1It is now important to note that incubation rituals had a basic, common structure. First, there was a preparatory ritual, which included (amongst other things) purifications and sacrifices, seemingly to prepare the worshipper for meeting the deity and opening up communication with the divine. Secondly, there is the nexus of the incubation rituals: the ritual sleep in the temenos during which the worshipper hoped for an epiphany of the god, a private epiphany where the worshipper him- or herself could communicate directly with the deity. After incubation, having obtained what was requested, there were rites of thanksgiving.

2In this chapter, I will critically analyse models previously used in order to understand the structure and function of incubation rituals, and then I move on to a broader analysis of their structure and function. Earlier approaches have focused on the technical aspects of incubation rites, that is, the manner in which they were enacted. Technical aspects of the animal sacrifice were used to define separate categories, such as whether or not the sacrificial animal was eaten, which parts were burnt, the colour of the chosen animal, whether its blood was poured on the ground or into a bowl, what sorts of libations accompanied the sacrifice, etc.

3In theoretical discussions on Greek religious rites, sacrifice is often the defining aspect when rites are categorized as belonging to the Olympian or Chthonian spheres, and also when rites are categorized as either common/calendrical rites or unusual rites. These unusual rites (‘Heilige Handlungen’ or ‘powerful’ rites) deviated from the common rites in terms of their technicalities.1

4My approach here involves studying the technical aspects of incubation rites and comparing these with the technicalities of other rites performed by worshippers in the same sanctuary. I then explore the social contexts inside the sanctuaries where incubation rites were enacted. Did incubants perform rites together with their families, with other incubants, or as individuals? This is necessary in order to broaden our understanding of the function and meaning of incubation rituals to the practitioners. Factors other than ritual enactment that pertain to the structure and function of incubation rituals, as well as the experience of the incubant, will also be discussed. An important presupposition made here is that a ritual constructed to contact a deity in a one-time crisis situation differs from rituals enacted for the maintaining good standing with the gods.

2.1. Previous theoretical approaches to incubation rituals

2.1.1. Chthonian and Olympian rites

5In previous works, the following have been cited as proof of the Chthonian nature of the ritual (s). First, there is an inscription from Epidauros of the third century BC that relates a holokautesis (complete burning of the sacrifice) to a god. Secondly, there is Strabo’s account that incubants sacrificed a black ram (the verb enagizein is used, denoting the complete destruction of the animal). Thirdly, wineless libations like those described in the cult of Asklepios in Piraeus and Hemithea at Kastabos may be evidence of a Chthonian ritual pattern. Fourthly, it has been argued that the presence of pre-sacrifices of cakes to Hermes in the Asklepieion at Piraeus and cakes to Zeus Meilichios in the Asklepieion at Pergamon are proof of a Chthonian connotation, since both these gods were Chthonian (the Hermes who healed being a Chthonian aspect of Hermes). Finally, the general presence of water in incubation purifications and healings can be interpreted as evidence of the Chthonian nature of incubation.

6In relation to the first point made above, Riethmüller, in his study of Asklepieia, sees elements of the original hero-cult of Asklepios in the so-called bothroi found in his sanctuaries; these bothroi were pits into which blood sacrifices, enagismata, according to the Chthonian model were offered.2 He refers to the so-called Thymele at Epidauros and argues that in front of it, after the blood sacrifice, the rite of holokautesis (the sacrifice and complete burning of animals) was performed, while the blood of the animal was libated in the Thymele.3

7A holokautesis, according to scholars who follow the Olympian-Chthonian distinction, was a typically Chthonian rite.4 In support of holokautesis being performed in Epidauros, Riethmüller refers to an Epidaurian inscription that mentions a holokautesis to a god, τῶι θεῶι.5 Martin and Metzger have also argued that the Chthonian element of the cult of Asklepios is evidenced by this holokautesis to a god.6 This inscription has been the subject of some debate, both in terms of which god (τῶι θεῶι) the holokautesis was directed at and also what is really meant by a holokautesis in this context.7 The underlying presupposition is that there was a Chthonian hero aspect to Asklepios, and this was preserved in the cult after Asklepios had become a god and was receiving worship in the Olympian style.

8In her discussion of the terminology of sacrifices made in hero cults, Ekroth concludes that there is nothing Chthonian about the way Greeks sacrificed to their heroes, the majority of the sacrifices being thysiai.8 Hence, a single holokautesis (to a god!) does not prove that the rituals of the cult of Asklepios were Chthonian. Ekroth further convincingly argues, concerning the inscription from Epidauros, that since no sacrificial terms other than holokautesis are mentioned, this term might just as easily relate to a burnt sacrifice of incense or cakes.9

9Furthermore, there are many theories on the nature of the Thymele in Epidauros; it has not only been interpreted as a large bothros.10

10Secondly, the sacrifice of a black ram and the practice of sleeping on its fell in the cult of Kalchas on Mount Drion have been interpreted as proof of the Chthonian character of this cult, and for the whole practice of incubation.11 Petropoulou argues that the sacrifice of the ram, which is described by Strabo with the verb ἐναγίζειν (‘sacrifice to the dead’12 — which almost always meant to burn or otherwise destroy the animal as a whole)13 refers to a Chthonian sacrifice. She adds that the Chthonian nature is confirmed by the fact that the animal is described as black.14

11The passage from Strabo on the oracle of Kalchas is a unicum for incubation rites: this type of sacrifice has no parallel in any other testimonia from Classical or Hellenistic times. In an earlier testimonium concerning the same set of cults by Timaeus of Tauromenion, cited in the Alexandra of Pseudo-Lycophron, the incubants sleep on sheepskins on the tomb of Podaleirios (Kalchas’ empty tomb is close by, but that is not where the incubants slept), but there is no mention made of the sheep having to be black or even that it was fells from the sacrificed sheep that incubants used for sleeping (thus, the word enagizein does not occur).15 In fact, there was no set rule for the practice of enagizein in hero cults — ritually, at least, there is no set Chthonian sacrificial pattern for hero cults as defined by researchers who have used this theoretical model.16

12Ekroth investigates the use of the word enagizein in hero cults from Archaic to Roman times and demonstrates how the word became frequent in Pausanias, Plutarch, Philostratus and Heliodorus.17 Ekroth discusses whether this should be interpreted as an effect of the word itself becoming more frequent, or whether it attests to an increase in this particular ritual practice, given the antiquarian tendencies in religion of the time. It is possible that the use of enagizein, concerning the cult of Kalchas, reflects the antiquarian spirit of the period, since the word is not used, and the animal is not black, in an earlier testimonium on the cult of Podaleirios (closely related to the cult of Kalchas), the Alexandra.

13The sacrifice of black animals is seen amongst scholars as a ‘marked’ or ‘modified’ rite compared to those sacrifices which were performed commonly in Greek cult, a specification which emphasizes the special character of the rite, the god, or the occasion.18 This sacrifice of a black ram, however, as compared with the other testimonia on sacrifice before incubation, is an exceptional occurrence.

14Specifications on what kind of animal the incubants should sacrifice are found only in the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse (a piglet) and in the cult of Kalchas (a black ram). In all other instances we must presume that the incubant had the same range of choices of what to sacrifice as the ordinary worshipper. As for the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse, a piglet was a sacrifice of little cost and was one of the most common victims in Greek cult,19 wherefore I find it difficult to see that the choice of animal here had anything to do with incubation itself. As a general rule in sacrifices before incubation, the sacrificial victim does not seem to have differed from the one offered by other worshippers, with the exception of the black ram in the cult of Kalchas.

15Thirdly, the wineless libations which were offered in the cult of Asklepios in Piraeus and the cult of Hemithea in Kastabos have been interpreted as indications of the Chthonian nature of incubation.

16Just before the incubants entered the dormitory at Piraeus, pelanos was offered, amongst other things.20 Stengel and Ziehen argue that the liquid pelanos was primarily an offering to Chthonian deities such as Ge, and also the dead.21 Vikela argues that the burning of the pelanos denotes a destruction sacrifice, a rite specific to Chthonian deities.22 There is nothing unusual in the burning of cakes or grains together with the god’s share of the animal, in any type of sacrifice, and thus there is no argument for interpreting the burning of cakes or the liquid pelanos as Chthonian if no animal was sacrificed.23

17Melikraton, a libation of milk and honey, was offered to Hemithea at Kastabos.24 In the cult of Asklepios at Piraeus, nephalioi were also offered with the cakes.25 Wineless offerings have been considered as appropriate for heroes, the dead, and underworld deities, i.e. Chthonian beings.26 Stengel, for instance, states that melikraton was used only in cases where the animal was ageustos, not to be eaten.27 According to Stengel, the libation of melikraton in the cult of Hemithea might be a sign that the sacrificial animal in Kastabos was not to be eaten, and hence the animal sacrifice at Kastabos would belong to a Chthonian ritual pattern.

18Any animal except the pig could be sacrificed at Kastabos, and Diodorus writes nothing on the absence of sacrificial meals.28 In his account, large crowds visited the sanctuary. Diodorus uses the word thysiai for the sacrifices held in the honour of Hemithea, and this does not suggest that the meat was not eaten. The most common meaning of thyo is a sacrifice ending with a banquet,29 and there is no reason to assume that this was not the case for the sanctuary of Hemithea. Melikraton was thus used in connection with thysia sacrifices at Kastabos, and cannot be interpreted as a sign that the rites at Kastabos were Chthonian.

19The absence of wine (as well as the prohibition of pig) was explained in Diodorus’ account by the myth of Molpadia, who later became the goddess Hemithea.30 Molpadia, who had been set to guard her father’s wine jar, fell asleep and a pig rushed in and broke it. Fleeing her father’s rage, she jumped off a cliff but was saved by Apollon.

20As for wineless libations in general, Henrichs, after a thorough examination of the testimonia, comes to the conclusion that, on most occasions, it is impossible to tell why a god or hero receives nephalia instead of wine, there being no Chthonian or Olympian pattern visible in the choice of libation in different cults.31 It is thus impossible to say why nephalia were offered at Piraeus, there being no set pattern for what this type of offering entailed.

21According to Theophrastos, cited in Porphyry De abstinentia 2.20, the melikraton was the old way of libating, the original libation of nephalia or water being followed by honey, oil, and wine.32 No opposition between Chthonian and Olympian is recorded here, nor is the assumption that nephalia would accompany the extraordinary burning of the whole animal substantiated.

22Fourthly, in previous research it has been argued that the cult of Asklepios had a certain Chthonian aspect because of the pre-sacrifice of cakes to Hermes.33 A passage where Cicero describes Hermes as subterranean and says that he should to be identified with Trophonios has been cited as evidence for this claim.34 The cultural as well as the chronological gap between this fourth-century BC inscription and Cicero, as well as the complete difference in terms of the purposes of these two texts, must make us put the search for a connection here aside.

23It has also been argued that the sacrifice of cakes to Zeus Meilichios in the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse, before the main sacrifice of a piglet to Asklepios, is an indication of the Chthonian nature of incubation.35 The cult of Zeus Meilichios in Piraeus has been attested in several inscriptions and reliefs from the fourth century. On these reliefs, Zeus Meilichios is sometimes portrayed as a snake; among scholars of the early twentieth century this was seen as a sign of his Chthonian nature. Recent scholars do not stress that Zeus Meilichios was a Chthonian deity, but they do not rule out that Zeus Meilichios has Chthonian aspects.36 Sacrifices made to Zeus Meilichios, however, exhibit aspects of both the Chthonian and Olympian, as defined by this theoretical model,37 and the snake pictured with Zeus Meilichios, which was previously said to emphasize his Chthonian nature, above all conveys the prosperity of the household.38 Hence there is no strong argument for interpreting the sacrifice of cakes to Zeus Meilichios at Pergamon as an indication of the supposedly Chthonian nature of incubation.

24Finally, Martin and Metzger argue that the use of water in purifications and cures in the cult of Asklepios is evidence of a Chthonian aspect. They further claim that water had oracular properties.39 Ginouvès argues that water was a carrier of healing and mantic powers in the Chthonian hero-cult of Amphiaraos, but he never states that water as such was considered Chthonian.40 The use of water is a very general feature in any event in life, cultic events included. To say that the use of water in a mantic and healing hero-cult indicates a Chthonian aspect of the cult is to use a circular argument where water is Chthonian because it is used in a Chthonian cult.

25As for the paradigm of Chthonian versus Olympian being used to interpret incubation, there are several problems with how this model has been applied to incubation rituals. The view of incubation as Chthonian cannot be proven by the incubation rites. It cannot be proven that the rites labelled Chthonian in the incubation ritual (e.g. wineless libations) were preferred in cults of deities viewed as Chthonian. In the case of the cult of Kalchas on Mount Drion, a singular testimonium, which is an exception when considered in the context of incubation rites as a whole, has been used to attest to a coherent and general practice. The whole system of Olympian and Chthonian rites has been questioned in previous research, and as argued in this study, using the Olympian and Chthonian model creates the risk of circularity.

2.1.2. Liminal aspects of incubation rites

26An interesting, broader interpretation of incubation, not only of its rites but also of the whole phenomenon, has been put forward in recent times, following the van Gennep theoretical model on rites of passage.41 Van Gennep describes three stages in a rite of passage: separation, liminality, and re-incorporation.42 First, there were preparatory rites that helped the initiand to leave the old group to which he/she belonged, followed by a liminal state where the individual was transformed, and thirdly there was a stage of re-incorporation into the new group and stepping out of the liminal experience. According to this interpretation, unusual preparatory rites before incubation show that the incubant was separated from other worshippers who were not incubating. The dream epiphany obtained by the incubation ritual is seen as the middle-step in the van Gennep model — the stage of liminality. Following the dream, steps were then taken to re-incorporate the incubant into normal everyday life.

27The theoretical basis on which certain rites are described as liminal comes from the structuralist approach to Greek religion. According to this approach, the Greeks perceived the world as divided between a cultural, civilized sphere, and a wild and uncivilized one, and this was illustrated as the opposition between the polis (‘city-state’) and the oros (‘mountain’).43 The basis for defining rites as liminal has much to do with the experience which the rites generated in the worshippers. The presupposition is that unusual rites in some way placed the worshipper outside of the normal social order during the ritual. It is easy to understand how entering another reality, where it was possible to communicate with a god, could be interpreted as an activity outside the scope of civilized, ordered society. The van Gennep model will not be discussed in detail here, but I will briefly examine how it may or may not be applied to incubation as regards the rites. Although this is an interesting approach to incubation, the fragmentary evidence for incubation rites causes problems for interpretation because the model must be applied based on singular rites that only existed at one or two incubation sanctuaries. Moreover, rites only attested in Roman times have been adduced as valid comparisons when determining the ritual pattern for Classical and Hellenistic times.

28Looking at the rites in particular, the van Gennep model calls for preparatory incubation rites that mark the special status of the incubant and facilitate stepping out of the ordinary. One element that ritually displayed this separation from the ordinary was purification by bathing in seawater before entering the sanctuary itself (as also observed in the mysteries at Eleusis).44 Though bathing in seawater has extra purifying connotations, the Ploutos, which describes rites at the Asklepieion at Piraeus, is the only instance where this particular action is attested before incubation. At other incubation sanctuaries, variations must have been expected (since not all sanctuaries to Asklepios lay by the sea), and purification with water before entering the sanctuary might in some cases not have differed at all from what was done by other worshippers entering the sanctuary.45

29Furthermore, the sacrifices of cakes before incubation to Artemis, as well as to dogs and huntsmen (kynegetai) would, according to this model, mean that incubation was associated with the woods and the liminal.46 In this study, I argue that the pre-sacrifice to Artemis at Pergamon was undertaken because of Artemis’ abilities as healer and averter of evil, and not because Artemis was associated with the wild.47 As for the sacrifice to the dogs and huntsmen (kynegetai) in a lex sacra from Piraeus, this inscription was not addressed only to incubants. The dogs and the huntsmen are present in the inscription because they belonged to the family of Asklepios and had saved him as a newborn infant. It is true that the huntsmen rescued Asklepios from ‘the woods’, but their presence in the inscription stresses that Asklepios was taken from the wilderness, not that the huntsmen should in any way bring the wilderness into the cult of Asklepios.48

30Graf suggests that wineless libations and libations of unmixed wine were markers of entering and leaving the marginal phases of a ritual.49 Melikraton was made in the cult of Hemithea, and nephalioi were offered Asklepios at Piraeus.50 Also, the addition of fluids to a cake sacrifice would have strengthened the stepping out of the ordinary, as seen in Aristophanes’ Ploutos and also in the cult of Asklepios at Piraeus.51 However, Henrichs examined the evidence for libations and discovered that the use of wineless (or unmixed) libations does not conform to a specific pattern, in contrast with those of wine in Greek libations; also, there is simply not enough ritual context for the wineless libations, which are known, to draw any conclusions on why they were used.52 Libations of honey and milk cannot be said to be a marker of any extraordinary occasion.

31If we apply the van Gennep model, incubation itself — that is, the liminal state — might have begun with putting on a wreath.53 This act would mark the beginning of the actual incubation and stepping out of the ordinary. The wreath was left on the incubant’s bed in the morning as a sign that the liminal state had been left behind. This was indeed a marking out of the incubant, in the same way that oracle-seekers might have worn wreaths on the day of consultation. The Lex sacra Hallenstrasse is, however, the only instance where the leaving behind of the wreath is recorded, and since parts of the inscription may date to after the Hellenistic period, we should not presuppose that this rite was common. Other signs of letting go of the ordinary would have been white clothes, the absence of rings, belts or shoes and loosened hair.54 Upon careful study, however, these prescriptions do not exist in any testimonia from Classical or Hellenistic times, and so they cannot be adduced here.

32Sleeping on stibades also underlines the stepping out of the ordinary.55 But the evidence does not suggest that incubants ever slept on beds of twigs: rather, the stibades mentioned in the Ploutos and the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse are rough, makeshift beds, not twigs with a ritual purpose.56 Practicalities related to sleeping may well have contributed to the beds being of a temporary character. Rough beds might nonetheless have served as a ritual marker of the special state that the incubant was about to enter, communicating directly with a god inside the dormitory, but one might have expected stronger ritual markers for such a liminal state.

33As for rites for stepping out of the liminal state, the act of leaving the wreath that the incubant wore inside the dormitory on the bed is one possibile such rite.57 As argued above, the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse is not indicative of how incubation rites were at all sanctuaries. Graf hypothesizes that there was a common meal after incubation, where the incubants ate the meat of the animal they had sacrificed before incubation and were ‘de-briefed’ together. The importance of the meal is emphasized by the presence of dining rooms in Asklepieia, as well as the common prohibition in many Greek cults on taking sacrificed meat out of the sanctuary.58 He compares the closure of incubation, that is, the stepping out of a state of extreme individual liminality, with the Mysteries at Eleusis, where the day of the mysteries was followed by a common feast.59 When analysing the concept of mystery cults, Graf suggests that a sumptuous common meal was often an outward expression of the group identity, defined and strengthened by a mystery cult.60

34A common meal for incubants only is not attested anywhere, and in a lex sacra from the cult of Amphiaraos at Oropos, where an ou phora rule applied to sacrificers, the inscription applied to both incubants and other worshippers who had sacrificed in the sanctuary.61 Thus, in the only testimonium on ou phora rules from an incubation context, the ou phora applies to both incubants and other worshippers alike. The common meal thus had nothing to do with incubation as such, but was for all worshippers at the sanctuary. In incubation, the group of sleepers helped and encouraged each other’s experiences inside the dormitory, but essentially the god heeded and healed one individual, who was supported by his or her family, in a one-time crisis situation. After the healing was effected, no outward expression of group identity was necessary.

35The van Gennep model is very broad, and it offers a general model that is made to fit the stepping in and out of different groups in human societies.62 The model calls for a stage of liminality from which the individual re-emerged as part of a new group. Liminality in the eyes of van Gennep is thus a state between two social groups, a state in which an individual finds him/herself after stepping out of the first but not yet having entered the second group — the individual is separated from his or her familiar social identity. The model cannot be successfully applied to Greek incubation because the ill person was not outside normal social groups. As for the preparatory steps, there are no real signs that incubants were marked out as a single group at the sanctuaries during the day, other than the wearing of white clothes and possibly wreaths for longer than just at the sacrifice. Some testimonia, however, such the Ploutos and the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse, suggest that incubants had to be purer than other worshippers in the sanctuary.

36The liminal character of sleeping inside a dormitory on holy ground may be acknowledged, although the liminality shows itself in the location and exclusivity of the dormitory chosen for sleeping rather than in the rites performed there.

37The major problem with using the van Gennep model for incubation rituals, however, is that the rites do not include a clear stepping out of the experience or reintegration. If there ever was a common meal after incubation, with incubants debriefing from the otherworldly experience, it is not explicit in the testimonia. The rites for van Gennep’s stepping out of the experience are striking in their absence. This, in fact, could suggest that the experience of incubation was not particularly liminal or frightening. This would be in direct contrast to the oracle of Trophonius, where all three stages of the van Gennep model can be identified in the rites.63

2.1.3. Affinities with mystery cults

38Previous scholars have argued that incubation and mystery cults had certain common aspects: they view the ritual and theological content of the cult of Asklepios as similar to that of the cult of Demeter at Eleusis, and the experience of incubation as comparable to the experience of initiation into a mystery cult.64 Indeed, both incubation and initiation into mystery cults require the opening of two worlds — the human and divine. In this section, I analyse how the structure and function of incubation rituals may be likened to those of initiation rituals. Was the method for creating a meeting with the divine similar in incubation rituals and in initiations into mystery cults?

39Certain similarities between incubation rites and mystery cults may be noted. In the same way that incubants at Pergamon were prohibited from eating certain foodstuffs, so were initiates of some mystery cults, such as that at Eleusis.65 Just as at the Amphiareion at Oropos, fees were also paid in mystery cults.66 We may further compare the bathing in the sea before incubation which is noted in the Ploutos with the Athenian mystes purifying in the sea three days before the procession to Eleusis.67 Plato attests to purification being a part of the initiation at Eleusis.68 The Homeric Hymn to Demeter of c. 600 BC, may, according to some scholars, portray an initiatory rite of sitting on a ram’s hide.69 Sacrifices were also offered before initiation into the Mysteria at Eleusis, notably a sacrifice of an inexpensive piglet.70 Some of these rites, such as purification in the sea, denote a higher level of preparation than what was necessary just to enter a sanctuary for prayer and sacrifice, but this is not surprising since both incubation and initiation (or the consultation of an oracle) were religious events that entailed direct contact with the divine and were performed on a daily basis. In this context, we might recall how Hermes, a popular deity in Attica, prescribed a sacrifice of cakes in an inscription from the Asklepieion at Piraeus.71 Hermes, the ‘bringer of dreams’, was also known to have helped Demeter and Kore communicate with a worshipper through a dream.72 Hence, Hermes was a deity who facilitated this meeting of worlds.

40A terminological likeness may be noted in Strabo’s account of the Plutonium in Acharaka. He uses the terms mystagogoi and symbouloi to refer to the priests there.73 Σύμβουλος means ‘adviser’, ‘counsellor’, and μυσταγωγός ‘introducing or initiating into mysteries’, and more generally, ‘teacher, guide’. Since mystagogos may also means ‘teacher’ or ‘guide’, the choice of words here may be due to the associations which the cult at Acharaka had for Strabo and how he thought fit to describe the cult.

41If we compare the collective versus the individual experiences of the two religious phenomena, the sleeping itself in an incubation dormitory was an individual experience within a collective experience, just as initiates into mysteries had an individual experience surrounded by ‘their group’, encircled by the strict nature of secrecy of the miraculous event.74 Mystery cults, however, differed from incubation in that the worshippers performed the rites as members of a group, and underwent certain rites in order to be taken into a new group, the initiated. The incubants were only a group on the night of the incubation, but not during the preparatory rites in most cases, and the group of incubants then dissolved in the morning.

42Many rites in mystery cults were, however, fundamentally different from incubation rites.75 Most importantly, the nexus of the incubation ritual — consisting of sleeping on holy ground and receiving a dream-vision — did not exist in any mystery cult. Furthermore, initiation, at least as depicted in Plutarch’s account of Eleusis, was a frightening passage into a wonderful place.76 No such ritual journey was made when incubating. The incubant did meet a god, but in his or her dream. In contrast, there was nothing frightening about incubation as it was experienced in Aristophanes’ Ploutos, except for the old woman who was afraid of Asklepios’ snakes.77 The epiphany itself, as inspired and deeply religious as it may seem in Aristides,78 requires active participation in the Epidaurian iamata and the Ploutos, and the god is described as a doctor with his chest of tools and medicines, followed by his assistants.79

43Each mystery cult developed different initiatory rites that were suitable for initiation. It is possible that the rites surrounding both incubation and the initiation into mystery cults changed along with religion in general (initiation rites in mystery cults may have been similar to rites in incubation cults during Roman times, but not any earlier).80 Perhaps the biggest difference between mystery cults and incubation cults can be noted in the individual’s reason for getting into contact with the divine. Plato writes that the purified and initiated were offered a life together with the gods after death instead of lying in the mire.81 In mystery cults, contact with the god was not sought only so a cure could be effected. People made a lifetime commitment when being initiated, and they aspired to a good afterlife. Incubants (along with their families) sought only help there and then, as a response to a crisis.

Using Aristides

44Aelius Aristides, a rhetor of the second century AD, uses mystery initiations as a metaphor to describe the experience of incubation, and consequently his writings have been used to liken the two phenomena.82 However, it is methodologically problematic for Aristides to be used to shed light on incubation in Classical and Hellenistic times. Aristides had a very special personal religiosity and private attachment to the god, believing himself to be chosen and much loved by the god.83 Very few people of his time had, or aspired to, this constant contact with a god or could afford to pursue it. Nonetheless, entering the world of the gods, either in a dream or through an initiation into a mystery cult, must have been an intense experience for the worshipper.

45Aristides describes the experience of incubation by comparing it with the experience of initiation at Eleusis. He uses the specific terminology that was used in Eleusis (telete, mystes, Torchbearer, Mystagogue) to underline his point that the feeling of incubation corresponded to the experience of initiation.84 Aristides, in his own text, is explicit about the fact that he used the parallel of mystery initiations to make his audience understand the magnitude of his experience when incubating. However, he is not saying that the two cultic events were related.85 Aristides used the language and images from the world-famous cult of Eleusis86 because he knew that this would help his educated readers relate to and understand the magnitude of his experience.87 Aristides likened the rituals at Pergamon to mysteries, but he kept the two apart, using the experience generated in initiations as a basis for his readers to understand what his very personal experience was during his contact with Asklepios.88 Furthermore, Aristides did not only use the words mystes and ‘initiation’ when describing incubation, or dream-contacts in the cult of Asklepios: he also used this imagery when describing the discipline of oratory. He believed that rhetoric was pure and sacred like mystery religions, and likened the orator to a mystes.89 Hence, using the structure of initiations in mystery cults as a comparative model in order to understand the structure and function of incubation rituals is difficult because they are two different phenomena which are better understood in their own religious contexts. However, the experience generated by the two was, for some worshippers, if not frightening, then on an emotional level, as intense as one might expect when entering the world of the gods.

2.2. Incubation rites and their social context

46Having argued that the Olympian and Chthonian theoretical model, as well as the van Gennep model on rites of passage (or the comparison with initiation in mystery cults) are not applicable to the testimonia on rituals of incubation, I will now turn to presenting an approach which has been lacking in previous research. The social context of the rites could basically be categorized in the following way: rites performed by the incubants as individuals, rites performed by all incubants at the sanctuary as a group, rites performed by the incubant together with his or her accompanying family, or rites performed together with all other worshippers at the sanctuary, such as those sacrificing and making a vow. Technical aspects of incubation rites will be combined here with the contexts of the different rites and the rules of incubation for the worshippers. How did the incubation rites differ from what other worshippers (if present) did at the sanctuary? Were the rites performed by all worshippers together in the sanctuary, or were incubants separated as individuals or as a group? What about the family accompanying the incubants — did family members participate in a sacrifice, for example? In short, the social context of the incubation rites is taken into consideration here.

47In order to analyse incubation rites from a social perspective, the material has been divided into three categories: first, the rites performed by incubants together with other worshippers in the sanctuary that did not differ technically from what other worshippers did at the sanctuary; secondly, the rites that essentially resembled what other worshippers did at the sanctuary and were not performed by incubants in isolation, but were modified or intensified in some way for the incubants; and thirdly, the rites performed by incubants only, as a separate group. I will begin by presenting the preparatory rites according to these divisions, then the offerings, followed by rites inside the dormitory, and finally the rites after sleeping will be presented.

Preparatory rites

48If we first look at the preparatory rites that applied to all worshippers who came to the sanctuary, prescriptions such as abstinence from birth and death can be noted.90 There is no reason to believe that incubants were exempted from these general rules, nor is there any evidence to suggest that they were stricter or harsher for incubants.91 We might further presume a preliminary abstinence from sex or the removal of any traces of such activity for incubants in general, just as may be presumed for any other participant in any major rituals.92 Abstinence from certain foods such as pig (as well as not touching the animal altogether) in the cult of Hemithea has previously been noted, and this was a rule that applied to all worshippers.93 These were all rules that the incubant had to conform to before entering the sanctuary, like any other worshipper.

49Furthermore, purification with water upon entering the sanctuary, as in sprinkling oneself with water (or by some other means), can be presupposed as a minimum requirement for incubants, and it is generally agreed that all worshippers coming to the sanctuary would have purified themselves in such a way.94 Any family members accompanying the incubants would naturally have had to purify themselves in the same way. Some of the evidence suggests that incubants came and went at times of their own choosing, and so it seems that they did not all enter the sanctuary as a group on the day of incubation.95 In any case, since Epidauros was a site to which incubants would have travelled (often for long distances), such a ‘group entry’ would have been impractical.

50Secondly, there is a group of preparatory rites that may be said to apply to all worshippers, but these were stricter for incubants, thus separating them as a group in the sanctuary. In the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse, incubants were to note a three-day period of purity from sex before incubating, and they were not to eat goat meat or goat cheese for three days, besides the purity instructions for all worshippers which were inscribed on the top of the stone.96 Since goat was a prohibited animal for sacrifices, I interpret this dietary requirement for the incubants as a strengthening of the prohibition of goat that applied to all worshippers.97 The incubants were set apart from normal worshippers in the sanctuary, not by the rule itself but because they had to take extra note of a rule that applied to all worshippers. In previous research, preparations by incubants in terms of prohibitions from certain foodstuffs have been interpreted as special rules that set the incubants apart, but as we can see, this is only partly true for the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse.98

51In the Ploutos we encounter an incubant who purifies himself in seawater before entering the sanctuary.99 This is, however, the only testimonium attesting to bathing in seawater before incubation, and we should take care not to think of this as a general rule. The sea was close to the Asklepieion of Piraeus, and this may have been partly why the incubant purified himself there. Examples from other instances in Greek cult strongly suggest that washing in seawater had extra purificatory capacities, and in this instance at least, the incubant was washed by his companions for the sole purpose of incubating. Carion’s line, ‘we first took him down to the sea, and then we bathed him’,100 indicates that it was primarily the incubant who had to bathe. Carion, Ploutos’ friend, bathed with Ploutos and they also incubated together. The bath in seawater in the Ploutos could be interpreted as a purification with water that was enacted on a deeper level. It was not only a purification before entering the sanctuary but a major step in preparing to meet the god. This bath not only purified the incubant, it also put him or her in the right state of mind to meet the god.101

52The existence of ample water installations (perirrhanteria, water sources, baths) both at Asklepieia and in the sanctuary of Amphiaraos at Oropos, make it likely that these were used by incubants for purifications as well as for curative functions, and they would have served to keep the large numbers of suppliants clean and in good health.102 Were these purifications anything out of the ordinary at the sanctuary, i.e. did they set the incubants apart from what was otherwise done by worshippers coming to the sanctuary to pray and sacrifice? The vastness of the archaeological evidence seems to suggest that purifications with water at some large healing sanctuaries were important.103 At large sanctuaries with ample water installations, it may have been possible to separate incubants as a separate group, and so they performed their purifications apart from other worshippers. However, at a smaller sanctuary where purification was possibly performed at the perirrhanterion at the entrance, it would have been impractical to have incubants gather in a group to enter separately from the others — at least for the sanctuaries to which worshippers had to travel and where they could not arrive all at a set time. Thus, purification rites upon entering the sanctuary were in all likelihood the same for incubants as for other worshippers.

53Thirdly, some preparatory rites were prescribed only for incubants. In the Plutonium at Acharaka, the incubants fasted as they lay in the cave.104 At Acharaka, only people who were ill came and stayed in the village, as Strabo attests, and only the ill went to the cave to sleep in the company of the priests. Strabo writes that the priests also slept in the cave and often brought the ill to the cave to lie there quietly without moving. The cult at Acharaka displays strong local characteristics, and what happened there cannot be said to apply to incubants in general in the Greek world.105

54An eparche, or a consultation fee, at Oropos, was also only paid by incubants.106 The payment was put in the thesauros, or money-box, together with any other fees and fines that had been collected, and it is likely that incubants did not deposit their money in a separate group. The neokoros had to be present to record the deposition, in order that only those who had paid might enter the dormitory. Also, according to the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse, a fee was paid at the same time as sacrifices were made before the incubation.107

55Finally, an invitation from the god to come to his sanctuary and incubate is found in the Asklepieion at Lebena, and this applied only to incubants, of course.108

Offerings

56Nothing in the animal sacrifices noted before incubation (with the notable exception of the cult of Kalchas at Mount Drion)109 sets the incubants apart from other worshippers at the sanctuary. The same sacrificial rules applied both to incubants and to other worshippers, as far as the evidence goes, with the possible exception of the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse.110 As for the libations accompanying the sacrifice, wineless libations were present in both incubation rituals and in prescriptions for worshippers who were not incubating in the given cults. Rules on which animal to sacrifice followed what the cult prescribed for all worshippers (in general, goat was prohibited at some Asklepieia and pigs were forbidden in the cult of Hemithea, whereas any animal was allowed at Oropos).111 Concerning the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse, it is possible that other worshippers also sacrificed a piglet, since two sets of purity inscriptions are given in the inscription: one for those sacrificing, and then, further down on the stone, additional, stricter rules for the purity of incubants. Since there are two sets of worshippers mentioned on the stone, it might be the case that the instructions on sacrifice applied to both groups.112

57If incubants performed these offerings separately from other worshippers, either at different locations or different times of the day, one might think that it would be referred to in one of the inscriptions. However, the generality of the rules given in the leges sacrae on how sacrifice was to be carried out suggests that such a division was not made. Also, it would have been impractical at many sanctuaries to keep a group of incubants separated from other worshippers who wanted to approach the altar. For smaller sanctuaries especially, where a priest would not have been present all the time to separate the incubants from other worshippers, it is difficult to argue for the separation of incubants from other worshippers.

58The likelihood that the incubants were not alone is further demonstrated by the epigraphical evidence. The iama A 5 from Epidauros relates how a mute boy was accompanied by his father at the sacrifice, and votive reliefs depicting sacrifice to Asklepios also include accompanying family members.113 Likewise, reliefs that depict incubants being healed could also include family members standing beside the incubants, something which may suggest that the family participated in the main rite that preceded the sleeping (i.e. the sacrifice).114 It would probably have been unthinkable for most women to travel alone to somewhere like Epidauros, and children would no doubt have been accompanied by their parents.115 A sacrifice was normally made by several people (a family or friends) together, offering the animal, with one main sacrificer; this ‘ordinary’ way of sacrificing in a group was one way of sacrificing before incubation, if not the most common. There is thus no evidence to support the idea that incubants sacrificed alone or in a group that consisted only of incubants.

59Concerning the vows and prayers said at the sacrifice, as well as the burning of incense, nothing has been found in the testimonia on incubation that would set these practices apart from what was done normally at the sanctuary.116 Following the argument made above on sacrifice, the prayers at sacrifice, libations, and the burning of incense must have been performed when accompanied by a priest, if they were regulated, as well as the incubant’s family (if present). Any onlookers that were there would in all probability not have been sent away.

60As for the evidence on libations, it cannot be demonstrated that wineless offerings were part of the incubation ritual, or that wineless offerings marked out any special rite as opposed to what happened normally at the sanctuary.117 The sponde of melikraton made in the cult of Hemithea, as well as the nephalioi in the fourth-century lex sacra from Piraeus, were made by all worshippers in the sanctuary.

61If we look at the sacrifice of cakes in the cult of Asklepios, both as a preliminary act before the animal sacrifice and as an offering on its own before incubation, we can note elements common to all worshippers as well as elements specific to incubants.118 The same rules would doubtless apply for cake sacrifices prior to the animal sacrifice as for the animal sacrifice that followed. It would be logical to assume that the sacrifice of cakes was performed by incubants together with their families. For example, in the iama A 5 of Epidauros, the mute boy’s father was present at both the pre-sacrifice and the sacrifice.119

62We now come to the category of rites modified or made stricter for incubants, although these rites were not necessarily exclusive to them. The sacrifice of cakes by incubants (but possibly also by worshippers other than incubants) before the sacrifice of a piglet to Asklepios in the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse is one such rite. In this lex sacra, it is prescribed that cakes should be given to Artemis Prothyraia, Artemis (with a missing epithet), Ge, Zeus Apotropaios and Zeus Meilichios, before the sacrifice of a piglet to Asklepios.120 The sacrifice to Ge has been conjecturally attributed to mantic powers she was believed to possess in Classical times — powers that might have been considered helpful in the process of incubation.121 The other gods all had associations with healing and general well-being, and there is proof that these gods were worshipped in this area. The reason why they were included in the inscription, and not the relatives of Asklepios (Hygieia, Epione, etc.), seems to be that these specific gods were asked to help incubants and possibly some other worshippers who were praying for health.122 The presence of two purification prescriptions, one before the sacrifice and one more for incubants proceeding into the dormitory, means that it is possible that people other than the incubants sacrificed the same cakes together with a piglet.123 Thus, it cannot be excluded that both incubants and other worshippers sacrificed cakes to these deities, and incubants (and other worshippers, too, for that matter) probably sacrificed together with their families.124 If, on the other hand, the prescription of a piglet in the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse was directed at incubants only, this suggests that there was an attempt to unify the sacrificial rites preceding incubation, also as regards the cakes. If all incubants sacrificed the same animal and cakes, it is likely that their group identity as incubants was strengthened.

63In a lex sacra from the cult of Asklepios at Piraeus from the fourth century BC,125 the associated gods are gods in Asklepios’ family (Maleas, Apollon, Iaso, Akeso, Panakeia, the dogs and the kynegetai), as well as Hermes, who was very popular in Attica, and in a later addition, Helios and Mnemosyne. It is not specified that the inscription is for incubants, but the popularity of incubation at the time makes it probable that they were also among those meant to adhere to the sacred law. The additional presence of Mnemosyne among the gods receiving offerings makes it likely that incubants also followed the rules of the Piraean inscription. It would make sense for the incubant to seek some help in remembering the incubation dream.

64The generally helpful character of most of the associated gods who received cakes suggests that all worshippers of Asklepios made sacrifices of cakes to these deities, not only the incubants. There is really no reason to suppose that other worshippers would have been asked to stay at a distance when incubants with their families approached the altar.

65Thirdly, there is the group of rites which were performed only by incubants, as a group, and other worshippers were not immediately present. The sacrifice of cakes just before going into the dormitory, the burning of some of the cakes on an altar outside, and the placement of cakes on another altar inside the dormitory are clearly such rites.126 In the Ploutos of Aristophanes, we are not told which gods receive the cakes, but in Pergamon they are Tyche and Mnemosyne outside the dormitory, and Themis inside the dormitory.127 A combination of the local characteristics of the cult and reasons related to the desire for successful incubation seems to have determined which associated gods were to receive cakes.128 In the Ploutos, all incubants offer cakes before entering the dormitory, and together, as a group, they bed down, and the priest goes around extinguishing the lamps. There is no reason to believe that incubants at Pergamon would have done otherwise. To have incubants enter the dormitory at various times of their own choice would not only have disturbed the sleep of others, it would also have disturbed the coherence of the rite of sleeping in itself, and likewise the religious experience.

66Thus, the sacrifice of cakes, which already existed in the ‘ordinary’ worship in the cult of Asklepios, was at least partly used to shape the incubation ritual and ensure a successful dreaming.

Rites inside the dormitory

67The mere presence of a special dormitory to sleep in sets the incubants apart from other worshippers.129 The incubants entered the dormitory as a group at the same time. In all the testimonia, the incubants slept collectively in the dormitory; there is no instance where a single worshipper slept apart or alone.130 At Oropos, men and women slept separately, but there seems to be no consistent rule on this in other incubation cults.131

68Inside the dormitory, naturally, any rites were specifically for incubants. The wearing of white clothing, argued for at Piraeus, would surely have been a ritual characteristic that set the incubants apart from other worshippers.132 Ploutos seems also to have worn a special dress when walking from his house in the city of Athens to the sanctuary. His special status would have been clear to all passing him on the way, and this would not only have distinguished him from other worshippers in the sanctuary but also from all the people of the city. On the other hand, as an exception to what is known of all other incubation sanctuaries, the friends accompanying the blind Ploutos, who incubated in the Asklepieion of Piraeus, slept beside him and witnessed Asklepios heal others without being ill themselves.133

69The wearing of a wreath at Pergamon, documented in the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse (the only testimonium attesting to this custom in incubatory contexts) may have had a three-fold purpose.134 First, it was a standard rite for all sacrificers in the sanctuary to wear a wreath, incubants as well as non-incubants. Secondly, it would have marked the sanctified status of the incubant during the day’s preparations (it was worn by incubants only). Thirdly, the wreath was a votive offering to the god, and it was left on the pillow on the morning after incubation (a rite which was enacted by incubants only). Thus, the rite was more complicated than just marking the sanctified status of the incubant, although admittedly this strongly underlined the special status of the incubant during the day and night of incubation, as compared to other worshippers in the sanctuary. There is no proof that the putting on of a wreath and leaving it on the pillow was ever done at any other site than Pergamon (and even there, we cannot be sure of the date of all the parts of the inscription). It is likely though that incubants wore wreaths at more than one incubation sanctuary, since consultants to oracles also wore wreaths.135 Thus, the wearing of a wreath can be viewed as a rite that was performed by all those sacrificing in the sanctuary and also as a rite that set incubants apart from other worshippers in the sanctuary, since they kept the wreath during the whole day (at least at Pergamon).

70The extinguishing of lamps by the priests inside the dormitory may be viewed as a practical measure, but also, since it was the priests who extinguished the lamps, and not the incubants, it was also a moment which signalled that Asklepios was about to arrive.136 It was only at Acharaka that priests also slept in the cave: in all other dormitories the incubants were alone and, ideally, no one from the outside was able to look into the room.

71A further rite that was naturally exclusive to the incubants, and was performed by them in a group, was sleeping on the fleece of the sacrificial animal. This occurred in some sanctuaries in Attica (as well as the later, in many ways exceptional, cults of Podaleirios and Kalchas).137 Sleeping on rough beds was also exclusive to the incubants.138

72It is of course only to be expected that the rules inside the dormitory were uniquely prescribed for incubants. The incubants formed a secluded group that no other worshipper or family member could join. Even more importantly, the group was united by its common expectation of a god-sent healing. This is well illustrated by Aristophanes, when the group of incubants grew so excited at the healing of Ploutos inside the dormitory that they were unable to go back to sleep.139

Rites after sleeping

73It has been shown that the common meal, as could possibly be indicated in an ou phora rule at Oropos, applied to all worshippers there.140 Staying at the sanctuary and eating the sacrificial animal (if an animal of sufficient size was sacrificed) could have strengthened a group; in the case of the incubants, however, it would seem strange if only other, unknown incubants took part in the eating of the animal and not the accompanying family members. At any Greek sacrifice, the family was first to share and eat the sacrificial animal.

74Only at Acharaka did priests help the incubants interpret their dreams.141 At Acharaka, the priests were in fact the main incubants, so it is understandable that they also helped to interpret the dreams of the worshippers. In all other instances of incubation there is no ritual element after the sleeping where the dream is discussed.

75The giving of thanks appears to be the rite (after the dreaming) that is most clearly illustrated in the evidence. There are rules and rites for thanksgiving that apply to incubants and other worshippers alike, but also those that are specifically for incubants.

76Firstly, there was a monetary payment for the healing. Concerning the cult of Asklepios, several testimonia mention the prescribed and carefully administered payment of a doctor’s fee, an iatra.142 In the testimonia on monetary payment prescribed by the sanctuary (e.g. iamata of Epidauros or the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse), the iamata emphasize how important it was to repay the god, or else the god would punish the incubant. This punishment emphasizes the importance of giving thanks to Asklepios for the healing, and was of course directed only towards incubants. At any large healing sanctuary that housed numerous help-seekers, the administration of the cult must have incurred considerable costs. A fee taken from those cured would have been one way of covering expenses.

77The iamata of Epidauros also provide evidence for other votives dedicated in the sanctuary, both valuable ones and things of no value, that tell of the nature of the cure. Both the archaeological contexts and the literary testimonia referring to votives attest that incubation sanctuaries housed votives just like any sanctuary offering healings or oracles.143 A votive was dedicated only by the healed person, who was thus giving thanks.

78The cure tablet type of votive, explaining the dream and the nature of the cure, was donated by incubants but not other worshippers. The creation of a graphically or textually detailed cure tablet after a successful healing was a rite that might also have been enacted after sacrifice with a vow, as well as after incubation, although the dedication of a detailed text, relating what happened in the dream or what was prescribed by Asklepios in the dream, was something that only incubants did, and these texts were read by the incubants-to-be. These iamata would have helped incoming incubants to get in the right spirit by reading about already effected cures.144

79In the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse, a sacrifice of an animal is prescribed as thanks for the healing. This animal, of no less than one year of age, would in fact have been of greater value than the piglet sacrificed before incubation.145 The text does not make it clear whether the thank-sacrifice also applied to diseased worshippers who had sacrificed and made a vow, but incubants were certainly the main group of readers. In the Mimiambi, two women give thanks to Asklepios after a cure (whether or not this is after incubation is unclear, though), and although the neokoros performs the sacrifice on his own, holy bread is passed around to a number of onlookers. In a lex sacra from the cult of Asklepios in Erythrai, the same rules concerning thank-sacrifices apply to both incubants and those who had made a vow.146 The sacrifice, being a communication with the god, strengthened the man-god relation that was obtained through incubation. The incubant thanked the god for his or her recovery and thus acknowledged the divine power, and it is likely that they prayed for continued good relations.

80It is clear that it was important to offer thanks for an effected healing. The general idea of giving thanks, by dedicating votives and making thank-offerings, does not differ between sanctuaries. It seems likely that those who were sacrificing and making a vow to a healing god, in whose sanctuary incubation was possible, would have offered just as much thanks as the ill person who would have done all those things and also incubated. The payment of iatra and the detailed cure tablets may be an adaptation particular to incubation, although the general idea may be found in any healing cult. The thank-offering was made for the cure and not for the epiphany — otherwise it would not have been called a doctor’s fee or iatra. The manner of saying thanks, however, as shown in the cure inscriptions, helped to elicit successful dream healings among newcomers to the sanctuary, thus exhibiting the power of the god as well as indicating the manner of execution of the cures.

A ritual pattern

81If we study the ritual elements of incubation and group them according to how common they were in Greek religion otherwise, the following three rough groups are formed.

82The first grouping consists of the ordinary rites performed by worshippers as everyday religious habits for the maintenance of their good standing with the gods: abstinences and purifications which were performed by all worshippers entering a sanctuary, libations, animal sacrifice, saying vows and prayers at the sacrifice as well as the saying of thanks after an effected prayer, and the donation of a votive offering. Were any of these done by the incubants as a separate group? Purification upon entering the sanctuary would in all probability have been performed by everyone who entered, at whichever time fitted them best. As for offerings being made, it is more likely that the incubant was accompanied by his or her family rather than being part of a group of incubants. The requested cure would have been a family concern as well as an individual concern, and the cost for the animal was paid by the whole family (especially in the case of children and women incubating). Even if the technicalities and social composition of the rites of sacrifice or the taking of a vow did not differ for those incubating or those who were only sacrificing and making a vow, and the result was the same (a cure), the experience of a cure achieved through incubating would have been very different.

83The second group consists of the ordinary rites that were performed by all worshippers alike at the sanctuary, but which were harsher or stricter for incubants. The observance of abstinence from sex, which was especially strict for incubants in the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse, was a rule to be observed only by incubants. Also, the purification with water at Piraeus served to particularly mark the incubants, in that seawater was used, and also because it was only the incubants who were to be bathed and not all who entered the sanctuary. In the cult of Asklepios, pre-sacrifices of cakes before the animal sacrifice may have had an impact on the subsequent incubation, although it cannot be proven that the pre-sacrifice of cakes before the sacrifice of an animal was exclusive to incubants. The wearing of an olive wreath at the sacrifice to Asklepios in the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse was nothing out of the ordinary for sacrificers, but keeping the wreath on during the day and the night, and then leaving it on the pillow in the dormitory would have set the incubants apart from other worshippers in the sanctuary. In relation to the wreath-wearing, we also might suggest that a common rite became stricter for incubants. The difficulties in dating the different parts of the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse make the bathing in seawater our only certain example of a rite that was more specific, and stricter, for incubants.

84The third group consists of the rites exclusive to incubants. Not all of these were performed by the incubants in one group, but most were. The invitation in a dream to come and incubate at Lebena, the fasting at Acharaka, and the sacrifice of a black ram on Mount Drion should all be placed in this third group. The probable wearing of white clothes at the Asklepieion of Piraeus, as well as the wearing of a wreath during the whole day (and not only for sacrifice at Pergamon), are also rites that belong to this group. The giving of cakes to Mnemosyne before stepping into the dormitory at Pergamon is an additional example of a rite exclusive to incubants. Sleeping in a holy place itself would have been a remarkable rite, and this was strengthened in some cases by sleeping on a fell or on stibades.

85How do these rites compare to other practices in Greek religions? White clothes and sleeping on fleeces mark the purity of the incubant about to enter into direct contact with the deity. Cakes were given to Mnemosyne, in all likelihood, in order that the incubant would remember the dream. Many of these rites may be compared to those performed by oracle consultants or priests: they denote preparations for the necessary direct contact with the god, without priests as intermediaries. The doctor’s fee, iatra, and the dedication of a cure tablet were practices which were tailored to incubation. These were actions performed after the effected cure, thanking the god and communicating the wonder to other worshippers. The thank-offerings were performed after the healing, at a certain time after the actual incubating (if the cure was not effected on the spot, inside the dormitory). It was the cure that provided occasion for the giving of thanks, and thus the thanksgiving did not, one would think, differ from the saying of thanks for other healings. Stipulated payments might, in a way, also be proof that administration fees were necessary at large healing sanctuaries.

86Looking at the ritual picture as a whole, we can note that the rites exclusively designed for incubants were mainly centred on what happened in the dormitory. Stricter rules have been noted in the preparations for the incubants, but surprisingly few preparations differ from what was done otherwise at the sanctuary, or they were common preparatory steps for everyone with a special addition for incubants.147 Collective sleeping on holy ground, set apart from other worshippers in the sanctuary, was of course the central focus of the ritual.

87The majority of rites surrounding incubation were probably performed with healthy worshippers in the sanctuaries, as well as the sick who chose only to sacrifice and pray.148 The exception is the tomb of Kalchas at Mount Drion and the cave at Acharaka, where no worshippers apart from the incubants slept. Family members might have accompanied the incubants, but they most likely did not go to the oracle just to sacrifice and make a vow, as worshippers did at Asklepieia.

88When the rites surrounding incubation are studied from the point of view of their social context inside the sanctuaries, we find that, just as incubation was a well-accepted phenomenon in Greek religion, the rites of incubation were, with some exceptions, well integrated into what happened otherwise at the same sanctuaries.

2.3. Low-intensity rites and high-intensity factors

89It has been argued above that the models of Olympian and Chthonian rituals and of rites of passage cannot be applied when analysing the rituals of incubation. Furthermore, it has also been argued that the technicalities of incubation rites combine with their social context to form a ritual picture that mostly corresponds to common rituals which were often performed for the upkeep of good relations with the god. The rites that centred on the dormitory itself were, however, especially for incubants and were performed by incubants as a group on their own. The rites at the dormitory were unusual if compared to common rites such as a thysia or the purification with water upon entering the sanctuary. A ritual designed firstly to meet a god, and secondly to receive a healing, cannot be described as an everyday ritual. Not everybody in Greek society was ill at all times, and the people seeking incubation cures had often been ill or infertile for long periods of time, and had consulted doctors without any result.149 How might the extraordinary function of incubation rituals best be explained considering that most of the rites performed by incubants were the same as those for anyone coming to the sanctuary?

Different functions of unusual rites

90One theoretical approach to religious rituals that might be of interest when interpreting Greek rites and rituals is a model based on a lecture by J. Platvoet, presented and elaborated by J. van Baal.150 This model partitions rituals and rites according to the type of occasion they were enacted at, as well as how they were enacted. Platvoet and van Baal view religious rituals (with a special reference to sacrificial rites) as consisting of either common rites that were performed regularly (low-intensity rites) or rites that were performed on exceptional occasions (high-intensity rites). For instance, van Baal considers an animal sacrifice performed at a time of crisis, such as illness, to be a rite of high intensity.151 Low-intensity rites were those performed in everyday life for the maintenance of good standing with the gods, e.g. praying for the preservation of good health.152 Thus, both the purpose of the rite and the manner of its execution determined whether it was a high-intensity or a low-intensity rite.153 According to van Baal, animal sacrifice, and especially the total destruction of the animal, corresponded to the need for a higher-intensity communication with the god.

91As the sacrifice of an animal was such a fundamental rite in Greek religion, I would argue that it can be placed in either the low-intensity or in the high-intensity group, depending on how it was executed. An animal sacrifice enhanced the prayer it accompanied and honoured the gods: the god’s portion at thysia sacrifices may have been small, but it recognized the god’s right to the animal.154 According to van Baal, the complete burning of a sacrificial victim (a holocaust) acknowledges the animal as sacred, as belonging to the god.155 Symbolically, the whole animal was given to the god also at thysia sacrifices, but the holocaust of an animal is generally interpreted by scholars as marking an unusual occasion. Thus, if we apply the van Baal model on Greek sacrifice, the holocaust would clearly mark a high-intensity situation.156

92If we use the van Baal model, incubation was a high-intensity ritual because it was performed in a crisis situation, i.e. illness, infertility, or other pressing issues. It could be argued that unusual rites, such as holocausts, corresponded to the high-intensity occasion at which they are performed, and that this unusual rite confirmed and shaped the strong emotions that the worshipper experienced during illness, war, famine, or the like.157 It might therefore be presupposed that incubation, a high-intensity occasion, would be marked by unusual rites, that is, in Greek ritual practice, unusual sacrifices, such as holocausts. However, this is not the case. Only one holocaust can be noted in an incubation ritual, in the cult of Kalchas at the time of Strabo. The rites surrounding incubation were, with the exception of the rites at the dormitory, similar to those performed by all other worshippers in the sanctuary, and were often performed together with other worshippers.

93The rites for incubants that differed, technically and socially, from what other worshippers did at the sanctuary were rites enacted in the dormitory itself. The wearing of white clothes and sleeping on a fleece are better compared to rites for priests or oracle consultants before meeting a divinity than to purifications of murderers, or battle-line sphagiai.158 If we look at ritual elements that were performed by incubants only (and not by other ill or healthy persons who came to the sanctuaries), there are ritual elements that had the same function as for oracle consultants: being invited by the god to come at Lebena, the paying of an eparche at Oropos, the keeping of the wreath at Pergamon so as to mark the sanctified status of the consultant, and the sacrificing of cakes to Mnemosyne just before entering the dormitory at Pergamon so as to remember the oracular dream.159 There were also rites that were exclusive to incubants, and these were enacted in order that the incubants would become suitable intermediaries with the divine, i.e. become pure enough and properly prepared for meeting the god. This was done by not eating goat products and abstaining from sex at Pergamon, wearing white clothes at Piraeus, and sleeping in fleeces in Oropos, Rhamnous, Piraeus, Athens and on Mount Drion.160 The fasting of incubants at Acharaka is too locally coloured for us to say whether it had to do with purity or not; it seems more to have been a way to engender visions.161

94The unusual rites at incubation thus seem more related to the worshipper being properly prepared and made suitable for communicating directly with the divinity than to the fact that incubants were seeking help in a crisis situation. There might, however, have been other factors that affected the rituals at the sanctuaries, factors which expressed the unusual nature of the occasion at which help was being sought and which shaped the experience of the rituals.

Locality

95Without sleeping in the holy place inside the temenos where the deity was thought to dwell, there could have been no direct contact with the divinity.162 This was the very purpose of the preparations — to obtain through this meeting a cure, a prescription, or an answer to whatever other question the incubant had asked. The special rites that have been discussed for incubants entering the dormitory, which were aimed at making the incubants pure, indicate the importance of the dormitory as a sacred space. Sleeping in one particular space within the sacred temenos area was imperative for the very functioning of the incubation rituals and no doubt contributed to make incubation a high-intensity experience. The connection between sacred space and the need for it to be a pure, as opposed to a profane space, has been discussed by Pakkanen, and no doubt the incubants entered the dormitory with the feeling that they had prepared to step into a sacred space closed-off to all others.163 It is known from leges sacrae that it was considered beneficial to sleep in the temenos area after, for instance, festivals; sleeping in a specially allotted space called an adyton or abaton that was centrally located within the temenos, where the sleepers expected to meet a god, must have intensified the experience of incubation, even though the preparatory rites were much simpler than those for oracle priests.164 The Greeks believed that the heroes and gods contacted at their respective shrines also dwelt in these places, and being allowed to sleep in the home of the deity must have had an intense impact on the incubants.165

Didactic efforts by the sanctuary to inspire dreams and cures

96Another factor that might have augmented the intensity of the experience and contributed to the function of the rituals was reading about the wonders retold by other worshippers who had been cured previously at the sanctuary. Before sleeping in the abaton, as related in the iamata themselves, incubants went around the sanctuary at Epidauros and read the cure tablets.166 Most worshippers, one might presume, believed in what was written on them, and were inspired, as well as imbued with hope, before going to sleep.167 Others, and they were also recorded in the iamata, did not believe in the miraculous events of the sanctuary and were scolded or punished by the god as unbelievers.168 The cure tablets helped incubants to believe in the possibility of miraculous healings and how they could be expected to occur — they shaped the function of the ritual, even though reading them was not, as far as we know, an obligatory part of the ritual. The iamata also helped promote the cult and attest to its success.169 Of course, many people would have returned home without having received help, or would have died in the sanctuaries from their illnesses,170 but the nature of these types of sanctuaries was such that it often improved the quality of life for those who were ill by inducing hope, and thus worshippers kept coming.

Motivation — a factor that affected the experience and outcome of the ritual

97Incubants were ill people, who, in the midst of crises, aspired to come into direct contact with a deity. The absence of more elaborate rites different from those enacted by healthy worshippers at the sanctuary, along with the fact that the basic structure was that of low-intensity rites as defined by the van Baal model (e.g. thysia sacrifices), is surprising when we consider the high-intensity occasion in which incubants were participating, according to the same model. Still, the motivation felt by an ill worshipper who aspired to a miraculous cure might account for a high-intensity experience not illustrated in unusual ritual enactment. If the emotional level of the worshipper was heightened, even though rites of a common and well-known structure were being performed, this might better account for the extraordinary function which the incubation ritual aspired to — curing illness through direct contact with a god.

98I would argue that a sacrifice which technically did not deviate from the majority of sacrifices performed in Greek religion (thysiai) may have been of just as high intensity as a holocaust. The occasion of the enactment of the sacrifice may have changed the emotional input in the ritual, making it high intensity, even though this is not visible in the technical aspects of the rite. Sacrifices offered to Asklepios in the event of an illness serve as examples here. The majority of sacrifices performed before incubation did not differ technically from sacrifices commonly performed in Greek religion. However, the occasion at which the sacrifice was offered by an ill person in hope of a cure might be argued to have lifted the rite to a level of high intensity, even though this is not shown in the technicalities of how the rite was performed. We may thus speak of high-intensity occasions.

99In common rites (e.g. the sacrifice of cakes, thysia sacrifice, and prayers), there may have been an intensified level for incubants, considering the greatness of the need of the incubants and the size of the favour they asked from the god. A full exploration of the sentiments the incubants might have had, or any heightened level of emotion they might have experienced, lies outside the scope of this study. The occasion of the enactment of any rite called for a more-or-less intense wish for communication with the god, as well as a more-or-less precise prayer expressed in that communication. I would suggest that a rite need not have had a fixed level of intensity attached to it, as expressed by the technical aspects of the rite. The meaning, as well as the intensity of the rite, could change depending upon the motivation of the worshipper performing the rite, and this is not always evident in the technicalities of the rite.

100It might be hypothesized that at prayer the emotional disposition of the person praying may have altered the intensity of the rite. Prayer to a ‘culturally postulated superhuman agent’, to use McCauley’s terminology,171 is one of the most fundamental rites in any religion. In ancient religions there were many ways of performing prayers — the upright honouring of the gods with outstretched hands, or supplication at times of crisis, where a worshipper might lie prostrate in front of the god’s statue.172 The language of prayer, however, does not differ much in the few cultic texts that are preserved.173 The same language of prayer was used in the regular honouring of the gods, as well as in times of crisis.174 On the other hand, the intensity of prayer, one might suspect, increased at a time of crisis.175 A relief from Piraeus depicting a sacrifice to Zeus, shows the first participant in the procession kneeling before the god, her hands outstretched towards the god in an entreating gesture.176 Normally, in these sacrificial reliefs, Zeus or Asklepios are greeted by the participants with an upheld hand, a gesture Asklepios mirrors in one relief.177 In the Hymn of Isyllos from the last quarter of the fourth century BC, Asklepios’ power is illustrated in the story of how he healed Isyllos’ son.178 Isyllos writes: ‘When my son saw you he stretched out his hand to you and spoke an imploring word of address (ἱκέτηι μύθωι): “I do not enjoy the blessings of your gifts, Asklepios Paian, please have mercy on me!”… ’179 The hymn indicates how it was seen as proper for an ill person to approach the god Asklepios, and it also gives us a sense of an emotional appeal directed to Asklepios by the son of Isyllos. By using the word suppliant, hiketes, a word which was also often used when describing the incubants in the Epidaurian iamata, Isyllos underlines the intensity of the prayer put to Asklepios.180

101A relief from the Roman period (though probably of Greek workmanship) also depicts this intense supplication.181 In it, a man kneels in front of Asklepios, Hermes stands on the left, supporting the man. It has been interpreted as a dream-vision connected with the cult of Asklepios, and shows, by way of the suppliant’s position, the attitude of any worshipper who approached a god begging to get well.182 Also from Roman times, a passage in Diogenes Laertius relates how Diogenes the Cynic was enraged by a woman kneeling in front of the statues of Asklepios, and his helpers ‘in an ungraceful attitude’, and how he dedicated a bruiser to Asklepios who was to hinder people from falling on their faces when praying.183 According to Klöckner, the posture of the person praying should be connected with male and female behaviour, and not with a particular deity.184 In the above-related reliefs, a woman and a man kneel in front of Asklepios. If we accept that kneeling was a female behaviour, which was seen as somewhat disgraceful and overly emotional, a man kneeling in front of Asklepios would be a sign that there was truly a cause for imploring the god. Someone who was ill and came to incubate or sacrifice and make a vow would have prayed for a healing with a higher emotional input than the worshipper who came to pray for the preservation of their good health.185 If the healing was further given directly by a deity by means of incubation, a deep emotional impact could be expected, as, in the words of McCauley, the participants remembered these ritual experiences and emerged from them convinced that the gods were responsible for what had happened in the ritual.186

102That groups of incubants had the opportunity to encourage each other’s hopes and expound on miraculous events is a further indication that the help-seekers helped to construct a high-intensity experience. To stay at an incubation sanctuary, especially for long periods of time (such as at the large Asklepieia), would have been very much a social occasion.187 Worshippers and their families could have stayed and socialized, and special worshipper guilds were even formed.188 There was a great deal of hope and anticipation among the incubants, as can be seen in the incubation scene of the Ploutos. Here, as soon as Ploutos is cured, all the incubants in the room get up and congratulate him, and they stay awake all night.189 The collective sleep and high expectations, augmented by reading the cure tablets set up in many sanctuaries, must have contributed to the worshippers’ belief that their dreams in the dormitory were significant and could be successful. The collective experience might be seen as an emotionally high-intense part of the ritual. A fragment of a possible unidentified play by Menander further underlines how sleeping in an Asklepieion entailed an emotional experience. Here, a character in the play eloquently compares an insight that he had, which changed him for the better (the text is fragmentary, so it is unclear why he is so excited), with a patient waking up cured after a night’s sleep in a sanctuary of Asklepios.190

103The rituals in the cult of Asklepios did not focus solely on the proper technical enactment of the rites — proper emotional attitude was also important. This is evidenced by the fact that the gifts to the god were often of small monetary value.191 In Greek religion, there was a correlation between the expense of the sacrifice made and the worshipper’s hope for success. Many testimonia attest to the worshippers considering the size of the offering to matter a great deal.192 In incubation, both sacrificial offerings and votive gifts were often inexpensive. In the Ploutos, there is not even a mention of a sacrificial animal — only cakes were sacrificed before incubation.193 In the Lex sacra Hallenstrasse, a piglet is the prescribed animal, the most inexpensive victim.194 One of the most common offerings in the cult of Asklepios was the cock.195 The small size of some of the offerings mentioned in the iamata paints a picture of a cult that did not encourage lavish sacrifice.196 Considering the importance of incubation for the individual, the inexpensive sacrifices and gifts are interesting.

104A notion in the cult of Asklepios that the worshipper was to be good and pure, that it was not the size of the gifts that mattered, but rather the moral state of the worshipper and the sincerity of the prayer, is clearly attested in Roman times.197 For instance, in Philostratus’ Vita Apollonii 1.10, a man arrives at the Asklepieion and sacrifices on a lavish scale, much to the surprise of the priests, who had never even seen him pray there before or stay for a period of time as people normally did. Asklepios subsequently appeared to one of the priests at night and bade him send the man away. Porphyry also wrote that it was important for those offering sacrifices to the gods to be pure in body as well as soul, and not to come with lavish sacrifices but with a pure mind.198 This disposition, we might infer, was one of general purity and righteousness, but also one of approaching the god with an earnest prayer rather than a costly gift. These are testimonia from Roman times, so it is difficult to ascertain their relevance to Classical and Hellenistic times. Given the small monetary value of offerings and votives given to Asklepios in Classical times, it is noteworthy that there was a correlation between inexpensive gifts and a pure mind in later, Roman times.

Making sense of the structure

105Even if we argue that sleeping in a sacred place and being emotionally motivated by a crisis were factors in making the rituals more intense for the incubants, one might still wonder why there were not more unusual rites.

106The answer might be that practical considerations played a part when incubation rituals were being shaped at the various sanctuaries which offered this opportunity to contact a divinity. The only instance of a holocaust is the sacrifice (enagizein) of a black ram (and then the sleeping in its fell) was in the cult of Kalchas on Mount Drion. This was a cult which offered oracular help in difficult situations, and only those who consulted the hero by incubation came here. Thus, it would have been possible for the officiants of the cult to prepare for this elaborate ritual and see to it that everyone who consulted the hero did what was required. The same goes for the Plutonium at Acharaka, to which only ill incubants came. They were led by priests into the cave and left there without food for days in order to obtain visions; these visions were then interpreted by the priests, who seem to have had plenty of time for the incubants. Staying in the cave without food seems, although Strabo does not write so explicitly, a somewhat frightening experience, and this is emphasized by the priests staying in the cave together with the ill and helping them to interpret their dreams. Helping the ill to interpret their dreams might have been a way of getting the incubants to return to normality after communicating with the divine. At an oracle cult that offered visionary oracles to notable enquirers who consulted the hero directly, Trophonios in Boeotia, there were also many elaborate and complicated preparations and debriefings for the consultants.199 Contemporary testimonia speak of how frightening it was to consult Trophonios, and the rites designed to return to normality were undoubtedly necessary.200 A small number of consultants thus seem to make for a more complicated ritual with official cult personnel involved. In these cults, enquirers were few and, in the cult of Trophonios, they paid well.201 In the mass incubations in Asklepieia and other incubation sanctuaries, this was not the case.

107The large incubation sanctuaries, on the other hand, were frequently visited: many incubants stayed for months, and a more elaborate and time-consuming ritual for every worshipper would have been impossible for organizational reasons.202 If there was only one intermediary communicating with the god, such as the Pythia, time and space could have been set aside for preparing her, but if everyone who came to a sanctuary was given this opportunity, such an elaborate ritual would have been impossible to carry out for each worshipper.

108In sum, the rituals of incubation seem to have combined ritual elements and factors that were not overly complicated with an emotional setting, which together made for very popular cults.