THE G ODS OF THE

G RE E K S
Publication of this volume has been made possible, in part,
through the generous support and enduring vision of
Wa rren G . Mo on .
T H E G O DS O F T HE

G RE E K S
Erika Simon

Translated by Jakob Zeyl

Edited by Alan Shapiro

The University of Wisconsin Press

 The University of Wisconsin Press
728 State Street, Suite 443
Madison, Wisconsin 53706
uwpress.wisc.edu

Gray’s Inn House, 127 Clerkenwell Road

London EC1R 5DB, United Kingdom
eurospanbookstore.com

Originally published in German as Die Götter der Griechen,

copyright © 1969 by Hirmer Verlag München
Translation copyright © 2021 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
All rights reserved. Except in the case of brief quotations embedded in critical articles and
reviews, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, transmitted
in any format or by any means—digital, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise—or conveyed via the Internet or a website without written permission of the
University of Wisconsin Press. Rights inquiries should be directed to rights@uwpress.wisc.edu.

Printed in the United States of America

This book may be available in a digital edition.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Simon, Erika, 1927–2019, author. | Zeyl, Jakob, translator. |
Shapiro, H. A. (Harvey Alan), 1949– editor. | Graf, Fritz, writer of foreword.
Title: The gods of the Greeks / Erika Simon ; translated by Jakob Zeyl ;
edited by Alan Shapiro with a foreword by Fritz Graf.
Other titles: Götter der Griechen. English
Description: Madison, Wisconsin : The University of Wisconsin Press, [2021] |
Originally published: Originally published in German as Die Götter der Griechen, 1969. |
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: L C CN 2020013199 | ISBN 9780299329402 (cloth)
Subjects: LCSH: Gods, Greek.
Classification: L C C BL782 .S5413 2021 | DD C 292.2/11—dc23
L C record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020013199
In Memoriam
Rol a n d Ha mpe
1908–1981

M ax Hirm er
1 893–1981
 Contents

Foreword by Fritz Gr a f ix
Editor’s Preface xvii
Preface to the Fourth Edition xxi
Notes on the Family Tree of the
Twelve Olympian Gods xxiii
Map of Greece and Asia Minor xxvi

Introduction 3
Z E U S 11
H E R A 35
P O S E I D O N 69
D E M E T E R 95
HESTIA 121
A P O L L O 135
A R T E M I S 165
A T H E N A 199
H E P H A E S T U S 233

vii
viii Contents

A P H R O D I T E 253
A R E S 281
D I O N Y S U S 297
H E R M E S 323

Abbreviations 345
Notes 351
Museum and Site Index 399
Index Locorum 409
Subject Index 415
 Foreword
Frit z Graf, The Ohio State University

Erika Simon’s Die Götter der Griechen appeared half a century ago, in 1969. At the time, the study
of Greek religion was beginning to break away from paradigms that went back to the later nine-
teenth century and had dominated the first six decades of the twentieth. The monumental
embodiment of this tradition was Martin Nilsson’s Geschichte der griechischen Religion, a hand-
book that appeared in 1941 and saw its third edition in 1965, two years before Nilsson’s death; it
would dominate the field for at least another decade. In the later sixties, after a period of quiet
stagnation conducive to handbook writing, Greek religion began to find renewed interest among a
new generation of scholars. In 1968, Jean-Pierre Vernant edited a collection of essays by his teacher
Louis Gernet, Anthropologie de la Grèce antique; Vernant’s own collection Mythe et pensée chez les
Grecs appeared three years earlier and became seminal, and not just in francophone scholarship.
In 1969, Angelo Brelich published Paides e partenoi, a book that inquired with new sophistication
into the initiation paradigm made famous by Gernet’s friend Henri Jeanmaire and delineated a
complex background for many Greek festivals; like his earlier Gli eroi greci, the book remained
marginal outside Italy, despite its potential. Walter Burkert’s Homo Necans, with its analyses of
Greek sacrificial rituals that proposed a previously unheard-of depth of time, was still in the
making; it would be printed in 1972 and slowly make an impact, first and foremost through its
elegant English translation of 1983, despite the quiet neglect by contemporary German classicists.
Erika Simon came out of Germany’s outstanding archaeological tradition. To the outside world,
this tradition manifested itself in superb excavations—Olympia, Miletus, Pergamon, and a host of
minor sites spring to mind. She herself was no excavating archaeologist but a keen observer and
expounder of images, to which she brought a gaze inspired by Erwin Panofky’s iconology. Trained
in Heidelberg, she started her academic career in Mainz and became a full professor in Würzburg.
Her presence over many decades turned Würzburg’s archaeological institute into a focus of inter-
national scholarship and its small university museum into an impressive and lively institution.

ix
x Foreword

Heidelberg, Mainz, and Würzburg are all in southern Germany, which has its own strong cultural
and spiritual traditions, and these, I think, are important in her intellectual make-up.
Simon’s book did not set out to change paradigms, at least not with respect to the theoretical
approach to Greek religion. Its easy narrative style, as much as the many glorious photographs that
underline her emphasis on iconography when reading Greek gods, made it look like an archae-
ologist’s coffee table book on a noble and edifying topic. The many references not only to Greek
authors but also to the great German poetic tradition only reinforced this impression and made
it seem less accessible to readers outside German culture. But this is deceptive. Erika Simon, after
all, was a major archaeologist of Greece, with an understanding of religious iconography that
she honed over many decades. It detracts nothing from the importance of the book to say that
in some respects her approach to Greek religion does not go beyond that of her German contem-
poraries; she shared with her generation some of the conventional models for understanding
Greek religion, notably the fertility paradigm made famous by James Frazer. But although she
followed Nilsson in recognizing the importance of Mycenaean religion for later Greece, she went
well beyond him. Her discontent with Nilsson’s rigid historicism shapes the entire book and is
not just manifest in the fact that, with the outsiders Walter F. Otto and Karl Kerényi and against
Nilsson’s unyielding opposition, she firmly embraces a Minoan-Mycenaean Dionysus.
The book talks about the twelve Olympian gods of the Greeks. It does so by looking at their cults
and festivals as major expressions of religious life and feeling, by tracing how the gods appear
in poetical texts from Homer to Sophocles (and, programmatically brushing aside Euripides, in
Callimachus), but especially by showing how they appear in images from the Bronze Age to the
end of the fifth century. Images, after all, were the one form in which the Greek gods revealed
themselves to their believers in the sanctuaries and cities of Greece, and they were a much more
permanent and physical presence there than in the poetry performed at festivals and banquets or,
between performances, memorized as mythical narratives. The images are a fundamental part of
the narration and vision that Erika Simon presents to us. This vision goes radically beyond what
images used to do in earlier accounts of Greek religion. If those predecessors contained images
at all, which was rare enough, all they did was illustrate a point in an otherwise firmly text-based
account. No earlier book asserted the documentary primacy of the image, and no later book has
done this quite as successfully. It is, of course, her program, as she states in the introduction: her
project is called “the Olympian deities as reflected in the archaeological monuments.” And she aims
at no less an undertaking than to rival and outdo Ludwig Preller’s masterful and long-lasting
account of the Greek gods—but whereas Preller followed exclusively literary sources, Simon is rely-
ing on “works in stone, bronze and terracotta . . . [and] the wondrous world of Greek vases.” The
first two paragraphs of her introduction slyly teach us the lesson: the texts taken alone distort his-
torical reality; images help us to correct this distortion. Often, she succeeds spectacularly—most
conspicuously in the chapter on Hera, where the gap between texts and images is especially wide.
The book has a second aim, no less important and no less unique; again, it results from
archaeology. Greek gods belong to sanctuaries, and sanctuaries are a part of Greek topography
 Foreword xi

and geography. Greek gods are local; thus, from the location of sanctuaries, we may derive fur-
ther insights into the nature of the gods. For Simon, the natural features of the landscape are often
made to speak about the gods located there, and photos of sanctuaries that show how they in-
teract with their topographical surroundings frequently supplement the pictures of Greek art
works. Some of them, like the photo of the white buffalo pulling a wooden plow in front of Hera’s
temple at Paestum (fig. 36), are works of art in themselves. Before Simon, few archaeologists gave
any thought to the question of how sanctuary and landscape interrelate. Simon refers to Paula
Philippson’s slender volume on Griechische Götter in ihren Landschaften. Philippson started out
from the close relationship between a sanctuary and its natural surroundings and asked her-
self whether this resulted from an original and essential relationship, and how far the character
of a landscape could help elucidate the character of a divinity. (“Ist diese Verbundenheit der Got-
theit mit ihrer Kultlandschaft auf einer Wesensverwandschaft dieses Gottes mit dieser Landschaft
begründet? . . . Lässt sich aus dem Charakter einer Landschaft das Wesen des Gottes, dem sie
kultisch zu eigen ist, oder zumindest eine Wesensseite dieses Gottes erschliessen?” [Is this close
association between the divinity and his or her cultic landscape based upon a relationship of this
particular god to this particular landscape? . . . Can the nature of the god, or at least one aspect
of his nature, be inferred from the character of the landscape to which his cult belonged?]) In a
series of test cases (Delphi, Delos, landscapes of Boeotia), she answers in the affirmative. The
book, with its beautiful photographs, appeared in 1939, decidedly the wrong time, and it left no
trace in scholarship until, thirty years later, Simon took it as a starting point for her own reflec-
tions. Only recently have some archaeologists given more thought to the relationship between god
and sanctuary, albeit with a very different approach to topography: the anthropological interest
in space and its function in human society and the structuralist’s eye for dynamic relationships
replaced the earlier, more romantic focus on static natural features. François de Polignac’s La
naissance de la cité grecque (1984) established some of the conceptual framework, after Henri
Lefebvre’s seminal La production de l’espace (1974). A decade later, the question was tackled in
two pioneering but far from methodologically uniform collections: Robin Hägg and Nanno
Marinatos’ Greek Sanctuaries: New Perspectives (1993) and, methodologically closer to de Polignac’s
approach, Susan Alcock and Robin Osborne’s Placing the Gods: Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in
Ancient Greece (1994). The essays show the conceptual and practical difficulty the topic still pres-
ents for many archaeologists. More recent research, influenced by the interest in pilgrimage first
explored by the anthropologist Victor Turner, has expanded the concept of space to movement
through space and thus, if anything, complicated the problems.
What Erika Simon’s approach to the gods shares with the more influential scholars of her
own time (Vernant, Brelich, Burkert) is her deep interest in cult and ritual. It is her firm belief
that rituals are a prime way of approaching the study of the Greek gods, and that festivals con-
tained important teachings about the gods’ nature. The prehistory of the gods, especially, is vir­
tually inaccessible without the rites and the traces they left in the archaeological record; see her
fine remarks on the altar of Zeus in Olympia, or on the ancestry of Demeter, goddess of the
xii Foreword

Thesmophoria. Homo Necans seems not that far away, although without its daring theories
and its blood and guilt. This is neither coincidence nor “Zeitgeist”: Simon and Burkert share not
only an acute interest in rites and in the deep past behind Greek religion but also an admiration
for the Hellenist and folklorist Karl Meuli, who opened up an entirely new approach toward
sacrificial ritual.
But it is here, in the role that this past plays in Greek culture, that Simon also marks clearly
her distance from these scholars and her roots in another spiritual world. Although Artemis has
an unbroken past that leads the scholar easily back to the epoch of hunter-gatherers, only the
Greek imagination gave her the unique form still known in our world; if to Burkert she is the
slaughtering goddess, to Simon she is the swift virgin and protector of wild nature. As creators
of a visual form that makes complex religious, intellectual, and emotional content accessible to
sensual perception, the Greeks are unsurpassed, and they are uniquely at the roots of Western
consciousness. Simon’s lively interest in hoary and archaic origins is checked by her confidence
that Greek culture between Homer and Sophocles marks the apex of human achievement. The
gods of the Greeks are part of this achievement, which still exerts its influence. That is why these
gods cannot be captured in the dry categories of the historian who constructs a development over
time but refrains from contemplating the nearly timeless creations that, in an unusually fortunate
epoch, this development has fashioned. It is for the poets to tell us about these creations, the
Greek poets as well as those of Germany’s Golden Age—mainly Goethe and Hölderlin—who
managed to come as close to the Greeks as any later-born human being can come.
This sounds very German indeed; although English-speaking poets, from Byron to Yeats,
sometimes came close to the Greeks, Anglo-Saxon classical studies tended to stay more aloof
from contemporary poetry. Simon knows about her position in the long history of German
Altertumswissenschaft, and she carefully takes sides and maps her stance in a terrain still marked
by ancient fault lines.
Ever since the young private-docent and minor Prussian aristocrat Ulrich von Wilamowitz-
Moellendorff attacked the equally young professor of Greek in the University of Basel, Friedrich
Nietzsche, anyone who studied classical antiquity in Germany had to take sides in a scholarly
battle that, for some, is still going on. On the surface, the fierce and, to modern ears, rather shrill
scholarly exchange dealt with the origin and function of Greek tragedy. Underneath were other
layers of motive and meaning. It was also a fight between the German South, with its old and
venerable spiritual traditions, and the Prussian North, with its recently acquired political power;
it was a fight about how the Greeks should be integrated into the contemporary culture of a
Germany whose political unity was very recent; and it was a fight about how to deal with his-
toricism, the most important contribution of the later nineteenth century to the history of
thought and scholarship. Wilamowitz, soon to be the son-in-law of that embodiment of histori-
cal studies Theodor Mommsen, fought squarely for historicism; Nietzsche wanted to overcome
it by reactivating past emotional structures. Each in his own way wanted to keep the Greeks alive
as a model or, in Nietzsche’s case, a catalyst for their own culture. And it is highly ironic that
 Foreword xiii

Wilamowitz, victorious at least in the eyes of fellow classicists, never knew that his historicism—
distanced, cold-eyed, and unemotional—bore the seed of the demise of classical antiquity as a
provider of norms for the contemporary world.
In German classical studies after Wilamowitz, most scholars sided with him—such was the
power and influence of the University of Berlin. Outside the realm of the professionals, things
looked somewhat different, and leading artists like Stefan George felt nothing but contempt for
those professors. Even inside academia there were those who disagreed, and to whom Erika
Simon refers with admiration: Karl Reinhardt, Wilamowitz’s doctoral student, who was also
influenced by Nietzsche and Stefan George and who showed like no other the religious depths of
Aeschylus and Sophocles, and especially Walter F. Otto, a southern German like herself, who saw
the Greek gods as timeless and transcendental entities. Although Simon does not subscribe to it,
she feels the power of Otto’s vision. Archaeology successfully kept its distance from radical histori­
cism; archaeologists like Ernst Buschor in Munich and Karl Schefold in Basel both emphasized
the lasting aesthetic value of Greek art and viewed religion as fundamental to an understanding
of its beauty and appeal. Karl Meuli, who studied in the Munich of Stefan George and the sym-
bolists, has intellectual roots in this world as well.
Erika Simon’s roots go even deeper, back to German scholarship and thought before the iron
rule of historicism. She insists on her debt to Karl Otfried Müller, the outstanding theoretician
of Greek mythology in the earlier nineteenth century and author of a prolegomena to a “science
of mythology” (Prolegomena zu einer wissenschaftlichen Mythologie, 1825). Müller connected Greek
myths with specific regions: single tribes and single regions, such as the Dorians or the Minyans
in northern Boeotia, have their own myths (Geschichte hellenischer Stämme und Städte, 1820–24).
And although Müller was more interested in local history than in the interaction between myth­
ology or religion and landscape, Simon sees him as an ancestor of her own pursuit. There may
be a deeper reason than Müller’s emphasis on local traditions: his approach to myth managed to
keep history and atemporality united, in contrast to the later split, in which Simon emblemati-
cally saw Nilsson and Otto as the leading antipodes.
Müller was only a milestone, albeit an important one, in a development that had started ear-
lier: some of Erika Simon’s roots seem to go back to the mythology of the German Classical and
Romantic age. The German Romantics, centered in Heidelberg (where Simon, a century and a
half later, took her doctoral degree) and, like her, Southern Germans, had moved Greek myth—at
that time the equivalent of Greek religion—into the realm of ideal creations. Karl Philipp Moritz,
in his study of the theology or mythological poetry of the ancients (Götterlehre oder mytholo-
gische Dichtungen der Alten, 1791), provided the most influential formulation of this thought:
myth was akin to poetry and art; its aesthetic power and its content, like those of poetry and art,
transcend history, although they are the creation of a historical moment; Greek gods were auton-
omous creations of the human mind. Traditionally, scholarly definitions of Greek myth plainly
privileged the poetic text over the work of the sculptor or painter. Moritz was an exception: in his
programmatic introduction, the representation of a god by a sculptor was as valuable as a poetic
xiv Foreword

account, and he added ample etchings (“65 in Kupfer gestochene Abbildungen”) to his book. This
awareness of the importance and autonomy of the visual arts goes back to Winckelmann and
Goethe: Winckelmann discovered the beauty of Greek art, saw it as highly relevant and deeply
normative for his own time, and made archaeology into another source of knowledge—or rather
Anschauung, meaning both “view” and “vision.” Goethe, intensely sensitive to the visual arts, was
profoundly impressed even in his old age by the Elgin Marbles and the archaic beauty of the
sculptures from the Aphaia temple in Aegina. He followed Winckelmann’s example, as did Moritz,
his contemporary. Nevertheless, works of visual art remained marginal to mythological studies;
texts, after all, traveled more easily, while etchings could not really evoke a masterpiece of ancient
sculpture, and plaster casts, which could, were rare, unwieldy, and rather expensive. Friedrich
Gottlieb Welcker, who had his spiritual roots in this background, who founded archaeology as
an academic discipline, and who created a cast gallery in Bonn, published after decades of prep-
aration and hesitation his own three-volume Griechische Götterlehre (1857–63). Surprisingly, but
typically enough, works of art are not very important there. More consequentially for its impact:
when Götterlehre finally appeared, contemporary scholarship had already moved on.
At a time when Erika Simon, like many of her fellow scholars, was dissatisfied with Nilsson
and his too-rational approach to Greek religion and sought a different strategy to find her way
toward the Greek gods, she had recourse to the power of Greek art, revitalizing an approach that
had its roots in what many perceived as the apex of German culture. The reprinting of Moritz’s
book in 1948 by a small publishing house in the Black Forest signaled its renewed influence in
a time of deep intellectual crisis. Supreme archaeologist that she was, Simon made the images
speak by themselves. Although some of the paradigms used in this book may seem somewhat
dated, this other, visual language still manages to convey meaning and to remind the reader that
texts are not the only, and not even the pre-eminent, avenue to the Greek gods. This was her
paradigm shift, and it is an insight that still needs highlighting, even in this visual age of ours.

WORKS CITED
Alcock, Susan, and Robin Osborne, eds. Placing the Gods: Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in Ancient Greece.
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994.
Brelich, Angelo. Paides e partenoi. Rome: Ateneo, 1969.
Burkert, Walter. Homo Necans: Untersuchungen zu altgriechischen Opferriten und Mythen. Berlin: De
Gruyter, 1972. English trans.: Homo Necans: The Anthropology of Ancient Greek Sacrificial Ritual and
Myth. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983.
Gernet, Louis. Anthropologie de la Grèce antique. Paris: Maspero, 1968.
Hägg, Robin, and Nano Marinatos, eds. Greek Sanctuaries: New Perspectives. London: Routledge, 1993.
Jeanmaire, Henri. Couroi et courètes: Essai sur l’éducation spartiate et sur les rites d’adolescence dans l’antiquité
hellénique. Lille: Bibliothèque Universitaire, 1939.
Kerényi, Karl. Dionysos: Archetypal Image of Indestructible Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976.
 Foreword xv

Lefebvre, Henri. La production de l’espace. Paris: Éditions Anthropos, 1974. English trans.: The Production
of Space. Oxford: Blackwell, 1991.
Meuli, Karl. Gesammelte Schriften. Basel: Schwabe, 1975.
Moritz, Karl Philipp. Götterlehre oder mythologische Dichtungen der Alten. Berlin: Unger, 1791; repr. Moritz
Schauenburg: Lahr, 1948.
Müller, Karl Otfried. Prolegomena zu einer wissenschaftlichen Mythologie. Göttingen, 1825.
Nilsson, Martin P. Geschichte der griechischen Religion, vol. 1: Religion Griechenlands bis auf die griechische
Weltherrschaft. Munich: Beck, 1941, 1955, 1965.
Otto, Walter F. Dionysos: Mythos und Kultus. Frankfurt: Klostermann, 1933.
Philippson, Paula. Griechische Götter in ihren Landschaften. Oslo: Symbolae Oslenses, 1939.
Polignac, François de. La naissance de la cité grecque: Culte, espace et société, VIIIe–VIIe siècles av. J.-C.
Paris: La Découverte, 1984.
Vernant, Jean-Pierre. Mythe et pensée chez les Grecs: Études de psychologie historique. Paris: Maspero, 1965.
Welcker, Friedrich Gottlieb. Griechische Götterlehre. 3 vols. Göttingen, 1857–63.
 Editor’s Preface
A l an Shapi ro

Erika Simon, who died in February 2019 at the age of ninety-one, was among her generation’s
pre-eminent scholars of classical art and archaeology. In many books and hundreds of articles,
she explored every aspect of her discipline, with a particular focus on the interpretation of works
of art in their literary, religious, and historical context. Die Götter der Griechen, first published in
1969, immediately became a standard reference work as well as a kind of bible for German stu-
dents of classics, Greek mythology and religion, and archaeology. After the editions of 1969 and
1980 had sold out, the third edition (1985) was published as a Studienausgabe, in a more affordable
format aimed especially at university students. It is our hope that this translation will accompany
a new generation of English-speaking students as they begin their studies of classical mythology
and art.
This project has come to fruition as a result of many people’s efforts over many years. A trans-
lation of Die Götter der Griechen was first proposed to Erika Simon in the early 1990s by Jakob
Zeyl, professor of classics at Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Ontario, and she readily agreed.
By 1998, with a draft of all the chapters substantially complete, Professor Zeyl was forced for
health reasons to withdraw from the project, and the present editor volunteered to see it to
completion. It soon became clear that this would entail more than simply polishing Professor
Zeyl’s fine translation, especially since in the interim the book’s fourth edition (1998) had
appeared, with some changes to the text and with the notes completely updated and rewritten. A
new chapter, on the goddess Hestia, was added. The translation has been modified and updated
to accord with the fourth edition, and a few further revisions requested by the author have been
incorporated. All the passages from Greek authors were translated from the Greek by Professor
Zeyl. A few that were added later are credited to published translations. The mostly Latinized
versions of Greek names he employed (e.g., Cronus for Kronos, father of Zeus) has been retained,
although this may look somewhat old-fashioned to contemporary readers.

xvii
xviii Editor’s Preface

Several graduate students at Johns Hopkins University and other individuals assisted me in
this long process, including Christopher Powers of the Humanities Center and Craig Dethloff of
the Classics Department. At a later stage, Donald Zeyl, professor of philosophy at the University
of Rhode Island and brother of the translator, kindly agreed to help in the editing of the manu-
script, and he has been instrumental in bringing the project to conclusion this year. Dr. Maureen
Basedow (then at the Department of Classics, Miami University of Ohio) undertook a thorough
round of editing and preparation of the manuscript for publication in 2004. More recently, two
Johns Hopkins PhDs made invaluable contributions toward the preparation of the book for the
University of Wisconsin Press. Jacquelyn Clements (National Endowment for the Humanities)
took on the herculean job of gathering all the images and permissions, and Ross Brendle (Con-
verse College) undertook one last round of polishing the manuscript, made new captions for all
the illustrations, and assisted with the indexes. The many original photos by Max Hirmer and
his son Albert were kindly made available by Irmgard Ernstmeier of Hirmer-Verlag in Munich.
Erika Simon’s long friendship and collaboration with the distinguished photographer and pub-
lisher Max Hirmer are commemorated in the book’s dedication.
Erika Simon was born in 1927 near Ludwigshafen and grew up in Aschaffenburg, near Frank-
furt. Much of her childhood was shadowed by the Second World War, an experience she recalled
in a memoir, Glück und Leid, published on her eightieth birthday in 2007. When the war ended,
she enrolled in Heidelberg University and received the DrPhil degree in 1952. Her adviser, the
archaeologist and Etruscologist Reinhard Herbig, instilled in her a lifelong fascination with the
Etruscans. In Heidelberg she also encountered Roland Hampe (1908–81), with whom she would
later collaborate on several books for the publisher Max Hirmer. One of these, Tausend Jahre
frühgriechische Kunst (1980), is the only one of her books translated into English (as The Birth of
Greek Art, 1981) before the present one. A Greek translation of Die Götter der Griechen, by Erika
Simon’s former pupil Semeli Pingiatoglou, a professor in the University of Thessaloniki, was pub-
lished in 1996.
It is more than fifty years since the first edition of Die Götter der Griechen appeared in print,
and the book now occupies a particular place in the history of scholarship on Greek religion, a
discipline that originated in Germany more than two hundred years ago and continues to be sig-
nificantly shaped by German-language scholarship. In order to situate Erika Simon’s book in that
long tradition, we wanted to include a brief essay by a classicist familiar with both the German
and the Anglo-Saxon traditions of scholarship. Professor Fritz Graf of The Ohio State University
generously agreed to take on this task, printed here as a foreword. Graf worked closely with Erika
Simon in designing the multivolume encyclopedia of Greek and Roman religion ThesCRA (The-
saurus Cultus et Rituum Antiquorum, 2004–6). Graf had been a pupil in Zurich of Walter Burkert
(1931–2015), the pre-eminent scholar of Greek religion of his generation, who shared a friendship
and many common interests with Erika Simon, the one approaching the subject from an archae-
ological and iconographical angle, the other from the texts, while employing anthropological
models. I am extremely grateful to Fritz Graf for his thoughtful and enlightening essay.
 Editor’s Preface xix

If there is one desideratum that it has not been possible to fulfill, it would be a systematic up-
dating of the notes to reflect scholarship published since the book’s fourth edition in 1998. It was
never Erika Simon’s intention to do this, and as time went on, it became a goal that could not be
realized. I would only say, in defense of this decision, that from the beginning the book had a bare
minimum of notes, often invoking the great classics on Greek religion in German that are discussed
in Professor Graf ’s foreword. The author’s purpose was not to engage systematically with the earlier
scholarship on the hundreds of objects illustrated and discussed in the book (as she in fact did in
many of her articles) but rather to present a coherent overview of each of the Olympian gods that
would be accessible to students, lay readers, and scholars. The great value of the book, from the
beginning and still today, is in its ideas, its insights into the nature of the gods and of the Greeks’
relationship to them, and its methodology of creating a dialogue between texts and images. If that
methodology can be traced as far back as Carl Robert’s Bild und Lied (1881), its continued impor-
tance in the late twentieth and twenty-first centuries is largely owed to the influence of Erika Simon.
This project was enthusiastically supported by the editors of Wisconsin Studies in Classics—
Laura McClure, Matthew Roller, and Mark Stansbury-O’Donnell. The last of these, with his long
experience writing books on Greek art, was especially helpful as this one was being prepared for
the Press. The staff of the Press, especially Adam Mehring and Amber Rose Cederström, greatly
facilitated work on this complex project. Erika Simon wrote one book in English during her long
career: Festivals of Attica (based on the Abraham Flexner Lectures at Bryn Mawr College), also
published by Wisconsin, in 1983. At an earlier stage, Professors Sarah Iles Johnston of The Ohio
State University and John Oakley of the College of William and Mary kindly wrote in support of
this project and made helpful suggestions.
Finally, all those involved in this project, friends and colleagues of Erika Simon, feel a particular
debt of gratitude to her, for writing this extraordinary book in the first place, then for investing
much effort and energy in helping to realize the publication of this English translation. It is a source
of great sadness that she did not live to see it in print. Friends and colleagues all over the world
did not merely admire her extraordinary learning; they truly loved her, for her warmth and gen-
erosity and her humanity. I think she felt a special bond with American university students,
having taught as visiting professor in no fewer than four institutions in the United States—Bryn
Mawr College, Florida State University, the University of Texas at Austin, and the Johns Hopkins
University—as well as McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. It was always her fond hope that
this book would be used and enjoyed by these students, as it has been for so many years in Germany.
I first read Die Götter der Griechen in 1983, while living in Würzburg as a fellow of the Alexander
von Humboldt-Stiftung, sponsored by Erika Simon. As I read along and listened to her every day
in lectures and informal discussion, I had the uncanny sensation that she was speaking and writing
about the gods of Mount Olympus not as a learned and distant scholar but as someone who knew
them personally, like an old friend. These astonishing insights jump off every page of The Gods
of the Greeks, and it is a pleasure to think that new generations of students will now be able to
see the Greek gods through the eyes of this uniquely gifted interpreter.
 Preface to the Fourth Edition
E ri ka Si mon

This new edition is owed to the initiative of Albert Hirmer. It is thanks to him that Die Götter
der Griechen has acquired a new look just in time for the new millennium. The text, first con-
ceived a full generation ago and revised in 1980, has been changed or expanded in those places
where new discoveries and new research have made this necessary. This is particularly true of
the end of the chapters on Demeter and Hephaestus, since the earlier interpretations of the Great
Relief from Eleusis and the east frieze of the Hephaesteum had to be modified. A new chapter
on Hestia has been added, and is dedicated, with great respect, to Mrs. Aenne Hirmer. Like the
goddess of the hearth, she has provided the warmth at the center of the publishing house Hirmer
Verlag since its founding over half a century ago.
The notes have had to be completely rewritten because so much new literature appeared in
the 1980s and 1990s, in particular the Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (1981–97).
In the process, the format of the notes has been assimilated to that of my companion book, Die
Götter der Römer (1990), now coming out in a second edition. In writing the notes, I was con-
stantly aware of how much our discipline owes to the founder of the publishing house, Max
Hirmer, the soul of archaeology, as Spyridon Marinatos called him. Therefore I should like to
dedicate this new edition to two men who knew and admired one another: Roland Hampe (to
whom the first edition was dedicated) and Max Hirmer.
Those individuals and museums who helped in obtaining photographs are listed at the back.
My thanks to all of them. For his critical reading of the previous edition of this book I am
indebted to Matthias Steinhart.

Würzburg, May 1998

xxi
 Notes on the Family Tree of the
Twelve Olympian Gods

The Olympian gods, named for the holy mountain where they dwell, are also called the “grand-
children of Uranus” because they are descended from the sky god Uranus. They were not wor-
shipped in the same grouping of twelve in all parts of Greece. Usually Hestia is numbered among
them; why she is missing from the gathering of gods on the east frieze of the Parthenon is dis-
cussed below. (For the gods on the Parthenon frieze see figs. 47, 71, 96, 171, 225, 249). Uranus,
who has no father, is both the son and the husband of Gê, or Gaia, the Mother Earth goddess
(fig. 186). The generation of the Titans was born from this couple, and they too married in
brother-sister couples: Koios and Phoibe, Cronus and Rhea, Oceanus and Tethys. One Titan,
however, Iapetus, married his niece Klymene, a daughter of Oceanus and Tethys.
The most important of the Titan couples is Cronus and Rhea, as they are the parents of Zeus.
Their other offspring include Hestia, Poseidon, Hades, Demeter, and Hera. From the moment of
his birth, Zeus is in conflict with his father, and eventually he defeats him, along with the other
Titans, in the so-called Titanomachy. Zeus’s brothers and sisters fight alongside him, as they will
do later in the Gigantomachy (figs. 85, 256). Zeus and Hera continue the practice of brother-
sister marriage from the previous generation, but Zeus also had children by many other partners.
This family tree includes only those who were among the Olympians and not, for example, heroes
like Herakles (figs. 189–91, 200). In contrast, Poseidon, who married the sea goddess Amphitrite,
daughter of Nereus and Doris, did not father any of the Olympians.
Let us consider the Olympian gods as they appear in the family tree, from left to right. Leto,
the mother of the twins Apollo and Artemis, born on the island of Delos, was the daughter of
two Titans, Koios and Phoibe, thus a cousin of Zeus. Persephone, mistress of the underworld,
who is not numbered among the Olympians, is a daughter of Zeus in the myth but in cult some-
times the daughter of Poseidon. But more important to her is her mother, Demeter, a sister of
Zeus. Athena is born from the head of Zeus, giving birth by himself (figs. 174–76, 199, 208f.). At

xxiii
xxiv Notes on the Family Tree of the Twelve Olympian Gods

the same time, Hera, taking revenge on her husband, gives birth to Hephaestus alone, according
to Hesiod’s Theogony (927 ff.). Like Athena, Hephaestus was born fully grown and equipped with
his attribute, the double axe, so right away he was able to assist Zeus in the birth of Athena. The
marriage of Zeus and Hera produced Ares, the rival of Hephaestus for Aphrodite’s favors. As far
as Aphrodite’s genealogy is concerned, the two poets used for this family tree, Homer and Hes-
iod, are not in agreement. For Homer she is the child of Dione, a daughter of Oceanus and Tethys,
while for Hesiod she was created out of the sea foam from the castrated member of Uranus. The
genealogy in Homer makes Aphrodite one of the Olympians, as a child of Zeus.
Eurynome was a sister of Aphrodite’s mother, Dione, and one of the many daughters of
Oceanus and Tethys. The Oceanid Eurynome was the mother, by Zeus, of the Charites, who are
closely related by nature to Aphrodite. Olympus would be unimaginable without them. One of
them, Charis, is the wife of Hephaestus in the Iliad, while in the Odyssey his wife is Aphrodite.
But in many parts of Greece it was not with Hephaestus that Aphrodite formed a couple, either
in marriage or in cult, but rather with Ares (cf. fig. 258). Their daughter was Harmonia, mother
of Semele, who bore Dionysus to Zeus. Since Semele’s father, Cadmus, was a mortal, Dionysus is
at first not equal in stature to the other Olympians. Of all the gods, only he and Demeter come
closest to the fate of mortals, which is why they are often worshipped together. It is also no acci-
dent that tragedy developed within the context of the cult of Dionysus.
Like Dionysus, Hermes was the offspring of one of Zeus’s not quite honorable liaisons. His
mother is Maia, daughter of Atlas, who was the son of the Titan Iapetus. Some of the deviousness
and slyness of the generation of Titans lived on in Hermes. Right after his birth, he invented all
sorts of things and stole the cattle of Apollo. Apollo was also a descendant of the Titans, yet his
nature is not characterized by deception, like Hermes’, but rather by a spiritual superiority. The
same is true of Athena and Zeus, even though they are glad to take advantage of Hermes’ services
as companion and messenger.
THE G ODS OF THE

G RE E K S
 I N T ROD U CT ION

M
any different roads lead the way to the gods of the Greeks. Much can be learned
 from the Greek poets, whose works cannot be conceived without the gods.
 Much can also be learned from ancient historians, and even more can be gath-
ered, as far as cult is concerned, from the commentaries of ancient scholars. But we would not
be able to visualize this rich literary tradition without the contribution of ancient art. The art of
the Middle Ages shows what strange ideas about Greek gods can develop without access to the
ancient representations.1 Apollo could be portrayed as a knight of the St. George variety (fig. 1),
despite the ancient texts that were known at the time.2 Only a few decades later, Dürer produced
a sketch (fig. 2) in which we could immediately recognize Apollo even if he were not holding the
orb of the sun inscribed with his name.3
In the interval between these two images, toward the end of the fifteenth century, the statue
of Apollo Belvedere was found (see fig. 120). This marble statue from the time of Imperial Rome,
a copy of a bronze original of the fourth century B.C., put a definitive stamp on how the god
was perceived in the Renaissance and Baroque periods. It elicited from Winckelmann these well-
known words of praise: “This depiction of Apollo exceeds all others by as much as Homer’s
word-portrait of Apollo stands above that painted by all the later poets.”4 While contemplating
a work of art, this scholar, who laid the foundations of Classical archaeology, called upon the
poetry of Homer. When we said, just now, that we would not be able to visualize the Greek gods
without ancient art, we should have added that, without access to the literary tradition, we would
hardly be capable of understanding their images at all. In this literary tradition, pride of place
must be given to Homeric poetry. Greek artists referred to Homer when they painted or sculpted
the gods, especially in the Classical period of the fifth century B.C.
At that time Herodotus wrote (2.53) that Homer and Hesiod “set up the genealogies of the
gods, gave the gods their titles, apportioned their honors and their domains, and described their

3
4 Introduction

1. Death of Achilles in the

temple of Apollo. After a tapestry
design of the early fifteenth century.
Paris, Louvre RF2114. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

appearance” (eidea auton semenantes). This position, so fundamental to our theme, requires an
explanation, since it has led to many erroneous conclusions. It is necessary to make clear what
this statement says and, also, what it does not say. In no way can Herodotus have meant that
Homer really gave the Greeks their gods. He himself speaks of gods that the Greeks took over
from the Pelasgians, the pre-Greek population of the Aegean, or from the Egyptians. As far as
the titles are concerned, Herodotus can only be referring to the well-known epic epithets that
Homer not only uses to describe the gods but also applies more generally to people, animals, and
objects. Such epithets as “nephelegeretes” (cloud-gatherer), for Zeus, are of poetic origin and
correspond only infrequently with the names the gods carry at their cult sites. We meet only a
few of these cult names in the works of Homer and Hesiod. Many we know from inscriptions
 Introduction 5

2. Apollo as Sun God. Drawing by

Albrecht Dürer. London, British
Museum SL.5218.183. Photo:
© The Trustees of the British
Museum / Art Resource, NY.

found in sanctuaries and many others from the description of Greece by Pausanias in the second
century A.D. Herodotus’ statement, therefore, does not apply to the gods’ cult titles but to their
epithets in literature. He implies that Homer and Hesiod, by means of their art, unified scattered
traditions in which the same deity could have entirely different functions at different locations,
thereby giving the gods they described panhellenic currency. This was possible because a com-
munal Greek undertaking, the expedition of the Achaeans and their Greek allies against Troy,
formed the core of the Homeric epics and because Hesiod undertook the construction of a sys-
tematic genealogy of the gods.
After the poems of Homer and Hesiod, the Homeric Hymns step in as source material for
our knowledge of the gods. In this book they may indeed be even more important, for while
the stories of heroes predominate in the epics, the Hymns praise the births and deeds of the
gods themselves. There are thirty-three Hymns, all written in hexameter and all traditionally
6 Introduction

attributed to Homer, although in most cases only the language is Homeric. The dating of the
poems has long been controversial. Recently, scholars have agreed that most of the Hymns belong
to the seventh and sixth centuries B.C., relatively close to the time of Homer, understood as the
second half of the eighth century B.C. Among them, five great Hymns, those to Demeter, Apollo,
Hermes, Aphrodite, and Dionysus, stand out. Added to these must be the short but excellent
(because of its beauty) Hymn to Athena (28), which inspired Phidias to create the east pediment
of the Parthenon. An additional important source for our knowledge of the Greek gods is the
lyric poetry of the Archaic period, even in the fragmentary form in which it has come down to
us. One can see, from the work of Alcman of Sardis, who lived in Sparta around 600 B.C., and
that of his contemporaries Archilochus of Paros and Alcaeus and Sappho, both of whom prac-
ticed their craft in Mytilene on Lesbos, and in the later work of Anacreon of Teos (559–478),
how much influence Homer’s versions of the Greek deities had on lyric poetry. Yet, at the same
time, new characteristics, shaped by each poet’s personal devotion, appear as notable additions
to the traditional depiction of the gods.
Most of the lyric poets of the Archaic period came from the Greek islands. The islands of
the Aegean, especially Crete and the Cyclades “encircling” Delos, were well known for their ven-
erable cults. Crete’s Minoan culture aside, the important contribution of the islands’ pre-Hellenic
populations to Greek religion can be measured by looking at the so-called Cycladic idols of the
third millennium B.C. In the chapter on Aphrodite, we will see that these female statues can
be identified with the Graces, for whom Herodotus posits a pre-Greek origin (2.50).5 The splen-
dor of the Olympian world could simply not be what it is without the charm of these ancient
deities. Most Olympians are attended by the Graces, including Zeus, Hera, Athena, Apollo, Arte-
mis, Aphrodite, Dionysus, Demeter, Hephaestus, and Hermes, who are all linked to them in cult
and myth—and often in art as well. Only Poseidon and Ares are not close to them, though the
former has access to the Graces through Demeter, the latter through Aphrodite. The Olympians
would not truly be Olympians without them. The Boeotian poet Pindar, whose home region
housed an ancient cult site for the Graces, understood their significance for Mount Olympus
(Olympian 14.812):6

Nor do the gods arrange their dances and their banquets without the holy Graces:
Stewards over all tasks in heaven, they place their thrones
Beside Pythian Apollo of the golden bow,
And pay homage to the everlasting prerogatives of Olympus’ patriarch.

According to Karl Reinhardt, a phase that began with Hesiod ended with Pindar and Aeschylus.
These two poets, together with Sophocles, are our latest direct sources for Greek belief in the
gods. This book does, as well, include a number of references from Euripides, who stands at
the beginning of the great reorientation in Greek religious belief. Most of these are from the
Bacchae in the chapter on Dionysus; in the other chapters such references are few. In contrast,
 Introduction 7

the Hellenistic poet Callimachus is cited frequently because he provides important accounts of
ancient cults and early depictions of the gods.
With a few exceptions, the visual works of art considered in this book date no later than
around 400 B.C. The great shift in religious sensibilities of that time also had an impact on the
arts. Some may regret a focus so restricted to the early period, but it was necessary in the interest
of clarity. The precedent of Walter F. Otto’s books on Dionysus (Dionysos: Mythos und Kultus,
1933) and the Greek gods (Die Götter Griechenlands, third edition, 1947) need not be followed
here. In these works evidence from early Antiquity is frequently intermingled with that from later
Antiquity. There is no need to emphasize how much our current generation is influenced by the
intellectual constructs of both books. No similar work has yet taken its place beside Otto’s. The
reference work by Martin P. Nilsson, Geschichte der griechischen Religion (second edition, 1955),
which appeared later, is so conceptually distant from Otto’s work that it is perhaps better under-
stood as its opposite. The Swedish historian of religion puts considerable distance between his
and Otto’s ways of thinking. “This methodology,” he writes, “takes too many liberties with the
facts to yield reliable conclusions: to deny general trends of human development is a pointless
exercise.”7 The idea at the center of this antithesis is that of “development.” In Nilsson’s view,
the Greek gods underwent significant development. From simple beginnings they rose to their
subsequent Classical grandeur. He says, “When attempts are made to decipher the origins of
the gods, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that these origins are grounded in the neces-
sities of life of primitive humans.” Such a point of departure would have been inconceivable to
Otto. For him, the beginnings of the Olympian religion are characterized not by a primitive
poverty but by a richness of spirit. Historical development is of little consequence to him. Over
and against it he puts the unchanging nature of the gods, or, to use a favorite expression of his,
their Gestalt (character). In support, he cites enduring features of individual Olympian deities,
qualities that are present from Homer through the Classical period into Late Antiquity.
What drove Otto to ignore the concept of development, a factor so important in the study
of history? He subscribed to the thesis that the Greek gods continued and continue (even today)
to have a spiritual reality. In modern times the only other person to hold the same opinion was
the poet Hölderlin, who, like Otto, came from Swabia. For both Otto and Hölderlin, in Karl
Reinhardt’s formulation, the statement “The gods exist” was a fact.8 From the fate of Hölderlin
we know that, at least for one person in the modern world, complications arose in using the
assumption that “the gods exist” as a point of departure. An anecdote has been handed down
about a dialogue between Reinhardt and Otto, staged against the backdrop of these complica-
tions. Reinhardt is said to have once asked Otto whether he was convinced of the reality of Zeus.
Otto answered in the affirmative. Reinhardt pressed further, asking whether Otto prayed to Zeus.
Again, Otto replied with a positive answer. Reinhardt replied: “In that case you should also wor-
ship Zeus with sacrifices of bulls.”
This is the critical point. The ancient gods no longer hold for our contemporaries the reality
they possessed in Antiquity, for they are no longer worshipped in cult. We can add that no one
8 Introduction

today considers himself or herself a descendent of Zeus, Poseidon, Aphrodite, or any other deity,
whereas in Greece, even in Late Antiquity, many people traced their genealogy back to a divine
ancestor, whether god or goddess. How close the relationship was between god and cult and how
intent the gods were on receiving the honors owed to them is well known by anyone who has
read Homer. There the gods arrive at their sacrificial banquets as guests and eagerly look forward
to receiving the honors due them. If denied, they could unleash a terrible vengeance. The Greek
gods did not exist in a separate sphere, far from the world of humans, as the Epicureans thought
after the reorientation of Greek religious beliefs. On the contrary, in the period before that, the
gods interacted with humans in a variety of ways. Otto did not give due consideration to the facts
of cult and the equally important phenomenon of genealogical relationships between mortals
and immortals.
The subtitle of Otto’s work was “The image of the divine in the mirror of the Greek spirit.” The
author of the present book cannot and will not employ a similar subtitle. If one existed, it would
read “The Olympian deities as reflected in the archaeological monuments,” for Classical archae-
ology can make a substantial contribution to our knowledge of Greek religion. Within the realm
of the discipline of archaeology, we find sculpted and painted portrayals of the gods, whether
preserved or surviving in descriptions dating from Antiquity, as well as altars, temples, and
numerous votive offerings from sanctuaries. Since archaeology belongs to the science of histori-
cal studies, we will of course investigate the development of the cults in specific sanctuaries. It is
possible to trace back over many centuries, well into the Mycenaean period, the cults of such sig-
nificant religious centers of the Greek world as Eleusis, the Acropolis of Athens, Argos, Thebes,
Delos, and others. In this we will follow Nilsson’s point of view and take special note of what must
surely be his most important work, that on the continuation of the religion of the second millen-
nium B.C. into the first: The Minoan-Mycenaean Religion and Its Survival in Greek Religion (1927).
Beside Nilsson’s contribution and the methodologically related work of Ulrich von Wilamowitz-
Moellendorff, Der Glaube der Hellenen (1932), Otto’s formative way of thinking still deserves
respect. To be sure, both Nilsson and Wilamowitz would reject this approach. Nevertheless, it
can be justified. In spite of all the changes that occurred and can be verified on the basis of evi-
dence from cult sites and literary sources, there are immutable characteristics in the depiction of
the Olympian deities that transcend the vicissitudes of time. These are the qualities that make
Zeus Zeus, Apollo Apollo, and Aphrodite Aphrodite. These ever-present characteristics are pre-
conditions for the continuity of cult. What Otto explicated lies within these continuities. His
accomplishment remains incomplete, however, because he did not deal with all of the important
deities. Of the twelve great gods, worshiped as an entity at many Greek sites, he subjected only
half to close scrutiny: Athena, Apollo, Artemis, Aphrodite, Hermes, and, in a separate mono-
graph, Dionysus. Excluded from careful study were Hephaestus, Ares, and Demeter, goddess of
the Eleusinian Mysteries. Poseidon, a deity greatly revered in the Aegean since very early times,
is missing, as is, most significantly, the principal Olympian pair, Zeus and Hera.


 Introduction 9

The best German work on the Greek gods and mythology is still Ludwig Preller’s book from 1854.
We will frequently refer to him and to a scholar from the preceding generation, Karl Otfried
Müller. Admittedly, they did not yet possess any knowledge of archaeology in the sense of data
derived from excavations, but ancient sources without exception yielded lively descriptions of all
the important deities. Subsequent additions to our corpus of ancient sources have also proved
important. Papyrus finds, in particular, have expanded our knowledge of the Greek lyric poets,
especially Bacchylides. Other papyri, such as commentaries on and the original text of the works
of Callimachus and the Aristotelian Constitution of the Athenians, have also proved valuable. As
for sculpture, like Winckelmann and Goethe, Müller and Preller knew only the Roman copies of
Greek originals. Since that time a plethora of Greek originals have emerged from the earth and
the sea, including works in stone, bronze, and terracotta. The wondrous world of Greek vases
had been known from finds in Etruscan graves since the eighteenth century, but only toward the
end of the nineteenth century was the foundation laid for dating and interpreting these works,
primarily through the work of Adolf Furtwängler. What Friedrich Creuzer and Eduard Gerhard
(the latter strongly influenced by the former) had written about the Greek gods as depicted on
the vases is today of interest only for the history of archaeology and no longer of any use for the
history of Antiquity in general.9
Karl Otfried Müller and Ludwig Preller were ahead of their time in their attempts to include
in their presentation of the gods and heroes a consideration of the real Greek landscape as
opposed to an idealized and imaginary Arcadia. In the twentieth century, their lead was followed
by Paula Philippson in her book Griechische Götter in ihren Landschaften (1939). On the basis of
a few noteworthy sanctuaries such as Delphi, Delos, Argos, and Athens, she has shown that not
every Greek god could be worshipped at every site, but that particular types of landscape suited
the character of particular gods.10 No one who has traveled through Greece, Asia Minor, South
Italy, and Sicily can maintain that the Greeks established their sanctuaries without taking the
landscape into account. Since temple sites differ markedly in character from each other, conclu-
sions can certainly be drawn about the nature of the gods worshipped there. This is particularly
true of Zeus, Poseidon, Hera, Apollo, and Artemis.
In order to become familiar with the essence of a god worshipped at a particular cult site, it
is worthwhile to study not only the site’s geography but also the cult practice at that site. Here
this author is indebted for important insights to the writings and lectures of the Swiss human-
ist and folklorist Karl Meuli.11 Without his work, the chapters on Zeus, Artemis, and Demeter,
who reach back far into the prehistoric period, could not have been completed in their present
form. As with the gods just mentioned, an attempt will be made in the case of the other Olym-
pian deities as well to track down their oldest possible characteristics, for the most ancient ele-
ments in religions are the least subject to change. The constants that Walter F. Otto recognized
in the Homeric deities reach back far beyond the Homeric epics into a more distant past, to
simple prehistoric cultures as well as the higher cultures of Crete and the Near East. The reli-
gion of the Greeks was formed in the second millennium B.C., not at the beginning of the first.
10 Introduction

The author is grateful to Roland Hampe for opening for her a door to the second millennium,
a world brought to light by the excavations of Heinrich Schliemann and Sir Arthur Evans, a
world that, since the decipherment of the Mycenaean script, no longer lies obscured in the mists
of the prehistoric era. Hampe’s lectures on Nestor,12 which she heard at the beginning of her
studies in Heidelberg, set a course to which she has remained true. Important inspiration was
drawn as well from the philologist Ernst Siegmann and the Würzburg-based Indo-Europeanist
Günther Neumann.
 ZEUS

M
odern research in philology and the history of religion has concluded with a
 high degree of certainty that the supreme god of the Hellenes was introduced
 into the Aegean by migrating Greek tribes in the second millennium B.C. The
name Zeus-Dios is Indo-European in origin. The root di- also occurs in the name of the most
important Roman deity, Jupiter or Diespiter, as well as in the Latin word for day, dies, and in the
Greek word for beautiful weather, eudia. The etymology is obvious enough to make his the only
uncontroversial name among all the Olympian deities.1 Zeus is originally, as his name indicates,
the god of the bright sky. In the course of the second and first millennia B.C., he is transformed
into the most polymorphic of the Greek gods. No other Greek god rivals his capacity for change.
Indeed, as Zeus Meilichios he even appears as god of the underworld in the form of a huge ser-
pent. Meilichios was a dark, sinister deity who needed to be propitiated by means of terrible
sacrifices but who nevertheless remained Zeus. The multiformity of Zeus is the subject of a work
in several volumes by Arthur B. Cook. The recognition of the multiplicity of Zeus’s shapes is
the most significant contribution of this monumental monograph. However paradoxical it may
sound, the god’s limitless capacity for change is equivalent in a way to the omnipresence of the
Christian God. Accordingly, it is possible to understand why the concept of monotheism, which
is also attested in the religion of the Greeks, came to be attached to the divine figure of Zeus.
Upon his migration to Greece, the god first of all had to come to terms with the higher
divinities of the pre-Greek population, especially Poseidon, Hera, and Athena. The mighty Pos­
eidon came to be his brother; the great Aegean goddess Hera became his spouse; and Athena
developed into a daughter close to him in mind and spirit. We know from parallels provided by
other Indo-European tribes that the Greeks must have already worshipped him as father before
their migration into the Aegean. The role of father is in harmony with the patriarchal social
structure of those peoples. Nevertheless, Zeus did not develop into the “father of gods and men”

11
12 ZEUS

that he is in Homer until he arrived in the Aegean and came to an understanding with the pre-
Greek divinities. The first book of the Iliad (400) makes reference to a conspiracy of the gods
against Zeus that, significantly, was instigated by Hera, Athena, and Poseidon. Poseidon is also
the father of innumerable children, who are, however, mere demigods, born of nymphs and
mortal women, or of primeval monstrosities like the Gorgon Medusa. Zeus, on the other hand,
is the father of Olympian deities. Athena, Aphrodite, Apollo, Artemis, Dionysus, Hermes, Ares,
and Hephaestus are his children, and even Persephone, queen of the underworld, is claimed as
his daughter. Zeus’s descendants bolster his already-considerable strength. He lets his sons and
daughters act in his place. He himself, from the time of his victorious wars against the Titans and
Giants, intervenes in events only sporadically. By limiting his direct intervention, he preserves
both the dignity of his supreme authority and his identity as the embodiment of justice, standing
on high above all parties in conflict.


In spite of his Greek origin, Zeus was not a “national god.”2 It is true that only Hellenes were
admitted to his games at Olympia, but the Homeric Zeus does not identify himself with the
interests of a single people, as does the God of the Old Testament. In the Iliad both Greeks and
Trojans pray to Zeus. There are other important characteristics that differentiate Zeus from Yah-
weh. While Zeus is very much a fatherly king, he is not the creator of the world. This he simply
could not be in the Greek view, because he is a relatively young god. According to the Theogony
of Hesiod (154ff., 453ff.), two other divine kings ruled before him: first Uranus, god of the heav-
ens, and then Cronus, son of Uranus and father of Zeus. Cronides, son of Cronus, is a common
epithet for Zeus in Homer. It is an honorary title, like the name Uranians (descendants of the
god of heaven, Uranus) for the Olympian gods in general. In spite of the glorious genealogy, the
three generations did not succeed each other without trickery and conflict. Cronus castrated his
father, Uranus, and then fell victim to deceit, in turn, when he was overthrown by his own son,
Zeus. Hesiod was not the only one to recount these events. In antiquity the theme was celebrated
in its own epic, the Titanomachy, now no longer extant, which treated the fall of Cronus and his
Titan brothers into Tartarus.
Recent research in mythology indicates that there are oriental prototypes for this tale.3 In
central Anatolian Bogazköy, the home city of a Hittite empire that flourished in the second mil-
lennium B.C., clay tablets came to light relating a myth similar to Hesiod’s Theogony. According
to this myth, the god Alalu was the first to rule the kingdom of heaven. After nine years he was
conquered in battle by Anu, and after an additional nine years Anu was castrated by Kumarbi.
Finally, Kumarbi was pushed aside by his son Teshub, the weather god. Admittedly, we have here
four successive generations, not three as in Hesiod. This minor incongruity aside, those scholars
who propose that the succession myth of Uranus, Cronus, and Zeus did not come into being
without influence from the Hittite story are probably right. Kumarbi is comparable to Cronus,
 Z E U S 13

and his son Teshub parallels Zeus, who was a weather god as well. There are also Babylonian texts
with content similar to the Hittite myth. Surely the Greeks must have already been familiar with
the oriental succession myth in the second millennium B.C.—that is, before the time of Hesiod,
as M. L. West has suggested.4
We have here an instance of a foreign myth being grafted onto a Greek god. This is not the
only instance of this in myths associated with Zeus. Something similar took place with the story
of his birth. According to the most widely known version, Rhea, the mother of the gods, gave
birth to Zeus in a Cretan cave (cf. Theogony 477ff.). In order not to let the child fall into the hands
of his father, Cronus, who was devouring each of her children as they were born, the infant was
exposed and thereafter raised in the wild by a goat and by bees. Nilsson has shown that this birth
tale is not Greek but fits very well into the period of time and the locale featured in the myth.5
In other words, its origin is Minoan. Cave cults had been a characteristic feature of Crete since
prehistoric times,6 and the births of gods are a feature of Minoan religion in the context of festi-
vals celebrating the births and deaths of vegetation deities.7 In fact, the Cretans pointed out not
only the birth cave on their island but also the grave of Zeus, which earned them a reputation
as liars. Callimachus makes reference to this in his Hymn to Zeus (1.8). The Greeks did indeed
superimpose on their Zeus a mythical birth by which he became the son of a great Aegean
mother goddess, but they rejected the death of the Cretan vegetation deity as an idea foreign to
their way of thinking.
The myth of Zeus absorbed Babylonian-Anatolian and Minoan features. A theory has recently
gained currency among scholars that these features were absorbed at a time when contacts among
Anatolia, Crete, and Greece were especially close—that is, in the Minoan-Mycenaean epoch.8
The previously accepted interpretation, now out of date, was that Zeus had first arrived in the
area of Greece with the final wave of migrants during the latter part of the second millennium
B.C. The new theory, proposing an earlier period of contact, is supported by the appearance of
the name of Zeus (in the dative: di-we) on a Linear B clay tablet from Pylos dating from the time
before the Dorian migration.9
Looking at the oldest temples of the supreme deity in Greece, we are at first surprised when
we realize that the foundation dates for Zeus’s temples are not as early as those for the temples of
other deities. Hera and Apollo in particular far outpace him in this respect. The temples of Apollo
in Thermon and Dreros, for example, like the temples of Hera in Perachora and Samos, go back
to the Geometric period, as excavations have shown. Likewise, the founding of the Temple of
Hera in Olympia took place around 600 B.C., almost a century and a half earlier than the con-
struction of the Temple of Zeus between 470 and 456 B.C. No remains have been found at Olym-
pia of any earlier temple of Zeus. The conclusion has been drawn, and rightly so, that the god
was originally worshipped under the open sky, as befits the lord of the heavens. Accordingly, in
Dodona, his most ancient cult site in Greece, Zeus possessed a renowned sacred oak through
which he prophesied. As has been convincingly demonstrated, this tradition came with him from
14 ZEUS

the north.10 The same is true of his priests at Dodona, the Selloi, who, like the priests of Jupiter
in Rome, were bound by unusual taboos. Dodona, excavations have revealed, remained untouched
by Mycenaean culture.11 Prehistoric forms of religion that later came across as strange, even
un-Greek, to the Greeks themselves continued to exist there. The Greeks no longer knew that
their own ancestors had founded the oracle of the oak in Dodona and did not suspect that the
name of the priests, Selloi or Helloi, contained the same root as the name of the Hellenes. The
transformation from their former tribal characteristics had been too extensive. It is not until
their fusion with the indigenous population of the Aegean that they develop into true Greeks.
In the Iliad, when Achilles invokes Zeus of Dodona, he even calls him a Pelasgian—that is, a
pre-Greek—god (16.233ff.):

Zeus, Pelasgian lord of Dodona, you who dwell at a distance

As you rule wintry Dodona. Round about reside the Selloi,
Your prophets, who wash not their feet and sleep on the ground.

Ancient religious ties existed between Dodona and Thessaly, the home of Achilles. They can
be explained by the wandering of the earliest Indo-European tribes across Epirus into the regions
near Olympus. So it is that the cult of Thessalian Zeus also contains aspects that originated in
areas much further to the north. The early Hellenistic author Antigonos of Karystos reports
(Historiae mirabiles 15) that in the city of Krannon in Thessaly there was a bronze wagon that
was moved around in times of drought while prayers for rain were offered to Zeus. Coins from
Krannon dating from approximately 300 B.C. show the head of Zeus and, on the reverse, a
wagon carrying an urn flanked by ravens (fig. 3). Similarly shaped wagons with vessels on them
have been found in an area stretching from northern Europe to the Balkan peninsula, as well as
in strata of the Urnfield period. An exceptionally beautiful example, a small bronze imitation
of such a cult wagon, comes from a grave dated to approximately 1000 B.C. in the vicinity of
Ochsenfurt am Main (fig. 4). It is not unlikely that whoever was buried there had been a priest

3. Coin from Krannon (Thessaly) with

a wagon carrying an urn. Ca. 300 B.C.
New Haven, Yale University Art
Gallery 2004.6.1647. Photo: Yale
University Art Gallery.
 Z E U S 15

4. Bronze urn-wagon
from Acholshausen,
Landkreis Ochsenfurt.
Ca. 1000 B.C. Würzburg,
Museum für Franken.
Photo: Courtesy Elmar
Hahn Verlag.

of the same god who was worshipped in Greece as Zeus. Apart from the wagon and several other
implements, the bronze funerary gifts included two cymbals similar to ones found in Olympia.12
The spouse of the original Zeus of Dodona was not Hera but Dione. She was his Indo-
European consort, and, although Hera ousted her in the Aegean area proper, she maintained her
status in the very remote northwest. Dodona was, in spite of (or rather because of) its antiquity,
the most famous oracle of Zeus in the ancient world. He was also oracular in Olympia. The
Olympian Zeus probably came from Dodona.13 Specifically, at Olympia his priests prophesied
based on the flight of birds and the sacrifices performed at the great ash altar (Pausanias 5.13.8ff.).
Situated between the still-to-be-built temples of Hera and Zeus, the ash altar was constructed
of the burned bones of sacrificial animals. In Pausanias’ time its height reached 6.5 meters, its
width 37 meters. Nothing remains of this altar. As one of the pagan world’s most important places
of sacrifice, it was probably demolished in its entirety in the fifth century A.D. by the emperor
Theodosius II. Werner Krämer has compiled a list of such ash altars in the area of the Danube
and the Alps. He found twenty-five of them altogether, going back to the prehistoric period
(fig. 5). They date from the late Bronze and the Urnfield periods, “that is, roughly stated, from
the five hundred years following the thirteenth century B.C.”14 In Langackertal, a remote loca-
tion, a sacrificial hill of this sort still projected above the ground surface in 1870. With a height of
4 meters and a diameter of 32 meters, its dimensions were approximately those of the Olympian
altar of Zeus.
The prehistoric finds show us that when we visualize an ash altar, we should not think in terms
of a loose pile of ashes. The altars contain ash and fragments of calcined animal bone, which can
become very hard. For that reason, one could climb the ashes of the Olympian altar, as Pausanias
16 ZEUS

reports, by a series of steps to the very top of the cone, where the thighbones of the sacrificial
animals were burned. On the basis of the altars he had tabulated, Krämer concluded, rightly, that
“similar religious performances and related sacrificial rites” had led to the formation of the large
ash altars in the Alps and the one in Olympia. It is more than likely that this facet of the cult of
Zeus came to Greece from the north.
The place name Olympia is identical to the most important title of Zeus, Olympios, attributed
to him in poetry as well as cult. This title leads one to think quite naturally of the mountain of
the gods in Greek mythology, Mount Olympus in Thessaly. However, there were and are in
Greece many mountains, large and small, named Olympus. To this day even Attica has its own

5. Prehistoric sites of burnt offerings in the Alps. After W. Krämer, “Prähistorische Brandopferplätze,”
in Helvetia Antiqua: Festschrift Emil Vogt (Zürich 1966). The numbers correspond to the following sites:
1 Langacker, 2 Goiserberg, 3 Hellbrunner Berg, 4 Dürrnberg, 5 Wasserfeldbühel, 6 Schlern, 7 Laugen,
8 Altbrixen, 9 Landeck, 10 Mottata, 11 Feldkirch, 12 Heidenburg, 13 Scheibenstuhl, 14 Schneller,
15 Guttenberg, 16 Eggli, 17 Osterstein, 18 Hägelesberg, 19 Messelstein, 20 Gauting, 21 Ratzenhofen,
22 Weiherberg, 23 Rollenberg, 24 Stätteberg, 25 Auerberg.
 Z E U S 17

Olympus. Olympus may simply be an ancient word for mountain or hill. The hill at Olympia that
rises above the sanctuary of Zeus (fig. 6) was, to be sure, not sacred to Zeus, but rather to his
father, Cronus, who received offerings there.15 In his description of the site, Pausanias reports
that in Olympia Zeus wrestled his father, Cronus, for supreme power (5.7.10). What Hesiod
portrays in his Theogony as myth becomes part of the cult in Olympia. When Zeus entered the
region, he pushed aside the pre-Greek god of the hill, Cronus, who was paired with Rhea, the
“mountain mother” whose temple in Olympia lay at the foot of the “Hill of Cronus.” Even though
sacrifices to him continued, Cronus was no longer the focus of the most important cult at the
site. As favorite son of the goddess Rhea and as consort of Hera, Zeus had managed to secure
the Aegean for himself.
As a result of the favoritism she showed her son, Rhea came to stand in opposition to her
consort. The mysterious Cronus must have been a god highly honored by the original population
of the Aegean. This god, pushed aside by Zeus, remained a friend of the oppressed until Late
Antiquity. During his festivals in Greece and also during the corresponding celebrations in Rome,
the Saturnalia, slaves were treated as equal to the freeborn.16 His peaceful character—in ancient
myth Cronus was the ruler during the Golden Age, in which there were no wars, and was also

6. The plain of Olympia with the Hill of Cronus and the Altis. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
18 ZEUS

the lord of the Blessed Isles—fits with what we know from archaeological evidence about the
pre-Greek population. No more than the name of the month of Cronion is required to contradict
the opinion of Nilsson and other scholars that Cronus existed only in myth and scarcely in cult.17
Greek months are customarily named after festivals held in honor of a deity, not after purely
mythological figures.
The founding of the first temple of Zeus in Greece took place in the sixth century B.C., the
time of the so-called tyrants, who made fundamental changes in many of the festivals held to
honor the gods.18 For them the cult of Zeus under the open sky was not sufficiently imposing
or monumental. They wanted to derive the origin of and justification for their own power from
Zeus. It is therefore not surprising that the earliest Temple of Zeus at Nemea dates from this
period, the sixth century B.C.19 The extant temple dates from the fourth century B.C. The initial
construction of the Olympieion in Athens, a building never completed, likewise began in the
sixth century B.C. The remnants still standing today (fig. 7) date from the period of the succes-
sors of Alexander the Great in the second century B.C., as well as from the time of the emperor
Hadrian. This gigantic Temple of Zeus Olympios was designed for the sons of Pisistratus in the
Ionian style, following the example of the Ionic temples of Asia Minor. In the vicinity, inci­
dentally, as in Olympia, there was an ancient sanctuary of Cronus and Rhea.20 For six and a half
centuries, several monarchs, among them Pisistratus, Antiochus IV, and, finally, Hadrian, worked
on the construction of the temple of their divine paradigm.
It is no accident that a second gigantic Temple of Zeus Olympios, the Olympieion of Acragas
in Sicily (fig. 8), was built after 480 B.C., likewise by a tyrant, Theron. The length of this temple,
in excess of 100 meters, approximates that of the Olympieion in Athens. The unusual structure
was furnished with supports in the shape of human figures (fig. 9) called Giants in the Middle
Ages. It is likely that they were originally meant to be the Titans defeated by Zeus, for their
stooped posture, with their arms up around their necks, is reminiscent of Greek depictions of the
Titan Atlas carrying the firmament on his shoulders.21 By means of these Titanic “Atlantes”
embellishing his temple, Zeus was identified as victor in the Titanomachy as well as lord of the
heavens. That Zeus could not exercise lordship until after the fall of the Titans is made quite
explicit in Hesiod’s Theogony (881ff.):

But when the blessed gods finished the toil [of battle]
They laid a forceful judgment on the Titans
Wresting from them their honors.
Then, with the cunning of Gaia, they urged wide-seeing Zeus
Of Mount Olympus to be the king or lord of the immortals.
And he distributed honors to them wisely.

The Early Classical period also saw the construction of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia between
470 and 456 B.C. (fig. 10). It was not built by a tyrant but rather by the inhabitants of Elis with
 Z E U S 19

7. Athens. Olympieion. Started in the second half of the sixth century, completed under the emperor
Hadrian. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

funds derived from booty. This work of the Elian architect Libon, “the most authentic realization
of the Doric canon,”22 speaks to us today in only a partial, truncated way, like a limbless torso.
The same is true of the central figure of the east pediment, the lordly and lofty image of Zeus
(fig. 11). The loss of his head is—when one looks at the head of Apollo on the west pediment (see
fig. 144)—especially regrettable. By order of Zeus, Apollo supports the heroes battling against the
centaurs. The Centauromachy is not, as Ernst Buschor assumed, represented because of local
Elian traditions.23 On the contrary, the theme of the Olympia west pediment is panhellenic, as
indeed were the Olympic games. The Centauromachy emphasizes one of the oldest and most
important characteristics of Zeus—his role as Zeus Xenios, the guardian of the rights of guests.
Zeus Xenios is frequently referred to in the Homeric epics and must already have been wor-
shipped by the pre-Homeric Greeks.24 The centaurs flouted the ancient laws of this Zeus when,
as wedding guests, they laid hands on the women and young boys present. In his eighth Olym-
pian victory ode (21f.), Pindar refers to Themis, who embodies justice, as an attendant of Zeus
Xenios. She also had an altar at Olympia (Pausanias 5.14.10) and was close to Apollo of Delphi.
On an Attic drinking vessel of the Classical period, Themis sits as the Pythia on a Delphic tri-
pod.25 In the Olympia Centauromachy the god of Delphi is able to accomplish the will of Zeus
20 ZEUS

8. Acragas. Olympieion.
Shortly after 480 B.C.
Reconstruction in cork.
Agrigento, Museo
Archeologico Regionale.
Photo: After Robert
Koldewey and Otto
Puchstein, Die
griechischen Tempel in
Unteritalien und Sicilien
(Berlin 1899), vol. 2
(Plates).

9. Acragas. Olympieion.
Shortly after 480 B.C.
One of the Atlantes.
Cf. fig. 8. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

Xenios by wreaking vengeance on those who violate the code of hospitality. In his left hand,
Apollo holds a bow and arrows, the weapons of an avenger. They correspond to the thunderbolt
that is to be restored in the left hand of his father on the east pediment of the temple. Both Zeus
and Apollo intervene only indirectly in the events they look upon.
Whereas the west pediment of the Temple of Zeus exemplifies the laws of Zeus Xenios, the
east pediment shows Zeus as god of oracles and fate (fig. 12). Research has indicated that the
two dignified elderly men sitting on the ground, behind the teams of horses belonging to Pelops
and Oenomaus, represent the two families of soothsayers from Olympia (one of them in fig. 13).
They rest on the ground on either side of their god, like the priests of Zeus at Dodona whom
Achilles mentions in the prayer quoted above. Worried, the prophet on Zeus’s left—the side of
 10. Olympia. Temple
of Zeus. 470–456 B.C.
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.

11. Zeus from the east pediment of

the Temple of Zeus. Olympia,
Archaeological Museum.
Completed in 456 B.C. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
22 ZEUS

12. Drawing of the east pediment of the Temple of Zeus. After R. Lullies and M. Hirmer, Griechische
Plastik, 4th ed. (Munich 1979), 72.

the thunderbolt—brings his hand to his head (fig. 13). He has a foreboding of the disaster that
will overtake Oenomaus. The other prophet, however, gazes up into the heavens with a look
typical of oracular priests. This one foresees the victory of Pelops. Although it is not possible
to go into great detail here, the latter must have stood on the propitious side, to Zeus’s right.26
The god’s head was turned benevolently toward him. Remarkably, Zeus does not hold a scepter
in his right hand. Instead, his empty hand, which is preserved, touches a fold in his garment.27
Has he perhaps given his scepter to Pelops, the progenitor of the Peloponnesian kings? In a well-
known passage in the second book of the Iliad, the poet states that Hephaestus made Zeus a
scepter that was subsequently presented through Hermes to “horse-driving Pelops” (101ff.). But
only a spear would really be fitting for the armed Pelops of the pediment. The scepter of Pelops
that was passed on to his descendants was precisely this, a spear.28 It was the object of an ancient
cult in Chaironeia in Boeotia. Like the image of Zeus in Aigion, the spear was kept at all times

13. Old Seer, possibly

identified as Amythaon,
from the east pediment
of the Temple of Zeus,
Olympia, Archaeological
Museum. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
 Z E U S 23

in the house of the priest who had been chosen for that year.29 It is probable that Zeus him-
self was worshipped in the form of a spear before the Homeric myth of Pelops’ scepter took over.
As will be shown in the chapter on Ares, Zeus entered the Aegean with a god of war whom the
Thracians worshipped in the form of a sword (Herodotus 4.59, 4.62). The Temple of Zeus at
Olympia and his statue inside it were funded from the spoils of war (Pausanias 5.10.2). Dedica-
tory weapons were found in unusually large numbers during the excavations at Olympia.30 The
Early Classical Zeus of the east pediment turns his back, of course, like the Zeus of Homer, on
the bloody handiwork of Ares. The son of Ares, Oenomaus, who has already slain a dozen of his
daughter’s suitors with the bronze spear of his father, is hateful to him.31 During the Olympic
games a truce had to prevail. A bronze statue of Ekecheiria, the personification of the peace of
the gods, was situated in the entrance hall of the Temple of Zeus.
It has long been suspected that the form of government prevalent in the Mycenaean period
served as a paradigm for the position of Zeus at Olympia. His function was comparable to that of
King Agamemnon (cf. Iliad 9.96ff.). This similarity in their rule is expressed symbolically by the
scepter discussed above. In spite of this depiction of a divine monarchy tied to the Mycenaean form
of rule, the dignity of the father of gods and men was not at all diminished during those times when
other forms of government prevailed in Greece, even during the Athenian democracy. Monarchy
had ascended to the sacred sphere. In Athens responsibility for the celebration of the ancient festi-
vals lay in the hands of a government official especially appointed for that task, an archon with
the title Basileus (King). The eternal majesty of Zeus depended on the immortal traits that Homer
had bestowed on him. One of the most significant characteristics of Homer’s Zeus is his impartial
justice. All the other gods take sides with either the Achaeans or the Trojans. They exert them-
selves for their favorites, as Athena does for Diomedes, Achilles, and Odysseus, or they support
their sons, as Thetis and Aphrodite do. Zeus, on the contrary, abandons his son Sarpedon to his
fate, which is death at the hands of Patroclus (Iliad 16.490). Sacred, golden scales symbolize the
impartial justice of Zeus. Homer mentions them not infrequently, and he does so extensively before
Hector is felled by Achilles in the twenty-second book of the Iliad (209ff.). The latter has already
chased the fleeing Hector four times around the walls of Troy when Zeus lets the scales decide:

Then the father set up his golden scales, and in them

He placed two spirits of death which levels men,
One for Achilles, and one for horse-taming Hector.
Grabbing the scale’s center, he held it up; Hector’s fateful day sank.
He went to Hades, and Phoebus Apollo abandoned him.

The sacred, golden scales of Zeus are, therefore, the scales of fate upon which Zeus weighs out
for men and women their portion (Greek moira) of human destiny. Since in Homer the scales
are an exclusive attribute of Zeus, he can be thought of as a god of fate. Zeus and Moira are often
named together as authors of fateful events. The image that Achilles uses in his discussion with
24 ZEUS

Priam (Iliad 24.527ff.) points in the same direction. Zeus has in his house two pithoi, which were
large urns used for supplies. One of these is filled with evil, the other with pleasant things. The
god distributes fate to mankind from these pithoi, sometimes from both, at other times only from
the one containing evil—never solely from the pithos containing good things. All good and no
evil is not the lot of mortals.


In the fifth century B.C., Aeschylus put Zeus on stage as a god of fate. In the drama called Psy-
chostasia (the weighing of souls), Zeus appeared with scales bearing the psychai (souls) of Achil-
les and Memnon, visually represented by small images of the heroes. Here, as in many of his
tragedies, Aeschylus’ ideas revolved around the inexplicable choices made by Zeus. The choral
songs of this tragedian and theologian contain the most beautiful and, at the same time, the most
profound and unfathomable prayers that have come down to us from antiquity. Mention need
only be made of the hymn from the beginning of the Oresteia, in the middle of which reference
is made to the primeval Uranus-Cronus-Zeus cycle.32

Zeus, whoever he is, if this name is

Pleasing to him when he is so addressed,
Then with this name do I call on him.
I am not able to compare anything to Zeus,
Even when I ponder all possibilities,
Except—if I’m compelled to truly cast aside
The burden of fruitless thinking—except himself.
And whosoever was great in times gone by,
Bursting with a boldness equal to every kind of conflict,
He will not be mentioned, since he is “a thing of the past.”
He who was born next met his victor
And departed.
But if someone readily shouts the triumphal songs of Zeus,
His thoughts will altogether have hit the mark.

For it is Zeus who has shown mortals the way to understanding

By establishing the universal principle that learning comes
Through suffering.
Not sleep but the pain which recalls suffering infiltrates the mind,
And sound thinking comes even to those who wish it not.
There surely comes a blessing from the deities who have
Used force to gain a seat at the tiller of our lives.


 Z E U S 25

Are there any extant Bronze Age images of the god? Previously, we could point to a Mycenaean
crater of the fourteenth century B.C., found at Enkomi on Cyprus, on which Nilsson was inclined
to see Zeus with the scales of fate.33 This interpretation, however, has been conclusively refuted
in the Enkomi publication of Porphyrios Dikaios. The subject matter is now interpreted as the
weighing and transportation of copper bars. On the other hand, a well-known monument from
around 1400 B.C., the Hagia Triada sarcophagus (fig. 14), can now be linked to the cult of Zeus
as a young Cretan vegetation god.34 He stands by a sacred tree in front of his sanctuary and
receives a train of worshippers bringing gifts. On the other side of the sarcophagus, a cult scene
shows a bull lying on a bronze table, bleeding to death. Such a table is also attested for the sacri-
fice of cattle at the Dipolieia, the oldest festival of Zeus in Athens. Also from Crete, dating more
than half a millennium later than the sarcophagus, we have on the lid of a pithos from the area
of Knossos an image of a beardless figure, stylized in the Late Geometric manner, holding a
bundle of wavy thunderbolts (fig. 15). A number of scholars rightly identify the figure as Zeus
standing beside a tripod sacred to him.35 Emil Kunze was of the opinion that he had found
other Geometric representations of Zeus.36 They are bronze figurines that, along with many other

14. Hagia Triada sarcophagus. Early fourteenth century B.C. Heraklion, Archaeological Museum 396.
Photo: Nimatallah / Art Resource, NY.
26 ZEUS

15. Zeus on the lid of a

pithos from a tomb at
Fortetsa, near Knossos.
Around 700 B.C. Heraklion,
Archaeological Museum
Π12445. Photo: Archaeological
Museum of Heraklion—
Hellenic Ministry of Culture
and Sports—TAP Service.

votive offerings, came to light everywhere in the sanctuary at Olympia, not only near the great
ash altar. Some of these were attached to utensils such as tripods. Since Pausanias reports that
the ancient statue of Zeus standing beside Hera in the Heraeum was helmeted (5.17.1), Kunze
interprets all statues of this kind as Zeus. Those carrying spears are Zeus as warrior; those raising
their arms are Zeus in epiphany. Going well back into the later Bronze Age, however, raised
arms were characteristic not only of the gods but also of people engaged in prayer. The gesture,
which probably originated in Mesopotamia, was one of the most common religious gestures in
Antiquity, enduring long enough to be transformed into the imagery of people at prayer in Early
Christian art. From the open hands of the deity, power and blessings flowed into the hands of the
praying person, who extended his or her hands in imitation of the god’s gesture. Therefore, in
the case of many primitive bronze and terracotta figurines, it is difficult to decide whether the
open hands are those of the donor or the recipient—that is, whether the figure is that of a god or
a suppliant. These are valid objections to Kunze’s interpretation. Neither the helmet—a feature
of nearly every Geometric male bronze figure—nor, as we have seen, the gesture, suffices to iden­
tify these figurines as Zeus. The interpretation of the figures as suppliants makes much more sense.


One of the earliest reliable representations of Zeus in Greek art is to be found on a small Proto-
corinthian ointment jar or perfume jug (lekythos) from the early seventh century B.C. (fig. 16).37
The identity of the bearded god is made certain by the weapons he brandishes, a bundle of
 Z E U S 27

thunderbolts. The flowerlike stylization of the bolt was adopted from the Orient, which exerted
a strong influence on Greek art at this time. It is not surprising, therefore, that the Hittite god
of weather who corresponds to Zeus was depicted with a similar thunderbolt, which also identi-
fied him in hieroglyphic inscriptions.38 The theme on the vase under discussion is the sover-
eignty of Zeus, which is why his opponent takes the form of a centaur. Both grab the object
planted between them, a scepter. The proposal to identify Zeus’s opponent as either Cronus
or Typhon fails to convince. Cronus, the respected king of the primeval period, cannot be
depicted as a monstrosity, and Typhon was described by Hesiod as serpent-like (Theogony 825ff.).
He corresponds to the many-headed dragon of Hittite myth, Illuyanka, slain by the weather god.
On a Chalcidian hydria of approximately 530 B.C., Zeus, identified by an inscription, hurls his
thunderbolt at Typhon, who is depicted with snake legs and wings (fig. 17).39 In contrast, Zeus’s
opponent on the Protocorinthian vase grasps the trunk of a pine tree, known from iconography
and poetry as a weapon of the centaurs (cf. Pseudo-Hesiod, Shield of Heracles 188). To sum up,
Zeus is battling a centaur for supremacy. We do not have a myth stating this theme explicitly, but
we should remember that centaurs also appear as opponents of the god on the west pediment of
the Temple of Zeus at Olympia. Their father, Ixion, who wanted to marry Hera, belonged to
the wild Phlegyans, who are referred to as blasphemers and despisers of Zeus in the Homeric
Hymn to Apollo (278ff.). They even spread war to the sanctuary of Delphi, where Apollo drives
them away, according to the report of Pausanias, “with a constant barrage of bolts and powerful
earthquakes” (9.36.3). Karl Otfried Müller rightly stresses the close relationship between centaurs
and Phlegyans.40 The Protocorinthian scene belongs to the general context of this myth, known
to us only from a few fragments. That the site of the battle with this monster must be the sanc­
tuary at Delphi can be deduced from the prominent position given to the depiction of the two
eagles. They are not merely a decorative filler motif. The two huge birds in flight flank a cauldron

16. Zeus and centaur. Protocorinthian lekythos by the Ajax Painter. 660–650 B.C. Boston, Museum of
Fine Arts 95.12. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
28 ZEUS

17. Zeus fighting Typhon.

Chalcidian hydria. Ca.
540–530 B.C. Munich,
Antikensammlungen
596. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

with two eagles sitting on its rim, a repetition of the motif. They were intended to function as
reminders of the Delphic myth of the two eagles that Zeus sent out in opposite directions to
determine the center of the earth; the birds met over Delphi (Pindar fr. 54 Snell). The thunder-
bolts that Apollo is said to have sent against the Phlegyans were obtained, quite naturally, from
his father, Zeus. It is likely that in this composition Zeus himself is about to intervene in the
battle, and the beardless god who appears at his side carrying a large sacrificial knife is his priest-
son, the god of Delphi. Our perfume jug would then provide evidence for the close relationship
between Zeus and Apollo, which is also depicted in a very impressive manner on the Temple of
Zeus at Olympia. The jug, however, predates the sculpture by two centuries.
Zeus also makes an appearance hurling a thunderbolt in one of the earliest extant represen­
tations of the god. On the west pediment of the Temple of Artemis on Corfu, dated to approxi-
mately 600 B.C., the god throws his weapon at an opponent who collapses in its wake (fig. 18).41
A recent interpretation identifies this scene as Zeus fighting the Titans. The god would then be
brandishing his bolt against Cronus or Iapetus. It seems, however, preferable to return to the
 Z E U S 29

older interpretation, where Zeus is involved in a Gigantomachy with his opponent utterly
destroyed, as on the pediment. By contrast the Titans, who were immortal gods, were hurled alive
into Tartarus. Attention can also be drawn to a remarkable feature of the scene on the Corfu
pediment—Zeus’s beardlessness, which is quite noticeable because of the contrast with the long
beard of the Giant. In later periods, the beard properly belongs on the father of gods and men,
and Zeus is almost always depicted as bearded. In the seventh century B.C., however, there are
other beardless Zeus figures. It was a time when Crete exerted a considerable influence in art and
religion on the Greek mainland. On Crete, Zeus was worshipped as the “greatest youth” (megistos
kouros), corresponding to the Minoan vegetation deity who was envisaged this way.42 He sur-
vived as a youthful deity in Aigion in Achaea, an “area of retreat” for the Achaeans as well as for
the religion of the second millennium B.C. In that community there was a statue of a youthful
Zeus from the hand of the Early Classical sculptor Hageladas. It stood in the house of that year’s
priest (Pausanias 7.24.2) and is a direct reference to the tradition of Minoan private chapels.

18. Zeus and a Giant. West pediment

of the Temple of Artemis on Corfu
(Corcyra). Ca. 600 B.C. Corfu,
Archaeological Museum. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
30 ZEUS

A small bronze from Dodona, the location of the time-honored oracle of Zeus in Epirus, shows
the ancient motif of the lightning hurler in an Early Classical mode (fig. 19).43 The lightning has
here been streamlined into a sharp missile and so is better thought of as a thunderbolt. On the
god’s hand sat an eagle, Zeus’s most common attribute after the thunderbolt. In the Orient it was
an attribute of gods and kings. In Greek art the eagle often sits on the throne or atop the scepter
of Zeus. A Laconian cup found in Olympia shows the divine royal couple, Zeus and Hera,
enthroned with an eagle sitting behind them.44 On a cup of the same type (fig. 20), a large eagle
flies toward his enthroned master.45 A generation later, around 500 B.C., an Attic vase painting
(fig. 21) was produced showing the eagle in stylized form sitting on the scepter of the king of the
gods as he sits upon his throne.46 Again, his wife, Hera, is sitting beside him, attended by a winged
Iris. Beneath the seat of the throne two athletes are depicted, a motif identifying Zeus as lord of
athletic competitions, and of those at Olympia above all. Later Phidias also decorated the throne

19. Zeus wielding the thunderbolt.

Bronze statuette from Dodona.
Ca. 470 B.C. Athens, National
Archaeological Museum 16546.
Photo: Universal Images Group /
Art Resource, NY.
 Z E U S 31

of his statue of Zeus for the temple at Olympia with images of athletes. They were likewise placed
between the legs of the throne (Pausanias 5.11.3). The pair of sphinxes that crown the seat in the
Attic vase painting also make a return appearance on Phidias’ throne of Olympian Zeus. Here,
too, the master reached back to earlier depictions of Zeus’s throne.


The chryselephantine statue by Phidias, the most renowned statue of a god in the ancient world,
was produced several decades after the completion of the Temple of Zeus.47 Some have asked
what the earlier statue there, before the completion of Phidias’ masterpiece, might have looked

20. Zeus and the eagle. Laconian cup

by the Naucratis Painter. The god probably
sits on the steps of his ash altar in Olympia.
Ca. 560 B.C. Paris, Louvre E668. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

21. Zeus and Hera enthroned.

Amphora by the Nikoxenos
Painter. Ca. 500 B.C. Munich,
Antikensammlungen 2304.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
32 ZEUS

like. It cannot have been a naked thunderbolt-wielder like the Dodona statuette (see fig. 19), since
this type belongs not inside a temple but outside in the open air.48 In ancient cult, places that had
been struck by lightning were left exposed to the sky. The naked Zeus who dispensed lightning
was created for the original cult of the god, practiced exclusively outdoors. If the Phidian Zeus
had a predecessor, it must have been a Zeus sitting on a throne, especially given that lightning
was not an attribute of the image Phidias created.
Phidias’ work has been preserved only in distant reflections. Images on the obverse of coins
from the time of the emperor Hadrian, struck in Elis for the Olympiads of A.D. 121, 133, and 137,
show the entire seated figure five times and the head of the god once. The latter is best preserved
on a bronze coin from A.D. 133 identified by Joseph Liegle, now in Berlin (fig. 22).49 It shows a
bearded, crowned head of noble proportions and great dignity. Of the three different coins from
the year A.D. 137 with the best representations of the entire seated figure, two show the god
obliquely, seen from the right and from the left respectively, while the third, whose best example
is now in Florence, shows the seated figure in profile (fig. 23).
Pausanias has given us an extensive description of the seated Zeus of Olympia (5.11):

The god sits on a throne and is made of gold and ivory. On his head there is a wreath in the form
of olive twigs; in his right hand he supports a gold and ivory Victory holding a ribbon and, on her
head, a wreath. In the left hand there is a scepter decorated with pure metal inlays. The bird sitting
on this scepter is an eagle. The god’s sandals and his cloak are also gold. Figures and lilies have
been attached to the cloak. The throne is a variegated work of gold, gems, ebony, and ivory; figures
are painted on it, and sculpted work attached to it. Four Victories dance on each leg of the throne,
and two additional ones on the foot of each leg. Across each of the two front legs lie Theban boys
being abducted by sphinxes, and below the sphinxes Apollo and Artemis shoot the children of
Niobe. Between the legs of the throne are four ledges, each of which stretches from one leg to the
other. The ledge directly opposite the entrance to the temple begins with seven figures; of the eighth
no one knows how it has disappeared. They may well be representations of ancient contests, since
boys’ contests had not yet been set up in the time of Phidias. The one tying a ribbon around his head
looks similar to Pantarches, an Elean youth who allegedly was the favorite of Phidias. Pantarches

22–23. Left: head of Zeus. Right:

Phidian statue of the enthroned Zeus.
Reverse sides of two bronze coins
from Elis. A.D. 133 (left) and A.D. 137
(right). Berlin, Staatliches
Münzkabinett; Florence, Museo
Archeologico Nazionale. Photos:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
 Z E U S 33

also gained a victory in boys’ wrestling in the eighty-sixth Olympiad. On the other ledges is featured
the troop with which Heracles fought against the Amazons. The number of figures on both sides is
about twenty-nine, and Theseus is also to be found among the allies of Heracles.

The inlaid lilies on Zeus’s garment were, as the excavations in Olympia indicated, made of
glass, which was still very expensive at the time of manufacture.50 The throne of Zeus on the east
frieze of the Parthenon shows that the reliefs with the slaying of the Niobids were situated below
the armrests on Zeus’s throne at Olympia. As with the temple statue, a sphinx also reclines in
front of the throne’s supports on the Parthenon frieze. Parts of the throne decoration at Olympia,
the sphinxes and the Niobids, have also left traces in copies from the Roman period.
The Austrian excavations at Ephesus uncovered a sculpture group consisting of a winged
sphinx sinking its talons into the body of a young man on the point of expiring (fig. 24).51 The
dark stone from which the group is carved resembles the ebony that was used for parts of the
throne of Zeus at Olympia. However, the youth under the sphinx is certainly not the young
man described by Pausanias. This may reflect the interpretation of a later period. During the
time of Phidias, it is unlikely that the Theban Sphinx would be copied for use as a mere decora-
tive motif. In the sphinxes of the throne of Zeus at Olympia, Roland Hampe sees Keres, that is,
death spirits.52 They could appear in large groups from early Greek art onward. For Zeus, who
had possessed the scales of fate since the Mycenaean period—scales that were in fact frequently
called the scales of the Keres—images of two spirits of death, two Keres, one on the right and one
on the left, were meaningful attributes. The two “sphinxes” on Zeus’s throne, therefore, symbol-
ized the power of this supreme god over life and death.
Partial copies of the depiction of the slaying of the Niobids on the throne of Zeus have also
been preserved. All the sons and daughters of Niobe are shown already slain by the arrows of
Apollo and Artemis. Apollo functions here, as on the west pediment of the Temple of Zeus, as
avenger of hubris at his father’s behest (see fig. 144). There is a congruence between the themes
of the temple’s cult statue and the sculptures decorating the temple’s exterior, a congruence that
is still closer in the case of Phidias’ other chryselephantine statue, the Athena Parthenos. While
the temple sculptures at Olympia are the work of another, earlier master, Phidias himself con-
ceived the decorative program of the Parthenon.


The Olympian Zeus of Phidias signaled, as the ancient world well knew, a high point in the ico-
nography of the supreme deity. All artists who subsequently depicted Zeus would refer to it as a
benchmark, when not copying it directly. Ancient authors report that Phidias based his work on
the Homeric Zeus as depicted in the first book of the Iliad (528ff.). This view must not be dis-
missed as the interpretation of a later period. Other artists of that time also drew their inspiration
from Homer. Homer’s Zeus thoroughly defined the Classical conception. The paradigm of a just,
impartial disposer of fate unites the Homeric and the Phidian Zeus. It was, moreover, by no
34 ZEUS

24. Sphinx group from

the throne of Zeus in
Olympia. Reconstruction
after a fragmentary
copy found in Ephesus.
Vienna, Ephesus
Museum. Photo:
Erich Lessing / Art
Resource, NY.

means an accident that Phidias was inspired by the very first book of the Iliad, for the principal
deities of Homer are already completely present at the beginning of the epic. One need only think
of Athena’s first appearance, along with those of Apollo, Hera, and Hephaestus, all of whom are
very clearly defined in the first book. To a suppliant in front of the statue of Zeus at Olympia, the
god remained, well into Late Antiquity, the stately ruler who could fulfill a request with a nod of
his head, just as he once did for Thetis (528ff.):

With his dark brows the son of Cronus nodded,

And the ambrosial locks flowed from the immortal head
Of the Lord. And he made great Olympus tremble.
 HER A

I
n Goethe’s time it was Hera, the Roman Juno, wife of the supreme deity and queen of
 Olympus, who was admired above all other Greek goddesses. Winckelmann wrote
 that “as wife and goddess” she was “elevated above others, in stature as much as in
royal pride,” as if he were describing the very same beautiful queen of the gods, with her crown,
scepter, and regal cape, that we see on an Early Classical cup in Munich (fig. 25)1—but this
vase was then still buried in Etruscan soil. In addition, we read in the writings of Karl Philipp
Moritz (1757–93):

Stately Juno is called ruler, large eyed, white armed; it is not the soft allure of her eyes which marks
them as noteworthy, but the awe felt for their impressive size; and as far as the remaining features
of this divine figure are concerned, the poets only mention the beauty of her mighty arm.2

In recent centuries it was an ancient statue, along with the Homeric epics and Virgil’s Aeneid, that
served as the definitive depiction of the Olympian queen. This was the colossal head known as
the Juno Ludovisi (fig. 26), currently in the Palazzo Altemps in Rome. Goethe saw this head, so
much larger than life and crowned with a diadem, as incorporating the very essence of the divine.
“No words can describe it adequately; it is like a poem by Homer,” he wrote from Rome to Char-
lotte von Stein. And later: “Not one of our contemporaries who for the first time steps forward
to face it can claim he is able to stand up to such a gaze.”3 Goethe went so far as to have a cast of
the goddess’s colossal head placed in his room, so that he might become accustomed to its divine
proportions through daily contact. For the rest of his life, she remained the ideal.
For Schiller, Juno Ludovisi embodied humanity’s highest value, “to be the freest and most
exalted existence.” In his fifteenth letter on the subject of the aesthetic education of mankind
he wrote:

35
36 HERA

25. Hera (name inscribed)

in the tondo of a white-
ground cup by the
Sabouroff Painter. 470–
460 B.C. Munich,
Antikensammlungen
J336/2685. Photo: Staatliche
Antikensammlungen und
Glyptothek München.
Photographer: Renate
Kühling.

It is neither grace nor majesty that speaks to us from the magnificent face of Juno Ludovisi; it is
neither, while at the same time it is both. . . . The entire figure finds rest and dwells within itself, a
completely enclosed creation, as though she were some distance removed from our reality, without
yielding, without resisting; here there is no power battling other powers, no opening which tempo-
ralities can penetrate.4

Through the image of the human ideal he saw embodied in this work of art, Schiller instinctively
grasped an essential characteristic of the head as we see it today, knowing as we do that it is not a
divine image after all. Its qualities do not originate in the ideal of a Greek goddess. It is the por-
trait of a noblewoman in the Classical style popular during the Roman Imperial period. Its majes-
tic features belong to a princess of the Julio-Claudian family who was a priestess of Augustus.5
Is the exile of the Juno Ludovisi from Greek art and the sphere of the Homeric poems the
reason why Hera-Juno today occupies a much less prominent place in the minds of educated
people than she did in Goethe’s time? Probably not. The reason lies instead in the development
of the field of religious studies during the second half of the nineteenth century. It was during
this time that the exalted figure of the Olympian queen was progressively divested of its impres-
sive, clearly delineated contours. Ludwig Preller’s Griechische Mythologie of 1854 states:

Hera is the feminine side of Heaven, i.e. the Sky (Uranus), the element which is at the same time
femininely fertile and the most pliable of the heavenly elemental powers.6
 H E R A 37

26. Juno Ludovisi.

Ca. A.D. 40–50. Rome, Museo
Nazionale Romano, Palazzo
Altemps 8631. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

To explain the Olympians, scholarly research every now and then reaches back to ancient
attempts at interpretation, a practice that Preller’s interpretation reflects. The early historians of
religion did not realize that those ancient efforts were themselves far removed from the practice
of cult at the time. They arose from learned speculation and etymological frivolity. Because
of the phonetic similarity of her name with aer (air/sky), Hera had already become “Air/Sky” in
Plato’s Cratylus (404c). The Stoics explained her in like fashion, as is attested by Cicero (De
natura deorum 2.66). Nor was the Hera of the Homeric epics spared this interpretation.7 In book
15 of the Iliad (18ff.), Zeus threatens his spouse: “Do you not remember how once you hung
from heaven—I had hung two anvils from your feet and had bound your arms with golden,
unbreakable bonds.” Although the context makes it clear that Zeus was punishing Hera because
of her hatred for Heracles, commentators in Antiquity already viewed the suspended Hera as no
more than an allegory of the air. We may rightfully conclude that nineteenth-century researchers
in the academic discipline of religion did not contribute anything new in this matter.
38 HERA

Hera as earth goddess superseded Preller’s ancient-modern goddess of the air in F. G. Welcker’s
Griechische Götterlehre (Greek religion), published in 1857.8 This too has its roots in an ancient
idea dating to at least the fifth century B.C., as Bruno Snell has shown.9 Finally, we have Hera
the moon goddess. This is the guise in which she appears in W. H. Roscher’s lexicon.10 Since not
only Hera, but also Aphrodite, Artemis, and others are named as moon goddesses in this work,
Hera lost still more of her individuality by means of this designation. The profile of the queen of
Olympus, so precisely drawn in Goethe’s time, became blurry and indistinct in the shadow of an
indeterminate goddess of marriage, birth, and women. Admittedly, she continued to possess, espe-
cially in Preller’s and Welcker’s depiction, an elemental majesty. However, this too would dimin-
ish in scholarly estimation. Nilsson, for example, wrote in his 1955 handbook of Greek religion:

Fundamental is that Hera exists only as spouse of Zeus. . . . The fact that she is a spouse puts a
definitive stamp on her jealous, haughty character, as already delineated by Homer. . . . The family
relationships of a time when males freely associated with mistresses . . . painted the details of her
character in a way now well-known.11

Such are the depths to which the great goddess had descended. There is, therefore, no reason for
surprise that Walter F. Otto, in his book Die Götter Griechenlands (The Gods of Greece), does
not even include a chapter on Hera.


A very different picture emerges when one investigates Hera from the point of view of archaeol-
ogy. Through excavations that have taken place since the second half of the nineteenth century—
and particularly through the results of the more recent ones—Hera has been revealed as one of
the oldest and most honored deities of Greece. Heinrich Schliemann himself came across traces
of her in Mycenae. In the Iliad, Hera names Mycenae, Argos, and Sparta as her favorite cities.
Since Homer frequently refers to her as Boöpis (Cow-eyed), Schliemann concluded that the god-
dess was originally bovine in form. Accordingly, he interpreted the many clay cattle figurines that
he found in Mycenae as early statues of Hera.12 On the subject of early depictions of Hera we are,
as we will see, very well informed. They were not in animal form. We can nevertheless today still
understand the terracotta cows Schliemann found as animals sacred to Hera. Cows, whether in
the flesh or fashioned from stone, bronze, or clay, were ever the goddess’s favorite offerings and
votive gifts.
German archaeologists began excavating the Heraeum of Olympia in 1875 (fig. 27). It is incon-
ceivable that the goddess at Olympia functioned merely as “spouse of Zeus.” The goddess’s original
independence is clearly discernible. Her temple at Olympia had been in existence for a century
and a half before the Temple of Zeus was built. The placement of the ancient cult statues, still
seen by Pausanias (5.17.1), leaves little doubt as to who was the real proprietor of the temple. Hera
sat on the throne; Zeus, bearded and helmeted, simply stood at her side. With the decipherment
 H E R A 39

27. Olympia. Heraeum. Ca. 600 B.C. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

of the Mycenaean script, common worship of the paired deities Zeus and Hera has now been
attested for Pylos in the thirteenth century B.C. On a clay tablet listing sacrificial instructions,
the name e-ra can be read beside di-we (the dative of Zeus). This proves that the pair did not, as
was previously assumed, arrive in the Peloponnese with the Dorians.13 Nevertheless, there were
no temples in Greece equally shared by Zeus and Hera. Here and there temples were found that
belonged either to Zeus or to Hera, but wherever temples to both exist, excavation has shown
every time that Hera’s temple is older. These incontrovertible facts reflect the differences between
the origins and cults of the two deities.


Zeus was brought along into the Aegean by Greek tribes migrating from the north. Originally,
he was worshipped under the open sky, as is indicated especially by the site of Dodona. It is no
accident that his wife there was not Hera but Dione, who, like him, was worshipped under the
oak trees. However, the house as dwelling place had belonged to Hera from the very beginning.
It is not unlikely that Greek temple architecture developed primarily within Hera’s cult during
the early part of the first millennium B.C. Apart from the Temple of Apollo in Thermon, no
40 HERA

evidence has yet been unearthed in post-Mycenaean Greece of temples earlier than the Heraea
of Samos and of Perachora near Corinth.14 The excavators date the foundations of these struc-
tures as far back as the ninth century B.C. The construction of these buildings predates the
beginning of the Doric and Ionic orders. Even before that time, Hera must have been worshipped
in houses, oval buildings of a prehistoric type. This can be concluded from the clay or limestone
house models that came to light in the sanctuaries of Argos, Samos, and Perachora.15 Apart from
small votive cows, these were the most characteristic votive offerings for Hera. Among them are
purely oval structures such as the beautiful, small limestone house from Samos. Additionally,
some of these are quite unusual buildings featuring a mixture of apsidal elements and the features
of a rectangular Doric temple, as, for example, in the clay house model from Perachora (fig. 28).
Particularly attractive is the terracotta model of a small early temple from the Heraeum at Argos
(fig. 29). It is obvious that the house type from Perachora represents a transitional phase between
prehistoric and Doric building styles and is of considerable significance for the history of archi-
tecture. Moreover, it is known that the Doric style has its origins in the practice of building with
wood. This can be clearly seen in the columns of the Heraeum at Olympia that are still in situ.
The wooden columns were replaced at different times by stone ones with correspondingly differ-
ent stylistic features. In the time of Pausanias (5.16.1), a column of oak was still on view in the
rear chamber. The old Heraeum of Argos, which was devastated by fire in the Classical period,
also had wooden columns, as did the Heraeum of Metapontum in southern Italy (Pliny, Natural
History 14.9), which was also most likely an Early Archaic foundation.
In contrast with the etymology of Zeus’s name, the etymology of Hera’s is obscure. Wilamow-
itz, Nilsson, and other scholars have championed the view that it is the feminine form of heros

28–29. Terracotta models of temples of Hera. Eighth century B.C. Left: from the Heraeum at Perachora
near Corinth, after H. Payne, Perachora I (Oxford 1940). Right: from the Heraeum at Argos. Athens,
National Archaeological Museum. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
 H E R A 41

(hero/lord) and means “mistress” or “lady.”16 However, philologists have not yet formed a con-
sensus. In one more recent interpretation, Hera is declared to mean “ripe for marriage,” while in
another it is viewed as a variant of Hora.17 To the Greeks the Horae were goddesses who brought
forth vegetation as the seasons changed. In the Heraeum at Olympia, their ancient statues sat
enthroned next to Hera (Pausanias 5.17.1). The statue of Hera at Argos, a work by Polyclitus, had
its crown decorated with Horae and the closely related Charites (Pausanias 2.17.4). As will become
evident in the course of our investigation, Hera was so closely tied to vegetation that a linguistic
relationship with Hora is quite possible.
Whatever the answer might be, the Hera of Olympia was indeed closely related to the Horae
and to the pre-Greek god of vegetation, Dionysus. There are many indications that in the pre-
Greek period, the foot of the Hill of Cronus at Olympia was the site of a cult for a goddess who
was at the same time both Rhea and Hera.18 Excavations of the prehistoric strata here may pro-
vide an explanation. The provenance of the goddess is certain: she originated in the pre-Greek
Aegean. Herodotus reports (2.50) that the Hellenes adopted the goddess Hera and the Charites
from the Pelasgians, together with a number of other deities, all of whom were female. To the
Greeks, the Pelasgians were the original inhabitants of their country. As we also know from
Herodotus (6.137), they surpassed the Hellenes in agriculture. Accordingly, Herodotus saw in
Hera an indigenous deity who was allied with the resident, farming Pelasgians. The traditions of
myth and cult, as well as the excavations of Hera’s sanctuaries, verify his account.
Ancient tradition reveals that the plains of Argos (in the Peloponnese) and of Thessaly (in the
northeast of Greece) were the most important habitation areas for the native Pelasgian popula-
tion (cf. fig. 30). That the pre-Greek populations of these two areas were related is evident from
corresponding place names and prehistoric finds.19 At the same time these regions were home to
the most ancient cults of Hera that we know. The migrating Hellenic tribe of Aeolians adopted
Hera as their primary deity from the Thessalian Pelasgians.20 Aeolic Boeotia was renowned for
its festival of Hera, the Daidala (which we will discuss later). The poet Alcaeus of Lesbos called
Hera “the famed Aeolian goddess, the producer of all” (frr. 129.6f. Lobel-Page). The chief hero of
the Aeolians, Jason, was Hera’s protege. It was from Thessaly that the Argonauts, the first seafar-
ers, carried the cult of their goddess to distant parts of the ancient world. This is probably how
the Heraea of Samos and Paestum were founded.21 A still more important center, radiating influ-
ence over a wide area, lay in the Argive plain, the principal locus of Mycenaean civilization.
The Achaeans took over the goddess from the Pelasgians already resident there. Both temples of
Hera dug up by the British excavations at Perachora near Corinth turned out to have been estab-
lished from the central Argive Heraeum.22 It lay between Argos and Mycenae (fig. 31) and was
excavated by American archaeologists toward the end of the nineteenth century.23 The older
temple, dating as far back as the eighth century B.C., was the earliest Doric peripteral temple
in the Peloponnese. Vitruvius (4.1.3) attributes it to the founding hero of the Dorians, Doros.
One may not, however, conclude from this learned derivation that the Argive cult of Hera was
first established by the Dorians, who entered the Peloponnese toward the end of the second
42 HERA

30. The most important

cult sites of Hera. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

millennium B.C.24 This theory is contradicted by mythology, which unequivocally ties Hera to
the Achaeans. Time and again she is called Argeiê, “Argive,” in Homer. The large number of
Mycenaean finds from near the Argive Heraeum also contradicts the notion of a Dorian founda-
tion for the cult. In the 1930s Carl Blegen excavated the nearby prehistoric strata going all the
way back to the Neolithic period.25 In the vicinity of the Heraeum lay a settlement with the
pre-Greek name Prosymna, whose local nymph, according to local myth, had been Hera’s nurse
(Pausanias 2.17.1). The goddess must have been a long-time resident there, with her cult reaching
back to the Pelasgian settlement of the Argolid.


The definitive characteristics of the goddess can be inferred from the landscape around the
Argive Heraeum. Paula Philippson wrote about some of these in her fine monograph, Griechische
Gottheiten in ihren Landschaften (Greek gods in their landscapes, 1939), where she describes
Hera as the mistress of the Argive plain. Philippson could not, however, have known about the
Heraeum located by Paola Zancani-Montuoro at Foce del Sele, the mouth of the ancient Silaris,
near Paestum (fig. 32). Its situation in the landscape is similar to that of the Argive Heraeum. In
both cases we have a lowland plain extending out to the sea, traversed by a stream. The same is
true of one of the most famous cult sites of Hera in the ancient world, her sanctuary on Samos
(fig. 33). It also lies on a plain that reaches as far as the sea and is bisected by a river. The favorite
plant of the Samian Hera was the lygos, a kind of willow that grows in the lowlands. During one
of the campaigns of the German excavators on Samos, the trunk of the ancient lygos tree sacred
to the goddess was found in the vicinity of her temple.26 At Olympia as well the Heraeum was
 H E R A 43

31. Argos, Heraeum.

View of the late fifth-
century B.C. ruins of
the Classical Temple
of Hera, seen from the
plateau of the Archaic
temple. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

built in a plain at the foot of the Hill of Cronus and near a river, the Cladeus, whose valley extends
as far as the Alpheus (fig. 34). Finally, a cult site very much like that of Argive Hera lay in the
broad lowlands of the Po valley in the vicinity of the Adriatic Sea. The sacred grove there is
alleged to have been planted by Diomedes. In the time of the emperor Augustus, the geographer
Strabo visited and described this revered site (5.1.9). The wild animals living there did not
harm the tamed ones. Large herds of horses dominated the landscape. Strabo reports that in early
times their fame was great; indeed, the Archaic poet Alcman writes with admiration of Venetian
racehorses (1.51 Page). Their patron, Hera, who was also worshipped as Hippia in Olympia and
elsewhere, was certainly more than the jealous spouse of Zeus. Her meaning in the early period
is evident from the location of her sanctuaries and the nature of her cult.
The main sanctuary between Argos and Mycenae is surrounded by pastureland. In Homer
Argos is called “nurse of horses.” The hill beside the Argive Heraeum is named Euboia, like the
island to the east of Attica, for which an ancient cult of Hera is also attested.27 The name is derived
from the Greek word for cow, bous, and means “area rich in cattle,” or “region of sleek cattle.”
Another location known for its cattle, Boeotia, was likewise the site of a famed Hera cult. At the
beginning of The Phoenician Women, Euripides mentions the meadows of Hera near Cithaerum
together with herds of horses and cattle. Herds of cattle belonged to the Argive Heraeum, and
the priestesses of Hera were transported on festival days on carts drawn by cattle (the tale of
Kleobis and Biton told in Herodotus 1.31 comes to mind). Argive Hera changed her rival Io into
a cow.28 The daughters of King Proetus of Tiryns, who had made fun of the small size of Hera’s
temple—the goddess seems to have been especially sensitive concerning her temple—she punished
with a madness29 in which they imagined themselves to be cows. The festival of Hera at Argos
was called Hecatombaea because of the many cows sacrificed. Hecatombs were also sacrificed to
44 HERA

32. Foce del Sele near

Paestum. Heraeum.
Photo: Courtesy
Giovanna Greco.

33. Samos, Heraeum

(IV) of Polycrates.
The building was
started shortly after
538 B.C. Photo: Courtesy
Hans R. Goette.

her on the islands of Aegina and Samos.30 A Hellenistic epigram names calves as the favorite
sacrifice to Samian Hera (Anthologia Palatina 6.243):

You who rule Samos and call Imbrasus your own, O Hera,
Accept as sacrificial gift, Mistress, for the day of your birth
This dedication of calves; that it is dearest to you by far
We know who understand the customs of the sacred gods.
 H E R A 45

The sanctuaries of Hera in Italy also lay amid extensive pasturelands. The plain of Foce del
Sele, which extends to the mountains at Paestum, was in its entirety sacred to Hera. Of the three
temples still extant in Paestum, two belonged to her: the Archaic temple (the so-called Basilica)
and the Early Classical temple (the so-called Temple of Poseidon, fig. 35). The identification
of the cults associated with these buildings was one of the most surprising results of the excava-
tions.31 The beautiful, large oxen (fig. 36), which even today graze there and bathe in the sea from
time to time, must surely be descended from the herds of Antiquity. Hera also had a temple
(fig. 37) with pastureland on the east coast of southern Italy, at Croton (Livy 24.3).32 It was an
important sacred site with a festival—a panegyris—which attracted the Greeks of southern Italy
from far and wide. Here, in the early part of the fifth century B.C., a butcher named Kyniskos
dedicated a sacrificial axe (fig. 38). “I am sacred to Hera of the plain,” it declares.33 As in Metapon-
tum and Sybaris, the “mother” city of Paestum, Achaeans whose chief deity was Hera had founded
Croton. These cities were located in an area called Italia long before the name was extended

34. Landscape near Olympia with view of the lower course of the Alpheus River. At the horizon appears
Katakolon and the island of Zakynthos. Photo: Courtesy Hans R. Goette.
35. Paestum. Right: Temple of Hera I. Second half of sixth century B.C. Left: Temple of Hera II. Ca. 460
B.C. Photo: Courtesy Hans R. Goette.

36. Paestum. Temple of Athena. Beginning of fifth century B.C. In the foreground, buffalo yoked to the
plough. Photograph taken in 1951. Photo: Archive of the author.
 37. Croton. Heraeum.
Beginning of the fifth
century B.C. Photo:
Sandro Baldi via
Wikimedia Commons.

38. Bronze axe. Dedication of the butcher

Kyniskos, who performed the sacrificial
slaughter to Hera. Early fifth century B.C.
London, British Museum 1884.0614.31.
Photo: © The Trustees of the British
Museum / Art Resource, NY.
48 HERA

to include the entire peninsula.34 The name Italia is derived, as was already known in Antiquity,
from vitulus (young cow). Anyone reflecting on these associations will not be surprised that
excavations of recent years have increasingly revealed Hera as one of the most important deities
of Magna Graecia (southern Italy). Whereas Demeter and Kore controlled the granaries of Sicily
long ago, Hera held sway over the colonies’ cattle pastures.
From the landscape and locations of her sanctuaries and from the history of her cult, we
can conclude that the goddess Hera was not originally dependent on Zeus. As mistress of the
plains, herds of livestock such as cattle and horses belonged to her. She was at the same time a
goddess of seafarers. Her temples were built in proximity to the sea or near harbors, as is the case
with both of her temples at Perachora. There Hera was given the epithets Akraia and Limenia,
meaning “goddess of the promontory” and “harbor goddess.” She was also connected to the sea
by the myth of the Argonauts. The brave Samian sailor Kolaios, who around 650 B.C. sailed as
far as distant Tartessos in Spain, declared himself to be under her protection.35 When he returned
to his native isle with considerable profits, he presented a dedicatory gift to the goddess of the
Samian Heraeum, a bronze cauldron decorated with griffins. Herodotus, who records this story,
calls it a mixing vessel in the Argive style (4.125). We know this cauldron shape, so typical of the
seventh century B.C., from Olympia (figs. 39–40), Argos, and Samos.36 Because Argos and Samos

39. Griffin head. Ca. 650 B.C. Olympia,

Archaeological Museum B145.
Photo: D-DAI-ATH-Olympia 4964.
Photographer: E.-M. Czakó.
 H E R A 49

40. Reconstruction
of a griffin cauldron
of the seventh
century B.C. After
H.-V. Herrmann,
Die Kessel der
orientalisierender
Zeit (Berlin 1955).
Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

are cult sites dedicated only to Hera, the griffin cauldrons of Olympia should likely be associated
particularly with her.
The wealth of the early populations in the Aegean region depended on trade across the sea
and the size of their herds. Hera, the patron of sailors and the mistress of pastures, must have
been the richest Greek goddess of the early period. Cattle were used as a form of payment. Con-
flicts over herds and pastures could serve as a cause for war in myth and in real life. Moreover,
once the transition to a currency-based economy was complete, Hera was again involved. Archae-
ologists have found in Argos and Perachora bundles of metal rods (obeloi), the earliest Greek
money. One from Perachora (fig. 41) is, in fact, inscribed with a dedicatory inscription to Hera.37
Juno, her Roman equivalent, exercised control over the activities of the mint in Rome.38 Scholars
have always assumed that this role of Juno Moneta is an accidental one, arising because of the
proximity of her temple on the Capitoline to the mint. This does not seem nearly as much of an
accident when we bring these developments in Greece into the discussion. What took place in
Greece must also have taken place in the “cattle country” that is Italy.
The supreme deity, Jupiter, was linked with Juno and Minerva on the Capitol. The origin of
this Capitoline Triad is not clear. Because of the presence of Minerva, Jupiter and Juno are not,
within the triad, originally a married couple. Instead, what we see is the typically Roman com-
munity of shared interests. Juno and Minerva appear to have come to Latium as Hera and Athena,
the richest and most powerful goddesses of the Achaean colonies. Hera and Athena were often
associated with each other in Greek myth and in cult.39 It is true that they appear as rivals in the
myth of the Judgment of Paris, but they subsequently unite against the victorious Aphrodite. In
the Iliad their bond is unbreakable, but not only there. The same constellation appears in two
50 HERA

41. Base for obeloi from the Heraeum at Perachora. Sixth century B.C. Corinth. Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.

other mythic cycles that do not have the Judgment of Paris as background: the battle of the Seven
against Thebes and, above all, the saga of the Argonauts. The spheres of influence of the two
goddesses are not mutually exclusive but dependent on one another. Hera, the protector of cattle,
and Athena, the patron deity of cities and olive groves, must work together if civilized life is to
flourish for mankind. The most beautiful example of the combined worship of these two god-
desses is preserved in Paestum, where the Late Archaic temple of Athena stands beside the two
temples of Hera.
Poseidonia (Roman Paestum) obtained its name from Poseidon. Nevertheless, Hera and
Athena overshadow him in that city’s cult, as their temples indicate. This is similar to the situa-
tion in Attica and Argos. In Attica Poseidon was bested by Athena when they vied for possession
of the land; in Argos he was defeated by Hera.40 Tension between Hera and Poseidon must have
been unavoidable. Poseidon too was closely connected with the sea and also, like Hera, with
cattle and horses. His complex functions show that the association of sea and pastureland, as
has been demonstrated for Hera, belonged to more than one Greek god. This is not surprising
for gods of the Aegean region, where land and sea are so thoroughly intertwined with each other.
The domains of pasture and sea are also inseparable in Greek art. On Geometric vases and
brooches of the seventh century B.C., horses, fish, and birds share the same compositions with
ships, and fish swim alongside grazing animals (fig. 42).41 Images such as these help us to better
understand the complex nature of the early Greek deities. The nineteenth-century hypothesis in
which each Greek god embodied a specific elementary power can no longer be maintained.
Interpretations of Hera as earth, air, or moon goddess are, while unitary in spirit, too one-sided.
The Olympian deities cannot be tied to individual elements or, for that matter, merely to the ele-
ments in general. They were spiritual, historically active powers. They were products of cultural
and historical circumstances in which they also played a formative role.


 H E R A 51

42. Boeotian fibula with a

mare feeding a foal (right) and
birds and fish next to a warship
(left). Third quarter of eighth
century B.C. Berlin, Staatliche
Museen, Antikensammlung
31013a. Photo: bpk Bildagentur /
(Antikensammlung) / Art
Resource, NY. Photographer:
Johannes Laurentius.

When Zeus, the chief deity of the migrating Hellenes, came into Greece, he encountered the
great goddess of the native Pelasgian population. He was able to subdue her power only by
becoming linked to her. As Rhea, she became his mother, but as Hera she became his wife. In
Homer, Zeus is frequently called “the thundering consort of Hera,” a notion reminiscent of the
“prince-consort” of a more powerful queen. That she could be a real threat to him is evident on
more than one occasion in the Homeric poems. In the Hymn to Apollo (351ff.), Hera gives birth
to Typhon, Zeus’s most dangerous opponent. A common theme of many cults is that Zeus was
able to win Hera only by trickery after she had at first rejected his advances. It was alleged that
he became united with her in love only after he had deceived her by taking the form of a cuckoo.42
This is why a cuckoo sat on the scepter of Hera at Argos (Pausanias 2.17.4), and a cuckoo is
employed as a decorative motif in the molding of her Classical temple there (fig. 43). The Iliad
also refers to the premarital love (associated with Samos) of the supreme divine couple (scholia
on Iliad 14.295f.).
A now-lost wooden relief of the late seventh century B.C. (fig. 44) came from the Heraeum
of Samos.43 The carving, half-Greek, half-oriental in style, does not, as it has been interpreted,
show the “Sacred Wedding” of Zeus and Hera. Instead, what we have here are Zeus and Hera as
a courting couple. The woman does not wear a bridal veil, and the young, beardless Zeus does
not grab her by the wrist, which is the gesture that the Greeks associated with the marriage ritual.
He touches her breast, while she grabs his arm. A bird flutters between their heads, which project
from the background, smiling. On account of the bird’s small size, it is probably not the eagle of
Zeus but the sly cuckoo that deceived Hera. However, we also know that the goddess equaled her
husband in deceit and intrigue. The story from book 14 of the Iliad in which Hera succeeds in
 43. Sima from the
Classical Heraeum at
Argos. End of the fifth
century B.C. Athens.
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.

44. Zeus and Hera as lovers.

Wooden relief from the Heraeum II
on Samos. Ca. 610 B.C. Lost, once Samos,
Archaeological Museum of Vathy H1.
Photo: D-DAI-ATH-Samos 2313.
Photographer: H. Wagner.
 H E R A 53

distracting him from the fighting at Troy is well known. She beguiles Zeus, who is seated on
Mount Ida, by donning the magic girdle of Aphrodite so that Love and Sleep overpower the chief
god. The couple does not lose any of their majesty, for Homer describes Hera’s maneuver as a
“Sacred Wedding” (346ff.):

The son of Cronus spoke, and embraced his wife.

Beneath them the divine earth made fresh grass
To grow, and dewy lotus, and crocus as well as hyacinth,
Thick and soft, springing forth from the earth.
There they lay down and pulled over them a golden, beautiful
Cloud; and dew fell down in shining drops.

In contrast, a fragment of a metope from Mycenae (fig. 45) from the same period as the
Samian wood relief—and one of the most beautiful pieces of Archaic sculpture known to us—

45. Fragmentary metope from

Mycenae. Probably Hera as a bride.
620–610 B.C. Athens, National
Archaeological Museum 2869.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
54 HERA

shows a garlanded young woman who is indeed veiled like a bride.44 With an expansive gesture,
like a bride, she draws back her veil with her left hand. One suspects that this metope did portray
the “Sacred Wedding” of Zeus and Hera. Because of the metope’s fragmentary condition, this
cannot be proved, though no more attractive explanation has been proposed. An Early Classical
metope from Selinus (fig. 46) shows the same event.45 Reclining backward, Zeus rests on the
mountain peak that serves as his throne. With his right hand he grasps Hera’s wrist in order to
draw her nearer. Her hieratic bearing and complicated three-layered garment provide a strong
contrast to the idle posture of the half-naked Zeus. Besides the imposing bridal Hera on the
east frieze of the Parthenon (fig. 47), this is one of the few sculptures of the goddess that have
come down to us from the fifth century B.C. Polyclitus’ famed chryselephantine statue of Hera
at Argos, the counterpart to the Zeus and the Athena Parthenos of Phidias, has been lost to us.
Only the beautiful heads of Hera on the coins of Argos (fig. 48) and Knossos (fig. 49) reflect
something of the celebrated grace of the sculptor’s seated statue.46 The high polos becomes a
diadem, similar to the one worn by the Hera depicted on the white-ground cup mentioned at
the beginning of this chapter (see fig. 25).

46. Selinus. Heraeum

(Temple E). Metope: Sacred
wedding (hieros gamos) of
Zeus and Hera. Ca. 460.
Palermo, Museo Archeologico
Regionale “Antonino Salinas”
3921B. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
 H E R A 55

47. Parthenon, east

frieze. Zeus and Hera.
Ca. 440 B.C. London,
British Museum. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

Our quest for depictions of Hera from an earlier period has proven much more productive.
We know about the ancient cult statue in the Samian Heraeum from ancient references, from
inventories of the Samian temple treasuries, and from the imperial Roman coins of Samos (fig.
50).47 Hera appeared in bridal garb, but without Zeus. In addition to her veil, she wore a high,
round crown on her head. Although the peacocks at her side are later additions, her headgear is
an ancient attribute. It appears already on an Early Archaic wooden statuette of the goddess
found in the same Heraeum (fig. 51).48 This form of the divine crown is generally called a polos.

48. Head of Hera. Obverse of a stater

from Argos. Ca. 400–360 B.C.
London, British Museum. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

49. Head of Hera. Obverse of a stater

from Knossos. Ca. 350 B.C. London,
British Museum. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
56 HERA

50. Cult statue of Hera on Samos,

represented on a sestertius of the
emperor Trajan Decius. A.D. 249–251.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

51. Hera with pyleon on her head. Wooden

statuette from the Heraeum II. Ca. 650 B.C.
Samos, Archaeological Museum of Vathy 5476.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

In Hera’s case it is more appropriately called (as Winckelmann proposed) a pyleon—that is, a gate
tower. This is what Alcman calls the headdress of the Spartan Hera (fr. 60 Page). In Sparta the
pyleon was woven out of beautiful grasses with a helichrysos, a vine with yellow-gold fruits,
entwined around it. These grasses of the pastureland are appropriate for Hera as goddess of
herds. In Argos her headdress was woven from tufts of sacred grass called asterion (“star grass”:
Pausanias 2.17.2). The plants varied from place to place, but the weaving of grasses in the form of
shoots and tendrils remained typical for Hera’s crown. Even the Samian coins of a later period
still show the tendrils twining around the pyleon (see fig. 50).
From Callimachus and other sources, we know what sorts of shoots the images of Hera in
Samos and Argos wore on their crowns: they were vines (fr. 101 Pfeiffer). The Hellenistic poet
explains the vine boughs in Hera’s hair as a token of victory over her hated stepson Dionysus.
However, Hera and Dionysus, the mistress of pastures and the lord of vineyards, were not hostile
to one another in the earliest period of the pyleon. Sappho and Alcaeus report that, on the island
of Lesbos, a triad of Zeus, Hera, and Dionysus was worshipped (frr. 17 and 129 Lobel-Page).
Alcaeus called this Hera, linked to Dionysus, “she who brings everything forth.” Hera and Dio-
nysus were also united peacefully in Olympia, where the sixteen women who arranged dances
for Dionysus also wove a peplos for Hera every four years (Pausanias 5.16). Their ancestors are
 H E R A 57

said to have been the first worshippers of Dionysus. Plutarch has given us a cult hymn of the
women of Elis (fr. 871 Page) that begins, “Come, hero Dionysus, into the sacred temple of the
Elians. Come with the Charites.”
Evidence for the association between Hera and Dionysus at Olympia is provided not least of
all by the head of that statue of Hera that received the peplos woven by the Elean women. A broad
face of pale gray limestone, larger than life, 52 centimeters high (fig. 52),49 it was discovered in
1878 during excavations in the vicinity of the Heraeum. According to its style and the shape of
the crown, it must have been sculpted by a Laconian artist around 600 B.C. In spite of its colos-
sal size, the face is not stiff but lively and animated. Some of its features are sharply hewn, while
others are modeled delicately. The lips are depicted as thin and drawn, but a smile glimmers at
the corners of the mouth. The eyes, within which the iris was once brightly painted, are defined
by very pronounced bottom lids, while the upper lids are among the most delicately rendered
features ever produced by an Archaic Greek sculptor. Prominently sculpted brows arch above
them. Their sweeping curves emphasize the majesty and dignity of her face, a face whose charm
is enhanced by the many small waves of hair on her temples. Above the softly rendered headband,

52. Head of Hera from her cult

statue in the Heraeum at Olympia.
Early sixth century B.C.
Olympia, Archaeological Museum.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
58 HERA

the patterns on her headdress are smaller and sharper. The pyleon of Hera sits atop her parted
hair, over a narrow, very clearly woven crown. Above her left ear, a shoot grows from the pyleon.
Paul Wolters was the first to point this out in 1924. He also identified its most significant parallel,
which is the crown of a goddess on a large relief pithos found in Thebes (fig. 53), but produced
in the Cyclades.50 On it, long branches sprout from both sides of the goddess’s crown. Bunches
of grapes hang from these branches; they must be grapevines. We can reconstruct the “Diony-
sian” pyleon of the statue of Hera at Olympia in the same way.
Chrysoula Kardara has identified the goddess on the relief pithos as Hera. If this interpreta-
tion is correct, this is a significant early image of the goddess. We should therefore spend some
time with this pithos. It is true that other deities typically raise their hands, and not only Hera.
Her broad, plank-like body, is, however, an unusual feature. Its entire surface, covered as it is by
a patterned cloth, gives no sense of the body beneath it. Only the feet, turned to the left, protrude
from the bottom of the garment. This flat depiction is reminiscent of the so-called Brettidole
(“plank statuettes”) from the sixth century B.C., which have been found in Boeotia in large num-
bers, some sitting, some standing (fig. 54).51 They also lack a distinct body, and, like the goddess
on the relief pithos, many of them wear a polos with shoots or tendrils. In Boeotia this headdress
has also been found by itself in the form of a clay votive offering (fig. 55). Pomegranates decorate

53. Hera between lions. From the neck of a Cycladic-style relief pithos from Thebes. 680–670 B.C.
Athens, National Archaeological Museum 5898. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
 54. Clay plank-shaped figurine from Boeotia.
Sixth century B.C. Würzburg, Martin-von-Wagner-
Museum H4275. Photo: Martin-von-Wagner-
Museum der Universität Würzburg.

55. Clay pyleon from Boeotia. Sixth century

B.C. Würzburg, Martin-von-Wagner-Museum
HA3849. Photo: Martin-von-Wagner-Museum
der Universität Würzburg.
60 HERA

it in addition to the coiled tendrils. The statue of Hera at Argos also held a pomegranate (Pausa-
nias 2.17.4). The unique poloi, which at times have been interpreted as ritual vessels, have their
closest parallel in Hera’s pyleon. They seem to have the same form as the grass crown woven for
the mistress of the cattle country, Boeotia. The Boeotian plank statuettes must therefore also
represent Hera. This has long been suggested and can now be proved.
The style of the clay plank statuettes predates the Archaic period of their manufacture. They
also do not seem to originate in the preceding Geometric period. In that period the bodies of
human figures have sharply delineated arms and legs (cf. fig. 15), while the arms of many of the
plank statuettes are presented in rudimentary fashion, and legs are not included at all. We must
go much further back, into the third millennium B.C., the Early Bronze Age, to find the origin
of the board or plank. A clay statuette of this period from Vounos on Cyprus (fig. 56) consists
simply of a garment, decorated front and back with patterns and a necklace, topped by an unusual
birdlike head. How could this form endure in Boeotia over the millennia? The examples from

56. Clay plank-shaped figurine from Vounos,

Cyprus. Early Bronze Age (late third
millennium). Nicosia, Cyprus Museum.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
 H E R A 61

the presumed intermediate period of transition must have been made of perishable material,
probably wood, which is best suited to the board form. The type can have continued for so
long a time only for ritual reasons. Not surprisingly, there was a festival of Hera that was named
after such wooden images, the Daidala of Plataea.52 All of Boeotia took part in it. Pausanias (9.3)
reports that on this day ancient wooden dolls were brought from fourteen Boeotian cities to
Mount Cithaerum, where they were burned. They represented Hera in bridal dress. Later, in
Archaic Boeotia, these wooden images would be reproduced for religious purposes in clay. This
is the reason they have survived until now. Greeks today, reminded of their own priests by the
images’ unusual head covering, call them papades. We have now, if our conjecture is correct,
found their ancient name: daidala.
The goddess on the pithos (see fig. 53) is represented in similar fashion, with the exception of
her head, which is not birdlike but shaped like that of a human, if we may be so presumptuous
as to introduce human criteria and standards into a discussion of the depiction of a goddess.
A demonic expression radiates from the face, with its large, round eyes, transforming the stiff
daidalon into an image of a great goddess. Two figures embrace her on either side. Obviously
female, they are only as tall as her shoulders. They press themselves close to her, grasping her
dress. There has been some speculation that they are performing a dance around a cult statue.
The gestures, however, are not those of dance. Other scholars have interpreted the figures as birth
assistants and view the goddess—whether she is Rhea, the mother of Zeus, or Leto, the mother
of Apollo—as actively giving birth.53 But her statue-like appearance argues against a childbirth
scene, particularly since the most important element in such a scene, the newborn infant, is miss-
ing. A pithos showing the Birth of Athena illustrates how one shows the birth of a deity within
this same genre of relief-decorated pithoi (see fig. 174). A custom well attested in many cults,
including that of Hera, explains the activities of the attendants on the pithos. They are dressing
the goddess.54 In a similar way, the statue of Hera in Olympia received, as mentioned above, a
newly woven peplos every four years. The plank-like representations of Hera at the Daidala fes-
tival were draped with bridal dresses. It seems to me that just such a ritual clothing is what is
depicted in the relief, whether it shows her priestesses as the ones involved in the action or—if
the scene is taking place on the mythological level—the Horai and Charites acting as her atten-
dants. This interpretation is confirmed by another relief pithos showing a procession of women
carrying a large peplos on their heads as a votive offering.55
In our discussion so far, we have ignored the two lions that are also part of the composition
on the pithos. These semi-rampant predators, with jaws open and roaring, are, without a doubt,
acolytes of the goddess. They accentuate the power of her presence. The heraldic arrangement
and elevated position of the front paws can be traced as far back as the art of the second millen-
nium B.C.—one need only think of the Lion Gate at Mycenae. Was the master of the pithos still,
to some extent, under the influence of Minoan-Mycenaean treatments of the same theme when
he composed his scene, or was he dependent on oriental examples? We will leave the question
unanswered at this time. In the Orient lions were associated with many deities, including the
62 HERA

highest goddess of the Assyrians, whom the Greeks equated at times with Aphrodite and at other
times with Hera. Lucian (Concerning the Syrian Goddess 31) reports that lions carried the image
of the Assyrian goddess. It is no wonder that the Greeks also associated lions, an ancient symbol
of power and majesty, with their important deities, especially with Apollo and Dionysus, but also
with the two closely related goddesses Rhea and Hera. Callimachus (Diegesis fr. 101 Pfeiffer) and
other sources state that a lion’s skin lay at the feet of the statues of Hera in Argos and Samos.
Coins of Samos struck in the sixth century B.C. uniquely show the image of a lion scalp by itself.
From 494 B.C. onward, the scalp was on one side of the coin, with the forequarters of an ox on
the reverse (fig. 57).56 Not until the later issues in small denominations from 394 to 365 B.C. on
does the head of Hera regularly appear in place of the forequarters.
Hesiod reports that Hera was instrumental in raising the Nemean lion (Theogony 328).
Bacchylides also mentions that “in the blooming plain of Nemean Zeus, white-armed Hera
approached the dark-roaring lion,” whose strangling fulfilled the first of the famous labors of
Heracles (9.6ff.). Hera is even seen holding a lion in representations of the Judgment of Paris,
as she still does, for example, on a drinking cup of the late fifth century B.C. (fig. 58).57 In the
Heraeum on Delos, French archaeologists have found Archaic clay statuettes of a goddess sitting
with a lion in her lap.58 If the site of these finds were unknown, these seated figures would be
classified according to type as Rhea. In addition to many other arguments, briefly touched upon
above, the lion, sacred to both goddesses, speaks for a pre-Greek identity for Rhea and Hera.
Therefore, we may assume that the lions on the vase with relief decoration (see fig. 53) are
attendants of Hera. As in Argos, Samos, and Olympia, here, too, lions and vines are her attributes.
In addition, the goddess’s form is that of the plank statuette preserved in the Boeotian daidala.
This plank form dates back, as we have seen, to the third millennium B.C.—that is, to the pre-
Greek period of the Aegean. In it we can see the “Pelasgian” form of Hera, which is also attested
for Samos. Callimachus tells us that the oldest cult statue of Samian Hera was an axoös sanis, a
rough, flat plank (fr. 100.2 Pfeiffer). From the ancient commentary on this text, it is clear that,
according to local Samian tradition, this plank received its statue-like form under King Procles.
Procles was the Ionian colonizer of Samos, and for this reason he is correctly dated by scholars to
the time of the Dorian-Ionian migrations, the late second millennium B.C.59 It follows, therefore,

57. Stater from Samos with a lion

scalp and the ox of Hera. Ca. 420
B.C. London, British Museum.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
 H E R A 63

58. Hera, holding a lion

in her hand, arriving at
the Judgment of Paris.
Attic kylix. Late fifth
century B.C. Berlin,
Staatliche Museen,
Antikensammlung
F2536. Photo: bpk
Bildagentur /
(Antikensammlung) /
Art Resource, NY.
Photographer: Johannes
Laurentius.

that the Ionians encountered a Hera already ensconced on the island. That accords with the myth
that it was the Argonauts—that is, heroes of the generation before the Trojan War—who brought
the cult of Hera to Samos.60


The ancient report that the cult-image plank was turned into a statue under Procles fits well with
our knowledge of the sculpture of the late second millennium B.C. During this sub-Mycenaean
phase of Greek art, sculpture began to blossom. Depictions of the gods of this time do seem
rather severe, but at the same time they are not flat boards but rounded and much closer to the
human figure. Many examples of these are found in the Heraklion Museum in Crete. The most
beautiful of all shows the goddess in an oval house with two men sitting on its roof, eavesdrop-
ping on her (fig. 59).61 Since we have evidence that, in the Geometric period, models of houses
were dedicated to Hera as votive offerings (see figs. 28–29), we may identify this goddess, who
is depicted with arms raised, as Hera. Knossos was known for its Hera cult. This temple model
is one of a large number of votive gifts of this sort found near Knossos.62
It is curious that the German excavators on Samos have ignored not only the ancient tradi-
tion about Procles but also the existence of sub-Mycenaean plank idols. Ernst Buschor imagined
“Samian herdsmen or fishermen” around 900 B.C. finding, in the vicinity of the beach, a piece
of wood in which they recognized Hera.63 Dieter Ohly accepted this modern myth and suggested
that this piece of wood was carved into a statue-like form around 700 B.C.—that is, approxi-
mately four centuries later than the tradition claims.64 This deviation from the ancient sources
can be explained by the fact that Buschor saw in the plank statuette the typical cult statue of
64 HERA

59. Clay model of a small

temple with a goddess
inside. From Archanes
(Crete). Tenth century B.C.
Heraklion, Archaeological
Museum ΑΕ376. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

the Geometric period. Since this assumption has found its way into handbooks, it is necessary
to caution the reader against it. This notion came into being when art-historical typologies were
mixed together with categories defined within the history of religion. The sculptures of the Geo-
metric period that have come down to us—one thinks of the ivory figures from an Attic grave
(see fig. 236)—are not shaped like planks. Moreover, the human figures on Geometric vases are
so sharply delineated that, stylistically, they form the starkest possible contrast to the undifferen-
tiated plank form. If, between the tenth and eighth centuries B.C., there were still plank-formed
cult statues—and there is no reason to doubt this—they must have been the relics of an earlier
time: namely, as we have seen, the third millennium B.C.


 H E R A 65

Finally, we will conduct an inquiry into the early statues of Hera at her ancestral seat, the Argive
Heraeum.65 Pausanias saw there a small, wooden, seated statue of Hera, which he labels the old-
est (2.17.5). He says nothing about any plank-like figures. Beside it stood a pillar or column with
a small statue of Hera. Here, the pillar, not the statue, seems to have been the original cult object.
The Argive tradition speaks very clearly in three lines from an Archaic epic, the Phoronis, which
recounts the ancient sagas of the Argolid (fr. 3 Davies). There one reads of Callithoe, the priestess
of Argive Hera, who was the first to decorate the lofty pillar of the goddess:

Callithoe, priestess of Argive Hera (the Olympian queen holding

The key), who with ties and tassels
Was first to provide decoration round about the tall pillar of
Her mistress.

The sources from which the anonymous poet created the Phoronis must have had a link to
the Argive Heraeum. The Heraeum maintained a calendar from very early on. In the Argolid,
years were recorded according to the names of each year’s priestess of Hera.66 The valuable evi-
dence provided by the Phoronis indicates that the Hera of Argos was worshipped in the form of
a tall pillar. The early Christian writer to whom we are indebted for the above quotation from
the ancient epic correctly points out an analogous cult manifestation: the pillar of Dionysus in
Thebes.67
In the history of the ancient depictions of cult, the “tall pillar” of Argive Hera occupies its
own unique place. It is the idol form for a number of deities, male and female, that were taken
over from Minoan Crete into Mycenaean Greece.68 We need only think of the most monumental
example, the relief on the Lion Gate of Mycenae. Many Mycenaean engraved gems also show the
sacred pillar flanked by animals.69 There are birds and cattle on a clay seal from Mycenae (fig.
60)—do they point to a mistress of the cattle herds? There are griffins on a gold ring from one
of the graves near the Argive Heraeum (fig. 61). Griffins also adorned a cauldron dedicated to
Hera in the seventh century B.C. Were they already acolytes of the goddess in the second mil-
lennium B.C.? More important for purposes of comparison with the quotation from the Phoronis

60. Clay seal from

Mycenae. Column of
Hera (?) with oxen and
birds. Drawing (left) and
impression. Thirteenth
century B.C. Athens,
National Archaeological
Museum. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
66 HERA

61. Disc of a gold ring from a tomb near the

Heraeum of Argos. Griffins and the column
of Hera (?). Drawing. Fourteenth century
B.C. Athens, National Archaeological
Museum. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

62. Disc of a gold ring from Mycenae. Lions and

the column of Hera (?). Drawing. Fourteenth
century B.C. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum
AN1938.1126. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

is a gold ring (fig. 62).70 On it, the knotted fillets we know from Minoan religion hang from the
capital of the pillar. One can imagine that the “ties and tassels” with which the priestess deco-
rated the pillar of Hera looked like this. Two lions bound to the cult pillar share this composition.
The “tall pillar” marks an important point in the development of Hera’s cult. For the kings of
Mycenae, the modest Pelasgian plank, which we must assume to be the oldest cult depiction of
Hera, was not sufficiently monumental. For this reason, they adopted the pillar form from Crete.
From the goddess of the rural Pelasgians, Hera was transformed into the spouse of the supreme
deity of the kings of Mycenae. The ancient poet of the Phoronis was aware of this, since he gave
the pillar-Hera nothing but royal epithets. The common cult of Zeus and Hera has now been
authenticated for the thirteenth century B.C.71


In the history of religion, the Mycenaean pillar-Hera occupies a transitional point between the
early plank-like forms and later statuary cult depictions. In Samos, this step was omitted. There
was no intervening stage from plank form to statue. This is not accidental, for, as excavations
have shown, Samos remained largely untouched by Mycenaean culture.72 Accordingly, the Pelas-
gian plank statue would continue until the arrival of the Ionians. Let us, in conclusion, look once
again at the Lion Gate of Mycenae (fig. 63). Perhaps the above quotation from the Archaic epic
gives us a hint as to the meaning of this monument, which has been the focus of such widely
63. Mycenae. Lion Gate. Fourteenth–thirteenth century B.C. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
68 HERA

differing interpretations.73 The pillar may embody the Mycenaean Hera who, as we know from
Homer, was the primary deity of the Mycenaeans. We have seen that, as symbols of the power
and might of the goddess, the lions could be linked to Hera as well. Their posture on the relief
pithos (see fig. 53) immediately brings the Lion Gate to mind. In order to bestow on the image
of Hera a monumental quality, the lords of Mycenae changed her from a modest plank into an
impressive pillar. Similar motives probably led to the addition of the lions. The mighty pillar,
surrounded by powerful lions gazing out over the countryside, would be a most worthy image of
the queen of Olympus and mistress of the Argive plain.
 POSEIDON

A   lthough the name of the Peloponnese was derived not from Poseidon’s name but
rather from that of a hero close to his heart, the oldest cult traditions of the god are
preserved on this “island of Pelops.” Poseidon was also the focal point of very
old cults and myths in Boeotia, where, as the father of Minyas of Orchomenos, he was the
progenitor of the famed Minyans. The Aegean Sea also brings Poseidon to mind. Its name is
derived from Aigai, his legendary home in the Homeric epics. The Peloponnese, Boeotia, and
the Aegean Sea—what an expansive domain this is for a Greek god, embracing sea, island,
and mainland! We need to stress this. The more usual categorization of Poseidon as merely the
god of the sea is an oversimplification. While it is true that in the Iliad Poseidon himself states
that it fell to him “to dwell forever in the gray salt sea” when the rule of Cronus was appor-
tioned by lot to his three sons, Poseidon does, occasionally, leave the sea, and “the earth is com-
mon to all, as is great Olympus” (15.193). Poseidon speaks these words to Iris, messenger of the
gods, who had been dispatched by Zeus to order the god to leave the Achaeans and either
join the other gods or go back into the sea. Reluctantly, Poseidon obeys. This incident is tell-
ing because it illustrates the position he occupies in Olympus. Zeus is the mightier, not sim-
ply because of primogeniture, which the “father of gods and men” will call upon if necessary,
nor because the best prize, the heavens, came his way in the lottery. Rather, he is stronger be-
cause it is his sons and daughters who populate Olympus and whom he can command as he
wishes (15.197). Poseidon recognizes this. Although he himself is not inferior to Zeus in num-
ber of offspring, Poseidon’s children are not Olympian deities.1 In addition to countless heroes
among his sons, a good number of his children are hybrid creatures like the uncouth Triton
(Hesiod, Theogony 930ff.), fabulous animals like the winged horse Pegasus, offspring of Posei-
don’s liaison with the Gorgon Medusa (278ff.), or giants like the Cyclops Polyphemus, who was
blinded by Odysseus.

69
70 POSEIDON

The most detailed description of Poseidon’s amazing divine form and vast domain is found
at the beginning of book 13 of the Iliad, where one can read of a number of largely unsuccessful
attempts by the god to assist the Achaeans—all terminated by command of his opponent, Zeus,
brought to him by Iris, as noted above (13.10ff.). This section of text contains one of the earliest
descriptions in European literature of a landscape. It is characteristic of Greek thought that the
landscape is seen through the eyes of a god.

The mighty Earth-shaker did not keep a blind watch,

And amazed at war and field of battle he sat
High on the loftiest summit of wooded Samothrace;
From there all of Mount Ida was in view.
Visible too were the city of Priam and the ships of the Greeks.
There, after leaving the brine, he sat down and pitied
The Achaeans overcome by the Trojans,
And strong was his anger for Zeus.
Suddenly he descended from the craggy mountains,
Walking with hasty step, and the vast mountains and the woods
Trembled under the step of the immortal feet of Poseidon as he
Went. Thrice he took a step forward, and with the fourth he reached
His destination, Aigai, where a fabled palace was built for him
In the depths of the sea, glittering in gold and imperishable.
There he harnessed to his chariot two steeds, a span
Fleet of foot, with bronze hooves, and decked with a golden mane.
He himself wrapped his body in gold and grasped the golden
Whip, well made, and so climbed into his chariot,
And drove over the waves. Everywhere from the abyss
Monstrous creatures came and gamboled, as they recognized
Their master. And with joy the sea parted, while the horses
Flew speedily, and below the bronze axle did not become wet.

Research into cult and, above all, into the nature of sagas generally has suggested that in
earlier times Poseidon must have been a much more powerful god than he appears to be in the
Homeric epics. This view, championed by Wilamowitz, E. H. Meyer, Nilsson, and other scholars,2
has now been corroborated by the decipherment of the Mycenaean script. The Linear B tablets
show Poseidon to have been the chief deity in Pylos, where Telemachus came upon Nestor sac-
rificing to the god (Odyssey 3.5ff.).3 Poseidaon, as he is called there, receives richer sacrifices than
other deities, richer even than Zeus and Hera. It was surprising to discover a goddess whose
name links her to Poseidon on the Pylos tablets. She was called po-si-da-e-ja, which is the femi-
nine form of Poseidon’s name. In her we can recognize a goddess corresponding to Amphitrite,4
who in the Homeric epics is sovereign of the sea and in Hesiod’s Theogony is called Poseidon’s
 P O S E I D O N 71

spouse. She was worshipped as Poseidonia on Naxos, from which Poseidon abducted her, it is
said, after seeing her for the first time during the Dance of the Nereids (Apollodorus in a scholion
on Odyssey 3.91). The close relationship of Poseidon with the sea is not, therefore, Homeric in
origin, since it is already attested for the Mycenaean period.


The hypothesis, almost universally accepted today, that Poseidon originally ruled the land and
was subsequently pushed into the sea by Zeus is also in need of revision. Land and sea form an
inseparable whole in the Aegean, itself united by the sea. Ludwig Preller recognized this. Unfor-
tunately, his characterization of the god was all but ignored:

The most prominent attributes of Poseidon’s relationship to the earth and dry land, above all
his twofold character as the shaker as well as the establisher and master builder of earth, have no
other origin than the nexus of ideas flowing from his lordship over the sea. For it was thought
that the earth rested on and was supported by the sea, since it is surrounded in all its inlets and
bays by the sea, and is penetrated by it in all its depths and inmost caverns—a description espe-
cially appropriate for Greek terrain, that of neighboring coastal lands, and the islands of the
Aegean Sea.5

How closely Preller’s view agrees with the Greek conception of the interrelationship of land
and sea is made clear by the number of lakes and salty springs sacred to Poseidon in the interior
of the country, of which the salty pool within the Erechtheum on the Acropolis is the best known
(Pausanias 1.26.5). To honor Poseidon Genethlios, the Argives drowned bridled horses in the
spring of Dine, which they believed welled up out of the sea (Pausanias 8.7.2). Admittedly Preller
interpreted all the Olympian gods as essentially elemental, which is an oversimplification for
most of them. In Poseidon’s case, however, his interpretation is on the mark. This god remained
more closely connected with the elements than the other Olympians. His intrusions into the
spiritual world are rare exceptions. This is probably why Walter F. Otto did not include Poseidon
in his work on the Greek gods.


Preller’s interpretation was ignored because it was believed that philology provided a key to the
god’s original nature. His name was interpreted as a mixture of the Greek word for husband,
Posis, and a hypothetical pre-Greek familiar form of address for Da, the earth mother. Poseidon
would then mean “husband of earth.” As such he is supposed to have originally resided in the
depths of the earth with no connection to the sea. The alleged components of the name, Greek
and pre-Greek, led Fritz Schachermeyer to explain the god’s origin as both Hellenic and Aegean
in his book Poseidon und die Entstehung des griechischen Götterglaubens (Poseidon and the origin
of Greek religion, 1950). The migrating Greek tribes entering the Aegean region would have been
introduced to a great mother goddess with a partner at her side, whom they named Poseidon,
72 POSEIDON

and upon whom they conferred attributes of a god or gods from their earlier homeland. However,
the fact that to Herodotus’ ear the word Poseidon did not sound Greek raises some doubt about
attempts to derive the first part of his name from the Greek language. According to the historian,
the Hellenes adopted the god’s name from the Libyans (2.50). Moreover, in different Greek dialects
the name is subject to considerable variation. In addition to Poseidon and Poseideon, we have
Posidaon, Poteidan, Potedan, Posoidan, Pohoidan, and Posdan. That suggests that, as is the case with
Apollo, we should seriously consider the possibility that the Greeks adopted a non-Greek name
for the god, one that was accommodated by the Greek phonetic system only with great difficulty.
Nilsson was right to observe about earlier etymological attempts that “they cannot contribute
anything to solving the riddle of the nature of the god.”6 The philological argument has lured
researchers completely off-track. After more than a century, we can return to Preller’s view. If we
accept its conclusions, Poseidon is inextricably bound to the landscape of the Aegean, with its
characteristic interpenetration of land and sea. The Greeks could therefore not have taken the
god along with them, either as a personage or a supernatural entity, since none of the terrain from
which they hailed was comparable to the unique Aegean landscape. Poseidon is as intertwined
with the Aegean landscape as any local deity can be with his or her territory. Neither can it be
claimed that the Greeks created him when they migrated into the area, as Schachermeyer pro-
posed. Any such god could have been too strong a rival for their own Zeus. It is much more likely
that they came upon Poseidon as the mighty lord of the Aegean, and Zeus had to work out an
“arrangement” with him. The results of this arrangement are evident in the Iliad.


The original might of the god is much more obvious in the Odyssey. It is the wrath of Poseidon
that keeps Odysseus far from home for such a long time, driving him over the stormy sea. The
hero undertakes his heroic journey to the shades of the underworld in order to learn from the
seer Teiresias how he might appease this angry god (11.121ff.). Teiresias advises him that on his
return home, he should set out for the interior of the country, taking with him an oar, until he
comes upon a people unfamiliar with the sea. He will recognize these people when they misiden-
tify the oar as a paddle used to winnow grain. There he should plant the oar in the earth and
offer beautiful sacrifice to Poseidon (11.127ff.):

When at some point another traveler meets you and says

That you are carrying a winnowing fan on your glistening shoulder,
Then plant in the earth the well-fitted oar.
At the same time bring splendid offerings to Lord Poseidon:
A ram, a bull, and a sow-mounting boar.

As well known as triple sacrifices may be in the history of religion (they correspond to the
Roman suovetaurelia7), the circumstances of this one are unusual. Where sacrifice is made to a
god, the god is thought to be present at that location. If Poseidon can be present in the distant
 P O S E I D O N 73

corners of the interior, he is not merely a god of the sea. More than any other part of the Odyssey,
this puzzling passage points to the interconnectedness of land and sea as integral to the god’s nature.
We can determine just how far back in prehistory Poseidon dates by looking at his sons in the
Odyssey: the Cyclopes. These giants, who know no laws and dwell in caves, were seen by Plato as
representing an unrefined early form of the human race (Laws 3.680b, 682a). “Inspired by Charites
and Muses, Homer has often come upon a kernel of truth.” The Cyclopes possess herds but do not
till the soil, although in Odysseus’ opinion the land would be suitable for it, nor do they know how
to build ships (9.125ff.). The most fearsome among them is Polyphemus, a godless cannibal (9.275ff.):

We Cyclopes care not a whit about Zeus with the aegis,

Nor, for that matter, about the blessed gods, for we
Are much stronger . . .

Polyphemus prays to Poseidon for help simply because the god is his father, who by rights should
make Odysseus pay for blinding him, “and the dark-haired one heard him” (9.535). Because he
is the father of the monstrous Polyphemus, Poseidon occupies a place apart from the Olympians
throughout the entire epic. He is the only god not to pity the suffering Odysseus, even in his deep-
est agony. Poseidon remains continually hostile and harmful to him (1.20). The Odyssey could,
in fact, be called a poem about the anger of Poseidon. The god is characterized by this propensity
to anger outside of the epic as well. A god who conjures up destructive sea storms, earthquakes,
seaquakes, volcanic eruptions, and other catastrophes must be hostile. His angry character is
expressed by the terrible sacrifices many ancient cults carried out in order to appease the forces
of nature. So it is that upon their arrival on Lesbos, the Penthilides, the offspring of Orestes,
drowned a bull and a young girl in the sea as sacrifices to Poseidon and Amphitrite (Plutarch,
Septem Sapientium Convivium 20.163a). We know of similar sacrifices elsewhere, particularly as
part of the cult of the winds.8 When we think of the many earthquakes that afflict the Aegean
even today, we have a vivid and direct sense of the wrath of Poseidon. In cult (fig. 64) the Earth-
shaker is frequently given the epithet Asphalios, “placed on sure foundations,” as for example in
Athens, Sparta, Megalopolis, Lycian Patara, on Laconian Mount Tainaron, the island of Rhodes,
and elsewhere. It is an epithet that euphemistically suggests the contrary. Poseidon shares this
type of “euphemistic epithet” with other dark and hostile deities, such as Hades and the Erinyes.


How did the widely scattered cults of the Earth-shaker come into being? In all probability they
were instituted in response to specific situations in order to avert extreme danger or celebrate
survival. For the Hellenistic period we have the report of Strabo, who, following the philosopher
and scientist Poseidonius, tells us about a volcano that erupted out of the sea between the islands
Thera and Therasia in the year 197–196 B.C.,9 an eruption that created the island of Hiera (1.3.16).
The Rhodians were the first to step onto the new island, where they at once set up a sanctuary
to Poseidon Asphalios. We can assume a similar response to the much earlier volcanic event at
74 POSEIDON

64. Cult sites of Poseidon

as god of earthquakes:
Poseidon Asphalios and
Poseidon Gaiochos.
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.

the same location, the catastrophic eruption of Thera around the middle of the second millen-
nium B.C. Spyridon Marinatos suspects, with good reason, that this enormous natural disaster
worked its destruction as far away as Crete.10 American excavators on the Cycladic island of Ceos
have recently found evidence of tidal waves caused by that famous eruption.11 There must have
been countless foreshocks and aftershocks, felt throughout the entire Aegean, which, together
with the eruption itself, forced people to become aware of Poseidon’s power. In many places there
must have been attempts, independent of each other, to appease the Earth-shaker. We have
evidence of the cult of this god on Linear B tablets from Knossos.12 His name appears there as
e-ne-si-da-o-ne. Convincing attempts have been made to compare this name with an epithet
given to Poseidon in Pindar, Ennosidas, and the similar Homeric epithets Ennosigaios and Ennosi-
chthon. The plethora of Homeric epithets for Poseidon referring to earthquakes reflects the terror
induced by the natural catastrophes of the second millennium, catastrophes in which primordial
Chaos burst over a highly civilized world through the power of an angry god.
From time immemorial the notion of propitiating an angry deity must have been a significant
motivator for the founding of many cults, including the cult of Poseidon. Aeschylus was aware of
this and wrote of such foundations in his trilogies.13 For example, the Oresteia concludes with the
establishment of the cult of the Erinyes, minor deities who, allowing themselves to be appeased,
are transformed into the Eumenides. Similarly, the anger of Demeter, which humans learned
to fear because of the droughts it brought on, led to the establishment of her cult. The theme of
the Homeric Hymn to Demeter is the propitiation of this goddess. In Arcadia, both angry gods,
Poseidon and Demeter, were worshipped together as a pair. This is not surprising in the context of
Arcadia’s rocky landscape, where earthquakes are common and agricultural yields meager. These
hardships are the reason a large part of the Greek tribe that settled there chose to migrate to
Cyprus during the Mycenaean period, a population movement we can prove through philological
 P O S E I D O N 75

evidence. Those remaining behind, the original pre-Greek inhabitants fused with a group of Arca-
dian Greeks, continued even into the Roman period to preserve the most ancient of their cult
practices in their poverty-stricken, backward homeland in the middle of the Peloponnese. In their
celebration of the Mysteries they appeased the angry Demeter as Erinys (Fury)14 or Melaina (the
black one). She possessed characteristics of the Gorgons. Snakes grew on her head in Phigaleia
(Pausanias 8.42). In Arcadia her daughters were fathered not by Zeus, but by Poseidon, whom
Greek myth elsewhere recognizes as the lover of the Gorgon Medusa, who bore him a winged
horse. In Arcadian myth both Poseidon and Demeter also appeared as horses. The god in the form
of the stallion is said to have mounted the goddess transformed into a mare (Pausanias 8.25.5).
Pausanias states that the name of their daughter was revealed only to the initiated but implies
that in Phigaleia and Lycosura she was referred to as Despoina, that is, “Mistress.” In the myster-
ies of Lycosura, Poseidon Hippios, the Poseidon of Horses, was worshipped as her father (8.37.10).


The origins of Poseidon Hippios can be given an approximate date, since horses likely entered
the Aegean for the first time with the Hellenic migrants.15 However, it would be incorrect to draw
from this the conclusion that Poseidon did not antedate this migration, since the horse was
associated not only with him but also with two goddesses who were also longtime inhabitants of
the Aegean—namely, Athena and Hera. In the pre-Mycenaean period in the Aegean, Poseidon
was linked with another powerful animal that had a long history in the area: the bull. It remained
his preferred sacrificial animal. Several of his myths refer to him as lord of the bulls. We are
reminded of the monstrous bull that Poseidon sends against the horses of Hippolytus in response
to Theseus’ curse.16 The animals panic, thereby precipitating Hippolytus’ death. Poseidon was
also closely related to the river gods, who were pictured as bulls in myth and in Archaic iconog-
raphy. The mother of Neleus conceived her son with Poseidon17 when he approached her in the
form of the river god Enipeus (Hesiod frr. 30, 32ff. Merkelbach-West). In general, however, as the
myth of Europa illustrates, actual metamorphosis into the most powerful animal, the bull, was
reserved for the mightiest god, Zeus.
When the horse was first introduced into the Aegean, it had been domesticated for only a
short period of time. For this reason, many extant myths tell of the taming of horses. In this
connection it is characteristic of the wild and unruly Poseidon that he originally had nothing to
do with this civilizing act. He himself could take the form of a horse, but always an untamed
horse. He was indeed the father of the winged horse Pegasus, but it was Athena who showed
Bellerophon how to tame it (Pindar, Olympian 13.63ff.):

Long ago desiring to tame

The son of the snake-haired Gorgon, Pegasus,
He suffered much beside the spring,
Until the maid Pallas brought him the gilded bit.
76 POSEIDON

Subsequently, as Pindar continues, the hero, in gratitude, brings offerings to the powerful Posei-
don Gaiaochos (Holder of Earth) and Athena Hippia. This divine pair was worshipped in many
locations in Greece. The best-known example is Colonus, near Athens, where Poseidon Hippios
and Athena were the patron deities of horses.18 The Oedipus at Colonus of Sophocles kept the
memory of this cult alive. However, when the tragedian makes Poseidon “first (to impose) on
horses the bridle which softens their fierceness” (714f.), he presents a typically Attic version
intended to bestow a certain legitimacy upon the god, enhancing the qualities of the Poseidon
who had been defeated by Athena in the contest over Attica. The same is true for the god’s second
gift to Athens that Sophocles mentions: control over the sea. Poseidon did indeed have control
over the sea, but the construction of the first ship, the Argo, was unanimously attributed in Greek
mythology to the cleverness of Athena.


Poseidon is not the inventor of ships, but he is the progenitor of seafaring peoples, notably the
Phaeacians. Known from the Odyssey, this tribe on the borderline between fairy tale and his-
torical saga possessed magical ships that could find their own way through the seas (8.559).
Poseidon is the ancestor of their royal family (7.56) and the chief deity of their city. His “beautiful
sanctuary” is located at the center of its marketplace (6.226). So it is that Odysseus, persecuted
by Poseidon’s wrath, comes upon worshippers of Poseidon, who escort him safely home. Even the
Phaeacians do not escape the god’s anger. They had been warned that if they helped Odysseus,
a raging Poseidon would overwhelm one of their ships at sea and cover their city with a moun-
tain (8.565ff.). The lord of the sea again shows himself as the dreaded shaker of the earth. After
Odysseus lands safely on Ithaca, thanks to the escort of the Phaeacians, Poseidon intends to make
that old oracle come true (13.149ff.). But following the advice of Zeus, who addresses Poseidon
as “the oldest and best” of the gods, he restrains his anger. He limits himself to changing the ship
that transported Odysseus into a huge rock, which he sets down at the entrance to the harbor
so that, when sighted from the sea, it blocks the city from view. In response to this portentous
gesture, the Phaeacians dedicate twelve specially selected bulls to Poseidon so that he will not
completely cover their city with a mountain (13.181ff.).
Accordingly, even such civilized descendants of Poseidon as the Phaeacians fear their god
when he sides with his primitive sons, the Cyclopes. The Phaeacians had migrated (6.4ff.) to
Scheria in order to escape their earlier unbearable proximity to their cousins. The Cyclopes
and Phaeacians, respectively primitive cave-dwellers and civilized seafarers, embody the two
opposing aspects of Poseidon’s essential nature. The “taming” of the wild, angry god is brought
to the fore in the myth and cult traditions of Athens, especially in the figure of the greatest of
the Attic heroes, Theseus.19 He was, to be sure, Poseidon’s son, but from the civilized side of
the genealogical line, from which Nausithoos, king of the Phaeacians, and ancestors such as
Minyas had also come. En route to Athens from his birthplace, Troezen in the Peloponnese,
traveling over the narrows at Corinth, Theseus defeats an impressive list of powerful brigands
 P O S E I D O N 77

and monsters, including Periphetes, Procrustes, Sinis, Sciron, and Cercyon. Poseidon is the
father of all of them.20 In contrast to his reaction to the Polyphemus episode in the Odyssey, the
god does not become angry with Theseus. He is also Poseidon’s son. In the bright figure of this
Attic hero, the father overcame the ugly, dark side of his own being. Theseus was a relatively
young hero. The unifier of Attica must have stood close to the threshold of the historical period.
A much earlier hero of Athens, Erechtheus, was also related to Poseidon in cult.21 The situation
was similar in many regions and cities of Greece. The first settlers were traced back to Poseidon,
and, as is shown especially in Hesiod’s Ehoiai (Catalogue of Women), the god was from time to
time allowed to contribute to the procreation of successive generations—small wonder for a god
who was and remained omnipresent in the Aegean.
In Pylos many families regarded Poseidon as their ancestor. Nestor’s father, Neleus, was a
son of the god.22 The location of his sacred precinct near the beach, as described in the Odyssey
(3.4ff.), was typical for sanctuaries of gods who were held in high esteem. What was unique in
Pylos, however, was the presence of nine groups of seats, arranged like theatrical seating, for the
participants in the sacrificial meals. (The number nine was also found to be significant in the
Linear B tablets from Pylos.23)

But to Pylos they came, Neleus’ well-founded city.

And on the sandy shore of the sea they performed sacrifices of
Bulls, all-black, to the dark-haired shaker of the earth.
In nine blocks of seats they sat, five hundred in each;
Each block offered nine bulls.

A site comparable to the sanctuary of Poseidon at Pylos was found in the excavation of the
Panionion (fig. 65), the sanctuary of all Ionians north of the Mycale peninsula on the coast of
Asia Minor.24 The sacred precinct, founded during the Ionian migration, dated by the Marmor
Parium to the year 1086/1085, also contained both an altar for Poseidon (fig. 66) and a theater-
like place of assembly (Bouleuterion). In both sanctuaries impressive bull sacrifices were offered
to the god.25 Indeed, in Antiquity it was believed that Mycale had received its name from the
bellowing of sacrificial bulls there, a bellowing also mentioned in the Iliad (20.403ff.):

  . . . He
Breathed out his spirit and bellowed as does the bull
Who is dragged away as sacrifice to the Heliconian lord;
Young men drag it; in them the Shaker of Earth rejoices.

The Heliconian lord is Poseidon Heliconius, as he is called in Mycale (Herodotus 1.148). Already
in Antiquity there was uncertainty about the origin of this epithet.26 Nevertheless, the common
characteristics of the sanctuaries at Pylos and the Panionion can now be explained, since the
78 POSEIDON

65. Map of the settlements

in Ionia and the location
of the Panionion. After
G. Kleiner, P. Hommel, and
W. Müller-Wiener, Panionion
und Melie, JdI Suppl. 23
(Berlin 1967). Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

mythical-historical tradition related the cult of Poseidon at the Panionion to Pylos. The offspring
of Neleus, the Neleids, had fled to Athens and there become the ancestors of well-known Attic
families. These Attic Greeks in turn took part in the migration of Ionians to Asia Minor. They
settled in Miletus and established a sanctuary to Poseidon to the south, in the vicinity of what is
today Cape Monodendri (Strabo 14.1.3). The remains of a monumental Archaic altar, whose stairs
are washed by the sea, was excavated there in the late nineteenth century (figs. 67–68).27 Hampe
gave an accurate historical appraisal of the ancient tradition about the Neleids, asking, in 1950,
“Was the cult of Poseidon, perhaps already taken from Pylos to Athens, taken again from there
to Miletus?”28 Since the Linear B tablets have shown that Poseidon was the major deity of Pylos,
we can now answer this question in the affirmative. And since the colonizers from Athens were,
according to Herodotus, considered to be the most influential among the Ionians (1.146), they
are likely to have had a decisive voice at the founding of the Panionion. One would expect Apollo,
the Ionians’ ancestor, to be the lord of a sanctuary common to all Ionians. The choice of Poseidon
in Apollo’s place can probably best be explained by the influence of the Pylian-Attic Neleids, who
worshipped Poseidon as their ancestor.


 P O S E I D O N 79

66. Remains of the altar

of Poseidon on the hill of
the Panionion.

67. Remains of the altar

of Poseidon at Cape
Monodendri, south of
Miletus.

Since archaeological finds in Pylos, Miletus, and Mycale have shown the core of the saga of the
Neleids to be historical, we may question some of the assumptions about the history of the cult of
Poseidon at Pylos. Did the god who, according to the Linear B tablets, received more sacrifices than
any other god really have only local significance, as Emily Vermeule concluded?29 The theater-
like rows of seats depicted in the Odyssey could seat nine times five hundred—that is, 4,500
people—without a doubt more than the population of the immediate vicinity. Comparison with the
Panionion gives rise to the possibility that Pylos was the capital of a confederacy in which several
municipalities were joined together in a cult of Poseidon. These alliances, called amphictyonies,
were important for Poseidon in other places as well: we will mention only the amphictyonies
80 POSEIDON

68. Altar of Poseidon at

Cape Monodendri.
Reconstruction after
A. von Gerkan, Der
Poseidonaltar bei Kap
Monodendri, Milet 1.4
(Berlin 1915). Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

of Onchestos in Boeotia (Strabo 9.2.33) and Calauria (figs. 69–70), a small island not far from
Troezen in the northeast of the Peloponnese (Strabo 8.6.14). The latter amphictyony involved an
alliance of seven cities from near and far, including Athens and Orchomenos in Boeotia. Since
Orchomenos was a sea power in the time of the Minyans—that is, the second millennium B.C.—
Nilsson concluded that the amphictyony of Calauria was very old.30 Minyan Orchomenos, how-
ever, also had close ties with Pylos, since Nestor’s mother came from there. “Sandy Pylos,” so well
suited for beaching ships, a technique used in ancient Greece to provide safe harbor, probably
owes its significance in the Mycenaean period to an amphictyony for Poseidon.


At the Panionion sanctuary a cave was discovered between the altar of Poseidon and the Bouleu-
terion. According to its excavator, Gerhard Kleiner, another cult place of Poseidon may have been
located in the cave. Many caves were sacred to the god; his cave-temple at Tainaron was well
known (Pausanias 3.25.4). It would nevertheless not be implausible that Apollo shared the cave at
the Panionion with Poseidon. Apollo could also be worshipped in caves (Pausanias 10.32.6), espe-
cially in Asia Minor. The earliest Attic cult site of Apollo was a grotto in the rock of the Acropo-
lis where Ion, Apollo’s son and eponymous hero of the Ionians, had been exposed.31 Apollo and
Poseidon were also connected in myth and cult at other sites. For example, they are said to have
built Troy together (Iliad 7.452). The gods also sit beside each other on the east frieze of the Parthe­
non (fig. 71).32 Apollo turns to Poseidon to engage him in conversation. The figure of Poseidon,
sitting rigidly and looking somewhat depressed, contrasts with the relaxed posture of a quite “Ionic”
Apollo. The latter is probably attempting to cheer up the god after his defeat by Athena in the
contest over Attica. We are also reminded of the dialogue between Poseidon and Apollo in book
21 of the Iliad, in which they are of one mind about the activities of mortal mankind (435ff.).
 69. The island of Calauria, seat
of an amphictyony for Poseidon.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

70. Plan of the Poseidonion on the island of

Calauria. After B. Bergquist, The Archaic
Greek Temenos (Lund 1967). Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

71. Poseidon, Apollo, and

Artemis from the east
frieze of the Parthenon.
Athens, Acropolis
Museum. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
82 POSEIDON

An altar for Poseidon stood in the entrance to the Temple of Apollo at Delphi (Pausanias
10.24.4). This unusual location must date quite far back. In Greek sanctuaries, altars customarily
stood not in the temples but in front of them. In contrast, in the early first millennium B.C., altars
could also be found inside temples.33 The phenomenon at Delphi also occurs on the Acropolis
of Athens, in the entrance hall of the Erechtheum, where again there was an altar for Poseidon
(Pausanias 1.26.5). The Erechtheum was the place where the Athenian cults of the Mycenaean
period were gathered. In the contest over Attica, Poseidon yielded to Athena but remained a
god who was much worshipped there. The beautiful temple at Sounion, built anew in the Clas-
sical period and the only temple of Poseidon still standing (fig. 72), belongs to him. The altar
of Poseidon in Delphi was explained in Antiquity by the tradition that Poseidon had been in
possession of the oracular site before Apollo. He is said to have exchanged it with Apollo for the
cave at Tainaron. Something similar was said of the second great sanctuary of Apollo, on the

72. Temple of Poseidon at Cape Sounion, the southern tip of Attica. Second half of fifth century B.C.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
 P O S E I D O N 83

island of Delos. It too was alleged to have been Poseidon’s until the god traded it with Leto and
Apollo for the island of Calauria, the seat of the amphictyony mentioned above (Pausanias 10.5.6).
From this myth we learn that Apollo, an immigrant from the Orient, had peacefully united with
the old Aegean Poseidon. This corresponds with what we know from other sources about the
intelligent behavior of the priesthood of Apollo. In contrast, other gods vied with Poseidon for
land, as we know well from Pausanias. Athena fought him for Attica and Troezen (1.24.5; 2.30.6);
Hera, for Argos (2.15.5); Helios, for Corinth. In Corinth the primeval Briareus, one of the hun-
dred-handers, was chosen as arbiter. Helios was able to keep Acrocorinth, while Poseidon was
awarded the Isthmus (2.1.6).


American excavators revealed the ground plan of the Temple of Poseidon at the Isthmus of
Corinth (figs. 73–74).34 The temple was founded in the seventh century B.C. Around 460 B.C., a

73. Remains of the

Temple of Poseidon at
the Isthmus of Corinth.
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.

74. Plan of the Classical phase of the Temple

of Poseidon at the Isthmus of Corinth, around
460 B.C. After O. Broneer, “Excavations at
Isthmia: Third Campaign,” Hesperia 27 (1958): 6.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
84 POSEIDON

new temple, similar in style and aesthetic to the Temple of Zeus at Olympia, if somewhat smaller,
was built at the same location. This was the site of the Isthmian games, celebrated in Poseidon’s
honor and only slightly less famous than the Olympic games. Poseidon was also worshipped
elsewhere in Corinth. This is attested by the Archaic painted clay votive pinakes (figs. 75–78),
more than a thousand in number, which were excavated in 1879 southwest of Acrocorinth and
subsequently many of them made their way to the Antikenmuseum in Berlin.35 Once, as Adolf
Furtwängler suggested, they probably hung on trees in a sacred grove. Many of them carry
votive inscriptions for Potedan. They depict the god in a variety of ways. He sits on his throne
or stands dressed in a beautiful Archaic garment and carrying his attribute, the trident, like a
scepter. The trident was not, as scholars once assumed, developed from the oriental depiction of
the thunderbolt. Rather, as Heinrich Bulle has pointed out, it represents a harpoon, an implement

75–78. Pinakes dedicated to Poseidon by Corinthian potters. Sixth century B.C. Berlin, Staatliche
Museen F539 + 630 (75); F486 (76); F368 (77); F494 (78). Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
 P O S E I D O N 85

still used to catch fish today. This very real attribute marks the god first and foremost as the lord
of the sea and of fishing. However, like the double axe, it became a symbolic instrument.36 On
the Acropolis of Athens the god used his trident to call the salt pool into being. The tremors of
earthquakes also come from this attribute, when Poseidon, as Preller put it, “bores his trident
into the ribs of the earth (and) makes the entire edifice shake to its deepest roots.”37
Let us return to the Corinthian votive offerings. Poseidon’s spouse, Amphitrite, frequently
appears either on the reverse of the clay plaques or beside him in a chariot. Poseidon as charioteer
is familiar to us from the Iliad. Homeric gods in general love riding into battle or racing chariots.
It would be quite un-Homeric to picture Poseidon as an equestrian, yet this is how he is fre-
quently depicted on the Corinthian plaques. Greek iconography scarcely knows of any other
Olympian on horseback. Furtwängler pointed to additional examples on Archaic coins from
Poteidaia (see fig. 83).38 Furthermore, Pausanias mentions a sculpted group that stood in front of
the sanctuary of Demeter in the Kerameikos in Athens showing Poseidon on horseback engaged
in battle with a Giant (1.2.4). Recently a beautiful vase, a pelike of the late fifth century B.C. (figs.
79–80), was found in Policoro (ancient Herakleia) near Taranto in Magna Graecia, showing

79. Poseidon as a horseman with his

son Eumolpus, invading Attica. Early
Italiote pelike from Policoro (Herakleia)
near Taranto. Late fifth century B.C.
Policoro, Museo Archeologico
Nazionale della Siritide 35304. Photo:
German Archaeological Institute, Rome.
86 POSEIDON

80. Athena and a companion

driving a three-horse chariot.
The olive tree appears under the
first horse, while above its head a
thunderbolt is barely visible.
Reverse of the pelike in fig. 79.
Late fifth century B.C. Policoro,
Museo Archeologico Nazionale della
Siritide 35304. Photo: German
Archaeological Institute, Rome.

Poseidon—called Posdan in the inscription—armed with trident and seated on horseback,39

while on the other side of the vessel his rival, Athena, is depicted traveling by chariot. It is the
close relationship between Poseidon Hippios and his horse that must have led to this image, so
unusual for an Olympian, of a mounted god.
The small clay plaques from Corinth (see figs. 75–78) were not primarily votive gifts from
equestrians. They were for the most part the gifts of potters, as is apparent from the images
depicted on them. Time and again they show potters gathering clay from clay pits, spinning the
potter’s wheel, and watching over the firing of pots in the kiln. The imposing figure of Poseidon
himself is sometimes placed beside the kiln as though to guarantee the results of the firing.
How are Poseidon and his spouse, who embody the sea, associated with a craft that exists nearly
everywhere else under the patronage of Hephaestus and Athena? The period during which the
votive plaques were produced in the sixth century B.C. is a time when the potters of Corinth,
who had dominated world trade with the quality of their ceramic production in the seventh
century B.C., were now rivaled by the potters of Athens. From the early sixth century on, Attic
 P O S E I D O N 87

pottery workshops were increasingly involved in the export of vases to Etruria. In time they
surpassed their Corinthian colleagues. Did the latter perhaps turn to Poseidon and Amphitrite
because this divine couple had a close and immediate relationship with the sea and its storms—
that is, with the very elements to which potters had to entrust their fragile export? Is the “gracious
gift in return” that was expected from Poseidon, according to the inscriptions,40 a quiet and
safe journey for their pots across the sea to the desired and (for Corinth at that time) already-
threatened export markets of Etruria? That this is the proper question is shown by the fact
that, in addition to scenes showing the potter’s craft, many of the pinakes feature lively seafar-
ing scenes.


Several scholars have tried to identify images of Poseidon predating the Archaic depictions. It
has been proposed that we interpret the heraldic, crest-like composition of a man flanked by two
horses that was employed as a stock motif on Geometric vases from the Argolid as Poseidon
Hippios with his sacred animals.41 However, those opposed to this interpretation point to the
fact that the man is leading the horses by the reins, like an ordinary mortal, and neither towers
above the beasts nor controls them in the manner of gods in other representations. Moreover,
the trident, an attribute also of Poseidon Hippios, is missing. Since this theme does not survive
into the art of the Archaic period, which in general shows such distinguishing characteristics
more clearly, the interpretation of the “master of horses” as Poseidon must remain an open ques-
tion. It is possible to make the general statement that the fondness of pre-Archaic Argive vase
painters for combining horses and fish in the same composition, which is also the case on con-
temporary Boeotian brooches, consciously emphasizes the spheres of influence of the two ancient
Aegean deities worshipped in Argos and Boeotia, namely, Poseidon and Hera (cf. fig. 42).
In the Archaic vase painting of Athens, Poseidon is a beloved deity. On an amphora (fig. 81)
signed by Amasis as potter, he stands in a hieratic pose similar to that of the Corinthian plaques,
here facing Athena.42 It is apparent from her gesture that the goddess is addressing him. Is it pos-
sible that the contest for Attica is depicted here as a duel of words? The two gods seem to be elevated
above every suggestion of conflict. The amphora was made in the time of the Pisistratids. Pisistra-
tus shared the name of Nestor’s son in the Odyssey, considering himself a Neleid and, consequently,
a descendant of Poseidon. The tyrant probably contributed much to the easing of tensions
between the two Attic deities, as he actively exploited the political advantages of religious cults.43
Poseidon, whose stateliness hints at his tendency toward rigidity, and the young, nimble daugh-
ter of Zeus appear on the amphora by Amasis as the patron deities of both Pisistratus and Attica.
An especially beautiful representation of Poseidon is found on a lekythos in Oxford (fig. 82).44
Here the god is traversing the land not on a horse but on a winged sea horse, a hippocamp. He
is simultaneously Hippios and lord of the sea. On a black-figure amphora in Würzburg (fig. 84),
a bull, the animal that belonged to him long before the horse did, serves as the god’s mount.45


 81. Athena and Poseidon. Amphora by
the Amasis Painter. Ca. 530 B.C. Paris,
Cabinet des Médailles 222. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

82. Poseidon riding a hippocamp. Attic

black-figure lekythos. Ca. 490 B.C.
Oxford, Ashmolean Museum
AN1889.1011. Photo: © Ashmolean
Museum, University of Oxford.
 P O S E I D O N 89

83. Poseidon as a rider on a

tetradrachm from Potidaea,
northern Greece. Ca. 520–480
B.C. Private collection. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

84. Poseidon riding a bull.

Attic black-figure amphora.
500–490 B.C. Würzburg, Martin-
von-Wagner-Museum L194. Photo:
Martin-von-Wagner-Museum der
Universität Würzburg.

Poseidon had a special opportunity to prove himself the mighty shaker of the earth in the great
cosmic battles of the gods. While the war with the Giants, the Gigantomachy, is quite frequently
represented in art, we have so far no visual record of the other war, the Titanomachy, the war
with the Titans.46 In contrast, Hesiod’s extended description of this event (Theogony 617–735) has
survived, although another poem, the epic Titanomachia, is no longer extant. The images the
poet introduces to characterize the tumult of the elements—the moaning of the earth, the boil-
ing of the sea—are what we also see in ancient descriptions of volcanic eruptions and earth-
quakes. There may well be some justification here, as there is in the many epithets of Poseidon
referring to earthquakes, for relating this part of the poem to the great natural disasters of the
second millennium B.C. The victory of the gods fighting alongside Zeus could be achieved only
with the help of three monstrous primeval creatures, the hundred-handers, who were close
to Poseidon. It was Poseidon, too, who in the end imprisoned the defeated Titans in Tartarus
(732). In these battles the god developed from an elemental god into a real brother to Zeus. The
90 POSEIDON

weapons he employed against the Giants, trident and rocks, are quite appropriate for the god
of earthquakes. He is said to have hurled a piece of the island of Cos at the giant Polybotes, who
had fled into the sea to avoid Zeus’s lightning bolt, burying him underneath it. According to
ancient tradition this became the rocky island Nisyros. On the Gigantomachy cup by the Brygos
Painter (fig. 85), Hephaestus attacks a Giant with fiery lumps of metal, while Poseidon battles
beside him with his own kind of weapon. He is depicted on the point of smashing the chunk
of island down on Polybotes, who is already wounded by the trident. In the background we see
Hermes, his petasus (sunhat) hanging on his neck, also engaged in battle.
It is not only in the Gigantomachy that we see Poseidon brandishing his trident. This was as
characteristic a gesture for him as hurling the thunderbolt was for Zeus or brandishing a spear
was for Athena Promachos. Like both these deities, Poseidon could also be depicted in a generic
pose, free of a specific context, as he was from the Archaic period onward on the coins of his city
Poseidonia-Paestum (figs. 86–87).47 These probably copy a statue of the god, one that did not
stand in a temple. What can be said of the statues of Zeus the Thunderer and Athena the Warrior
also applies to those of the Trident Hurler: they are suitable only for the open air. The many
open-air cult sites of Poseidon—and Pausanias mentions quite a few—must often have included
a statue of the god brandishing his trident. By a fortunate coincidence a large sculpture of this
sort has been preserved: the bronze god from the sea (figs. 88–90). The ship that was supposed
to take it to Italy long ago sank near Cape Artemisium, in the very same waters in which a dis­
astrous storm broke out over the Persian fleet in 480 B.C. Herodotus (7.192) reports that, on that
occasion, the Greeks believed that Poseidon had saved them. From that time onward they wor-
shipped him as Soter (savior). Herodotus does not say anything about a statue being set up at the
location where the god had destroyed the Persian ships. The conclusion has nevertheless been

85. Poseidon and

Hephaestus fighting
the Giants. Kylix by
the Brygos Painter.
Ca. 490 B.C. Berlin,
Staatliche Museen,
Antikensammlung
F2293. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
 P O S E I D O N 91

86. Poseidon on a stater from

Poseidonia. Ca. 530–510 B.C.
Berlin, Staatliches
Münzkabinett. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

87. Poseidon on a stater of

Dossennos from Poseidonia.
Ca. 350 B.C. The thymiaterion
in front of the god’s statue
implies the use of a cult statue
as a prototype. Paris, Cabinet
des Médailles. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

drawn, and correctly so, that the more than two-meter-tall Artemisium statue was meant to be
set up not far from the site where it was found.48 Dated to around 460 B.C., it is a masterpiece by
an unknown artist that is the most significant image of a deity to have come down to us from
Antiquity in its original form. Scholars have debated about whether it depicts Zeus or Poseidon,
but in his exemplary publication Christos Karusos has argued convincingly that it is the latter.
Important for his interpretation was, among other evidence, the image of a statue-like Poseidon
on an Early Classical amphora in Würzburg (fig. 91).49 The right arm reaching so far back must
have brandished the trident, not the short lightning bolt, in a manner conveyed as truly effortless
and with a grasp that is almost playful. This divine superiority puts its stamp on the god’s entire
physique. In spite of this motion, so bold for a free-standing sculpture, the overall impression is
one of statuesque calm.

With this extended arm the god encircles his domain; he will accomplish his goals easily; in elemen-
tal storms he towers unmoved. The fusion of world-encompassing breadth and concentrated power
in this divine figure, and the blending of its flux of motion with an inherent stability of character,
bring to light the daring boldness of the artist’s conception.50

With these words Ludwig Curtius sketched the contours of the statue from Artemisium. In this
work opposing elements are subjugated and united to form a harmonious whole in a way only
achieved by truly great artists. These contrasts are not restricted to elements of form but also
88–89. Poseidon. Bronze statue from Cape Artemisium. Ca. 460 B.C. Athens, National Archaeological
Museum X15161. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
90. Head of the bronze statue of Poseidon from Cape Artemisium. Ca. 460 B.C. Athens, National
Archaeological Museum X15161. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
94 POSEIDON

91. Poseidon on an Early

Classical Attic amphora.
Ca. 470 B.C. The god
is probably to be thought of
here as a statue. Würzburg,
Martin-von-Wagner-Museum
L502. Photo: Martin-von-
Wagner-Museum der
Universität Würzburg.

characterize the very essence of the god, even permeating his face. This opposition is visible in
the youthfully taut profile, which would have been the primary view of the head, framed by the
fullness of its beautifully wrought hair. If we do look the god full in the face, we are surprised
to discover older features. These express not only the beneficence but also the anger of the Earth-
shaker. The artist has infused the face of Poseidon with youthful elasticity as well as dignified
maturity, expressing both elemental anger and fatherliness. The god completely occupies the
sphere of the natural elements assigned to him from the beginning of time and simultaneously
elevates himself into the realm of spirituality.
 D E ME T E R

The tribe of men and gods is one,

For we both draw breath from one mother.
But a power entirely unique to each clan keeps us apart,
Which for one side amounts to nothing, while for the other
A bronze heaven forever remains as an immovable dwelling place.

With these words at the beginning of his sixth Nemean ode, Pindar gives expression to the ties
that bind gods and men as well as to the differences that keep them apart. Among the Olympian
deities it is Apollo who most clearly embodies the rift between mortals and immortals. It is the
goddess Demeter, more than any other divine being, who focuses our attention on the connec-
tions between the two races, both descended from the same mother. Even in death, the goddess
remains at the side of mankind. Whereas the other Olympians abandon the dying and the dead,
Demeter (along with Hermes, another exception to the rule) looks after them. Indeed, the
deceased could even be called demetreioi, “property of Demeter.” This goddess linked so inti-
mately to mortals displays “motherliness in her very name.” Its first syllable, de- (or da-), seems
not Hellenic but rather a pre-Greek nickname for the earth mother.1
In Greek myth Demeter is a daughter of Cronus and Rhea, and thereby a sister of Zeus. There
are, however, many indications that Demeter’s power was greater prior to the arrival of the Zeus
cult in Hellas. This power is made manifest in a sculpted dyad.2 At Demeter’s side stood her
daughter, called Kore (Maiden) or Despoina (Mistress) by the Greeks. She was usually considered
the daughter of Zeus, but Poseidon was named as her father in Arcadia. This latter version must
certainly be the earlier one, as Poseidon had been in the Aegean longer than Zeus. For Kore,
however, her father does not play a fundamental role. She is above all her mother’s darling. Pairs
of mother and daughter in which the daughter was really the rejuvenated mother were significant

95
96 DEMETER

elsewhere in the religion of the Aegean as well. Rhea and Hera, for example, and Hera and Hebe,
and perhaps also Helen and Hermione, form comparable pairs. Representations of such pairs are
found in Minoan-Mycenaean art. The paintings on the short sides of the Hagia Triada sarcoph-
agus show paired goddesses on a magical chariot.3 In many cults, Demeter and Kore were joined
to form a dual entity with a common name. They could even be called the demeteres. Most fre-
quently, however, they were simply called to theo, the dual goddesses.
From the pre-Hellenic period onward, this daughter of Demeter bore a name that under-
went some remarkable phonological changes. She was Persephone, or, as the Athenians said,
Pherrephatta. The meaning has been tracked down by the Bulgarian scholar Vladimir Georgiev,
who explained it as “piglet-killer.”4 In the cult of the “dual goddesses,” piglets played a significant
role.5 This is especially true of the Thesmophoria, a festival open only to women and celebrated
more widely throughout Hellas than any other festival. According to Nilsson, it dated from “time
immemorial.”6 When looking at Demeter we must take as our point of departure the Thesmo-
phoria and not the later Eleusinian Mysteries. We know about the Thesmophoria in Athens from
the brilliant depiction in one of Aristophanes’ comedies, supplemented by information from ancient
commentaries on the text. This women’s festival was celebrated over the course of three days in
a month that corresponds approximately to our October, the time when the new grain crop is
sown. From subterranean grottos, called megara, women specially selected for the task retrieved
the remains of piglets that had been thrown into the pits alive as part of a festival that took place a
short time before, the Stenia. The putrefied animals were mixed with offerings on the altars of the
Thesmophoroi, the name given to Demeter and Persephone as mistresses of the festival. The new
seed was then added to the mix. This primitive rite ensured the fertility of the fields. The third
day of the festival was called the Kalligeneia. It dealt, as the name indicates, with conception and
auspicious birth. Throughout this part of the festival the women sat on the ground and rested.
Herodotus reports on the origins of the Thesmophoria (2.171): “It was the daughters of
Danaus who brought this festival of Demeter from Egypt to us and taught it to the Pelasgian
women.” In fact, we have additional evidence for this Egyptian link between swine and the grow-
ing of wheat crops. From Herodotus we learn not only that the inhabitants of the Nile delta had
their pigs stamp the seed kernels into the ground, but also that they threshed the ears of grain
with the help of pigs (2.14). Confirmation for the historian’s reports comes from Egyptian murals
with scenes showing these practices.7 To this we may add that, in excavations of prehistoric set-
tlements, traces of both grain cultivation and swine husbandry have been found. These are the
two great achievements of Neolithic mankind.8 The piglet ritual in the Greek seed festival is a
survival of a Stone Age tradition. The rite is certainly older than the Hellenic goddesses Demeter
and Kore. The question may therefore legitimately be raised whether Neolithic figurines of the
“mother goddess” (figs. 92–93) represent precursors of Demeter.9 These statuettes, remarkably
similar in Europe and the Near East, point to related religious concepts that were widespread
over vast regions. The “Giver of Grain” was worshipped in Greece long before the arrival of the
Hellenes and was also known to peoples practicing agriculture outside the Aegean. Herodotus
 D E M E T E R 97

92–93. Neolithic figurine

from Otzaki, Thessaly.
Photo: Thessalien-Archiv,
Universität Heidelberg.

mentions a sanctuary of Demeter among the grain-growing Scythians near the mouth of the
Borysthenes River, known today as the Dnieper (4.53). The respect and adoration accorded to
Demeter and Kore in Sicily are due only in part to the presence of Greek colonists, for, as the
excavations of Piero Orlandini indicate, the native Sicilian component in the cult of Demeter is
not insignificant.10
In the Peloponnese and on the islands of Aegina and Thera, Demeter had a double, Damia.11
She, too, was worshipped chiefly by women. At times another goddess appeared at her side,
Auxesia, who was the equivalent of Kore. Greeks sacrificed to these goddesses according to the
Eleusinian rite (Pausanias 2.30.4). Herodotus mentions the goddesses in his remarks on the pre-
history of the Peloponnese (5.82):

The land at Epidaurus was not producing any crops. To put an end to this calamity, the Epidaurians
posed a question to the oracle at Delphi. The Pythia replied that if they raised a statue to Damia
98 DEMETER

and Auxesia, they would fare better. The Epidaurians asked in addition whether the statues should
be made of bronze or stone. The Pythia wanted neither one nor the other; instead, they should be
hewn from the wood of a cultivated olive tree.

According to Herodotus’ sources, the wood was purchased from Athens in return for tribute.
One day, however, the inhabitants of Aegina, a nearby island, stole the statues. The Athenians
went to Aegina to retrieve them. There they found that the images of Damia and Auxesia had
knelt down, making themselves immovable, “a position they have maintained until the present
day” (5.86).


We are therefore dealing with a pair of goddesses represented as crouching or kneeling. We can
recall at this point that women rested on the ground on the third day of the festival of the Thes-
mophoria and also that Homer has Queen Althaea kneeling on the ground while she petitions
Persephone (Iliad 9.570). In addition, Demeter herself had a sanctuary in Olympia as Demeter
Chamyne (literally “she on the flat earth”: Pausanias 6.21.1). As familiar as kneeling within a
Catholic church may be, it is very rarely encountered in ancient cult. This defines the posture as
a clear identifying characteristic of these two goddesses.
The examples just mentioned give us the key to the meaning of an exquisite group of ivory
figurines12 found in a sanctuary on the acropolis of Mycenae and dating to the fourteenth century
B.C. (figs. 94–95). The goddesses, both of whom are squatting on the ground, are physically close
to each other, as is emphasized by the shared cloak draped across their backs and the positioning
of their arms. The identification of these figures as Demeter and Kore has already been tentatively
suggested. Comparison with the group associated with Mycenae’s neighbor, Epidaurus, described
by Herodotus as kneeling, leads to the same conclusion. The goddesses from Mycenae have a
child between them. It should be remembered that the third day of the Thesmophoria was called
Kalligeneia. In this context, Demeter and Kore bestowed fertility. Furthermore, the Eleusinian
Mysteries featured the announcement by Demeter of the birth of a boy, in all probability Plutus,
who embodied wealth, especially wealth in grain.13 Late Classical art also recognizes Plutus as a
child. Demeter appears in our ivory group represented in “triple” form, as she is in many images
from the Eleusinian circle, some of which were produced as much as a thousand years later than
the Mycenaean work.
In view of the inseparability of the two goddesses in ancient cult, it is surprising that they are
not linked together anywhere in the Homeric epics. For Homer, Demeter is the giver of grain;
Persephone, however, is the queen of the dead. Since the Thesmophoria festival dates back far
beyond the time of Homer, the idea that Demeter and Kore became mother and daughter only
in the post-Homeric period is out of the question. Homer appears rather to have made a con-
scious decision to suppress the close links between the two goddesses. In place of an explanation,
we can point to at least one important representation in which Demeter is also alone. On the east
 D E M E T E R 99

94–95. Demeter, Kore, and Plutus (?). Ivory group from the Acropolis of Mycenae. Fourteenth century
B.C. Athens, National Archaeological Museum N7711. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

frieze of the Parthenon, where the Olympians can be interpreted as grouped with gods to whom
they are closely connected, Demeter sits, brooding, without Kore,14 between Ares and Dionysus
(fig. 96). In this frieze, as was recognized long ago, we have before us the twelve Olympians
who, from the sixth century B.C. onward, were worshipped as a group in the Agora of Athens.
There they had a common altar, identified by Thucydides as having been founded by the younger
Pisistratus (6.54.6). On such an altar, offerings would be made to the Olympian deities—but not
to the queen of Hades, Persephone. The Greeks differentiated very clearly between the offerings
of food to the Olympians and the “holocausts” presented to the chthonic deities under the earth.15
In the case of a food offering, the meat of the butchered animal was enjoyed by mortals while
the gods received the thigh bones wrapped in fat. In the case of chthonic sacrifices, the animals
were slaughtered so that their blood flowed into a sacrificial pit, after which their carcasses were
burned completely, flesh and all. The most vivid description of such a sacrifice is found in the
Odyssey. Circe advises Odysseus to let the blood of a ram and a black sheep flow into a pit at the
entrance to the underworld and then to burn the skinned animals in their entirety. In the mean-
time, he should pray to “strong Hades and to terrible Persephoneia” (10.527ff.). The mistress of
the underworld, Persephone, as recipient of sacrifices of death, had no place in the cult of the
Olympians. The Olympians were immortal; they had no relationship with the realm of the dead.
In pre-Greek cult, on the other hand, the situation must have been very different indeed. In a
religion in which festivals commemorating the birth and death of vegetation deities were central,
100 DEMETER

96. Demeter between Dionysus, on the left, and Ares, on the right. From the east frieze of the
Parthenon. London, British Museum. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

a separation of the two rites would have made no sense. The alternating interpretations of
the painted Hagia Triada sarcophagus, where some scholars see scenes from the cult of the
Olympian deities and others see a cult of the gods of the netherworld, are therefore without
meaning.16 Demeter and her daughter belonged among the vegetation deities and were wor-
shipped with rituals characteristic of both categories. The Hellenic tribes, however, who intro-
duced the large ash altars and associated customs typical of the rites of the Olympians, ruptured
the bond between mother and daughter. Demeter was allowed to receive Olympian sacrifices,
but not Persephone. For that reason, the mother sits alone among the twelve Olympians. It is not
by chance that the earliest mention of the twelve in Greek literature takes the reader to Olympia
and the vicinity of its famous ash altar.17 As described in the Homeric Hymn to Hermes, young
Hermes slaughtered cattle on the Alpheus according to the Olympian rite in order to honor
the twelve (116ff.). Neither Demeter nor Kore shared in the six altars at Olympia upon which
the twelve in pairs received their offerings.18 Admittedly, Demeter did receive high honors at
Olympia. Her priestess was the only married woman who was allowed to be present at the
Olympic games. She observed the contests from the altar of her goddess in the stadium (Pausa-
nias 6.20.9). But there again Demeter had the epithet Chamyne, linking her to the chthonic
realm. She corresponds to Demeter Chthonia in Sparta and to Hermione, for whose cult Pausa-
nias describes an altogether un-Olympian sacrifice (2.35.6f.). In it, four cows are driven, one after
the other, into the temple of Demeter and locked in. Inside the temple wait four old ladies, who
kill the cows with sickles.
 D E M E T E R 101

Demeter Chthonia also received holocausts like Persephone. The sacrifice of piglets during the
Thesmophoria belongs within this same chthonic sphere. However, the use of sickles in the cult of
Chthonia demonstrates that she was, at the same time, being worshipped as giver of grain. In the
pre-Hellenic period Demeter and Kore, as well as other vegetation deities, must have been associ­
ated with the fertility of crops, animals, and mankind as well as with the underworld. With the
arrival of the religion of Zeus, the earthly functions fell to the mother, the underworldly concerns
to the daughter. Since Demeter, as giver of grain, was among the most powerful deities, she was
taken up into the family of gods surrounding Zeus. So it was that in Athens and elsewhere she
was counted among the twelve Olympians. As an Olympian her cult was cut off from that of her
daughter. The far-reaching power of the “dual goddesses,” mighty mistresses of life and death—and
probably the strongest opponents of the new religion of Zeus—was broken by this separation of
mother and daughter. In support of this theory, Homer is our most important witness. The poet,
otherwise so devoted to the interests of the Olympians, pays relatively little attention to Demeter.
The most extensive mention of her in the Iliad occurs in a simile (5.499ff.). It is known that Homeric
similes frequently introduce figures and images from the “unheroic” parallel world into the poems.
Was not that ivory group, which in all probability shows the two goddesses (see figs. 94–95),
found in that stronghold of Archaic culture, the acropolis of Mycenae? They wear the beauti-
ful dress of the prominent ladies of Crete and Mycenae. However, they are not enthroned like
other Mycenaean goddesses; instead, they squat on the ground like the women at the Thesmo-
phoria. The Mycenaean lords surely possessed arable land, and the grain of Demeter formed an
important part of their wealth.19 The Eleusinian concept of Demeter as mother of Plutus, the
personification of wealth in grain, belongs, as Nilsson pointed out, within the sphere of Minoan-
Mycenaean religion.20 Plutus, or a daimon like him, is probably the little boy in the ivory group
from Mycenae. In the Mycenaean period, the kings would transform the agricultural cult of the
Thesmophoroi into something quite different. The changes are significant. What was a festival
open solely to women, involving rituals that the Danaids had taught to Pelasgian women, became
a cult equally accessible to men and women as the festival of Demeter Eleusinia. It was cele-
brated in Eleusis, Boeotia, and in the Peloponnese, as is attested by Pausanias.21 Nilsson explained
the relationship between the Eleusinian cult and the Thesmophoria. Both festivals focused on
Demeter and Kore as a pair, and both involved secret rites. Up to now, too little attention has
been paid to the fact that the priesthoods of Demeter Eleusinia were made up of men only. The
unwritten secrets of the Eleusinian Mysteries were handed down through the generations by
priests—not by priestesses.22 In the Homeric Hymn to Demeter, which describes the founding
of the Eleusinian cult, Demeter imparts the sacred initiation rite to five kings (473ff.). Admittedly,
the festival for women, which was much older, did not fade into oblivion. It did, however, yield
ground, according to Herodotus (2.171), who cites the incursion of Dorians in the latter part of
the second millennium B.C. as a cause. It was probably the case that the more refined cult of
Demeter Eleusinia, celebrated by both men and women, over time became more and more
attractive. What was its origin?
102 DEMETER

Some historians of religion have traced the Mysteries of Eleusis to Egypt or Crete; others
have regarded them as indigenous. George Mylonas, who excavated in Eleusis for many years,
concluded on the basis of archaeological evidence that Egypt and Crete could be removed from
consideration.23 In spite of the pre-Greek finds, the Mysteries were nevertheless not autochthonous
in Eleusis. Since the progenitor of the most prominent clan of priests, the Eumolpids, came from
Thrace, Mylonas assumed that the Mysteries came from that northerly region. This theory is in
need of some slight modification. It is not Thrace, but Boeotia, strongly influenced by Thrace, that
seems to have been most responsible for the important characteristics of the Eleusinian religion.
The oldest sanctuary of Demeter we know of is that of Pyrasos (Iliad 2.695f.). The city lay
in Phthiotis, one of the districts bordering on Boeotia. It was named after grain. The origin of
the Eleusinian Mysteries is to be sought in a landscape rich with crops, not in the relatively poor
bay of Eleusis. The goddesses remained true to their agricultural character. According to the
Hymn to Demeter, their gift to mankind is Plutus, the wealth of grain (489). In the Theogony,
Hesiod calls him the son of Demeter and the hero Iasion.24 Demeter as goddess of agriculture
pervades the Works and Days of the Boeotian poet, for Boeotia was the most important grain-
producing region in prehistoric Hellas. In his still-relevant book about Orchomenos, Müller
explained how this Boeotian city obtained its reputation for wealth. Orchomenos is mentioned
in the Iliad (9.381) as one of the wealthiest cities in the world, second only to Egyptian Thebes.
Müller assumed that the katavrothen mentioned by Homer can be traced back to the Minyans of
Orchomenos. These man-made, canal-like features on the rim of the great plain of Copais facil-
itated the run-off of excess water, thereby preserving the very fertile land from over-inundation.
His theory has been corroborated by archaeological research in that area.25 In addition, in the
course of excavations at Orchomenos, prehistoric remains came to light that were clearly silo
buildings.26 In graves from the Cycladic civilization of the third millennium B.C., such silos
appear to have been reproduced in “model” form in order to ensure sustenance, and therefore an
afterlife for the dead, just as in Egypt. In Eleusis, as well, the storing of grain played an important
role. This was done in the siroi (pits or vessels for storing grain) in the sacred precinct, some of
which were found during excavations.27
The large-scale planning represented by the katavothren and silos on the plain of Copais, so
rich in grain, must be connected to the time of the early kings who controlled large areas of land.
Boeotia is the land of the great mythical master farmers; we can think of the saga of Trophonius
and Agamedes. The expansive “modern” methods of agriculture practiced by those prehistoric
kings must have drastically transformed the rural cult of the goddesses of grain. We have already
recognized the male priesthood as the most significant difference between the Eleusinian cult
and older Demeter worship. Therefore, it is not surprising that, in Boeotia as in Eleusis, Demeter
is associated with kings. Cadmus and his successors inhabited, as Pausanias testifies, the temple
of Demeter Thesmophoros (9.16.5). Euripides’ Phoenician Women invokes Demeter and Kore
together with Cadmus as founders of Thebes (683ff.). Indeed, the Eleusinian Mysteries have been
 D E M E T E R 103

traced back by scholars to the primitive agrarian population of Greece, protecting its most sacred
traditions in the form of a secret cult.28 Yet only the older form, the Thesmophoria, belongs to
those rural peoples. The founding of the mystery cult comes about in the Hymn to Demeter at a
royal court bearing a purely Mycenaean stamp. Furthermore, the holy of holies at Eleusis bore
the name anactoron, “house of the lord.”
Following this line of reasoning, the origin of the cult of Demeter Eleusinia, sustained by
priest-kings, should be sought in the plain of Copais. This was also the original location of Eleu-
sis: according to the story, it sank into the lake of Copais (Pausanias 9.24.2). The prehistoric
system of katavothren must have slowly fallen into decay during the course of the second half
of the second millennium B.C., turning the land into a marshy lake. Many inhabitants were
forced to leave at that time. Led by their kings, they may have transplanted their cult of Demeter
to the Bay of Eleusis. Migrating people often take along names from their former homeland. It
is therefore possible that not only the place name Eleusis but also the river name Cephissus are
of Boeotian origin. The Boeotian Cephissus was a major river that was an important part of the
canalization of the agricultural land of Copais. The Cephissus near Eleusis is a little river with a
relatively insignificant role in the initiation rites.29 Moreover, from the Hymn to Demeter we can
infer that the founding of the Eleusinian rites took place at a location where a temple of Demeter
already existed (297ff.; 473ff.). The Mysteries were therefore added to an older cult of the goddess.
Now, early Eleusis was closely related to neighboring Megara, and, as Friedrich Pfister has shown,
Demeter Thesmophoros was the patron deity in pre-Doric Megara.30 Indeed, according to ancient
tradition, the city obtained its name from the underground caves (megara) into which the piglets
for Demeter were thrown.31 The choice of the bay of Eleusis was certainly advantageous for the
expansion of this new form of the Demeter cult. The Megarid lies between Boeotia and the
Argolid, both agricultural areas in which Demeter was particularly honored. All three regions
are united in the old saga of the Seven against Thebes, who traveled from Argos to Boeotia and
whose graves in the neighborhood of Eleusis would be pointed out to visitors. The graves were
found in the excavations exactly where Pausanias’ description had located them.32
Finally, our theory of a provenance for the Eleusinian cult in the plain of Copais is sup-
ported by Demeter’s emotional state at its founding. She is angry. When the katavothren could
no longer carry enough water away from the land and arability decreased, there can be no doubt
that the inhabitants attributed these events to her anger.33 The parts of the Hymn to Demeter
describing the founding of the Mysteries unequivocally show that the cult was established for an
angry deity. Demeter, grieving for her lost daughter, was taken, unrecognized, into the house of
the Eleusinian king Celeus as a nurse. She anointed his infant son with ambrosia and concealed
him at night in flames in order to make him immortal. Concerned about the child, his mother,
Metaneira, interrupted her. Demeter then revealed herself in her full and fearful divinity, filled
with anger at foolish mankind (256ff.). Shaking with fear, they attempted to appease the angry
goddess through the night. When morning broke, King Celeus called his people together to
104 DEMETER

build her a temple (292ff.). By the power of Demeter, it rose quickly, and she resided within it,
consumed by grief over her daughter. Her wrath toward Zeus and the Olympians was much
deeper than anything she felt toward mankind, as it was the gods who let Hades abduct Kore.
This anger brings consequences that were devastating for all. The grain did not germinate in the
earth, there was no harvest, mankind was threatened with starvation, and the gods no longer
received offerings (305ff.). Only Zeus was able to intervene. In the end he decided that each year
Persephone must remain in the underworld for a period of time, after which she may stay with
her mother for the rest of the year (445ff.). At the Hymn’s conclusion, following her appeasement
by Zeus, Demeter is transformed from an angry deity into the most benevolent of all the gods.34
The most significant theme within the Eleusinian Hymn, accordingly, is the reconciliation
of Demeter. The reconciliation progresses through a number of steps until, with the founding of
the Mysteries, the highest level is reached. The anonymous Homeric poet follows the subject in
all its variations, from the sublime to the ridiculous—all of which reflect actual cult practices.
The ridiculous aspect is found in the first part of the Hymn, when Demeter is amused by the
coarse jests of Iambe, who elsewhere in the Eleusinian tradition is called Baubo (202ff.). Her jests
are intended, as is explicitly stated, to propitiate the angry goddess by drawing from her first a
smile and finally a laugh (204): meidesai gelasai te kai hilaon skein thumon (to smile and laugh
and keep a gracious heart).
In this episode we probably have a key to the meaning of the many grotesque rituals in ancient
cults: the angry deity needed to be cheered up by jokes. Demeter’s smiles were regarded as the
first sign of reconciliation. Perhaps we have here, as well, an explanation of the smile worn by
many Archaic cult statues, even those representing dark, feared deities.35 In any case, we note
that in the Hymn, Demeter’s mood begins to change from the very moment when she laughs,
thanks to Iambe. At this point in the hymn, attention is for the first time drawn to the sacred
rites, the orgai, that she later establishes (205). These represent the ultimate level of her propitia-
tion. This level was not reached in all cults of Demeter. The Haloa, also celebrated in Eleusis, was
a cheerful festival.36 In the Mysteries of Demeter Cabiria at Thebes, the grotesque predominated,
as is shown by the finds from the Cabirion and from the graves of those initiated there.37 On the
other hand, in the Greater Mysteries of Eleusis, the grotesque element was restricted to an epi-
sode at the beginning. For this reason, the Cabiric Mysteries of Thebes remained provincial,
while Eleusis became one of the most venerated Greek cult sites until Late Antiquity.
In the Eleusinian saga of Demeter’s frightful anger, by which all mankind was threatened with
extinction, there seems to be a historical core—namely, the fear of the people who had experi-
enced the decline of their once-rich harvests due to the encroaching waters of Lake Copais. The
traditions of the original Eleusis remained local, hidden beneath the landscape’s fertile mud. Its
inhabitants, who, according to our theory, moved to the bay northwest of Athens to found a
second Eleusis, later became dependent upon Attica. This was the occasion for transforming the
earlier myth to include a relationship with Athens.38


 D E M E T E R 105

Many historians of religion have attempted to hypothesize about the content of the Mysteries of
Eleusis. There is, however, no point in attempting to decipher the sacred acts—the dromena—in
a rational way. During the late summer days, participating in the Great Mysteries meant “expe-
riencing” them, that is, calling up feelings, which by their very nature defy rational analysis. Even
with the help of the Hymn to Demeter and the testimony of the few authors of the Christian era
who did not feel bound to maintain the customary silence, we gain only the vaguest notion of
the Eleusinian rituals. The Christians were, of course, quite eager to demonstrate the ridiculous-
ness of the secret Mysteries. As a result, we get very little factual information from their reports.
Initiation into the Mysteries took place in the Telesterion, a building that was in no way com-
parable to a canonical temple (fig. 97). The Archaic Telesterion, as well as the Classical Teleste-
rion, which survived into the late Roman period, was a rectangular building where the focus was
entirely on its interior space. It enclosed a “forest of columns,” rows of seats, and, in the center,
the anactoron, comparable to a tabernacle, where the most sacred cult equipment was kept.39 The
Telesterion was built, as the careful excavations of the Greek Archaeological Society have revealed,
on top of a Mycenaean temple of the goddess. A version of this venerable building is probably
mentioned in the Hymn to Demeter (297ff.). As we know from a number of ancient authors, dur-
ing the festival the initiates experienced the abduction and return of Persephone. Demeter
searched for her daughter in the dark with torches, for which we have parallels in the hymn (48).
“And when she has been found,” the Christian Lactantius divulges, “the entire ritual terminates
with the offering of congratulations and the swinging of torches.”40 Anyone who has experienced
Easter night in a Greek Orthodox church can perhaps begin to imagine the mood of the initiates
at the end of the festivities. All at once, hundreds of candles blaze into light in the hands of the

97. Plans of the

Telesterion in Eleusis.
Left: ca. 525 B.C.; right:
fifth century B.C. After
J. Travlos, Pictorial
Dictionary of Ancient
Athens (New York 1971)
and E. Noack, Die
baugeschichtliche
Entwicklung des
Heiligtums (Berlin 1927).
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.
106 DEMETER

worshippers upon the announcement, “He is risen.” The nave, up until that point almost dark,
is transformed into a lake of shimmering light. It is significant that, as at Easter, the Eleusinian
Mysteries also involved a collective experience. In addition to the visual element—the lights—the
initiates also received auditory stimulation. Thus, Apollodorus of Athens reports that the hiero-
phant (priest) struck the echeion, a kind of gong, at the moment that Kore called for help.41 The
Hymn records the cry of the girl being abducted by Hades in an unforgettable manner (20ff.).
Only Hecate and Helios heard her. Demeter does not hear her daughter directly, only the echo
of her immortal voice resounding over the mountains and lakes (39f.). This echo would be imi-
tated by a priest with an “echo machine.” The expressions of joy, mentioned by Lactantius as
marking the end of the celebrations, correspond to the blessing at the end of the Hymn (480ff.):

Blessed is whoever of mortals dwelling on earth saw these things.

But whoever, uninitiated, has no share in them does not receive
A similar fate when he perishes beneath the gloomy darkness.

The initiates received the assurance that after their death they would share in a blissful existence
thanks to the goddesses. A fragment from Pindar offers the Eleusinian initiates similar praise (fr.
137 Snell):

Blessed is whoever saw this before entering the earth,

Saw the end of earthly life,
Saw the godly beginning.

The initiates probably experienced the end of Persephone’s life on earth with her abduction
by Hades and the beginning of her life as a goddess with her return. For the Hymn concludes
with the departure of both goddesses for the blessed life with Zeus on Mount Olympus. In art,
the return of Kore is most beautifully depicted on a krater (fig. 98) of approximately 440 B.C.42
Persephone ascends from the depths, from a cleft in the earth. Hermes, the guide, stands at her
side, while Hecate illuminates the way with two torches, ready to escort her to Demeter.
The achievement of that unknown royal priest who set the abduction and return of Perse-
phone at the center of the Eleusinian cycle of myths cannot be admired enough. The fate of the
two goddesses in this myth is so similar to that of mortals. The beloved daughter of Demeter
becomes the prey of Hades. The initiates, mindful that they themselves are destined for death,
are deeply moved during the initiation while experiencing Demeter’s wandering search as de-
scribed in the Hymn. Just as they have participated in their goddesses’ suffering, so in the end they
will share in their joy. The dromenon concluded with the reunion of Demeter and Kore and the
declaration that those who witnessed it would be blessed. What they had seen guaranteed them
a blessed afterlife in the company of the initiated. In the Frogs, Aristophanes describes the throng
of initiates as separated from the other inhabitants of Hades (323ff.). In death, they celebrate a
 D E M E T E R 107

98. Hermes and

Persephone returning
from Hades. Bell-krater
by the Persephone
Painter. Ca. 440 B.C.
New York, Metropolitan
Museum of Art 28.57.23.
Photo: The Metropolitan
Museum of Art; Fletcher
Fund, 1928.

perpetual festival to Demeter. This certainty of immortality was not secured for the initiates
by means of potent magical rites, as earlier scholars—and even Ludwig Deubner—postulated for
Eleusis.43 The certainty lay rather in the mysterious union of the initiates with the fate of their
god, as is characteristic of many mystery religions. During the dromena, which had a powerful
effect on their emotions, those present in the Telesterion identified with the goddesses’ fate, with
their grief and their joy, and also, therefore, with their eternal life.


If one searches for an area of Greece where there was a widespread belief about the afterlife
similar to that at Eleusis, one comes again to Boeotia. It is well known that hero worship there
went much further than in the rest of Hellas and that it had a particular hold on the lower classes
of society. Gravestones and innumerable grave finds testify to this. In no other area did the dead
throughout the centuries receive dedications of so many heroic attributes or images of gods in
quantity. We are reminded of the statues of Artemis and Hera, which are discussed in their
108 DEMETER

respective chapters. Added to these are the masks and busts of Dionysus. This god was closely
associated with Demeter in Boeotia. His presence at Eleusis, much discussed in the scholarly
literature,44 can be explained by the fact that he too came from Boeotia, along with the goddess.
While praising his native city of Thebes (Isthmian 7.3ff.), Pindar calls Dionysus the “cult partner”
(paredros, “one who sits beside”) of Demeter. As finds from many graves have shown, both deities
were represented in Boeotia in bust form.45 This was the form, according to Pausanias, of the most
venerable Boeotian representation of Demeter, that of Demeter Thesmophoros in the Cadmeia
of Thebes (9.16.5). One of the most beautiful of the extant busts of Demeter, an Attic terracotta
of the Early Classical period, portrays the goddess crowned with a tall polos (fig. 99).46 Her fea-
tures are arranged in a pensive, melancholy expression. The style and the type of clay argue in
favor of the view that an Attic artisan created the busts for export to Boeotia, as was the case with
many terracotta objects.
The same bust form is attested for Demeter and Kore in Magna Graecia, both in Agrigentum
(fig. 100)47 and in the sanctuary of Demeter Malophoros near Selinus. The cult practiced there

99. Clay bust of Demeter

Thesmophoros. Attic. Ca. 450 B.C.
Heidelberg, Universität
Antikenmuseum TK82. Photo:
Antikenmuseum der Universität
Heidelberg.
 D E M E T E R 109

100. Clay bust of Demeter

Thesmophoros from Acragas.
Ca. 490 B.C. Agrigento,
Museo Archeologico Regionale.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

hailed from the mother city of the Sicilian colony, Megara, which was close to Eleusis. In the
distant past, Eleusis had belonged to Megara, not to Athens, as the mythical battles between the
citizens of Attica and Eleusis suggest.48 The chief deity of Dorian Megara was Demeter. As is
noted in an inscription of the fifth century B.C., at her side in Selinus stood Kore, with the epithet
Pasikrateia, “she who vanquishes all.”49 The temple, located outside the city, was small and built
without columns (fig. 101), reminiscent of the anactoron in the Eleusinian sanctuary. Demeter
also had simple temples of this sort, their form probably derived from the Mycenaean megaron,
in Agrigentum and elsewhere.
We now return to Boeotia. Not only the figurative art, but also the two great poets from the
area, Hesiod and Pindar, exhibit many characteristics that are familiar to us from Eleusis. Pindar’s
interest in matters eschatological is an established fact. Many of his poems treating this theme
focus on Sicily—the island that in its entirety was sacred to Demeter and her daughter. In Pindar’s
work, Persephone is the mighty dispenser of the fate of the dead (fr. 133 Snell):

From whomsoever, however, Persephone will accept atonement for the grief of old,
Their souls she returns to the sun above in the ninth year.
From them arise the lordly kings,
110 DEMETER

101. Temple of Demeter

Malophoros at Selinus.
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.

Mighty in strength, and great in wisdom.

In the future people will call them sacred heroes.

The archetype of all the heroes favored by Persephone was a Boeotian, the Theban seer Teiresias,50
“almighty Zeus’s towering prophet who speaks the truth” (Pindar, Nemean 1.61f.). The poet of the
Odyssey mentions the prominent position of Teiresias in the house of Hades (10.494f.):

To him, even though dead, Persephone gave a mind

With which to be wise, but the others dart about like shadows.

The verse in which Pindar declares the Eleusinian initiates blessed has already been cited
above. With the same word of praise that occurs in the Hymn to Demeter, olbioi, Hesiod describes
the heroes of the fourth race who fell in the wars at Thebes and Troy. Whereas in Homer they
are all biding their time in Hades, the Boeotian poet assembles them on the Isles of the Blessed
(Works and Days 172f.):

Blessed heroes for whom the grain-given land

Bears teeming fruit, honey-sweet, three times a year.

Demeter and Kore, who bestow the fruits of the field, gave those blessed heroes three times
as much as they gave the living. In Eleusis three was considered a sacred number. Following
ancestral custom, three siroi (grain silos) were, according to an inscription, set up in Eleusis.51
Triptolemus, the Eleusinian hero of agriculture, bears the number three in his name. His sending
forth by Demeter belongs among the great themes of Classical Athenian vase painting (fig. 102).52
Plutus was born to Demeter on a thrice-ploughed field (Theogony 971). The triple harvest of the
 D E M E T E R 111

102. Demeter sending

Triptolemus on his mission.
Volute-krater by the Berlin
Painter. Soon after 480 B.C.
Karlsruhe, Badisches
Landesmuseum 68.101. Photo:
Badisches Landesmuseum
Karlsruhe. Photographer:
Thomas Goldschmidt.

heroes in Hesiod shows that their blessed life depended specifically on their nourishment. In
many cultures’ beliefs about the afterlife, this need for nourishment after death presented serious
challenges. One need only think of Egypt. Besides the water containers to slake the proverbial
thirst of the dead, most ancient burial rites involved offerings of grain. It is therefore easy to
understand why the cereal goddesses were at the same time goddesses of death. They provided
nourishment to the dead and thereby guaranteed them an afterlife. For the same reason, Stone
Age people placed female figurines, which we can recognize as the antecedents of Demeter,
in their graves. The theory that the figurines relate to a birth of the deceased back into the
womb of the Magna Mater (Great Mother)53 reflects contemporary psychology, not prehistoric
ceremonial rites. The “models” of silos in Cycladic graves (fig. 103) may also have to do with
nourishing the dead.54 This is true of the miniature granaries in graves of the Geometric period
as well. Some years ago a grave of a wealthy woman of the ninth century B.C. was excavated in
112 DEMETER

103. Steatite “model”

of a granary from the
island of Melos. Ca. 2000
B.C. Munich,
Antikensammlungen
1983 WAF. Photo:
Staatliche
Antikensammlungen
und Glyptothek
München. Photographer:
Renate Kühling.

Athens; in it five ceramic granaries of this type were set beside each other as part of a complex
vessel (fig. 104).55 This may be regarded as a prototype for the earliest kernoi, which is what we
call unusual cult vessels consisting of several small individual receptacles (Athenaeus 11.476).
These held different kinds of grain and seeds—that is, a panspermia—as was customary in the
chthonic rite. The small containers, usually arranged in a circle, are miniature versions of the
large storage vessels (pithoi) in which farmers in Crete and Messenia and on Cyprus still today
store the fruits of the field.56 By means of the kernoi, the dead received a share of the house’s
stores, and, indeed, symbolically, a multiple share. This is reminiscent of the triple crop in the

104. Model of five

grain silos. From a rich
woman’s grave in the
Athenian Agora. Ninth
century B.C. Athens,
Agora Museum P27646.
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.
 D E M E T E R 113

land of the blessed in Hesiod. That the kernoi were also sacred to Demeter goes without saying.
A large number of them have been found in Eleusis.
The most miraculous “multiplication” is the gift of Demeter herself: the ears of grain with
their multiplicity of kernels springing from a solitary seed. The ears of grain were cut apart in
total silence during the most sacred moment of the celebration of the Mysteries, as reported by
an author of the early Christian period.57 The only ones admitted to the celebration of the epop-
teia (viewing) were those who had participated in the celebrations of the Greater Mysteries at
least once before. In Eleusis the initiations proceeded step by step. While the subject of the
Greater Mysteries, Persephone’s abduction and return, focused sharply on the emotions, the
epopteia was a spiritual experience involving the viewing of a symbol. The double structure of
the initiation corresponds to the double blessing of the initiates at the end of the Hymn to Deme-
ter. The first initiation, quoted above, refers to continued existence after death; the second, which
follows, refers to wealth during life on earth (483ff.):

But when all things had been set in place by the goddess,
They went to Olympus, to an assembly of the other gods.
There, holy and revered, they dwell near Zeus
Who delights in the thunderbolt. Much blessed is he
Whom among men dwelling on earth these goddesses
Eagerly love. Straightaway to his great house they send Plutus,
Who bestows wealth on mortal men.

From the double beatification in the hymn, the conclusion can be drawn that the most prom-
inent part of the Mysteries, the epopteia, also had relevance for life on this earth. Since Plutus
played a role in it, and since the text consciously highlights a group of people whom the god-
desses “eagerly love,” the final step was probably limited to those from the wealthy strata who
could afford substantial donations to the sanctuary of Eleusis. In the Greater Mysteries, on the
other hand, the certainty of a blessed life after death was imparted to people of all strata, poor
and wealthy. This should be stressed, because the Eleusinian religion differs conceptually from
other Greek cult activities, most notably those of the Archaic period. In the minds of the people
of the Archaic period, an individual’s high status and wealth were prerequisites for a happy after-
life. The poor could not be counted among the heroes. In contrast, all people were, according to
Eleusinian doctrine, equal when facing their ultimate fate. This belief had a considerable impact
on the collective experience of the participants in the Greater Mysteries, who came from a vari-
ety of quite different social classes. For this reason it is no accident that whereas the Archaic
religion of the aristocracy did not endure, the much more humane doctrine of Eleusis survived
for millennia. It is also not surprising that the early Christians saw it as a dangerous focal point
of resistance within ancient religion.


114 DEMETER

Eleusinian art is restricted to only a few themes, since the secrets could not be profaned by either
words or images. Accordingly, the abduction of Persephone was rarely depicted in the Archaic
and Classical periods.58 The mission of Triptolemus, however, was a favorite subject. He was the
hero whom the two goddesses dispatched around the world with the gift of ears of grain, a theme
from the highest levels of the Mysteries.59 In the Hymn to Demeter, Triptolemus is one of the
kings to whom the goddess imparts the rites of initiation. He is depicted on black-figure Attic
vases as a bearded man seated on a wheeled cart (fig. 105).60 He holds ears of grain in his hand.
His counterpart on the other side of the vase is frequently Dionysus, the giver of the vine. On
red-figure vases, Triptolemus is portrayed as young, and his divine provenance is occasionally
alluded to by the scepter he holds (see fig. 102). The cart is now winged. This mythical image is

105. Triptolemus (bearded)

on his cart between Demeter
and Kore. In the background
and at right, Hermes and Hades.
Black-figure amphora. Ca. 520
B.C. Würzburg, Martin-von-
Wagner-Museum L197. Photo:
Martin-von-Wagner-Museum
der Universität Würzburg.
 D E M E T E R 115

quite common, while realistic scenes, like the frieze on a band cup showing the transport of two
pithoi full of seed corn on a mule-driven cart (fig. 106), are rare.61 One of the earliest depictions
of Demeter and Kore, from the first millennium B.C., displays the goddesses themselves on such
a farmer’s cart. This is a terracotta group from the end of the seventh century B.C., from Thebes,
made by a Corinthian artisan (fig. 107).62 Demeter and Kore are here depicted in identical fashion
with patterned robes (peploi), long tresses, and, on their heads, the tall headdresses (poloi) iden-
tifying them as goddesses. Only the seat remains from their carriage. The body of the vehicle and
its wheels were probably made of wood.
On an Attic black-figure hydria from approximately 530/520 B.C., Demeter boards an elegant
racing chariot drawn by four horses (fig. 108).63 Her name has been added to the picture, which is
useful; otherwise she would be difficult to recognize, since her attribute, stalks of grain, is absent.
Here Demeter is not the goddess of agriculture but the great goddess of the end of the Eleusinian
hymn. She travels to the house of Zeus, reconciled after she instituted the Mysteries. Hermes, the
guide, and Persephone, returned from Hades, walk in front of the horses. The now-reunited god-
desses approach the Olympians, represented symbolically by the lyre-playing Apollo. Facing him
stands his sister, Artemis, who had a temple at the entrance to the sanctuary of Eleusis.
This Artemis Propylaia was identical to the goddess Hecate on the Acropolis of Athens and
at the gates of other shrines.64 Hecate stands by the mother robbed of her daughter in the Homeric
Hymn (52ff.) and lights the way for Persephone during her return to Eleusis, as on the vase shown
above (see fig. 98).65 She is also the one who announces the birth of Athena to the two Eleusinians
on the east pediment of the Parthenon (fig. 109).66 These two sit close together on low chests, just

106. Seeds being brought

to the fields in pithoi.
Attic black-figure band
cup. Ca. 550 B.C. Paris,
Louvre F77. Photo: ©
RMN-Grand Palais /
Art Resource, NY.
Photographer: Hervé
Lewandowski.
116 DEMETER

107. Demeter and Kore,

originally sitting on a
farmer’s wagon. Terracotta
group from Thebes.
Corinthian. Ca. 620–600 B.C.
London, British Museum
1895.1029.5. Photo: © The
Trustees of the British
Museum / Art Resource, NY.

as they do in the shrine of Eleusis. They do not sit on the cista mystica, which was round, but on
containers with their own, very likely mysterious, contents. Mother and daughter are barely dis-
tinguishable, as is generally true in the art of the fifth century B.C.
Around the same time this group was sculpted in Athens, a very different representation of
the two goddesses was created in Eleusis, the so-called Great Eleusinian Relief (fig. 110).67 This
is often incorrectly interpreted as a votive relief, against which its height alone—2.4 meters—
would seem to testify. Between Demeter and Kore stands a tall, nearly naked boy, his right hand
raised in prayer to the mistress of Eleusis. The latter is talking to him, as her gesture reveals, while
leaning on her scepter. Behind him, Kore-Persephone touches his head with one hand while
holding a long, burning torch in the crook of her other arm. The boy grasps his himation with
his left hand, as if he would like to wrap the cloak around himself. This motion indicates what
took place before he appeared in front of the goddess: the purifying bath of the mystes. The idea
of ritual purity played a central role in the Eleusinian Mysteries. Only those who had purified
 D E M E T E R 117

108. Return of Demeter to

Olympus after her
reconciliation. Attic black-
figure hydria. Ca. 530–520 B.C.
Würzburg, Martin-von-
Wagner-Museum L308. Photo:
Martin-von-Wagner-Museum
der Universität Würzburg.

themselves in the sea or in the lake near Eleusis could take part in the celebrations there. Anoint-
ing typically follows a bath. This is what Persephone is doing to the head of the boy, whose hair
is shown as damp.
What shall we call him? When scholars still thought that the two goddesses were holding
ears of corn in their hands, they saw in him Triptolemus, whom the goddesses sent out, as
shown in numerous vase paintings (see fig. 102).68 What was disturbing about this interpretation
was the lack of the winged cart that accompanies Triptolemus, not only in vase painting, but
also in relief sculpture and terracotta representations (see fig. 114). A further objection lies in the
fact that while Triptolemus often appears very young in Classical art, he is never depicted as a
boy. For this reason Kevin Clinton proposed an interpretation identifying him as Plutus.69 The
latter, the divine personification of wealth, Demeter’s son, does indeed appear as a boy in Eleusin-
ian visual art. Against this interpretation, however, is an objection as grave as that against the
identification as Triptolemus. Just as a winged wagon belongs to the former, to the latter belongs
118 DEMETER

109. Demeter and Kore.

From the east pediment
of the Parthenon.
London, British
Museum. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

a cornucopia. This is nowhere to be seen on the Great Relief. In addition, the boy does not pres-
ent himself to Demeter as a son, but rather, as has already been mentioned, as a ritually purified
mystes.
The relationship between these two figures can be defined with a little more precision.
Demeter is, to be sure, carrying a scepter, but her hairstyle is anything but regal. Whereas Kore
has put up her hair in the usual fashion of Classical hairstyles, her mother’s hair is cut short. Its
wavy strands fall to her neck. This is the type of hairstyle that can be observed on gravestone
reliefs showing older women. On vase paintings and terracotta votives, it belongs to servant girls
and, especially, to wet-nurses.70 In hundreds of representations, Demeter is recognizable by vir-
tue of her long locks. The poet of the Homeric Hymn calls her “beautiful-haired” in the very first
line. The Demeter of the Great Relief, on the contrary, is wearing the hairstyle of a trophós, the
Greek word for wet-nurse. Since age cannot affect an Olympian goddess, the hairstyle must have
been consciously chosen here as a type of costume—a statement about her relationship to the
boy standing in front of her. Demeter is his trophós. The Greek language also had the word threp-
tós, which we cannot directly translate, to designate the ward of a wet-nurse. This is what the
spectators of the Great Relief must have perceived in the boy.
An Eleusinian hero called Threptós is named in an inscription composed not long after the
date of the Great Relief.71 The designation has to do with the myth of Demophon, the young son
of the royal Eleusinian couple, whom Demeter, bereft of her daughter, nurses in the Hymn (224ff.).
110. The Great Eleusinian Relief. Demophon as “hearth boy” between Demeter, in the
role of his nurse, and Persephone. Ca. 430 B.C. Athens, National Archaeological Museum
126. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
120 DEMETER

The poet envisions her with the short hair of a nurse. After she is disturbed in her activity and
appears as a goddess, her body becomes radiant, and her hair grows long (278f.):

Radiance from the skin of the immortal goddess

Spread far and wide
And her blond hair fell and covered
Her shoulders.

The divine nurse had attempted to make immortal the child entrusted to her by burying him
in the flames of the hearth, but his horror-stricken mother thwarted her and brought about the
epiphany of the enraged Demeter. Nicholas Richardson reminds us in this context of the cult
custom of initiating a small boy, offspring of a member of the Eleusinian priestly caste, into the
state hearth as a mystes.72 This “hearth boy” (pais aph’ hestias) served in the great celebrations of
the Mysteries as mediator between the community of believers and the two goddesses. As suc-
cessor to Demophon, this young mystes was a threptós of Demeter—and she is his nurse. Brunilde
Ridgway is the only one who has yet raised the question as to whether the boy in the Great Relief
could be the hearth boy.73 Our observations above make it clear that the initiates must have seen
in him the hearth boy’s mythical forebear: that is, Demophon, son of the Eleusinian king Celeus.
In the inscription cited above, he is probably called Threptós so that he will not be confused with
another mythical Demophon, the son of Theseus.
In the Great Relief we can therefore confidently identify a cult relief produced by the Eleu­
sinian priestly caste, a precursor of the Christian altar panel.74 Since the work was found in the
sanctuary at Eleusis, one might ask whether what we have here is the “cult image” of the Teleste-
rion. Cult statues in Greek temples are usually free-standing sculptures in the round, very unlike
what one sees on Christian altar panels. But the Telesterion of Eleusis was not an ordinary tem-
ple, and the mystery religions were different from other cults. We have described the emotional
experience of a sacred act as characteristic of the Mysteries. That act could be better displayed
through a relief, which tells a story, than with a free-standing sculpture. For this reason in later
mystery religion sanctuaries, depictions on the altars were frequently done in relief. We can think
here of the cult of Mithras. The three dancing Charites on the Acropolis of Athens (see fig. 231)
were also depicted on a relief.75 As Pausanias tells us, they served a function that remained a
secret from the masses (9.35.3). These parallels support the thesis that what we have in the Eleu­
sinian relief is a cult relief from the Telesterion in whose presence so many generations of Greeks
were initiated. It served as a religious monument of the first order, a worthy prototype of the
Christian icon.
 HESTIA

N
o divinity in the Greek pantheon radiated as much warmth as Hestia. She was
 the divine personification of the domestic hearth. She was not just the fire; she
 embodied the entire household revolving around it. She represented the center
for human communities both large and small—communities of families, villages, and cities.
Since such associations flourish only when their members are in harmony, Hestia was the god-
dess who always avoided strife, in contrast to a goddess like Hera. No one understood this bet-
ter than the Athenians. They set up statues of Hestia and Eirene, goddess of peace, next to their
civic hearth inside the Prytaneion in the Agora.1
Along with Zeus-Jupiter, the common roots of Greek and Roman religion are most apparent
in the figures of Hestia-Vesta.2 Characteristic of both is their virginity, which probably derives
from their common element, the pure fire. Though unmarried herself, Hestia was an important
presence at wedding ceremonies. On the evening before a wedding, the bride was led around the
hearth in the groom’s house and showered with figs and nuts.3 The mothers of both partners
carried torches lit at Hestia’s hearth (see fig. 118). In the representations of the Wedding of Peleus
and Thetis that are popular on black-figure vases of late Solonian Athens, Hestia and Demeter
stand near the head of the divine procession visiting the newlywed couple (fig. 111).4 Pairing the
goddesses of grain and the hearth reflects the basic needs of the young married couple. Hestia
not only leads the procession; she is the first to pour a libation of wine at the start of the banquet.
We learn this from the twenty-ninth Homeric Hymn, which is addressed to both Hestia and
Hermes. Hermes is invoked as “divine messenger with golden staff and giver of good,” together
with Hestia (29.8–9). While the link between Hestia and Demeter is immediately obvious, that
between Hestia and Hermes may seem surprising at first. What they share is a role as interme-
diaries. The smoke from the hearth’s altar, where the sacrifices burn, provides, like Hermes, a
means of communication between the realm of mortals and Olympus.5

121
122 HESTIA

111. Demeter and Hestia

The rights holder did not in a wedding procession.
Fragment of a dinos by
grant permission to reproduce this Sophilos from the
image in the digital edition. Athenian Acropolis
(from the same vessel as
the fragment illustrated
in fig. 267). Ca. 580 B.C.
Athens, National
Archaeological Museum
15165/1.587. Photo:
Museum. Photographer:
Kostas Xenikakis.

The goddess of the hearth does not figure in the Homeric epics. This corresponds with her
absence among the divinities recorded in the Linear B tablets. As is obvious to anyone who has
entered an excavated Mycenaean megaron, it was the hearth itself that was sacred (fig. 112).6 In
the center of the main room lay the large, round hearth toward which the ruler’s throne was
oriented. Four columns surround the hearth area, which is roofless to allow the smoke to escape.
We also encounter such a hearth, associated with Zeus, in formulaic oaths in the Odyssey.7 Later,
in the middle of the Classical period, Euripides’ Alcestis, on the day she is to die, withdraws
to her domestic hearth and, invoking as her mistress the Hestia clearly understood as present
there, prays for her children (162–69). This oscillation between the sacred object and the god-
dess who personified it is characteristic of the Greek cult of the hearth throughout Antiquity.
The same was true in Rome. Ovid reports that there was no cult image in the sanctuary of Vesta
in the Roman Forum, where the Vestal Virgins tended the sacred fire.8 This is reflected in the
scarcity of literary descriptions and artistic renditions of Hestia. The hearth as the revered center
of human society reaches back to a time when the Olympian gods had not yet taken physical
form. As Herodotus (2.50) records, the Hellenes adopted Hestia—along with Hera, Themis, the
Charites, and the Nereids—from the Pelasgians, the aboriginal inhabitants of the Aegean.
 H E S T I A 123

112. Reconstruction
of the megaron in
the palace of Pylos,
with a round hearth
and four columns in
the center (P. de
Jong). Thirteenth
century B.C. Photo:
Courtesy of the
Department of
Classics, University
of Cincinnati.

In Hesiod’s Theogony (454), Hestia is the eldest daughter of Cronus and Rhea. Her sisters are
Demeter and Hera. We learn more about Hestia from the Homeric Hymns, especially the Hymn
to Aphrodite (5.21–32). As the poet says, only three inhabitants of Olympus—Athena, Artemis,
and Hestia—could resist the goddess of love. Of Hestia he writes:

Third is a revered maiden not charmed by the deeds of Aphrodite,

Hestia, whom Kronos of crooked counsels begat first
and youngest too, by the will of aegis-bearing Zeus.
Poseidon and Apollo courted this mighty goddess
but she was unwilling and constantly refused.
She touched the head of aegis-bearing Zeus
and swore a great oath, which has been brought to pass,
that she, the illustrious goddess, would remain a virgin forever.
Instead of marriage Zeus the father gave her a fair prize,
and she took the choicest boon and sat in the middle of the house.
In all the temples of the gods she has her share of honor
and for all mortals she is of all the gods the most venerated. (Homeric Hymns 5.21–32, trans.
Apostolos Athanassakis)
124 HESTIA

Hestia’s role as intermediary at sacrifices, mentioned above, is emphasized here, as is her vir-
ginity, her place at the center of the household, and her share in the gods’ temples. The peculiar
notion that Hestia was born as both the first and the last daughter of Cronus is usually explained
as follows: Cronus, having swallowed all his children, coughed up his eldest daughter last.9 This
passage reminds us not to try to measure the Greek gods by human standards. At the same time,
neither does this interpretation exhaust the verses’ meaning. As the twenty-ninth Homeric Hymn
suggests, Hestia was both first and last in another respect. Prayers and libations were directed to
her both at the beginning and at the end of a banquet:

      for without you

there can be no feasts for mortals, if at the beginning
yours is not the first and last libation of honey-sweet wine. (29.4–6, trans. Athanassakis)

The extremes of beginning and end enclose the whole and point toward the center. This reflects
the central importance of the goddess of the hearth for human society. Hestia, who was born first
and last, who is invoked at the beginning of the meal and at the end, thereby reveals herself as a
central figure.
The beginning of the twenty-ninth Homeric Hymn characterizes the goddess in yet another
important way. She plays the same role among the dwellers on Olympus that she does among
mortal men:

Hestia, in the lofty dwellings of all,

both of immortal gods and of men who walk on the earth,
you have attained an eternal abode and the highest honor. (29.1–3, trans. Athanassakis)

Hestia’s central presence on Olympus, as Alan Shapiro has written,10 confirms that the Olym-
pian gods are indeed a family, that they have their home on this mountain peak. Plato, too, in the
epiphany of the gods in the Phaedrus (246e–247) understood Hestia as a guarantor of Olympian
identity:11

Now the great leader in heaven Zeus, driving a winged chariot, goes first arranging all things and
caring for all things. He is followed by an army of gods and spirits, arranged in eleven squadrons;
Hestia alone remains in the house of the gods. Of the rest, those that are included among the twelve
great gods and are accounted leaders are assigned each to his place in the army.

The fourth century B.C., when Plato was writing, was the great age of the cult of the Twelve
Gods.12 Although this falls outside the strict chronological limits of this book, we can look at
this period for the light it sheds on earlier times. In the year of his archonship (522/1 B.C.), the
Pisistratus who was the grandson and namesake of the tyrant founded the Archaic Altar of the
 H E S T I A 125

Twelve Gods in the Athenian Agora, which has been identified, along with its Classical successor,
by the American excavations.13 The laying of a trench for the Piraeus Railway had destroyed most
of the altar, including the offering place itself. The altar was housed within a rectilinear enclosure
wall and is usually reconstructed as having been rectangular as well. We might consider, however,
the possibility that it could have originally been round—like the old Mycenaean hearth (see fig.
112) within which the goddess was present. Pindar, in his dithyramb for the Athenians (fr. 75.3
Snell) called the Altar of the Twelve Gods a fragrant omphalos (navel), envisioning it as a “rounded
center.” Other evidence points in the same direction, including the mid-fourth-century round
monument, found in Athens near the precinct of the Twelve Gods in the Agora, that had a relief
of the Twelve Gods carved on it.14 Not all the gods were preserved; we cannot be certain that
Hestia was among them. Even if she was not shown in person, the form of the monument would
have alluded to her presence at the center of the divine family.
A survey of ancient representations of the Twelve Gods reveals that a large number of them
are round monuments.15 In the archaeological literature they may be referred to as “circular
bases,” “cylinders,” or “puteals” (from the shape of the rounded covers for wells), but all of them
seem to me to represent in some way the ancient hearth, the Greek hestia. There is a Hellenistic
example in Alexandria16 and a classicizing one in Ostia (fig. 113).17 The latter monument, which
Werner Fuchs believes was probably made in Athens, carries the Greek inscription dodekatheon:
“[altar of] the Twelve Gods.” Both monuments include a goddess seated on a rounded object
whose form echoes that of the monument itself. Most scholars have correctly identified her as
Hestia. A comparable round hearth can be found on a votive relief from Mondragone (fig. 114)
whose style suggests Attic work of the mid-fourth century.18 Erwin Bielefeld convincingly iden­
tified the goddess seated on the hearth as Hestia.
On that monument the goddess marks the center not of the Twelve Gods, but rather of the
“holy family of Eleusis.” To her right stands Demeter and, behind her, Hermes the messenger,
before the throne of Zeus. He was the father of Kore, who stands next to Demeter, and whom
Hermes has just led out of the underworld (see fig. 98). The twenty-fourth and twenty-ninth
Homeric Hymns link Hestia with Zeus and Hermes, while Archaic Athenian art links her with
Demeter (see fig. 111). The flanking figures of Triptolemus on the left, in his magical cart, and
Dionysus on the right complete this important piece of evidence for the Attic-Eleusinian cult.
The new interpretation of the Great Eleusinian Relief provided in the chapter on Demeter (see
fig. 110) reinforces this interpretation. The “hearth boy” (pais aph’ hestias) was initiated as a mystes
at the fire of Hestia in the Prytaneion in the Agora. It was therefore the goddess of the hearth
who prepared this boy, the representative of the community of mystai, for his important role in
the state celebration of the Mysteries.
It is surely no accident that our goddess occupies the central position on this votive relief
from Mondragone. The fourth century marked the acme not only of the Twelve Gods but also
of the cult of Hestia. Skopas, one of the great masters of Late Classical art, created a famous
marble seated statue of Hestia, which was later brought to Rome and displayed in the Gardens
 113. The veiled Hestia,
seated on her round
hearth, surrounded by
Hermes and Apollo.
Inscribed “Altar of the
Twelve Gods,” probably
made in Athens in the first
century A.D. Ostia, Museo
Archeologico Ostiense 120.
Photo: Courtesy Hans R.
Goette.

114. Hestia on her round hearth among the “sacred family” of Eleusis. Attic votive relief from
Mondragone. Mid-fourth century B.C. Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale (no inv. no.). Photo:
Courtesy Hans R. Goette.
 H E S T I A 127

of Servilius.19 Pliny the Elder, to whom we owe this knowledge, adds that two “spiral columns”
(campteres), also by Skopas, were set up together with this Vesta, and that another two identical
columns could be found in the collection of Asinius Pollio. The goddess was thus originally sur-
rounded by a baldacchino with four magnificently worked supports (Skopas was also an archi-
tect). We cannot say for certain whether Skopas was also responsible for the type of Hestia seated
on a circular altar, as on the Mondragone relief (see fig. 114) and the Twelve Gods monuments in
Alexandria and Ostia (see fig. 113).
But why, then, is Hestia missing from the finest representation of the Twelve Gods that has
come down to us from Antiquity—the one on the east frieze of the Parthenon? On the one hand,
numerous studies of the Twelve Gods have shown that some substitutions were possible and that
the group sometimes comprised more than twelve.20 But, on the other hand, the Parthenon must
visualize the Attic tradition, and as we have just seen, here Hestia is undoubtedly among the
Twelve Olympian Gods. It seems to me that the passage from the Phaedrus cited above, which
may even have been inspired by the Parthenon frieze, may offer a solution. The gods are visitors
in Athens, while Hestia stays behind to look after their divine home on Mount Olympus. We
might then ask whether the frieze invokes this most important goddess by other means. The
identity of the two female cult attendants in the center of the frieze (fig. 115) is still much debated.21
They have most often been called Arrephoroi, and I myself earlier shared this view. But if that
were the case, they should be children, which their dress and physique show they are not. The fact
that they are shorter than the other figures on the frieze does not prove that they are children (as
is the boy at the right), but could rather allude to their function as assistants, a phenomenon we
see elsewhere in Classical art.22 Alexander Mantis tentatively named these two attendants Kosmo
and Trapezo (or Trapezophoros), and I should now like to make this identification definite.23

115. The central scene of

the east frieze of the
Parthenon. From the
right, two Praxiergidai,
followed by the priestess
of Athena with her
helpers Kosmo and
Trapezo, probably
carrying stools for Ge
and Hestia. London,
British Museum. Photo:
Erich Lessing / Art
Resource, NY.
128 HESTIA

According to the orator Lycurgus, who belonged to the same family as the priestess of Athena,
these two young women “do everything together with the priestess of Athena Polias.”24 Their names,
Trapezophoros and Kosmo(phoros), refer to their roles: carrying paraphernalia for the ritual,
chairs and a box, probably containing incense. This is what the two young women do here. They
also confirm the usual identification of the priestess of Athena Polias, who stands back-to-back
with the priest, himself a member of the clan of the Praxiergidai.25
In an earlier article I tried to interpret the two chairs as allusions to two figures who also took
part in the sacrifice at the Panathenaia: Ge (Mother Earth) and Pandrosos, one of the daughters
of Cecrops.26 But the latter is not a goddess, and the chairs are of the same type as those of
the Twelve Gods on the east frieze (only that of Zeus is different). In light of this, I should now
like to suggest that while the one chair belongs to Ge Kourotrophos (Earth who nurtures the
young), the other belongs to Hestia. These two goddesses were of equal stature. The great think-
ers and poets regarded them as equals in the fifth century, just as would later be the case in Rome
with Terra Mater and Vesta.27 Besides, in Athens Hestia was, like Ge, also known as kourotrophos.28
This may seem surprising for a virgin goddess like Hestia, but it derives from an Athenian ritual,
the Amphidromia (“running-around festival”), in which newborns on their fifth day were car-
ried around the flaming hearth,29 observed by all those involved in the birth. The purpose of
the circular movement was the purification of the infant and the entire household. At the same
time, the newest member was placed in the care of the goddess of the hearth. This is why, for
example, Alcestis, in Euripides’ play (162–69), prays for her children before the hearth. We can
now understand why the two kourotrophic goddesses, Ge and Hestia, are invited to the celebra-
tion of Athena’s birth, their presence hinted at in the two chairs to be placed beside the Twelve
Gods.30 It is, after all, mainly young people, under the protection of Ge and Hestia, who are the
participants in the Panathenaia as seen on the Parthenon frieze.
Let us now take a second look at the Attic circular altar for the Twelve Gods in Ostia (see
fig. 113). Hermes stands behind Hestia, who sits on the hearth-like seat, pulling up the mantle on
her shoulder with her left hand. As noted above, the author of the twenty-ninth Homeric Hymn
had already linked these two deities. Hestia, however, turns not toward the divine messenger
but toward Apollo Kitharoidos, who is paired with Artemis. This reflects an ancient tradition as
well, since Hestia had an altar in the Temple of Apollo at Delphi, where Greek poleis renewed
their source of fire in an annual rite.31 As a pure, and purifying, agent, this sacred hearth fire was
appropriate within a sanctuary of Apollo, the god of purification. A short Homeric Hymn (24),
given here in its entirety, speaks of the link among Hestia, the Delphic god, and Zeus:

Hestia, you who tend the sacred dwelling

of the far-shooting lord, Apollo, at holy Pytho,
from your tresses flowing oil ever drips down.
Come to this house! Come in gentle spirit
with resourceful Zeus and grant grace to my song. (trans. Athanassakis)
 H E S T I A 129

Delphi is also the source of one of our earliest preserved representations of Hestia, the frieze
of the Siphnian Treasury, ca. 525 B.C. (see fig. 210).32 A visitor climbing the Sacred Way toward
the temple saw the Battle of Gods and Giants on its north wall. The eye fell first upon the figure
at the far left, Hephaestus, the divine smith, using his bellows as a flamethrower. The goddess
beside him, swinging a large torch, is identified by inscription as Hestia. It makes perfect sense
that these two gods, linked by fire, are together in the Gigantomachy.
Hestia’s tresses dripping with oil, as the Hymn quoted above describes them, allude to some-
thing rather different: the banquet where libations were poured to her at the beginning and end.
Greek artists did not depict mounds of unguent on banqueters’ heads, as their counterparts in
Egypt did,33 but we can imagine hair dripping with perfumes, especially on festive occasions in
the Archaic period, as the hymn suggests for Hestia. This is how she is depicted on two of the
finest images we have of her, both securely identified by inscription. Both are Attic drinking cups
of the Late Archaic period, vessels that would have been used during banquets. One of these is
Oltos’ huge cup of ca. 520, now in Tarquinia (fig. 116),34 and the other is the so-called Sosias cup
of about two decades later, found in Vulci and now in Berlin (fig. 117).35 On the latter, the gods
have assembled on the occasion of Heracles’ entry into Olympus. On Oltos’ cup, Zeus and Hestia
sit across from one another as the principal figures. The central scene on the Oltos cup is framed,
on the right, by Aphrodite and Ares (see fig. 261) and on the left by Athena, Hermes, and Hebe,
bride of the deified Heracles. Her attributes, apple and flower bud, are also those of Hestia on the
Oltos cup, although Hebe holds both the fragrant flower and branches heavy with many hanging
apples. On the cup by Oltos, Hestia’s long, flowing hair disappears into the mantle drawn up to
the nape of her neck. A snake bracelet entwines her right arm. Zeus, whose proximity to Hestia
characterizes him as the father of the house, reaches out his phiale to be filled with nectar by

116. Zeus with Ganymede

and Hestia. Exterior of
Attic red-figure kylix by
Oltos. Ca. 520 B.C.
Tarquinia, Museo
Nazionale Tarquiniense
RC6848. Photo: Scala /
Ministero per i beni e le
attività culturali / Art
Resource, NY.
130 HESTIA

117. Hestia and Artemis seated

in the center; behind them,
Hermes, Apollo, and Athena
introduce Heracles into
Olympus. At left, leading the
procession, are the Horai.
Exterior of Attic red-figure
kylix signed by Sosias as potter.
Ca. 500 B.C. Berlin, Staatliche
Museen, Antikensammlung
F2278. Photo: bpk Bildagentur /
(Antikensammlung) / Art
Resource, NY. Photographer:
Johannes Laurentius.

Ganymede. The impending reception of Heracles on Olympus, the occasion for this feast, is
heralded by a libation from Zeus to Hestia, as in a banquet on earth. Zeus’s action sanctions the
practice of mortal men.
The Sosias cup shows, as it were, the continuation of the scene (see fig. 117). Now both sides
are filled with the Olympian dwellers as Heracles arrives, accompanied by Athena. He addresses
his father, enthroned with Hera at the far end of the cup, and the words “O, my dear Zeus” ema-
nate from the mouth of the new god. On the reverse, three pairs of divinities—Poseidon and
Amphitrite, Ares and Aphrodite, Dionysus and a goddess36—are all seated facing the chief cou-
ple. The Heracles side has more standing figures, including the three Horae, Athena, and Hermes.
A pair of goddesses sits in their midst. Like the other Olympians, they have spread animal hides
on their stools and hold out phialai. All the gods ask for nectar from the jug of Hebe, who stands
beside Zeus so as to welcome Heracles with the proper libation. Hestia is the rear figure of the
central seated pair, identified by an inscription. Her attire is similar to that on the Oltos cup, with
the addition of a veil. The goddess seated at her left has the inscription Amphitrite, but this sea
goddess is actually located on the other side of the cup, next to her consort, Poseidon. This can
be explained by recognizing that some of the inscriptions are merely exclamations, like that
uttered by Heracles, meant to link the two sides of the cup. The goddess calls out Amphitrite’s
name across the length of the cup, just as Heracles calls out the name of Zeus.
But who is Hestia’s companion? The answer is not easy. She carries an attribute that is unique
for a goddess—it looks like roasting spit with grilled meat on it, perhaps to appease Heracles’
proverbially large appetite. Could she be Artemis, who presided over the killing of animals and
organized communal meals and sacrifices? This function would cause her to be closely associated
 H E S T I A 131

with her fellow hearth goddess, Hestia. The connection of both goddesses with the realm of
Apollo has already been explained for the Twelve Gods altar in Ostia (see fig. 113). The problem
on the Sosias cup is that the name Artemi(s) already appears elsewhere, next to the figure mov-
ing between Heracles and Hermes. This figure’s attributes, a deer and a tortoise-shell lyre, could
suit Artemis, even if the instrument is more typical of her brother, Apollo. What is missing,
however, are female breasts, which are clearly rendered on all the other female figures on this
cup. I would like to propose, therefore, that the name Artemis here is meant once again as an
exclamation,37 called out by Apollo, whose absence from this Olympian company would other-
wise be conspicuous. Ever since Homer, it was the music of Apollo that made Olympus what it
was (Iliad 1.601–3), and the close friendship between Apollo and Hermes, who here looks back
toward him, has been well established since the Homeric Hymn to Hermes (574f.). Furthermore,
Apollo’s right hand, which is hidden by the figure of Hermes, may be imagined as outstretched
in a speaking gesture. He sees his sister sitting by Hestia and calls out her name. She, however,
is caught up in a conversation with Amphitrite and does not hear him (otherwise she would turn
in his direction). This may represent a comic element, employed by the painter to enliven this
gathering of the gods.
Apart from such symposium cups, Hestia’s appearances on Attic vases are usually in the con-
text of a wedding. We have already noted that the goddess of the hearth played a central role in
ceremonies of both marriage and birth. It is, for example, not surprising that Hestia, standing
beside a flaming altar smeared with blood, serves as a destination for a wedding procession (fig.
118).38 As the divine patroness of the new household, she holds a scepter and offers a piece of
fruit to the wedding couple that is approaching her accompanied by the music of the pipes.
The mothers of the bride and the groom, burning torches in hand, run to the goddess’s side from
both directions. In this manner, the painter shows that they are circling the hearth altar, much
as the bridal couple will do later in the ceremony. This frieze, in the white-ground technique,
decorates the lid of a pyxis, which in this context would be a woman’s cosmetic box and a popu-
lar wedding gift.
On a red-figure pyxis in the collection of the University of Mainz (fig. 119), Hestia sits atop
the by-now familiar circular hearth altar at the center of the house, framed by two columns.39
Seen in perspective, these must represent the four supports of the chimney hole in the roof, in
much the same way that Skopas would indicate their presence in his famous statue of Hestia a
century later.40 On the pyxis the goddess holds a typical attribute, a burning torch, and is sur-
rounded by numerous women. The first of those to the right brings a large skyphos, a ceremonial
drinking vessel, from which she will pour a libation to the goddess at the start of the celebration,
as we know from the Homeric Hymn (29.4–6). Two women rush in from the left holding hands.
As at the Amphidromia discussed above, they will run in circles around the altar. It is true that
we have no newborn baby here, but there is a reference to childbirth in the long, freely flowing
hair of the woman, also carrying an offering for Hestia, who follows the figure with the skyphos.
It was customary to loosen the hair, belt, and any constraining garments while a woman was in
 118. Hestia receiving a
bridal couple at the
hearth. She is flanked by
the mothers of the bride
and groom, both holding
torches. Attic white-
ground pyxis. 450–440
B.C. London, British
Museum 1894.0719.1.
Photo: © The Trustees
of the British Museum /
Art Resource, NY.

119. Hestia with torch,

in the center of a house,
receives a libation of
wine. Attic red-figure
pyxis. 440–430 B.C.
Mainz, Universität,
Klassisch-Archäologische
Sammlungen 116. Photo:
Johannes Gutenberg
Universität-Mainz.
 H E S T I A 133

labor.41 This is why mother goddesses like Ge (see fig. 186) and Cybele are often shown with
loose, flowing hair.42 Of course, young girls can also be shown wearing their hair in this same
style, as we can see on the korai from the Athenian Acropolis. When we recall Hestia on the cup
by Oltos (see fig. 116), which is contemporary with the Archaic korai, we may wonder whether
her flowing hair is meant to characterize her as a kourotrophos, here in a specific reference to the
Olympian maiden Hebe. The Athenian custom at the Amphidromia shows just how closely the
goddess of the hearth, despite her own virginity, was associated with the next generation.
If representations of Hestia are fewer than those of the other Olympians, this reflects the
ancient tradition of worshipping the hearth goddess aniconically. Nevertheless, large-scale sculp-
tural images of Hestia do exist, such as the group with Eirene in the Athenian Prytaneion, men-
tioned at the beginning of the chapter, or the marble figure by Skopas, later set up in Rome.43
From Skopas’ native island of Paros came another statue of Hestia, one that the emperor Tiberius
brought back to Rome and set up in the Temple of Concordia.44 Whether this was also a work of
Skopas we do not know, but it is, in any case, not the same as the statue that stood in the Gardens
of Servilius. Inscriptions attest to two Hellenistic bronze statues of Hestia that once stood in the
Prytaneion on Delos.45 One showed her seated on a small, surely circular altar; the other showed
her seated on an omphalos. Recognizing Hestia in Greek and Roman statuary can be difficult.
Apart from the motif of sitting on a round hearth, her attributes can vary considerably. Based
only on the images reproduced here, we see that she can hold an apple branch, scepter, torch, or
phiale, or, indeed, can be depicted without any attributes at all. This reflects in part the idiosyn-
crasies of Greek artists. Full comprehension often emerges only from the peculiarities of the
composition, where, for example, Hestia can be identified by her emphatic centrality, as on the
votive relief from Mondragone (see fig. 114) or the pyxis in Mainz (see fig. 119). All the images
considered here give testimony to the great respect allotted to Hestia by gods and men alike.
 AP O L L O

N
o one embodies the splendor and mystery of the world of the Olympians like the
 god with whom the action of the Iliad begins. Chryses, the priest of Apollo
 slighted by Agamemnon, turns to his god and pleads for vengeance (1.37ff.). The
god grants his request and in anger sends a plague into the Achaeans’ camp (1.44ff.):

He came down from the peaks of Olympus, angry at heart,

On his shoulders a bow and a close-covered quiver.
As he moved angrily the arrows clattered
On his shoulders. So he came like the night.
He sat down then far from the ships, and let fly an arrow.
Terrible was the twang of the silver bow.

The artist who created the bronze original of the Apollo Belvedere (fig. 120), probably the
Attic sculptor Leochares, must have had this image of the god at the beginning of the Iliad in
mind as his model.1 In the left hand of the original we can reconstruct a bow, a silver one.
Although he interpreted the statue otherwise—namely, as depicting Apollo as the victor over
the Pythian dragon—Winckelmann had already recognized that this Apollo is angry, like the
avenger summoned by Chryses:

Emanating from the paramount pinnacle of aloof independence, his noble gaze soars far above
his victory, as if into eternity: disdain plays on his lips, and indignation, drawn in, as it were, with
his breath, swells in his nostrils and spreads up toward his proud brow. However, the serenity which
lies in blissful stillness over that very brow is not disturbed.2

135
136 APOLLO

120. Apollo Belvedere. Roman marble

copy, probably after a Greek bronze
original by Leochares. Ca. 340 B.C.
Vatican, Belvedere 1015. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

Winckelmann was not familiar with the artistically far superior replica of the head, untouched
by restorations, in the Antikenmuseum in Basel (fig. 121).3 In it the characteristics Winckelmann
noted in the Apollo Belvedere are revealed in a more forceful manner. The Apollo Belvedere
shows that the influence of the Homeric versions of the gods extended into the fourth century
B.C. and, indeed, beyond that into the time of the Roman copyists. In the case of Apollo, we are
fortunate to have in our possession artists’ portrayals from the time of Homer, or at least from
the epoch immediately following the era of the composition of the Homeric songs. These images
are among the oldest identifiable Greek representations of the gods.


From the end of the eighth century B.C., the Late Geometric phase in Greek art, we have the head
of a clay statue found in the sanctuary of Apollo at Amyclae, near Sparta (fig. 122).4 The helmeted
head, with its crude, angular forms and large eyes, corresponds to the style of a cult statue there,
 A P O L L O 137

121. “Steinhäuser Head” of Apollo.

Replica of head of Apollo by
Leochares. Cf. fig. 120. Basel,
Antikenmuseum BS205. Photo:
Antikenmuseum Basel und
Sammlung Ludwig.

described by Pausanias (3.19). The head of the statue of Apollo Amyklaios, a statue more than
13 meters tall, was adorned with a helmet. In its hands the figure held a spear and a bow, weapons
that do not really go together. Early cult images did not depict the gods in specific situations.
Rather, the various attributes together expressed the fullness of the divine being and his or her
power. The body of the Apollo of Amyclae, fashioned, according to Pausanias, “without art,”
resembled a pillar. A head, hands, and feet had been added to it. We are here probably dealing
with a statue that had originally been a pillar. This form was typical in the Mycenaean period for
depictions of gods, a form taken over from Minoan Crete. We know of cult statues with pillar
shapes not only for male deities like Apollo, Hermes, and Dionysus but also for goddesses such
as Hera and Artemis.5
Before the Dorian invasion during the late second millennium B.C., Amyclae was the Laco-
nian center of a flourishing Mycenaean culture, attested by the nearby beehive tomb at Vaphio.6
The evolution of the pillar into a shape more like that of a human probably occurred during the
time of the Dorian conquest. At the same time, the Ionian colonizers of Samos similarly added
human features to the ancient flat image of Hera. By the addition of a helmeted head and hands
bearing weapons, the pillar of Amyclae was turned into a martial god conforming to the Dorian
138 APOLLO

122. Terracotta head of Apollo

from Amyclae, near Sparta.
720–700 B.C. Athens, National
Archaeological Museum 4381.
Photo: Foto Marburg / Art
Resource, NY.

conception of the deity. The pre-Dorian Amyklaios, however, was a different sort of deity, as
demonstrated by his close association with Hyacinthus. Hyacinthus was Apollo’s favorite. His
ascension into heaven after his death as a youth was depicted on the altar-shaped base of the
statue of Apollo Amyklaios. Martin Nilsson and Machteld Mellink have convincingly interpreted
him as a pre-Greek vegetation deity.7 Characteristic of this type of deity, of which Zeus Kreta-
genes is another example, are the events of birth and death, which are analogous to the phenom-
ena of the bloom and decay of nature.
The pre-Dorian god of Amyclae, accordingly, was linked to vegetation, a relationship Apollo
had elsewhere: for example, in his various cults at Athens.8 In his important work Die Dorier,9
Müller declared that Apollo was a genuine Hellenic, and originally Dorian, deity. This cannot
be maintained today. Other scholars regard Apollo as an Ionian deity, since Ion, the progenitor
of the Ionians, was reputed to be his son,10 and well-known cult sites of Apollo were located on
 A P O L L O 139

the Ionian coast of Asia Minor. But ancient tradition and the finds of the German excavations at
Miletus combine to contradict this hypothesis as well. Pausanias reports (7.2.6) that the Milesian
oracle of Apollo was already in existence when the Ionians colonized Miletus. From Strabo
(14.1.6) and other sources we know that Miletus was originally founded from Crete. Moreover,
finds from the Minoan period antedating the Doric-Ionic migration have come to light in the
excavations at Miletus,11 thus lending support to the ancient reports of the founding of the Mile-
sian cult of Apollo by Cretans. Inhabitants of this island are said to have also established the
nearby oracle of Apollo at Colophon (Pausanias 7.3.1).


Pre-Greek Crete therefore contributed important characteristics to the later Greek conceptual-
ization of Apollo. The Minoan origins of Apollo of Amyclae have already been mentioned. The
oracles of Miletus and Colophon prove that the Apollo of Crete was already a prophetic deity.
Moreover, the priests of the most famous oracle of Apollo in the ancient world, the oracle at
Delphi, hailed from Crete. In the Homeric Hymn to Apollo, the god makes Cretan sailors from
Knossos into his Delphic priests (475ff.). Ritual purification and absolution were closely con-
nected with the dispensation of oracles. That these rites of cleansing were also enacted on Crete
is evident from the tale of the Cretan priest Karmanor. After killing the Pythian dragon, Apollo
himself traveled to Karmanor to receive absolution (Pausanias 2.7.7; 10.7.2). We must then come
to terms with the fact that this god, who for many is the epitome of the Greek spirit, was neither
Dorian nor Ionian, nor, for that matter, even Greek. In 1903 Wilamowitz had already taken a
step in this direction. He interpreted Apollo as a Near Eastern deity hailing from Lycia. This
provenance would explain why the god sides with the Trojans in the Iliad. Although Wilamowitz
subsequently distanced himself from this interpretation, his earlier opinion exerted influence
long thereafter.12 In truth, the god’s anger against the Achaeans is set in motion from the very be-
ginning of the Iliad. Yet the deeper, “Homeric” basis for Apollo’s animosity toward the Achaeans
seems to lie in the figure of Achilles. A demigod himself, he cannot fall at the hands of a mere
mortal. He needs a divine opponent as his match: the most brilliant hero pitted against the most
brilliant god. Death does not overtake Achilles before the Iliad ends, but prophecies that Apollo
will someday cause Achilles to fall are frequent (22.359f.).13 From its beginning in the proemium,
the tension between Achilles and Apollo pervades the entire epic. It may well be rooted in cult,
especially since Neoptolemus, Achilles’ son, would later also be killed by the priests of Apollo
and buried in Delphi. Homer, like the tragedians of later date, made the realities of cult serve
poetic ends.
At the beginning of book 22 of the Iliad, the two opponents are engaged in conversation.
Achilles has been chasing after Apollo, who, disguised as a Trojan, is leading him astray. At this
point the god accosts Achilles: “Why do you, son of Thetis, pursue me with your swift feet—a
mortal chasing an immortal god?” As he does frequently, Apollo points here to the line of demar-
cation between gods and men. No other deity emphasizes so much the distance between the two
140 APOLLO

categories. So spoke Delphic Apollo to those who approached his sanctuary: “Know thyself ”—
that is, know your limitations as a human being relative to the divine (Plato, Charmides 164d–e).
Addressed to Achilles, who, after all, is the son of a goddess, this emphasis on distance is espe-
cially harsh. Achilles answers angrily, yet not without dignity, “You have deceived me, most
pernicious of all the gods, and you did so with impunity, for you need fear no vengeance. Truly,
I would avenge myself on you, if I had the power to do it.”
The phrase “most pernicious of all the gods” (theon oloötate panton) echoes the meaning that
speakers of ancient Greek could detect in the god’s very name. The prophetess Cassandra also
addresses him (Aeschylus, Agamemnon 1080) as “Apollo, my destroyer” (apollon emos). Her ill-
fated gift of prophecy originated with this god. In a scene on an amphora of the Classical period
(fig. 123), Cassandra is depicted embracing the statue of her god in supplication.14 Ajax lays hands

123. Cassandra seeks refuge

at the cult statue of Apollo.
From an Attic red-figure
amphora. Ca. 440 B.C.
London, British Museum
E336. Photo: © The Trustees
of the British Museum /
Art Resource, NY.
 A P O L L O 141

on the prophetess despite this gesture. The statue on the vase is a typical Archaic depiction of
Apollo, a nude kouros rendered in the pose that was canonical for standing male figures (includ-
ing not only statues of gods, but also grave markers and dedicatory statues) since the seventh
century B.C. Even before this type had been developed in the Subgeometric phase of the early
seventh century B.C., a bronze statue found in Thebes (figs. 124–125)15 had been cast; accord-
ing to the inscription on the thighs, it was dedicated as a tithe by a certain Mantiklos to the
“Far-shooter with the silver bow.” The lower legs have not been preserved. Taking our cue from
the excessively elongated neck, we should envision them as being quite long as well. His left hand
may be reconstructed holding a silver bow, a reference to Homer’s epithet. The eyes, whose
cavities are now empty, probably originally also shone with silver. The triangular head was prob-
ably covered with a silver helmet. The neck is as long as it is in order to accentuate the head as
the spiritual part of the body. The fullness of the hair, so characteristic of Apollo, is best appreci-
ated when viewed from the rear. A belt encircles the small torso, which is still entirely Geometric
in style.

124–125. Bronze statuette of Apollo with a dedicatory inscription of Mantiklos from Thebes. Early
seventh century B.C. Boston, Museum of Fine Arts 03.997. Photo: © Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.
126. Apollo between Leto and Artemis. Sphyrelata statuettes from Dreros. Ca. 640 B.C. Heraklion,
Archaeological Museum 246. Photo: Marie Mauzy / Art Resource, NY.
 A P O L L O 143

In contrast to this solid-cast statue, the sizable bronze statuette of Apollo (fig. 126) that came
to light during the excavation of the Temple of Apollo at Dreros on Crete was manufactured by
a different process.16 It is made of hammered bronze sheets that were either hollow or mounted
on wood. This sphyrelaton technique is known from many early cult statues. We can envision the
statue from Amyclae, mentioned earlier, as having been similarly constructed of wood sheathed
with bronze, except that in this case the statue was colossal in size. This venerable technique lives
on even today in the Madonnas of the Middle Ages and in Greek icons sheathed in foil. The long
hair of the Apollo from Dreros is bound, falling down onto his back. The head is helmeted. Both
hands would have carried weaponry, probably the same weapons as those of Apollo of Amyclae,
given that the Dreros statuette dates from the third quarter of the seventh century B.C., a time
in which Crete was to a large extent colonized by Dorians. Together with the 80-centimeter-
high statue of Apollo, two female statuettes half as tall were found on the altar inside the temple.
They have been convincingly interpreted as Leto and Artemis, an interpretation all the more
likely given that the three deities are named on an inscription found in the temple. Apollo appears
frequently with his mother and sister, both in Homer (cf. Iliad 5.447f.) and in Greek art. The
group under discussion is the earliest preserved securely identified depiction of the Apollonian
triad (see, however, n. 4). The god’s relative importance is naively indicated by the size differ-
ences. One can detect stylistically, apart from the Greek influences, a native “Eteocretan” com-
ponent, especially in the treatment given the hair on the back, and in the suppleness of the naked
body. As in the character of the god himself, pre-Greek Cretan characteristics can also be found
in this representation.
These characteristics were brought to light with particular clarity in the post-Homeric era,
the age of lyric poetry. They are present, for example, in a hymn in which Alcaeus sang of the
god’s arrival in Delphi.17 According to Greek belief, Apollo spent the winter with the Hyperbor­
eans, then in the spring returned to Delphi and Delos, his special places in the Greek motherland.
He returned with the arrival of vegetation. We see a representation of just such an entry of Apollo
into his Delian sanctuary on a vase found on Melos (fig. 127) and painted in the third quarter of
the seventh century B.C. on one of the Cycladic islands near Delos.18 He steers, in a fantastical
manner, a wagon pulled by four winged horses: the horses’ reins are wound around the kithara
the god holds in his hands. This is the earliest indisputable depiction of Apollo Kitharoidos in
Greek art. The two ladies behind him are to be interpreted as the two Hyperborean maidens,
whose graves in the sanctuary of Artemis on Delos were regarded as sacred. With a stag in her
hand, Artemis herself stands before the wagon to welcome her brother. On her back she carries
a bow and quiver, attributes that she shares with him in Homer as well. From the perspective
of cult history, she was the older deity in Delos. The earliest cults are linked with her temple in
more than just the textual tradition. Excavations have provided corroboration, bringing to light
the earliest finds on the island in the form of precious Mycenaean ivory carvings from the site
of her temple.19


144 APOLLO

127. Arrival of Apollo in

Delos. Main scene of a
Cycladic krater found
on the island of Melos.
Ca. 630 B.C. Athens,
National Archaeological
Museum 3961. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

So far we have considered only small representations of the god. The 13-meter-high statue of
Apollo of Amyclae is no longer extant. Even today, however, fragments of a monumental statue
of Apollo dating to around 600 B.C. lie on the island of the god’s birth, Delos.20 Part of the upper
torso survives, with the long locks so typical of the god (fig. 128), as does part of the hip area,
which, like that part of the Apollo of Mantiklos, was girded with a metal belt. The base of this
over-life-size statue (fig. 129) has been preserved, with an inscription proudly claiming that it is
made of the same stone as the statue. That stone is Naxian marble. The Naxians set up this colos-
sus as well as a marble hall beside it. Devout worshippers of Apollo, they controlled Delos in
the Archaic period. They exhibited their devotion in Delphi as well, where they erected the
most monumental Archaic votive offering preserved there, a sphinx crouching on a high pillar
(fig. 130).21 This hybrid daimon was an attribute of other major deities who possessed power over
life and death. Roland Hampe has shown that we should equate the early Greek sphinxes with
the Keres, who appear in Homer and in epic poetry elsewhere as daimones of death snatching
up the fallen.22 For mankind, Apollo was also lord of life and death. But the Naxians may have
chosen the sphinx as a votive gift for him for different reasons. The ancient Sibyls, the priestesses
of Apollo, of whom the Pythia was the most important, and among whom we can also count
Cassandra, had this mythical creature as their attribute. At the same time, the sphinx had acquired
a repu­tation, as we know from Theban myth, for making riddling, oracular statements. It is
significant that the Naxians dedicated to the god of Delphi precisely this creature, which, more
than any other in Greek art, is shrouded in the enigma of death.
When the Naxians controlled Delos, they dedicated other daemonic creatures as well, such as
the well-known crouching lions with gaping jaws that long ago flanked the processional street
(fig. 131).23 Herbert Cahn proved in a pioneering essay that, as sacred animal of the oriental sun
 128. Fragments of the colossal
statue of Apollo erected by the
Naxians on Delos. Upper body.
Ca. 600 B.C. Delos. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

129. Base of the Naxian Apollo with the inscription: “From the same block am I, statue and base.”
Ca. 600 B.C. Delos. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
146 APOLLO

130. The Naxian sphinx in the sanctuary

of Apollo in Delphi. Ca. 550 B.C.
Delphi, Archaeological Museum 380 +
1050. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

god, the lion would become an attribute of Apollo.24 In addition to his pre-Greek, Cretan aspects,
already familiar to us from several examples, we now catch a glimpse, on Delos’ Lion Terrace,
of the oriental origin of this multifaceted god. Lions were also affiliated with his temples on
the coast of Asia Minor, whereas, apart from Delphi, they were rare in Apollo’s sanctuaries on the
Greek mainland. It is therefore possible to verify statistically, as it were, their migration from the
east. The Archaic limestone statuette of a lion-taming Apollo (fig. 132) from his sanctuary in
Naucratis, the Greek trading post in the Nile delta, was fashioned, on the evidence of its style,
in the area in which it was found.25 On the other hand, an ivory statue with the same motif found
in Delphi (fig. 133) is of eastern origin.26
The Greeks did not simply equate Apollo with the sun. They were reluctant to identify the
twelve great Olympian deities unilaterally with the elements. Moreover, they had Helios, their
own sun god. Yet the sun belonged, as Otto has shown, to the fundamental domain of the Greek
131. The Lion Terrace in Delos. Second half of sixth century B.C. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

132. Apollo with lion. Limestone

statuette from the sanctuary of
Apollo Milesios at Naucratis in the
Nile delta. Ca. 550 B.C. London,
British Museum B448. Photo:
© The Trustees of the British
Museum / Art Resource, NY.
148 APOLLO

133. Apollo with lion. Near Eastern

ivory statuette from Delphi. Seventh
century B.C. Delphi, Archaeological
Museum 9912. Photo: Nimatallah /
Art Resource, NY.

Apollo—not elementally but rather in a spiritual sense.27 Apollo shared “purity” as a common
characteristic with the light of the heavens. His name Phoebus has been interpreted as “pure” and
“holy.” With no other deity, not even Pallas Athena, was an epithet or “nickname” used as the
god’s proper name to such an extent. Frequently Apollo is simply called Phoebus by Homer, as
well as other poets. It may well be that the double name Phoebus Apollo was chosen because the
god’s complex nature could not be summed up by a single name. While Apollo, to the Greeks,
expressed his destructive power, his epithet Phoebus signaled his radiant purity. The double name
should, therefore, provide a warning against attempts to base the god’s personality on any single
aspect of his being. With respect to the etymology of the second part of his name, Walter Burkert
has suggested the Doric word for national assemblies and festive gatherings: apellai.28 Since the
god was called Apellon in the regions where Doric was spoken, and since he had especially strong
ties with young men who were, for the most part, the ones involved in setting up these gatherings,
 A P O L L O 149

this derivation may be correct. However, it would be premature to conclude that the god was not
known in pre-Dorian, Bronze Age Greece, since Apollo, like Dionysus, had festivals with similar
celebrations in both Attica and Ionia in Asia Minor.29 These must date back to the time before
the Doric-Ionian migration—that is to say, to the Mycenaean period. The god later called Apollo
may have been addressed with the name Paiaon (god of healing), which appears in Linear B.30 In
addition, in place of Apollo, Helios is also referred to in ancient sources as the god of Apollo’s
Attic-Ionian festivals. The possibility that the two gods were identical in the second millennium
B.C. must not be ruled out, all the more because Apollo exhibits strong similarities to other sun
gods, especially the Babylonian Shamash:31

Shamash, Lord of Heaven and of Earth, you are Builder

Of City and Home.
You have taken in hand the task of determining fate and
Delineating boundaries.
The fate of life you have determined.
The boundaries of life you have delineated.

In myth, Apollo, like Shamash, is a master builder and founder of cities. He himself lays the
foundations of his temple at Delphi “with broad and exceedingly lengthy stones,” according to
the Homeric Hymn to Apollo (294f.; cf. 247f.). In the Iliad (7.452f.), Homer alludes to the construc-
tion of the walls of Troy by Apollo and Poseidon. It is probably no accident that the Skaian Gate,
the main gate of Troy, is where Achilles is killed with help from Apollo. The Babylonians believed
that the temple of Shamash was situated at the center of the world, just as the Greeks held that the
temple at Delphi with the omphalos, the “navel” stone, was located at the midpoint of the world.
The Babylonian god was revered as a stern judge who, like Apollo the avenger, passed judgment
and punished according to strict rules. On the famous stele of Hammurabi in the Louvre, Shamash
sits enthroned as lawgiver before the king (fig. 134). The Greek states also derived their consti­
tutions through Apollo. For example, Lycurgus, the lawgiver of Sparta, asked Delphic Apollo for
advice (Plutarch, Lycurgus 5). The same god provided the names of the ten Attic tribes in the
constitution of Cleisthenes (Aristotle, Constitution of the Athenians 21). In addition, his oracle
was again and again consulted when a colony was founded.32 Moreover, Shamash was, like Apollo,
god of the interpreters of oracles and dreams. Wherever Shamash appears, he exudes an air of
triumph. Such is also the case with Apollo. Concerning the impression he makes upon arrival,
Otto aptly stated, “It is simply inconceivable that Apollo, when making an appearance, could fail
to display his superiority.” Hence when the god enters Olympus at the beginning of the Homeric
Hymn to Apollo, all the gods jump from their seats, a greeting otherwise accorded only to Zeus
(Iliad 1.533f.). One is reminded of adoration scenes of oriental gods or rulers. Indeed, in Babylon
Shamash was closely linked to the king, who was regarded as his son or representative. Likewise,
Apollo of Delphi had a special relationship with the kings of the east; the Persian-friendly oracles
150 APOLLO

134. Hammurabi, king of Babylon,

worshipping the sun god,
Shamash. Top of the stele with
the law code of Hammurabi. Ca.
1930–1888 B.C. Paris, Louvre Sb8.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

of Apollo are well known. In the Archaic period, Near Eastern kings, such as Croesus and Alyattes,
consulted the Pythian god and bestowed on him at Delphi the most beautiful votive offerings.
Let me mention a final parallel between the Babylonian god and the Greek god. In Mesopo-
tamia a monumental gate, the gates of heaven through which the sun entered, played a role in
the epiphany of Shamash. Akkadian cylinder seals (fig. 135) of the mid-third millennium B.C.
show two divine servants opening the gates for the god.33 He strides forward, two mountains at
his feet. Shamash’s role as god of the gate of every house is therefore a distant and faint reflection
of his cosmic function at the gate of heaven. Likewise, the Greeks knew not only the modest role
of the gatekeeper Apollo Agyieus34 but also his grand epiphany, framed by monumental doors.
At his temple at Didyma, near Miletus (fig. 136), the center door of the cella was meant not for
visitors to the temple—they entered by side doors—but, as has been shown, for the epiphany of
Apollo.35 No mortal, only a god, could stride over the massive threshold. The anticipation of such
an epiphany, presaged by the creaking of a threshold jarred by the foot of the god, marks the
beginning of the Hymn to Apollo by Callimachus:
135. Impression of an Akkadian cylinder seal. Ascent of the sun god Shamash at the gates of heaven.
Second half of third millennium B.C. New York, Morgan Library and Museum, Morgan Seal 178. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

136. Northeast side of the later Temple of Apollo at Didyma, near Miletus. Begun ca. 310 B.C. The
“epiphany door,” with its 1.46-meter-high threshold, is visible at the southwest end of the great
colonnade. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
152 APOLLO

How the young laurel of Apollo trembled!

How the whole edifice trembles! Away, away whoever is sinful!
Now indeed Apollo shakes the doors with his beautiful foot.
Do you not see it? The Delian palm nods gently—
Unexpectedly; while the swan in the air sings sweetly.
Of your own accord now, gate bolts, open up,
Of your own accord, you locks. For the god no longer is far away.

Down to the time of Ovid’s Metamorphoses (2.1ff.), the gates of the palace of the sun, which
are at the same time the gates of heaven, were a standard feature in ancient mythology. Like other
important characteristics of the Greek depiction of Apollo, they can be traced to Babylonian
antecedents.
In Greek religion the Babylonian hierarchy of sun god, king, and people (the latter pray to
the king, but the king prays to Shamash) becomes the hierarchy of Zeus, Apollo, and people. The
Greeks were in immediate contact with their gods. Unlike the Near Eastern peoples, they did not
need a king to mediate. Instead, the god Apollo himself was able to mediate between mankind
and Zeus, his father. The god of Delphi functioned characteristically as priest and prophet of
Zeus.36 In accordance with Zeus’s wishes, Apollo’s oracles established the rules governing cults
both in Greece and far beyond. The author of the Homeric Hymn to Apollo lets the god, recently
born on the island of Delos, speak as follows (131f.):

May the lyre and the curved bow be dear to me—

I shall declare through my oracle to mankind the unfailing will of Zeus.

Finally, the divisions of time, as regulated and disseminated by Delphi, cannot be explained
without reference to Babylonian influence. Nilsson demonstrated this in his fundamental studies
of the Greek calendar.37 Apollo developed, nevertheless, into a deity more Greek than any other,
yet the aspect regarded as most typically Greek, his opposition to hubris as god of moderation,
was already implicit in the “firm rules” of the Babylonian cult. With a superior ancient culture
behind it, this cult had spread widely throughout the Aegean. The cult of Shamash had undergone
development and organization in Mesopotamia for more than a thousand years before it pene-
trated the West, probably in the second millennium B.C. Perhaps the cult passed through Lycia,
a place to which many of the god’s epithets point. This land, often overemphasized by historians
of religion when it is in fact a relatively peripheral area,38 can have been no more than a way
station for the cult of Apollo, a place where the god did not tarry long. The critical transfor­
mation, the adaptation of the Babylonian cult to Aegean religion, took place on Crete. This is
not surprising in view of the many connections discovered by scholars between Mesopotamian
and Minoan high culture. We are already acquainted with Apollo’s Cretan characteristics. On the
island he took on aspects of the Minoan vegetation deity, whose birth and death were com-
memorated with festive celebration. In this way the birth of Apollo became one of the main
 A P O L L O 153

features of his myth. It was localized on the island of Delos, which in the second millennium B.C.
had close ties with Crete.
As the tale of his birth became significant for Apollo, he developed a relationship with one of
the most revered mother goddesses in the Aegean. At her side he was able to begin his triumphal
procession through the Aegean by establishing himself in places where mother goddesses had
been worshipped previously. For example, it was remembered in the Classical period that, before
the time of Apollo, Delphi had been controlled by the earth mother. The Pythia mentions this at
the beginning of the Eumenides of Aeschylus. From the chthonic cult of the mother goddesses
Apollo took over one of his most important attributes: the omphalos.39 As if the company of a
single female deity were not sufficient, those involved in spreading his cult added a second god-
dess long worshipped in the Aegean—Artemis. Perhaps Delos was the site where the originally
independent deities became brother and sister, both the offspring of Leto.40 The later inseparable
triad of Apollo, Leto, and Artemis would then have come together for the first time in the Delian
birth myth. This tale, a favorite of ancient poets, is told most beautifully in the fragments of a
Pindaric hymn (fr. 33c–d Snell):

God-built island, hail,

Scion most dear to the offspring
Of Leto with her shining locks,
Daughter of the sea, of our wide-spread earth
Unmoved marvel,
Whom mortals name “Delos,”
But in Olympus the blessed ones
“Far shining star of the dark earth.”
. . .
For previously the isle was tossed about
By waves and by the gusts of every kind of wind.
But when the child of Coeus,
Frenzied with the travail of birth,
Stepped onto its soil,
Then four straight columns sprang up
From the roots of the earth,
Columns with adamantine bases which held up the rock.
There she gave birth,
And gazed at her blessed offspring.

The Apollonian triad of Apollo, Leto, and Artemis, an element integral to the Greek cult of
Apollo, differentiates it from its Babylonian predecessor (see nn. 4 and 16). It seems that not only
the spiritual superiority to the Babylonian god but also the intelligence of Apollo’s priests, and
their admirable tact in relation to other cults, gave rise to the victorious progression and duration
154 APOLLO

of the religion of Apollo throughout Hellas. In Greece, as far as strict organization and breadth
of perspective are concerned, nothing can be compared to the priesthood at Delphi. Delphi was
also the only site in the Greek world where the development of a kind of dogma could take place.
The priests of Apollo were wise not to set up their god in opposition to the highest god of the
Greeks. Rather, Apollo became the son of Zeus and the enactor of his will. The Delphic god
defined himself as the priest of his father. It is moreover characteristic of the religion of Apollo
that it developed powerful cult centers—such as Delos (fig. 137), Delphi (fig. 138), and Miletus—
which soon acquired an importance extending far beyond the boundaries of Greece.41 The sig-
nificance of the choice of these places as cult sites cannot be overstated. They lie not on easily
accessible routes but in the unspoiled and secluded countryside. The oriental sun god strode
forward over the mountains; Apollo too favored mountains. Cliffs, promontories, bluffs, and
islands were his favorite haunts. However, it was his nature not to be as bound to his isolated
temples as other deities were to their abodes. Instead, he appears there on specific occasions, so
as to have frequent opportunities to impress by the impact created by his arrival. The author of
the Homeric Hymn to Apollo addresses the god as follows (140ff.):

You, silver-bowed Lord, far-shooting Apollo,

At times you walk on craggy Kynthos,
At times you roam among the islands and their peoples,
Many are your temples and many your wooded groves,
Dear to you are all the mountain peaks
And the steep crest of lofty mountains
And the rivers flowing onward to the sea.

137. Delos. View of

the sacred area from
Cythnus, toward the
northwest; right center,
the sanctuary of Apollo
with the three temples
of Apollo. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
 A P O L L O 155

138. Delphi. Temple of

Apollo VI. 366–320 B.C. The
Phaedriades cliffs are visible
in the background. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

To be near for only a short period of time, to be distant and to rove here and there, these are
behaviors typical of Apollo and inherited from the untiring wanderings of the Babylonian sun god.
This divine restlessness was linked so intimately with Apollo that, even before his birth, it had
been transmitted to his mother. The Homeric Hymn to Apollo, as well as Pindar and Callimachus’
hymns to Delos, all depict the restless wandering over land and sea that the daughter of Coeus,
Leto, undertook before she could give birth to her son on Delos.


Since the Archaic period Greek painters took pains to try to capture the god’s roving nature
in two-dimensional art, a situation unlike that faced by sculptors, whose art was governed by
different principles. The depiction on the krater from Melos of his entry into Delos, already dis-
cussed (see fig. 127), is an early attempt to show the god in motion. A metope from Selinus,
sculpted at the height of the Archaic period (fig. 139), shows Apollo, face turned toward the
viewer, striding majestically toward his mother and sister.42
156 APOLLO

139. Apollo, Leto,

and Artemis.
Metope from
Selinus. Ca. 550 B.C.
Palermo, Museo
Archeologico
Regionale “Antonino
Salinas” 3918. Photo:
Hirmer Photo
Archive.

A hydria by the Berlin Painter (fig. 140)43 from the beginning of the Early Classical period
shows an exquisite depiction of Apollo seated on a winged tripod, hovering above the sea. On
his back he carries his bow and quiver, while with his right hand he uses a plectrum to bring forth
sound from a lyre. Karl Arno Pfeiff described this work of art as follows:

The entire surface of the vase is given over to the god, with the exception of two dolphins filling the
space between the wings and the sea. They have a significance beyond their ornamental purpose:
while the octopus snakes awkwardly in the deep, the elegant, music-loving dolphins, creatures
sacred to Apollo, apparently function as escorts to their god. They have the same harmonious con-
tours as the tripod and wings: the entire scene, including the vessel itself, with its handles also
extending like wings, resonates with Apollonian music.

In addition to Apollo’s wandering, Greek artists always emphasized another, no less significant,
characteristic: his divine individualism. On a calyx-krater by Exekias in the Agora Museum in
 A P O L L O 157

140. Apollo on a winged tripod.

Hydria by the Berlin Painter. Ca.
490–480 B.C. Vatican, Museo
Gregoriano Etrusco 16568.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

Athens (fig. 141), Apollo stands in the midst of other gods, facing his sister, forming with her a
separate group.44 In many two-dimensional representations, the tendency of the two children of
Leto or the Apollonian triad toward “exclusiveness” is clearly noticeable. The Apollo of Exekias
plays the kithara; plucking its strings, he provides musical accompaniment for Heracles’ ascent
to heaven. His music reaches out and describes an existence beyond itself. Where the kithara, the
musical instrument of Apollo, sounds, the world of the gods, Olympus, is to be found. In the
numerous councils of the gods in Greek art, the kithara-playing Apollo brings the atmosphere of
the Olympian sphere to the fore.
The strings of the kithara and of the bow were equally dear to the god, as the words of the
newborn god in the Hymn to Apollo indicate. Both reverberate with sound when plucked, but
how different are the effects they produce. For the philosopher Heraclitus, the lyre and the bow,
both belonging to the same god, were symbols of the unity of opposites.45 In the Early Classical
period, artists found the means to express the tension between these extremes in their depictions
158 APOLLO

141. Apollo as
Kitharoidos. Calyx-
krater by Exekias.
Ca. 530–520 B.C. Athens,
Agora Museum AP1044.
Photo: Agora Archive.

of the god. The hydria by the Berlin Painter provides one of the earliest examples. More impor-
tant illustrations of this point are found in depictions, so common in the fifth century B.C., of
Apollo pouring a libation (fig. 142).46 The antipathy between lyre and bow is here raised to a
higher plane, subordinated to the libation the god pours at the behest of his father, Zeus. One of
the earliest and the most beautiful representations of Apollo pouring a libation is found on the
interior of a white-ground cup from a grave in Delphi (fig. 143).47 The very young god, wearing
a chiton and a regal purple cloak and seated on a folding chair, holds his tortoise-shell lyre on
his lap and extends his right hand, which holds the phiale, far away from him. Red wine drips
out. Apollo otherwise tends to pour standing. When he does sit, he is in the company of others.48
He is alone here, but not completely. His sacred bird, the raven, sits across from him. Does it
bring a message from Zeus? Delphic Apollo had designated himself as Zeus’s priest. According
to the will of his father, after the killing of Python, Apollo had to purify himself ritually, which
is what he is doing here. He demonstrates, by his own example, the efficacy of the purification
and expiation that Delphi propagated. As with other white-ground cups, this must have been
specially commissioned, perhaps by a Delphic priest.
The Early Classical period produced the most significant representations of Apollo in Greek
art. At that time Zeus and Apollo were linked so closely that Apollo was even given a place of
honor in the decorative program of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia.49 While Zeus occupies the
prominent center of the east pediment (see fig. 11), Apollo appears in the same place on the west
pediment (fig. 144). By punishing the centaurs’ hubris, he lends support to the heroes, controlling
 142. Apollo, between
Artemis and Hermes,
making a libation. Bell-
krater. Ca. 450–440 B.C.
Vienna, Kunsthistorisches
Museum 3733. Photo:
KHM-Museumsverband.

143. Apollo making a libation. Tondo of a white-ground Attic cup from a grave in Delphi. 480–470 B.C.
Delphi, Archaeological Museum 8140. Photo: Nimatallah / Art Resource, NY.
160 APOLLO

144. Apollo from the middle of the

west pediment of the Temple of Zeus
at Olympia. Completed in 456 B.C.
Olympia, Archaeological Museum.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

the battle with a commanding gesture of his right arm. He fulfills the will of his father, while
the latter at the same time receives honor and respect through the achievement of the most
noble of his sons. In the metopes of the same temple, the motif of honoring the father through
his offspring is repeated. Here another great son of Zeus is depicted performing his labors: Her-
acles, to whom ancient myth ascribed the foundation of the Olympic games.50 But while the
demigod Heracles must exert himself to the point of exhaustion, for Apollo his mere presence is
sufficient. As faint traces indicate, he held bow and arrows in his left hand—without, however,
needing to use them.
The relationship between Apollo and his father was given new expression in the High Clas-
sical period when Phidias sculpted the chryselephantine statue in the Temple of Zeus at Olympia.
On the throne of Zeus, Apollo was depicted once again as the avenger of hubris. But this time,
 A P O L L O 161

following the dictates of the myth, his role in the story was an active one. Aided by Artemis and
using his bow and arrows, he shoots and kills the sons and daughters of Niobe. She had boasted
of the number of her children in comparison with Leto, who had given birth to only two. A copy
of the relief of Apollo from the throne of Zeus (fig. 145)51 shows that, to some extent, Phidias must
have had in mind Homer’s image of Apollo shooting his arrows at the beginning of the Iliad. In
the composition he crouches down at a distance, like Homer’s Apollo, and shoots his unfailing
arrow. “Like the night” their doom descends upon the Niobids.
Apollo appears as avenger of his mother, Leto, not only in the myth of Niobe but also in the
tale of Tityus. The Giant Tityus, a son of Earth, was so brazen as to take liberties with Leto as she
was traveling to Delphi with her children. The killing of Tityus by Apollo and Artemis was
already a familiar theme in Archaic art.52 In the middle of the fifth century B.C., the Penthesilea
Painter portrayed the event on the interior of a large Attic drinking cup (fig. 146). The focus is
on Apollo, his victim, and the latter’s mother. Covering her face, the earth mother, Ge, leaves the
scene in horror. The god, standing over the Giant, raises his sword to deal him a fatal blow.
Apollo’s face is partly covered by his sword arm, but the eye of the avenger shines all the more
clearly and severely over the miscreant with his faltering gaze.



145. Apollo as archer. Replica of

the relief with the killing of the
Niobids from the throne of Zeus
at Olympia. Kassel, Staatliche
Kunstsammlungen Sk112. Photo:
Museumslandschaft Hessen—
Kassel, Antikensammlung.
162 APOLLO

The god’s vengeance is directed against everything his father Zeus despises, as Pindar states in
his first Pythian Ode (13). This poem gives us the key to the many depictions of an avenging
Apollo in contemporary Early Classical art. Pindar chooses as an example the most powerful
of all the opponents of Zeus—Typhon. But Tityus was also hateful to Zeus, since this Giant—as
he, like Typhon, was considered—desired the mother of Zeus’s children, Leto. Niobe, too, had
insulted Leto as a mother, and thereby also the father, Zeus. The centaurs that are Apollo’s oppo-
nents on the west pediment in Olympia (see fig. 144) were descended from the nefarious union
of Ixion with a phantom of Hera. Ixion, though mortal, was allowed to dine with Zeus but
showed such disregard for the laws of hospitality that he had designs on Zeus’s noble spouse.53
The gods ostensibly fulfilled his wish: Ixion embraced a cloudy facsimile that he took to be Hera.
It bore him the centaurs, creatures similar to their father in their disregard for the rules of hos-
pitality. As guests at the wedding of Peirithoos, they tried to violate the women and boys present.
The rights of guests stood under the protection of Zeus Xenios. The reason the centaurs were
punished by Apollo is that they broke his father’s sacred laws. If the Centauromachy of the west
pediment at Olympia is understood in this way, it can be seen as more than simply decorative. It
is decoration with meaning.
Classical bronze statues of Apollo are not preserved in their original form, but there are many
Roman copies. Indeed, the god was the most commonly depicted Olympian in Rome.54 About a
decade after the casting of the statue of Poseidon from Cape Artemisium (see figs. 85–87), the
bronze original of a two-meter-tall Apollo was created, a nearly complete marble copy of which

146. Apollo killing

Tityus, with Ge,
Tityus’ mother, in
the background.
Tondo of an Attic
red-figure kylix by
the Penthesilea
Painter. Ca. 460–450
B.C. Munich,
Antikensammlungen
2689. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
 A P O L L O 163

is now located in Kassel (fig. 147).55 Scholarship has connected it with a bronze statue on the
Athenian Acropolis mentioned by Pausanias (1.24.8), a work of Phidias. If this relationship is
valid, then the “Kassel Apollo” is to be interpreted as a youthful work of Phidias, created before
the Athena Parthenos (see fig. 201), the Parthenon, and the Olympian Zeus (see figs. 22–23). As
on the west pediment at Olympia (see fig. 144), the god is holding bow and arrow in his left hand,
but his cloak is missing and the head, with the long hair bound, turns to the side with the weapon.
What Apollo carried in his right hand is the subject of controversy. The best reconstruction is a
laurel branch, which served for lustration—that is, purification through sprinkling. As can be
deduced from the text of Pausanias, this Apollo of Phidias was understood as the Delphic god
who advised the Athenians with his oracles and had saved them from a plague of locusts. The
Kassel Apollo is indeed represented as speaking. His mouth is slightly open, and one sees the
top row of teeth, which were, most likely, silver inlays in the original bronze statue.56 This previ-
ously barely noticed correspondence with Pausanias’ report further supports the hypothesis of
the Phidian origins of the Kassel type. Swarms of insects were taken as a stain on the open fields,
and so they were driven away by the god of purity. The bow and arrow, as well as a lustrating
laurel, all point to a defensive posture. According to Pausanias, the locusts were also destroyed
through rainstorms from Zeus. This therefore represents another collaboration between father
and son, as is known from many works of poetry and visual art. Since the sanctuary of Zeus
Polieus57 was “across from the Parthenon,” where Phidias’ statue stood, the Apollo Parnopios
must have belonged in its vicinity as well.
To be sure, in Pindar’s first Pythian Ode it is not the arrows of Apollo that are directed against
Zeus’s opponents but rather his other “shafts”—namely, the sounds of his lyre (12). The “golden
lyre, common property of Apollo and the violet-tressed Muses,” with whose invocation the poem
begins, brings terror to the vanquished opponents of the Olympian gods, but bliss to the Olym-
pians themselves. In this way the poet of the Early Classical period gave form to the tension
between the two sides of Apollo’s nature. At the beginning of the Iliad, Homer captured Apollo’s
complexity in a different way. The first book starts with Apollo as avenger and ends with Apollo
as leader of the Muses. The conflict between Zeus and Hera dissolves into a festive banquet at
which the Muses sing to the accompaniment of Apollo’s lyre (601ff.). Apollo Musagetes with his
lyre serves as a radiant Olympian counterpoint to the Far-shooter with his bow, who falls upon
people like the night:

And so then the whole day—until the sun set—

They banqueted, nor was unfulfilled their heart’s
Desire for a fitting portion, nor for the lyre,
Beautiful above all, held by Apollo, nor for the Muses,
With beautiful voices singing antiphonal songs.
147. “Kassel Apollo.” Late Flavian marble copy of a bronze original, an early work of Phidias,
ca. 450 B.C., on the Athenian Acropolis. Kassel, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen,
Antikenabteilung Sk3. Photo: Museumslandschaft Hessen–Kassel, Antikensammlung.
Photographer: Ute Brunzel.
 A RT E M I S

T
he goddess has her roots in the deepest depths of the prehistoric era of hunters
 and gatherers, in the guise of a variety of precursors from whom she derives her
 character as a wanderer as well as her intimate bond with animals. The historical
centuries within which we shall for the most part conduct our overview of the worship of Artemis
cover a relatively short period compared with the time span of her origins. It is nevertheless dur-
ing this later period that Artemis came to be shaped by the creative spirit of the Greeks into the
unique figure we now know: constantly in motion like her sacred springs and streams, yet timid,
like the animals of the wild among whom she abides and whom she protects, and as huntress. She
also plays an active role in the lives of humans, but at an unbridgeable distance. Among the Olym-
pians, none apart from Zeus has more titles or epithets. Artemis possesses beautiful temples and
is prayed to more frequently than the others, yet she remains in essence as inexorable as the death
that she sends with her “gentle arrows.” At the same time, she is fond of choral song and dance, like
her brothers Apollo and Dionysus, who, besides the warlike Ares, are closest to her among the
Olympians. In the history of cult she is the oldest of goddesses, but Homer’s art transformed her
into the youngest of the major deities, maidenly and endowed with an incomparable, ravishing
beauty. It is significant that she does not take part in the contest of the goddesses Hera, Athena, and
Aphrodite over who among them was the most beautiful. In ancient cults she was called Kalliste,
“the most beautiful one.” She would never acquiesce to judgment by a mere mortal. The poet of
the Odyssey highlights Artemis’ beauty in a simile. Although elsewhere a great many natural
phenomena form the subjects of Homeric similes, here the subject is the great goddess herself,
the goddess who rules over nature. We see her with the loving eyes of her mother, Leto (6.102ff.):

So Artemis goes through the mountains, shooter of arrows,

The lofty mountains of Taygetus or Erymanthus—

165
166 ARTEMIS

Taking pleasure in the boars and the swift deer—

Along with her stride the daughters of Zeus, shaker of
The aegis, nymphs indulging in rustic sport, and Leto
Is glad at heart, since her child outshines them all with
Her head and face, and she is easily recognized, although the
Others are beautiful.

Also significant is something the Homeric epics fail to discuss, although, as far as the story
is concerned, it would have seemed natural to mention it. Artemis had ordered the sacrifice
of Iphigenia, Agamemnon’s daughter, at Aulis prior to the Achaeans’ departure for Troy. The
reason for the goddess’s demand is reported in ancient literature in various ways. Agamemnon
insulted Artemis because he boasted that he surpassed her in hunting, or because he had killed
an animal sacred to the goddess. Euripides relates that Artemis had a claim on Agamemnon’s
daughter because she had been the most beautiful newborn of the year (Iphigenia in Tauris 19ff.).
Aeschylus gives only a dark motivation for Iphigenia’s sacrifice. The gods exert their incompre-
hensible power, and humans become entangled in the consequences (Agamemnon 228ff.):

Her prayers, her fearful cry “O Father,”

The maidenly bloom of her life mattered not
In the eyes of the war-loving commanders.
Her father prayed and bade the attendants raise and
Hold her above the altar in the manner of a sacrificial kid,
Wrapped as she was in robes, with her head courageously
Bent, and he told them to keep far from her beautifully
Vibrating lips the cry cursing the house.

The Artemis who could control storms and who had to be placated with human sacrifice was
linked in the myth to barbarian Tauris, situated north of the Black Sea. It was to that site that
Artemis Tauropolos, “Bull drover,” removed her sacrificial victim Iphigenia. Here, too, it was
customary to perform human sacrifice in her cult. The worship of Artemis in those northeast-
erly regions is frequently mentioned. Herodotus refers to her as one of the deities of Thrace, the
others being Ares and Dionysus (5.7). Alexander the Great pledged a temple to Tauropolos in
Amphipolis (Diodorus 18.5). In Euripides’ portrayal at the end of the drama mentioned above,
Orestes brought the cult statue of Tauropolos from Tauris to Halai on the east coast of Attica,
where, from that time on, a less severe version of the rite was practiced. The Alexandrian scholar
Aristarchus assumed that the sacrifice of Iphigenia at Aulis was unknown to Homer. This, how-
ever, is out of the question. The tale is retained in all the parallel sources for the Trojan cycle,
including the Cypria, the epic that dealt with the period prior to the start of the Trojan War. The
rite of human sacrifice was resurrected in historical times when serious danger threatened—as,
 A R T E M I S 167

for example, prior to the battle of Salamis.1 It reaches back into prehistoric times and later
becomes inextricably tied up with the fate of the house of Atreus. Homer ignores it in order not
to burden either Agamemnon or Artemis with this frightful stigma.


The image of Artemis that contemporary historians of religion have fashioned comes across as
more uniform than their interpretations of other Greek deities, although she is second only to
Zeus in being the most polymorphic of the Olympians. All modern portrayals of the goddess
have in common an unmistakably romantic touch. This applies not only to the monograph by
the Swiss Karl Hoenn (1946) but also to works by Wilamowitz, who depicted Artemis as “Mistress
of the Outdoors,” and even Nilsson, who postulated that she was originally a nymph who rose to
the position of “leader of the nymphs.” Otto adds psychology to romanticism when he says of
Artemis:2

The mirror of this divine femininity is Nature . . . unfettered Nature, with her attractive sheen and
her fierceness, with her innocent purity and her unique uncanniness; she is, admittedly, motherly
and gently caring, but in the manner of a true virgin, and, like her, at the same time, inflexible, stern,
and cruel.

At the same time, the efforts of the philologists have not led to unanimity about the meaning of
Artemis’ name, which is already known in the Bronze Age from Linear B texts.3 It is generally
agreed that, while this name may certainly be derived from Indo-European roots, the real ques-
tion is, which roots? The Greeks, as Carl Robert pointed out, heard in Artemis or Artamis the
word for butcher (artamos).4 Perhaps we are here confronted with the very oldest characteristic
of her being, a rather different one than previously assumed.
To interpret the most popular Greek goddess, as Nilsson characterized Artemis,5 it will be
necessary to make use of a number of conclusions derived from research into folklore. Meuli has
made these available in a pioneering study of the origins of Greek sacrificial rites. We need only
apply them to Artemis.6 From Homer on, the goddess was known in poetry as a huntress; this
is also how she was presented in pictorial art from this period. It is now customary to regard the
hunt in general as a relatively new feature of her character, when it is in fact the most ancient.
Most of the later functions of the goddess evolve from it. As huntress alone Artemis certainly
could not have commanded the popularity that she possessed in the second and first millennia
B.C. The hunt was, at that time, no longer absolutely necessary for survival. The inhabitants
of the Aegean basin no longer depended on killing prey to feed themselves. To be sure, then as
now there were professional hunters, and the hunt as the sport of the nobility was known in the
palaces of Mycenaean kings and among the rulers of Asia Minor, Hellenistic kings, and Roman
emperors. But a goddess who reigned within such a restricted domain would have enjoyed a
minor exclusive cult, like the sort of devotion to Artemis maintained by Hippolytus.7 She would
168 ARTEMIS

not have been invoked by all strata of society in a variety of situations, as Artemis was. In the
Stone Age, however, and especially among hunting peoples, the deities of the hunt who preceded
her must have affected every aspect of life. These early goddesses include Diktynna on Crete,
Laphria among the Aetolians, and Kalliste of the Arcadians, goddesses who at that time did not
yet live in the regions later named after them. A goddess who was worshipped at many sites,
Agrotera, “She of the Wild,” an appellation also given to Artemis in the Iliad (21.471), can be
added to this list.8 But wild animals already no longer played a role in Agrotera’s cult. Her sac­
rifice consisted of domesticated goats. The prehistoric goddess of the hunt had changed herself
into a goddess of the flock, a metamorphosis that was possible because many customs of the
hunting period were evidently taken over by the later pastoral culture without alteration. Meuli
writes, “As these shepherd people proceeded directly along a straight, almost unimpeded line of
development from hunting to domesticating, caring for, and breeding animals, so they kept,
essentially unchanged, the core of the hunter’s customs for handling animals, including the
butchering of them.”9


With convincing parallels from folklore, Meuli has worked out how the deception of the sacri-
fice of Prometheus, as known to us from Hesiod, in which the Olympians are left with only the
bones wrapped in fat, has its roots in the practices employed by Stone Age hunters in their butch-
ering of animals. Long before there were gods comparable to the later Olympians, the slaughter-
ing of animals was done according to strict ceremony—ceremony that was observed so that
killing out of necessity was not perceived as indiscriminate murder. Man and beast were much
closer to one another in the Stone Age, as they are even today among the hunting and pastoral
people of Asia, than is the case in our Western cultures. Whoever took part in the hunt or slaugh-
tered an animal from the herd was subject to a precisely defined ritual in which the animal was
involved as an equal partner. It was necessary that the one taking a life purify himself in advance
and that the animal die voluntarily. The creature could not be tortured, nor could its “soul” be
disturbed. For that reason, strict rules also governed the carving up of the butchered animal.
Attention was paid to the hide. The bones were buried or burned unbroken, and the skull was
hung up. These were the parts that were later given to the Olympian deities after simple butcher-
ing had been transformed into a sacrificial feast. Carried over from the Stone Age goddess to the
pastoral cultures was her role in keeping a close watch over the taking of life and the strict pun-
ishment of behavior found to be indiscriminate and cruel.
We know Artemis, Mistress of the Animals, from many cults and myths where she is protec-
tor and avenger of animals. Her sanctuary at Brauron on the east coast of Attica, according to its
foundation myth, was established in propitiation for the death of a bear. For that reason the
young girls from Attica who served the goddess at Brauron from the age of five until seven were
called arktoi, “she-bears.”10 Meuli has demonstrated that the killing of bears, who are similar to
humans in so many ways, was regulated by Asiatic hunters with particular strictness. In the little
 A R T E M I S 169

Athenian she-bears, a Stone Age tradition lived on. The many myths in which the goddess was
angered because a deer sacred to her had been killed—for example, the story of the angry Artemis
of Aulis—project the same sort of image. In addition, the many tales in which Artemis disposes of
young hunters for approaching her, the virgin goddess, with callous desire were, in all probabil-
ity, originally hunting myths, pure and simple. When Artemis changed Actaeon into a stag and
had him torn apart by his own hounds, she probably meted out to him the same fate that he
himself, contrary to the rules of the hunt, had caused a deer to suffer. He had not behaved in
accordance with the ground rules for the hunt as they were understood in the prehistoric period.
In the Arcadian myth of Buphagus, whom Artemis struck with her arrows because he dared to
commit an act forbidden by the goddess, the hero’s name, “Bull-eater,” retains the reason for her
anger (Pausanias 8.27.17). Buphagus probably did not follow the rules handed down from the Stone
Age for butchering a bull. When, during the second millennium, the Olympian deities appeared
on the world stage, and it became the custom to sacrifice animals in their honor and invite them
to dinner, Artemis stood near at hand with her firm demands, supervising their sacrificial feasts.
This conclusion can be drawn from the hymn to Hecate in the Theogony of Hesiod (415ff.). Hecate
has long been recognized by scholars as a prehistoric precursor of Artemis:11

She is exceedingly honored by the immortal gods;

For even now, whenever someone of men who dwell on earth
Performs holy sacrifices, appeasing the gods
According to custom, he calls upon Hecate.

Therefore artamein (to cut up), as understood by Artemis, could not be an indiscriminate
dismembering, as Nilsson assumed. On the contrary, it referred to a precisely regulated carving
up of sacrificial animals. Indeed, the very picture that Nilsson introduces as an example, which
is also the main theme of a Boeotian amphora in Athens (fig. 148), contradicts his own thesis.12
This vessel, dated by recent research to around 680 B.C., shows a goddess with large, spreading
wings instead of arms, with birds above them. The goddess must be a “Mistress of the Wild Ani-
mals,” for beside her roar two powerful lions. There is also a fish on her dress, an indication of
her authority over creatures that swim. However, directly under her wings the head and limb of
a cow are displayed—that is, precisely those parts of the sacrificial animal that were apportioned
to the Olympians. The bukranion, the ox’s head, would be hung in the sanctuary, while the thigh-
bones would be covered with fat and burned.13 Since this picture and the hymn to Hecate origi-
nate in the same region, and, what is more, are dated to the same period, we are able to recognize
on the Boeotian amphora, as Gerda Bruns has already proposed, the figure of Artemis-Hecate.


Killing in the most painless way possible, which her predecessors had demanded from hunters
of the Stone Age, remained the purview of Artemis. She herself taught favored hunters how to
170 ARTEMIS

148. Artemis-Hecate as
Mistress of the Wild
Animals. Scene on the
shoulder of a large
Boeotian amphora.
Ca. 680 B.C. Athens,
National Archaeological
Museum 5893. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

aim at and hit game unerringly (Iliad 5.51f.). Elaphebolos, “Deer-shooter,” was one of her more
common titles. Since, as far as she was concerned, man and beast had from time immemorial
been of equal value, she could demand human sacrifice, attested for her cult by myths. She also
brought humans their inexorable fate quickly and surely with her “gentle arrows,” of which, espe-
cially in the Odyssey, mention is made a number of times. Penelope desires a rapturous death by
her hand (20.61ff.). Another heroine, Artemis’ priestess Iphigenia, is actually abducted by the
goddess to another country. This was originally, surely, a metaphor for a painless death.
The myth of Iphigenia features an additional motif dating from the age of hunting. In the end,
Agamemnon sacrificed a doe instead of his daughter, just as Abraham sacrificed a ram instead
of his son. The belief that an animal died voluntarily in place of another victim provided prehis-
toric hunters with justification for their kill. Meuli has pointed out the survivals of this con-
cept in Greek sacrificial customs in which animals approached the altar voluntarily.14 One of the
most beautiful pictorial representations of this idea from the Aegean was found in the excava-
tions at Kato Zakros in East Crete15—a rhyton, a libation vessel, carved from stone, dating from
approximately 1500 B.C. (fig. 149). On it, wild goats brighten a rugged landscape of crags where
a mountaintop sanctuary is located. Four of the goats rest peacefully on its roof, having presented
themselves as sacrificial offerings. Likewise, from the sanctuary of Achilles on the island of Leuke,
a story spread that the goats came to the hero’s altars of their own accord and that seabirds
sprinkled the temple and cleaned it every day (Arrian, Periplus 21). Birds are also seen approach-
ing on the rhyton from Kato Zakros. They can be interpreted in the same way as in the tale of
Leuke. The sanctuary on the Cretan vessel, however, probably belonged to a Minoan predecessor
of Artemis, whether she was called Diktynna, Britomartis, Aphaia, or another name. The Cretan
 A R T E M I S 171

149. Stone rhyton with wild goats

and birds in a mountaintop sanctuary.
From the palace of Kato Zakros, eastern
Crete. Ca. 1500 B.C. Heraklion,
Archaeological Museum AE2764.
Photo: Nimatallah / Art Resource, NY.

goddess of the hunt was particularly closely linked with wild goats, since the island abounded
in agrimia, as these goats are called today. She took them along to Delos, where Apollo is sup-
posed to have crafted the famous horn altar from the left horns of wild goats, which his sister
laid on the slopes of Mount Cynthus (Callimachus, Hymn to Apollo 60ff.; Plutarch, Theseus 21).
Marinatos found the remains of a horn altar of this kind in the Temple of Apollo at Dreros on
Crete. As Meuli pointed out, whenever we come across such an altar, there can be no doubt but
that it is part of a tradition of prehistoric hunting practices.16
What Artemis acquired from her predecessors in distant prehistory was not what we read
about time and again in works by modern authors—namely, a fundamental cruelty. On the con-
trary, hers is the vengeance against a cruel death, or, expressed more positively, an intimate bond
with every living creature, be it man or animal, and respect for its life as well as its death. Seen
from this perspective, the goddess’s importance becomes understandable. She is a goddess whose
power, made sacred by the custom of thousands of years, touches the central concerns of mortals
in a strict and inexorable way.

172 ARTEMIS

The most significant characteristics of the historical Artemis are explicable based on her pre­
historic origins. This is especially true of a function that has been problematic for historians of
religion: Artemis as goddess of political assemblies. As Agoraia she had an altar in the Altis of
Olympia (Pausanias 5.15.4). In the Agora, the marketplace of Athens, a cult of Artemis Boulaia
was instituted, and in Miletus there was a corresponding cult of Artemis Boulephoros, as is
shown in inscriptions found during excavations.17 It has been asked how the huntress of the
mountains came to be worshipped in the center of the marketplace as goddess of counsel, since
that is what the epithet Boulaia means. The members of such assemblies came together for more
than just political deliberation. During the times of aristocracy and democracy, they also formed
dining and sacrificial associations. As a responsible “butcher,” Artemis supervised the killing
of sacrificial animals that was customary for political assemblies. This is how she seems to have
become a goddess of good counsel. The councilors (Prytaneis) of Athens dined together in a
round building (tholos) in the Agora, where the goddesses named the Phosphoroi, “Lightbearers,”
were worshipped.18 This is probably a name for Artemis in her triple-bodied form as Hecate.
It is clear from the passage of the hymn to Hecate cited above that this goddess was invoked at
all sacrificial feasts. How civilized the ghost-like Hecate could appear in Classical times can be
seen on a votive relief from Krannon in Thessaly (fig. 150), which shows her, dressed like a girl,
standing between domesticated animals.19
As is evident from Heinrich Drerup’s research on the dining associations of Homeric times,
these were founded, in particular, in temples to Apollo.20 Where Apollo lives, his sister cannot be
far away. Müller observed not only that Artemis possessed many cult sites in which she alone

150. Artemis-Hecate as
protector of domestic
animals. Votive relief
from Krannon, Thessaly.
Ca. 350 B.C. London,
British Museum
1839.0806.3. Photo:
© The Trustees of the
British Museum /
Art Resource, NY.
 A R T E M I S 173

was worshipped but also that there are scarcely any sanctuaries to Apollo that Artemis does not
share.21 Accordingly, in the temple at Dreros on Crete, which served as a dining and sacrificial
association, her statue was found together with those of her brother and her mother, Leto (see
fig. 126). The hymn to Hecate in the Theogony (430, 434) calls her the mighty counselor of kings
and their peoples. Her Italic counterpart, Diana, was likewise a goddess of assemblies of the
people. The sacred precinct of Diana of Aricia became, in the sixth century B.C., the center of
the league of Italian cities organized against Etruscan domination of Rome. Admittedly, Kurt
Latte was of the opinion that “the political origin of the sanctuary has nothing to do with the
essential character of the goddess.”22 However, because of the communal celebration of sacrifices,
the precinct of a goddess who controlled ritual killing—her priests in Aricia were at times even
required to kill their own predecessor—would not be inappropriate as the league’s sanctuary.
Nilsson’s statement that Artemis is rarely connected with civic life23 cannot, in the end, be
brought into line with the facts. Indeed, the Homeric Hymn to Aphrodite (5.20) says of Artemis
that “she delights in lovely precincts and cities with upright men.” In the Greek cities to which
Pausanias traveled during the Roman Imperial period, partially preserved statues or temples
of Artemis, or of Eukleia, who resembled her, were still to be found in marketplaces every-
where. “You who dwell in Metapontum, O golden Mistress of the People,” sang Bacchylides about
Artemis (11.116f. Snell). And Anacreon prays to her (fr. 348 Page):

Hear my supplication, Deer-huntress,

Blond Artemis, child of Zeus,
Mistress of the wild beasts,
You who now at the whirlpool of the river Lethaeus
Look down, rejoicing with gladness,
Upon the city of bold-hearted men,
For you do not shepherd citizens who are savage.

The Artemis to whom the poet turns is Leukophryene of Magnesia on the Maeander in Asia
Minor. Her sanctuary was located on its tributary, the river Lethaeus. As in the Iliad, she is hunt-
ress and Mistress of the Wild Animals (potnia theron: 21.470). At the same time, she rejoices
in the civilized citizens of the city, whom she “pastures.” Poimaineis is the word Anacreon uses.
The huntress has undergone a metamorphosis and become a shepherdess whose herd consists
of city-dwellers. The concept of shepherding was a key component of an ancient, venerable
metaphor for leadership. One need only think of the reference to Agamemnon as “shepherd of
the people” (poimen laon) in the Iliad. “Leader of the city” (kathegemon tas polios) was Artemis’
cult epithet at Magnesia, as inscriptions have indicated.24 In other Greek cities in Asia Minor, she
was also given the epithet “leader”—for example, in Iasus, Ephesus, and Miletus.25 This does not
apply, as Nilsson assumed, to her relationship with her company of nymphs.26 A citation from
Callimachus’ Hymn to Artemis (225ff.) gives a much clearer picture of how her leadership is to
174 ARTEMIS

be understood. The poet turns to the goddess, worshipped in Miletus, addressing her as Chitone
(wearing the chiton) and Hegemone (leader):

Greetings, Lady Chitone, with many dwellings and cities,

You who inhabit Miletus! Neleus made you leader
When he led his ships to sea from the land of Cecrops.

We have here a reference to the colonization of Miletus by Attic-Ionian colonists in the lat-
ter part of the second millennium B.C. under the leadership of the Neleids, the descendants of
Nestor, who hailed originally from Pylos. Herodotus reports that the emigrants’ point of depar-
ture was the Prytaneion, the city hall in the Agora of Athens (1.146). Here, as mentioned above,
she was worshipped as Artemis Boulaia and received sacrifice prior to each meeting of the
Assembly.27 In Miletus there was a corresponding goddess of counsel, Boulephoros. The festival
of Artemis in Miletus was even called Neleis in remembrance of the Pylian founders (Polyaenus,
Strategemata 8.35). Linear B tablets prove that a cult of Artemis existed at Pylos. The epithet
Chitone was acquired by the Milesian Artemis because of the garments dedicated to her, a prac-
tice also typical of the Attic cult.28 Because of these similarities, the core of the story reported
by Callimachus must be regarded as historical. Artemis, who already in the Mycenaean period
had been worshipped as goddess of gatherings of people, accompanied emigrating peoples and
colonists, an activity well suited to her wandering nature. This is why cities rooted in the Doric-
Ionian migration worshipped her as their divine leader. The last Greek tribe to migrate to Hellas,
the Dorians, also followed Artemis as their leader. As Hegemone she had a sanctuary in Sparta
together with Apollo Carneius, a principal deity among the Spartans (Pausanias 3.14.6). Other
Doric settlements in the Peloponnese also worshipped Artemis Hegemone.29
How did the goddess of migrating peoples reveal her will? Since the entire realm of animals
owed obedience to her as potnia theron, she made use of animal oracles. It is possible that, in
particular, migratory birds flew ahead of the migrants. Among these birds, quail (ortyges), which
flock annually to the Aegean, were especially sacred to the goddess. The islands and groves into
which they descended received the name Ortygia and were distributed from Aetolia to Ephesus
and Syracuse. Throughout those regions sacred precincts of Artemis could be found. In addition,
when colonies or sanctuaries were established, animals dispatched by the goddess often served
as oracles. For example, it was foretold to the founders of the Spartan settlement of Boeae that
Artemis would show them where they should live and that they should choose a hare to lead
their way (hegemona tes hodou: Pausanias 3.22.12). Where it disappeared into a myrtle bush, they
built their city and founded a cult for Artemis Soteira, “the savior.” The inhabitants of Aegeira,
a city in the northern Peloponnese, when threatened with war by the Sicyonians, made use of the
following stratagem to mislead the aggressors about their modest numbers. A herd of goats had
lights bound between their horns. The enemy caught sight of them during the night, and, believ-
ing them to be nearby reinforcements, withdrew. The people of Aegeira built a shrine for Artemis
 A R T E M I S 175

Agrotera in the spot where the most beautiful goat, the leader, had lain down. Pausanias called
this goat kalliste and hegoumene (7.26.3). Both words are epithets of Artemis. It is not unlikely
that in popular belief the most beautiful animal, the leader of the herd, was the goddess herself
in disguise.
Artemis Hegemone was worshipped in Aetolia, in the Peloponnese, and by Ionian colonists;
corresponding to her in the northeastern regions was an Artemis or Hecate with the epithet
Enodia. She was, as her name indicates, a mistress of the roads.30 On land and on sea, she assisted
travelers. The popularity of this goddess rests on the indispensability of a divine escort. This
concept is prevalent in many religions, extending to the notion of guardian angels for our chil-
dren. The examples of Tobias and Raphael in the Old Testament could be mentioned, or that of
the Panaghia Hodegetria of the Byzantines, who was perhaps a direct descendant of the divine
guide Artemis. A dedicatory poem written by the Hellenistic poet Antiphilos of Byzantium to
this goddess has been preserved (Anthologia Palatina 6.199):

For you, Enodia, Antiphilos brought here his hat,

Which protected his own head during his journey.
Be merciful and grant him your protection on the road,
And hear his prayers. Insignificant is his gift, but
From a pious heart.

Let us return to Artemis’ prehistoric predecessors, since other characteristics of the god-
dess can be derived from them. Her concern, for example, for every defenseless young life is not
to be accounted for by any relationship to fertility—a vague concept in any case—but by an atti-
tude toward young animals that is still intelligible to hunters today. Since she did not differentiate
between man and beast, she extended the loving protection she felt for an animal brood to
human offspring as well. Artemis was worshipped in many places as a nurturer of children (kou-
rotrophos). The Spartans celebrated a wet-nurse festival in her honor.31 The Athenians placed
their young girls under her protection as “she-bears,” which made their children favorites of the
goddess. Dedicatory statues of such girls have survived (fig. 151). Smiling, they approach the god-
dess, who is otherwise quite stern, and ask her to transform her harshness into gentleness.32 As
Mistress of Wild Animals the goddess also functioned as “avenger” within the animal kingdom.
She punished the destruction of defenseless young by predators. In the Agamemnon Aeschylus
has the seer Calchas relate that Artemis angrily witnessed the misdeed of two eagles who tore
apart a pregnant hare. He describes her as “the beautiful goddess who is well disposed toward
the helpless offspring of rapacious lions and the suckling young of all beasts of the field” (135ff.).
That wild animals recognized her as mistress is clear in many Archaic representations of the
potnia theron (see figs. 161–162). In her sacred precincts peace reigns between wild and domes­
ticated animals, as in Strabo’s report on a visit to the game park of the Aetolian Artemis in the
land of the Veneti (5.1.9).
176 ARTEMIS

151. Head of an arktos (little bear), a

young Athenian girl in the service of
Artemis. Pentelic marble. Ca. 340 B.C.
Würzburg, Martin-von-Wagner-
Museum HA3935. Photo: Martin-von-
Wagner-Museum der Universität
Würzburg.

In the end, the goddess’s virginity does not represent a romantic picture of unspoiled nature
but must be conceptualized concretely as the purity related to the practices of the ancient hunt.
“The hunt is something pure; game animals desire only the pure hunter”: this is the wisdom of
hunting peoples. Meuli gathered examples indicating that such tribes wash themselves and put
on clean clothes prior to the hunt, and “quite a few undertake a fumigation, be it while still at
home or later in the woods, where a catch has taken place. To this end they jump over a fire or
circle around it one or more times.”33 In addition, the torch, a frequent attribute of Hecate as
well as Artemis, was originally associated with the purity that was required during the hunt. This
is the probable source of the depiction, in poetry as in art, of Artemis holding a torch and even
using it as a weapon. Thus, she swings a torch, quite unrealistically, above a collapsing deer on
an Attic pelike of the early fourth century B.C. (fig. 152).34 A goddess of victory touches the head
of the deer-huntress, after whom an entire month was named in Athens. Zeus and Apollo, father
and brother, gaze admiringly at her.

 A R T E M I S 177

152. Artemis as Elaphebolos (Deer-

shooter). Attic red-figure pelike.
Ca. 380 B.C. London, British Museum
1867.0508.1340. Photo: © The Trustees of
the British Museum / Art Resource, NY.

The purity in killing that Artemis demanded from prehistoric hunters and shepherds became a
requirement for ritual purity when butchering was transformed into sacrificial offering. Meuli
has shown by means of numerous examples that purification ceremonies took place prior to each
Greek sacrifice.35 At the entrance of sacred precincts, people sprinkled water from a basin on
themselves, which is analogous to the sprinkling of holy water in Catholic churches. Excavations
of the Archaic sanctuaries of a number of deities—in Athens, Delphi, Corinth, Olympia, Rhodes,
Samos—have found marble washbasins (perirrhanteria) supported by three female figures.36
The earliest example, from the Heraeum of Samos, dates from approximately 650 B.C. (fig. 153).
Of the three goddesses, as they are correctly identified, one holds two reclining lions with ropes
while the other two grab the animals by the tail. We have then a triple Mistress of the Beasts,
attached to a washbasin that served for ritual purification. Triple-bodied form, mastery of wild
animals, and purity are characteristics of Artemis in her manifestation as Hecate. The washbasins
represent the oldest Hecateia that have come down to us. To be sure, Pausanias wrote that, in his
opinion, Alcamenes of the school of Phidias was the first to depict a triple Hecate (2.30.2). But
he gave her an Archaic appearance, which, along with other arguments, contradicts Pausanias.37
178 ARTEMIS

153. Triple representation of

Artemis-Hecate as lion-tamer
and support for a washbasin
(perirrhanterion). From Heraeum
II on Samos. Ca. 650 B.C.
Berlin, Staatliche Museen,
Antikensammlung SK1747. Photo:
Erich Lessing / Art Resource, NY.

The Classical Artemis-Hecate of Alcamenes, which has survived in Roman copies only, stood
at the entrance to the Propylaea on the Acropolis. She did not carry a washbasin. Instead, the
torches she held in her hands communicated symbolically that ritual purification was required
upon entering the sanctuary. Her official name in Athens was Artemis Epipyrgidia, “Artemis on
the tower,” a name that relates to the original Mycenaean bastion beneath the Classical temple of
Athena Nike. She shared a priest with the Charites, as we know from an inscription on a seat in
the Theater of Dionysus.38 Around the triple Epipyrgidia danced three Charites (Graces). These
goddesses also found a place at the entrance to the Acropolis (Pausanias 1.22.8). Their relation-
ship with Artemis appears to extend back into the distant past. The Charites were, according to
Herodotus (2.50), of Pelasgian origin, although they first received their historical names from the
Greeks. In Attic cult they were called Auxo, Thallo, and Carpo. These are names that refer to the
growing, sprouting, and maturing of plants and fruits. In addition, yet another name was found
in Athens, a name of a different sort: namely, Hegemone (Pausanias 9.35.2). We have already met
 A R T E M I S 179

it as a common epithet of Artemis. We come across it again in the wording of the oath of the
youth of Athens (Pollux 8.106). This points to Artemis, who was among the gods frequently
called upon by the Greeks in oaths because she was so inexorable in her demands.39
“Artemis on the tower” at the Propylaea, who was related to the Charites, took over the Hec-
ateia in Archaic sanctuaries at a late date. According to evidence presented by Pausanias (9.35.3),
mystery celebrations were part of the cult of the Charites on the Acropolis. In the mystery reli-
gions, requirements for purification were particularly strict. For that reason, Artemis Propylaea
had a temple at the entrance to the Eleusinian sanctuary, and there was a temple of Artemis
Hegemone in front of the sanctuary of the Arcadian mystery goddess Despoina (Pausanias 1.38.6;
8.37.1). In other sacred precincts, too, Artemis’ presence can be explained by that ancient require-
ment for ritual purity at a sacrifice. This was certainly one of the reasons why Artemis became
the sister of Apollo, for this deity had long included purification and expiation within his domain.
From the close connection between the divine twins and purity one may also derive their
connection with all flowing waters. The sanctuaries of the children of Leto lay near springs and
streams—for example, the Castalian Spring at Delphi—or near a lake, such as the one in which
the Achaeans, afflicted with the plague, cleansed themselves prior to sacrificing to Apollo (Iliad
1.314). Here, too, an incorrect conclusion was reached when it was postulated that the goddess
Artemis must originally have been a spring nymph on account of her connection with water.40
Rather, flowing water was sacred to her because it could remove stains of all kinds. For example,
Artemis of Lusi in Arcadia, a place whose very name refers to washing, is said to have purified
the daughters of Proetus, who had been polluted with madness, just as Apollo purified the matri-
cide Orestes in Delphi.41


Since the goddess who supervised both purification and the taking of life reaches back to such
remote times, the question whether the ancestors of the Greeks knew Artemis before she came
into the area of the Aegean is a false one. When we compare the remains of Stone Age cultures
with one another, distant regions are drawn together, and the world becomes more uniform.
Thus, Meuli was able to gather his material about the way of life of tribal hunters and shepherds
from different parts of the world. They worshipped deities of the hunt everywhere.42 Therefore,
it would be pointless to ask which region should be given pride of place. The bear in the entou-
rage of the Attic as well as the Arcadian Artemis could have originated in the wide steppes of
Eurasia, bears’ classical habitat, but these creatures were also found in the Aegean. As for the
origins of the doe with the golden antlers, Artemis’ magic animal, these are almost certainly
northern, as Meuli has shown elsewhere.43 Every hunter knows that the hind has no horns but
female reindeer are horned, and so it is possible that this tale developed among the hunters
and breeders of reindeer in the north. Artemis’ horned companion brought along to Greece the
expansiveness of her native land. Heracles had to pursue her over the entire world. The Indo-
European migrants who introduced the cult of Zeus to Greece must surely have been familiar
180 ARTEMIS

with the strict precepts of the prehistoric goddess of the hunt, for they burned the thighbones
of sacrificial animals on large ash altars of the sort that Krämer has determined are also found
north of the Alps.44 Perhaps the name Artemis originates with these new arrivals from the north.
However, the goddess’s predecessors had long made their home in the Aegean as well. As we meet
the many figures that resemble her, we become aware of a multiplicity of layers that gave rise to
the many cult titles and epithets of the historical Artemis.
The goddesses of the ancient Aegean who correspond to Artemis are to be distinguished from
the Artemis of the migrants in that they were linked with different gods and cults. Understanding
the essence of a deity requires consideration of the other deities usually depicted around her. The
Cretan Mistress of the Wild Goats, whom we can also recognize on Delos, had close affinities
with the vegetation cult so distinctive of the Greek islands. Dionysus, the most important male
deity of these islands, was and remained close to her (cf. Odyssey 11.325). Moreover, Apollo had
probably already become her brother. On Delos, the graves of the Hyperborean maidens, Arge
and Opis, lay within the Artemisium, the oldest cult site in the large sanctuary. Both maidens
had been given names that were epithets of Artemis, as Müller pointed out.45 They were, accord-
ingly, to be identified with the goddess, or, rather, they formed with her a union of Aegean veg-
etation deities. Celebrations of birth, death, and rebirth were characteristic of the cults of these
deities, in whose company the Horae and Charites also belonged. Therefore, Artemis’ birth was
celebrated on Delos on the sixth day of the spring month, corresponding to our May.46 The next
day was considered the day of Apollo’s birth. The newborn Artemis is said to have assisted her
mother at the time of her brother’s birth (Apollodorus 1.4.1). Looked at from a historical point
of view, this myth expresses the greater age of the cult of Artemis on Delos, as was also revealed
by the excavations of the French archaeologists.47 Artemis is also invoked elsewhere as a god-
dess of birth.48 This function must surely date back to the pre-Greek period. Leto supposedly
gave birth to Apollo at the palm tree on Delos that is mentioned in the Odyssey (6.163ff.). This
tree was sacred to both of Leto’s children; it has rightly been connected with the tree cult of
the second millennium B.C. A cylinder seal, found some years ago on the neighboring island of
Naxos (fig. 154), provides confirmation.49 On it, a man in Mycenaean garb stands in front of an
altar with sacrificial offerings; beside it grows a large palm. The man, who is a warrior, has placed
his sword on the altar as a sacrificial offering. Mycenaean ivory reliefs depicting heavily armed
warriors were also found in the Artemisium of Delos.50 Under Mycenaean influence, the Minoan
Mistress of the Wild Goats and Vegetation assumed warlike features.


While the Aegean Artemis was related to Apollo, Dionysus, and the Charites, the Artemis of the
Hellenic migrants entered with Zeus and Ares. Artemis had close relationships with both deities.
While another daughter of Zeus, Athena, went so far as to take part in a conspiracy against her
father (Iliad 1.400), the relationship between Zeus and Artemis remained consistently intimate
and devoid of serious problems. Homer has her run hastily to her father from the battle of the
 A R T E M I S 181

154. Cylinder seal from the

island of Naxos. Mycenaean
warrior at the altar of Artemis (?).
Third quarter of second
millennium B.C. Athens,
National Archaeological Museum.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

gods in book 21 of the Iliad, in which Hera not only hurls verbal abuse at her but also beats her
about the head with her quiver. Looking for solace, the daughter settles on her father’s lap (506).
Callimachus, in his Hymn to Artemis, artfully adapted this motif. There, little Artemis sits fawn-
ingly on the lap of her father, who is so proud of his daughter that he is unable to refuse her any
request. What differentiated Artemis from her Aegean predecessors was above all her sisterly
relationship with Ares. Together with Artemis and Dionysus, he was one of the supreme deities
of the Thracians (Herodotus 5.7), retained by many cults of the earliest Greek migrants.51 Oeno-
maus, son of Ares and king of Elis, who was accustomed to killing his daughter’s suitors, made
a sacrifice to an ancient statue of Artemis prior to his decisive race.52 This version, which has
been preserved for us on a Late Classical vase (fig. 155), is perhaps the original. If the name of
Artemis is to be read as “butcher,” then we can understand why the god of war was at her side.
Both dealt directly with death. Both expected dedications of the spoils—of the hunt or of war—
since the taking of life had occurred with their permission and their assistance. If their allotment
182 ARTEMIS

155. Oenomaus making a sacrifice to Artemis. Her statue is set on a column in the middle of the scene.
Attic bell-krater. Ca. 390–380 B.C. Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale H2200. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

was not kept for them, they were capable of terrible vengeance. It is significant that the chorus
in Sophocles’ Ajax (172ff.) wonders whether to attribute Ajax’s madness to the anger of Artemis
or Enyalius (Ares), who both in all probability felt cheated of their spoils. Annually in Athens,
Artemis and Enyalius together received a sacrifice of five hundred goats on the day when the
battle of Marathon was commemorated. Prior to the battle, the Athenians had promised to sac-
rifice to Artemis every year goats equal in number to the Persians they would slay (Xenophon,
Anabasis 3.2.12; Aristotle, Constitution of the Athenians 58). This figure could not be achieved,
but the vow was fulfilled by building a temple for Artemis Agrotera in Agrae on the river Ilissus,
near Athens, where she is alleged to have taken part in the hunt for the first time after she arrived
from Delos (Pausanias 1.19.6). The Artemis of Euboea, the most important deity of that island,
 A R T E M I S 183

also had warlike characteristics.53 Armed dances were celebrated at her festival in Eretria. Strabo
cited an ancient inscription from the Artemisium in Eretria in his reconstruction of the bygone
splendor of this most important festival of Euboea. The procession featured three thousand heav-
ily armed men and an additional six hundred cavalry and sixty wagons (10.1.10). The beautiful
friezes of horsemen and hoplites on Chalcidian vases, which perhaps came from a workshop in
Eretria, have preserved for us a reflection of the luster of that Archaic festival for Artemis.
Finally, the most renowned sanctuary of Artemis in the ancient world, the Artemisium of
Ephesus, also had war-related origins. The daughters of Ares, the Amazons, are said to have
founded it. Pindar spoke of this in a poem no longer extant (Pausanias 7.2.7), and Callimachus
also discusses it in the Hymn to Artemis cited above (237ff.):

Also for you the Amazons who butcher,

Intoxicated, set up a statue on the coast at Ephesus
Under the trunk of an oak; and Hippo built the temple.
Around it, Queen Upis, they themselves danced
With their weapons,
First with shields and fully armed, then again in a circle
They arranged the extensive chorus, and the luminous Syrinx
sounded out.

In the Classical period, statues of wounded Amazons were produced for a contest by some
of the most famous artists of the day and placed in the sanctuary at Ephesus.54 The Ephesian
cult of Artemis dates back, as shown above, to the time of the Ionian migration. Its origin was
Pylian-Attic. Since the Ionians who came from the Prytaneion of Athens were the most promi-
nent (Herodotus 1.146), the cults they took along generally continued, as the example of the cult
of Poseidon at the Panionion proves (see fig. 66). This was also true of Artemis, the goddess most
widely worshipped by the Greeks of Asia Minor. To be sure, scholars usually assume that, in the
case of Artemis of Ephesus,

we are dealing with a variant of the same great female deity who reigned throughout Asia Minor,
Syria, Phoenicia, and Palestine. . . . The ancient Anatolian Mother Goddess was equated by the Greeks
migrating to Asia Minor with a number of their own deities . . . most frequently with Artemis, but
not in her manifestation as fleet-footed huntress, but as that older, original nature goddess.55

It cannot be denied that many oriental characteristics were transferred to Artemis in Asia Minor,
especially since the Ionians intermarried with the natives (Herodotus 1.146). However, the hunt-
ress Artemis is not a younger form of the goddess but actually the oldest. It even seems that the
Anatolian Cybele takes something from Artemis. The “Ephesian type” of the Cybele reliefs shows
the goddess as a young girl.56 On the other hand, the form of cult image of Artemis of Ephesus
184 ARTEMIS

followed Anatolian precedents,57 and the goddess had eunuchs among her cult personnel,58 as is
also known to be true for Cybele.59 In addition, Cybele and Artemis both received sacrifices of
bulls, even though both are female.60 The chest ornament of Artemis Ephesia has been insight-
fully explained as a row of sacrificial bull’s testicles61 that were originally attached to the cult
image in natura. In addition, the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus is oriented to the west in Anato-
lian style,62 not to the east as in Greek sanctuaries. The Archaic Ephesians, nevertheless, had
searched for a common bond with Athens. Although many an excellent sculptor dwelled in
Ephesus, the Ephesians assigned the restoration of the temple statue of the Artemisium to the
Athenian Endoios. As Georg Lippold noted, the Ephesians, like the inhabitants of other cities in
Asia Minor who employed Endoios, were very conscious of the Attic-Ionian tradition that
extended back to the second millennium B.C.63


Artemis was the mistress of the east and west coasts of Attica. At Munychia she sat on the pen-
insula in Piraeus that today still bears her name. With Leto and Apollo she was worshipped on
Cape Zoster to the south.64 She controlled the east coast from Brauron, above Halai, as far as
Rhamnus (Nemesis, who hailed from there, was a manifestation of our goddess of many forms).65
Indeed, her realm extended as far as Boeotian Aulis, for the sacrifice of Agamemnon before his
departure for Troy was dedicated to her. Pausanias was still able to see the temple of Artemis
located there (9.19.6). Whoever put out to sea from Attica, in whatever direction, had to pay
homage to this goddess. In the myth of Theseus’ journey to Crete, Apollo admittedly took his
sister’s place (Plutarch, Theseus 18), but the departure took place in the month Munychion—on
the sixth of the month to be specific, the day on which most Greek festivals in honor of Artemis
took place and when her birthday was celebrated.
Very little literary evidence of the Attic cult of Artemis has come down to us. We know it
much better from recent excavations. At Brauron and in her sanctuaries in the Piraeus and in
Athens, similar cult vessels were found:66 small, colorfully painted krateriskoi from the early fifth
century B.C. (fig. 156). They originally contained either cleansing water or the perfumes cher-
ished by this pure goddess. Her altar, beside which stood the sacred palm, appears time and
again on these vessels. Lilly Kahil, to whom we are indebted for an excellent study on this topic,
interpreted the girls who dance on many of these vases, garbed in short dresses, as Artemis’ she-
bears. It was they who dedicated the little vessels to the goddess. Since the krateriskoi also came
to light in the precinct of Munychia, the longstanding controversy about the presence of she-
bears in the Piraeus has thereby been settled. The cults at Brauron and on the west coast were
similar. This holds true also for the sanctuaries of Artemis in the city of Athens.
Kahil has correctly compared the dancing scenes on these vases to the cult dance of the Spar-
tan Artemis Orthia. Common to both is an unmistakable Dionysian aspect. Nearly all Dorians
worshipped an Artemis, who was called Orthia, Vortheia, or—as at Byzantium—Orthosia. Brit-
ish archaeologists excavated her tribal sanctuary in Sparta at the turn of the twentieth century.67
Since no Mycenaean remains were found there, it must have been founded in this swampy area
 A R T E M I S 185

156. Krateriskos with dancing arktoi

(little bears). Cf. fig. 151. Dedication
to the Attic Artemis. Ca. 490 B.C.
Brauron, Archaeological Museum
A25. Photo: © Hellenic Ministry of
Culture and Sports / Ephorate of
Antiquities of East Attica.

of the Eurotas plain only after the Dorians came. The cult of Artemis Orthia was as important
for the early history of Greek dramatic poetry as the cult of Dionysus was in Athens. Choral songs
were sung in the goddess’s honor. The oldest that have come down to us are from the hand of
Alcman, dating as far back as the seventh century B.C., when, according to the archaeological
finds, the sanctuary was thriving. One of the most beautiful fragments from this poet pictures
the goddess in the mountains producing cheese from lions’ milk (fr. 56 Page):

You are often seen on the mountain peaks,

As often as a feast with many torches is celebrated
For the gods,
You are holding a golden vessel, a great skyphos
Such as shepherds possess.
Putting lions’ milk within it,
You make with your hands
A great sturdy cheese
For Hermes, slayer of Argus.

Alcman seems to be referring to a festival of Dionysian character, since he calls it polyphanos

and the torches in the cult of Dionysus are known as phanai. An ancient orator said that Alcman
186 ARTEMIS

had Dionysus milk lions (Aristides, Orations 12.7). It is not unlikely that the god was mentioned
in the context of a poem similar to the one under consideration. He milked the predators, Arte-
mis performed the curdling, and Hermes was permitted to eat the cheese. This accords with the
cult of Orthia, for during her festival it was customary to heap cheeses on the altar in her sanctu-
ary. Young Spartans were required to steal them from there in a ritual game (Pseudo-Xenophon,
Constitution of the Spartans 2.9). In the mythical world of the poem, this task falls to the divine
thief Hermes, who, as god of shepherds, was connected to the Orthia of the countryside. In the
hymn to Hecate from the Theogony, Hermes and the goddess increase the offspring of the herds
(444ff.). On an early Archaic votive relief from Paros, he is depicted with Artemis.68
More important, however, is the connection of Orthia with Dionysus, also evident in the frag-
ment. The choral songs of Alcman were the ancestors of the chorus of Attic tragedy, which com-
memorated its Spartan origin through continual use of the Doric dialect. Masked choruses also
made an appearance in the cult of Orthia. Earthenware reproductions of their masks were found
in her sanctuary.69 There are masks of ugly, toothless old women, but also of youths, and even of
satyrs, all from the Archaic period, some as early as the seventh century B.C. Ivory and bone
carvings from the considerable trove found at the site frequently represent the goddess sporting
on her head a crown of reeds, appropriate for the “lady” of a temple in the marshes. The god
Dionysus also had temples in the wetlands of Sparta as well as in Athens. It is probably this god
who is depicted on an Archaic ivory relief from her temple. With a commanding gesture, he
controls the animals, and, like the goddess, he is winged.70 A winged Dionysus with the epithet
Psilax was still on view in Amyclae in Sparta in the time of Pausanias (3.19.6).
Not only in Sparta and Athens, but elsewhere too, Artemis and Dionysus were close to each
other. Ines Jucker has suggested that the “pot-belly dancers” on Corinthian vases can be shown
in many cases to be dancing for Artemis.71 Statues of Artemis and Dionysus were placed beside
one another in the agora of Corinth (Pausanias 2.2.6). In Calydon the cults of Artemis and Dio-
nysus had been joined since the Archaic period and were transplanted together to Patras during
the reign of the emperor Augustus.72 Although in the seventh and sixth centuries Artemis was
the main contributor, from whom the cult of Dionysus took many things, the increase in popu-
larity his cult received from the theater led to her being drawn into his domain. In a dithyramb
for a festival of Dionysus in the city of his birth, Thebes, Pindar has Artemis harness lions to the
wagon for Dionysus-Bromios, the god of the loud cry (fr. 70b, 19ff. Snell):

And Artemis approaches

Quickly from a lonely, wandering journey
And harnesses in Bacchic madness
The wild race of lions for Bromios.
The sight bewitches him
In whatever way the pack of animals proceeds to dance.


 A R T E M I S 187

On a Classical krater from Tarentum (fig. 157), the daughter city of Sparta, Artemis, garbed in
a short dress and high hunting boots, and swinging a torch above Dionysus’ head, enters the
Dionysiac circle.73 In wealthy Tarentum, Archaic Sparta’s joy in festival and theater lived once
again. Accordingly, Artemis is even carrying a situla, a bucket filled with wine, which is also a
reminder of her ancient association with Dionysus in Sparta. But she has donned the hide of a
fawn, the nebris, in such a way that it functions as a cuirass.
In view of Artemis’ popularity, it is not difficult to understand her frequent depiction in art.
The images of the “Mistress of the Animals” in Minoan art need not be considered here, since
scholars have not yet convincingly differentiated the mountain mother Rhea from the Cretan
predecessors of Artemis.74 The pillar-shaped cult statue of Artemis in Sicyon (Pausanias 2.9.6)
dates back, based on its form, to the second millennium B.C. Her title, Patroa, which we also see
in the epithet of the Apollo Patroos of the Ionians, points back to the Ionian phase of a city that
became Dorian only late in the second millennium B.C. On the island Ikaria, which had been
colonized by Ionian Miletus (Strabo 14.1.6), there was a wooden representation of Artemis “which
had not been worked” (Clement of Alexandria, Protrepticus 4.46). In remote regions and among

157. Artemis in the Dionysiac circle.

Early South Italian volute-krater by the
Karneia Painter. Ca. 410 B.C. Taranto,
Museo Archeologico Nazionale IG
8263. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
188 ARTEMIS

the simple people who worshipped this goddess like no other, the use of such wooden pillars in
the cult of Artemis may have continued for many centuries.75 Roman paintings of rural scenes
frequently portray cult pillars still decked out with her symbols (fig. 158).76
The earliest sculpture we have from the Greek Protogeometric period (fig. 159) is an attribute
of Artemis, the deer sacred to her. An awkward, barrel-shaped figure—only the head with its
antlers serves as an identifying element—it comes from an Attic grave of the tenth century B.C.77
A predecessor is an oriental deer of argentiferous lead from the shaft graves of Mycenae.78 The
Artemis-Hecate we have already considered on the amphora from Thebes (see fig. 148) is among
the earliest depictions of a deity that can be identified with any certainty in the vase painting of
the first millennium B.C. In the same period, around 700 B.C., unusual bell-shaped figurines
were produced in Boeotia, intended for suspension (fig. 160).79 They wear short, stiff dresses from
which the legs protrude, hanging freely. The neck, over which locks of hair fall, is even more
elongated than that of the Mantiklos Apollo (see fig. 124). The arms are formed individually or
simply painted on the dress, which may be decorated with birds, branches, or a circle of women.

158. Cult pillars of Artemis on a

wall painting in the so-called
House of Livia on the Palatine
Hill in Rome. Ca. 30 B.C. On the
balustrade at left is the triple
Artemis-Hecate. The aniconic
column is decorated at the top
with the goddess’s diadem, while
the trunk is adorned with deer,
goat, and boar heads. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
 159. Protogeometric deer. From a
tomb in the Kerameikos in Athens.
Ca. 925–900 B.C. Athens, Kerameikos
Museum 64. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

160. Clay figurine of Artemis from

Boeotia. Ca. 700 B.C. Paris, Louvre CA573.
Photo: Erich Lessing / Art Resource, NY.
190 ARTEMIS

Smallish breasts are sculpted on the figurine, and between them the artist has painted jewelry.
The usual interpretation has been that they relate to the cult statue of Artemis Pergaia of Asia
Minor, which appears on coins of the Hellenistic-Roman period as a cone with a female head.80
But this statue and the Cretan figures from the late second millennium B.C. differ from the
Boeotian examples in that they have no legs. It is, however, to these legs, dressed in hunting boots,
that we must look for an interpretation. This is Artemis the huntress. She wears a knee-length
dress, as do her cult attendants, the Bears, on the Attic krateriskoi (see fig. 156). The designs on
her dress of birds and women are appropriate for Artemis, as is the fact that the statuettes were
to be hung up. Suspension was not unusual, as Nilsson has shown, for goddesses who figured in
the tree cult of the second millennium B.C.81 Condylea in Arcadia still possessed a cult of “hang-
ing Artemis” in the time of Pausanias (8.23.6f.). The clay figurines were imitations of wooden
images of a Boeotian Artemis that hung on a sacred tree.
In the seventh century B.C., during the Orientalizing period of Greek art, the oriental depic-
tion of the Mistress of Beasts was copied in many places and in a variety of media. The archaeo-
logical finds from the Spartan sanctuary of Orthia have already been mentioned. An abundance
of depictions of a winged Tamer of Beasts have been preserved in Corinthian pottery of the
seventh and sixth centuries B.C. A perfume bottle from around 600 B.C., found on Delos, is
particularly attractive (fig. 161).82 Beautifully dressed and sporting sickle-shaped wings, Artemis
is holding the necks of two large geese. The winged Artemis on a krater (dated approximately
570 B.C.) by the Attic painter Kleitias (the François Vase: fig. 162), holds a deer and a panther.83
Corinthian pottery, as well as the Boeotian and Attic vases influenced by it, is well known for its
animal friezes. Not enough attention is paid to the fact that it is to the realm of Artemis that these
images belong. When we find lions, panthers, bulls, boars, deer, and goats joined together with-
out any hint of a skirmish, an explanation can certainly be found in the rules and canons of
decoration. But peace among animals was at the same time a feature of the sacred precinct of
Artemis (Strabo 5.1.9). Groups of fighting animals testify, on the contrary, to the death-dealing
might of the Mistress of Wild Animals. Here as well, we today are too ready to adduce the word
“decorative” as a sufficient and satisfactory explanation. A number of scholars have proposed that
many of the scenes can be interpreted as similes composed in the manner of the numerous
Homeric predator similes.84 In the Middle Ages the expressive power of the ancient depictions
of animal conflicts, insofar as they were known at that time, was still grasped directly. Accord-
ingly, the Hellenistic group of a lion tearing apart a collapsing horse, found today in the garden
of the Palazzo dei Conservatori on the Capitoline,85 served in the fourteenth and fifteenth cen-
turies A.D. as a symbol of justice. Death sentences were passed in front of it. Corresponding to
this we note the ancient custom of executing criminals in front of images or temples of Artemis
and placing their bodies there, as well as the nooses of suicides, as is attested for Athens and
Rhodes (Plutarch, Themistocles 22; Porphyry, De abstinentia 2.54).


 A R T E M I S 191

161. Artemis as
Mistress of Animals.
Frieze from an
alabastron (ointment
vase). Early sixth
century B.C. Delos,
Archaeological Museum
B6191. After D. A. Amyx,
Corinthian Vase-Painting
of the Archaic Period
(Berkeley 1988), vol. III,
pl. 41, 1.

162. Artemis as Mistress of

Animals. Handle of the volute-
krater by the potter Ergotimos
and painter Kleitias. Ca. 570 B.C.
Florence, Museo Archeologico
Nazionale 4209. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

The decoration of the Temple of Artemis on Corcyra (Corfu), dating from the early sixth century
B.C. (fig. 163), is linked to Corinthian art.86 The two powerful “lion-panthers” that recline, ready
to pounce, on either side of the central group have often been related to Artemis, the temple’s
inhabitant. The themes of the three remaining groups that fill the pediment have, on the con-
trary, been interpreted as unrelated. The attempt to see in both pediment corners scenes from
the Titanomachy has been convincingly refuted.87 The flanking groups are, rather, on the left, a
192 ARTEMIS

163. West pediment of the Temple of Artemis on Corfu. In the middle, Perseus killing Medusa, flanked
by lions. Ca. 600 B.C. Reconstruction drawing after G. Rodenwaldt, Altdorische Bildwerke in Korfu
(Berlin 1938), fig. 37. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

depiction of the death of Priam, and, on the right, the death of a Giant by a thunderbolt of
Zeus. The climax of the Iliupersis stands opposite the climax of the Gigantomachy. Now, it is true
that Archaic pediments elsewhere also featured mythical battle scenes. Nevertheless, the poros
limestone reliefs of the Athenian Acropolis and other Archaic pediments elsewhere offer nothing
corresponding to the Corfu pediment. Out of the entire treasury of Greek myth, no other exam-
ple exists of pediment sculpture portraying two such vastly different deaths that confront one
another in this way. Does the theme of the corner groups give evidence, perhaps, of the author-
ity of the temple’s mistress, Artemis, in whose power lay the taking of life? This relationship must
have been relevant in much greater measure for the central group. It has so far most often been
explained with the often-misused word “apotropaic.” Jack Benson has recently emphasized again
that the group has a narrative character.88 As Hampe had already pointed out, the central scene
depicts the slaying of Medusa by Perseus.89 Again, as was the case with the flanking groups,
we have a scene of action, and, as there, an action with a fatal result. However, this drama is not
shown in abbreviated form, as Benson assumes. Both opponents exhibit a real presence—much
more so than is the case in the corner groups. In the center, the giant female daimon Medusa
meets her slayer, Perseus, whose heroism is magnified by his reduced stature. Here again we have
a death as well as the climax of the myth. Each of the three slayings on the Corfu pediment comes
from a different cycle of myths and, indeed, from a different mythological stratum. It is precisely
this that leads us to the conclusion that the pediment reflects a conscious harmonization. The
Gigantomachy is a tale of the gods, and the destruction of Troy is a historical myth. However,
the decapitation of Medusa by Perseus, the ancestor of Peloponnesian royal families, belonged to
the ancient myths of the Peloponnese, with which Corcyra was connected as a colony of Corinth.
The deadly power of Artemis reveals itself in all three mythical domains, and with the lion-
panthers her authority is also extended to wild animals.
 A R T E M I S 193

Regarding the Corfu pediment, scholars have more than once made reference to the Corin-
thian epic poet Eumelus, who must have lived at the time when the Temple of Artemis was under
construction. We no longer possess his work, which was much prized in Antiquity. This much,
however, can be said: the pediment relief is not epic in character; it does not tell a story of long
duration. Rather, we have three mythic examples of killing, chosen to prove the power of the
temple’s mistress. If one wished to compare a literary genre with this pediment, it would be not
epic poetry but choral lyric. Within this genre we encounter the stylistic principle of celebrating
a god, a hero, or a man with mythical examples, having as a common thread a focus on the spe-
cific deeds or characteristics of the poem’s subject. Such mythical examples can sometimes be
painted with a few strokes, sometimes in much greater detail—even in the same lyric—so that a
thorough interpretation is needed to understand why this or that myth has been placed in the
central location. The same is true of the Corfu pediment, where the comparison with choral lyric
is also meaningful because this genre of poetry is rooted in the cult of Artemis.
The Temple of Artemis on Corcyra, of which only the west pediment has been preserved, was
one of the largest and most beautiful of all Doric temples in Archaic Greece. Its façades, with their
eight columns, would be equaled, later in the sixth century B.C., only by the massive Ionic tem-
ples of Asia Minor, such as the Artemisium of Ephesus. Corcyra was established as a colony by
Corinth in 734 B.C. As in the time of the Dorian and Ionian migrations, Artemis also accompa-
nied migrants during this period of Greek colonization. In their new abodes colonists frequently
constructed larger and more beautiful sanctuaries for the goddess who had led them there than
she had possessed in the mother cities. Artemis also frequently appears on the coinage of the
colonies. The coins struck by Massalia (fig. 164), known today as Marseilles, can be cited as an
example.90 It is, moreover, no accident that the seventh century B.C., the epoch of colonization, is
at the same time the period of the animal frieze in Greek art. It depicts, as stated above, the realm
of Artemis. The leader of colonists was the mightiest goddess of that time. At the same time Corinth
founded Corcyra, she also established Syracuse as a daughter city. The heart of that flourishing
Sicilian colony was the island of Ortygia, named after the quail of Artemis and sacred to her. The
spring Arethusa gurgles on the island even today. Its nymph was identified with Artemis. She is
said to have fled from Elis to escape the river god Alpheus, who, smitten with her, pursued her
over the sea as far as Sicily. Her beautiful profile, with dolphins from the nearby sea playing
around it, adorned the coins of Syracuse from the middle of the sixth century B.C. (fig. 165).91

Sacred resting place of Alpheus,

Ortygia, offspring of famed Syracuse,
Bed of Artemis,
Sister of Delos.

Pindar addresses the island of Artemis in his first Nemean Ode (1–4). In the second Pythian Ode,
which celebrates a victorious chariot race of Hieron of Syracuse, the poet has Artemis of Ortygia
tame the winning horses for the tyrant.92
194 ARTEMIS

164. Head of Artemis on a drachma

from Massalia. Late fourth century
B.C. London, British Museum
1866.1201.40. Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.

165. Head of Artemis-Arethusa on the

reverse of a decadrachm from
Syracuse. 480–479 B.C. London,
British Museum 1841.0726.287. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

In Pindar’s time, the first half of the fifth century B.C., some significant images of Artemis
were produced. Together with her brother, Apollo, she is portrayed as punishing hubris, above
all in the Niobe story. Whether the goddess is armed like an Amazon or dressed in Heracles’
lionskin (fig. 166),93 as in the martial imagery of Archaic art, Early Classical artists emphasize not
only her severity but also her maidenly beauty. Although she carries her bow, she is shown wear-
ing a long dress. On a well-known krater by the Niobid Painter, she stands behind her brother,94
who shoots the children of Niobe to death amid rocky crags covered with stands of fir (fig. 167).
From the quiver on her back the goddess is seen drawing one of her unfailing arrows.
Representations of Artemis are also numerous in the Early Classical period because the god-
dess assisted the Greeks in their victory over the Persians. The sacrifice of goats to Artemis and
Enyalius at the commemoration of the battle of Marathon has already been mentioned. The
polemarch for the year 490 B.C. fell at Marathon, but he had personally made a vow, which his
descendants fulfilled. On the Athenian Acropolis they dedicated a winged goddess placed on a
high column, called “Messenger of the Immortals” in the votive inscription. Was she placed in
the precinct of Artemis Brauronia, which lay to the right of the Propylaea? Had the Polemarch
Callimachus promised a votive offering not to Athena but to Artemis? The messenger’s wand
found on the Acropolis, which Hampe attributed to the winged goddess, fits nicely with this
interpretation.95 Its ends were decorated with the head of the goat-god Pan, who was worshipped
in Athens from the time of the battle of Marathon (Herodotus 6.105). The Arcadian Pan was
closely linked to Artemis, not only in his native country, rich in herds, but also elsewhere, espe-
cially in Ephesus. Be that as it may, after the Persian Wars one of the most original of the Attic
vase-painters, the Pan Painter, linked the two together on the two sides of the krater from which
he derives his name. Pan and Artemis are the allies of the Athenians at Marathon.96 The essence
 166. Artemis with lionskin,
fighting the Giants. From a dinos
by Lydos. Ca. 550–540 B.C.
Athens, National Archaeological
Museum, Acropolis Collection
607. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

167. Apollo and Artemis

killing the Niobids. Calyx-
krater by the Niobid
Painter. 460–450 B.C. Paris,
Louvre G341. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
196 ARTEMIS

of each is depicted: the lustful Pan, who chases the attractive young shepherd Daphnis past a
herm (fig. 168), and the chaste goddess, who lets the hunter Actaeon die because he compromised
her purity (fig. 169). Actaeon sinks onto his bended knees, while his own dogs fall upon him as
though he were a deer. His head falls back; his right arm reaches out into the void. The Pan
Painter has unmistakably shown here that it would be pointless for Actaeon to flee for his life.
The goddess, who was hurrying away, fleet of foot, turns back, aims an arrow at him, and so, by
means of a swift death, rescues him from the cruel attack of his maddened dogs.

168. Bell-krater by the

Pan Painter. Pan chasing the
shepherd Daphnis.
Ca. 480–470 B.C. Boston,
Museum of Fine Arts 10.185.
Photo: © Museum of Fine
Arts, Boston.

169. Bell-krater by the Pan

Painter. Artemis killing the hunter
Actaeon. Ca. 480–470 B.C. Boston,
Museum of Fine Arts 10.185. Photo:
© Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.
 A R T E M I S 197

After the sea battle at Salamis, many offerings were bestowed on Artemis, and the founding
of new cults for the goddess was not uncommon. The storm broke over the Persian fleet not far
from her sanctuary, the Artemisium on the north side of Euboea (Herodotus 7.192). As Munychia
she was the mistress of the waters in which the battle of Salamis took place. The day commemo-
rating the battle was transferred to her festival, since the victory was owed to her (Plutarch, De
gloria Atheniensium 349f.). The victor, Themistocles, however, dedicated at his own expense a
sanctuary to Artemis in the neighborhood of his home in Athens, Melite (Plutarch, Themistocles
22). This testimony was doubted for a long time, until the small temple was excavated.97 In it were
found the same krateriskoi, decorated with painted dancing she-bears, that have already been
mentioned (see fig. 156). Themistocles gave his Artemis the epithet Aristoboule: that is, “Artemis
of the best counsel.” The victor of Salamis credited her with the inspiration to dare to fight a sea
battle. The name recalls the Artemis “goddess of counsel” in the Agora of Athens, who accom-
panied the Ionians in their migration to Miletus. Themistocles had reinterpreted this Archaic
depiction of the goddess in a personal way.
With the booty from Marathon, the Athenians ultimately put up a temple for the goddess
Eukleia in the vicinity of the Agora (Pausanias 1.14.5). Eukleia has been identified with Artemis.98
She embodied “good reputation,” as her name indicates, and watched over the morals of the young.
She was worshipped in many Greek cities. She had a festival in Corinth (Xenophon, Hellenica
4.2.2), and in Corcyra a month was named after her. Young couples offered sacrifice to her before
their wedding. For this reason Eukleia can also be seen in the circle of Aphrodite on Attic vases
of the late fifth century B.C. (fig. 170). Granted, the fifth Homeric Hymn states that Aphrodite was
never able to subdue Artemis (16f.), but in the Homeric Hymn to Apollo, both Aphrodite and
Artemis dance together in the circles of the Horae and Charites to the Olympian music of Apollo

170. Detail of Eukleia, in

the circle of Aphrodite.
Lid of a lekanis (wedding
vase). Ca. 410 B.C. Mainz,
Universität, Klassisch-
Archäologische
Sammlungen 118. Photo:
Johannes Gutenberg
Universität-Mainz.
198 ARTEMIS

(194ff.). These divine triads are associated with both goddesses. The Graces link the separate
realms of Artemis and Aphrodite, as they do those of other Olympians.
Artemis and Aphrodite sit beside each other at the council of the gods on the east frieze of
the Parthenon (fig. 171).99 The proximity of Aphrodite, who is only partially preserved, indicates
that this Artemis has assumed characteristics of Eukleia, who looks after adolescents. Young men
and women are, after all, the main participants in the procession on the Parthenon frieze. While
Apollo, to his sister’s right, turns in the direction of Poseidon to carry on a conversation with
him, Artemis looks wide-eyed into the distance. Is she on the lookout for the approaching sacri-
ficial procession, or do the mountains through which she roams as huntress appear before her
in her mind’s eye? The sculptor has infused both interpretations into his image, since each has
seemingly been part of her character forever: distance from mankind, yet involvement in their
doings. This involvement, however, takes place from a distance, away from the world of the gods.

171. Artemis from the east

frieze of the Parthenon.
Cf. fig. 249. Athens, Acropolis
Museum. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
 AT H E N A

T
he name of the goddess is derived from the same root as the name of her city,
Athens. It is pre-Greek and etymologically as difficult to explain as her Homeric
epithets, Tritogeneia and Atrytone. Perhaps these names will be clarified once the
Minoan script Linear A has been deciphered.1 Athena’s most significant epithet, Pallas, has an
Indo-European ring. It should probably be derived from pallein, “to swing” or “to brandish,” a
word that fits her spear. The epithet refers to the armed, spear-brandishing goddess. Only her
likeness as an armed goddess is given the name Palladium.2 We know from both art and litera-
ture that there were other depictions of Athena. In book 6 of the Iliad (303), the women of Troy
place a peplos on the knees of a seated Athena—the first appearance of a cult statue in Greek
literature. As is also the case with the double name of Phoebus Apollo, the double name of Pallas
Athena expresses the fullness of her nature and, at the same time, its dichotomy. The goddess
knows warfare but also peaceful crafts. She keeps watch over the soldiers but also their families.
She protects the people in the city, but also the olive tree sacred to them. She has maidenly as
well as motherly characteristics.
Of all the great Olympian deities, Pallas Athena preserves the Minoan-Mycenaean phase of
Greek religion in its purest form. Archaeological research into the Minoan-Mycenaean culture
has revealed new aspects of the early goddess, whom nineteenth-century scholars had tried to
explain as a goddess of thunderclouds and lightning.3 In the Archaic period, temples of Athena
were situated at the sites of Mycenaean palaces, as in Mycenae itself and also on the Acropolis of
Athens. From this Nilsson correctly postulated a continuity of cult from the second millennium
B.C.4 Athena was probably first worshipped as a palace goddess housed in private chapels, such
as the ones known from the palace of Knossos. Following the demise of Mycenaean culture, the
cult was then transformed into a temple cult. From the palace goddess developed Athena Polias,
the city goddess. To the examples provided by Nilsson we can add the more recent finds from

199
200 AT H E NA

Tiryns, where Archaic inscriptions to Athena were found on stones from the cyclopean wall.5
Places associated with the goddess, such as those mentioned in a passage from book 7 of the
Odyssey (7.78ff.), can now be understood thanks to Nilsson’s research:

Lovely Scheria she left behind,

And went to Marathon and to Athens with its broad streets,
And entered the sturdy house of Erechtheus . . .

The palace queen resided in the palace of the king. She belonged to the royal clan. Here we
have an explanation for the very personal relationship Athena fostered with families of heroes
through several generations. We can think, for example, of her care for Telemachus, whom she
looked after like a father during Odysseus’ long absence, or of her relationship with Diomedes
in the Iliad, whom she protects as she had already helped his father. She differs from both Hera
and Aphrodite in the way she relates to heroes. The latter is concerned with Aeneas because he
is her very own son, while Hera is not really very much interested in individual heroes. Hera is
concerned with the Achaeans as a group and with the honor of the cities dear to her—Argos,
Mycenae, and Sparta. Hera was not, as Nilsson assumed, a palace goddess, since in the Argive
plain she put distance between her own dwelling and the palaces (see fig. 31).6 In contrast, Athena
lived in the citadel together with the royal family.
The decipherment of the Mycenaean script supports the hypothesis that Athena has her ori-
gins in the religion of the second millennium B.C. The name atana potinia (Athena the Mistress)
was found on a clay tablet from Knossos.7 It corresponds to Homer’s potnia Athenaia. Nilsson
assumed that the Achaeans had changed the peaceful palace goddess into a warrior. As guardian
of the palace and its king, she would, of course, also accompany the ruler into battle. While a tree,
bird, and snake had been the goddess’s pre-Greek attributes, her shield may have come to her
from the Mycenaeans. The supposition that Athena’s arming is entirely Mycenaean in origin is,
however, open to doubt. In the Near East there are many parallels for armed goddesses—we need
only mention the armed Ishtar. In addition, in certain locations the names of the goddess dating
back to the prehistoric period point to Near Eastern influences. For example, an Athena Saitis,
who allegedly comes from Egypt, was worshipped at Lerna, an ancient site (Pausanias 2.36.8; cf.
Plato, Timaeus 21e). The Athena of Thebes had the unique epithet Onga, which, according to
Pausanias, was Phoenician (9.12.2). Cadmus, the founder of Thebes, is said to have brought this
goddess from his homeland.8 Athena also had connections elsewhere—for example, with North
Africa. Her birth was said to have occurred near Lake Triton in Libya (Pausanias 1.14.6). In the
context of the complex relations between the Minoan-Mycenaean and the Near Eastern–African
worlds in the second millennium B.C., new evidence provided by the extraordinary treasure of
Near Eastern cylinder seals found at Thebes9 shows that the palace goddess may have assumed
a number of eastern characteristics, which were not limited, as we shall see, to her weapons.


 A T H E N A 201

Although Nilsson painted a convincing portrait of the early Athena, he only briefly sketched her
most important attribute, the cultivated olive tree, which is the source of her great esteem. He
did, admittedly, point to her connection with the characteristically Minoan tree cult,10 but Athena
was associated with a very specific tree. With it she became the mistress of Attica in her contest
with Poseidon. It is characteristic of Athena that she achieved victory not by means of a wild plant
or tree but with a tree cultivated for its usefulness to humans. Bringing under cultivation the wild
olive so that it could be put to profitable use producing a generous supply of oil was a significant
step in the development of civilization, and one the Greeks attributed to Athena’s wisdom, much
as she was also made responsible for the taming of the horse and the art of shipbuilding. Scholars
have not yet been able to discover how and where the olive tree was first cultivated, but most
evidence seems to point to the Near East.11 Stories about the goddess and her names point to the
same area. Did she travel from the Near East to Greece as mistress of the olive grove? It is gener-
ally accepted that the cultivated olive tree arrived on the Greek mainland after crossing the island
bridge of the Aegean. This theory would explain the rivalry between Rhodes and Athens over
which had the older cult of Athena (cf. Pindar, Olympian 7.42ff.). How much the Minoan and
Mycenaean kings valued the cultivation of olives is evident from the excavation of their palaces.12
Olive trees are frequently depicted in the frescoes, in metal engravings, and on gold rings. Olives
were found in the palace of Kato Zakros. In addition, many of the Linear B tablets deal with olive
trees or quantities of olive oil. The goddess holding sway over this domain must have been well
respected, and such was the case with Athena. In addition, she was not only the cultivator but
at the same time the valiant protector of the sacred trees, which would be exposed to danger
during raids and wars. An armed Athena was still associated with the fruit of the olive tree on
the Athenian prize amphorae containing precious olive oil from the famous olive groves of Attica
(see figs. 181–182).


Depictions of Pallas Athena can be traced back to the art of the second millennium B.C. Gerhard
Rodenwaldt has described a painted limestone slab from Mycenae (fig. 172) from the thirteenth
century B.C.13 The center of the composition of three figures is taken up by a large figure-eight
shield, the principal type of shield in the earlier Mycenaean period. It is carried by a figure
painted in white, a female figure who almost disappears behind it. This is probably a cult statue,
with a Mycenaean altar shown to the right. The two women flanking the central figure are prob-
ably worshippers.
Although there the Palladium looms large between the two humans, it appears remarkably
small on a gold ring from the same period found in Mycenae (fig. 173).14 Swinging a spear, the
Palladium is suspended from the heavens, in which stars twinkle. Beneath the statue two women
and two small girls approach a goddess. On the right side of the composition are six lion heads—
probably not the skulls of sacrificed animals, as has been assumed, but animal-head vessels,
probably made of metal.15 Such containers were used elsewhere in rituals of that time; they point
202 AT H E NA

172. Athena in the

form of a Palladium.
Limestone plaque,
stuccoed and painted,
from Mycenae. 1300–
1200 B.C. Athens,
National Archaeological
Museum 2666. Photo:
National Archaeological
Museum, Athens.
Photographer: Kostas
Xenikakis.

here to the cultic character of the scene. The two little girls remind us of the Arrephoroi on the
Acropolis of Athens, who, in service to Athena, practiced ancient and venerable rites to foster the
growth of trees and plants. At the festival of the Arrephoria, they were required to travel, carry-
ing secret objects, from the Acropolis to the sanctuary of “Aphrodite in the Gardens” (Pausanias
1.27.3). In the Mycenaean period they traveled by way of a staircase that has been reconstructed.16
In what sense could Athena and Aphrodite share in the same festival? Did they not by their
very natures exclude each other? The common element probably lay in the relationship of both
goddesses to the olive tree. Aphrodite also loved its fruit, specifically for the preparation of the
sweet-smelling ointments she required in abundance. The decipherment of the Linear B tablets
has shown that copious quantities of various aromatic oils were produced in the Mycenaean
palaces and especially at Mycenae itself,17 where the gold ring was found. Does the ring show the
two goddesses of the Arrephoria festival, Athena and Aphrodite? The bouquet of poppies held
by the seated goddess would make sense for Aphrodite; her cult statue by Canachus in Sicyon
held a poppy in one hand (Pausanias 2.10.5). The blossoms are also meaningful gifts for the god-
dess of love. Are they perhaps sweet-smelling flowers of the kind used to make scented oils?
Be that as it may, the Palladium in this charming “garden scene” shows that the sacred olive tree
also stood in need of the protection provided by weapons. For this reason, another powerful
symbol appears on the seal ring beside the Palladium: the sacred double axe. It may be inter-
preted as an attribute of Zeus,18 who as Zeus Morius, with Athena Moria, protected olive trees.
Sophocles expressed this most beautifully in a choral ode in Oedipus at Colonus (694ff.):

There grows a plant such as is not native to the land

Of Asia, and does not yet grow on the great Dorian isle
Of Pelops, a plant self-producing and not trained by hand,
 A T H E N A 203

173. Athena in the form

of a small Palladium in
the Garden of Aphrodite
(?). Bezel of a large gold
ring from the treasure of
Mycenae. Third quarter
of second millennium.
Athens, National
Archaeological Museum
992. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

A plant which flourishes greatly in this land,

The child-nourishing, gleaming olive tree.
No one in command, young or old, will destroy it by hand
And make it fruitless, for the ever-seeing eye
Of Zeus Morios sees him, and that of bright-eyed Athena.

The Palladium protecting the olive tree on the gold ring is remarkably small. This surely can-
not be interpreted as a function of perspective, showing a diminutive goddess approaching from
some distance, as if from the heavens.19 Rather, it is a sacred symbol corresponding to the double
axe. The cult image of the armed Athena must have often been genuinely small, corresponding
to other figurines of the gods known from Minoan-Mycenaean house chapels. This form suits its
function, as it was a magic object upon which the fate of the place that sheltered it depended. If
the Palladium disappeared, then the palace or the city it protected was at risk of being destroyed.
For that reason Odysseus and Diomedes had to steal the Palladium from Troy to provide an
opportunity for the city to be taken. This belief survived until the time of the Roman Empire,
when the Palladium of the Romans’ Trojan forebears was included among the pignora imperii.20
The small size of many Palladia probably also explains why a tiny goddess, emerging fully
developed from Zeus’s head, was an accepted representation of the birth of Athena down to
the Classical period. Yet the Mycenaeans’ tendency to think monumentally, as for example, with
the “Treasury of Atreus,” could not easily be satisfied by the small sacred object alone. The Pallas
on the Mycenaean limestone tablet (see fig. 172) is certainly not intended to be a miniature
204 AT H E NA

representation. Moreover, there are stories about Palladia that stood on mountaintops, just as,
in the historical period, many statues of Athena stood in the open air.21 A number of the lat-
ter were of considerable size, such as the Athena Promachos on the Athenian Acropolis. One of
these statues was tied into the tradition of the Heraclidae. At their approach, Eumedes of Argos,
a priest of Athena from the clan of Diomedes, had taken the Palladium away and set it up in the
mountains. In his hymn The Bath of Pallas, Callimachus told the tale (33ff.):

Come out, Athena. Here is a crowd

To please your heart, a crowd of maidens,
Offspring of the great Arestorids.
Athena, Diomedes’ shield is also being carried,
This custom Eumedes, your favorite priest,
Taught the Argives of long ago.
He once knew that the people were preparing
A deliberate death for him, and fled,
Carrying your sacred image, and settled on
Mount Kreios, yes, on Mount Kreios.
But you, goddess, he placed on the precipitous rocks
That now bear the name Pallatides.

The cult and festivals of Athena were especially rich and diverse, as well as widespread. In
contrast to the cult of Hera, it is not possible to pin down just one place of origin for the cult
of Athena. It had deep roots in Athens, to be sure, but also in other locations. In commenting
on the Peloponnesian War, Wilamowitz correctly observed that Athena was worshipped no less
by the enemies of Athens:22

As Chalkioikos she sits on the hill that could be regarded as the acropolis of Sparta. Alea of Tegea
is the richest goddess of Arcadia, even though she is not given her temple, the most beautiful of
the peninsula, until the next century. Argos claims it possesses the Palladium of Ilios, and places
the shield of Diomedes, who had taken it home as important booty, in the great procession tak-
ing the Palladium to its bath in the river Inachus. Corinth displays on its coins neither Hera nor
Aphrodite, both of whom are domiciled on its acropolis, but Athena. Boeotia’s original festivals
dedicated to her are the Itonia of Coroneia. In Phocis she receives similar honors, and in addition
had the old temple at Delphi dedicated to her.

What is said here of the fifth century B.C. is even more valid for the earlier period. Athena is
characterized by an abundance of epithets. They outnumber Hera’s cult names many times over.
It is possible that many of them conceal ancient place names. The number of palace goddesses
equaled the number of Mycenaean palaces. The situation on the Mycenaean mainland would
 A T H E N A 205

have been virtually identical to that in the Hittite empire of that time, where amalgamation of
cults and myths was not a common phenomenon.23 As each Hittite city had its own Ishtar, so
each Mycenaean palace would have had its own Athena. For all that, the individual palace god-
desses had much in common—first, through their common origin in Minoan religion, then
through their relationship to the olive gardens so prized by the Mycenaeans. These are, even
today, widespread throughout areas known to us for their ancient cults of Athena. Among these
are the groves in Attica, in the Marmaria near Delphi, on Rhodes, and in the Argive plain, where
olive trees have only relatively recently been replaced by orange groves. The recognition of the
similarity or common identity of the various manifestations of Athena probably spread among
the various Mycenaean centers through intermarriage and trade connections—for example,
through the trade in ointments mentioned in the Linear B tablets. Additionally, large-scale com-
munal undertakings, such as the Trojan War, may have contributed to the standardization of
palace cults. Athena then became, like Hera, the patron deity of the kings who campaigned
against Ilium, although she was also the goddess guarding Troy.
The historical process of fusing different manifestations of Athena found its crowning glory
in the Homeric epics. Homer gave the Greeks their one Athena for all time. Like Apollo and
Zeus, she makes an appearance in the first book of the Iliad, establishing her character. After
Agamemnon and Achilles have their difference of opinion, Achilles is on the point of drawing
his sword when Athena, sent by Hera, arrives from Mount Olympus (194ff.). She stands behind
Achilles, visible only to him, and grabs his hair. “He was astonished, turned around and imme-
diately recognized Athena: for frightful was the flash from her eyes.” Still filled with anger, he
speaks to her. But Athena glaucopis calms him with her reasoning. Here, for the first time, we
come across the well-known Homeric epithet referring to the luster of the goddess’s eyes, signifi-
cant because Achilles has recognized her by their radiance alone. If the epithet boöpis emphasizes
the size and beauty of Hera’s eyes, glaucopis draws attention to Athena’s penetrating gaze, in
which her mental qualities find their expression. In her first appearance in the Iliad, Athena
tames the anger of the mightiest hero, not with her physical powers—powers that she does, of
course, possess and display in a number of passages in the epic—but by her mental superiority.
Although Homer nowhere explicitly mentions it, by her conduct Athena shows that she is the
daughter of both Metis, “intelligence,” and wise Zeus.


Zeus, who arrived in the Aegean with the migrating Hellenes, made the Minoan protector of
palaces and olive groves his daughter. Only the wild olive tree was originally sacred to Zeus, as
local tradition at Olympia indicates (Pausanias 5.15.3). However, through his relationship with
Athena, Zeus received a share in one of the most valuable products of the Aegean, the cultivated
olive. According to the myth, on the summit of Mount Olympus, he gave birth to Athena, fully
armed as the Palladium, from his head. In Homer, Athena is called a child of Zeus and daughter
of a powerful father. Ares reproached Zeus with the fact that he gave birth to Athena (Iliad 5.880),
206 AT H E NA

but the Homeric epics never reveal any details about her birth. We learn about it, as is the case
with other un-Homeric, primitive material, from Hesiod’s Theogony.24 He writes that Zeus, fear-
ing a child who would be stronger than himself, swallowed his first wife, Metis, and himself
brought her daughter into the world:

But when she was about to give birth to the goddess

Bright-eyed Athena, then [Zeus] deceived her mind
With treachery and flattering words, and placed her
Into his stomach, through the shrewdness of Gaia and
Starry Uranus, for so they counseled in order that
No one else of the everlasting gods have kingly honor
Instead of Zeus. For children most wise were fated
To be born from her, first bright-eyed Tritogeneia,
The maiden, possessed of might equal to her father’s,
And wise in counsel.

Zeus inherited from his father and grandfather, Cronus and Uranus, his fear that a son would
overthrow him. As we now know, the succession of rulers—Uranus, Cronus, Zeus—was influ-
enced by Near Eastern myths.25 There, too, we discover gods afraid of their own offspring; there,
too, we come across the tale, admittedly in a different context, of a male god giving birth to other
gods from his mouth.26 The myth of the birth of Pallas Athena is probably based on Near Eastern
concepts. The story did not strike the Greeks as strange because they were accustomed to describ-
ing the origin of their ancient, sacred wooden images, a category that included the Palladia, as
“fallen from Zeus” (i.e., from the sky).27


The birth of the “diipetes Palladium” from the head of Zeus is a favorite theme in Archaic art. At
the beginning stands an image that is unusual in many respects: a relief in clay on a large pithos
(fig. 174) from the first half of the seventh century B.C.28 It was found, together with other pithoi
featuring equally amazing subjects, in a mountain sanctuary on the island of Tenos. Arms out-
stretched in a solemn gesture, a winged figure in a short dress sits on a chair with a back. The
head, with its large rounded eyes, is turned toward the viewer. From it emerges a helmeted,
winged figure brandishing a spear (fig. 175). In front of the throne, a nude, winged daimon kneels
at a tripod to warm the bathwater for the newborn, similar to birth scenes in Christian art. At
the upper right stands a figure, only half of which is preserved, with unusually twisted feet. It
too is winged, like the small figure in the long dress behind the throne. The short garment of
the seated figure points to its being male, although it has not infrequently been suggested that,
because of its supposed beardlessness, it is female. In Archaic art only dancing nymphs, and
 174. Birth of Athena.
From the neck of a
Cycladic relief pithos.
Ca. 680–670 B.C. Tenos,
Archaeological Museum
B64. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

175. Zeus giving birth to

Athena. Cf. fig. 174.
Drawing by Brinna Otto.
208 AT H E NA

certainly no solemnly enthroned goddesses, could wear such a garment. The theme of a birth
from the head fits, according to all we know of Greek mythology, only with Zeus (fig. 176).29
The figure on the pithos is certainly an unusual Zeus, a god with huge wings growing from his
chest. However, since all the other figures there are winged, it is possible to interpret the scene
as communicating that we are in a sphere far removed from human limitations. Apart from that,
Athena was frequently depicted with wings in Archaic art, especially in Ionia. The weather god
of the Hittites corresponding to Zeus could likewise be winged.30
Since the first edition of this book, I have been able to study the relief on the vase in the
museum of Tenos. At that time it became clear that the chin of the enthroned figure had been
incorrectly restored. On both sides of the chin, which projects in an unusual way, incisions are
preserved. On the right there are three incised checks, on the left three rows of small dots (see
fig. 175). Since hair is regularly depicted on Cycladic pithoi by incision, the figure sitting on the
throne must have been bearded, wearing the customary pointed beard of the seventh century
B.C. (cf. Zeus in fig. 16). With this we have conclusive evidence that we are dealing with the birth
of Athena. On the right, above Zeus, stands Hephaestus, who assists him with the birth. The
figure kneeling at the tripod is not naked, as was at first suspected. On the original, unrestored
pithos, a short, belted garment is clearly visible. This figure is probably Hermes, not only because
Hermes frequently appears in scenes of this sort, but also because he is engaged in a special activ-
ity. The Homeric Hymn to Hermes describes how, just after his birth, Hermes kindles a fire,
the gift of Hephaestus (108ff.). Hermes and Hephaestus, who are both called “fire gods” in this
text, are also joined together significantly in the Cycladic pithos relief because the tripod before
which Hermes kneels was, of course, manufactured by Hephaestus.31 In addition, both gods are
frequently linked in cult and myth to Athena: Hephaestus with Athena Ergane, the goddess of
artisans, and Hermes, the guide, with the tireless protectress of heroes.

176. Birth of Athena.

From the leg of an
ointment vase
(exaleiptron). Zeus is
flanked by two birth
goddesses (Eileithyai),
Poseidon on the right,
Hephaestus on the left,
and two more goddesses
at either end of the
scene. Ca. 570 B.C. Paris,
Louvre CA616. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
 A T H E N A 209

Finally, the attributes of the newborn on the pithos relief also point to Athena. That she is
armed corresponds with the description of her birth in the twenty-eighth Homeric Hymn. On
the relief, as in the hymn, she brandishes a spear in her right hand. But what does she hold in
her left? It cannot be a shield seen from the side; the object is too much like a branch. At its
bottom a twig branches out to the right. The attributes of Archaic depictions of the gods do not
often relate to a specific narrative situation but do reflect the powers and nature of the god they
characterize. Apollo Amyklaios, for example, carried two incompatible weapons, a spear and a
bow. Athena Nike, in her temple on the Acropolis, held a helmet and a pomegranate.32 The depic-
tion of Athena from New Ilium featured a spear in her right hand and a spindle in her left, as
ancient descriptions (Apollodorus 3.12.3) and coins indicate.33 A helmeted Athena with a spindle
is also known from Classical art (fig. 177).34 The pithos relief calls to mind the spindle of Athena
Ergane all the more because the winged woman in the long dress standing behind Zeus’s throne
also carries a woman’s implement. She is Eileithyia, holding the attribute of midwives, an instru-
ment for cutting the umbilical cord. Omphaletomoi was the name given to midwives in Ionia,

177. Athena Ergane. Clay relief

(drawing). Late fifth century B.C.
Syracuse, Museo Archeologico
Regionale Paolo Orsi. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
210 AT H E NA

an area that included Tenos.35 Hera of Argos, who was honored as a goddess of birth, also held
a pair of scissors.36
Palladia of the second millennium B.C. stood with feet together, and early Archaic depictions
of armed Athena adopt the same posture. We can mention the clay statue of Athena from Gortyn
on Crete as an example (fig. 178).37 The statue itself dates from the early seventh century B.C.,
but cult practice on the acropolis of Gortyn can be traced back into the second millennium B.C.,
as the Italian excavator, Doro Levi, has shown.38 The goddess’s left arm can be reconstructed
holding a shield; the raised right arm, a spear. It is not certain whether the helmet she currently
wears in the museum of Heraklion belonged to her original armor. Another Palladium with feet
together, a bronze statue from the middle of the sixth century B.C., was found on the Acropolis
of Athens (fig. 179).39 An additional example of this type, albeit a quite primitive one, was un-
earthed in Olympia.40 This statuette, which we can almost call “Subgeometric,” reflects the arrested
style of its provincial, in all likelihood Italic, provenance.
In sixth-century Athens this ancient type was transformed into Athena Promachos, the cham-
pion.41 While in earlier depictions Athena held her weapons simply as attributes, Late Archaic
bronze statuettes from the Athenian Acropolis depict the goddess as a combatant, putting spear
and shield to actual use (fig. 180).42 This later type was linked to the revival of the Panathenaic
festival. In 566/565 B.C. the great public festival for the city’s patron deity, a festival with roots in

178. Clay statuette of

Athena from the acropolis of
Gortyn, on Crete. The helmet was
found with the statuette and
probably belongs to it. Ca. mid-
seventh century B.C. Heraklion,
Archaeological Museum 18502.
Photo: Archaeological Museum of
Heraklion—Hellenic Ministry of
Culture and Sports—TAP Service.

179. Bronze statuette of Athena

from the Acropolis of Athens.
Ca. 570 B.C. Athens, National
Archaeological Museum 6457.
Photo: © Acropolis Museum, 2011.
Photographer: Vangelis Tsiamis.
 A T H E N A 211

180. Bronze statuette of Athena as

Promachos from the Acropolis of
Athens. Shortly after 480 B.C.
Athens, National Archaeological
Museum 6447. Photo: Alinari /
Art Resource, NY.

the time of the kings, was established anew, with the notable addition of artistic and athletic
contests.43 The victors in these games received as prizes the so-called Panathenaic amphorae,
filled with precious Attic olive oil. On one side the vessels displayed the image of the Promachos,
Pallas Athena as champion. An amphora in London (fig. 181) is the earliest known example of
this kind; its style dates it to around 560 B.C.44 The later amphorae often depict Athena between
two columns, with roosters standing on the capitals (fig. 182).45
The portrayal of Athena Promachos in the black-figure technique continued on prize ampho-
rae into the Hellenistic period. It is generally agreed that this image of the goddess must have
been very important in the time of Pisistratus (561/560 to 528/527 B.C.), who, as is well known,
lived on the Acropolis as the Mycenaean kings once did. Questions have been raised, however,
as to whether this is the context of the columns with the cocks, and whether the statue stood in
the open air or inside a precursor of the Parthenon. The latter location must be rejected, although
this interpretation is still frequently proposed.46 Athena the Champion, who does not simply
carry the spear as an attribute but genuinely brandishes it, is similar to the thunderbolt-hurling
212 AT H E NA

181. Pallas Athena. The earliest known

Panathenaic prize amphora. Ca. 560
B.C. London, British Museum B130.
Photo: © The Trustees of the British
Museum / Art Resource, NY.

Zeus—an image created to be placed under the open sky.47 It is not surprising, therefore, that the
Macedonian king Antigonus II Gonatas (277/276–239 B.C.) should use the image of the Archaic,
Attic Promachos to represent the lightning-hurling Athena Alkis on his tetradrachm (fig. 183).
As Phidias’ statue of the goddess did later, the Athena Promachos of the time of Pisistratus
stood under the open sky, perhaps between columns with cocks, whose significance has not yet
been explained.48 As many vase paintings show, that statue must have been much larger than life,
since it is shown being adorned or otherwise worshipped by humans drawn on a much smaller
scale. The colossal Promachos of Phidias, no longer extant, was a replacement for this large
statue, which, though destroyed during the Persian attack, had an afterlife on the Panathenaic
amphorae. Archaic vase paintings from Athens show us that the statue of Athena Promachos was
the object of cult worship in the time of the tyrants during the state sacrifice of the Panathenaic
festival, even though it was not the most ancient and venerable statue on the Acropolis. In accor-
dance with her nature, Athena Promachos appears to have been worshipped in particular by the
military, who were heavily supported by Pisistratus. This is the conclusion to be drawn from a
 182. Pallas Athena. Panathenaic
amphora from Taucheira (Tocra)
in Cyrenaica, Libya. On the
goddess’s shield is the Tyrannicides
group. Ca. 400 B.C. London,
British Museum B605. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

183. Athena Alkis as an archaistic

Palladium, wielding her father’s
thunderbolt instead of a spear.
Tetradrachm of Antigonus II
Gonatas from Macedon. 277/276–
239 B.C. Berlin, Staatliches
Münzkabinett 18214213. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
214 AT H E NA

cup in a private collection dating to around 560 B.C. (fig. 184).49 On it, the Promachos, only partly
preserved, can be seen on the left. In front of her stands her priestess, who, with a handshake
extended over a burning altar, greets the leader of a procession. The sacrificial animals being led
along are not those of the Panathenaic procession as we know them from the Parthenon frieze.
On the cup we see instead a triple sacrifice, a trittoia, of a bull, a boar, and a ram.50 The animals
are followed by musicians performing at the sacrifice, and, finally, by the actual worshippers, a
train of soldiers on foot and horseback. The triple sacrifice brought to Athena Promachos is
reminiscent of the suovetaurelia of the Roman army, a sacrifice in honor of Mars, the god of war.
Votive offerings by potters found on the Acropolis show the same three kinds of animals, provid-
ing additional proof that such sacrifices did indeed take place.51
Those who think a second cult statue of Athena on the Acropolis excessive should be reminded
that we know of still other statues of Athena on the Acropolis that also served as cult objects.
There was an Athena Hygieia standing under the open sky,52 and, in her small temple on the Nike
bastion, Athena Nike, for whose cult we have evidence from an altar inscription dating to the
sixth century B.C.53 Athena was so powerful and so complex that a single statue could not have
embodied her composite nature. The different cults of the goddess on the Acropolis echo a very
ancient tradition. As in Homer’s Troy, where the Palladium, upon whose presence the fate of
Ilium depended,54 stood next to a seated Athena, the Athenians worshipped both a Polias and a
Promachos.



184. Sacrificial
procession for Athena
Promachos. Only the
lower half of the
goddess (at far left,
above) survives. In
front of her stands the
priestess, who greets
the arrival of the
procession on the other
side of the altar. Attic
band cup. Ca. 560 B.C.
Paris, Niarchos
Collection A031. Photo:
Archive of the author.
 A T H E N A 215

The Minoan characteristics of the old palace goddess were most purely expressed in the enthroned
Athena Polias who was the recipient of the Panathenaic peplos and the civic sacrifice of sheep
and cattle. Her image was carved from the wood of the olive tree sacred to the goddess. She did
not wear a helmet on her head, instead wearing, as inventories of the fourth century B.C. indicate,
a rounded headdress. This venerated statue has not been preserved, and whether Athena was
seated or standing is a point of contention in the literature.55 The numerous terracottas and votive
offerings from the Athenian Acropolis depicting a seated Athena with a Gorgon’s head on her
breast and a rounded headdress cannot be explained away (fig. 185).56 The worshippers must
have seen Athena Polias in them. If the Gorgon’s head is disregarded,57 one could think of her as
a mother goddess. Indeed, the ancient mistress of the Acropolis possessed motherly characteris-
tics. According to Athenian belief, she raised one of the early kings of Athens, Erichthonius, in
her sanctuary.58 A scene on an Early Classical stamnos in Munich depicts Athena receiving the
infant Erichthonius from the hands of the earth mother, Ge (fig. 186).59 She has carefully folded
back the threatening, snake-embroidered aegis and covered the Gorgon’s head on it. So as not to
frighten the child, she wears a simple stephane instead of her helmet.

185. Athena enthroned, of the same type

as her ancient cult statue on the
Acropolis of Athens. Attic terracotta
(drawing). Ca. 500 B.C. Berlin,
Staatliche Museen, Antikensammlung.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
216 AT H E NA

186. Birth of Erichthonius.

Stamnos from the circle of
Hermonax. 470/460 B.C.
Munich, Antikensammlungen
2413. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

The olive tree on the Acropolis of Athens was also a remnant of Athena’s second-millennium
B.C. cult. The recent excavations at Kato Zakros in East Crete have shown that provision was
made for an enclosure for the sacred tree within the court of the palace (fig. 187).60 The olive tree
within the Mycenaean stronghold on the Acropolis may have been similarly enclosed. It was
burned down during the Persian attack in 480 B.C., but the trunk is said to have sent out a new
shoot on the same day. In myth, the sacred olive tree was tended by the king’s daughters. They
were succeeded by the Arrephoroi after the palace cult came to an end. In the context of our
earlier discussion of the gold ring from Mycenae (see fig. 173), mention was made of a ritual task
imposed on these young women. By means of the journey of the Arrephoroi from Athena to
Aphrodite, from the city’s acropolis to the lower city, a ritual bond was established between the
olive groves of the Attic plain and the citadel’s solitary sacred tree. The welfare of the Attic olive
groves as well as the fate of the city depended upon it.
The vase painters of the Classical period liked to depict that venerable tree and also indicate
its inexhaustible vitality. On an Attic calyx-krater (fig. 188), four young shoots sprout from the
olive tree on the Acropolis.61 Among them is a covered basket, in which, scholars have assumed,
is the little Erechtheus. He was the same as Erichthonius, whose birth is depicted on the stamnos
in figure 186. But after Athena’s victory with the olive tree, shown with a Nike floating above it,
Erechtheus cannot be thought of as a small child: he fought alongside Athena in her contest with
187. Central court of the
palace of Kato Zakros,
East Crete, with the
enclosure for the sacred
tree. Photo: Courtesy
Hans R. Goette.

The rights holder did not

grant permission to reproduce this
image in the digital edition.

188. The sacred olive tree on the

Acropolis. In front of it is the
basket of Erichthonius, flanked by
Cecrops and Athena. Calyx-krater.
Ca. 410 B.C. Schloss Fasanerie,
near Fulda (Adolphseck),
Hessische Hausstiftung AV77.
218 AT H E NA

Poseidon. The calyx-krater, produced in the time of the Peloponnesian War, shows the restora-
tion of peace, which many likely longed for at the time. Athena has put aside her weapons, and
she and the aged King Cecrops—with the lower body of a reptile—make an offering for the sake
of reconciliation with Poseidon. He reclines on a couch at the bottom right. An Eros draws
his attention to the peace offering. The mysterious basket refers to the Eleusinian Mysteries,
which fell under the control of Athens after the victory of Athena and Erechtheus. The olive
branch that Nike holds in her left hand alludes to the victory of Athena in the contest for Attica.
The prize, which she won with the olive tree, was awarded to her by the autochthonous King
Cecrops (Callimachus, fr. 194, 66 ff.):

But who created the olive tree? Pallas Athena,

Once when she competed with the god who dwells in the seaweed
Long ago, and the snake-tailed man was the judge at Akte.


The most beautiful images of Athena in ancient art date from the Early Classical period. The
goddess appears four times in the metopes of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia, each portrayal
showing a different dimension of her character.62 Like a mother she comforts and gives new
energy to Heracles, exhausted by his battle with the Nemean lion. She accepts the slaughtered
Stymphalian birds while sitting opposite him, nymph-like, on a rock. The hero hands her his
spoils almost like a lover’s gift (fig. 189). As a mighty Olympian for whom no task is difficult, she
helps the hero to bear the weight of the heavens in the Atlas metope (fig. 190). With a command-
ing gesture she directs Heracles in his labor at Augeas’ stable (fig. 191). Only in this metope in the
series does she wear a helmet and carry a shield. In the sculptural program of this temple, Athena
appears beside Zeus and Apollo as the third great Olympian deity. This is no accident: in the
Homeric epics, Zeus, Athena, and Apollo are often mentioned in one breath (cf. Iliad 4.288).
Only they, the mightiest and noblest of the Greek gods, carry the frightful, snake-embroidered
aegis, which in later art belongs especially to Athena. Zeus, Athena, and Apollo determine things
human and divine as absolute masters, not only in the Archaic epics, but also in Classical drama.
The Oresteia provides a clear example.
Athena shares with Apollo a loathing of the baser instincts as well as a desire to punish hubris.
One example is her vengeance against the sacrilege of Locrian Ajax, whose ship she causes to be
smashed at sea (Alcaeus fr. 298 Lobel-Page). Also characteristic is her attitude toward Tydeus, as
depicted in Classical Greek and Etruscan art.63 She wanted to transform the hero into an immor-
tal. However, when she saw that he had sucked out the brains of his opponent in a cannibalistic
rage, she turned away from him. On a vase fragment showing this scene, she leads away a female
figure identified by an inscription as Athanasia (immortality). Athanasia was meant to marry
Tydeus, much as Heracles took Hebe, goddess of youth, as his Olympian bride. But through his
barbarism Tydeus lost the goddess’s friendship.
 189. Heracles brings Athena the
Stymphalian birds. Metope from the
west side of the cella of the Temple
of Zeus at Olympia. Paris, Louvre.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

190. Athena helps Heracles

support the sky. At right, Atlas
approaches with the apples of the
Hesperides. Metope from the east
side of the cella of the Temple of
Zeus at Olympia. Olympia,
Archaeological Museum. Photo:
Marie Mauzy / Art Resource, NY.
220 AT H E NA

191. Athena instructing

Heracles to clean the
Augeian Stables. Metope
from the east side of the
cella of the Temple of
Zeus at Olympia.
Olympia, Archaeological
Museum. Photo: Alinari /
Art Resource, NY.

No period in ancient art emphasized Athena’s Apollonian clarity and propensity to act in an
intelligent, well-considered manner as much as the Severe style. As an example, we may mention
the group by Myron that we know from Roman copies in marble (fig. 192).64 It portrays a very
youthful Athena as the inventor of flute playing, but it also shows her distancing herself from
her own invention. Irresistibly drawn by the goddess’s music, the dancing satyr Marsyas stumbles
across the discarded instrument. That the goddess loathes the flute cannot be concluded from
this group, especially since there is evidence that flutes were used to accompany sacrifices dedi-
cated to her. For this reason, a new interpretation is proposed here. Myron’s goddess appears to
shy away only from a specific kind of flute music. What kind this might be we learn in one of the
early odes of Pindar, where he writes that Athena invented flute playing in imitation of the dirge
of the Gorgons bewailing Perseus’ slaying of Medusa (Pythian 12.18–23, 490 B.C.):65

But when she’d rescued from these toils

The man so dear to her, the goddess maid composed
 192a. Athena from the group of Athena and
Marsyas of Myron. Roman copy of the bronze
original of ca. 450 B.C. Frankfurt, Liebieghaus
LH 195. Photo: Liebieghaus
Skulpturensammlung, Frankfurt am Main.

192b. Experimental
reconstruction of the
Athena-Marsyas Group
of Myron, ca. 450 B.C,
by Peter C. Bol and
Silvano Bertolin (1982).
Silver, copper, glass.
H. 195 cm. Frankfurt,
Liebieghaus
Skulpturensammlung.
Photo: Liebieghaus
Skulpturensammlung—
Artothek.
222 AT H E NA

The flute’s sound many-toned to give an

Instrumental imitation of the loud shrieking wail
Pressing close from Euryale’s eager jaws.
The goddess invented it, and having invented it for mortal men to hold,
Named it the “many-headed tune.”

The Perseus of Myron, shown after beheading Medusa, stood on the Acropolis not far from
our group (Pausanias 1.23.7). In the latter, as befits an Olympian, Athena throws the Gorgon-
inspired instrument behind her and so banishes emotional lamentation for the dead from the
divine sphere of influence. We are not certain who dedicated this group; Myron was only the
artist. As it is a work very much representative of the middle of the fifth century B.C., it was
probably set up as a civic project. Since the days of Solon, prohibitions on excessive expenditure
for funerals and grave monuments were passed in Athens on a number of occasions (Cicero,
Laws 2.25.64ff.). Such an edict was also in force when Myron sculpted his group.66 It corresponds
quite closely with the spirit of Pericles’ funeral oration in Thucydides (2.44). Thus, the group by
Myron may have been set up to support the aims of a municipal law limiting excess in funeral
dirges. The patron deity of the city distances herself from her own invention.
Since the original of Myron’s Athena has not been preserved, it may be possible to come closer
to understanding its formal characteristics by looking at a contemporary votive relief, the
“Mourning Athena” from the Acropolis (fig. 193), which closely resembles Myron’s style.67 Since
there is no inscription, we cannot know why the goddess lingers in this contemplative pose in
front of the small stele. The bronze statuette of the Elgin Athena in New York (fig. 194) is also a
“Myronian” Athena.68 As in the two works already discussed, and as on Classical coins from
Corinth (figs. 195–196),69 she has pushed her Corinthian helmet up over her forehead. The head
of the goddess as the locus of her wisdom is emphasized by the long and impressive outline of
her helmet. The small, bronze Elgin Athena holds a spear in her left hand. With a raised right
hand, she lets fly an owl, her sacred bird. Perhaps the statue was dedicated by grateful donors for
whom the owl in flight had been a good omen.
A monumental votive offering of this sort, dedicated by Athenian settlers who colonized the
island of Lemnos, stood on the Athenian Acropolis: the Athena Lemnia, sculpted by Phidias
(Pausanias 1.28.2).70 That bronze statue, much praised by ancient art connoisseurs like Lucian,
has not survived, but it has been plausibly reconstructed by Adolf Furtwängler and Georg Treu
with the aid of Roman marble copies. The best replica of the head is in Bologna (see fig. 198),
while a heavily damaged one is at the Albertinum in Dresden. There it belongs to one of two
Early Classical Athena torsos with an oblique aegis (fig. 197). That the pieces belong together is
certain, but our knowledge of the statues of Phidias is so limited that the identification of this
beautiful statue as his work is frequently questioned. The goddess wears the same Attic peplos as
in the three representations from the circle of Myron that we have already considered, but she
does not wear a helmet on her head (fig. 198). This corresponds to the ancient sources on the
 193. Votive relief to Athena
from the Athenian Acropolis.
Ca. 450 B.C. Athens, Acropolis
Museum 695. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

194. Athena lets fly an owl. Attic

bronze statuette. Ca. 450 B.C. New
York, Metropolitan Museum of Art
50.11.1. Photo: The Metropolitan
Museum of Art, Harris Brisbane
Dick Fund, 1950.
 195–196. Reverses of two
staters from Corinth, showing
a head of Athena wearing a
Corinthian helmet. Ca. 430–
415 B.C. Left: Berlin,
Staatliches Münzkabinett.
Right: London, British
Museum. Photos: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

197. Roman marble copy of the

Athena Lemnia by Phidias. Dresden,
Skulpturensammlung, Staatliche
Kunstsammlungen Hm 049. Photo:
bpk Bildagentur / (Staatliche
Kunstsammlung) / Art Resource, NY.
Photographers: Elke Estel, Hans-
Peter Klut.
 A T H E N A 225

198. Head of the Athena Lemnia by

Phidias. Bologna, Museo Civico
Archeologico G1060. Photo: Museo
Civico Archeologico di Bologna.

Lemnia. It is generally believed that she held the helmet in her right hand and simply gazed at it.
While it is true that Athena does sometimes hold her helmet in her hand, as we know from a
long series of vase paintings, she does not look at it. Her gaze is directed at someone opposite
her; taking off her helmet was an epiphany gesture. For this reason, Athena has doffed her helmet
in many depictions of her birth, most beautifully on a black-figure hydria in Würzburg (fig.
199).71 The colonists from Lemnos might also have placed another attribute in the right hand of
the votive offering, the most Athenian of all: the little owl. Representations of Athena with her
sacred bird are known not only from bronze statues but also from marble reliefs and vase paint-
ings. A beautiful and relatively early example can be found on the interior of a cup by the Oedi-
pus Painter (fig. 200).72 A weary Heracles is seated near the goddess’s olive tree, greeting her
respectfully. To slake his thirst, she pours a drink into his kantharos, while holding her little owl
in her left hand. She graciously turns her un-helmeted head toward the hero, with a gesture that
is distinctly reminiscent of the Athena Lemnia. In order not to frighten him, she wears the aegis
in such a way that Medusa’s head does not show on her chest. Rather, the large eyes of her owl
shine out in its place. The owl’s face must have been a sort of positive gorgoneion for the Greeks,
a symbol promising good luck. With the statue of Athena Lemnia, the effect of this phenomenon
would have been enhanced, if our new proposal for reconstruction is correct, by the gaze of
 199. Birth of Athena. Attic
black-figure hydria by the
Antimenes Painter. Ca. 510 B.C.
Würzburg, Martin-von-Wagner-
Museum L309. Photo: Martin-
von-Wagner-Museum der
Universität Würzburg.

200. Athena serving

Heracles wine. Tondo
of a kylix by the
Oedipus Painter. 470–
465 B.C. Munich,
Antikensammlungen
2648. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
 A T H E N A 227

Athena Glaucopis. The gorgoneion on the obliquely draped aegis, meanwhile, turns away from
the viewer and toward the goddess’s left, the unlucky side. When she imposes a dark fate, Athena
is called Gorgopis (Sophocles, Ajax 450). For the Attic colonists who moved to Lemnos, the
sacred bird of Athena, sitting ready for flight on her right hand, would have been a lucky omen.
For the reconstruction of Phidias’ statue of Athena in the Parthenon, the so-called Athena
Parthenos,73 richer sources are available than for the reconstruction of the statue of Zeus at
Olympia. Still, they are by no means able to furnish a realistic picture of the statue of gold and
ivory. Pausanias describes it this way (1.24.5ff.):

In the middle of her helmet sits a sphinx . . . however, griffins have been placed on both sides of the
helmet. The statue of Athena stands upright with a chiton reaching her feet, and a head of Medusa
made of ivory is attached to her breast. And in her hands she holds a winged victory about twelve
feet high, as well as a spear. At her feet stands a shield, and beside the spear is found a snake that
may well represent Erichthonius. On the base of the statue the creation of Pandora is depicted.

A marble statue found in Athens and dating from the third century A.D. (fig. 201) shows the
complete figure but is without any aesthetic value.74 In addition, the copyist has added a column
under the goddess’s right hand that is neither mentioned by Pausanias nor present in other cop-
ies, not even in the best copy, which is in Patras.75 If one pretends that the column is not there,
the hand on which the victory goddess floats acquires buoyancy and a sense of spontaneous
motion. It is not these faint, distant echoes, but rather the history of the impact of this work
on Greek art after the Classical period, that makes clear how unprecedented the original must
have been. We should not speak, as is frequently done, of a cult statue, since it was the ancient
statue of the seated Athena carved from olive wood, not the statue by Phidias, that continued to
function as the cult object. The function of the Parthenos is instead symbolic. She is the embodi-
ment of Athens, her city, and the archetype for city goddesses into the Roman period. The large
snake behind the shield expressed the autochthonous origins of the Athenians, of which they
were so proud. The Parthenos’ decorative program, including a Gigantomachy and an Ama-
zonomachy,76 refers indirectly to Athens’ victory over the Persians. The fantastic creatures on the
helmet, creatures that could be found among the decorative motifs on barbarian garments and
weapons at that time, are also reminiscent of the Persian Wars. The same is true of the winged
victory. Pandora’s creation by Hephaestus and Athena, as depicted on the base of the statue (left
out in fig. 201), expressed symbolically the exceptional significance allotted to Attic art. There
was surely no higher praise for a work of art in Antiquity than to claim that it was alive, much as
Athena bestows real life on the work of art that is Pandora.77 Since in Greek myth Pandora was
the first mortal woman and the mother of mankind, her creator, the noble Athena, becomes the
spiritual founder of the human race.
Variations on the mythic themes of the statue of Athena Parthenos are repeated in the sculp-
tural program of the Parthenon in order to praise the goddess and her city. The Centauromachy
228 AT H E NA

201. Athena Parthenos. Marble

statuette, copy of the cult statue made
by Phidias ca. 447–438 B.C. for the
Parthenon on the Athenian Acropolis.
From the Varvakeion. Athens, National
Archaeological Museum 129. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

that decorated her sandals is seen again in the metopes on the south side; the Amazonomachy
and Gigantomachy of her shield appear in the metopes on the west and east sides.78
The only north metope not destroyed by the Christians shows Athena ready for departure,
perhaps together with Themis (fig. 202).79 In the Gigantomachy of the east metopes, attention
is drawn to Athena the victor by the figure of Nike crowning the goddess.80 If here she can be
said to be showing off her armor, in the assembly of the gods on the east frieze she appears in
maidenly beauty as the mistress of the festival (see fig. 225).81 The close reciprocal relationship
between temple statue and temple decoration comes to a crowning conclusion in the pedimental
sculptures:
 A T H E N A 229

202. Athena and Themis (?).

Metope 32 on the north side of
the Parthenon. Athens, Acropolis
Museum. Photo: © Acropolis
Museum, 2012. Photographer:
Socratis Mavrommatis.

When one enters the temple called the Parthenon, the entire pediment tableau focuses on the birth
of Athena; the opposite pediment, however, features the contest between Poseidon and Athena for
possession of the land. (Pausanias 1.24.5)

Up to now hypothetical reconstructions of the center of the west pediment have frequently
featured the olive tree, which Athena caused to grow as her emblem during her contest with
Poseidon. As Jacques Carrey’s drawing shows (figs. 203–204), the center of the pediment could
hardly provide sufficient space for such a tree. Moreover, in sculptures of the fifth century, trees
do not usually tower over divine or human figures (cf. fig. 188). A new proposal for reconstruction
presented here envisions the olive tree as analogous to one in a Classical vase painting with a
similar theme (see fig. 80), where the tree is placed beneath the hooves of Athena’s team of flying
horses.82 Another important detail taken over from the same source is the thunderbolt descending
in front of the team. By means of this device, which also occurs in battles of the gods elsewhere,
Zeus shows that Poseidon and Athena, his brother and daughter, should settle their differences.
The god of the sea is on the point of inundating Attica (Hyginus, Fabulae 164); the people on the
230 AT H E NA

203–204. The west pediment of the Parthenon in 1674 A.D. After the drawings by Jacques Carrey. Paris,
Bibliotheque Nationale. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

left half of the pediment gesticulate as though threatened by a flood. At the moment of greatest
danger, the expressed will of Zeus brings deliverance. The mighty figures of Poseidon and Athena
move away from each other (fig. 205). Ancient observers were aware that reconciliation had taken
place on the level of cult, for both Poseidon and Athena were worshipped in the Erechtheum.
On the east pediment of the Parthenon, the theme of Athena’s birth, which had been depicted
in Greek art for two and a half centuries, appeared in a new form and on a grander scale. Only
the corners of the east pediment have been preserved, but they show how the central scene
encompassed even the furthest reaches of the globe and all the heavens and seas (figs. 206–207).83
Through the research of Evelyn Harrison, it has become clear that Zeus, turned toward the
viewer, was enthroned in the center, so that his head, facing frontally, towered into the apex of
 A T H E N A 231

205. Middle group from the west pediment of the Parthenon. New reconstruction. Drawing by
M. Balestrazzi (Padua). Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

the pediment.84 Athena did not emerge from this head in the shape of a small Palladium but
stood instead at Zeus’s side as one of the largest figures on the pediment (as on the hydria, fig.
199). But on which side? In the proposed reconstruction, she is stepping away from her father’s
left, hurrying toward the goddess of night, still preserved, and Aphrodite, reclining next to her.
A strong case can also be made that the newborn appeared on her father’s right, as Nike does on
the statues of Athena Parthenos and Zeus at Olympia, and that she is not rushing toward the
night, but toward the rising sun god. As is frequently maintained, the description in Homeric
Hymn 28, in which heaven, earth, and sea are powerfully moved by the birth of the armed god-
dess, is indeed fundamental to the composition of the pediment:

This is the beginning of my song to Pallas Athena,

Goddess well known, bright-eyed, clever,
With heart relentless, maiden goddess respected,
Guardian of the city, valiant, Tritogeneia—
To her Zeus himself, all-wise, gave birth
From his sacred head. She wore the instruments of war,
Bright-shining, golden. Reverence gripped all who looked on,
Immortals though they were. With vigor she rushed
From his immortal head, brandishing her sharp-pointed spear.
232 AT H E NA

206–207. The east pediment of the Parthenon in 1674 A.D. Cf. figs. 109, 254, 292. After the drawings by
Jacques Carrey. Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

Great Olympus trembled terribly because of the might of

Bright-eyed Athena, and awesome was the roar of the earth
Round about, while at the same time
The sea was a welter of purple waves. But suddenly
The brine was held in check, and the bright son of Hyperion
Halted his swift-footed horses for a long time
Until the maiden Pallas Athena took from her immortal
Shoulders the divine weapons. Zeus all-wise rejoiced.
And so, farewell, child of aegis-bearing Zeus.
But I will remember you, and others, in song.
 H E P H AE S T U S

H
omer was notably fond of the god who, though crippled, created the magical
 world of the visual arts with his clever, nimble hands. Without Hephaestus, this
 world would not exist. Homer’s Hephaestus is a universal artist in the spirit of
the Italian Renaissance. He is sculptor, architect, and goldsmith as well as armorer, bronze-caster,
decorative metalworker, and inventor of mechanical devices. He created the large, precious metal
“painting” on the shield of Achilles, which comes into being before our very eyes in the Iliad
(18.478–608) in Hephaestus’ capable hands.1 “The secret sympathy of the poet for the wonder-
working god,” as Karl Reinhardt described Homer’s partiality for Hephaestus,2 gave the visual
arts a significant role in poetry into Late Antiquity and beyond. We know this from the work of
Paul Friedländer, who traced the influence of Achilles’ shield.3 The most refined manifestation
of the craftsman god is found in Plato’s Timaeus, in the figure of the Demiurge who fashions the
material world.4 True, the creator in the world Plato depicts is not identical to Hephaestus, or,
for that matter, to any of the other familiar gods, of whom the Demiurge is also the creator (41a).
Nevertheless, when Plato describes him practicing his craft (much as Homer does repeatedly
with Hephaestus), he calls the cosmos that the Demiurge fashions “beautiful” and “most beauti-
ful,” terms used again and again in Homer’s description of the cosmos on Achilles’ shield.
The Homeric rhapsode is blind. This was true not only of Homer himself but also of Demo-
docus in the Odyssey, whom the Muse is said to have deprived of sight (8.64ff.). The blind bard
nevertheless is better at capturing the world in his poetry than any of those who have not lost
their sight. Similarly, Hephaestus, though disfigured and unsightly, produces extraordinarily
beautiful works of art. His limited mobility makes him an inventor of “automata” (literally, “self-
movers”), such as the tripods that run by themselves to the council of the gods (Iliad 18.375ff.), or
the two animated golden maidservants who support their lame master. In this way, Hephaestus’
lameness is explained as the raison d’être for his art. He was already lame when Hera gave birth

233
234 HEPHAESTUS

to him (Iliad 18.396).5 Particularly unforgettable is Homer’s description of the god washing and
dressing himself in order to receive Thetis respectfully when she comes to visit him (18.414ff.):

And he now wiped himself round about his face

With the sponge, and both arms, his hairy
Breast and his sturdy neck. He put on his
Chiton and took up his heavy scepter.
Limping he left through the door, and golden
Maidens supported their master; they seemed
Like living girls.

Homer was interested not only in Hephaestus’ physical appearance and works but also in his
character. We know more about him in this regard than any other Homeric god. Characteristic
of him, as Reinhardt writes, is

his ability to act from the heart, to touch the emotions, to exert himself on behalf of others, to be
utterly devoted. As “anima candida” of Mount Olympus he inspires the gods’ deep affection (as is
the case with Thetis!), much as he does the sympathies of the poet.6

The contrast between his physical form and his works corresponds to the opposition between
the external and the internal. He prevails through a character trait that the other Homeric gods
lack: self-deprecating irony. Together with Apollo, Zeus, Athena, and Hera, Hephaestus also
makes a decisive appearance in the first book of the Iliad. Zeus and Hera are at loggerheads
because of the secret conversation the king of the gods has had with Thetis: “And in the house
of Zeus, the grandchildren of Uranus grumbled” (570). The harmony of the gods’ banquet has
obviously been disturbed. Hephaestus restores it, first by making Hera smile and then by making
all the gods laugh. He brings this about by taking over the task that usually belongs to the young-
est and most attractive inhabitants of Mount Olympus and acting as cupbearer, misshapen
though he is. From later vase paintings, as well as Etruscan wall paintings, we know how much
emphasis was given to the beauty of the wine-pourer, who should move along with dancing
steps.7 Think only of Ganymede. On vases, a winged Iris, who tends to hover rather than step,
serves the gods.8 In the text under discussion, we find instead the lame god Hephaestus, whose
fall from heaven had only worsened his inherent defect. In his words of consolation to Hera,
he refers to his fall directly (586ff.), and a miracle happens—the goddess laughs (595ff.):

He spoke, and therefore white-armed Hera

Smiled, then smiling she grasped the cup from
Her son. Moving to the right he now poured
Sweet nectar also for the other gods, ladling
 H E P H A E S T U S 235

It with a tankard from the cauldron.

Unquenchable laughter arose amid the blessed
Gods, as they saw Hephaestus panting his way
Through the chamber.

Hephaestus assumes the role of court jester in order to dissolve the tense atmosphere with
laughter. He does so consciously, with godly deliberation, not, as has been assumed, with comic
spontaneity. His disarming naiveté is the product of consummate art. While all the other Olym-
pians are intent only on their own honor, Hephaestus treats his role as cupbearer with a certain
amount of irony. In doing so he comes across as one of the “most modern” figures in the Iliad.
One explanation for this is that the poet conferred something of his own nature on the artisan
god, as many scholars have observed.9


This “most modern” Homeric god is, nevertheless, one of the oldest from the point of view of
his origins and cult. His favorite resort in the Iliad and Odyssey is the island of Lemnos off the
coast of Asia Minor, opposite the Troad. Scholars are right to look for Hephaestus’ homeland in
this vicinity.10 In the Iliad he has a priest in Troy named Dares, whose wealth is emphasized
(5.9f.). The capital of Lemnos, Hephaestia, was already named after him in the Archaic period.11
The island was also the site of a temple of Hephaestus. Recent Italian excavations have yielded
significant prehistoric finds that are very close to objects discovered in Troy.12 Schliemann’s splen-
did finds of gold, silver, and copper from Troy II bear witness to advanced skill in metal refining,
casting, and soldering, all of which were already highly developed in the third millennium B.C.13
For the derivation of Hephaestus, historians of religion point to the telluric fire, flames shoot-
ing out from the earth, which, according to reports from Antiquity, are said to have burned
on Lemnos during the prehistoric period. Indeed, from Homer on, the name of the god is used
simply as a synonym for fire, which is also frequently referred to as “the flame of Hephaestus.”
However, the god is not to be merely equated with fire. By taming the flames and using them to
create works of art, he far transcends the simply elemental. Hephaestus’ creative ability was, as
Schliemann’s Trojan finds indicate, already in full flower in his land of origin in the early part
of the third millennium B.C. A gold pendant in the “Treasure of Priam,” made of over sixteen
thousand individual parts, must have seemed to be the creation of a god even at the time it was
crafted, comparable to the famous necklace of Harmonia that Hephaestus created.
In the Homeric epics, the Sintians of Lemnos are Hephaestus’ people. In the song of Demo-
docus in the Odyssey, they are characterized as “harsh sounding” (8.294). Hephaestus’ name,
whose meaning we have so far been unable to derive from a Greek root, probably goes back to
the language of this semibarbaric people. The historian Hellanicus from the neighboring island
of Lesbos wrote that Lemnos was inhabited by Thracians and “mixed Greeks,” whom the neigh-
bors called Sintians. They were manufacturers of weapons.14 Hellanicus’ report is pertinent to
236 HEPHAESTUS

many archaeological finds; the question is frequently raised whether ancient works in metal are
“Greek.” As Hellanicus shows, the enquiry is fairly meaningless in the context of half-Greek metal
workshops like those on Lemnos.
Apart from Lemnos, the god had another important cult site: Athens. According to prevailing
opinion, the Attic cult of Hephaestus is post-Homeric. We read in Nilsson:

It was Homer (whose heroes greatly valued and admired the smith who manufactured their trea-
sures and their weapons) who accorded him his place on Greek Olympus, and the artisans of Ath-
ens took him over from the epic poet, providing him with a cult.15

Wilamowitz believed that the god was introduced into Athens in the Late Archaic period, at the
time Miltiades conquered Lemnos:

The artisans of the Kerameikos . . . wanted to elevate their god. . . . The state cult gave the plebeian
god prominence. . . . However, when the lame god became a noble lord, he became estranged from
his essential nature.16

In fact, Homer calls Hephaestus anax (lord) throughout the epics. The worship of Hephaestus
in Athens can be dated back to the second millennium B.C.—that is, to the period before the
Dorian-Ionian migration. Together with the Ionians, who in the latter part of the second millen-
nium traveled through Attica to Asia Minor, the Athenians celebrated a common festival, the
Apaturia (Herodotus 1.147). At this great “family festival” of the Attic-Ionic tribes, young boys
and girls were enrolled in the phratries. Sacrifices were made on this occasion to Zeus Phratrios,
Athena Phratria, and—in an especially festive way—to Hephaestus. The historian Bistros tells
us, “The Athenians put on their best garments, take up burning torches, and sing hymns to
Hephaestus during the sacrifices.”17 His role in this tribal festival becomes clear when we recall
that the god was worshipped not only as patron of craftsmen but also as ancestor of Attic kings
and the Athenians in general. As such, he had an altar in the Erechtheum, the place where the
ancient cults from the Mycenaean period were gathered (Pausanias 1.26.5). In the Eumenides of
Aeschylus, the Pythia calls the Athenians “children of Hephaestus” (13). Plato states in the Timaeus
that Athena took charge of the seeds of the Athenians from the Earth and Hephaestus (23e). This
is a reference both to the birth of the autochthonous king Erichthonius from the Earth and to
his rearing by Athena. The poet who composed the Catalogue of Ships (Iliad 2.547f.) knew the
tale, though he calls the infant born from the life-giving field “Erechtheus.”18 The poet does not
refer to Hephaestus as the child’s father, not only because of the compressed style of the list
of ships, but also because of the Homeric aversion to such primitive, crude myths as the tale of
Hephaestus’ amorous, but unsuccessful, pursuit of Athena.


 H E P H A E S T U S 237

In Attic cult, Hephaestus had a double of sorts, regarded by Wilamowitz as a prior inhabitant
of Athens: the fire god Prometheus.19 Both deities were honored with torch races. The altar of
Prometheus was also located near the manufacturing quarter in the north of Athens, close to the
later Academy of Plato. Sophocles, whose Oedipus at Colonus commemorates the gods of that
area, speaks of the cult site of the fire-bearing god, the Titan Prometheus (55f.). An ancient com-
mentary on the text states that, in the vicinity of the Academy, a base with relief sculpture was
found on which Hephaestus and Prometheus were depicted: “Prometheus as the first and older,
with a scepter in his right hand, and Hephaestus as youthful and occupying the second place.
And a common altar is depicted on the base.” This report dates from the second century B.C.
Now, from the Archaic period on, Hephaestus could be depicted as either mature or youthful,
with and without a beard. However, the relief on the base was, judging from its form, probably
not Archaic but “archaizing.”20 Prometheus’ beard indicates the older generation of the gods. He
was the son of the Titan Iapetus; Hephaestus, the son of Zeus.
Was Prometheus in Athens really the older cult god? Does his worship extend further back
than that of Hephaestus? In contrast to Hephaestus, the name Prometheus, meaning “Fore-
thought,” is etymologically transparent. In and of itself this is not significant, for it could be a
case of a Greek name’s transposition onto a pre-Greek deity. However, only purely Greek names
occur in the entire myth cycle to which Prometheus belongs. This can be no accident. Epi-
metheus (“Afterthought”) is his brother; the latter’s wife, sent to trick him by the gods, is called
Pandora,21 “she to whom all the gods gave gifts,” as Hesiod interprets the name (Works and Days
73f.). Her daughter, in turn, is Pyrrha, the “reddish blonde,” who was mother of Hellen, the pro-
genitor of the Hellenic peoples.22 We are dealing here with a genealogy of the Greeks in which
Prometheus figures as a primal ancestor. Since Doros, the eponymous hero of the Dorians, is
firmly rooted in this family tree, it can scarcely have come into being before the late second mil-
lennium B.C. Hephaestus, however, reaches much further back, to Anatolian metalworking in
the early Bronze Age.
How was it that Hephaestus, in origin a Lemnian god, came to be worshipped in Athens?
Ancient tradition also answers this question. Thucydides reports that Lemnos and Attica were
once colonized by the same people, known as the Pelasgians or Tyrrhenians (4.109). Herodotus
mentions the conflicts between the Athenians and the Pelasgians, who were driven from Attica
back to Lemnos upon the conquest of Lemnos by Miltiades (6.137f.). Accordingly, the cult at both
locations is to be traced back to the same pre-Greek population, the Pelasgians, from whom the
Greeks took over so many gods. From the same Pelasgian domain came Charis, Hephaestus’
spouse. As is shown in the chapter on Aphrodite, the Charites (Graces), whom Herodotus traced
back to the Pelasgians (2.50), were Aphrodisian goddesses of the pre-Greek native population.23
Charis emphasizes the magic and beauty of her husband’s work; in Hesiod’s Works and Days
(73f.), the Charites adorn Pandora with golden necklaces. Finally, Hephaestus’ close relationship
with the mystery cults also speaks in favor of the god’s Pelasgian origin. The birth of Hephaestus’
son, Erichthonius, took place under mysterious circumstances. Two of the daughters of Cecrops
238 HEPHAESTUS

opened, without permission, the basket in which the child was hidden, and they were punished
with madness and death. On Lemnos, all the descendants of Hephaestus belonged to the mystery
cults. There, the god was father or grandfather of the Cabiri,24 the primeval mystery gods, in
whose cults prehistoric languages were used well into historical times. The Cabiric cults spread
among simple folk in many places in Greece and contributed to the popularity of Hephaestus,
a popularity we can see in vase paintings.


Next to Dionysus, Hephaestus was the favorite god of the Greek vase-painters. He is time and
again presented in two myths in particular: assisting at the birth of Athena and returning to
Mount Olympus from his exile. If the interpretation given in the chapter on Athena is correct,
the earliest depiction of Hephaestus that has so far been recognized can be found on the neck
of a pithos on Tenos.25 On this vase, his feet are curved like claws. His attribute, however, has
not been preserved (see fig. 174). It was probably the double axe, the age-old cult symbol of the
Minoan period that Pindar calls “sacred” (fr. 34 Snell):

Zeus who, struck by the sacred axe,

gave birth to blond-haired Athena.

When Hephaestus is shown engaged in his work in other contexts, he carries not the double
axe but rather tongs or a hammer. The “sacred” axe common to scenes of Athena’s birth provides
confirmation for the god’s derivation from pre-Greek religion, since it was also the attribute of
another pre-Greek god: Carian Zeus.26 Since the tool Hephaestus employs at Athena’s birth from
the head of Zeus is itself a sacred emblem, the entire birth process gains a symbolic character,
emphasizing its significance. One of the finest Archaic depictions of this scene is found on a vase,
now in London, signed by the potter Phrynos (fig. 208).27 Hephaestus, in a short but elegant gar-
ment, has just completed his task. With the sacred axe in hand he strides away from the scene,
looking back, however, to greet his newborn sister. His feet are not deformed here. In contrast,
a contemporary amphora (around 560 B.C.) features not a noble Hephaestus but a near caricature
(fig. 209).28 The god, holding an oversized double axe, hurries away with immense strides, like a
thief. But Zeus and Hermes are also portrayed on this amphora with similar humor.
Hephaestus amuses the gods at their banquet in the first book of the Iliad, and the song about
his dealings with his rival, Ares, and Aphrodite entertains the Phaeacians at their dance. Simi-
larly, the burlesque tale of his return to Mount Olympus, painted on vases used at symposia,
delighted the participants at these banquets. In book 18 of the Iliad (394ff.), Hephaestus tells his
wife, Charis, how the Nereid Thetis and the Oceanid Eurynome saved him after his fall into the
depths. Hera had flung him, her son born lame, from heaven.29 He reports on his services to the
sea goddesses during his exile (400ff.):
 H E P H A E S T U S 239

208. Hephaestus at
the birth of Athena.
Exterior of a kylix by
Phrynos. Ca. 560 B.C.
London, British Museum
B424. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

209. The birth of

Athena (right);
Hephaestus running
away from the scene
(left). Attic black-
figure amphora of the
type known as
“Tyrrhenian.” Ca. 560
B.C. Berlin, Staatliche
Museen, Antiken­
sammlung F1704.
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.

Nine years I stayed with them and crafted

Much jewelry, buckles, coiling clasps,
Necklaces and earrings, there in the hollow
Cave, and around the stream of Ocean,
Murmuring with foam, flowed unending.

Hephaestus’ revenge on his mother and their eventual reconciliation, which was at the same
time reconciliation with her stepson Dionysus, was portrayed in a hymn of Alcaeus.30 Hephaestus
240 HEPHAESTUS

sent his mother a throne from which she could not rise without his help. Ares boasted that he
could get hold of Hephaestus, but the latter drove him away with firebrands. The frieze of the
Siphnian Treasury at Delphi (525 B.C.) provides a visualization of the efficacy of this defense, as
Hephaestus uses two bellows as flamethrowers in the Gigantomachy (fig. 210).31 When Ares
returns, unsuccessful, to Mount Olympus, Dionysus descends to visit the smith, entraps him
with wine, and brings him back to the heavens drunk. A jolly cohort of silens and nymphs, the
Dionysiac thiasos, marches along with him into an astonished Olympus. This scene was a favor-
ite with vase-painters. The fullest Attic depiction of it is on the François Vase of Kleitias and
Ergotimos in Florence (fig. 211).32 With Olympian dignity, Hephaestus, dressed in beautifully
decorated garments, sits as if enthroned on his mount. His disability is portrayed unobtrusively,
while the whip in his left hand indicates that, in spite of his drunken state, he is able to control
his mule.
Alcaeus did not invent this tale. There is earlier evidence of it from art, admittedly in a some-
what different form. On an ointment bottle painted in Corinth around 580 (fig. 212), Hephaestus,
incessantly quaffing wine from a drinking horn as he sits on the mule, is depicted with con-
spicuously crippled feet.33 The goddess wrapped in a cloak and standing behind him is probably

210. Hephaestus with his

bellows, shooting flames, in
the Gigantomachy. Next to
him are Hestia and Aphrodite.
From the north frieze of the
Siphnian Treasury in Delphi.
Ca. 525 B.C. Delphi,
Archaeological Museum.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
 H E P H A E S T U S 241

211. Return of
Hephaestus to Olympus.
From the lower frieze of
the volute-krater by the
potter Ergotimos and the
painter Kleitias. Ca. 570
B.C. Florence, Museo
Archeologico Nazionale
4209. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

212. Return of
Hephaestus to Olympus.
Middle Corinthian
amphoriskos. Ca. 580
B.C. Athens, National
Archaeological Museum
664. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

Thetis, from whose cave the procession departs for Mount Olympus. Dionysus, in a short jacket
and with a sizable length of vine over his shoulder, directs the expedition with a gesture. They
are accompanied by grotesque companions, among them the buffoon in front of the mule. These
are not, however, hybrid creatures like satyrs and silens but are instead similar to the well-known
rotund revelers common in Archaic vase painting throughout Greece. Our small vase painting
has been interpreted by Ernst Buschor, Frank Brommer, and other scholars as evidence that
satyrs and revelers are essentially identical.34 It is also possible to come to a different conclusion:
that it was Alcaeus who first introduced silens and nymphs into this tale. Previously, Hephaestus
was accompanied by daimones, who were much more closely related to the craftsman god. In
Lemnos and elsewhere Hephaestus was worshipped as the father of the Cabiri. In the cult of
these gods, grotesque scenes similar to the depiction of the Archaic revelers were not out of the
ordinary, as we can see on the well-known skyphoi from the Cabirium at Thebes.35 Aeschylus
depicted these daimones as wine-imbibing lushes who made the Argonauts drunk.36 They were
therefore—and again the Cabiric skyphoi provide further information—linked just as closely to
Dionysus as to Hephaestus. As Dionysian-Hephaestean spirits, they were made to order for their
role in Hephaestus’ return. Alcaeus could have taken the tale in this form from the nearby island,
Cabiric Lemnos, and transformed it for the cult of his native Lesbos. T. B. L. Webster suspects
that the hymn was composed as a cult song for Dionysus, who was worshipped on Lesbos together
with Hera and Zeus.37 The myth endured in the fine arts in the form Alcaeus gave it, until it was
given new shape by the dramatists who produced Attic satyr plays.
242 HEPHAESTUS

On his calyx-krater (fig. 213), the Kleophrades Painter portrayed Hephaestus riding “side-
saddle” on a mule38 (an image found in many earlier depictions), thus focusing attention on the
god’s disability. On the exterior of a cup by Douris (fig. 214), Dionysus grabs his brother’s wrist.39
Hephaestus is here intoxicated, and his condition is causing him to forget his lameness. As on
the krater of Kleitias and on later vessels, Hera herself, sitting on her bewitched throne, awaits
the returning deities. On the interior of the same cup by Douris (fig. 215), she sits enthroned,
holding a phiale in order to greet her son with a libation of wine. In front of her stands a god
with crown and scepter who is identified by an inscription as Prometheus. Nowhere else does
he make an appearance at the return of Hephaestus. As previously stated, he was linked with
Hephaestus in Attic cult. Did Prometheus, whose name means “Forethought,” perhaps advise
the troubled Hera to bring Hephaestus back in order to effect a reconciliation? It seems reason-
able to suspect that this element is an invention of an Attic writer of satyr plays, especially since
the return of the drunken smith was a theme integral to so many of them.40 The theme of
binding and freeing the queen of the gods would serve as a brilliant counterpoint to the theme
of binding and freeing Prometheus. Did Aeschylus’ Prometheus trilogy, at the beginning of
which Hephaestus fastened Prometheus to the crags, end with the satyr play “The Return of
Hephaestus”? We will have to leave this question unanswered.41


Should we wish to review all the themes in vase painting that have anything to do with Hepha-
estus, we would scarcely be able to complete the task. It is not only that his myths worked well

213. Return of
Hephaestus to Olympus.
Calyx-krater by the
Kleophrades Painter.
490–480 B.C. Paris,
Louvre G162. Photo:
© RMN-Grand Palais /
Art Resource, NY.
 214. Return of
Hephaestus to Olympus.
The satyr at left carries
the god’s tools, bellows,
and hammer. Exterior
of a kylix by Douris. Ca.
470 B.C. Paris, Cabinet
des Médailles 542. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

215. Hera and

Prometheus. Interior of
the kylix by Douris
(fig. 214). Ca. 470 B.C.
Paris, Cabinet des
Médailles 542. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
244 HEPHAESTUS

as subject matter for the dinnerware used at symposia; they were also the favorites of potters and
vase-painters because the divine craftsman was their own patron deity. Accordingly, they dis-
played his bust together with that of Athena Hephaesteia next to their foundry furnace (fig.
216).42 They depicted him traveling on the winged chariot he himself had made (fig. 217),43 and
pictured him—again in connection with Athena—at the creation of Pandora (fig. 218).44 On a
very unusual vessel,45 he directs a chorus of maidens (fig. 219). The female dancing figures, half
walking, half floating, are spread over the entire large astragal, a carved and painted bovine
anklebone, here designed as a box to store knucklebones. Its opening is depicted as a cave, from
which Hephaestus emerges, limping. The maidens, whom he bids dance with a bold gesture, were
called Clouds (Nephelai) by Ludwig Curtius. The god of craft, however, does not count personi-
fications of nature among his creations. What he did create were works of art, like the golden
maidens who supported him. The dancers here are probably figures of this sort, artificial cre-
ations animated by the master craftsman. They are reminiscent of the rows of dancers on the
shield of Achilles, except that those consisted of young men as well as maidens (Iliad 18.599ff.):

At times they would run with skilled feet,

Very lightly, as when a potter sitting down
Tries out a wheel fitted to his hands to see
If it runs. At other times they would again
Run to each other in rows.

One might also think of the much-discussed choros, another group of mechanical figures, that
Daedalus, a human double of Hephaestus, created for Ariadne (Iliad 18.591f.).46

216. Heads of Hephaestus

and Athena Hephaisteia
in a foundry. Kylix by
the Foundry Painter.
480–470 B.C. Berlin,
Staatliche Museen,
Antikensammlung
F2294. Photo: bpk
Bildagentur /
(Antikensammlung) /
Art Resource, NY.
Photographer: Johannes
Laurentius.
 217. Hephaestus on a
winged chariot. Tondo of
a red-figure kylix from
Saturnia. Ca. 500 B.C.
Florence, Museo
Archeologico Nazionale
81600. Photo: Courtesy
Ministero per i beni e le
attività culturali—Polo
Museale della Toscana–
Firenze.

218. Beardless Hephaestus at the

creation of Pandora (not visible in
the picture), here named Anesidora.
The first woman in Greek mythology
is at the same time a work of his
youth. The scene may echo a satyr
play of the young Sophocles, Pandora,
or The Hammerers. Athena is
Hephaestus’ pendant at the left. Tondo
of a white-ground kylix by the
Tarquinia Painter. Ca. 470–460 B.C.
London, British Museum 1881.0528.1.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
246 HEPHAESTUS

219. Vase in the form of

hollow astragal
(astragaloi were bones
that could be used as
dice), made by the potter
Sotades. Hephaestus
“directing” a female
chorus. From Aegina.
Ca. 470 B.C. London,
British Museum
1860.1201.2. Photos:
© The Trustees of the
British Museum /
Art Resource, NY.

Of all the temples of the Greek gods, the best preserved is that of Hephaestus, located above the
Athenian Agora.47 This so-called Theseum was actually a Hephaesteum, the most beautiful cult
site of the god in the ancient world (fig. 220). As in the Parthenon, the cella was decorated with
a frieze, which did not, however, continue all the way around the Hephaesteum, running only on
the east and west sides. The metopes are distributed in a similarly thrifty manner, some sculpted
and the others left bare. The decorated ones invoke an ancient Attic theme: the jux­taposition of
 H E P H A E S T U S 247

220. Hephaesteum in
Athens, from the
southwest. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

the deeds of Heracles with those of Theseus. Theseus is also involved in the Centauromachy on
the west frieze. We are most interested in the east frieze (fig. 221), which has been interpreted
from the time of Karl Otfried Müller through to the work of H. A. Thompson as also depicting
a deed of Theseus: his otherwise rarely represented battle with his Giant-like cousins, the fifty
Pallantidai.48 Indeed, a massive battle is taking place, and corpses are strewn on the ground. At
the center, a powerful man in curiously unwarlike clothing fights to victory, the long garment
draped over his left shoulder serving as a counterpoint to the powerful movements of his mighty,
naked body (fig. 222). Several enemies shove stones at him but cannot do him harm. Further
along, toward the outer borders of the frieze, warriors with “normal” weapons appear. On the left
side is a prisoner with his hands tied behind his back (see fig. 221). On each side, three invisible
deities sit amid the action.
It seems that Florens Felten has found the best solution for this curious battle.49 He sees the
central figure as the Hephaestus of book 21 of the Iliad, who, at the request of his mother, Hera
(330–41), sets fire to the springs and rivers of the Trojan plain, bringing their waters to a boil
(364f.). Homer describes this war of the elements as taking place in several phases (342–76). The
various waters of the Troad have brought themselves together “with tree trunks and stones” (314)
in order to fight Achilles, who had tainted their waters with the corpses of fallen Trojans. To
avenge the death of his friend, he let twelve Trojans live, pulling them out of the river and bind-
ing their hands behind their backs, only to kill them later at Patroclus’ grave (29–33):
248 HEPHAESTUS

221. East frieze of

the Hephaesteum in
Athens. Drawing by
M. Cox. Reproduced
with permission
from J. Boardman,
Greek Sculpture:
The Classical Period
(London 1985), 152,
fig. 112.

These, bewildered with fear like fawns, he led out of the water
and bound their hands behind them with thongs well cut out of leather,
with the very belts they themselves wore on their ingirt tunics
and gave them to his companions to lead away to the hollow ships,
then himself whirled back, still in a fury to kill men. (Trans. R. Lattimore [Chicago 1951])

On the left slab of the east frieze, the demonic Achilles of book 21 is portrayed in the act of
taking his victims prisoner, as if “behind the backs” of the deities partial to him, among whom
we can identify Athena with certainty.50 The other two with her may be easily identified as Hera
and Poseidon using the Homeric scheme of the sides taken by the Olympians in the Trojan War.
On the opposite side of the frieze, Aphrodite51 sits between Ares and Apollo, the three divine
“allies” of the Trojans. In book 21 (284–98), Athena and Poseidon come to Achilles’ aid when the
water deities want to drown him. Hera does her part by sending Hephaestus against the rivers as
mentioned above. And the latter does his part (342–45):
 H E P H A E S T U S 249

222. Hephaestus fighting the rivers of the Troad. Center of the east frieze of the Hephaesteum (fig. 221).
Athens. Photo: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Agora Excavations.

. . . and Hephaistos set on them an inhuman fire.

First he kindled a fire in the plain and burned the numerous
corpses that lay there in abundance, slain by Achilleus,
and all the plain was parched and the shining water was straitened. (Trans. R. Lattimore)

After a simile and further descriptions of the catastrophe, which brings Hephaestus across the
Trojan rivers, Homer continues (353–56):

The eels were suffering and the fish in the whirl of the water
who leaped out along the lovely waters in every direction
in affliction under the hot blast of resourceful Hephaistos.
The strength of the river was burning away. (Trans. R. Lattimore)

This is the narrative positioned at the center of the east frieze of the Hephaesteum, portrayed
in the powerful language of images. The next step is the plea to Hera from the representative
of the Trojan water deities, Xanthos-Scamander (369–76), which brings Hephaestus to a halt.
A battle of the gods follows, where Athena fights against Ares (392) and then against Aphrodite
(424f.), while Poseidon and Apollo make peace. These are the gods of the east frieze, whose main
theme is the aristeia of Hephaestus. There is no need to go into how marvelously it fits the
entrance to the temple. Among the ancient texts available to us, there is none that may be read
together with the east frieze of the Hephaesteum as convincingly as book 21 of the Iliad.
250 HEPHAESTUS

Recent research has concluded that the east pediment, which rises in front of and above this
frieze, also depicted a myth of Hephaestus. The Swedish archaeologist Charlotte Scheffer has
reinterpreted a sculptural group found in the Agora. It consists of two women, one of whom is
carrying the other in the ephedrismos position—that is, piggyback (fig. 223a).52 While in the past
the women were interpreted as an acroterion group from the Hephaesteum,53 Scheffer shows
these figures to have numerous parallels among Dionysian nymphs “getting carried away.”
Accordingly, the pediment scene would have included a thiasos, the companions of Dionysus and
Hephaestus. It is therefore not difficult to imagine the theme of the pedimental sculpture: it must
be the return of Hephaestus to Olympus (figs. 211–214). In the center of the pediment, Hera may
have sat on the enchanted throne.54 Since there is a horse’s hoof among the fragments of the
pediment (fig. 223b),55 Hephaestus may have been portrayed, as he often is in this scene, riding
on a mule.
The cult image inside this temple included Hephaestus and Athena. Its artist was Alcamenes,
who was a descendant of the Attic colonists in Lemnos, the island of the artist god.56 Whether
Hephaestus stood to Athena’s right or left is a point of contention, as is the question of whether
he supported himself with a scepter or a long torch.57 The statue was famous for Alcamenes’
discreet concealment of the god’s lameness. A Roman marble copy of what is probably his head
has been preserved (fig. 224).58 Semni Karouzou has brilliantly delineated its character:

Alcamenes was especially concerned to confer on the face the taciturnity typical of every seri-
ous worker. Insight, concentration of the nous [mind], must necessarily precede creativity of the
hands.59

Moreover, she convincingly concludes that, by analogy with the births of gods on the temple
sculptures of Phidias, the birth of Erichthonius was depicted on the base of the statue of Hepha-
estus.60 At the god’s side stood Athena Hephaisteia. On the east frieze of the Parthenon, these two
deities sit beside one another (fig. 225).61 As the companion of Hephaestus she was given the title
Hephaisteia or Ergane. It was not only in the minds of the Athenians that she was linked to Hep-
haestus, for the two are reported to have together built one of the early temples of Apollo in
Delphi and decorated it with pedimental sculptures (Pindar fr. 52i.6ff. Snell):

The sides were of bronze and under them stood

Pillars of bronze. Golden sirens, however,
Sang above the pediment, six in number.

It is true that artisans had their places of business—as they still do today—in the vicinity of
the hill in the Agora; but the god worshipped in the Hephaesteum was not only their patron deity.
As father of Erichthonius, he was also the ancestor of all Athenians (see fig. 186).
 223a. From the east
pediment of the
Hephaesteum (fig. 220).
Nymphs playing
“piggyback” in a thiasos
(?) as part of the return
of Hephaestus. Athens,
Agora Museum S429.

223b. Cuttings in the middle of the

pediment floor. Photos: Courtesy
Hans R. Goette.
 224. Head of Hephaestus.
Roman copy of a work by
Alcamenes. Vatican, Museo
Chiaramonti 1211. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

225. Hephaestus and

Athena. From the east
frieze of the Parthenon
on the Athenian
Acropolis. London,
British Museum. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
 AP H R O D I T E

W
ithout Aphrodite, what would Olympus—what would human life—be! Nei-
ther god nor mortal can escape her power, says the fifth Homeric Hymn. Three
goddesses alone eluded her temptations: Athena, Artemis, and Hestia. These
exceptions, however, serve only to underscore her dominance. Everyone else must succumb to
her power. The Hymn to Aphrodite was probably composed by the same poet who composed the
Iliad, as Reinhardt in particular has shown.1 Just as, at the beginning of the epic, Apollo, Athena,
Zeus, Hera, and Hephaestus make their appearance in a manner that expresses their individual
characters, so book 3 of the Iliad is full of the grace and power of Aphrodite. There she spirits
Paris, who had awarded her the prize in the beauty contest of the goddesses, away from the
assault of the much superior Menelaus (380ff.). Other gods also rescue their sons or favorites
from threatening circumstances, but Aphrodite does this in an unusual way, one typically her
own. She transports Paris into his fragrant bedroom, puts him to bed, and brings to his side
Helen, who has been watching the duel of her “husbands” from the walls of Troy. Disguised as a
gray-haired old woman, Aphrodite speaks to her:

Paris is calling you to come home. He lies in his chamber on his elaborate bed, attractively dressed
and looking very handsome. You would not think that he had just come home from a duel. He
looks rather like someone going to the dance floor or someone who has just finished dancing
and is having a rest.

Helen, who, like the other spectators, assumes that Paris had been defeated, is annoyed at these
words. Aphrodite then puts aside her old woman’s disguise and reveals herself to Helen as she
really is (396ff.):

253
254 APHRODITE

And when she noted the goddess’s most beautiful neck,

Her alluring breasts and her sparkling eyes,
She was astonished.

The effect of this revelation is different from that of Athena’s revelation to Achilles (Iliad
1.199ff.). As soon as Helen has recognized Aphrodite, she responds to the goddess with bitter,
almost degrading, reproaches. Nevertheless, in the end she follows Aphrodite to Paris’ room.
Whereas Achilles willingly accepts divine advice, Helen is reluctant to obey Aphrodite. The god-
dess, smiling, pulls up a chair beside Paris’ bed, and the daughter of Zeus, as Helen is solemnly
called here, sits down (424ff.). We seem to be looking in on the very picture of a heroic couple of
the sort we know from later banqueting hero reliefs. The hero lies on a kline, and the heroine sits
opposite him.2 However, unlike the reliefs, the Homeric image is not peaceful. It is filled with inner
tension. Helen continues to avert her eyes and then speaks just as reproachfully to her spouse as
she had to Aphrodite: “I wish you had been killed by that powerful man who was once my hus-
band.” Paris, however, does not let his attention be diverted from the gifts that “golden Aphrodite”
granted him (cf. 3.64). The vicissitudes of battle do not interest him. First one wears the victor’s
crown, then another does. Instead, he is filled with eros and sweet himeros, a longing to make love
with Helen. In book 3 of the Iliad the poet uses these words as abstract concepts, as he also does
in book 14 (198, 216). In the Odyssey as well, the god of love is not personified. In Hesiod, on the
other hand, Eros and Himeros appear as deities, daimones, as they also do in Archaic art. On a
votive clay plaque from the middle of the sixth century B.C., Himeros and Eros, identified by in-
scriptions, are depicted as sprightly young boys in the arms of their mother, Aphrodite (fig. 226).3
The goddess of love of the Homeric epics is a child of Zeus and Dione. She is also called
the daughter of Zeus in the fifth Homeric Hymn. It is by that name that Sappho summons her in
her first poem, the only one to survive in its entirety. In Theogony 180–206, on the other hand,
Hesiod tells quite a different tale of her birth.4 When Cronus emasculated his father, Uranus, the
god of heaven, with his sickle, Erinyes, Giants, and nymphs sprang up from the blood that fell to
the earth. From the genitals, which fell into the sea, Aphrodite came into being. She came ashore
on the island of Cyprus (Theogony 194ff.), known also to Homer as her favorite residence:

The revered and beautiful goddess stepped out of the sea.

Grass grew round about under her slender feet.
Gods and men called her well-garlanded Kytherea and Aphrodite,
The foam-born goddess, because she was nourished in the foam. . . .
Eros accompanied her, and beautiful Himeros followed her from her birth,
And as she traveled to the tribe of the gods.

The Aphrodite who was worshipped in Greek cult was not the child of Zeus and Dione we know
from the Homeric poems, but the motherless daughter of Uranus in Hesiod. This can be concluded
 A P H R O D I T E 255

226. Aphrodite with

Himeros and Eros in her
arms. Votive plaque from
the Acropolis of Athens.
Mid-sixth century B.C.
Athens, National
Archaeological Museum,
Acropolis Collection 2526.
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.

from the epithet that occurs most frequently at her Greek cult sites: Urania. Aphrodite Urania
reveals in her name her descent from the god of heaven, Uranus. Nilsson assumed that, provided
one disregards the Muse Urania, the name was unique among the Greek names for gods.5 He
overlooked the fact that Herodotus refers to the epithet Uranius, which was used for Zeus in
Sparta (6.56). We will return to this subject later.


Together with Nilsson and the majority of historians of religion, we may conclude that the pre-
cursor of Urania was the supreme goddess of the Semitic peoples of the Near East, worshipped
as “queen of heaven.” Even the Hebrew people had worshipped her in Egypt (Jeremiah 44:17ff.):
“Since the time when we ceased giving burnt offerings and pouring libations to the queen of
heaven, we have been destitute and have perished through the sword and through hunger.”
From this text it is clear that the queen of heaven was fond of incense and that she protected her
worshippers with military might. The same is true, as we shall see, for the earliest cult of Urania
in Greece.
What the modern study of religion has discovered, the ancient Greeks already knew—namely,
that Aphrodite had come to them from the Near East. Herodotus (1.105) reported that the temple
of Urania in Ascalon in Syria was
256 APHRODITE

the oldest of all the temples dedicated to this goddess. The temple on Cyprus was also founded
from Ascalon, as the Cypriots themselves admit, and the Phoenicians, also inhabitants of this land
of Syria, set up the temple on Kythera.

Pausanias identified the sanctuary of Urania on Kythera, an island south of the Peloponnese,
as the oldest and most sacred sanctuary of Aphrodite in Greece. He describes the cult statue as
armed (3.23.1). The Aphrodite of Acrocorinth also bore arms (2.5.1), as did the one in Sparta
(3.15.10). The Theban Aphrodite, spouse of Ares, whose festival was organized by the military
officials, was likewise a warlike deity.6 According to tradition, she too was brought into the coun-
try by the Phoenicians. The three ancient depictions of Aphrodite seen by Pausanias were said
to have been carved from the wood of the ship that carried Cadmus and his Phoenician comrades
over the sea to Boeotia (9.16.3). Aphrodite’s role as guardian of sailors, which seems to have
been known already to Sappho (fr. 5 Lobel-Page), comes to mind here. One of the Aphrodites of
Thebes was called Urania. Analogously, the supreme goddess of the Phoenicians had been given
the epithet “heavenly,” Latinized as Caelestis.7 The Boeotian poet Hesiod, who tells the tale of
Urania’s birth, had probably become acquainted with it in the “Phoenician” tradition of the god-
dess’s cult in Thebes.
Homer certainly knew about the birth of Urania, yet, judging by what we know of his poetry,
the original myth, reminiscent of the story of Kumarbi, must have remained foreign to him. He
appears to have consciously suppressed the goddess’s oriental characteristics. As Christos Karouzos
observed,8 Zeus’s words to Aphrodite, who returns wounded to Olympus after the battle at Troy,
not only apply to the particular situation in which she finds herself but have a wider, more general
relevance (Iliad 5.428ff.):

The works of war have not been given to you, my child:

But you, search out the lovely works of marriage.
Those works of war, all these swift Ares and Athena will tend to.

As daughter of Zeus, Aphrodite had to renounce any and all claims to weaponry, since her
siblings Ares and Athena looked after “the works of war.” Adoption as a child of Zeus brought
about a curtailment of her power, as it did to other adoptees. The characteristics and spheres of
influence of other gods, too, as assigned by Zeus to his children or his brothers or sisters, were
more clearly defined and differentiated from each other than ever before. For all these gods, the
loss of divine power was compensated for by a more clearly defined personality, one that they
owed to Homer more than anyone else, although the poet admittedly stood at the end of a
lengthy process of development. Through his work he solidified tendencies and smoothed over
the complications that had occurred at the beginning of the development of Greek religion, when
Zeus migrated into the Aegean.
 A P H R O D I T E 257

227. Birth of Aphrodite. Gilded silver medallion of the

Roman Imperial era, inspired by the relief decoration on
the base of the cult statue of Zeus at Olympia. From the
area of Galaxidi. Paris, Louvre MNB1290. Photo:
© RMN-Grand Palais / Art Resource, NY.

The supreme deities of the Near East corresponding to Zeus were coupled with spouses who
resembled Urania. In the Aegean, however, Zeus married Hera, a goddess of a different kind. It
is apparent from a number of myths and cults, however, that a goddess of the Aphrodite type also
belongs at the side of the highest Greek god. In Sparta there was an ancient cult statue called
Aphrodite-Hera (Pausanias 3.13.9). As already mentioned, Herodotus refers to the Spartan office
of a priest of Zeus Uranius (6.56). Additionally, Zeus shared with Aphrodite in Sparta his most
important epithet, Olympios (Pausanias 3.12.11). Aphrodite Urania was invoked in many places
in Greece together with Zeus Urios, who sends favorable winds.9 The relationship of the Near
Eastern Urania to the supreme deity, the lord of heaven and weather, was retained. It is possible
that the phonetic similarity of the names played a role in coupling the pair. A valuable witness
for the close connection between Zeus and Aphrodite is the birth of Urania depicted on the base
of Phidias’ statue of Zeus at Olympia. A gilded silver medallion from Galaxidi on the Gulf of
Corinth10 has preserved for us an impression of the main group of the relief sculpture on the base
(fig. 227) as described by Pausanias (5.11.8). Eros stands behind Urania as she rises from the
waves, and he closes his arms around her.
On the other hand, Hera, as wife of Zeus, adopted characteristics of Aphrodite. This is the
case at one of her most important cult sites, Samos, where a temple of Aphrodite stood in the
sanctuary of Hera,11 and especially in Sicily and Magna Graecia. In Acrae near Syracuse an in-
scription was found “of Hera and Aphrodite” (Inscriptiones Graecae Siciliae et Italiae, ed. G. Kaibel
[Berlin 1892] 208). In the sanctuary of Hera at Paestum, as at the nearby Foce del Sele, Late Clas-
sical terracottas were found that show a goddess crouching at her bath (fig. 228).12 Divinities of
love flutter around her, as they do elsewhere around Aphrodite. That Hera used them to enflame
the love of Zeus is indicated by the famous tale of Aphrodite’s girdle in book 14 of the Iliad. Before
Hera goes to Zeus on Mount Ida, she uses a pretext to ask Aphrodite for her magic girdle. The
goddess of love is unable to reject a request from the wife of Zeus (214ff.):

She spoke and from her breast she loosened

Her many-colored, embroidered girdle.
258 APHRODITE

228. Hera-Aphrodite at her bath,

surrounded by love deities.
Terracotta group from the
Heraeum at Foce del Sele. Ca. 370
B.C. Paestum, Museo
Archeologico Nazionale. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

There all her charms are fashioned,

There within are love and longing
And friendly beguilement that takes
Away the understanding of those who think deeply.

The effects of this wonderful piece of embroidery on Zeus are described in what follows
(294ff.), exactly as the quoted verses suggest. The kestos, the girdle of Aphrodite, remained her
most important attribute into the Byzantine period. She had taken it over from her Near Eastern
predecessor, who also retained it as a distinguishing feature until a late period.13 And when
Greeks, Etruscans, and Romans compared the supreme goddess of their contemporaries in the
Near East, the Syrians and the Carthaginians, sometimes to Hera and sometimes to Aphrodite,14
this inconsistency gave expression to the complexities that developed in the second millennium
B.C. when Zeus entered Greece.
 A P H R O D I T E 259

The marriage of Zeus and Hera stood in contrast not only to the Semitic but also to the Indo-
European cultural tradition. The Zeus of the migrants had also been married to a goddess of the
same type as Aphrodite: Dione. Her name is apparently preserved as di-wi-ja, the feminine form
of Zeus, on the clay tablets of Pylos.15 Just as doves were sacred to Aphrodite, so were they sacred
to Dione, as the oracle of Dodona indicates.16 This goddess became the mother of Aphrodite.
From the Hellenistic period, however, we have sources in which the two goddesses are regarded
as equal.17 We should not be surprised, as Nilsson is, that Aphrodite played no role in Dodona,
where the ancient divine couple Zeus and Dione had their residence.18 There, Dione herself was
a double of Aphrodite. Pairs of goddesses in which the daughter is the rejuvenated mother were
characteristic of Aegean religion; we are reminded of Demeter and Kore. The myth of Aphrodite
as daughter of Dione was created in conformity with this type, no doubt already in pre-Homeric
times. In this way, one of the mightiest goddesses, who belonged, as daughter of Uranus, to the
generation of Cronus, became a child of Zeus, and a unique child at that, who with her power
quite often controls and charms her own father, as is evident in the fifth Homeric Hymn (36ff.).
But Zeus turns her own art against her. He fills her heart with longing for a mortal man, the
beautiful Anchises, and she seduces him with all the skills at her disposal, an event described in
an incomparable way by the Homeric Hymn to Aphrodite.
To sum up, the Near Eastern queen of heaven and the Greek Dione both contributed to the
image of Aphrodite. For all that, Aphrodite would not have become the inimitable figure known
from Greek poetry and art if characteristics from a third region had not also contributed to her
composition: the venerable Aegean islands. Like Crete, the Cycladic islands are noted for the
antiquity of their cults. In the third millennium B.C., the island-dwellers were already making
large and small figures of gods, especially female ones, from the characteristic luminous marble
of the islands (fig. 229).19 The slender figures of these “island statues” differentiate them from
other Neolithic statues, which are usually more rotund.20 Instead of maternal characteristics, they
exhibit a nature unmistakably like Aphrodite’s. Judging from the position of the head and the
feet, we would conclude that they were lying down. On their heads they wear divine crowns,
originally enhanced by color. Other decorative elements were probably indicated by paint. Not
only is the statue’s shape reminiscent of Aphrodite, but so also is the instrument that several
of the most beautiful Cycladic marble figures play (fig. 230).21 It is unquestionably a harp, an
instrument that—in the art of the Near East, as in Classical vase paintings—belongs to the cult
of Aphrodite.22
Since in the Cyclades and Crete several female statues would be given as funerary gifts to the
dead, they can hardly be interpreted as representing a single major deity. But is it necessary that
the people of the Cyclades knew the goddess of love as one single deity? In Greece of the his-
torical period, the worship of several Aphrodites, or of the closely linked pair Aphrodite-Peitho,
could take place at the same cult sites.23 In the sanctuary of “Urania in the Gardens” in Athens,
Pausanias read an ancient inscription that called Aphrodite the most sacred of the Fates (1.19.2).
The goddess was accordingly perceived as a member of a divine triad. This representation can
 229. Cycladic idol of a goddess.
2400–2200 B.C. Heraklion,
Heraklion Archaeological Museum.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

230. Harp-player from the

Cycladic island of Amorgos.
Second half of the third
millennium. Athens, National
Archaeological Museum 3908.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
 A P H R O D I T E 261

be placed in the context of Greek popular religion. Was this perhaps the belief of the pre-Greek
population? Karl Schefold interprets the Cycladic idols as nymphs who act as companions of the
dead.24 Perhaps we would come closer to the Aphrodite-like nature of the statues and to the reli­
gion of the Cyclades if we were to call them Charites (Graces). The Charites, whom the Greeks,
according to Herodotus, had taken over from the pre-Greek inhabitants (2.50), were worshipped
in twos or threes.25 They had settled in the Cyclades long ago. Their cult on Paros can be traced
to the Early Archaic period, as it was transferred to Thasos as early as 680 B.C.26 On both islands
Peitho, the embodiment of persuasion, was worshipped with the Charites;27 she was frequently
equated with Aphrodite or was considered one of the Charites (Pausanias 9.35.5). Moreover,
Aphrodite and Dionysus are supposed to have been the parents of the Charites (Servius on
Aeneid 1.724), and this myth is certainly older than the version of their descent from Zeus. It was
Dionysus, not Zeus, who in the pre-Greek period was worshipped in the Aegean isles. There he
was linked to vegetation, and the same is true for the Charites. King Minos is said to have sacri-
ficed to them on Paros28 in a joyful festival, begun with flute music, that later turned into a funeral
celebration. This is a pattern for pre-Greek vegetation festivals. The Charites were, accordingly,
like the kindred Horae (Hours), related to the growth and ripening of nature. For this reason
their images could be given as funerary gifts to attend the dead, as we also suspect was true in
Demeter’s case. They were guarantors of future nourishment and so of future life. At the same
time the figure of a female statue indicates something more: the charis (grace) of love that is also
preserved in the name of the Charites.


Given the close relationship between the goddess of love and the Charites in the Aegean, we
understand why, in the Homeric epics, the wife of Hephaestus is called Charis on one occa-
sion (Iliad 18.382) and Aphrodite on another (Odyssey 8.267), and why the priestess Theonoe in
Euripides’ Helen speaks of Charis but means Aphrodite (1006). The same substitution of Charis
for Aphrodite is found in a fragment from the comedian Antiphanes (fr. 288 Kock).29 What
would the realm of Aphrodite be without the Charites, who, together with Peitho, the Erotes,
and the Horae, make up the goddess’s entourage? In an Archaic votive relief from the Athenian
Acropolis (fig. 231),30 the Charites, who were highly revered there, dance with a small Eros. He is
wingless, just as he is on the Archaic clay pinax also found at that site (see fig. 226). Eros, Charis,
and Peitho welcomed Aphrodite on the base of the seated statue of Olympian Zeus (Pausanias
5.11.8). The Charites wash, anoint, and clothe the goddess after her adventure with Ares (Odyssey
8.362ff.), and, in the Hymn to Aphrodite, prepare her for her adventure with Anchises (61). In the
Hymn to Apollo, Aphrodite dances on Mount Olympus with the Horae and Charites to the music
of Apollo’s lyre (194ff.). In Hesiod, Zeus gives Aphrodite the task of bestowing grace (charis) on
Pandora, but it is the Charites who execute the task (Works and Days 65, 73). They also weave a
garment for Aphrodite (Iliad 5.338). The Graces and Hours also made the wonderful clothes that
the goddess wore to the judgment of Paris, according to two fragments from the Cypria.
262 APHRODITE

231. Votive relief,

probably to the Charites,
from the Athenian
Acropolis. Ca. 510–500
B.C. Athens, Acropolis
Museum 702. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

She dressed herself in garments that the Charites and Horae made for her,
And had dipped in spring flowers,
Such as the Horae themselves wear, in crocus and hyacinth,
And in the blooming violet, and in the beautiful flower of the rose,
Sweet with nectar, and in the ambrosial cupped
Flowers of the beautiful flowing narcissus.
In such clothes, filled with the fragrances of the seasons (horae),
Aphrodite dressed herself.

It was the Charites and Horae, then, who adorned the goddess’s clothes with blossoms, as they
did their own, and saturated them with perfume. A picture on a small wine jug by the Meidias
Painter (fig. 232),31 an Attic vase-painter of the Classical period who devoted his art entirely to
Aphrodite and the Charites, shows us this scene. In it, two beautifully dressed women lay expen-
sive clothing on a swing as they burn incense underneath it.
It is now possible to trace the use of fragrant plants and oils back into the Mycenaean period.
On the Linear B tablets from Knossos and Pylos, and especially from Mycenae, there is a full
record of aromatic plants, and in the same context a mention of olive oil and the profession of
a-re-pa-zo-o (aleiphazoos), which the decipherers identify as “ointment refiner.”32 In Pylos an
 A P H R O D I T E 263

232. Two women perfuming

garments. Oinochoe by the
Meidias Painter. Ca. 420 B.C.
New York, Metropolitan Museum
of Art 75.2.11. Photo: The
Metropolitan Museum of Art,
Gift of Samuel G. Ward, 1875.

ointment refiner named Philaios stands in the service of a “mistress.” Do we dare recognize
Aphrodite in her? Her name has not yet been read on the tablets. Our present understanding
leads to the conclusion that no other goddess is more appropriate as the patron supervising the
preparation of fragrant ointments. Moreover, a portion of the perfumes mentioned in the tablets
came from Cyprus, Aphrodite’s island. Other aromatic plants are mentioned as being Phoeni-
cian.33 It was stated previously that the Phoenicians spread the Aphrodite cult in the Aegean. The
scents of incense, ointment, and oil were dear to the Near Eastern as well as the Greek Aphrodite.
The Greeks probably became familiar with incense—that is, aromatic resin—through the cult
of Urania.34 It was the preferred sacrifice for the goddess at many Greek cult sites, especially
for Aphrodite Urania of Corinth, who remained very oriental (Pindar, fr.122 Snell). As we hear
in Sappho’s poetry,35 perfumed ointments and oils also play an important role in the service
of Aphrodite. In the Iliad (3.382), Aphrodite’s favorite, Paris, has a bedroom filled with scent.
Aphrodite anoints Hector’s body with rose oil to guard it against decomposition (Iliad 23.185ff.):

But the dogs Aphrodite, daughter of Zeus, warded off,

And night, and smeared him with oil,
Which smelled of roses, ambrosial.
264 APHRODITE

In Shaft Grave III at Mycenae were found small figures of a nude goddess that scholars have
interpreted as Aphrodite (fig. 233).36 The carved reliefs decorated with pressed gold leaf were
pinned to the shroud covering the deceased. They show the goddess grasping her bosom with
both hands in a familiar gesture for the goddess of love. Birds flutter around her, which, be-
cause of their large size, should not be interpreted as doves but rather as geese, equally sacred to
Aphrodite. The dead in the shaft graves were embalmed, a practice Aphrodite performs in the
Iliad on Hector’s body. Accordingly, there is significance in the fact that the shrouds of deceased
Mycenaean royalty carry the image of this goddess, since it was presumably in her service that
the sweet-smelling balsam was produced.
Another possible Mycenaean depiction of Aphrodite is identified in the chapter on Athena.37
Under consideration is the large gold ring from Mycenae (fig. 173), which shows a goddess sitting
under an olive tree and grasping herself under her breast with one hand, a gesture correspond-
ing to the one the Aphrodite figures from the third shaft grave at Mycenae make with both hands
(see fig. 233). However, rather than being nude, the goddess on the ring is beautifully dressed, as
are the two other women approaching her with flowers in their hands. Marinatos has interpreted

233. Clothing ornaments made from gold sheets. From Shaft Grave III at Mycenae. Naked Aphrodite
with geese. Sixteenth century B.C. Athens, National Archaeological Museum. Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.
 A P H R O D I T E 265

them as divine beings; they may be related to the daimones who function as cult attendants on
another large gold ring found in Tiryns. The blossoms presented to the goddess at the olive tree
could be the kind that provide ingredients for perfumes. At the same time, they are reminiscent
of the fragrant blossoms worn by Aphrodite, the Horae, and the Charites on their dresses, as
mentioned in the fragment of the Cypria quoted above. The two women on the Mycenaean gold
ring could be Horae or the kindred Charites, especially since the symbols of sun and moon, seen
in the sky on the ring, refer to the changes of the seasons. From Homeric to Hellenistic poetry,
it was the Charites who, among Aphrodite’s entourage, best understood ointments and perfumes
(Odyssey 8.362ff.; Callimachus fr. 7.12 Pfeiffer). Together with the seated goddess at the olive tree,
the two “Charites” formed a trinity in which the former stands out as the most imposing. If the
connection with the festival of the Arrephoria, established in the chapter on Athena, is correct,
this seated figure is a “Urania in the Gardens.” The lion-shaped vessels on the right suit her, as in
the Near East the lion was the symbolic animal of the goddess of love. The naturalistic mood
pervading the garden scene of the gold ring does not return until the Classical period, in vase
paintings with the garden of Aphrodite as their theme (fig. 234).38 There, too, the goddess can be
seen sitting amid rocks and trees while divine servants approach her. The most beautiful scenes
of this kind are by the Meidias Painter and his circle. In contrast to the “Near Eastern” depiction
of the goddess from Shaft Grave III, the Aphrodite on the gold ring is pure Minoan-Mycenaean.
The Semitic cult of Urania seems to have become amalgamated with the cult of the Charites. Like
the Apollo who hailed from the Near East, the Near Eastern Aphrodite took on new character
traits in the Cretan-Cycladic realm. In the religion of the Aegean, both deities became associated
with the Charites. The Archaic image of Apollo in Delos, the center of the Cyclades, showed the
Charites on the right (Callimachus fr. 114.9 Pfeifer). In the garden of Aphrodite, these same god-
desses remained ever present; the lovely Lasas, whose origin, like that of the Charites, is in the
ancient Aegean, correspond to them in the retinue of the Etruscan goddess of love.39


The earliest depictions of figures similar to Aphrodite from the first millennium B.C. are also,
as it appears, connected with representations of the Charites. Like the Cycladic statues of the
third millennium B.C., there are a number of these divine beings, all of whom appear unclothed.
Foremost is the engraving on a Boeotian bow clasp (fibula) from the middle of the eighth century
B.C. (fig. 235).40 On it are two nude goddesses, facing front, with water birds in their hands. A
snake and a fish fill the rest of the field. In Boeotia, where this image was created, the cult of the
Charites reached back into earliest prehistory. The goddesses were worshipped in Orchomenos
as stones that had fallen from heaven. According to Pausanias, the ancient king Eteocles is said
not only to have prayed to them but also to have given them names, which had, however, been
lost (9.35.1, 9.38.1). In Hesiod’s Theogony the Charites number three (907). However, the fibula with
its two goddesses is older than this poem. Originally, only two Charites were known in Sparta
and Athens, as Pausanias reports (9.35.1–2). Accordingly, the pair of figures of the Aphrodite type
234. Aphrodite in her garden. Squat
lekythos (perfume vase) by the
Meidias Painter. 420–410 B.C.
London, British Museum E697.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

235. Two naked

goddesses, possibly
Charites, on a Boeotian
fibula (at left). Mid-
eighth century B.C.
London, British Museum
3204. Photo: © Trustees
of the British Museum.
 A P H R O D I T E 267

on the fibula may represent the Charites. The water birds and water animals rounding out the
scene identify them as goddesses “which the waters of the Kephissos delivered.” With these words
Pindar addresses the Charites of Orchomenos at the beginning of his fourteenth Olympian Ode.
To be sure, the Charites were later represented clothed in Archaic art, but the Hellenistic poet
Euphorion still remembered that they were originally naked in Orchomenos.41
Naked goddesses carved in ivory were found in a grave from the late eighth century B.C. at
the Dipylon gate in Athens (figs. 236–237).42 Their number once more precludes identification
with Aphrodite, although the influence of the Near East is palpable, since the predecessors of
these polos-crowned goddesses are ivory statues of the kind that came to light, for example, in
Nimrud.43 As important as these figures are for the evolution of Greek sculpture, where they
appear at the very beginning of its development, from the point of view of the history of religion
they look backward. The finds in Athens are isolated, whereas, to judge by the number of statu-
ettes found, the custom of giving such female figures as funerary gifts was widely practiced in
the Cyclades in the third millennium B.C. (cf. fig. 229). In Athens we may have a continuation
of that very ancient practice. Accordingly, we might well label the ivory goddesses from the Attic
grave as Charites.
Except on Crete, nude goddesses became less common in art as of the seventh century B.C.
This phenomenon is probably related to the fact that the Homeric epics and hymns always

236–237. Ivory statuette, probably

representing one of the Charites.
From a tomb at the Dipylon
cemetery in Athens. Ca. 730 B.C.
Athens, National Archaeological
Museum 776. Photos: © Vanni
Archive / Art Resource, NY (236);
D-DAI-ATH-NM 3282B.
Photographer: H. Wagner (237).
268 APHRODITE

describe Aphrodite and the Charites as beautifully dressed. We need only think of the fragment
of the Cypria discussed above in this chapter. In the sixth Homeric Hymn, in which the birth of
Aphrodite from the sea foam is described, the Horae approach her immediately afterward and
clothe her in “ambrosial dress.” Richly dressed and adorned, the newborn goddess is escorted to
Mount Olympus. Archaic art also shows her beautifully dressed. Her name stands in large letters
beside a veiled image on a Cycladic amphora dating to 670-660 B.C.44 She is accompanied by
Ares, who here can be regarded as her bridegroom (see fig. 258). The same is true for the frag-
ment of a second amphora of this kind,45 on which the goddess wears a polos, that most ancient
attribute of the Cycladic figures of the Aphrodite type (see fig. 259; cf. fig. 229).
One of the favorite mythological themes in Archaic art was the journey of the goddesses to
the Judgment of Paris. The earliest extant example of the scene is found on the Chigi vase,
painted in Corinth around 640–630 B.C. and now in Rome.46 On it Aphrodite, who walks along
behind Athena and Hera, is depicted as somewhat smaller than her two rivals, but certain of her
victory. Still smaller, because of the curve of its edge, she appears on the handle of an ivory comb
from the late seventh century B.C.47 found in the sanctuary of Artemis Orthia in Sparta (fig. 238).
Although he sits on the judge’s chair, the bearded Paris stretches out his hand past Hera and
Athena to the goddess of love. Behind her walks her sacred bird, a goose. In one of the most
beautiful representations of this theme, on a cup painted by Makron around 490 B.C. (fig. 239),
four Erotes float around the goddess, who, as usual, comes last in the procession of the god-
desses.48 The fact that the Judgment of Paris was such a beloved theme in ancient art should not
mask the frightening aspect of this tale, to which Reinhardt has drawn attention.49 Paris him-
self is very much aware of it in several Archaic depictions (fig. 240). He attempts to flee the
approaching goddesses but is prevented from doing so by Hermes. The origin of the myth of

238. Judgment of Paris.

Handle of an ivory comb
from the sanctuary of
The rights holder did not Artemis Orthia in
Sparta. Ca. 620 B.C.
grant permission to reproduce this Athens, National
image in the digital edition. Archaeological Museum
15368. Photo: National
Archaeological Museum,
Athens. Photographer:
Demetrios Gialouris.
 A P H R O D I T E 269

239. Aphrodite,
with Erotes fluttering
around her, arrives at
the Judgment of Paris.
Detail of the exterior
scene on a kylix by
Makron. 490 B.C. Berlin,
Staatliche Museen,
Antikensammlung F2291.
Photo: bpk Bildagentur /
(Antikensammlung) /
Art Resource,
NY. Photographer:
Ingrid Geske.

240. Paris fleeing at the

sight of the three goddesses
(Hera, Athena, Aphrodite)
being led to him by Hermes.
Attic black-figure plate.
Ca. 560 B.C. Florence, Museo
Archeologico Nazionale 9674.
Photo: Courtesy Ministero
per i beni e le attività
culturali—Polo Museale della
Toscana—Firenze.

Paris and the goddesses is unknown, as is the case with most ancient myths. As interpreted by
Reinhardt, a “Handbook for Mycenaean Princes” could have advised, “This is the fate that befalls
a city when a prince chooses Aphrodite’s gifts instead of Hera’s and Athena’s.” However, if we
consider Aphrodite not as a Greek goddess of love but instead as the all-powerful Near Eastern
queen of heaven, her victory over Hera and Athena seems all but certain. As the spouse of the
supreme god, she combines within herself Hera’s characteristics while, at the same time, being
270 APHRODITE

an armed guardian deity like Athena and, naturally, also the goddess of love. Perhaps the myth,
localized in the Troad, of Aphrodite’s victory over Hera and Athena was first told among the
non-Greek population of Asia Minor to praise their ancient indigenous queen of heaven. Homer
may then have used an Anatolian myth as background for the actions of the gods in the Iliad.
Aphrodite Urania, the daughter of the god of heaven, born from the sea, remained closely
associated with both sea and heaven. Added to this was the third element, the earth, which, under
the footsteps of the newborn goddess, as Hesiod describes it, let grass sprout forth. Greek artists
tried time and again to indicate something of her cosmic power in their depictions of the god-
dess. Boeotian terracotta figurines of the sixth century B.C. did this in a charmingly naive way,
showing Aphrodite flying through the air while standing on her sacred animal, the goose (fig.
241),50 or speaking to her geese as they flap their wings.51 This image is most beautifully expressed
in an Early Classical cup by the Pistoxenos painter (fig. 242), dating to 470–460 B.C. The white-
ground interior shows Aphrodite sitting on a large goose floating through the air.

241. Aphrodite on a goose.

Terracotta group. Late sixth
century B.C. Paris, Louvre
CA1747. Photo: © RMN-Grand
Palais / Art Resource, NY.
 A P H R O D I T E 271

242. Aphrodite on a
flying goose. Tondo of a
white-ground kylix by
the Pistoxenos Painter.
470–460 B.C. London,
British Museum D2.
Photo: © The Trustees
of the British Museum /
Art Resource, NY.

The goddess’s sacred animal propels itself forward with powerful movements of its wings, which
at the same time are constrained by the circular shape of the bowl, transforming its flight into a
hovering motion. No other ancient work known to us is permeated so completely by the rhythms
of divine epiphany: powerful movement and peaceful hovering; mighty upsurge and diffused, radi-
ating serenity. The large branch in the goddess’s right hand is not simply a sweet-smelling plant in
whose aroma the goddess delighted, as it was in the Archaic period. This branch, held ceremoni-
ously like a scepter, is an attribute of her cosmic dignity.52

What has been given expression here corresponds to Aphrodite’s words in the Danaids of Aeschy-
lus, which was staged around the time of the cup’s manufacture. In the splendid fragment pre-
served from her speech, Aphrodite reveals herself as the power that joins Heaven and Earth in
marriage. Uranus lets the rain flow down on Gaia, and the latter brings forth for mankind grass
for the herds, the grain of Demeter, and the fruits of the trees. For all of this is Aphrodite also, in
part, responsible:53

Sacred Heaven desires to wound the earth,

And in his desire he takes Earth to marry her.
The rain falling from Heaven, her husband,
Impregnated Earth, and she bore for mortals
Fodder of the flocks and the sustenance of Demeter.
From the moist union the fruit of the trees
Is perfected. Of these things I am the cause.
272 APHRODITE

Statues of Aphrodite from the Early Classical period, such as the “Sosandra” of Calamis, were
still well known in the Roman period.54 No other period was able to express so completely the
blend of charm and dignity in the goddess’s nature. The original Early Classical free-standing
sculptures of Aphrodite are no longer extant, but the goddess on the cup by the Pistoxenos Painter
(fig. 242) shows just how warranted was the affection of ancient art connoisseurs. In addi­tion to
this, we have an Early Classical relief of the highest artistic quality,55 and, as we may surmise from
its provenance, one also prized by the Romans: the Birth of Aphrodite on the “Ludovisi Throne”
(figs. 243–245). In the Imperial period it was located with other famous works of art in the Gardens
of Sallust. It was found on the grounds of the Villa Ludovisi in Rome in the 1880s. I have attempted
elsewhere to demonstrate, in contrast to other proposals, that what is represented here is Aphro-
dite’s birth. A vase found in Paestum has confirmed that interpretation (fig. 246). Two divine
servants standing on a pebbly beach welcome the newborn into their midst. As in vase paintings,
where the birth of the goddess is identified by inscription, on the relief the sea is represented not
by waves but as depths out of which the goddess emerges. A densely woven piece of cloth, held
by the attendants on either side, keeps the body of the newborn goddess from view and in a ritual
sense sets the event apart, behind a screen. Through the miracle—the mystery—of this birth, the
three figures form a trinity, with Aphrodite as the most important among the related deities.
The two female figures gracing the side panels of the Ludovisi relief also point to Aphrodite
Urania. In contrast to the divine attendants on the front panel, these women are human, form-
ing an antithetical pair: a veiled bride is sprinkling Urania’s favorite offering, incense, and a nude
hetaira on a soft pillow plays the double flute. Urania, who came from the Near East, was a
matchmaker and, at the same time, a patron of hetairai. Herodotus reports (1.199) that bands of
prostitutes belonged to her temple in Babylon. In Greece her temples in Corinth and on Mount
Eryx in Sicily and at the sanctuary at Locri in southern Italy were all known for the presence of
such temple servants.56 In the discussion mentioned above, the present author was inclined to
link the Ludovisi relief with Mount Eryx. More recent research has led to the likelier conclusion
that the work was originally set up not at that cult site, which remained very Phoenician, but in
the purely Greek sanctuary of Locri. The young girls who served Aphrodite as temple servants
performed this service for a short time only, prior to their weddings. As Helmut Prückner has
demonstrated,57 many of the terracotta votive reliefs found at Locri have to do with these young
women. One of the most beautiful of the Locrian clay reliefs shows Aphrodite with Eros on her
arm, together with her cult partner, Hermes, standing before a censer that is reminiscent of the
thymiaterion (incense stand) on the Ludovisi relief (fig. 247).58 Among the great number of small
finds at Locri, Paola Zancani-Montuoro has published a type that shows the birth of Aphrodite
from the sea (fig. 248).59 The Ludovisi relief is so close to it in time, style, and mood that we may
connect it with Locri, as Bernard Ashmole did some time ago.60
On the east frieze of the Parthenon,61 Aphrodite is not sitting beside Ares (fig. 249), as she does
in the Olympian scenes on early Attic red-figure vases. She forms instead part of the right-hand
group, framing the composition of the assembled gods, where her neighbors are Artemis and
 243–245. Birth of Aphrodite; flute-
playing hetaira; bride offering
incense. Panels on the sides of the
so-called Ludovisi Throne. Ca. 460
B.C. Rome, Museo Nazionale
Romano, Palazzo Altemps 85702.
Photos: Hirmer Photo Archive.
246. Birth of Aphrodite on a wedding vase from Paestum. Third quarter of fourth century B.C. Paestum,
Museo Archeologico Nazionale. Photo: akg-images / Album / Prisma.

247. Aphrodite and

Hermes as companions in
cult at a thymiaterion.
Terracotta relief from Locri.
460–450 B.C. Munich,
Antikensammlungen 5042.
Photo: Staatliche
Antikensammlungen und
Glyptothek München.
Photographer:
Renate Kühling.
 248. Birth of
Aphrodite.
Reconstruction of a
terracotta relief from
Locri by P. Zancani-
Montuoro, 1964.
Reggio Calabria,
Museo Archeologico
Nazionale. Photo:
Hirmer Photo
Archive.

249. Poseidon, Apollo, Artemis, and the fragmentary Aphrodite with Eros (added in a drawing). From
the east frieze of the Parthenon. Athens, Acropolis Museum. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
276 APHRODITE

Apollo. In contrast to the maidenly Artemis, the veiled Aphrodite, most of whose body has been
lost, is given a matronly appearance, with a young Eros at her side. In Athens her relationship
with the twin children of Leto can be traced back to Theseus,62 whom Apollo had advised in a
prophesy before his journey to Crete, telling him that he should choose Aphrodite as his guide
(Plutarch, Theseus 18). On the return journey from Crete, Theseus dedicated a statue of Aphro-
dite, given to him by Ariadne, in the sanctuary of Apollo at Delos (Theseus 21). In Theseus’ time
Athens seems, as is evident from the sources, to have experienced an upswing in the cult of
Aphrodite. It is no accident that this was also the time when, according to the mythical tradition,
Athens had close ties with Crete and the Cyclades. There, as indicated above, goddesses of the
same type as Aphrodite had been worshipped since time immemorial. Aegeus, Theseus’ father,
is said to have founded the cult of Urania. Theseus himself founded that of Aphrodite Pandemos
(Pausanias 1.4.7, 1.22.3). Influenced by the differences expressed in Plato’s Symposium (180d), we
think of these two Aphrodites as diametrically opposed to one other: on the one hand, the noble
Aphrodite Urania, the daughter of Uranus; on the other, the goddess of the common people,
Aphrodite Pandemos, the daughter of Zeus and Dione. Each is accompanied by an Eros appro-
priate to her. W. H. Roscher still differentiated the two Aphrodites in this way.63 However fruitful
the antithesis between this pair remained for philosophy and art into the time of the Florentine
neo-Platonists and the painters of the Renaissance, it has nothing to do with the original cult.
Why should the Hesiodic Aphrodite be noble and the daughter of Zeus, the Homeric Aphrodite,
not? A Sophist—and that is what the speaker is in this part of Plato’s Symposium—has made use
of the two cult titles and the two genealogies of Aphrodite for his own purposes.


Pausanias gives us the original meaning of the epithet Pandemos (1.22.3):

Theseus instituted the cult of Aphrodite Pandemos, and also that of Peitho, when he brought
together the Athenians of the surrounding area into one political community. In my time the
ancient cult statues are no longer extant; the contemporary ones were made by artists who certainly
were not insignificant.

It appears then that Theseus unified Attica under the auspices of the cult of Aphrodite.64 Pan­
demos was the name of the Aphrodite who was “common to the entire unified population (of
Attica).” The epithet had not ethical but, rather, political significance. That the “non-Platonic” ver-
sion mentioned in Pausanias corresponds to the cult of Pandemos is evident in the goddess’s festi-
val. An inscription from the year 287 B.C. indicates that it was celebrated on behalf of the state
“according to ancestral custom.”65 The cult statues of both Aphrodite and Peitho were washed,
and the sanctuary was ritually purified with the blood of a dove. The decorative motif of doves
was used in the architecture of the precinct of Pandemos, as is indicated by the identification of
part of an entablature from the sanctuary, which Pausanias mentions as having been located on
 A P H R O D I T E 277

the southwest slope. The entablature can now be found lying along the path leading up to the
Acropolis (fig. 250).66 The relief sculpture shows the sacred birds of the goddess forming a grace-
ful frieze and holding thickly knotted fillets in their beaks. The sacrificial animal of Pandemos
was the billy goat, a sacrifice unusual for a female deity but significant for the goddess of love.
Plutarch reports in his Life of Theseus that Aphrodite herself had wanted this, for when Theseus
was sacrificing to her before the journey to Crete, the sacrificial female goat turned into a male.
Hence the goddess carried the epithet Epitragia (18).
We know, on the other hand, that hetairai offered their goddess she-goats.67 She had, there-
fore, a relationship with the whole herd. Thus, on a Late Classical bronze folding mirror, she rides
a large goat accompanied by two kids (fig. 252).68 This refers to the constellation Aix with the two
Eriphoi, as Ursula Knigge has shown. The animal carried by a very attractive, smiling goddess
on a Late Archaic clay relief from Gela, presumably Aphrodite Pandemos herself (fig. 251),69 is
meant to be a young billy goat. Pausanias writes (6.25.1) that the Parian sculptor Scopas repre-
sented Aphrodite on a billy goat (tragos).70 The bronze statue stood in Elis; in the same sanctuary
was Phidias’ gold and ivory statue of Aphrodite Urania with one foot on a tortoise (6.25.1).71
Another motif that appears frequently on vases and mirrors of the fourth century was Urania
on a white Apollonian swan (fig. 253).72 The examples we have show that the sophistic differen-
tiation of the two Aphrodites in Plato’s Symposium was common in the fourth century. It reflects
the dissolution of traditional religion from the late fifth century onward. The contrast between
Urania and Pandemos was not based on Plato’s philosophy, even if popular opinion regarded it
as a “Platonic” antithesis because it was mentioned in the Symposium. We see in this example
how dangerous it would have been for our project to follow the forms of the Greek gods beyond
the period of that intellectual revolution which brought about a significant change in Greek reli-
gion in the time of the Sophists. For this reason, one of the most significant statues of Aphrodite
in Antiquity, the Knidia of Praxiteles,73 will not be discussed here.

250. Architectural
decoration from a
naiskos (small temple)
of Aphrodite Pandemos,
with the goddess’s
sacred doves. Third
century B.C. Athens, at
the entrance to the
Acropolis. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
278 APHRODITE

251. Aphrodite Pandemos with a

little goat (?) Terracotta relief from
Gela, Sicily. Early fifth century B.C.
Oxford, Ashmolean Museum G8.
Photo: © Ashmolean Museum,
University of Oxford.

That the “political” meaning of Pandemos is very old is also evident from a tale from the
Argolid. There, Peitho, who was closely associated with Aphrodite Pandemos, also had a con­
nection with the ancient king of the region, Phoroneus (scholion on Euripides’ Orestes 1239).
Peitho helped Phoroneus set up the first civic community in the Peloponnese. Furthermore, like
the Attic cult of Aphrodite that flourished under Theseus, the Argive cult of Peitho had connec-
tions with Apollo and especially with Artemis (Pausanias 2.7.7, 2.21.1). Artemis and Aphrodite,
two very different goddesses, developed a relationship with each other with the help of the
Charites. Although there is abundant evidence that their character was closer to that of Aphro-
dite, they had a close relationship with both goddesses.
The originals of two statues of Urania from the hand of Phidias, mentioned in ancient
sources—one in Athens, the other in Elis—have been lost, as has the “Aphrodite in the Gardens”
by his pupil Alcamenes.74 Fortunately, however, an original Classical work from his workshop
has been preserved:75 the resting Aphrodite on the east pediment of the Parthenon (fig. 254). Her
head, still visible in Carrey’s drawing from the year 1674, is now lost. Like the head of Dionysus,
which occupies a corresponding position at the opposite corner of the pediment (figs. 206,
292), it was presented in profile. The blend of stateliness and languor visible in the posture of the
goddess at rest is beyond description. It would not be achieved again until the time of Venetian
Renaissance art, by such painters as Giorgione and Titian, whose favorite motif was a reclining
252–253. Relief covers of two
folding mirrors. Above:
Aphrodite Pandemos on a
goat, with two kids. Ca. 375
B.C. Paris, Louvre Br. 1707.
Below: Aphrodite Urania on
a swan. Late fifth century
B.C. Athens. Athens,
National Archaeological
Museum. Photos: ©
documentation Musée du
Louvre, Département des
Antiquités grecques,
étrusques et romaines (252);
© RMN-Grand Palais /
Art Resource, NY (253).
280 APHRODITE

Venus. The goddess of love on the pediment of the Parthenon is, however, clothed, albeit with
the finest of chitons, which serves to enhance the beautiful form of her entire body. Only the
curve of the shoulder turned toward the viewer is uncovered. It stands out because she rests her
arm on the lap of the goddess seated beside her. This figure appears to be aware, though at a
distance, of the miracle that is taking place in the center of the pediment, as indicated by the
gesture of the arm. The reclining goddess she supports seems to have been awakened by the
movement of the seated goddess, but her gaze follows the team of horses of the night sinking into
the ocean. The seated figure, which, forms an indissoluble group with Aphrodite, has often been
interpreted as her mother, Dione. An image from the Iliad (5.370f.) flashes before our eyes:

But divine Aphrodite fell on the knees of Dione,

Her mother. And she took her own daughter into her arms.

The scene there, however, has an entirely different context. In the Iliad, Aphrodite has returned
wounded from the battlefield, while here she awakes resting in the lap of a goddess. The latter’s
stature is, as the original in London clearly shows, smaller than Aphrodite’s, so we may exclude
Aphrodite’s mother, Dione, from consideration. Ernst Berger has convincingly identified her as
Artemis, a goddess who also forms a close group with Aphrodite on the east frieze of the Parthe-
non (figs. 171 and 249). There, as Georgios Despinis has indicated, the arms of the two goddesses
are entwined. The pediment figure’s dress, fastened at the shoulders, also fits with Artemis. Her
raised feet, a remarkable phenomenon not seen with any other of the many seated figures on the
Parthenon pediments, can perhaps be explained as the goddess’s reaction to the surging of the
sea at Athena’s birth, as portrayed in the twenty-eighth Homeric Hymn (see the chapter on
Athena).76 Near the ocean, into which the night sinks, the goddess of love awakens “charmingly
tired, as though the night is not sufficient for her rest” (Goethe, Achilleis 133f.).

254. Aphrodite on the

lap of Artemis. At left,
probably Leto. From the
east pediment of the
Parthenon. 448–432 B.C.
London, British
Museum. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
 ARE S

O
f all Olympian gods you are the most hateful to me,” chides Zeus in the Iliad as
 Ares returns wounded to Mount Olympus from the battlefield, “since strife, bat-
 tles, and war are always dear to your heart” (5.890ff.). To this injury he adds insult
by comparing his repulsive son to his stubborn mother, Hera. Much to our surprise, however,
Zeus then continues in a different vein:

But no longer will I endure your being in pain,

For you are my son, it is for me your mother bore you.
But if another of the gods had fathered you, you who are so
Destructive, you would long ago have been placed
Lower than the sons of Uranus.

Zeus then orders the divine healer Paean (Apollo) to heal Ares. His wound closes immediately,
“for he was in no way a mortal,” the poet adds.
Homer was not fond of Ares. He depicts the god’s rage in battle, along with his bloodthir­
stiness and insatiable appetite for killing, with undisguised antipathy. Homer’s Athena, the
thoughtful warrior, serves as a counterpoint to the raging god of battle. She always has a goal that
lies beyond the battle. Ares, on the other hand, wages war simply for the sake of waging war. His
name is in fact frequently used as just another word for war. In Homer he often appears not as
an Olympian deity but as a divine force that enters the heroes, making them similar to himself—
and the most similar to “the fleetest of all Olympians” is the swift-footed Achilles.
This is particularly true of the dark Achilles of book 21. “Like a divine force” he storms through
the bloodbath at the river Scamander. Why then does the poet who is so sympathetic to the son
of Thetis hate Ares? All of Achilles’ actions, even the most horrible, are overshadowed by fate:

281
282 ARES

his impending, frequently alluded to, early death. When facing his final destiny, he is, in spite of all
his raging, no more than a helpless human being. The fate he prepares for others will soon over-
take him. He will pay with his own blood and life. This sympathy-evoking dimension is missing
from the portrayal of Ares, “for he was in no way a mortal.” He never seriously atones for what
he inflicts on others. When he is wounded, Homer has him cry out like nine or ten thousand
men raising the battle cry “of Ares” (5.860). What a unique simile, the essence of which is a com-
parison of Ares with Ares—and what hyperbole! The wound heals quickly, and Hebe, the divine
embodiment of eternal youth, transforms her brother back into an Olympian god (5.905f.):

Hebe then washed him and clothed him in lovely garments;

Then rejoicing in his glory he sat beside Zeus, the son of Cronus.

Ares, the bloody fiend of battle, a picture of radiant elegance at the side of Zeus! Gone are the
dread creatures that attend him on the battlefield: his sister Eris (Strife); his companions Phobos
and Deimos (Terror and Fear); and Kydoimos, the spirit of the din of battle. Far away too are the
Keres, the rapacious spirits of death. Since Ares is surrounded in battle by such obvious per-
sonifications, Nilsson has raised the question of whether the god does not also “belong in essence
to this company.” Even in Antiquity, Ares’ name was interpreted as “destroyer,” an etymology
taken over by modern scholars, as in the statement “Ares is little more than a personification of
raging battle.”1 Although Wilamowitz and other scholars were of the same opinion, we should
not lose sight of the fact that Ares does take his rightful place on Mount Olympus. If he were
simply one of these grim personifications, he should be housed with them in the infernal regions.
It is generally believed that he received this position of honor because of the Homeric epics. Nils-
son writes, “His being classified with the major deities he owes to Homer, and perhaps he likewise
owes to him what little cult there is in his honor, since, wherever a cult had anything to do with
war, the Homeric Olympian god was introduced.”2 Nevertheless, it is evident from the incident
cited at the beginning of the chapter and from many other passages in the Iliad that the poet
tolerates Ares among the Olympians only with great reluctance. He makes Zeus express clearly with
his tongue-lashing what he himself, as author, finds repugnant in the god of war. Why then would
Homer have transformed a hateful god into an Olympian deity? Has he not done everything in his
power to create distance between Ares and the other Olympians, especially Athena? The contrast
between the goddess and Ares receives so much emphasis that the question may be raised whether
it does not overshadow all that the two war gods have in common. Indeed, in the “ideal” world
on the shield of Achilles, away from the real battle over Troy, the otherwise hostile brother and
sister put in an appearance as a team: divine leaders of one and the same army (18.516ff.):3

      Ares led it and Pallas Athena;

Both golden, clothed in golden garments,
Beautiful and great with their implements of war,
Godlike, conspicuous both. The people were smaller.
 A R E S 283

When the poet of the Iliad first came across Ares, the god must already have been the son of
Zeus. Homer himself would hardly have raised him to that level. The poet’s aversion to the god
of war was echoed by the Homeric rhapsodes. This could well be why there is no Archaic hymn
to Ares, since the eighth in the collection of Homeric Hymns has been proved, on stylistic grounds
and by the invocation of the planet Mars, to be the product of a much later period. Ares plays a
thoroughly disgraceful part in the Odyssey when, in the second song of Demodocus, he is trapped
in a net as the illicit lover of Hephaestus’ wife (8.296ff.).4 The tale lays a burlesque foundation
for the marriage between Ares and Aphrodite, which existed, as we shall see, in myth and cult.
Hephaestus demanded from Zeus, Aphrodite’s father, the return of the bride price (8.318), whereby
the marriage was ended and Aphrodite was freed for Ares. But the elaborately shameful way in
which Demodocus has Ares win his bride is quite significant. Alcaeus seems to have aligned
himself with the Homeric poets when he depicted Ares as a miles gloriosus who, in another myth,
boasts that he will free Hera, until he is driven back by the fire of Hephaestus. It is an Ares cast
in this Homeric light who sits, depressed, behind Hera on the François Vase (fig. 255), unable to
help his mother despite his impressive weapons, towering stature, and vast strength.5
The extent to which Homer’s poetry formed the Olympian gods can be seen in all the deities
we are looking at here. This shaping force exists even for Dionysus and Demeter, who play no
role in the Homeric epics, in the form of two especially beautiful hymns. For the figure of the
god of war, however, Homer played a particularly authoritative defining role. We must now
attempt to look beyond the Homeric epics for Ares’ origin and nature. As Otto saw the god’s
origin, “The figure of Ares comes from the vanquished religion of the earth. There his wildness

255. Volute-krater by the potter Ergotimos and the painter Kleitias. At far left, Artemis (poorly
preserved), then Ares crouching, and, turning toward him, Athena. In front of her is Hera on her throne,
from which she cannot get up, then Zeus, and, at far right, Aphrodite, facing toward the procession, led
by Dionysus, that brings Hephaestus back to Olympus. Cf. fig. 211. Ca. 570 B.C. Florence, Museo
Archeologico Nazionale 4209. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
284 ARES

finds its rightful place in the context of an inexorable world. He is the spirit of the curse, of ven-
geance, and of criminal justice.”6 From the archaeological discoveries of the Minoan-Mycenaean
culture and the decipherment of the Linear B script, however, we have learned that the concept
of “religion of the earth” simply does not apply to very many pre-Hellenic cults. Moreover, those
early cults were not superseded but continued to live on in a variety of ways. Ares’ name has been
found (in the dative, a-re) on the Linear B tablets from Knossos.7 A tablet from the same site
features a list of deities including the name e-nu-wa-ri-jo, which has been convincingly explained
as Enyalius.8 This is used as a name or epithet of Ares in the Iliad. It is derived from the name
of his battle companion Enyo, probably the personification of a battle cry, and identifies Ares
specifically as a god of war. By the Mycenaean period, Ares-Enyalius was not a god of curses and
imprecations but a god of battle.


Was the Mycenaean Enyalius, whom we know from Homer, merely a repulsive minor god of
war, or was he more than that—a powerful god, a lord of the battlefield? Many of the Homeric
formulas referring to Ares do not correspond with the negative picture the poet paints of him
elsewhere. This suggests that the latter is the case, as when Menelaus is time and again character-
ized as “the beloved of Ares,” when heroes are named “children of Ares,” and especially when
Homer labels the Achaeans as a whole “the followers (or servants) of Ares” (therapontes Areos)—
all this even though the god clearly sides with the Trojans. Perhaps such formulaic turns of phrase
preserve vestiges from the Mycenaean period, when the god of war commanded more respect.
A further question may be raised. Was the Enyalius of the Mycenaeans of pre-Greek origin,
or did he migrate into the Aegean with the Greeks? The ancient tradition since Homer speaks
unequivocally of Ares hailing from Thrace. Although this has been examined and modified in
the excellent article in Roscher’s Lexikon,9 the majority of scholars still interpret the god’s origin
as Thracian. Herodotus (5.7) reports that the Thracians worship three deities: Ares, Dionysus,
and Artemis. Among the Scythians, who lived further east, the most important deity was Ares,
worshipped in the form of a sword (4.59, 62). Martial deities are attested also for other Indo-
European peoples; one need only think of the Italic god Mars.10 Not long ago the ancient rites
of the Roman cult of Jupiter were convincingly compared to the earliest Zeus cult in Greece.11
The oldest Roman triad of gods was made up of Jupiter, Mars, and Quirinus—that is, the supreme
deity and two gods of war. The parallels between the cults of Jupiter and Zeus suggest that the
original Zeus could also have had martial gods at his side. Perhaps Ares and Enyalius, like Mars
and Quirinus in Rome, were the names of the gods of war of two different settlements or tribes.
Be that as it may, the Hellenes would hardly have had to adopt Ares from other peoples; they had
their own god of war. Excavations of prehistoric sites have revealed that it was with the Greeks
that war as a way of life arrived in the Aegean.
If the god of war belonged with Zeus from the very beginning, then Homer was not in a posi-
tion to separate them. The Homeric Zeus must acknowledge his son, however reluctantly. To put
 A R E S 285

distance between Ares and the other Olympians, Homer has him live among the Thracians. This
is all the more convincing because the Thracians were known for their ferocity and eagerness for
battle and because they were zealous followers of the cult of Ares. As has been correctly assumed,
the Hellenic tribes that lived in the area before the Thracians of the historical period would have
already been worshippers of Ares.12 They were probably the same tribes who, in the border region
between Asia Minor and Greece, adopted the cult of Dionysus, a god whom Homer also connects
with Thrace. For Homer, both the god of the maenads and the raging god of battle are barbaric
and “mad.” Is it possible that, in these “Thracian” sons of Zeus, specific cults of the earliest Greek
migrants lived on? Ares and Dionysus have a lot in common, not only in Homer, but also in other
myth cycles. In the Battle of Gods and Giants, which is set in Thessaly, the god of the maenads
was a powerful warrior on whom victory ultimately depended, according to a number of ver-
sions.13 Archaic art shows Dionysus consistently as a valiant warrior. On the frieze of the Siph-
nian Treasury at Delphi, scholars at first confused him with Heracles.14 Frequently, Ares and
Dionysus enter the battle against the giants together, as, for example, on a vase from the circle of
the Brygos Painter (fig. 256).15 Here Dionysus is fighting with a spear and entangles his opponent
with ivy. The depiction of a battle-ready Dionysus with links to the god of war seems not to have
died out in Macedonia in northern Greece. It continued to live in Dionysus, the conqueror of the
East, who served as a shining example for Alexander the Great.


After all this, it is no accident that we meet Ares and Dionysus together again in the oldest cults
and myths of a city that is well known for its relations with northern Greece: Cadmean Thebes.
Dionysus is said to have been born there, and the pillar image of Dionysus Cadmeios, judging

256. Ares and Dionysus

fighting the Giants.
Scene on the exterior of
a kylix. Ca. 490 B.C.
Paris, Cabinet des
Médailles 573. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
286 ARES

from its form, reaches well back into the second millennium B.C.16 At the same time, ancient
tradition was unanimous in declaring Ares the ancestor of the inhabitants of Thebes and its royal
house.17 The epics that encompassed the rich Theban cycle of myth have all been lost, with the
exception of a few fragments. They were in part pre-Homeric. The poet of the Iliad frequently refers
to them because the descendants of the “seven against Thebes” fought even before the Trojan War.
In a particularly long Theban section in book 4 of the Iliad, the city’s wall, with its seven towers,
is called the wall of Ares (407). Much material from those ancient epics reappeared in Aeschylus’
Theban tetralogy of 467 B.C.,18 of which The Seven against Thebes is still extant. In it, the chorus
of Theban women turns in desperation to the chief deity of the beleaguered city (105ff.):

What are you going to do? Are you abandoning your land,
Ares, who have lived here so long?
O gold-helmeted god, look, look upon the city
Which once you held dear.

Ares gave Harmonia, his daughter with Aphrodite, as wife to Cadmus, the founder of Thebes
(Hesiod, Theogony 937). Later, in the same wildly excited choral song, the Theban women turn
to both deities at the same time (135ff.):

You, Ares, alas, protect the city that carries Cadmus’ name,
Show your care for it!
And Aphrodite, ancestral mother of our race,
Defend us, for from your blood we are descended,
With prayers calling on the gods we approach you.

The Aphrodite of Thebes was a martial goddess. The Theban polemarchs, the officials charged
with looking after affairs of war, celebrated the festival called Aphrodisia in her honor at the
conclusion of their year of duty (Xenophon, Hellenica 5.4.4). We are familiar with depictions of
this armed goddess from a variety of Greek sites. It is possible to trace the origin of the figure
of the armed Aphrodite to the Near East, where its archetype was the armed Ishtar.19 Also from
the Near East came the Phoenician Cadmus, legendary founder of Thebes, whose myth we now
recognize, using the results of recent archaeological finds from the Cadmeia of Thebes, to have
been based in reality. No other excavation on the Greek mainland produced as many Near East-
ern seals as were found in Thebes.20 The warlike Aphrodite of the Cadmeians had migrated into
Boeotia. Ares, on the other hand, had become established in the area at an earlier date.21 We may
be reminded that Boeotia had been the home of one of the wildest tribes of Greek myth, the
Phlegyans,22 who were devout worshippers of Ares. That the god arrived in Boeotia before Cad-
mus is clear from the myth where the hero slays a dragon on the site where he founded Thebes.
This dragon was a son of Ares. From its teeth, which, following divine advice, Cadmus planted
 A R E S 287

in the earth, sprang the Spartoi (the sown ones), the ancestors of Thebes’s valiant nobility. On a
Classical calyx-krater made in Athens (fig. 257), Ares is depicted standing beside his son, the large
dragon who protects both a spring and his father, the patron deity of Thebes.23 Cadmus approaches,
carrying a water jar and guarded by his protector, Athena, whom he is also thought to have
brought from his Phoenician homeland (Pausanias 9.12.2).
The myth of the slaying of Ares’ dragon-son reflects the differences between new arrivals
in the area of Thebes and very early Hellenic immigrants living there who were worshippers of
Ares. A similar interpretation suggests itself for the tale of the battle of Heracles and Cycnus,
another son of Ares, as told in the pseudo-Hesiodic epic The Shield of Heracles.24 The dragon
slaying ended in reconciliation, as witnessed by the splendid wedding of Cadmus and Harmonia,
the daughter of Ares and Aphrodite, to which all the gods were invited.25 To use the language of
cult rather than myth, it can be said that the Near Eastern Aphrodite and the Hellenic god of war
are worshipped in Thebes from this time on as a divine couple. This union made sense because,
like Ares, the newly arrived oriental goddess was armed. Since the coupling of Ares with Aphro-
dite occurred on Theban soil, it is understandable that it was the Boeotian poets who more than
once depicted them as a married couple. In the Theogony of Hesiod (934ff.), Aphrodite gives
birth, as Ares’ wife, to the spirits of battle Deimos and Phobos, but also to Harmonia, the wife of

257. Ares (at right) beside the

dragon of Thebes, facing
Cadmus and Athena. Attic
calyx-krater. Ca. 450 B.C. New
York, Metropolitan Museum of
Art 07.286.66. Photo: The
Metropolitan Museum of Art;
Rogers Fund, 1907.
288 ARES

Cadmus (Hesiod, Theogony 975).26 Pindar, in his fourth Pythian Ode (87f.), calls Ares the “bronze-
wagoned” spouse of Aphrodite and compares him to the beautiful Apollo.
Encouraged by the recent excavations in Thebes, we can now date the link between the cults
of the oriental goddess and the Hellenic god of war to the Mycenaean period, a period during
which there was close contact with the Near East. Aphrodite and Ares unite as combative gods
to protect Thebes. Fear and Terror are their children. Like all the great gods, they could also show
graciousness and mercy. Their daughter is the lovely Harmonia, whose own daughter, Semele,
became the mother of Dionysus, “joy to mortals” (Iliad 14.325), as he was already called by Homer.
At Aphrodite’s side in Thebes, the wild Enyalius became an Olympian deity, a god who not only
personified war, as is the current view, but was also empowered to confer the opposite, peace, as
embodied in his beautiful daughter, Harmonia. It is no wonder, therefore, that Homer, with his
antipathy to Ares, is silent about the marriage to Aphrodite, although he must have known about
it from the Theban mythical cycle. There are many other opinions about this pair of gods among
scholars of religion. In Wilamowitz we read:

When the austere is paired with the delicate, the strong with the tender, then a harmonious note is
produced. This harmony of opposites has charm and depth, but at the same time it is filled with
symbolism and has a profoundly poetic dimension; it has, however, nothing to do with religion.27

Similarly, in Nilsson:

On the other hand the proverb that the strong deserves the beautiful has deep roots within human
nature. . . . It is not worthwhile to look for reasons for the relationship between Aphrodite and Ares
in cult, even though this relationship is especially prominent in Thebes.

In opposition to their conclusions, we have the work of Christos Karouzos, who tracked down
and interpreted a considerable catalogue of representations of the divine couple in Archaic art.28
From these one can conclude that the marriage between Ares and Aphrodite arises not out of
allegorical musings but from a functioning cultic-mythical tradition.
The earliest example, which at the same time is the earliest certain depiction of Aphrodite and
of Ares, is to be found on the neck of a large amphora from the island of Naxos, painted around
670–660 B.C. (fig. 258). Aphrodite, as she is identified in large letters, stands in a chariot drawn
by a magical team of winged horses. The name of the lively driver who stands at her side wear-
ing a short cloak has not been preserved. His head is also missing. Nevertheless, Karouzos has
correctly interpreted him as Ares. Archaeological evidence from the late eighth century B.C.
indicates that Boeotia stood in a close trading relationship with the Cyclades.29 The presence
on Naxos of the “Theban” theme of Ares and Aphrodite should not surprise us in this context.
In addition, Aphrodite was also worshipped as a warrior goddess in the Cyclades, as an inscrip-
tion from Paros indicates.30 The same pair of gods traveling in a similar magical wagon may be
 A R E S 289

258. Aphrodite and Ares riding

in a chariot. Neck of an amphora
from Naxos. Ca. 670–660 B.C.
Naxos, Archaeological Museum.
Photo: D-DAI-ATH-Naxos 90.
Photographer: Karousos.

represented on the fragments of another amphora from this period (fig. 259).31 The beardless,
bold head of the god driving the chariot is preserved here, with a large sword at his side and,
behind him, a goddess drawing a veil over her face. On her head she wears the polos, which is
to be interpreted here as a bridal crown. Both vase paintings most likely show Ares and Aphro-
dite as bridal couple. The god is transporting his bride on a “bronze chariot,” as Pindar calls it.
The same theme, now without the wagon, was depicted on the votive offering of the Cypselids
in Olympia, the famous, round, beehive-shaped chest, now no longer extant (Pausanias 5.18.5):32
“Ares fully armed is leading Aphrodite: the caption labels him Enyalius.” Because of the beauty
of the bride and the dignity of the groom, this bridal couple was famous not only in Archaic art
but also in poetry. Among the fragments of Sappho’s wedding songs, in which the poet happily
compares human bridal pairs to divine couples, we read (fr. 111 Lobel-Page):

Raise the roof of the house,

You carpenters!
There comes the groom, like Ares,
Much larger than a big man.
290 ARES

259. Ares and Aphrodite.

Fragment of a Cycladic
amphora. Ca. 670–
660 B.C. Berlin,
Staatliche Museen,
Antikensammlung.
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.

Wedding songs frequently contained clever allusions. The larger-than-life, Ares-like bridegroom,
for whom the ceiling is too low, is very much at home in this genre.


In gatherings of the gods, a favorite theme of Archaic painting and relief,33 Ares and Aphrodite
sit beside each other as a couple—as, for example, on the east frieze on the Siphnian Treasury of
Delphi, dated to around 525 B.C. (fig. 260).34 The heavily armed Ares does not, however, seem
comfortable in the midst of the lively discussions of the other Olympians. Reason does not appeal
to him; he is, instead, a man of action. Impatiently he waits for the signal for battle to be given.
On a cup by Oltos in Tarquinia,35 dated to around 520 B.C. (fig. 261), he has also brought his
arms—helmet and spear—into the company of the Olympians. Here too it appears that he does
not quite belong, although Aphrodite deliberately looks back at him. Oltos painted this couple
a second time, as Martin Robertson has shown.36 Here the two stand facing each other while a
little Eros, delicate as a butterfly, flits behind Aphrodite. Ares is armed, ready to leave Olympus.
His spouse, as Robertson assumes, has poured a libation in honor of his departure.
Ares and Aphrodite sit together again on the exterior frieze of the cup by the Sosias Painter (see
fig. 117). Only a part of Ares’ head has been preserved, but the most important part, a large eye,
survives.37 A most astonishing eye it is; its like appears nowhere else in this entire gathering of
the gods. The profile shows the eye wide open and gazing, a bold innovation for this time (around
500 B.C.). The other eyes on the cup’s exterior show the inner corner of the eye still closed and
a frontal view of the pupil. The eye in the form displayed by Ares is seen again only on the vase’s
interior, where Achilles applies a dressing to the wounded upper arm of his friend Patroclus. It is
surely no accident that Achilles and Ares are linked by means of identical, unusual glances. In the
 A R E S 291

260. Ares and Aphrodite,

Artemis and Apollo from
the gathering of gods in
the east frieze of the
Siphnian Treasury of
Delphi. Ca. 525 B.C.
Delphi, Archaeological
Museum. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

261. Ares and Aphrodite.

Detail of the scene on
the exterior of a kylix by
Oltos (fig. 116). Ca. 520
B.C. Tarquinia, Museo
Nazionale Tarquiniense
RC6848. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

Homeric epic, the basic natures of the god and the hero were very much alike, a view still found in
Pindar. In one of the victory odes, Themis, on Mount Olympus, predicting the birth of an Achil-
les doomed to fall in battle, describes him as being “like Ares in his hands and lightning-quick feet”
(Isthmian 8.37). These are the hands that accomplish bloody “works of war,” that murdered so
many of Priam’s sons (Iliad 24.478f.). The idea that Ares, the “storm-wild” or “keen-eyed,” is the
one who kills warriors in battle comes from Archaic grave epigrams. We will cite just one, found
on the base of the grave statue of Kroisos, the most attractive of the Attic kouroi (530–520 B.C.):38
292 ARES

Stay and grieve at the grave of the dead Kroisos

Whom fierce Ares slew in the front ranks.

On the east frieze of the Parthenon, Ares and Aphrodite are separated from each other (see
fig. 96).39 The goddess sits with Apollo and Artemis, with whom she was closely associated in
Athens from the time of the unification of Attica by Theseus. Nor is Ares seated near Artemis,
who rivaled him in wildness and with him jointly received offerings of booty. Here the goddess
is not the great slayer, or the sister of Ares, but rather above all the sister of Apollo and, as Arte-
mis Eukleia, the protector of the good reputation of the youth. Athena is not close to Ares here
either. Her companion is Hephaestus, the progenitor of the Athenians, who has an ancient cult
on the Acropolis. Oddly, it is Demeter with whom Ares is associated in the frieze, a Demeter who
sits pensively in the background thinking about her daughter in Hades. Through Ares’ presence,
Demeter becomes even lonelier, for the peaceful giver of grain has no affinity with the wild god
of battle. Ares, too, is further alienated through the juxtaposition with Demeter. He had a rela-
tionship only with Dionysus, seated across from him, who was a “Thracian” like himself, though
these links were localized in northern Greece, not Attica. The Attic Dionysus, therefore, turns
completely away from Ares and toward Hermes, on whose shoulder he lazes as if drunk. A com-
parison citing Ares and Dionysus as an antithetical pair in Euripides’ Phoenician Women (784ff.)
comes to mind almost immediately. On the Parthenon frieze, Ares is indeed isolated from all
the Olympian gods, and his unusual posture strengthens this impression. His feet do not touch the
ground, one leg is pulled up quite high, and both hands are clasped around his knee. This is the
same posture that identifies other figures in Classical art as persons or deities who are keeping
their composure only with great difficulty.40 As on the frieze of the Siphnian Treasury, so on the
Parthenon frieze, Ares feels out of place among the other Olympians.
The decorative program of the Parthenon had just been completed when the shadows of the
Peloponnesian War lengthened over Attica. In the middle of this disastrous war, a large and
important sculpture of the god of war was created. This has survived in Roman copies as the so-
called Ares Borghese.41 The best example is in the Louvre (fig. 262). The Campo Santo of Pisa
has a good copy of the head (fig. 263). The god is beardless, as on the east frieze of the Parthenon.
He is nude, wears only a richly decorated helmet, and held, as some remaining traces reveal, a
spear in his left hand. His head is slightly bowed, its expression pensive, verging on melancholy.
It seems as though the god of war has become aware of the fear that he brings to mankind, and
this knowledge depresses him. How did the sculptor who created this statue, probably Phidias’
pupil Alcamenes, come up with this unusual rendering of Ares? The new dimension in the god’s
character has been transposed onto him from the world of the heroes. In Homer, as in Pindar,
Ares’ mortal counterpart was the hero Achilles. On the Sosias cup (see fig. 117), the two figures are
related to each other by the similarity of their gaze. A Classical statue of Achilles, the Doryphoros
of Polyclitus,42 influenced the pose and the mood of the Borghese Ares, bestowing on it a calm-
ness and sense of gravity.
 A R E S 293

262. Ares Borghese. Roman

marble copy of a work by
Alcamenes of ca. 430–420 B.C.
Paris, Louvre Ma 866. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

This statue is not the only Classical representation in which an Olympian god assumes the
characteristics of a hero. The same phenomenon occurs on a drinking vessel by the Codrus
Painter (figs. 264–266), which was produced in the first decade of the Peloponnesian War, around
430–420 B.C.43 It shows five pairs of gods: Zeus and Hera, Poseidon and Amphitrite (fig. 264),
Dionysus and Ariadne, Ares and Aphrodite (fig. 265), and, in the interior, Hades-Pluto with
Persephone (fig. 266). The pairs are not sitting beside each other. The male deities recline on
couches, and the goddesses sit or stand beside them. This is a composition known as the funer-
ary banquet, which was usual for the depiction of heroes—but not Olympians—from the Late
263. Ares Borghese. Copy of the head. Pisa, Campo Santo. Photo: A.F.O.P. Archivio
Fotografico Opera del Duomo di Pisa.
 A R E S 295

264–265. Kylix by the

Codrus Painter.
Symposium of the gods.
Above, Zeus and Hera,
Poseidon and
Amphitrite; below,
Dionysus and Ariadne,
Ares and Aphrodite. Ca.
430–420 B.C. London,
British Museum E82.
Photos: © The Trustees
of the British Museum /
Art Resource, NY.

Archaic period on.44 With the gods of the underworld given a central, primary position, serious
thought went into the pairing of the other gods. As a parallel we have the banquet of the gods
(lectisternium) that was first celebrated in Rome in 399 B.C., on the instruction of the Sibylline
Books, to avert a serious plague (Livy 5.13.6). The gods reclined on couches and were entertained.
The Romans performed this ceremony a number of times when war or plague loomed large. The
ritual must have been taken over from a Greek religion that had long accorded the Dioscuri such
a theoxenia.45 A few years after the beginning of the Peloponnesian War, a plague broke out in
296 ARES

266. Tondo of kylix by the Codrus Painter: Hades-Pluto and Persephone. Ca. 430–420 B.C. London,
British Museum E82. Photo: © The Trustees of the British Museum / Art Resource, NY.

Athens, to which Pericles also fell victim. Did the Athenians appeal to the gods in that time of
emergency, setting up couches and food for them, as occurred in Rome a generation later? We
do not have any literary evidence for this, but the Codrus Painter’s vase and several other, some-
what later vase paintings46 can scarcely be explained any other way. On the vase’s decorative
frieze, Ares’ couch stands beside that of Dionysus. As on the Parthenon frieze, so here too, both
“Thracian” sons of Zeus are neighbors. In contrast to their depiction on the Parthenon, here they
are bearded. Age and dignity have been conferred upon them. They are fashioned to appear
similar to the three sons of Cronus, the brothers Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades, who rest on the
other three couches. Ares wears a symposiast’s wreath on his head and holds a spear in his left
hand. A vessel in hand, Aphrodite approaches him quietly and pensively. This is not Homer’s
fierce god of war. Like the other gods on the vase, Ares shares the serious mood that pervades
the entire scene, which is not an Olympian banquet made pleasurable by the soothing strains of
Apollo’s lyre, but a feast in the presence of the god of death.
 DIONYSUS

G
od is close at hand and difficult to grasp.” This statement by Hölderlin applies to
 Dionysus more than any other Greek god. He seems to be closer to us than all the
 other ancient deities, because much of what he created lives on today, including
exuberant masked festivities prior to the onset of spring (such as Mardi Gras and Carnival),
theater, and wine. Dionysiac religion, moreover, differs in many respects from other Greek cults,
and these differences display similarities with Christianity. The founder’s divine origin is recog-
nized by only a few; he must prove his identity by means of miracles. Persecution and death
threaten him and his followers. Both founders are savior types. However—and here we sense a
gulf between the two religions—Dionysus could never say, “My kingdom is not of this earth.” On
the contrary, his kingdom is this world. It is no accident that the great conquerors, beginning
with Alexander the Great, saw themselves as reincarnations of this god. In his important book
on Dionysus, Otto called him “the intoxicated leader of the choral dance of the terrestrial sphere.”
It is nevertheless also true that Dionysus has power in the hereafter. He leads his mother, Semele,
who is, not incidentally, a mortal, from the depths of Hades to Mount Olympus. All the same, the
life after death that Dionysus-Bacchus promised his initiates as god of the Mysteries was not very
different from what would take place during Dionysiac festivals celebrated on this earth. Revelry
and sacrifice, grape-gathering and maenadic dance—all of these reappear in the afterlife.1
Different explanations have been given for the etymology of the god’s name, as is the case
with many other Greek gods. Scholars such as Wilamowitz and Nilsson claim to have detected
in the first syllable the genitive case of the name Zeus.2 Dionysus means “son of Zeus,” since nysus
is probably an obsolete or non-Greek (perhaps Thracian) word for son. Otto, on the other hand,
related the second part of the compound name to Nysa, either a place name or a name referring
to nymphs.3 “Nyseion most sacred” is mentioned in the Iliad (6.132ff.) as the home of the infant
Dionysus and his nurses. In Greek mythology the nurses of “mad Dionysus” (as Homer calls him)

297
298 DIONYSUS

were nymphs. Later mad themselves (in Greek they are known as maenades, “mad women”),
these nymphs followed the mad god all over the face of the earth. On Archaic Athenian pottery
the names Nyphai [sic] and Nysai are found inscribed beside representations of these nymphs.
As Nysai they make music on a fragment of a krater by Sophilos dating from around 580 B.C.
(fig. 267).4 It was among these nymphs of Nysa that Dionysus was raised. Otto writes, “Dionysus
is characterized by this name as one of them. . . . As Bacchus he is encircled by Bacchae. Similarly,
as Nysus he is surrounded by Nysae.” Other examples can be given. The god of the Thracian
maenads was called Bassareus; the maenads themselves, Bassarai or Bassarids. One Greek appel-
lation for maenads was Lenae; their god was called Dionysus Lenaeus. In any case, with his
explanation of the name, Otto has clarified only its religious context—not its linguistic meaning.
The names of the god and his maenads have their own individual etymology. The decipherment
of Linear B may have brought to light a connection between Dionysus’ name and a pre-Greek
word for wine (woinos).5

267. Nymphs (Nysai)

playing music, on a
vase fragment from
the Acropolis. Ca. 580
B.C. Athens, National
Archaeological
Museum 15165. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
 D I O N Y S U S 299

The fact that the god and his usual female attendants were linked by matching names is of deep
religious significance, as is evident from the maenads’ behavior, best described by two comple-
mentary concepts derived from Greek: ecstasy and enthusiasm. They are related to each other as
cause and effect, since ecstasis, “standing outside oneself,” is a precondition for being filled with
the divine. And being filled with the divine is enthousiasmos, “having the god within.” One could
say that the maenads are not inherently mad, but that “mad Dionysus” brings them to this state.
The lord and his followers are one. The longing of the worshipper to become one with his god,
a phenomenon found in many religions, is much more intense in the Dionysiac rituals than in
other Greek cults. It is therefore not surprising that this religion spread with such irresistible force.


Among scholars of the nineteenth century, there was no doubt that Dionysus was a late intruder
into the Greek world. The classical formulation of this hypothesis can be found in Erwin Rohde’s
Psyche,6 first published in 1893, which posits that the god arrived in Greece no earlier than the
eighth century B.C. Wilamowitz was of the same opinion, while Nilsson listed Dionysus among
the “younger” gods as recently as 1955, even though by that time his name (in the genitive: di-wo-
nu-so-jo) had already been detected on a Linear B tablet from Pylos.7
Otto’s opinion that Dionysus was a long-time resident of Greece by Homer’s time was there-
fore substantiated by the decipherment of the Mycenaean script. More recently Karl Kerényi
made an interesting attempt to interpret all of Greek art from a Dionysiac point of view.8 There
is very little to add here. That Dionysus belongs to the category of pre-Greek vegetation deity
who undergoes birth, then subsequently dies,9 is indisputable in view of all we know of his cults
and myths. But this type of deity was very widely distributed under a variety of names: those of
Hyacinthus, Attis, Adonis, and Osiris come to mind. Gods like this were worshipped in Minoan
Crete also, as Nilsson in particular has shown. In the cults of these deities, the commemoration
of their death was observed with rites of intense mourning; their resurrection, correspondingly,
provided an occasion for festive celebrations. We should probably interpret the ecstatic figures
on Cretan gold rings10 within this context. These rings could be worn by people of either sex (fig.
268). The typically Minoan talent for fluid, open form complements the theme of ecstasy very
well, and these images must be counted among the most important representations of ritual
ecstasy to come down to us. It has not been possible so far to identify with certainty the god or
gods involved. The Greeks of the historical period equated the most important Cretan vegetation
god with Zeus, not Dionysus. At the same time, they were familiar with a “Cretan Dionysus” who
had a temple in Argos (Pausanias 2.23.7), where the grave of Ariadne, a Cretan and Dionysus’
consort, would be pointed out to visitors. The possibility that Dionysus was worshipped in Greece
during the second millennium B.C. is supported by the following three arguments:

1. The cult statue of Dionysus Cadmeus in Thebes was, as Pausanias (9.12.4) and other ancient authors
indicate, a pillar sheathed in bronze. Such a cult pillar type was characteristic of the Minoan-
Mycenaean religion.11
300 DIONYSUS

268. Women performing

an ecstatic dance.
Bezel of a gold ring
from Isopata near
Knossos. Ca. 1550–1530
B.C. Heraklion,
Archaeological Museum
424. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

2. The Panhellenic festival called the Lenaea was celebrated in honor of Dionysus Lenaeus, during
the month of Lenaeum, named after him.12 The use of the name of this month, already known to
Hesiod (Works and Days 504), was so widespread that it, and therefore the festival of Dionysus,
must date back to a very early period. In addition, the pillar shape of Dionysus Cadmeus can, as we
shall see, also be confirmed for the cult image of Lenaeus.
3. To honor Dionysus, the Attic-Ionic Anthesteria festival13 was celebrated prior to the onset of spring,
by the Athenians and also by the Ionians in Asia Minor. This common element points to a date for
the festival’s origin before the separation of the Ionian tribes during the Dorian migration, as is also
the case for the Apaturia festival.


Both of these Dionysiac festivals of the Mycenaean period received their most magnificent stag-
ing in Athens. As if these two celebrations did not suffice, a third grand celebration was added,
called the City Dionysia.14 The date of its introduction can be fixed fairly precisely. It came
into being much later, during the time of the tyrants in the sixth century B.C. In this period,
which would have a considerable impact on the development of many Greek cults, Dionysus and
Demeter were transformed into the most significant cult gods in Athens and elsewhere. Demeter,
whose sanctuary in Eleusis underwent renovation at that time, and Dionysus, whose cult received
a boost from drama, especially in Corinth and Athens, were the gods of the agricultural class on
whose support the tyrants relied. Since both deities played only a marginal role in the Homeric
epics, it was not until the age of the tyrants that they became “presentable,” as it were. Artists
depicted them, and poets praised them in song. Around 600 B.C. the poet Arion of Lesbos
 D I O N Y S U S 301

worked at the court of the tyrant of Corinth. Ancient tradition credits him with the invention of
tragedy and the composition of the earliest satyr choruses. More recently, Harald Patzer, in his
book Die Anfänge der griechischen Tragödie (The origins of Greek tragedy, 1962), argued that we
should take this ancient tradition seriously. During a period of close relations between the courts
of the respective tyrants, Arion’s creations were transplanted to Athens, where tragedy became
linked with the Attic cult of Dionysus—as celebrated, however, with the Lenaea and the Dionysia,
not the Anthesteria.
A closer look at the Attic festivals of Dionysus may provide a solution to the controversial
problem of determining the region from which he migrated to Greece. As in ancient times, so
in modern religious studies, several different regions press their claim to being the place of
Dionysus’ origin, among them Thrace, Asia Minor, Egypt, and Crete.15 Recent interpretations
often fail to take cultic-mythic traditions into account. In Greek myth, Thebes in Boeotia is
Dionysus’ homeland; in cult he is frequently linked to Demeter.16 His father was Zeus and his
mother was Semele,17 a mortal and the daughter of King Cadmus. She gave birth to him in the
Cadmeia, the royal citadel of Thebes, which was also sacred ground for Demeter (Pausanias
9.16.5). It is to be hoped that new excavations in Thebes will give a clearer picture of this city in
the second millennium B.C., a time when it was inhabited not by Boeotians, but, still, by Cad-
means. The oriental cylinder seals that were found there in unusually large numbers18 corrobo-
rate a mythical tradition that speaks of close relations between the East and Thebes. According
to this tradition, Cadmus founded the city upon his arrival from Phoenicia. Because of the finds,
the myth of the birth of Dionysus must be interpreted anew, for in its own way it mirrors those
relationships with the Near East. The god’s mother is Theban, but nymphs raise the child in a
distant, eastern country after Semele is killed by Zeus’s lightning bolt. With his nurses accom­
panying him as Bacchae, Dionysus returns as a youth to Thebes to demand recognition as a god,
which is the theme of Euripides’ great tragedy.19
Two of the three main festivals of Dionysus, the Lenaea and the Dionysia, can be related to
the myth of his birth, since both concern the god who had come to Athens from Boeotia. The
festival of the City Dionysia, instituted by Pisistratus, had as its focus a statue of Dionysus that
carried the epithet Eleuthereus, a name derived from Eleutherai, a boundary town located between
Attica and Boeotia. Bruno Snell has shown that the Dionysus worshipped there was a column
wrapped with ivy.20 Every year, at the beginning of the Dionysia festival, young Athenians carried
the cult statue of Eleuthereus from this area north of Athens to the city itself—more specifically,
to the south slope of the Acropolis (fig. 269). This commemorated Dionysus’ arrival in Athens
from the Boeotian region to the north. It was to the cult of this god that drama, especially tragedy,
belonged. The Athenian Theater of Dionysus lay in the precinct of Eleuthereus.
An early theater scene is depicted on an Attic krater of the early fifth century B.C. (fig. 270).21
A half-chorus of six young men (a whole chorus consisted of twelve) approaches a tomb adorned
with twigs and ribbons. With its song, the chorus summons up the deceased from the under-
world. The performers’ gestures, their arms slanting out and up in front of them, resemble the
269. Sanctuary and Theater of Dionysus Eleuthereus in Athens. Fourth century B.C.
After W. Dörpfeld and E. Reisch, Das griechische Theater. Beiträge zur Geschichte des
Dionysos-Theaters in Athen und anderer griechischer Theater (Athens 1896; repr.
Darmstadt 1966). Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
 D I O N Y S U S 303

gestures of mourners in the many depictions of funerary scenes known from Greek art. Lamen-
tation was a primary function of the chorus from the very beginning of tragic drama. A famous
invocation to the ghost of Darius is found in Aeschylus’s early play Persians. As the Basel krater
shows (fig. 270), Aeschylus was following a precedent. It is, however, difficult to identify the poet
or drama that inspired the image on this vase.
The columnar cult statue of the Dionysia corresponded to the closely related Lenaea, when
similar dramatic performances took place. This we know from the Lenaea vases, which depict
the ecstatic activity of the “Lenae,” maenads at the festival of Dionysus Lenaeus (figs. 271–273).22
Set up in their midst, the god’s image consists of a very much decorated pole. It is covered with
twigs, wrapped with colorful cloth, and decked out with cakes, a chain, clusters of grapes, and,
more significantly, a mask—the bearded, ivy-covered mask of Dionysus. Outside of Attica, exam-
ples of this type of mask (a later addition to an earlier pillar) are also known from Boeotia, sug-
gesting that the proposal, first made by August Frickenhaus, that the Lenaea image came from
Thebes is still valid.23 Clay masks of Dionysus, designed to be suspended (fig. 274)24 were found
in Archaic graves in Boeotia. As was the case with the daidala, these reproductions have been
reduced in size.25 The carved wooden originals on which they were modeled are no longer extant.
We are therefore very fortunate that an Attic marble mask by an outstanding artist from the time
of Pisistratus has been preserved, at least in part (fig. 275).26 In this piece, as in so many Archaic
Athenian sculptures, two opposites—primordial power and courtly refinement—are inseparably
intertwined. It is self-evident that such an amalgam is particularly appropriate for the representa-
tion of a god who is both rustic and imperial. The wavy beard and the similarly wavy hair crowning

270. Tragic chorus in

the Theater of Dionysus
in front of a tomb
monument. The deceased
appears, conjured up by
the chorus’s singing.
Column-krater.
500–490 B.C. Basel,
Antikenmuseum B415.
Photo: Antikenmuseum
Basel und Sammlung
Ludwig.
304 DIONYSUS

271. Kylix by the Haimon

Group, probably made in
north Attica. Maenads
and the idol of Dionysus
Lenaeus. Ca. 490 B.C.
Uppsala, Gustavianum.
Photo: Gustavianum,
Uppsala University
Museum.

272. Altar and cult statue

of Dionysus Lenaeus,
with maenads. Exterior
of a kylix by Makron.
Ca. 480 B.C. Berlin,
Staatliche Museen,
Antikensammlung
F2290. Photo: bpk
Bildagentur /
Antikensammlung,
Staatliche Museen, Berlin
/ Art Resource, NY.
Photographer: Johannes
Laurentius.

the brow with large spiral curls were once colored, as were the large pupils. For a sense of the
original impression made by the sculpture, one can compare it to a mask of Dionysus from a
black-figure amphora dated not much later (fig. 276).27 Like this painted mask, the marble mask
was surely also crowned with ivy. Repair work on the curls suggests that it continued to be used
ritually for a considerable period; its provenance, after all, was Ikaria, an Attic village well known
for its viticulture and its cult of Dionysus.
 273. Cult statue of Dionysus
Lenaeus and maenads. Stamnos by
the Dinos Painter. Ca. 420–410 B.C.
Naples, Museo Archeologico
Nazionale H2419. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

274. Clay mask of Dionysus.

From a grave in Boeotia.
Ca. 500 B.C. Heidelberg,
Universität Antikenmuseum
TK61. Photo: Antikenmuseum
der Universität Heidelberg.
 275. Marble mask of Dionysus from
Ikaria, Attica. Ca. 540–530 B.C. Athens,
National Archaeological Museum 3072.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

276. Dionysus mask on a neck

amphora by the Antimenes
Painter. Ca. 530–520. B.C.
Tarquinia, Museo Nazionale
Tarquiniense RC1804. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.
 D I O N Y S U S 307

This pillar god hailing from Boeotia, the lord of the Lenaea and the Dionysia, was also the
lord of the Attic theater. Ancient reports indicate that, prior to the construction of the Theater
of Dionysus on the south slope of the Acropolis, the dramas were performed in the sanctuary of
Dionysus Lenaeus, whose location we have not yet been able to identify.28 The dramas remained
tied to both festivals for centuries, although comedies were linked more closely with the Lenaea
and tragedies with the Dionysia. In spite of this difference, the two festivals had much in com-
mon. Both concerned the son of the Theban princess Semele who, in his native domain, had close
ties with Demeter. The Eleusinian priesthood played a role in summoning the god to the Lenaea
as “son of Semele.”29 He was worshipped as the god of maenads, the god of masks, the rouser of
ecstasy. It can be no accident that it was within the cult of this god that drama developed. The
mask not only belonged to the idols of the Lenaea and Dionysia but was also integral to ancient
drama. The behavior of the actor, who set his own personality aside to let another—a hero or a
god—speak through him, had affinities with the enthusiasmus of the maenads.


The third Attic festival of Dionysus, the Anthesteria (see n. 13), was unlike the two already
discussed. It involved other dimensions of the many-sided god. Its name, “festival of flowers,”
reveals a glimmer of the character of the pre-Greek vegetation deity, whose arrival and departure
would coincide with the beginning and end of the blossom season. This cyclical pattern was also
reflected in the festival’s rites. During the first two days of the three-day festival, the new wine
was taken out of the pithoi (jars) and drunk amid festive revelry. The last day, however, was seri-
ous, an “all-souls festival” during which sacrifices were made to the dead. The children of Attica
customarily played on swings on this day, not just for fun but to commemorate the death of
Erigone, the daughter of Attica’s first vine-grower, Ikarios, who had hanged herself. Children
were set on swings to atone for her death. The main ceremony, however, performed in the mid-
dle of the day, was a sacred wedding in which the wife of Athens’ highest official, the Archon
Basileus, was brought to Dionysus as the god’s spouse. Attic vase-painters of the Classical period
depicted this event (fig. 277).30 The “king archon” was, as his name suggests, the successor of the
Athenian kings. In democratic Athens he watched over the ancient sacred cults that dated back
to the era of the kings (i.e., the Mycenaean period).31 The marriage of his wife to Dionysus was
analogous in myth to the well-known story of Theseus, Ariadne, and Dionysus. Just as, on Naxos,
Theseus had to give his partner, Ariadne, to the god, so during the Anthesteria Dionysus took
for himself the wife of Theseus’ successor, the Basileus. Historians of religion postulate that the
marriage rite reflects Dionysus’ acquisition of Attica.


The god of this blossom festival, who in Athens had his own sanctuary “in the marshes,” was not
an intruder from Boeotia. Myth associates him with the island of Naxos, where an important
Temple of Dionysus dating back to Archaic times has been excavated.32 If the Boeotian god was
308 DIONYSUS

277. A silen leads the

wife of the Archon
Basileus to her wedding
to Dionysus. Skyphos by
Polygnotus. Ca. 450 B.C.
Berlin, private collection.

associated with the maenads, the Naxian god was associated with the silens.33 By his side stood
not his mother, the Theban Semele, but his wife, the Cretan Ariadne, whom he met on Crete. In
all probability, this Dionysus was already lord of the Aegean islands before his arrival in Athens.
Evidence for a cult of Dionysus exists on many islands, and on just as many, grapes are cultivated.
From the Archaic into the Hellenistic period the islands minted coins with images of Dionysus,
his followers, and his attributes.34 In a quarry on the island of Naxos, a colossal Archaic statue of
Dionysus lies unfinished to this day, the earliest large sculpture of the god (fig. 278).35 Especially
beautiful is a smiling head of Dionysus on the Archaic and Classical coins of the city of Naxos
on the east coast of Sicily (figs. 279–281).36 Stories emanated from many Aegean islands that
they had been colonized by sons of Dionysus. Mention can be made here of the hero Staphylus,
whose name means “vine,” and of Chios, island of wine, whose viticulture is said to have been
established by Oinopion (Pausanias 7.4.8).37 Ariadne with Staphylus and Oinopion, her children
by Dionysus (fig. 282), was a favorite theme of Archaic vase painting.38 The greatest Attic vase-
painter of the second half of the sixth century, Exekias, painted Oinopion, identifying him by
name, as a cupbearer facing his divine father (fig. 283).39 A bearded figure of noble stature, with
a kantharos in his right hand and vine branches in the left, the ivy-crowned Dionysus stands
quietly before the youth. He is the lord of the Anthesteria, a fatherly god who also protects chil-
dren, who were allowed for the first time during his festival to drink wine poured from little jugs.
The progenitor of the island heroes must have come to Attica across the sea; this too is
reflected in the Anthesteria. The well-known wheeled ship that was driven in the festival pro­
cession alludes to his initial arrival. This ritual ship provided keen stimulus to the imagination
of vase-painters, not only in Attica but also across the sea in Ionia. A fragment of a vase from
Clazomenae portrays satyrs on a ship.40 On an Attic black-figure amphora in Tarquinia (fig. 284),
 278. Unfinished colossal
statue of Dionysus
(10.45m) in one of the
marble quarries on
Naxos. Sixth century
B.C. Photo: Courtesy
Hans R. Goette.

279. Drachma from Naxos on Sicily

with the head of Dionysus on the
obverse and a bunch of grapes on
the reverse. Ca. 550–530 B.C.
Switzerland, private collection.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

280–281. Heads of Dionysus on

two tetradrachms from Naxos on
Sicily. Left: soon after 461 B.C.
London, British Museum. Right:
ca. 430–420 B.C. Private collection.
Photos: Hirmer Photo Archive.
 282. Dionysus and
Ariadne, with their sons
Oinopion and Staphylus
in her arms. Attic black-
figure amphora. Ca. 530–
520 B.C. London, British
Museum B168. Photo:
© The Trustees of the
British Museum / Art
Resource, NY.

283. Dionysus and his

son Oinopion. Amphora
by Exekias. Ca. 525 B.C.
London, British Museum
B210. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
 D I O N Y S U S 311

284. Dionysus (head,

shoulders, and chest missing)
with his followers on a ship.
Attic black-figure amphora.
Ca. 510 B.C. Tarquinia, Museo
Nazionale Tarquiniense 678.
Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

Dionysus is seated amidships, his divine stature towering over the others on board.41 He is rowed
by satyrs to the music of a kithara and a flute played by a satyr and a nymph. Here and there, ivy
and grapevines, the god’s sacred plants, extend themselves throughout the ship.
Like the Boeotian maenads, the silens of the Aegean islands facilitated the transformation of
their lord into a god of the theater. Arion of Lesbos introduced choruses of satyrs in Corinth, and
his compatriot Alcaeus, if our supposition is correct, had silens play a role in his hymn on the
return of Hephaestus.42 Whereas elsewhere it is the maenads, as priestesses of Dionysus, who
abandon themselves completely to ritual behavior on his behalf (fig. 285),43 it is these creatures,
with the manes, ears, tails, and at times also the hoofs of horses, who are the entourage of the
god of the wine-producing islands. Vase paintings show silens busying themselves with vines and
the production of wine. The satyrs gather grapes, press them, and store the new wine. This is
particularly well-depicted on an amphora by the Amasis Painter (figs. 286–287).44 On one side of
this amphora, they pluck and press the grapes, while on the other a silen fills Dionysus’ drinking
container with wine from a wineskin. The god moves drunkenly—an exception among the many
images that portray him in serene dignity.


 285. Dionysus and two
dancing maenads. Amphora
by the Amasis Painter.
Ca. 530 B.C. Paris, Cabinet
des Médailles 222. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

286. Vintaging scene: silens

gathering and pressing the
grapes. Amphora by the
Amasis Painter. Ca. 530–520
B.C. Würzburg, Martin-von-
Wagner-Museum L265. Photo:
Martin-von-Wagner-Museum
der Universität Würzburg.
 D I O N Y S U S 313

287. Reverse of the amphora

in fig. 286. A silen is filling
Dionysus’ kantharos with wine
from a wineskin. Würzburg,
Martin-von-Wagner-Museum
L265. Photo: Martin-von-
Wagner-Museum der
Universität Würzburg.

The most beautiful representation of the lord of the Aegean isles is on a cup now in Munich from
the hand of Exekias (fig. 288).45 The painting on the interior, whose deep curvature cannot be
adequately captured in a two-dimensional reproduction, shows the miraculous journey of Dio-
nysus across the sea. Like a reveler on a couch, with a drinking horn in his right hand, he reclines
in a ship surrounded by gamboling dolphins. Above him the sail, once painted white, billows in
the wind. Behind the mast a vine shoots up, spreading out on high with boughs heavy with grape
clusters. This scene evokes admiration for its artful composition in the round, its theme—so
appropriate for a drinking vessel—and for its crystallization of the essence of Dionysus. The
protruding prow, with its large eyes, the two small white dolphins on the hull of the boat, and the
sail held taut by oblique ropes all suggest brisk motion. Nevertheless, the overall impression is
not that the vessel will speed out of sight. On the contrary, the ship seems suspended in its round
frame, embraced by the form of the cup. Even the handles appear to play a part in the composi-
tion, with their arch mirroring the slant of the ship’s ropes. Force and opposing force work together
to produce the impression that the ship is hovering. The sailboat’s motion is underscored by four
314 DIONYSUS

288. Dionysus sailing over the

sea. Tondo of a kylix by Exekias.
Ca. 530 B.C. Munich,
Antikensammlungen 8729/2044.
Photo: Staatliche
Antikensammlungen und
Glyptothek München.
Photographer: Renate Kühling.

dolphins accompanying the ship, but it is at the same time counterbalanced by three other mem-
bers of the pod swimming in the opposite direction, toward the ship. The grape clusters at the
top of the composition form a counterweight to the dolphins swimming in the water below.
The horizontal line of the hull and the vertical lines of mast and vine cross each other in the
middle of the bowl. Here, a peaceful zone surrounds the god. Calmly, he lies in a ship propelled
by his might, under a vine grown by his power. Many depictions in Greek art show Dionysus
standing or sitting in this way, calm though surrounded by his wild entourage. He leads its mem-
bers into ecstasy without yielding to this emotion himself. The dolphins dance around him as
elsewhere satyrs and maenads do. The reveler who long ago placed this cup filled with wine to
his lips imbibed the god with his mouth and his eyes. The lower the surface level of the wine
dropped, the clearer its color sparkled before his eyes, for Exekias used a special shade of red to
paint the sea.
Many admirers of this cup have been reminded of the story of Dionysus and the Tyrrhenian
sea pirates as told in the seventh Homeric Hymn. Not recognizing the young god, the pirates
 D I O N Y S U S 315

kidnapped him. Suddenly a vine sprouted in the middle of the ship, extending its branches, heavy
with grape clusters, first over the sail, then throughout the ship, the first of many miraculous
events. The distraught pirates hurled themselves into the sea, where they were changed into
dolphins. In the end, Dionysus revealed himself to the helmsman, who, because of his piety, was
the only one spared, saying, “I am Dionysus, the son of Zeus and Semele.” The Exekias cup dis-
plays the power of Dionysus, and the vine certainly corresponds with the picture painted in the
Homeric Hymn. But the Dionysus of the hymn is a youth, while Exekias’ is the same bearded,
patriarchal god we know from his vase depicting Dionysus with Oinopion (see fig. 283). There is
also not the slightest hint of a human origin for the dolphins. Parallels suggest that it would not
have been too difficult to depict such a metamorphosis in Archaic art.46 We must conclude,
therefore, that the painter likely used some elements from the Hymn but did not base the entire
composition on it. Exekias envisioned not only the tale told in the Hymn but also the Dionysiac
cult and the procession with the wheeled ship.
Exekias’ translation of an inspiration from real life into art could not be more different from
that of the painter of the amphora in figure 284. On one vase there are rhythmically rowing satyrs,
a satyr playing the kithara, and a flute-playing nymph. In Exekias’ work, the ship propels itself
miraculously. Calmness prevails, and the whole focus is on the god. Exekias did not illustrate
either the myth of the Tyrrhenian pirates or the procession with the wheeled ship but amalgam-
ated both sources of inspiration into one condensed, powerful image. In it, cult and myth are
inseparable. The successful fusing of elements from cult and myth, so important in Dionysiac
art, succeeds all the more absolutely when the work of art itself is a masterpiece.


The Dionysian frieze on a large Chalcidian bowl, probably painted on the island of Euboea and
now in Würzburg (fig. 289), is a companion piece to Exekias’ image of Dionysus.47 Dionysus and
Ariadne stand on a magical chariot drawn by an unusual team of four. A lion, a panther, and two
stags, a combination of the fiercest and the most timid of animals, submit to the divine driver
without harming each other in any way. In the opinion of the ancients, this peace among animals
was characteristic of the paradisiacal state of being that marked the Golden Age, a paradise that
would be invoked at certain Dionysiac festivals. The choral odes of Euripides’ Bacchae are full of
allusions to that paradise,48 so prominent was it in the ecstatic minds of the god’s female devotees.
It included miraculous springs spontaneously overflowing with milk, honey, and wine. Accord-
ingly, on the Würzburg cup, a spring with a washbasin in front of it is transformed into a fountain
of wine. The painter expressed this very clearly by means of a branch with grape clusters growing
around a lion-head waterspout. A silen has discovered the wine and enthusiastically welcomes
the miracle. The frieze provides the best proof that the many wine miracles did not originate at
a later time, as Nilsson assumed. Wine springs such as those which, tradition said, welled up on
the islands of Naxos and Andros during the celebration of the epiphany of Dionysus at his festi-
val inspired the artist to paint this fairytale picture.49
316 DIONYSUS

289. Dionysus and

Ariadne in their
fantastical chariot, drawn
by deer, a panther, and a
lion. Drawing of the
interior of a Chalcidian
kylix, the Phineus Cup.
Ca. 525. Würzburg,
Martin-von-Wagner-
Museum L164. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

In the course of this chapter it has been argued that the wine-producing islands of the Aegean
were ancient cult sites of Dionysus, the god in whose honor the Anthesteria festival was cele-
brated in Athens. He was, as we saw, a pre-Greek vegetation deity, and, more precisely, the lord
of the wine-producing mountains who had a link to Minoan Crete through his spouse, Ariadne.
Vines must have been his concern from the very beginning. Otto has convincingly refuted Mül-
ler’s argument that wine was of secondary importance in the cult of Dionysus.50 The excavations
in Naxos and Ceos51 testify to the great age of the Dionysus cult. Its beginnings on Ceos lie in
the fifteenth century B.C., and the cult continued virtually without a break into the Hellenistic
period. From the temple’s early period, we have fragments of more than twenty terracotta statues,
a number of which are almost life-size (1.5m). They represent mature and young women clad in
familiar Cretan dress, and they are depicted—significantly—as dancers (fig. 290). The question
may be asked whether we have here a troupe performing a dance for Dionysus akin to the dance
performed long ago by sixteen women from Elis (Pausanias 5.16.6f.). In the Archaic period, it
was Dionysus who was worshipped in the thousand-year-old sanctuary of Keos. Votive inscrip-
tions and drinking vessels testify to this unequivocally.52
In the Mycenaean period, wine, the gift of Dionysus, belonged among the most important
agricultural products, as the Linear B texts indicate. In Egypt, the production of wine was depicted
as early as a sixth-dynasty grave (2350–2200 B.C.).53 Whether viticulture arrived in the Aegean
from Egypt or Anatolia is not clear. In any case, it arrived there in the third millennium B.C.
Here, the migrating Greeks found wine along with the lord of the vine-bearing mountains.54
A mighty god, he, like other pre-Greek deities, had to be subjugated by Zeus. Zeus turned him
into a son,55 while the great goddess, who in the pre-Greek period was closely connected with
him, became (as Rhea) the mother and (as Hera) the spouse of the supreme deity. The triad of
gods attested for Lesbos by Alcaeus and Sappho, consisting of Zeus, Hera, and Dionysus, reflects
an early stage of the amalgamation of Greek and pre-Greek religions. Each of these poets from
Lesbos reports that the sons of Atreus had founded the cult.56 As a more recent god, Zeus was
added to the older Aegean deities, Hera and Dionysus. Had Hera as “producer of all” (Alcaeus’
 D I O N Y S U S 317

290. Terracotta statue (99cm high)

of a female dancer from the
sanctuary of Dionysus on the
Cycladic island of Kea. Fifteenth
century B.C. Kea, Archaeological
Museum 1–1. Photo: Courtesy of
The Department of Classics,
University of Cincinnati.

label for her) originally been the mother of Dionysus? In any case, Rhea, mother of the gods, who
in the prehistoric period was probably indistinguishable from Hera, maintained a maternal rela-
tionship with Dionysus throughout Antiquity.
In view of the presence of a pre-Greek cult of Dionysus in the wine-producing islands of the
Aegean, it is necessary to ask again: from which barbarian country did the Greeks import this
god? The thesis of the Lydian-Phrygian origin of Dionysus,57 advanced by Wilamowitz, Nilsson,
and other scholars on the basis of ancient texts, is doubtful. The Phrygians migrated to Asia
Minor no earlier than the first half of the first millennium B.C. The Greeks took from them only
a late version of Dionysus, the mystery god Sabazios, who found his way to Athens in the Clas-
sical period.58 Nevertheless, the ancient reports in which Dionysus arrives from Lydia or Phrygia
contain a kernel of truth. Knowledge of the Hittite kingdom and its Anatolian predecessors had
been lost during the first millennium B.C. The Hittites themselves were replaced by the Lydians
and Phrygians. The Greeks attributed to these later inheritors of the land much that was in fact
318 DIONYSUS

earlier. It appears that the Hittites were especially fond of wine,59 and that the ancient wine-
producing islands such as Lesbos, Chios, and Samos lay directly within the Anatolian sphere of
influence.
Another region well known in antiquity for its cult of Dionysus, Thrace, also had geographic
and ethnic links with Asia Minor. Ancient authors and modern scholars of religion have also
derived Dionysus from Thrace. It is commonly accepted that the ecstatic maenad cult came from
there. Erwin Rohde provided a gripping description of its epidemic of frenzy.60 However, he
regarded it as a phenomenon of the historical period—in spite of the myths that lead far back
into the prehistoric era. The influence of his interpretation is still evident in Nilsson’s surprise
that no traces of Dionysiac orgies can be found in Thessaly, Thrace’s closest Greek neighbor.
Rohde’s intellectual frame of reference reveals him to be an heir to the age of Goethe. Where
the traditions of myth are concerned, he wanted to recognize only the poetic element, the exem-
plary formulation, of what is typically human. He was unfamiliar with the more recent approach
of Schliemann, who, like people in Antiquity, took myth to be a source for history, an outlook
that led him to rediscover Tiryns, Mycenae, Orchomenos, and Troy.61 When myth tells us that
female subordinates of the royal house are swept away by Bacchic madness, and that this takes
place at important centers of Mycenaean civilization, such as Thebes, Orchomenos, and Tiryns,
we are correct in dating these events to the second millennium B.C. The Greeks must have come
into contact with the god of the maenads at the beginning of their migration into the Aegean.
From his northern Greek/Thracian domain they took him south, where the god—a long-time
resident there, especially in the islands—met them anew. In the cults of Athens, both encounters
were preserved: the one with the Thracian-Boeotian god of the maenads in the Lenaea and the
Dionysia, and the one with the vegetation god of the islands in the Anthesteria.


The two manifestations of Dionysus were essentially alike, as were the various forms of the god
worshipped in other parts of Greece. Everywhere, the same demanding, relentless, powerful god
inflicts madness on his opponents. The daughters of King Proetus of Tiryns were driven mad,
either because they insulted Hera (according to one version) or because they insulted Dionysus
(according to another). Both versions were probably derived from a single antecedent, since
Argive Hera was originally linked to Dionysus.62 Many Argolid women joined the princesses and
for years stormed, possessed, through the countryside. Then the king sought the assistance of the
famous seer Melampus, about whose deeds an entire epic was written.63 The following is an
account of what happened:

The cure took place by means of an intensification of Dionysiac excitement “with shouts of joy and
emotional dancing” and the use of certain cathartic remedies. Instead of suspending the worship of
Dionysus and its enthusiasm, Melampus channels it and allows it to run its course. For that reason
Herodotus (2.49) could regard him as the founder of the cult of Dionysus in Greece.64
 D I O N Y S U S 319

We are indebted to Rohde for the insight that the maenad festivals, often tempered by state con-
trol in historical Greece, served a cathartic purpose. Like was to be banished by like; dance mania
was to be mitigated by the homeopathic remedy of cult dance. Indeed, Dionysiac doctrine dif-
ferentiated two kinds of madness: on the one hand, the indiscriminate rage inflicted by the god
on opponents who refused to acknowledge him, such as Lycurgus, Pentheus, and many others,
especially women of royal birth; on the other, madness as the holy rapture of the pious. Euripides
depicts both kinds in the Bacchae.65
In the visual arts, frequently only the context can determine which kind of madness is meant.
The impious Agave and her companions are, after all, depicted similarly to the god’s entourage.
He is all-powerful and transforms both opponents and followers into creatures possessed. It is
certainly better to follow him than to resist him. While the fits of madness he inflicts on his
enemies have disastrous consequences (in their insanity Lycurgus and Agave murder their own
children),66 he bestows happiness and freedom on his initiates in their hysteria. The twin statues
of Dionysus, which as a pair were worshipped in many places, must also be looked at in the
context of this twofold power, as Rohde has noted.67 One was called Baccheus (the mad one), the
other Lysius (the liberator). Writing about such a pair in the agora of Corinth, Pausanias (2.2.7)
reports that they were carved from the tree near Thebes that Pentheus, in his madness, climbed
to spy on the maenads. The oracle of Delphi had given instructions to worship the tree “just like
the god.” This story preserved for posterity knowledge of the Mycenaean tree and pillar cult,
which was connected in Thebes especially to Dionysus.
It was not unusual for the Delphic oracle to regulate the cult of Dionysus Baccheus and
Dionysus Lysius. The oracle had also interceded in the worship of this double god in Sicyon, as
Pausanias observes (2.7.6), and had seen to it that Lysius, the liberator from the dark madness of
Dionysus’ opponents, became ensconced there. The man who brought Lysius to the Peloponnese
was Phanes, a Theban, a fact that should not surprise us, because Thebes was so important in
Dionysus’ cult. However, the most significant figure in the introduction of the cult of Dionysus,
as Herodotus recognized, was the seer Melampus, the healer of Proetus’ daughters. He came from
Thessaly, went to Pylos with Neleus, Nestor’s father, ruled later as king over a part of Argos, and
was worshipped as a hero in a number of locations. This royal priest and prophet should not be
placed, as Rohde and Nilsson assumed, at the threshold of the historical period.68 The Irish
scholar H. W. Parke has shown that his name, “Black Foot,” has to do with the unusual taboo
of the priests of Zeus of Dodona, who do not wash their feet.69 This ancient practice places
Melampus back in the time when the Greeks first appeared in the Aegean. He must originally
have been a priest of Zeus, even though tradition depicts him as priest of Apollo and Dionysus.
This “concealment” by Melampus of the deity he really serves speaks for itself. The great esteem
in which such priestly figures were held, as well as their cleverness, would have helped ensure
that Zeus’s control over Greece would be paramount. In this development the great pre-Greek
gods Apollo and Dionysus maintained their own spheres of influence, while at the same time
they were subordinated to Zeus as his sons. This is how these diametrically opposed forces—we
320 DIONYSUS

are reminded of Nietzsche’s well-known antithesis between the Dionysian and the Apollonian—
became brothers. As brothers they were demonstratively affiliated with each other at prominent
cult sites. Dionysus had no less a share in Delphi than Apollo. His maenads, called Thyiades in
Delphi, honored their god in the winter with dances on Mount Parnassus.70 On Apollo’s island,
Delos, splendid celebrations of the Dionysia took place,71 and Apollo’s mythic priest, Anius, a
favorite of Dionysus, was venerated on Delos in a hero cult.72 Anius’ three daughters, called the
Oinotropes (wine-growers), were given by the god the ability to change whatever they wanted
into wine, bread, or oil.73 Moreover, the Thracian Maron, who poured wine for Odysseus, was
simultaneously a priest of Apollo and a son or nephew of Dionysus.74

291. Dionysus with

thyrsus and
vine branch. Tondo of a
kylix by Makron (fig.
272). Ca. 480 B.C. Berlin,
Staatliche Museen,
Antikensammlung
F2290. Photo: bpk
Bildagentur /
Antikensammlung,
Staatliche Museen, Berlin
/ Art Resource, NY.
Photographer: Johannes
Laurentius.
 D I O N Y S U S 321

Another Dionysian-Apollonian priest, and not the least among them, was the Thracian
Orpheus.75 Women from his native land are said to have been the first to follow him, carrying
narthex staffs like maenads (Palaiphatos fr. 33). The narthex or thyrsus staff was the attribute of
the initiates in the orgia, the god’s secret rites.76 Attic vase paintings from 520 B.C. on depict
maenads carrying the staff. From this period on, it appears not infrequently in the hand of
Dionysus (fig. 291).77 This shared attribute shows Bacchus’ close relationship with his followers.
The staff itself may originally have been called Bacchus, as were the staff-shaped bundles of leaves
carried by the initiates at Eleusis,78 with the name then subsequently transposed to the god him-
self. The narthex, often carried like a scepter and crowned with ivy, bestows an air of aloof dignity
on the women who carry it. It raises them above the nymphs, the friends of the silens in the
earlier vase paintings. With their thyrsus the women appear intimidating to the lustful silens.
Should we follow other scholars in regarding these hieratic maenads as indicative of a new wave
of Thracian-Dionysian religion entering Attica at this time?79 A more likely possibility presents
itself. In the period of the early development of Attic drama, Aeschylus’ predecessors had given
choruses of maenads a role in their dramas, as the famous playwright later did himself. They were
the maenads of myth, the Thracian nurses of Dionysus. The first time they are mentioned in the
Iliad (6.130ff.), they already carry sacred implements (thysthla), probably thyrsoi. The new way
in which the maenads are depicted in Late Archaic painting shows the powerful influence of early
tragedy. Early drama is also responsible for the fact that Dionysus was depicted as a youth in
painting and in sculpture somewhat earlier than most Olympian deities, as he also appears on
the east pediment of the Parthenon (fig. 292).80

292. Dionysus from the east pediment

of the Parthenon. London, British
Museum. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.
322 DIONYSUS

He is portrayed as young in the passage of the Iliad cited above and also in the Hymn to
Dionysus. The dramatists often describe him the same way. In their plays, the god is surrounded
by a chorus of barbarian women, Thracians or Lydians, a detail that agrees with the myth in its
historical core while at the same time corresponding with the Greeks’ general attitude to the cult
of Dionysus. For them the god continued to have an element of strangeness, evident not only in
Homer’s well-known attitude toward him but also in Herodotus (2.49). In light of the preceding
discussion we cannot interpret this alien quality as meaning that the god was a latecomer to
Greece. Otto forcefully demonstrated that Dionysus’ strangeness, as well as his advent from
abroad, are part of the essence and epiphany of the god. Similar gods from the Near East, such
as Adonis or Sabazios, who did in fact enter Greece during the historical period, remained alien.
In contrast Dionysus grew into an Olympian deity and the god of Attic tragedy. This is one of
the greatest accomplishments of the Greeks. It was achieved through centuries, even millennia,
of adaptation and transformation.
 HE R ME S

H
ermes appears everywhere in Greek myth, functioning as messenger of the gods
 and an escort for men, living and dead. The Roman poet Horace summed him
 up with incomparable conciseness as superis deorum gratus et imis (“welcome
alike to the gods above and those below”: Odes 1.10). Always on the move, Hermes the messenger
links the gods above with the underworld gods below. He further links both divine realms to the
territory that lies between them, the realm of mortals. He is as gratus, “welcome,” in Hades as on
Olympus. Homer’s most important description of Hermes, the one that established his character
for the future, is found in book 24 of the Iliad. Here Priam, the graying monarch of Troy, is on
his way, with an old driver and an oxcart filled with ransom, to visit his mortal enemy, Achilles,
in order to ask for the return of the body of his son Hector. Zeus sees them both in the plain
before Troy, and, feeling pity for old Priam, turns to Hermes, his dear son (334ff.), asking him to
bring Priam secretly into Achilles’ camp, unnoticed by any of the Achaeans.

He spoke; and the messenger, the slayer of Argus, did not

Disobey. Then immediately he bound under his feet beautiful sandals,
Immortal and golden, which carry him over the sea
Or over the boundless land with gusts of wind.
He took the rod with which he charms the eyes of men,
Whomsoever he wants, and with which he wakes others when asleep.
Holding it in his hands, the mighty slayer of Argus took to flight.
Immediately he reached Troy and the Hellespont.
He went his way like a prince, a young man,
One with his first beard, one whose youth is most fair.

323
324 HERMES

As Priam waters his animals in a stream, shadows lengthen and dusk falls. Catching sight of
a youth, he is startled. Hermes, however, makes a friendly approach and takes his hand, calling
the old man “father.” A lengthy, very humane dialogue takes place in which Priam learns that his
son’s body still lies intact. Hermes passes himself off as a companion of Achilles and promises to
guide Priam safely. He jumps onto Priam’s wagon, whispers directions to the horses and mules,
puts the guards at a ditch in front of the naval encampment to sleep, and drives unnoticed to
Achilles’ tent. Before returning to Olympus, he identifies himself as Hermes. While all gods and
men are asleep, while even Priam sleeps in the tent of Achilles, Hermes, not being one to leave a
job undone, considers how he can best bring the king and Hector’s body back to Troy in secrecy
(679ff.). He then wakes Priam, hitches up the animals, and escorts him unnoticed to a fording
place in the river Xanthus. There he leaves Priam and returns to Olympus as dawn spreads over
the earth.
Dawn is a counterpoint to the dusk of the previous evening, when Hermes first appeared to
Priam at the very same river crossing. Twilight, the transition between day and night, is the god’s
favorite time for his schemes. One could say that his very nature contained an element of twilight,
although this aspect is not very pronounced in the Homeric epics. In Homer, Hermes always
strikes the noble pose of an Olympian, even when performing a subordinate function. When
Priam wants to give him a vase from the ransom destined for Achilles, he declines. In the Homeric
Hymn to Hermes, he is pictured quite differently—as predatory and greedy, and at the same time
filled with irresistible charm. “He was born at dawn, played the lyre at noon, and at dusk stole
the cattle of Apollo the far-shooter” is the description of the first day of his life (17f.). These
exploits are described in the Hymn in considerable detail.
The son of Zeus and the nymph Maia, he was born in secret in a cave on Mount Cyllene in
Arcadia. But he did not stay long in the liknon, the winnowing basket that his mother used as a
cradle, like other mothers in the countryside. He goes outside the cave, meets a tortoise, kills it,
and out of its shell constructs the lyre, his first invention. Playing it, he sings of the secret love of
his parents, of his own birth, and also of the treasures in his mother’s cave and of his mother and
her maids. Then he prepares to steal the cattle of Apollo, “like a thief.” He rustles a herd of fifty
cows with such stealth that neither the bull nor the four dogs guarding the cattle notice the theft.
He then drives them from Pieria near Olympus to Pylos, where he makes their hoofprints go in
the opposite direction to conceal his movements. At the Alpheus River he learns how to kindle
a fire, butchers two cows, and sacrifices to the Twelve Gods,1 after which he finally returns to his
crib and his swaddling clothes. “Like a young animal,” he lies there bundled up and pretends to
be asleep when Apollo, now robbed of his cattle, enters the cave. When asked about the cattle,
Hermes says he knows nothing—after all, he is only a baby. But Apollo grabs him and takes him
to Olympus, where Hermes, his swaddling clothes over his arm, tells his lies again, this time in
the presence of Zeus. He also commits perjury, swearing an oath by the gate of heaven. Zeus,
nevertheless, has to laugh about this clever babe in arms and orders him, accompanied by Apollo,
to look for the cattle. Hermes obeys his father, as he will continue to do in the future. He manages
 H E R M E S 325

to bring Apollo so far under the spell of his lyre playing that Apollo gladly gives up the cattle
in exchange for the musical instrument. The tension between Hermes and Apollo is resolved.
Reconciliation is achieved by means of an agreement and an exchange of gifts. Hermes leaves his
brother the lyre and discovers for himself the shepherd’s pipe. Apollo gives Hermes a magic
wand, bringing luck and riches, and promises to love no other immortal as much—provided
Hermes never steals from him again.
The cattle theft was depicted many times by Archaic vase-painters.2 On an Ionian hydria of
the Caeretan type (fig. 293), the baby Hermes lies in a wheeled crib, and Apollo enters the cave
with long strides and points accusingly at the child.3 His mother, Maia, and a bearded man, per-
haps Zeus himself, attempt to defend their young offspring. On the other side of the vase, the
cattle peek out of the cave where they are hiding. Hermes is also seen leading the cattle to Maia’s
cave on a cup by the Brygos Painter dated to around 490 B.C. (fig. 294).4 They crowd around the
little one, who is half-sitting in the liknon familiar to us from the hymn. One of the animals sniffs
at him. On his head he already wears the petasus, the broad-brimmed sun hat of both the wan-
derer and the messenger of the gods.

293. The newborn Hermes after

stealing the cattle of Apollo.
Caeretan hydria by the Busiris
Painter. Ca. 530 B.C. Paris,
Louvre E702. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
326 HERMES

294. The newborn

Hermes stealing the
cattle of Apollo. Kylix by
the Brygos Painter. Ca.
490–480 B.C. Vatican,
Museo Gregoriano
Etrusco 16582. Photo:
Scala / Art Resource, NY.

The development of a thieving god, a concept surprising to us, has been clearly explained
by Nilsson, who points out that Hermes was, above all, a god of herdsmen.5 He was born on
Mount Cyllene in the “herd country” of Arcadia, where he also had ancient cults. On one vase
of the Archaic period the god introduces himself: “I am Hermes the Cyllenian” (see fig. 209).6
Myths and folktales tell us that in the pastoral world it is not unusual for herdsmen to augment
their flocks by means of theft. The most splendid example of this is provided by Ajax of Salamis,
one of the many heroes courting Helen, who promises as his bride price to drive herds of cattle
and sheep from Troezen and as far as Corinth and Megara (Hesiod fr. 204.44ff. Merkelbach-
West). Even today it is regarded as a mark of manliness among the farmers and shepherds of
Crete “to procure the main course of the wedding banquet from someone else’s herd, even at
the risk of one’s own life.”7 In a discussion with Penelope near the end of the Odyssey (23.356f.),
Odysseus declares his intention to use rustling to fill out the herds devoured by the suitors.
Related genealogically to Hermes through his grandfather, the archetypal thief Autolycus,8 the wily
Odysseus embodies the same qualities among heroes that Hermes does among the Olym­pians.
Indeed, like Hermes, Odysseus travels to the gates of Hades. The parallels between god and hero
confirm that the Greeks were very fond of this type of character. Thus it is Odysseus, and not
Agamemnon, who remained for all time the most typical Greek.
 H E R M E S 327

Hermes is also frequently characterized by modern authors as the “most Greek” of all the
gods.9 This statement undoubtedly goes too far. It is true that there are scarcely any Greek myths
of any length in which Hermes does not appear at some point. But in many cases the god is
playing his customary subordinate role. He acts at the behest of his father, Zeus, and rarely inter-
venes in anything on his own initiative. Apollo also identifies with Zeus’s will, yet he orders and
shapes the world around him. Hermes, on the other hand, exploits situations already at hand.
The contrast must have led to the differences between the two sons of Zeus that the Homeric
Hymn to Hermes relates in burlesque form. At the end of this poem, Apollo’s generosity is joined
with Hermes’ charm in an alliance blessed by Zeus’s grace (574f.):

So the lord Apollo loved the son of Maia,

Loved him deeply, and the son of Cronus bestowed his grace.

Apollo, who shows humans their limitations, lovingly defines the domain of his newborn
brother in the Hymn to Hermes. This domain chiefly consists of animals: cattle, horses, mules,
lions, wild boars, dogs, and all small livestock (567ff.). In Apollo’s list, the verbs are important.
Hermes will rule, or be lord over (anassein), the small livestock, dogs, and wild animals that
threaten the flocks. Horses, however, he should tend to as a servant (amphipoleuein). An attempt
to prove that Hermes was a “master of animals,” based on this text and on depictions of the god
on animal friezes on Archaic vases, was not successful.10 Hermes was not the male counterpart
of the “Mistress of the Animals,” Artemis, who had a close relationship with all herd animals
and all animals of the wild. It is Dionysus who is her counterpart.11 In addition, cattle belonged
also to Hera and Poseidon. Hermes “ruled” primarily the goats and sheep with which he is so
frequently depicted in art.
As shepherd Hermes is keen-eyed (euskopos), a characteristic he shares with Artemis and
well-known shepherds such as Lynceus. The archetype of the keen-eyed shepherd, however, was
Argus, the servant of Hera as mistress of the meadows.12 In myth, Argus was said to have had
many eyes. For that reason, he was portrayed in Archaic art with either two heads or a body
covered with eyes. He guards Io, Zeus’s beloved, whom Hera has changed into a heifer.13 Argus’
adversary is Hermes, who, on his father’s instructions, frees Io from her guard (fig. 295), in
most versions by killing him. The Io myth reflects a dispute between Argive Hera and Zeus in
which Hermes, as elsewhere, operates on his father’s side against the schemes of his stepmother.14
It is not surprising that Hermes is also close to Hera’s other stepsons, including Perseus, Heracles,
and Dionysus. An epithet frequently given to Hermes after the time of the Homeric epics,
Argeiphontes,15 very likely derives from the god’s duping and slaying of the shepherd. It is most
frequently coupled with the adjective euskopos, which alludes to shepherds’ keen eyesight. For
Hermes, his opponent’s multiple eyes did not present a problem. His magic wand, after all,
enabled him to open and close eyes at will.
328 HERMES

295. Hermes
(unarmed) steals
away Io, transformed
in a cow, from her
guardian, the many-
eyed Argus, at right.
Ionian amphora. Ca.
530–520 B.C.
Munich, Antiken­
samm­lungen 585.
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.

The most beautiful representation of Hermes the shepherd is the figure of the ram-bearer.16
The god holds the ram in his hand, as in the Late Archaic bronze statue in Boston (fig. 296),17 or
under his arm, as in the statue, no longer extant, by the bronze sculptors Onatas and Calliteles
in Olympia (Pausanias 5.27.8).18 The familiar image of the good shepherd known to us from
Christian art is also attested for Hermes. The Early Classical sculptor Calamis created a Hermes
with a ram on his shoulders for the town of Tanagra in Boeotia (Pausanias 9.22.1). It bore the cult
title Kriophoros, the Ram-Bearer, and the god was depicted without a beard.19 During the festival
of Hermes at Tanagra, the most attractive ephebe carried a ram on his shoulders around the
city wall in imitation of the god. Hermes was said to have once driven pestilence away from the
city in this way. The motif of the ram-bearer was already known from earlier Archaic art. An
Attic black-figure vase (fig. 297) serves as an example while making an additional point.20 In
this scene, the ram on the god’s shoulders has been stolen. Hermes is absconding with it, looking
back vigilantly while the animal does the same. We have here not only the benevolent rescuer of
Tanagra but also the thieving shepherd from the Homeric Hymn to Hermes.


 H E R M E S 329

296. Hermes carrying a ram. Bronze statuette. Ca. 520 B.C. Boston, Museum of Fine Arts 99.489. Photo:
© Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

Linear B tablets from Pylos show that Hermes was worshipped in the Mycenaean period.21 Apart
from Zeus, his is the only name of an Olympian deity for which the etymology is clear, though
not quite as certain as in Zeus’s case. Generally speaking, the interpretation that Müller and Prel-
ler formulated more than a hundred years ago is still in favor—namely, that Hermes’ name
derived from a heap of stones constructed in his honor. As Preller wrote:

Since antiquity such heaps of stone were called hermaioi lophoi or hermaia, also hermakes . . . and
so it appears that the very name of the god—Hermes, Hermeias, Hermaon—is closely connected
with this custom of building cairns. The Odyssey already recognizes such a heap of stones along
the side of the road near the town of Ithaca (16.471). Strabo noticed many along the roadways
of Elis (8.3.12). Pausanias saw them along the boundaries of Messenia and Arcadia (8.34.6), and
more recent travelers have noticed them even in contemporary Greece as boundary markers and
road signs.22
330 HERMES

297. Hermes stealing a

ram. Attic black-figure
olpe. Ca. 520 B.C. Paris,
Louvre F159. Photo:
© RMN-Grand Palais /
Art Resource, NY.

As lord of the boundary stones, Hermes had a rural cult and was worshipped by the shepherds
and farmers whom he often assisted. These heaps of stone would have marked the boundaries of
individual meadows, although it is not unlikely that from time to time they were moved secretly.
This would not be out of keeping with Hermes’ character.
In the prehistoric period to which the cult of Hermes can be dated, the stone monument had
yet another, very important function. At the beginning of the twentieth century, two scholars,
Ludwig Curtius and Martin P. Nilsson, came independently to the conclusion that the heap of
stones from which Hermes obtained his name originated as a funerary monument.23 Archaeo-
logical excavations since then have provided consistent corroboration for this theory. The prac-
tice of piling up stones on graves is attested for the prehistoric as well as the historical period.
This view of Hermes’ origin serves as a basis for understanding one of the god’s most impor-
tant characteristics, his relationship with the realm of the dead. In the bright world of the Hymn
to Hermes, this relationship is alluded to only peripherally (572). But at the beginning of book
24 of the Odyssey, Hermes, his golden staff in hand, summons the souls of the suitors slain by
Odysseus. They follow the call of the herald, whirring around him like bats. Hermes leads them
to Oceanus and past the rocks of Leucas, the gates of Helios, and the people of dreams to the
 H E R M E S 331

meadows of asphodel, where the souls of the dead reside. The god performs this function so
naturally that we can conclude that his role was both widespread and very old. Indeed, it is
attested very early and is found in all regions of the Greek world. In this function Hermes has
the cult title Chthonios.
The appellation often found today, Psychopompos, “guider of souls,” is only a literary one, first
used of Hermes in the literature of the Roman period. Euripides calls the ferryman Charon, who
transports the dead in his skiff, psychopompos (Alcestis 361), which is a more appropriate use
of the term. This ferryman merely guides the souls across the river of the underworld. Hermes,
on the other hand, is much more than a mere guide. He is the understanding companion of the
dead, their helper, who stays close to them in the grave. Those who bring offerings to the departed
turn to him. The second play in the Oresteia of Aeschylus, the Choephori, begins with an invoca-
tion to Hermes Chthonios uttered by Orestes. His sister Electra turns later to the same god (124ff.):

O greatest herald for those above and those below,

Help, Hermes of the Earth, summon for me the spirits
Below the earth to hear my prayers.

In Athens a very ancient sacrifice was offered to Hermes Chthonios on the third day of the
Anthesteria, the festival of Dionysus that dated from the second millennium B.C. The Athenians
cooked many different kinds of seeds in clay pots, a panspermia, from which they did not eat, as
was the custom with chthonian sacrifice. Instead, they presented it to Hermes and Dionysus and
prayed to Hermes on behalf of the dead.24 Atop an Archaic grave in Sparta a stone was found
with the inscription Hermanos—that is, “property of Hermes.”25
Curtius proposed that not only the stone heap honoring Hermes but also the image of the god
frequently linked to such stones, an image we usually call a “herm,”26 was derived from a grave
monument type. It is rarely acknowledged that the word herma does not occur in Greek, but only
in Latin. The Romans, who were especially fond of using this form for statues, were the first to
differentiate between the purely anthropomorphic representation of Hermes-Mercury and the
rectilinear pillar-shaped statue adorned with a head, stubs at the shoulders, and genitals.27 For
the Greeks, on the other hand, the herm (fig. 298) was simply a representation of the god.28 They
called this type of statue Hermes Tetragonos, the four-cornered Hermes, or, more frequently,
simply Hermes. According to Thucydides, a considerable number of such herms could be found
in fifth-century Athens “at the entrances of private houses as well as of sacred precincts” (6.27).
Excavations of Attic graves of the Archaic and Classical periods have not brought any herms to
light, although they must have been placed there, according to Cicero (Laws 2.26.65). In Helle-
nistic Thessaly, where ancient traditions lived on, grave stelae regularly had herms incised or
painted on them, as many examples in Larissa and Volos indicate. Inscriptions on those grave-
stones indicate that this image was called Hermes Chthonios.29


332 HERMES

For all that, our current knowledge does not allow us to prove convincingly that the grave was
really the earliest location where herm-like representations could be set up. In the cults of Anti­
quity there were large numbers of pillar-shaped statues with which the herms, allowing that they
are a distinct group, must ultimately be classified. In the chapters on Hera, Apollo, Artemis, and
Dionysus, it was pointed out that these gods were worshipped in the form of columns or pillars
in the Minoan-Mycenaean period.30 We also know of idols of this kind with some human fea-
tures, as is also the case with the herms. The prevalence of these forms is, to be sure, restricted
elsewhere in the Aegean to two periods: the late Mycenaean period and “atavistic” Archaic Boeo-
tia. On the other hand, herms continued to be made throughout many centuries in the same
ithyphallic form (figs. 298–299).31 This characteristic differentiates them from other semihuman
statues. Today, many a scholar assumes that every pillar-shaped statue had phallic significance.
This modern opinion is, however, contradicted by column-shaped cult statues of the goddesses
Hera of Argus and Artemis Patroa of Sicyon dating back to the second millennium B.C. Never-
theless, for the early herms, the ithyphallic condition is a significant characteristic. It must also
indicate an essential aspect of the god these herms represent.32

298. Herm from the

island of Siphnos.
Ca. 510 B.C. Athens,
National Archaeological
Museum 3728. Photo:
© Vanni Archive /
Art Resource, NY.

299. Roman adaptation

of the Hermes
Propylaios of
Alcamenes, created in
the last third of the fifth
century B.C. From
Pergamon. Istanbul,
Archaeological Museum
1433. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
 H E R M E S 333

Phallic rites were practiced in Greek religion in two spheres: the festivals celebrated by the
rural populace (for example in the “rural Dionysia”) and in certain mystery cults. Herms belonged
to both spheres. Herodotus traced their origin back to the rustic Pelasgians (2.51). The Athenians
took the ithyphallic herms from them, and all the other Greeks followed the Athenians’ example.
“The Pelasgians knew how to tell a sacred tale about the custom, which was revealed in the mys-
teries celebrated in Samothrace.” For Herodotus, herms were pre-Greek and associated with the
Cabiric Mysteries. We have no reason to doubt his assertion, especially since, in Thucydides’
report about the notorious mutilation of the herms by Alcibiades, the desecration of the herms
and the parodying of the Mysteries are mentioned in the same breath (6.28 and elsewhere). Sac-
rifice to a Cabiric figure is found more than once on the fifth-century B.C. skyphoi from the
sanctuary of the Cabiri near Thebes (fig. 300).33 The oldest herm in Athens must have been the
“wooden Hermes” in the cella of Athena Polias34 in the Erechtheum, which Pausanias refers to
as a votive offering of the legendary king Cecrops, and which he reports was barely visible because
of a profusion of myrtle twigs (1.27.1).
Agricultural cults and the Mysteries clung tenaciously to ancient traditions. For this reason,
the statue of Hermes was not “modernized” even after Homer caused him to appear in a nobler,
more humane role. As a particularly beautiful example, we can call upon the seminal work of the
Berlin Painter (fig. 301).35 In book 24 of the Iliad, the poet deliberately presents his attractive,
youthful, princelike Hermes (347) as a contrast to the bearded, ithyphallic statue of the country-
side. The poet of the Hymn to Hermes “underplayed” the god’s Homeric youthfulness, in that
he introduced him as an infant. Nevertheless, the Hermes of the Hymn shares one defining char-
acteristic with the herms: both are associated with daimones. Apollo addresses his newborn
brother as “daimon of the gods” (551). Hermes already belongs to the realm of the daimones
through his position as intermediary between gods and men, which is quite in keeping with the
doctrine of the priestess Diotima in Plato’s Symposium (202–3): “For the god does not relate to
humankind without an intermediary. All contact and dialogue between gods and humans, awake
or asleep, takes place through the world of the daimones.” A god that can use his magic wand to
induce sleep or rouse from slumber whenever he feels so inclined, a god that prefers to be active

300. Cabiri sacrificing

at a herm, on a Boeotian
skyphos (drawing).
Ca. 420 B.C.
Kassel, Staatliche
Kunstsammlungen
T424. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
334 HERMES

301. Hermes and satyr. Amphora

by the Berlin Painter. Ca. 490
B.C. Berlin, Staatliche Museen,
Antikensammlung F2160. Photo:
Hirmer Photo Archive.

at twilight, is more a daimon than an Olympian. The use of the plural of the god’s name, which
occurs not infrequently in literature, points in the same direction. This use of the plural was not
restricted to the multitude of herms. In Lebadeia in Boeotia, young men who served as attendants
at sacrifice were called Hermai, after the god who served as their model, the sacrificing Hermes
known from the Hymn (Pausanias 9.39.7). The use of the plural is not typically Olympian but is
characteristic of the world of the daimon. Cabiri, Dactyls, Telchines, satyrs, nymphs, and many
others can be cited as examples. Hermes is associated with nymphs and satyrs in the Homeric
Hymn to Aphrodite (262) as well as in the visual arts. Herodotus (2.51) links him with the Cabiri.
The “plural” element in their nature, their insatiable lust for life, but also the mystery of their
mere existence—all find incomparable expression in the Cabiri of Goethe’s “Classical Walpurgis-
nacht” (Faust, 8075–77, 8186–87, 8194–99):36
 H E R M E S 335

The Sirens: They are gods, wonderfully unique,

Who continually reproduce themselves
And never know what they are!
. . .
The Nereids and Tritons: Three we have taken along,
The fourth did not want to come.
. . .
There are actually seven of them!
The Sirens: Where did the three get to?
The Nereids and Tritons: We did not know the answer,
They are on Olympus to ask;
There was perhaps the eighth,
Of whom no one had yet thought.


The earliest herms were not made of stone but of wood, as the Hermes in the Erechtheum
makes clear. That is why they have not survived. It was not until Hipparchus, the son of the
tyrant Pisistratus, put up stone herms in Attica on a grand scale that the stone herm appears
to have become fairly common. They functioned as milestones, signaling the midpoint of the
distance between a particular deme and the Agora.37 By extending Attica’s road network and set-
ting up the herms the rural population was so fond of, Hipparchus was establishing a memorial
to himself in the rural communities of Attica, which provided the tyrant’s base of support. For
that reason “This is a memorial to Hipparchus” was inscribed on all these herms (Plato, Hip­
parchus 228–29). The second part of the pentameter contained a moral injunction along the
lines of “Go and be right-minded” or “Don’t betray a friend.” Based on the number of Attic
demes, there must have been around 150 herms set up in Attica between 528 and 514 B.C. On
the interior of an early red-figure cup of this period,38 we see one of these statues taking shape
in the hands of a young artist (fig. 302). The inscription reads, “Hipparchus is beautiful,” refer-
ring to the son of Pisistratus. In ancient literature the “four-cornered Hermes” is mentioned
several times as an Attic invention. It may well have been exactly that. The Late Archaic sculp-
tors commissioned by Hipparchus to produce his herms could well have been the ones who
established the now-familiar stone form. Their proportions, taken over by Alcamenes, lived on
into the Roman period. In comparison, the early wooden herms were undoubtedly flatter, more
plank-like, corresponding to the Boeotian terracotta idols, which had stump-like arms like the
herms. The squared “shoulders” in all probability held garments, as is illustrated on several vase
paintings (fig. 303).39 We have only fragments of the Archaic stone herms of Athens. They must
have looked similar to the well-preserved, cheerful marble herm from the island of Siphnos
(see fig. 298).
 302. Sculptor carving a
herm. Tondo of a kylix
by Epictetus. Ca. 515 B.C.
Copenhagen, National
Museum of Denmark
119. Photo: Niels Elswing,
The National Museum
of Denmark.

303. Shrine of Hermes.

Lekythos by the Bowdoin
Painter. Ca. 460 B.C.
Karlsruhe, Badisches
Landesmuseum 85.1. Photo:
Badisches Landesmuseum
Karlsruhe.
 H E R M E S 337

Hipparchus was murdered in 514 B.C. The Athenians dedicated statues to his murderers, the
Tyrannicides, in the Agora. But the popularity of herms in Attica did not diminish. On the con-
trary, that same Agora now contained a herm for each of the ten Attic tribes (Xenophon, Hip-
parchicus 3.2). Cimon also erected three herms, one for each of his three military victories, an
image of which may be preserved on a fragment of an exquisite vase in the Louvre showing a trio
of herms (fig. 304).40 The painting is by the Pan Painter, who had a greater fondness for herms
than any other Athenian vase-painter. We are reminded of the krater in Boston from which the
painter takes his name (see fig. 168). The statue on it is not of Hermes but one of the lesser dai­
mones of Attica, similar to the fertility god Priapus. The gaunt face, rolling eyes, and goatee clearly
distinguish this daimon from the noble, well-groomed head known from statues of Hermes.
A favorite theme of vase-painters of the fifth century B.C. was a sacrifice offered to a herm.41
Again, it is the Pan Painter who has provided us with the most beautiful example (fig. 305). An
Athenian presides over two young attendants roasting sacrificial meat on an altar in front of the
herm. One of the youths holds a spit over the burning altar, while the other is holding a twig-
covered sacrificial basket. Their master pours wine from a kylix. The scene probably shows a goat
being sacrificed to Hermes; its horns are hanging to the right. The god’s coiffure, with its crown
of corkscrew curls, resembles the hairstyle of the Archaic herms from the time of Hipparchus—

304. Three herms.

Fragmentary pelike
by the Pan Painter. 470
B.C. Paris, Louvre
C10793. Photo: ©
RMN-Grand Palais /
Art Resource, NY.
338 HERMES

305. Sacrifice at a herm.

Column-krater by the
Pan Painter. Ca. 470–460
B.C. Naples, Museo
Archeologico Nazionale
127929. Photo: Scala /
Art Resource, NY.

even though the krater is half a century later in date. The painter purposely depicted the idol in
an old-fashioned style, which is characteristic for herms. Hermes wears the garland of a sympo-
siast upon his curly locks. He is a guest at his own sacrificial meal. In spite of, or rather because
of, his strange form, he is closer than the great anthropomorphic Olympians to those performing
the sacrifice. Those sacrificing, who could be called hermae, are in a sense his colleagues.
Where did such sacrifices take place? Probably in front of the house, since, according to the
passage of Thucydides cited earlier, herms stood at the doors of most private houses in Attica.
Each had its own herm. As Paul Zanker has observed, based on the many vases showing aspects
of this cult of herms, the god frequently resembles his worshippers.42 An elderly man is shown
praying to an aged herm (fig. 306).43 Likewise, a youthful herm can be matched with a child. The
herm’s adaptability is, like its limitless multiplicity, a characteristic that comes from the realm of
the daimon. We are reminded, especially when we consider the private character of the statues,
of the cult of the Roman genius. We can thereby understand why the Romans put portrait heads
on their herms.44 We need only compare the Greek herm and the Roman genius to identify the
most significant difference: the genius vanishes with the death of the individual person, but
Hermes survives. As Chthonios he is also a companion for the dead. He escorts them safely to
the underworld and brings them the offerings provided by their next of kin.
Fifth-century Attic representations of Hermes Chthonios expose ancient art’s most pro-
found sensibilities regarding death. An imposing sculpture of this solemn god, preserved in a
Roman copy of a Greek original, probably the work of Phidias (figs. 307–308), has been convinc-
ingly compared to an official Attic tomb monument in an article by Semni Karouzou.45 Hermes
 306. “Each one prays to
his own Hermes.” Scene
on a column-krater.
Ca. 470–460 B.C.
Bologna, Museo Civico
Archeologico 206. Photo:
Museo Civico
Archeologico di Bologna.

307. Hermes Chthonios.

Roman marble copy after a
funerary monument from the
Circle of Phidias. Rome,
Museo Nazionale delle Terme
(Palazzo Massimo) 8624.
Photo: Hirmer Photo
Archive.
340 HERMES

308. Hermes Chthonios. Head of

the statue in fig. 307. Rome, Museo
Nazionale delle Terme (Palazzo
Massimo) 8624. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.

Chthonios is depicted on many white-ground lekythoi produced for the cult of the dead. On one,
Hermes sits facing a young woman who is pressing a bridal wreath into her hair. Gently, yet
forcefully and inexorably, he beckons her with his finger (figs. 309–310).46 Behind her, the con-
tours of a tombstone emerge. Other lekythoi show Hermes helping a dead woman step into the
sullen Charon’s skiff, encouraging her to take that very last step.47 He never appears as a death-
dealing god. As the guide to the underworld, he is always beyond death. This aspect finds expres-
sion in the attribute he constantly carries with him, the kerykeion. It is a herald’s staff, which
enables his access to the gods above and those below. Artemis, on the other hand, who appears
in many death scenes, always plays a direct role in killing, as her weapons show, and leaves behind
those she has killed. Hermes’ very different way of operating reveals him to be, while just as
relentless, for the most part beneficent and helpful. He helps the dead reach the destination they
are struggling to reach and thereby achieve the rest they are seeking. How mild and noble his
manner is, especially in contrast to Charon’s! It should be noted that the people he takes an inter-
est in are for the most part women.48
 H E R M E S 341

309–310. Hermes as guide of the souls of the dead, with a young woman at a grave stele. White-ground
lekythos by the Painter of the Boston Phiale. From Oropos in Attica. 440–430 B.C. Munich,
Antikensammlungen 6248. Photo: Hirmer Photo Archive.

What is the origin of the noble figure of Hermes on white-ground lekythoi? He corresponds
to the solemn guide of Persephone in the Mysteries at Eleusis. In particular we can think of the
krater, contemporary with these beautiful lekythoi, depicting the goddess as she returns from the
sacred chasm, attended by a helpful Hermes (see fig. 98). The lekythos painters were steeped in
the spirit of the Eleusinian Mysteries. We can assume that most of them were initiates. On white-
ground lekythoi we find Eleusinian themes such as Pluto and Persephone, the pair of underworld
deities, or Demeter and Kore at the pouring of a libation (fig. 311). “It [the painting] does not refer
to a definite moment from the myth of the descent of Kore into the underworld, but, independent
of any scene defined by time and space, it refers rather to the inner essence of the Eleusinian
deities, as reflected in the entire myth.”49 If the lekythos painters captured the essence of the two
Eleusinian goddesses in this way, the same is likely to be true in the case of Hermes, who was so
342 HERMES

The rights holder did not

grant permission to reproduce this
image in the digital edition.
311. Demeter, with scepter and
three ears of grain in her right
hand, and Persephone holding a
torch and phiale. White-ground
lekythos. Ca. 460–450 B.C.
Athens, National Archaeological
Museum 1754. Photo: National
Archaeological Museum, Athens.
Photographer: Pantelis Magoulas.

closely linked to them. As we know from Herodotus, the god had long been part of the Myster-
ies of the Cabiri (2.51). In his role as Kore’s Eleusinian guide, the coarseness clinging to the
original Hermes has been stripped away. The Pelasgian has become an Olympian without losing
his connection with the underworld.
Looking at the quiet grave scenes on Attic lekythoi, we think of Sappho’s instruction to her
daughter that a dirge is not appropriate for the people of a house where the Muses are cultivated.50
Love for the Muses beyond the grave was second only to the Mysteries of Eleusis as a subject
inspiring the most beautiful Attic lekythoi. A lekythos in Munich showing a Muse sitting with a
lyre on Mount Helicon provides an example.51 Hermes also participates in the musical sphere.
Two of the instruments used by the Muses, the lyre and the syrinx, are his inventions. A poem
by Sappho (fr. 95 Lobel-Page) describes how Hermes entered her house and how the poet, in her
longing for death, turned to him:
 H E R M E S 343

O lord . . .
A longing to die has a hold on me,
To see the shores of Acheron,
Cloaked with lotus and dew.

Just as Sappho, contemplating Hermes, conjures up a vision of an underworld landscape, so the

later lekythos painters depicted the bulrushes of Acheron beside the grave. On grave markers
Hermes, too, could sit on the rocks of the underworld. Life and death and the world of light and
shadow have fused into an indissoluble whole (see figs. 309–310).
The most famous depiction of the guide of the dead in the art of Classical Athens, the image
that was most famous in Antiquity as well as in modern times, also belongs in that world of music.
This is the Hermes on the so-called Orpheus relief (fig. 312),52 which has survived in several

312. Hermes as
companion of Eurydice
and Orpheus. Roman
copy of an Attic relief of
the late fifth century
B.C. Orpheus’ face is a
modern restoration.
Naples, Museo
Archeologico Nazionale
6727. Photo: Hirmer
Photo Archive.
344 HERMES

Roman copies. While returning to the light of day from Hades, the singer Orpheus turns back to
look at his wife, Eurydice, restored to him by the gods of the underworld, and unveils her face.
With that action he breaks the promise he made to stern Persephone. From this point on, Eurydice
cannot proceed but must turn back. The hand of Hermes, who will lead her back to the shadows,
is placed gently but firmly on her right arm. With considerable tact—with sympathy, one could
almost say53—the god stays in the background, as it were, at the moment of recognition between
husband and wife. Never did his duties weigh so heavily on his shoulders. He appears younger
than on the lekythoi, which usually show him bearded, and more deeply affected by the task he
must perform. As is true for mortals, the immortal too is subject to a harsh law.
 Abbreviations

Special abbreviations applying to each chapter are found at the beginning of the notes for that chapter.
Citations of classical works use the abbreviations from the Oxford Classical Dictionary.

AA Archäologischer Anzeiger
AJA American Journal of Archaeology
Akurgal/Hirmer E. Akurgal and M. Hirmer, Die Kunst der Hethiter (Munich 1961)
AM Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung
AntK Antike Kunst
ArchEph Archaiologike Ephemeris
ArchHom F. Matz and H. G. Buchholz, eds., Archaeologia Homerica (Göttingen 1967–)
ASAtene Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di Atene
Atti CIM I Atti e memorie del primo congresso internazionale di Micenologia, Rome
1967 (Rome 1968)
Atti CIM II Atti e memorie del secondo congresso internazionale di Micenologia,
Rome-Naples 1991 (Rome 1996)
AW Antike Welt
BCH Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique
Beazley, ABV J. D. Beazley, Attic Black-Figure Vase-Painters (Oxford 1956)
Beazley, ARV 2 J. D. Beazley, Attic Red-Figure Vase-Painters, 2nd ed. (Oxford 1963)
Beazley, Dev. J. D. Beazley, The Development of Attic Black-Figure (London 1964)
Beazley, Paralipomena J. D. Beazley, Paralipomena: Additions to Attic Black-figure Vase-painters
and Attic Red-figure Vase-Painters (Oxford 1971)

345
346 Abbreviations

Berger/Gisler-Huwiler E. Berger and M. Gisler-Huwiler, Der Parthenon in Basel: Dokumentation

zum Fries (Mainz 1996)
Berve/Gruben/Hirmer H. Berve, G. Gruben, and M. Hirmer, Griechische Tempel und Heiligtumer
(Munich 1961)
BJbb Bonner Jahrbücher
Buchholz, Bronzezeit H.-G. Buchholz, ed., Ägäische Bronzezeit (Darmstadt 1987)
Buchholz/Karageorghis H.-G. Buchholz and V. Karageorghis, Altägäis und Altkypros (Tübingen
1971)
Buitron-Oliver 1997 D. Buitron-Oliver, ed., The Interpretation of Architectural Sculpture in
Greece and Rome, National Gallery, Washington, D.C. Studies in the
History of Art 49, Symposium Papers 29 (Hanover/London 1997)
Burkert W. Burkert, Greek Religion, trans. J. Raffan (Cambridge, MA, 1985)
Carpenter T. H. Carpenter, Dionysian Imagery in Archaic Greek Art (Oxford 1986)
Carter/Morris J. B. Carter and S. P. Morris, eds., The Ages of Homer: A Tribute to Emily
Townsend Vermeule (Austin 1995)
CVA Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum
Deubner, AF L. Deubner, Attische Feste (Berlin 1932)
Dinsmoor, Arch. W. B. Dinsmoor, The Architecture of Ancient Greece, 3rd ed. (London/New
York 1950)
Drerup, ArchHom H. Drerup, Griechische Baukunst in geometrischer Zeit, Archaeologia
Homerica 2, ch. O (Göttingen 1969)
EAA Enciclopedia dell’Arte Antica (Rome 1958–)
Fittschen Klaus Fittschen, Untersuchungen zum Beginn der Sagendarstellungen bei
den Griechen (Berlin 1969)
FGrHist F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker (Berlin 1923–)
Friedländer, Studien P. Friedländer, Studien zur antiken Literatur und Kunst (Berlin 1969)
Furtwängler, Berlin A. Furtwängler, Beschreibung der Vasensammlung im Antiquarium (Berlin
1895)
GGA Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen
Hampe, Sagenbilder R. Hampe, Frühe griechische Sagenbilder in Böotien (Athens 1936)
Hampe/Simon R. Hampe and E. Simon, The Birth of Greek Art: From the Mycenaean
Period to the Archaic Period (New York 1981)
Harrison, “Charites” E. B. Harrison, “Charis, Charites,” in LIMC 3 (1986), 191–203
Haussig, VO H. W. Haussig, ed., Götter und Mythen im Vorderen Orient (Stuttgart 1965)
Hedreen 1992 G. M. Hedreen, Silens in Attic Black-figure Vase-painting (Ann Arbor
1992)
 Abbreviations 347

Helbig W. Helbig, Führer durch die öffentlichen Sammlungen klassischer

Altertümer in Rom, 4th ed., ed. H. Speier, 4 vols. (Tübingen 1963–72)
Heubeck, Schriften A. Heubeck, Kleine Schriften zur griechischen Sprache und Literatur,
Erlanger Forschungen, series A, vol. 33 (Erlangen 1984)
Himmelmann 1997 N. Himmelmann, Tieropfer in der griechischen Kunst, Nordrhein-
Westfälische Akademie der Wissenschaften G349 (Opladen 1997)
IG Inscriptiones Graecae
IstMitt Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung Istanbul
Jdl Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts
JHS Journal of Hellenic Studies
KlPauly Der Kleine Pauly: Lexikon der Antike, vols. 1–5 (Munich 1964–75)
Kokkorou-Alewras G. Kokkorou-Alewras, “Die archaische naxische Bildhauerei,” Antike
Plastik 24 (1996): 37–138, pls. 9–55
Kotinos H. Froning, T. Hölscher, and H. Mielsch, Kotinos: Festschrift für Erika
Simon (Mainz 1992)
Kraay/Hirmer C. M. Kraay and M. Hirmer, Greek Coins (London 1966)
Kron, Phylenheroen U. Kron, Die zehn attischen Phylenheroen, AM Beiheft 5 (Berlin 1976)
LIMC Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae, vols. 1–8 (Zurich 1981–97)
Long, Twelve Gods Ch. R. Long, The Twelve Gods of Greece and Rome (Leiden/New York 1987)
Lullies/Hirmer R. Lullies and M. Hirmer, Griechische Plastik, 4th ed. (Munich 1979)
Maaß, Prohedrie M. Maaß, Die Prohedrie des Dionysostheaters in Athen, Vestigia: Beiträge
zur alten Geschichte 15 (Munich 1972)
Marinatos/Hirmer Sp. Marinatos and M. Hirmer, Crete and Mycenae (New York 1960)
Metzger, Imagerie H. Metzger, Recherches sur l’Imagerie Athénienne (Paris 1965)
Meuli, Schriften K. Meuli, Gesammelte Schriften, 2 vols. (Basel/Stuttgart 1975)
ML W. H. Roscher, ed., Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen
Mythologie, 6 vols. (Leipzig 1884–1937)
Moustaka A. Moustaka, Kulte und Mythen auf thessalischen Münzen (Würzburg
1983)
MusHelv Museum Helveticum
Nilsson M. P. Nilsson, Geschichte der griechischen Religion, vol. 1, Handbuch der
Altertumswissenschaft 5.2, 2nd ed. (Munich 1955)
Nilsson, GF M. P. Nilsson, Griechische Feste von religiöser Bedeutung mit Ausschluß der
attischen (Leipzig 1906)
Nilsson, MMR M. P. Nilsson, The Minoan-Mycenaean Religion and Its Survival in Greek
Religion (Lund 1927)
348 Abbreviations

ÖJh Jahreshefte des Österreichischen Archäologischen Instituts

Otto, Götter W. F. Otto, Die Götter Griechenlands, 3rd ed. (Frankfurt 1947)
Overbeck, SQ J. Overbeck, Die antiken Schriftquellen zur Geschichte der bildenden
Künste bei den Griechen (Leipzig 1868)
Parke, Oracles H. W. Parke, The Oracles of Zeus (Oxford 1967)
Pingiatoglou 1981 S. Pingiatoglou, Eileithyia (Würzburg 1981)
Preller, Gr. Myth. L. Preller, Griechische Mythologie, vol. 1: Theogonie und Götter (Leipzig
1854)
Prinz F. Prinz, Gründungsmythen und Sagenchronologie, Zetemata 72 (Munich
1979)
RA Revue Archéologique
Raubitschek 1949 A. E. Raubitschek, Dedications from the Athenian Akropolis (Cambridge,
MA, 1949)
RE Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft (Stuttgart
1894–1978)
Reinhardt, Ilias K. Reinhardt, Die Ilias und ihr Dichter (Gottingen 1961)
RGVV Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten
RhM Rheinisches Museum für Philologie
Ridgway I B. S. Ridgway, The Archaic Style in Greek Sculpture (Princeton 1977)
Ridgway II B. S. Ridgway, Fifth Century Styles in Greek Sculpture (Princeton 1981)
RM Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Römische Abteilung
Robertson, HGA M. Robertson, A History of Greek Art (Cambridge 1975)
SBHeid Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften
Schefold 1993 K. Schefold, Götter- und Heldensagen der Griechen in der früh- und
hocharchaischen Kunst (Munich 1993)
Schmidt, TKWü E. Schmidt, Martin-von-Wagner-Museum der Universität Würzburg,
Katalog der antiken Terrakotten, vol. 1: Die figürlichen Terrakotten (Mainz
1994)
Shapiro, ACT H. A. Shapiro, Art and Cult under the Tyrants in Athens (Mainz 1989)
Simon, Festivals E. Simon, Festivals of Attica (Madison 1983)
Simon, Führer E. Simon, ed., Führer durch die Antikenabteilung des Martin-von-Wagner-
Museums der Universität Würzburg (Mainz 1975)
Simon, GdR E. Simon, Die Götter der Römer, 2nd ed. (Munich 1998)
Simon/Hirmer E. Simon, M. Hirmer, and A. Hirmer, Die griechischen Vasen, 2nd ed.
(Munich 1981)
Stella 1965 L. A. Stella, La civiltà micenea nei documenti contemporanei (Rome 1965)
 Abbreviations 349

Stibbe 1996 C. M. Stibbe, Das andere Sparta, Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 65
(Mainz 1996)
Strasburger, Lexikon G. Strasburger, Lexikon zur frühgriechischen Geschichte (Zürich/Munich
1984)
Strommenger/Hirmer E. Strommenger and M. Hirmer, Fünf Jahrtausende Mesopotamien
(Munich 1963)
Theocharis, Neol. Gr. D. R. Theocharis, ed., Neolithic Greece (Athens 1973)
Thompson/Wycherley, Agora H. A. Thompson and R. E. Wycherley, The Athenian Agora 14 (Princeton
1972)
Toepffer, AG I. Toepffer, Attische Genealogie (Berlin 1889)
Travlos J. Travlos, Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Athens (New York 1971)
TrGF Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, 4 vols.: vol. 1, 2nd ed., ed. B. Snell
(Göttingen 1986); vol. 2, ed. R. Kannicht and B. Snell (1981); vol. 3, ed. S.
Radt (1985); vol. 4, ed. S. Radt (1977)
Ventris/Chadwick M. Ventris and J. Chadwick, Documents in Mycenaean Greek (Cambridge
1959)
Vermeule E. T. Vermeule, Götterkult, Archaeologia Homerica 3, ch. V (Göttingen
1974)
Vidali, Delphin St. Vidali, Archaische Delphindarstellungen (Würzburg 1997)
WdF Wege der Forschung (Darmstadt)
Wehgartner I. Wehgartner, Attisch weißgrundige Keramik (Mainz 1983)
West, Theog. Comm. M. L. West, ed., Hesiod Theogony, with Prolegomena and Commentary
(Oxford 1966)
Wide, LK S. Wide, Lakonische Kulte (Leipzig 1893)
Wilamowitz, Gl. Hell. U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Der Glaube der Hellenen, 3rd ed., 2
vols. (Darmstadt 1959)
ZPE Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik
 Notes

INTRODUCTION
1. N. Himmelmann, Antike Götter im Mittelalter, Trierer Winckelmannsprogram 7 (Mainz 1986). Him-
melman focuses on miniature representations of ancient gods with “negative” connotations that were
meant to illustrate pagan idolatry. He shows conclusively that these “graven images” were not connected
with ancient iconography, as previously supposed. Instead, a naked or near-naked standard type had been
restored with medieval attributes: e.g., Jupiter with a snake or Neptune with an urn. Cf. 13: “In contrast to
Classical Antiquity, medieval art represented all the gods in the nude in order to mark them as idols.”
2. Illustration of the early fifteenth century A.D., which, along with various tapestries of the period,
refers to the Trojan saga. Paris, Louvre RF2114. M. Scherer, The Legends of Troy (New York/London 1963),
101, fig. 81. The statue of Apollo stands on a high base, similar to the ones generally used for pagan idols
(see also Himmelmann, Antike Götter [n. 1], pls. 7–9). In contrast, this Apollo is not naked but fitted out
in knightly fashion—a “positive” sign. This illustration of the Trojan epic is a product (like many others in
Scherer’s book) of the (Burgundian) International Style, in which the pagan was Christianized through the
iconography of chivalry. One thinks also of the “Order of the Golden Fleece” in E. Panofsky, Renaissance
and Renascences in Western Art (Stockholm 1960), 161.
3. Dürer, Apollo as Sun God, London, British Mus., drawing, SL.5218.183. This was a preliminary sketch
for an engraving, as the mirror-image writing in the sun’s disk shows. E. Panofsky, Albrecht Dürer (Prince­
ton 1955), 86f., fig. 119; E. Panofsky, Meaning in the Visual Arts (Garden City, NY, 1955), 257ff., fig. 76. Despite
the reference to ancient corporeality, the scepter in the god’s hand, which identifies him as “Kosmokrator”
(see Panofsky), is a “medieval” legacy. This is also the case with the nudity of Diana-Luna, who in ancient
representations is always clothed. See Himmelmann, Antike Götter (n. 1), 13f.
4. J. J. Winckelmann, Geschichte der Kunst des Alterthums (Rome 1763), book 11, ch. 3.
5. Harrison, “Charites,” 191–203, pls. 151–57.
6. K. Reinhardt, Vermächtnis der Antike (Göttingen 1960), 25f.
7. Nilsson 11. His theory (389) that the functions of the ancient gods would have become more special-
ized over the course of their development is easily refuted by reference to ancient Roman religion, in which
an abundance of separate gods exists from the very beginning.

351
352 Notes to Pages 7–12

8. Reinhardt, Vermächtnis (n. 6), 378.

9. Two essays by F. Creuzer were republished in Die Eröffnung des Zugangs zum Mythos, ed. K. Kerényi
(Darmstadt 1967). See especially 62–64 for the splendid critique of Creuzer’s “Symbolik und Mythologie,”
by K. O. Müller. For Müller see R. Lullies and W. Schering, eds., Archäologenbildnisse (Mainz 1988), 23f.,
and also Creuzer (14f.) and Gerhard (20–22). Since Preller was not an archaeologist, he is not included in
this book.
10. V. Scully, The Earth, the Temple and the Gods (New Haven 1962) tried to extend Philippson’s
approach, with somewhat peculiar results. See the review by H. A. Thompson, Art Bulletin 45 (1963): 276ff.
The new study of R. G. Buxton, Imaginary Greece: The Contexts of Mythology (Cambridge 1994), 80–113,
is important.
11. See Meuli, Schriften, vols. 1 and 2. The same holds true for the works of W. Burkert and F. Graf cited
here, which build upon Meuli’s approach.
12. Reprinted in R. Herbig, ed., Vermächtnis der antiken Kunst (Heidelberg 1950), 11–70, and again in
R. Hampe, “Die Homerische Welt im Lichte der neuesten Ausgrabungen,” Gymnasium 63 (1956): 1–57,
pls. 1–16.

ZEUS
D. Aebli, Klassischer Zeus (Munich 1971).
K. W. Arafat, Classical Zeus: A Study in Ancient Art and Literature (Oxford 1990).
Ch. Augé / P. Linant de Bellefonds, “Zeus in peripheria orientali,” in LIMC 8 (1997), 384–88, pls. 242–57.
W. Bröcker, Theologie der Ilias (Frankfurt 1975).
Burkert 125–31. Cf. review by B. Gladigow, GGA 235 (1983): 1–16.
A. B. Cook, Zeus: A Study in Ancient Religion, 3 vols. (Cambridge 1914–40).
Nilsson 389–427.
Parke, Oracles.
H. Schwabl, “Zeus, Part I: Epiklesen,” in RE 10.A (1972), 253–375; “Zeus, Part II,” in RE 15 (1978), 994–1411,
1441–81 (addendum).
Shapiro, ACT, 112–17.
E. Simon, “Zeus, Part III: Archaeologische Zeugnisse,” in RE Suppl. 15 (1978), 1411–41.
M. Tiverios (with E. Voutiras, I. Leventi, V. Machaira, P. Karanastassi, E. Ralli-Photopoulou, S. Kremydi-
Sicilianou), “Zeus,” in LIMC 8 (1997), 310–74, pls. 218–42.
Vermuele 80–82.
R. Vollkommer, “Zeus (in Anatolien),” in LIMC 8 (1997), 374–84.
K. Ziegler, “Zeus,” in ML 6 (1924–37), 563–702 (first section of entry by E. Fehrle, based on manuscript by
O. Gruppe).

1. Nilsson 390f.; Vermeule 80–82; Burkert 125f.

2. This made it easy for the cult of Zeus to spread to the East during the Hellenistic period, which this
book treats only in passing. See Augé/Linant de Bellefonds; Vollkommer; A. Invernizzi, “Zeus in Meso­
potamia,” in LIMC 7 (1997), 388–92; M. Pfrommer, “Zeus in Ägypten,” ibid., 392–95.
3. H. B. Güterbock, “The Hittite Version of the Hurrian Kumarbi Myths,” AJA 52 (1948): 123–34;
F. Dornseiff, Antike und alter Orient, 2nd ed. (Leipzig 1959), 35–95; E. von Schuler, “Königtum im Himmel,”
in Haussig, VO, 182. See discussion of ancient Near Eastern texts in West, Theog. Comm., 18–31; bibliogra-
phy on “Hesiod and the East,” ibid., 106f.
 Notes to Pages 13–19 353

4. West, Theog. Comm., 28f.; U. Hölscher, “Anaximander und die Anfänge der Philosophie (II),”
Hermes 81 (1953): 406–10.
5. Nilsson, MMR, 461–85; Nilsson 319–24. The Hittite divinities of childhood are not included there.
For these, from an archaeological perspective, see J. V. Canby, “The Child in Hittite Iconography,” in
Ancient Anatolia: Essays in Honor of Machteld J. Mellink (Madison 1986), 54–69. Here we should recall
that the Cretan Rhea corresponds to the Anatolian Kybele. For this see M. J. Mellink, “Comments on a
Cult Relief of Kybele from Gordion,” in Beiträge zur Altertumskunde Kleinasiens: Festschrift Kurt Bittel
(Mainz 1983), 349–60; F. Naumann, Die Ikonographie der Kybele in der phrygischen und der griechischen
Kunst, IstMitt Suppl. 28 (Tübingen 1983), 17–100; E. Simon, “Kybele” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 744–50
and passim.
6. The cult caves of Crete are compiled in West, Theog. Comm., 297f. See also Burkert 24–26; Simon,
“Zeus,” 1416, with references. For the Cretan “goat-nymph,” Amaltheia, the wet-nurse of the young Zeus
when he was threatened by his father, see E. Simon, “Amalthea,” Antike und Abendland 45 (1999): 66–74.
7. Nilsson, MMR, 484 and passim; Nilsson 869, s.v. Vegetationskult.
8. Simon, “Zeus,” 1415–19; B. C. Dietrich in Buchholz, Bronzezeit, 478–98, on Greek religion in general
and how Zeus is inextricably tied into it.
9. Ventris/Chadwick 125f., 287; on Knossos, 306; Vermeule 60, 62, 66 (Knossos and Pylos); Stella 1965,
240–43.
10. Parke, Oracles, 20–33.
11. Parke, Oracles, 94–98. The excavations brought forth rich finds of Neolithic potsherds, which are
connected stylistically with Thessaly. Above these prehistoric layers came an eighth-century B.C. Geo­
metric layer. When W. Ekschmitt writes (AW 29 [1998]: 13) that the Northwest Greeks immigrated and
there founded the cult of Zeus “in the 12th c. B.C.,” this is pure (and outdated) speculation.
12. Ch. Peschek, Germania 50 (1972): 29ff.; E. Simon, “Der frühe Zeus,” Acta of the 2nd International
Colloquium on Aegean Prehistory (Athens 1972), 157–65; for Krannon see Moustaka 164. The phenomenon
of the ravens of Krannon has been recently reviewed by Gudrun Schmidt, Rabe und Krähe in der Antike:
Studien zur archäologischen und literarischen Überlieferung (Wiesbaden 2002).
13. Parke, Oracles, 164–93, with treatment of both Olympian priestly clans.
14. W. Krämer, “Prähistorische Brandopferplätze,” in Helvetia Antiqua: Festschrift Emil Vogt (Zürich
1966), 111–22; Burkert 51.
15. For the prehistoric cult in Olympia, which corresponds to that of Cronus, see H.-V. Hermann in
Buchholz, Bronzezeit, 426–36.
16. For the Cronia and Saturnalia festivals, see Meuli, Schriften, 2:1040–43. For more recent literature
on the Saturnalia, see Simon, GdR, 193f., 283.
17. Nilsson 511; also West, Theog. Comm., who is influenced by Nilsson.
18. See Shapiro, ACT; reviewed by E. Simon, Gnomon 64 (1992): 155–61.
19. D. E. Birge, L. H. Kraynak, and S. G. Miller, Excavations at Nemea, vol. 1 (Berkeley/Oxford 1992).
20. Travlos 402f.; Shapiro, ACT, 112. For the sanctuary of Cronus and Rhea located in the area, Pausa-
nias 1.18.7.
21. R. Olmos et al., “Atlas,” in LIMC 3 (1986), 2–16.
22. Berve/Gruben/Hirmer 121.
23. E. Buschor and R. Hamann, Die Skulpturen des Zeustempels zu Olympia (Marburg 1924), 25. The
eruption of the battle between Lapiths and centaurs at the wedding celebration takes place not in the Pelo-
ponnesus but in Thessaly. This northern Greek region was united with Olympia through the race of the
Aiolidae. Salmoneus went from there to Elis. See E. Simon, “Salmoneus,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 653–55.
354 Notes to Pages 19–27

24. O. Weinrich, “Xenios,” in ML 6 (1924/37), 522–25.

25. Berlin 2538. Beazley, ARV2 1269.5 (Codrus Painter); R. Hampe, Die Gleichnisse Homers und die
Bildkunst seiner Zeit (Tübingen 1952), 39, pl. 23; Kron, Phylenheroen, pl. 15.2.
26. This is today—despite the divergent reconstruction in the new museum of Olympia—the nearly
universal view, and rightly so. See Robertson, HGA, 277f.; Lullies/Hirmer 72; H.-V. Herrmann, ed., Die
Olympia-Skulpturen, Wege der Forschung 577 (Darmstadt 1987), 125–48; H. Kyrieleis, “Zeus and Pelops in
the East Pediment of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia,” in Buitron-Oliver 1997, 13–27; E. Simon, Ausgewählte
Schriften, vol. 1 (Mainz 1998), no. 7.
27. The conjecture of Kyrieleis (in Buitron-Oliver 1997, 22) that Zeus touches the hem of the garment
with the right hand “to suggest an act of unveiling . . . an epiphany” fits well with the lightning bolt in his
other hand. As wielder of the lightning bolt he is usually naked.
28. On the lance as symbol of sovereignty, A. Alföldi, “Hasta-Summa Imperii,” AJA 63 (1959): 1–27;
Kyrieleis (in Buitron-Oliver 1997) 20n25.
29. Pausanias 9.40.11. For Zeus at Aigion see below p. 29.
30. Helmets, shields, armor, and greaves fill volumes of excavation reports from Olympia. For Zeus as
granter of victory, see Ziegler 691f. The Zeus of Phidias held a goddess of victory in the right hand.
31. For Oenomaus on the east pediment, see Kyrieleis (in Buitron-Oliver 1997), 20; in general, I. Tri-
antis, “Oinomaus,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 19–23.
32. Aeschylus, Agamemnon 160–83; L. Bergson, “The Hymn to Zeus in Aeschylus’ Agamemnon,” Eranos
65 (1967): 12–24.
33. Nilsson, 366f., pl. 25.1; P. Dikaios, Enkomi II (Mainz 1971), 918–25; W. Güntner in Kotinos, 6–9, pl.
1.3f; D. Lenz, Vogeldarstellungen in der ägäischen und zyprischen Vasenmalerei des 12.–9. Jhs. V. Chr., Inter-
nationale Archäologie 27 (Espelkamp 1995), 171–73.
34. Simon, “Zeus,” 1417f. For the best illustrations (color), see Marinatos/Hirmer pls. XXVII–XXIX;
Buchholz/Karageorghis 82f., no. 1065a–b. W. Pötscher (Aspekte und Probleme der Minoischen Religion
[Hildesheim/Zürich/New York 1990] 171–91, and Klio 79 [1997]: 315f.) interprets (unconvincingly, in my
view) the background colors of the frieze as indications of the time of day; Carter/Morris 294f., fig. 18.7A–C
(J. B. Carter); H. Brand, Griechische Musikanten im Kult von der Frühzeit bis zum Beginn der Spätklassik
(Dettelbach 2000), 19ff.
35. Simon, “Zeus,” 1420f., with references up to 1978, of which H. Payne, JHS 53 (1933): 292; Cook III
1150; and Fittschen 120 with n. 590 can be cited in particular. See also Schefold 1993, 46, fig. 17.
36. E. Kunze, Olympiabericht 7 (Berlin 1961), 138–41; with reservations, Herrmann in Buchholz,
Bronzezeit, 436. For a different interpretation, as images of the dedicators, see R. Hampe, Gymnasium 72
(1965): 76f.; R. Hampe, GGA 215 (1963): 144f.; Simon, “Zeus,” 1419f.
37. Boston, Mus. of Fine Arts 95.12. H. Payne, Protokorinthische Vasenmalerei (repr. Mainz 1974), 13, pl.
11, 1–5; Fittschen 113, 119–23 (an unconvincing attempt to explain away the bundle of lightning bolts and
scepter and to see instead Heracles in battle with a centaur); Schefold 1993, 45, fig. 16 (Zeus and Typhon);
Carter/Morris 351–54, fig. 20, 16d–e (J. L. Benson): a masterpiece of the Protocorinthian Ajax Painter,
certainly Zeus with lightning bolt.
38. E. von Schuler, “Hauptwettergott,” in Haussig, VO, 209, pl. II, fig. 2.2. For the storm god and dragon
god Illuyanka, cf. a relief from Malatya, ibid., 177, with pl. III, fig. 3; Akurgal/Hirmer pl. 104; M. J. Mellink,
Iranica Antiqua 6 (Leiden 1966), 81, pl. 14.3.
39. Munich, Antikensammlungen 596; Simon/Hirmer pl. XVIII; Schefold 1993, 198, fig. 198. The triple-
bodied monster of the pediment of the Old Temple of Athena should also be identified as Typhon; see
 Notes to Pages 27–35 355

Lullies/Hirmer pl. 25; Shapiro ACT, 21–24, pl. 5c; U. Höckmann, AA (1991): 11–23 (convincing restoration);
skeptical: O. Touchefeu-Meynier, “Typhon,” in LIMC 8 (1997), 150, no. 25.
40. K. O. Müller, Orchomenos und die Minyer (Breslau 1820; 2nd ed. 1844).
41. Lullies/Hirmer 48, ill. 5 (drawing of the whole); Ridgway I: 191–96; Schefold 1993, 174–78, fig. 181d
(identified as Zeus and the Titans). For the whole pediment, see below pp. 191–92 and fig. 163.
42. Nilsson 322.
43. Athens, Nat. Mus. 16546. K. A. Neugebauer, Die griechischen Bronzen der klassischen Zeit und des
Hellenismus (Berlin 1951), 3–6, pls. 2f., 13, 3.
44. Olympia, Mus. K1293. E. Kunze-Goette in Olympiabericht 7 (Berlin 1961), 196–206, pl. 85. A. Kossatz-
Deißmann, “Hera,” in LIMC 4 (1988), 687, no. 237.
45. Paris, Louvre E668. C. M. Stibbe, Lakonische Vasenmaler des 6. Jhs. v. Chr. (Amsterdam/London
1972), 31, pl. 15, 3 (Naukratis Painter); Simon/Hirmer pl. 37 (below); Tiverios 321, no. 45, pl. 221.
46. Amphora, Munich, Antikensammlungen 2304. Beazley, ARV2 220.1 (Nikoxenos Painter). See also
A. Kossatz-Deißmann, “Hera,” in LIMC 4 (1988), 685, no. 211, pl. 417.
47. Tiverios 327, no. 89, with reference to Overbeck, SQ, nos. 692–754.
48. W. H. Gross, RM 70 (1963): 3–19. For Zeus as wielder of the thunderbolt, see Tiverios 320, nos. 35–37
(Archaic), 324f. (Classical).
49. J. Liegle, Der Zeus des Phidias (Berlin 1952). For coins with the Phidian statue of Zeus, see Tiverios
366, no. 497, pl. 240.
50. W. Schiering et al., Die Werkstatt des Phidias in Olympia, Olympische Forschungen 18 (Berlin 1991).
51. F. Eichler, ÖJh 45 (1960): 5–22; reconstruction, 16f., fig. 11f.
52. R. Hampe, Ein frühattischer Grabfund (Mainz 1960), 64.

HERA
Burkert 131–35.
S. Eitrem, “Hera,” in RE 8.1 (1912), 369–403 and RE Suppl. 3 (1918), 906–9.
J. de La Genière, ed., Héra: Images, espaces, cultes, Collection de Centre Jean Bérard 17 (Naples 1997).
R. Häußler, Hera und Juno: Wandlungen und Beharrung einer Göttin, Schriften der Wissenschaftlichen
Gesellschaft an der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt 10 (Stuttgart 1995).
A. Kossatz-Deißmann, “Hera,” in LIMC 4 (1988), 659–719, pls. 405–35.
Nilsson 427–33.
H. Payne, Perachora I (Oxford 1940).
W. Pötscher, Hera: Eine Strukturanalyse im Vergleich mit Athena (Darmstadt 1987).
W. H. Roscher, “Hera,” in ML 1.2 (1886/90), 2075–2134.
A. Schachter, Cults of Boeotia, Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, Suppl. 38.1 (London 1981).
Strasburger, Lexikon 171, s.v. Hera.
Vermeule 82f.

1. J. J. Winckelmann, Geschichte der Kunst des Alterthums (Rome 1763), book 5, ch. 2. The cup, Munich
2685 (from Vulci, Hera labeled by an inscription): Beazley, ARV2 837.9 (Sabouroff Painter); Wehrgartner
70, no. 76.
2. K. Ph. Moritz, Götterlehre oder mythologische Dichtungen der Alten (repr. Lahr 1948), 86.
3. Letter of January 6, 1787. J. W. von Goethe, Gedenkausgabe der Werke, Briefe und Gespräche, ed.
E. Beutler, vol. 19 (Zürich 1948), 51; E. Grumach, Goethe und die Antike (Potsdam 1949), 535; the second
citation is from the Italian Journey.
356 Notes to Pages 36–41

4. Schillers Werke, ed. L. Bellermann, vol. 7 (Leipzig 1895), 327f.

5. A. Rumpf, Antonia Augusta (Berlin 1941); Kossatz-Deißmann 674f., no. 131, pl. 411; E. La Rocca,
“Iuno,” in LIMC 5 (1990), 843f., no. 243.
6. Preller, Gr. Myth. 104 (the quotation has been somewhat abbreviated).
7. B. Hederich, “Iuno,” in Gründliches mythologisches Lexikon (Leipzig 1770; repr. Darmstadt 1967),
1400. Compare E. Panofsky, The Iconography of Correggio’s Camera di San Paolo (London 1961), 81–88.
8. F. G. Welcker, Griechische Götterlehre, vol. 1 (Göttingen 1857), 377.
9. B. Snell, Gesammelte Schriften (Göttingen 1966), 158f.
10. Roscher 2087–98.
11. Nilsson 429; similarly, Roscher 2105.
12. H. Schliemann, Mykenae (Leipzig 1878; repr. Darmstadt 1964), 117–20.
13. For Hera as Dorian goddess, see E. Kirsten and W. Kraiker, Griechenlandkunde (Heidelberg 1967),
337. For Hera in Linear B, see Ventris/Chadwick 126; Stella 1965, 230f.; Burkert 43f.
14. Vermeule 135–38 (Perachora), 138–44 (Samos).
15. For the house model from Perachora, see Payne 34ff.; Drerup, ArchHom, 72, pl. 2; T. G. Schattner,
Griechische Hausmodelle, AM Suppl. 15 (Berlin 1990), 33–35, no. 6, pl. 4 (reconstruction: 174, fig. 47);
M. Boss, Nürnberger Blätter zur Archäologie 10 (1993/94): 61–66 (divergent reconstruction). M. Weber goes
against the prevailing reconstructions in “Das Hausmodell der Hera Akraia in Perachora,” AA (1998):
365–71. The alleged “double column” for the projecting roof is actually the remains of two statues that were
erected in front of the apsidal house. The votive offering stems not from the end of the ninth century, as
Schattner writes, but from the seventh century. For the model house from the Argive Heraeum, see Drerup,
ArchHom, 70f., fig. 55, pl. 3a; Schattner, Hausmodelle, 22–26, fig. 1, pl. 1. For the limestone house model
from the Heraeum on Samos, see Drerup, 72, pl. 1; Schattner, 40–84, nos. 10–43, pls. 3–22.
16. Wilamowitz, Gl. Hell., 1:232; Nilsson 350, 428.
17. The latter suggestion is found in F. R. Schöder, Gymnasium 63 (1956): 57–78, while the etymology
“she who is ripe for marriage,” which Pötscher defended in various writings, certainly has many supporters
as well (see Häußler 86, with references). This is but “one possibility,” says Burkert, 131. Pötscher’s picture
of the early Hera, which developed from this etymology and defined her too one-sidedly as a goddess of
marriage (together with “the hero ripe for marriage”), is summed up in Kossatz-Deißmann 659. P. Lévêque
draws from the various studies the conclusion that Hera is “l’une des déesses les plus puissantes, les plus
riches d’attrait de tout le panthéon hellénique . . . une déesse totale” (in de La Genière 267–70).
18. On Hera and Dionysus in Olympia, see below pp. 56f. For Rhea in Olympia see Berve/Gruben/
Hirmer 119, fig. 8 (Metroon). The connection between the Olympian and the Aeolic Hera through the
figure of the hero Salmoneus was still unknown when earlier editions of this book were published. See
n. 23 in the chapter on Zeus, and E. Simon in de La Genière 83–86.
19. The hill fortress of Argos is named Larisa, like the city in Thessaly. In Lerna in the Argolid, as also
in Sparta, Neolithic idols were discovered, just as they were in the prehistoric excavations in Thessaly. See
Theocharis, Neol. Gr., figs. 200, 225f.; Buchholz/Karageorghis 98f.
20. On the Aeolic Hera, the goddess in prehistoric Boeotia and Thessaly, see E. Simon in de La Genière
84–92; Schachter.
21. For Argonauts as founders of the Heraeum of Samos, see Pausanias 7.4.4. For Jason as founder of
the Temple of Hera Argoa at Silaris (Foce del Sele), see Strabo 6.1.1. For new excavations in this sanctuary
see J. de La Genière in de La Genière 173–79, with references. For ship models as votive offerings for Hera,
see F. de Polignac, ibid., 113–22.
 Notes to Pages 41–49 357

22. Payne 32ff.

23. C. Waldstein, The Argive Heraeum, 2 vols. (Boston/New York 1902–5); “Zur Frühgeschichte des
Argivischen Heraions,” in Friedländer, Studien, 473–80. For new archaeological investigations at the site,
see M.-F. Billot in de La Genière 11–81, with references.
24. See also n. 13 above.
25. C. W. Blegen, Prosymna: The Helladic Settlement Preceding the Argive Heraeum (Cambridge 1937).
A road leads there from Mycenae (de La Genière 117, fig. 2). The place was destroyed soon after 1200 B.C.
according to the finds, like other places in the Argolid. See M.-F. Billot in de La Genière 13. The cults,
including the most important Argive cult, were surely not simply wiped out. K. Kilian shows how Myce-
naean cults can be detected with the help of the finds: “Mykenische Heiligtümer der Peloponnes,” in
Kotinos, 10–25.
26. H. Walter, Das griechische Heiligtum dargestellt am Heraion von Samos (Stuttgart 1990); cf. Pausanias
7.4.4.
27. Roscher 2081; for the coins see Kossatz-Deißmann 681, nos. 187–93, pl. 415.
28. For the early Io: E. Simon, AA (1985): 265–80; see n. 14 in the chapter on Hermes.
29. L. Kahil, “Proitides,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 522–25. Of those listed there, nos. 1–3 should be given ques-
tion marks, while nos. 4–7 securely show this myth. See also below n. 63 in the chapter on Dionysus.
30. Roscher 2076f. (Argos), 2078 (Aegina).
31. M. Cipriani in de La Genière 211–25, with references, of which the reports on the excavations of
P. C. Sestieri should be emphasized. G. Giannelli, Culti e miti della Magna Grecia, 2nd ed. (Florence 1963),
is outdated with regard to Hera.
32. For the shrines of Hera in Croton: R. Spadea in de La Genière 235–59. For her cult in Elea/Velia,
see G. Tocco Sciarelli in de La Genière 227–34.
33. London, British Mus. 1884.0614.31. A. Rumpf, “Die Religion der Griechen,” in Bilderatlas zur Reli-
gionsgeschichte 13/14, ed. H. Haas (Leipzig 1928), fig. 123.
34. The name Italia previously referred to what is today Calabria and Lucania. See the map of “Italia”
in Enciclopedia Virgiliana 3 (Florence 1987), 37. For the history of the name see D. Musti, ibid., 34–40.
Sophocles is referring to these regions when in Antigone 1118f. he says of Dionysus, “you who protect
famed Italy.” The derivation of the name Italia from vitulus (calf) was rejected from the standpoint of
modern scientific etymology by G. Radke, in KlPauly 2:1483. In our context, however, the ancient folk
etymology is still rather important and is richly attested by written and pictorial evidence (coins). See
F. Canciani, “Italia,” in LIMC 5 (1990), 806–10. For the coinage from the time of the Social Wars, see
ibid., nos. 1–8. Also, the animal at the feet of Italia on the Ara Pacis (ibid., no. 10) is not a cow, but, on
account of the dewlap, a young steer. For Bacchylides (11.30) the Archaic colony Metapontum lies in “calf-
nourishing Italy.”
35. For the dating of the voyage of Kolaios, see B. Freyer-Schauenburg, Madrider Mitteilungen 7 (1966):
89–108.
36. U. Jantzen, Griechische Greifenkessel (Berlin 1955); H.-V. Herrmann, Olympische Forschungen 6
(1966); 11 (1979); cf. also E. Akurgal in Kotinos, 33–52.
37. Payne 187–90, 257–61, pls. 36, 132, no. 3; Waldstein, Argive Heraeum (n. 23) 61–63, fig. 31. Bundles
of metal spits have been found in other shrines dedicated to Hera. They could be interpreted as reminders
of a sacrificial meal. See U. Kron, “Zum Hypogäum von Paestum,” Jdl 86 (1971): 17–148; A. E. Furtwängler,
“Zur Deutung der Obeloi im Lichte samischer Neufunde,” in Tainia: Festschrift R. Hampe (Mainz 1980),
81–98.
358 Notes to Pages 49–58

38. Simon, GdR, 104; on the Capitoline Triad (as I shall refer to it here), 107f.; M. Dennert, “Moneta,”
in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 852–54.
39. The principal sites of Hera’s cult in the Argolid—Mycenae, Tiryns, and Argos—were also cult
places of Athena. A temple was built for her in the Archaic period in Tiryns and in Mycenae at the site
of the Bronze Age citadel. In Aigion too, where her cult extends back into pre-Dorian times, that is, in
Achaean Argos, the temples of Hera and Athena stood next to one another (Pausanias 7.23.9), just as in
Poseidonia-Paestum, which thus also stands in an old Achaean tradition. This can be shown in Sybaris as
well. See Giannelli, Culti (n. 31), 101–7. For Hera and Athena see also Pötscher.
40. Pausanias 2.5.5; 1.24.5.
41. So perhaps on the fibula Berlin 31013a. Hampe, Sagenbilder 11, no. 62a, pl. 4.2; E. Simon, “Eine
spätgeometrische böotische Fibel im Martin-von-Wagner-Museum,” in Agathos daimōn: Mythes et cultes;
Études d’iconographie en l’honneur de Lilly Kahil, ed. P. Linant de Bellefonds, J. Balty, and L. Kahil (Athens
2000), 453–63. For models of ships as dedications to Hera, see n. 21 above.
42. Zeus as sky god could indeed change himself into a bird (swan, eagle, etc.) at will. The story of the
cuckoo, whose “egoistic” behavior was well known to early peoples, characterized him as “intruder in a
strange nest.” See H. Gossen and A. Steier in RE 11.2 (1922), 2099–2103. See also E. Simon in de La Genière
84–85.
43. The carving was 19.1 cm high. E. Akurgal, Orient und Okzident (Baden-Baden 1966), 205, fig. 64;
Vermeule pl. VIIIe; Kossatz-Deißmann 683f., no. 202, pl. 415; Schefold 1993, 57, fig. 33.
44. Athens, Nat. Mus. 2869. Kossatz-Deißmann 670, no. 97a, pl. 408.
45. Palermo, Mus. Arch. 3921B. Kossatz-Deißmann 684, no. 207, pl. 415.
46. For the Hera of Polyclitus, see Kossatz-Deißmann 673, no. 111. For the coin of Argos with Hera’s
head, see Kraay/Hirmer pl. 161, no. 517; for the coin of Knossos, pl. 165, no. 544.
47. For the cult statue of Hera of Samos on late coins (fig. 50, coin of Trajan Decius, A.D. 249–51), see
Kossatz-Deißmann 678, no. 156.
48. Samos, Vathy Mus. 5476. Wooden statuette of Hera with pyleon. Hampe/Simon 230, figs. 349–51;
Kossatz-Deißmann 670, no. 92, pl. 408.
49. Lullies/Hirmer pl. 19; Kossatz-Deißmann 670f., no. 98, with references and discussion of the view
that the head is that of a sphinx (for example, U. Sinn, AM 99 [1984]: 77–87). For counterarguments
see Häußler 48–50. No Archaic architectural sculpture with so finely worked a surface is known to me.
This is not a question of quality: the heads of the Corfu pediment, to which it is close in date (see details
in Lullies/Hirmer pls. 20–23), are also of high quality. The difference here is one of genre. The head in
Olympia was meant to be seen from closer up than a pedimental sculpture. Departures from axial sym-
metry, which some have tried to use as an argument, are characteristic of Archaic heads of various types.
The tendrils on the head were not only for sphinxes but were also typical for (free-standing) statues of
Hera. See nn. 47 and 50 here, which dispose of Sinn’s argument (AM, 80) that the tendril would only appear
on a relief. Stibbe 1996, 111–14, summarizes the Laconian style of head.
50. Cycladic relief amphora, Athens, Nat. Mus. 5898. P. Wolters, ArchEph (1892), 218ff., and Festschrift
Heinrich Wölfflin (Munich 1924), 168ff. Schefold 1993, 51, fig. 24, relies on the latter in interpreting the
goddess as giving birth, identifying her thereby as Leto. The interpretation of the goddess as Hera by
Ch. Kardara seems to me more likely to be correct: see “Problems of Hera’s Cult Images,” AJA 64 (1960):
343–58. In a birth scene one would expect the newborn child, or, in Leto’s case, both children, Apollo and
Artemis.
 Notes to Pages 58–65 359

51. Kossatz-Deißmann 666, no. 53f; Schmidt, TKWü 36f., no. 23, with parallels and references. For
individual poloi (likewise with tendrils), see Simon, Führer, 54 (Ch. Bauchhenß); E. Simon, “Hera und
die Nymphen,” in RA (1972), Festschrift Pierre Devambez, 205–14 = Ausgewählte Schriften, vol. 1 (Mainz
1998), no. 6.
52. E. Kirsten, “Plataiai,” in RE 20 (1950), 2319–25; Schachter 247–50; E. Simon in de La Genière 85f.
53. P. Blome, AM 100 (1985): 39–51, pl. 13; L. Kahil and N. Icard-Gianolio, “Leto,” in LIMC 6 (1992), 258,
no. 9; Schefold 1993, 50f., ill. 24. See also the discussion in Häußler 114f.
54. For Hera’s relationship to textile weaving, see G. Greco, “Des étoffes pour Héra,” in de La Genière
185–99.
55. Boston, Mus. of Fine Arts 529. Hampe, Sagenbilder 69f., pls. 36 (middle), 37; Schefold 1993, 141,
fig. 141a–b.
56. Kraay/Hirmer pls. 182f., no. 615 and passim.
57. Cup, Berlin F2536. Beazley, ARV2 1287, 1 (name vase of the Painter of Berlin 2536); “Paridis iudi-
cium,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 180, s.v., no. 39, pl. 113.
58. P. Lévêque, BCH 73 (1949): 125ff. For the lion with Cybele, see “Kybele,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda,
764f.
59. L. Bürchner, “Samos,” in RE 1.A (1914), 221f. For the continuity of the principal cult of Samos in the
Bronze Age, see B. C. Dietrich, “Die Kontinuität der Religion im ‘dunklen Zeitalter’ Griechenlands,” in
Buchholz, Bronzezeit, 487, 489.
60. Dietrich, “Kontinuität” (n. 59), proposed that the Ionic settlers brought the name Hera with them
and thus named a great nature goddess who had already been venerated there for a long time.
61. Marinatos/Hirmer pls. 138f.; Hampe/Simon 57, figs. 78 (with closed door), 79 (with open door). For
the interpretation see n. 62 below.
62. For Hera cult in Knossos, see Nilsson, GF, 56. Her head also appears on coins there (see fig. 49).
Since house models are typical votive offerings for Hera (see n. 15 above), the idol in the round building
model from Archanes can be interpreted as the goddess. Another possibility would be that this is the
Cretan mother of the gods, Rhea, who is closely associated with Hera in the history of religion and whose
Anatolian counterpart, Cybele, is typically represented in combination with a naiskos. See “Kybele,” in
LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 766. The lionlike animal on the roof is fitting for both (see n. 58 above).
63. AM 55 (1930): 1ff.
64. AM 68 (1953): 25ff. For a critique of this, see F. Oelmann, BJbb 157 (1957): 19f., 51f.
65. My interpretation in the following text is supported by Häußler 88–92, against the views of Pötscher.
In contrast M.-F. Billot (in de La Genière 27–31) does not see the cult statue in the “high columns” from
the Phoronis, but only the base on which the statue of Hera stood (as does Pötscher, 29, n. 171). In so doing
she misunderstands the mode of expression of the Archaic epic, as well as the richly attested tradition of
Greek aniconic cult statues. M. W. de Visser, Die nicht menschengestaltigen Götter der Griechen (Leiden
1903), collected the testimonia for these at the beginning of the twentieth century (see especially 71 and
218 on Hera); in addition, more recently, U. Kron, “Heilige Steine,” in Kotinos, 56–70.
66. Hellanikos of Lesbos, a contemporary of Thucydides, wrote three books about this. See Jacoby,
FGrHist 1:126–29, no. 4 (frr. 74–84).
67. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 1, 24, 163/164. On the Boeotian Dionysus in the form of a column,
see nn. 11–13, 20 in the chapter on Dionysus.
68. Nilsson, MMR, 201–24; Ch. Kardara, ArchEph (1966): 149–200.
360 Notes to Pages 65–74

69. Athens, Nat. Mus. Fig. 60: clay sealing from Mycenae; fig. 61; gold ring from a grave in the Her-
aeum. F. Matz and H. Biesantz, eds., Corpus der minoischen und mykenischen Siegel, vol. 1: Athen (Berlin
1964), nos. 19, 98 (A. Sakelleriou).
70. Oxford, Ashmolean Mus. AN1938.1126. Gold ring from Mycenae. V. E. G. Kenna, Cretan Seals
(Oxford 1960), 137, no. 340, pl. 23.
71. Ventris/Chadwick 126, 169, 289; Burkert 43–44.
72. On the sparse late Helladic finds, see P. Brize in de La Genière 124f. See also Vermeule 139.
73. P. Aström and B. Blomé, Opuscula Atheniensia 5 (1964): 159–91; E. F. Bloedow in Atti CIM II:
1159–66.

POSEIDON
H. Bulle, “Poseidon in der Kunst,” in ML 3.2 (1902–9), 2854–98.
Burkert 44, 136–39.
I. Chirassi, “Poseidon-Ensidaon . . . ,” in Atti CIM I: 73–117.
E. H. Meyer, “Poseidon,” in ML 3.2 (1902–9), 2788–2854.
Nilsson 444–52.
P. Philippson, Thessalische Mythologie (Zürich 1944), 25–64.
Prinz 462 (index), s.v. Poseidon.
C. J. Ruijgh, “La ‘Désse Mère’ dans les textes Mycéniens,” in Atti CIM II: 453–57.
Shapiro, ACT, 101–11.
E. Simon, “Poseidon,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 446–79, pls. 352–78.
Strasburger, Lexikon, 371–73, s.v. Poseidon.
Toepffer, AG, 332 (index), s.v. Poseidon.
Vermeule 62, 83–86.
E. Wüst, “Poseidon,” in RE 30.1 (1953), 446–532.

1. For genealogical heroes who were the sons of Poseidon, see, for example, the indices in Toepffer,
AG; Prinz; and Kron, Phylenheroen.
2. Meyer 2796–2831; Wilamowitz, Gl. Hell., 1:330; Nilsson 445f.
3. Ventris/Chadwick 439 (index), s.v. Poseidon; Chirassi; Vermeule 62; Burkert 44.
4. LIMC 1 (1981), 724–35, s.v. Amphitrite (S. Kaempf-Dimitriadou).
5. Preller, Gr. Myth., 355.
6. Nilsson 444f.; similarly, Burkert 136f. In contrast, Chirassi, 115, and Ruijgh, 454–56, fall back on the
etymology of P. Kretschmer, “consort of the earth mother”: Glotta 1 (1907): 27f. Cf. also H. Petersmann,
“Altgriechischer Mütterkult,” in Matronen und verwandte Gottheiten, Beiheft BJbb 44 (Cologne 1987),
171–99.
7. RE 7.A.1 (1939), 328–30, s.v. Trittoia (L. Ziehen); see n. 50 in the chapter on Athena.
8. R. Hampe, Kult der Winde in Athen und Kreta, Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der
Wissenschaften (Heidelberg 1967), 7–11.
9. F. Hiller von Gärtringen, Thera III (Berlin 1904), 104.
10. Marinatos/Hirmer 18–22; Buchholz, Bronzezeit, 275–77 (S. Marinatos).
11. Only the date of the eruption is contested; there is an earlier estimate and a (more convincing) later
one, c. 1500.
12. Ventris/Chadwick 309; Chirassi; Vermeule; Ruijgh.
 Notes to Pages 74–84 361

13. A. Martina, “Le Erinni nell’ Oresteia di Eschilo e nella civiltà micenea,” in Atti CIM II: 331–43.
14. Martina, “Erinni” (n. 13), 331, n1.
15. J. Wiesner, Fahren und Reiten, Archaeologia Homerica 1, ch. F (Göttingen 1968), 34–37: finds of
horse bones occur from the Middle Helladic; from around 1600 horses are attested in art (ibid., figs. 4–5).
16. LIMC 5 (1990), 446, 457f., s.v. Hippolytus I, nos. 101–6 (P. Linant de Bellefonds).
17. LIMC 6 (1992), 727–31, s.v. Neleus; LIMC 8 (1997), 153f., s.v. Tyro (E. Simon). The brother of Neleus
was Pelias.
18. Pausanias 1.30.4; Travlos 42, 164, no. 224.
19. LIMC 7 (1994), 922–51, s.v. Theseus (J. Neils).
20. J. Neils, The Youthful Deeds of Theseus (Rome 1987). On the particular highwaymen see also LIMC
7 (n. 19): Periphetes 929, no. 61; Sinis 929f., nos. 62–85; Sciron 931f., nos. 97–122; Cercyon 932f., nos. 123–25;
Procrustes 933f., nos. 126–46.
21. They had a common altar at the Erechtheum: Pausanias 1.26.5. On the cult association (though they
are not the same): Kron, Phylenheroen, 48–52.
22. On Neleus see n. 17 above; on Nestor, LIMC 7 (1994), addenda, 1060–65, s.v. Nestor (E. Lygouri-
Tollia).
23. R. Hampe, Gymnasium 63 (1956): 51f.
24. G. Kleiner, P. Hommel, and W. Müller-Wiener, Panionion und Melie, JdI Suppl. 23 (Berlin 1967).
25. Nilsson, GF, 74–79. The assumption that in Mycale bulls would be hung up for Poseidon is incor-
rect. This cannot be inferred from the passage in Homer.
26. It is usually derived from Helike, an Achaean city on the Gulf of Corinth, which was destroyed in
373 B.C. by an earthquake and flood. Its principal deity was Poseidon; see KlPauly (1975), 2:994, s.v. Helike
(E. Meyer). The Achaeans who emigrated to Asia Minor became Ionians there. Helike (daughter of the
Peloponnesian king Selinus) is also the name of Ion’s consort: LIMC 5 (1990), 703, s.v. Ion.
27. A. von Gerkan, Der Poseidonaltar bei Kap Monodendri, Milet 1.4 (Berlin 1915).
28. In R. Herbig, ed., Vermächtnis der antiken Kunst (Heidelberg 1950), 64; Prinz, 318–76, offers a
detailed account of the story of the Neleids, but the use of archaeological evidence in the history of religion
is unfamiliar to him.
29. E. Vermeule, Greece in the Bronze Age (Chicago 1964), 295.
30. G. Welter, Troizen und Kalaureia (Berlin 1941); B. Bergquist, The Archaic Greek Temenos (Lund
1967) 35f.; M. P. Nilsson, The Mycenaean Origin of Greek Mythology (repr. New York 1963), 144f.
31. Travlos 91–95, s.v. Apollon Hypoakraios. On Ion: LIMC 5 (1990), 702–5, s.v. Ion (E. Simon).
32. Berger/Gisler-Huwiler 162f., pl. 136. On the conversation between the two divinities, see B. Ash-
mole, Some Nameless Sculptors of the Fifth Century B.C. (London 1962), 231. Their juxtaposition, along with
Artemis and Aphrodite, is motivated by the Theseus myth; see Worshipping Athena, ed. J. Neils (Madison
1996), 22f. (E. Simon).
33. S. Marinatos, BCH 60 (1936): 241ff.; M. P. Nilsson, “Archaic Temples with Fire-places in Their Inte-
rior,” in Fron Stenålder till Rokoko. Studie tillägnade Otto Rydbeck den 25 Augusti 1937 (Lund 1937), 43–
48 = Opuscula selecta, vol. 2 (Lund 1952), 704ff.; F. Oelmann, “Homerische Tempel und nordeurasische
Opfermahl-Häuser,” BJb 157 (1957): 11–52; H. Drerup, AA (1964): 202ff.
34. O. Broneer, Isthmia I: The Temple of Poseidon (Princeton 1971).
35. Furtwängler, Berlin, 47–105, nos. 347–955; Simon, “Poseidon,” 456–58, nos. 103–17, pls. 359–61, with
references. The figure of Poseidon is so varied on the pinakes that even the type with the leg propped up,
popular in later periods, is attested: Simon, ibid., 457, no. 107.
362 Notes to Pages 85–93

36. Bulle 2855f.

37. Preller, Gr. Myth., 355.
38. Furtwängler, Berlin, 65f. on no. 539 (= Simon, “Poseidon,” 457, no. 109). Tetradrachms from Poteid-
aia: Kraay/Hirmer no. 395, pl. 128; Simon, ibid., 455, no. 70, pl. 358.
39. Policoro, Mus. della Siritide 35304, close to the Karneia Painter (Trendall); Simon, “Poseidon,” 463,
no. 162, pl. 366.
40. Furtwängler, Berlin, nos. 453, 834, 946. References to navigation, ibid., nos. 646–61, 831–37. Dolphin
of Poseidon on the pinakes: Vidali, Delphin, 25.
41. Discussion of the different opinions in P. Courbin, La céramique géométrique de l’Argolide (Paris
1966) 485ff., and in H. Jucker, “Bronzehenkel und Bronzehydria in Pesaro,” in Studia Oliveriana 13/14
(1966): 35ff. Both, independently of one another, reject the interpretation as Poseidon.
42. Paris, Cab. Méd. 222, Beazley, ABV 152.25; D. von Bothmer, The Amasis Painter and His World (New
York/London 1985), 125–29. From the photos there it is clear that Athena’s eye and helmet (not her profile)
and the added white of her flesh are modern restorations, while the figure of Poseidon is well preserved.
43. See Shapiro, ACT.
44. Ashmolean Mus. V247 (Athena Painter) (Haspels); Simon, “Poseidon,” 463, no. 156, pl. 365.
45. Martin-von-Wagner-Museum L194 (unattributed). Simon, Führer, 94; Simon, “Poseidon,” 463, no.
160, pl. 366.
46. Poseidon in combat with the Giants: Simon, “Poseidon,” 465, nos. 174–81a, pls. 368f. The Berlin
Gigantomachy cup by the Brygos Painter, ibid., 465, no. 181 (see fig. 85). On the attempts of J. Dörig and
K. Schefold to find traces of the battle with the Titans in sculpture, see R. Hampe, GGA 215 (1963): 125–52;
Burkert 127.
47. Kraay/Hirmer nos. 217–22, pl. VIII and pp. 77f.; Simon, “Poseidon,” 454, nos. 61–63, pl. 357.
48. Athens, Nat. Mus. X15161. Ch. Karusos, Deltion 143 (1930/31): 41–104, ills. 1–10; Lullies/Hirmer pls.
112f.; R. Wünsche, JdI 94 (1979): 77–111; Simon, “Poseidon,” 452, no. 28, pl. 353, with arguments against the
interpretation as Zeus by Wünsche and others.
49. Martin-von-Wagner-Museum L502. Beazley, ARV2 195 (only on the form of the rope-handle
amphora, no painter attribution); Simon, Führer, 128, pl. 40 (T. Hölscher); Simon, “Poseidon,” 462, no. 146,
pl. 364. The figure of a spectator (worshipper) on the reverse of the vase can best be understood in asso-
ciation with a statue of Poseidon.
50. L. Curtius, Interpretationen von sechs griechischen Bildwerken (Bern 1947), 69–82.

DEMETER
L. Beschi, “Demeter,” in LIMC 4 (1988), addenda, 844–92, pls. 563–99.
L. Bloch, “Kora und Demeter,” in ML 2.1 (1890/97), 1284–1379.
Burkert 159–61, 200, 242–46.
K. Clinton, Myth and Cult: The Iconography of the Eleusinian Mysteries; The Martin P. Nilsson Lectures on
Greek Religion (Stockholm 1992). Review by E. Simon, Gnomon 72 (2000): 246–49.
Deubner, AF, 40–42.
F. Graf, Eleusis und die orphische Dichtung Athens in vorhellenistischer Zeit, Religionsgeschichtliche Ver-
suche und Vorarbeiten 33 (Berlin/New York 1974).
G. Güntner, “Persephone,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 956–78, pls. 640–53.
Hampe/Simon 51.
U. Kron, “Frauenfeste in Demeterheiligtümern: Das Thesmophorion von Bitalemi,” AA (1992): 611–50.
 Notes to Pages 95–97 363

R. Lindner, “Hades,” in LIMC 4 (1988), 367–94, pls. 210–25.

Metzger, Imagerie, 7–48.
G. E. Mylonas, Eleusis and the Eleusinian Mysteries (Princeton 1961).
Nilsson 456–81.
H. Petersmann, “Altgriechischer Mütterkult,” in Matronen und verwandte Gottheiten, Beiheft BJbb 44
(Cologne 1987), 171–99.
N. J. Richardson, The Homeric Hymn to Demeter (Oxford 1974).
C. J. Ruijgh, “La Déesse-Mère dans les textes Mycènians,” in Atti CIM II: 453–57.
G. Schwartz, “Triptolemos,” in LIMC 8 (1997), 56–68, pls. 30–41.

1. Petersmann 175–81 (a follower of P. Kretschmer); see also n. 6 in the chapter on Poseidon. Nilsson’s
skepticism (461f.) derives from his desire to explain Demeter as a “Corn Mother” (ibid., 466). In the earlier
editions of this book, his interpretation was accepted with reservations, although Petersmann’s linguistic
arguments now seem to be the better ones. In addition, Demeter was not only “Corn Mother” but also
connected with the fig tree, a staple food of people in the Mediterranean before the “Neolithic revolution”
(about 6000 B.C.); for this see Theocharis, Neol. Gr., 147–64 (text by C. M. Renfrew); I. Chirassi, Elementi
di culture precereali nei miti e riti Greci (Rome 1968), 55–72; Simon, Festivals, 78.
2. See Petersmann 184–86; E. Simon, “Doppelgöttinnen in Anatolien, Griechenland und Rom,” in
Festschrift Jan Bouzek, Eirene 31 (1995): 69–87.
3. Marinatos/Hirmer color pls. XXIXB–XXX. The white skin clearly identifies feminine figures, and
the pairs of animals—wild goats and griffins—suggest goddesses. For the sarcophagus, see n. 34 in the
chapter on Zeus.
4. V. Georgiev, Die Träger der kretisch-mykenischen Kultur, ihre Herkunft und ihre Sprache (Sofia 1937),
22–29. In contrast Petersmann, 181n598f., tries to explain the name Persephone as “she who is filled with
light.”
5. M. Sguaitamatti, L’offrante de porcelet dans la coroplathie Géléenne (Mainz 1984). Beschi, 856f.,
argues for the interpretation of such clay statuettes as Demeter, giving numerous examples. This interpre-
tation is secure because, besides the piglet, the goddess can carry the torch (e.g., no. 108), her main attribute
in Western Greece. Likewise, Persephone can hold the piglet. See Güntner 957, no. 25, pl. 642.
6. Nilsson, GF, 313–25; Nilsson 463–66; Deubner, AF, 50–60; Burkert 13; Simon, Festivals, 18–24. Rep-
resentations of the dual goddesses reach back into the Neolithic: Petersmann 185, pl. 28, 1; Simon, “Dop-
pelgöttinnen” (above n. 2) 69f., ill. 1a–b.
7. For example, the grave in the Theban necropolis (eighteenth dynasty) showing pigs treading upon
the ears of corn. See P. E. Newberry, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 14 (1928): 2ff., pl. 19. For the signifi-
cance of barley in Mycenaean Greece: A. Aloni and M. Negri, in Atti CIM II: 159–68.
8. For Neolithic pig breeding, see W. Richter, Die Landwirtschaft im homerischen Zeitalter, in Arch-
Hom 2, ch. H (Göttingen 1968), 67n495; Theocharis, Neol. Gr., 174 (text by S. Bökönyi); Petersmann 179.
9. J. Thimme, AntK 8 (1965): 72–86; Theocharis, Neol. Gr., pls. 16–18, 35f., 38. The statuette illustrated
here comes from the excavations of V. Milojcic in Thessaly (the site of Otzaki): Neue deutsche Ausgrabun-
gen (Berlin 1959), 225ff. See also Buchholz/Karageorghis 98f., nos. 1172–75, 1177–83.
10. P. Orlandini, “Lo scavo del thesmophorion di Bitalemi e il culto delle divinità ctonie a Gela,” Kokalos
12 (1966): 8–35; Sguaitamatti, L’offrante de porcelet (n. 5); Petersmann 186–90; Kron.
11. Petersmann 185f.
364 Notes to Pages 98–103

12. Athens, Nat. Mus. N7711. Stella 1965, fig. 102; E. Vermeule, Greece in the Bronze Age (Chicago/
London 1972), pl. 38; Buchholz/Karageorghis 106, no. 1280a–b; Hampe/Simon 214f., ill. 328; Petersmann
185; Beschi 848, no. 3; K. Clinton, “Ploutos,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 419, no. 31, pl. 342; Simon, “Doppelgöttinnen,”
75f., fig. 6. For kneeling in the cult of Demeter, see Metzger, Imagerie, pl. 26.4. For more recent literature
on kneeling in prayer, see G. Despinis, Th. Stefanidou-Tiveriou, and E. Voutiras, Catalogue of Sculpture in
the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki, vol. 1 (Thessaloniki 1997), 38f., no. 20.
13. Deubner, AF, 85; for the opposite point of view, see Mylonas, Eleusis, 306–10. That the emergence
of Plutus from the earth actually belonged to the Eleusinian circle is demonstrated, for example, by the
Attic hydria from Rhodes in Istanbul: Beschi 877, no. 403; Clinton 133, no. 3, ill. 29. For additional Eleusin-
ian images of Plutus: Metzger, Imagerie, pls. 14.1, 16.2, 24.
14. Berger/Gisler-Huwiler 154, pl. 132. For the twelve gods of the Agora, see Shapiro, ACT, 133–42, as
well as the chapter on Hestia.
15. On the distinction between food and holocaust offerings, see Meuli, Schriften, 2:911–34; E. Simon
in Buitron-Oliver 136–40. The Olympian, as opposed to the chthonian, sacrifice had a “festive and gay
character” (Meuli 2:935); for the “ash altars” appertaining to it, see n. 14 in the chapter on Zeus.
16. For literature on this sarcophagus see n. 34 in the chapter on Zeus.
17. On the twelve gods of Olympia in the Hymn to Hermes (Hom. Hymn 4.115–29), see G. Berger-Doer,
“Dodekatheioi,” in LIMC 3 (1986), 646. For further sources see Long, Twelve Gods, 154–57.
18. Long, Twelve Gods, 58–62, provides sources for which divinities received these sacrifices at Olym-
pia. On six altars the following gods were worshipped: Zeus and Poseidon; Hera and Athena; Hermes and
Apollo; Dionysus and the Charites; Artemis and Alpheus; Cronus and Rhea. In other places the Twelve
were ordered differently.
19. Ventris/Chadwick 129, and see index entries under “barley” (434) and “wheat” (440).
20. Nilsson, MMR, 487–90.
21. Pausanias 2.14.1; 3.20.5; 8.15.1; 8.25.3; 8.29.5; 9.4.3.
22. That is, through relatives of the priestly aristocracy at Eleusis. See also Toepffer, AG, 24–112.
23. Mylonas 15–20.
24. 969f. West, Theog. Comm., 422–24; cf. Homer, Odyssey 5.125–28. The myth of Iasion did not belong
to the Eleusinian but to the Samothracian Mysteries: E. Simon, “Iasion,” in LIMC 5 (1990), 626–28.
25. K. O. Müller, Orchomenos und die Minyer, 2nd ed. (Breslau 1844), especially 67ff.; Marinatos/
Hirmer pls. 158f.; S. Jacovides, ArchHom, ch. E 204 with n. 1273 (“a communal project of an alliance of small
states, most probably led by Orchomenos”).
26. F. Oelmann, AM 50 (1925): 19–27; Dinsmoor, Arch., 6, pl. 4.
27. Mylonas 96f. and passim.
28. Deubner, AF, 71; cf. also the Iasion myth (n. 24 above).
29. Deubner, AF, 73.
30. F. Pfister, Die mythische Königsliste von Megara (diss. Heidelberg 1907), 8. The citadel of Megara
was called Karia after its founder, Kar: Pausanias 1.39.5; 1.40.6. The pre-Greek inhabitants of the Aegean
were known as Karians, from whom the cult of the dual goddesses came. See Simon, “Doppelgöttinnen”
(above n. 2) 72 and passim.
31. Pausanias 1.39.5. Megaron was also usually the name of the sacred dwelling of the Thesmophoros,
as on Paros and Delos: O. Rubensohn, “Paros,” in RE 18.1 (1949), 1844.
32. Pausanias 1.39.2; Mylonas 62f.
 Notes to Pages 103–112 365

33. On Demeter Erinys see Martina, “Erinni,” 331n1. The reconciliation of Demeter, with reference
to the Hymn, is, in my opinion, represented on the Eleusinian pelike in St. Petersburg (Beschi 877f., no.
404): E. Simon, AntK 9 (1966): 72–78; reprinted in revised form in Ausgewählte Schriften, vol. 1 (Mainz
1998), no. 15.
34. The philanthropy of the Eleusinian goddesses is stressed by Attic orators like Isocrates (I thank W.
Batschelet for this information).
35. For the “Archaic smile” see E. Simon, Gnomon 33 (1961): 646f., where I had not yet considered this
aspect.
36. This festival is in my view represented on the Pinax of Niinnion (Simon, Festivals, 35–37, pl. 11).
Today I would see the figure standing above (with the two torches) as Kore, and the seated figure at the
lower right as Aphrodite. For her presence at Eleusis, see Beschi 877f., no. 404, and p. 881, no. 439, pl. 596.
37. P. Wolters and G. Bruns, Das Kabirenheiligtum bei Theben I (Berlin 1940); D. Vollkommer-Glökler,
“Megaloi Theoi,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 824, nos. 25f., pl. 560.
38. On the relationship between Athens and Eleusis, see Nilsson 663–67; for the sixth century in par-
ticular, see Shapiro, ACT, 67–83.
39. O. Rubensohn, JdI 70 (1955): 1–49; Mylonas 78–96.
40. Lactantius, Div. inst. 23; Deubner, AF, 84; Mylonas 264, 282; Clinton 85n113.
41. Jacoby, FGrHist 2.B (Leiden 1962) 1074, no. 244, fr. 110b; Clinton 86n128.
42. Bell-krater, New York, Metropolitan Mus. 28.57.23. Beazley, ARV2 1012.1 (Persephone Painter, name
vase); Beschi 872, no. 328.
43. Deubner, AF, 79.
44. G. E. Mylonas, Ephemeris (1960): 68–118; H. Metzger, “Le Dionysos des images éleusiniennes du
IVe siècle,” RA (1995): 3–22.
45. For Dionysus see Schmidt, TKWü, 69, no. 85, with literature. For Demeter (Boeotian protomes and
others), see Beschi 862–64, nos. 193–214, pl. 575.
46. B. Neutsch, ed., Die Welt der Griechen (Heidelberg 1948), 42, no. 20.
47. E. Langlotz and M. Hirmer, Die Kunst der Westgriechen (Munich 1963), pls. 36f.; Beschi 862, no. 197,
pl. 575.
48. Mylonas, Eleusis, 24–29. For Demeter in Megara see above nn. 30f.
49. IG 14 268. For the interpretation see W. M. Calder III, The Inscription from Temple G at Selinus
(Durham, NC, 1963), 31f. On the Temples of Demeter in Selinus and Agrigentum, see Berve/Gruben/
Hirmer 212f., 223.
50. K. Zimmermann, “Teiresias,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 1188–91.
51. IG 12 76; Nilsson 473.
52. T. Hayashi, Bedeutung und Wandel des Triptolemosbildes vom 6.–4. Jh. v. Chr. (Würzburg 1992);
Schwarz. The example selected here (see fig. 102) is a volute-krater (foot restored) in Karlsruhe, Badisches
Landesmuseum 68.101; Beazley, Paralipomena 344.131 bis (Berlin Painter); Simon/Hirmer pl. 142; Beschi
873, no. 340, pl. 585; Schwartz 58, no. 20.
53. J. Thimme, AntK 8 (1965): 80.
54. Munich, Antikensammlungen 1983 WAF. For a different interpretation see O. Höckmann, IstMitt 4
(1974): 13ff. See also the exhibition catalogue Kunst und Kultur der Kykladeninseln im 3. Jt. v. Chr. (Karlsruhe
1976), 515f., no. 360, pls. 336f.
55. E. L. Smithson, Hesperia 37 (1968): 93ff., no. 23, pls. 24–27; Drerup, ArchHom 75, pl. IVa. For the
kernoi, especially in southern and central Italy, see A. Kossatz-Deißmann, AA (1985): 229–39.
366 Notes to Pages 112–120

56. R. Hampe and A. Winter, Bei Töpfern und Töpferinnen in Kreta, Messenien und Zypern (Mainz
1962).
57. Deubner, AF, 83, 85–87.
58. R. Lindner, Der Raub der Persephone in der antiken Kunst (Würzburg 1984); Güntner 967–70, nos.
193–248, pls. 649–52. Of those, only no. 193 is Attic; nos. 194–201 are Late Classical South Italian vases.
59. See n. 52 above.
60. Würzburg, Martin-von-Wagner-Museum L197. See also Simon, Führer, 116; Lindner 374, no. 34, pl.
212; Schwartz 60, no. 55.
61. Band cup, Paris, Louvre F77; CVA (Louvre 9) pl. 82.
62. London, British Mus. 95.10–29.5. R. A. Higgins, Catalogue of Terracottas in the British Museum, vol.
1 (London 1954), no. 897, pl. 130; Beschi 869f., no. 299, pl. 82.
63. Würzburg, Martin-von-Wagner-Museum L308. Simon, Führer, 115; Beschi 881, no. 442.
64. See nn. 37f. in the chapter on Artemis.
65. On Hecate in Eleusis see H. Sarian, “Hekate,” in LIMC 6 (1992), addenda, 989–92, nos. 1–26, pls.
654–56; New York krater: ibid., 990, no. 13 (Hecate is securely identified by an inscription).
66. Sarian, “Hekate,” 991, no. 17, pl. 654; see my reason for interpreting the running figure G as Hecate
(AM 100 [1985]: 277–79), which Sarian adopts. For E and F see Lullies/Hirmer pl. 152; Beschi 882f., no. 463,
pl. 598. Against the interpretation that the figure sitting on the left (E) should be Demeter, see Beschi, who
calls her Persephone and figure F Demeter. For the problem of making this distinction, see A. Peschlow-
Bindokat, “Demeter und Persephone in der attischen Kunst des 6. bis 4. Jh. v. Chr,” JdI 87 (1972): 60–157.
67. Athens, Nat. Mus. 126. L. Schneider, Antike Plastik 12 (1973): 103–22, pls. 31–35; Lullies/Hirmer pl.
161; Beschi 875, no. 375, pl. 588; Clinton 39–55; Schwarz 58, nos. 12–13, pl. 30 (copy in New York, Metro-
politan Mus.). Its interpretation as the bestowal of grain on Triptolemus, argued in the earlier editions of
this book, should be abandoned. According to the original study of Ph. Bruneau, which H. Metzger
describes in RA (1968): 114–16, there are no holes for fastening metal ears of corn. The supposition of
painted ears, which G. Schwartz proposed, fails, in my opinion, because of the uneven surface in the area
of Demeter’s right hand.
68. So too in the earlier editions of this book; likewise Beschi and Schwartz (see above n. 67).
69. See Clinton 39ff.; K. Clinton, “Ploutos,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 417, no. 13.
70. For older women in Attic funerary monuments, see S. Pfisterer-Haas, AM 105 (1990): 179–96;
J. Bergemann, Demos und Thanatos (Munich 1997), 99f., pls. 48–56. For nurses in vase painting, see Simon/
Hirmer pls. 174, 181 (top). For nurse statues in clay, see H. Rühfel, Das Kind in der griechischen Kunst,
Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 18 (Mainz 1984), 192–95, fig. 76f.
71. Richardson 231–36, especially 233f.; Clinton 100–102.
72. Richardson; Deubner, AF, 74f.
73. Ridgway II: 138–41; E. Simon, “Neues zum Großen Relief von Eleusis,” AA (1998): 373–87.
74. U. Rapp, Das Mysterienbild (Münsterschwarzach 1952), 48. Cf. E. Will, Le relief cultuel gréco-romain
(Paris 1955).
75. W. Fuchs, Die Vorbilder der neuattischen Reliefs, JdI Ergänzungsheft 20 (Berlin 1959), 59f.; Harrison,
“Charites,” 196f.

HESTIA
G. Berger-Doer, “Dodekatheioi,” in LIMC 2 (1986), 646–58.
E. Bielefeld, “Zum Relief aus Mondragone,” Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Universität Greifswald 1
(1951/2): 1–35.
 Notes to Pages 121–125 367

D. Bonanome, Il rilievo da Mondragone nel Museo Nazionale di Napoli, Accademia di Archeologia Lettere
e Belle Arti di Napoli 10 (Naples 1995).
W. Fauth, “Hestia,” in KlPauly (1975), 1118–20.
W. Fuchs, “Hestia,” in EAA 4 (1961), 18–22.
Th. Hadzisteliou Price, Kourotrophos: Cults and Representations of the Greek Nursing Deities (Leiden 1978).
Long, Twelve Gods.
Nilsson, 78, 249, 337, 415.
A. Preuner, “Hestia,” in ML 1.2 (1886/90), 2605–53.
H. Sarian, “Hestia,” in LIMC 5 (1990), 407–12; additional literature cited on p. 408.
Shapiro, ACT, 74, 136, 140f.
E. Simon, “Trapezo/Trapezophoros et Kosmo,” in LIMC 8 (1997), 51f.
W. Süss, “Hestia,” in RE 8.1 (1912), 1257–1303.
Thompson/Wycherly, Agora, 46f., 129–36, 168.
O. Weinreich, “Zwölfgötter,” in ML 6 (1924/37), 764–848.

1. Pausanias 1.18.3. See also Süss 1284; Thompson/Wycherley 47; Fuchs 20.
2. Simon, GdR, 229. Burkert, 170f., I believe, misses the mark when he relegates Hestia to the “minor”
gods, who never achieved “an importance equivalent to the Roman Vesta.” But the Vestals at Rome were
purely priestesses of the state religion; in the very different Greek situation, the worship of Hestia in Pry-
taneia (for which see especially the beginning of Pindar, Nemean 11) always retained a private dimension
typical of the goddess of hearth and family.
3. J. Hechenbach, “Hochzeit,” in RE 8.2 (1913), 2133.
4. a) dinos by Sophilos, London, British Mus. 1971.11–1.1; G. Bakir, Sophilos 64, no. A.1, pl. 1, fig. 2;
Sarian 408, no. 4, pl. 291 (detail); Shapiro, ACT, pl. 16b. b) fragment of a dinos by Sophilos from the Acropo-
lis, Athens, Nat. Mus. 587; Bakir 64 no. A.2, pl. 3, fig. g; Sarian 408 no. 3. c) François Vase, Florence, Museo
Archeologico Nazionale 4209. See also Simon/Hirmer 70, pl. 56 (below); Sarian 408, no. 5, pl. 291 (detail).
5. The Indian fire god Agni was likewise an intermediary. On him see Süss 1262f.
6. Hampe/Simon 10–17, figs. 1–3, 7.
7. 14.158f. = 17.155f. = 20.230f.: “Zeus be my witness, first of the gods, and the table of friendship, and
the hearth of blameless Odysseus, to which I come as a suppliant” (trans. R. Lattimore).
8. Fasti 6.295–98. See also Simon, GdR, 234.
9. West, Theog. Comm., 293.
10. Shapiro, ACT, 140f.
11. Trans. W. R. Lamb. See also Süss 1296f.; Long, Twelve Gods, 179; E. Simon, Gnomon 64 (1992): 160.
12. Long, Twelve Gods, 68f., 176–80. See also E. Simon, Gnomon 63 (1991): 47f.
13. Thompson/Wycherley 129–36; Berger-Doer 647, no. 3; Long, Twelve Gods, 159–63, 173–80, figs.
130ff.; Shapiro, ACT, 133–41.
14. Berger-Doer 649, no. 5, pls. 508f.; Long, Twelve Gods, 190, figs. 13–16; Sarian 409, no. 11, pl. 292;
Bonanome 129n17. The goddess without attributes who stands opposite the seated Poseidon (Long, Twelve
Gods, fig. 13) is usually identified not as Hestia but rather as Aphrodite (Long, Twelve Gods, 6, no. 5, fol-
lowing E. Pemberton, “The Gods of the East Frieze of the Parthenon,” AJA 76 (1972): 113–24; likewise
Berger-Doer). Sarian, however, interprets her as Hestia, and this is supported by the combination of Pos­
eidon, Amphitrite, and Hestia in the dedication of Mikythos at Olympia (Pausanias 5.26.2). That monu-
ment stood, however, at Olympia, while here we are concerned with an Attic cult.
15. Berger-Doer 651f., nos. 22–25, pls. 512–15; Long, Twelve Gods, figs. 31–34, 69–73, and passim.
368 Notes to Pages 125–128

16. Alexandria, Greco-Roman Mus. 27004; Berger-Doer 651, no. 18, pls. 510f.; Long, Twelve Gods, 225–
27, figs. 1–3; Sarian 409, no. 13; Bonanome 77, 125f., figs. 40, 65. Long does not identify the seated figure (fig.
1f.), but I believe Sarian is correct in naming her Hestia. The two divinities grouped with her are too frag-
mentary to identify.
17. Ostia Mus. 120; Fuchs 20; Fuchs in Helbig 4 (1972), no. 3025; Berger-Doer 652, no. 24, pls. 513f. (for
Hestia see pl. 514); Long, Twelve Gods, 257–59, figs. 69–73; Sarian 409, no. 16, pl. 293; Bonanome 125f., fig. 64.
18. Naples, Museo Nazionale (no inv. no.). See Bielefeld; L. Beschi, “Demeter,” in LIMC 4 (1988),
addenda, 878, no. 412, pl. 994; Bonanome.
19. Pliny, HN 36.25. Sarian 410, no. 21, and others have incorrectly linked this passage with Cassius
Dio 55.9.6. The latter concerns Tiberius, who forced the inhabitants of Paros to sell him a statue of Hestia.
This one did not end up in the Gardens of Servilius (which were probably in southwest Rome: “Horti,” in
RE 7.2 [1913], 2487f., no. 62), but rather in the Temple of Concord in the Forum Romanum. G. Lippold,
“Skopas,” in RE 3.A.1 (1927), 572f., prefers the reading lampteres (lamps, candelabra) in the Pliny text, as
proposed by von Jans, instead of campteres (spiral columns). This would mean Hestia was associated with
her familiar element, fire, though the four campteres of the text, understood as a kind of baldacchino,
would also make sense. In keeping with Roman taste, two of the four would have been omitted in setting
up the monument as a relief in the Gardens of Servilius.
20. See in particular Long, Twelve Gods, 360–68, 367, s.v. Thirteenth God.
21. Berger/Gisler-Huwiler, 171–74, provide the best overview of the various interpretations. Cf. also
Berger-Doer 648f., no. 4a, pls. 508f.; Long, Twelve Gods, 168–73, figs. 8–12. The interpretation of B. Wesen-
berg cited here is now published in JdI 110 (1995): 149–78, but I still agree with Berger/Gisler-Huwiler’s
interpretation of these objects as chairs. This would render Wesenberg’s interpretation of the scene as the
Arrephoria and, with it, his denial of the frieze’s temporal unity, impossible.
22. E.g., on the calyx-krater by the Cecrops Painter, Adolphseck 77; Simon/Hirmer pl. 226; Simon,
“Trapezo,” 52, no. 1.
23. Cf. Berger/Gisler-Huwiler 172, 174, who show that Mantis’ suggestion, Problemata tis Eikonographias
ton Hiereion kai ton Hiereon stin archaia ellenike Techne (Athens 1990), was anticipated by A. S. Murray,
The Sculptures of the Parthenon (London 1903). See Simon, “Trapezo,” 52, no. 2.
24. This is reported by Istros, the colleague of the Alexandrian poet Callimachus: Jacoby, FGrHist 3 B
(repr. Leiden 1964), 170, no. 334, fr. 4. For the family of Lycurgus, see J. K. Davies, Athenian Propertied
Families (Oxford 1971), no. 9251.
25. This new identification of the priest, who has usually (including by me) been identified as the
Archon Basileus, was proposed by M. Steinhart, AA (1997): 475–78. On the genos of the Praxiergidai, see
Toepffer, AG, 133–36. The association of the priest with the Praxiergidai resolves the doubts expressed
by E. Harrison, “Time in the Parthenon Frieze,” in Der Parthenon-Kongreß Basel, ed. E. Berger (Mainz
1984), reiterated in “The Web of History,” in Worshipping Athena: Panathenaia and Parthenon, ed. J. Neils
(Madison 1996), 205. We now see that the man and woman standing back-to-back both belong to impor-
tant Athenian priestly families.
26. AM 97 (1982): 127–44, esp. 140–44.
27. Ovid, Fasti 6.267; cf. F. Bömer, P. Ovidius Naso, Die Fasten, vol. 2 (Heidelberg 1958), 357. On the
equivalence of Ge and Hestia in philosophical writing, see Süß 1293–98. This was also expressed in the lost
Triptolemos of Sophocles: TrGF 4, fr. 615 Radt. Cf. also Hadzisteliou Price 10.
28. Hadzisteliou Price 125f., 193. One of the most important testimonia is the Xenokrateia Relief from
New Phaleron, Athens, Nat. Mus. 2756; A. Linfert, AM 82 (1967): 149–57; LIMC 1 (1981), 24, s.v. Acheloos,
 Notes to Pages 128–133 369

no. 197, pl. 41 (H. P. Isler); Ridgway II: fig. 97; LIMC 2 (1984), 713, s.v. Artemis, no. 1182 (L. Kahil); Bonanome
194n15, fig. 99; not mentioned in Sarian. The inscription that goes with the relief (for which see Linfert,
Kahil, and Hadzisteliou Price) lists a number of kourotrophic divinities, both female and male, starting
with Hestia. She should therefore appear on the relief, in my view as the beautiful figure in the middle,
wearing a peplos and turned to the right.
29. RE 1.2 (1894), 1901f., s.v. Amphidromia (P. Stengel). The majority of the relevant attestations are
Athenian.
30. Placing chairs together as a symbol of unity also appears in Pindar, Olympian 14.10f., quoted in the
introduction.
31. Süss 1288f.
32. The identification of the figure was arrived at independently by the author (ZPE 57 [1984]: 12f.) and
by V. Brinkmann (BCH 109 [1985]: 90) and was reported in the 3rd ed. of this book (p. 218, on fig. 202).
33. K. Lange and M. Hirmer, Ägypten (Munich 1967), pls. XXV–XXVII.
34. Tarquinia, Mus. Nazionale RC6848; Simon/Hirmer pls. 92f.; Shapiro, ACT, 136–40, pl. 41a; Sarian
408, no. 7, pl. 292.
35. Berlin F2278; CVA (Berlin 2), pls. 49, 2; 50; Simon/Hirmer pl. 118f.; Shapiro, ACT, 136–40, pl. 51a–b
(both sides); Sarian 408, no. 8, pl. 292; I. Wehgartner, in Euphronios der Maler, exh. cat. (Berlin 1991),
244–49 (with color illustrations). Wehgartner, 246, notes that the figure with lyre must be Apollo; “the
inscription could stand for the missing Artemis.” But since Artemis is probably the figure seated next to
Hestia, the inscription might also be Apollo’s exclamation. See n. 37 below.
36. Shapiro, ACT, pl. 51a. The inscription naming this last goddess is not preserved, but she is probably
Thyone/Semele, the mother of Dionysus, who was also taken up to Olympus.
37. The careful transcription of the inscription in Furtwängler, Berlin, 555, reveals that the final sigma
is not certain. Thus the name could be in the vocative.
38. London, British Mus. D11, from Eretria. Beazley, ARV2 899.146 (Splanchnopt Painter); Wehgartner
141; Sarian 410, no. 26, pl. 293.
39. Inv. 116. Beazley, ARV2 1224.2 (Oppenheimer Group); R. Hampe and E. Simon, Griechisches Leben
im Spiegel der Kunst, 2nd ed. (Mainz 1985), 28; Sarian 410, no. 27; CVA (Mainz 2), pl. 26.
40. See n. 19 above.
41. Nilsson, 114.
42. E. Simon, “Kybele,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 766.
43. For both of these see n. 19 above.
44. Sarian 410, nos. 22, 23.
45. F. Durrbach and P. Roussel, eds., Inscriptions de Délos, vol. 3 [5] (Paris 1935), no. 1417.B.I.89–90, 100;
J. Marcadé, Au Musée de Délos: Étude sur la sculpture hellénistique en ronde bosse découverte dans l’île (Paris
1969), 169–70.

APOLLO
Burkert 143–49.
Deubner, AF, 179–204.
E. Di Filippo Balestrazzi, “Apollo Agyieus,” in LIMC 2 (1984), 327–32, pls. 279–83.
A. Furtwängler, “Apollon in der Kunst,” in ML 1 (1884/90), 450–67.
W. Lambrinudakis et al., “Apollo,” in LIMC 2 (1984), 183–327, pls. 182–279.
M. Maaß, Das antike Delphi: Orakel, Schätze und Monumente (Darmstadt 1993).
Nilsson 529–64.
370 Notes to Pages 135–143

K. A. Pfeiff, Apollon: Die Wandlung seines Bildes in der griechischen Kunst (Frankfurt 1943).
T. S. Scheer, Mythische Vorväter: Zur Bedeutung griechischer Heroenmythen im Selbstverständnis kleinasias-
tischer Städte (Munich 1993), 335f. (index), s.v. Apollon.
Shapiro, ACT, 48–64.
Simon, GdR, 27–34.
Strasberger, “Apollon,” in Lexikon, 47f.

1. Vatican, Belvedere 1015. Pfeiff 135–39; Lambrinudakis 198, no. 79, pl. 189, with bibliography. The
statue by Leochares outside the Temple of Apollo Patroos in Athens is mentioned in Pausanias 1.3.3.
2. J. J. Winckelmann, Geschichte der Kunst des Alterthums (Rome 1763), book 11, ch. 3.
3. Basel, Antikenmuseum BS205. Pfeiff pl. 53; Lambrinudakis 199, no. 79c, pl. 189. Furtwängler, 465f.,
compares both heads.
4. Athens, Nat. Mus. 4381. Pfeiff 20–22, pl. 1; Hampe/Simon 254, ills. 397–99; see figs. 400f., for a head
of a woman with a polos in terracotta, which corresponds stylistically and is from the same site. Is this Leto
or Artemis? See Lambrinudakis 256, no. 579, pl. 226; Stibbe 1996, 54, ill. 27. For coins with Apollo Amyklaios,
see Kraay/Hirmer fig. 520. For ancient sources for the cult at Amyclae, see Wide, LK, 67–69.
5. Di Filippo Balestrazzi; U. Kron in Kotinos, 58–63.
6. See Buchholz/Karageorghis index (516), s.v. “Vaphio.” The best-known find is the pair of gold cups,
87f., nos. 1104f.; Marinatos/Hirmer pls. 178–85.
7. Nilsson, MMR, 485–87; M. J. Mellink, Hyakinthos (diss. Utrecht 1943); “Hyakinthos,” in LIMC 5
(1990), 546–50, pls. 376–79 (L. and F. Villard). Pausanias (3.19.3–4; LIMC 5, 547, no. 1) was surprised that
the Hyacinthus on the throne at Amyclae was bearded. But in a work of the sixth century, this need not
signify advanced age; Apollo also can be bearded in Archaic art. Cf. Furtwängler 453 and Apollo on the
Cycladic krater (see fig. 127).
8. Deubner, AF, 179–204; Simon, Festivals, 73–78. See also the gifts of the Hyperboreans to Delian
Apollo, which were bound by wheat straw: Parke, Oracles, 279–86.
9. For K. O. Müller see n. 9 in the introduction. Die Dorier (Breslau 1824), in addition to Orchomenos
und die Minyer, are the only works that Müller completed from his planned Geschichte hellenischer Stämme
und Städte. He died in Athens when he was forty-three years old. Müller’s hypothesis has been partially
resuscitated by Burkert (see n. 28 below, and also nn. 29 and 30).
10. See E. Simon, “Ion,” in LIMC 5 (1990), 702–5, for my refutation of Carl Robert’s statement that Ion
had no hero cult. The ancient historian Eduard Meyer also saw Apollo as Ionian.
11. C. Weickert, IstMitt 9/10 (1959/60): pl. 35.3; Buchholz/Karageorghis 71, no. 921; see also 77f., no. 1036.
12. As in “Apollon,” in Lexikon der Alten Welt (Zürich/Stuttgart 1965), 212; see also below n. 38.
13. See R. Hampe/E. Simon, Griechische Sagen in der frühen etruskischen Kunst (Mainz 1964), 47–52.
14. Neck amphora, London, British Mus. E336. Beazley, ARV2 1010.4 (Dwarf Painter); Lambrinudakis
189, no. 5, pl. 182. The woman has also been identified as Helen—e.g., by Boardman; see O. Paoletti, “Kas-
sandra,” in LIMC 7 (1994), addenda, 963, no. 121. The warrior would then be Menelaus. But Menelaus’ anger
is usually dissipated at this point in the myth, and there is no trace here that this is the case.
15. Boston, Mus. of Fine Arts 03.997. Pfeiff 23f., Beilage 1; Lullies/Hirmer pl. 10; Hampe/Simon ills.
427f.; Lambrinudakis 194, no. 40, pl. 185.
16. Heraklion, Arch. Mus. 246; Lambrinudakis 265, no. 658, pl. 237: “The earliest known representation
of the triad” (the “Triad” of Amyclae, from which two heads are preserved, would, however, be about two
generations earlier; seen. 4 above). See Hampe/Simon 254, ills. 397–401; Schefold 1993, 66, fig. 45.
 Notes to Pages 143–153 371

17. Alcaeus fr. 307 Lobel-Page. Dionysus, who shared the temple with Apollo in Delphi and Delos, was
worshipped at festivals during the winter in both places; see E. Simon, “Apollon und Dionysos,” in In
Memoriam E. Paribeni II (Rome 1998), 451–60.
18. Athens, Nat. Mus. 3961. Simon/Hirmer pl. 23; Lambrinudakis 304, no. 1005, pl. 270; Schefold 1993,
61, ill. 39; Ph. Zafiropoulou, “Hyperboreioi,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 642, no. 1.
19. Hampe/Simon 215, fig. 333.
20. Delos and London, British Mus. B322. Lambrinudakis 193, no. 38, pl. 183; Kokkorou-Alewras 87f.,
K 18, pls. 22f.
21. Delphi, Mus. 380 + 1050. Maaß 187, fig. 85; Kokkorou-Alewras 60, 118, K 87, pls. 54f. (interpreted as
the guardian of the grave of Python).
22. Hampe, Ein frühattischer Grabfund (Mainz 1960), 64–66. R. Vollkommer, in LIMC 6 (1992), 16–18,
22, does not convincingly refute the identification of “Lion-women”—an unnecessary renaming of the
sphinxes—as Keres.
23. Kokkorou-Alewras 121f., K 92, pls. 51–53, and AntK 36 (1993): 91–102, with a later dating of the lions
than has previously been assumed.
24. H. A. Cahn, MusHelv 7 (1950): 185–99; Lambrinudakis 221–23.
25. London, British Mus. B448. EAA 5 (1963), 360–62, s.v. Naukratis (E. Paribeni). Lambrinudakis,
223, warns against calling statuettes of this sort Apollo. Their identification can be ambiguous. When,
however, they are found (as the one shown here was) in the sanctuary of Apollo Milesios, the identification
is obvious.
26. Delphi, Mus. 9912. Hampe/Simon 231, fig. 353 (Near Eastern); Lambrinudakis 222f., no. 322, pl. 209;
Schefold 1993, 65, fig. 44; Maaß, Delphi, 140f., ill. 61 (East Greek or West Anatolian).
27. Otto, Götter, 80f.
28. “Apellai und Apollon,” Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 118 (1975): 1–21; Burkert 144f.
29. The Thargelia, for example; see Deubner, AF, 179–98. Burkert, 144f., and H. W. Parke, Festivals of
the Athenians (London 1977), 148, are of the opinion, for which there is no evidence, that this festival came
to Athens in the eighth century from Ionia by way of Delos. Counterarguments can be found in Simon,
Festivals, 73–76.
30. Ventris/Chadwick 126, 312.
31. A. Jeremias, “Sonnengott,” in ML 4 (1909/15), 533–58; Haussig, “Sonnengott,” in VO, 126. Stele of
Hammurabi (see fig. 134), Paris, Louvre Sb8: Strommenger/Hirmer pls. 158f.
32. Thus the earliest Greek oikists in Sicily established the altar of Apollo Archegetes in Sicilian Naxos
(Thucydides 6.3), and those in Italy established the Temple of Apollo at Cumae. The sequence repeats itself
many times in Asia Minor, for which see Scheer.
33. New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, Morgan Seal 178. H. Frankfort, Cylinder Seals (London 1939),
pl. 18a.; J. B. Pritchard, The Ancient Near East in Pictures (Princeton 1954), no. 683.
34. Di Filippo Balestrazzi; U. Kron in Kotinos 61f.
35. Berve/Gruben/Hirmer pl. 164.
36. E. Simon, Opfernde Götter (Berlin 1953), 24–27.
37. Nilsson 561f.
38. In 1903 Wilamowitz supported the Lycian origin of Apollo (see above n. 12); Otto, Götter, 65, fol-
lows him.
39. H.-V. Herrmann, Omphalos (Münster 1959).
40. On what follows, see E. Simon, “Pindar und Delos,” JdI 112 (1997): 247–60.
372 Notes to Pages 154–163

41. This goes especially for Delphi, for which see Maaß, but also for Miletus and Didyma.
42. Palermo, Mus. Arch. 3918. Ridgway I: 243; Lambrinudakis 263, no. 643, pl. 235; I Greci in Occidente,
exh. cat. (Venice 1996), 406.
43. Vatican, Mus. Gregoriano Etrusco 16568. Beazley, ARV2 209.166 (Berlin Painter); Pfeiff 61f.; J. D.
Beazley, The Berlin Painter (Mainz 1974), pls. 25f.; Lambrinudakis 233, no. 382, pl. 213. For Apollo and the
dolphin, see Vidali, Delphin, 111–14, 172 (index), s.v. Apollon.
44. Beazley ABV 145.19 (Exekias); Lambrinudakis 286, no. 832, pl. 257.
45. Fr. 51 Diels; Otto, Götter, 75–78.
46. Simon, Opfernde Götter, 13–46; Himmelmann 1997, especially 48–54; E. Simon, “Archäologisches
zu Spende und Gebet in Griechenland und Rom,” in Ansichten griechischer Rituale: Kolloquium zu Ehren
von Walter Burkert, ed. F. Graf (Leipzig 1998), 126–42. For fig. 142: Bell-krater in Vienna, Kunsthist. Mus.
3733. Beazley ARV2 1067.1 (Barclay Painter); P. Zanker, Wandel der Hermesgestalt in der attischen Vasen-
malerei (Bonn 1965), 75f., pl. 8 (ibid. for the libation-pouring Apollo).
47. Delphi, Mus. 8140 (unattributed). Wehgartner 55, 82f., no. 16, color pl. II; Maaß 54, pl. 1.
48. See the catalogue of types of the sacrificing Apollo in my published dissertation, Opfernde Götter,
39–46.
49. Temple of Zeus pediments in Olympia Mus.: Lullies/Hirmer pls. 104f.; Lambrinudakis 293, no. 914,
pl. 263; P. Grunauer in Die Olympia-Skulpturen, ed. H.-V. Herrmann, WdF 577 (Darmstadt 1987), 46–54,
pl. 2f.
50. Pausanias 5.8.3; 8.48.1.
51. Kassel, Staatliche Kunstsammlung Sk112. Lullies/Hirmer pl. 160; Lambrinudakis 312, no. 1083, pl. 277.
52. Lambrinudakis 310f., pls. 274–76; cup by the Penthesilea Painter in Munich, Antikensammlungen
2689: ibid., no. 1071, pl. 275; Beazley, ARV2 879.2.
53. For the myth of Ixion, see C. Lochin, “Ixion,” in LIMC 5 (1990), 857–62, pls. 554–57.
54. E. Simon, “Apollon/Apollo,” in LIMC 2 (1984), 365.
55. Pfeiff 81–84, pls. 31–33; E. Schmidt, Der Kasseler Apollon und seine Repliken, Antike Plastik 5 (Ber-
lin 1966); Lambrinudakis 219, no. 295; U. Schmidt and P. Gercke, eds., Apollon und Athena, exh. cat., Staatl.
Kunstsammlung Kassel (Kassel 1991); W. Fuchs and M. Hirmer, Die Skulptur der Griechen, 3rd ed. (Munich
1983), 79f., ill. 72. For literature on the attribution to Phidias, see Schmidt, TKWü, 40 (in place of E. Simon,
Helbig no. 1788, read H. v. Steuben).
56. As is the case with Hero A from Riace: see Fuchs and Hirmer, Skulptur der Griechen (n. 55), 78–78b.
Winckelmann described this particular feature of the statue of Apollo before it went to Kassel from Rome.
See P. Lummel in Schmidt and Gercke, Apollon und Athena (n. 55), 47; see also E. Schmidt, Kasseler Apol-
lon (n. 55), 12: “The mouth is slightly open, the upper teeth visible.” The larger opening of Riace Warrior
A’s mouth denotes savagery, which can also be seen in the centaurs of the south metopes of the Parthenon.
The slight opening of the lips of the Kassel Apollo, for which Winckelmann could cite no other divine
figure as a parallel, shows, in my opinion, the Delphic god as the oracle speaker mentioned by Pausanias.
57. Travlos 70f., no. 118.

ARTEMIS
G. Bruns, Die Jägerin Artemis (diss. Munich 1929).
Burkert 149–52.
W. Burkert, Homo Necans, RGVV 32 (Berlin/New York 1972) = Burkert, HN.
Deubner, AF, 204–10.
 Notes to Pages 167–172 373

Heubeck, Schriften 260–64.

L. Kahil, “Artemis,” in LIMC 2 (1984), 618–753, pls. 442–563.
Moustaka, 30–36.
Nilsson, 481–500.
Pingiatoglou 1981, 98–119.
H. Sarian, “Hekate,” in LIMC 6 (1992), addenda, 985–1018, pls. 654–73.
Th. Schreiber, “Artemis,” in ML 1 (1884/90), 558–608.
Shapiro, ACT, 64–66.
E. Simon, “Artemis/Diana,” in LIMC 2 (1984), 792–849, pl. 587–624.
Strasburger, “Artemis,” in Lexikon 65–67.

1. Plutarch, Themistocles 13. See R. Hampe, Kult der Winde in Athen und Kreta, SBHeid (Heidelberg
1967), 7–9.
2. Wilamowitz, Gl. Hell., 1:165–81; Otto, Götter, 81–91. See also K. Hoenn, Artemis: Gestaltwandel einer
Göttin (Zürich 1946); Nilsson 481–500.
3. Ventris/Chadwick 127, 278; Burkert 45n23. She is perhaps already represented as a huntress on a
Minoan gem: Kahil 624, no. 1, pl. 442.
4. In L. Preller and C. Robert, Griechische Mythologie (Berlin 1887), 296n2.
5. Nilsson 481. Her popularity is clear also from the abundance of images assembled by Kahil, Sarian,
and Simon in LIMC.
6. Meuli, Schriften, 2, especially 948–1018; Burkert, HN.
7. See especially the hero’s prayer to Artemis at the beginning of Euripides’ Hippolytus.
8. Pausanias 1.19.6; 1.41.3; 5.18.8; 7.26.3; 7.26.11; 8.32.4.
9. Meuli, Schriften, 2:948.
10. L. Kahil, AntK 8 (1965): 20–33; AntK 20 (1977): 86–98; Simon, Festivals, 83–88. For the bear hunt
see Meuli, Schriften, 2:951–58.
11. Th. Kraus, Hekate: Studien zu Wesen und Bild der Göttin in Kleinasien und Griechenland (Heidel-
berg 1960); Moustaka 30f.; Sarian 985–88; E. Simon, “Der Laginafries und der Hekate-hymnos in Hesiods
Theogonie,” AA (1993): 277–84.
12. Boeotian amphora, Athens, Nat. Mus. 5893. Hampe, Sagenbilder, pl. 17.2; Nilsson 308f.; Simon/
Hirmer pls. 16f.; Kahil 626, no. 21, pl. 443.
13. Meuli, Schriften, 2:943f., 958, 990–93.
14. Meuli, Schriften, 2:950, 982, 995f.; Himmelmann 1997, 18–20.
15. Heraklion, Arch. Mus. 2764 and 2722 (neck). S. Marinatos and M. Hirmer, Kreta, Thera und das
mykenische Hellas (Munich 1976), pls. 108–10; Buchholz/Karageorghis 93f., no. 1163.
16. S. Marinatos, BCH 60 (1936): 241–44; Meuli, Schriften, 2:945n2.
17. Artemis Boulephoros in Miletus: BCH 1 (1877): 288. For Artemis Boulaia in Athens, see R. E.
Wycherley, The Athenian Agora III: Literary and Epigraphical Testimonia (Princeton 1957), nos. 118–21. It
is clear from the inscriptions that the Athenian prytanes sacrificed to an Artemis with the titles Boulaia
and Phosphoros in addition to Apollo (and Athena). For the epithet Phosphoros see Maaß, Prohedrie, 122.
18. Wycherley, Agora III, 58, no. 123. For the common meal of the prytanes, see Aristotle, Constitution
of the Athenians 43.3. For the tholos in the Agora, see Thompson/Wycherley 41–46.
19. London, British Mus. 816. Kahil 687, no. 882, pl. 512 (dated too early). According to A. Moustaka,
“Enodia,” in LIMC 3 (1986), 743f., it concerns Enodia.
374 Notes to Pages 172–180

20. Drerup, ArchHom, 123–28.

21. K. O. Müller, Die Dorier (Breslau 1824), 1:372; see n. 9 in introduction and n. 9 in the chapter on
Apollo.
22. K. Latte, Römische Religionsgeschichte (Munich 1960), 170; in contrast: Simon, “Artemis/Diana,”
792f.; Simon, GdR, 51f.
23. Nilsson 498.
24. O. Kern, Die Inschriften von Magnesia (Berlin 1900), 213 (index), s.v. Artemis.
25. O. Jessen, “Hegemone 1,” in RE 7.2 (1912), 2597.
26. Nilsson 499; a different, but no more satisfactory, explanation can be found in Wide, LK, 111f.
27. Wycherley, Agora III, 56, no. 119.
28. See above n. 3. For Artemis Chitone see Schreiber 572f.
29. Wide, LK, 111f.
30. Moustaka, “Enodia,” 743f. See also n. 19 above.
31. Nilsson, GF, 182–89. As assistant at childbirth (Artemis Eileithyia), the goddess also looked after
the new generation, a point underestimated by Nilsson (493). See also I. Jucker, “Frauenfest in Korinth,”
AntK 6 (1963): 47–61; Th. Hadzisteliou Price, Kourotrophos (Leiden 1978), 225 (index), s.v. Artemis; Pingi-
atoglou 1981, 98–119; Kahil 676f., nos. 720–24, and n. 10 above.
32. Würzburg, Martin-von-Wagner-Mus. HA 3935. H. Rühfel, Das Kind in der griechischen Kunst
(Mainz 1984), 217–22. The head in the Martin-von-Wagner-Museum comes from such a statue. See Rühfel,
ibid., 220, ill. 90; T. Lorenz in Simon, Führer, 246f.
33. Meuli, Schriften, 2:950, 981f.
34. London, British Mus. E432. Beazley, ARV2 1472.2 (Heracles Painter); Kahil 653, no. 396, pl. 478
(dated too late).
35. Meuli, Schriften, 2:993f.
36. C. Blümel, Die archaisch griechischen Skulpturen der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin (Berlin 1963),
41f., no. 33, figs. 90–93.
37. E. Simon, “Hekate in Athen,” AM 100 (1985): 271–84, especially 272f. The bronze head from
Nemi in Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 1624, may come from a Late Archaic three-bodied statue of
Diana: Simon, “Artemis/Diana,” 816, no. 110, pl. 605; B. Poulsen and T. Fischer-Hansen, eds., In the Sacred
Grove of Diana: Finds from the Sanctuary at Nemi, exh. cat., Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek (Copenhagen 1997),
128, no. 1.
38. Maaß, Prohedrie, 122, on IG II2 5050. We find Artemis with the Charites in Sparta also. See Wide,
LK, 124f. For Hecate with the Charites, see Harrison, “Charites,” 198, nos. 28–34, pls. 154f.; Sarian 1004f.,
nos. 217–33, pls. 669f. For the Hecate of Alcamenes, see Ridgway I: 318f.
39. The prayer of Medea in Euripides’ play (161–63) serves as one example among many.
40. Schreiber 559–62.
41. Bacchylides 11.95ff. Snell. For Melampus, who purified the Proetides in the sanctuary of Artemis,
see E. Simon, “Melampous,” in LIMC 6 (1992), 407f., nos. 4–7, pl. 206.
42. Or, rather, protective spirits of the hunt, as in Meuli, Schriften, 2:962.
43. K. Meuli, “Scythica Vergiliana,” Schweizer Archiv für Volkskunde 56 (1960): 125ff. = Meuli, Schriften,
2:757ff. For Heracles and the deer, see 797–813.
44. W. Krämer, “Prähistorische Brandopferplätze”; see n. 14 in the chapter on Zeus and fig. 5.
45. Müller, Die Dorier, 373. For the tomb of the Hyperborean maidens in the precinct of Artemis, see
Nilsson 380f.; Ph. Zaphiropoulou, “Hyperboreoi,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 641–43.
 Notes to Pages 180–186 375

46. Nilsson, GF, 209; Ph. Bruneau, Recherches sur les cults de Délos, BEFAR 217 (Paris 1970), passim.
47. Ph. Bruneau and J. Ducat, Guide de Délos (Paris 1965), 16, 99f., no. 46.
48. See especially Pingiatoglou 1981.
49. N. Kontoleon, Ergon 1959 (Athens 1960), 127, ill. 135.
50. H. Gallet De Santerre and J. Tréheux, “Rapport sur le dépôt égéen et géométrique de l’Artémision
à Délos,” BCH 71/72 (1947/48): pl. XXV; R. Hampe, Gymnasium 63 (1956): 12, 14, pl. 10; Buchholz/Kara-
georghis 107, no. 1289.
51. See p. 284 in the chapter on Ares.
52. Bell-krater, Naples, Museo Nazionale H2200. FR pl. 146; Beazley, ARV2 1440.1 (Oenomaus Painter);
I. Triantis, “Oinomaos,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 20, no. 6.
53. Nilsson, GF, 238–40.
54. Lullies/Hirmer pls. 162–64; H. Beck, P. Bol, and M. Bückling, eds., Polyklet: Der Bildhauer der
griechischen Klassik, exh. cat., Liebieghaus Frankfurt (Mainz 1990), 213–39.
55. I. Jucker in Festschrift Karl Schefold (Bern 1967), 136.
56. E. Simon, “Kybele,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 750, no. 19, pl. 508.
57. The Anatolian types of cult statues for Artemis are dealt with by R. Fleischer in LIMC 2 (1984),
753–66, including the most important, that of Artemis Ephesia: 755–63, nos. 1–136, pls. 564–73.
58. Cf. the Archaic ivory statuette of a eunuch from Ephesus now in London, British Mus. 1907.1202.8.
E. Akurgal, Die Kunst Anatoliens (Berlin 1961), 198, figs. 158f.; in general, see H. Hepding, “Hierodouloi,”
in RE 8.2 (1913), 1460f.
59. Simon, “Kybele,” 762f., nos. 121–23, pls. 517f.
60. For Taurobolian altars for Cybele, see n. 59 and ibid., 764, no. 131, pl. 519. Bull sacrifices for Artemis
Ephesia are depicted on the theater frieze of Hierapolis (Pamukkale), upon which G. Seiterle based his
hypothesis: AW 10 (1979): 3–16.
61. Seiterle (n. 60), 3–16.
62. E. Akurgal, Ancient Civilisations and Ruins of Turkey (Istanbul 1969), 147 (“like the temples of
Artemis at Sardis and Magnesia”); ibid., 243, on the temple in Ankara and the Temple of Cybele in Pessinus,
which is likewise oriented toward the west.
63. G. Lippold, Die griechische Plastik: Handbuch der Archäologie (Munich 1950), 74. Conversely, the
Athenians were emotionally connected with the Ionian states, as Herodotus reports in his account of the
tragedy The Capture of Miletus by Phrynichos (6.21): Strasburger, Lexikon, 362.
64. E. Meyer, “Zoster 1,” in RE 10.A (1972), 848–53.
65. For Nemesis and Artemis, see E. Simon, AntK 3 (1960): 25f.; P. Karanastassi, “Nemesis,” in LIMC 6
(1992), 752, nos. 192–98, pl. 443.
66. L. Kahil, AntK 8 (1965): 20–33, pls. 7–9. For the example shown here (fig. 156), Brauron, Mus. A25,
see Kahil, ibid., pl. 7.3; Simon, Festivals, 83, pl. 24.2.
67. R. M. Dawkins, The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia (London 1929); Wide, LK, 409 (index), s.v. Arte-
mis Orthia; Stibbe 1996, 26–31.
68. O. Rubensohn in RE 18.1 (1949), 1851.
69. G. Dickins in Dawkins, Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia (n. 67), 163–86, pls. 47–62.
70. Dawkins, Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia (n. 67), pls. 99, 160; L. E. Marangou, Lakonische Elfenbein-
und Beinschnitzereien (Tübingen 1969), 30f., no. 12, fig. 222; C. Gasparri, “Dionysus,” in LIMC 3 (1986), 440,
no. 152.
71. Jucker, AntK 6 (1963): 59f.
376 Notes to Pages 186–194

72. E. Dyggve, Das Laphrion: Der Tempelbezirk von Kalydon (Copenhagen 1948), 297ff.; F. Poulsen,
ibid., 340f.
73. Early Lucanian volute-krater: Taranto, Mus. IG8263. A. D. Trendall, Early South Italian Vase Paint-
ing (Mainz 1974), 38, no. 350, pls. 24f. (Karneia Painter); Gasparri, “Dionysus” (n. 70), 490, no. 801, pl. 393.
74. The material is collected by E. Spartz, Das Wappenbild des Herrn und der Herrin der Tiere (diss.
Munich 1962); Kahil (624, nos. 2–10, pl. 442) presents a series of Bronze Age gems and ivory reliefs whose
identification remains open.
75. M. W. de Visser, Die nicht menschengestaltigen Götter der Griechen (Leiden 1903), 213f.; U. Kron in
Kotinos, 56–63.
76. Rome, Palatine, House of Livia; Simon, GdR, 55, ill. 69.
77. Athens, Kerameikos Mus. 64. M. Xagorari, Untersuchungen zu frühgriechischen Grabsitten (Mainz
1996), 84f., pls. 18.1f.
78. Heraklion, Arch. Mus. 388; Marinatos/Hirmer pl. 177. It could be a case of an import from Anato-
lia, as G. Karo proposed in his initial publication.
79. Paris, Louvre. J. Dörig, “Giocattolo,” in EAA 3 (1960), 908f. Forerunners of these are the “bell idols”:
Xagorari, Untersuchungen (n. 77), 5f., nos. 1–8, pls. 2f. For a parallel with rows of figures painted on the
garment, cf. Paris, Louvre CA623; Hampe/Simon ill. 429.
80. F. R. Grace, Archaic Sculpture in Boeotia (Cambridge, MA, 1939), 13. For Artemis Pergaia see
R. Fleischer in LIMC 2 (1984), 765f., pl. 574.
81. Nilsson, MMR, 458f.
82. Alabastron, Delos, Mus. B6191, from the Heraeum. Kahil 626, no. 25.
83. Florence, Mus. Arch. 4209. Simon/Hirmer pl. 51; Kahil 626, no. 33, pl. 445.
84. R. Hampe, Die Gleichnisse Homers und die Bildkunst seiner Zeit (Tübingen 1952), 31–36; F. Hölscher,
Die Bedeutung archaischer Tierkampfbilder (Würzburg 1972).
85. Helbig 2, no. 1793 (H. von Steuben); E. Künzl, Frühhellenistische Gruppen (diss. Cologne 1968), 92f.
86. Ridgway I: 191–95; Lullies/Hirmer pls. 21–23; Schefold 1993, 174–78, ill. 181a–d.
87. R. Hampe, GGA 215 (1963): 125–52: review of J. Dörig/O. Gigon, Der Kampf der Götter und Titanen.
Schefold (in Schefold 1993, fig. 181c–d) tentatively agrees with the interpretation of the scene as battle
with the Titans, though this is hardly possible iconographically. See J. Bazant, “Titanes No. 2,” in LIMC 8
(1997), 31.
88. J. Benson in Festschrift Karl Schefold (n. 55) 48–60.
89. R. Hampe, “Korfugiebel und frühe Perseusbilder,” AM 60/61 (1935/36): 269–99.
90. Kraay/Hirmer pl. 112, no. 331; Kahil 683, no. 828, pl. 509.
91. Kraay/Hirmer pls. 23–38, 41–46; H. A. Cahn, “Arethousa,” in LIMC 2 (1984), 582–84. The myth of
Alpheus, who pursues Arethusa (Artemis) across the sea, is connected etiologically, in my opinion, with
the cult of the Twelve Gods at Olympia, where Artemis was not grouped with Apollo (who had Hermes
as his companion), but rather with Alpheus. For sources see Long, Twelve Gods, 58f.; see also n. 18 in the
chapter on Demeter.
92. Artemis is probably the winged goddess hurrying in front of a chariot, with bird and dog, on an
Archaic Sicilian relief. See H. Froning in Die Sammlung Kiseleff in Martin-von-Wagner-Museum, ed. E. Simon,
vol. 2 (Mainz 1989), 127–29, no. 205, pl. 83.
93. Athens, Nat. Mus. 607, from the Acropolis. Beazley, ABV 107.1 (Lydos); Kahil 725, no. 1327, pl. 554.
94. Paris, Louvre G341. Beazley, ARV2 601.22 (Niobid Painter); Simon/Hirmer pl. 193; Kahil 727, no.
1348, pl. 557.
 Notes to Pages 194–201 377

95. R. Hampe, “Neue Funde aus Olympia,” Antike 15 (1939): 168ff.; the “Nike of Callimachus,” Athens,
Acropolis Mus. 690; Raubitschek 1949, 18–20, no. 13.
96. Boston, Mus. of Fine Arts 10.185. Beazley, ARV2 550.1 (Pan Painter); J. D. Beazley, The Pan Painter
(Mainz 1974), 1f., pls. 1–4; Kahil 731, no. 1396; “Priapos,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 1030, no. 6, pl. 680.
97. See “Artemis Aristoboule,” in Travlos 121–23.
98. Lekanis lid, Mainz, University 118. Beazley, ARV2 1327.87 (Manner of the Meidias Painter); R. Hampe,
“Eukleia und Eunomia,” RM 62 (1955): 107–23, pls. 42–45; A. Kossatz-Deißmann, “Eukleia no. 4,” in LIMC
4 (1988), 50; CVA Mainz University 2 (1993), pl. 28.3.
99. Berger/Gisler-Huwiler 163f., Figures East VI 40 and 41 on pl. 136. Not only do the goddesses sit
beside one another, but their arms are linked, as G. Despinis discovered. Therefore, their connection is
very close. See Kernos: Festschrift G. Bakalakis (Thessaloniki 1972), 35–42; Kahil 712, no. 1180a. On the effect
of this discovery on the reconstruction of the east pediment, see p. 280 in the chapter on Aphrodite.

AT H E NA
Burkert 139–43.
P. Demargne, “Athena,” in LIMC 2 (1984), 955–1044, pls. 702–65.
A. Furtwängler, “Athene in der Kunst,” in ML 1 (1884/86), 687–704.
Kron, Phylenheroen, especially 32–48.
J. Neils, ed., Worshipping Athena (Madison 1996).
Nilsson 433–44.
F. Pfister, Der Reliquienkult im Altertum, RGVV 5 (Giessen 1909; repr. Berlin/New York 1974), 340–44.
W. Pötscher, Hera: Eine Strukturanalyse im Vergleich mit Athena (Darmstadt 1987).
W. H. Roscher, “Athene,” in ML 1 (1884/86), 675–87.
Shapiro, ACT, 18–47.
Simon, Festivals, 55–72.
Strasburger, “Athena,” in Lexikon, 76f.

1. The name of the goddess, in the form a-ta-no, is perhaps already attested in Linear A. See A. Furu-
mark, Opuscula Atheniensia 6 (1965): 98. As to whether the place name or the name of the goddess is
earlier, Burkert has concluded, in my opinion correctly, that the place name is earlier.
2. Pfister 340–46; Demargne 965–69, nos. 67–117, pls. 711–16.
3. Preller, Gr. Myth., 124ff.; Roscher 675–78.
4. Nilsson, MMR, 420–32.
5. N. Verdelis, Deltion 18 (1963), Chronika 73 (late seventh or early sixth century).
6. On the relationship between Hera and Athena, see pp. 49f. in the chapter on Hera; see also Pötscher.
The link between Hera and Athena is characteristic of cities with Achaean cult traditions.
7. Ventris/Chadwick 126f., 311.
8. The oriental “forerunner” is probably a form of Ishtar, who could have served as the source of both
the armed palace goddess and the goddess of love. See also “Istar” in Haussig, VO, 179.
9. E. Porada, AJA 69 (1965): 173; ibid. 70 (1966): 194.
10. Nilsson, MMR, 428; Nilsson, 442, regarded the association of Athena with the olive tree as typically
Attic, which it is, but not exclusively.
11. W. Richter, Die Landwirtschaft im homerischen Zeitalter, ArchHom 2, ch. H (Göttingen 1968),
135n1039.
378 Notes to Pages 201–210

12. Ventris/Chadwick 438 (index) s.v. olive oil, olives, olive trees; Richter, Landwirtschaft (n. 11), 136.
13. Athens, Nat. Mus. 2666. G. Rodenwaldt, AM 37 (1912): 129ff., pl. 8; Hampe/Simon 49, ill. 77 (with
a later date than Rodenwaldt gives because the revetment has now been attributed to the “cult center” of
Mycenae); Demargne 957, no. 1, pl. 702.
14. Athens, Nat. Mus. 992. Marinatos/Hirmer pl. 207 (below); Hampe/Simon 187, ill. 276; Demargne
957, no. 2, pl. 702.
15. Schliemann’s discoveries in the shaft graves show just how important a role rhyta played. See
Marinatos/Hirmer pls. 175–77. They were meant to be viewed, naturally, from the front, as the bull-head
rhyton (pl. 175) shows. Lion-head rhyta, as on the gold ring, are also attested elsewhere; see Marinatos/
Hirmer pl. 99.
16. For the Arrhephoroi see Deubner, AF, 9–15; W. Burkert, Hermes 94 (1966): 1–25 (in contrast: Simon,
Festivals, 40–43); B. Wesenberg, JdI 110 (1995): 158–64. As detailed in the chapter on Hestia (nn. 21–24
there), I now consider the stool-bearers on the east frieze of the Parthenon to be Kosmo and Trapezo. For
the Mycenaean staircase on the Acropolis, see S. Iacovides, Kriegswesen 1, ArchHom 1, ch. E (Göttingen
1977), 198–291, figs. 40f.
17. See above n. 12. For Aphrodite as mistress of fragrant oils, see pp. 262–63 in the chapter on
Aphrodite.
18. For Zeus and the double axe, see Nilsson 276f., 345. This is the attribute of Carian Zeus in later
times: Kraay/Hirmer pl. 167, no. 638.
19. F. Matz, Göttererscheinung und Kultbild im minoischen Kreta (Wiesbaden 1958).
20. Pfister 340–46; RE 18.3 (1949), 171–201, s.v. Palladion (L. Ziehen/G. Lippold).
21. Including the Athena Aethyia of Megara in Pausanias 1.41.6 and many other Athenas mentioned
by him.
22. Wilamowitz, Gl. Hell., 2:160f.
23. Akurgal/Hirmer 48–54; Haussig, VO, 155.
24. Theogony 886–900, 924–26; West, Theog. Comm., 401–4.
25. See n. 3 in the chapter on Zeus.
26. Akurgal/Hirmer 53.
27. The designation “fallen from heaven” is literally true of meteorites; see U. Kron in Kotinos 63f.
28. Tenos, Mus. Fittschen 129–31, GS 1: “the earliest preserved representation of a divine myth”; Demar-
gne 988, no. 360, pl. 745, and commentary, 1022: “jusqu’ici sans nul doute le premier de la série des Nais-
sances par le crane”; R. Olmos, “Eileithyia No. 1,” in LIMC 3 (1986), 686, and commentary, 697; Schefold
1993, 53, ill. 26; M. Tiverios, “Zeus,” in LIMC 8 (1997), 317. For Zeus’s beard see E. Simon, AntK 25 (1982):
35–38, with fig. 1 (here fig. 175).
29. Exaleiptron, Paris, Louvre CA616. Beazley, ABV 58.122 (C-Painter); Beazley, Dev., 23f., pl. 9.1;
Demargne 986, no. 345, pl. 743.
30. Akurgal/Hirmer pl. 104 above. For winged Athena, see Demargne 964f., nos. 59–66, pl. 710.
31. Hephaestus also manufactures tripods for the gods to use in Iliad 18.373–79.
32. Harpocration, s.v. Nike Athena; E. Simon, Archaiognosia 4 (1985/86 [1989]): 12f.
33. Demargne 963f., nos. 58 and 58a–h.
34. Terracotta, Syracuse, Nat. Mus. (no inv. no.); S. Stucchi, RM 63 (1956): 122–28; Demargne 962f.,
no. 54.
35. S.v. omphaletomos, in Liddell and Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th ed. (Oxford 1996).
 Notes to Pages 210–215 379

36. A. Kossatz-Deißmann, “Hera No. 1,” in LIMC 4 (1988), 662; “Hera No. 2,” ibid., 718, no. 490. For a
Sicilian calyx-krater showing a cult statue of Hera of Argos with shears, see Pingiatoglou 1981, 94.
37. Heraklion, Arch. Mus. 18502. Demargne 961, no. 34, pl. 707. Doro Levi kindly informs me that the
restoration with the helmet is not entirely secure, since individual clay helmets, as votive offerings, were
also found.
38. D. Levi, ASAtene 33/34 (1957): 217ff.
39. Athens, Nat. Mus. 6457. H. G. Niemeyer, Festschrift Eugen von Mercklin (Waldsassen 1964), 106–11,
pl. 47; Demargne 965, no. 72; Shapiro, ACT, 28n80, pl. 8b–c.
40. Olympia, Mus. 4500. Demargne 965, no. 69, pl. 711.
41. Demargne 969–74, nos. 118–73, pls. 716–23.
42. Athens, Nat. Mus. 6447. Demargne 972, no. 146, pl. 720.
43. Shapiro, ACT, 18–21.
44. London, British Mus. B130. Beazley, Dev., 88–90 (Burgon Group); Demargne 969, no. 118, pl. 716.
45. London, British Mus. B605. Beazley, ABV 411.4 (Kuban Group); also Beazley, Dev., 96f.; Simon/
Hirmer pl. 234, color pl. LI; Demargne 971, no. 140, pl. 719.
46. Cf. C. J. Herington, Athena Parthenos and Athena Polias (Manchester 1955), 41f. On this problem
see also the review of Herington by E. Harrison, AJA 61 (1957): 208f.
47. K. Lange, Götter Griechenlands (Berlin 1946), pl. 31.
48. Nevertheless, it is the two columns, not the cocks, that are the constants. In the fourth century the
cocks were replaced by other motifs. See N. Eschbach, Statuen auf panathenäischen Preisamphoren des 4.
Jhs. v. Chr. (Mainz 1986). On the Hagia Triada sarcophagus (fig. 14), a krater stands between two columns
crowned by birds and double axes. In the Phoenician world there are corresponding pairs of columns, for
Melkart in Tyre for example, and in the temple of Jerusalem. See U. Kron in Kotinos, 59. Thus, the pair of
columns on the Acropolis stands in a long tradition.
49. Paris, private collection (Niarchos). Demargne 1010, no. 574, pl. 760; Simon, Festivals, pls. 16.2, 17.2;
Himmelmann 1997, 22, ill. 10a–b.
50. See n. 7 in the chapter on Poseidon. The trittoia is already attested for the Mycenaean era in Linear
B; see Burkert 50–51.
51. For example, on the dinos by Lydos: see Beazley, ABV 107.1. For further examples, see in H. A. Cahn
in M. u. M. Auktion 18 (Basel 1958), no. 85.
52. Pausanias 1.23.4. The statue was made, as the inscription from the Acropolis and Pliny’s HN 34.80
attest, by the Athenian bronze smith Pyrrhus: Raubitschek 1949, 185, no. 166; A. Rumpf, “Pyrrhos No. 18,”
in RE 24 (1963), 169f.
53. Ira S. Mark, The Sanctuary of Athena Nike in Athens: Architectural Stages and Chronology (Prince­
ton 1993); Shapiro, ACT, 24. The Patrocles Altar is no longer dated, as it was by Raubitschek 1949, 359,
to the time of the reorganization of the Panathenaia (566 B.C.); it is now dated to the third tyranny of
Pisistratus (ca. 540–530 B.C.).
54. See above, at the beginning of this chapter, with n. 2.
55. In the earlier editions of this book, I followed A. Frickenhaus, AM 33 (1908), 17–32, who described
the xoanon of Athena Polias as a seated statue, just as Nilsson (436) and Herington (above n. 46) did. By
contrast, J. H. Kroll, in Studies in Honor of H. A. Thompson, Hesperia Suppl. 20 (1982): 65–76, argued for
a standing xoanon, while H. Jung, Thronende und sitzende Götter (Berlin 1982), 53–64, stated that it was
not possible to come to a conclusion either way. Shapiro, ACT, 25, legitimately criticizes Kroll’s argument,
380 Notes to Pages 215–226

which states that we can draw a conclusion about the attributes of the Archaic xoanon from Athenian coins
of the third century that show Athena standing with a phiale and a little owl.
56. Demargne 959, nos. 19–21, pls. 704f. For discussion and more recent literature, see Schmidt, TKWü,
24f., nos. 1–3).
57. It was painted, which is to be expected, even where no colors can be discerned today. This gorgo-
neion distinguishes the Attic seated statue from the Athena Lindia (from Rhodes and Sicily), which sports
rich attachments hanging from the breast: Demargne 959f., no. 22f.
58. Kron, Phylenheroen, 32–39.
59. Munich, Antikensammlungen 2413. Beazley, ARV2 495.1: the painter, named after this stamnos, is
very close to Hermonax; Simon/Hirmer pls. 176f.; Demargne 999, no. 476.
60. S. Marinatos and M. Hirmer, Kreta, Thera und das mykenische Hellas (Munich 1976), pl. 60, color
pl. XXI.
61. Schloss Fasanerie, near Fulda (Adolphseck). Beazley, ARV2 1346.1 (Kekrops Painter); Simon/Hirmer
pls. 226f.; Demargne 996f., no. 454 (not a bell- but a calyx-krater). [Editor’s note: this interpretation of fig. 188
represents a revision of the author’s earlier thinking. For the full argument see her article “Eine Allegorie
im Zentrum des Parthenonfrieses,” in Ēchadin: Timētikos tomos gia tē Stella Drougou, ed. M. Giannopoulou
and Ch. Kallinē (Athens 2016), 510–18.]
62. Robertson, HGA, 274–76; Lullies/Hirmer pls. 90–92; Demargne 1005, no. 529, pl. 759.
63. I. Krauskopf, “Athanasia,” in LIMC 2 (1984), 953–55, nos. 1–4, pl. 702.
64. The best marble replica, which came to light in 1884 in Rome, is in the Liebieghaus Museum,
Frankfurt. In the garden there, the bronze group of Myron was reconstructed in the original material.
P. C. Bol, Liebieghaus, Antike Bildwerke, vol. 1 (Melsungen 1983), 55–63, no. 16; Demargne 1015, no. 623, pl.
764. For the replica see B. and K. Schauenberg, Antike Plastik 12 (1973): 47–67. For the symbolism of the
goddess’s Corinthian helmet, under which a Persian cap appears, see E. R. Knauer, AA (1992): 379f.
65. For the interpretation see J. D. Beazley, Hesperia 24 (1955): 313; T. Georgiades, Musik und Rhythmus
bei den Griechen (Hamburg 1958), 8–10.
66. F. Eckstein, “Die attischen Grabmälergesetze,” JdI 73 (1958): 18–29.
67. Athens, Acropolis Mus. 695. H. Kenner, “Die trauernde Athena,” Anzeiger Österreichische Akademie
der Wissenschaften 114 (1978): 379–406; Demargne 1015, no. 625, pl. 765.
68. New York, Metropolitan Mus. 50.11.1. Demargne 976, no. 205, pl. 728.
69. Kraay/Hirmer pl. 153, no. 483f.
70. Overbeck, SQ, 137f., nos. 758–64; Robertson, HGA, 320f., pl. 109d; Ridgway II: 170f.; K. Hartswick,
AJA 87 (1983): 335–46 (both skeptical); H. Protzmann, ed., Die Antiken im Albertinum (Mainz 1993), 16, no.
2 (accepting Furtwängler with qualifications).
71. Würzburg, Martin-von-Wagner-Museum L309. Beazley, ABV 268.28 (Antimenes Painter); Simon,
Führer, 117; J. Burow, Der Antimenesmaler, Kerameus 7 (Mainz 1989), 94, no. 128, pl. 126 (incorrectly inter-
preted as the Judgment of Paris).
72. Cup (interior), Munich 2648. Beazley, ARV2 441.185 (Douris, a student piece?); D. Buitron-Oliver,
Douris, Kerameus 9 (Mainz 1995), 88, pl. 134 (O, 8): Oedipus Painter (a close collaborator of the late
Douris).
73. Demargne 977f., nos. 212–33, pls. 728–31.
74. Athens, Nat. Mus. 129. W. H. Schuchhardt, Antike Plastik 2 (1963); Lullies/Hirmer pls. 158f.;
Demargne 977, no. 220, pl. 729.
75. Patras, Mus. T. Hölscher and E. Simon, AM 91 (1976): 115–48, pl. 43.
 Notes to Pages 227–233 381

76. The latter is dealt with in the article cited in n. 75; see also LIMC 1 (1981), 602f., s.v. Amazones, no.
246 (P. Devambez/A. Kauffmann-Samaras).
77. LIMC 7 (1994), 163–66, s.v. Pandora, pls. 100f. (M. Oppermann).
78. E. Berger, Der Parthenon in Basel: Dokumentation zu den Metopen (Mainz 1986).
79. Berger, Parthenon in Basel (n. 78), 48–50, pls. 34f. The names of Hera and Themis have been pro-
posed for the goddess sitting before her on the rock (see Berger). In North Metope 25 (Berger, 38f., pls.
22f.), the statue at which Helen seeks refuge was thought to be the Palladium of Athena. Berger, however,
provides good arguments for a cult statue of Aphrodite.
80. Berger, Parthenon in Basel (n. 78), 60f., pls. 44f., 47.1.
81. Berger/Gisler-Huwiler 160f., pls. 135, 137.2, 140.2.
82. Discussed further by E. Simon, “Die Mittelgruppe im Westgiebel des Parthenon,” in Tainia: Fest-
schrift für Roland Hampe (Mainz 1980), 239–55. The most important vase painting, an Attic red-figure
hydria, in Pella (80.514) from the circle of the Pronomos Painter, was not yet known at that time. Here
the tree stands between Athena and Poseidon and the lightning bolt appears before it: Greece and the Sea,
exh. cat. (Amsterdam 1987), 204, no. 104 (St. Drougou); LIMC 7 (1994), 474, s.v. Poseidon, no. 241, pl. 375
(E. Simon). A new reconstruction of the west pediment with the help of the hydria in Pella that was cer-
tainly inspired by it would be worthwhile.
83. On the natural phenomena on the east pediment, see E. Simon, “Die Geburt der Athena im
Ostgiebel des Parthenon,” in Ausgewählte Schriften, vol. 1 (Mainz 1998), no. 8. This is the German version
of a paper published in Spanish in R. Olmos, ed., Coloquio sobre el puteal de la Moncloa (Madrid 1986),
65–85.
84. E. B. Harrison, AJA 71 (1967): 27ff. E. Berger and others follow her, despite the fact that their recon-
structions vary enormously in their details; cf. O. Palagia, The Pediments of the Parthenon (Leiden/New
York/Cologne 1993), 18–39; Buitron-Oliver 29–49 (O. Palagia).

HEPHAESTUS
F. Brommer, Hephaistos (Mainz 1978). Also by Brommer are several shorter articles cited by Hermary/
Jacquemin (630) and Brommer (1–4).
Burkert 167–68.
R. J. Forbes, Bergbau, Steinbruchtätigkeit und Hüttenwesen, ArchHom 2, ch. K (Göttingen 1967).
J.-R. Gisler, “Prometheus,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 531–53, pls. 420–30.
A. Hermary/A. Jacquemin, “Hephaistos,” in LIMC 4 (1988), 627–54, pls. 386–405.
L. Malten, “Hephaistos,” in RE 8.1 (1912), 311–66.
Nilsson 526–29.
A. Rapp, “Hephaistos,” in ML 1.2 (1886/90), 2036–74.
H. A. Shapiro, ACT Suppl. (Mainz 1995), 1–14.
E. Simon, “Vulcanus,” in LIMC 8 (1997), 283–93, pls. 204–11.
J. Wiesner, “Der Gott auf dem Esel,” AA (1969): 531–45.

1. For the Homeric Hephaestus see H. Schrade, Gymnasium 57 (1950): 38–55, 94–112. See also Brommer
passim. For Hephaestus and the shield of Achilles, see E. Simon in Beschreibungskunst—Kunstbeschreibung,
ed. G. Boehm and H. Pfotenhauer (Munich 1995), 123–41 = Ausgewählte Schriften, vol. 1 (Mainz 1998), no. 1.
2. Reinhardt, Ilias, 411.
382 Notes to Pages 233–239

3. P. Friedländer, Johannes von Gaza and Paulus Silentiarius (Leipzig/Berlin 1912; repr. Hildesheim
1968).
4. For the influence of this figure, see E. R. Curtius, Europäische Literatur und lateinisches Mittelalter
(Bern/Munich 1965), 527–29.
5. For early metalworkers, who worked with dangerous substances such as arsenic, lameness may
have been an occupational hazard. See E. Rosner, Forschungen und Fortschritte 29 (1955): 362f.; Burkert 97f.
Hephaestus did not specialize: see Forbes 35.
6. Reinhardt, Ilias, 102; Friedländer, Studien, 3–18; P. Friedländer, “Lachende Götter,” Die Antike 10
(1934): 209ff.
7. For example, the cupbearer skipping on tiptoes in the fresco of the Tomba Golini I in Orvieto. See
S. Steingräber, Etruscan Painting (New York 1985), 278, no. 32.
8. A. Kossatz-Deißmann, “Iris,” in LIMC 5 (1990), 746f., nos. 42–67, pls. 487–89. On the Sosias cup
(Berlin, Antikensammlung F2278; see also n. 35 and fig. 117 in the chapter on Hestia), Hebe is the cupbearer,
while in Sappho fr. 2.13–16 Lobel-Page, even Aphrodite serves in this role.
9. Reinhardt, Ilias, 401–11.
10. Malten 311; L. Malten, JdI 27 (1912): 232ff.; Nilsson 526–29; Forbes 35; Brommer 1–3; Hermary/Jac-
quemin 628; Shapiro, ACT Suppl., 6.
11. Malten 315, no. 6; D. Mustelli, “Efestia,” in EAA 3 (1960), 230f.
12. L. Bernabò-Brea, “Lemno,” in EAA 4 (1961), 542–45; E. Meyer, “Lemnos,” in KlPauly 3 (1975), 553f.,
notes that the island “was already densely inhabited in the prehistoric period.”
13. H. Schmidt, H. Schliemanns Sammlung trojanischer Altertümer (Berlin 1902); K. Bittel, JdI 74 (1959):
1–34; M. Siebler, AW 25 (1994): 40–54; see 55–64 on “Priam’s Treasure” in the Pushkin Museum.
14. Jacoby, FGrHist 1.A (repr. Leiden 1968), 125, no. 4, fr. 71, with “Commentary,” 1.A, 454.
15. Nilsson 529.
16. Wilamowitz, Gl. Hell., 1:140f.
17. Jacoby, FGrHist 3.B (repr. Leiden 1964), 169, no. 334, fr. 2; Deubner, AF, 232–34; Shapiro, ACT
Suppl., 2.
18. Kron, Phylenheroen, 32–39.
19. Gl. Hell., 2:140. For Prometheus see Gisler.
20. Gisler 548, no. 118. Symmetrical arrangement of gods on an altar is typical of archaizing sculp-
ture. For examples see W. Fuchs, Die Vorbilder der neuattischen Reliefs, JdI Ergänzungsheft 20 (Berlin 1959),
pl. 28b.
21. For Pandora see n. 77 in the chapter on Athena; Gisler 547.
22. A. Kossatz-Deißmann, “Hellen,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 614f.
23. For Hephaestus and Charis see Shapiro, ACT Suppl., 10–13.
24. D. Levi, “Il cabirio di Lemno,” in Festschrift for A. K. Orlandos (Athens 1964), 110–32; D. Vollkommer-
Glökler, “Megaloi Theoi,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 821. See also n. 36 below.
25. In the restoration he carries a sword or knife in his right hand. The restoration is not secure.
26. On the double axe of Carian Zeus, see n. 18 in the chapter on Athena.
27. London, British Mus. B424. Beazley, ABV 168; Beazley, Dev., 54, pl. 21.1 (“perhaps the finest of
Little-Master cups”); Hermary/Jacquemin 646, no. 191.
28. “Tyrrhenian” amphora, Berlin F1704. Beazley, ABV 96.14; P. Demargne, “Athena,” in LIMC 2 (1984),
986f., no. 346, pl. 743.
 Notes to Pages 238–246 383

29. This myth has not yet been identified in Greek art, but it may occur in a frieze of the Temple of
Vulcan in Ostia. See Simon, GdR, 254, ill. 331; Simon, “Vulcanus,” 289, no. 69.
30. Fr. 349 Lobel-Page; in addition, see B. Snell, Gesammelte Schriften (Göttingen 1966), 102–4; see also
T. B. L. Webster, Greek Art and Literature 700–530 B.C. (London 1959), 62f.
31. See n. 32 in the chapter on Hestia.
32. Florence, Mus. Arch. 4209. Beazley, Dev., 31; Simon/Hirmer pl. 56 (center); Hermary/Jacquemin
638, no. 114; Hedreen 1992, 1, pl. 1b.
33. Athens, Nat. Mus. 664. Carpenter 15–19, pl. 5; Hermary/Jacquemin 639, no. 129, pl. 393.
34. F. Brommer, Satyroi (diss. Munich 1937); E. Buschor, Satyrtänze und frühes Drama, Sitzungsberi-
chte Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Munich 1943); in contrast see R. Hampe, JdI 90 (1975): 91,
with references.
35. P. Wolters and G. Bruns, Das Kabirenheiligtum bei Theben, vol. 1 (Berlin 1940); one example can be
found in fig. 300 here.
36. TrGF 3:214–16, frr. 95–97a Radt. The passage concerns an episode with the Argonauts on Hephaestus’
island, Lemnos; see n. 24 above.
37. Webster, Greek Art (n. 30) 62f.
38. Calyx-krater, Paris, Louvre G162. Beazley, ARV2 186.47 (Kleophrades Painter); Hermary/Jacquemin
638, no. 117, pl. 391.
39. Paris, Cab. Méd. 542. Beazley, ARV2 438.133 (Douris); Hermary/Jacquemin 644, no. 169b, pl. 400;
D. Buitron-Oliver, Douris, Kerameus 9 (Mainz 1995), 83, no. 178, pl. 100. For the cup’s interior, see Gisler
548, no. 117.
40. F. Brommer, Satyrspiele (Berlin 1959), 29–32, fig. 20; E. Simon in Satyrspiel, ed. B. Seidensticker,
WdF 579 (Darmstadt 1989), 377f.
41. For the Prometheus dramas of Aeschylus, see TrGF 3:302–30, frr. 187a–208a Radt; E. Simon in
Mythen und Menschen, exh. cat., Würzburg 1997 (Mainz 1997), 120–22.
42. Cup by the Foundry Painter, Berlin, Antikensammlung F2294. Beazley, ARV2 400.1; Simon/Hirmer
pl. 158 (above); C. C. Mattusch, The Fire of Hephaistos: Large Classical Bronzes from North American Col-
lections, exh. cat. (Harvard 1996), 182–84.
43. Florence, Mus. Arch. 81600. Not attributed by Beazley; Hermary/Jacquemin 633, no. 44, pl. 388;
Shapiro, ACT Suppl., 4, pl. 73d.
44. White-ground cup, London, British Mus. D 4. Beazley, ARV2 869.55 (Tarquinia Painter); Wehgart-
ner 67f., no. 68; E. Simon “Anesidora,” in LIMC 1 (1981), 790f. (Anesidora is the name of Pandora here), no.
1, pl. 642. For the Sophoclean satyr play Pandora, or The Hammerers, see TrGF 4:388–90, frr. 482–86 Radt.
Sophocles typically preferred satyr plays with young gods. Thus Pandora became an early work of the
artisan god.
45. Astragal (used for holding knucklebones of this shape for games), London, British Mus. E804.
Beazley, ARV2 765.20 (Sotades Painter); L. Curtius, Der Astragal des Sotades, Sitzungsberichte der Heidel-
berger Akademie der Wissenschaften (Heidelberg 1923); G. Neumann, Gesten und Gebärden in der
griechischen Kunst (Berlin 1965), 23f., fig. 9, regards the young women as Aurai (breezes).
46. For Daedalus see J. E. Nyenhuis, “Daidalos et Ikaros,” in LIMC 3 (1986), 313–20, pls. 237–42; S. P.
Morris, Daidalos and the Origins of Greek Art (Princeton 1992); E. Simon in Carter/Morris 407–13 =
Ausgewählte Schriften, vol. 1 (Mainz 1998), no. 3.
47. Dinsmoor, Arch., 179–82; Berve/Gruben/Hirmer 186–88.
384 Notes to Pages 247–250

48. K. O. Müller, Hyperboräisch-römische Studien (1838), 276ff.; H. A. Thompson, AJA 66 (1962): 339–
47. In the earlier editions of this book, this is the accepted interpretation; later interpretations are fully
summarized by U. Kron, “Erechtheus,” in LIMC 4 (1988), addenda, 940, no. 71. In addition, see J. Neils,
“Theseus,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 936, no. 175, pls. 652f.; A. Delivorrias in Buitron-Oliver 1997, 83–90.
49. F. Felton, Griechische tektonische Friese archaischer und klassischer Zeit (Waldsassen 1984), 57–66.
Delivorrias in Buitron-Oliver 1997, 83–90, agrees. This interpretation of book 21 of the Iliad is rejected by
Kron, “Erechtheus” (n. 48 above), but her counterargument is that the three opponents in the frieze are
shown wielding rocks, while Homer speaks of only two river gods, Scamander and Simoeis. This can be
refuted, because Scamander-Xanthos summons not only his brother Simoeis but all the waters around the
Troad in the battle against Achilles (21.308–23).
50. Cuttings for the aegis and gorgoneion are visible on her chest. See Ridgway II: 86, figs. 49f.
51. On Aphrodite see A. Delivorrias in LIMC 2 (1984), 126, no. 1326, pl. 130.
52. Ch. Scheffer, “Return or No Return: The So-Called Ephedrismos Group and the Hephaisteion,”
Opuscula Atheniensia 21 (1996): 179–88. A. Delivorrias’ chapter in Buitron-Oliver 1997, 95–100, was pub-
lished simultaneously, with the older interpretation of an Iliupersis (see n. 53 below). For the group of
women, see ibid., 97, fig. 22; for the pediment see fig. 21.
53. H. A. Thompson, Hesperia 18 (1949): 241ff., pls. 53–55, as also in the earlier editions of this book.
In contrast, see A. Delivorrias, who associated this group with one of the two pediments of the Hephaes-
teum: Attische Giebelskulpturen und Akrotere des 5. Jhs. (Tübingen 1974), 33–40, pls. 10f. and folding pl. 4.
54. The frontal, enthroned Hera on the volute-krater by Polion from Spina could have been inspired
by this hypothetical pediment: Ferrara, Mus. Arch. from grave 127 at Valle Trebba. Beazley, ARV2 1171.1;
N. Alfieri, P. E. Arias, and M. Hirmer, Spina (Munich 1958), pl. 110; H. Froning, Dithyrambos und Vasen-
malerei in Athen (Würzburg 1971), 67–75.
55. Delivorrias, Attische Giebelskulpturen (n. 53 above), pl. 6b.
56. Overbeck, SQ, 146, nos. 821f.; Hermary/Jacquemin 634, no. 67. A. Delivorrias (in Buitron-Oliver
1997, 100) also sees an association with the workshop of Alcamenes in the style of the preserved pediment
figures.
57. S. Karusu, AM 69/70 (1954/55): 67–76; E. B. Harrison, AJA 81 (1977): 137–78; Harrison’s fig. 1 is
Karusu’s reconstruction, fig. 2 is Harrison’s. The latter gives him a torch, the former gives him a scepter,
but both have him stand on the right—that is, to Athena’s left. The reverse arrangement is reconstructed
by E. Diehl, AA (1963): 751ff., ills. 3–5; Simon 284, no. 8, pl. 204.
58. Vatican City, Museo Chiaramonti 1211. Helbig 1 (1963), no. 293 (W. Fuchs); Hermary/Jacquemin 635,
no. 69, pl. 388 = Simon, “Vulcanus,” 286, no. 29.
59. S. Karusu, AM 69/70 (1954/55): 70.
60. Perhaps a copy of the base is preserved on a fragment of a relief in the Vatican from Ostia. Simon,
“Vulcanus,” 290, no. 77, pl. 210.
61. Berger/Gisler-Huwiler 160f., pl. 135.

APHRODITE
St. Böhm, Die “nackte Göttin” (Mainz 1990).
Burkert 152–56.
A. Delivorrias (with G. Berger-Doer and A. Kossatz-Deißmann), “Aphrodite,” in LIMC 2 (1984), 2–151, pls.
6–153.
F. Dümmler, “Aphrodite,” in RE 1.2 (1894), 2729–87.
 Notes to Pages 253–259 385

W. Fauth, Aphrodite Parakyptusa: Untersuchungen zum Erscheinungsbild der vorderasiatischen Dea Pros-
piciens, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften und Literatur, Mainz, geistes- und sozialwis-
senschaftliche Klasse (Mainz 1966), 331–437.
A. Furtwängler, “Aphrodite,” in ML 1.1 (1884/86), 406–19.
R. Hampe, Kretische Löwenschale des 7. Jhs. v. Chr., SBHeid. (Heidelberg 1969).
U. Knigge, “Die zweigestaltige Planetengöttin,” in AM 100 (1985): 285–92.
E. Langlotz, Aphrodite in den Gärten, SBHeid. (Heidelberg 1953/54).
Nilsson 519–36.
E. Schmidt, “Venus,” in LIMC 8 (1997), 192–230, pls. 132–64.
Shapiro, ACT, 118–24.
E. Simon, Die Geburt der Aphrodite (Berlin 1959).

1. Reinhardt, Ilias, 507–21.

2. R. N. Tönges-Stringaris, AM 80 (1965): 1–98. See also the divine couples in figs. 264–266.
3. Pinax, Athens, Nat. Mus. 2526, from the Acropolis. Shapiro, ACT, 120f., pl. 53b.
4. West, Theog. Comm., 211–13, 221–25. See also Friedländer, Studien, 95–98 (a critical discussion of
Jacoby’s article); K. Reinhardt, Vermächtnis der Antike (Göttingen 1960), 25; Heubeck, Schriften, 167–70.
5. Nilsson 520. For Aphrodite’s oriental origin, see Otto, Götter, 92; Simon, Geburt, 24–36; Fauth;
Burkert 152.
6. Xenophon, Hell. 5.4.4. See also below p. 286 in the chapter on Ares.
7. S. Bullo, “Virgo Caelestis,” in LIMC 8 (1997), 269–72, pls. 194f.
8. JdI 52 (1937): 178.
9. J. Klek, “Urios,” in ML 6 (1924–37), 117–21.
10. Simon, Geburt, 43, ill. 26; Delivorrias 114f., no. 1173, pl. 117.
11. E. Buschor, AM 72 (1957): 77–86. For Aphrodite-Hera in western Greece, see H. Speier, RM 62
(1955): 137f.; Simon, Geburt, 27–29.
12. Delivorrias 102, no. 997, pl. 97. The kneeling naked goddess with two acolytes ultimately belongs to
an oriental tradition reaching back into the Archaic age. See Pingiatoglou 1981, 135; Stibbe 1996, 247–53.
Based on the Classical terracottas and their provenance, one might consider whether the Spartan goddess
attested in terracotta and marble and reconstructed by Stibbe could likewise be identified as Aphrodite-
Hera (see Pausanias 3.13.9).
13. See E. Simon, JdI 79 (1964): 310f.; O. Brendel, RM 51 (1936): 62; Helbig 2 (1966), no. 1180 (E. Simon).
14. M. Hörig, Dea Syria (Kevelaer 1979). See also H. J. W. Drijvers, “Dea Syria,” in LIMC 3 (1986),
355–58, pls. 263–66. For the identification of the Etruscan Uni (Juno) with Astarte, see Simon, GdR, 94f.
15. Ventris/Chadwick 125, 168; “Euripides, in his Archelaos, gives the earliest correct etymology of the
name Dione”: E. Siegmann, Hamburger Papyri (Hamburg 1954), 13, no. 118, on lines 46f.; C. Austin, ed.,
Nova Fragmenta Euripidea (Berlin 1968), fr. 2, lines 21f.
16. S. I. Dakaris, Das Taubenorakel von Dodona, AntK Beiheft 1 (1963). For Dione in Dodona see Parke,
Oracles, 69f.; for Dione in the oracular texts, see ibid., 259–72. She is mentioned again and again. For Dione
in general see E. Simon in LIMC 3 (1986), 411–14, pl. 295.
17. L. von Sybel, “Dione,” in ML 1 (1884/86), 1028.
18. Nilsson 522.
19. I. A. Sakellarakis, in Kunst und Kultur der Kykladeninseln im 3. Jahrtausend v. Chr., exh. cat., Her-
aklion, Museum (Karlsruhe 1976), 154, fig. 140. One gains the best overview of these statues in the Museum
of Cycladic Art (Goulandris Foundation) in Athens.
386 Notes to Pages 259–267

20. J. Thimme wants too close an association between the Cycladic idols and the Neolithic figures.
See his article in AntK 8 (1965): 72–86. In contrast, R. Hampe correctly points out the restraint and youth-
fulness of the Cycladic idols. R. Hampe and H. Gropengiesser, Aus der Sammlung des Archäologischen
Instituts der Universität Heidelberg (Berlin/Heidelberg/New York 1967), 14, pl. 1.
21. Athens, Nat. Mus. 3908. See Kunst und Kultur (n. 19), 71, fig. 38 (C. Renfrew).
22. R. Herbig, AM 54 (1929): 164–93; M. Wegner, Das Musikleben der Griechen (Berlin 1949), 50f.;
E. Simon, The Kurashiki Ninagawa Museum (Mainz 1982), 116–22, no. 55. While in later periods the harp
was always played by women (and Muses), in Cycladic culture the harpists are always male. See H. Brand,
Griechische Musikanten im Kult von der Frühzeit bis zum Beginn der Spätklassik (Dettelbach 2000).
23. For multiple Aphrodites, see Simon, Geburt, 46, 54f., 100–103; for pairs, see Knigge. For Aphrodite
and Peitho in Athens, see Shapiro, ACT, 118f.; E. Simon, “Aphrodite Pandemos auf attischen Münzen,”
Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau 49 (1970): 5–19 (= Ausgewählte Schriften I [Mainz 1998], no. 5).
For Peitho in general, see N. Picard-Giannolio, “Peitho,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 242–47.
24. AntK 8 (1965): 87–90.
25. Harrison, “Charites.”
26. O. Rubensohn, “Paros,” RE 18.1 (1949), 1845. See also J. Pouilloux, Études Thasiennes 3 (1954): 333ff.
27. E. Simon, “Peitho,” in EAA 6 (Rome 1965), 6.
28. Scholion on Callimachus fr. 7; see Pfeiffer and other sources. For its interpretation see E. Schwar-
zenberg, Die Grazien (Bonn 1966), 4–7, who convincingly identifies a vegetation cult in the rite on Paros.
29. R. Kassel and C. Austin, Poetae Comici Graeci, vol. 2 (Berlin 1991), 446f., fr. 226.4.
30. Athens, Acropolis Mus. 702. Schwarzenberg, Grazien (n. 28), pl. 5; Harrison, “Charites,” 195, no. 20.
The three dancers have also been interpreted as the Aglaurids, but these had no cult in common. The
votive relief shows the three recipients facing us. The two male figures, in profile, are their “attributes.” The
cult of the Charites is well attested on the Acropolis, and Hermes was worshipped nearby (Pausanias 1.22.8).
31. New York, Metropolitan Mus. 75.2.11. Beazley, ARV2 1313.11 (Meidias Painter); L. Burn, The Meidias
Painter (London 1987), 98, M 12, pl. 52b.
32. Ventris/Chadwick 217, 224; Hampe, Löwenschale, 29f. For the perfumer Philaios see Ventris/
Chadwick 224f.
33. Ventris/Chadwick 222.
34. H. Fritze, Die Rauchopfer bei den Griechen (Berlin 1894), 23ff.; RE Suppl. 15 (1978), 700–777, s.v.
Weihrauch. See also E. Simon in Ansichten griechischer Rituale, ed. F. Graf (Leipzig 1998), 127f.
35. Sappho fr. 94, lines 18ff. Lobel-Page; see D. Page, Sappho and Alcaeus (Oxford 1959), 78f.; Hampe,
Löwenschale, 31.
36. Marinatos/Hirmer pl. 205 (below), pl. 205 (middle), where similar birds fly around a sanctuary,
perhaps that of the naked goddess (?); Delivorrias 46, no. 349, pl. 33; Böhm 145, M 1, pl. 1a.
37. See n. 14 in the chapter on Athena.
38. London, British Mus. E697. Beazley ARV2 1324.45. This is probably by the Meidias Painter himself.
See also Simon/Hirmer pl. 219; Delivorrias 122, no. 1271, pl. 127.
39. R. Lambrechts, “Lasa,” in LIMC 6 (1992), 217–25, pl. 104.
40. Curved fibula, London, British Mus. 3204. Hampe, Sagenbilder, pl. 1; Hampe, Löwenschale, 33f., pl. 19.
41. Fr. 87 Powell; see Callimachus fr. 7, 9ff. Pfeiffer.
42. Athens, Nat. Mus. A 776. Hampe/Simon ills. 393–96; Delivorrias 46f., no. 354, pl. 33; Böhm 156f.,
E 1–4, pls. 6f. For the entire tomb, see M. Xagorari, Untersuchungen zu frühgriechischen Grabsitten (Mainz
1996), 6–8, 49f., 76–78, nos. 9–12a, pls. 4–7.
 Notes to Pages 267–276 387

43. R. D. Barnett, A Catalogue of the Nimrud Ivories (London 1957); Strommenger/Hirmer pls. 263f.;
E. Akurgal, Orient und Okzident (Baden-Baden 1966), 172–76; Böhm pl. 9.
44. Naxos, Mus. Ch. Karusos, JdI 52 (1937): 166–97; Fittschen 143 GV 2; Delivorrias 123f., no. 1285, pl. 128.
45. Berlin, Antikensammlung F301. Furtwängler, Berlin, 38f.; Karusos, JdI (n. 44) 179–81; Fittschen 143,
GV 3; Delivorrias 124, no. 1286, pl. 128.
46. Rome, Villa Giulia 22679. Simon/Hirmer pl. 25 (middle register, on the left); Delivorrias 136, no.
1423. Excellent detailed images of the goddesses’ heads can be found in LIMC 2 (1984), pl. 750 (Athena, no.
405). Along with the Naxian amphora (see n. 44 above), this is the earliest inscribed Aphrodite in vase
painting.
47. Athens, Nat. Mus. 15368. R. Hampe, “Alexandros,” in LIMC 1 (1981), 499, no. 6, pl. 376; Delivorrias
135, no. 1417.
48. Berlin, Antikensammlung F2291. Beazley, ARV2 459.4 (Makron); Hampe, “Alexandros” (n. 47), 499,
no. 10, pl. 377; Delivorrias 136, no. 1426; N. Kunisch, Makron, Kerameus 10 (Mainz 1997), 190, no. 295, pl. 95.
49. K. Reinhardt, Tradition und Geist (Göttingen 1960), 16f.; for the fleeing Paris see fig. 240 in this
volume), Florence, Mus. Arch. 9674. Beazley, ABV 108.8; A. Kossatz-Deißmann, “Paridis iudicium,” in
LIMC 7 (1994), 178, no. 10.
50. Paris, Louvre CA1747. Delivorrias 96f., no. 905, pl. 89.
51. Hannover, Kestner-Mus. 1899, 67c. Delivorrias 16, no. 63, pl. 10.
52. London, British Mus. D2. Beazley, ARV2 862.22 (Pistoxenos Painter); N. Himmelmann-Wildschütz,
Zur Eigenart des klassischen Götterbildes (Munich 1959), 22, fig. 22 (from which the quotation comes); see
also Delivorrias 97, no. 916, pl. 90; Wehgartner 67, no. 66.
53. TrGF 3:157–61, frr. 43–46 Radt, supplemented by L. Luppe, GGA 239 (1987): 27. For the Aeschylean
drama, see A. Kossatz-Deißmann in Komos: Festschrift für Thuri Lorenz (Vienna 1997), 103–6.
54. Overbeck, SQ, 96, 518–20. See also Delivorrias 23, no. 147.
55. Simon, Geburt, 9–55, figs. 1f.; Delivorrias 114, no. 1170, pl. 117; Knigge 291n39.
56. On Aphrodite as goddess of hetairai, see Fauth.
57. H. Prückner, Die Lokrischen Tonreliefs: Beiträge zur Kultgeschichte von Lokroi Epizephyrioi
(Mainz 1968).
58. Munich, Antikensammlungen 5042. Prückner, Tonreliefs (n. 57), 15–17, pl. 1.1; Delivorrias 127, no.
1328, pl. 130.
59. P. Zancani-Montuoro in Essays in Memory of Karl Lehmann (New York 1964), 386–95, ills. 4–7;
Delivorrias 114, no. 1171.
60. B. Ashmole, JHS 42 (1922): 248ff.
61. Delivorrias 133, no. 1404, pl. 138; Berger/Gisler-Huwiler 163f., pl. 136; Himmelmann 1997, 40f., fig.
26. Himmelmann concludes that the gods are located on Olympus because Aphrodite’s index finger points
downward. In polytheistic religion, however, it was customary, as it still is today in Japan, to invite the gods
to the feast and, at the end, to say goodbye again. For example, in the Iliad and Odyssey, while the gods are
among the Ethiopians, Olympus remains empty (or the home of Poseidon is empty). See also Odyssey
3.435f.: “Athena came (to Pylos) to be present at the sacrifice.” In his dithyramb for the Athenians (fr. 75.1
Snell), Pindar summons the Olympians “here.”
62. See E. Simon in Worshipping Athena, ed. J. Neils (Madison 1996), 15–17, 22f.
63. “Aphrodite,” in ML 1.1 (1884/86), 399. As Knigge, 285–92, has shown, the importance of both Aphro­
dites can already be observed in the early Hellenistic period, when philosophy penetrated into religion.
64. See Simon, “Aphrodite Pandemos auf attischen Münzen” (above n. 23), 5–19.
388 Notes to Pages 276–282

65. Deubner, AF, 215f.; Simon, Festivals, 48–51.

66. L. Beschi, ASAtene 45/46 (1967/68): 520–26; Simon, Festivals, pl. 15.1.
67. U. Knigge, AM 97 (1982): 153–55.
68. Paris, Louvre Br. 1706. Delivorrias 98, no. 938, pl. 92, with further examples; A. Schwarzmaier,
Griechische Klappspiegel, AM Beiheft 18 (Berlin 1997), 320, cat. 210. For the same motif see cat. 14, 120, 251.
For their interpretation as constellations, see Knigge (n. 67 ) 153–70.
69. Oxford, Ashmolean Mus. G8. Delivorrias 16, no. 65, pl. 10.
70. Delivorrias 100, nos. 975f.
71. S. Settis, Chelone: Saggio sull’ Afrodite Urania di Fidia (Pisa 1966); D. Dumoulin, Antike Schildkröten
(Würzburg 1994), 65–79.
72. Paris, Louvre Br. 1707. Delivorrias 99, no. 958, pl. 94; Schwarzmaier, Klappspiegel (n. 68), 320, cat.
211, pl. 5.1. The same motif: cat. 15, 58, 62, 254. It is also found in many other artistic media; see Delivorrias
96–98.
73. Lullies/Hirmer pl. 210; Delivorrias 49–52; B. S. Ridgway, Fourth-Century Styles in Greek Sculpture
(London 1997), 263f., pls. 66f.
74. Langlotz identified a sitting Aphrodite. More persuasive is Delivorrias, 30f., who reconstructs a
leaning Aphrodite.
75. Lullies/Hirmer pl. 153; Delivorrias 132, no. 1393, pl. 137. The reclining figure is indisputably Aphro-
dite; her companion has been variously identified. Since the discovery of G. Despinis (see n. 99 in the
chapter on Artemis), the figure’s designation as Artemis, as proposed by E. Berger in Die Geburt der Athena
im Ostgiebel des Parthenon (Basel 1974), has gradually gained acceptance. See O. Palagia, The Pediments of
the Parthenon (Leiden 1993), 22.
76. For these shoulder cords, see E. B. Harrison in Festschrift für Frank Brommer (Mainz 1977), 155–61,
who identifies Themis. On the movement of her feet, which retreat involuntarily from the swell of the
sea that awakens Aphrodite, see E. Simon in Coloquio sobre el Puteal de la Moncloa (Madrid 1986), 74f.
(= Ausgewählte Schriften, vol. 1 [Mainz 1998], no. 8).

ARES
P. Bruneau, “Ares,” in LIMC 2 (1984), 479–92, pls. 358–72.
Burkert 169–70.
A. Cambitoglou/S. A. Paspalas, “Kyknos I,” in LIMC 7 (1994), addenda, 970–91, pls. 686–715.
A. Furtwängler, “Ares in der bildenden Kunst,” in ML 1.1 (1884/86), 487–93.
K. J. Hartswick, “The Ares Borghese Reconsidered,” RA (1990): 227–83.
R. Häußler, Hera und Juno (Stuttgart 1995), 125 (index), s.v. Ares.
Nilsson 517–19.
Shapiro, ACT, 180 (index), s.v. Ares.
E. Simon, “Ares/Mars,” in LIMC 2 (1984), 505–59, pls. 378–417.
H. W. Stoll, “Ares,” in ML 1.1 (1884/86), 477–87.
M. A. Tiverios, “Kadmos I,” in LIMC 5 (1990), 863–82, pls. 557–62.

1. Nilsson 518f.; cf. Wilamowitz, Gl. Hell., 1:316. As one may observe again and again in this book,
these two scholars are frequently of the same opinion, with Nilsson following Wilamowitz.
2. Nilsson 519.
 Notes to Pages 282–288 389

3. See E. Simon in Beschreibungskunst—Kunstbeschreibung, ed. G. Boehm and H. Pfotenhauer (Munich

1995), 131. It is clear from the typical Greek composition for a city-siege, which I have reconstructed there,
that it cannot have had a model provided by Near Eastern art.
4. W. Burkert, “Das Lied von Ares und Aphrodite,” Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 103 (1960):
130–44; Häußler 73f.
5. Florence, Mus. Arch. 4209. Furtwängler 487; Simon/Hirmer pl. 52 (second register from the bot-
tom, on the left); Bruneau 484, no. 74, pl. 366.
6. Otto, Götter, 244.
7. “Without context,” however: see Ventris/Chadwick 126, while Burkert, 43, takes it to be the name
of the war god, since Enyalius is also found in the texts from Knossos.
8. Ventris/Chadwick 311f.; Burkert 486 (index), s.v. Enyalios. The other gods on tablet no. 208 are
Athena Potnia, Poseidon, and pa-ja-wo—that is, Paean, the same Paean who appears in the passage of the
Iliad cited at the beginning of this chapter (5.899) and heals the wounded Ares.
9. Stoll 482.
10. Simon, “Ares/Mars,” 505–7; Simon, GdR, 135–45.
11. Parke, Oracles, 21 and passim, 290 (index), s.v. Iuppiter; W. Pötscher, “Flamen Dialis,” Mnemosyne
21 (1968): 215–39 (= Hellas und Rom [Hildesheim 1988], 419–45); Simon, GdR, 107–11.
12. Stoll 482. For the Thracians, see J. Wiesner, Die Thraker (Stuttgart 1963); Gold der Thraker, exh. cat.,
Cologne/Munich/Hildesheim 1979–80 (Mainz 1979).
13. For sources, see J. Ilberg, “Giganten,” in ML 1.2 (1886/90), 1646. For Dionysus in the battle against
the Giants, see C. Gasparri in LIMC 3 (1986), 474–78.
14. Gasparri, LIMC 3 (n.13) 477, no. 651, pl. 374.
15. Paris, Cab. Méd. 573. Beazley ARV2 417.1 (Painter of the Paris Gigantomachy, name vase).
16. See below pp. 299f. in the chapter on Dionysus.
17. Stoll 482f.
18. It consisted of Laius, Oedipus, the preserved Seven against Thebes, and the satyr play Sphinx: TrGF
3:231f., 287f., 341–43 Radt; E. Simon, Das Satyrspiel Sphinx des Aischylos, SBHeid (Heidelberg 1981).
19. See n. 5 in the chapter on Aphrodite.
20. R. Edwards, Kadmos the Phoenician (Amsterdam 1979); Tiverios 863–65.
21. E. Porada, AJA 69 (1965): 173; ibid. 70 (1966): 194.
22. K. O. Müller, Orchomenos und die Minyer, 2nd ed. (Breslau 1844), 179ff.; G. Türk, “Phlegyas,” in ML
3 (1902/9), 2378–83.
23. Calyx-krater, New York, Metropolitan Mus. 07.286.66. Beazley, ARV2 617.2 (Spreckels Painter);
Bruneau 485, no. 88; Tiverios 867, no. 15.
24. Cambitoglou/Paspalas list a large number of depictions of the combat of Heracles and Cycnus.
Two-thirds of the representations (974ff., nos. 44ff., pls. 693ff.) show Ares present. See also Bruneau 481f.,
nos. 33–44, pls. 360–63.
25. Tiverios 872, nos. 43–45, pls. 562. The myth was still alive in Byzantine times; see E. Simon, JdI 79
(1964): 300–304. Ares’ and Aphrodite’s role as Harmonia’s parents was also a theme in Roman art; see
Simon, “Ares/Mars,” 544f., nos. 346–56, pls. 408f.
26. West, Theog. Comm., 415, 424.
27. Gl. Hell., 1:317; Nilsson 524 (see n. 1 above).
28. Naxos, Mus. See n. 44 in the chapter on Aphrodite.
390 Notes to Pages 288–296

29. Hampe, Sagenbilder, passim; F. Canciani, JdI 80 (1965): 73f. The Cycladic relief vase (Athens, Nat.
Mus. 5898; see n. 50 in the chapter on Hera) was found at Thebes.
30. IG 12.5: 220; see Ch. Karusos, JdI 52 (1937): 179n1; O. Rubensohn, “Paros,” in RE 18.2 (1949), 1847.
31. Berlin, Antikensammlung F301. See n. 45 in the chapter on Aphrodite.
32. Bruneau 482, no. 50. For the circular form of the Chest of Cypselus, a votive punning on the name
of the Cypselids, see R. Splitter, Die “Kypseloslade” in Olympia (Mainz 1999). For kypselos as beehive, see
R. Hampe and A. Winter, Bei Töpfern und Zieglern in Süditalien, Sizilien und Griechenland (Mainz 1965),
217, 239.
33. H. Knell, Die Darstellung der Götterversammlung in der attischen Kunst des 6. und 5. Jhs. v. Chr.
(Freiburg 1965); Shapiro, ACT, 133–41.
34. Bruneau 487, no. 115, pl. 371.
35. Tarquinia, Mus. Nazionale RC6848. Beazley, ARV2 60.66 (signed by Oltos); Simon/Hirmer pl. 94
(above); see also n. 34 and fig. 116 in the chapter on Hestia.
36. M. Robertson, ÖJh 47 (1964/65): 107–17; Bruneau 482, no. 46, pl. 363.
37. Berlin, Antikensammlung F2278. See also n. 35 in the chapter on Hestia; Shapiro, ACT, pl. 51a.
38. Lullies/Hirmer pls. 50f.; Ridgway I: 51f. and passim. For the epigram, see P. Friedländer, Epigram-
mata (Berkeley/Los Angeles 1948), no. 82; see also epigram no. 25, from the grave of Arniadas in Corcyra,
in which Ares is described as “sharply glancing.”
39. Bruneau 487, no. 116, pl. 371; Berger/Gisler-Huwiler 154f., pl. 132.
40. E. Simon, AJA 67 (1963): 44.
41. Furtwängler 488–90; B. Freyer, JdI 77 (1962): 220; W. H. Schuchardt, Alkamenes, Berliner Winck-
elmannsprogramm 126 (Berlin 1977), ills. 34f.; Bruneau 480f., no. 23, pl. 360. In his detailed investigation,
K. J. Hartswick would like to prove that the statue is a Roman creation. According to Hartswick, Pausanias
(1.8.4) was mistaken and the helmet of the Ares Borghese type is Roman. But attributes such as helmets,
sword hilts, and quivers were frequently altered by copyists to fit the taste of the times. The comparison
with the purely Roman Mars-Ultor statue (Hartswick 265, fig. 16) shows an entirely different character.
Moreover, the “Concordia groups” in which the Borghese type appears (Simon, “Ares/Mars,” 544f., nos.
346–56, pls. 408f.; Hartswick 241, ill. 8) are composed of two originally Greek statue types.
42. Th. Lorenz, Polyklet (Wiesbaden 1972); H. von Steuben in Polyklet, exh. cat., Frankfurt Liebieghaus
(Mainz 1990), 185–98.
43. London, British Mus. E82. Beazley, ARV2 1269.3 (Codrus Painter); Bruneau 487, no. 114, pl. 371.
44. R. N. Thönges-Stringaris, AM 80 (1965): 1–98.
45. Theoxenia of the Dioscuri: see K. Schauenburg in Mélanges Mansel (Ankara 1974), 101–17; Ch. Augé
and P. Linant de Bellefonds, “Dioskouroi,” in LIMC 3 (1986), 576f. (s.v.), nos. 110–19, pl. 465. For the Lec-
tisternia in Rome, see K. Latte, Römische Religionsgeschichte (Munich 1960), 242–44. The cup, n. 43 above,
was found at Vulci.
46. For example, on the calyx-krater of the Cadmus Painter in Bologna (Beazley, ARV2 1184.6), which
P. Jacobsthal, Theseus auf dem Meeresgrunde (Leipzig 1911), had already treated quite splendidly; see J. Neils
in LIMC 7 (1994), 940, no. 224. Here Poseidon reclines, just as he does on the calyx-krater by the Cecrops
Painter in Schloss Fasanerie (fig. 188), on which Hephaestus also reclines: Beazley, ARV2 1346.1; Simon/
Hirmer pl. 226.

DIONYSUS
C. Antonelli, “Dioniso: Una divinità micenea,” in Atti CIM II: 169–71.
M.-L. Bernhard/W. A. Daszewski, “Ariadne,” in LIMC 3 (1986), addenda, 1050–70, pls. 727–35.
 Notes to Pages 297–299 391

F. Berti/C. Gasparri, eds., Dionysos: Mito e Mistero, exh. cat. (Bologna 1989).
Burkert 45, 161–67.
T. H. Carpenter, Dionysian Imagery in Archaic Greek Art (Oxford 1986).
C. Gasparri, “Dionysos,” in LIMC 3 (1986), 414–514, pls. 296–406.
G. M. Hedreen, Silens in Attic Black Figure Vase Painting: Myth and Performance (Ann Arbor 1992).
K. Kerényi, Der frühe Dionysos (Oslo 1961).
A. Kossatz-Deißmann, “Semele,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 718–26, pls. 530–34.
I. Krauskopf/E. Simon, “Mainades,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 780–1303, pls. 524–50.
Nilsson 564–601.
W. F. Otto, Dionysos: Mythos und Kultus (Frankfurt 1933).
A. Pickard-Cambridge, The Dramatic Festivals of Athens (Oxford 1968).
E. Rohde, Psyche: Seelenkult und Unsterblichkeitsglaube der Griechen, 2 vols., 9th and 10th eds. with an
Introduction by Otto Weinreich (Tübingen 1925).
Shapiro, ACT, 84–100.
E. Simon, “Silenoi,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 1108–33, pls. 746–83.

1. Adapted from my preface to the exhibition catalogue Dionysos: Griechische Antiken (Ingelheim am
Rhein 1965).
2. Wilamowitz, Gl. Hell., 2:62; Nilsson 567f. Likewise, G. A. Privitera, “Dioniso nella società micenea,”
in Atti CIM I: 152, although, thanks to the Linear B tablets, a new etymology is possible; see K. Kerényi,
ibid., 101–4; Burkert 45.
3. Otto 59; Krauskopf/Simon 780f.; U. W. Gottschall, “Nysa I, Nysai,” in LIMC 8 (1997), addenda,
902–5, pls. 598f. There were also cities named Nysa. Otto, 59f., saw Nysa more as a name from folklore. It
is true, however, that these cities are not Archaic but Hellenistic, like the famous “college town” of Nysa,
where the geographer Strabo studied. For the Dionysian theater frieze excavated there in the 1980s by
Turkish archaeologists, see R. Lindner, Mythos und Identität: Studien zur Selbstdarstellung kleinasiatischer
Städte in der römischen Kaiserzeit (Stuttgart 1994), 109–98.
4. Athens, Nat. Mus. 15165. Beazley, ABV 39.15 (signed by Sophilos); Gottschall, “Nysa” (n. 3) 903, no.
2, pl. 598.
5. A. Heubeck, Aus der Welt der frühgriechischen Lineartafeln (Göttingen 1966), 104.
6. As the most famous work of late nineteenth-century classical scholarship, Psyche had by 1897 (four
years after publication) already appeared in a second edition. There would be many more. Rohde was born
in Hamburg in 1845 and died in 1898 as professor of classical philology in Heidelberg. His Kleine Schriften,
which also contain the paralipomena to Psyche, were edited by F. Schoell (Tübingen 1901).
7. Heubeck, Lineartafeln (n. 5); Ventris/Chadwick 127; Nilsson 565n2; Antonelli.
8. Kerényi; see also the supplement “Herr der wilden Tiere?” Symbolae Osloenses 33 (1957): 127–34.
9. For this typology with regard to Dionysus, the fundamental study is Nilsson, MMR, 493–513.
10. Especially on the gold rings by the “Master of the Isopata Ring,” Heraklion, Arch. Mus. 424 (= fig.
268). See M. Steinhart, Das Motiv des Auges in der griechischen Bildkunst (Mainz 1995), 15–20, pl. 1. One
indication of the “ecstasy” in these Minoan rings is the nonrepresentation of the face, which appears
sometimes as a “chrysalis” (see Hampe/Simon 188). According to G. Rodenwaldt and others (references in
Hampe/Simon 17n155) this is a stylistic feature of the workshop, yet this explanation is unsatisfactory in
light of other Minoan rings (see, for example, fig. 173). The interpretation that this represents the conceal-
ing of the face and individuality of those seized by ecstasy should not be discarded. This could be a kind
of prelude to the later use of masks in cult.
392 Notes to Pages 299–307

11. The fundamental study is A. J. Evans, “Mycenean Tree and Pillar Cult and Its Mediterranean Rela-
tions,” JHS 21 (1901): 99ff. See also further literature in U. Kron in Kotinos 59n23.
12. A. Frickenhaus, Lenäenvasen, Berliner Winckelmannsprogramm 72 (Berlin 1912); Deubner, AF,
123–34; Pickard-Cambridge 25–42; Simon, Festivals, 100f.
13. Deubner, AF, 93–123; Pickard-Cambridge 1–25; Simon, Festivals, 92–99; Shapiro, ACT, 84f.; Hedreen
79–83. On the dispute about whether the “Lenaea vases” were associated with the Lenaea or the Antheste-
ria, Frickenhaus’s and Deubner’s (see n. 12 above) interpretations are to be preferred to those of Nilsson
and his followers (Burkert; B. C. Dietrich, Hermes 89 [1961]: 45).
14. Deubner, AF, 138–42; Pickard-Cambridge 57–101; Simon, Festivals, 101–4.
15. Nilsson 564f.
16. Shapiro, ACT, 87f. For Demeter and Dionysus in Eleusis, see n. 44 in the chapter on Demeter.
17. Semele has also been described as a “Phrygian earth goddess,” but the linguistic basis for this no
longer holds up. See Kossatz-Deißmann 719. For the mortality of Semele, see especially Otto 62–70.
18. See E. Porada, AJA 69 (1965): 173; ibid. 70 (1966): 194.
19. E. R. Dodds, ed., Euripides, Bacchae, with introduction and commentary, 2nd ed. (Oxford 1960);
H. Diller; Die Bakchen und ihre Stellung im Spätwerk des Euripides, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wis-
senschaften in Mainz (Wiesbaden 1955), 453–71. For the significance of this tragedy for our conception of
the maenads, see Krauskopf/Simon 781.
20. B. Snell, Szenen aus griechischen Dramen (Berlin 1971), 82n19, for an interpretation of fr. 203 N. It
concerns Euripides’ late tragedy Antiope, whose setting was the region of Eleutherai. The mention there of
a mask on the “column entwined with ivy” of Dionysus is not explicit. It was clearly secondary to the type
of cult statue that originated in the Bronze Age, perhaps brought about by the introduction of the dramatic
performances in the cult of Dionysus Eleuthereus in Athens. A statue consisting of the pole and mask for
the Dionysia on Delos can be deduced from the inscribed accounts. See Nilsson, GF, 280f.
21. Basel, Antikenmuseum BS 415. M. Schmidt, AntK 10 (1967): 70–81; E. Simon, Das antike Theater,
2nd ed., Heidelberger Texte: Didaktische Reihe 5 (Freiburg/Würzberg 1981), 16f., pl. 2.
22. Out of many, three vase paintings, two from the earlier and one from the later fifth century, are
illustrated here. Fig. 271: late black-figure cup, Uppsala, Gustavianum; Beazley, ABV 560.518 (Haimon Group);
Nilsson 588n2, pl. 37.3 (wrongly interpreted, as both of the others also are, as the Anthesteria); Simon, AntK
9 (1976): 21, pl. 5.3–5. Fig. 272: cup, Berlin, Antikensammlung F2290; Beazley, ARV2 462.48 (Makron);
Gasparri 427, no. 41; N. Kurnisch, Makron, Kerameus 10 (Mainz 1997), 197f., no. 345, pl. 117. Fig. 273: stamnos,
Naples, Mus. Nazionale H2419; Beazley, ARV2 1151–52 (Dinos Painter); Simon/Hirmer pls. 212–15; Gasparri
426, no. 33, pl. 298.
23. See nn. 12 and 13 above.
24. Heidelberg, University Antikenmus. TK61. See Gasparri 425, no. 10, with nos. 11–20, pls. 296f., for
further Boeotian examples.
25. Since imitations in clay of carved wooden figures were deposited in graves in Late Archaic Boeotia,
we have evidence for the existence of these objects that would otherwise be entirely lost.
26. Athens, Nat. Mus. 3072, from Ikaria. W. Wrede, “Der Maskengott,” AM 53 (1928): 66–93, pl. 1; Gas-
parri 424, no. 6, pl. 296; Shapiro, ACT, pl. 44.
27. Tarquinia, Mus. Nazionale RC1804. Beazley, ABV 275.5 (Circle of the Antimenes Painter). Simon/
Hirmer color pl. XXVIII; Gasparri 425, no. 24, with further examples. For the neck amphorae with masks,
see also J. Burow, Der Antimenesmaler, Kerameus 7 (Mainz 1989), 33f.
28. R. E. Wycherley, Hesperia 34 (1965): 72ff. See also a conjecture by Travlos 566.
 Notes to Pages 307–313 393

29. Aristophanes, Frogs 479, with the ancient scholia. Deubner, AF, 125f., finds the participation of the
Dadouchos in the Lenaea mysterious. In my opinion it can be explained by the close connection between
Demeter and Dionysus in Boeotia, which was transmitted to Eleusis (see n. 16 above).
30. Skyphos by the Lewis Painter (Polygnotus II) in a private collection in Switzerland. J. D. Beazley,
ARV2 1676.37 and Paralipomena (Oxford 1971) 436; E. Simon, AntK 6 (1963): 6–22; Simon 1115, no. 43b,
pl. 754.
31. Aristotle, Constitution of Athens 57. For the relationship between the myth of Theseus, Ariadne, and
Dionysus and the Anthesteria, see Simon, AntK (n. 30) 12ff. For visual representations see Bernhard/
Daszewski 1061f., nos. 110–23, pls. 732f. (no. 113, the head from the south slope, as well as similar heads
listed here, must be eliminated, since they are of Dionysus).
32. See preliminary report by W. Lambrinudakis and G. Gruben, AA (1987): 569–621.
33. Hedreen, 67–103, draws special attention to this in his treatment of the Anthesteria on Naxos. For
silens as daimones associated with viticulture see Simon, “Silenoi,” 1120f., with references. It is likely that
wine was a chief source of income in the Aegean islands. Thus, for example, the Achaeans in the heroic
age were supplied with wine from Lemnos (Iliad 7.467–75).
34. M. Bernhart, “Dionysos und seine Familie auf griechischen Münzen,” Jahrbuch für Numismatik
und Geldgeschichte 1 (1949): 9–176.
35. Hampe/Simon pl. 464 (color); Kokkorou-Alewras.
36. Kraay/Hirmer pls. 1–3; Gasparri 442, nos. 176–78, pls. 315f.
37. L. Parlama, “Staphylos,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 807f., pls. 575f.; O. Touchefeu-Meynier, “Oinopion,” in
LIMC 8 (1997), addenda, 920–22, pls. 610f.
38. London, British Mus. B168. Beazley, ABV 142.3 (Group E). Beazley identifies the figure carrying the
two boys simply as a goddess; according to the authors cited in n. 37, she is Ariadne with Oinopion and
Staphylus, while Carpenter, 24f., calls her Aphrodite Kourotrophos with Eros and Himeros. Shapiro fol-
lows him, ACT, 121f., pl. 43a, with further arguments. However, the boys lack wings, which in Late Archaic
representations are always present on Erotes; also, the tunic (fig. 282) would be unusual for Eros or Himeros.
Like Hedreen, 34f., I prefer the interpretation as Ariadne.
39. Amphora by Exekias, London, British Mus. B210. Beazley, ABV 144.7; Simon/Hirmer pl. 75; Gas-
parri 488, no. 785, pl. 392; Touchefeu-Meynier, “Oinopion” (n. 37) 921, no. 3, pl. 610.
40. Oxford, Ashmolean Mus. 1924.264 from Karnak (Egypt). J. Boardman, Early Greek Vase Painting
(London 1998), 220, fig. 487.2.
41. Tarquinia, Mus. Nazionale 678. Gasparri 489, no. 790, pl. 392; Hedreen pl. 23 (with new restoration:
the upper body and head of Dionysus had been added). The ship-cart is represented on three black-figure
skyphoi: Gasparri 492, nos. 827–29, pl. 398.
42. See especially Hedreen. For the appearance of the silens, see Simon, “Silenoi,” 1111–15.
43. Paris, Cab. Méd. 222. Beazley, ABV 152.25 (Amasis Painter); Simon/Hirmer color pl. XXIII. The
other side of the amphora shows Athena and Poseidon: see n. 42 and fig. 81 in the chapter on Poseidon.
See also D. von Bothmer, The Amasis Painter and His World (New York/London 1986), 126.
44. Würzburg, Martin-von-Wagner-Mus. L265. Beazley, ABV 151.22; Simon/Hirmer pl. 68; von Both-
mer, Amasis Painter (n. 43), 113–18, no. 19, and see here also on the vintaging scenes by the Amasis Painter
in Kavala and Basel.
45. Munich, Antikensammlungen 2044. Beazley, ABV 146.21; Simon/Hirmer color pl. XXIV; Gasparri
489, no. 788, pl. 392.
394 Notes to Pages 315–318

46. The metamorphosis is represented on a Samian drinking cup in Berlin: E. Walter-Karydi, Samos
VI.1: Samische Gefäße des 6. Jhs. v. Chr. (Bonn 1973), 130, no. 476, pl. 53; Vidali, Delphin, 96, pl. 10, O11. For
further examples see M. Harari, “Tyrsenoi,” in LIMC 8 (1997), 154f.
47. Würzburg, Martin-von-Wagner-Mus. L164 (Phineus Cup). Simon, Führer, 84f., pl. 19; Hedreen
pl. 22, after A. Furtwängler and K. Reichhold, Griechische Vasenmalerei (Munich, 1904–32), pl. 41. Here
the added white and purple are restored and the inscriptions given. The name of Dionysus’ companion
was recovered with modern methods by M. Boss, AA (1992): 537f., fig. 65a. On the Phineus vase, see also
M. Steinhart and W. J. Slater, JHS 117 (1997): 203–10.
48. See the hymns of praise in the parodos (72ff.) and the first stasimon (370ff.) and Dodds’s commen-
tary on the play (n. 19).
49. Nilsson 589f.; Nilsson, GF, 292f. For springs of wine on Naxos, see Steph. Byz., s.v. Naxos. For Teos
see Diod. Sic. 3.66.2. For the Aegean islands, and especially Naxos, as the home of the silens, who in fact
play no role in the Theban myth of Dionysus, see Hedreen 67–103.
50. Otto 132–38. Curiously, Nilsson maintains that viticulture in Greece was much older, “and therefore
Dionysus was later associated with the rituals involving the cultivation of the vine.” Something similar was
assumed by Nilsson, 232, and others for the silens, who were thought originally to have been independent
daimones. For an opposing view see Simon, “Silenoi,” 1108.
51. For Naxos see above n. 32. For Ceos see J. L. Caskey, Hesperia 33 (1964), 326ff., and the American
publication of the Ceos excavations, M. E. Caskey, Keos II: The Temple at Ayia Irini, Part I: The Statues
(Princeton 1986).
52. Caskey, Hesperia (n. 51) 333f. That wine was already being produced on Ceos in the Bronze Age is
shown by a graffito in Linear A. See ibid., 325f.
53. J. B. Pritchard, The Ancient Near East in Pictures (Princeton 1954), ill. 155 (excavation of Mereru-ka
near Saqqara).
54. The situation in central Italy during the immigration of the Italic peoples is comparable. Jupiter
had to come to an accommodation with the wine god later called Liber Pater; see Simon, GdR, 127–30.
55. Indeed his “clone,” since he gave birth to Dionysus from his thigh. One of the most beautiful rep-
resentations is by the early Apulian Painter of the Birth of Dionysus, on a volute krater in Taranto: Gasparri
478f., no. 667, pl. 376.
56. Alcaeus fr. 129, 5ff.; Sappho fr. 17 Lobel-Page; Burkert 84. On the Aeolian Hera see n. 20 in the
chapter on Hera.
57. Wilamowitz, Gl. Hell., 2: 59f.; Nilsson 578ff.
58. E. Simon, Opfernde Götter (Berlin 1953), 83–87; Gasparri 496, no. 869, pl. 406; S. B. Matheson,
Polygnotos and Vase Painting in Classical Athens (Madison 1995), 129–32.
59. Kindly brought to my attention by E. Akurgal. See Akurgal/Hirmer passim as well as pls. 139f.
60. Rohde II: 38–102. The high esteem in which Nilsson held Rohde comes through in the many pas-
sages quoted from the latter’s book, as well as in the review of scholarship (8f.) where Nilsson calls Psyche
a masterpiece, especially in its representation of the Dionysian world.
61. Ventris/Chadwick is dedicated “To the memory of Heinrich Schliemann (1822–1890), father of
Mycenaean archaeology.”
62. See above p. 299. For Dionysus in the Argolid, see G. Casadio, Storia del culto di Dioniso in Argolide
(Rome 1994).
63. E. Simon, “Melampous,” in LIMC 6 (1992), 405–10, pls. 205f. See Rohde II: 52 and passim, Simon,
“Melampous” (n. 63) and “Apollon und Dionysos,” in In memoria di Enrico Paribeni, vol. 2, ed. G. Capecchi,
O. Paoletti, et al. (Rome 1998), 451–60, and n. 29 in the chapter on Hera.
 Notes to Pages 318–325 395

64. Rohde II: 51f.

65. See n. 19 above. The blessed rapture is expressed in the song of the chorus; the ominous raving, in
the messenger speech (680ff.) and in the appearance of Agave herself.
66. For Agave, see J. Bazant and G. Berger-Doer, “Pentheus,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 306–17, pls. 250–65. For
Lycurgus, see A. Farnoux, “Lykourgos,” in LIMC 6 (1992), 309–19, pls. 157–65.
67. Rohde II: 50n2.
68. Rohde II: 52 and passim. In contrast see Simon, “Melampous” (n. 63) and “Apollon und Dionysos,”
in In memoria di Enrico Paribeni, vol. 2, ed. G. Capecchi, O. Paoletti, et al. (Rome 1998), 451–60.
69. Parke, Oracles, 165–75.
70. On this see especially Otto 183f.
71. Nilsson, GF, 280–82; P. Bruneau, Recherches sur les cultes de Délos a l’époque hellénistique et a
l’époque impériale (Paris 1970), 295ff.
72. Cf. the votive relief for the hero Anius: P. Bruneau, “Anios,” in LIMC 1 (1981), 793, no. 1, pl. 643.
73. A. Kossatz-Deißmann, “Oinotrophoi,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 26f., pl. 20.
74. A. Kossatz-Deißmann, “Maron,” in LIMC 6 (1992), 362–64, pl. 182.
75. M.-X. Garezou, “Orpheus,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 81–105, pls. 57–77.
76. For the introduction of the thyrsus as the attribute of the maenads in Late Archaic art, see Kraus-
kopf/Simon 797.
77. As in the tondo of the Berlin cup by Makron (n. 22 and fig. 272 above).
78. For the staff of the Eleusinian mystae, see G. E. Mylonas, Eleusis (Princeton 1961), 327 (index), s.v.
bacchos, emblem of cult. The staff at Eleusis was not a narthex (giant fennel stalk) with tufts of ivy; it con­
sisted instead of leafy branches, which were held together with bands. For this see J. D. Beazley, “Bakchos-
Rings,” Numismatic Chronicle, ser. 6, 1 (1941): 1ff.
79. Thus M. W. Edwards, “Representations of Maenads on Archaic Red-Figure Vases,” JHS 80 (1960):
78ff.
80. Gasparri 465, no. 493, pl. 356; O. Palagia, The Pediments of the Parthenon (Leiden/New York/Köln
1993), 19f., pls. 31–36. The detail photographs—especially the one of the back of the head (pl. 33)—show
that he absolutely cannot be Heracles, as some scholars have proposed. Moreover, on the east frieze below,
Dionysus and Demeter are next to one another. A reworking of the Dionysus on the east pediment is found
in the Dionysus of the Lysicrates Monument. See W. Ehrhardt, Antike Plastik 22 (1993): pl. 6a.

HERMES
Burkert 156–59.
S. Eitrem, “Hermes,” in RE 8.1 (1912), 738–92.
Nilsson 501–10.
W. H. Roscher, “Hermes,” in ML 1.2 (1886/90), 2342–90.
Shapiro, ACT, 125–32.
G. Siebert, “Hermes,” in LIMC 5 (1990), 285–387, pls. 198–283.
E. Simon, “Mercurius,” in LIMC 6 (1992), 500–537, pls. 272–95.
P. Zanker, Wandel der Hermesgestalt in der attischen Vasenmalerei (Bonn 1965).

1. For the cult of the Twelve Gods at Olympia see Long, Twelve Gods, 58–62, 154–57.
2. The vase mentioned in the earlier editions of this book, an Early Corinthian krater in Paris, Louvre
E633, is here omitted. H. Brunn had recognized as early as 1860 that it depicts a different cattle theft, that
of Melampus. See LIMC 6 (1992), 407, no. 3, pl. 205. Siebert 309f. also omits this vase.
396 Notes to Pages 325–331

3. Paris, Louvre E702. J. Hemelrijk, Caeretan Hydriae, Kerameus 5 (Mainz 1984), 10–14, no. 3, pls. 29f.;
Siebert 309, no. 241, pl. 220.
4. Cup, Vatican, Mus. Gregoriano Etrusco 16582. Beazley, ARV2 369.6 (Brygos Painter); H. Sichter-
mann in Helbig 1: 677f., no. 939; Siebert 309f., no. 242.
5. Nilsson 507. For Hermes as shepherd, see Zanker 60–64; Siebert 310, nos. 252f., pl. 221.
6. “Tyrrhenian” amphora, Berlin F1704. Beazley, ABV 96.14; P. Demargne, “Athena,” in LIMC 2 (1984),
986f., no. 346, pl. 743.
7. R. Hampe, “Hochzeit auf Kreta,” in Edwin Redslob zum 70. Geburtstag (Berlin 1955), 225 = R. Hampe,
Antikes und modernes Griechenland, Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 22 (Mainz 1984), 75f.
8. In the Odyssey (19.395–98) his grandfather on his mother’s side is the master thief Autolycus, who
is not a son but rather a worshipper of Hermes; in Hesiod (fr. 64, 15–18), Autolycus is the offspring of
Hermes and Philonis. See E. Simon, “Philonis,” in LIMC 7 (1994), 385; E. Simon in Tranquillitas: Mélanges
en l’honneur de Tran tam Tinh (Quebec 1994), 533–41.
9. H. Sichtermann in EAA 4 (1961), 3.
10. J. Chittenden, Hesperia 16 (1947): 89ff. Hermes’ appearance among sphinxes, sirens, and other
creatures in the animal frieze does not show him as “master of beasts,” but as messenger with the kerykeion.
11. See n. 8 in the chapter on Dionysus.
12. M. Halm-Tisserant, “Les yeux d’Argos,” AA (1994): 375–81.
13. Ionian amphora, Munich, Antikensammlungen 585. N. Yalouris, “Io,” in LIMC 5 (1990), 667, no. 31,
pl. 443; see also 661–76; Siebert 356, no. 837.
14. See n. 28 in the chapter on Hera. For the battle between Hermes and Argus, see Siebert 356–58, nos.
387–850, pl. 268.
15. Against this etymology see Heubeck, Schriften, 247–59.
16. Siebert 311–14, nos. 260–97, pls. 222–25.
17. Bronze statuette, Boston, Mus. of Fine Arts 99.489. E. Langlotz, Frühgriechische Bildhauerschulen
(Nuremburg 1927), pl. 2; Siebert 311, no. 260, pl. 222.
18. Siebert 311, no. 268.
19. Siebert 313, no. 293.
20. Paris, Louvre F159. Beazley, ABV 450.3 (Painter of Louvre F161); Siebert 313, no. 294, pl. 225.
21. Ventris/Chadwick 28.126; A. Heubeck, Aus der Welt der frühgriechischen Lineartafeln (Göttingen
1966), 104. For doubts as to the reading, see Atti CIM I: 207f. (M. Gérard). In contrast, however, see Burk-
ert 43n9: “Hermes gives no cause for scruple, A. Heubeck, Gnomon 42, 1970, 812.” Burkert also draws
attention to new evidence from Thebes.
22. Preller, Gr. Myth., 250. See also K. O. Müller, Handbuch der Archäologie der Kunst (1830), § 379, 1.
23. L. Curtius, Die antike Herme (diss. Munich 1903); Nilsson, GF, 388.
24. Scholion to Aristophanes, Acharnians 1076; Deubner, AF, 112–14; E. Diehl, Die Hydria (Mainz 1964),
130, 133f.
25. Nilsson 504n3.
26. Curtius (above n. 23); Siebert 295–306, nos. 9–187, pls. 199–216.
27. As the list of Siebert cited in n. 26 above shows, Hermes in the form of the herm was very popular
in Greece. In the Roman sphere there are many portrait herms, yet, apart from one series of copies, few
images of the god himself: Simon, “Mercurius,” 506f., nos. 24–32, pls. 274f.
28. Marble herm, Athens, Nat. Mus. 3728, from the island of Siphnos. Siebert 296, no. 12, pl. 199; Sha-
piro, ACT, 127, pl. 57c.
 Notes to Pages 331–342 397

29. Nilsson 509n6.

30. U. Kron in Kotinos 61f.
31. Fig. 299: marble herm, Istanbul, Arch. Mus. 1433, from Pergamum. Siebert 298, no. 47, pl. 202.
32. Thus correctly L. Deubner, Corolla Curtius (Stuttgart 1937), 201–4, while Nilsson, 506, is of another
opinion.
33. Cabiric skyphos, Kassel, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen T424. K. Braun, Das Kabirenheiligtum bei
Theben, vol. 4 (Berlin 1981), 66, no. 389; Siebert 301, no. 102, pl. 207.
34. Siebert 295, no. 8a.
35. Berlin, Antikensammlung F2160. Beazley, ARV 196.1; J. D. Beazley, The Berlin Painter (Mainz 1974),
1, pls. 1–3; Simon/Hirmer pls. 137–39. As Beazley recognized, the painter depicts an episode from the
Return of Hephaestus to Olympus (cf. figs. 211–214). It is true that the protagonists are absent, but the
attributes of the silens and of Hermes point to this episode. Hermes’ link to the Dionysian sphere was as
close as his link with the Apollonian (see n. 39 below).
36. K. Reinhardt, Tradition and Geist (Göttingen 1960), 337ff.
37. Shapiro, ACT, 125f.
38. Cup, Copenhagen, Nat. Mus. 119. ARV2 75.59 (Epictetus). Siebert 305, no. 170, pl. 215; Shapiro, ACT,
126, pl. 57a.
39. Red-figure lekythos, Karlsruhe, Badisches Landesmuseum 85/1. Beazley, ARV2 685.164 (Bowdoin
Painter); Siebert 301, no. 95a. Represented is an Athenian “street corner,” where Hermes was worshipped.
His nearby altar looms large. As a sacrificial offering, a small, dead billy goat (not a rabbit, as Beazley
writes) hangs from the slender column. The herm marked with a kerykeion wears a cult garment, the
agrenon, which originated in the Apollonian sphere. See H. Froning, Dithyrambos und Vasenmalerei in
Athen (Würzburg 1971), 76. Hermes is already associated with Apollo in the Homeric Hymn, while his close
connections to the Dionysian are known primarily from the visual arts. See fig. 301 and the votive pinax
with the dancing satyr beside the herm in fig. 303.
40. Fragmentary pelike, Paris, Louvre C10793. ARV2 555.92 (Pan Painter); Siebert 304, no. 141, pl. 213.
41. Column krater, Naples, Mus. Naz. 127929. Beazley, ARV2 551.15; J. D. Beazley, The Pan Painter
(Mainz 1974), 11, no. 14, pl. 30; Siebert 302, no. 119; Himmelmann 1997, 10f., ill. 1.
42. Zanker 95, 99f.
43. Column krater, Bologna, Mus. Civ. 206. Beazley, ARV2 537.12 (Boreas Painter); Zanker 95, pl. 5b;
Siebert 304, no. 153, pl. 214.
44. See n. 27 above; L. Curtius, Die Wandmalerei Pompejis (repr. Hildesheim 1960), 377.
45. Rome, Mus. Naz. 8624. S. Karusu, AM 76 (1961): 91–106; Siebert 364, no. 923, pl. 273.
46. Munich, Antikensammlungen 6248. Beazley, ARV2 1022.138 (Phiale Painter); Simon/Hirmer color
pls. XLVIf.; Siebert 336, no. 598, pl. 248; J. H. Oakley, The Phiale Painter, Kerameus 8 (Mainz 1990), 88f.,
no. 138, pl. 109.
47. For example, three by the Sabouroff Painter: Siebert 337, no. 611a–c, pl. 249.
48. An exception, in which Hermes leads a youth, is a white-ground lekythos in the Antikenmuseum
of Heidelberg University: R. Herbig, Ganymed, Heidelberger Beiträge zur antiken Kunstgeschichte (Hei-
delberg 1949), 12, figs. 2f.
49. White-ground lekythos from the Kerameikos in Athens, Nat. Mus. 1754. Quotation from E. Simon,
Opfernde Götter (Berlin 1953), 70–73. L. Beschi, “Demeter,” in LIMC 4 (1988), addenda, 864, no. 222, pl. 576.
50. Fr. 150 Lobel-Page; see R. Hampe and E. Simon, Griechisches Leben im Spiegel der Kunst (Mainz
1985), 38.
398 Notes to Pages 342–344

51. Munich, ex Schoen 80. Beazley ARV2 997.155 (Achilles Painter); Simon/Hirmer color pls. XLIVf.;
A. Queyrel in LIMC 6 (1992), 660, no. 6, pl. 383; J. H. Oakley, The Achilles Painter (Mainz 1997), 142, no.
209, color pl. 2.
52. Naples, Mus. Naz. 6727. L. Curtius, Interpretationen von sechs griechischen Bildwerken (Bern 1947),
83–105; E. Langlotz in Bonner Festgabe für J. Straub (Bonn 1977), 91–112; Lullies/Hirmer pl. 179; G. Schwartz,
“Eurydike I,” in LIMC 4 (1988), 99, no. 5.
53. Here it should be remembered that H. A. Thompson (Hesperia 21 [1952]: 47–87) associated the
relief with the Altar of the Twelve Gods (the “Altar of Pity”) in the Agora. On this see n. 13 in the chapter
on Hestia.
 Museum and Site Index

ADOLPHSECK, SCHLOSS FASANERIE

AV77 Calyx-krater, Cecrops and Athena, fig. 188

AGRIGENTO, MUSEO ARCHEOLOGICO REGIONALE

Atlantes from the Olympieion, fig. 8
Terracotta bust of Demeter Thesmophoros, fig. 100

ATHENS, HILL OVERLOOKING THE AGORA, HEPHAESTEUM

East frieze of the cella (drawing), fig. 221
Center of the east frieze: Hephaistos in battle, fig. 222

ATHENS, ACROPOLIS SLOPE

Entablature frieze from the precinct of Pandemos, fig. 250

ATHENS, ACROPOLIS MUSEUM

695 Relief of the “Mourning Athena,” fig. 193
702 Votive relief to the Charites, fig. 231
Metope with Athena and Themis (?), fig. 202
Slabs from the east frieze of the Parthenon, figs. 71, 171, 249

ATHENS, AGORA MUSEUM

AP1044 Calyx-krater by Exekias, fig. 141
P27646 Model of five grain silos, fig. 104
S429 Nymphs playing “piggyback” in a thiasos (?), fig. 223

ATHENS, KERAMEIKOS MUSEUM

64 Protogeometric clay statuette of a deer, fig. 159

399
400 Museum and Site Index

ATHENS, NATIONAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM

126 “Great Eleusinian Relief,” fig. 110
129 Small-scale copy of the Athena Parthenos from the Varvakeion, fig. 201
607 Fragment by Lydos: Artemis in the Gigantomachy, fig. 166
664 Middle Corinthian amphoriskos: Hephaestus (roll-out drawing), fig. 212
776 Ivory statuette from a grave at the Dipylon, figs. 236–237
992 Gold ring from Mycenae, fig. 173
1754 White-ground lekythos: Demeter and Kore, fig. 311
2526 Pinax, Aphrodite: Himeros and E[ros], fig. 226
2666 Stuccoed limestone plaque from Mycenae, fig. 172
2869 Fragmentary metope from Mycenae, fig. 45
3072 Marble mask of Dionysus from Ikaria, fig. 275
3728 Herm from the island of Siphnos, fig. 298
3908 Cycladic harp-player, fig. 230
3961 Cycladic krater with Apollo, fig. 127
4381 Terracotta head of Apollo from Amyclae, fig. 122
5893 Boeotian amphora with Artemis-Hecate, fig. 148
5898 Cycladic relief pithos from Thebes, fig. 53
6447 Bronze statuette of Athena Promachos, fig. 180
6457 Bronze statuette, Palladium, fig. 179
15165 Fragment by Sophilos: Nyphai (name inscribed), fig. 267
15165/1.587 Fragment by Sophilos: Demeter and Hestia, fig. 111
15368 Ivory comb from Sparta, fig. 238
16546 Bronze statuette of Zeus from Dodona, fig. 19
N7711 Ivory group from Mycenae, figs. 94–95
X15161 Bronze statue of Poseidon from Cape Artemisium, figs. 88–90
Bronze relief mirror: Aphrodite Urania, fig. 253
Gold ring from Argos, fig. 61
Mycenaean gold appliqué of a nude goddess, fig. 233
Seal impression from Mycenae, fig. 60
Cylinder seal from Naxos (impression), fig. 154
Clay models of the temples of Hera at Perachora and Argos, figs. 28–29

BASEL, ANTIKENMUSEUM AND SAMMLUNG LUDWIG

B415 Column-krater: tragic chorus, fig. 270
BS205 Roman copy of the head of the “Apollo Belvedere,” fig. 121

BERLIN, STAATLICHES MÜNZKABINETT

18214213 Tetradrachm of Antigonus II Gonatas: Athena Alkis, fig. 183
Stater from Poseidonia/Paestum: Poseidon, fig. 86
Stater from Corinth: head of Athena, fig. 195
Bronze coin from Elis: head of the Phidian Zeus at Olympia, fig. 22
 Museum and Site Index 401

BERLIN, STAATLICHE MUSEEN, ANTIKENSAMMLUNG

31013a Bronze Boeotian fibula, fig. 42
F539 + 630 (75); F486 (76); F368 (77); F494 (78) Corinthian pinakes: Poseidon, figs. 75–78
F1704 Tyrrhenian amphora: Birth of Athena, fig. 209
F2160 Amphora by the Berlin Painter with Hermes and a Silen, fig. 301
F2278 Sosias cup, fig. 117
F2290 Cup by Makron: Lenaea festival, figs. 272, 291
F2291 Cup by Makron: Aphrodite, fig. 239
F2293 Cup by the Brygos Painter: Gigantomachy, fig. 85
F2294 Cup by the Foundry Painter, fig. 216
F2536 Red-figure cup: Judgment of Paris, fig. 58
SK1747 Three-figure Artemis-Hecate as support for a washbasin, fig. 153
Terracotta statuette of Athena Polias (drawing), fig. 185
Fragment of a Cycladic amphora, fig. 259

BOLOGNA, MUSEO CIVICO ARCHEOLOGICO

206 Red-figure column-krater: worshippers before herms, fig. 306
G1060 Roman marble copy of the head of the Athena Lemnia, fig. 198

BOSTON, MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS

03.997 Bronze statuette (“Mantiklos Apollo”), figs. 124–125
10.185 Bell-krater by the Pan Painter, figs. 168–169
95.12 Protocorinthian lekythos by the Ajax Painter: Zeus in battle, fig. 16
99.489 Bronze statuette of Hermes carrying a ram, fig. 296

BRAURON, ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM

A25 Krateriskos: dancing “little bears,” fig. 156

COPENHAGEN, NATIONAL MUSEUM OF DENMARK

119 Cup by Epictetus: sculptor with herm, fig. 302

CORFU (KERKYRA), ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM

West pediment of the Temple of Artemis, figs. 18, 163

DELOS
Colossus: Apollo of the Naxians, figs. 128–129
Lion Terrace, fig. 131

DELOS, ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM

B6191 Early Corinthian alabastron: Artemis (rollout drawing), fig. 161

DELPHI, ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM

380 + 1050 Naxian sphinx, fig. 130
8140 White-ground cup: Apollo pouring a libation, fig. 143
402 Museum and Site Index

9912 Ivory statuette of Apollo from Delphi, fig. 133

North and East friezes of the Siphnian Treasury, figs. 210, 260

DRESDEN, SKULPTURENSAMMLUNG, STAATLICHE KUNSTSAMMLUNGEN

Hm 049 Athena Lemnia, fig. 197

FLORENCE, MUSEO ARCHEOLOGICO NAZIONALE

4209 Volute-krater signed by Kleitias and Ergotimos (François Vase), figs. 162, 211, 255
9674 Black-figure plate: Judgment of Paris, fig. 240
81600 Red-figure cup: Hephaestus, fig. 217
Bronze coin from Elis: Phidian Zeus, fig. 23

FRANKFURT, LIEBIEGHAUS SKULPTURENSAMMLUNG

LH 195 Roman copy of Athena from the Myronian group of Athena and Marsyas, fig. 192a
Modern bronze copy of the Myronian group of Athena and Marsyas, fig. 192b

HEIDELBERG, UNIVERSITÄT ANTIKENSAMMLUNG

TK61 Boeotian clay mask of Dionysus, fig. 274
TK82 Terracotta bust of Demeter Thesmophoros, fig. 99

HERAKLION, ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM

246 Sphyrelaton group from Dreros, fig. 126
396 Sarcophagus from Hagia Triada, fig. 14
424 Gold ring from Isopata, fig. 268
18502 Terracotta statuette of Athena from Gortyn, fig. 178
AE376 Clay temple model with goddess, fig. 59
AE2764 Rhyton from Kato Zakros: peak sanctuary, fig. 149
Π12445 Pithos from Fortetsa: Zeus, fig. 15
Cycladic idol, fig. 229

ISTANBUL, ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM

1433 Roman marble adaptation of the Hermes of Alcamenes, fig. 299

KARLSRUHE, BADISCHES LANDESMUSEUM

68.101 Volute-krater by the Berlin Painter: Demeter, fig. 102
85.1 Lekythos by the Bowdoin Painter: sanctuary of Hermes, fig. 303

KASSEL, STAATLICHE KUNSTSAMMLUNGEN, ANTIKENABTEILUNG

Sk3 “Kassel Apollo,” fig. 147
Sk112 Copy after a relief on the throne of Zeus at Olympia: Apollo, fig. 145
T424 Skyphos from the Cabirion (rollout drawing), fig. 300

KEA, ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM

1–1 Mycenaean terracotta statue of a dancing woman, fig. 290
 Museum and Site Index 403

LONDON, BRITISH MUSEUM

1839.0806.3 Votive relief from Krannon: Artemis-Hekate with house pets, fig. 150
1841.0726.287 Demarateion: head of Artemis-Arethusa, fig. 165
1860.1201.2 Astragal by Sotades, fig. 219
1866.1201.40 Drachma from Massalia: head of Artemis, fig. 164
1867.0508.1340 Red-figure pelike: Aphrodite Elaphebolos, fig. 152
1881.0528.1 White-ground cup by the Tarquinia Painter: detail of Hephaestus, fig. 218
1884.0614.31 Bronze axe, dedication of the butcher Kyniskos, fig. 38
1894.0719.1 White-ground pyxis: Hestia, fig. 118
1895.1029.5 Terracotta group: Demeter and Kore, fig. 107
3204 Boeotian bronze fibula: Charites, fig. 235
B168 Black-figure amphora: Ariadne with her sons, fig. 282
B130 Panathenaic prize amphora by Burgon Group, fig. 181
B210 Amphora by Exekias: Dionysus and Oinopion, fig. 283
B424 Cup by Phrynos: Birth of Athena, fig. 208
B448 Limestone statuette from Naucratis: Apollo, fig. 132
B605 Panathenaic prize amphora by Kuban Group, fig. 182
D2 White-ground cup by the Pistoxenos Painter: Aphrodite Urania, fig. 242
E82 Cup by the Codrus Painter, figs. 264–266
E336 Red-figure amphora: statue of Apollo, fig. 123
E697 Perfume vase by the Meidias Painter: Aphrodite, fig. 234
SL.5218.183. Drawing by Albrecht Dürer: Apollo, fig. 2
Parthenon pediments, figs. 109, 254, 292
Parthenon east frieze, figs. 47, 96, 115, 225
Tetradrachm of Naxos: head of Dionysus, figs. 280
Corinthian stater: head of Athena, fig. 196
Stater from Samos: lion scalp and Hera’s ox, fig. 57
Stater from Argos: head of Hera, fig. 48
Stater from Knossos: head of Hera, fig. 49

MAINZ, UNIVERSITÄT, KLASSISCH-ARCHÄOLOGISCHE SAMMLUNGEN

116 Red-figure pyxis: Hestia, fig. 119
118 Lekanis lid, circle of the Meidias Painter: detail of Eukleia, fig. 170

MUNICH, STAATLICHE ANTIKENSAMMLUNGEN

585 Ionian amphora: Hermes and Argus, fig. 295
596 Chalcidian hydria: Zeus and Typhon, fig. 17
1983 WAF Steatite model of a granary from Melos, fig. 103
2304 Amphora by the Nikoxenos Painter: Zeus and Hera, fig. 21
2413 Stamnos near the painter Hermonax: Erichthonios, fig. 186
2648 Cup by the Oedipus Painter: Athena and Herakles, fig. 200
2689 Cup by the Penthesilea Painter: Apollo and Tityos, fig. 146
5042 Locrian clay relief: Hermes and Aphrodite, fig. 247
6248 White-ground lekythos: Hermes and woman, figs. 309–310
404 Museum and Site Index

8729/2044 Cup by Exekias: Dionysus, fig. 288

J336/2685 White-ground cup with inscription: Hera, fig. 25

NAPLES, MUSEO ARCHEOLOGICO NAZIONALE

6727 Orpheus relief, fig. 312
127929 Column-krater by the Pan Painter: sacrifice to Hermes, fig. 305
H2200 Bell-krater by the Oenomaus Painter: sacrifice to Artemis, fig. 155
H2419 Stamnos by the Dinos Painter: Lenaea festival, fig. 273
Attic votive relief from Mondragone: Hestia at the center of the sacred Eleusinian family, fig. 114

NAXOS, ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM

Neck of a Cycladic amphora: Aphrodite (inscribed) and Ares, fig. 258

NAXOS, MARBLE QUARRY

Unfinished colossal statue of Dionysus, fig. 278

NEW HAVEN, YALE UNIVERSITY ART GALLERY

2004.6.1647 Coin of Krannon (Thessaly), fig. 3

NEW YORK, METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART

07.286.66 Calyx-krater by the Spreckels Painter: Ares beside the dragon of Thebes, fig. 257
28.57.23 Bell-krater, name vase of the Persephone Painter: return of Persephone, fig. 98
50.11.1 Bronze statuette, Elgin Athena, fig. 194
75.2.11 Oinochoe by the Meidias Painter, fig. 232

NEW YORK, THE MORGAN LIBRARY AND MUSEUM

Morgan Seal 178 Akkadian cylinder seal: Shamash, fig. 135

NICOSIA, CYPRUS MUSEUM

Early Bronze Age plank-shaped figurine, fig. 56

OLYMPIA, ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM

B145 Bronze griffin head, fig. 39
Head of the cult statue of Hera, fig. 52
Sculptures from the Temple of Zeus, figs. 11, 13, 144, 190, 191

OSTIA, MUSEO ARCHEOLOGICO OSTIENSE

120 Round altar of the Twelve Gods, fig. 113

OXFORD, ASHMOLEAN MUSEUM

AN1889.1011 Black-figure lekythos: Poseidon on a hippocamp, fig. 82
AN1938.1126 Gold ring from Mycenae (drawing), fig. 62
G8 Terracotta relief from Gela, fig. 251
 Museum and Site Index 405

PAESTUM, MUSEO ARCHEOLOGICO NAZIONALE

Terracotta statuette: Hera-Aphrodite at her bath, fig. 228
Wedding vase: Birth of Aphrodite, fig. 246

PALERMO, MUSEO ARCHEOLOGICO REGIONALE “ANTONINO SALINAS”

3918 Metope from Selinus: arrival of Apollo, fig. 139
3921B Metope from Selinus: Zeus and Hera, fig. 46

PARIS, BIBLIOTHÈQUE NATIONALE

Carrey drawings of the Parthenon pediments, figs. 203–204, 206–207

PARIS, CABINET DES MÉDAILLES

222 Amphora by the Amasis Painter, figs. 81, 285
542 Cup by Douris: Hephaestus, figs. 214–215
573 Red-figure cup with Gigantomachy, fig. 256
Stater of Dossennos from Poseidonia, fig. 87

PARIS, LOUVRE
Br. 1707 Bronze relief mirror: Aphrodite Pandemos, fig. 252
C10793 Fragment of a pelike by the Pan Painter: three herms, fig. 304
CA573 Boeotian clay idol: Artemis, fig. 160
CA616 Black-figure exaleiptron, fig. 176
CA1747 Terracotta group: Aphrodite on a goose, fig. 241
E668 Laconian cup: Zeus, fig. 20
E702 Caeretan hydria: Hermes, fig. 293
F77 Black-figure band cup: farmers, fig. 106
F159 Black-figure olpe: Hermes, fig. 297
G162 Calyx-krater by the Kleophrades Painter, fig. 213
G341 Calyx-krater by the Niobid Painter, fig. 167
Ma 866 “Ares Borghese,” fig. 262
MNB1290 Medallion from Galaxidi: Birth of Aphrodite, fig. 227
RF2114 15th c. tapestry cartoon: sanctuary of Apollo, fig. 1
Sb8 Stele of Hammurabi, fig. 134
Metope from Olympia, fig.189

PARIS, NIARCHOS COLLECTION

A031 Black-figure band cup: sacrificial procession for Athena, fig. 184

PISA, CAMPO SANTO

Roman copy of the head of the “Ares Borghese,” fig. 263

POLICORO, MUSEO ARCHEOLOGICO NAZIONALE DELLA SIRITIDE

35304 Pelike near the Karneia Painter: Poseidon on horseback and Athena as charioteer in their
contest, separated by the thunderbolt of Zeus, figs. 79–80
406 Museum and Site Index

REGGIO CALABRIA, MUSEO ARCHEOLOGICO NAZIONALE

Relief from Locri: Birth of Aphrodite (drawing), fig. 248

ROME, MUSEO NAZIONALE ROMANO, PALAZZO ALTEMPS

8631 “Juno Ludovisi,” fig. 26
85702 “Ludovisi Throne,” figs. 243–245

ROME, MUSEO NAZIONALE DELLE TERME (PALAZZO MASSIMO)

8624 Roman marble copy of the Phidian Hermes Chthonios, fig. 307

ROME, PALATINE, HOUSE OF LIVIA

Wall painting with cult pillars of Artemis-Hecate, fig. 158

SAMOS, ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM OF VATHY

5476 Wooden statuette of Hera, fig. 51
H1 Wooden relief (lost): Zeus and Hera, fig. 44

SYRACUSE, MUSEO ARCHEOLOGICO REGIONALE PAOLO ORSI

Terracotta relief of Athena Ergane (drawing), fig. 177

TARANTO, MUSEO ARCHEOLOGICO NAZIONALE

IG 8263 Volute-krater by the Karneia Painter: Dionysus and Artemis, fig. 157

TARQUINIA, MUSEO NAZIONALE TARQUINIENSE

678 Black-figure amphora: ship of Dionysus, fig. 284
RC1804 Black-figure amphora: mask of Dionysus, fig. 276
RC6848 Cup by Oltos, figs. 116, 261

TENOS, ARCHAEOLOGICAL MUSEUM

B64 Relief pithos: Birth of Athena, fig. 174

UPPSALA, GUSTAVIANUM
Cup of the Haimon Group: Lenaea festival, fig. 271

VATICAN MUSEUMS
1015 “Apollo Belvedere,” fig. 120
1211 Roman marble copy of the head of Hephaestus by Alcamenes, fig. 224
16568 Hydria by the Berlin Painter, fig. 140
16582 Cup by the Brygos Painter: Hermes, fig. 294

VIENNA, EPHESUS MUSEUM

Sphinx group from the throne of Zeus in Olympia, fig. 24

VIENNA, KUNSTHISTORISCHES MUSEUM

3733 Red-figure bell-krater: Apollo at sacrifice, fig. 142
 Museum and Site Index 407

WÜRZBURG, MUSEUM FÜR FRANKEN

Bronze urn-wagon from Acholshausen, fig. 4

WÜRZBURG, MARTIN-VON-WAGNER-MUSEUM
H4275 Clay plank-figure, fig. 54
HA3849 Clay pyleon, fig. 55
HA3935 Marble head from the statue of an Arktos (Bear), fig. 151
L164 “Phineus Cup,” interior frieze: Dionysus (drawing), fig. 289
L194 Black-figure amphora: Poseidon riding a bull, fig. 84
L197 Black-figure amphora: Triptolemus, fig. 105
L265 Amphora by the Amasis Painter, figs. 286–287
L308 Black-figure hydria: Demeter, fig. 108
L309 Black-figure hydria: Birth of Athena, fig. 199
L502 Red-figure twisted-handled amphora: statue of Poseidon, fig. 91

PRIVATE COLLECTIONS, VASES AND COINS

Anthesteria skyphos by Polygnotus, fig. 277
Drachma from Naxos: head of Dionysus, fig. 279
Tetradrachm from Potidaea: Poseidon on horseback, fig. 83
Tetradrachm from Naxos: head of Dionysus, fig. 281
 Index Locorum

Aeschylus Alcman of Sardis  6 Bacchylides 9

Agamemnon
135ff. 175
160–83  24, 354n32
228ff. 166
1080 140
Choephori 124ff.  331
Danaids 271
Eumenides 153
Oresteia  24, 74
Persians 303
Psychostasia 24
Seven Against Thebes 105ff.  Apollodorus of Athens  71, 106
286
Sphinx, TrGF 3:231f., 287f.,
341–43 Radt  389n18
TrGF 3:214–16, frr. 95–97a Radt
241, 383n36
Alcaeus of Lesbos  6, 41, 143,
239–41, 283, 311, 316–17
fr. 56 Page  185–86
fr. 129, 5ff.  394n56
fr. 298 Lobel-Page  218
fr. 307 Lobel-Page  371n17
frr. 15 and 129 Lobel-Page  21 149
56
frr. 128.6f. Lobel-Page  41
1.51 43
fr. 56 Page  185–86
fr. 60 Page  56
Anacreon of Teos  6
fr. 348 Page  173
Anthologia Palatina 6.243  44
Antigonos of Karystos, Historiae
mirabiles 15  14
Antiphanes, fr. 288 Kock  261
Antiphilos of Byzantium, Antho-
logia Palatina 6.199  175
1.4.1 180
3.12.3 209
Aristides, Orations 12.7  186
Aristophanes
Acharnians 1076  396n24
Frogs
323ff. 106
479 393n29
Thesmophoriazusae 96
Aristotle, Constitution of the
Athenians 9
57 393n31
58 182
9.6ff. 62
11.95ff. Snell  374n41
11.116f. Snell  173
Callimachus
The Bath of Pallas 33ff.  204
Diegesis fr. 101 Pfeiffer  62
fr. 7 Pfeiffer  386n28
fr. 7.12 Pfeiffer  265
fr. 100.2 Pfeiffer  62
fr. 101 Pfeiffer  56
fr. 114.9 Pfeiffer  265
fr. 194, 66ff.  218
Hymn to Apollo  150–52, 154
60ff. 171
Hymn to Artemis
137ff.  181, 183
225ff. 173–74
Hymn to Zeus 1.8  13
Cassius Dio, 55.9.6  368n19
Cicero
De natura deorum 2.66  37
Laws
2.25.64ff. 222
2.26.65 331
Clement of Alexandria
Protrepticus 4.46  187

409
410 Index Locorum

Stromata 1, 24, 5.82 97–98 1.194ff. 205

163/164 359n67 6.21 375n63 1.199ff. 254
Cypria  166, 261–62, 265, 268 6.56  255, 257 1.314 179
Diodorus Siculus 6.105 194 1.400  12, 180
3.66.2 384n49 6.137 41 1.570 234
18.5 166 6.137f. 237 1.586ff. 234
Euripides 7.192  90, 197 1.595ff. 234–35
Alcestis Hesiod 1.601ff. 163
162–69  122, 128 Ehoiai (Catalogue of Women) 1.601–3 131
361 331 77 2.101ff. 22
Antiope 392n20 fr. 64, 15–18  396n8 2.695f. 102
Archelaos 385n15 fr. 204.44ff. Merkelbach-West 3.64 254
Bacchae  6, 301, 315, 319 326 3.380ff. 253
680ff.  319, 395n65 frr. 30, 32ff. Merkelbach-West 3.382 263
Hippolytus 373n7 75 3.396ff. 253–54
Iphigenia in Tauris 19ff.  166 Theogony  70–71, 102, 206 3.424ff. 254
Medea 161–63  376n39 135ff. 286 4.407 286
Orestes 1239  278 154ff. 12 5.9f. 235
Phoenician Women  43, 102–3 194ff. 254 5.51f. 170
683ff. 102–3 278ff. 69 5.338 261
784ff. 292 328 62 5.370f. 280
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang 415ff. 169 5.428ff. 256
Achilleis 133f.  280 430 173 5.447f. 143
Faust, 8075–77, 8186–87, 8194– 434 173 5.499ff. 101
99 334–35 444ff. 186 5.860 282
Hellanikos of Lesbos, frr. 74–84, 453ff. 12 5.880 205
FGrHist 359n66 454 123 5.890ff. 281
Heraclitus. fr. 51 Diels  157, 477ff. 13 5.899 389n8
372n45 617–735 89 5.905f. 282
Herodotus 825ff. 27 6.130ff.  321, 322
1.31 43 881ff. 18 6.132ff. 297
1.105 255–56 927ff. xxiv 6.303 199
1.146  78, 174, 183 930ff. 69 7.452 80
1.199 272 934ff. 287 7.452f. 149
2.14 96 937 286 7.467–75 393n33
2.49  318, 322 975 288 8.64ff. 233
2.50  6, 41, 72, 122, 178, 237, Works and Days 102 8.294 235
261 73f. 237 9.96ff. 23
2.51  333, 334 172f. 110 9.381 102
2.53 3–4 504 300 9.570 98
2.171  96, 101 Homer 14.10ff. 70
4.59  23, 284 Iliad 14.198 254
4.62  23, 284 1.37ff. 135 14.214ff. 257–58
5.7  166, 181, 284 1.44ff. 135 14.216 254
 Index Locorum 411

14.295f. 51 3.91. 71 278ff. 27

14.325 288 3.435f. 387n61 294f. 149
14.346ff. 51–53 5.125–28 364n24 351ff. 51
15.193 69 6.4ff. 76 475ff. 139
16.233ff. 14 6.102ff. 165–66 Homeric Hymn to Athena (28)
18.296 234 6.163ff. 180 6, 280
18.382 261 6.226 76 1ff. 231–32
18.394ff. 238 7.56 76 Homeric Hymn to Demeter (2) 
18.400ff. 238–39 7.78ff. 200 74, 103, 105, 110, 114, 118
18.414ff. 234 8.267 261 20ff. 106
18.478–608 233 8.296ff. 283 48 105
18.516ff. 282 8.318 283 202ff. 104
18.591f. 244 8.362ff.  261, 265 204 104
18.599ff. 244 8.559 76 205 104
18ff. 37 9.125ff. 73 224ff. 119
20.403ff. 77 9.275ff. 73 256ff. 104
21  180, 281–82 9.535 73 278f. 120
21.29–33 247–48 10.494f. 110 292ff. 104
21.284–98 248 10.527ff. 99 297ff.  103, 105
21.308–23 384n49 11.121ff. 72 305ff. 104
21.314 247 11.127ff. 72–73 445ff. 104
21.330–41 247 11.325 180 473ff.  101, 102
21.342–45 248–49 14.158f.  121, 367n7 480ff. 106
21.342–76 247 16.471 329 483ff. 113
21.353–56 249 17.155f.  121, 367n7 489 102
21.364f. 247 19.295–398 396n8 Homeric Hymn to Dionysus (1) 
21.369–76 249 20.61ff. 170 314–15, 322
21.392 249 20.230f.  121, 367n7 Homeric Hymn to Hermes (4)
21.424f. 249 23.356f. 326 328
21.435ff. 80 24 330–31 17f. 324
21.470 173 Homeric Hymn to Aphrodite (5) 108ff. 208
21.471 168 209, 253, 254, 259, 268 115–29 364n17
21.506 181 16f. 197 116ff. 100
22.209ff. 23 20 173 551 333
22.359ff. 139 21–32 123 567f. 327
23.185ff. 263 36ff. 259 572 330
24.334ff. 323 61 261 574f.  131, 327
24.347 333 262 334 Homeric Hymn to Hestia (24) 
24.478ff. 291 Homeric Hymn to Apollo (3)  125, 128–29
24.527ff. 24 149, 155, 157 Homeric Hymn to Hestia and
24.679ff. 324 131f. 152 Hermes (29)  125
Odyssey 140ff. 154 1–3 124
1.20 73 194ff.  197–98, 261 4–6 124
3.5ff. 70 247f. 149 8–9 121
412 Index Locorum

Horace, Odes 1.10  323 2.10.5 202 7.24.2 29

Hyginus, Fabulae 164  229 2.14.1; 3.20.5; 8.15.1; 8.25.3; 7.26.3 175
Istros, FGrHist 3 B  368n24 8.29.5; 9.4.3.  364n21 8.23.6f. 190
Jeremiah 44:17ff.  255 2.17.1 42 8.25.5 75
Lactantius, Divine Institutes 23  2.17.2 56 8.34.6 329
365n40 2.17.4  41, 51 8.37.10 75
Livy 2.17.5 65 8.48.1 372n50
5.13.6 295 2.21.1 278 9.3 61
24.3 45 2.23.7 299 9.12.2 200
Lucian, Concerning the Syrian 2.30.2 177 9.12.4 299
Goddess 31  62 2.30.4 97 9.16.5  102, 108, 301
Ovid 2.30.6 83 9.19.6 184
Fasti 2.35.6f. 100 9.22.1 328
6.267 368n27 2.36.8 200 9.24.2 104
6.295–98  122, 367n8 3.12.11 257 9.35.3 179
Metamorphoses 2.1ff.  152 3.13.9 257 9.35.5 261
Pausanias 3.14.6 174 9.36.3 27
1.2.4 85 3.15.10 256 9.39.7 334
1.4.7 276 3.19 137 10.7.2 139
1.14.6 200 3.19.3–4 370n7 Phoronis, fr. 3 Davies  65–66,
1.19.2 259 3.19.6 186 359n65
1.19.6 182 3.22.12 174 Phrynichos, The Capture of
1.19.6; 1.41.3; 5.18.8; 7.26.3; 3.23.1 256 Miletus 375n63
7.26.11; 8.32.4  373n8 5.7.10 17 Pindar
1.22.3 276 5.8.3 372n50 fr. 33c–d Snell  153, 155
1.22.8 386n20 5.10.2 23 fr. 34 Snell  238
1.23.4 379n52 5.11 32–33 fr. 52i.6ff. Snell  250
1.24.5  83, 229 5.11.3 31 fr. 70b, 19ff. Snell  186
1.24.5ff. 227 5.11.8  257, 261 fr. 75.1 Snell  387n61
1.24.8 163 5.13.8ff. 15 fr. 75.3 Snell  125
1.26.5 361n21 5.16 56 fr. 133 Snell  109–10
1.27.1 333 5.16.1 40 fr. 137 Snell  106
1.28.2 222 5.16.6f. 316 Isthmian Odes
1.39.2 364n32 5.17.1 41 7.3ff. 108
1.39.5 364n31 5.18.5 289 8.37 291
1.39.5; 1.40.6  364n30 5.26.2 367n7 Nemean Odes
1.41.6 378n21 5.27.8 328 1.1–4 193
2.1.6 83 6.20.9 100 1.61f. 110
2.2.6 186 6.21.1 98 6 95
2.2.7 319 6.25.1 277 11 367n2
2.5.1 256 7.2.7 183 Olympian Odes
2.7.6 319 7.3.1 139 7.42ff. 201
2.7.7  139, 278 7.4.8 308 13.63ff. 75–76
2.9.6 187 7.23.9 358n39 14.1 267
 Index Locorum 413

14.10f. 369n30 Themistocles Oedipus at Colonus

14.812 6 13 373n1 55f. 237
21f. 19 22  190, 197 694ff. 202–3
Pythian Odes Theseus 714f. 76
1.12 163 18  184, 276, 277 Triptolemos, TrGF 4, fr. 615
1.13 162 21  171, 276 Radt 368n27
2 193 Pollux 8.106  179 Strabo
4.87f.  288, 289 Polyaenus, Strategemata 2.3.16 73
12.18–23 220–21 8.35 174 5.1.9  43, 175, 190
Plato Porphyry, De abstinentia 8.3.12 329
Charmides 164d–e  140 2.54 190 8.6.14 80
Cratylus 404c  37 Pseudo-Hesiod, Shield of 9.2.33 80
Hipparchus 228–29  335 Heracles 188  27 10.1.10 183
Laws 3.680b, 682a  73 Pseudo-Xenophon, Constitution 14.1.3 78
Phaedrus 246e–247  124, 127 of the Spartans 2.9  186 14.1.6  139, 187
Symposium 180d  276, 277 Sappho  6, 254, 263, 316 Thucydides
Timaeus fr. 2.13–16 Lobel-Page  382n8 2.44 222
21e 200 fr. 5 Lobel-Page  256 4.109 237
41a 233 fr. 17 Lobel-Page  394n56 6.27 331
Pliny the Elder, Natural History fr. 94.18ff. Lobel- 6.28  333, 338
14.9 40 Page 386n35 6.54.6 99
34.80 379n52 fr. 95 Lobel-Page  342–43 Titanomachia  12, 89
36.25  127, 368n19 fr. 111 Lobel-Page  289 Virgil, Aeneid 1.724  261
Plutarch fr. 150 Lobel-Page  342, Vitruvius 4.1.3  41
De gloria Atheniensium 349f. 397n50 Xenophon
197 Sophocles Anabasis 3.2.12  182
fr. 871 Page  57 Ajax Hellenica
Lycurgus 5  149 172ff. 182 4.2.2 197
Septem Sapientium Convivium 450 227 5.4.4 286
20.163a 73 Antigone 1118f.  357n34 Hipparchicus 3.2  337
 Subject Index

Page numbers in italics indicate illustrations. For specific ancient writings, please see the Index
Locorum. Specific artworks, when indexed, are listed by findspot, artist, individual title, and/or subject
matter; see also the Museum and Site Index.

Achilles: Apollo and, 4, 139–40, 149; Ares and,
281–82, 290–91, 292; Athena and, 205, 254; on
Hephaesteum, east frieze, Athens, 247–49, 248,
384n49; Hermes and, 323–24; shield of, 233, 244,
282, 381n1; Zeus and, 14, 20, 23–24
Acholshausen, bronze urn-wagon of Zeus from,
14–15, 15
Acrae, inscription of Hera and Aphrodite from,
257
Acragas (Sicily): bust of Demeter Thesmophoros
from, 108, 109; Olympieion at, 18, 20
Acrocorinth, cult statue of Aphrodite of, 256
Acropolis, Athens: Apollo, grotto of, 80; Arrepho-
roi on, 202; Artemis, cult of, 178–79, 194; Athena
Nike, temple of, 178, 209, 214; bronze statuettes
of Athena from, 210, 210–11, 211; Charites and
Eros, cults of, 120, 261, 262, 386n20; Erech-
theum, 71, 82, 85, 230, 333, 335, 361n21; Kassel
Apollo as copy of Phidias’ statue from, 163; korai
from, 133; “mourning Athena” votive, 222, 223;
multiple cult statues of Athena on, 204, 211–15,
224–25, 225, 379–80n55; naiskos of Aphrodite
Pandemos, 276–77, 277; nymphs, vase fragment
with, 297; olive tree on, 216–18, 217; Perseus of
Myron on, 222; Propylaia, 115, 178, 179, 194; tem-
ples of Athena on, 178, 199, 209, 354–55n39;
votive plaque of Aphrodite with Eros and
Himeros, 254, 255. See also Parthenon
Actaeon, 169, 196
Adonis, 299, 321
Aegean islands: Aphrodite associated with, 259–61;
Dionysus associated with, 308, 316, 393n33; pre-
Hellenic cults of, 6. See also specific islands by
name
Aegeira, cult of Artemis Agrotera at, 174–75
Aegeus, 276
Aeolians, 41
Aeschylus: daimones as depicted by, 241; knowl-
edge of the gods from, xiii, 6; maenads in work
of, 321; Prometheus trilogy of, 242; Zeus as por-
trayed by, 24
Agamedes, 102
Agamemnon, 23, 135, 166–67, 170, 173, 187, 205, 326
Agave, 319
Aglaurids, 386n30
Agni (Indian fire god), 367n5

415
416 Subject Index
Agora, Athens: Altar of the Twelve Gods in, 124–
25, 398n53; Artemis, cult of, 172, 174, 197; gra-
nary models from grave in, 111–12, 112; herms in,
337; Prytaneion, 125, 133, 174, 183; Tyrannicides,
statues of, 337
Agoraia, 172
Agrotera, 168, 174–75, 182
Aigion, cult of Zeus at, 22, 29, 358n39
Aiolidae, 353n23
Ajax, 140, 140–41, 182, 218, 227, 326
Ajax Painter, Protocorinthian leythos with Zeus,
26–28, 27, 208, 354n37
Alcamenes, 178, 250, 252, 278, 292, 332, 335
Alcibiades, mutilation of herms by, 333
Alcock, Susan, and Robin Osborne, Placing the
Gods: Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in Ancient
Greece, xi
Alexander the Great, 18, 166, 285, 297
Alexandria, Altar of the Twelve Gods in, 125, 127
Alpheus, 376n91
altars: ash altars, 15–16, 16, 100, 180; horn altars,
171; inside versus outside temples, 82; symmetri-
cal arrangement of gods on, in archaizing sculp-
ture, 382n20. See also specific altars
Alyattes, 150
Amaltheia, 353n6
Amasis Painter: amphora with Athena and Posei-
don, 87, 88, 362n42; amphora with Dionysus
and dancing maenads, 311, 312; amphora with
Dionysus and silens gathering and pressing
grapes, 311, 312, 313
Amazonomachy, 227, 228
Amazons, 183, 194
Amorgos, Cycladic harp player from, 259, 260,
386n22
amphictyonies, 79–80
Amphidromia, 128, 131, 133
Amphipolis, temple of Artemis Tauropolos, 166
Amphitrite, xxiii, 70–71, 73, 85, 130, 131, 293, 295
Amyclae: Dionysus Psilax at, 186; statue head/
sanctuary of Apollo at, 136–39, 138, 143, 144,
370n4, 370n7, 370n16
Amytheon, 20–22, 22
Anchises, 259
animals: Artemis as “Mistress of Beasts,” 165, 166,
168, 169, 170, 172, 174, 175, 177, 190, 191, 327;
Dionysus and, 315; Hermes and, 327, 396n10. See
also specific types of animal
Anius, 320
Anthesteria, 300, 301, 307, 308, 316, 318, 331, 393n33
Antigonus II Gonatas (Macedonian ruler), 212, 213
Antimenes Painter: hydria with birth of Athena,
225, 226, 230; neck amphora with Dionysus
mask, 304, 306
Antiochus IV Epiphanes, 18
Apaturia, 300
Aphaia, 170
Aphaia temple, Aegina, xiv
Aphrodisia, 286
Aphrodite, 253–80; Aegean islands, associated
with, 259–61; Apollo and, 261, 275, 276, 278; Ares
and, 256, 268, 283, 286–92, 289–91, 293, 295;
Artemis and, 123, 165, 197, 197–98, 253, 272–76,
275, 278, 280, 377n99; Assyrian goddess associ-
ated with, 62; Athena and, 49, 123, 200, 202, 203,
216, 253, 256, 268–70; birth scenes and stories,
xxiv, 254–55, 257, 272, 273, 274; Charites/Graces
and, 6, 197, 261–62, 265–68, 266, 267, 278,
386n30; cult and rites, 272, 276–80; as cup-
bearer, 382n8; Dione and, 259; Dionysus and,
261; doves sacred to, 259, 264, 276, 277; Eukleia
and, 197–98, 198; in family tree of the gods, xxii,
xxiv; garden, association with, 202, 203, 259,
265, 266; geese, association with, 264, 268, 270,
270–71, 271; goats sacrificed to, 277, 279;
heaven, earth, and sea represented by, 270–71;
on Hephaesteum, east frieze, Athens, 248, 249;
Hephaestus and, 238, 261, 283; Hera and, 49, 53,
257–59, 258, 268–70, 385n12; Hermes and, 272;
Hestia and, 123, 253; in Homer and Hesiod, xxiv,
253–55; images and iconography, 202, 203, 255,
256, 257, 258, 264, 264–76, 266–71, 273–75, 288–
92, 289–91, 293, 295; in Judgment of Paris scenes,
49, 62, 261, 268, 268–70, 269; magic girdle of, 53,
257–58; as martial goddess, 286–88; nude versus
dressed, 264, 264–68, 266, 267, 280; olive tree
and, 202; origins and development, 254–65,
286–88; sanctuaries and temples, 255–56, 259,
 Subject Index 417
272, 276–77, 277; two cult titles and genealogies,
significance of, 276–80, 387n63; Zeus and, 12,
254–59, 257, 261, 263, 276
Aphrodite Epitragia, 277
Aphrodite Hera, 257, 258, 385n12
Aphrodite Olympios, 257
Aphrodite Pandemos, 276–78, 277, 278, 279
Aphrodite Peitho, 259. See also Peitho
Aphrodite Urania, 255–57, 263, 270, 272, 276, 277,
278–80, 279. See also Urania
Apollo, 135–64; Aphrodite and, 261, 275, 276, 278;
as archer, 135, 157–58, 161, 163; Ares and, 281, 288;
Artemis and, 137, 142, 143, 144, 153–57, 156, 158,
159, 161, 165, 171–74, 176, 179, 180, 184, 194;
Athena and, 218, 250; as avenger, 33, 135, 140,
149, 160–62, 163; cattle stolen by Hermes, xxiv,
324–26, 325, 326; cave-sites, worshipped at, 80;
Centauromachy at Delphi and, 27, 27–28;
Charites/Graces, attended by, 6, 265; cult and
rites, 152–55; the dead, association with, 144;
Dionysus and, 149, 319–20, 371n17; in family tree
of the gods, xxii, xxiii, xxiv; flowing water, con-
nection to, 179; on Hephaesteum, east frieze,
Athens, 248, 249; Hephaestus and, 250; Hermes
and, xxiv, 131, 324–25, 326, 327, 333, 397n39; Hes-
tia and, 126, 128–29; images and iconography, 3,
4, 5, 81, 115, 135–38, 136–38, 140–42, 140–44, 145,
147, 148, 155–63, 156–62, 164, 275; libations, pour-
ing, 158, 159; lions associated with, 62, 144–46,
147, 148; lyre/kithara, association with, 143, 144,
157, 158, 163, 325; in medieval art, 3, 4, 5, 351nn2–
3; mortals and humans, emphasizing demarca-
tion between, 95, 139–40, 144, 150, 152; Niobids
and, 33, 194, 195; origins and development, 72,
136–43, 148–49, 153–54; as Paiaon/Paean (god of
healing), 149, 281, 389n8; pillar/column, wor-
shipped in form of, 65, 137, 332; Poseidon and,
78, 80–83, 81; prophecy, association with, 140–
41, 144, 152; sanctuaries and temples, 13, 39,
82–83, 136–39, 143, 146, 147, 150, 151, 154, 154–55,
155, 171, 174, 371n32 (See also Delos; Delphi);
Shamash (Babylonian sun god) and, 149–52, 150,
151, 153–54; Sosias cup and, 131, 369n35; as sun
god, 144–52, 150, 151; as wanderer, 154–56; Zeus
and, 12, 13, 19–20, 27–28, 33, 149, 152, 154, 158–63,
160, 161, 327
Apollo Agyieus, 150
Apollo Amyklaios, 136–39, 138, 143, 144, 209, 370n4
Apollo Archegetes, 371n32
Apollo Belvedere, 3, 135–36, 136, 137
Apollo Carneius, 174
Apollo Kitharoidos, 143, 144, 157, 158
Apollo Milesios, 146, 147, 371n25
Apollo Musagetes, 163
Apollo Parnopios, 163
Apollo Patroos, 187
Apollo Phoebus/Phoebus Apollo, 148, 199
Apollonian triad (Apollo, Artemis, and Leto), 142,
143, 153–54, 155, 156, 173, 184, 370n16
Apulian Painter, volute krater with Birth of Diony-
sus, 394n55
“Archaic smile,” 365n35
Archanes, house model dedicated to Hera from,
63, 64, 359n62
Archilochus of Paros, 6
Archon Basileus, wife of, sacred marriage to
Dionysus, 307, 308
Ares, 281–96; Achilles and, 281–82, 290–91, 292;
Aphrodite and, 256, 268, 283, 286–92, 289–91,
293, 295; Apollo and, 281, 288; Artemis and, 165,
166, 180–83, 292; Athena and, 205, 281, 282, 292;
Demeter and, 292; Dionysus and, 285, 285–86,
292, 295, 296; dragon of Thebes, slaying of,
286–87, 287; in family tree of the gods, xxii,
xxiv; on Hephaesteum, east frieze, Athens, 248,
249; Hephaestus and, 238, 240; Hera and, 281,
283; Homer on, 281–85, 288; images and icon­
ography, 283, 285, 287, 289–91, 292–96, 293–96;
origins and development, 282–88; sacrifice/
sacrificial rituals, 181–82; as war god, 281–83;
Zeus and, 12, 23, 205, 281–85, 283, 293, 295, 296
Ares Borghese, 292, 293–94, 390n41
Arethusa, 193, 194, 376n91
Arge, 180
Argos: coin with head of Hera, 54, 55; cult of Hera
at, 38, 83, 87, 200, 358n39; cult statues of Hera at,
51, 56, 60, 62, 65–66, 210, 379n36; Dionysus and,
299, 319; gold ring from tomb near Heraeum
418 Subject Index

Argos (continued) 179–80; Pan and, 194; pillar/column, worshipped

with griffins and column of Hera (?), 65, 66; in form of, 137, 187–88, 188, 332; political assem-
Heraeum, 40, 40–43, 43, 48–49, 51, 52, 54, blies and civic life, association with, 172–74, 190;
357n25; house models associated with Hera polymorphism of, 165, 167; purification rituals,
from, 40; Palladium of Athena and, 38, 83, 87, associated with, 176–79, 178; sacrifice/sacrificial
200, 204; Poseidon and, 50, 83, 87; scissors, Hera rituals for, 166–70, 172–74, 177, 179–82, 182, 184,
of Argos depicted with, 210, 379n36; temple of 194, 197, 198; sanctuaries and temples, 143, 165,
Cretan Dionysus, 299 166, 174, 180, 182–84, 191–93, 192, 197, 268; the-
Argus, 327 ater and tragedy, connection to, 185–87; torch
Ariadne, 244, 276, 293, 295, 299, 307, 308, 310, 315, associated with, 176, 178, 187; in triple-bodied
316, 393n38 form, 172, 177–78, 178, 188, 374n37; virginity of,
Arion of Lesbos, 300–301, 311 167, 169, 176; Zeus and, 12, 165–67, 173, 176, 179,
Aristarchus, 166 180–81, 192
arktoi (she-bears), young girls serving Artemis as, Artemis Agoraia, 172
168–69, 175, 176, 184, 185, 190, 197 Artemis Agrotera, 168, 175, 182
Arniadas of Corcyra, grave of, 390n38 Artemis Arethusa, 193, 194, 376n91
Arrephoria, 202, 265, 368n21 Artemis Aristoboule, 197
Arrephoroi, 127, 202, 216 Artemis of Aulis, 166, 169
Artemis, 165–98; animals, association with, 165, Artemis Boulaia, 172, 174
166, 168, 169, 170, 172, 174, 175, 177, 190, 191, 327; Artemis Boulephoros, 172, 174
Aphrodite and, 123, 165, 197, 197–98, 253, 272–76, Artemis Brauronia, 194
275, 278, 280, 377n99; Apollo and, 137, 142, 143, Artemis Chitone, 174
144, 153–57, 156, 158, 159, 161, 165, 171–74, 176, 179, Artemis Eileithyia, 374n31
180, 184, 194; Apollonian triad (Apollo, Artemis, Artemis Elaphebolos, 170, 177
and Leto), 142, 143, 153–54, 155, 156, 173, 184, Artemis Enodia, 175
370n16; Ares and, 165, 166, 180–83, 292; arktoi Artemis Ephesia, 183–84, 375n57, 375n60
(she-bears), young girls serving Artemis as, Artemis Epipyrgidia, 178–79
168–69, 175, 176, 184, 185, 190, 197; Athena and, Artemis of Euboea, 182–83
165; as birth/vegetation deity, 180, 374n41; Artemis Eukleia, 173, 197, 197–98, 292
Charites/Graces and, 6, 178–79, 197, 374n38; Artemis Hecate, 169, 170, 172, 172–73, 175, 176, 177–
children, as nurturer of, 175, 374n31; cruel death, 78, 178, 188
providing vengeance against, 169–71, 175; cult Artemis Hegemone, 174, 175, 178–79
and rites, 172–87, 194–98; Dionysus and, 165, Artemis Kalliste, 165, 175
166, 180, 184–87, 327; in family tree of the gods, Artemis of Lusi, 179
xxii, xxiii; flowing water, connection to, 179; Artemis Orthia, 184–86, 190
Hera and, 165, 181; Hermes and, 185–86, 327; Artemis Patroa, 187
Hestia and, 130–31; hunting and butchering, Artemis Patroa of Sicyon, 332
association with, 165, 167–72, 175–77, 179–80, Artemis Pergaia, 190
181; images and iconography, 81, 107, 115, 142, Artemis Phosphoros, 373n17
143, 144, 156, 159, 169, 170, 172, 177, 187–89, 187– Artemis Propylaea, 179
98, 191, 192, 194–98; Iphigenia, sacrifice of, 166– Artemis Soteira, 174
67, 170; migration/movement of peoples, asso- Artemis Tauropolos, 166
ciation with, 174–75, 193, 197; Niobids and, 33, Artemisium (cape), sculpture of Poseidon from,
194, 195; origins and development, xii, 165–72, 90–94, 92–93, 162
 Subject Index 419
Ascalon (Syria), temple of Urania, 255–56
ash altars, 15–16, 16, 100, 180
Asinius Pollio, 127
Astarte, 385n14
astragaloi, 246
Athanasia, 218
Athena, 199–232; aegis of, 215, 218, 227, 384n50;
Aphrodite and, 49, 123, 200, 202, 203, 216, 253,
256, 268–70; Apollo and, 218, 250; Ares and, 205,
281, 282, 292; as armed/warrior goddess, 200;
Artemis and, 165; Athens and, 199, 201, 215–18,
227; birth of, 61, 115, 203–9, 207, 208, 225, 226,
229, 230–32, 232, 238, 239, 326; cult and rites,
204–5, 214, 215, 220; in family tree of the gods,
xxii, xxiv; flute invented by, 220–22, 221; Graces,
attended by, 6; Hephaesteum, Athens, and, 248,
249, 250; Hephaestus and, 208, 227, 238, 239,
244, 250, 252, 292; Hera and, 49–50, 200, 204,
205, 250, 268–70, 358n39, 377n6, 381n79; Hera-
cles and, 218, 219–20, 225, 226; Hermes and, 208;
heroes, special relationship with, 200, 218;
horses associated with, 75–76, 86; images and
iconography, 33, 201–4, 202, 203, 206–32, 207–16,
219–32, 252, 287; in Judgment of Paris scenes, 49,
62, 261, 268, 268–70, 269; motherly attributes of,
199, 215, 218; olive tree and, 201, 202, 205, 215,
216–18, 217, 229, 230, 231, 377n10, 381n82; open
sky, worship under, 211–12, 214; origins and
development, 199–206; owls sacred to, 223,
225, 226; as palace goddess, 199–200, 204–5;
Palladium of, 199, 201–6, 202, 203, 210, 213, 214,
231, 381n79; Pallas Athena, 148, 199, 201, 206,
218; Poseidon and, 76, 82, 83, 86, 87, 88, 201, 208,
218, 229, 381n82; sacrifice/sacrificial rituals for,
214, 215, 220; sanctuaries and temples, 46, 199,
214 (See also Parthenon); ships invented by, 76;
Zeus and, 11, 12, 180, 202–3, 205–9, 207, 208, 212,
218, 219, 220, 227, 230–32, 238
Athena Aethyia, 378n21
Athena Alkis, 212, 213
Athena Atrytone, 199
Athena Ergane, 208, 209, 250
Athena Glaucopis, 205, 227
Athena Gorgopis, 227
Athena Hephaestia, 244, 250
Athena Hippia, 76
Athena Hygieia, 214, 379n52
Athena Lemnia, 223–25, 224–25
Athena Lindia, 380n57
Athena Moria, 202
Athena Nike, 178, 209, 214, 218
Athena Onga, 200
Athena Parthenos, 163, 227–28, 228, 231
Athena Polias, 199, 214–15, 215, 333, 379–80n55
Athena Polias, priestess of, 127, 127–28
Athena Promachos, 90, 204, 210–14, 211, 214
Athena Saitis, 200
Athena Tritogenia, 199
Athens: Aphrodite/Urania in the Gardens, sanctu-
ary of, 202, 259, 278; Archaic stone herms of,
335; Archon Basileus, wife of, sacred marriage
to Dionysus, 307, 308; Artemis, cult of, 172, 174,
197, 373n17; Athena and, 199, 201, 215–18, 227;
Charites, cult of, 120, 178–79, 261, 262, 267,
386n20; Demeter as cult god in, 300; Dionysus
and Dionysian festivals in, 300–301, 318;
Dipylon gate, ivory statuette of one of Charites
from, 267; Hephaesteum, xxi, 246–50, 247–49,
251, 384n49; Hephaestus, cult of, xxi, 236–38,
246–50; Olympieion, 18, 19; Phidian statute of
Aphrodite, 278; plague of, 295–96; potters and
pottery of, 86–87; sanctuary and theater of
Dionysus Eleuthereus, 301, 302, 307. See also
Acropolis; Agora; Kerameikos; Parthenon
Atlas, xxiv, 218, 219
Attis, 299
Augean stables, 218, 220
Augustus Caesar, 43
Aulis, cult of Artemis at, 166–67, 184
Autolycus, 396n8
Auxesia, 97–98
Babylonian mythology: Apollo and Shamash, 149–
52, 150, 151, 153–54; Zeus and, 12–13
Bacchus, 297, 298, 321. See also Dionysus
Basedow, Maureen, xviii
Basel krater, tragic chorus in Theater of Dionysus,
301–3, 303
420 Subject Index
Baubo, 104
bears: arktoi (she-bears), young girls serving
Artemis as, 168–69, 175, 176, 184, 185, 190, 197;
Artemis and, 179; hunting and killing, 168–69
Beazley, J. D., 397n35, 397n39
Bellerophon, 75
Benson, Jack, 192
Berger, Ernst, 280, 368n21, 381n79, 388n75
Berlin Painter: amphora with Hermes and satyr,
333, 334, 397n35; hydria with Apollo on winged
tripod, 156, 157, 158
Beschi, L., 363n5, 366n66
Bielefeld, Erwin, 125
Billot, M.-F., 359n65
birth scenes and stories: Aphrodite, xxiv, 254–55,
257, 272, 273, 274; Apollo and Artemis, births of,
180, 358n50; Apulian Painter, volute krater with
Birth of Dionysus, 394n55; Artemis as birth
goddess, 180, 384n31; Athena, 61, 115, 203–9, 207,
208, 225, 226, 229, 230–32, 232, 238, 239, 326; in
Christian art, 206; Hera, as birth goddess, 210;
Hermonax, stamnos from circle of, with birth of
Erichthonius, xxiii, 133, 215, 216, 251; Hestia
associated with, 131–33; Phidias, births of gods
on temple sculptures of, 250
Blegen, Carl, 42
Boeae, cult of Artemis Soteira at, 174
Boeotia: Ares and, 286–87; Artemis, bell-shaped
figurines of, 188–90, 189; beliefs about afterlife
in, 107–8; Cyclades and, 288; Demeter and, 102–
4, 107–10; Dionysus and, 108, 301, 303, 318; fibula
with pastoral and marine imagery from, 50, 51,
87; fibula with two naked goddesses from, 265–
67, 266; Onchestos, amphictyony of Poseidon at,
80; plank statuettes from, 58–61, 59, 62; terra-
cotta figurine of Aphrodite on a goose, 270
Boston Phiale, Painter of. See Phiale Painter
boundary stones/stone piles/funerary markers
associated with Hermes, 329–32
Bowdoin Painter, lekythos with shrine of Hermes,
335, 336, 397n39
Brauron, cult of Artemis at, 168–69, 184
Brelich, Angelo, xi; Gli eroi greci and Paides e
partenoi, ix
Brendle, Ross, xviii
Brettidole. See plank statuettes
Briareus, 83
Britomartis, 170
Brommer, Frank, 241
brother-sister marriages of Greek gods, xxii, xxiii
Bruneau, Ph., 366n67
Bruns, Gerda, 169
Brygos Painter: Gigantomachy cups, 90, 285; kylix
with Hermes stealing Apollo’s cattle, 325, 326
bulls: Artemis associated with, 166, 169, 184,
375n60; Poseidon associated with, 75, 77, 87, 89,
327, 361n25; Zeus associated with, 75
Buphagus, 169
Burkert, Walter, xii, xviii, 148, 352n11, 356n17,
367n2, 371n29, 377n1, 396n21; Homo Necans, ix,
xii
Buschor, Ernst, xiii, 19, 63–64, 241
Busiris Painter, Caeretan hydria with Hermes’
theft of Apollo’s cattle, 325
butchering and hunting, association of Artemis
with, 165, 167–72, 175–77, 179–80, 181
Byron, George Gordon, Lord, xii
Cabiri and Cabiric mystery cults, 104, 238, 241, 333,
334–35
Cadmus and Cadmeians, xxiv, 102, 200, 256, 286–
88, 287, 301
Cadmus Painter, calyx-krater of, 390n46
Cahn, Herbert, 144–46
Calamis, “Sosandra” of, 272
Calamis, statue of Hermes as ram-bearer by, 328
Calauria, amphictyony of Poseidon on, 80, 81, 83
Callimachus (Polemarch), 194
Callimachus (poet), knowledge of the gods from,
x, 7, 9
Calliteles and Onatas, statue of Hermes as ram-
bearer by, 328
Callithoe (priestess of Argive Hera), 65
Calydon, cults of Artemis and Dionysus at, 186
Canachus, cult statue of Aphrodite in Sicyon by,
202
Cape Artemisium, sculpture of Poseidon from,
90–94, 92–93, 162
 Subject Index 421
Cape Monodendri (Miletus), sanctuary of Poseidon
at, 78, 79, 80
Cape Zoster, cult of Artemis at, 184
Capitoline Triad of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, 49
Carian Zeus, 238, 378n18, 382n26
Carrey, Jacques, 230, 232, 278
Cassandra, 140, 140–41, 144
cattle. See bulls; cows/cattle
Cecrops, 217, 218, 333
Cecrops, daughters of, 237–38
Cecrops Painter, calyx-krater of, 390n46
Celeus, 103–4
Centauromachy, 19–20, 27, 158–60, 162, 227–28,
247, 353n23
Chalcidian vases: Archaic festival for Arten of
Eretria on, 183; hydria with Zeus fighting
Typhon, 27, 28; kylix with Dionysus and
Ariadne in chariot (Phineus cup), 315, 316
charioteer, Poseidon as, 84, 85
Charis, xxiv, 237, 238, 261
Charites (Graces): Aphrodite and, 6, 197, 261–62,
265–68, 266, 267, 278, 386n30; Apollo and, 6,
265; Artemis and, 6, 178–79, 197, 374n38; Athens
and cult of, 120, 178–79, 261, 262, 267, 386n20;
the dead, associated with, 261; Dionysus and, 6,
261; gods attended by, xxiv, 6; Greek names for,
178–79; Hephaestus and, 6, 237; Hera and, 6, 41,
57, 61; Hestia and, 122; Paros, cult of the Graces
on, 261, 386n28; Poseidon and, 73
Charon, 331
Chigi vase, 268, 387n46
Christianity: Apollo in medieval art, 3, 4, 5,
351nn2–3; birth scenes in art of, 206; Dionysus
and, 297; Eleusinian Mysteries and, 105, 113;
good shepherd image, and Hermes, 328; Great
Eleusinian Relief and altar panels of, 120; raised-
arm position in, 26; Zeus and, 11
chryselephantine statuary of Phidias: Athena
Parthenos, 33, 54, 163, 212, 227–28, 228, 231;
Olympian Zeus, 31–34, 32, 54, 160, 163, 227, 257,
261
Chryses, 135
chthonic holocausts versus Olympian offerings,
99–101, 331, 364n15
Cimon, 337
civic life. See justice and political life
Clazomenae, vase fragment with satyrs on ship
from, 308
Cleisthenes, constitution of, 149
Clements, Jacquelyn, xviii
Clinton, Kevin, 117
Codrus Painter, kylix with Symposium of the gods,
293–96, 295, 296
coins: with Athena Alkis, from Macedon, 212, 213;
with Athena wearing Corinthian helmet,
Corinth, 224; with cult statue of Artemis
Pergaia, 190; with cult statue of Athena, from
New Ilium, 209; with cult statue of Hera, from
Samos, 55, 56; with head of Artemis, from Mas-
salia, 193, 194; with head of Artemis Arethusa,
from Syracuse, 193, 194; with head of Dionysus,
from Axons, 308, 309; with heads of Hera, from
Argos and Knossos, 54, 55, 259n62; Hera associ-
ated with currency and mints, 49; with images
of Poseidon, from Paestum, 90, 91; with lion
head and ox of Hera, from Samos, 62; with
Phidian statue of enthroned Zeus, from Elis, 32;
with Poseidon on horseback, from Potidaea, 85,
89; with urn-wagon of Zeus, from Krannon, 14
Colophon, oracle of Apollo at, 139
columns. See pillars/columns
Cook, Arthur B., 11
Corfu (Corcyra): Arniadas, grave of, 390n38;
temple of Artemis on, 28–29, 29, 191–93, 192
Corinth: coins with Athena wearing Corinthian
helmet, 224; cult of Aphrodite Urania at, 263,
272; cults of Artemis and Dionysus at, 186,
190, 191; ointment bottle depicting return of
Hephaes­tus to Olympus, 240–41, 241; potters
and pottery of, 86–87; temple of Poseidon at, 83,
83–84; votive pinakes dedicated to Poseidon
from, 84, 84–86, 362n35
cows/cattle: Hera and, 38, 40, 43–44, 48, 49, 327;
Hermes’ theft of Apollo’s cattle, xxiv, 324–26,
325, 326; Io changed into cow, 43, 327, 328. See
also bulls
Crete: Aphrodite in, 265, 276; Apollo and, 139, 152–
53; Dionysus and, 299; Fortesa (near Knossos),
422 Subject Index
Crete (continued)
pithos lid with Zeus, 25, 26, 60; gold rings asso-
ciated with vegetation deities, 299, 300, 391n10;
Gortyn, clay statue of Athena from, 210; hunting
goddesses of, 168, 170–71, 180; influence of reli-
gious culture of, 6 (See also Minoan-Mycenaean
religion and art); Kato Zakros, palace of, 170,
171, 201, 216, 217; Zeus and, 13, 25, 29. See also
Dreros; Knossos
Creuzer, Friedrich, 9, 352n9
Croesus, 150
Cronus: Aphrodite and, 254, 259; cult and rites
of, 17–18; Demeter and, xxiii, 95; in family tree
of the gods, xxii, xxiii; Hestia and, 123, 124;
Olympia, hill at, 17, 41; sanctuaries and temples,
18; Zeus and, 12, 13, 17, 27, 28, 206
Croton, temple of Hera, 45–48, 47
cuckoos, associated with Hera, 51, 52, 358n43
Cumae: Sibyls and Sibylline books, 144, 295;
temple of Apollo at, 371n32
cupbearers, 234–35, 308, 382n8
currency. See coins
Curtius, Ludwig, 91, 244, 330
Cybele, 183–84, 375n60, 375n62
Cyclades: amphora fragment with Ares and
Aphrodite, 289, 290; Aphrodite and, 259–61, 260,
265, 267, 268, 276, 288, 289, 290; Boeotia and,
288; “idols” from, 6, 259–61, 260, 267, 268,
386n20; Melos, Cycladic krater with arrival of
Apollo on Delos from, 143, 144, 155; pithos relief,
birth of Athena, 61, 206–9, 207, 238; silo/granary
models in graves of, 111, 112; Thebes, Cycladic-
style relief of Hera between lions from, 58,
58–62, 358n50
Cyclopes, 69, 73, 76
Cycnus and Heracles, battle of, 287, 389n24
cylinder seals, 150, 151, 180, 181, 200, 301
Cyprus, association of Aphrodite with, 254, 263
Cypselus, Chest of, 390n32
Dactyls, 334
Daedalus, 244
daidala, 61, 62, 303
Daidala festival, Plataea, 41, 61
daimones, 144, 206, 207, 241, 254, 265, 333–34, 337,
338, 393n33, 394n50. See also nymphs and satyrs;
silens
Damia, 97–98
Danaids, 101
Daphnis, 196
Dares, 235
the dead: Apollo associated with, 144; Artemis
providing vengeance against cruel death, 169–
71, 175; death sentences and suicides, Artemis
associated with, 190; Demeter associated with,
95, 106–8, 110–13, 112, 341, 342; Dionysus
associated with, 297, 303, 307; funerary banquets
of the gods, 293–96, 295, 296; funerary markers/
boundary stones/stone piles associated with
Hermes, 329–32; Graces and Horae associated
with, 261; Hermes associated with, 95, 323, 330–
32, 333–34, 338–44, 339–41; lekythoi produced
for cult of, 338–44, 341, 342, 397n48; mourning
and lamentation, as choral function in Greek
tragedy, 303; vegetation deities and, 299, 300.
See also Hades; Persephone/Kore
death sentences and suicides, Artemis associated
with, 190
deer, Artemis associated with, 169, 170, 176, 177,
179, 188, 189, 191
Deimos and Phobos (Terror and Fear), 282, 287,
288
Delos: Artemis, cult of, 171, 180, 182, 190, 191;
Charites next to Archaic image of Apollo, 265;
Crete, ties to, 153; cult and rites at, 154; Dionysus
and, 320, 371n17, 392n20; fragments of monu-
mental statue of Apollo on, 144, 145; horn altar,
171; landscape of, 154; lion terrace, 144–46, 147;
Melos, Cycladic krater with arrival of Apollo on
Delos from, 143, 144, 155; Poseidon, association
with, 83; Prytaneion, statues of Hestia in, 133;
sanctuary of Artemis on, 143; sibling relation-
ship of Apollo and Artemis possibly developed
on, 153; spring return of Apollo to, 143
Delphi: altar for Poseidon at sanctuary of Apollo,
82–83; Athena and Hephaestus as builders of
early temple of Apollo at, 250; Castalian Spring
at, 179; Centauromachy at, 27, 27–28; cult and
 Subject Index 423
rites at, 154; Dionysus and, 319–20, 371n17;
foundations laid by Apollo, 149; ivory statuette
of Apollo with lion from, 146, 148; landscape
of, 155; as mother goddess site, 153; Naxian
sphinx, 144, 146; omphalos at, 149, 153; oracle of
Apollo at, 97–98, 139, 140, 149–50, 319; sanctuary
of Apollo at, 82–83, 144, 146, 155; Siphnian
Treasury frieze, 129, 240, 285, 290, 291, 292;
spring return of Apollo to, 143; white-ground
Attic cup with Apollo making libation, from
grave at, 158, 159
Demeter, 95–120; anger of, 74–75, 103–4, 120; Ares
and, 292; Athens, as cult goddess in, 300; cult
and rites, 74–75, 300; dead, association with, 95,
106–8, 110–13, 112, 341, 342; Dionysus and, xxiv,
108, 301, 307, 393n29, 395n80; Eleusinian Mys-
teries and, xxi, 96–98, 101–7, 105, 110, 113–17, 120,
125, 218, 341–42; in family tree of the gods, xxii,
xxiii–xxiv; Graces, attended by, 6; as grain/
agricultural goddess, 102–4, 110–13, 112, 363n1;
Hermes and, 106, 107, 115, 117, 341–42; Hestia
and, 121, 122, 123, 125; Homer shaping, 98–99,
283; horses, association with, 75; images and
iconography, 96, 97, 98–99, 99, 100, 101, 108,
108–10, 109, 111, 114–19, 114–20; as Olympian,
99–101, 115, 117; origins and development,
95–103, 97; Persephone/Kore and, 48, 95–101,
104, 106, 108–10, 113–20, 116–19, 259, 341, 342;
Poseidon and, 74–75; in “sacred family of
Eleusis,” 125; sanctuaries and temples, 85, 98,
102–7, 105, 108–9, 110; in Sicily, 48, 97; Thesmo-
phoria and, xii, 96, 98, 101, 103; Triptolemus
and, 110, 111, 114, 117, 366n67; Zeus and, 95, 101,
104, 106, 110, 113, 115. See also Persephone/Kore
Demeter Cabiria, 104
Demeter Chamyne, 98, 100
Demeter Chthonia, 100–101
Demeter Eleusinia, 101–3
Demeter Malophoros, 108–9, 110
Demeter Thesmophoros, 102, 103, 108, 109
Demiurge, in Plato’s Timaeus, 233
Demodocus, 233, 235
Demophon, 118–20, 119
Despinis, Georgios, 280, 377n99, 388n75
Despoina, 75, 95, 179
Dethloff, Craig, xviii
Deubner, Ludwig, 107, 392n13, 393n29
Diana, 173, 374n37. See also Artemis
Diana of Aricia, 173
Didyma, temple of Apollo at, 150, 151
Diehl, E., 384n57
Dietrich, B. C., 359n60
Dikaios, Porphyrios, 25
Diktynna, 168
dining associations in Greece, 172–73
Dinos Painter, stamnos with maenads and Dionysus
Lenaeus, 303, 305
Diomedes, 200, 203, 204
Dione, xxii, xxiv, 15, 39, 254, 259, 276, 280
Dionysia, 300, 301, 307, 318
Dionysus, 297–322; Aegean islands, associated
with, 308, 316, 393n33; alien qualities of, 297, 322;
animals and, 315; Aphrodite and, 261; Apollo
and, 149, 319–20, 371n17; Ares and, 285, 285–86,
292, 295, 296; Artemis and, 165, 166, 180, 184–
87, 327; Charites/Graces and, 6, 261; cult and
rites, 300, 307–11, 308, 311, 316–22, 317; the dead,
associated with, 297, 303, 307; Demeter and,
xxiv, 108, 301, 307, 393n29, 395n80; ecstasy/
enthusiasm/madness, association with, 299, 300,
307, 318–22, 391n10, 395n65; in family tree of the
gods, xxii, xxiv; festivals associated with, 297,
300–311, 315, 316, 331; Hephaestus and, 239–42,
241–43, 250; Hera and, 41, 56–58, 239, 316–17,
318, 327; Hermes and, 292, 331, 397n35, 397n39;
Homer shaping, 283; images and iconography,
108, 293, 295, 303–7, 304–6, 308–15, 309–14, 316,
319, 320, 321; images of Heracles confused with,
285, 395n80; lions, associated with, 62; maenads
and, 298–99, 303, 304, 305, 307, 311, 312, 318–22;
masks of, 292n20, 303–7, 305, 306; Minoan-
Mycenaean origins of, x; nymphs and satyrs/
silens, associated with, 241, 250, 297–98, 311, 312,
321; origins and development, 285, 297–301,
307–11, 316–18; pillar as cult statue of, 65, 137,
285–86, 299, 300, 303, 304, 305, 332, 392n20; in
“sacred family of Eleusis,” 125; sacred marriage
to wife of Archon Basileus, 307, 308; sanctuaries
424 Subject Index
Dionysus (continued)
and temples, 186, 301, 302, 307, 316; ship, arrival
on, 308–11, 311, 313–15, 314; theater, as god of,
xxiv, 185–87, 301–11, 302, 303, 321; Thebes, asso-
ciation with, 285–86; thyrsus or narthex staff of,
320, 321, 395n78; Triptolemus and, 114; twin
statues, worshipped as, 319; Tyrrhenian sea
pirates and, 314–15; as vegetation deity, 41, 261,
299, 307, 316, 318; wine, as god of, 297, 298, 307,
308, 311, 312, 313, 315–18, 316, 320, 393n33, 394n50;
youth, portrayal as, 321, 321–22; Zeus and, 12,
287, 299, 301, 315, 316, 319, 394n55
Dionysus Baccheus, 319
Dionysus Bromios, 186
Dionysus Cadmeios, 285–86, 299, 300
Dionysus Eleuthereus, 301, 302, 392n20
Dionysus Lenaeus, 300, 303–7, 304, 305
Dionysus Lysius, 319
Dionysus Psilax, 186
Dioscuri, Theoxenia of, 295
Dipolieia, 25
Dipylon cemetery, Athens, ivory statuette of
Charites, 64, 267
Dodona: bronze statuette of Zeus from, 30, 32; cult
of Zeus at, 13–15, 20, 30, 39, 319; excavations at,
353n11; oracle of, 13–14, 259
Dorian migration, 13, 39, 41–42, 101, 137–39, 143,
174, 185, 193, 300
Dörig, J., 362n46
Doris, xxiii
Doros, 237
Doryphoros of Polyclitus, 292
double axe, xxiv, 85, 202, 203, 238, 378n18, 379n48,
382n26
Douris, kylix with return of Hephaestus to
Olympus, 242, 243, 397n35
doves, sacred to Aphrodite/Dione, 259, 264, 276,
277
dragons: Ares slaying dragon of Thebes, 286–87,
287; Pythian dragon, slain by Apollo, 135, 139
Dreros (Crete): sphyrelata statuettes of Apollo
between Leto and Artemis from, 142, 143, 173;
temple of Apollo at, 13, 171, 173
Drerup, Heinrich, 172
dual goddesses (to theo), 95–101, 99, 115–20, 116,
118, 119, 264n30, 363n6
Dürer, Albrecht, Apollo as Sun God, 3, 5, 351n3
eagles: Artemis and, 175; Zeus, as attribute of, 27,
27–28, 30, 31, 32, 51, 358n42
earthquakes and volcanos, association of Poseidon
with, 73–74, 89
Eckschmitt, W., 353n11
ecstasy/enthusiasm/madness, association of
Dionysus with, 299, 300, 307, 318–22, 391n10,
395n65
Egypt/Egyptians: Aphrodite/Urania and, 255;
Athena and, 200; Demeter/Eleusis and, 96, 102,
111; Dionysus and, 301, 316; Greek gods taken
over from, 4; perfumes and ointments, use of,
129
Eileithyia, 208, 209
Ekecheiria, 23
Eleusinian Mysteries, xxi, 96–98, 101–7, 105, 110,
113–17, 120, 125, 218, 341–42
Eleusis: Artemis Propylaea and, 179; Dionysus and,
307, 321; Great Eleusinian Relief, xxi, 116–20, 119,
125, 366n67; Mondragone, votive relief of sacred
family of Eleusis from, 125, 126, 127, 133; narthex
staff at, 321, 395n78; renovation of sanctuary at,
300; “sacred family” of, 125, 126; Telesterion, 105,
107, 120; temple of Artemis at, 115–16
Elgin Athena, 222, 223
Elgin Marbles, xiv
Elis: coin with Phidian statue of enthroned Zeus
from, 32; Hera and Dionysus at, 57, 316; statues
of Aphrodite in, 277; temple of Zeus at Olympia
built by inhabitants of, 18–19
Endoios, 184
enthusiasm/ecstasy/madness, association of
Dionysus with, 299, 300, 307, 318–22, 391n10,
395n65
Enyalius, 182, 194, 284, 288, 289
ephedrismos (piggy-back) position, 250, 251
Ephesian cup of Artemis, 183
Ephesus: Artemisium and Artemis Ephesia, 183–
84, 193, 375n57, 375n60; sphinx group, throne of
Zeus, 33, 34
 Subject Index 425

Epictetus, kylix with sculptor carving herm, 335, Fates, 259

336 Felten, Florens, 247
Epicureans, 8 flute, Athena as inventor of, 220–22, 221
Epidaurus, dual goddesses associated with, 97–98 Foce del Sele, Heraeum, 42, 44, 45, 257, 258
Epimetheus, 237 Fortesa (Crete, near Knossos), pithos lid with
epopteia, Eleusinian Mysteries, 113 Zeus, 25, 26, 60
Erechtheum, Acropolis, Athens, 71, 82, 85, 230, 333, Foundry Painter, kylix with heads of Hephaestus
335, 361n21 and Athena Hephaestia, 244
Erechtheus, 77, 218 François vase, 190, 240, 241, 283
Ergotimos: François vase, 190, 191, 240, 241, 283, Frazer, James, x
397n35 Frickenhaus, August, 303, 379n55, 392n13
Erichthonius, 215, 216, 217, 227, 237–38, 250 Friedländer, Paul, 233
Erigone, 307 funerary banquets of the gods, 293–96, 295, 296
Erinyes (Furies), 73, 74, 254 funerary markers/boundary stones/stone piles
Eris, 282 associated with Hermes, 329–32
Ernstmeier, Irmgard, xviii Furies (Erinyes), 73, 74, 254
Eros, 254, 255, 257, 261, 262, 272, 275, 276 Furtwängler, Adolf, 9, 84, 222
Erotes, 261, 268, 269
Etruscans: Aphrodite and, 258, 265; Greek vases Galaxidi, Roman Imperial era medallion with
as grave goods of, 9, 35, 87, 157, 326; league of birth of Aphrodite found at, 257
Italian cities against, 173; Simon’s interest in, Ganymede, 129, 129–30, 234
xviii; Tydeus in art of, 218; wall paintings of, Ge/Gaia, xxii, xxiii, 127, 128, 133, 161, 162, 215, 216,
234 271
Euboea: Artemis, cult of, 182–83, 197; Dionysus Ge Kourotrophos, 128
and, 315; Hera and, 43 geese: alabastron from Delos with Artemis hold-
Eukleia, 173, 197, 197–98, 292 ing, 190, 191; association of Aphrodite with, 264,
Eumedes of Argos, 204 268, 270, 270–71, 271
Eumelus, 193 Gela (Sicily), terracotta relief with Aphrodite
Eumenides, 73 Pandemos, 277, 278
Eumolpids, 102 genius, Roman cult of, 338
Euphorion, 267 Geometric period: Apollo in, 136–37; granary/silo
Euripides, knowledge of the gods from, x, 6 models from, 111–12, 112; Hera in, 50, 60, 63, 64;
Europa, 75 Poseidon in, 87; Zeus in, 13, 25–26
Eurydice, 343, 344 George, Stefan, xiii
Eurynome, xxiv, 238 Georgiev, Vladimir, 96
Evans, Sir Arthur, 10 Gerhard, Eduard, 9
Exekias: amphora with Dionysus and Oinopion, German Romanticism, xiii, 35–36
308, 310, 315; calyx-krater with Apollo Kitha­ Gernet, Louis,Vernant, Anthropologie de la Grèce
roidos and Artemis, 156–57, 158; kylix with antique, ix
Dionysus in ship, 313–15, 314 Gigantomachy, xxiii, 12, 29, 85, 89–90, 90, 129, 192,
227, 228, 240, 285
family tree of the gods, xxii, xxiii–xxiv Gisler-Huwiler, M., 368n21
fate/justice/scales, association of Zeus with, 23–25, goats: Artemis/hunting goddesses and, 170–71, 171,
33 174–75, 180, 182, 194; Delos, horn altar on, 171; as
426 Subject Index
goats (continued)
sacrificial offerings to Aphrodite Pandemos, 277,
279
gods of the Greeks. See Greek gods; specific gods by
name
Goethe, Johann Wolfgang, xii, xiv, 9, 35, 38, 280,
318, 334–35
gold rings: Argos, tomb near Heraeum, ring with
griffins and column of Hera (?), 65, 66; Crete,
rings associated with vegetation deities, 299,
300, 391n10; Mycenae, ring with lions and
column of Hera (?), 65–66, 66; Mycenae, ring
with Palladium and two goddesses, 201–2, 203,
216, 264–65, 378n15, 391n10; Tyrins, ring with
daimones as cult attendants from, 265
Golden Age, 17, 315
Gorgons, 12, 69, 75, 215, 220, 222
Gortyn (Crete), clay statue of Athena from, 210
Graces. See Charites
Graf, Fritz, ix, xviii, xix, 352n11
granary/silo models, 111–13, 112
Great Eleusinian Relief, xxi, 116–20, 119, 125,
366n67
Greek gods, 3–10; in archaeology, ix, x–xi, xiii, xiv,
8–9; brother-sister marriages of, xxii, xxiii; cult
and ritual, importance of, xi–xii, 9; develop-
ment, concept of, and Simon’s rejection of strict
historicism, xii–xiii, 7–9; family tree of, xxii,
xxiii–xxiv; German classical tradition and, ix,
xii–xiv, 7–10, 35–36; in images, x, xiii–xiv, 3, 4,
5, 7, 9; landscape and sanctuary, interaction of,
x–xi, 9, 42–48, 43–46, 154–55; map of Greece,
xxvi–xxvii; Minoan-Mycenaean religion and, x,
6, 8 (See also Minoan-Mycenaean religion and
art); in poetic and literary texts, x, xiii–xiv, 3–7,
9; prehistory of, xi–xii, 9; Simon’s Die Götter
der Griechen and study of, ix–xiv, xvii–xix, xxi;
single elementary power, refutation of thesis
of each god embodying, 50, 69, 71, 72. See also
specific gods
Greek islands. See Aegean islands
griffins, associated with Hera, 48, 48–49, 49, 65,
66
guests, hospitality and rights of, 8, 19, 20, 162
Hades, xxii, xxiii, 73, 104, 106, 110, 293, 296
Hadrian (emperor), 18, 19, 32
Hageladas, 29
Hägg, Robin, and Nanno Marinatos, Greek Sanc­
tuaries: New Perspectives, xi
Hagia Triada sarcophagus, 25, 100, 379n48
Haimon Group, kylix with maenads and Dionyus
Lenaeus, 303, 304
Haloa, 104
Hammurabi, stele of, 149, 150
Hampe, Roland, xxi, 10, 33, 144, 192, 194,
386n20
Harmonia, xxiv, 286, 287–88, 389n25
harp player, Cycladic, 259, 260, 386n22
Harrison, Evelyn B., 230, 384n57
Hartswick, K. J., 390n41
“hearth boy,” Eleusinian Mysteries, 119, 120, 125
Hebe, 96, 129, 130, 133, 218, 282, 382n8
Hecate, 106, 107, 115, 169, 170, 172, 172–73, 175, 176,
186, 366n66
Hector, 23, 263–64, 323–24
Hedreen, G. M., 393n33
Helen (of Troy), 96, 253, 261, 326, 370n14, 381n79
Helios, 83, 106, 146, 149
Hellanicus (historian), 235–36
Hellen (progenitor of Hellenes), 237
Hephaestus, 233–53; Alcaeus’ hymn of return of,
silens in, 311; Aphrodite and, 238, 261, 283;
Apollo and, 250; Ares and, 238, 240; Athena
and, 208, 227, 238, 239, 244, 250, 252, 292;
Charites/Graces and, 6, 237; Dionysus and,
239–42, 241–43, 250; disability/lameness of, 233–
34, 238, 240, 250, 382n5; in family tree of the
gods, xxii, xxiv; Hephaesteum, Athens, xxi,
246–50, 247–49, 251, 384n49; Hera and, 233–34,
238–40, 242, 243, 247–49, 248, 250; Hestia and,
129, 240; Homer’s fondness for, 233–36; images
and iconography, 90, 238–44, 239–46, 249,
250, 252, 397n35; origins and development,
235–38; returning to Mount Olympus, 238–42,
241–43, 250, 251, 311, 397n35; sanctuaries and
temples of, xxi, 235, 246–50, 247–49, 251, 383n29;
wives of, xxiv, 237, 261, 283; Zeus and, 12, 237–38,
239, 241
 Subject Index 427
Hera, 35–68; air/sky/earth/moon goddess theories
about, 36–38, 50; Aphrodite and, 49, 53, 257–59,
258, 268–70, 385n12; Aphrodite Hera, 257, 258,
385n12; Ares and, 281, 283; Artemis and, 165, 181;
Assyrian goddess associated with, 62; Athena
and, 49–50, 200, 204, 205, 250, 268–70, 358n39,
377n6, 381n79; Charites/Graces and, 6, 41, 57, 61;
cows and horses associated with, 38, 40, 43–44,
48, 49, 75; cult and rites, 38, 39–40, 40, 42,
47–49, 48–50; currency and mints, associated
with, 49; Dionysus and, 41, 56–58, 239, 316–17,
318, 327; in family tree of the gods, xxii, xxiii,
xxiv; German Romanticism’s admiration for,
35–36; griffins associated with, 48, 48–49, 49, 65,
66; Hebe and, 96; Hephaestus and, 233–34, 238–
40, 242, 243, 247–49, 248, 250; Heracles and, 37,
62, 327; Hermes and, 327; Hestia and, 122, 123;
houses/house models associated with, 359n62,
39–40, 40, 63, 64, 356n15; images and iconogra-
phy, 26, 30, 31, 35–36, 36, 37, 41, 51–68, 52–60,
62–67, 107, 210, 293, 295, 384n54; Ixion and, 162;
in Judgment of Paris scenes, 49, 62, 261, 268,
268–70, 269; lions, associated with, 58, 61–62, 63,
66, 66–68, 67; lygos (willow) sacred to, 42; map
of most important cult sites, 42; numerous
deities worshipped in form of, 65; origins and
development, 38–42, 51, 122, 356n17; pillar,
worshipped in form of, 65, 65–68, 66, 67, 137,
332; plains/pastures, as goddess of, 42–48, 43–46,
50; Poseidon and, 50, 70, 83, 87; Rhea and, 41,
51, 96; “sacred wedding” to Zeus, 51–54, 52–55;
sacrifice/sacrificial rituals for, 39, 43–45, 47;
sanctuaries and temples, 13, 26, 38–40, 39,
42–49, 257; sea and seafarers, as goddess of, 47,
48–49, 50; text versus images on, x; Zeus and,
11–13, 17, 26, 27, 37–39, 43, 48–54, 52, 54, 55, 66,
258–59, 293, 295, 316, 327
Hera of Argos, 210
Heracles: Artemis dressed in lionskin of, 194, 195;
Athena and, 218, 219–20, 225, 226; Cycnus, battle
with, 287, 389n24; in family tree of the gods,
xxii, xxiii; on Hephaesteum, Athens, 247; Hera
and, 37, 62, 327; images of Dionysus confused
with, 285, 395n80; labors of, 62, 160, 218, 219–20;
Olympia, on temple of Zeus at, 160; on Sosias
cup, 129–31, 130; statue of Zeus interpreted as,
354n37
Heraclidae, 204
Herbig, Reinhard, xviii
Herington, C. J., 379n55
Hermai, 334
Hermes, 323–44; animals, association with, 327,
396n10; Aphrodite and, 272; Apollo and, xxiv,
131, 324–25, 326, 327, 333, 397n39; Artemis and,
185–86, 327; Athena and, 208; cattle of Apollo
stolen by, xxiv, 324–26, 325, 326; cult and rites,
331–38; as daimon, 333–34; dead, association
with, 95, 323, 330–32, 333–34, 338–44, 339–41;
Demeter/Persephone and, 106, 107, 115, 117, 341–
42; Dionysus and, 292, 331, 397n35, 397n39; in
family tree of the gods, xxii, xxiv; Graces,
attended by, 6; Hera and, 327; herders/shep-
herds, as god of, 186, 326–28, 328–30, 330; Hestia
and, 121, 125, 126; images and iconography, 90,
106, 107, 115, 117, 325, 326, 328–30, 332–34, 333–
44, 336–43, 396n27, 397n39, 397n48; Io and,
327, 328; at Judgment of Paris, 268, 269; lyre,
invention of, 324; lyre, traded to Apollo for
cattle, 325; magic wand of, 325, 327, 333–34; as
messenger god, 323–24; as “most Greek” of the
gods, 327; Odysseus and, 326; origins and
development, 326–27, 329–32; plural use of
name of, 334; in “sacred family of Eleusis,” 125;
sacrifice to Olympians offered by, 100; sacrifices
for, 297n49, 331, 333, 333–34, 337–38, 338, 339;
stone piles/boundary stones/funerary markers
associated with, 329–32; syrinx (shepherd’s
pipes), invention of, 325, 342; as thief, xxiv,
324–26, 325, 326, 328, 330, 396n8; Zeus and, 12,
323–25, 327, 329
Hermes Argeiphontes, 327
Hermes Chthonios, 331, 338, 339, 340
Hermes Kriophoros, 328
Hermes Propylaios of Alcamenes, 332
Hermes Tetragonos, 331
Hermione, 96, 100–101
Hermonax, stamnos from circle of, with birth of
Erichthonius, xxiii, 133, 215, 216, 251, 380n59
428 Subject Index
herms, 331–38, 332, 333, 336–39, 396n27, 397n39
Herodotus, on Homer and the gods, 3–4
Hesiod: on Aphrodite, xxiv, 254–55, 256, 270, 276;
on Isles of the Blessed in, 110–11, 113; knowledge
of the gods from, 4–5, 6; on Prometheus, 168
Hestia, 121–33; aniconic worship of, 121, 133;
Aphrodite and, 123, 253; Apollo and, 126, 128–29;
Artemis and, 130–31; banquet libations offered
to, 121, 124, 129, 129–31, 130; Demeter and, 121,
122, 123, 125; in family tree of the gods, xxii,
xxiii, 123; Ge and, 128; hearth/household, as
divine personification of, 121–22, 123, 125, 128,
133; Hephaestus and, 129, 240; Hera and, 122,
123; Hermes and, 121, 125, 126; images and
iconography, 122, 125–33, 126, 127, 129, 130, 132,
240; Olympian identity and, 124; origins and
development, 121–25; Parthenon, missing from
east frieze of, xxiii, 127, 127–28, 367n14; sacrifice/
sacrificial rituals and, 121, 124, 128, 130; Simon’s
addition of chapter on, xvii, xxi; as virgin
goddess, 121, 123, 124, 128, 133; weddings and
marriage, association with, 121, 122, 131–33, 132;
Zeus and, 121–25, 128–30, 129
Hestia Kourotrophos, 128, 133, 368n27
hetairai and Aphrodite, 272, 273, 277
Hierapolis (Pamukkale), theater frieze, 375n60
Himeros, 254, 255
Himmelmann, N., 351n1, 387n61
Hipparchus, 335, 337
hippocamp, Poseidon riding, on Attic black-figure
lekythos, 87, 88
Hippolytus, 75, 167
Hirmer, Aenne, xxi
Hirmer, Albert, xviii, xxi
Hirmer, Max, xviii, xxi
historicism, Simon’s rejection of strict use of, xii–
xiii, 7–9
Hittite deities: Dionysus and, 317–18; Zeus and,
12–13, 27, 208, 353n5
Hoenn, Karl, 167
Hölderlin, xii, 7, 297
Homer: on Aphrodite, xxiv, 253–54, 256, 276;
Apollo and, 135–36, 139–40, 161; on Ares, 281–
85, 288; on Artemis, 165–66; on Athena, 205;
blindness of, 233; on Demeter, 98–99, 283;
Dionysus and, 283, 300, 322; hearths in Odyssey,
122; on Hephaestus, 233–36; on Hera, 37, 38, 49;
on Hermes, 324, 333; Hestia’s absence from, 122;
images of gods and, 3; Judgment of Paris story
and, 270; knowledge of the gods from, x, 3–6;
on Poseidon, 72–74; principle deities appearing
at beginning of Iliad, 34; wife of Hephaestus, in
Iliad versus Odyssey, xxiv, 261; on Zeus, 12, 34
Homeric Hymns, as sources, 5–6
Horae (Hours), 41, 61, 197, 261–62, 265
horses: Athena associated with, 75–76, 86; Deme-
ter associated with, 75; Hera associated with, 43,
48, 75; Poseidon associated with, 75–76, 84, 85,
85–87
hospitality and rights of guests, 8, 19, 20, 162
Hours (Horae), 41, 61, 197, 261–62, 265
houses/house models, Hera associated with,
359n62, 39–40, 40, 63, 64, 356n15
human sacrifice, 166–67, 170
hundred-handers, 83, 89
hunting and butchering, association of Artemis
with, 165, 167–72, 175–77, 179–80, 181
Hyacinthus, 138, 299, 370n7
Hyperboreans, 143, 180
Iambe, 104
Iapetus, xxii, xxiii, xxiv, 28, 237
Iasion, 102, 364n24, 364n28
Ikaria: marble mask of Dionysus from, 303–4, 306;
wooden representation of Artemis on, 187
Ikarios, 307
Iliupersis, 192, 384n52
incense, 128, 255, 262–63, 272, 273
Indo-European language and culture, 11, 14, 15, 167,
179, 199, 259, 284
Io, 43, 327, 328
Ion, 80, 138, 370n10
Ionian migration, 62–63, 77–78, 149, 174, 183, 193,
197, 236
Iphigenia, 166, 170
Iris, 69, 70, 234
Ishtar, 205, 286
Isocrates, 365n34
 Subject Index 429

Italy. See also Etruscans; Magna Graecia and Sicily; kithara/lyre, Apollo’s association with, 143, 144, 157,
Ostia; Po valley; Rome 158, 163, 325
Ixion, 27, 162 Kleiner, Gerhard, 80
Kleitias: François vase, 190, 191, 240, 241, 283,
Jason and the Argonauts, 41, 48, 63 397n35
Jeanmaire, Henri, ix Kleophrades Painter, calyx-krater with return of
Johnston, Sarah Iles, xix Hephaestus to Olympus, 242, 397n35
Jucker, Ines, 185 Klymene, in family tree of the gods, xxii, xxiii
Judgment of Paris scenes, 49, 62, 261, 268, 268–70, kneeling posture associated with dual goddesses,
269 98, 99, 101
Jung, H., 379n55 Knidian Aphrodite of Praxiteles, 277
Juno, 35–36, 49, 385n14. See also Hera Knigge, Ursula, 277, 387n63
Juno Ludovisi, 35–36, 37 Knossos: coin with head of Hera, 54, 55, 359n62;
Jupiter, 11, 14, 49, 121, 284, 394n54. See also Zeus Linear B tablets from, 74, 200, 262, 284, 389n8;
justice and political life: association of Artemis private chapels at palace of, 199
with political assemblies and civic life, 172–74, Koios, in family tree of the gods, xxii, xxiii
190; death sentences and suicides, Artemis asso- Kolaios (Samian sailor), 48
ciated with, 190; scales of justice/fate, associa- Kore. See Persephone/Kore
tion of Zeus with, 23–25, 33 Kore Pasikrateia, 109
Kosmo, 127, 127–28, 378n16
Kahil, Lilly, 184 Krämer, Werner, 15, 16, 180
Kaibel, G., Inscriptiones Graecae Siciliae et Italiae, Krannon: coins from, 14; votive relief of Artemis
257 Hecate as protector of domestic animals from,
Kalliste, 165, 168 172
Kar and Karians, 364n30 krateriskoi dedicated to Artemis, 184, 185, 190, 197
Kardara, Chrysoula, 58, 358n50 Kroisos, grave statue of, 291–92
Karmanor, 130 Kroll, J. H., 379–80n55
Karneia Painter, volute-krater with Artemis enter- Kron, U., 384n49
ing Dionysiac circle, from Tarentum, 187 Kumarbi, 256
Karouzos, Christos, 91, 288 Kunze, Emil, 25
Karouzou (Karusu), Semni, 250, 338, 384n57 Kydoimos, 282
Kassel Apollo, 162–63, 164, 372n56 Kyniskos, sacred axe dedicated to Hera by, 45, 47
katavothren, 102, 103, 104 Kyrieleis, H., 354n27
Kato Zakros (Crete), excavations of palace of, 170, Kythera, sanctuary of Urania on, 256
171, 201, 216, 217
Keos, Archaic sanctuary of Dionysus at, 316 Lactantius, 105, 106
Kerameikos, Athens: Protogeometric deer statu- Lambrinudakis, W., 371n25
ette from, 188, 189; sanctuary of Demeter, landscapes: earliest description of, in European
sculpture with Poseidon on horseback in front literature, 70; sanctuary, interaction with, x–xi,
of, 85 9, 42–48, 43–46, 154–55
Kerényi, Karl, x, 299 Langackertal, sacrificial hill/ash altar at, 15
Keres (death spirits), 33, 144, 282, 371n22 Laphria, 168
kernoi (granary/silo models), 111–13, 112 Lapiths, 353n23
Kilian, K., 357n25 Latte, Kurt, 173
430 Subject Index
lectisternium (banquet of the gods), 295
Lefebvre, Henri, La production de l’espace, xi
Lemnos, association of Hephaestus with, 235–38,
241
Lenae and Lenaea vases, 303, 305, 392n13
Lenaea, 300, 301, 303, 307, 318, 393n29
Leochares, 135, 136, 137
Lesbos, deities of, 241, 316–17
Leto: Apollo and, 142, 143, 153–54, 155, 156, 161, 162,
180, 370n4; Apollonian triad (Apollo, Artemis,
and Leto), 142, 143, 153–54, 155, 156, 173, 184,
370n16; Artemis and, 165, 173, 180, 184; births of
Apollo and Artemis to, 180, 358n50; in family of
the gods, xxiii; Hera and, 61; Parthenon, east
pediment, 280; Poseidon and, 83
Leukophryene of Magnesia on the Maeander, 173
Levi, Doro, 210, 379n37
Lewis Painter (Polygnotus II), skyphos by,
393n30
Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae,
xxi
Liber Pater, 394n54
Libon (Elian architect), 19
Linear A, 19, 377n1, 395n52
Linear B, 149, 167, 200–202, 205, 284, 298, 316,
379n50, 391n2; Knossos tablets, 74, 200, 262,
284, 389n8; Mycenae tablets, 262; Pylos tablets,
13, 39, 70–71, 77–79, 122, 174, 262, 299, 329
lions: Aphrodite and, 265; Apollo and, 62, 144–46,
147, 148; Artemis and, 177, 178, 191, 192, 193, 194;
Dionysus and, 186; Hera and, 58, 61–62, 63, 66,
66–68, 67; Mycenae, Lion Gate, 62, 65, 66–68,
67; Nemean lion, 62, 218; numerous deities asso-
ciated with, 61–62
Lippold, Georg, 184
Locri, sanctuary of Urania/Aphrodite at, 272, 274,
275
Lucian, 222
Ludovisi Throne, 272, 273
Lycia, association of Apollo with, 139, 152
Lycosura, mysteries of, 75
Lycurgus, 128, 149, 319
Lydia, association of Dionysus with, 317
Lydos, dinos with Artemis in lionskin by, 194, 195
lygos (willow) sacred to Hera, 42
Lynceus, 327
lyre: Apollo trading cattle to Hermes for, 325;
Apollo’s association with lyre/kithara, 143, 144,
157, 158, 163, 325; Hermes’ invention of, 324,
342
Lysicrates Monument, 395n80
madness/ecstasy/enthusiasm, association of Dio-
nysus with, 299, 300, 307, 318–22, 391n10, 395n65
maenads, 298–99, 303, 304, 305, 307, 311, 312, 318–22
Magna Graecia (southern Italy) and Sicily: Aphro-
dite and Hera in, 257; Apollo and, 371n32; Arte-
mis and, 193, 194, 376n92; Demeter in Sicily, 48,
97; Demeter/Kore in, 48, 97, 108–9, 109; Gela
(Sicily), terracotta relief with Aphrodite Pande-
mos, 277, 278; Hera’s importance in, 45–48; as
Italia, 45, 48, 357n34; Locri, sanctuary of Urania/
Aphrodite at, 272, 274, 275; Mount Eryx (Sicily),
cult of Urania at, 272. See also Acragas; Cumae;
Paestum
Magna Mater, 111
Maia, xxiv, 324, 325
Makron: kylix with Dionysus carrying thyrsus
and vine branch, 320, 321; kylix with Judgment
of Paris, 268, 269; kylix with maenads and
Dionysus Lenaeus, 303, 304
Mantiklos Apollo, 141, 144, 188
Mantis, Alexander, 127
Marathon, battle of, 182, 194, 197
Marinatos, Nanno, and Robin Hägg, Greek
Sanctuaries: New Perspectives, xi
Marinatos, Spyridon, xxi, 74, 171, 264–65
Maron, 320
marriage. See weddings and marriages
Mars, 214, 284. See also Ares
Mars Ultor statue, 390n41
Marsyas, 220, 221
masks: Artemis and, 186; of Dionysus, 292n20,
303–7, 305, 306
Massalia, coins with head of Artemis from, 193,
194
medieval art: animal conflicts, ancient depictions
of, 190; Apollo in, 3, 4, 5, 351nn2–3
 Subject Index 431
Medusa, 12, 69, 75, 192, 222, 225, 227
megara, 96, 103, 364n31
Megara: Athena Aethyia, 378n21; citadel of Karia,
364n30; Demeter in, 109; Eleusis and, 103, 109
megaron, 109, 122, 123
Meidas Painter: lekythos with Aphrodite in her
garden, 265, 266, 386n38; oinochoe with women
perfuming garments, 262, 263
Melaina, 75
Melampus, 318, 319
Mellinck, Machteld, 138
Melos, Cycladic krater with arrival of Apollo on
Delos from, 143, 144, 155
Menelaus, 253, 284, 370n14
Mercury, 331. See also Hermes
metal rods, bundles of, at shrines dedicated to
Hera, 49, 50, 357n37
Metaneira, 103
Metis, 205, 206
Meuli, Karl, xii, xiii, 9, 167, 169–71, 176, 177, 179,
352n11
Meyer, E. H., 70
migration/movement of peoples: Artemis associ-
ated with, 174–75, 193, 197; Dorian migration, 13,
39, 41–42, 101, 137–39, 143, 174, 185, 193, 300;
Ionian migration, 62–63, 77–78, 149, 174, 183,
193, 197, 236
milestones, herms functioning as, 335
Miletus: Artemis Boulephoros, cult of, 172, 173,
174; Cape Monodendri, sanctuary of Poseidon
at, 78, 79, 80; as cult site of Apollo, 139, 154,
371n25
Minerva, 49. See also Athena
Minoan-Mycenaean religion and art, x, 6, 8;
Aphrodite in, 202, 203, 264, 264–65; Apollo and,
153–54; Ares and, 284; Artemis and, 170–71, 171,
174, 180, 187, 373n3; Athena in, 199–205, 202, 203,
215; columns/pillars, gods worshipped in form
of, 332; Demeter and, 101; Hera and, 38, 42, 62;
Hermes and, 329; mother-daughter pairings in,
96; vegetation deities in, 299; Zeus and, 13, 29.
See also Crete; Mycenae
Minoans, xiii, 69, 80, 102
mints, Hera associated with, 49
mirror covers, Aphrodite with goats and swans on,
277, 279
Mithras, cult of, 120
Moira, 23
Mommsen, Theodor, xii
Mondragone, votive relief of sacred family of
Eleusis from, 125, 126, 127, 133
money. See coins
Monodendri (Miletus), sanctuary of Poseidon at,
78, 79, 80
Moritz, Karl Philipp, xiii, xiv, 35
mother-daughter pairings, 95–101, 99, 115–20, 116,
118, 119
Müller, Karl Otfried, xiii, 9, 27, 102, 180, 247, 316,
329, 370n9; Die Dorier, 138
Munychia, 184, 197
Muses, 73, 163, 233, 255, 342, 386n22
Mycenae: clay seal with column of Hera (?)
flanked by oxen and birds, 65; cult of Hera at,
38, 200, 358n39; deer statuette from shaft graves
of, 188; Demeter, Kore, and Plutus (?) ivory
group from, 98, 99, 101; gold ring with lions and
column of Hera (?), 65–66, 66; gold ring with
Palladium and two goddesses, 201–2, 203, 216,
264–65, 378n15, 391n10; Hera as bride, fragmen-
tary metope depicting, 53, 53–54; limestone slab
with Athena in form of Palladium, 201, 202,
203–4; Linear B tablets from, 262; Lion Gate, 62,
65, 66–68, 67; round Mycenaean hearth, 122,
123, 125; Shaft Grave III, nude Aphrodite with
geese from, 264, 265; temple of Athena at, 199;
“Treasury of Atreus,” 203
Mylonas, George, 102
Myron and Myronian Athenas, 220–22, 221,
380n64
mystery cults: Cabiri and Cabiric mystery cults,
104, 238, 241, 333, 334–35; characteristics of,
107, 120, 179; Charites and, 179, 237; of
Despoina, 179; Dionysus and, 297; Eleusinian
Mysteries, xxi, 96–98, 101–7, 105, 110, 113–17,
120, 125, 218, 341–42; Hephaestus and, 237–38;
Lycosura, mysteries of, 75; phallic rites in, 333;
of Sabazios, 317, 321; Samothracian Mysteries,
333, 364n24
432 Subject Index
narthex or thyrsus staff, 320, 321, 395n78
Naucratis, sanctuary of Apollo Milesios at, 146, 147
Naucratis Painter, Laconian cup with Zeus and
eagle, 30, 31
Naxian sphinx, Delphi, 144, 146
Naxos: altar of Apollo Archegetes, 371n32;
amphora with Aphrodite and Ares from, xxiv,
268, 288–90, 289, 387n46; Apollo and, 144, 145,
146, 371n32; cylinder seal of warrior at altar of
Artemis (?), 180, 181; temple and cult of Diony-
sus on, 307–8, 309, 315, 316
Neleis (festival), 174
Neleus and Neleids, 75, 77–79, 87, 174, 319
Nemea, temple of Zeus at, 18
Nemean lion, 62, 218
Nemesis, 184
Neolithic period, 96, 97, 111, 168, 169, 179, 358n18,
363n1, 386n20
Neoptolemus, 139
Nereids, 122
Nereus, xxiii
Nestor, 10, 70, 77, 80, 87, 174, 319
Neumann, Günther, 10
New Ilium, depiction of Athena at, 209
Nietzsche, Friedrich, xii–xiii
Nikoxenos Painter, amphora with Zeus and Hera
enthroned, 30, 31
Nilsson, Martin: on Aphrodite, 255, 259; on Ares,
282, 288, 388n1; on Artemis, 167, 169, 173, 190; on
Athena, 199–201, 377n10, 379n55; on Demeter,
96, 101, 363n1; on Dionysus, 297, 299, 317, 319,
394n50; Geschichte der griechischen Religion, ix,
7; on Greek calendar, 152; on Hera, 38, 40–41,
200; on Hermes, 326, 330; on Hyacinthus, 138;
The Minoan-Mycenaean Religion and Its Sur-
vival in Greek Religion, 8; on Poseidon, 70, 72,
80; Rohde and, 394n60; Simon’s Die Götter der
Griechen and, x, xiv, 351n7; on Zeus, 13, 18, 25
Niobe and Niobids, 33, 161, 162, 194, 195
Niobid Painter, calyx-krater with Apollo and
Artemis killing Niobids, 194, 195
numismatics. See coins
nymphs and satyrs: Cycladic idols associated with
nymphs, 261; Dionysus associated with, 241, 250,
297–98, 311, 312, 321; Hephaestus and, 240–41,
241, 250; Hermes associated with, 334
Nysa, Nysai, and Dionysus, 297–98, 298, 391n3
Oakley, John, xix
obeloi, Perachora, temple of Hera, 49, 50
Oceanus, in family tree of the gods, xxii, xxiii, xxiv
Odysseus: Athena and, 200, 203; Demeter and, 99;
Hermes and, 320, 326, 330; Hestia and, 367n7;
Poseidon and, 69, 72–73, 76; Zeus and, 23
Oedipus Painter, kylix with Athena serving Hera-
cles wine, 225, 226
Oenomaus, 20–22, 181, 182
Ohly, Dieter, 63
Oinopion, 308, 310, 393n38
Oinotropes, 320
ointments. See perfumes and ointments
olive tree: on Acropolis, Athens, 216–18, 217;
Aphrodite and, 202; Athena and, 201, 202, 205,
215, 216–18, 217, 229, 230, 231, 377n10, 381n82; at
palace of Kato Zakros (Crete), 216, 217; Zeus
and, 205
olive wood cult statue of Athena at Parthenon, 227
Oltos cup, 129, 129–30, 133, 290–91, 291
Olympia, 16–17, 17; Apollo at temple of Zeus, 158–
63, 160, 161; Artemis Agoraia, cult of, 172; ash
altar at, ix, 15–16, 26, 100; Athena at temple of
Zeus, 218, 219, 220; bronze figurines as votive
offerings at, 25–26; Calliteles and Onatas, statue
of Hermes as ram-bearer by, 328; chryselephan-
tine statue of Zeus at, 31–34, 32, 54, 160, 163,
227, 257, 261; dedication of Mikythos at, 36714;
griffin cauldrons associated with Hera, 48,
48–49, 49; head of cult statue of Hera from, 57,
57–58, 61, 358n49; Hera and Dionysus at, 56–57;
hill of Cronus at, 17, 41; Laconian cup found at,
30; sacrifices at, 99–101, 364n18; sanctuary of
Demeter Chamyne, 98, 100; temple of Hera, 13,
26, 38, 39, 40–43, 45; temple of Zeus, 13, 17,
18–23, 21, 22, 27, 33, 84, 158–63, 160, 161, 218, 219,
220, 257, 354n27, 354n34; throne of statue of Zeus
at, 30–31, 160–61, 161
Olympian gods. See Greek gods; specific gods by
name
 Subject Index 433
Olympic games, 12, 19, 23, 32, 84, 100, 160
omphaletomoi, 209
omphalos, 125, 149, 153
Onatas and Calliteles, statue of Hermes as ram-
bearer by, 328
Onchestos (Boeotia), amphictyony of Poseidon at,
80
Opis, 180
oracles: animal oracles and Artemis, 174; Colophon,
oracle of Apollo at, 139; Delphi, oracle of Apollo
at, 97–98, 139, 140, 149–50, 319; Dodona, sacred
oak of Zeus at, 13–14, 259; Epirus, oracle of Zeus
in, 30; Miletus, oracle of Apollo at, 139; Olym-
pia, oracle of Zeus at, 15; Sibyls and Sibylline
books, 144, 295; Zeus as god of, 20–21, 22
Orchomenos: Charites in, 267; Demeter and, 102;
Poseidon and, 69, 80
Orestes, 73, 166, 179, 331
Orlandini, Piero, 97
Orpheus: Dionysus and, 321; Hermes and Orpheus
Relief, 343, 343–44, 398n53
Ortygia, cult of Artemis on, 174, 193
Orvieto, Tomba Golini I, 382n7
Osborne, Robin, and Susan Alcock, Placing the
Gods: Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in Ancient
Greece, xi
Osiris, 299
Ostia: Altar of the Twelve Gods, 125, 126, 127, 128;
temple of Vulcan, 383n29
Otto, Walter F., x, xiii, 7–8, 9, 71, 146, 167, 283–84,
297, 298, 299, 316, 391n3; Die Götter Griechen-
lands, 38
Otzaki figurine, 96, 97
owls sacred to Athena, 223, 225, 226
Paestum (Poseidonia): Athena, temple of, 46, 50;
birth of Aphrodite on wedding vase from, 272,
274; coins with images of Poseidon, 90, 91; Hera,
temples of, 45, 46, 50, 257
Paiaon/Paean (god of healing), 149, 281, 389n8
Palladium of Athena, 199, 201–6, 202, 203, 210, 213,
214, 231, 381n79
Pallantidai, 247
Pallas Athena, 148, 199, 201, 206, 218
palm tree, sacred to Apollo and Artemis, 180
Pamukkale (Hierapolis), theater frieze, 375n60
Pan, 194
Pan Painter: bell-krater with Pan chasing Daphnis
and Artemis killing Actaeon, 194–96, 196, 337;
column-krater with sacrifice at herm, 337–38,
338; fragment of pelike with three herms, 337
Panaghia Hodegetria, 175
Panathenaia, 128, 201, 211–12, 212, 213, 214, 215,
379n53
Pandora, 227, 237, 244, 245
Pandrosos, 128
Panionion, 77–80, 78, 79, 183
Panofsky, Erwin, ix
Paris (from Iliad): Aphrodite and, 253–54, 263;
Judgment of Paris scenes, 49, 62, 261, 268, 268–
70, 269
Parke, H. W., 319, 371n29
Paros: cult of the Graces on, 261, 386n28; statue of
Hestia from, 133
Parthenon: Athena and Themis, north metope,
229, 381n79; Centauromachy, Gigantomachy,
and Amazonomachy, 227–28; chryselephantine
statue of Athena Parthenos at, 33, 54, 163, 212,
227–28, 228, 231; olive wood cult statue of
Athena at, 227; Panathenaic procession on, 214;
west pediment, reconstruction of, 229–30, 230,
231, 381n82
Parthenon, east frieze: Aphrodite on, 272–76, 275,
280, 292, 377n99; Apollo on, 198, 275, 292; Ares
on, 292; Artemis on, 198, 275, 280, 292, 377n99;
Athena on, 227–28, 250, 252, 292; Demeter on,
98–99, 100, 292, 395n80; Dionysus on, 292,
395n80; female cult attendants/Arrephoroi, 127,
127–28, 378n16; Hephaestus on, 250, 252, 292;
Hera and Zeus, 54, 55; Hermes on, 292; Hestia
missing from, xxiii, 127, 127–28, 367n14; Homeric
Hymn to Athena and, 6; pairings of gods on,
292; Poseidon and Apollo sitting together on,
80, 81, 276, 361n32
Parthenon, east pediment: Aphrodite, Artemis,
and Leto, 230, 232, 278–80, 280, 388nn74–76;
birth of Athena on, 115, 229, 230–32, 232; Deme-
ter and Kore, 115–16, 118; Dionysus, 321, 395n80;
434 Subject Index
Parthenon, east pediment (continued)
Hecate announcing birth of Athena, 115; Leto,
280; Zeus, 230–31
pastoralism: Artemis/hunting goddesses associ-
ated with, 168, 173, 185–86; Hera as goddess of
pastures and plains, 42–48, 43–46, 50; Hermes,
as god of herders/shepherds, 186, 326–28, 328–
30, 330; sea and pasture, connection between,
50, 51
Patrocles Altar, 379n53
Patroclus, 23, 247, 290
Patzer, Harald, Die Anfänge der griechischen
Tragödie, 301
Pausanias: on Artemis as civic goddess, 173; cult
names of gods provided by, 5; on Demeter
Eleusinia, 101; on Olympia, 15–16, 17, 32–33
Pegasus, 69, 75
Peirithoos, centaurs at wedding of, 19, 162
Peitho, 259, 261, 276, 278
Pelasgians, 41, 51, 62, 66, 101, 122, 178, 237, 333
Peleus and Thetis, wedding of, 121
Pella, hydria with olive tree, Athena, and Poseidon
by circle of Pronomos Painter from, 381n82
Peloponnesian War, 204, 218, 292, 293, 295
Pelops, 20–23
Penelope, 170, 326
Penthesilea Painter, kylix with Apollo killing
Tityus, 161, 162
Pentheus, 319
Penthilides, 73
peplos, presentation of: to Athena, 199, 215; to
Hera at Olympia, 56, 57, 61
Perachora: house model dedicated to Hera, from
Heraeum, 40, 356n15; temple of Hera, 13, 41, 49,
50
perfumes and ointments: Aphrodite and, 262–63,
263, 265, 266; Artemis and, 184, 190, 191; Athena
and, 202, 208; Hephaestus and, 240; Hestia and,
129; Zeus and, 26, 28. See also incense
Pericles, 222, 296
Persephone Painter, bell-krater with Hermes and
Persephone returning from Hades, 106, 107
Persephone/Kore: on Codrus Painter kylix, 293,
296; Demeter and, 48, 95–101, 104, 106, 108–10,
113–20, 116–19, 259, 341, 342; in family tree of
the gods, xxii, xxiii; Hermes and, 106, 107, 115,
117, 341–42; in Orpheus and Eurydice story,
344; in “sacred family of Eleusis,” 125; Zeus
and, 12
Perseus, 192, 222, 327
Persian Wars, 90, 182, 194, 197, 212, 216, 227
Petersmann, H., 363n1
Pfeiff, Karl Arno, 156
Pfister, Friedrich, 103
Phaeacians, 76, 238
phallic rites, 331–33
Phanes, 319
Phiale Painter, lekythos with Hermes and young
woman at grave site, 340–41, 341, 343
Phidias: Alcamenes as pupil of, 292; Aphrodite
Urania, statues of, 278–80, 280; Athena Lemnia,
223–25, 225; Athena Promachos, 212; births of
gods on temple sculptures of, 250; Elis, chrysele-
phantine statue of Aphrodite Urania at, 277, 278;
Hermes Chthonios statue from circle of, 338,
339, 340; Kassel Apollo as copy of Acropolis
statue by, 163; Olympia, chryselephantine statue
of Zeus at, 31–34, 32, 54, 160, 163, 227, 257, 261;
Olympia, throne of statue of Zeus at, 30–31,
160–61, 161; Parthenon, chryselephantine statue
of Athena Parthenos at, 33, 54, 162, 163, 212, 227–
28, 228, 231; Parthenon, east pediment, 6; triple
Hecate represented by school of, 177
Philaios (ointment refiner), 263
Philippson, Paula, Griechische Götter in ihren
Landschaften, xi, 9, 42
Phineus cup (Chalcidian kylix with Dionysus and
Ariadne in chariot), 315, 316
Phlegyans, 27–28, 287
Phobos and Deimos (Fear and Terror), 282, 287,
288
Phoebus Apollo/Apollo Phoebus, 148, 199
Phoenicians, 183, 200, 256, 263, 272, 286, 287, 292,
301, 379n48
Phoibe, xxii, xxiii
Phoroneus, 278
Phosphoroi, 172
Phrygia, association of Dionysus with, 317
 Subject Index 435
Phrynos, kylix with Hephaestus at birth of Athena,
238, 239
piggy-back (ephedrismos) position, 250, 251
piglets, Demeter, Persephone, and Thesmophoria,
96, 363n5
pillars/columns: Apollo worshipped in form of, 65,
137, 332; Artemis worshipped in form of, 137,
187–88, 188, 332; Dionysus worshipped in form
of, 65, 137, 285–86, 299, 300, 303, 304, 305, 332,
392n20; Hera worshipped in form of, 65, 65–68,
66, 67, 137, 332; herms, 331–38, 332, 333, 336–39; in
Minoan-Mycenaean religion and art, 332; Myce-
nae, Lion Gate, 62, 65, 67; Palladium of Athena,
199, 201–6, 202, 203, 210, 213, 214, 231, 381n79
Pinax of Niinnion, 365n36
Pindar: on Artemisium of Ephesus, 183; knowledge
of the gods from, 6; on Poseidon as Ennosidas,
74
Pingiatoglou, Semeli, xviii
Piraeus, cult of Artemis at, 184
Pisistratus and Pisistratids, 18, 87, 99, 124–25, 211,
301, 303, 335, 379n54
Pistoxenes Painter, kylix with Aphrodite on a fly-
ing goose, 270–72, 271
plank statuettes (Brettidole): of Hera, 58–60, 58–64,
66; herms compared, 335
Plato, Academy of, Athens, 237
Pluto, 293, 296, 341. See also Hades
Plutus, 98, 99, 101, 102, 110, 113, 117, 364n13
Po valley, Heraeum in, 43
Policoro, pelike with Athena and Poseidon from,
85, 85–86, 86
Polignac, Francois de, La naissance de la cité
grecque, xi
Polion, volute-krater with frontal enthroned Hera
by, 384n54
politics. See justice and political life
polos or pylaeon crown, 54, 55–60, 56–59, 268, 289,
290
Polybotes, 90
Polyclitus: Doryphoros (statue of Achilles), 292;
statue of Hera at Argos, 41, 54
Polygnotus, skyphos with Dionysus’ sacred mar-
riage to wife of Archon Basileus, 307, 308
Polygnotus II (Lewis Painter), skyphos by,
393n30
Polyphemus, 69, 73, 77
Poseidon, 69–94; anger of, 72–74, 76; Apollo
and, 78, 80–83, 81; Athena and, 76, 82, 83, 86,
87, 88, 201, 208, 218, 229, 381n82; as charioteer
or on horseback, 84–86, 85–86, 89; children/
descendants of, xxiii, 69, 75, 76–77, 87; cult and
rites, 73–79, 74; Demeter and, 74–75; earth-
quakes and volcanos, association with, 73–74,
89; euphemistic epithets for, 73, 74; in family
tree of the gods, xxii, xxiii; at Gigantomachy, 85,
89–90, 90; on Hephaesteum, east frieze, Athens,
248, 249; Hera and, 50, 70, 83, 87; horses and
bulls, association with, 75–76, 77, 84, 84–87, 85,
88, 327, 361n25; images and iconography, 81, 84,
84–94, 85, 88–94, 275, 293, 295; map of cult sites,
74; open-air cult sites for, 90; origins and devel-
opment, 69–78; sacrifice/sacrificial rituals for,
70, 72–73, 75, 77, 79; sanctuaries and temples,
77–84, 79–83, 90; sea, as god of, 50, 69, 71–73,
76, 87, 88; trident of, 84, 84–87, 85, 90, 90–91, 91,
94; Zeus and, 11, 12, 69, 70, 71, 76
Poseidon Asphalios, 73
Poseidon Gaiaochos, 76
Poseidon Genethlios, 71
Poseidon Heliconius, 77
Poseidon Hippios, 75, 87, 88
Poseidonia. See Paestum
Posidaeia/Poseidonia (goddess), 70–71
Potidaea, coin with Poseidon on horseback from,
85, 89
Pötscher, W., 354n34, 356n17
Powers, Christopher, xviii
Praxiergidai, 127, 128, 368n25
Praxiteles, Knidian Aphrodite of, 277
Preller, Ludwig, x, 9, 71, 72, 329, 352n9; Griechische
Mythologie, 36–38
Priam, 24, 70, 192, 235, 291, 323–24
Priapus, 337
prize Panathenaic amphorae, 201, 211–12, 212, 213
Procles of Samos, 62–63
Proetus of Tiryns, daughters of, 43, 179, 318, 319
Prometheus, 168, 237, 243
436 Subject Index
Pronomos Painter, circle of, hydria with olive tree,
Athena, and Poseidon, from Pella, 381n82
prostitutes (hetairai), and Aphrodite, 272, 273, 277
Prosymna, 42
Protogeometric period, 188, 189
Prückner, Helmut, 272
Psychopompos, 331
purification rituals, Artemis associated with, 176–
79, 178
pylaeon or polos crown, 54, 55–60, 56–59, 268, 289,
290
Pylos: Artemis, cult of, 174; Linear B tablets from,
13, 39, 70–71, 77–79, 122, 174, 262, 299, 329;
megaron, palace of, 122, 123; sanctuary of
Poseidon at, 77–80
Pyrasos, sanctuary of Demeter at, 102
Pyrrha, 237
Pyrrhus (bronze smith), 379n52
the Pythia, 97–98, 145, 153, 236
Pythian dragon, slain by Apollo, 135, 139
Python, 158
quail, sacred to Artemis, 174
Quirinus, 284
Radke, G., 357n34
raised-arm position, 26
ram-bearer statuette of Hermes, 328, 329
Reinhardt, Karl, xiii, 6, 7, 233, 234, 253, 268, 269
“religion of the earth,” concept of, 283–84
Rhea: Artemis and, 187; Demeter and, xxiii, 95;
Dionysus and, 316–17; in family tree of the gods,
xxii, xxiii; Hera and, 41, 51, 96; Hestia and, 123;
images of, 61; lions, associated with, 62; sanctu-
aries and temples, 18; Zeus and, 13, 17, 316
Rhodes: Artemis on, 190; Athena on, 201, 205,
380n57; hydria with Plutus from, 364n14;
Poseidon Asphalios on, 73
Richardson, Nicholas, 120
Robert, Carl, 167; Bild und Lied, xix
Rodenwaldt, Gerhard, 201, 378n13, 391n10
Rohde, Erwin, 318, 319, 394n60; Psyche, 299, 391n6,
394n60
Roman cult of genius, 338
Rome: Ara Pacis, 357n34; Capitoline Triad of
Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, 49; Concordia,
Temple of, 133, 368n19; House of Livia, Palatine
Hill, cult pillars of Artemis in wall painting
from, 188; Juno Ludovisi, Palazzo Altemps,
35–36, 37; lion attacking horse, on Capitoline,
190; Sallust, Gardens of, 272; Saturnalia, 17;
Servilius, Gardens of, 125–27, 133, 368n19
Roscher, W. H., 38, 276; Lexikon, 284
Sabazios, 317, 321
Sabouroff Painter: lekythoi for cult of the dead by,
397n47; white ground cup with Hera, 35, 36, 54
sacrifice/sacrificial rituals: for Aphrodite Pande-
mos, 277; for Ares, 181–82; for Artemis, 166–70,
172–74, 177, 179–82, 182, 184, 194, 197, 198; for
Athena, 214, 215, 220; chthonic holocausts ver-
sus Olympian offerings, 99–101, 331, 364n15; for
Demeter, 97, 99–101; German studies of, ix, xii;
for Hera, 39, 43–45, 47; for Hermes, 297n49, 331,
333, 333–34, 337–38, 338, 339; Hermes sacrificing
to Twelve Gods, 324; Hestia and, 121, 124, 128,
130; human sacrifice, 166–67, 170; importance
to gods of, 8; at Olympia, 99–101, 364n18; for
Poseidon, 70, 72–73, 75, 77, 79; purification ritu-
als related to, Artemis associated with, 176–79,
178; suovetaurelia, 72, 214; triple sacrifices, 72;
for Zeus, 11, 15–17, 25, 28
Salamis, battle of, 167, 197
Salmoneus, 256n18, 353n23
Samos: coins of, 55, 56, 62; cult statue of Aphrodite
in Heraeum, 257; cult statue of Hera at, 55, 56,
62–63, 66, 137; Heraeum, 13, 40, 42, 44, 48–49,
51–53, 52, 55, 177, 178, 257; wooden statuette of
Hera, 56
Samothracian Mysteries, 333, 364n24
sanctuaries and temples: of Aphrodite, 255–56,
259, 272, 276–77, 277; of Apollo, 13, 39, 82–83,
136–39, 143, 146, 147, 150, 151, 154, 154–55, 155, 171,
174, 371n32 (See also Delos; Delphi); of Artemis,
143, 165, 166, 174, 180, 182–84, 191–93, 192, 197,
268; of Athena, 46, 199, 214 (See also Parthe-
non); cult names of gods from inscriptions in,
5; of Demeter, 85, 98, 102–7, 105, 108–9, 110; of
 Subject Index 437
Dionysus, 186, 301, 302, 307, 316; of Hephaestus,
xxi, 235, 246–50, 247–49, 251, 383n29; of Hera, 13,
26, 38–40, 39, 42–49, 257; landscape and sanctu-
ary, interaction of, x–xi, 9, 42–48, 43–46, 154–55;
of Poseidon, 77–84, 79–83, 90; of Zeus, 13–24, 17,
19–22, 84. See also specific locations
Sarian, H., 367n14, 368n16
Saturnalia, 17
Saturnia, kylix with Hephaestus on winged chariot
from, 244, 245
satyrs. See nymphs and satyrs; silens
scales of justice/fate, association of Zeus with,
23–25, 33
Scamander-Xanthos, 249, 384n49
Schachermeyer, Fritz, Poseidon und die Entstehung
des griechischen Götterglaubens, 71, 72
Scheffer, Charlotte, 250
Schefold, Karl, xiii, 261, 362n46, 376n87
Schiller, Friedrich, 35–36
Schliemann, Heinrich, 10, 38, 235, 318, 377n15,
394n61
scholia, 51, 71, 278, 386n28, 393n29, 396n24
Schwartz, G., 366n67
Scopas. See Skopas
Scully, V., 352n10
Scythians, 284
sea and seafarers: Artemis and, 184; Hera as god-
dess of, 47, 48–49, 50; pasture and sea, connec-
tion between, 50, 51; Poseidon as god of, 50, 69,
71–73, 76, 87, 88
Selinus: Heraeum, sacred wedding of Zeus and
Hera, 54; metope with Apollo, Artemis, and
Leto, 155, 156; sanctuary of Demeter Malopho-
ros, 108–9, 110
Selloi, 14
Semele, xxiv, 288, 297, 301, 307, 308, 315, 369n36,
393n17
Servius, on Aeneid, 261
“Seven against Thebes,” 103, 286
Severe style, 220
Shamash (Babylonian sun god) and Apollo, 149–
52, 150, 151, 153–54
Shapiro, Alan, xvi, 124, 379–80n55
shield of Achilles, 233, 244, 282, 381n1
Sibyls and Sibylline books, 144, 295
Sicily. See Magna Graecia and Sicily
Sicyon: cult statue of Aphrodite by Canachus in,
202; cult statue of Artemis in, 187
Siegmann, Ernst, 10
silens, 308, 311, 312, 315, 316, 321, 393n33, 394nn49–50
silo/granary models, 111–13, 112
Simoeis, 384n49
Simon, Erika: Festivals of Attica, xix; Glück und
Leid, xviii; Die Götter der Griechen, ix–xiv, xvii–
xix; Die Götter der Römer, xxi; Tausend Jahre
frühgriechische Kunst, xviii
Sintians, 235–36
Siphnian Treasury frieze, Delphi, 129, 240, 285,
290, 291, 292
Siphnos, herm from, 331, 332, 335
Skopas: Aphrodite on a billy goat, statue of, 277;
seated statue of Hestia by, 125–27, 133
Snell, Bruno, 38, 301
Social Wars, 357n34
Solon, 222
Sophilos, dinos fragment with Demeter and Hestia
in wedding procession, 121, 122
Sophists, 276, 277
Sophocles, knowledge of the gods from, x, xiii, 6
“Sosandra” of Calamis, 272
Sosias cup, 129–31, 130, 292, 369n35, 382n8
Sotades, vase in form of astragal with Hephaestus
directing female chorus by, 244, 246
Sounion, temple of Poseidon at, 82
Sparta: Charites/Graces in, 265; comb with Judg-
ment of Paris scene, sanctuary of Artemis
Orthia, 268; cult of Dionysus in, 186; cult statue
of Aphrodite of, 256, 257; Demeter in, 100; Hera
and, 38, 56, 200; Hermes in, 331; Poseidon in, 73;
sanctuary of Artemis Hegemone and Apollo
Carneius, 174; sanctuary/cult of Artemis Orthia,
184–87, 190, 268, 374n38; terracotta and marble
statue of goddess from, 385n12; wet-nurse festi-
val for Artemis in, 175; Zeus Uranius in, 255
Spartoi, 287
sphinxes: as “lion-women” or Keres, 371n22; Nax-
ian sphinx, sanctuary of Apollo at Delphi, 144,
146; on throne of Zeus, 31, 33, 34
438 Subject Index
sphyrelata statuettes of Apollo between Leto and
Artemis from Dreros, 142, 143
Staphylus, 308, 310, 393n38
Stein, Charlotte von, 35
Steinhart Matthias, xxi
Stoics, 37
Stone Age. See Neolithic period
stone piles/boundary stones/funerary markers
associated with Hermes, 329–32
Strabo, 391n3
Stymphalian birds, 218, 219
Subgeometric phase, 141
suicides and death sentences, Artemis associated
with, 190
suovetaurelia, 72, 214
Symposium of the gods, Codrus Painter kylix,
293–96, 295, 296
Syracuse: Athena Ergane, clay relief of, 209; coin
with head of Artemis Arethusa from, 193, 194
syrinx (shepherd’s pipes), Hermes’ invention of,
325, 342
Tainaron, cave-temple of Poseidon at, 80
Tanagra, festival of Hermes at, 328
Tarentum, volute-krater by Karneia Painter with
Artemis entering Dionysiac circle, from, 187
Tarquinia Painter, kylix with Hephaestus at cre-
ation of Pandora, 244, 245
Teiresias, 110
Telchines, 334
Telemachus, 70, 200
temples. See sanctuaries and temples
Tenos, pithos with depiction of Hephaestus from,
238
Terra Mater, 128
Tethys, in family tree of the gods, xxii, xxiii, xxiv
Thargelia, 371n29
theater and tragedy: Artemis and, 185–87; Diony-
sus as god of, xxiv, 185–87, 301–11, 302, 303, 321
Thebes: Aphrodite in, 256; association of Ares,
Dionysus, and Aphrodite with, 285–88, 301;
Athena in, 200; Cabirion, 104, 241; cult of
Dionysus in, 186, 285–86, 299, 300, 319;
Cycladic-style relief of Hera between lions from,
58, 58–62, 358n50; necropolis, grave showing
pigs treading ears of corn, 363n7
Themis, 19, 122, 229, 291, 381n79
Themistocles, 197
Theodosius II (emperor), 15
Theoxenia of the Dioscuri, 295
Thermon, temple of Apollo, 13, 39
ThesCRA, xviii
Theseus, 33, 75, 76–77, 184, 247, 276, 278, 307
Thesmophoria, xii, 96, 98, 101, 103
Thetis, 34, 121, 234, 238, 241
Thimme, J., 386n20
Thompson, H. A., 247, 398n53
Thrace: Ares and, 166, 284, 285; Artemis and, 166;
Demeter and, 102; Dionysus associated with,
166, 301, 318
Threptós and threptós, 118–20
thunderbolts of Zeus, 20, 22, 25, 27–28, 30, 32, 90,
192, 211–12, 301
Thyiades, 320
Thyone, 369n36. See also Semele
thyrsus or narthex staff, 320, 321, 395n78
Tiberius (emperor), 133, 368n19
Tiryns: Archaic inscriptions to Athena at, 200; cult
of Hera at, 358n39; gold ring with daimones as
cult attendants from, 265
Titanomachy, xxiii, 12, 18, 28–29, 89, 191, 362n46,
376n87
Titans, xxii, xxiii, xxiv, 12, 18, 28–29
Tityus, 161–62, 162
tragedy. See theater and tragedy
Trapezo, 127, 127–28, 378n16
Treu, Georg, 222
trident of Poseidon, 84, 84–87, 85, 90, 90–91, 91, 94
triple sacrifices, 72
triple-bodied form of Artemis, 172, 177–78, 178,
188, 374n37
Triptolemus, 110, 111, 114, 117, 125, 366n67
Triton, 69
Trophonius, 102
Turner, Victor, xi
Twelve Gods, cult of, 124–27, 126, 324, 376n91,
398n53
Tydeus, 218
 Subject Index 439
Typhon, 27, 28, 51, 162, 354–55n39
Tyrannicides, statues of, in Athenian Agora, 213,
337
Tyrrhenian black-figure amphora with birth of
Athena, 238, 239, 326
Uni (Juno), 385n14
Urania (Muse), 255
Urania (precursor of/epithet for Aphrodite), 255–
57, 259, 263, 265, 272, 276, 278
Uranus, xxii, xxiii, xxiv, 12, 206, 254–55, 259, 271
Urnfield period, 14, 15
urn-wagons dedicated to Zeus, 14, 14–15, 15
Vaphio, beehive tomb at, 137
vegetation deities: Aphrodite and, 261, 386n28;
Apollo and, 138, 143, 152; Artemis and, 180;
chthonic holocausts distinguished from Olym-
pian offerings and, 99–100; Demeter as, 99–101;
Dionysus as, 41, 261, 299, 307, 316, 318; Hera as,
41; Hyacinthus as, 138, 299; on Paros, 386n28;
Zeus as, 13, 25, 29
Venus, 280. See also Aphrodite
Vermeule, Emily, 79
Vernant, Jean-Pierre, Anthropologie de la Grèce
antique (ed.) and Mythe et pensée chez les Grecs,
ix
Vesta, 121, 122, 128, 367n2. See also Hestia
virginity: of Artemis, 167, 169, 176; of Hestia, 121,
123, 124, 128, 133
Visser, M. W. de, 359n65
volcanos and earthquakes, association of Poseidon
with, 73–74, 89
votives: bronze figurines, Olympia, 25–26; Charites
and Eros, votive relief of, from Acropolis,
Athens, 261, 262; Great Eleusinian Relief incor-
rectly interpreted as, 116; Locrian clay reliefs
with Aphrodite, 272, 274, 275; Mondragone,
votive relief of sacred family of Eleusis from,
125, 126, 127, 133; “mourning Athena” relief,
Acropolis, Athens, 222, 223; pinakes dedicated
to Poseidon, Corinth, 84, 84–86, 362n35; plaque
of Aphrodite with Eros and Himeros, Acropolis,
Athens, 254, 255; relief of Artemis Hecate as
protector of domestic animals, from Krannon,
172
Vounos, Cyprus, plank statuette from, 60
Vulcan, 383n29. See also Hephaestus
Webster, T. B. L., 241
weddings and marriages: Ares and Aphrodite, 256,
268, 283, 286–90, 290; brother-sister marriages
of Greek gods, xxii, xxiii; Dionysus’ sacred
marriage to wife of Archon Basileus, 307, 308;
Harmonia’s marriage to Cadmus, 286–88;
Hephaestus, wives of, xxiv, 237, 261, 283; Hera
and, 38, 41, 51; Hestia and, 121, 122, 131–33, 132;
Paestum, birth of Aphrodite on wedding vase
from, 272, 274; Peirithoos, centaurs at wedding
of, 19, 162; priestess of Demeter at Olympia as
married woman, 100; “sacred wedding” of Zeus
and Hera, 51–54, 52–55; Zeus, marriage partners
of, xxii, xxiv, 15, 38–39, 259, 316
Welcker, Friedrich Gottlieb, Griechische Götter-
lehre, xiv, 38
West, M. L., 13
wet-nurses, 118–20, 119, 175, 353n6
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich von, xii–xiii,
40–41, 70, 139, 167, 204, 237, 282, 289, 297, 299,
317, 388n1; Der Glaube der Hellenen, 8
Winckelmann, J. J., xiv, 3, 9, 35, 56, 135–36, 372n56
wine, Dionysus as god of, 297, 298, 307, 308, 311,
312, 313, 315–18, 316, 320, 393n33, 394n50
Wolters, Paul, 58
Xanthos-Scamander, 249, 384n49
Yahweh, Zeus compared to, 12
Yeats, William Butler, xii
Zancani-Montuoro, Paola, 42, 272
Zeus, 11–34; Aphrodite and, 12, 254–59, 257, 261,
263, 276; Apollo and, 12, 13, 19–20, 27–28, 33,
149, 152, 154, 158–63, 160, 161, 327; Ares and, 12,
23, 205, 281–85, 283, 293, 295, 296; Artemis and,
12, 165–67, 173, 176, 179, 180–81, 192; Athena and,
11, 12, 180, 202–3, 205–9, 207, 208, 212, 218, 219,
220, 227, 230–32, 238; beardless versus bearded
440 Subject Index

Zeus (continued) 39, 212; origins and development, 11–13, 316;

depiction of, 29; bulls, association with, 75; Poseidon and, 11, 12, 69, 70, 71, 76, 89–90; in
Carian Zeus, 238, 378n18, 382n26; Cronus and, “sacred family of Eleusis,” 125; “sacred wedding”
12, 13, 17, 27, 28, 206; cult and rites, 13–16, 14, 15, to Hera, 51–54, 52–55; sacrifice/sacrificial rituals
17, 22–24, 25–26, 32; Demeter and, 95, 101, 104, for, 11, 15–17, 25, 28; sanctuaries and temples,
106, 110, 113, 115; Dionysus and, 12, 287, 299, 301, 13–24, 17, 19–22, 84; thunderbolts and, 20, 22, 25,
315, 316, 319, 394n55; in family tree of the gods, 27–28, 30, 32, 90, 192, 211–12, 301
xxii, xxiii–xxiv, 11–12; fatherly status of, 12–13, Zeus Cronides, 12
23; foreign influences and spread of cult to the Zeus of Dodona, 13–14, 15
East, 12–13, 352n2; Graces, attended by, 6; Zeus Kretagenes, 138
Hephaestus and, 12, 237–38, 239, 241; Hera and, Zeus Meilichios, 11
11–13, 17, 26, 27, 37–39, 43, 48–54, 52, 54, 55, 66, Zeus Morius, 202–3
258–59, 293, 295, 316, 327; Hermes and, 12, 323– Zeus Olympios, 16–17
25, 327, 329; Hestia and, 121–25, 128–30, 129; Zeus Uranius, 255
images and iconography, 19–22, 21, 22, 25–32, Zeus Urios, 257
25–34, 52, 54, 55, 293, 295, 354n27; justice/scales/ Zeus Xenios, 19–20, 162
fate, association with, 23–25, 33; marriage part- Zeyl, Donald, xviii
ners, xxii, xxiv, 15, 38–39, 259, 316; multiformity Zeyl, Jakob, xvii
of, 11; as “nephelegeretes” (cloud-gatherer), 4; Zoster (cape), cult of Artemis at, 184
open sky, originally worshipped under, 13, 18,
WISCONSIN STUDIES IN CLASSICS
Laura McClure, Mark Stansbury-O’Donnell, and Matthew Roller, Series Editors

Romans and Barbarians: The Decline of the Western Empire

E. A. Th ompson

A History of Education in Antiquity

H. I. M arrou
Translated from the French by George Lamb

Accountability in Athenian Government

Je n ni f er Tolbert R oberts

Festivals of Attica: An Archaeological Commentary

E ri ka Simon

Roman Cities: Les villes romaines

P ierre Grimal
Edited and translated by G. Michael Woloch

Ancient Greek Art and Iconography

E di t ed by Warren G. Mo on

Greek Footwear and the Dating of Sculpture

K at h erine D ohan Morrow

The Classical Epic Tradition

Joh n Kevin Newman

Ancient Anatolia: Aspects of Change and Cultural Development

E di t ed by Jeanny Vorys C an by, E di th Por a da , Bru n i l de Si smon d o
R i d gway, and Tamara St ech

Euripides and the Tragic Tradition

A nn Norris Mich elini

Wit and the Writing of History: The Rhetoric of Historiography in Imperial Rome
Pau l P l ass

The Archaeology of the Olympics: The Olympics and Other Festivals in Antiquity
E di t ed by Wendy J. R aschke

Tradition and Innovation in Late Antiquity

E di t ed by F. M . C l over an d R . S . Hum phreys
The Hellenistic Aesthetic
Barbara Hu gh es Fowler
Hellenistic Sculpture I: The Styles of ca. 331–200 B.C.
Bru nilde Sismond o R id gway
Hellenistic Poetry: An Anthology
Selec t ed and t ransl ated by Ba rba r a Hu g hes Fow l er
Theocritus’ Pastoral Analogies: The Formation of a Genre
K at h ryn J. Gu t zwille r
Rome and India: The Ancient Sea Trade
E di t ed by Vimal a Beg l ey an d R i cha rd Da n i el D e P um a
Kallimachos: The Alexandrian Library and the Origins of Bibliography
Ru d olf Blum
Translated by Hans H. Wellisch
Myth, Ethos, and Actuality: Official Art in Fifth Century B.C. Athens
Davi d C ast riota
Archaic Greek Poetry: An Anthology
Selec t ed and t ransl ated by Ba rba r a Hu g hes Fow l er
Murlo and the Etruscans: Art and Society in Ancient Etruria
E di t ed by R ichard Dan iel D e P um a a n d
Jo c elyn P enny Small
The Wedding in Ancient Athens
Joh n H . Oakley and R ebec ca H . Si n o s
The World of Roman Costume
E di t ed by Ju dith Lynn Sebesta a n d L a ri s s a B on fa n te
Greek Heroine Cults
Jenni f er L arson
Flinders Petrie: A Life in Archaeology
M argaret S. D rower
Polykleitos, the Doryphoros, and Tradition
E di t ed by Warren G. Mo on
The Game of Death in Ancient Rome: Arena Sport and Political Suicide
Pau l P l ass
Polygnotos and Vase Painting in Classical Athens
Susan B. M at h eson
Worshipping Athena: Panathenaia and Parthenon
E di t ed by Jenif er Neils
Hellenistic Architectural Sculpture: Figural Motifs in Western Anatolia and the Aegean Islands
Pa mel a A. Webb
Fourth-Century Styles in Greek Sculpture
Bru ni lde Sismond o R id g way
Ancient Goddesses: The Myths and the Evidence
E di t ed by Lu cy G o odison an d C hri sti n e Morri s
Displaced Persons: The Literature of Exile from Cicero to Boethius
Jo-M arie C l aassen
Hellenistic Sculpture II: The Styles of ca. 200–100 B.C.
Bru ni lde Sismond o R id g way
Personal Styles in Early Cycladic Sculpture
Pat Getz-Gent le
The Complete Poetry of Catullus
C at u llu s
Translated and with commentary by David Mulroy
Hellenistic Sculpture III: The Styles of ca. 100–31 B.C.
Bru ni lde Sismond o R id g way
The Iconography of Sculptured Statue Bases in the Archaic and Classical Periods
Angeli ki Kosmop ou l ou
Discs of Splendor: The Relief Mirrors of the Etruscans
Alexandra A. C arpino
Mail and Female: Epistolary Narrative and Desire in Ovid’s “Heroides”
Sara H . L indh eim
Modes of Viewing in Hellenistic Poetry and Art
Graham Z anker
Religion in Ancient Etruria
Je a n-R ené Jannot
Translated by Jane K. Whitehead
A Symposion of Praise: Horace Returns to Lyric in “Odes” IV
Ti mot h y Joh nson

Satire and the Threat of Speech: Horace’s “Satires,” Book 1

C at h erine M . S ch legel

Prostitutes and Courtesans in the Ancient World

E di t ed by C h ristoph e r A . Fa r aon e a n d L au r a K. McC lu re

Asinaria: The One about the Asses

P l au tu s
Translated and with commentary by John Henderson

Ulysses in Black: Ralph Ellison, Classicism, and African American Literature

Pat ri ce D. R ankine

Imperium and Cosmos: Augustus and the Northern Campus Martius

Pau l R ehak
Edited by John G. Younger

Ovid before Exile: Art and Punishment in the “Metamorphoses”

Pat ri cia J. Joh nson

Pandora’s Senses: The Feminine Character of the Ancient Text

Vered L ev Kenaan

Nox Philologiae: Aulus Gellius and the Fantasy of the Roman Library
E ri k Gu nderson

New Perspectives on Etruria and Early Rome

E di t ed by Sincl air Be l l an d Hel en Nag y

The Image of the Poet in Ovid’s “Metamorphoses”

Barbara Pavl o ck

Responses to Oliver Stone’s “Alexander”: Film, History, and Cultural Studies

E di t ed by Pau l C artled ge a n d Fi ona Ro se Green l a n d

The Codrus Painter: Iconography and Reception of Athenian Vases in the

Age of Pericles
A malia Avramid ou

The Matter of the Page: Essays in Search of Ancient and Medieval Authors
Shane Bu t ler
Greek Prostitutes in the Ancient Mediterranean, 800 bce–200 ce
E di t ed by Allison Gl azebro ok a n d M a del ei n e M . Hen ry

Sophocles’ “Philoctetes” and the Great Soul Robbery

Norman Au st in

Oedipus Rex
S oph o c les
A verse translation by David Mulroy, with introduction and notes

The Slave in Greece and Rome

Joh n Andreau and R aymon d D es cat
Translated by Marion Leopold

Perfidy and Passion: Reintroducing the “Iliad”

M ark Bu chan

The Gift of Correspondence in Classical Rome: Friendship in Cicero’s “Ad Familiares” and
Seneca’s “Moral Epistles”
A manda Wil c ox

Antigone
S oph o c les
A verse translation by David Mulroy, with introduction and notes

Aeschylus’s “Suppliant Women”: The Tragedy of Immigration

Geof f rey W. Bakewell

Couched in Death: “Klinai” and Identity in Anatolia and Beyond

E li z ab eth P. Bau ghan

Silence in Catullus
Benjamin E ld on Stevens

Odes
Horac e
Translated with commentary by David R. Slavitt

Shaping Ceremony: Monumental Steps and Greek Architecture

M ary B. Hollinsh ead

Selected Epigrams
M a rt ial
Translated with notes by Susan McLean
The Offense of Love: “Ars Amatoria,” “Remedia Amoris,” and “Tristia” 2
O vi d
A verse translation by Julia Dyson Hejduk, with introduction and notes
Oedipus at Colonus
S oph o cles
A verse translation by David Mulroy, with introduction and notes
Women in Roman Republican Drama
E di t ed by D orota D u ts ch, Sha ron L. Ja m es , a n d Davi d Kon sta n
Dream, Fantasy, and Visual Art in Roman Elegy
E mma S cioli
Agamemnon
Aesc h ylu s
A verse translation by David Mulroy, with introduction and notes
Trojan Women, Helen, Hecuba: Three Plays about Women and the Trojan War
Eu ri pides
Verse translations by Francis Blessington, with introduction and notes
Echoing Hylas: A Study in Hellenistic and Roman Metapoetics
M ark Heerink
Horace between Freedom and Slavery: The First Book of “Epistles”
St ephanie McC arter
The Play of Allusion in the “Historia Augusta”
Davi d R oh rbach er
Repeat Performances: Ovidian Repetition and the “Metamorphoses”
E di t ed by L au rel Fu lker s on a n d Ti m Stover
Virgil and Joyce: Nationalism and Imperialism in the “Aeneid” and “Ulysses”
R andall J. Po gorzelski
The Athenian Adonia in Context: The Adonis Festival as Cultural Practice
L au rial an R eit z amme r
Ctesias’ “Persica” and Its Near Eastern Context
M at t Waters
Silenced Voices: The Poetics of Speech in Ovid
Bartol o A. Natoli
Tragic Rites: Narrative and Ritual in Sophoclean Drama
Adriana Bro ok
The Oresteia: “Agamemnon,” “Libation Bearers,” and “The Holy Goddesses”
Aesc h y lu s
A verse translation by David Mulroy, with introduction and notes
Athens, Etruria, and the Many Lives of Greek Figured Pottery
Sheramy D. Bu ndrick
In the Flesh: Embodied Identities in Roman Elegy
E ri ka Z immermann Damer
Spear-Won Land: Sardis from the King’s Peace to the Peace of Apamea
E di t ed by Andrea M . Berl in a n d Pau l Ko sm i n
Language and Authority in “De Lingua Latina”: Varro’s Guide to Being Roman
D iana Spencer
Reset in Stone: Memory and Reuse in Ancient Athens
Sarah A. R ou s
A Guide to Scenes of Daily Life on Athenian Vases
Joh n H . Oakley
Insults in Classical Athens
D eb orah K amen
The Discourse of Marriage in the Greco-Roman World
E di t ed by Jef f rey Benek er an d Georg ia Ts ou va l a
The Gods of the Greeks
E ri ka Simon
Edited by Alan Shapiro, translated by Jakob Zeyl