of the

year 426.) Epimenides ~po/leis eka/thêren a/llas te kai\ tê\n

Athênai/ôn~, Paus. 1, 14, 4.]

[120\9: The purification of Athens from the Kylonian ~a/gos~ by

Epimenides is now further confirmed by the Aristotelian ~Ath. pol.~

1 fin. This admittedly is not a very strong guarantee of its

historical truth; but no strong guarantee is required to dispose of

the doubts recently raised as to the historical truth of the story

that Athens was purified by Epimenides, and even of Epimenides' very

existence. There is no reason at all for such a doubt. The fact that

the historical figure of Epimenides has been almost entirely

obscured behind the veil of fable and romance gives us of course no

right to doubt his existence (or what would be the fate of

Pythagoras, Pherekydes of Syros, and of many others?); and further,

because some parts of the story of Epim. and his life are fabulous,

to doubt the truth of his entirely non-fabulous purification of the

Athenians from murder is a monstrous inversion of true historical

method.--No exact dating for the purification of Athens is to be

derived from the Aristotelian account of the event, as the English

ed. (Kenyon) of the ~Ath. pol.~ rightly observes. It certainly does

not follow (as e.g. Bauer takes for granted in his _Forsch. zu

Arist._ ~Ath. pol.~ 41) that the purification took place _before_

the archonship of Drakon (Ol. 39). Furthermore, it is probable that

in Plu., _Sol._ 12, everything that comes before ~tou\s ho/rous~ (p.

165, 19, Sint. ed. min.) is taken from Aristotle (though perhaps not

directly). In this case Aristotle, too, would be shown to have

attributed to Solon the first suggestion that led to the

condemnation of the ~enagei=s~. In Plu., however, Solon is still far

from having thoughts of his ~nomothesi/a~, he is still only ~ê/dê

do/xan e/chôn~ c. 12 (not till c. 14 does his archonship begin).

Solon's archonship is put by ~Ath. pol.~ in the year 591/0 (c. 14,

1, where we should be careful to avoid arbitrary alteration of the

figures); Suid. ~So/lôn~, Eus., _Chron._ also date it in Ol. 47, and

the same period is implied by Plu., _Sol._ 14, p. 168, 12. (~Ath.

Pol.~ {333} 13, 2, also brings the first archonship of Damasias to

582/1 = Ol. 49, 3: a date to which all other reliable tradition also

points). The condemnation of the ~enagei=s~ and the purification of

Athens by Epimenides thus took place some considerable time before

591. It is possible that Suid. gives the right date. s.v.

~Epimeni/dês; eka/thêre ta\s Athê/nas tou= Kulônei/ou a/gous kata\

tê\n [=]m[=]d Olumpia/da~ (604/1)--that in the Kirrhaian war there

was an ~Alkmai/ôn~ general of the Athenians offers no objection:

Plu., _Sol._ 11. Suidas' statement has not (as I once thought

myself, with Bernhardy) been taken from D.L., nor is it to be

corrected acc. to his text. D.L. i, 100, only brings forward the

connexion between the purification and the ~Kulô/neion a/gos~ as the

opinion of "some" (which in spite of the vagueness of expression

must mean Neanthes ap. Ath. 602 C), while the real reason is said to

be a ~loimo/s~, and the purification (as in Eus. _Chr._) is placed

in Ol. 46; i.e. probably 46, 3, the traditional date of Solon's

legislation.--Plato, _Lg._ 642 DE, does not conflict with the story

of the expiation of the ~Kul. a/gos~ by Epimenides: his story that

Epimen. was present in Athens in the year 500 and retarded the

threatened Persian invasion for ten years is not intended to contest

the truth of the tradition of the much earlier purification of

Athens by Epimen. ("retarded": so Clem. Al., _Str._ vi, 13, p. 755

P., understood Plato and prob. rightly; we often hear in legendary

stories of the gods or their prophets retarding coming events which

have been determined by fate; cf. Pl., _Smp._ 201 D; Hdt. i, 91;

Ath. 602 B; Eus., _PE._ 5, 35, p. 233 BC; Vg., _A._ vii, 313 ff.;

viii, 398 f.; and what Serv. ad loc. reports from the _libri

Acheruntici_). How the same man could be living both at the end of

the seventh and of the sixth centuries would have troubled Plato not

at all--tradition attributed a miraculously long life to Ep. At any

rate, it is quite impossible to base the chronology of Ep.'s life on

the story in Plato. (It may have been suggested by a forged oracle

made ex eventu after 490 and fathered on Epim., as Schultess

suggests, _De Epim. Crete_, p. 47, 1877.)]

[121\9: Details of the expiation ceremonies: D.L. i, 111-12;

Neanthes ap. Ath. 602 C. It is not the human sacrifice but the

sentimental interpretation of Neanth. that Polemon (Ath. 602 F.)

declares to be fictitious. They are invariably sacrifices to the

~chtho/nia~ that Epim. institutes. Thus (as Abaris founded a temple

at Sparta for ~Ko/rê sô/teira~) he founded at Athens, evidently as

the concluding part of the purification, ~ta\ hiera\ tô=n semnô=n

theô=n~, i.e. of the Erinyes: D.L. i, 112.]

[122\9: Such a connexion must at least be intended when Aristeas is

brought to Metapontum and Phormion to Kroton, both important centres

of the Pythagorean society. Aristeas, too, as well as Abaris,

Epimenides, etc., is one of the favourite figures of the

Pythagoreans: see Iamb., _VP._ 138.]

[123\9: It would certainly be necessary to deny to Epimenides the

"Theogony" that the whole of antiquity read and quoted under the

name of Epimenides without once expressing a doubt, if the figments

of that Theogony really contained borrowings from the teaching of

Anaximenes or, even worse, from the rhapsodical Theogony of Orpheus,

as Kern, _de Orphei Ep. Pher. Theog._ 66 ff. maintains. But in the

first place a few vague resemblances are not enough to show any

connexion between Epimenides and those others. In the second,

supposing the connexion proved, Epimenides need not necessarily have

been the borrower. In any case, such alleged borrowings do not

oblige us to advance the period when Ep. lived from the end of {334}

the seventh to the end of the sixth century. If they really exist

then we should rather have to conclude that the Theogony is itself a

forgery of a much later date.]

[124\9: The possibility of theoretical activity in the case of these

men is often implied in the statements of later writers; e.g. when

the name is given to Epimenides (D.S. 5, 80, 4) or Abaris (Apollon.,

_Mir._ 4); or when Aristeas is called an ~anê\r philo/sophos~ (Max.

Tyr. 38, 3, p. 222 R.).]

[125\9: Arist., _Meta._ 1, 3, p. 948_b_, 19 f.]

[126\9: See Append. viii.]

[127\9: See above, chap. i, n. 41. Archiloch. _fr._ 12: ~kei/nou

kephalê\n kai\ chari/enta me/lê Hê/phaistos _katharoi=sin_ en

hei/masin ampheponê/thê~. E., _Or._ 40 f.: the slain Klytaimnestra

~puri\ _kathê/gnistai_ de/mas~ and Sch. ~pa/nta ga\r kathairei= to\

pu=r, kai\ hagna\ dokei= ei=nai ta\ kaio/mena, ta\ de\ a/tapha

memiasme/na~. E., _Sup._ 1211: ~. . . hi/n' autô=n~ (those who are

being buried) ~sô/math' hêgni/sthê puri/~; cf. ~ha/gnison pursô=|

me/lathron~, _IT._ 1216. On a grave inscr. from Attica (_Epigr. Gr._

104): ~entha/de Dia/logos katharô=| puri\ gui=a kathê/ras . . .

ô/|chet' es atha/natous~--evidently modelled on ancient ideas; cf.

also ib. 109, 5 (_CIA._ iii, 1325). Those, too, who are struck by

lightning (see Appendix i) are purified from all earthly taint by the

holiest sort of ~pu=r katha/rsion~ (E., _IA._ 1112; ~katharsi/ô|

phlogi/~, E., _Hel._ 869) and go straight ~pro\s athana/tous~.

Iamb., _Myst._ v, 12, also explains how fire ~ta\ prosago/mena

kathai/rei kai\ apolu/ei tô=n en tê=| hu/lê| desmô=n, aphomoioi=

toi=s theoi=s~, etc.]

[128\9: Cf. also Pl., _Lg._ 677 DE; Plu., _Fac. Orb. Lun._ 25, p.

940 C.]

{{335}}