Home » Type » E-journal, Mythology/Religion, Research Symposium » Local Pantheons in Motion: Synoecism and Patron Deities in Hellenistic Rhodes

Local Pantheons in Motion: Synoecism and Patron Deities in Hellenistic Rhodes

Citation with persistent identifier:

Paul, Stéphanie. “Local Pantheons in Motion: Synoecism and Patron Deities in Hellenistic Rhodes.” CHS Research Bulletin 3, no. 2 (2015). http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:hlnc.essay:PaulS.Local_Pantheons_in_Motion.2015

Ἀκολούθως δὲ τούτοις νομισθῆναι τὴν νῆσον ἱερὰν Ἡλίου καὶ
τοὺς μετὰ ταῦτα γενομένους Ῥοδίους διατελέσαι περιττότερον
τῶν ἄλλων θεῶν τιμῶντας τὸν Ἥλιον ὡς ἀρχηγὸν τοῦ γένους αὐτῶν.
(Diodorus V 56)

1§1 In his account of the early history of Rhodes, Diodorus Siculus relates how the very first inhabitants perished during a flood, after which the sun god Helios made the island emerge from the water and named it after his beloved nymph Rhodos. “In consequence of these events,” Diodorus goes on, “the island was considered to be sacred to Helius, and the Rhodians of later times made it their practice to honour Helius above all the other gods, as the ancestor and founder from whom they were descended.”[1] Similarly, when in the second century AD the traveler Pausanias arrived to a new place, he asked the locals which god or goddess they honored the most (μάλιστα θεῶν τιμεῖν).[2]

1§2 The Greek phrase expressing the idea of honoring one god above all others could be translated into the modern concept of patron deity, or chief god. While introducing a form of hierarchy within a local pantheon, this concept represents a very convenient way to finally bring some order into the chaos that is Greek polytheism. Yet, ancient sources do indeed point to the idea that some communities put a particular emphasis on a single deity that appeared to have had a special interest in, or concern regarding, the city and its inhabitants. During the Hellenistic period, at a time when Greek poleis were constantly competing with each other to stand out, for a community to emphasize a particular cult and advertize the special relationship it had with its gods helped reinforce its identity. One of the tools used for this purpose was the phenomenon of divine epiphany. This is the case of the small city of Bargylia in Caria, which passed a series of decrees at the end of the second century BCE to embellish the cult of Artemis Kindyas, in gratitude for the goddess’ epiphany in a time of crisis. One of these inscriptions nicely articulates what defines a patron deity:

Now the people must increase her honors because the city and the countryside are in excellent shape thanks to her, who looks after the city’s common interests and after those of all the inhabitants of the city and the countryside.[3]

1§3 As far as the identification of a patron deity is concerned, however, not every polis presents a clear picture. In some cases, the evidence simply does not allow us to get a full insight into the organization of the local pantheon. In other cases, the modern tendency to conceptualize the idea of a patron deity into a systematic category may lead us to oversimplify an otherwise complex and shifting religious system.[4] As historical circumstances change, local cult configurations may also be subject to change. I would like to illustrate the last point further, taking as an example the island of Rhodes. This case-study allows me to address some of the limitations in the concept of patron deity, as well as, in a broader perspective, the impact of historical events on the religious landscape.

The Rhodian synoecism and the cult of Helios

2§1 In the year 408/7 BCE, as Diodorus reports, “the inhabitants of the island of Rhodes left the cities of Ialysos, Lindos, and Cameiros and settled in one city (μετῳκίσθησαν εἰς μίαν πόλιν), that which is now called Rhodes.”[5] The Greek historian hereby accounts for the urban relocation of the population, or physical synoecism, following the foundation of the new town of Rhodes on the northern tip of the island. The political unification, however, was, as recent scholarship convincingly argues, the result of a longer and complex development. In fact, the evidence shows some signs of an island-wide identity and some form of political unity throughout the sixth and fifth centuries BCE. Conversely, the political unification of the island never entailed a massive relocation or abandonment of the previous settlements, as opposed to what one may infer from Diodorus’ account. Ialysos, Cameiros, and Lindos still functioned as political entities after 408/7 BCE and preserved to a certain extent their autonomy and decision-making power. In this respect, Rhodes is a quite unique case compared with other synoecized poleis.[6]

2§2 The modification of the island’s political landscape necessarily had an impact on the religious landscape as well. Although we lack direct evidence for Rhodes of a large-scale cult reorganization, such as we have for the other synoecized poleis of Cos and Myconos,[7] it is commonly agreed that the unification of the island led to the introduction of Helios (doric Halios) as patron deity of the new polis.[8] The sun god had certainly an iconic position within the Rhodian pantheon from the late fifth century BC: his face appeared on the obverse of the city’s coinage along with the rose (rhodos) on the reverse;[9] the priesthood associated with his cult was the culmination of the Rhodian priestly career, and the priest was the eponymous official of the polis (isn’t Helios the eponymous one?);[10] the Panhellenic festival of the Halieia, which included a procession, a sacrifice, as well as athletic and musical contests, was celebrated in his honor;[11] and finally, the famous colossus, a gigantic statue of the god, was erected in the city after the siege of Demetrios Poliorcetes in 305 BCE.[12]

2§3 The cult of Helios is relatively minor in ancient Greece and the choice of the Rhodians to elect him as representative of the unified state over Athena, whose famous sanctuary at Lindos had a panrhodian function before the synoecism, is intriguing at first sight, but highly significant as regards the mythical past of the island. Diodorus Siculus (XV 56), quoted above, narrates how the god dried the earth after a flood and fathered a new generation of inhabitants. A slightly different version of the myth is told by Pindar in his seventh Olympian, where he praises the athlete Diagoras of Rhodes after his boxing victory at the Olympic Games in 464 BCE. After the gods divided the world among themselves, they realized that they had forgotten to include Helios in the process. Although Zeus offered to start all over, Helios refused: he had spotted an island still covered by the sea, made it rise and claimed it as his share. Then he coupled with the nymph Rhodos, and from this union were born seven men, the Heliadai. One of them, Kerkaphos, had in turn three sons named Ialysos, Cameiros, and Lindos, who divided the island in three shares and founded the cities bearing their names. As metaphorical father of the island and forefather[13] of the founders of the three Rhodian poleis, Helios embodied, more than any other god, the island-wide identity. In fact, the whole poem has been interpreted as a means to anticipate and to promote the political unification of the island, which was presumably instigated by the aristocratic family of the Eratidai, the genos of Diagoras, from the city of Ialysos.[14]

2§4 There is no evidence for a cult of Helios before the late fifth century BC, although votive inscriptions from the late Archaic period to Kerkaphos, son of Helios and father of the eponymous founders, do indicate the existence of cult practice in connection with the mythical past of the island.[15] Even if Helios was worshipped at an earlier date, it is clear that his cult took a whole new dimension after the foundation of the new polis in 408/7 BCE. However, despite the many occurrences of the god’s name in the epigraphic evidence, as far as the practicalities of the cult are concerned, our knowledge is surprisingly limited. The location of the god’s sanctuary in the city of Rhodes remains uncertain to this day.[16] Although the Halieia clearly represented a major event in the Rhodian festival calendar, it is only mentioned incidentally in inscriptions, which makes it difficult to grasp its full significance.[17] Similarly, the Haliastai and the Haliadai are abundantly attested as cult associations in the Hellenistic period, but details regarding actual cult practice are lacking.[18]

2§5 Among the corpus, two inscriptions stand out in providing us with an insight into rituals performed in honor of Helios on the island. The first one was discovered in the excavations at Cameiros. It is a small marble stele broken at the bottom, dated to the third century BCE:[19]

Δαλίου νευμηνίαι
Ἁλίωι βοῦν λευκὸν
ἢ πυρρόν, ἰκάδι βοῦν
λευκὸν ἢ πυρρὸν
δαμιουργὸς θύει.
Πανάμου ἔσω ἰκά-
δος αἴγας τρεῖς
ἰεροποιοὶ θύο̣ν̣[τι]
κ̣α̣ὶ̣ ἰ̣ε̣ρ̣[—]
[—]

On the first of Dalios,
to Halios, an ox, white
or red; on the 20th, an ox,
white or red,
the damiourgos sacrifices.
Before the 20th of Panamos,
three goats,
the hieropoioi sacrifice
and [—]

2§6 The text belongs to a series of similar inscriptions following the laconic writing pattern of sacrificial calendars, each focusing on one deity.[20] These were probably excerpted from a broader document recording the public sacrifices performed in the city of Cameiros throughout the year. Probably set up next to the altar of the recipient deity, they aimed at providing specific instructions regarding individual cults.[21] Our stone prescribes two sacrifices of an ox to Helios to be performed in Dalios, on the first and the 20th of the month, by the damiourgos of Zeus Teleios and Hestia, who was the eponymous(again, is it the official or the deity who is eponymous?) official in Cameiros, similarly to the priest of Athena Lindia in Lindos.[22] Another, cheaper sacrifice is to be performed by the hieropoioi, i.e. cult officials, at the latest (text says before) on the 20th of Panamos. According to Segre, the sacrifices prescribed in this series of inscriptions do not follow a chronological sequence––the month Dalios comes directly after Panamos in the Rhodian calendar––but were organized according to the importance of the sacrificers, which is, to my knowledge, unparalleled in these types of documents. Conversely, Badoud has recently argued that the Rhodian civil year had to be distinguished from the eponymous year, the latter beginning with the month Dalios. According to this hypothesis, the sacrificial regulations did indeed follow a chronological order, and the first sacrifice to Helios by the damiourgos marked the beginning of the eponymous year, as well as their introduction into office.[23] It would also entail that the city of Cameiros only performed three annual sacrifices to the patron deity of the island, since Panamos would be the last month of the eponymous year.

2§7 The second inscription, undated, comes from the deme of Netteia, in the territory of Lindos:[24]

Λάκων
Ὑακινθίου
τετράδι ἐπὶ δέ-
κα Ἁλίωι ἔριφον
λευκὸν ἢ πυρ-
ρὸν <θ>ύ<ε>τ<α>ι, κα-
τάχρουν θεᾶι
θύεται <κ>ατ᾿{ρ} ἐ-
{ω}νιαυτόν.

Of the Lak-.
On the 14th of
Hyakinthios
to Halios a kid,
white or red,
is sacrificed

(the end of the text is too corrupt to allow a translation)

2§8 The reading of the final lines is difficult, and the mention θεᾶι in line 7 is especially doubtful. Unfortunately, the stone is now lost, thus preventing any hope of improving the reading, or dating the inscription. Similarly to the inscription from Cameiros above, the text follows the style of a sacrificial calendar and records the sacrifice of an animal, white or red, to Helios, but the context is different, in that Λάκων seems to be the name in the genitive of an association or familial group in charge of the sacrifice.[25] This means that the scope of the sacrifice is significantly smaller. However, both inscriptions are interesting in that they give evidence that cult practices to Helios spread beyond the urban center of Rhodes, at different levels and to an extent which is, as of yet, unknown.

Athena and Zeus, from the local to the federal

3§1 The introduction of Helios after the constitution of the Rhodian state did not overshadow the famous cult of Athena Lindia, whose sanctuary, located on the acropolis at Lindos, was claimed to be of a great antiquity. A literary tradition attributes the foundation of the sanctuary and the dedication of the cult statue to either Danaus or his daughters.[26] The so-called Lindian Chronicle, inscribed in 99 BCE, providing a catalogue of offerings––both mythical and historical––also aims to document the prestigious past of the cult as we read in the introductory decree:

Since the hieron of Athena Lindia, both the most archaic and the most venerable in existence, has been adorned with many beautiful offerings from the earliest times on account of the visible presence of the goddess.[27]

The catalogue names among the first donors the eponymous founder Lindos and the Telchines, thus referring to the mythical past of the island, while the mention of Homeric heroes places the sanctuary within a larger, panhellenic frame. The inscription also records a catalogue of epiphanies of the goddess in times of crisis, thus demonstrating the extent of her power and her goodwill towards the people of Lindos.

3§2 The founding myths told by Pindar and Diodorus Siculus furthermore suggest the great antiquity of the cult on the island. When Athena sprang from Zeus’ head, Helios urged his sons, the Heliadai, to be the first to offer a sacrifice to the new-born goddess. But in their haste, they forgot to bring fire to burn the meat on the altar, while the Athenian king Cecrops performed the sacrifice slightly later, but in accordance with customs. The etiological myth, apart from explaining a particular tradition of offering fireless sacrifices, also claims the precedence of the Rhodian cult over the Athenian one.[28]

3§3 Archaeological excavations partly confirm the alleged antiquity of the cult.[29] Votive material discovered on the acropolis of Lindos attests some form of cult activity going back to the Geometric period, while inscribed dedications mentioning the name of Athena are dated to the sixth century BCE. It is at the same time that the first temple, which is attributed to the tyrant Cleoboulos by literary sources, was built. It was later replaced during a phase of reconstruction in the sanctuary extending from the end of the fourth century to the first half of the third century BCE, i.e. after the siege of Rhodes by Demetrios Poliorcetes in 306/5 BCE. The sanctuary had a panrhodian function before the synoecism, as copies of inscriptions from the other Rhodian cities were published there.[30] The importance of the cult throughout the Classical and Hellenistic periods is attested by the great number of votive inscriptions brought to light. Furthermore, the priest of Athena Lindia became the eponymous(?) official of Lindos after the foundation of the unified polis.

3§4 Athena was also worshipped on the acropoleis of the two other cities of Rhodes, Cameiros and Ialysos. The chronology of both sites is strikingly similar to the one at Lindos: while the votive material attests the existence of cult activities going back to the eight century BCE, excavations have unearthed the remains of an Hellenistic temple, which replaced an older one of Archaic date.[31] After the foundation of Rhodes, a temple dedicated to Athena Polias and Zeus Polieus was built on the acropolis, in the western part of the city, and a joint priesthood was associated to their cult at least from the third century BCE.[32] The cult-epithet Polieus/Polias is almost exclusively associated with Zeus and Athena, who are often worshipped in a joint cult under that name. The epithet emphasizes more than any other the close connection these gods had with the polis and their role as protectors of the physical territory of the city, which is symbolized by the location of their sanctuary on the acropolis, but also as protectors of the community of citizens. Interestingly, the importance of these gods is paramount in other cities formed by synoecism, such as Athens and Cos, where their cult is clearly oriented towards the unity of the community.[33]

3§5 The Rhodian cult evidently mirrored the configurations at play in the three constituent poleis of Lindos, Cameiros, and Ialysos: in Cameiros, a joint priesthood of Athena Polias and Zeus Polieus is first attested around 273 BCE and is one of the highest offices of this community.[34] In Lindos, the cult of Zeus Polieus was associated with the priesthood of Athena Lindia at the latest in the last years of the fourth century BCE, and both gods appear regularly, although not systematically, as a pair in votive inscriptions throughout the Hellenistic period.[35] No such association is known from Ialysos for the same period, but an inscription from the Imperial time deserves a closer look, despite its later date: it lists the priesthoods of Athena Lindia and Zeus Polieus, of Athena Cameiras and Zeus Polieus, and of Athena Ialysia Polias and Zeus Polieus.[36] The inscription underlines beautifully the dialectic between local specificities and poliadic cult, through the use of topographic epithets in association with the name of the goddess. Yet the emphasis on local affiliations does not eclipse the strong similarities between these cults, nor their eminently “poliadic” nature, as exemplified by the double name of Athena Ialysia Polias. In fact, Athena Lindia is none other than the Athena Polias of Lindos, as Athena Cameiras is the Athena Polias of Cameiros.[37] They are the same, and yet they are different. Through the association with Zeus Polieus, the divine pairs transcend their local framework and gain a wider dimension in reference to the unified polis of Rhodes. It is interesting to note that in both cities of Lindos and Cameiros this association is first attested at the same period (late 4th century – early 3rd century BCE). On the one hand, the cult of Athena Polias and Zeus Polieus in Rhodes seems to exist as a reflection of local configurations in the three constituent poleis of Ialysos, Cameiros, and Lindos. In turn, the introduction of Zeus Polieus as partner of the local Athenas aims at ‘connecting the dots’ in bringing the different cults closer to each other and to the one newly introduced in Rhodes.

Patron deities and concerns of unity

4§1 Let us finally come back to the problem of the patron deity in Hellenistic Rhodes. Insofar as religion played a significant role in social cohesion, concerns of unity in a city formed by synoecism were understandably a strong component of the main cults.[38] From this point of view, it is undeniable that Helios had an iconic position after 408/7 BCE. The representation of the god on the city’s coinage, the position of his priest and the festival of the Halieia are all indications of that being the case. Helios embodied the Rhodian state in accordance with the myths that created the panrhodian identity. Furthermore, the introduction of his cult marked an important break with the local religious traditions, preventing any of the three constituent poleis to take precedence over the others. Finally, if indeed the synoecism had been motivated as a response to the Athenian imperialism, as it has been suggested, the choice of the Rhodians not to emphasize the cult of Athena was perhaps a way to distance themselves from Athens.[39] On the other hand, the joint cult of Athena and Zeus and its local variations reflect the dialectic between unification and strong regional identities at play on the island of Rhodes.[40] Therefore, the introduction of the cult of Helios did not overshadow the preexisting cults of Athena, but rather, they functioned on different levels.

4§2 The simple claim that Helios was the patron deity of Rhodes after the synoecism in 408/7 BCE does not fully account for the complex organization of its pantheon nor the interactions between the various cults concerned with the unity of the polis. A few documents allow us to have a glimpse into the interactions at play between Helios and Athena. The representation of a statue of Athena Promachos appears on a Rhodian coin dating to ca. 360-340 BCE, along with the rose, on the reverse, and the head of Helios, on the obverse.[41] A small inscription from Cameiros dated to the third century BC records a series of sacrifices to Athena Polias, one of which is to be performed on the first of the month Dalios.[42] As we saw earlier, a sacrifice was offered to Helios by the damiourgos in Cameiros on the same day, which formed part of the rituals that presumably accompanied the beginning of the eponymous year. Finally, a small dedication from Rhodes dated to the fourth or the third century BCE associates as divine recipients Helios, Athena Nike, and Zeus Soter:[43]

[Μ]νασ[ί]δ[ωρος] Πλάτα̣ Ἁλίωι,
Ἀθάναι Νίκ[αι, Ζ]ηνὶ Σωτῆρι.
[ὁ δεῖνα τοῦ δεῖνος Ῥόδ]ιος ἐποίει.

4§3 Although the text says nothing of the circumstances of the dedication, the cult-epithets perhaps suggest a victory in war. These cult configurations are not isolated, but can be observed in several examples. A dedication from Rhodes names Athena Nike and all the other gods.[44] An inscription from Lindos concerns the funding of the cults of Athena Lindia, Zeus Polieus and Nike.[45] A small inscription from Rhodes dated to the fourth century BCE prescribes a sacrifice to Athena Apotropaia, “averter of evil.” Later, in the second century BCE, another sacrifice to Zeus Apotropaios was added on the stone.[46] Finally, a dedication was offered to Athena Soteira by the priest of Athena Polias and Zeus Polieus in Rhodes during the first century BCE.[47] This collection of cult-epithets that belong to a common semantic field shows that Athena and Zeus’s prerogatives, sometimes in association with Helios, extended far beyond the unity of the polis to encompass in a broader sense the protection and the safety of its inhabitants. In the words of the inscription of Bargylia quoted in introduction, they truly “look after the city’s common interests and after those of all the inhabitants of the city and the countryside.”

Bibliography

Ashton, R.H.J. 2001. “The Coinage of Rhodes 408-c.190 BC.” Money and its Uses in the Ancient Greek World (eds. A. Meadows and K. Shipton) 79–115. Oxford.

Badoud, N. 2010. “Une famille de bronziers originaire de Tyr.” ZPE 172:125‑143.

Badoud, N. 2015. Le temps de Rhodes. Une chronologie des inscriptions de la cité fondée sur l’étude de ses institutions. Munich.

Bernardini, C. 2006. I bronzi della stipe di Kamiros. Athens.

Blinkenberg, C. 1931. Lindos. Fouilles de l’Acropole, 1902-1914. I. Les petits objets. Berlin and Copenhagen.

— 1939. “Règlements de sacrifices rhodiens.” ΔΡΑΓΜΑ. Martino P. Nilsson a.d. IV Id. Iul. anno MCMXXXIX dedicatum. 96–113. Lund.

Brackertz, U. 1976. Zum Problem der Schutzgottheiten griechischer Städte. PhD FUBerlin.

Bresson, A. 1979. Mythe et contradiction. Analyse de la VIIIe Olympique de Pindare. Paris.

Burkert, W. 1995. “Greek Poleis and Civic Cults: Some Further Thoughts.” Studies in the Ancient Greek Polis (eds. M.H. Hansen and K.A. Raaflaub) 201–210. Stuttgart.

Caliò, L.M. 2001. “Il santuario di Camiro. Analisi delle strutture e ipotesi di ricostruzione della grande stoà dorica.” Orizzonti 2:85–107.

Cole, S.G. 1995. “Civic Cult and Civic Identity.” Sources for the Ancient Greek City-State. Symposium August, 24-27 1994. Acts of the Copenhagen Polis Centre vol. 2 (ed. M.H. Hansen) 292–325. Copenhagen.

Constantakopoulou, C. 2005. “Proud to Be an Islander: Island Identity in Multi-Polis Islands in the Classical and Hellenistic Aegean.” MHR 20:1–34.

Dignas, B. 2003. “Rhodian Priests after the Synoecism.” AncSoc 33:35–51.

Dyggve, E. 1960. Lindos III. Le sanctuaire d’Athana Lindia et l’architecture lindienne. Berlin and Copenhagen.

Gabrielsen, V. 1994. “The Rhodian Associations Honouring Dionysiodoros from Alexandria.” C&M 45:137–160.

— 2000. “The Synoikized Polis of Rhodos.” Polis & Politics. Studies in Ancient Greek History (eds. P. Flensted-Jensen, T.H. Nielsen and L. Rubinstein) 177–205. Copenhagen.

Habicht, C. 2003. “Rhodian Amphora Stamps and Rhodian Eponyms.” REA 105:541–578.

Higbie, C. 2003. The Lindian Chronicle and the Greek Creation of their Past. Oxford.

Hoepfner, W. 2003. Der Koloss von Rhodos und die Bauten des Helios: neue Forschungen zu einem der Sieben Weltwunder. Mainz am Rhein.

Kontorini, V. 1989. Ἀνέκδοτες ἐπιγραφές Ρόδου ΙΙ. Athens.

Kowalzig, B. 2007. Singing for the Gods. Performances of Myth and Ritual in Archaic and Classical Greece. Oxford and New York.

Lippolis, E. 1988. “Il santuario di Athana a Lindo.” ASAA 50:97–157.

Livadiotti, M., and G. Rocco. 1996. La presenza italiana nel Dodecaneso tra il 1912 e il 1948. La ricerca archeologica. La conservazione. Le scelte progettuali. Catania.

Livadiotti, M., and G. Rocco. 1999. “Il tempio di Athana Polias a Ialiso: un contributo alla conoscenza dell’architectura rodia.” Ρόδος 2.400 χρόνια. Η πόλη της Ρόδου από την ίδρυση της μέχρι την κατάληψη από τους Τούρκουσ (1532), Πρακτικά, Τόμος Α. Athens.

Ma, J. 2009. “Empires, Statuses, and Realities.” Interpreting the Athenian Empire (eds. J. Ma, N. Papazarkadas, R. Parker) 125-148. London.

Mackil, E.M. 2013. Creating a Common Polity: Religion, Economy, and Politics in the Making of the Greek Koinon. Berkeley.

Maiuri, A. 1928. “Rapporto generale sul servizio archeologico a Rodi dal 1912 al 1927.” Clara Rhodos 1.

Martelli, M. 1988. “La stipe votive dell’Athenaion di Ialysos. Un primo bilancio.” Archaeology in the Dodecanese (eds. S. Dietz and I. Papachristodoulou) 104–120. Copenhagen.

Momigliano, A. 1936. “Note sulla storia di Rodi.” RFIC 14:49–63.

Morelli, D. 1959. I culti in Rodi. Pisa.

Morricone, L. 1949-51. “I sacerdoti di Halios.” ASAA 11-13:351–380.

Papachristodoulou, I. 1992. “Culti e santuari di Rodi. Nuovi dati e scoperte.” La Magna Grecia e i grandi santuari della Madrepatria. Atti del trentunesimo convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto, 4-8 ottobre 1991 249–73. Taranto.

— 1999. “The Rhodian Demes within the Framework of the Function of the Rhodian State.” Hellenistic Rhodes: Politics, Culture and Society (eds. V. Gabrielsen et al.) 27–44. Aarhus.

Parker, R. 2009. “Subjection, Synoecism and Religious Life.” The Politics of Ethnicity and the Crisis of the Peloponnesian League (eds. P. Funke and N. Luraghi) 183–214. Washington DC.

— 2011. On Greek Religion. Ithaca and London.

Paul, S. 2010. “À propos d’épiclèses ‘trans-divines’. Le cas de Zeus et d’Athéna à Cos.” ARG 12: 65–81.

— 2013a. “Manifestation du divin et reconfiguration des panthéons à la période hellénistique. L’exemple des Artémis d’Asie mineure.” Perceptions et constructions du divin dans l’Antiquité (eds. P. Borgeaud and D. Fabiano) 237–259. Geneva.

— 2013b. Cultes et sanctuaires de l’île de Cos. Liège.

Pirenne-Delforge, V. 2008. Retour à la source. Pausanias et la religion grecque. Liège.

Pugliese Carratelli, G. 1939-40. “Per la storia delle associazioni in Rodi antica.” ASAA 1-2:147–200.

Ringwood Arnold, I. 1936. “Festivals of Rhodes.” AJA 40:432–436.

Schachter, A. 2014. “Tlepolemos in Boeotia.” The Epigraphy and History of Boeotia. New Finds, New Prospects (ed. N. Papazarkadas) 313‑331. Leiden and Boston.

Segre, M. 1951. “Rituali rodii di sacrifici.” PP 6:139–153.

Sfyroeras, P. 1993. “Fireless Sacrifices: Pindar’s Olympian 7 and the Panathenaic Festival.” AJPh 114:1–26.

Versnel, H.S. 2011. Coping with the Gods. Wayward Readings in Greek Theology. Leiden and Boston.

Wiemer, H.-U. 2013. “Zeno of Rhodes and the Rhodian View of the Past.” Polybius and his World. Essays in Memory of F.W. Walbank (eds. B.J. Gibson and T. Harrison) 280–306. Oxford and New York.

Zervoudaki, E. 1975. “Ἥλιος και Ἁλίεια.” ΑD 30:1–20.


* This paper presents a case-study which is part of a wider research project aiming to reevaluate the concept of patron deities in ancient Greece. Its completion greatly benefitted from the excellent research conditions offered by the Center for Hellenic Studies and the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut in Berlin. I would also like to thank for their comments and suggestions the participants in the symposium, particularly Christy Constantakopoulou, Douglas Frame, Luca Giuliani, Peter Liddel, Richard Martin, Nikolaos Papazarkadas, Anthony Snodgrass, as well as Ryan C. Fowler for revising my English. All remaining errors are, of course, my own.

[1] Translation taken from C.H. Oldfather (Loeb Classical Library). The sources of Diodorus for these stories include the Hellenistic historiographer Zeno of Rhodes: see Wiemer 2013:284-298.

[2] See the references in Pirenne-Delforge 2008:262-263.

[3] SEG 50.1101.8-11: νῦν | τε καθήκει τῶι δήμωι συναύξειν τὰ τίμια αὐτῆς διὰ τὸ τήν τε πόλιν καὶ τὴν χώραν ἐν τῆι | καλλίστηι εἶναι διαθέσει προνοούσης αὐτῆς τῶν τε κοινῶν τῆς πόλεως πραγμάτων καὶ τῶ[ν] | κατ᾿ ἰδία{ι}ν ἑκάστου βίου τῶν κατοικούντων τήν τε πόλιν καὶ τὴν χώραν. On Artemis Kindyas and the use of divine epiphanies in cults of patron deities, see Paul 2013a.

[4] Brackertz 1976 proposed a model with a list of criteria to identify a patron deity. The validity of such a model, which proves to be over-rigid in its application to every polis irrespectively of the historical context, has been rightly questioned by Cole 1995. On these questions, see also Burkert 1995; Parker 2011:86-87; Versnel 2011:95; Paul 2013b:309-313.

[5] XIII 75. Translation taken from C.H. Oldfather (Loeb Classical Library).

[6] On the Rhodian synoecism, see more recently Gabrielsen 2000, with previous bibliography. On common island identities, see Constantakopoulou 2005. On the function of Rhodian demes within the unified state, see Papachristodoulou 1999.

[7] Myconos: a sacrificial calendar explicitly refers to the synoecism: LSCG 96.2-5 (ca. 225-200). Cos: a series of inscriptions dated to the mid-fourth century BCE, including four stelae of a cult calendar, as well as regulations on priesthoods, seems to result from the synoecism of 366 BCE. See Paul 2013b: 22-23. On the impact of synoecisms on cult configurations, see Parker 2009 (esp. 205-210 on Rhodes).

[8] The most comprehensive account of Rhodian cults is still Morelli 1959. For more recent discoveries in this matter, see also Papachristodoulou 1992.

[9] On Rhodian coins from the years 408-190 BCE, see Ashton 2001.

[10] An inscription recording the priests of Helios has been published by Morricone 1949-51 (SEG 12.360) and is dated to 381/0 BCE, while the first name is believed to be from 408/7 BC. Contra Gabrielsen 2000: 187 (and n. 49) who advocates for a later date (ca. 358 BCE). Badoud 2015, who has recently revised the chronology of the Rhodian inscriptions, dates the first name to 407 BC (p. 159-161). On the Rhodian priestly career, see Dignas 2003. The priest was appointed in turns from the tribes of Ialysos, Cameiros, and Lindos, and was also the eponymous official on amphora stamps: Habicht 2003.

[11] On the Halieia, see Ringwood Arnold 1936:435-436; Morelli 1959:17-20; 97-98. The prizes attributed to winners in contests were amphorae of Panathenaic style depicting Helios: Zervoudaki 1975.

[12] On the much-debated question of the appearance and location of the colossus, see recently Hoepfner 2003.

[13] Helios is named προπάτωρ in three inscriptions from the Imperial period, but the epithet appears to be a post-Hellenistic development: Suppl.Epigr.Rh. 42; I.Lindos 465h; 482.

[14] Bresson 1979:156-157; Kowalzig 2007:224-266.

[15] SEG 46.989 (from the territory of Ialysos). It has been suggested that the names of some Rhodian patrai (Haliadai, Haliatadai, Haliotadai) indicated the existence of a private, gentilicial, cult of Helios before the synoecism (Morelli 1959:95), but this hypothesis cannot be substantiated.

[16] For a summary of the various hypotheses, see Hoepfner 2003:33-42. A series of dedications by priests of Helios after their terms in office found at the foot of the acropolis seem to indicate a location of the temenos in the area: Kontorini 1989:129-148. See also Badoud 2015:157-159, who suggests that the sanctuary was originally located in the area of the palace of the Knights, but relocated after the dedication of the colossus.

[17] The majority of occurrences concern either winners in contests or gymnasiarchs and agonothetai. See the references in Morelli 1959:17-18.

[18] On these associations, see Pugliese Carratelli 1939-40; Gabrielsen 1994:156-157.

[19] Tit.Cam. 152.

[20] The series was studied by Blinkenberg 1939 and Segre 1951.

[21] An altar of Helios has been discovered in the excavations of Cameiros: Tit.Cam. 144.

[22] Dignas 2003:38.

[23] Badoud 2015:21-23.

[24] IG XII 1, 892.

[25] Segre 1951:151-152, who also emphasizes the problems in the reading.

[26] Herodotus II 182; Diodorus V 58.1; Strabo XIV 2.11; Apollodorus II 1.4; Diogenes Laertius I 89; Callimachus, Aitia fr. 100 (Pfeiffer).

[27] I.Lindos 2. Translation taken from Higbie 2003.

[28] Pindar, Olympian 7.58-94; Diodorus XV 56. On these ἄπυρα ἱερά, see Sfyroeras 1993; Kowalzig 2007:227-238

[29] On the Lindian sanctuary, see Dyggve 1960; Lippolis 1988. On the votive material: Blinkenberg 1931.

[30] Tit.Cam. 105. Cf. Momigliano 1936:49-51. Pindar’s Olympian 7 was meant to be inscribed in golden letters and set up in the sanctuary of Athena Lindia: schol. on Pindar, Olympian 7.1.

[31] Cameiros: Caliò 2001; Bernardini 2006. Ialysos: Livadiotti and Rocco 1999; Martelli 1988.

[32] On the excavations in the acropolis, see Maiuri 1928: 46-48; Livadiotti and Rocco 1996:12-26. The priesthood is attested on a Lindian inscription recording priesthoods from Rhodes: I.Lindos 134 (ca. 215 BCE). Badoud 2015:169 and 229 suggests, however, a slightly later date for this inscription (ca. 185).

[33] On Athena Polias and Zeus Polieus, see Paul 2010; Paul 2013b: 313-316.

[34] Tit.Cam. 15 (ca. 273 BCE). The priesthood is attested throughout the third and second century BCE: Tit.Cam. 17; 28; 30; 31; 35-41; 43-48; 50; 61; 84.

[35] See I.Lindos 56 (ca. 310-290 BCE); 83 (ca. 282-262 BC) for the first occurrences. On the dating of the inscriptions, see Badoud 2015:45-46, who suggests that the association with Zeus Polieus both in Lindos and in Cameiros (p. 98) may date to the synoecism. On Lindian dedications, see I.Lindos (index).

[36] IG XII 1.786.

[37] Similarly, Athena Ilias is associated with Zeus Polieus at Ilion: I.Ilion 52 (2nd cent. BCE).

[38] See the recent study by Mackil 2013:147-236 on the role of religion with koina. On synoecism and religion, see Parker 2009. On Rhodes, the cult of Tlepolemos may have been linked to concerns of unity as well: Kowalzig 2007:239-257; Wiemer 2013:296-297. On the cult of Tlepolemos in Thebes in relation with Rhodes, see Schachter 2014.

[39] On the impact of Athenian imperialism in local contexts, see Ma 2009.

[40] One of the examples of this tension is the fact that towards the end of the fourth century BCE, the Lindians fought to preserve their exclusive right to participate in the rites and to be elected as priests: IG XII 1.761. Cf. Gabrielsen 2000:194; Parker 2009:206.

[41] Ashton 2001, nr. 83.

[42] Tit.Cam. 148.

[43] ClRh 2 (1932) 185.11.

[44] IG XII 1.20 (not after 3rd cent. BCE).

[45] I.Lindos 252 (ca. 125 BCE). On the date of this inscription, see Badoud 2010:130.

[46] N.Suppl.Epig.Rodio 169.20a-b.

[47] ClRh 2 (1932), 184.9.

About Stéphanie Paul

Stéphanie Paul (PhD University of Liège) is a postdoctoral researcher funded by the Belgian National Fund of Research (F.R.S.-FNRS) at the University of Liège, Belgium. Her research focuses on ancient Greek religion during the Hellenistic period, and particularly the continuity and/or change seen in the epigraphic evidence. The topic of the transformations within pantheons is taken into consideration, notably through the study of votive inscriptions and cult-epithets. Her research interests also include the study of sacrificial practices as reflected in the inscriptions. She has published a book in 2013 entitled Cultes et sanctuaires de l’île de Cos (Kernos suppl. 28), issued from her doctoral thesis. Her research at the CHS/DAI will focus on the re-evaluation of the concept of patron deity in Greek cities.

Leave a Reply