Theoroi and Initiates in Samothrace. The Epigraphical Evidence. By NORA M.
DIMITROVA. Hesperia Supplement 37. Princeton, NJ: The American School of
Classical Studies at Athens, 2008. Pp. 280. Paper, $55.00. ISBN
978–0–876–61537–9.
Order this text for $55.00 from Amazon.com
using this link and benefit CAMWS and the Classical Journal:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect-home/classjourn-20
This and previously published CJ Online reviews are at
http://classicaljournal.org/reviews.php
CJ Online 2010.03.04
The epigraphic habit at Samothrace from the 2nd century BCE to the 3rd
century CE is distinguished by the inscription of sometimes lengthy lists
of names of individuals (in Greek and Latin) who visited the island either
seeking initiation in the cult of the Great Gods or as sacred ambassadors
to an unspecified Samothracian festival, and sometimes as both. Catalogues
of initiates are known in such quantity from nowhere else in the Greek
world, but they make up nearly 75% of all known inscriptions from the city
of Samothrace and its chora. In Theoroi and Initiates in Samothrace, Nora
Dimitrova (henceforth D.) provides a new edition of and commentary on 171
inscriptions that mention either group (including more than 30 inedita),
together with a series of exegetical essays that situate this evidence in
its historical and religious context.
The work falls into two parts; the first treats the theoroi (28
inscriptions), the second the initiates (143 inscriptions). Short essays
bookend each section and provide critical background, including, discussion
of the etymology of the word theoros and the function of theoroi in
antiquity, and a general introduction to myesis and mystery cult. In
Appendices I–II, D. collects 8 further inscriptions that bear on the two
primary groups. Following the Appendices are a bibliography, a concordance
of previously published inscriptions and of inscriptions in museums, an
index of names (subdivided by language and office), and a geographic index.
The new editions are based when possible on autopsy, and D. has spent weeks
of study not just at Samothrace, where the majority of the inscriptions are
located, but also in Paris, Vienna, Berlin and Kavala, tracking down
squeezes and membra disiecta. Couple this autopsy with the fact that D. is
a careful, conservative (in the best sense of the word) editorand the
results are transformative for the study of Samothracian history and
religion. Roughly 500 names of theoroi and initiates are corrected from
earlier publications, and some 100 new names are added. There are new or
corrected provenances for several of the now more than 700 initiates and
250 theoroi recorded in the inscriptions.
D. offers new readings in nearly every inscription she has examined in
person. [ed. note: if you encounter difficulty with the Greek display, a
PDF version of the review is at http://classicaljournal.org/CJ Graninger on
Dimitrova.pdf] A brief, representative selection: at no. 4, D. reads the
relatively common Βακχύλλ̣ο̣ς for Friedrich’s otherwise
unattested Βά[ττ]αλος. There will be no ghost names here; at no.
12, a likely record of Kyzikene and Mylasan theoroi possibly dating to the
early 2nd century BCE, Friedrich had read at lines 9–10
Κυζικηνῶν | [μη]νὸς Ποσειδεῶν[ος]. An
initiate’s name and father’s name are expected, not a dating formula.
D. now reads: [------]ΝΟΣ Ποσειδέου̣, “…nos, son of
Poseideos”; at no. 17, a record of theoroi from Stratonikeia and Sardis,
possibly dating to the 1st century BCE, Triantaphyllos had read θ . τος
at ii.4, which gives no sense. D. now reads ἀρχιθεωρ̣ός
(relatively clear in the photograph). The Stratonikeian theoroi thus had a
lead theoros (paralleled elsewhere in the corpus) who is recognized as
such. One could go on.
Some exceptional texts are collected here. No. 29 is a 2nd–1st century
BCE epitaph for Isidore, a mime from Attica who was initiated at Eleusis
and also Samothrace, where he saw the “doubly sacred light of Kabiros”
(l. 16: Καβ̣ίρου δὶχ’ ἱερὸν φῶς). This is the
first mention of Kabiros in a Samothracian document in relation to the cult
of the Great Gods, as well as the first hint that seeing light was featured
in the Samothracian Mysteries. Isidore’s initiations invoke a lengthy,
prosperous life and a position among the euseboi in the underworld—the
first indication that the latter was a possible outcome of the Samothracian
Mysteries. No. 46, a stele dated to ca. 40–45 CE, commemorates the
initiation of Gaios Ioulios Raskos, probably the son of Rhoimetalkes II,
and the inscription (?) offers clear evidence that Thracian royals
participated in the cult. No. 66, a stele precisely dated to September 4,
100 BCE, records the initiation of (among others) Lucius Tullius, the uncle
of Cicero, who was campaigning against Cilician pirates under the
leadership of M. Antonius, grandfather of Mark Antony the triumvir. But the
value of this collection goes beyond such extraordinary texts; it lies
rather in what Robert called the mise en série, tracing the evolution of a
fundamental institution over the course of centuries.
In the commentaries and essays, D. is sensitive throughout to
archaeological context, problems of sanctuary topography, and the crucial
distinction between Fundort and Standort. Many of the theoroi records were
inscribed on wall blocks that do not fit the dimensions of any known
building associated with the temenos of the Great Gods, and D. infers that
these may have been published in the city, not the sanctuary. D. likewise
suggests that the initiate catalogues will have been published outside the
sanctuary and will thus have been visible to those who had not yet been
initiated. Her attention to onomastics is laudable (this was a major
failing of P. Fraser’s 1960 corpus of Samothracian inscriptions), [[1]]
and the work is particularly strong on Thracian names. D. suggests that the
theoroi of this corpus were attending the Samothracian Dionysia and that
some took advantage of the opportunity to seek initiation; the point is
persuasive and well-argued, but may be controversial. D. finds no evidence
of a major, annual festival of the Mysteria in these inscriptions, but
thinks it likely that there were multiple iterations from late spring to
early autumn at which visitors might be initiated.
Criticisms are few and superficial. Occasionally, D.’s epigraphic
commentary could have elucidated more fully what portions of dotted letters
are visible on the stone, especially within a sequence of letters that does
not construe (e.g., nos. 68, 128, 161; but cf. no. 133). And practically
every inscription, even when letter forms are the only criterion for
dating, can be supplied a more specific date than “Date?” (see, e.g.,
nos. 126–7); “post-Archaic” vel sim. would be an improvement.
Finally, as is inevitable in publications of this sort, there are some
minor inconsistencies of line number between text, apparatus and
commentary, none of which will cause confusion.
The Hesperia Supplement monograph series has long been a premier venue for
epigraphic publication, but D.’s edition represents a new height: text
and commentary are laid out cleanly and legibly; there are 133 black and
white photographs and drawings of the inscriptions; and it is possible in
many cases to check D.’s text against an illustration without turning a
page.
In sum, D. has presented what will be the standard corpus of Samothracian
inscriptions concerning theoroi and initiates for this generation, as well
as an invaluable resource for advanced students and scholars researching
nearly any aspect of the religion and history of the island.
D. GRANINGER
American School of Classical Studies at Athens
University of Tennessee, Knoxville
[log in to unmask]
[[1]] P.M. Fraser, Samothrace 2.1: The Inscriptions on Stone, New York 1960.
If you have been forwarded this review, you may subscribe to the listserv
by sending an email to: [log in to unmask]
Leave the subject line blank, and in the first line of the message write:
SUBSCRIBE CJ-Online
You may remove yourself from the CJ-Online listserv by sending an email to:
[log in to unmask]
Leave the subject line blank, and in the first line of the message write:
UNSUBSCRIBE CJ-Online
|