Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-24T07:31:24.750Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Athens and the oracle of Ammon1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 October 2013

Extract

The importance attached by Greek cities and their leading statesmen to the oracle of Ammon is a matter of common knowledge. That it was not consulted by Greeks only is shown by the story of its consultation by Croesus (Hdt. i. 46) nearly a century before Kimon sent to seek its advice shortly before his death. From Pausanias we learn that it was frequently consulted by Sparta and by the men of Elis; and that at Thebes there was a temple of Ammon, which can hardly be dated later than the middle of the fifth century, seeing that the statue of the deity, by Kalamis, was dedicated by Pindar. As the poet also sent a hymn in honour of Ammon, which Pausanias apparently saw for himself on his visit to the Oasis-sanctuary, it seems possible that he took the opportunity to visit the oracle when he went to Cyrene for the recital of the second ode in honour of Arkesilas' victory at Delphi in 462 B.C.

In spite of its misleading promise to Alcibiades that he would conquer Syracuse, Athenian faith in its responses was not shaken, and perhaps even strengthened by its hostile attitude to Lysander, but we have no explicit account of any individual Athenian consulting it after the fifth century. That its influence and repute continued throughout the fourth century is attested not only by Alexander's attitude to it, but by the increasing devotion to the cult of Ammon at Athens, for which we have abundant epigraphical evidence. Taking this in chronological order, the first item is a silver phiale dedicated to Ammon, weighing 802 dr. This had been among the votive offerings in charge of the Treasurers of Athena, since, at any rate, 375 B.C.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 1962

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 In addition to the article in Pauly–Wissowa, RE, see also Bates, Oric, The Eastern Libyans (1914) 190 ff.Google Scholar

3 Plut. Cimon, 18.

4 Paus. iii. 18, 3 (Sparta); v. 15, 11 (Elis); ix. 16, 1 (Thebes and Pindar). For Lysander's curious dealings with the oracle, Plut. Lys. 20 and 25.

5 Pyth. v. For the visits to the oracle of theoroi from Cyrene, who dedicated dolphins on pillars, see Strabo i. 49.

6 Plut. Nicias, 13.

7 See note 4, above.

8 I find that Ferguson, W. S., The Treasurers of Athena 180Google Scholar, lines 4–6, had also proposed this restoration.

9 IG ii.2 1398, ll.7–9; 1395, ll. 19–20; but not, apparently, in 1399 (? 403/2 B.C.) nor recognizable in 1407 + 14 (385/4 B.C.).

10 So also Ferguson, loc. cit.

11 Inscriptions grecques du Musée du Bardo (Limoges, 1936); cf. REG xliv. 290 ff.

12 BCH lxii. 236 ff., and especially 246.

13 Lewis pointed out that the first letter is certainly Ν.

14 P. 230, BCH iii. 479 (Phrygia, late); 266 (note 4), GDI iii 3106 (Pagai, 1st(?) cent. B.C.); also syll. 3 600, l. 3 (Mantinea, (?) 192 B.C.); ibid. 455 (Delos, c. 245 B.C.; cf. Tarn, W. W., Antigonos Gonatas 389, 469)Google Scholar.

15 Thuc. vi. 16.

16 Harvard Studies (Ferguson vol.) 402.

17 IG ii.2 1388, l. 70; 1414, ll. 6–7. For other epigraphical evidence for ἡμιωβέλια cf. Tod, M. N., ‘Epigraphical Notes on Greek Coinage, III, Obolos’, Numismatic Chronicle 1947, 22 f.Google Scholar

18 In spite of a kind warning by Lewis against the risks of arguing from the rarity of names, I let this suggestion stand, in hope of subsequent confirmation.

19 Cf. BSA l. 30, and for L.'s convincing restoration of the elaborate stele to which IG ii.2 1556 belongs, Hesperia 1959, 209–238.