[Authors and titles are listed at the end of the review]
This book is the publication of the proceedings of a conference held at the University of the Aegean in Rhodes in October 2018. It brings together Greek and foreign archaeologists, epigraphists and philologists to highlight how archaeology can contribute to the understanding of Greek religion in the Dodecanese. In this way, it recalls the conference edited by Dietz and Papachristodoulou in 1988[1] and follows the one on Caria and the Dodecanese published in 2021.[2] The 27 papers are mostly based on new data from recent excavations directed by some of the authors, or on the reconsideration of older material with investigations on museum archives and excavation diaries. On the whole, they provide interesting, rich and new reflections on the topic.
The editorial notes by Manolis Stefanakis and the first three papers (Fani Seroglou, Georgios Mavroudis, and Konstantinos Kalogeropoulos) present the intellectual ambitions of this conference (they could have been grouped together in a single paper for a more consistent introduction). The aim is to build a new theoretical and methodological framework based on three research themes which, despite the editors’ polemical tone, are hard to see as new (“man’s timeless need for the depiction and realisation of the divine”, “comprehension of the ritual activity”, study of “sites in the forms of buildings intended for religious ritual activities”, p. X and repeated on p. 10–13), but the papers in the book are classically concerned with studying the religious life of the cities through the archaeology of sanctuaries, votive objects discovered in them, inscriptions, and literary texts.
Several contributions focus on Rhodes in the first half of the first millennium, before the synoecism. Jérémy Lamaze studies the Archaic-period temple of Vroulia (7th BC), and tries to find valid comparisons for its specific features, which he concludes should be sought less in Crete or the Aegean islands than in Cyprus or the Syro-Palestinian coast. Two papers focus on cults at Kamiros during this period, using the same method: the study of artefacts discovered by the first excavations and their cross-referencing with the excavation diaries of Giulio Jacopi and Alfred Biliotti. Isabella Bossolino looks at the creation of the cult of Athena on the acropolis, which should be dated to the second half of the 8th century BC, and the construction of the temple during the middle of the 7th BC, linking it to the formalisation of Kamiros as a polis. Nicholas Salmon reconstructs the original context of more than 1,700 objects found on the same acropolis, and identifies a local production of bronze, bone, ivory, terracotta and faience objects, stressing the network with Egypt, Syria and Samos. Craftsmen were not dependent on a single sanctuary, but frequented multiple low-range local markets on the island. Dimitris Paleothodoros and Georgios Mavroudis focus on the cult of Dionysus in Rhodes, studying a dense corpus of Athenian ceramics from the early 5th century BC. Paolo Daniele Scirpo attempts to find Rhodian religious elements in the Sicilian colonies of Gela and Akragas, alongside Cretan and Sicilian elements, with cults of the Founders, Herakles, Potnia and the Paredros, but comes to the rather common conclusion that the pantheon at Gela is the result of a mixture between Rhodians and Cretans. In fact, his contribution shows that given the extent to which beliefs are shared and common, and the way a city’s pantheon evolves after its foundation, it is almost impossible to attribute the importation of a divine figure, a festival or a month of the calendar to one ethnic group or another.
The time of the synoecism in Rhodes also brings questions about the reorganization of worship in the new city. Vincent Gabrielsen studies a Lindian inscription (SEG 4.171) on the cult of Enyalios, a warrior deity, proposing a slightly modified text based on autopsy. He focuses on the obligation placed on all those undertaking a military campaign from Lindos to pay 1/60th of their misthos to Enyalios. He stresses the distinction between the “stated organized campaigns (demosiai) and the “privately organised and conducted campaigns” (idiai) (p. 40): both were forced to be paid, and this text shows the extent to which the city was organized to collect money not only from its own activities, but also from private individuals. Dimitra-Maria Lala considers the evolution of the Rhodian pantheon after synoecism by listing the cults attested by the priesthoods. Juliane Zachhuber looks at the Rhodian sacrificial calendars (17 or 18 fragmentary inscriptions), asking how synoecism led to the creation of a shared time, notably through the priesthood of Halios, and how this helped to forge a common sense of belonging to the new city.[3] Maria Chiara Monaco argues for religious continuities before and after synoecism and discusses the role of the Diagoreans in the latter as well as the creation of the new Pantheon. Politically dominant, they would have also imposed the cults of Ialysos, in particular that of Halios. However, she underestimates the agency and negotiating skills of the other two cities of Kamiros and Lindos, as well as the conflicts within the cities, or between elites and non-elites, over the definition of the new city. Finally, the contribution by Maria Michalaki Kollia offers an overview of the urbanism of the new city of Rhodes, showing how the layout of the known sanctuaries corresponded to the description of Diodorus of Rhodes as an amphitheater, by arranging the sanctuaries in the Hippodamean grid along two diagonal lines, starting from the city’s acropolis, where the temple of Athena Polias and Zeus Polieus are located. She also restores the importance of the nymphaea built in this area, linking it to the important figure of the nymph Rhodos. This article, the longest of the book, is the result of lengthy observations and reflections on site based no less on her intimate knowledge of the city than on her obvious enthusiasm for its past.
Several articles study the sanctuary of a specific deity in Rhodes. Giorgio Rocco and Monica Livadotti publish the first results of their work on the sanctuary of Zeus at Mt Atavyros, which has no temple but a building that they consider to be a hestiatorion and thesauros at the same time, and an Ionian-style altar. In the city of Rhodes, the sanctuaries of the Theon-Panton (Kalliope Baraimi), Kybele (Vassiliki Patsiada), the Great Gods and Hekate (Romina Carboni and Emiliano Cruccas), receive detailed analysis. Aynur-Michèle-Sara Karatas focuses on the sanctuaries of Demeter at Rhodes and Lindos.[4] These four articles are all solid and richly documented, and show Rhodes’ relations with Caria, Asia Minor and Samothrace.
Two articles raise various issues: Sanne Hoffman studies the forms of the cult of Athana Lindia on the basis of terracotta figurines found on the Lindian acropolis, and proposes that Athana Lindia should be linked to the Mistress of Animals (Potnia Theron) and therefore to Kybele. The article lacks methodological precautions regarding the origin and identity of the pilgrims, the possibility of honoring several deities in the same place, and the chronology. The paper of Panayotis Pachis on the cult of Isis Sôteira, which is attested in a unique inscription, contains unsubstantiated assertions (e.g. “Added to this was the tolerance demonstrated by political leaders who act as ‘social agencies’ for the introduction and acceptance of these new ideas in the environment of the island”, p. 254; “the cult of Isis and Sarapis came undoubtedly first among the preferences of the Greeks”, p. 256). Much of the information in this article comes from Charikleia Fantaoutsaki’s Greek thesis. But she provides in this volume a more accurate and cautious paper on the ‘Egyptian experience’ in Rhodian sanctuaries based on this thesis, especially focusing on the Ptolemaion which became the sanctuary of Isis and Serapis after the earthquake of 227, when Rhodes built a more monumental Ptolemaion.
Five papers focus on the island of Cos. Richard Buxton attempts to explain why Rhodes chose Helios and Cos Asklepios as their tutelary deities, on the basis of a close analysis of the myths. He reconstructs all the links uniting these two deities. His article goes hand in hand with that of Vassiliki Stefanaki and Angeliki Giannikouri, a numismatic study of coins from the 3rd and 2nd BC illustrating the introduction of the figures of Asklepios and Apollo into civic coinage; they assign a crowned-head divinity on a few coins to Aphrodite Pandamos, but it could just as easily be Pontia. Dimitrios Bosnakis explores the cult of Asklepios at Kalymnos, which can be reconstructed from some statues representing the god in the Epidauros type. While the importance of this cult has clearly political meanings in the time of the homopoliteia between Kos and Kalymnos, we must give full weight to the idea that he evokes, but does not repeat in his conclusion, that the adoption of the cult of Asklepios was not only political but also based on the god’s prestige. Lastly, two papers deal with the deme of Halasarna. Georgia Kokkorou-Alevras and Georgios Doulfis present a list of the divinities honored in the demes alongside Apollo and Herakles. Kerstin Höghammar studies the cult personnel in the 200s BC, in a sociological study that has major methodological shortcomings that weaken its conclusions. Hoghämmar wanted to study the background of the priests and naopes, in particular on the basis of the sums that some of them offered to the city during an epidosis for war purposes (IG XII 4, 75-77). Demesmen from Halasarna donated modest sums (10–100 drachmas), which means, for Höghammar, that “they had only modest means” (p. 63) and belonged to the “lower middle class” (p. 66). At the same time, however, she asserts that, when a priest makes an offering of 100 drachmas, it is a sign that he belongs to the elite. If we consider that only 10% of the citizens of Cos took part in the great epidosis, we cannot make them members of the “lower middle class”. The stone is not complete, and the sum shown on the stone is not a proportion of the wealth of the donors, as some may have donated in other contexts, and the mere fact of appearing on the list regardless of the size of donation is enough to distinguish the elite who donated from those who did not.
This book provides a well-documented overview of the richness and diversity of cults in the Dodecanese, based on precise and well-documented studies. As such, they are an important contribution to the study of Greek religion and polytheism. Despite the stated ambition to study the Dodecanese as a region, all the papers focus mainly on Rhodes and Cos; however, most papers take care to make comparisons on a regional or Mediterranean scale, showing the place of Rhodes in networks from east to continental Greece. For the long chronology, I regret that the Roman period has not been included, especially as some authors make incursions past the first millennium, and it would be appropriate to study the imperial cult in continuity with Hellenistic cults. A general conclusion would have been welcome to summarize the major long-term developments in religious life and to insert these case studies within the general reflections on the uses of polytheism in Greece, or on polis religion, an issue addressed by contributors like Juliane Zachhuber or Gabrielsen. Finally, the papers focus almost exclusively on public sanctuaries. I would have liked also to see articles on private worship in homes, in associations, or in places other than sanctuaries, such as gymnasiums or necropoleis.
In terms of form, the book is well put together, but there is no organization of the papers (chronological, geographical, or thematic), which results in many repetitions between chapters (e.g. Hoffmann and Karatas present a study based on an identical corpus of votive objects from Lindos; Karatas adding some useful graphs), without any cross-references between the articles, even though there are sometimes divergent opinions. The articles are richly illustrated with photographs (personal or archival), enhanced plans and graphics, most of which are of very good quality. A common bibliography and a common appendix which could have contained the maps used by several authors would have been easier for the reader.
Authors and Titles
Editorial Notes – Manolis I. Stefanakis
Religion and cult in the Dodecanese during the 1st Millennium BC: A summary – Fani K. Seroglou
Ancient Greek religion and cult: A theoretical framework – Georgios Mavroudis
Religion and cult in the archaeological context – Konstantinos Kalogeropoulos
From Helios to Asklepios: Contrasting and complementary perceptions of divinity – Richard Buxton
The formation and evolution of the ‘pantheons’ of the Rhodian cities after the synoecisme – Dimitra-Maria Lala
Sacrifice, synoikism, and local epigraphic habits: a reconsideration of Rhodian sacrificial inscriptions – Juliane Zachhuber
The cult of Enyalios: Epigraphic evidence on military organisation and taxation in Lindos – Vincent Gabrielsen
The multifunctional Athana Lindia: discussing the aspects of a goddess through sanctuary setting and votive offerings – Sanne Hoffmann
Public servants and cult officials: The socio-economic standing and activities of the priest of Apollo and the hieropoioi at Halasarna, Kos, c. 220-180 BC – Kerstin Höghammar
Politics and religion on Koan types (end of 3rd – first half of 2nd century BC) – Vassiliki E. Stefanaki and Angeliki Giannikouri
Technically gifted: Votive deposits from Kamiros acropolis – Nicholas Salmon
Sculpture from ‘Pantheon’: An open-air sanctuary at the foothill of the Rhodian acropolis – Kalliope Bairami
Dedication, dedicators and cults at ancient Halasarna of Cos – Georgia Kokkorou-Alevras and Georgios Doulfis
Sculpture in religious context: Reconstructing the cult of Asklepios on Kalymnos – Dimitrios Bosnakis
Synecism as a divide? Cults of the Rhodian cities: Ancient hypotheses, new perspectives – Maria Chiara Monaco
An open-air sanctuary of Kybele? in the city of Rhodes – Vassiliki Patsiada
Temples, sacred places and cults in the city of Rhodes: Revisiting the evidence – Maria Michalaki Kollia
Early Iron Age Kamiros and its sanctuaries: Some observations – Isabella Bossolino
Revisiting the Archaic shrine, ‘La Chapelle’, of Vroulia (Rhodes) – Jérémy Lamaze
The Sanctuary of Zeus on Mt Atavyros, Rhodes: Some preliminary notes on its architecture – Giorgio Rocco and Monica Livadiotti
Forms of private and public devotion in the Dodecanese in the Hellenistic Age: The cases of the Great Gods and Hecate – Romina Carboni and Emiliano Cruccas
Divine travellers from Egypt settling on Rhodes: Some issues for discussion – Charikleia Fantaoutsaki
Ἴσ[ει] Σωτείρα. The cult of Isis on the island of Rhodes in the Hellenistic Age – Panayotis Pachis
Rhodian cults in the Greek colonies of Sicily: A research prologue – Paolo Daniele Scirpo
Visual and written testimonies on the cult of Dionysus in the Dodecanese – Dimitris Paleothodoros and Georgios Mavroudis
De natura δεκάτης (or -ας) – Alan W. Johnston
The sanctuaries and cults of Demeter on Rhodes – Aynur-Michèle-Sara Karatas
Notes
[1] Dietz, S. and Papachristodoulou, I., éd. (1988) Archaeology in the Dodecanese, Copenhagen
[2] Poulsen, B., Pedersen, P. and Lund, J. (2021) Karia and the Dodekanese: cultural interrelations in the Southeast Aegean, Oxford.
[3] Written at the start of her PhD, these thoughts are explored in greater depth in the recently published book based on her thesis: Zachhuber, J. (2024) Religious Life in Late Classical and Hellenistic Rhodes, Oxford.
[4] I note a few translation errors: in the dedication IG XII 1, 29, it should not be ‘Mnasimbrote Damagoras son of Aristomachos’, but ‘Mnasimbrote daughter of Damagoras, and [—]das son of Aristomachos, for his wife Mnasimbrote’; the Haliadai found in Lindos II 183 are not so much fishermen as an association of Haliadai. In I.Kamiros 84 in honour of Aristombrotidas, one of the three dedicators, Nausippos, does not do so ‘on behalf of the deity’ but for his uncle ([tou thia]). In these inscriptions, hyper + genitive makes the statue an offering to the divinity for the sake of the honorand, here the uncle.