Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike International License 4.0.
All citation, reuse or distribution of this work must contain somewhere a link back to the DOI (
Four fragments (A-D) of one limestone
Fragment A
Fragment B
Fragment C
Fragment D
Letters:
Space between lines:
Encoded for EpiDoc schema 8.17 on 06-06-2016 by JM Carbon.
Edition here based on Stavrianopoulou in
Cf. also:
Further bibliography:
(Given the extremely fragmentary character of the text, no translation is attempted here.)
(En raison du caractère extrêmement fragmentaire du texte, aucune traduction n'est proposée ici.)
As Stavrianopoulou (followed by Lupu) has demonstrated, the fragments of this stele almost certainly belong to a sacrificial calendar, and most probably to the sacricial calendar of the city itself (see also below on line A9). This last conjecture is notably based on the wide range of sacrifices in these fragments: there are at least nine deities in the extant parts of the texts: a Hero, Zeus Poliarchos, a Nymph, Artemis, a Zeus without epithet, the Mothers, an unknown Zeus, Zeus Machaneus and (Artemis) Agrotera. A notable absentee in this pantheon is Apollo, since he was the main divinity of Eleutherna (cf. Lupu). On the whole, the text appears to have had a style typical of sacrificial calendars: dated entries, followed by deities in the dative and sacrificial animals in the accusative. A few other details would be included for each entry, such as further specifications concerning the animal, the different locations of the ritual (cf. e.g. lines A7, 13, 14 and 22?); few verbs would be expected (indeed, only a few are preserved here). Also in keeping with the style of sacrificial calendars, several entries appear to have been concluded with clauses concerning meals resulting from the sacrifice, especially in the form of "no take-away" rules: cf. lines A5 (probably), A11, A24, B8 (meal). For such "no take-away" rules, cf. e.g. the sacrificial calendar of Thorikos, CGRN 32, Commentary on lines 10-12. Since there is no way of determining the size of the lacunae on either side, it is impossible to determine how many calendrical units would have appeared in these parts of the text. It is striking that only a few traces of dates (lines A7 and C5), and temporal clauses, ὁπόκ
The Cretan Doric dialect contains many particularities, and this text is no exception: cf. the distinctive spelling λύμφα[ι] for Nympha (Stavrianopoulou discusses this morphology, aptly comparing Latin
Fragment A
Line A4: Since there may be a trace of a
Line A5: Here, Stavrianopoulou restores [ἐνόρχ]
Line A6: For other sacrifices to a hero/heroine, the identity of which is not further specified, cp. CGRN 20, Face C, line 8; Face D, lines 6-7, CGRN 21, lines 11-12, and CGRN 102, line 14 (all from Athens).
Line A8: The entry appears to mention a male ox (βῶν = βοῦν acc. sg.)—probably offered to a male god—of which it is said: ὧι ἐς τρὶς. Unfortunately, it is not known what was done "thrice" to the animal, probably some sort of ritual action (cp. Lupu).
Line A9: A sacrifice to Zeus Poliaochos, "who holds the city", is envisaged here. As Lupu notes, with references, Athena Polias and Poliouchos is well-attested on Crete, but this is the first mention of a Zeus in this role on the island. Since rites taking place presumably on the acropolis at Eleutherna are mentioned in lines A7 (if the restoration is correct) and A13, we may reasonably suppose that Zeus Poliaochos was also worshipped there. It would thus seem that an important set of sacrifices took place in the center of Eleutherna, perhaps early in the month Damatrios (since this was introduced only two lines prior). For Zeus Polieus (the more common title of Zeus in his capacity of tutelary deity) in the present Collection, cf. e.g. CGRN 7 (Athens), Face A, lines 26-27 and CGRN 83 (Miletupolis), line 7.
Line A10: The word ἧ is used in Cretan inscriptions as an adverb of manner. Thus, it seems that a particular sacrifice (mentioned in the lacuna to the left) was to take place here "as to the Nymph". Such "shorthand", in which the specifics of a ritual are not spelled out, but are to be understood by reference to another ritual, is rather common in our Collection (many can be found by carrying out a combined search for the Theme "Authority" and the Greek lemma καθάπερ). This type of strategy seems to recur in these four fragments—a similar expression is found in A12, B5 and D3 (and cp. A23)—which may at the same time provide another argument for seeing them as part of the same document.
Line A12: The traces τᾶι
Line A13: The meaning of [καθι]στάντας ἰμ πό[λι] is difficult to determine, since neither the agents nor the object is preserved. Perhaps the participle qualifies some officials whose role is to "arrange" rituals on the acropolis, or"‘place" an item or bring it into the acropolis (but we would rather expect εἰς + acc.), such as a cult-statue.
Line A14: Stavrianopoulou here restores a "winter-born" male kid, χί[μαρον], apparently to be offered in the sanctuary of Artemis, the Artemision. Alternatively, we may think of restoring χί[μαιραν] instead, as also suggested but not adopted by Lupu. Indeed, she-goats were especially sacrificed to Artemis Agrotera before battle: see the literary sources mentioned in
Line A15: As with some of the other restorations proposed by Stavrianopoulou, [κριὸ]ν̣ is to be treated with caution, since there are many other animals possible. For white male sacrificial animals, see esp. here CGRN 110 (Kamiros), line 4, and CGRN 117 (Lindos), lines 5-6: white or tawny oxen, and a similar billy-goat, respectively offered to Helios.
Line A16: The entry preserves the qualifier for a black male animal; for comparisons, see here CGRN 32 (Thorikos), lines 34 and 46 (tawny or black he-goats for Dionysus), and CGRN 56 (Marathonian Tetrapolis), col. II, line 18 (an all-black he-goat for an unknown recipient, probably Ge "at the oracle"). In the fragmentary phrase, ὃς κα μετρ̣, Stavrianopoulou plausibly detects a reference to the distribution of meat (perhaps into equal, i.e. measured or weighed portions, for example if a form of μετρέω, "to measure out", is to be restored). Since references to meals (the οὐκ ἀποφορά requirement and the δαίς in line A24) recur in the calendar, such a clause would not be out of place.
Line A17: Stavrianopoulou, followed by Lupu, restores the offering to Zeus here as a τέλεον τ̣[αῦρον]. A bull called τέλειος is however almost certainly unexpected, since τέλειος was probably used as an age-qualifier and bulls would normally be adults in any case (the only other possibility may be that τέλειος is used to qualify the animal as "perfect" or "unblemished, cp. perhaps
Line A18: Stavrianopoulou 1993 provides a detailed study of the cult of the Materes; the cult is attested at Engyon in Sicily, where it is thought to have been brought from Crete. The goddesses are convincingly identified as local Cretan divinities that reared Zeus after his birth in the cave of Mount Ida (cf. Diod. Sic. 4.79.5-4.80.6). However, we also note the opinion of Lupu (p. 332) that the (possible) presence of Demeter herself in a different guise in the calendar (cf. our Commentary at lines B3-4) "does not in and of itself seem [...] to provide sufficient grounds for rejecting Demeter and Kore as candidates" for an identification with the Materes. Indeed, one should recall that the perhaps analogous Damateres (i.e. Demeter and Kore) were worshipped in other areas of the Dorian world, cf. here for example CGRN 149 (Kamiros), line 4. That being said, an identification between the two pairs remains speculative for the time being.
Lines A20-21: According to Stavrianopoulou's plausible restoration, a conditional clause was stipulated here, perhaps having the meaning of "But if (so-and-so) does not make the sacrifice, (something is to happen) man by man". It may also be interesting to observe that we find a distributive notion both in ἕκαστος (ϝέκαστα ϝάννα) and in the adverb ἀνδρακάς ("per man"). Therefore, it is also possible to envisage that every man of a particular group was to sacrifice a lamb, in which case line 20 of the text would specify something about "each lamb" in this sacrifice—for example mentioning its weight or price or colour. Line 21 would then continue: "But if (some group) does not make (this) sacrifice (of individual lambs) man by man", then something (now missing) is to happen.
Line A22: As Stavrianopoulou has well explained, ἄδυττα may be a mistake for ἄδυτα τὰ. At any rate, Lupu provides a extensive discussion of the possible meanings of the phrase. Stavrianopoulou's preferred interpretation is of "sacrificial pits", but Lupu rightly remarks that these would be surprising in a cult of Artemis; he thus prefers the more general meaning of "sacred places not to be entered" (cp. ἄβατα). It may be that these ἄδυτα formed one or separate sanctuaries of the goddess, unless they represented subsections of the aforementioned Artemision (see above, line A14).
Fragment B
Lines B3: We cautiously adopt Stavrianopoulou's excellent suggestion of reading offerings of cakes to the goddess Demeter called Megalartos ("of big breads"). Megalartia are attested as part of the many festivals of the Labyadai at Delphi, cf. here CGRN 82, Face D, lines 10-11, as well as in Thessaly, where a month Megalartios is attested at Thebai (cf.
Line B4: It is possible that the sacrifices mentioned here were also connected with the occasion on which the δόλπαι were offered, but given our general uncertainty about the extent of the lacunae, we cannot be sure. The restorations proposed by Stavrianopoulou, [θῆλυ]ς χοῖρος τρ[ίται], in the first part adopted by Lupu, may reasonably be doubted. The first restoration is highly speculative and one would not expect an adjective to precede the mention of the sacrificial animal (unless this word belongs to a previous prescription; see above on line A17). In any case, χοίρος must certainly be accusative plural (i.e. Doric for χοίρους; all offerings in the calendar indeed appear in the accusative). The restoration of the numeral "three", better yet in the Cretan form τρ[ίνς], is more attractive. Groups of piglets are rare, but a few cases may still be adduced for the sacrifice of three piglets: cp. the calendar of the Marathonian Tetrapolis, CGRN 56, col. II, line 44, where this sacrifice is made to Kore, in addition to a ram in the month Metageitnion (August/September), and cp. also this sacrifice in CGRN 1 (Corinth), fr. A, lines 2-3 (summer month Phoinikaios); of a different character is the purification undertaken at Andania with χοιρίσκους τρεῖς: CGRN 222, line 68.
Line B7: The phrase τρίτω ϝέ[τους] must be correctly restored by Stavrianopoulou, who plausibly thinks of a trieteric festival; for the trieteric (biennial) festival celebrated at Gortyn, see CGRN 10, line 7, with Commentary; for another such festival at Axos, see
Fragment C
Line C4: The traces ΜΑΤ may be another occurrence of Ματέρσι, see above at line A18, but no certainty is possible.
Line C5: The word ἱσταμένου is almost certainly part of the expression of a date, counting from the beginning of the month (the moon "rising"). The expected expression would be in full: "μηνὸς + name of the month in the genitive + ordinal number in dative + ἱσταμένου".
Fragment D
Line D3: θύμα may refer to an animal (e.g. CGRN 13, Selinous, line A12, and CGRN 126, Lykosoura, line 18), but also to other offerings, such as fruits or cakes or aromatics, that were to be burnt (cf. the references in
Line D4: We adopt Lupu's attractive and nearly certain restoration of the god Zeus Machaneus, though he confesses that it is not otherwise known on Crete (see Lupu at D5 for further discussion and references). Another reference to (Zeus) Machaneus is found in CGRN 22 (Knossos), fr. B, line 9. The epithet Machaneus has been interpreted in antiquity already as "the one who knows μηχαναί", i.e. a Zeus who possesses mechanisms of
Line D5: For a discussion of the epithet Ἀγρότερα for Artemis, meaning "Wild" or "the Huntress", cf. Lupu (with further references).