¹ Dr. Schubart very kindly pointed out this resemblance; he regards the attribution of the text, on palaeographical grounds, to the late Ptolemaic period as quite certain. Dr. Schubart has helped us in other ways. Our warmest thanks are due to him, and to Professor Wilcken and Dr. Bell for their help in the reading of the text; to the Trustees of the British Museum for permission to publish the papyrus; to the late Professor F. Ll. Griffith and to Professors Edgerton and Glanville and Sir Herbert Thompson for help on the Egyptology; and to Professors A. E. R. Boak, Campbell Bonner, W. M. Calder, Franz Cumont, W. S. Ferguson, R. Marcus, M. P. Nilsson, A. Plassart, H. J. Rose, W. L. Westermann, Dr. K. Hanell, Dr. M. N. Tod, Dr. W. W. Tarn, Mr. M. V. Anastos, Mr. M.P. Charlesworth, Mr. C. F. Edson, Jr., Mr. R. P. Hinks, Mr. H. M. Last, and Mr. C. T. Seltman for their generous aid. Mr. Roberts and Mr. Skeat are in the first instance responsible for the palaeographical remarks and for the reading of the text, and Mr. Nock for the commentary; but we have worked together. We are grateful to Professor Wilcken for allowing us to associate this publication with his name.

² BGU, VIII.

³ The abrupt shifts of mood and tense in our text (infinitive, future, imperative) are paralleled in earlier Greek laws relating to priesthoods, e.g. SIG, 1003, 1009–1012, 1016 (Iasos, 4th cent. B.C.; at the beginning of this there is an analogy for the δὲ of 1. 10; (…).

⁴ The fragment from Magdola (82 later) includes regulations, as does SB, 4549; OGI, 180 refers to a new foundation, but is a dedication. Professor A. E. R. Boak has kindly communicated a provisional text of P. Mich. 2710 — the nomos of a gild of the freedmen of Claudius resident at Tebtunis providing for the election of a ἡγούμενος for a year (the fourth of Claudius). It shows striking similarities to our text.

⁵ Cf. pp. 80f. later.

⁶ Cf. P. Mich. Tebt. 121 recto 2. ii, 1, , in an abstract in which Dionysius has not been mentioned. Cf. H. Thompson, A family archive from Siut, from papyri in the British Museum, including an account of a trial before the Laocritae of the year B.C. 170, 1, 59, where the names of the witnesses are omitted in a copy of the material parts of the deed. W. P. Edgerton, Münch. Beitr. z. Pap. u. ant. Rechtsgesch., 19, 1934, 299 ff., remarks that some older Egyptian legal documents are not full texts but abstracts or even ex parte statements.

⁷ Cf. san Nìcolò, M., ΕΠΙΤϒΜΒΙΟΝ Heinrich Swoboda dargebracht, 284, 296 ff.Google Scholar

⁸ Guéraud, P. Enteuxeis, 1, 20 (pp. 53 ff.).

⁹ P. Tebt. 700.37.

¹⁰ The edict of Philopator (Cichorius, C., Römische Studien, 21Google Scholar), ordering those who initiated for Dionysus to come to Alexandria and deposit their sacred books under seal, is a measure regulating not associations but self-ordaining ministers of the type discussed by Nock, , Conversion, 28 ff., 277Google Scholar. At Talmis in the fifth century of our era the king names officials of the synodoi for Isis (Otto, Priester u. Tempel, 1. 251 n. 2), but this is outside Egypt.

¹¹ For this cf. Mitteis, Grundz., 47 ff. and SB, 6704, in which huntsmen of Aphrodito in 538 A.D. made a contract with their accepted leaders. The laws of associations are not ‘agrapha,’ for agreements so described imply the existence of ‘engrapha,’ instruments achieving the same purpose with full formality. The normal basis of associations lies in something like the Solonian law quoted by Gaius in the Digest 47.22.4, .

¹² Cf. Welles, C. B., Royal Correspondence of the Hellenistic period, 324Google Scholar; P. Tebt. 780.12.

¹³ Cf. Ljungvik, H., Zur Syntax der spätgriechischen Volkssprache (Skr. hum. Vetenskap.-Samf. i Uppsala. 27, iii, 1932), 45Google Scholar on the use of καί to couple a participle and a finite verb; Mayser, E., Grammatik, 2, iii, 22, 203Google Scholar, on loose usage of the participle.

^13a Such as the society of Harsamtus at Dendera had; n. 112 later. In P. Mich. Inv. 1277 the members, who select a president, are thus introduced; .

¹⁴ Cf. Westermann, W. L., J. Eg. Arch. 18, 1932, 28Google Scholar; A. E. R. Boak, P. Mich. Tebt. I, p. 71, and index s.v.; BGU, 1615.6 (weavers at Philadelphia; 84 A.D.), Wilcken, V., Abh. Berlin, 1933, 6, 37ffGoogle Scholar. (Philadelphia, 2nd cent. B.C.).

¹⁵ Professor Nilsson and Dr. Hanell have kindly confirmed this, finding for ἔνη only IG, 1 (ed. 2), 4 1. 19 (455/4 B.C.), : this is a restoration and, if it is right, it must be noticed that the meaning of hένας is made clear by the words which follow.

¹⁶ Cf. T. A. Sinclair's note ad loc.

¹⁷ Philochorus fr. 181: αὐτήν (sc. τὴν ἕνην) has been quoted as evidence that the ἕνη must have been the last day of the month in the time of Philochorus. But this fragment comes from the note of Proclus on Hesiod, Works, 768, which begins TE. ; then comes the sentence quoted, and then remarks on the fourth day and the seventh. It is therefore possible that Phil. said ; the note of Proclus was concerned with subject matter and not with language. One must not press the point, but he did not say καὶ οὐχ, .

¹⁸ H. Linssen, Jahrb. f. Liturgiewiss. 8, 1928, 66, remarks on the absence of dominus deusque from inscriptions.

¹⁹ On coins it appears first under Aurelian and even then only in the products of the mint of Serdica (Mattingly-Sydenham-Webb, Roman Imperial Coinage, 5.1.258 f.; Fr.Sauter, , Der römische Kaiserkult bei Martial u. Statius, 33Google Scholar). On κὐριος in general cf. now McCown, C. C.Ann. Am. Sch. Or. Res. 13, 1933, 139 ff.Google Scholar κὐριος alone of Auletes in BGU, 1767.1 (prob. after 64/3 B.C.), 1768.9 (undated). In OGI, 186 (62 B.C.) a high official in a proskynema uses the phrase τοῦ κυρἰον . Cf. now Otto, W., Hist. Zeit, 152, 545 f.Google Scholar

²⁰ The next Cleopatra is just θεά in Preisigke, , SB, 1570Google Scholar. It has been assumed that she died; but cf. the warning of Gauthier, H., Le livre des rois d'Egypte, 4, 399 n. 1Google Scholar; for the date of the marriage, ib. 398.

²¹ Such as the αἱρέσεις of ephebe associations (Wilcken, Chr. 141–2) and possibly of others (Wilcken, , Abh. Berlin 1933, 6, 38Google Scholar). Cf. perhaps Dessau, Inscr. lat. sel. 7212.25 ut quisquis seditionis causa de loco in alium locum transient.

²² Cf. Seyrig, H., BCH, 51, 1927, 224Google Scholar on the synonymous use of ἔτος and ἐνιαυτός side by side in a Thasian text of the second century B.C.

^22a The prohibition by Paul of appeal to the courts springs from the background of the life of the Judaism of the Dispersion.

²³ Kourouniotis, K., Thompson, H. A., Hesperia, 1, 1932, 193 ff.Google Scholar; Stavropoullos, Ph. D., Arch. Delt., 13, 1930 (publ. 1933), παρ. 2Google Scholar.

²⁴ Wilhelm, J. Keil-A., Monum. Asiae min. ant., 3. 1–4Google Scholar (probably 3rd cent. A.D.). Cf. variation elsewhere between Zeus Olbios and Theos Olbios. (Höfer, in Roscher, Lex. Myth., 3. 329 f.Google Scholar, 5. 638; at Panderma near Cyzicus also , Hasluck, F. W., JHS, 25, 1905, 56CrossRefGoogle Scholar), and the diversity of terminology in various places illustrated by Br.Müller, , ΘΕΟΣ ΜΕГΑΣ (Diss. Phil. Hal., 21, 3, 1913)Google Scholar; at Patara we find both and (Kalinka, E., Tituli Asiae minoris, II, 2 nos. 403–4Google Scholar; the first is coupled with Poseidon Hedraios and Helios Apollo). Zeus Bronton is familiar; in South Russia we find (Suppl. epigr. gr., 2.481; 234 A.D.), that is, the use of the form with theos in a public dedication.

²⁵ Dated before Christian era by Perdrizet, P., BCH, 23, 1899, 592CrossRefGoogle Scholar, in 2nd cent. A.D. more probably by Cook, op. cit. 882. (Mr. R. P. Hinks is inclined to date ca. 200 A.D. on grounds of style.) Cf. Perdrizet, l.c., for other texts from this region which he refers to the same sodality, one including the phrase συναγωγῇ, dated in 93/4 A.D., if the Sullan era was used, ca. 114/5 if the Pompeian [a fact due to Dr. M. N. Tod's kindness]. Ziebarth, E., Ath. Mitt. 30, 1905, 145 f.Google Scholar, doubts, with reason, whether the texts do so refer, but they are kindred.

²⁶ Unless ὑψίστου in Kaibel, , Epigr. gr. 465Google Scholar = IG, 4.620 is a poetical epithet. This curious poem shows a special pious devotion.

²⁷ Pelekides, S., Arch. Delt., 8, 1923 (publ. 1925), 268 f.Google Scholar For three other dedications to Z. H. from Edessa, cf. Baege, W., De Macedonum sacris (Diss. phil. Hal., 22, 1, 1913), 8Google Scholar. Duchesne-Bayet, , Arch. miss, scient. 3.3, 1876, p. 248Google Scholar, no. 84, publish a dedication from Thessalonica αρ. Papageorgiu, , ΑΘΗΝΑ, 15, 1903, 46Google Scholar, n. 14, reads Ἀλέξιον, a less likely name in Macedon (as Mr. Edson remarks) and then . Here Δ.θ., like θεῷ Διί at Tralles (Cook 958), suggests a foreign god bearing the name of Zeus. Ὑψίστου is a better supplement, but we could read Κτησίου or Ὑπάτου etc.

²⁸ Daicovici, C., Anuarul Cluj, 1928–1932, 1, 85 no. 3Google Scholar, ; another instance (θεῶ ὑ.) cited by him, ib.

^28a (1) Zeus Hypsistos: relief of ‘the just goddess Nemesis’ dedicated to him, presumably in a shrine (Kubitschek, W., Jahrb. f. Altertumskunde, 4, 1910, 147 ff.Google Scholar; Perdrizet, P., BCH, 38, 1914, 89 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; bought at Thessalonica and may well come thence).

(2) dedication to Theos Hypsistos: Avezou-Picard, , BCH, 37, 1913, 100Google Scholar; cf. p. 65 later.

²⁹ Cagnat, R., Rev. arch., 5th Ser. 20, 1924, 47 f.Google Scholar

³⁰ Plassart, A., Mélanges Holleaux, 201 ff.Google Scholar; Revue biblique, N. S. 11, 1914, 523 ff.Google Scholar (θ. ὑ. 3 times, ὑ. once; one dedication, without the name of the deity, by a slave who has become free).

³¹ Plassart, A., Exploration de Délos, 11, 289 ff.Google Scholar

³² Hicks, E. L., JHS, 8, 1887, 115Google Scholar suggests that the cult may be identical with that of Zeus Megistos.

³³ For this cf. now Cumont, , Cat. Cinquantenaire, ed. 2, 67 f.Google Scholar

³⁴ Add a dedication at Apamea ad Maeandrum, Suppl. epigr. gr. 6.266.

³⁵ A new dedication to Z. H. in Suppl. epigr. gr. 2.553.

³⁶ New inscriptions and important discussion by Laumonier, A., BCH, 58, 1934, 337 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar [C. F. E.]

³⁷ Add Suppl. epigr. gr. 7.146–7; Seyrig, H., Syria, 14, 1933, 263 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁸ For the god's foot as performing miracles, cf. Weinreich, O., Antike Heilungswunder, 67 ff.Google Scholar

³⁹ Kalinka, , Tituli Asiae minoris, II 2Google Scholar, no. 402.

⁴⁰ Votive inscription at Sebastopolis to appear in Studie Pontica 3, 284Google Scholar; M. Cumont has kindly supplied a copy of the text.

⁴¹ Revised readings of one text in Suppl. epigr. gr. 3.590.

⁴² On this, cf. Cumont, Atti pontif. Acc. rom. arch. Ser. 3, Memorie, 1. 1, 1923, 76 no. 22Google Scholar: p. 64 later.

⁴³ ὕψιστος, like and unlike σώζων, appears never to be found as a legend on coins.

⁴⁴ Cf. at Jerash (Jones, A. H. M., JRS, 18, 1928, 172Google Scholar).

⁴⁵ Note in particular in the hymn to Apollo by Aristonous of Corinth (latter half of 3rd cent. B.C.) inscribed on stone at Delphi and the cause of honors to its author: Diehl, , Anthologia lyrica, 2, 298Google Scholar. In the hymn to Isis at Cyrene (103 A.D.) we read, (Peek, W., Der Isishymnus von Andros, 129Google Scholar).

⁴⁶ Cf. Cook, 868 ff.

⁴⁷ Cf. Pindar, , Pae. 6.92 f.Google Scholar, .

⁴⁸ S. Pelekides, Arch. Delt. 8. 1923 (pub. 1925) 268. Mr. C. F. Edson, Jr., to whom this point is due, remarks that it is at least a coincidence that we know a Zoilus as mintmaster under king Perseus till ca. 174/3 B.C. (A. Mamroth, Z. f. Num. 38, 1928, 4 ff.). Mr. Tod, while emphasizing the fact that we are not yet able to trace the development of Macedonian lettering chronologically, thinks this text compatible with a date fairly early in the 2nd cent. B.C.; it looks older, he says, than Ann. Brit. Sch. Ath., 18.145 (128 B.C.) and is fairly certainly later than 18.134 (ca. 240 B.C.) Mr. Edson also draws attention to the speculations of Ecphantus on the kinship of god, king, and eagle (Goodenough, E. E., Yale Classical Studies, 1, 1928, 82 f.Google Scholar); cf. Corp. Herm. 18.16 and Cic. de diuinat. 1.26 and Pease ad loc., and in particular his reference to Arrian Anab. 2.3.3f., in which Gordios is said to have seen an eagle sitting on the yoke of his oxen, and to have been told to sacrifice to Zeus the king, and to the cult of Zeus of Bottiaea, on which cf. Babelon, E., Rois de Syrie, xiGoogle Scholar. The two griffins in the akroterion of the stele are separated from the eagle, which stands in a wreath (as on the coins struck by the mintmaster Zoilus for Perseus) under the inscription; there can be no thought of the later use of both eagle and griffin as symbols of apotheosis. In spite of the generally Oriental connections of the griffin (Cumont, Syria, 9, 1928, 102), there need be no direct relation to the East, for the griffin was familiar in these parts, as we see from the early coins of Abdera.

⁴⁹ Nilsson, M. P., The Mycenaean origin of Greek mythology, 221 ff.Google Scholar, argues forcibly that Zeus is originally the one god dwelling on the mountain peak or in the heavens.

⁵⁰ It is a Ptolemaic emblem from the beginning of their coinage. On the stele, as on Ptolemaic coins, the eagle faces left; on the coins of Perseus, as on the silver and bronze struck by Alexander at Amphipolis, he faces right.

⁵¹ Cf. Edson, ap. Nock, , Conversion, 282Google Scholar.

⁵² Cf. Weinreich, O., Ath. Mitt. 37, 1912, 19 ff.Google Scholar; Campbell Thompson—, R.Hutchinson, W., Archaeologia, 79, 1929, 140 ff.Google Scholar (in temple of Nebo at Nineveh; mid. 1st cent, A.D.); Suppl. epigr. gr. 3.535 (of Thracian ridergod); Rehm, A.Milet, 1.7. p. 349 no. 285Google Scholar, where, as the editor remarks, the god might be Zeus, Apollo, Asklepios, or even Sarapis.

⁵³ Hoffmann, O., RE, 14, 690Google Scholar explains the Macedonian month name ὑπερβερεταῖος as derived from a (postulated) festival of Zeus ὑπεβερέτας, an epithet which would be synonymous with .

While this article is in proof Mr. C. F. Edson writes that Dr. Ch. I. Makatonas has found more Zeus Hypsistos inscriptions at Kozani in Macedonia.

⁵⁴ Laumonier, A., BCH, 58, 1934, 294 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar [C. F. E.] Note at Lagina . (Cook, 879).

⁵⁵ Cf. Adad as ‘summum maximumque’ in Macrob., Sat. 1, 23. 17Google Scholar; Dussaud, R., Rev. Arch. 4th Ser. 5, 1905, 161 ff.Google Scholar; Baudissin, W. W., Adonis u. Esmun 77 n.Google Scholar; Baudissin-Eissfeldt, , Kyrios, 3. 83Google Scholar; Cumont, , Arch. f. Rel. 9, 1906, 334Google Scholar; RE, 9. 444 ff.Google Scholar; Dodd, C. H., The Bible and the Greeks, 11Google Scholar.

⁵⁶ Cf. Suppl. epigr. gr. 7.59 (4th ? cent, A.D., between Beroea and Antioch) .

⁵⁷ Premerstein, Keil-von, Zweite Reisebericht (Denkschr. Wien, 54, 2, 1911)Google Scholar, no. 189; cf. their note on no. 39 in their first Bericht. (Denkschr. Wien, 53, 2, 1908). It would hardly be plausible to suggest that Hypsiste represents the survival of a type of Judaism such as we know at Elephantine in the text published by Cowley, A., Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C. (note pp. xviii f.Google Scholar).

⁵⁸ Cook, 888.

^58a Laumonier, A., BCH, 58, 1934, 337 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁵⁹ Perdrizet, , BCH, 20, 1896, 363Google Scholar; add A. Dain, Inscriptions grecques du Musée du Louvre, no. 71. In one of the Delian texts, which is almost certainly Jewish, θεὸς ὔψιστος is thanked for a healing (Plassart, , Mélanges Holleaux, 205, 209 f.Google Scholar).

⁶⁰ Berlin Sitzungsberichte, 1897, 200 ff.Google Scholar For such development, cf. Epiphan., Pan. 80.1Google Scholar.

⁶¹ Hypsistos (Supp. Rev. Instr. Publ. Belg., 1897); C. R., Ac. Inscr. 1906, 63 ff.Google Scholar; Musée Belge, 14, 1910, 55 ff.Google Scholar Cf. Calder, W. M., JHS, 31, 1911, 196CrossRefGoogle Scholar on ᾽Υοῃ Ὀρονδίῳ near Laodicea Combusta, Ἰυῷ Διονύσῳ north of Iconium as including transliterations of Jahwe; Keil-Premerstein, 2, no. 224 and their note for the cult of the cosmic at Iconium (Cronin, H. S., JHS, 22, 1902, 124CrossRefGoogle Scholar) is probably Christian, as Professor Calder kindly states in a letter, on grounds of style and period, although it is not (as has been stated) accompanied by crosses; but, as he adds, ὕψιστος is apparently unique in Christian epigraphy and the text may (as Ramsay, W. M. suggests, Luke the Physician, 389 ff.Google Scholar) come from the Hypsistarioi. There is the alternative possiblity of its being a literary flosculus, chosen as metrically convenient; the text includes also ὀπάων. [Calder's transcript, made in 1908, gives ὑψἰστοιο, not ὑψἰστον. He further notes that the subject of the inscription must be identical with the πρεσβὐτερος of J. R. S. Sterrett, Epigraphical journey, no. 197.]

⁶² When the Jews revolted in 66 A.D. there were disturbances in some but not all Syrian cities and in Alexandria, but they are not recorded elsewhere (Josephus, , BJ, 2, 457 ff.Google Scholar: Fink, R. O., Journ. Rom. Stud. 23, 1933, 119CrossRefGoogle Scholar; in 116 the troubles were in Alexandria, Cyrenaica, Mesopotamia, and Cyprus (Henderson, B. W., Five Roman Emperors, 334 ff.Google Scholar). Even at Alexandria earlier Philo states that large numbers of non-Jews came over to the celebration of the making of the Septuagint held on the island of Pharos every year (De vita Mosis 2. 7 sect. 41, ii p. 140/1 Mangey).

^62a Reinach, A. J., Rev. ét. juives, 65 and 66, 1913Google Scholar (with the suggestion that Jewish and Phrygian legends had combined).

⁶³ Keil, J., Anatolian Studies presented to Sir William Ramsay, 263Google Scholar; in RE, 13, 2197Google Scholar he is less confident about the explanation from Judaism. Zeus Hypsistos at Cyzicus, who has the quasi-Dionysiac relief, is coupled with other ordinary pagan deities: cf. n. 25 above. Pârvan, V., Dacia, 1, 1924, 277Google Scholar entered a general caveat.

⁶⁴ Cook 889.

⁶⁵ Cook 885 f.

⁶⁶ Seyrig, H., Syria, 14, 1933, 270 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar This god can be coupled with the Dioscuri, ib. 280ff.: with ‘la Bonne Epoque,’ 252 n. 6. For him cf. also Cumont, , Fouilles de Doura-Europos, 104Google Scholar n. 4.

⁶⁷ Plassart, A., Rev. biblique, N. S. 11, 1914, 529, n. 5Google Scholar.

⁶⁸ Ramsay, W. M., Cities and bishoprics of Phrygia, 2, 652 f.Google Scholar, no. 563.

⁶⁹ The material at Seleucia on the Calycadnus (n. 24 supra) has been treated as Jewish, in view of the known later strength of the Jewish colony there: and yet, could a Jew or Judaizer have so used the name Zeus? Possibly; we simply do not know the limits of Jewish divagation.

⁷⁰ Lebas-Waddington ad no. 416 emphasize the distinction of Zeus Hypsistos at Mylasa from the three other forms of Zeus there known.

⁷¹ Note ib. 834 a dedication from the district of Cyzicus (2nd or 3rd cent, A.D.), , where βρονταίῳ may be, as Cook suggests, an afterthought, or may again be due to the writer having felt that some more specific and personal epithet was needed.

⁷² Cf. Montgomery, J. A., Daniel, 215 f.Google Scholar; Lake-Cadbury on Acts 7.48 and 16.17; cf. Moore, G. F., Judaism, 3, 132Google Scholar (he emphasizes that ὔψιστος had not a fixed relation to a fixed Hebrew word). There is a curious analogy in the Aramaic papyri from Elephantine. In them Jews commonly (not always) use to one another the phrase ‘ya’ u the God, but in dealing with Persians repeatedly (not always) the God of heaven or ‘ya’ u the God of heaven (Cowley, A., Aramaic papyri, xviiiGoogle Scholar) and in no. 32.3 (according to Cowley, apparently a note by the messenger of an answer given verbally) the Persian authorities are recorded as saying ‘the God of heaven’ (ib. 123); but in no. 30.6 the priests of Khnub are represented as using ‘ya’ u the God (ib. 113).

⁷³ Epistulae et leges, ed. Bidez-Cumont, , 134 p. 193Google Scholar; in a contemporary letter probably to Theodorus he says (89b, p. 135). Nectarius, the pagan son of a Christian, writing to Augustine (Ep. 103) has ‘cum nos ad exsuperantissimi Deicultum compelleres’ and ‘Deus summus te custodiat’; Batiffol, P., La paix constantinienne et le catholicisme, 192Google Scholar, notes that Christian terminology accepted ‘summus’ but not ‘exsuperantissimus.’

⁷⁴ Preisendanz, , P. gr. mag. 4, 1068Google Scholar (of Balsames), 5.46 (of solar god), 12.63 (of Iao Adonai); ὔψιστος is applied to God the Father and to Christ in P. Oslo., 5.7, 10 (Preisendanz, vol. II, p. 191). Philo Ad Gaium 23 § 157 (2, p. 569 M), 40 § 317 (p. 592) are quoted as instances of Roman officials using ὔψιστος θεός mean Jahwe; but in both Philo is not professing to quote verbally and is presumably using his own words.

⁷⁵ The dedication and solemn kindling of lamps has been thought to point to Jewish influence but is not a clear indication, in view of the frequency with which lamps were dedicated to gods in general (Nilsson, , Gött. gel. Anz., 1916, 49 ff.Google Scholar). A puzzling case is OGI 755/6, two inscriptions, the first mentioning a priest τοῦ , the second a prophetes τ. ἁ. θ. ὑ., at Miletus, as honored by the gardeners and the associated spikers of razorfish respectively. We have no information as to the date of these texts. They may show Jewish influence — to judge from the cumulative effect of the epithets: or they may be related to the monotheistic trend of the oracle of Claros, which is credited with an interest in Jewish piety; cf. Nock, , Rev. ét. anc. 30.1928, 280ff.Google Scholar

The possibilities of coincidence are illustrated by the appearance of κνρί θιῷ at Philippopolis with a relief of the Thracian ridergod (Suppl. epigr. gr., 3. 513). Cf. Pârvan, V., Riv. di fil., 52, 1924, 326Google Scholar on a henotheistic trend in Thrace.

⁷⁶ Often coupled with ‘summus’: Cumont, , Arch. Rel. 9, 1906, 323 ff.Google Scholar; Türk, , RE, 4A, 900 f.Google Scholar ‘summus’ had a wide use in Latin from early times: it is in no sense specific, though it could be adapted to the henotheistic trend (Batiffol, , La paix constantinienne, 188 ff.Google Scholar).

⁷⁷ At Pergamon we have on a small altar (Cook 882); at Badinlar in Phrygia (Ramsay, , JHS, 10, 1889, 223Google Scholar); Alexander Polyhistor ap. Diog. Laert. 8.31 has (sc. ψυχὰς) , referring to the supreme being as enthroned in the highest celestial sphere (A. Delatte, La vie de Pythagore [Mém. acad. Belg. 2nd Ser. 17.2.1922], 226 f.). In a dedication at Rome of 370 A.D. we have τὸ πᾶν (CIL, 6.509). Attis, like Cybele, had from near the end of the third century A.D., been called omnipotent; σ.τ.π. is said by Graillot, , Culte de Cybèle, 549 n. 6Google Scholar to be ‘empruntée à la langue des mystères,’ but the verb συνέχω is a term expressly said by Galen to belong to later Stoicism (cf. von Arnim, J., Sto. uet. fragm., 2 pp. 144 ff.Google Scholar; hence the use in Corp. Herm. VIII 2, XI 5, Exc. Herm. XIV 1Google Scholar, XV 1 ed. Scott). A smaller figure could under the stress of emotion be promoted to such rank. Thus a dedication from the territory of Rithymna in Crete (Kaibel, , Epigr. gr. 815Google Scholar; prob. 2nd cent. A.D.) tells how Salvius Menas and his wife worshipped Hermes; she died, and apparently he regarded it as due to his omission of an annual sacrifice. He grieved and learnt his lesson, and in the closing couplet invoked the god as (the whole is reminiscent of confessioninscriptions and of the aretalogy type in general; cf. Nock, , Conversion, 83 ff.Google Scholar). Hermes is κύριος and σωτήρ in a dedication at Comana in Cappadocia (Souter, A., Studies Ramsay, 402 f.Google Scholar). So Priapus became a solar deity (Herter, H., De Priapo, 306Google Scholar) and ‘pantheus’ (ib. 236 ff.). ὕπατος was earlier occasionally used of other gods (Jessen, , RE, 9.250 f.Google Scholar), and the sun is ὕπατος [θεῶν] in the Susa hymn, Suppl. epigr. gr. 7.14; cf. [Eurip.] Rhes. 703 ;

⁷⁸ Cf. Mendel, G., Cat. sculpt. Constantinople, 3,52 ff.Google Scholar; Körte, A., Ath. Mitt. 25, 1900. 431 ff., 443 f.Google Scholar (with revised reading, Suppl. epigr. gr. 1,463); Cumont, , Textes et Monuments, 2, 172 no. 548Google Scholar; Zingerle, J., Jahresh., 22, 1926, Beibl. 50 f.Google Scholar (with remarks on the tendency to a neutral view of deity); Keil-von Premerstein, 2, 180, 186; Buckler-Calder-Cox, , JRS, 15, 1925, 161 f.Google Scholar; Suppl. epigr. gr. 6. 409, with Zingerle's note, for Δικαίῳ separately.

⁷⁹ Cf. Nock, , Harv. Theol. Rev. 23, 1930, 261 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Am. J. Phil. 55, 1934, 288 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and on the thin line between abstraction and personification cf. Radermacker, L., Jahresh., 29, 1934, 93 ff.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ OGI, 96; in 742 (37 B.C.) simply .

⁸¹ Rubensohn, O., Arch. Pap., 5, 1909, 163 n. 10Google Scholar, . The names of the dedicants do not prove anything.

⁸² n. 74 above. The prayer at Alexandria has been mentioned n. 42 and pp. 64 f.

⁸³ Viereck, P., Philadelphia, 12 ff.Google Scholar; Viereck-Zucker, , BGU 7 pp. 7 ff.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Edgar, C. C., Zenon papyri in the University of Michigan, 84Google Scholar.

⁸⁵ BGU, 1579. 9f. (118/9 A.D.), 1580.11 (119 A.D.).

⁸⁶ Edgar, p. 162; P. Cairo Zen. 59168. For Dioscuri, cf. P. Cairo Zen. 59569.24.

⁸⁷ Viereck, , Philadelphia, 14Google Scholar, Wilcken, U., Arch. Pap. 8, 1927, 280Google Scholar; Bell, H. I., Gnomon, 4. 1928, 585Google Scholar; P. Cairo Zen. 59745.32 and note on ll. 34–7. For the Arsinoeion cf. P. Columbia Zen. 39.14 f., with Westermann-Hasenoehrl ad loc. pp. 96 f.: for the Samothracian deities, P. Cairo Zen. 59296.32 (250 B.C.).

Anubis has been inferred from SB. 5796 ( = Lefebvre, , Ann. ant. serv., 13, 1913, 93 ff.Google Scholar), a votive relief which does not necessarily prove the existence of an independent temple.

⁸⁸ Wilcken, , Arch. Pap. 9, 1928, 74Google Scholar.

⁸⁹ P. Cairo Zen. 59422.5 (the Zeus without epithet may be in fact Zeus Labrayndaios, mentioned with Asklepios in the text cited in n. 91: it is cot certain whether the temples in question were at Philadelphia); cf. P. Columbia Zen. 7 for a priest of Asklepios whose habitat is unspecified.

⁹⁰ Wilcken, U., Festgabe Deissmann, 1 ff.Google Scholar (SB, 7351).

⁹¹ Edgar 31, with notes, p. 96.

⁹² P. Eubensohn, P. Elephantine, 10 with notes pp. 43 ff.

⁹³ P. Enteuxeis, pp. 15 f.; on the Rosetta stone (OGI, 90.52) permission is formally given to private persons to celebrate the festival of the god Epiphanes Eucharistos and to erect and keep his shrine, performing the monthly and annual rites.

⁹⁴ For an instance of the first generation doing so, cf. p. 72 n. 100 later. Attention should be paid to a list of festivals preserved in Ross, P.. Georg. 41Google Scholar (2nd cent, A.D.; edited by Krüger, O., in Zereteli-Krüger, , Papyri aus russischer u. georgischer Sammlungen, 2.188 ff.Google Scholar). It is ϕόρια, Σούχια. The Delia and Demetria are purely Greek and certain festivals are distinguished by the express description Αἰγυπτίων. This looks as though it were the calendar of the aggregate of temples in a place where Greek and Egyptian elements had their place side by side. In general cf. Brady, T. A., The reception of the Egyptian cults by the Greeks (University of Missouri Studies, 10, i, 1935), 14 ff.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Smith, C., F. Ll. Griffith, Cl. Rev. 5. 1891, 77 ff.Google Scholar; Petrie, W. M. F., Naucratis, l. 28 pl. 30.2Google Scholar. Kalén, Ture, Berliner Leihgabe griechischen Papyri I (Uppsala Universitets Årsskrift), 188Google Scholar explains no. 18.13 as land that had once belonged to Ammon (though there is nothing in the papyrus to war-rant this); the phrase occurs in a report to the village-scribe of Lagis in the Fayum.

As early as the 2nd cent. B.C. Ἄμμων could be regarded by the Egyptians as a Greek God; cf. the double names of certain individuals where the Demotic name is a translation of the Greek in Spiegelberg, Ein Erbstreit a.d. ptol. Ågypten (Schr. d. Wiss. Ges. in Strassburg, Heft 13, 1912) p. 45Google Scholar, à propos of the double name Ἀμμωνία ἡ καὶ Σενμῖνις; he also quotes the name from P. Oxy. 494, 6, where the ‘Greek’ version of the name comes second. [T. C. S.]

⁹⁶ 2.42; 4.181; 2.74.

⁹⁷ Ancient Egypt, 1928, 37 ffGoogle Scholar; Griffith Studies, 13–15.

⁹⁸ 18th dyn. hymn trans, by Ranke, H. in Gressmann, H., Altorientalische Texte zum A. T., ed. 2, 13Google Scholar.

⁹⁹ Note the emergence of a curious Egyptian compound in Greek at the same time in (i.e. Thoth-Khonsu) 80/69 B.C.; in the Ghizeh Museum: Milne, J. G., JHS, 21, 1901, 281 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar (unless it be asyndeton; cf. Mayser, 2. iii, 175 f.Google Scholar).

¹⁰⁰ At Xois the strategos of the nome and the Boeotians an d their fellow dwellers there dedicated a precinct and what went with it to Zeus Basileus and their other ancestral gods (SB, 6664: 2nd cent. B.C.).

¹⁰¹ Poland, , RE, 4A, 1420 ff.Google Scholar; add its use of a Jewish meeting in a proseucha in an unpublished Rylands papyrus, (after a few lines) .

¹⁰² P. Tebt. 700.38 (124 B.C); Meyer, P. M., Juristische Papyri, p. 343Google Scholar § 108.

¹⁰³ Cf. thiasos (Maiuri, A., Nuova silloge epigrafica di Rodi e Cos, 182 no. 495)Google Scholar; (182 no. 496); in Bulgaria (Dobrusky, V., Arch.-epigr.-Mitt. 18, 1893, 117 no. 30Google Scholar), (112 no. 19); at Tschygh Dagh in Pamphylia , sc. (Suppl. epigr. gr. 6.718).

¹⁰⁴ Borchardt, Rubensohn-L., Arch. Pap. 3, 1905, 356 ff.Google Scholar; the genitive might be thought ambiguous. The text is dated by U. Wilcken ib. 366 f. ca. 173/2 as just before Philometor's marriage; if that be accepted, the date becomes ca. 176/5 in view of W. Otto's arguments, Zur. Gesch. d. Z. des 6 Ptol. (Abh. München N. F. 11, 1934), 14: but Cleopatra II's position did not at once receive full recognition (ib. 135).

¹⁰⁵ Breccia, , Iscrizioni, 144Google Scholar.

¹⁰⁶ Rubensohn, , Z. äg. Spr., 42, 1905, 111 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ Wilcken, Chr. 112.

¹⁰⁸ P. Mich. Tebt. 127, I, 30; P. Mich. Inv. 671 (written under Claudius or late in Tiberius' reign) refers to this or another synodos of Harpocrates at Tebtunis; probably to the same, but, since the number of members of such societies was not large and Harpocrates was a popular god, we cannot be certain.

¹⁰⁹ Ib. 127, I, 20; 124 recto II, 23.

¹¹⁰ Milne, J. G., Theban Ostraca, 158 f.Google Scholar no. 142.1; cf. Jouguet, P., Mélanges Glotz, 1, 498Google Scholar.

¹¹¹ Perdrizet, P., Terres cuites de la collection Fouquet, 1, 79 f.Google Scholar; a dedication to the god Ammonios, explained by P. as a syncretistic type of sphinx.

¹¹² Spiegelberg, W., Z. äg. Spr., 50, 1912, 36 ff.Google Scholar

¹¹³ Id., Dem. Denkm. 3.2, no. 50024.

¹¹⁴ Id., Dem. Inschr. 1.51, no. 31130; translation modified by Sottas, Rev. arch. 5th ser. 13.1921, 34. — On a synodos at Memphis in 17 B.C. a dedication by which is said to have been found in the temple of Ptah, cf. Inscr. gr. ad res Rom. 1, 1114; Otto, W., Priester, 1, 127Google Scholar; Roussel, P., Rev. ét. gr. 42, 1929, 144Google Scholar.

¹¹⁵ Strack, Arch. Pap., 3, 1903, 131Google Scholar.

¹¹⁶ Inscr. gr. ad res Rom. 1, 1303Google Scholar.

¹¹⁷ Ib. 1084.

¹¹⁸ Breccia 132.

¹¹⁹ Inscr. gr. ad res Rom. 1, 1106Google Scholar.

¹²⁰ Guéraud, P. Jouguet-O., Aegyptus, 13, 1933, 446 no. 5Google Scholar.

¹²¹ Preisigke-Spiegelberg, , Prinz Joachim Ostraka, 2.12Google Scholar; Preisigke supplies ⟨τῆς⟩ before τοῦ.

¹²² Poland, RE, 4A, 1330Google Scholar.

¹²³ P. Lond. 1178.32; cf. Premerstein, Keil-von, Zweite Reisebericht. p. 39Google Scholar.

¹²⁴ In general cf. Poland, F., Geschichte des griechischen Vereinswesens, and RE, 4A, 1420 ff.Google Scholar; M. san Nicolò, Ägyptisches Vereinswesen zur Zeit der Ptolemäer u. Römer (the completion of which is greatly to be desired), and article in ΕΠΙΤΥΜΒΙΟΝ Swoboda, 255 ff.Google Scholar; Westermann, W. L., J. Eg. Arch. 18, 1932, 16 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cumont, P., Harv. Theol. Rev., 26, 1933, 151 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹²⁵ So the actors' gild (Poland, , RE, 5A, 2540 ff.Google Scholar). As an instance of a society serving a public end, cf. the Iouliastai who built the heroon for C. Iulius Xenon at Thyateira between 27 and 2 B.C. (Keil-von Premerstein, Zweite Reisebericht, no. 74).

¹²⁶ Professor Edgerton draws attention to the fact that the common demotic word for house is often applied to the associations discussed pp. 80 ff. later.

¹²⁷ Apul. Met. 11.30; cf. a college attached to the temple of Hermanubis at Thessalonica (Avezou-Picard, , BCH, 37, 1913, 94 ff.Google Scholar no. 6, and the Σαραπιασταί, gathered by Menneas, who made a dedication in the public Sarapeum at Delos during the Athenian period); (Boussel, P., Inscriptions de Délos, 1403Google Scholar; 1417A Col. II 88).

¹²⁸ Cf. Papadakis, N., Arch. Delt. 1, 1915, 148 ff.Google Scholar; Roussel, P., Les cultes égyptiens à Délos, 270 f.Google Scholar; Poland, F., RE, 15, 408 ff.Google Scholar

¹²⁹ Ziehen, , Leges Graecorum sacrae, 33Google Scholar. (= IG, 2, ed. 2, 1343Google Scholar). This prohibition does not occur in other temple regulations, and in the private shrine of Men Tyrannus at Sunium such gatherings were expressly allowed (Ziehen, ib., 49). A Thesmophorion, in view of the secret character of the rites there celebrated probably had special facilities for meetings, and women at least were prone to come together for various religious occasions; cf. Aristophan. Lys. 1. In the cult of Dionysus private thiasoi existed in addition to those which had become official; so at Miletus, where there was a prohibition on the gathering of any thiasos before the public thiasos (Nilsson, M. P., in Studi e materiali di storia delle religioni, 10, 1934, 4Google Scholar).

¹³⁰ Of course individuals as well as groups made benefactions. A text at Gerasa, of 69/70 A.D. is of interest: a porch and a pit were given to Artemis κυρία by οἱσεβόμενοι (McCown, C. C., Ann. Am. Sch. Or. Res., 11, 1933, 134 n. 19Google Scholar); the form of the dedication seems to show Semitic feeling.

¹³¹ Poland 36ff.; Wiegand, Th., Ath. Mitt. 26, 1901, 121 ff.Google Scholar on civically organized mystai at Cyzicus; Cumont, , Am. Journ. Arch. 37, 1933, 241 n. 9Google Scholar; so also the mystae at Tomi (Ziehen 84), and a similar gild at Philadelphia (Keil-von Premerstein, Erste Reisebericht, no. 42).—The kynegoi at Beroea had a special standing in regard to the temple of Heracles, but they were men of a particular rank (Edson, C. F., Harv. Stud, class. phil. 45, 1934, 226 ff.Google Scholar). Age groups might be closely related to a temple (e.g. epheboi, and CIL, 13, 913Google Scholar iuenes a fano Iouis: among the Nitiobroges), but they are so to speak a cross-section of the community.

¹³² Nilsson, S. Wide-M. P., Griechische u. römische Religion, ed. 4, 20Google Scholar.

¹³³ Cf. Wilcken, U., Urkunden der Ptolemäerzeit, 1Google Scholar, passim, for katochoi and others living in the Sarapieion at Memphis, and ib., p. 51 for other καταλύματα there, and no. 70 for the strategos spending two days in the Anubieion; Milne, J. G., J. Eg. Arch. 11, 1925, 9Google Scholar for beershop in Sarapieion at Arsinoe; Wilcken, , Festgabe Deissmann, 10 ff.Google Scholar for strangers lodging in the Metroon at Philadelphia; PSI, 543 (mid. 3rd cent. B.C.), expense account for breakfast in an Iseum; PSI, 1152 (first half 2nd cent, A.D.), ἱστιατόρια in temple of Seknebtynis at Tebtunis; Cumont, F., Fouilles de Doura-Europos, 34, 170Google Scholar; Suppl. epigr. gr. 6.839 n. for temple-barbers.

¹³⁴ Cumont, , Religions orientales dans le paganisme romain, ed. 4, 256Google Scholar; Seyrig, H., Syria 14, 1933, 260 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar On Sarapic and Isiac meals outside Egypt, cf. Roussel, P., Les cultes égyptiens à Délos, 285 n. 5.Google Scholar

¹³⁵ Thomsen, A., Arch. Rel., 12, 1909. 466 ff.Google Scholar More details about the Attic functionaries called παράσιτοι would be welcome.

¹³⁶ E.g. at Ephesus and in the shrine for the Ephesian goddess built by Xenophon at Scillus (Ch. Picard, , Ephèse et Claros, 300 ff.Google Scholar)

¹³⁷ At Panamara (Roussel, P., BCH, 51, 1927, 123 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar).

¹³⁸ Stengel, , RE, 8, 1315Google Scholar; Fiehn, ib. 5A 518; Picard, op. cit. 54; Studniczka, Fr., Das Symposion Ptolemaios IIGoogle Scholar (Abh. sächs. Ges., 30, 1914), 142 f.Google Scholar (two houses next to temple, possibly that of Zeus Aphesios, at Megara, perhaps meant for entertainment of pilgrims), 147 ff. (in area of Hippolytus sanctuary at Troezen); Frickenhaus, A., Arch. Jahrb., 32, 1917, 114 ff.Google Scholar κατακεἰμενον in 1 Cor. 8.10 suggests temples of Syrian or Egyptian deities.

¹³⁹ Durrbach, F., Choix d'inscriptions de Délos, 1, 85, pp. 140 ff.Google Scholar (ca. 153/2 B.C.) is an interesting exception: the met in the temple of Apollo, but that was because they had not yet a shrine of their own, which they subsequently acquired. As a matter of fact, they do not speak of this as a special privilege. Durrbach remarks, p. 143, ‘un endroit banal.’ Again, at Chytroi in Cyprus three thiasoi sacrificed in the temple of Apollo (Ohnefalsch-Richter, M., Ath. Mitt., 9, 1884, 137Google Scholar). Elsewhere throughout the Greek area there does not seem to be any clear example of the use of a public temple by a private society; apparent exceptions (Poland, 454 f.) belong to societies of the first type, that is to say to groups with a public function, such as the ‘worshippers of Zeus who are of those who enter the adyton’ at Sardis (Buckler-Robinson, , Sardis, VII, 1, 22 pp.Google Scholar 47 ff.; ca. 100 B.C.), and the koinon (society of festive reunion) of those who go together to Zeus Hyetios on Cos (Paton-Hicks, , Inscriptions of Cos, 382Google Scholar; Modona, A. N., L'isola di Cos nell' antichità classica, 87 n. 8Google Scholar) — or to associations of priests or priestly officials. At Rome certain collegia met on occasion in public temples, but the overwhelming majority had their own shrines and buildings (Waltzing, J. P., Etude historique sur les corporations professionelles chez les Romains, 1, 210 f.Google Scholar; San Nicolò, 2, 144).

¹⁴⁰ Milne, J. G., J. Eg. Arch. 11, 1925, 6 ff.CrossRefGoogle ScholarOtto, W., Zur Geschichte der Zeit des 6Google Scholar. Ptolemäers, (Abh. Munich, N. F. 11, 1934), 16 f.Google Scholar

¹⁴¹ Breccia, Ev., Monuments de l'Egypte gréco-romain, 1, 106 ff.Google Scholar (103/2 B.C.). The politeuma and the Idumaeans from Memphis met in the upper Apollineion, ἐν (OGI, 737; Otto 1, 128 thinks this an Egyptian temple; was it perhaps Semitic?).

¹⁴² Peterson, A. E. R. Boak-E. E., Karanis 1924/1931 (pub. 1933), 41Google Scholar. Cf. ib., 35 ff. on houses in the temple-precinct, and 14, two instances of τόπος with the genitive of an occupational name in the North temple. Yeivin, S., Aegyptus, 14, 1984, 78 f.Google Scholar suggests that τόπος here denotes the place which these workmen occupied by prescriptive right, like the ‘pitch’ of a costermonger in London; and Sir Herbert Thompson has in a letter kindly drawn attention to the fact that every large Egyptian temple had its own masons, carpenters, and metalworkers, as well as its bakers, brewers, herdsmen, etc. Nevertheless, there may be a meaning ‘place of meeting for worship,’ for in OGI, 176 (98 B.C.), 178 (95 B.C.), we have the τόπος in the temple of Suchos of men who had passed their ephebeia in a particular year. Cf. SB, 5022 (Theadelphia; late Ptolemaic) . For dining rooms cf. also the ὲστιατὀριον dedicated to Heron at Theadelphia in 140 B.C. (SB, 6596).

¹⁴³ Westermann, l.c. The society worshipping Augustus at Alexandria met (Wilcken, Chr. 112), possibly a public place, as San Nicolò assumes, 2, 145 n. 1.

¹⁴⁴ San Nicolò 2.144 ff.

¹⁴⁵ A priestess of the burial gild of Egyptian women mentioned in a Magdola papyrus of the fourth year of Philopator had held office for four years (Guéraud, O., ΕΝΤΕΥΞΕΙΣ, 1, pp. 57 f.Google Scholar no. 21); another from Magdola of the first year of Philopator names a priest and an ἀρχιθιασίτης (ib. 53 ff. no. 20); the association of Pramarres (n. 106 above) had a ‘priest for life.’

¹⁴⁶ Very often a high priest and a president at the head as in the club worshipping Augustus (Wilcken, Chr. 112, synagogeus kai prostates, priest, and gymnasiarch); compare a contemporary women's club, — , perhaps as the editor suggests, Ἀπολλονιακῇ, at Alexandria (Edgar, C. C., J. Eg. Arch. 4, 1917, 253 f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar); for an earlier Greek association with various officers, cf. Wilcken, , UPZ, 1, 438 f.Google Scholar An unpublished Rylands papyrus, perhaps of the time of Augustus, mentions the prostates and grammeteus of a funerary club of fellow-soldiers.

¹⁴⁷ Apart from the use of ὑπηρέται for a class of initiates in two new Mithraic inscriptions from Rome discussed by Cumont, F., Rev. Hist. rel. 109, 1934, 63 ff.Google Scholar The Iobacchi had an ἀνθιερεὐς as well as a ἱερεὐς (SIG, 1109). On the meaning of ὑπηρέτης in the papyri cf. Holmes, B. T., J. Bibl. Lit., 54, 1935, 64 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁸ Sottas, H., Papyrus démotiques de Lille, 1, pp. 57 ff. no. 29Google Scholar. We may note in passing that from the first century A.D. we find Greek cities voting decrees of consolation (SIG, 866 and note) — perhaps an indication of an increasing trend towards human sympathy.

¹⁴⁹ Spiegelberg, W., Die demotischen Papyrus, (Cat. Cairo, 89) pp. 18Google Scholar ff. no. 30605 (157/6 B.C.); 26 ff. no. 30606 (158/7); 290 ff. no. 31179 (148/7); 66 ff. no. 30619 a + b (138/7); 61 ff. no. 30618 (accounts only: 138/6); 286ff. no. 31178 (180/79). A Ptolemaic fragment from Pathyris (Gebelên), p. 94, no. 30654 is too short to afford data.

¹⁵⁰ There are fines for non-attendance and for failure, unless excused for sickness, to bring an offering on feast days; attendance at funerals is required; the president is to help if a man becomes a temple-prisoner; help is to be given to members involved in difficult cases at law. There are variations in detail, apart from those in the selection of deities listed, e.g. the ordinance of 138/7 names the days on which temples are to be attended.

¹⁵¹ The association formed in 158/7 was to last till the month of Mesore, that of 157/6 was to commence on the second of Mesore and continue till Mesore 8 of the next year. At the same time, as between 148/7 and 138/7, we find the opening day shifting from Thot to the fifteenth of Pharmouthi, which is a greater gap than is to be expected from a slight running over the 365 days; perhaps there was some discontinuity; and there are slight differences in the law of 138/7. An association at Tebtunis has a ‘president of the fifth year’; Mich., P.Tebt. 127, I, 20Google Scholar. The year is not regnal, for it was the sixth year of Claudius, and the expression perhaps implies that the association started on an annual basis and decided to continue as it was; but it might be loose phrasing for . In Mich., P.Inv. 1277Google Scholar, the law of the freedmen's gild at Tebtunis under Claudius, a ἡγούμενος is chosen for a year; but the group had some effective continuity of existence, for we read in I. 2 (for -ὸ) ὑ (for οἱ) οἱπογεγραμμένοι. (for ὑπογ.) ἄνδρες: some one had called them together.

¹⁵² Listed (not separately) with other names but not initially mentioned in the text of 138/7; initially mentioned but not separately listed in that of 180/79. The society of Hathor established before Agathodaemon by Harm-esen, the son of Peteharsomtus, the lesonis priest, and the folk of the cult society together (Spiegelberg, , Dem. Denkm., 3, p. 2Google Scholar no. 50024) illustrates priestly participation in 6 B.C. at Dendera. Cf. Spiegelberg, , Z. äg. Spr., 42, 1905, 43 ff.Google Scholar (text relating to a weavers' association, 250/100 B.C., in which was a lesonis priest).

¹⁵³ Sottas 70 ff.; the Greek text is reprinted in SB, 6319; here no one of the members is described as having priestly functions.

¹⁵⁴ Cf. San Nicolò 2, 56 f.; 1, 169 n. 5; 2, 77 f. (on the βοηθός collecting taxes and the influence of administrative institutions. So at Memphis the epistates of the temple, the high priest, and the head of the pastophoroi, each had a deputy; Wilcken, , UPZ, 1 pp. 44 ff.Google Scholar).

¹⁵⁵ The annual basis remains unexplained; for the point of departure each year is neither the named festival nor the first day of the year or of the month (themselves celebrated in temple; Erman, A., Die Religion der Ägypten, 1934 ed., 179 f.Google Scholar).

¹⁵⁶ Meyer, P. M., Juristische Papyri, p. 839Google Scholar; cf. Rostovtzeff, M., Gnomon, 11, 1935, 528Google Scholar.

¹⁵⁷ PSI 1149, a memorial from the temple of Seknebtynis at Tebtunis to the prefect of Egypt or the high priest of Alexandria: the pastophoroi claimed τὴν (cf. Horapollon 1.41 where the hieroglyph for παστοϕόρος is explained τὸ ἱερόν).

¹⁵⁸ Wilcken, U., UPZ, 1. pp. 381 ff., 438 f.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁹ On this aspect of the χοαχύται cf. Wilcken, U., UPZ, 2 p. 38Google Scholar and his reference to the gild of Amon of Opet. In general ef. Otto, 1, 95 ff.; for the thiasos at Ombos concerned with burying the sacred birds cf. Fr. Preisigke — W. Spiegelberg, Die Prinz Joachim Ostraka (Schr. Wiss. Ges. Strassburg, 19, 1914)Google Scholar and Sottas, H., Rev. Arch. 5th ser., 13, 1921, 24 ff.Google Scholar; for the isionomoi, Otto, 2, 73, 175, 196, and Edgar, C. C., Bull. Ryl. Libr., 18, 1934, 128, no. 16Google Scholar; for ‘the pious servants of Hapi-Osiris (the later Sarapis) the great god’ — perhaps a sodality — on a stele of the 24th year of Darius, probably from the Sarapieion at Sakkara, cf. Spiegelberg, , Demot. Denkmäler, 3, p. 13, no. 50042Google Scholar.

¹⁶⁰ The cry made a deep impression on the Roman world; for Busiris, cf. Herodot. 2. 61. To avoid misunderstanding, it should be stated that from of old private persons made offerings of food and drink; Blackman, A. M., Encycl. Rel. Eth., 12, 780Google Scholar; Lefebvre, G., Le Tombeau de Petosiris, 1, 150Google Scholar ‘tout haut fonctionnaire, tout prêtre, tout prophète, tout officiant, tout homme qui entrera dans cette nécropole pour faire des sacrifices aux esprits supérieurs’; Otto, 1.392 ff. The permission in the Gnomon of the Idios Logos for ἰδιῶται, laymen, to take part in a procession in Greek temples may imply a prohibition at that time or their so doing in Egyptian temples, unless a confraternity was privileged, though it need do no more than attend. For lay functions in connexion with a temple cf. the (perhaps military) society of the 2nd century B.C. made known by U. Wilcken, P. Würzburg, no. 4, pp. 37 ff.

¹⁶¹ Moret, A., Recueil Champollion, 331 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁶² Formerly in the possession of Monsieur S. de Ricci, and now, as he courteously informs us, in the Bibliothèque de l‘Institut de France. The text was mentioned by Spiegelberg, Die sogenannte demotische Chronik (Dem. Stud. 7, 1914), 30Google Scholar. Professor W. F. Edgerton has kindly made available a provisional translation based on Spiegelberg's photograph and transcription.

¹⁶³ Černý, J., Bull. inst. franç., 27, 1927, 159 ff.Google Scholar Professor W. F. Edgerton draws attention to a doubtful confraternity for which Legrain, G. argues, Ann. Serv. Ant. Eg., 8, 1907, 254 ff.Google Scholar Sethe's suggestion (ap. Griffith, F. Ll., Proc. Soc. Bibl. Arch., 31, 1909, 290)Google Scholar that the Dodgson papyrus refers to a sect of Osirians who cast out an unworthy member does not seem convincing. On native religious associations in Egypt cf. also Wiedemann, A., Arch. Rel., 13, 1910, 360 f.Google Scholar; 17,1914, 216 f.; Woch. klass. Phil., 1913, 822 f.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁴ Ephipp. ap. Athen. 13 p. 572CGoogle Scholar. and Aeschin. 1.75 treat the habit of drinking without paying one's scot as associated with unnatural vice. For habitual drinking together, cf. Poland, , RE, 4A, 1075 ff.Google Scholar; on the development of private groups so meeting in the fourth century B.C., cf. Nilsson, M. P., Symbolae Danielsson, 218 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁵ Sometimes also for the meal which preceded the symposion proper; cf. J. Martin, Das Symposion (Stud. Gesch. Kult. Alt. 17, 1/2, 1931), 149 ff.Google Scholar Private persons often made private celebrations of recognized public festivals, as we do of Christmas (cf. Edgar, C. C., Bull. Ryl. Libr., 18, 1934, 127 no. 15Google Scholar for the Hermaia; P. Col. Zen. 19 for the Thesmophoria; Deubner, L., Attische Feste, 156Google Scholar, for the Diasia at Athens; and above all OGI, 90.52).

¹⁶⁶ Wilamowitz-Schubart, , Berl. Kl. T. 5, 2, 62 f.Google Scholar, a reference due to Professor Schubart.

¹⁶⁷ Cf. Westermann, W. L., J. Eg. Arch. 18, 1932, 16 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar For dining clubs cf. San Nicolò 1, 14, adding Tait, J. G., Ostraka 1, p. 52Google Scholar no. 312 (late 3rd cent. B.C.), 49 no. 295 and 53 no. 322 (both 1st B.C.), SB, 6668 (209 B.C.; Kôm Saggari); also a kleinarches from Memnonia in Tait, 137 no. 372 (no date); ib. nos. 369–71, wine accounts, possibly of a sodality; (nos. 370–1 are 2nd/3rd A.D.).

¹⁶⁸ Sacrifice may well be covered by the phrase (9–10; note ad loc.), but it was perhaps omitted; it involved payment of the tax levied on victims sacrificed as well as on incense (Schwahn, W., RE, 5A, 292Google Scholar).

¹⁶⁹ P. Tebt. 5, 245 ff. (118 B.C.). — Even in the Demotic texts (p. 80 above) royalty comes before the gods, — as in a Roman military dedication at Lambaesis, CIL, 8, 2554Google Scholar.

¹⁷⁰ Lucian, Concerning the death of Peregrinus, 11 speaks of Christ as θιασἀρχης καὶ ξυναγωγεύς. For Corinth we may note that, according to Hermias ap. Athen. 4 p. 149F, in the three sacred annual dinners of the men of Naucratis (p. 49 above) certain food and drink were given to all in the prytaneion, and those eating there were not allowed to bring in any eatables from outside.

¹⁷¹ Cf. Tarn, W. W., Camb. Anc. Hist., 10, 35 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁷² Not without its rifts; cf. Schwartz, E., Abh. Munich, N. F. 10, 1934, 199Google Scholar.