Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 August 2011
The old and very illegible inscription from Athens containing the charter of the Eleusinian Mysteries was happily completed by a few small fragments discovered during the American excavations on the Agora. It was not an easy task for Professor B. D. Meritt to bring together the broken pieces and the stone bearing the inscription (now in the British Museum). He did it with his usual epigraphical expertness and contributed very much to the reading and to the restoration of a document which has been a real problem to many scholars for a long time. Of course, the inscription so old and so badly preserved will continue to be debated by specialists in different fields of Classical studies, but the part of Professor Meritt in elucidating this important testimony of the ancient Greek cult always will be gratefully appreciated. I should like to discuss some passages of the document in question in the hope that small changes in certain lines may perhaps make it more intelligible.
1 IG I2 6; Syll.3 42; Ziehen, Leg. Gr. Sacr. II 3; Meritt, B. D., Hesperia XIV (1945), pp. 63 ff.Google Scholar, XV (1946), pp. 249 ff.; Suppl. Ep. Gr. X 6.
2 I am particularly obliged to Professor B. D. Meritt for sending me a copy of the notes he made during his study of the stone in the British Museum and for kind advice given me in his letter. I thank gratefully also Professor A. D. Nock and Professor M. N. Tod for their kind help and suggestions on many points linked with the problems discussed in this article.
3 Cf. J. et L. Robert, Rev. Ét. Gr. LIX-LX (1946–1947), pp. 313–314, nr.79.
4 Gött. Gel. Anz. CLXX (1908), p. 1022.
5 IG I2 6, 106.
6 Rhein. Mus. LXXVII (1928), p. 265.
7 Cf: Syll3 56, 15; 998 ( = LGS 54), 20; 999 (=LGS 63), 16–17; 1033 ( = LGS 103) a 1–2; IG V, 1, 364 ( = LGS 57), passim; IG XII Suppl. 73 ( = LGS 119), 7; Syll.3 978 ( = Lois Sacr. 55). 10–12; 1044 ( = Lois Sacr. 72), 3–4; Dion. Hal. VI 1, 2. Ferguson in the comment on IG II2 1361 (Hesperia, Suppl. VIII, p. 155) writes that the sex of the victims determined whether the priestess or the priest got τἀ Ιερεώσυνα. Such an appropriation founded on a purely accidental circumstance would be absolutely unjust. I think that the words in question denote rather persons than victims. The priest assisted usually men in the sacrifices and in the initiations, the priestess did the same in relation to the women.
8 Cf. Xen., resp. Lac. XV 3; Inschr. Priene 108, 261; 113, 61; IG V 1, 1390 ( = LGS 58) 95.
9 On the παῖς ἀø'έστίας cf. H. G. Pringsheim, Arch. Beitr. zur Gesch. des eleus. Kultes, Bonn 1905, p. 41, 118; A. Oepke, Arch. f. Relgw. XXXI (1934), p. 51, n.1; O. Kern, RE VIII (1935), p. 1236; G. Meautis, Rev. Ét. Anc. XXXIX (1937) PP. 105–107; L. Deubner, Att. Feste, p. 75; M. P. Nilsson, Gesch. gr. Rel. II, p. 88, n.1. See also Pol. XII 5, 10.
10 Cf. OGI 338, 21; Suid. s.v. μεταγωγεῖν. If the letter E is not absolutely certain, one could read: έν ḥ [βει.
11 Cf. Foucart, P., Les mystères d'Eleusis, Paris 1914, p. 275.Google Scholar
12 Hermes XXXVIII (1903), p. 154.
13 Cf., however, Orph. hymn. 43, 10.
14 Anc. Gr. Inscr. Br. Mus. I 2. Dittenberger, Syll.3 304 read: ὦσι
15 O. c, pp. 1021, 1023.
16 O. c, p. 266.
17 Hermes 1944, pp. 217 ff.
18 Leg. Gr. Sacr. II, 35, 1; 40, 8; 79, 10; Lois Sacrées 11, 1; 35, 1; 79, 10. Cf. Wilamowitz, Heracles II, 113.
19 Cf. Schulthess, O., Vormundschaft nach att. Recht, Zürich 1886, pp. 31–32.Google Scholar
20 Syll.3 915 a 2; IG IV 932, 61. Cf. A. Wilhelm, Urk. der dram. Auf. p. 236.
21 On the preliminary ceremonies before the initiation itself cf. Roussel, P., Bull. Cor. Hel. LIV 1930, pp. 51–55.Google Scholar
22 Supplementary note. Because of technical difficulties in printing, the dots could not be put underneath certain letters in the beginning (b.) and the end (e.) of lines (as seen on the stone). Mark with dots the following letters: π (1.22,e.). ν (1.24,b.); ε (1.24,e.); ε (1.25,e.); χ (1.33,b.); ε (1.37,e.); μ (1.39,e.); π (1.42.e.).
