Version classiqueVersion mobile
OpenEdition Books

Regionalism in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor

 | 
Hugh Elton
, 
Gary Reger

Girdled by Hills: Culture and Religion in Phrygia Outside the Polis

Barbara Levick

Texte intégral

  • 1 Haspels 1971, 1.187; MAMA, 6, 23 l. 4; Gibson 1978a, 34, no 15.
  • 2 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990,1914.
  • 3 Abrams & Wrigley 1978; Finley 1981a; Rich & Wallace-Hadrill 1991.
  • 4 Drew-Bear & Eck 1976.

1Parasitism has been a model for relations between city and hinterland, with population sometimes touchingly modest1, known from materials that need scholarly apology2. That model has been revised3. It does not do justice to what poleis, especially religious or assize centers, contributed, in protection or culturally and economically. Chorae beyond polis territory were exploited; Araguan coloni are victims (OGI, 519). Profits might be siphoned off to distant magnates or, like those from Phrygian marble, to the Fiscus4.

2Rethinking favors the line taken here, the divisive polis as a wrinkle on the surface of a society held in a matrix of interrelated and finely graded protective ties, largely religious, that made for prosperity, stability, and so security from interference from above. Some ties linked this matrix with neighboring regions, while elements distinctly Phrygian, such as language, were available when required.

3Geography and history were against the polis in Phrygia. Originally and ideally sovereign, it was organized to deal with the “other”, politically, often militarily; Pausanias admits of the Panopeans that “their territory has boundary stones with its neighbors and they send delegates to the Phokian assembly” (Paus. 10.4.1). Sovereigns keeping residual control were less appropriate as founders than gods or heroes safely dead; even with emperors poleis enjoyed diplomatic relations.

  • 5 Drew-Bear 1978, 50, no 26; MAMA, 5, 87.

4This does not mean that villages lacked individuality. Men made dedications for themselves and family and on behalf of a whole community, simply referred to as “the village”; near Nakoleia a sculptor set up a statue of “Concord of the villages”, sure sign of trouble, and villages also formed associations5. But they were less well-equipped for external relations and liable to have quarrelsome heads knocked together by superior authority.

  • 6 Waelkens 1986, 42-44.
  • 7 MAMA, 9, xx.

5On the bridge between Europe and Asia, Phrygia is itself no unity. There are contrasts between the west and E. Haspels’s eastern highlands, but the transitions are not marked by sharp boundaries like those of Pisidia; the uplands form a rolling series. The map of Phrygia, with its central core and outlying regions, is hard to draw, politically and culturally too: doorstones and the cult of Mên pass far beyond6. Strabo (12.4.4) blamed the difficulty in determining its northwest boundaries on the precariousness of the hold that early conquerors had on it; that reflected geographical facts. Under the Empire most of the area belonged to the conventus of Sardeis or Apameia; there were still links with Bithynia7. Northward connexions follow rivers like the Tembris that drain into the Black Sea; the Gediz ridge sends its streams south and west to join the Hermos. Further south the Maiandros links Phrygia with Karia. In the east, Kybele’s shrine at Pessinous fell among Tolistobogians (Strabo 12.5.3).

  • 8 Naval Intelligence Division 1942-1943, 2.552, 566, 581, 586.

6The few considerable modern cities8 go back to antiquity. The north is noticeably short of towns outside Kütahya and those tiny by comparison. These also have ancient origins. The area then supported others, notably Aizanoi, but a block of territory in northern Phrygia could show far fewer than equivalent areas round Sardeis or Alabanda. Main roads and sea-coast made some difference. Best placed were Dorylaion in the north and Apameia Kelainai in the south., the trading center on Strabo’s east-west highway (14.2.29); Kotiaieion was on the Ankyra-Sardeis route, much of the rest was on back roads.

  • 9 Drew-Bear 1978, 79, no 11; Robert 1965, 188; Texier 1839-1849, 1.96; Naval Intelligence Division 1 (...)

7Geography leads us to expect the cellular development that S. Mitchell predicates of Christianity, and also modest prosperity, tryphe9. But there is a warning: Aizanoi got its name from inedible animals, fox and hedgehog, exis and ouanous, sacrificed in a famine to daemones when gods failed to respond (Steph. Byz., s. v. Aizanoi).

  • 10 Von Aulock 1980-1987, 1.13-39.
  • 11 Hom., Il., 2, 862; 3, 185-187; 10, 431; 16, 717-719.
  • 12 Accius, Trag., 569.

8As to history10, Phrygia had been under monarchs in the eighth century and Homer’s horsy warriors11 were conquered by effete Lydians and Persians. The Greeks said that “any Phrygian is the better for a good beating”, and the Romans knew them for softies12. Only suzerain-friendly poleis were to be expected; Alexander found vici, not urbes: (Curt. 3.1.11-12). Any features in common with an Athens or a Miletos were due to an imposed blueprint or conscious imitation; communities that put in petitions such as Orkistos’s to Constantine were keen on status and freedom from supervision (MAMA, 7, 305).

  • 13 OGI, 445-446; Dessau, ILS, 37.

9The origins of Phrygian poleis are varied: ancient markets or the adjuncts of religious centers, founded or refounded by monarchs. Kelainai went from strength to strength as Apameia, its assize activities illuminated by Dio Chrysostom. In the North, Bithynian and Pergamene kings rewarded Macedonian mercenaries with land; cities came late13.

  • 14 Naumann 1979; MAMA, 9, xxxiii-xxxv.
  • 15 Str. 12, p. 577; Lane 1971-1978; Levick 1967, 85-87.

10Aizanoi is an example of a religious center and associated market developing into a town(ship) which finally acquired polis status, perhaps early in the reign of Augustus (MAMA, 9, 13; Dessau, ILS, 9463). The Steunene Mother emblematically left her cave upriver for the cavernous cellar under the city temple of her son Zeus14. In Paroreia, where Mên’s hill-top shrine attracted pilgrims and dealers, rulers took land for colonists15. Seleucid Antioch was equipped with a Roman identity, and urbanism reinforced. This cult remained outside the city, its finances managed by a colonial official.

  • 16 Head 1911, 663; Burnett, Amandry, and Ripollès 1992, 1.498.
  • 17 Foss 1985, 1.13, 111, n. 6.

11Overall, urbanization remained weak. One sign is the issuing of coins. Some score of communities sporadically struck in the second and first centuries BC; there is a slight rise in the first century of the Principate and a nearly threefold increase under the Empire. But the blank in north Phrygia under the early Principate is noticeable, though issues were not confined to poleis16. The weakness was demonstrated in the Byzantine age. A ninth century Persian geographer says of Asia Minor that “cities have become few;... To each village appertains a castle in which... they may take shelter”. In north Phrygia there were two options: permanent retreat to a hill-top site, as at Ankyra, and contraction of the city, as at Aizanoi, where the late eleventh or early twelfth century fortifications made the temple peribolos the wall of the hisar that still forms part of its present name. “Aizanoi” survived as a sixteenth century official district name: Sazanos. The cities functioned as refuges and markets17.

  • 18 IGR, 4, 552.

12Phrygia remained more famous than most of its cities. Delegates from Meiros to the oracle of Klarian Apollo had their names inscribed on Apollo’s temple wall, or the priests did, as being “from Phrygia”. Some towns are so obscure that no site has produced distinctly civic monuments to identify it. It was the elders of the Goleni who, under a man of impeccably Greek name, set up a basis to Hadrian in their katoikia on the territory of Ankyra18.

  • 19 Paus. 8.4.3; 10.32.3; Steph. Byz. s. v. Azanoi.
  • 20 Sherk 1969, 65.

13One test was Panhellenion membership, achieved by Aizanoi alone, with her claims to Arkadian origin19. Was the Panhellenion a club that Groucho Marx would have wished to join? Eminent absentees have been noticed. Athens’ glory was perhaps too great for Ephesian stomachs, but Aizanoi was lucky to belong. How Aizanoi got its name was probably a joke against it that circulated in Panhellenion clubrooms. And when we say Aizanoi was lucky we are talking in the first place of elite families involved in Panhellenion politics. It had been the same with her membership of the koinon: a member of a long-standing family of rank was secretary as early as 9 BC20.

  • 21 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2005 n. 364; Gibson 1978a, 67-70.
  • 22 Mitchell 1993, 1.189.

14A low level of city development in a productive hinterland does not favor the “parasite” city. It should also be self-sustaining: the countryside enjoyed a higher proportion of what it produced. The quantity of epigraphic material in Phrygia suggests that there was money to spare for more than the bare necessities, employment for masons outside cities as well as within21. Relatively little went on city monuments and institutions, statues to benefactors, from polis or individuals. Votives and gravestones dominate22, the first reminders to gods and men of duty done on both sides, the second, as the prevalent phrase “mnemes charin” shows, guaranteeing survival in the memory of others.

  • 23 Haspels 1971, 1.73-111; Akurgal 1978, 274-276.

15Aizanoi was a partial exception, with numerous civic inscriptions, and in the second century the city center was redeveloped and the Temple of Zeus constructed after a Hadrianic crackdown on landholders who had ceased paying rent. But the spin-off was a school of sculptors who provided individuals with doorstones decorated with motifs commonly taken from the temple23.

  • 24 Waelkens 1986, 205; MAMA, 9, 335; Akurgal 1978, 274-276; MAMA, 9, 313, 336, 411, 420, 422, 428; Wa (...)

16The distinctive type with keyhole and lock, developed at Aizanoi for well-to-do citizens and echoing with its gable Greek temples and the rock-cut monuments of Phrygia, reached outlying northern districts, where they were imitated, and the eastern border with the upper Tembris Valley. The Valley in turn had its own workshops, producing a monument with a distinctively shaped gable, fitting C. Roueché’s claim that in some areas, specifically Phrygia, there was no decline in Anatolian prosperity in the third century. Other types occur in the southwest, as well as in the middle Hermos valley24.

17Such concern for the dead meant preoccupation with their livelihood. East of Aizanoi agricultural tools occur: the plough (MAMA, 9, 430) and pruning hook (MAMA, 9, 363, 391, 437). These, with horses, are Upper Tembris favorites. But they appear on stones with styluses, tablets, and scrolls (MAMA, 10, 5, 34, 155). Women’s gravestones display mirror, comb, perfume jar, wool basket, spindle, distaff. The man is literate, the woman has time and money for herself (MAMA, 10, 2, 148, 155, 219). These elaborate monuments suggest surplus and leisure.

  • 25 Gibson 1978a, 80, no 29; Petrie 1906; Ramsay 1895-1897, 124, no 6” Kotiaieion; “sophos”: Peek 1955 (...)
  • 26 Drew-Bear 1978, 24; Haspels 1971, 313-314, no 40; Gibson 1978a, 94; Lane Fox 1986, 404.
  • 27 Drew-Bear 1978, 67, no 2; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1929, no 5; Drew-Bear 1978, 12-13; no 6; Gibson (...)
  • 28 MAMA, 7, xxvii-xxix; Gibson 1978a, 96, n. 15.

18Calling the dead “panmousos” or “metochos paedeias25 confirms what sculpture tells. Formulaic hexameters are rich in Homeric reminiscence, and a man is commemorated for skill in “pneumatikais graphais” and the verse of Homer26. Opportunities were fewer in the country, but the ideal was the same. The claim to Achaian origin asserted at Eumeneia was taken over by country folk. Regardless of the Iliad, the religious association of a katoikia outside Akmoneia speaks of itself as “dignified Achaian”. These people, self-consciously Greek, like koinon members, are comfortable with themselves and with Greek, though it displayed changes leading to modern Greek, and oral usage affected written. Doubt about their identity, Phrygians or Greeks, would surprise them: they were both27. Self-consciousness also shows in the preservation of languages. Some have held that Phrygian, revived in third-century inscriptions, had lived on in speech. But its use for the curse formula shows that it was felt effective in one matter where Greek could not do the job so well. That does not suggest that it was in use in kitchen or bedroom all the time28, rather that it was special.

  • 29 Snodgrass 1991, 17.
  • 30 Krzyżanowska 1970, Tab. 1.
  • 31 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2006-2008; MAMA, 5, 7.
  • 32 Mitchell 1993, 2.28.

19The prime stereotype about Phrygians concerned religiosity (Apol., Flor., 4). Of course, “communal state cults stood at the very heart of the polis”29, but Phrygian religion, apart from its dominance at Aizanoi and Antioch30, was potent outside civic structures. Shaping those cults of the countryside was concern for livelihood. Behind the omnipresent ox-heads T. Drew-Bear and C. Naour saw a working yoke of oxen; if the ox, when it has a fillet, is leading actor in a sacrifice, that too involves what is treasured31. Unlike the warrior gods of Pisidia, such as Ares32, Phrygian deities belong, as S. Mitchell points out, to a settled, cultivated region. They form a protective matrix, physical, moral, and so political.

  • 33 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1919; Gibson 1978b, 234; Körte 1900, 421. Theos Hypsistos; Drew-Bear & Nao (...)
  • 34 Drew-Bear et al. 1990, 1913-1914, Bronton’s bennos: 1998, no 20. Tembris Bronton: 2001-2004.
  • 35 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1987, no 19, Ben(n) os: 1955-57, 1990-91; Şahin 1978, 2.783; Şahin 1986, 1 (...)

20Any “Zeus” is a friend of crops: “Drench the earth, so that it may weigh heavy with fruit and blossom in ears of grain; these things I... beseech you, Zeus son of Kronos, performing pleasing sacrifices round your altars”33. Zeus Bronton the thunderer probably originated round Dorylaion and Nakoleia, and his popularity in N. Phrygia is a mark of its cultural unity. On the Upper Tembris Bennios is the corresponding deity, although Bronton is still about and could possess the mysterious bennos of his neighbor.34 Bennios serves a number of purposes: in the same dedication he is to protect the Severan dynasty and the local village’s crops. His epithet gave a name to the benneitai, devotees consciously united in cult. His appeal is shown by a stele of AD 79. Vespasian’s freedman, security officer for the region’s imperial estates, along with his wife, offered it, with a prayer for the rulers and his own family, to Zeus Bennios of his native land of the Agrosteis and of Zbourea, and to his hereditary deities. He is a native, holding a responsible position35. Length, careful execution, intended distinctiveness single out these from run-of-the-mill dedications. Yet Helios shares origin and cult with the local peasants.

  • 36 Drew-Bear 1978, 29-31; Lane 1971-1978, 3.72; Mitchell 1993, 2.24-25; Cults 249, no 3; Haspels 1971 (...)

21Mên in various aspects, appropriately Ouranios, had a kindred appeal, and other deities with manifestly protective functions: Sozon, protector par excellence, and the Meteres, attached to genitives, or with geographical names. Deities already versatile had powers reinforced by association, Mên and Demeter a potent combination36.

  • 37 Gibson 1978a, 76, no 28.
  • 38 Cults 260-61, no 15; Drew-Bear 1978, 66, no 1; J. and L. Robert, “Bull. épig.”, 1953, 129.
  • 39 Mitchell 1993, 2.46; Sheppard 1980-1981, 84, n. 39 (ban).
  • 40 Drew-Bear 1978, 38, no 3; 40-41, no 6-8.

22Phrygian gods play a direct role in what in the Eumenides is claimed for the city. Gods protect the (righteous) worshiper or chastise offences: perjury, compounding theft or another offence against the divinity. As S. Mitchell remarks, they keep up law, order, and morality, the Phrygian sophrosyne 37. Hence they protect social cohesion and village autonomy. At Eumeneia a worshiper offers a stele to Apollo “before the gate”, Propylaios, while undergoing chastisement, kolazomenos37. Such confessions go particularly well with the north and central Phrygian deities Holy and Just, with their scales and measuring rod38. Divine instructions on confession inscriptions bring home the directness of the relation between offence and punishment; internalized guilt is close. The angeloi who convey divine judgments must also be significant to those low in stratified societies, enough for orthodoxy to condemn their worship39. But gods like Holy and Just are not let off their daily tasks: they are for crops as well as moral matters, and Holy may be addressed alongside Bronton40.

  • 41 Cults 251f, no 8f.; Drew-Bear 1978, 32, no 1; 45, no 17; 47f. no 23-25; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 20 (...)

23Like gravestones, votives show geography and need imposing on the life of the area, not only through decoration but in the deities involved. Epithets attached to Olympians like Zeus are rich and significant, some conventionally Greek, Soter or Megistos, others, Pap(i) as, protector of oxen, virtually confined to Phrygia; others are topographical. Conversely, the same epithet links distinct personalities: both Zeus and Apollo are found as Alsenos, Zeus at Nakoleia, Akmoneia, and in central Phrygia, Apollo on the territory of Akmoneia41.

  • 42 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1944, 1971 n. 225; Haspels 1971, 1.110-11; Mitchell 1993, 2.18-22.
  • 43 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1914; Tuğru 1966, 183-518, no 17-22; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1949-1951.

24Whether there “were” only a few basic figures, an agricultural or sky-god, an “Anatolian mother goddess”, of which each Mother was a manifestation42, depends on how she was seen at any moment; for immediate concerns the question would not arise: Yahweh’s Christian descendant often goes into battle on opposing sides. Dedications to a single god with different epithets, Zeus Soter and Bennios, appear at one shrine, carved by the same sculptor. At one shrine among the Appoleni, Zeus Alsenos is also “Wanderer of the mountains” and “Petarenos”. Zeus in three forms is addressed on a matter concerning an ox, while Zeus Karpodotes of Amorion clinches his status, as Megistos Soter Olympian43.

25This is another example of gradation and transition. Multiple names enable the deity to share the prestige and Greekness of Zeus, while he is also plugged in to a community’s special interests, especially through a local epithet. If that epithet also belongs to another deity, he can draw on characteristic powers. The result is wider coverage, reinforced effectiveness, and the preservation of local interests, a network of divine agencies providing comprehensive service.

  • 44 Cults 248; Mitchell, Anatolia 2.50.
  • 45 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2037, n. 497; Robert 1969-1990, 1.417; Robert 1962, 387 n. 2; Mitchell 199 (...)
  • 46 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2039-2040, no 33.
  • 47 Mitchell 1993, 2.43; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2033, n. 483; Mitchell 1993, 2.35, cf. 49; Drew-Bear (...)

26The abstract Theos Hypsistos, “Most High God”44, never depicted, is taken like Holy and Just to represent a tendency towards more purified concepts, connected with a renewed attempt to integrate the Olympians into a system under one guiding principle45. Near Aizanoi a man fulfilled a vow to Theos Hypsistos because he came to the end of “all his sufferings thanks to the pity” of the god; T. Drew-Bear and C. Naour justly draw attention to this Christian idea in association with a deity with monotheistic tendencies46. There may also be direct Jewish influence. S. Mitchell has drawn attention to the closeness of Judaism in its moral aspect to the religiosity of pagan Phrygia. The Most High is important at Akmoneia, where there was a strong Jewish community, but he too is found with Zeus and Holy and Just, shown with corn ears, and has to look after oxen like other gods. The deity’s function is precisely his supremacy, his vantage point.47

27In the countryside Judaism and Christianity blend into the background.

  • 48 Mitchell 1993, 2.35 with n. 202; Waelkens 1986, 230, 270, 258; MAMA, 9, 420, 430, 550b.

28Menorah on quarry walls defiantly display the identity of Jewish prisoners-of-war. Yet some Jewish grave monuments are recognizable only from nomenclature48. Not surprisingly, for Jews were also planted as settled allotment-holders.

  • 49 Ramsay 1895-1897, 2.532.
  • 50 MAMA, 5, xxxiii; 4, xi; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2008 n. 386.

29The problems of identifying Christian monuments are significant. A well-off person at Eumeneia made a heroon for himself and his family and Theodotos, the greengrocer. Admission of that outsider was taken by W. M. Ramsay for a sign49. The vine and the crater naturally figure on altars dedicated to Bronton, protector of crops, but when they were found on a Byzantine capital from near Synnada they were ascribed Christian significance and used for similar interpretations of other monuments. But Christians were reinterpreting symbols originally pagan50.

30On the other hand, the “Christians for Christians” series of grave monuments from the Upper Tembris, stretching from the mid-third century into the fourth, display confidence, difference, and exclusivity. In fact there are thought to have been more Christians than pagans in the Valley before the end of the third century.

  • 51 MAMA, 10, 181-2, no 13, 22-23; Waelkens 1996, 366, 372-375.

31Further west, round Kadoi, the deceased holds consecrated bread, a hot cross bun. In his left hand he has a bunch of grapes, symbolizing the wine. The stalk of the grapes may end in a cross; another gravestone is avowedly the work of Christians51. Here was a community confident enough to declare itself by the late second century. The material comes from the countryside rather than from city sites, recalling Pliny’s claim (Ep., 10.96.9) that in Pontus the contagion had spread to vici and agri and all levels of society.

  • 52 Foss 1985, 125.
  • 53 Roueché 1989, 90-93.

32This Phrygia, necessarily rustic and variegated, religious and reasonable, is suspiciously close to the stereotype of Plato’s Phrygian mode players (Rep., 399A). But even if the Phrygians did not read Plato, they seem to have ingested the model of sophrosyne. And there are sharper contrasts and conflicts. Unlike the Tembris Valley, the Aizaneitis has no early recognizably Christian gravestone, and few from the fourth century (MAMA, 9, 552, 560). This has less to do with town and country opposition than with the vitality of paganism, orchestrated from the temple of Zeus. C. Foss52 attributed the decline of Aizanoi to the triumph of Christianity; as C. Roueché shows for Aphrodisias, the matter was not so clean-cut53.

  • 54 Lane Fox 1986, 404-418; Gibson 1978, 125-37.

33North Phrygian Christian inscriptions are a little earlier than those of the Montanist heresy of “The New Prophecy”, “prevalent among the Phrygians”, (Euseb., Hist. eccl., 5.14-19) which continue from the first into the second quarter of the third century. The records from Temenothyrai pass, perhaps after orthodox persecution, to Akmoneia. From the third century to the sixth Montanists appear in territories, “crawling like poisonous reptiles over Phrygia and Asia”. But R. Lane Fox’s more sympathetic probe finds the “grave, puritanical ethic” well suited to the mood of the Phrygian villages54.

34The ministry stressed communication between individuals and the Holy Spirit. Rigorous, ecstatic in some sense, millenarian, it ruffles ideas of untroubled rusticity and rouses speculation about social tensions. Montanism’s New Jerusalem, the “insignificant” Pepuza, was chosen perhaps because it was insignificant, potentially an ideal city. Angels had long conveyed messages to individual pagans. Now the Paraclete, not subject to earthly authority, gave the devout their own route to salvation.

  • 55 Mitchell 1993, 2.40; Strobel 1980, “pagan” view.

35There is no need to admit the charge that Montanos was a former priest of Cybele; even without pagan input55, Montanism reached parts that orthodoxy failed to reach, outbidding it and so assuaging moral scruples and fears for livelihood. Sectarian status rivalry does not demonstrate social tensions, and Montanism raked in shekels from all classes. In this perspective, even the excesses of Cybele’s cult itself might be fitted into the scheme as the extreme of asceticism.

Notes

1 Haspels 1971, 1.187; MAMA, 6, 23 l. 4; Gibson 1978a, 34, no 15.

2 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990,1914.

3 Abrams & Wrigley 1978; Finley 1981a; Rich & Wallace-Hadrill 1991.

4 Drew-Bear & Eck 1976.

5 Drew-Bear 1978, 50, no 26; MAMA, 5, 87.

6 Waelkens 1986, 42-44.

7 MAMA, 9, xx.

8 Naval Intelligence Division 1942-1943, 2.552, 566, 581, 586.

9 Drew-Bear 1978, 79, no 11; Robert 1965, 188; Texier 1839-1849, 1.96; Naval Intelligence Division 1942-1943, esp. 2.13-176.

10 Von Aulock 1980-1987, 1.13-39.

11 Hom., Il., 2, 862; 3, 185-187; 10, 431; 16, 717-719.

12 Accius, Trag., 569.

13 OGI, 445-446; Dessau, ILS, 37.

14 Naumann 1979; MAMA, 9, xxxiii-xxxv.

15 Str. 12, p. 577; Lane 1971-1978; Levick 1967, 85-87.

16 Head 1911, 663; Burnett, Amandry, and Ripollès 1992, 1.498.

17 Foss 1985, 1.13, 111, n. 6.

18 IGR, 4, 552.

19 Paus. 8.4.3; 10.32.3; Steph. Byz. s. v. Azanoi.

20 Sherk 1969, 65.

21 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2005 n. 364; Gibson 1978a, 67-70.

22 Mitchell 1993, 1.189.

23 Haspels 1971, 1.73-111; Akurgal 1978, 274-276.

24 Waelkens 1986, 205; MAMA, 9, 335; Akurgal 1978, 274-276; MAMA, 9, 313, 336, 411, 420, 422, 428; Waelkens 1986, 89; Roueché 1981, 117.

25 Gibson 1978a, 80, no 29; Petrie 1906; Ramsay 1895-1897, 124, no 6” Kotiaieion; “sophos”: Peek 1955, 1016.

26 Drew-Bear 1978, 24; Haspels 1971, 313-314, no 40; Gibson 1978a, 94; Lane Fox 1986, 404.

27 Drew-Bear 1978, 67, no 2; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1929, no 5; Drew-Bear 1978, 12-13; no 6; Gibson 1978a, 97.

28 MAMA, 7, xxvii-xxix; Gibson 1978a, 96, n. 15.

29 Snodgrass 1991, 17.

30 Krzyżanowska 1970, Tab. 1.

31 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2006-2008; MAMA, 5, 7.

32 Mitchell 1993, 2.28.

33 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1919; Gibson 1978b, 234; Körte 1900, 421. Theos Hypsistos; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1914, 2037, 1992-1993.

34 Drew-Bear et al. 1990, 1913-1914, Bronton’s bennos: 1998, no 20. Tembris Bronton: 2001-2004.

35 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1987, no 19, Ben(n) os: 1955-57, 1990-91; Şahin 1978, 2.783; Şahin 1986, 135; MAMA, 10, 157; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1967, no 15-16.

36 Drew-Bear 1978, 29-31; Lane 1971-1978, 3.72; Mitchell 1993, 2.24-25; Cults 249, no 3; Haspels 1971, 1.199-200; 42, no 10; Lane 1971-1978, 1.164-74; 3.81-2.

37 Gibson 1978a, 76, no 28.

38 Cults 260-61, no 15; Drew-Bear 1978, 66, no 1; J. and L. Robert, “Bull. épig.”, 1953, 129.

39 Mitchell 1993, 2.46; Sheppard 1980-1981, 84, n. 39 (ban).

40 Drew-Bear 1978, 38, no 3; 40-41, no 6-8.

41 Cults 251f, no 8f.; Drew-Bear 1978, 32, no 1; 45, no 17; 47f. no 23-25; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2014-2018; Mitchell 1993, 2.23; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2018-2022, n. 428; Mitchell 1993, 2.23-4; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2022-2026; 1915-1931, no 1-5; 1933-1934, no 7; Cults 250-251, no 4.

42 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1944, 1971 n. 225; Haspels 1971, 1.110-11; Mitchell 1993, 2.18-22.

43 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1914; Tuğru 1966, 183-518, no 17-22; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 1949-1951.

44 Cults 248; Mitchell, Anatolia 2.50.

45 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2037, n. 497; Robert 1969-1990, 1.417; Robert 1962, 387 n. 2; Mitchell 1993, 2.43-4.

46 Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2039-2040, no 33.

47 Mitchell 1993, 2.43; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2033, n. 483; Mitchell 1993, 2.35, cf. 49; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2036-2038; MAMA, 5, 212.

48 Mitchell 1993, 2.35 with n. 202; Waelkens 1986, 230, 270, 258; MAMA, 9, 420, 430, 550b.

49 Ramsay 1895-1897, 2.532.

50 MAMA, 5, xxxiii; 4, xi; Drew-Bear & Naour 1990, 2008 n. 386.

51 MAMA, 10, 181-2, no 13, 22-23; Waelkens 1996, 366, 372-375.

52 Foss 1985, 125.

53 Roueché 1989, 90-93.

54 Lane Fox 1986, 404-418; Gibson 1978, 125-37.

55 Mitchell 1993, 2.40; Strobel 1980, “pagan” view.

Auteur

Fellow and Tutor Emeritus, St Hilda’s College, Oxford

© Ausonius Éditions, 2007

Conditions d’utilisation : http://www.openedition.org/6540