IG The Eleusinia, and The Eleusinians

IG I2 5, the Eleusinia, and the Eleusinians Author(s): Kevin Clinton Source: The American Journal of Philology, Vol.
100, No. 1, Tekmhpion. A Special Issue in Honor of James Henry Oliver (Spring, 1979), pp. 1-12 Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/294221 . Accessed: 10/10/2013 08:29
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The American Journal of Philology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 83.212.248.199 on Thu, 10 Oct 2013 08:29:40 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
IG 12 5, THE ELEUSINIA, AND THE ELEUSINIANS J. H. Oliver's publication of the Law Code of Nicomachus in Hesperia 4 (1935) was an important event for students of Athenian religion. It represented a major addition to the previously known fragments and a major advance in our understanding of the whole document. In addition, it provided a firm basis for further discussion and discovery during the past four decades. On this occasion it is a pleasure to continue the discussion, in the course of an examination of one of the earliest decrees found at Eleusis, which contains regulations that are rather similar to some in the Code of Nicomachus. IG 12 5, inscribed around 480-470, presents a list of sacrifices. They have long been associated with the Eleusinia, an agonistic festival held at Eleusis, which was distinct of course from the famous Eleusinian Mysteries (ra Mvuri'Qta). The inscription is actually a resume of a decree.' It states (1) the xrT.), (2) the type of sacrifice to be offered prescript ([E'6oXuE]v ([c. ]AEta 0[iE]v), (3) the officials who are to perform the sacrifices (ro0 htEq.7orqto. 'EEvtvtov xat [r... Ca. 13.]), (4) the place of sacrifice ([E]v [T6t 'E]Etvuti'[(ot]), (5) the gods and their victims, and finally (6) the time of year (Ev T ttoQ[TEt]). I was able to make the following text from inspection of the stone .3
I The most thorough treatment of the inscription is H. von Prott's article, "Ein IEPOZ NOMOZ der Eleusinien," AthMitt 24 (1899) 241-66. The stone, according to Prott, served as the base of a sacrificial table or altar. The date can only be determined roughly, from the style of the letters. 2 The above quotations from the decree omit the interpuncts. 3 My text differs from IG 12 5 most conspicuously in regard to subscript dots. A dot under an omicron or theta here indicates that the central part of the letter is missing or damaged; the reason for the other dots can be seen from a glance at Prott's drawing (loc. cit.). In line 1 the second epsilon of is visible. the first word cannot be read, but the lower part of the tau of h6oTc The lowest dot of the interpunct at the end of line 3 is visible. In line 2 there is a rather large gap, at least 0.023 m., at the lower level of the line between xxaxand the next letter; considering the size of the gap, the following letter seems most likely to be tau; a gap of approximately the same size exists between the xxa[and following tau in line 1. The vacant spaces marked
0002-9475/79/1001-0001
AJP 100 (1979) 1-12 ? 1979 by The Johns Hopkins University Press $01 .00
KEVIN CLINTON
xai [T]6i NqOt * h6CrE7HaOat3dr[E; iyOauudEtE t]v [MoXaxE]v [ * TEl Po)El] *EVt * 'E)Etnatviov * xai [r ca. 13 * 0[PfE]v * TrO hlEtO7ol6; [Jr7oToE-la [Tl6 'E)]El'vlv[iot [1JoElCt6]6vt . [xt6v]V hE jha7u 'Evayov(ot * X4itutv . AQTE8uA * atya * [HMotTPo]vt * [oAi]XtOl * obl * TtiTToav' .P/aXov . a[ya .[ ca. 15. ]ov : TOAi[ot *xt6v]o
*
ElVTEl *oO[Trh. vacat]
Prott identified the E'OQ[TE] as the Eleusinia, because of the and the fact that some presence of the iteQ0rotol 'E2Evatvtvwv of the gods, especially Hermes Enagonius and Telesidromus, are the sort that would be most at home in an agonistic festival. His identification of the festival has been accepted by all subsequent editors and commentators.4 However, the place of sacrifice, the Eleusinion, i.e. either the sanctuary of Demeter and Kore at Eleusis or, more probably, the Telesterion itself, is an obstacle to Prott's identification, for it was the place in which the Mysteria were held. We do not know precisely where the Eleusinia were held, but their contests certainly did not take place within this sanctuary," and it seems logical to expect sacrifices at the Eleusinia to have been in close proximity to the contests. But there is a consideration that is even more important: we have no positive evidence that any festival but the Mysteria was celebrated within the sanctuary, into which only initiates of the Mysteria were admitted.7 So, if we suppose that the sacrifices of IG 12 5 were held at the time of the Eleusinia, we have to imagine that only the sacrificers and perhaps those who happened to have already been initiated (at least several months earlier) entered the sanctuary to atat the ends of lines 1-2, 4-5, indicate the relation of the ends of these lines to the end of line 3. A full epigraphical commentary and critical apparatus will appear in the edition of all the Eleusinian inscriptions that I am preparing for the Greek Archaeological Society. I am grateful to them and the Archaeological Service for allowing me to study this inscription at Eleusis. 4The most recent discussions are my own (AJP 92 [1971] 497-98, reviewing Sokolowskis LSCG) and R. M. Simms' ("The Eleusinia in the Sixth to Fourth Centuries B.C.,' GRBS 16 [1975] 269-79). After Prott the inscription was edited by: L. Ziehen, LGS II, 2; Hiller von Gaertringen, IG 12 5, and F. Sokolowski, LSCG 4 (cf. criticism in my review, loc. cit.). 5 Cf. 0. Rubensohn, 'Das Weihehaus von Eleusis und sein Allerheiligstes," JdI 70 (1955) 1-49. "The location of the Stadium at Eleusis is discussed by J. Travlos, Hesper-ia 18 (1949) 146. 7Cf. G. E. Mylonas, Eleusis and the Eleusiniani Mysteries (Princeton 1961) 224-29.
THE ELEUSINIA AND THE ELEUSINIANS
tend the sacrifices: the uninitiated would be excluded. This would be an awkward arrangement for a Panhellenic festival. Another difficulty is that the main part of the inscription was found within the sanctuary.8 Therefore, the most natural interpretation of Ev Ttt ioQ[TEt], which must have been so obvious to a reader that the festival did not need to be named, is that it refers simply to the only festival that was held right there, viz. the Mysteria.9 Then the awkwardness involved in supposing the festival to be the Eleusinia disappears. The fact remains, however, that the most natural environment for Hermes Enagonius, Telesidromus, and Dolichus would be the agonistic festival, the Eleusinia. Yet there is no compelling reason why sacrifice to some (or all) of the gods of the Eleusinia could not be made at the Mysteria. The festivals were related. 10The sacrifices of IG 12 5 were carried out by the tEQorotot 'E),vutvt[Ov (who are probably not to be understood as the hieropoioi of the Eleusinia but as the hiero8 Pittakys, 'Ep. 'AQX. 1860, no. 3798; L. Lenormant, Recherches archheologiques d Eleusis (Paris 1862) 70-71; von Prott, op. cit., 242. The stone was found between the lesser Propylaea and the Telesterion, at a deep level. I For this reason I tend to prefer the restoration [F]v [rti 'E)]jvatv[[ot F]tt to Rubensohn's [f]v [rtt 'E)]jvaiv[t av']tt (op. cit., 9, n. 42), unless the courtyard is the one inside the sanctuary, in front of the Telesterion. However, it is by no means impossible, though a bit unlikely, that the stone's original location was the outer courtyard, and that it was later moved within the area of the sanctuary. If this was the case and Rubensohn's restoration is correct, then the sacrifices were performed in the outer courtyard. This would eliminate some of the awkwardness I have objected to if we have to assume the festival was the Eleusinia, but not all, for the outer courtyard was the courtyard of the sanctuary of the Mysteries. If the phrase "in the [courtyard at El]eusi[s]" was meant to designate this courtyard, it had to do so by relying mainly on the inscription's location (the words themselves do not specify which courtyard and which sanctuary at Eleusis); by the same token "in the festival" should refer to the obvious festival held right where the inscription was set up: the Mysteria. The title [CQon7o1oi 'E),cvatv[cov does not offer a sure indication of the festival (see below, n. 11). On Ge and the Eleusinia see R. F. Healey, HThR (1964) 153-59 especially note 19. "'Both were chiefly in honor of Demeter and Persephone: the Eleusinia were a harvest festival in some sense; the Mysteria occurred at the time of sowing. In the Hellenistic period these two festivals and the Panathenaea were announced together by theoroi sent abroad by Athens; cf. 'ET. 'AQX. 1914, 167-72 (=B. Helly, Gonnoi, II [Amsterdam 1973] 121-22, no. 109). Thus it would not be surprising to see Athena honored in both Eleusinian festivals.
KEVIN CLINTON
poioi of the Eleusinians) and perhaps another official or group of officials named in the lacuna.1I It is in fact conceivable that all the deities listed in IG 12 5 were associated with the Eleusinia, although there is no direct evidence to confirm this. 12 Some of them were also associated with the Mysteria: certainly Triptolemus, Pluto, and the Two Goddesses were. 13
'Unless the rest of the title of the [c-Qo:rotoi'E)Evatviov xai [---] followed in the lacuna. Theoretically Lc?Qotooi 'E)A,vatv[wvv might mean hieropoioi of the Eleusinia, but actual usage offers no support. I have not been able to find + genitive of the festival. The regular a parallel for the phrase t'o:roto expression, if the festival is mentioned, is U?eQoao1oi + participle of ti?oaot,l?v (or a similar verb) + accusative of the festival: cf. IG 112 1749, line 80. Thus it appears unlikely that the title in IG 12 5 means hieropoioi of the Eleusinia. A century ago L. Ziehen, RhM 51 (1896) 224, called such a meaning"auffallend"; A. Mommsen, Heortologie (Leipzig 1864) 257, had already understood the phrase to mean hieropoioi of the Eleusinians, and he associated the sacrifices with the Mysteria, but then he did not distinguish between the Mysteria and the Eleusinia and so did not realize that there was a problem; later, Feste de Stadt Athen (Leipzig 1898) 183, he evidently associated the sacrifices with the Eleusinia. Hieropoioi can also be designated with the name of the sanctuary; cf. [CQO:TOLOt tT ro "H/3g Wq 'E6Ov, IG 1121199. A noun in the genitive following i?eQonrotol designates the gods whom they serve or the group from IG 3o16JOV, which they are drawn; cf. [{rv i90OlTOOVTv 5 /OovAf xai TOV 12 330, lines 13-14 (for the restoration, which is probable, cf. lines 6-7 and 33-34, and see U. Kohler, AthMitt 7 [1882] 102-8 andIG II 5, 128 b); [l?otoloi ?y /OVA)g, IG 112 1672, lines 280, 284, 289, is a similar designation; at Priene there were tEQorotoi r[cifblv rpvA[cv], Inschriftei von Priene, 14, line 25. 2These deities are discussed by R. F. Healey, S.J., in his unpublished dissertation 'Eleusinian Sacrifices in the Athenian Law Code" (Harvard 1962), with summary in HSCP 66 (1962) 256-59. I am very grateful to Fr. Healey for sending me a copy of his dissertation. as an epithet of Pluto, as Prott did It is perhaps better to take a[oAi],vq (op. cit. [above, n. 1] 252), meaning 'long-lasting'" or "'the god of the Long Course"; the hero Dolichus would have been created from this epithet of Pluto. Ziehen, LGS II 2, however, although he found the idea attractive, finally could not adopt it. 3 There was a shrine of Pluto within the sanctuary; cf. Mylonas, op. cit. (above, n. 7) 146-49. And Pluto had a priestess; cf. my Sacred Officials of the Eleusinian Mysteries, Tr-ansAmer-PhilSocN.S., 64, Pt. 3 (1974) 97. R. M. Simms, "The Eleusinia in the Sixth to Fourth Centuries B.C.,"' GRBS 16 (1975) 274, is wrong in suggesting that the myth of Triptolemus does not belong with the Mysteria. The speech of the daduch Callias to the Lacedaemonians clearly indicates Triptolemus' connection with this festival: 6 uT?0og :7eoyovog Ta A?IU,QOg xal K6OWN .. ,-y,rat uv Tht TOr6euo O'
aQ99}Ta 1C9-& :T9WTot; t?Votg TOlV V/MeTE9O(V atoo0xofQotv 6iat
'H9ax)El
T? TO) V/TETC9W TOIs A?yiUoiT9O;
XAl ?l5
.wO)iTatv,
xai
&
xaaQoT
The sacrifices and deities in this inscription occur again, according to F. Sokolowskil4 and R. F. Healey, 15 in the Code of Nicomachus at the end of the fifth century (ed. J. H. Oliver, Hesperia, 4 [1935] 1-32 = LSS, 10, lines 77-86 and following), along with additional deities and sacrifices. The immediately preceding sacrifices in this part of the Code were carried out by the Eumolpidae and the priestess of Demeter (lines 6076);16 these sacrifices were to: Themis, Zeus Herkeios, Demeter, Persephone (Pherephatta), Eumolpus, Melichus the hero, Archegetes, Polyxenus, Threptus, Diocles, Celeus. It is very curious that Demeter and Persephone are listed separately and not as a pair. At Eleusis they were called Demeter and Kore or simply the Two Goddesses. As far as I know, the name Persephone does not occur in any prose inscription at Eleusis. Another curious fact is that this list does not contain the name of any other deity whom one would immediately associate with an agonistic festival like the Eleusinia.'7 Since
6wQeraaaOat (Xenophon, Hellenica 6.3.6). :rQ6iwqv v)v I7)-orovvcraov acudQua
Triptolemus gave to the Peloponnesians what Demeter gave to the Athenians: grain and the Mysteries. The two gifts are indeed related. Isocrates calls them 6coe&ag 61TTs6 . . . TOV5r T xaQerovi . . . xai T7v T&iET6v . (Panegyricus 4.28). They belong together, and Triptolemus distributed both to the rest of the Greek world. But he was probably associated with the Eleusinia as well. "4Lois sacrees des Cites grecques, Supplement (Paris 1962) no. 10. Unless otherwise indicated, the text referred to and quoted here is the one published by Sokolowski. I5In his dissertation, op. cit. (above, n. 12) 197-202, 318-20. He assumes that IG 12 5 is a copy of one of the stelai referred to in the rubric Ex TJibv in line 77. aTr[?7Awv] 16 See Clinton, op. cit. (above, n. 13) 70. '" Demeter, of course, was associated with the Eleusinia, as well as with many other festivals. Healey, op. cit., 117-20, identifies Threptus with Demophon, Demeter's nursling of the Homeric Hymn, and sees lines 265-67 of the Hymn, which describe a contest among the aaiT6c 'E)cvwtviw'(vin his honor, as an aition of the Eleusinia. But there is nothing to indicate that the contest described in the Hymn was the Eleusinia. If these lines are an aition of a festival, it is more likely that it was the festival called Ba)itiTrV6 (Hesychius, s.v., Athenaeus 9.406d). Hesychius reports that the Balletys was in honor of Demophon, and in Athenaeus' time it was a separate festival from the Eleusinia. Cf. L. Deubner, Attische Feste (Berlin 1932) 69 and N. J. Richardson, The Homeric Hymn to Demeter (Oxford 1974) 245-47. J. H. Oliver, Hesperia 4 (1935) 26, and A. Korte, Glotta 25 (1937) 134-40, identified Threptus as Triptolemus: their view obviously cannot be taken as certain but it does seem more plausible than an identification with Demophon.
KEVIN CLINTON
some of them can be identified as the ancestral gods of the Eumolpidae, the easiest hypothesis would be that they all are. 18 If that is so, then we should seriously consider whether the following group of sacrifices might be to the ancestral gods of the other "Eleusinian" genos, the Kerykes. The code tells us that these sacrifices were to: Hestia, Athena, Charites, Hermes En[agonius], (H)e.[mes?--], Her[acles?], D[----], and one or more deities that are not preserved. 19 A decree of the year 20/19, honoring the daduch Themistocles, contains the names of several priests who were members of this genos.20 They probably represent all the priesthoods that were then controlled by the Kerykes.21 In addition to specifically Eleusinian priesthoods this list includes: (1) the priest of the Graces and Artemis Epipyrgidia, (2) the priest of Hermes Patroos, and (3) the priest of Zeus Horius and Athena Horia and Poseidon Prosbaterius and Poseidon Themeliuchus. It is clear, then, that the Kerykes have a special relationship with certain cults of the Charites, Artemis, Hermes, Poseidon, Athena, and Zeus. Athena, the Charites, and Hermes are listed in that order in the section of the Law Code we have been discussing (lines 80-83), and all but Zeus appear also in IG 12 5 (if Athena is restored).22 Although the absence of several of the epithets does not permit certainty, sacrifices in this particular section of the Law Code have at least a strong claim to consideration as sacrifices of the genos of the Kerykes, parallelling the sacrifices of the Eumolpidae immediately preceding. Both sets of sacrifices were most likely made at the Eleusinia or at the time of the Eleusinia.23 They seem to be the sacrifices of the two gene which had a principal role in this festival, but were
In line 66 the correct reading is Mc%xwt; see Healey, op. cit., 130, and F. Graf, ZPE 14 (1974) 139-44. '8This is also the view of Healey, op. cit., 72-191. 19For the readings ' line 85, see Healey's line 82, and H4.[axAieT, dissertation, op. cit. (above, n. 12) 257, 262. 201. Threpsiades, 'Ecvoutvtaxa 1 (1932) 223-36 = Clinton, op. cit. (above, n. 13) 50-52. 21 Ibid., 77, n. 8. 22 Athena is restored by Healey, op. cit., 230, and Mylonas, 'AeX. 'Ep., 1960, 80, but the space seems a bit too large for her name. 23 The festival at which they were made was trieteric; cf. Korte, op. cit. (above, n. 17) 136; Healey, op. cit., 7-9.
probably not the main sacrifices of the festival itself: the name 0epraTCrij militates against this. We have seen that the sacrifices of IG 12 5 were carried out at the Mysteria, but some of the deities to whom they were offered must have figured more prominently in the Eleusinia, especially Hermes Enagonius, Telesidromus, and D[oli]chus. We have also seen that some of the deities in this inscription were served by the Kerykes: Hermes, the Charites, [Athena], [Poseid]on and Artemis, although epithets are lacking in some cases. Moreover, it is conceivable that Telesidromus and Dolichus appeared in the now missing section of the list of [Kerykes'] sacrifices in the Law Code of Nicomachus.24 All but one of the remaining deities in IG 12 5 have been equated with Eumolpid deities listed in the Law Code: Triptolemus with Threptus, [Pluto]n with Polyxenus, and of course the Two Goddesses with Demeter and PherrephattE.25The other goddess, Ge, may be equated either with Themis or Hestia who appear respectively at the heads of the lists of deities in the Law Code; in antiquity Themis and Hestia were regarded as manifestations of GE.26 On this hypothesis, therefore, the deities of IG 12 5 represent principal deities of the Eleusinia who all happen to be identifiable with deities served by the two principal gene of the Eleusinia and Mysteria. Some of these gods-Triptolemus, Pluto, and the Two Goddesseswere also worshipped in the Mysteria, and it must have seemed appropriate to honor in the Mysteria the companions whom these gods of the Mysteria had in the other principal festival at Eleusis. So IG 12 5 regulates the set of sacrifices at the
24Dolichus may be an epithet of Pluto; see above, n. 12.
On Threptus and Triptolemus see above, n. 17; on Polyxenus and Pluto, Richardson, op. cit., ad line 153, Healey, op. cit. (above, n. 12) 145-48. It is curious that Poseidon does not appear among the Eumolpid deities listed in the Code. He was the divine ancestor of the genos (Pausanias 1.38.2; Aristeides, Eleusinios 4; Euripides, Erechtheus, ed. Austin [Nova Fragmenta Euripidea (Berlin 1968)]; cf. J. Toepffer, Attische Genealogie [Berlin 1899] 28). It is conceivable that he is to be identified with 'Ae%qy&gqg (line 67)-he seems well qualified for the title-or that he appeared ahead of Themis. For other theories on the identity of 'AeX17y-Ti5 see J. H. Oliver, op. cit., 27, whose identification with Iacchus has been generally accepted, Healey, op. cit., 142-44, and F. Graf, Eleusis und die orphische Dichtung Athens in vorhellenistischer Zeit (Berlin 1974) 54 n. 17. 26Cf. Healey, op. cit. 75-79, 219-24.
25
KEVIN CLINTON
Mysteria to Triptolemus, Pluto, the Two Goddesses, and their companion deities at the Eleusinia.27 What also suggests that the sacrifices of IG 12 5 are not the main ones of the Mysteria is the fact that they are not offered by the most important priests of the cult, namely the hierophant and the priestess of Demeter and Kore; one misses also the ite'etv FartBw1t,. It is possible that [Trv htieQav] stood in the lacuna in line 2, but still we would expect the hierophant in addition to her for major sacrifices, and perhaps also the altar-priest.28 Another possibility, more in accord with my analysis, is [rai yFve Trolv 06oiv], but still, if it were a question of the major sacrifices, we should expect only the major priests, not the larger groups, the gene. So [n7or1]Xlta remains appealing, despite the unusual spelling.29 The officials who do perform the sacrifice are the iteonro0oi 'EXevatv[tv: not the hieropoioi of the Eleusinia, which is an unparalleled expression at Athens, but the hieropoioi of the Eleusinians,3" who seem to be an earlier version of the evuiv66ev (IG 12 76 = Meiggs-Lewis, 73) or [e,oQo.oi'Et [e-ono0oi 'EXevalvt (IG J2 311), of the late fifth century. The title in IG 12 5 may reflect the fact that the Eleusinians once had an important role in the Eleusinia and the Mysteria. Eventually, however, they gave way to the two gene and the
27 But they were not the main sacrifices; see below and the following note. The main sacrifice was called ,Z Ova(ta(IG I12 661, lines 21-22) and included /of3;; cf. IG 112 1008, lines 8-9, 1028, lines 10-11, P. Foucart, Les Mysteres d'Eleusis (Paris 1914) 371-74. 28 Cf. Clinton, op. cit. (above, n. 13) 82. 2!i Simms, op. cit. (above, n. 13) 272, suggests [,7rQoT6OVa or [axQ6V]Aea. The -?l- here is not a spurious dipthong, but the fact remains that in Athenian inscriptions, according to Meisterhans-Schwyzer, 43, n. 275, the spelling does not occur before the second century. However, evidence in the TC'r)lO; case of -r?'?lo; may simply be incomplete; genuine -?l- appears both as -?land -?- in the fifth century and later; see ibid., 40-41. Yet, against this is the fact that the spelling of i1A?loS is remarkably consistent in the preserved texts. For a discussion of the meaning of reor6)?ua see Healey, op. cit. (above, n. 12) 320-22. Themistius, Or. 5.71A, an important passage to which Healey calls attention, uses the word to mean "preliminary ceremonies" of the Mysteria which took place before the telete, which in turn took place in the anaktora; but the context in IG 12 5 limits the meaning there to sacrifices alone. 1"See above, n. 11.
Athenian State.31Perhaps even at this date the title indicated that the hieropoioi were appointedby or drawnfrom the Eleusinians, but surely later in the century they were appointed by the State, probablythe Boule.32The duties of the late fifth century teEonroto' 'E)Evatv6OEv included some limited administrative and sacrificial activities at the Mysteria, i.e. mainly activities in which the State had an interest and which it did not wish to be handled by the gene, e.g. the Aparch.33 The Eleusinians, however, maintained some kind of a role, perhaps not an official one, in the Eleusinia, whereas they seem to have been completely excluded from the Mysteria. In a decree of the third century honoringa general we learn: ytvouEvrg; R xat' Tvg ;ravi7[yi5QE]wo T(6v
'EAEva[t]vi` [v] TCjuUEya(0v E'v OE! g TEatv oT! EaTQaTfjy?7XEv, gOvaEv TaTg OEag uET&aT(Jv Et- 'ETEvaivog rcEt T[f]!r ToV
&7jjov atT7etaa.34 No such sacrifice or the group oe E`t 'EAEvaTvog is mentionedin connection with the festival of the
Mysteriain the following sentence of this decree.

Appendix: The Trieteric and Penteteric Festival
IG 112 1672 offers importantevidence for the trieteric and penteteric celebrations of the Eleusinia. It is an account of
the year 329/8, compiled by the En;rtarTat 'EAEvatvv0Ev xa' Tautat Toiv OEoiv. This was the last year of their four-year
term of office. After listing income and expenses for the sanctuary prytany by prytany, and after presentinga total for the year, they go on to account for the rent of the Rarian Field over the whole four-year period. Out of this rent, measured in grain, they gave 61 bushels each year to "priests and priestesses."35 Then follow the words: Ei` Ti)V TetET7eiba T76v 'EEvctv[vOv Ei`gTOvyvyvtxov dyJva xat T[ t[7ru7roQouag]
SEG X, 24, lines 7-12. 33Cf. my discussion in op. cit. (above, n. 13) 14-15. 34IG 112 1304, lines 24-27. 3 Simms, op. cit. (above, n. 13) 269, n. 3, believes these allocations of grain were used by the priests and priestesses for sacral purposes at the Eleusinia. But there is nothing to indicate that this was the case. No purpose is stated in the inscription, and the simplest hypothesis is that the grain was for personal use. For monetary distributions of this type at Eleusis cf. Clinton, op. cit., 23.
31Cf. Clinton, op. cit. (above, n. 13) 8. 32Just as were the zuararat 'E,evorvo0ev,
10
KEVIN CLINTON TroV -rarQtov ayJovo;
xat
xat Trig yovux7g y5t&yvot 70 Et; then the same series of r[Jv 'E)]E[vatviwv], Tr?7V -rEVrEcri7Qa contests, [the number of bushels], plus, for a horse race added according to decree, 70 bushels. Finally, there is the total of (1) the grain allocated to "priests and priestess" and (2) the rdv 'EAEvatviv xat (3) Eig m\V grain used Ei` nv \rQtEcnyeia
7rcEvrEcrh7a.36
This clearly states that there was one celebra-
tion called i) rQtEri7tg and one ? 7EvrEri7[g during the preceding four years. If there had been more than one trieteric celebration, the document surely would have the plural,
Some scholars, even so, have assumed Etr -a; TQtepQ8iag. that Ecg n\v TrQETcuQia refers to two celebrations, two years
apart.37 If the clear language of the inscription leaves any doubt, surely it vanishes when one considers the method of accounting used throughout. Nowhere in the account are expenditures for two separate years lumped together without informing the reader. We should therefore not expect this principle to be violated in the present instance. Thus two, not three, celebrations over this four-year period are referred to here. The conclusion we must draw is that ,' teriQig was evidently so named because there was an interval of two years between it and the more glamorous one, i7 nrvrcr,etg, which occurred every four years. Another question that has touched off a considerable amount of argument is in which years of the Olympiad these celebra36 Lines 258-62. There is no conjunction separating [ixeaeii] Xai lEQeeagl from -i' ri6v T9Q1elTQ6a xr<., but asyndeta in accounts of this type were common. They occur frequently in this inscription; cf. Meisterhans-Schwyzer, 250. The preceding entries make it quite clear that here (in line 262) we have (2) Ei; riv TeQW7Q[6a xaCl(3) i; Triv a series: (1) [ xaei3u] XCiE[edai;, ;r,evUT)7Qt6a. 3 So recently Simms, loc. cit., following P. Boesch, PhilWochenschr 37 (1917) 157-58, Kirchner, ad IG II2 1496, Deubner,Attische Feste (Berlin 1932) 91, Healey, op. cit. (above, n. 12) 28-47. Consequently, since the penteteric festival is now generally acknowledged to have taken place in the second year of the Olympiad (see below, n. 38), they incorrectly assign the trieteric festival to both the first and third years of the Olympiad. However, A. Mommsen, Feste der Stadt Athen (Leipzig 1898) 184, n. 4, A. R. van der Loeff, De Ludis Eleusiniis (Leiden 1903) 108-9, and W. Kolbe, Die attischen Archonten von 29312-31/0 (Berlin 1908) 69-70, correctly understood this passage to indicate only one trieteric celebration in the four-year period.
11
tions were held. The surest approachto an answer is to consider which years are attested for trieteric and which for penteteric festivals. The inscriptions are conveniently listed by R. M. Simms.38 However, there is only one inscriptionthat provides the informationwe need: IG 112 1304.39 It mentions three years in which the Greater Eleusinia took place. Lines 24-27, quoted above, state that the generalDemaenetus,whom this decree honors, sacrificed at the Greater Eleusinia in the years when he served as general. These years appear to be 219/8 (archonship of Chaerophon), 215/4 (archonship of Diocles), 211/0 (archonship of Aeschron). I say "appear" because the language is a bit imprecise. Lines 12-14 read: XECoToV[?]0EiS as arQaTiyo'g Eb ri)v Xweav riv E7r
'E[AE]vaTvog ro ,Ev [zQrov
xaA6t xa[i
E.7i X]atQEqpjvrog a6eXovrog
could easily translate: "Elected general of the Eleusinian region for the first time in the year of the archon Chaerephon, he carriedout his office nobly, in a mannerworthy of himself, etc." The year of his election, accordingly, would be 219/8; the year of his service, 218/7. But the comma can be moved
so as to translate, "Elected general ... for the first time, in
a&i]Sw av'roi5 q[?7yayEv] frfv [adQXiv xrA. One
the year of the archon Chaerephon he carried out his office...." The expression is imprecise but a reading of the following lines (18-24) convinces me that the latter translation makes better sense. The penteteric festival took place, therefore, in the second year of the Olympiad.For the trietericthe only useful information is that of IG 112 1672: the trieteric
38 op. cit. (above, n. 13) 269, n. 2. In addition, IG II2 847 is evidence for a celebration in the second year of the Olympiad, apparently a major celebration; cf. van der Loef, op. cit., 6-9. 39 Van der Loeff in his treatise, op. cit., which is the fullest treatment of the date of the Eleusinia, did not realize the significance of IG II2 1304, partly, I suppose, because the archons had not been precisely dated by the time he wrote. W. Kolbe, loc. cit., was evidently the first to realize, from IG II2 1304, that the penteteric festival was held in the second year of the Olympiad. He then assigned the trieteric to the fourth year, though some of his reasoning in support of this, namely that the celebration mentioned in IG II2 1028, line 16, occurred in the year of Echecrates = 101/100, was wrong; but the year of Medeius, in which it did occur (see below, n. 40), has since been redated to 101/100.
12
KEVIN CLINTON
took place once in each Olympiad, therefore in the fourth

year. 40
We know also that the Eleusiniatook place in the year 332/1, the first year of the Olympiad.4'In the Hellenistic period the festival was held also in the third year.42It stands to reason, then, that this harvest festival also took place in the thirdyear of the Olympiadin the fourthcentury and earlier;celebrations
in the first and third years may have been called ra 'EAEvat[vta ra xa-r Evtavrov, like similar festivals of the Panathenaea.43
KEVIN CORNELL UNIVERSITY CLINTON
40 A celebration is attested for the fourth year in IG II2 1028, line 16, keeping in mind that the ephebic year started in Boedromion of 102/1 and ended at the end of Metageitnion of 101/100. 41IG II2 1496, line 130. 421IG II2 2336, lines 202-3 = S. Dow, HSCP 51 (1940) 122, lines 208-9. 43IG 12 334 (=LSCG, 33) line 32. For the Eleusinia as a harvest festival see Schol. Pindar, 01. 9.150. Annual celebration is appropriate for a harvest festival. We can infer from IG II2 1672 that there were no contests in the xar' EvtavTOrvcelebrations.

IG The Eleusinia, and The Eleusinians

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IG The Eleusinia, and The Eleusinians

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IG I2 5, the Eleusinia, and the Eleusinians Author(s): Kevin Clinton Source: The American Journal of Philology, Vol.

ElVTEl *oO[Trh. vacat]

THE ELEUSINIA AND THE ELEUSINIANS

T? TO) V/TETC9W TOIs A?yiUoiT9O;

THE ELEUSINIA AND THE ELEUSINIANS

THE ELEUSINIA AND THE ELEUSINIANS

THE ELEUSINIA AND THE ELEUSINIANS

Mysteriain the following sentence of this decree.

KEVIN CLINTON TroV -rarQtov ayJovo;

This clearly states that there was one celebra-

THE ELEUSINIA AND THE ELEUSINIANS

E.7i X]atQEqpjvrog a6eXovrog

a&i]Sw av'roi5 q[?7yayEv] frfv [adQXiv xrA. One

took place once in each Olympiad, therefore in the fourth

You might also like