Gods and Emperors: The Greek Language of the Roman Imperial Cult Author(s): S. R. F.

Price Reviewed work(s): Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 104 (1984), pp. 79-95 Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/630281 . Accessed: 27/01/2013 14:44
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Journalof HellenicStudiesciv (1984) 79-95

GODS AND EMPERORS: THE GREEK LANGUAGE OF THE ROMAN IMPERIAL CULT
THEGreeks underRomanrulesuffer froma doubleprejudice.' On theonehand,Hellenists in theGreeks loseinterest aftertheclassical on the Roman historians findit hardto other, period; This avoida Romanocentric double becomes acute perspective. prejudice particularly whenthe the issueis the religious used the Greeks to refer to Roman Forexample, language by emperor. the Greeks calledthe livingemperor both theou huios('sonof god') andalsotheos ('god').The from of looks odd the classical Athens of both and Rome.One language perspectives imperial it is to make sense of to treat it as of a translation out Latin. Thus the bizarre of way practice the theou is it is huios seen as natural because the translation of calling emperor perfectly simply divi as the heirsof Rome,we canattemptto ignorethe cultural Because, flius. Why natural? differences between usandtheancient Greek world.Butthetacticof treating asa translation out of Latin doesnot always work.Calling thelivingemperor theos cannot beseenasa translation of a term which to dead Modern scholars are therefore forced to treat divus, only applies emperors. Infactthefailure theusageas'deviant', theproduct of eitherfollyor flattery. of theos to translate the firstassumption thattheou divusundermines is a translation of diviflius. huios Thefirstsectionof thisarticle theusageof theos, examines bothin general andin relation to the Roman emperor;it shows that theosis a very differentterm from divusand that its of theemperor mustbe understood in a Greek context.The second section predication explores some of the implications of thispointby lookingat otherrelated of the language used aspects both in describing and in addressing the emperorin religiouscontexts.The thirdand final section reflects on thesignificance of thislanguage forourunderstanding of Greek Does religion. theos with 'God'? its Does of the fit the common unfavourably compare predication emperor view of the Greekgods as anthropomorphic? I

Theos, thougha basicterm of Greekreligion,has neverbeen given a detailedsemantic in theireagerness to examine whatthe Greeks study.2Scholars, thoughtabouttheirgods,have not paused to consider the priorquestion-what doestheos mean? Thereis, however, generally one pointof general is not theos a like for thetwo 'Tiberius'.3 name, Take, example, agreement: 'This is Tiberius' 'This is and a theos'. The first a statement of sentences is, logicallyspeaking, it asserts the of 'This' and 'Tiberius' without addingany other identity identity; merely information. 'Thisis a theos' hasthesamegrammatical formasthefirstsentence, but By contrast, It sayssomething is logicallydifferent. aboutthesubject of thesentence; thatis, theos is a (logical)
What were the conditionsfor its predicate.4So far so good. But what sort of predicateis theos?
use? As a preliminary move I want to set out three possible types of predicate. There are, first,
I 1 should like to thank Mary Beard and LuciaNixon who have greatly improved this article. The analysis runs parallelto that of my book Rituals andpower:the Romanimperial cult in Asia Minor (Cambridge 1984). I refer to corpora of inscriptionsby the standardabbreviations; those not listed by J. J. E. Hondius, Saxa (Leiden 1938) are mainly to be found in the loquuntur series Inschriften Stlidteaus Kleinasien(Bonn griechischer 1972). 2 See, however, W. P6tscher, Theos. Studien zur griechischen (Diss. Wien 1953); Gottesvorstellung iilteren W. Burkert, Griechische Religionder arch.u. kl. Epoche
(1977) 406-8.
3

U. von Wilamowitz, Der Glaube der Hellenen i

(Berlin 1931) 17-18; C. Habicht, Gottmenschentumund griechische Stadte2 (Munich 1970) 157; cf. M. P. Nilsson, Geschichte dergriechischen Religionii2 (1961) 197-8. See contra Pitscher (n. 2) 187-218. 1974). Of course it is possible to convert theos into a

4 For this distinction see, for example, P. F. Strawin logicandgrammar son, Subjectandpredicate (London

name by adding the definite article. 'This is the theos'is comparable to 'This is Tiberius'.

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

80o

S. R. F. PRICE

predicatessuch as 'is a Knight', which are simply a matterof human ascription.X 'is a Knight' if and only if he hasbeen made a Knight by the monarch.The predicatedoes not inform one of X's A second classof predicateis exemplifiedby Roman Catholicusesof'is natureor characteristics. a Saint'. The ascriptionof this statusis unlike the arbitrarydubbing of a Knight. A decision is made by a body of the Roman Catholic Church (the Congregationfor the Causesof Saints),but the elaborateprocedureis designedto discoverthe factsof the case.5Was the 'candidate' reallya of the life? The final the does not so much holy ceremony, performedby perfectexemplar Pope, create as recognize a Saint. Thirdly, predicateslike 'is a person'lack clear criteriafor use. The paradigmcaseof'is a person'is an adulthumanbeing of 'normal'intelligenceand physique,who has both rights and responsibilities. But when one or more of the featuresof the paradigmare absent (as with a foetus immediately after conception, or a patient sufferingfrom irreparable brain damage) it ceasesto be clear that the predicatestill applies. Irresolvableargumentsarise because the predicate'is a person', like 'is a Saint', claims to recognize the way things are;but, unlike 'is a Saint', it has no institutionalcontrol. To which of these three categoriesdoes theosbelong? No ancient source offers a semantic which were not normallymade analysisof theosand we thereforehave to teaseout assumptions A limits Greek debate on the of shows that the term theosis in fact explicit. polytheism comparableto 'person'. Carneades,a member of the Academic school of philosophy in the second centuryBC,propoundeda seriesof argumentsabout the gods, which proceedon a 'little by little' basis from secure premises to unacceptable conclusions. One specimen of these arguments,as reportedby Cicero, runs:6 If godsexist,arethenymphs alsogoddesses? If thenymphs andSatyrs alsogods? But are,arethePans the nymphsalso are not gods. Yet they possess vowed and they are not gods;therefore temples dedicated to themby the nation.Therefore the othergodswho havehadtemples dedicated to them arenot gods either.7 Cicero makes clear that Carneades did not advance these arguments 'with the object of establishingatheism ..., but in order to prove Stoic theology worthless'.One partof the Stoic projectwas a rationaltheology which proposedto justify popularpolytheism by showing that the innumerableindividualdeitieswere aspectsof one cosmic deity. Carneades' aim was to show that this projectwas a failurebecauseof its inabilityto discriminate between deitiessuch as Zeus, whose divinity was not in question,and other beings who were clearlynot gods. He placedthe Stoics in a fork: either nothing is god or everything is god. Carneades'concern was not to draw out the semantic implications of his 'little by little' reasoning, but his arguments are of interest in this context because they appeal to common Greekusage;his caseagainstthe Stoicswas telling only if his own usageoftheoswas not aberrant. Arguments of similartype can be used on numerousother predicates(e.g. ones concerningsize
or colour), but Carneades' arguments (the most celebrated ones of this type in antiquity) do help to characterize the term theos.They make clear that there were no uncontroversial criteria for the predication of theos. The boundaries of the concept were not unequivocally defined. The implication of this is that theosis the same sort of predicate as 'person'. Admittedly theos has sometimes been seen as 'a sort of rank or status achieved through merit, with no implication whatever of divine nature .... Essentially the conferring of divinity was a political act that contrele polytheisme', REG liv iii (1967) soritesde Carneade Encyclopedia s P. Molinari,New Catholic 55-9. (1941) 43-57; J. Barnes,'Medicine,experienceand 6 Sextus contra ix I82-9o and logic', in Science mathematicos and Speculation, ed. J. Barneset al. Empiricus, deorum Cicero,denatura iii 43-52, quotedfrom43:'sidi (Cambridge1982) 24-68; and esp. M. F. Burnyeat, etiamNymphae deae? si Nymphae, Panisci 'Gods and heaps', in Language and logos, ed. M. sunt,suntne etiamet Satyri? hi autemnon sunt;ne Nymphae[deae] Schofield, M. C. Nussbaum (Cambridge 1982) 315-38. quidemigitur. at earumtemplasunt publicevota et 7 Cicero'suse of the argumentshows that deusis dedicata. ne ceteriquidemergodi, quorum sunt comparable to theos. templa dedicata.' Seeon thistypeof argument P. Couissin, 'Les

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

GODS AND EMPERORS

81

grantedhonours due for benefactions.'8In other words theosis like Knight-a purelyhonorific term. My argument placesit in a quite differentcategory. Unlike 'is a Knight' and 'is a Saint' there were no institutionalcontrols and no uncontroversial criteriafor the use of 'is a theos'.As makesa statementabout the world which is not basedon humanfiat. with 'is a person','is a theos' There areunproblematicusesof both concepts(e.g. of Zeus or of healthyadults)but at the edges The elasticityof the term meant problemsarose.Were the nymphs, or satyrs,or emperorstheoi? be included.We need now to see in some detail howtheoswas predicated that the emperorcould in comparisonto its predicationof of the emperor.Was its predicationof the emperoraberrant the traditionalgods? How are we to explain its seemingly random usage? Theoswas predicatedquite commonly of both Hellenistickings and Roman emperors.As early as the fourth century Bc one Greek writer commented that it was easier for Philip of thanit had been for him to reachhis presentposition of political Macedonnow to become a theos his Alexander and successorswere from time to time called theoi,both in their supremacy.9 lifetimes and posthumously.1' In Egypt there were official cults of the TheoiAdelphoi('God and Antiochos IV of Syria(175-164 Bc) placed, Brothers')and TheoiSoteres('God Saviours'),"1 for the first time, the title of theoson his coins.12 The term was also appliedsporadicallyin the second and first centuriesBC to Roma, the personificationof the power of Rome.13 The Roman emperorsdid not use theosof themselveswhen communicatingin Greek with their subjects.14The significant exception was Gaius who railed against a Jewish embassy becausethe Jews failed to recognize him as a theos.15Claudius,Gaius'successor,reasserted the norm of imperialbehaviourin publicly criticisingGaius'foolish and mad attempt to force the Jews to call him theos.'6 Despite the standardimperial attitude, the Greek subjects of the emperor repeatedly referred to him as theos. There are numerous uses in the lifetime of Augustus,17and this continues through the first and second centuriesAD.18However, in the third century theoswas rarely applied to a living emperor;19 insteadthe adjectivalform theios ('divine') was used.20 The expectation that a ruler would be acclaimed as theosis neatly of an outsider. Both Jewish and Christiansourcesnote that Herod illustratedby the aspirations the Roman client ruler ofJudaea, was called theos,and was immediately struckdown Agrippa, by the True God for his presumption.21 The uses of theosin imperial contexts are similarto two of its uses in connection with the traditionalgods. First, 'the theos'on its own could refer unambiguously to the emperor. For example, a text recording the building of imperial temples and the celebrating of imperial festivals by a local benefactor twice says that he displayed piety towards 'the god'.22 The referenceto the emperor, Augustus, was clear. Similarlythe assemblyof the province of Asia when reforming the calendarto begin on Augustus'birthdaytalkseasily about 'the birthdayof the god' and about the earlierdecision of the assembly 'that a crown be awarded to the one
8

E.g. Tiberius, Ann. Ep. 1934 89; Claudius, IGR iii 328; Nero, P. Le Bas, W. H. Waddington, Inscriptions et latines. . . iii (i870) 6ooa; Domitian, I.Priene 10 Habicht (n. 3) 156-9; E. Badian, in Ancient grecques Macedonian Studiesin Honorof CharlesF. Edson(Thessa- 229; Hadrian,IGR iii 286; Antoninus Pius, IGR iv 594; loniki 1981) 27-71, esp. 54-9. Commodus,TAM ii 829. Cf. alsoP. Veyne, Latomus Alexandria(Oxford 1972) xxi (1962) 57; M. Le Glay, BCH c (1976) 351-3. 11 P. M. Fraser,Ptolemaic
9

(Leiden forthcoming), followingHabicht(n. 3).

Isoc. Ep. 3.5.

D. Fishwick, The ImperialCult in the Latin Westi

Habicht(n. 14) 84. 18

215-20.
12

0. Morkholm, Studiesin the Coinageof Antiochus Kleinasiatische Miinzen (Vienna 19oI) Io6 no. I , 10o7 IV of Syria (Copenhagen 1963) 68-74. no. 6; SNG von Aulock2412-15, 2694-6; Julia Domna, 1975)12. 13 R. Mellor,9EA 'POMH (G6ttingen IGBulgii 623;Julia Mammaea, IGBulgii 640; Gordiani, 14 Habichtindeedarguesthat Augustusexplicitly T. E. Mionnet, Description de midaillesantiques ... iii

19 See, however, Plautilla, F. Imhoof-Blumer,

the Greeksfrom usingit themselves: in Le 545 no. 45; also Julian, Side Agorasive Civarindaki prohibited cultedessouverains dansl'empire romain,Entr. Hardt xix Binalar(Ankara 1956) 8I no. 48. 20 Price(n. I) ch. 9. (Vandoeuvres 1973) 41-88. 21 Josephus, AJ xix 345, 347; Acts Philo, 353. is Leg. of Apostlesxii 22. 22 IG xii 16 Josephus, suppl.124 (Eresus). AJ xix 284.
17

F. Taeger, Charisma ii (Stuttgart I960) 187 n. 3;

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

82

S. R. F. PRICE

suggesting the greatesthonours for the god'.23 There was no need for the assemblyto spell out that 'the god' was Augustus.This use of theosto referto whichever particular deity was in mind at the time can be documented as early as Homer.24 Secondly, theoswas added to the name of the emperor (e.g. theosNero).25 Some scholars have suggestedthat this usage was peculiarto imperialcontexts and implicitly distinguishedthe emperorfrom the traditionalgods, who did not need to be calledtheos.26 In fact the sameusage is found in connection with the gods. By the imperialperiod it was common to refer to theos Dionysos or theaAphrodite.27While theoswas sometimes used when the standingof the deity had been threatened28 or as part of a phrasein appositionto the name of the diety (suchas 'the leading gods Artemis and Apollo'),29 in most casestheosis added to the bare name of the god without any discerniblereason for emphasis.30Thus the use of 'theosNero' is not a mark of uncertaintyabout the emperor'sstatus;it is in line with contemporaryreligious usage. There was considerablefluidity in the uses of theos.First,it was employed in both religious and non-religious situations.While the inscriptionsbelow imperialstatuesin the sanctuaries of the gods sometimescalledthe emperortheos,31 statueserectedelsewherein secularcontextswere describedin the same way,32 and secularbuildings such as porticoes, theatresand baths were dedicatedto the theoiemperors.33Secondly, within religious contexts the emperor was called theosin what seems a haphazardfashion. Priesthoods,for example, sometimes simply give the name of the emperorand sometimesadd theos or anotherdivine name. Thus only a quarterof the civic priesthoods of Augustus term him theos in his lifetime.34 The flexibility of usage is illustratedby the differencebetween the titles of the two priesthoodsof Augustusheld by one man from Bargyliain Cariain about AD80.35This man was high priestof the goddessRoma and of the god SebastosCaesar(eitherin anothertown or in the provincialassembly),high priestof Emperor Titus and priest of Artemis Kindyas and SebastosCaesar(both at Bargylia). This all seems very confusing, as if the Greeksused theoscompletely at random. In fact the reason for the variabilityin usage is that there were no institutionalproceduresnor established criteriacontrolling the predicationof theosof the emperor. When a city came to passa decreeit was not concerned to debate the statusof theosbut to establisha cult of the emperor.36The clearestexpressionof the procedureis a decree of the city of Acraephiaepassedafter Nero had restoredfreedom to Greece.37
23

superiortext is in U. Laffi,SCO xvi [1967] at p. 22). Cf. iii 664 = TAM ii 4o8 (Patara);I.Labraunda ii 65. also I.Olympia53.8 and 37 and OGIS 456.17. 34 Namely, IGR iv 256=I.Assos 15; IGR iv 24 Referencesin G. et l'emploi 1302= I.Kyme 19; Altertiimer von Pergamon viii.3 (1969) Frangois,Lepolytheisme au singulierdes mots THEOS, DAIMON (Paris 1957) 164-5. 317-23. 35 BCH v (1881) 191 no. 14 with BCH xviii (1894) 25 SNG Aeolis 139-43 (Cyme), Phrygia 25 no. 21 and C. Fayer, II cultodelladea Roma (Pescara Copenhagen 567-8 (Laodicea),702 (Synaos). thattheuseof thea withRoma 1976)142-3.Itis possible 26 L. Cerfaux, Tondriau, Le culte dessouverains dans influenced theimperial in thefirstpriesthood. J. usage
la civilisation grico-romaine (Tournai 1957) 191.
27

(Baltimore 1969)no. 65 lines41 and43 (a slightly

R. K. Sherk, Romandocuments from the GreekEast

32 33

SEG xxiii 450 (Demetrias).

SEG xix760(Ilyas); IGRiv 8o8(Hierapolis); IGR

L. Robert, Hellenicaxiii (1965) 176 analyses the about Alexander: Badian loc.cit.(n. Io). data from Aphrodisias; e.g. LEpEbVS 8tL flov OEotl aPXLEPE" I37LS 8794= Syl.3 814: p r&v ZEPviii 454), 70ro AtovVaoov (MAMA 8GEas aa-rv 8tLd flov KaL NEpwcvos KAavstov Kataapos lpoi ZE aorrov 'ETazELtvCvS8a 'EirazEtvCLovvov ELTTEV 'AfpoSEtrryL (MAMA viii 521). 28 Syll.3 867=I.Ephesos ia 24. 7Tpo EPovAEv1LEPVOV Eav7rLo ELVaL TpOgS TrE77V povA7v 29 IGR iii 583-4= TAM ii 188-9. d ro rTavT7O KOrLOVUKUptLO KaG -r7v 8 tLOV' 7TL8r76
30

36

the (obscure) in Athens debate See, however,

has not received detailed study. It seems to be largely a phenomenon of the later Hellenistic and Roman
periods, but it has roots in Homer (Od. xiii 189-90; xix emperor (e.g. IGR iv 229, 984; TAM ii 1200). 31 IGR iv I8o = I.Lampsakos i i; Hist. Zeits. xxix 217 n. I; BCH ix (1885) 79 no. Io. (1921-2)

As Robert notes, the development

of this usage

NE'pwv,

396-7). I can discernno significancein the variationsin the titlesofjoint priesthoodsof a traditionalgod and the

S, a7To08E8ELytVOS, SrptpLKaLt"KaTov ,TT-r77p7Tmarpl ro- EAA7ortv vEoS 'HAtoS iTpoELprl7tVOS L7TAtdl4as EKa r-v EvEpyErTEv KaL EflV 'EAAdSa,EdlcfllIEVOs TroV9s ?dv TTaptLr7avojlEvovgS OEOvSg av t 7raV7o7E ErL
7TpOVOLL KaGL UT77PtLa, 77/V Cd7T7TTLV7OS 70t OvC WVOS

waVTOKpat7p

/LEytLaOS, 8-rlapXLKr/9 EOU'Mls

Kat av7roXOova EAEvOEptlav 7rrpOEpov E tS KaKL iovoS 7rWV 7wv 'EEAAmvwv daLtpEOLaav i7T AEAAqV yEVO/EVOS altovos avTOKpaTW p /iEyLUTOSqL

aOLtyEv7/

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

GODS AND EMPERORS 83 Thehighpriest of theemperors forlifeandof NeroClaudius Caesar sonof Sebastos, Epameinondas . . . 'Since Nerothelordof thewhole the universe, Epameinondas spoke: greatest emperor, holding tribunician forthethirteenth timeelect,father of hiscountry, dawned asa newSunforthe power chosen to benefit and revered ourgodsinreturn forthefactthat Greeks, Greece, especially theyhad himforhiscare stood foralltime, beside and theoneand and, always protection; onlyemperor being NeroZeusEleutherios of Freedom) andrestored the (Zeus mightiest philhellenic gave,granted and immemorial removed from theGreeks toitsancient condition of freedom indigenous previously andfreedom it wasdecided councillors andpeople to ...; therefore autonomy by themagistrates, forthepresent analtar dedicate statue theSaviour, it "toZeus Eleutherios by [the of] Zeus inscribing inthetemple Neroforever" andto establish statues of Apollo withourancestral Ptoiosjointly gods of NeroZeusEleutherios andof TheaSebaste Messalina. ...' The city did not have an elaborate with clearcriteria, like thatof the Vaticanfor procedure whichunequivocally that was to be identified withZeusEleutherios. Nero canonization, judged The emperor hadmadea magnanimous restoration of freedomandthe city responded with a a cult. decisionto establish The terminologyand the associated procedurefor divinizingan emperorwere very in Rome.Theretheofficial different wasclear. Theemperor wasnot a deus position ('god')in his divus anddeus lifetime,butafterhisdeathhe mightbe madea divus.38IntheRepublican period two scholars of thefirstcentury and hadbeenusedinterchangeably; BC (Varro Ateius) attempted to distinguish betweentheterms, butdei(likethediimanes, or spirits sayingthatdiviwereeternal of the dead)werehonoured because of theirconsecration.39In facttheirprescriptive definition in official was unsuccessful; the two termswere distinguished sense. usage,but in the reverse in From the cult of the deceased Caesar onwards divus referred Julius exclusively official to formeremperors and members of theirfamily.They were thusdistinguished terminology from the traditional dei.40 for the creationof a divus.Afterthe Therewere a standard and clearcriteria procedure funeral the senate met decide to and could establish an officialcult of the former emperor's emperor(or to do nothing,or to damnthe emperor's memory).In the firstcenturyAD,five and members of the received these'heavenly honours'.41This emperors eight imperial family but the like all sound was not the arbitrary very 'political', despitepressures, procedure may a The like the was of the arbiter senate, Vatican, traditionally supreme dubbing knight. religious andin thecaseof formeremperors it took a decision on thebasis of thereport of a witness who Thecreation of a divus, hadseenthesoulof theemperor likethatof a Saint, was risingto heaven.
xaplaTro,Y 7T7 aV'Tovotltas K EUE 7) LyY Kat pltaS, rrpoQELsT Ka LrpooS0KOK7W8WPE Kat d 7VO t7jV ' 6SE 7V, VELUOplota 7rpd7EpovZEpaTr(WvO"ATEAr WKEV' S a78 7T17a Ka Ka ESYL'vovL EtvatL 70oS rTE apXovgt avvLUVpOQ 3771W KaLEpWUaLtEV KaTa 7T rapov 70v 7rrp~s 7Twr T LLtt 7(0 , AL f WCLdV,E7rTLypda0ov7aS ZwrptL 'EAv6EpA' [NEppwv]L EtLatlova, Kat dLylyAa7ra v 7TO vaW 70oi 'An7'AAoVos 70"To H7wT'rovavvKaOE3tSpoV7'ra ZE's V 7apXatLd7T7a a7TOKa~7EU77)rV ELS 7r
1E'wKEV,

[Npwv]

'EAEvU6ptoS

the Greek equivalent of Augustus(see n. 45). 38 S. Weinstock, DivusJulius(Oxford 1971) 386-92; E. Bickerman, 'Consecratio', in Culte dessouverains (n. 14) 3-25 and 'Diva Augusta Marciana', AJP xcv (1974) 362-76. See further W. Schwering, 'Deus und divus. Eine semasiologischeStudie als Ergainzung zum Artikel divus in Thesaurus linguae latinae', Indogermanische
Forschungen xxxiv (1914-15)
1-44.

39 Serviuson Aen. v 45 (= Varrofr. 424 Grammaticae Romanae fragmenta,ed. Funaioli). The Ateius is either a contemporary of Varro (fr. 12 dzt Praetextatus, Ateius ~a7ptoIL [wY] [NEpwrvoS] 7oQS Kat' e9oES 7 Ec9LS 2E9ag77gs [ME9aailvs], Ltva Funaioli), or Ateius Capito, an Augustan writer (fr. 15 'EAEvOEpl'ov 7 7)trE7EpaTrdALS Funaioli). See also Servius on Aen. xii 139 (=Varro, de 70o7w)V oQU7WS 7EhAEU0Evr7V Kat Kat cl1v)7cL TaUvL 7VEL/77V EK7TETAVpWEUU/ELcV lingualat.fr. 2, Goetz-Schoell). 40 Deus was used 'unofficially' of emperors (and KvIa Es rTOv Tro Kvptov EEEaa9Tro[Neppwvos 7E others) (I. M. Le M. Du Quesnay, Papersof theLiverpool otKOV.]IEtvaL E'EV avaypa)T7 0bLUtaCa 70 ^V aUT~A-i rTapaT 7 7~ dlyop 7 iii (I981) 104, on the late Republic; TLL ALLt Tw Worpt 'Vv v TW LtEPC Latin Seminar Ka, s.v. 'deus', col. 891. 10-78), but this shows only that 70o3 'A7r'AAwVoS 701o T7WlotoU. Thisassimilation hadextraresonance of the divusmight be seen as a subset of deus;there remains a because ancient cult of Zeus Eleutherios celebratedby the contrast with the undivided category of theos. Plataea. 41 For a list see R. Cagnat, Coursd'6pigraphie latine4 Leagueof Greeksat the neighbouring Cf. R. Etienne, M. Pierart, BCH xcix (1975) 63-7; W. C. (1914) 170--2 with E. Stein, Hermes lii (1917) 571-8. is West, GRBS xviii (1977) 315-I6. Note that Sebastos

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

S. R. F. PRICE 84 the recognition of a stateof affairs. It was alsoa definitive When the senatehad recognition. semantic fuzziness was none of the about divus which characteristic is of the there decided, of predication theos. It wasnotthattheywereignorant to divus. The Greeks didnot create a category comparable of the officialRomansystem.Romansilvercoinage,which circulated widely in the Greek the titles. Roman featured the Roman Milestones, authorities, world, generally gave put up by with the full official the emperor's titles.42Letters from the emperorto Greekcitiesstarted For example,a letterfrom Nero to Rhodesbegins:'Nero Claudius, titulature. son of theos and of theos of Tiberius Caesar Sebastos Germanicus Caesar, Claudius, greatgrandson grandson tribunician Sebastos,Caesar SebastosGermanicus, high priest, holding power, to the of The refers council and correctlyto magistrates, people Rhodes,greetings.'43 emperor The andnot to Tiberius andGermanicus, asdeified. Greeks thusknew Claudius andAugustus, wasnot deus or divus andtheycouldtellwhichemperors thatin Romethelivingemperor were term as a But did not establish a translation of divus. Occasional simple precise divifilius. they or 'theemperor suchas 'theheavenly amongthe gods',wereemployed, periphrases, emperor' the in Romanized but term usedwas theos. It is therefore contexts,44 generally mainly heavily canbe seenas a translation thattheou of divifilius. huios temptingto suppose in imperial titlesin documents instances of thephrase theou Thenumerous huios produced by fromLatin thesamemeaning themselves asthe the Greeks bearing mightseemto be translations of the Latindivifilius,but their 'original'.45 They may indeedoften functionas equivalents form of a different The theos cannotbe the samesincethey system.46 meaning part conceptual of theou theelusivity of thecommonGreek element retained huios So,whileit was usageof theos. to refer to the as because he became divus afterhis divus, livingemperor divifilius only impossible Greeks could refer to the as theos son of the theou death, huios livingemperor ('god, god').For of a statue was erected son of theos theos, Sebastos,who has 'EmperorCaesar, example, deedsfor all people'.47 Thismodifiedphrase couldeven be usedin performed incomparable In with 'translations' of further Roman the titles. lifetime of therewas a conjunction Augustus of Roma and son of theos and father of his Sebastos, Caesar, theos, 'priest Emperor highpriest The fact that the Greeks could use theou even in with huios theos, country'.48 conjunction other Romantitles,shows that they did not regardthe simpletheou huiosin the sameway as the Ithada different Romans sawdivifilius. of different evocations, range forming partof a radically conceptual system.
E.g. IGR iii 82, 138, 145; iv 267, 599-601. IGR iv 924-6 are peculiar in beginning roi^9 OBcAv EraavEardroL9(reign of Septimius Severus).

is an exact translation of the Latin Augustus. It did indeedbecomethe standard almostinstanequivalent iii 902), but taneously (e.g. SEG xxvi 1243= I.Ephesos 43 IGR motivation is morestronglyreligious than iv II24= Syll.3 810: [NEpwv] KAaU'8tos, its semantic It also functioned 'the Sebastoi' KaIo[a]pos Augustus. differently; 0EovEKAavSl'ov vLdO, TtfEplov ZEflaroTV referto twojoint Augusti, but it mayequally refer Ka Ka'aapos 0Eo- ZEP3aaTroQvmay EpLaptvLKOi ' 7yyovos, and his collective ancestors: a sole to emperor e.g. IGR adroyovos, Kataap [EE]aarOds pptavLKdS, dpxEOUlUtaS, apXLKr)9 XcalpEvW

42

LEpeSa,8 apXovUL ovAi^ [Sj] 'l

POSLo)V iv arTOKpa'oTWp,

44 IGR iii 83= ILS 5883= OJh xxviii (1933) Beib. 64 46 Thus the question whether theouhuioswas used of no. 13 (Amastris): divi Aug. perpetuus sacerdos / o r70o someone who was not divifiliusis irrelevantto my case. icrovpavlov OEovQ Z(,(E)Paa0rov ApX[LEPEst 8a fliov?]; and Rome (London 1982) no. 47 IGR iv 201 =I.Ilion 81: A3TOKpa70opa J. Reynolds, Aphrodisias KaL'aapa
22.

1676 (Apollonia, Mysia; AD 40--); IGR iv 15o9 = Sardis vii.i 45 (c. AD 80); IGR iii 493 (Oenoanda; Trajanic);IG v.1 380 (Sparta;AD 15).

no. 38 (Camirus): 4 7oSLEVEKS 7-Jv T 7TETELLrjEvoS9 ro' Ev OE~stA7"TOKpaTodpwYv; SEG xi 492-3 (Laconia):6 iv
OEoQL e"ASptavds.

6; IGR iv 115o=ASAA

xxvii-xxix

(1949-51) 284

OEoQ vUdv OE8v 2E[pa]UTordV, ts97rpaoEULtv vd7rE#pfA-Tro

45 Note also how the Greek 'sebastophantes' used wrongly to be equated with the flamen Augusti, the (Hadrian, Isaura). standard term for an imperial priest in the western 48 IGR iv 1302=I.Kyme I9, lines 54-7: rM LEpEos L'w empire; in fact the sebastophantes probably displayed an -r-S 'PT"tPas 70opoS Ka('apos 0c'w Ka' ATKp Ow imperial image in the imperial mysteries, which are PXLEPEos /yl4ELTW Kat 7aT7pOS7Ta f ZaEpaoUTw Cf. IGR iv 594 (Synaos). unique to the Greek world (H. W. Pleket, HThR lviii raTrpl80os. [1965] 338-41). It is also wrong to imagine that Sebastos

KEX[P)IE'VOV KaL EUEpYEUlaLS97T1S EtS a"7TraV]TaS dv0pdnrovs. Cf. IGR iv 309-II, 314 (Augustus, Pergamum);L. Robert, RPh xiii3 (1939) 181-3 = Opera Minora Selectaii 1334-6 (Tiberius, Myra); IGR iii 286

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

GODS AND EMPERORS 85 The mismatch betweenthe list of Romandiviand the imperial cultsin the Greekworld this thrust of the The Greek was the towards system supports point. figureof the reigning and cults or are attested for almost allthereigning in the (i.e.priests temples) emperor, emperors as we havealready seen(p. 8i), theos was frequently usedof the firstcentury AD.In particular, in the Greekworld.Greekcults The creation of a divusmadelittledifference living emperor. were generally not initiated for a indeed cults of the reigning did divus;49 specifically emperor in Rome.When,aswithcultsof Augustus, hisreign,evenif he wasdeified not oftenoutlast they did endure,the Roman ceremonial made no difference. The titles of civic priesthoods of in refer to him continued to different sometimes as sometimes not.50 theos, Augustus ways, Somescholars asmeaningful tendto treattheos divus. Thisview of the only whenit translates Greek and Roman to between the seems lie behind the modern dictionaries relationship systems in suchdictionaries of Greektermsfor Romaninstitutions.5The Greekentries aredeemedto as of havemeaning bits ersatz-Latin. That correctness of translation is sole the criterion of is, only if Of he a Greek wanted to divi would theou but course, huios, significance. say say filius functional is not the samethingas identityof meaning.52 for example, equivalence Compare, the French, German andTurkish wordsusedin the samealcoholic as context 'Cheers!': sante, but and are functional have different gerefe equivalents, quite 'meanings'-'health', prost of the Greekspeakers and 'honour'.Nor can the mindsor intentions serveas a 'advantage' criterionof meaning independentof the two languages.53 Intentionsmay indeed be of languages, but they do not give meaningto words. HumptyDumpty was independent wrongto saythatwhenhe useda wordit meant justwhathe choseto makeit mean.We should in Latin, not imaginethatthe Greeks werereallythinking but hadthe misfortune therefore to in The of it in themselves Greek. theos of the is certain express predication though emperor, to divus in Latin, in thecontextof general contexts hasmeaning Greek equivalent usageof theos. II Theos Inpartthiswill termswhichwill repayanalysis. belongsto a rangeof Greek religious fill out ourunderstanding of theos. Afterall,no termcanbe understood on itsown;comparison andcontrast areessential.54In addition, of the whole set of termswill showhow they analysis locate the emperorbetweenhumanand divine. The argument involvesa challengeto our have views We about the nature of Godandhow He should Christianizing strong assumptions. be addressed, but our ideasaboutthe invisibility of Godandthe importance of prayers do not world.The analysis will fallinto two sections: first,thereligious necessarily applyto the Greek termsusedto describe theemperor andhiscult;secondly, thereligious addressed to the language emperor. of the religious of the emperor of (i) An analysis descriptions may beginwith the practice the to named deities.55 Thispractice, which we havealready assimilating emperor particular noted briefly(p. 83), is a stronger variantof the generalpredication of theos. The namesof
49 L. Robert, Hellenicaii (1946) 37-42. (n. 14) s3 G. W. Bowersock, in Culte dessouverains 5so Greeksat leastwere E.g. IGR iv 454 (Pergamum; AD 16): Trv 199:'It is evidentthat cultivated of thedifference betweendivus anddeus, OE-s'PTc"rs~9 KaL oEQO ZEaPuarou Katoapos; fullyconscious voEWKdpov IGR iii 360= L. Robert, Lesgladiateurs dansl'Orient both by the same grec even if they were obligedto render

to follow the lead of Rome;its high priest An obvious areaof contrast,which I do not discusshere, attempted was 'of theos Sebastos'only after Augustus'death is between 'god' and 'hero': see Price (n. I) esp. ch. 2. I

70o XEcaa-rou. The provincial assembly of Asia, however,

2ndcent.): 194o)no. 97 (Sagalassos; (Paris dpXLEpCa

word'.
54

See e.g. P. Ziff, SemanticAnalysis (Ithaca 1960).

note here that the paganuse of 'son of god' probablyhas (W. H. Buckler, RPh ix3 [1935] 177-88). 51 H. J. Mason, Greek termsfor Roman institutions no bearing on early Christianusage:see M. Hengel, The (Toronto1974).Note thereviewby M. Crawford,JRS Son of God (London 1976) 30. lxix (1979) 249-50. romanorum cum certis 5s P. Riewald, De imperatorum 52 W. V. et aequatione O. Quine, Wordand Object(Cambridge, dis et comparatione (Diss. phil. Halle xix. 3 Mass. 1960). 1912) hasmuchof the evidence.

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

S. R. F. PRICE emperorand god are sometimessimply collocated ('TiberiusClaudiusCaesarSebastos andAgrippina Sebaste Germanicus ZeusSaviour DemeterKarpophoros [Harvest-bringer]');56 Caesar are neos Hadrian new Dionysos sometimes ('new'):('Emperor they separated by Trajan Themostcommonassimilation fortheevidence (to give thefigures Olympios Panhellenios').57 andZeus(26), thoughtwelveof theinstances fromAsiaMinor)wasbetweenthe emperor are for Hadrian alone.Next in frequency were assimilations with Helios (12) and Dionysos(8). to femaledeities,especially Hera(18),Aphrodite wereassimilated (1) andDemeter Empresses of assimilating anddeitylooksvery odd to our eyes. We mightbe The practice emperor think it that the wasanincarnation of thedeityin question, to that but implies emperor tempted is a concept which only becomesimportantwith the birth of Christ.58Our incarnation arisebecause we cannotsee how the collocation of two names(e.g. 'Tiberius' difficulties and a relationship betweentwo separate 'Zeus')establishes beings.'Zeus'is of coursein someways namefor anindividual the familiar to seethatit can anthropomorphic deity,but it is important asa predicate alsooperate to a of divine to certain referring type power(apoint whichwe shall If section 'Zeus' can thus like becomes it to understand the return, operate theos, III). possible of Zeusto the emperor's addition nameas the predication of divinepowerof him. of suchpredications, Therange whichalsoseemsconfusing, is comprehensible in thelightof of Greekreligion.First,at the most generallevel, therewas the the three-foldstructures of the Olympian whichwasrecognized Theposition of Zeus hierarchy pantheon by all Greeks. at theheadof thispantheon wasso frequently assimilated to him;an explains why theemperor in thecaseof Hadrian additional reason washisclosecontact with Zeusthrough hiscompletion of the templeof Zeusin Athens.Secondly,at the level of individual cities,a particular deity local and festivals cults than he or she held at the through might acquire greater importance Panhellenic level.Thisexplains Forexample, it wasnatural to manyof the otherassimilations. assimilate theemperor to ApolloandAsklepios in theirsanctuaries on Cos.59Thirdly, thereis a small categoryof unique assimilations which were made in responseto particular local circumstances butwhichdidnot relate to a localcult.Forexample, Hadrian wasonceassimilated to Zeus Kynegesios (Zeusof Hunting)as a resultof his exploitsin a bearhunt in Mysia.60 of thissortalsoreflect a feature Assimilations of Greek It wasalways to respond religion. possible to peculiar eventsby postulating an intervention the by appropriate deity. If assimilations theuseof thenexttermtheos temptus to thinkof the Incarnation, epiphanes recallsthe Epiphany-God made manifest in the world. Hellenistic kings from PtolemyV onwards usedEpiphan~s as partof theirofficial IV of Syriacombining it with titles,Antiochus theos too wasoftendescribed astheos in the or, form, (n. 12). The emperor epiphanes superlative as epiphanestatos of the gods'. For example,a statuebase referred to theon,'most epiphanes Claudius as'Tiberius Claudius Caesar Sebastos Germanicus theos saviour of our epiphanFs, people Marcus Aurelius andCommodus werehonoured as'Emperor Marcus Aurelius too'.61 Similarly Antoninus of landandsea,andEmperor master Commodus theon theon Caesar, epiphanestatos,
epiphanestatos,master of land and sea'.62 Scholars have often seen epiphanes as 'a peculiarly
56 A. Maiuri, Nuova silloge epigrafica di Rodi e Cos (Florence 1925) no. 468. 57 SEG xv 530 (Chios). 58 A. D. Nock, JHS xlviii (1928) 30-8 =Essays on

86

(5).

8V &ov, pOU rowrqpa KatL trofvl 7LEE 'ApvEarTv-q Kal d 8nOS eEuqTE4UV 7rat9 9ovAn% 7Tp1-[aLS TELtaLS].

For a poet as 'new Homer' see A. E. Raubitschek,Hesp. xxiii (I954) 317-19 and I.Side 107. 59 Hist. Zeits. xxix (1921-2) 217 n. I (Apollo); AA 1903 193, IGR iv Io53, io6i (Asklepios). 60 L. Robert, BCH cii (1978) 437-52=SEG xxvii 809. 61 TAM ii 760c (Arneae): TL3E'ptov KAav'SLov Kalaapa ZEfaar6v rFptzavLKo'v,OEO E'7rtbav-/,

Religion and the Ancient World (Oxford 1972) 144-52.

cannot detect any significant differencesbetween them (cf. LSJ s.vv.). 62 C. H. E. Haspels, The Highlands of Phrygia O Ewv EcavE'rarov, y~^ KaL AlpCAto[v] 'AV-WVE-Vov, pa Kd4LoSov OaAduaar7s 3Ecr7Tro'rV, Kat arTOKpa7Opa
Kalaapa,

Also e.g. IGR iii 68o= TAM ii 420 (Patara), IGR iv 986 (Samos). I discuss 4ukav7I and Errt'avis together as I

(Princeton 1971) 333 no. 93:

av'roKpd'-ropa

Mi(pKov)

Also e.g. IGR iii 704 iii. 14-16 (Cyaneae), 8Eca7rrrqv. SEG xvi 758 (Derbe), IGR iv 341 (Pergamum).

rjvOvO

i vqavEar'uarov, Yi v

OaAdaa&rs

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

87 and term',63bothin thecontextof thecultof thetraditional religious godsandof theemperor, 'manifest' and as translate as not But is a they epiphanes epiphaneia 'manifestation'. epiphanes term;it hasa broadrangeof usesin purelysecular contexts, whereit canbest uniquely religious not as 'manifest' be translated but as 'distinguished' or 'prominent'. For example,countless weresetup 'inthemostprominent' or sanctuary; to partof a square people belonged inscriptions most while could refer to the sudden 'the distinguished' family;64 (epiphanestatos) epiphaneia of the enemyin battle.65 was thusa word with a convenient widthof 'appearance' Epiphanes and which could refer to both divine non-divine.66 meaning Ourpreoccupation with theproblem of God'spresence in theworldleadsusto imagine that in was useful the of the of the solving problem presence physical 'epiphanes' particularly emperor in contrast with the godswho weregenerally not visibleto humaneyes.One mightthinkthat in theprovinces, theos wasa response to thevisiblepresence of theemperor butit could epiphanes who nevervisitedtheGreek be usedof anemperor world(n.61).Alternatively, onemightthink that the use of the superlative was a way of handlingthe visiblepresence of the emperor in was Rome;unlikethetraditional only fromtimeto time,the emperor gods,who weremanifest of the gods'.But thisideais refuted the fact that the traditional 'themostmanifest by godstoo as were often described not only as theos but also ton Theos theon.67 epiphanes epiphanestatos be and in therefore seems to to the the the same applied emperor gods way. epiphan-s is in dangerof blindingus to the fact that the earthly Our Christianizing perspective of the emperor for the Greeks. Afterall, the physical of presence posedno problem appearance the traditional was For a AD at gods alwayspossible. example, second-century priestess Didyma asked theoraclethereforadvice because shewasworried fromthetimethatI tookupthe 'since, the godshaveneverappeared so much,both in the formsof girlsand priesthood, (epiphaneis) womenandalsoin the formsof men andchildren'.68Theseappearances whichso worriedthe were a of taken to be divine An favour. decreeof the same priestess normally sign Ephesian claims that the of Artemis was 'because of the clear period worship extremelywidespread that were made her' The notion of was thus forthe (n. 28). epiphaneiai by epiphaneia appropriate andaccession. Theassembly of theprovince of Asiastated that'thebirthday emperor's birthday of the god (sc.Augustus) markedfor the world the beginningof good tidingsthroughhis accession wasdescribed in similar terms: 'Whenthe announcement coming'.69 The emperor's wasmadeof the ruleof GaiusCaesar Germanicus which had beenhopedandprayed Sebastos, forby allpeople,therewasno limitto theworld's joy; everypeoplehasbeeneagerforthesight of the god, sincethe happiest era for mankindhas now begun.'v7The predication of theos that the in was the world like one of the traditional epiphan-s implied emperor present gods. The mortality of the ruler,like his physical presence, might seemto be another problem whichneeded solution. EversinceHomerthegodshadbeenathanatoi Thegodsdid ('deathless'). not die;the emperor did.In facttherewasno realdifficulty, asathanatos couldbe applied to the in various was of the individual A Greek civic emperor ways.Immortality predicated emperor.
63

GODS AND EMPERORS

47wL KdOULWL 296-7 and M. Le Glay, BCH c (1976) 353, 365. See 69 Sherk (n. 23) 65, lines 4o-1: "pEV F. Pfister, REsuppl. iv (1924) 277-323 andE. -rcv SLt'ai-rov EvavyEMA[wv 7 yEva'Atos generally 7,]E'Ipa 70) was not often used explicitly. For Pax, RAC v (1962) 832-909. 'Epiphaneia' 0evo. 64 Syll.3 796 B IO;IGR iii 628 = TAM ii 288. which lacks religious overtones, imperialvisits epidemia, 65 LSJs.v. ZErtodkvEta. was more frequent. Cf also parousia (L. Robert, 66 Nock (n. Hellenica xiii (1965) 129-31). 58) 38-41I=Essays 152-6. 67 F. mit Steinleitner, Die Beichtim Zusammenhange 70 IGR iv 251 = I.Assos 26: 7 Ka7r EvX7lV racLtv der sakralenRechtspflege in der Antike (Leipzig 1913) advOpnots 'AmrtTLOEiGa Falov ELt Kalaapos rFEptavLKoO von Pergamon 3E viii. 3 no. IoI. 15-21; Altertiimer Lovta 7pOV EflaaUrov 7'yEp oE V SE 68 Ka7'r/vyEA7aL, I.Didyma 496 with L. Robert, Hellenica xi-xii xap~s Evp7KE 0 ua KaG rV "Ovo 7rLSo ia 8 r K6 KcOS, 701) UEO 0 o lv7OTO 7rV OvLv ECYTrEvKEV, cs av 701T (1960) 543-6: wrTEL, 'r7E77"r lEparvf lavI dVrE''Aq)Ev,ETL vt EavE-lsL' 'TrLcrrdcrEwV ws OLg ol atcwvos vvv var~70ro, ... Cf. IGR iv orV7 avOpor7rots o08Vror7 yEyEv7v-rat, iv 8td TrapOEvwO Kal yuvaLKOV, II02, a datingformula. -70ror70 7L TOLOUrTO 7T 70ro70 8E Kat St' dppEVWV Ka Vr7pWoWV,

Mellor (n. 13) 14; similarlyWeinstock(n. 38)

Kat El E7TL altiLo;

Cf. POxy

1381 (2nd cent. AD).

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

88 S. R. F. PRICE an emperormakinga benefaction 'so that the greatness of his immortality decreedescribes shouldbe in thismattertoo the more splendid',71 andthe emperor's rulewas alsosaidto be The emphasis on imperial ruleoffered an easytransition immortal.72 to the immortality of the A on of the emperorscollectively. priesthood Cypruswas devoted to 'The Immortality in and Liviawas praised Sebastoi';73 in a decreebecause 'shecreated the raceof the Sebastoi with the most sacred succession of the epiphaneis accordance and theoi,a houseincorruptible of epiphanFs theaddition to theos The assimilation to particular immortal for all time'.74 deities, alltended to strengthen theprimary of theos of the andtheuseof athanatos predication emperor. The termsused to describethe cult expressmore hesitation about the positionof the The cultcouldbe described as isotheoi a phrase whichis not easyto translate.75 timai, emperor. butalsoof divinecult,forwhichthere wasusednot onlyin secular 'Timai'('honours') contexts, Greek of thegods'is thus,forwhatit is worth,thenearest wasno specific Greek word;'thetimai An isotheos was one to the and timai can to 'religion'.76 thus (isos) gods' isotheoi 'equal equivalent as'honours to thosepaidto thegods'.Ashasoftenbeenobserved, be paraphrased the equivalent from the cult of the timai and ruler cult both were Isotheoi gods.77 compares distinguishes phrase from them.The emperor modelledon the cult of the traditional gods but were distinguished his honours were to those to the traditional couldbe called theos; given gods,butthey equivalent were not the same. whichis whattheimperial cultwasdesigned to express, the Eusebeia againclassifies ('piety'), Some have with but here too nuances scholars to the the attempted deny emerge. emperor gods, of the conceptin the imperial were viewedas civic existence cult;'theprovincial priesthoods a display of piety'.78 suitable forthewealthyandambitious butin no sense Ambition duties and andcommunities were of courseimportant, but they do not rivalryon the partof individuals undermine of eusebeia as the virtuewhichwas displayed in the cults.Imperial the significance for and others were towards the Sebastoi;79 one priests regularly praised havingdisplayed piety localbenefactor who performed sacrifices and in his built native imperial imperial temples city andin theprovincial made'notonly the city butalsotherestof theprovince witnessto capital his piety towards the god' (sc.Augustus).80 The display of eusebeia was even enshrined in the oath of loyalty taken by the islandof Cyprusat the accession of Tiberius: 'We and our will heed and obey by landand seaandwill regardwith loyalty (euno-sein) descendants and revere(sebasesthai, theverbal formof eusebeia) Tiberius sonof Sebastos, Caesar withall Sebastos, his house'.sl
71 IGR iv I45= Syll.3 798 (Cyzicus): 'rrEL' vios 78 G. W. Bowersock, in Culte des souverains (n. 14) 6 182-4. "HAWLos KaLtap F&ibs ZEflaar rpptavLK3l a a'ya Kat rd~ 0opvo'dpovs atc aLS avvavaAd 79 E.g. IGR 473 (Balbura);IGR iv 98 (Mytilene); 18ratl~ a 'va aivro- 7ro IGRiii 493 iii A IGRiv 1155 Pa(LA7a, S7)YEEPovlaS-qOEA7uEV (Oenoanda); (Sandaina); 1972 626 (Side); IGR iii 1507 (Termessus Ann.Ep. IE'yaAECov &Oavauaas KatL v ro7T'WL rotEpvd-rEpoV "rTS... Cf the reference by a Romangovernorto the minor). 80 IG xii suppl. 124. 25-6 (Eresus):oi pdo'vov immortality of Livia (I.Ephesos i a 17.65). 7r[dv ' Av K 7-dV] [Ao]l'Tav 7rapXav pap-rvpa 72 IGR iv 144= SEG iv 707 (Cyzicus). See generally 'ALVd &A[A& H. U. Instinsky, 'Kaiser und Ewigkeit',Hermes rag EldTo OoVElvaE[PEla]s. lxxvii 7rroIPvos Cf.alsoIGRiv (1942) 313-55. ii 236. I6o8c=I.Ephesos vii.2 3801 ii; I.Ephesos 73 SEG xvii 750o. 81JRS 1 (1960) 75-9=SEG xviii 578=P. HerrKaisereid 74 SEG xxviii 1227 (Tlos): avvEorap-E'vi 8U Kal mann, Der riimische (G6ttingen 1968) 124 no. OEWV 5: avTo[L TE KatL Ot KyOVOL 7lLcWbV y'vos KarT LEEPwTa-rrV E/a3arjwv 6taroXqv KaTa TE y7V Kat Ka-a lvTTaKOcEYoaL ErL avov oKov qOaprov Ka avarov E' Tv dE TrELOaPX'rGcELV 8aAar77r[av

Xpovov.

Ath. Mitt. lxxvii (1962) 306-27. Note also the impor(procuratorof Augustus). de la pens&e tance of asebeia('impiety') to the emperor: Thasosii 76J. Rudhardt, Notions fondamentales religieuse ... (Geneva 1958) 57; Habicht (n. 3) 211-12. I85 = SEG xviii 350;Reynolds (n. 44) no. 62; Hist. Zeits. 222 n. 2 (Cos). The oaths of Paphlagonia 77 So too Is-Olympic games were modelled on (isos) xxix (1921-2) the traditionalgames at Olympia, down to the detailsof (n. 88) and Assos (n. 70) call only for the subjects to eunoiseinthe emperor. organisation, but they were not held at Olympia.

I.Side iol = Ann. Ep. 1966 462 (Pompey) and IG v.I 435

75 Nilsson (n. 3) ii 14-1;

Habicht (n. 3) 196. Also

vacat Ttf'ptov Kat'aapa E;VOVEvE crEac,(E)e>Oat ~EPfaaro^ EfEaaUdrv abv TBL anTtav'L av70ov vov OLtKWL. Cf: S. Weinstock, 'Treueid und Kaiserkult',

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

GODS AND EMPERORS 89 a significant The useof eusebeia choiceof terms.Eunoia('loyalty') waswhatlocal represents citizens towards their own communities. It was also sometimes called for in oathsof displayed was to the but a not used of to local emperor, eusebeia allegiance allegiance strongerterm, The of the distinction communities. importance betweenthesetermsis well illustrated by the honoursawardedto a man on Samos'for his eusebeia towardsthe Foundress Hera,Caesar son of Germanicus Germanicus andhishouse'andalsofor 'theeunoia Sebastos and (i.e. Gaius) he munificent which showed to the and its association of elders disposition' city (gerousia).82 was a conceptwhichhelpedto definethe religious domainof the Greeks, Eusebeia remaining down to theendof antiquity.83 The display of pietyto thegodsthrough theregular important of cult secureda stable order; it was even responsible for specific divine performance to the emperoremphasized that the subjects interventions.84The displayof eusebeia were the on the as on emperor gods. dependent with honours not strictly The city of Cyzicus was,however,compatible Eusebeia divine.85 a decree towards Sebastos and towards eusebeia (theemperor Gaius) honours 'concerning passed theemperor divinehonours in contrast thekings'andwe mightexpectthatthedecree offered to the decree thosegivento hisclientkings.Infactthiswasnot thecase.Theritual for prescribed by thevisitof theclientkings(andtheirmother) to thecitywasprayers andpriestesses by thepriests andthesafetyof the at thetemples of thegods'onbehalfof theeternal duration of theemperor raises theemperor abovehisclientkings,but theprayers wereto thegods The formula kings'.86 did not raisethe emperor to a parwith the gods.Thecomplex on hisbehalf.The city'seusebeia andgodswhichis implicit in thetermisotheoi is anddifferentiation of emperor timai comparison in the termwhichsumsup the aim of the imperial cult. alsopresent is thataddressed to theemperor in whichI wishto consider (ii)Thesecond typeof language in person.87They addressed theemperor thecults.I leaveto one sidethewaysin whichsubjects in the earlyempire, arepoorlydocumented thoughit is clearthatthe termswhichwe havejust in Rome. Therethe emperor was treated as citizen,not as were unacceptable been discussing in like In the forms of address the theindividual the rituals, however, god. provinces, employed termsdiscussed a complexrelationship betweenthe emperorand the gods. above, establish fall into threemaincategories: andprayers. Theseformsof address oaths,praise to the emperor wereswornin thenamesof the (a)Oathspromising loyaltyandobedience of the oath to Tiberius and the For (n. 81)was'inthe nameof gods emperor. example, Cypriot local of 'and ourAkraia other the island the descendant of Aphrodite Sebastos Aphrodite', gods theos Caesar andthe eternal Here is invoked but another Roma'. oath, Augustus posthumously, takenwhenPaphlagonia wasincorporated into theRomanempire(3 Bc), calledupontheliving and Sebastos himself'.88 is. 'Zeus,Earth,Sun, all the gods and goddesses emperor: Augustus at the end of the witnesses to the oath and from the of and placed distinguished sequence gods
85 E wasalsoshownto familyandfriends: Dio IGR iv 981: Ev'oElEaS Eusebeia gpV [EVIEKEV 77"S [ELS9[TIE ' Or. Ka xxxi 12-15; Ath. Mitt. lxxv (1960) 162, no. 60; r-iv [dpxrlYryE'w "HpaV KalaoapaFEpptavLKO3 UvL'V ?E/ KaG7rv OLKOv aTO, EvvolaS Syll.3 I 107; IG ii2 1275. rEptzavLKOV 86 IGR iv 145= Syll.3 798: 84% Kat LtAoo'dovaauov StLaOE'uEWS Els 7riV 7ralpuS Kaat riv ElaaauOat /Zv -rEp "77~ yEpovalav. Cf. Milet i.3 134. Fa"tov Kaluapos alvoov 8tatov'q9 Kal rovo7WV 83 Rudhardt (n. 76) I1-17; D. Kaufmann-Biihler, cwrvplias. RAC vi (1966) 985-o1052; Burkert (n. 2) 408-12. A new 87 Note that 'MenanderRhetor' ends his recommenterm threskeia, also meaning 'piety', but with a more dations for a speech to the emperor by stressing the specifically religious connotation, appeared in the importance of prayersto the gods for the emperor (ed. Roman period (L. Robert, Etudes epigraphiqueset D. A. Russell, N. G. Wilson [Oxford 1981] 92). 8 8 IGR iii 137= OGIS 532= ILS 8781 = StudiaPonphilologiques [Paris 1938] 226-35; Hellenica ii [1946] 132-3) and is attested twice of the emperor: Sherk (n. ticaiii 66: Ala, Jr7v, 'HAtOV, Ka OEobV 'rcadvra[9S OtCvow,

82

23) no. 65 lines 25 and B 5; REG xix (1906) ioo no. 14. 84

See the texts on the aid of Hekateand Zeus to

Stratonicea: I.Stratonikeia i 10, 14, 20; ii.I 512, 1101 (with L. Robert, EtudesAnatoliennes[Paris 1937] 29,
516-23).

KalcrapL?EZacrUcLL Ka

7Ta]Uas

Kat

aG -rv

r'y

?E aU[T]'v

Ao']ywL Xpo'vov avoi0 av[-r]a [3lov] roi, K,[a ... EpyWL [7--]v yv [K]at KaL, C[L]

7O

EVvOrj[cELV

7[E'K]VOLS yydO'[VOLS TE]

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

S. R. F. PRICE afterall,theoathexpressed asreigning Another goddesses; loyaltyto Augustus emperor. wayof of in the the oaths of was to swear loyalty handling logicaldifficulty invoking emperor by the Fortune(tyche) of the emperor.This was one of the demandsmade of the Christians. For whenPolycarp, wasbroughtbeforethe governor, he wasordered example, bishopof Smyrna, to repent andsay'Awaywiththe Atheists'.89 to swearby theFortune of theemperor, Polycarp but could in good conscience to compromise his Christian was not prepared say principles, wasunacceptably Forhim the Fortune of theemperor butthe pagan, 'Awaywith the Atheists'. termdid not imply the divinityof the emperor. like oath-taking, did not (b) The offeringof praiseto the emperorat imperialfestivals, but it was modelled the of the on the emperor, clearly praise givento imply divinity necessarily are the celebrations of of the festivals involved. at the the gods.Two different actual First, parts the A whose task was to rituals therewerehigh-ranking officials praise emperor. choir specific in of Asia honour of andotherofficials the established Augustus90 province sang hymns by in honoured the at the the verse.91 In emperor imperial temples praised emperor prosetheologoi for theirnameto serveas the of Pergamum andSmyrna.92 They were sufficiently important in theprovincial thesebastologos, who served cultof Gaius atMiletus.93 modelfora new official, The offeringof ritualpraiseto the emperor hassporadic in the praiseaccorded to precursors butbehind thisliesthecultof thegods.Thetitlesof theimperial Hellenistic officials can rulers,94 in divinecultsand the singingof hymnswas important all be paralleled in manytraditional and on the cult of cults.95 both was the Praising kings emperors calqued gods. not only in athleticsand music, but also in Secondly,festivalsincludedcompetitions, encomia. We hearof one Coanwho 'in all the most distinguished citiesof Asiawon imperial in of encomia to the founder the the Sebastos Caesar and benefactors Tiberius competitions city and Germanicus Caesar and all theirhouseand to all the othergods in eachcity'.96 Caesar in praising in proseandversewerewidespread theemperor in theGreek Contests world,bothat festivalsin honour of the emperor and as part of the festivalsof traditionalgods.97 the encomia themselves do not survive,but thesecompetitions do meritour Unfortunately in attention. a are set context. Not were some of the held Againthey religious only competitions at festivalsof the gods, but there were also, from the first centuryBC onwards,similar in honourof the gods themselves, a development which may be due to the competitions increased attributed in to the cult The importance hymns proper.98 religiouscontextis also in the of the text honour of the who recited notjust in encomia Coan, emphasized by wording honourof Augustus andhisfamily,butalsofor 'alltheothergodsin eachcity'.Bothritual and of the emperor locatedhim in the companyof the gods. competitive praise likepraise, havedivineresonances, but it is muchharder to establish eitherthe (c) Prayers, 90
R. Knopf,G. Krfiger, G. Ruhbach, Ausgewahlte r7iS roadAos Ka'uapa Ka'7T ZEflaaurov r E'EpyE'ras 3-4. 7TV 1965) (Tiibingen Mdirtyrerakten4 TEPiE'pov Kat'apa KaL Kcuap'KaLtFEppraVLKtv jAov OtKOV 9V E[KauTraLS 90 I.Ephesos i a 17.56-61; IGR iv 353: pLVcpOL arC7V Kav [Ea r 0EOl) OA]AoS 7rT
89

the god Hadrian' (CtEAo7roLoto KaLG Ga/p8o0o OEol) 'ASpLavol^): BCH ix (1885) 124-8=I.Ephesos i a 22. 3-4, 63-4.
92 L. Ziehen, RE v A (1934) 203 I-3; L. Robert, RPh xvii3 (I943) I84-6.
210. 94

andreciterof poemsfor i a 27. 457-8, 533;'composer

OEaS KaL Eflaaurov ra9 Trro'a] tP4rLp.in Ephesos 91 Thesmodoi: ii 27= I.Ephesos Forschungen "laOpta.
97

0EOS'~

"7 KaL

HavaOlvara

J. Frei, De certaminibusthymelicis (Diss. Bile 1900) 34-41; Robert, Etudes (n. 83) 21-30. Add Ann.Ep. 1974 Corinth viii. I 14.87 602 andSEGxxix 452 (Thespiae);

93 IDidyma 148 with L. Robert, Hellenicavii (1949)

205 (paeanto Antiochus); IG vii 417.68 I.Erythrae (for the Romans at Oropus). 95 Nilsson (n. 3) ii 377-8 I. 96 Robert, Etudes(n. 83) 23, who notes that the text needs republishing:[vLK]d aavra [YK] [yK oLsp [iv] rairLTav T 'AlAtas 0da 7as rA E E "V KT E7rtarL7LOrras o

Note also the 189 line 22 (Athens, fragmentary). epideicticspeechesdeliveredby Aelius Aristidesat meetingsof the provincial (Orr.xxiii, xxvii, assembly xxviii, xxxiv K). 98 L. Robert, Hellenica xi-xii E.g. ApolloatDidyma: given to the Romansactedas a spur.

(1966) 743; Hesp. xxxix (1970) 79-83= Ann.Ep. 1969-70 587 withJ. and L. Robert, REG lxxxiv (1971) 434 no. 307 (Caesarea,Corinth); Hesp. suppl. xii (1967)

and 19.1-3, 5-7; viii.3 153with L. Robert,REGlxxix

(1960) 446-9. Robert suggests that the praise earlier

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

GODS AND EMPERORS

91

facts or the correct perspective on them. It is generally accepted that no one prayed to the emperor for his aid in sickness or shipwreck.99 I want to argue that personal prayers were indeed made to the emperor, both living and dead, and that prayers had a prominent place in the ideology of the imperial cult. But first it is necessary to question the Christianizing presuppositions with which scholars usually approach the subject. Two opposing conclusions have been drawn from the alleged absence of prayers to the emperor: first, that the imperial cult was essentially political and not religious; secondly, that the imperial cult was of a higher spiritual type than the contemporary religions because the emperor was not bound by the mechanical and demeaning contract of the do ut des.100 Both conclusions depend on the assumption that personal prayers are a fundamental aspect of true religion.1'1 This assumption is peculiar to Christianity. Within the Christian tradition prayers are of fundamental importance. The New Catholic Encyclopedia(xi 672) describes them as 'a necessary means of salvation'. Heiler's classic comparative study of prayer is firmly rooted in this tradition. Setting out to 'write a history of religion by writing a history of prayer' he started by claiming that 'religious people, students of religion, theologians of all creeds and tendencies, agree in thinking that prayer is the central phenomenon of religion, the very hearthstone of piety. Faith is, in Luther's judgement, "prayer and nothing but prayer".'102 The ranking of different types of prayer, which lies behind the positive evaluation of the alleged absence of prayer to the

In the wordsagainof theNew Catholic of Christianity. is alsoa concern emperor, Encyclopaedia (xi 667), 'the commonesttype (of personalprayer)is the petitionaryprayer,which, in accordance with primitive man'schildlike is concerned almostexclusively with his selfishness, own material not But are a universal characteristic of For prayers well-being'. personal religions. who in the of the live the southern is based Dinka, Sudan, example, religious system chieflyon collective to seea Dinkaprayindividually. On occasions of difficulty or danger 'Itis rare prayer. he mayaddress a shortpetition forhelpto Divinityor divinities, butmuchthegreater andmore 03 of collective and formal." There no is is more reasonto important part religious practice the criterion of than Dinka to Greek to privateprayer apply religion. in theimperial cultmustbe analysed fromthepointof view bothof practice andof Prayers controversial are prayers theory. The aspectsof practicewhich are particularly by private andthe votive offerings individuals madeas the resultof successful The prayers.104 emperor of thesevotive offerings, receiveda scattering of whichthe clearest examplereads:
Hadrian andthepeoplethevotive (euchin) wassetupby Salmon To Emperor Caesar Sebastos Trajan son of Theon,priestof Zeusand sacrificer for the Sebastoi, alongwith his wife, at a cost of 200 denarii.105

an imperial dedicated a votiveto the emperor Commodus.106Boththese Similarly procurator

a number of exceptions to 'Religious mentality in ancient prayer', in Faith, hope (1934)481. He latercollected his rule: 'Deificationand Julian',JRS xlvii (1957) andworship, ed. Versnel (Leiden 198I) 1-64 acceptsthat 'it is possible to describea phenomenology of prayerin (n. 58) 833-46. S15-23= Essays 100 W. denBoer,'Heerserscultus en ex-voto'sin het general' (p. 3). Romeinse Keizerrijk',Mededelingen der Koninklijke 103 G. Lienhardt, Divinity and experience(Oxford Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letter- 1961) 219. 104 Votives were made only by individuals; B. kundexxxvi.4 (1973); he repeated thecasein Entr. Hardt xxvi (1980)36-41. Kotting, RAC ix (1976) Io69-70 gives the exceptions. 101 Therehasbeena similarly 105 SEG ii 718 (?Pednelissus): misconceived discusA-TOKpiTropl sionaboutmiracles. KaL 7 Manyhavefelt thattheirextreme KaiaapL Tpaiav6tL 'A8pLavZL?XEaal- is crucial andJulian' Z0 rV E'X7VZcdA/tZwv AZILS (Nock, 'Deification KaL rarity [n. 99]), 8Lt e[E']ovoS?LEpElN AltertumswissenKEV thoughS. Morenz(WiirzburgerJb.f.d. rrpoOir7Tqs ?Efl]arjOv YeEVO/LEVOS [aviTrl] aV'v -7[CZv 6. iv [1949-50]370-8) attempted to useone miracle YUVaLKL (qrlvdpLa) schaft to show thatthe imperial cult was not an emptyshell. MAMA 106 i 23 (LaodiceaCombusta), See also IGR But it is arbitrary and ethnocentric to use the 'royal iv 363 (Pergamum, 7ri'q E"rr70jKoo of emperor); touch' as the criterionof significance; the practiceis MAMA vi 370 (Synnada)is perhapsa votive jointly to in France foundalmostexclusively andEngland andfor Zeus and the emperor; Denk. st.Ak.Wiss. lxxv.I historical reasons. peculiar (1952) 40 no. 78 (Claudiopolis, Antinous); IGR iv 93 viii (1932)517-18; CAHx 99 A. D. Nock, Gnomon
102

F. Heiler, Prayer(trans.1932) xiii. H. S. Versnel,

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

S. R. F. PRICE 92 votiveswere madeto the livingemperor, but literary textsalsoreferto the practice of private of the column dedicated to Caesar to the dead Suetonius talks the ritual at in emperor. prayers the forumat Rome:'at this for a long time they usedto sacrifice, undertake vows andsettle it is said,people Constantinople, disputes by swearing by Caesar'.107So too in fifth-century it with seton a column,honoured withsacrifices andlamps theimageof Constantine propitiated not be in our evaluation to a Votives must incense anduttered as of privileged prayers god.l08 not the imperial after votives were made to all deities the all, cult; equally.Asklepios, healing Zeus'positionat the headof the god, receivedfar morethanZeus,but he did not challenge But on this,admittedly scalethe imperial cult doesnot appear absurd. partial, pantheon.l09 also formed an of the of ruler cult. The important part Prayers publicexpectations poets thattheemperor bothlivinganddeadcouldbe called assumed on in prayer. 110Horace, looking forwardto the return of Augustusfrom Spain, describesthe peacefulness of Italy: the countryman returns hisvineyard) andinvites to hiscups asa godatthe (from joyfully yourpresence (Augustus) a prayer, second hepliesyouwithmany withpure fromthecups, winepoured andmixes course; with household in the like Greece her of Castor and your divinity gods, memory mighty Hercules."' the theoryof prayer Ovid alsoelaborates to the emperor. exileon the Writingfrommiserable BlackSeaafterthe deathof Augustus he carefully his that virtues, proclaims stressing hispiety was known to the locals. Theforeign sees that there isashrine of Caesar inourhouse. There stand beside himhispious country sonand wife and deities asimportant ashimwhohas nowbeen agod. made priestly (Tiberius Livia), Tomake thehousehold of thegrandsons both stand onenextto theside of his there, complete, group onenextto hisfather. When I always thedayrises from theEast offer to them grandmother, prayers andincense.112 At theendof thepoemis a prayer to Augustus, who wasamongthestars; thehopewasthatthe deceased whichthe living Augustus hadgiven.This mightmitigatethe punishment Augustus of even involved a of denial the of to otherpeople. publicexpectation prayers legitimacy prayers The SageApollonius of Tyanawas allegedlybroughtto trialbeforethe emperorDomitian because peoplehadcalledhim a god andprayedto him.113
to ZeusandAugustus, but history:A. Supp.980-2, Eupolis,Demoi(fr. 117 K), (Mytilene) may be a prayer the text is uncertain (IG xii suppl.p. 23); IG iv 584 Xenophon of Ephesusi 12. SimilarlyPrudentius, (Argos),votive ? to Titus;PSI 1261, a privateletter looking back from a Christianperspectiveat the from Egypt (212-17), talksof the 'fortune' (rixrl) of the beginningof the fifth century,assumed that prayers emperor saving someone, presumablyfollowing a formed a part of the rulercult: c. Symm.i 245-8, 271-7. "1 Odesiv 5: prayer. hinc ad vina reditlaetuset alteris 107 Div. Jul. 85: 'apudeam (sc.columnam) longo vota suscipere, controversias te mensisadhibetdeum; temporesacrificare, quasdam interposito iure iurandodistrahere te multaprece,te prosequitur mero per Caesarem defusopateris et Laribus tuum perseveravit (sc.plebs).' 108Philostorgius, Castoris (Diegriechischen miscetnumen,uti Graecia Kirchengeschichte christlichenSchriftstellerxxi3 [1981] 28 no. 17). S. et memor Herculis. magni Cf. ex Pont.iv 9: Weinstock, RE xxiii (1957) 824-5 on propitius. 112 Epist. 109Cf the disparity betweenthenumbers ofvotives nec pietasignotamea est:videt hospitaterra for Apollo and Dionysos(Z. Tashlkhollu, in nostrasacrum Caesaris Anadolu'da essedomo. stantpariter sacerdos, Apollon kiilt'il ile ilgili Kaynaklar[Istanbul 1963]; W. natusque piusconiunxque numinaiam factonon levioradeo. Quandt, De Bacchoab Alexandriaetatein Asia Minore culto [Diss. phil. Halle xxi.2 1913]) or in the usage of neu desitparsulladomus,statuterque nepotum, hic aviaelateriproximus, ille patris. epekoos (0. Weinreich, 'OEOIEHHKOOI',Ath.Mitt. his ego do totienscum tureprecantia xxxvii [1912] i-68=Ausgewidhlte Schrifteni [Amsterverba, dam 1969] 131-95). Eoo quotiens surgitab orbedies. 110 V. G. i 40-2, Aen. i 286-90. Cf earlierPlut. Dion See also the earlierTrist. iii 8. I3-14 and v 2. 43-78. to theapotheosized Romulus. 29; hymn and prayerto DemetriosPoliorcetes (Ath. Livyi 16 talksof prayers to Antiochos 253e);andtheJewishresponse 299 Kayser), 7 (p. 3Io). Epiphanes 113 Philostr.VA viii 5 (P-. (Jud.iii 8; Dan. vi 6-14). Such prayershad a long

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

GODS AND EMPERORS

93

Panegyrics also played upon the importance of prayers to the emperor. A second-century panegyric of Rome talks in elevated terms about how everyone, at the mere mention of the emperor's name, stands up and 'praises and worships him and utters a two-fold prayer, one on the ruler's behalf to the gods and one to the ruler himself about his own matters'.114 Two fourth-century speeches elaborate the idea of prayer to the ruler himself. A speech idealizing the late emperor Julian, written perhaps two years after his death in 363, includes a striking account of prayers to him: I have mentioned representations (ofJulian);many cities have set him beside the images of the gods and honoured him as they do the gods. Already people have requested some benefits of him in prayer,and it was not in vain. To such an extent has he literallyascendedto the gods and received a shareof their power from them themselves.They were right, then, those people who nearlystoned to death the first messenger to bring news of his end for telling lies about a god."5 A generation later (in 389) another panegyric generalizes the importance of these prayers: (The emperor)shouldbe such as is adoredby the peoples, to whom privateand public vows aremade by the whole world, from whom the future sailorseeksa calm sea, the future travellera safereturn, the future fighter good omens.116 The ideal ruler was the recipient of world-wide prayers.

III Theos was predicated quite commonly of the Roman emperor (as earlier of Hellenistic kings). It was added to the name of the emperor and on its own it could refer to a specific emperor. Both uses were in keeping with the contemporary usage in connection with the traditional gods. The predication of theoswas matched by other linguistic practices: the emperor was assimilated to particular named deities; he was described as epiphanis or epiphanestatostin thein; the cults themselves were designed to express eusebeiatowards the emperor. The whole linguistic system of which theos forms a part has to be interpreted primarily as the application of traditional Greek categories; theos has a different meaning from the Latin divus. The predication of theos does, however, remain puzzling to our eyes. We might wonder whether theoscould be used of the emperor because it was a weak term in contrast with Christian

114 Aristides, Or. xxvi (K) 32 (with commentsof Ka TO 7TpV TOV ayEAOV 7T9 7TEAEVhT7S9 LLKpO) r (oEOl) Trans.Amer.Philos. KaTaAevEoav-TES Nock, 'DeiJ. H. Oliver, TheRulingPower, KaTa~UEv8dLevov. ~ Soc. xliii. 4 [Philadelphia fication and Julian' (n. 99) argued for Christian S e' 1953] 918): oUSeLs TOVbPOVEL, but my otherparallels show influence on this passage, avrCw rTOaVOpa aKovuaag "r'qALKOa OrLS oLto thatthisis not a necessary , AA assumption. Kat U/VELl arTpElPE TarL ILOvov 71 ..avaarao~ 116 Panegyr. aJ3EL Ka 8L7TA-v T7jV 1L1VlYTTEp Lat.xii 6.4 (Bud6):'talemesse debere aUVEUXETaL EV2X7V, Se aVTC0 EKELVW TCV vel 70 adoratur, cuitotoorbeterrarum GeOL9S, 7T7 7TEPL a;Vov 1 quigentibus privata a quo petit navigaturus serpublicavota redduntur, eavroV3. I assume the double prayer to be more than the changeof preposition in the two enum,peregrinaturus significant reditum, pugnaturus auspicium.' limbs. The speech dates to AD I43: R. Klein, Die Some scholarsbelieve that languageof this sort is a rhetorical found Romrede des Aelius Aristides (Darmstadt 1981) 77. merelymetaphorical, commonplace 115 Libanius, Or. xviii 304: in Pliny,Pan.iv 4. I do not believethatthe distinction ELKVWV rrL iTWV 7TO'AELS TOLS between the literaland the metaphorical 7ToAAaL iKELVOV is clear or OECWV iLvpvOjqv, 0S TL useful;still less do I acceptthat only the 'literal'is Kal7 <Vs OQE03S 7Tapar7)oavre qLIOUaL, TEs~Ev 70" w A more helpfulposition,which I cannot Kat7rap'~ 80~ EUXS. 7) 7L -WV a8rI KE'VOU VyaO E significant. is T~ aTE7XVS0 EKELVOVUS KatOK oEV. or here, 7Tap' argue presentedby D. Sperber,Rethinking 7'TVX c 77 -WV ~ 7Tap' Symbolism K K KpELt7dVWV 8UVVaIEWS (Cambridge cva3EflrlE Kat I975). TO pa iijav oL aV-rT-v EKELVWV 3flEATtOroL ET)ELATrlSE.

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

S. R. F. PRICE 94 with predicates, usesof 'God'-while the Greeks Christians havein 'God'the playedaround name of the In fact this of Greek Being. Supreme Christianizing logicallyproper denigration on examination of is based an itself. inadequate Christianity Theologiansand religion onwards have that is from 'God' a recognized descriptive, predicable philosophers Aquinas to understand how Christians andpagans can talkto one term.117 It is otherwise impossible Thepagan who saysthathisidolis GodandtheChristian who contradicts himmustbe another. if in same 'God' were a would it be 'God' the sense; logicallyimpossible, propername, using it of lumpsof stone.ThispointaboutChristian rather thanmerelywicked,to predicate usage of were able to theos Greek the Church how of to early predicate theologians helps explain Thusbothpagan humans who werebroughtnearto God,bothin thislife andin the next.118 term. use theos/God as a predicative andChristians Greeks thetraditional Thepredication of theos the within religious system.He was placed emperor but not fullythe equalof the gods.The locatedin an ambivalent position,higherthanmortals which the cult displayed as isotheoi and the eusebeia was cult he receivedwas described timai, from be to conclude this that the with honours not divine. We fully might tempted compatible cults to a Christian saints receive elaborate without was the saint; usurping emperor analogous Roman doesnothold.According to theofficial Catholic honours dueto God.Infacttheanalogy as intermediaries for us with God. do not themselves receive our saints act They prayers, position with God on our behalf.119 But the emperor did not hold this but areinvokedas intercessors with the gods.He wasbothin needof divinesupport andalsogod-like. positionof intercessor I in of the cited there was a to the of one above, two-foldprayer, Thus, panegyrics godson behalf himself. Thisclearly the emperor andto the emperor the ambivalence of theimperial expresses cult. of theos Wastheapplication to theemperor a consequence of theanthropomorphism of the If in Greek the are conceived human it is not to of the difficult conceive form, surely gods gods? as a god. Yet thismodernemphasis on anthropomorphism is misguided. The Greek emperor were not were at most like them in and this gods actually people; they people picturing waywas one for them Homer's who are often merely (dominant) strategy making comprehensible. gods, seenasabsolutely more in have fearsome elements their also anthropomorphic,120 makeup.121 thehuman formsof divinestatues, a product of theepictradition, did Similarly partly obviously not encapsulate the whole truthaboutthe Greekgods.122'The Greekgods arepowers,not to the problemsof organizing and classifying these persons. Religiousthoughtis a response I have in that order to understand the Greek of the cult powers.'123 argued language imperial we

117 Aquinas, Summa Theologiae Ia 13. 9-10o; P. D. Stone, The Invocationof Saints2 (London/N.Y./ Geach, God andthe soul (London 1969) 57-8, io8; also Bombay 19o9). 120 P. Chantraine, La notiondu divin depuisHombre M. Durrant, Thelogical statusof'God' (London 1973) ch. Entr.Hardt humain Platon, i (1954)60:'L'aspect I. Note the debate in the early church inspired by the jusqu'd challenge of Arius: R. D. Williams, 'The logic of des dieux est un traitessentiel. L'anthropomorphisme Arianism',JThS xxxiv (1983) 56-81, esp. 81 (though desdieuxn'estpasseulement il estfondamenplastique, note the very differentemphasisin R. C. Gregg, D. E. tal.' 121 j. Griffin,Homeron life and death(Oxford 1980) Groh, Early Arianism-a view of salvation [London

G. W. Butterworth, 'The deification of man in 122 R. L. Gordon, 'The real and the imaginary: Clement ofAlexandria',JThS xvii (1915-16) 157-69;J. production andreligionin the Graeco-Roman world', Gross, La divinisationdu chritiend'apresles paresgrecs Art Historyii (1979) 5-34123 J. P. Vernant, Myth andthought (Paris 1938). Note also the Indians'predication of deva amongthe Greeks ('god') of their kings:J. Gonda, AncientIndiankingship (London 1983) 328. Cf. Rudhardt (n. 76) 55-III, and et from the religious point of view (Leiden 1966) 24-33. 'Considerationssur le polyth isme', Revuedetheologie xii (1967) de philosophie xvi3 (1966) 353-64, = Du mythe, de la 119 C. O'Neill, New CatholicEncyclopedia et de la comprehension de l'autrui(Geneva 962-3. Anglicans, for whom the practice of invocation religion grecque was proscribed by one of the 39 Articles, tend to be 198I)71-82. Fora helpful on surveyof otherliterature unhappy and ignorant about the invocation of saints. the namingof gods see B. Gladigow,RAC xi (1981) Note the interesting Anglican controversy reflected in 1202-38.

1981]). 118

ch. 5.

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

GODS AND EMPERORS

95

must have a clear notion of traditionalGreek religious terminology. A Greek maxim makes explicit an important aspect of the traditional system and shows how in consequence the emperor could be incorporatedwithin it: What is a god? The exercise of power. What is a king? God-like.124

S. R. F. PRICE
Hall, Oxford LadyMargaret
124 Philol. lxxx (1924-5) 339 with RhM cxii (1969)

48-53.
T]LOCEdS; "r[] KpaTOiy"71 auLem[s; l']deoosr a t I quote these two maxims from a longer list of maxims

preservedon a second-centuryADpapyrus,but the ideas they express were commonplace. Cf. Artemidorus, Oneirocr. ii 36, 69, with F. J. D61lger, Antike und iii (1932) 128-31. Christentum

This content downloaded on Sun, 27 Jan 2013 14:44:02 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions