In search of the ‘ beggar-priest ’

This paper examines the characterisation of itinerant ritual practitioners in both Greek and Roman cultures. It starts from the Greek term agurtes , tracing its development in Greek texts and looking for equivalent terms in Latin texts. Using selected material that describes similar persons and their activities it examines which qualities are highlighted for criticism in which contexts and identifies similarities and differences of characterisation between Greek and Roman descrip-tions.¹ It aims to illuminate the (different) conceptual models of particular social types developed in each culture, exploring what they reveal about both culturally specific conceptions of identity and power and the risks that were perceived to threaten them.


Introduction ²
The paper starts with an analysis of the meaninga nd transmission of the term agurtes,f rom its original, ancient Greek conception to its use in the RomanI mperial period (specifically, the late Severan period). Over that time, the term appears frequentlyi nG reek texts: usuallye mployed to describe non-Roman individuals,i tt ends to sustain an association with begging,l inking ritual activity with the quest for economic support.The sense of the term is usuallyderogatory. Sometimes it is enough thatb egging is involved at all: it appears that the need for support is perceivedtoundermine the authenticity of the ritual activity,since it suggests that the practitioner is motivated by acquisitiveness. It maya lso be that the ritual activity in question is somehow considered to be undesirable; for example, it mayb ea ffiliatedt oagroup that is not recognizedo rf or which there is social disapproval.³ Over time,a sw ew ill see, these characteristics come to the fore, and the term alsodevelops further derogatory nuances,including,for example, intimations of weakness and dependency.Insum, agurtes was at erm of abuse, part of ar hetoric of "othering";i tn ot onlys ignalled contempt for certain individuals,i ta lso drew as trong distinctionb etween thoseo ffering judgement and those being judged.
It is somewhat surprising then that texts in Latin neither yield asingle equivalent term, nor appear to use agurtes or related terms as loan words. Instead, as this paper shows, avariety of Latin words communicated certain aspects or nuances of the Greek term. In terms of livedr eality,t he differencei nt erminology does not mean that there were anyf ewer such individuals 'on the road';r ather, it drawsattentiont othe different conceptual models of the Romans, and the literary and historicalc ontexts that shaped them.This paper does not arguef or a persistent distinctionbetween two cultural models,Greek and Roman, but rather examines how the conception of, and languagea ssociated with, the agurtes evolvedw ithin ad ifferent culture, drawingp articulara ttention to evidence for growingc oncerns expressed in texts regardingt he location of itinerant figures, their identity,a nd their relation to claims to power.

Greek origins and development
In Greek texts,the earliest uses of the word agurtes,a nd related terms, such as agurtazo and ageiro,a ppear in descriptions of thosew ho survive by travelling and gathering the wherewithal to live and/or profit.⁴ But although at first sight it is similar,this is not simply 'begging':thereseem to be some further nuances of meaning involved in these characterisations. Thus, in Odyssey 19.283 -284, the emphasis seems to lie on Odysseus' travelling to amass more wealth, rather than the need to beg in order to survive: "onlyi ts eemed to his mind more profitable (kerdion)/t og ather wealth (chremat' agurtazein)b yr oaming over the wide earth".⁵ Roisman has argued persuasively that the double semantic sphere of kerd-ties this term not just to profit,b ut to skill or craft; its use here suggests that Odysseus' begging activities requiret hath eb eg uileful.⁶ By the  Agurtazo: 'collect by begging ' (Od.19.284;s.v. LSJ); the verb ageiro conveys asimilar familyof meanings:i tc an be used to indicateg atheringw ith an emphasis on movement or collection, and, finallyw ith the sense of 'begging',s ometimes for the gods (s.v. LSJ;C hantraine notes the relationship s.v. ageiro). This paper'sd iscussion of agurtes develops some ideas in Eidinow (2015,3 09 -310).  Saïd (2011,8 2-83)c itest his passage as part of ad isquisition on networks of trade.  Roisman (1987 Roisman ( , 66 and 1990 Roisman ( ,23-25,a nd 1994. She argues that the term mayi ndicate ( 1994,10): "resourcefulness exemplified by an immediater esponse to as ituation at hand with one's own interest uppermost in mind".S he observes differencesi nn uances of meaningb etween fifth centuryBCE, agurtes and its cognates are acquiring some more specific associations, some of which could be argued to build on this sense of craftiness: they are more regularlyfound, with aderogatory sense, in descriptions of itinerant sellers of ritual practices of various kinds.⁷ The earliest extant occurrence of the termand its cognates, which appears to link beggary with ritual practice, is found in Aeschylus' Agamemnon whereCassandrai sd escribing the slights she has suffered: "Ie ndured having to wander like an itinerant begging priestess (agurtria), awretched, starving pauper".⁸ Matthew Dickie suggests thatA eschylus probablywrotethis passagethinking of the ravingsofthe metragurtes,that is, the begging priests associated with the followers of Cybele, which cult,h es uggests was alreadyk nown in the Greek world in the sixth century BCE.⁹ This is possible, although the text offers no particular reason to make that connection.¹⁰ Further useso ft he term and its cognates in Greek drama maintain the association between ritual practice and financial gain. Forexample, in afragment of Aeschylus' Semele or Hydrophoroi,the related term ageirousan is used to describe the activities of Hera, who has been changed into apriestess and is begging on behalf of the Nymphsofthe riverInachus in Argos.¹¹ It maya lso lie behind the use of the termi nt he Rhesus to dethe Iliad where its use maybepejorative (1990,35) and the Odyssey whereitisa'valuable asset ' (1994,13).  Flower (2008, 66) calls it "the harshest insult" alongw ith the term magos;c f. Giammellaro (2013). Jiménez (2002, 189), whoe xamines the term in the context of Orphic ritual, also notes the link between begginga nd magical practice; this is citedi nd iscussion by Edmonds (2013, 203), whoa dds its use as abuse.  Aesch. Ag. 1269 -1274.  Dickie (2001,66): Pind. Dith.2 .8 -10 (fr.7 0b Snell).  In this paper, Ik eept he twot erms, metragurtes and menagurtes, separate from agurtes,on the grounds that the first two were used to denotespecific cult roles; while in contrast,ashere, agurtes was at erm of abuse. This differencem ay be playedupon at Plut. Mar. 17.5i nwhich the Bataces (probablynot himself a metragurtes but certainlyassociated with them) is abused as an agurtes. Asimilar playonwords seems to occur at Plut. Pyth. orac. 25,407c: herethe agurtikon kaia goraion […]g enos that Plutarch describes hanginga round the ceremonies of Serapis and Cybele aren ot immediatelyt ob ei dentified as the metros agurtai or galloi agurtai (as Anth. Pal. 6.218, Babr.1 41,r espectively), but certainlyr ecall them (contraJ iménez 2002,1 87-188 andDickie 2001,226,who acknowledgesthat Plutarchand his other sources refer to the agurtai and priests of Cybele as if they wereseparate categories of person, but argues that they should be regarded as the same).  Aesch. frr.220a -c( Sommerstein)( =fr. 168 Radt) and Pl. Resp.381d4-7; two lines fromthe fragments (frr.2 20a, 16 -17)a re attributed by Asklepiades to the Xantriai (schol. Ar. Ran. 1344; followed by Dillon 2002,96, and Dickie 2001 for the Semele or Hydrophoroi). On priestesses and ritual beggingp articularlyconnected to contexts of In search of the 'beggar-priest' scribe Odysseus;t his character does not explicitlyc laim mantic powers but is seen to perform ac urse (described later in the play, by the chorus, as Odysseus "speaking bad things" against the Atreidae).¹² Anumberoffurther occurrences seem to place rather more emphasis on the wayinwhich the need or greed for support undermines the authenticity of ritual expertise. In tragedy, one of the most famous examples is from Sophocles's Oedipus Tyrannus,when Oedipus is insultingthe blind seer Teiresias,allegingthat Creon has corrupted him: "[…]t his wizard hatcher of plots,t his crafty beggar (agurten), who has sight onlyw hen it comes to profit,b ut in his art is blind!"¹³ And this aspect mayh aveb een why, in Old Comedy, the concept of the agurtes also seems to have been employed to mock politicians:for example, Cratinus is reported to have alluded to it in his abuse of Lampon. Hesychius reports thati nh is play Drapetides,C ratinus called the politician, agersikubelis, and notes that he called him "begging priest" and "axe-wielder" (on the grounds that an axei sc alled a kubelis).¹⁴ Hesychius is again the sourcef or the information that Lysippus mocked Lampon as an agurtes in his Bacchae -wherehealso abused the politician as aglutton.¹⁵ Turning to adifferent genre, the writer of the Hippocratic treatise On the Sacred Disease intends to attack the ritual expertise of his opponents when he states that "those who first attributed as acred character to this maladyw erel ike the magicians, purifiers, charlatans (agurtai)a nd quacks of our own day, men who claim great piety and superior knowledge".¹⁶ The writeri st rying to distinguish between his own activities and those offered by others who, like him, werei tinerant sellers of various services associated with healing. It seems likelyt hat the term acquires its negative power here by associating an individual'sn eed for funds with their exercise of ritual, the one undermining trust in the integrity of the other.¹⁷ In literature of the fourth century,this pejorative sense of the term continues to associate itinerancy with begging and ritual activities. Forexample, in the Republic,P latou ses agurtai of the seers who knock on the doors of the wealthy weddingsa nd childbirth see Budin 2016,110 -111:afamous example is the priestess of Athene Polias described in CPG Suppl.1 :6 5( no. B177) as ageirei.  Eur. Rhes.503 -505 and 710 -719. Giammellaro(2013,281) quotes ll. 710 -719, but discusses l. 503.  Soph. OT 387-389.  Cratinus, Drapetides fr.66K -A (Hesych. a4 61).  As ag lutton: Ath. 344e; as an agurtes:H esych. α 461( frr.6aa nd bK -A,r espectively).  Hippoc. Morb.s acr.2 .  Lloyd( 1979,e sp. 15 -16,5 6); Nutton (2013:1 13 -114) states that the writer is "prepared to allow sacrifice, prayer and supplication to the gods" but attacks those who "wander from placet op lacec laimingapersonal, non-institutional relationship with the gods". with the aim of selling them various ritual services; he makes it clear that,inhis opinion, these self-proclaimed experts do not know what they are talking about, although they managet op ersuade theirc lients of theiri deas.¹⁸ These associations -of ritual practice, even of travelling -mayalso be implicit in the description by Clearchus of Soli (4 th -3 rd century BCE), quoted by Athenaeus, of the Persian adoption of the Melophoroi (the so-called Apple-Bearers,asquado f bodyguards) from the Medes.H aving first described how,f rom loveo fl uxury, the Medes would turn theirn eighbours into eunuchs, Clearchus describes how the Persians adopted the Melophoroi "not just as revengef or what had been done to them, but alsoa sareminder of the bodyguards' addiction to luxury and of what cowards they had become; because theiri nopportune and foolish addiction to luxury in the waythey livedwas,apparently, capable of converting even men armed with spears into agurtai".¹⁹ This passagem akes implicit associations with ritual practitioners through the earlier reference to eunuchs, which could have brought to mind the begging-priests of eastern cults;ifso, this aspect also reinforcesthe more explicit association made between the greed of agurtai, their loveo fl uxury and resulting weakness.
Such an evocative concept as the 'begging priest' had staying power.Abrief survey of passages from Greek works from across the Hellenistic and Imperial periods reveals the continued clustering,i nd ifferent configurations, of these ideas of itinerancy,ritual expertise and low social and/or economic status. Strabo for example offers asuccinct overviewofcategories of wanderer in which the activities of the agurtes are linked with practices of divinationa nd religious purification/initiation.²⁰ The individuals that Plutarch describes with this terma re also linked to divinatory practices,and are, invariably, of low social or economic status. They appear in incidental comments on, for example, the effects of Lycurgus' legislation in Sparta; the impact of his poverty on Aristides' descendants; and in atirade against travelling diviners whose practices have helpedtoundermine the role of poetry in the phrasing and delivery of oracles.²¹ Plutarch makes asimilar criticism of those who betray the trust of others in his treatise on superstition, whereh ed escribes how those who have suffered abad dream are likely In searcho ft he 'beggar-priest' to "put themselvesi nto the hands of agurtas and impostors". ²² The association of the agurtes with (false) prophecyisalso apparent in the writingsofJ osephus, who reports that the zealots in Jerusalem, through theirextreme actions, mocked prophecies that had been givenc oncerning the fall of that city as impostors' fables (agurtikas logopoiias).²³ As well as these more persistent associations, the link with weakness that emergedi nt he passagef rom Clearchuso fS oli, also reappears: for example, in Lucian's Dialogues of the Gods,whereHeracles compares Asclepius' feeble skills to his own mighty deeds, abusinghim as merelyaroot-chopperand an agurtes.²⁴ The sameimplication of lack of strength is also apparent in Philostratus' account of Dionysus vs. the Tyrrhenian Pirates,wherethe pirates think Dionysus "effeminate and av agabond (agurtes)".²⁵ In sum, across these passages from Greek texts,t he agurtes is aw eaka nd inconsequential figure, usually associated with claims to power through ritual practice (for example, practising mantike, goeteia or pharmakeia)c oupled with deceitfulness, often prompted by greed or need.²⁶ This paper now turns to Latin texts to look for the figureo fthe 'begging priest':i texamines the vocabulary usedtoevoke such characters,and looks for similarities and differences with the Greek model in the ways they werep ortrayed, and the concerns expresseda bout them.

Ritual experts
Similar itinerant ritual experts werea ctive throughout the Romane mpire, "disseminateda mongst all the religious, political and military activities of the Romans" and operating without centralised oversight.²⁷ Cicero'st reatises offer myriad possible terms to describe the individuals involved, including magoi, ha- Plut. De superst.3 ,165 f-166a. The link to healingt hrough purification is also found in Plut. Quaest. Graec. 54,3 03c.  Joseph. BJ 4.386.  Luc. Dial. D. 15(13).1.  Philostr. Imag.1 .19.10.  Polyb.12.8.5, exploringT imaeus' contemptf or Aristotle, uses agurtes with propetes (rash or reckless) to evoke the foolishness of ac haracter willingt om ake random accusations in al aw court.  At home: Cato Agr.5(discussed further below); armies:A pp. Hisp. 85. Quotation from North (1990,5 2-53), discussingd iviners and divination, specifically. ruspices, augures,h arioli, vates, coniectores.²⁸ The De divinatione provides the kind of value judgement that parallels that so often implied by the Greek term, agurtes. This occurs through the voice of Quintus, as af inal qualification of his otherwise supportivee xplanation of divination: "Iw ill assert,h owever,i nc onclusion, that Id on ot recognise fortune-tellers (sortilegos), or those whop rophesy for money,o rn ecromancers, or mediums,( psychomantia)w hom your friend Appius makes it ap racticet oc onsult. 'In fine, Is ay,Ido not care af ig /F or Marsian augurs (Marsum augurem), village mountebanks (vicanos haruspices), /A astrologers whohaunt the circus grounds (de circoastrologos), /OrIsis-seers (Isiacos coniectores), or dream interpreters (interpretes sómnium)-for they aren ot diviners either by knowledge or skill -/b ut superstitious bards, soothsayingq uacks (superstitiósi vates ímpudentesque hárioli), /A verse to work, or mad, or ruled by want,/Directingothers how to go,and yet/ What road to take they do not know themselves; /From those to whom they promise wealth they beg /acoin.F rom what they promised let them take /T heir coina st oll and pass the balanceon.' Such arethe words of Ennius whoonlyafew lines further back expresses the view that there aregods and yetsaysthat the gods do not care whathuman beings do. But for my part,believingasIdo that the gods do carefor man, and that they advise and often forewarn him, Ia pproveo fd ivination which is not trivial and is free fromf alsehood and trickery."²⁹ Alex Niceh as argued that the languagea nd phrasing employed by Ciceroi n this passage(e. g., hariolor)may have been introducedbyCiceroingentle mockery of the belief of his friend, Appius Claudius, in psychomantia and the skills of the Marsi.³⁰ The vocabulary is distinctive;few of these terms occur elsewherei n Cicero'sworks.However,they are found in the comic plays of Plautus indicating various types of diviner,a nd often with associations between such af igure, his facility with words and his demands for money (albeit these are seldom as ex- See Cic. Nat. D. 1.20, and Leg.2 .8.20 -21.Ons uch compositel ists, see Nice (2001,163). The term magus in Latin texts has receiveda ni nitial but thorough analysis by James Rives ( 2010), which demonstrates that it is not equivalent to the term agurtes: its initial usage,d own to the second half of the first century CE, (61) "denoteso nlyt he Persian religious specialists";w ith Plinyi ts tarts to acquirei ntimations of specific "arcane lore";( 66) in later writers it loses the connection with the Persian tradition, and indicates expertisei nd ivination and necromancy. Tacitus uses it to mean (66) free-lance expert in divination (Ann. 2.27.2,2 .32.2a nd 12.22.1). The term does not appear to be inherentlyd erogatory.  Cic. Div.1.132. On the structureofthe argument see Schofield(1986); on the culturalcontext, Beard(1986). Nice (2001) provides an overview of the debateconcerninghow much of this passage is aq uotation from Ennius:Ihave used his conclusions here.  Nice (2001,1 58). Lot oracles aree xplicitlyc riticised (Cic. Div.2 .85) as means of making money or to encouragesuperstition and error,but,a sN ice notes (2001,154), these could be either local oracles or those of strolling quacks.
In search of the 'beggar-priest' plicit as that made by Quintus quoting Ennius).³¹ Fore xample, the idea thatdiviners state the obvious is arunning joke found in different plays;³² while in the Rudens,a sG ripus and Trichalio argueo vert he ownership of the trunk (which contains the crucial proof of identity for the girls Palaestraa nd Ampelisca), the fraudulenceo fs oothsaying (hariola)c reates the joke, but is not overt.³³ In an umber of examples, the targeto fm ockery is as much those who consulta s those who are consulted. Thus, in the Poenulus,L ycus is obviouslyl ooking for good news before he rewards his diviner (haruspex)³⁴ while in the Miles Gloriosus,for example, Periplectomenus lists his wife'sneed to payawhole host of divining figures: "the sorceress on the festivalofMinerva, to the dream interpreter, to the clairvoyant,and to the soothsayer(praecantrici, coniectrici, hariolae atque haruspicae); it'sadisgrace if nothing is sent to the woman who uses eyebrows to prophesy."³⁵ Although these passages offer insights into dailya ttitudes to divination, none of these individual terms provides ac lose parallel to the term agurtes: they are not inherentlyd erogatory.³⁶ Rather,t heir use in various contexts, and with different nuances,s uggests other concerns. An example can be made of the term haruspex,w hich was used to denote diviners who were employed to servet he interests of the cities of the empire and its legions; we also find them attached to individual political figures,and apparentlyworkingfreelance.³⁷ In this capacity,i ta ppears that they werep erceivedt op resent something of a risk, which related not to their deceit,b ut to the power that they might offer: e. g., when Cato warns his bailiff away from visiting "afortune-teller,orprophet, or diviner,ora strologer[haruspicem,augurem, hariolum, Chaldaeum]",heisnot  Nice (2001,1 55): Hariolor also appears in Cic. Similarly, in Juv. 6, 542-592the targetofthe description of the astrologers and diviners in the Forum is, for the most part,the woman whoconsults them; the poem alludes to their methodso fcreatingconfidenceint hese women, but there is almost some sympathyi nt he mention of the mathematici who have been incarcerated( 562).  As Phillips (1986,2 729) illustrates in his brief overview of the treatment of the haruspices: "sidingw ith conservative interests throughout the Republic, derided and sanctionedb yC icero, conjoined with magicians and astrologers by Ulpian, purgedand welcomed in the fourth century and finallys ummoned to Rome in AD 408." Similarly, (ibid. 2730) "[t]he astrologers werep eriodicallye xpelled and periodicallyr eturned."  Horster (2011,3 37-338). concerned to disparagethe practice, but to keep the bailiff from acquiringknowledge that might threaten his master'sp osition.³⁸ Columella, in turn, warns his bailiff that he must not on his owninitiative have anyacquaintance with asoothsayero rf ortune-teller (haruspices sagasque), both of which classes of persons "incite ignorant minds through false superstition".³⁹ We will return to this aspect below.
One wayt oi ntimate suspicion about these individuals was to suggest their foreignness. We have seen aboveC ato'sr eferencet ot he Chaldaean astrologers. The De divinatione also mentions them, offering diverse points of view:w hile his brother attests to their popularity,C icerom akesas trongc ase against them.⁴⁰ Meanwhile, in Juvenal's Satire 6, the onlye xplicit criticism of ad iviner is made about aJewess: "She too gets her hand filled, though with less, because Jews will sell youw hatever dreams youl ike for the tiniest copper coin."⁴¹ The significanceo fs uch concerns is reinforced by the historicale xpulsion of some of these groups from Rome. Thus, Valerius Maximusr ecords the expulsion of the Chaldaeans and Jews in 139 BCE, justified on the grounds thatR oman mores must be protected from foreign influences.⁴² But these observations,a dmonitionsa nd expulsions were not necessarilya bout particularp erceptions of race: we can extend them to encompass Quintus/Ennius' references to both the Isiaci coniectores and archaic Italian traditions:i ta ppears to be ac oncern with non-Romanness.⁴³ As ap arallel, this concern with foreignness/non-Romanness has been productively studied with regardt oc ult.⁴⁴ Where it was used, the label of foreignness/non-Romanness need not creates tigma.⁴⁵ This was not ac oncern with maintaining ar eligion of Empire:⁴⁶ as Simon Price has argued about the early Imperial period, "religious identities were[ more] fluid and variouslyd efined", and the identities of specific cults should not be regarded as monolithic.⁴⁷  Cato Agr. 5.4.4; as North (1990,5 9 Ando (2008, 106 -107), whoa rgues for the importance of the notions of public and privatei nt he regulation of Roman religious practice; but see Bendlin (2000,e sp. 131-132) for a deconstruction of these distinctions.  On the historyo ft his idea, see Rüpke( 2011).  Price( 2011, 272).
In search of the 'beggar-priest' Rather,s cholarship has shown how the concept of foreignness/non-Romanness seems to have been employed in various contexts, under different historicalpressures:t he Romans tate'sa ssociationwith the Etruscan haruspices offers one illustration; the cult of Cybele/Magna Mater in Rome another.⁴⁸ With regard to the latter,Eric Orlin has focused on its simultaneous aspectsofinclusion and exclusion: the cult was central to the city and yets imultaneouslye xcluded via regulationst hatm aintained al evel of marginalisation of thoseh olding roles in this cult.⁴⁹ Dionysius of Halicarnassus reports the ambiguity of identitiesp rojected by the rites of the cult-on the one hand, Roman, on the other Phrygian.⁵⁰ Orlin argues that there is an aspect of "paraded foreignness" in these phenomena, which is also found elsewherei nR omanr eligion.⁵¹ Such peregrina sacra, Ando notes, "represented in the classicalp eriod not so much intrusions by foreign elements into Romanr eligion as privileged sites within Roman religion for the negotiationo fb oundaries between Roman and alien".⁵²  Orlin (2010,101), citingBeard (1994for discussion of their transgression of sexual boundaries.S ee also A. Klöckner'sc ontribution in this volume (Chapter1 3).  Orlin (2010,102 -103,a t1 04); "Choosingt oh avet he priests remaino utside the boundaries of Roman citizenship makesastatement about the styleofworship, not the cult itself or the goddess";see Baslez (2004) on whether "priest" is an appropriatet erm for the galli. Specific to our discussiono ft he figure of the agurtai,i tm ay be that part of what seemed unacceptable about the galli was the beggingthey performed as part of their rite. In evidencedatingfromthe Republican period, the festival descriptionsi nclude the galli beggingf or alms from the bystanders (rather than the moreu sual distributiono ff ood, etc.t ot hem) (see Lucr.2 .610 -628a nd Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom.2 .19 -this dates to the Augustan age, but Orlin (2010,1 01) argues that it seems to reflect Republicanp ractice). If so, this was not an ew discourse: Clemento fA lexandria -admittedlyaChristian source and therefore likelyt ob ei nimical to most aspectso f pagan practice -citesM enander's Charioteer (Heniochus,3 13/2 BCE): "'No godf or me is he whow alks the streets /W ith some old dame, and into houses steals /U pon the sacred tray.'-for this is what the priests of Cybele do" (Protr. 75.2 =6 .2 fr.156 K-A).  Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 2.19.5; see Orlin (2010,102).  Orlin (2010,100); he uses this phrase first with reference to the haruspices.  Ando (2003,197;i talics in the original).

Show-men
Returning to the vocabulary for 'begging priests',wef ind circulator givena sa n equivalent to agurtes in glossaries of later Latin.⁵³ From its earliest use, circulator seems to mean aperson of no fixed abodeoremployment,who travelled around selling items, perhaps medicines, or putting on shows of various kinds in order to make al iving.⁵⁴ But despite some obvious similarities to the Greek term,c irculator does not offer af ull correspondence either.Thisi sb ecause it does not usually conveythe sameinherent association with ritual expertise as agurtes;instead, its emphasis is on remarkable public performances.⁵⁵ Indeed, when Tertullian employs the term in various polemics to describe those who offer services such as necromancy, Iw ould arguet hat he employs it preciselyb ecause it suggests that thoseheisabusing are performers, rather than ritual specialists.⁵⁶ This is an aspect that mayb ei mplicit in some of the Greek texts we have seen (e. g., Plato'smendicant ritual experts or the individuals abusedbythe writer of On the Sacred Disease), but it is ad efining characteristic of the Roman circulator.⁵⁷ It is also possible to trace some more specific concerns about these performances,inparticular, about wherethey occurred. Anumber of sources draw attention to the location of these characters,s etting them in the heart of the city.We have seen this, for example, in Cicero's(or rather Quintus')referencet othe "astrologers who haunt the circus grounds".Wea lso see it in reverse, as it were, in the edicts to expel the astrologers from the city.A nd, in Livy'sa ccount of the Bacchic conspiracy of 186 BCE, the speech attributed to consul Spurius Postumius Albinus recalling previous expulsions of such figures,o ffers an even more detailed topographical report( discussed further below): "How often, in the times of our fathers and our grandfathers, has the task been assigned to the magistratesofforbiddingthe introduction of foreign cults, of excludingdab-  Dickie (2001,225), whoi sone of the few scholars to explorethis term and on whose work I build here, makes this suggestion drawing on al ateL atin glossary (no citation given; but see CGL 2: 101 and 217.  In Cic. Fam.10.32.3:C.Asinius Pollio describesthe appallingbehaviour of Balbus the younger,which includes exposing "Roman citizens to the beasts,amongthem acertain travellingpedlar (circulatorem quendam auctionum)".G ardin du Mesnil (1809 no. 500) givest he meaningo f circulator as one whog oes from town to town "sellingm edicaments in public places",a nd theres eems to be no reason not to take this as the basis for the term. In search of the 'beggar-priest' blers in sacrificesa nd fortune-tellers (sacrificulos vatesque)f rom the Forum, the Circus,a nd the City,o fs earchingo ut and burning books of prophecies, and of annulling every system of sacrifice except that performedi nt he Roman way".⁵⁸ Other sources also show the centralityo fs uch gatherings:H orace in a Satire refers to the Circus itself as deceiving because it is wherethe itinerant fortune-tellers assemble; while Juvenal describes the astrologers and diviners gathered in the Forum.⁵⁹ Over time,this concern with place will alsostart to appear in descriptions of begging priests in Greek texts, specificallyi nt he phrase en tois kuklois ageirontes,used by Maximus of Tyre.⁶⁰ It has been argued that circulator is an attempt to rendert his phrase into Latin; the Greek being translated as "thosec ollecting money in the centreo fac ircle of onlookers".⁶¹ This is ap ersuasive argument, and seems to be supported by the definitions in late Latin glossaries,w here ochlagogos occurs as asynonym for circulator alongside agurtes.⁶² But closer examinationofthe Greek phrase reveals concerns not (only) with crowds, but more specificallyw ith location, as suggested above. The idea that circulator originally provided atranslation of this Greek phrase is less secureifweconsider that circulator appears to have been used in texts that are dated earlier than those that use en tois kuklois with this meaning.⁶³ It seems more likelyt oh aveb een connected to as lightlydifferent phrase, en kukloi,which does mean "acircle of onlookers",a nd is in evidence from the fifth-centuryB C.⁶⁴ In contrast,i no ther  Livy 39.16.8.  Hor. Sat.1 .6.113 Garrod;Juv. 6.542-592.  Max. Tyr. 13.3.  Dickie (2001,225). OLD givesthe etymology of circulator as circulo + tor;with circulo meaning "to form circles or groups around oneself for the purpose of makingi mpromptu speeches" (citingCic. Brut. 200; Caes. BCiv. 1.64.2; Sen. Ep. 40.3;52.8; 88.40); cf. however Walde-Hoffmann 1, 220: 'Herumzieher,Gaukler,H ausierer' (Pollio).  Dickie (2001,2 25). In CGL 2:101, ochlagogos is another synonym of circulator,a longside agurtes. Dickie notes that this term is found in astrological texts (e. g., Vett.Val. 1.3.29;2 .17. 57) and cites two Christian texts which associatethe ochlagogos with ritual experts:first,the Traditio Apostolorum (sic,presumablyaslip for Traditio Apostolica), which lists "performers of incantations,a strologers, diviners, interpreters of dreams and makers of amulets";s econd, the Constitutiones apostolorum (8.32.11;F unk 1905,1 :5 36 -537) but this does not include the agurtes (contraD ickie 2001,2 25).  As earch of the TLG indicates that Maximus of Tyre is the earliest text to use this phrase to describe crowds,r ather than, say, the arrangement of heavenlyb odies (as, e. g., Arist. Cael. 249a6).  en kuklois indicating ac rowd: e. g., Soph. Aj.7 23; Phil.3 56;X en. Cyr.8 .5.8. texts,wefind en toikukloi referring not to people, but to places.⁶⁵ It identifies not (only) the people gathered around an individual, but more generally(or in addition) the types of crowded settings-the agora/Forum/Circus-whereb oth crowds and begging performers would congregate.

Culturalc haracteristics
So far,t he exploration of terms has offered no direct parallel for agurtes,b ut it has provided some insights into specificallyRoman concerns with such itinerant ritual experts, presented in the sources as the risks created by their foreignness, theircentral physical location, and theirconnection to power.These three risks come together in Livy'sa ccount of the BacchicC onspiracy of 186 BCE, which alsoo ffers some further possiblet erms for these figures.I ng iving his account of the conspiracy,S purius Postumius Albinus is said to have recalled previous responses to religious offences (see above). His words echo an earlier passagewhere Livy is describingevents duringthe Second Punic War(215BCE): the account describes how "superstitious fears,inlarge part foreign at that,invaded the state to such ad egree that either men or elseg ods suddenlys eemed changed",a nd condemns,a sa bove, the activities of sacrificuli ac vates.⁶⁶ This phrase is used again in association with these events, to describe the Graecus ignobilis or 'nameless Greek' who is rumoured to be "apriest of secret rites performedbynight".⁶⁷ Finally, in another context,itisplaced by Livy in the mouth of the Aetolian ambassador Archidamus as he sneeringly describes the behaviour of T. Quinctius Flamininus on the battlefield of Cynoscephalae: "Taking auspices and sacrificing and performing vows like ap oor sacrificing priest (sacrificuli vatis)".⁶⁸ Sacrificulus is ap hrase that, at least in Livy,c aptures some aspects of the agurtes;t he -ulus ending seems to suggest some kind of disparagement.A nd  en toi kukloi indicates ap articular location: Cass.D io 63.22 (the circle of the theatre); 73.19 (the arena); Ithink that Maximus of Tyre uses it in the plural to indicateatype. The distinction between crowded placeand gatheredc rowd would easilybel ost: this accounts for various definitions of related terms in later texts,for example,the gatheringofacrowd leads the scholiast on Pl. Rep.3 64b to see this as the origin of the word agurtes,d efiningi ta st hose who gather (ageirontes)acrowd around themselves; whileHesychius (α 868) givesthe definitionofagurtes as sunathroistas.m anteis. hos Apion.  Livy 25.1.6 -9.  Livy 39.8.3;39.4.1.  Livy 35.48.13.
In search of the 'beggar-priest' yetthe term sacrificulus is also usedwithout an inherent pejorative sense (notablyinthe phrase rex sacrificulus 'king of sacrifices');⁶⁹ and Livy uses vates without denigration in an umber of otherp assages.⁷⁰ Individually, the terms do not seem to carry an egative sense; moreover,t he hendiadys that Livy creates here does not seem to be used elsewhere, so apparentlyi td id not have the same widespread use as agurtes. As Livy uses it,t he term is associated with risks that are different from those linked to the agurtes:itisnot clear that the services these figures provided werec onsidered 'false' or undermined by greed or need. Rather,aswehaveseen above, in at least acouple of cases, Livy'sspeakers emphasise the foreignness, or rather the non-Romanness of their activities.⁷¹ The Bacchanalian episode also suggests another risk that these figures convey: Orlin has argued that this fear of non-Romanness cannot account for the Senate'sr eaction to the events of 186,e mphasising how the Senate'sd ecree did not ban the cult,but instead placed it very closelyunder the control of the Senate, which was "[…]very much in keepingwith traditionalRoman practice, where the Senate served as the final arbiter for religious matters."⁷² As he and others have suggested, this indicates some fear of ap olitical risk.⁷³ If this is the case, it recalls the theme of the warnings of Cato and Columella to their bailiffs, (p.2 60 above). They werec oncerned with access to, or encouragement of, power,a tt he individual level; here, this possibilityt hreatens the state.
Finally, in Livy'sa lternative explanation for the changes in Dionysian worship, we find af igure who bringst ogethera ll three elements of risk discussed  Sacrificulus: Livy 2.2.1; and 6.41.9.Suetonius uses sacrificulus to describe priests of Isis alongside the phrase variae superstitionis (Suet. Dom. 1).  Vates,e.g., 1.4.6;5.17.1;7. 6.3;44.37. 9(amongothers);Newman (1967) traces the development of vates from aterm of disparagement in Ennius and Lucretius,toamoreexalted sense, related to the idea of the poet as prophet,i nA ugustan verse.  As Pailler (2005) has noted, the sourcesoffer avery one-sided account of these events,portrayingt he Senatea sp rotecting the Roman statef romaforeign threat.  Orlin (2010,168); compare Ando (2008, 12),who emphasises how the Senateconcentrates on institutionalisingthe cult,alongwith financial and legalrelationships amongits members.The decree does ban male priests:the Senate'sconcern is "loyalty to other members of the cult, and not loyalty to Bacchus".  North (2003,215) cautions against distinguishingbetween "political as against religious action" in this context: "the Senatem ight be said to be solvingapolitical problem or at least a problem of the control of power".Heargues that the role of perception is important:the movement mayhavebeen "fundamentally amovement of women and of lower-class men, without an integrated political purpose",but led by as mall groupo f" upper-class men with definitep olitical purposes"-or it could be that this was what the Senatefeareditwas or could develop into; he argues (217)that the response of the authorities led in the long term to much moresignificant threats to the state. so far.⁷⁴ Hispala identifiesapriestess (sacerdotes), one Paculla Annia from Campania, as responsible for the innovations to the cult of Dionysus,which renders it "more dangerous" in the senate'se yes.⁷⁵ Other sources give us some idea of the narrativea ppeal of such af igure: Fontaine has observedt hat in Plautus' Truculentus,dating to 186 BCE, the manipulative and greedy hetaira Phrynesium is "a thinlyv eiled and politically conservative allegory for Paculla and her involvement in the scandal".⁷⁶ Moreover,P hrynesium is based on the hetaira Phryne, who was famouslyt aken to court for impiety in fourth-century Athens: her crime was to bring together groups of men and women in a komos to worship anew god.⁷⁷ Thus we can see how Livy'saccount of Paculla Annia'sinvolvement drawso nashared narrative of long-standingw ith ar ecognisable stock character:aforeigner (a woman) who has come to live among us, whose personal charisma, rooted in ritual competence and claims to ritual knowledge,e ndangers civic security.

Concluding contrasts
Tracing the figure of the itinerant ritual expert from Greek to Roman culture has not revealed aRomanterm directlyequivalent to the Greek agurtes. In texts written in Greek, use of the term agurtes identifies cultural marginality:inaworld of religious plurality,inwhich all claims to supernatural relations werepossible, it succeeded in undermining thosec laims by raising questions about the integrity of thosew ho made them. It did this on the basiso fc ultural values that looked askanceatthe individual who continuallymoved between poleis and made aliving on the basis, not of askill or art,but rather on theireconomic dependence on others. In general, those described as agurtai or with its cognates wereb eing abused weak and ineffectual, their claims to power not to be trusted, their informationunreliable. Thus, it seems likelythat the term could be employed as useful shorthandf or criticising,f or example, not onlyr itual practitioners, but also politicians who claimed ritual expertise.
In searcho ft he 'beggar-priest' In contrast, in texts written in Latin, no separate linguistic category develops to describe such ac ontemptible group. As Phillips observes, in Rome, "the debates did not center on the existenceo fi ndividuals with special powers-that was granted. The sourceofthe powers mattered far more".⁷⁸ Latin sources associate adifferent set of risks with the itinerant figures who offered ritual expertise, portraying them as potential sources of social and political danger.⁷⁹ Tacitus, in describinghow the astrologers urgedonthe ambitionsofOtho, offers asuccinct but unsparing judgment of the ways in which such people are dangerous,b ecause they encouraget hosew ho seek power.They are, "at ribe of men untrustworthyf or the powerful,d eceitful towards the ambitious, at ribe which in our state will always be bothf orbidden and retained".⁸⁰ We might stille xpect to find such figures marginalised, as in the Greek evidence; certainlyt he rhetoric of foreignness could be used in such aw ay,b ut thati so nlyh alf the Roman story.U nliket he original Greek agurtai, these characters are alsoa ti ts heart, both literally -they are in the centreo ft he city,o nt he Palatine, in the Forum and Circus -and figuratively, since they are shapingt he everydayd ecisions of its inhabitants.R eferences to these figures offer us insights thatg ob eyond attitudes to divination: as North has described, the role and presenceofthe diviner, and how it changes over time, is a "marker of the location of power"-and, Iw ould add, of the locationo ft hreats to power.⁸¹ Over time, as we have seen, this concern will also become ac haracteristic of the agurtes,a st he term loses the nuances of its original meaning,a nd the itinerant beggarp riest becomes a single monolithic figure.
But before that overlap occurs,asGreek and Roman concepts still run, as it were, in parallel, we find the idea of the agurtes usedtoprovide acontrastwith figures that are in some ways considered, or who claim to be, rituallymore powerful. Forexample, Apollonius defends himself by drawing adistinction between the "learned" and "semi-learned arts",comparing "poetry,music, astronomy, oratory,a nd public speakinge xcept of the forensic kind",a nd "painting,s culpture, of statue makers,ofp ilots, of farmers as long as they follow the seasons",  Phillips (1986,2 714).  On the importance of cognitio deorum ("knowledge of the gods": Ant. div. fr.3Cardauns) as interpreted by the Senate, and the problems of its regulation within the multiple dimensions of the Empire, see Ando (2008, 104-8).  Tac. Hist.1.22.1; and cf. Tac. Ann.12.52 -the expulsiono fastrologers from Italyafter the alleged consultation of Chaldeans by Furius Scribonianus, whow as lookinginto the death of the emperor.  In biographical narrativesthey provide a topos for reflectingonthe nature of Imperialcharacters: Suet. Dom.8 .3; Vit.7 .4 -5; Otho 7. 2.4. SHA Comm.1.5.
with "ak ind of sham learning and hucksterism [pseudosophoi te kaiageirontes] that yous hould not equate with prophecy",which he associates with sorcerers, who aim to dupe their audience.⁸² The implications of the term ageirontes would have been immediatelyu nderstood by his audience: Apollonius is referring to itinerants, who are selling false services, among them divination.⁸³ The contrast is also drawn, more explicitly, by other characters in this work: in an earlier passage, set in Egypt,Thespesion-the oldest of the so-called 'Naked Ones' and a great sage-clarifies the differenceb etween Apollonius, who seeks wisdom, and mere wandering agurtai who aim simplyt o" flatter people'se yesa nd ears, and seem no better than anyone else".⁸⁴ In developing this claim, Apollonius goes beyond mere accusations of greed to assert that being an agurtes is likelyt or esulti nf ar greater pleasure. This can be seen as af urther refinement of the accusation of weakness or even greed for luxury,which we have seen levelled at agurtai in earlier narratives. ⁸⁵ These examples show how the rhetoricalfigure of the agurtes could be used, as acomparison, by thosewho wanted to claim they had real power;inturn, as the Roman examples show,such claims to power weretaken seriously.The risks of making such ac laim are neatlyi llustrated by as tory from among the fragments of book 7ofStrabo's Geography: Orpheus, aCiconian goes,lives in the vil-lageofPimpleia (said to be the birthplace of the mythical Orpheus), nearthe city of Dium at the foot of Mt.Olympus. He is described as starting off agurteuonta from various activities including mantike and mystic initiatory rites.⁸⁶ To begin with, he simplyu ses his ritual expertise to support himself. But subsequently,  Philostr. VA 8.7. 9 -10.S ee North (1990,68-70).  Macris (2008, 221-222, and 224-226). Such self-proclaimed 'holym en' were, for the most part,ofE astern origin, from Egypt,L ibya, AsiaM inor and Anatolia, Syria and Palestine. Rejection of payment will become part of the discourse that distinguishes the Christian 'holym an'. Paul does talk about beingp aid as perfectlyj ustifiable (1Cor. 9:12-20; 2Cor. 11:7-12; and 12:13 ff; and 1Thess 2:9. But he is rare for not wantingt ob ep aid (Auffarth 2013,3 5). The risk posed by money or economic transactions is raised in connection with prophecyi nChristian writings.There, we find the idea that an individual mayhavemortal economic interests characterised as beingopposed to Christianity;byimplication this is understood to threaten the integrity of the supernatural transaction.A uffarth (2013,19) notest hat this is personifiedi nt he person of Simon Magus -whot ries to buyf rom Paul the ability to curep eople miraculously( see Acts 8:18 -24,S idonius Letters 7. 9.15). As the Didache (11.12) makesc lear.t he request for silver indicates af alse prophet.  Philostr. VA 6.10.6.  It is also found in Philo Cain and Abel 2.268.32, where it features amongthe list of adjectives describingw hat happens to the character of those whoy ield to Pleasure.  Str. Geogr.7a.18 Meineke=fr.10R adt = OF 554,6 59,8 16 Bernabé.
In search of the 'beggar-priest' his ambition develops,a nd he acquires "ac rowd (ochlos)a nd power".⁸⁷ This passaged raws attention (again) to the wayi nw hich the drawing of ac rowd, the possibility of power,d istinguishes the ineffectual agurtes from his more threatening brothers-on-the-road.Inresponse, Strabo tells us, some receivedOrpheus willingly, but among others, suspicions arose that he had plans and meant violence; as ar esult, he was killed.