NOTES

PROLOGUE

1. Quote from the Memorandum of Justification for the Recommendation by United Nations International Committee on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) that Delphi be listed as a World Heritage site, 6 March 1986. Full text can be viewed online:http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/393/documents/(1987 Advisory Body Evaluation)—last accessed 17.6.13.

2. Heliod. Aeth. For discussion of the novel, see: Feuillatre 1966, Hunter 1998.

3. Heliod. Aeth. 2.26–27; Pouilloux 1983, Weir 2004: 77–78, Baumbach 2008: 182.

4. For discussions of the veracity of Heliodorus’s account: Feuillatre 1966: 45–70, Pouilloux 1984.

5. For discussion of the date of the Aethiopica: Bowersock 1997: 149–60, Baumbach 2008: 167.

6. E.g., Strabo 9.3.3.

CHAPTER 1. ORACLE

1. “It happened just like at Delphi,” e.g., Hdt. 7.111. Amandry argued that the earliest oracular consultation at Delphi may in fact have been the reading of the rustling of leaves from a laurel tree at Delphi (not just any laurel tree, but the one that Daphne was transformed into when pursued by Apollo): Phylarchus FGrH 81F 32; Amandry 1950: 126–34.

2. Whereas at the oracular sanctuary of Dodona, questions and responses were often inscribed on lead tablets buried in the ground (and thus discoverable, and readable, today), at Delphi no such permanent records have survived, see Eidinow 2007. It is possible that archives of oracular responses were kept at Delphi: there is a zygastron referred to in inscriptions, but neither it, nor any responses, have ever been found: Flacelière 1961: 52.

3. Different accounts of same consultation: e.g., Thuc. 1.133–34 and Paus. 3.17.7 on Pausanias of Sparta. Different authorial styles: Herodotus’s passion for oracles and his use of them in his narrative: Kindt 2003, Kindt 2006. For discussion of the “use” of the Delphic oracle in other Athenian sources: Bowden 2005: 40–87. On the use of oracle stories in Pausanias: Habicht 1988, Elsner 2001, Elsner 2004, Hutton 2005a, Juul 2010. See also on the use of oracles in later literature: Busine 2005: 26–28.

4. All ahistorical accounts of oracle responses before fifth century BC, e.g., Fontenrose 1978: 11–195. Impossible to write a history after the fourth century BC: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 244. Middle path: Parke and Wormell 1956b: xxi.

5. The first Pythia was Phemonoe (meaning literally “prophetic mind”): Hes. Frag. 226; Strabo 9.3.5. Aristonice was Pythia at the time of the battle of Salamis in the fifth century BC: Hdt. 7.140. Periallus was the Pythia whom Cleomenes of Sparta bribed: Hdt. 6.66.

6. Plut. Mor. 405C. See Flacelière 1961: 42. By the third century AD, however, the post had become associated with the “priestly” families of Delphi: de la Coste-Messelière 1925: 83–86.

7. Chosen for life: Flacelière 1961: 42. See Roux 1976: 69. House to live in: FD III 5 50; Amandry 2000: 19. Multiple Pythias: Plut. Mor. 414B.

8. Diod. Sic. 16.26. See Flacelière 1961: 41. Pythia previously married: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 34.

9. Plut. Mor. 388E; Flacelière 1961: 39, Roux 1976: 175–76. Possibility of “special” consultations at other times: Price 1985: 134.

10. The lot oracle: Amandry 1939a, Amandry 1950: 25–36, Flacelière 1961: 39. Possibly a jar of black and white beans, the color indicating yes or no, selected at random by the Pythia: Price 1985: 132. These “lots” may have been kept in, and indeed consulted from, the tripod in which the Pythia was said to sit: Lucian Bis. Acc. 1. See also the early consultation by the Thessalians at Delphi about the choice of their king, which was said to have been performed with a lot oracle: Plut. Mor. 492A.

11. Amandry 1984c, Picard 1991: 261. See also Graf 2005.

12. Washing: Schol. Vet. on Eur. Phoen. 224. The Castalia was cleaned and fenced off in the third century BC: Colin 1899: 567. Burning barley: Plut. Mor. 397A. Only laurel wood was used on the sacred hearth: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 26. See Flacelière 1961: 43, Fontenrose 1978: 224.

13. Plut. Mor. 435B, 437B, 438A. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 30. Plutarch intimates that, occasionally, huge efforts were made to ensure the goat shuddered, including pouring a good deal of cold water over the animal: Plut. Mor. 438B. At the same time, Plutarch goes on to show how this bending of the rules led to an unsatisfactory consultation in which the Pythia’s voice was odd, ending with everyone running from the temple in fear and the Pythia dying a few days later.

14. Chian promanteia: Inscribed in the third century BC, when the Chians undertook a refit of their dedication (first made in the late sixth century BC): Courby 1927: 124. Several consulters with promanteia, see Eur. Ion 908.

15. CID I 8. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 32, Flacelière 1961: 48.

16. CID I 13; Amandry 1950: 245 (XVI). For discussion: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 31–32. The Sciathus inscription also says that it costs one Aeginetan stater for “consultation by 2 beans,” which is the best evidence for the existence of a lot (or “bean”) oracle at Delphi.

17. Asclepiads: FD III 1 394 1.22–33.

18. Waiting area: Flacelière 1961: 40. Proxenos: Eur. Ion 228. See Sourvinou-Inwood 1990: 15. It is not unlike the practice in the Gulf States today, such as in the United Arab Emirates, where a local, native partner is needed if a foreigner or foreign business wishes to engage in any business venture in the country.

19. Daux 1949c, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 32–33.

20. Plut. Mor. 385A, 378D.

21. See Hdt. 8.37; Plut. Mor. 388E; Plut. Vit. Sull. 12; Vit. Tim. 8; Fontenrose 1978: 226–27, Price 1985: 135. Elsewhere in the temple it was said there were busts of Homer and Hesiod, as well as Pindar’s iron seat and numerous other precious dedications: Flacelière 1961: 58.

22. E.g., Parke and Wormell 1956a: 28.

23. Initial temple publication: Courby 1927. See (reprinted) discussions in: Amandry 2010b, Amandry 2010a. Latest plan: Amandry 2000: 20–21, Amandry and Hansen 2010: 315–21 (figure 18.19).

24. Painted by the Codrus painter, supposedly showing Aegeus before the Pythia or Themis: Fontenrose 1978: 204, Lissarrague 2000. This impression of the consultation is favored by Fontenrose 1978: 223.

25. There were two priests of Apollo in second–first centuries BC (SGDI 1684–2343), but three by first century AD: Amandry 2000: 18. Bowden thinks there was only one in classical times, drawn from among the leading families of Delphi: Bowden 2005: 14. It seems local Delphians may also have been selected by lot to accompany the priests during parts of the consultation process: Plut. Mor. 438B; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 30.

26. Prophetes: Hdt. 8.36, Eur. Ion 413–16. Hosioi: the earliest mention of these officials is in the second century BC. There were five hosioi in Plutarch’s day: Mor. 292D; Parke 1940. Women responsible for flame: Plut. Mor. 385C. Parke and Wormell argue that these were women who had “ceased from marital relations” and may have been the group from which a Pythian priestess was picked. Tending the flame was thus a kind of preselection round for being chosen as the Pythia: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 36. Plutarch also mentions a group of “versifiers”: “there used to be [men who would sit around the oracle] weaving hexameters and metres and rhythms extemporaneously as vessels for the oracles,” Plut. Mor. 407B. For more on personnel: Roux 1976: 54–63.

27. Fontenrose 1978: 218.

28. Asking the question: Eur. Andr. 1104; Schol. Ar. Plut. 39. Providing answer in oral and written form: Eur. Ion 100; Hdt. 1.48; IG II2 1096. See Parke 1940, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 33, Price 1985: 136.

29. Amandry 1950: 129–30. Callimachus tells us she wore a bay-leaf crown and also held a bay sprig in her hand: Callim. Ia. 4.26–27.

30. Fontenrose 1978: 198–200.

31. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 19–20.

32. Diod. Sic. 16.26.

33. “Delightful fragrance”: Plut. Mor. 437C. Debate among friends: Plut. Mor. 432C–438D. Calm and peaceful: Plut. Mor. 759B. Bad consultation: Plut. Mor. 438B.

34. Strabo 9.3.5. Luc. 5.165–74; Fontenrose 1978: 208. The occasion of the consultation is that of Appius Claudius in 48 BC (see later chapters), and though the Pythia “rages,” her response is still clear and coherent. Pausanias 10.24.7. Lucian Bis.Acc.1. John Chrysostom The Homilies on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 29.1.

35. Pl. Phdr. 244A–245C, 265A–B. See Amandry 1950: 41–56, Flacelière 1961: 50, Fontenrose 1978: 204. “Intelligible and satisfying”: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 22.

36. Homolle, director of the original excavations at Delphi 1892–1901, is quoted as saying in 1894, “the temple, on which so much hope had rested, has been a great deception”: Broad 2006: 87.

37. Oppé 1904.

38. Price 1985: 139.

39. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 39. See also Dodds 1951: 70, Lloyd-Jones 1976.

40. E.g., Maurizio 1995.

41. Dempsey 1918.

42. Holland 1933.

43. The stone block: Bourguet 1914: 249, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 29. It was recently used as the center of an “oracle-consultation” scene in the movie Driving Aphrodite / Life in Ruins. It has, over time, been recognized as carrying the tomb of Dionysus, as the base for the tripod, and as having nothing at all to do with the temple. In reality, it seems to be a stone block originally from the temple that received its curious markings only so it could be made use of as an olive press in the last phase of the ancient settlement at Delphi in the sixth century AD: Hansen 2009: 115–20.

44. For an introduction to the general geology of the landscape at Delphi: Péchoux 1992.

45. De Boer and Hale 2000, de Boer, Hale, and Chanton 2001, de Boer, Hale, and Spiller 2002. See Broad 2006.

46. Price 1985: 131. See the discussion in Maass 1997: 1–19.

47. Respected: Rosenberger 2001: 65–126. Oracles were, as Mary Douglas put it, not “a poor man’s whiskey, used for gaining conviviality and courage against daunting odds”: Douglas 1966: 69. Numerous sites: e.g., Parke 1967, Parke 1985, Curnow 2004, Struck 2005, Johnston 2008, Stonemann 2011. For Dodona: Eidinow 2007. For oracles of the dead: Ogden 2001.

48. Paus. 2.24.1–2. For description of this sanctuary see: Vollgraff 1956.

49. See Dillery 2005, Flower 2008.

50. Eidinow 2007: 27.

51. Xen. Mem. 1.1.6–9.

52. Evans-Pritchard 1937. See Whittaker 1965.

53. See the scorn in later writers about how Croesus had mishandled his interaction with the oracle: Xen. Cyr. 7.2.17. On Herodotus and Croesus: Herodotus 1.46.2; Crahay 1956, Kindt 2003, Barker 2006, Kindt 2006. See how Herodotus also has Croesus misunderstand happiness as not being solely dependent on material possessions in his meeting with Solon of Athens: Herodotus 1.29–32; Osborne 2009: 204.

54. Bowden 2005: 22. See also Price 1985: 144. Some examples of personal questions with equal leeway: “is it advantageous for me to sail/farm/go abroad”: Plut. Mor. 386C.

55. It provided what has been termed “resistance” for the oracle to any accusation of falsehood: Parker 2000: 78–80.

56. Plut. Mor. 407E.

57. Johnston 2005: 301.

58. Parker 2000: 78. See Cleomenes in Sparta received an ambiguous oracle about his impending invasion of Argos. Making his own interpretation of it, he decided not to attack. When he was later put on trial in Sparta for his withdrawal, he defended himself by explaining his reasoning, which was determined sufficient to acquit him of all charges: Hdt. 8.77.

59. Advisor: Xen Mem. 1.4.15; Hdt. 1.157.3. There is no clear case of disobedience to a specifically solicited oracular responses recorded in the surviving sources: Parker 2000: 76.

CHAPTER 2. BEGINNINGS

1. Hom. Hymn Apollo lines 281–93. For discussion of the Homeric Hymn to Apollo, see Parke and Wormell 1956a: 107, Fontenrose 1959: 13, Miller 1986.

2. Hom. Hymn Apollo 300–304.

3. Alcaeus F 142 West; Davies 2007: 49–50.

4. See Roux 1976: 19–34.

5. Anaxandra FGrHist. 404 F 5; Callim. frag. 86–89; Plut. Mor. 417F–418B. See also Parke and Wormell 1956a: 7.

6. Ephorus FGrHist. 70F 31B; see Strabo 9.3.11: its purpose was to “summon humanity to civilization and rebuke it” See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 378.

7. Amandry 1950: appendix XCVI.

8. Simon. frag. 26a; Fontenrose 1959: 15.

9. Strabo 9.3.3; Fontenrose 1959: 410–11.

10. E.g., Strabo 9.3.12; Paus. 10.6.1.

11. Pind. frag. 55.

12. See Paus. 10.6.6; 10.7.2; 2.7–8; Morgan 1990: 145, Luce 2008: 429.

13. Strabo 8.6.14; Paus. 10.5.6; Ephorus FGrHist F150; Parke and Wormell 314.

14. See Amandry 1950: 196–200; appendix XCVI, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 11 n.28. The argument often ran that Dionysus’s followers were women, thus explaining the choice of a female oracular priest at Delphi: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 11. Dionysus’s tomb was supposedly inside the temple of Apollo at Delphi (earliest source third century BC): Philoch. FGrHist 328 f7. By Plutarch’s time at the latest (first century BC), Dionysus ran Delphi for three months each winter: Plut. Mor. 388E.

15. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 13. For the argument that the Sibyl was active much earlier in the archaic and classical period: Pollard 1960.

16. Paus. 10.6.1–4 and Plin. HN 7.203.

17. Pind. frag. 54; Plut. Mor. 409E–410A; Strabo 9.3.6. In early Greek maps, Delphi occupied the exact center of the world, like Jerusalem in maps of medieval Christendom: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 1.

18. Heraclitus frag. 93. See “Delphi, most famous of the clefts of ancient Greece, owed its name to this mythical image. ‘Delphi’ signifies in fact the female generative organ”: Eliade 1962: 21, see Richter 1994.

19. Centre of the Earth: Aesch. Eum. 39; Soph. OT 897. Cronus stone: Hes. Theog. 498–500; Paus. 10.24.6. Voice or “omphe” of the gods: Apollod. FGrHist 244f 94–99. Pytho’s tomb: Varro Ling. 7.17. Virgil thought the oracular tripod, not the omphalos, was Pytho’s tomb: Verg. Aen. 3.92. For discussion of the “archaic omphalos,” see Bousquet 1951. For the discussion on where in the temple of Apollo it was placed: Amandry 1992b. For a recent scientific investigation of the properties of the omphalos as an optical transforming device known as a space-inverting anamorphoscope (which has the effect of reflecting the world around it in such as a way as to “condense” its surroundings, making it look like it is warping the world around it and acting as its center): Kuckel 2010.

20. For discussion, see Sourvinou-Inwood 1979.

21. Single narrative: e.g., Dempsey 1918. Narrative roles: e.g., Miller 1986. A similar initiative, as we saw in the last chapter, has occurred in understanding the stories of Delphic oracular responses in literature. Comparison with other myth cultures: e.g., Fontenrose 1959.

22. For the Homeric Hymn to Apollo as confirming Delphi’s universal, Panhellenic status, see Clay 1989.

23. See Miller 1986: 73–75, 81, 107. Some scholars go further and seek to tie parts of the Hymn to historical events. For example, the Lelantine War (late eighth century BC) should be seen as a reason for the rejection of the Lelantine plain as an oracular site by Apollo, and the First Sacred War (early sixth century BC) should be seen as the outcome of the Delphic authorities not obeying Apollo’s final warning/prophecy not to engage in hubris. See Malkin 2000: 72. For both these events, see chapters 3 and 4. But tying theHymn so closely to such events, of course, requires taking a particular stance about the date of the Hymn’s first appearance, as well as of the date (and indeed historicity) of the events themselves.

24. See Malkin 2000. For discussion of Delphi’s role in, and the nature of Greek colonization, see the next chapter.

25. See Amandry 1950: 214, Sourvinou-Inwood 1987: 231.

26. See Sourvinou-Inwood 1979: 251.

27. The most notable of the myths is Heracles’ fight with Apollo over the oracular tripod, which comes about as a result of Heracles having fought off a number of others keen to take the sanctuary: Fontenrose 1959: 28, 401. But, as we shall see throughout this book, Delphi is also the subject of numerous conflicts for its ownership in the ancient world.

28. Aristotle told a story of a man called Hegesippus, who first went to the oracle of Zeus at Olympia to ask a question, and then to Apollo at Delphi where he asked only, “Does the son agree with the father?” Arist. Rh. 2.23.12 (1398 b 34). Hegesippus had effectively played Delphi off against Olympia, as Apollo at Delphi could hardly not agree with his father Zeus. The same story is told of king Agesipolis of Sparta on the question of whether to invade Argos, in Xen. Hell. 4.7.2.

29. See Defradas 1954: 148, Morgan 1990. Indeed, the later literary sources will claim that Delphi’s oracle was fundamental to the establishment of the oracle at Olympia (once again establishing its superiority over it): Parke and Wormell 1956a: 367. Similarly, in Strabo (9.3.12), the autochthonos nature of the Delphians is stressed, thus intimating their eternal association with the region, see Kyriakidis 2011: 86. Nevertheless, the myths fail to elucidate how Delphi is linked to other parts of the territory of Phocis, which it had to have been (in practical, economic terms if nothing else): McInerney 2011: 97.

30. The dragon was called Pytho e.g., Simon. frag. 26a. It is also suggested that the name Pytho came from the cry of the paean song encouraging Apollo to shoot the unnamed monster: Ephorus FGrHist 70F 31b (Strabo 9.3.12).

31. Graf 2009: 52.

32. See Larson 2007: 87–99.

33. For the etymology of Apollo, see Nagy 1994. He connects it to “apeileo”: to “make a boastful promise or threat.”

34. See Roux 1976: 35–52, Davies 1997. While many point to the equal worship of Dionysus at Delphi, and while it is not impossible that this god was worshiped at Delphi from its earliest existence, there is no archaeological proof for worship of Dionysus at Delphi until the fourth century BC. As a result, Dionysus’s role at Delphi will be considered in later chapters, along with that of the host of other deities worshiped at Delphi.

35. De La Coste-Messelière and Flacelière 1930.

36. Plut. Mor. 420C; FD III, 5, 25, col. III, A, 1.3–4 (CID II 62 IIIA.4). For discussion on whether this was a new sanctuary or the first attestation of a very old one: Dempsey 1918: 4, de La Coste-Messelière 1936: 63, Amandry 1950: 202–204, Sourvinou-Inwood 1987: 221.

37. For the initial excavation: Radet 1992. For the lion muzzle: Picard 1991: 7.

38. For the detailed publication of the cave: Touchais 1981. For the pottery: Picard 1991: 243.

39. Mycenean finds at the Corycian cave: Lerat 1984.

40. For discussion of the Delphic site in this period: Perdrizet 1908: 5–7, Amandry 1938: 305–307, Themelis 1983, Morgan 1990: 107. For the tomb: Bommelaer 1991: 15. For a wider discussion of Mycenaean Delphi and the surrounding area, see Müller 1992b, Müller 1992a, Luce 2011b: 306–10. For recent discussions on the nature and location of settlement across the Pleistos valley at this time: Skorda 1992b, Luce 2011b: 315–19.

41. Evidence for Gaia worship: Demangel 1926: 13–28. Deposited at later time: Lerat 1935.

42. Demangel 1926: 36, Bommelaer 1991: 48.

43. See Forrest 1957: 171, Morgan 1990: 107, Bommelaer 1991: 15.

44. Initial accounts of excavations: Luce 1992. Full report: Luce 2008. See also a summary of the arguments in Rolley 2002, Luce 2011b: 310–12. Pottery: Luce 2008: 438. Contact with Thessaly: Lerat 1961: 352–57, Morgan 1990: 108.

45. Luce 2008: 85–94, Luce 2011b: 312–15. See also Amandry 1938, Amandry, Lerat and Pouilloux 1950.

46. For discussion, see Morgan 1990: 106, 112, Luce 2008: 26–27, 29–50 (maison noire), 83. Theopomp. FGrHist 115F 193 [219] indicates that the first dedications at Delphi were tripods and cauldrons. See Jacquemin 1999: 37.

47. For a recent discussion of the (inverse) development of the settlements of Medeon and Delphi in Phocis during the Iron Age through to the eighth century BC: Luce 2011a.

48. Osborne 2009: 16.

49. For a wider discussion of eighth century BC change, see Snodgrass 1980, Morgan 1990: 5–20, Sourvinou-Inwood 1993, Osborne 2009: 66–162.

50. For the increasingly different political attachments of Delphi and Kalapodi, and thus their difference trajectories of development, see recently: McInerney 2011.

51. For discussion of the low level of elaboration at Olympia and Delphi in this early period, see Morgan 1990. For discussion of the comparative elaboration of “polis” sanctuaries: Alcock and Osborne 1994, de Polignac 1995. For debate over the appropriateness of the “Panhellenic” label, see Scott 2010: 260–64.

52. For discussion, see Morgan 1990: 112–27. For recent work on Kalapodi, see Felsch 2007, McInerney 2011.

53. Starting late eighth century BC: Morgan 1990: 134. For a comparison of the development of divination and cult at the sanctuaries of Delphi and Didyma in the eighth century BC: Morgan 1989. Long history of oracle at Delphi stretching back to second millennium BC: Bommelaer 1991: 19.

54. E.g., Snodgrass 1980: 120, Snodgrass 1986: 53–54. See Morgan 1993.

55. Note that some dedications from the west seem to have arrived before there is any evidence for Delphic involvement in colonization in the west: d’Agostino 2000: 79.

56. Luce 2008: 29–50.

57. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 312, Miller 1986: 105, Bommelaer 1991: 18. The stories involving Delphi and the heroes of the Homeric cycle grow in the literary sources during the classical and Hellenistic period. In the Odyssey, King Agamemnon is said to have consulted the oracle (Parke and Wormell 19), but also, later, to have planted a plane tree at Delphi to commemorate his visit (Plin. HN 16.238). In the Hellenistic period, Agamemnon’s visit was said to have been the moment of the foundation of the cult of Dionysus at Delphi: Parke and Wormell 408. It is interesting to note that later literary sources claim Homer himself consulted the Delphic oracle about his own birthplace: Parke and Wormell 317, 318, 319. The oracle’s response was later said to have been inscribed onto the base of a statue of Homer, which stood in the front section of the temple of Apollo at Delphi: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 394. Similarly, Hesiod (writing in the same period) was also later said to have consulted the oracle at Delphi about his fate: Parke and Wormell 206.

58. It was initially thought that Delphi, in contrast, did not receive the more personal kinds of dedications seen at Perachora (although such items were dedicated at the Corycian cave). The most recent excavations, have started to turn up more and more personal objects: Luce 2008: 212. Delphi, it seems, acted both as a local place for personal cult activity and, increasingly, for more state-level interaction.

59. See Morgan 1990: 142–46.

CHAPTER 3. TRANSFORMATION

1. Burning of the maison noire: Luce 2008: 47. Not the entire settlement: Lerat 1938, Lerat 1961: 330–38.

2. The Phlegyians: FGrHist 3 F 41e and FGrHist F 70, 93 (mid-fifth century–fourth century BC); Luce 2008: 48–49. Diod. Sic. (4.37.1) records another raid on Delphi, this time by the Dryopes (date uncertain). Neeft argues that an earthquake may have caused the destruction instead: Neeft 1981.

3. For the development of the relationship between Delphi and Medeon, see recently: Luce 2011a. Sadly much of the material evidence for the development of the Itean plain and other settlements like Medeon is still not widely available.

4. For further discussion, see: Morgan 1990: 115–26, Luce 2011b, Luce 2011a, McInerney 2011, McInerney (forthcoming). For discussion in particular on the north-south trade corridor: Kase, Szemler, Wilkie, and Wallace 1991.

5. Picard 1991: 243.

6. This is, however, unlikely. Tripod dedications, often identical to the ones at Delphi, are known from a variety of sites in the eighth century BC, many of which never had an oracle: Bommelaer 1991: 15–16.

7. Inception last quarter eighth century: e.g., Morgan 1990: 134. Problems of such a link: e.g., Osborne 2009: 192.

8. Luce 2008: 437. At the same time, of course, later literary sources claim the oracle was fully involved in a number of well-known Greek myths stretching far back in time: Kings Codrus and Aegeus of Athens consulted; famously, the family of Oedipus of Thebes as well as the Thebes’s rulers during the era of “the seven against Thebes”; King Oenomaus of Pisa; Orestes of the Atreus family; Io the nymph priestess of Hera seduced by Zeus; Jason who sought the Golden Fleece; Trophonius and Agamedes who were associated with the early building of the temple of Apollo at Delphi; Neoptolemus, the son of Achilles; and Heracles the demigod. As well, the oracle at Delphi was said to have given responses concerning Orpheus the son of Apollo, told the Epidaurians to worship Asclepius, identified the shoulder bone of the hero Pelops, set up the oracle at Olympia and the oracle of Trophonius at Lebadea, and been involved in the establishment of the shrine of Apollo Pythaios at Argos: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 297–318, 340–51, 367–68.

9. For further discussion, see Osborne 2009: 153–95.

10. See Morgan 1990: 155–61, 184–85.

11. Rejecting all accounts: e.g., Fontenrose 1978. Here, I have followed the list of fake and historical oracles in Morgan 1990: 186–90. Examples of “fakes”: involvement of the Delphic oracle in encouraging the Dorian invasion of Greece, and the Ionian migration: see Parke and Wormell 1956a: 55–57. Also consultations that link the oracle to authorizing the beginning of the Olympic games (Parke and Wormell 485; 486); the city of Aegion asking who were the better Greeks and being told that they were not in the reckoning (Parke and Wormell 1). Plut. Mor. 492A–B claims that the Thessalians consulted a “lot” oracle at Delphi when choosing Aleuas the Red as king.

12. In terms of individual consultations, the first more reliable consultation is that of Archilochus, the poet from Paros in the seventh century BC on the issue of his prospects for begetting children, and, later on, about what to do during hard financial times: Parke and Wormell 231, 232; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 396.

13. Parke and Wormell 29, 21, 217–21.

14. Tyrtaeus frag. 5 (West) repeated in Plut. Vit. Lyc. 6, and Diod. Sic. 7.12.5.

15. Process, oaths, land: Parke and Wormell 222, 539, 561. Warning: Parke and Wormell 222

16. Commencement: Parke and Wormell 296. Improve fortunes: Parke and Wormell 363, 297, 299.

17. Maximize chances: Parke and Wormell 365. Conduct during war: Parke and Wormell 364: it is ironic here that the oracle is supposed to have told Sparta to use trickery to take Messenia and to have warned the Messenians to beware Spartan trickery! Salvation: Parke and Wormell 298, 366, 367.

18. The oracle advised them to bring the bones of Orestes back to Sparta: Parke and Wormell 32, 33.

19. Lion and eagle oracle: Parke and Wormell 7. Aetion oracle: Parke and Wormell 6. Oracle to Cypselus: Parke and Wormell 8.

20. Parke and Wormell 12. For discussion of this early involvement between Athens and Delphi: Daux 1940: 40–41.

21. Parke and Wormell 51. In addition, by the mid-sixth century BC, literary sources relate that Gyges also asked the oracle who was the happiest man alive (expecting to be told himself) and instead was told it was an Arcadian, Aglaus of Psophis: Parke and Wormell 244; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 384–85. For a recent discussion of Delphi’s relationship with the east: Wörrle 2000.

22. Parke and Wormell 50. See Paus. 10.16.1–2. Strabo is the only ancient source to mention the construction of a treasury by Gyges at Delphi (Scott 4).

23. See discussion in Morgan 1990: 172–82.

24. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 115, Londey 1990.

25. See Parke and Wormell’s characterization of the oracle as “opportunistic,” especially in political issues (as opposed to more impartial or conservative in religious issues): Parke and Wormell 1956a: 418.

26. Malkin 1989: 150.

27. Parke and Wormell 370, 371, 384. For discussion of the Lelantine War, see Forrest 1957: 160–64, Salmon 1984: 67–70, Morgan 1990: 167–68.

28. See Osborne 1998, Osborne 2009: 122. For a recent discussion of colonization, and ways of approaching the relationship between colony and mother-city, see Scott 2012.

29. Ephesus: Parke and Wormell 234. Aegae: Parke and Wormell 225. Gela: Parke and Wormell 410, 3. Pausanias on Archias of Corinth: Parke and Wormell 2. Strabo on Croton and Syracuse: Parke and Wormell 229.

30. Thera: Parke and Wormell 37, 38, 40 (believed by the Therans); Battus: Parke and Wormell 39. See also Parke and Wormell 41.

31. Other literary sources: Pind. Pyth. 4.9; Diod. Sic. (Parke and Wormell 71); Paus. 10.15.7. Inscriptional evidence: SEG 9.72 (Sacred laws: Parke and Wormell 280); Meiggs and Lewis 1988: No. 5 (granting citizenship to Therans on basis of original agreement at time of colonial foundation).

32. Parke and Wormell 46, 47, 525, 526, 568.

33. Morgan 1990: 176. Yet for recent arguments for the lack of desire for a relationship between the colony and Delphi (as opposed to the desire for such a relationship on the part of the mother city), see: Davies 2009, Jacquemin 2011.

34. E.g., Thuc. 1.38.2 and 6.1.6 on the close relationship between Corinth and its colonies in the fifth century BC and on its willingness to provide military support on the basis of its role in their foundation.

35. Defradas 1954.

36. Forrest 1957, Snodgrass 1980: 120, Snodgrass 1986: 53–54. For the debate on where the stories of colonial consultations were shaped, see: Murray 2001: 31–34.

37. See the review of previously scholarly opinion in Malkin 1987: 18–22.

38. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 78, Malkin 1987: 7, 17–81, Morgan 1990: 171–78.

39. Callinus of Ephesus: see Malkin 1987: 19. Dorieus of Sparta: Malkin 1987: 78–81, Morgan 1990: 171–78.

40. Forrest 1957: 174. See Malkin 1987: 89–91, Osborne 2009: 193–94, Aurigny 2011. For the later take-up of Delphi as a place of crucial importance particularly for the development of identity among the western colonies after Phocaean intervention in the sixth century BC: d’Agostino 2000: 82–85. For a recent discussion on the importance of colonization for the identities of relevant communities, emphasizing the local emergence of Delphic colonial oracular consultation stories rather than their development at Delphi: Giangiulio 2010. For a very different view, emphasizing the lack of connection between Apollo Pythios and colonial foundations involving the oracle (as opposed to the stress put on Apollo by the mother city), see: Davies 2009, Jacquemin 2011.

41. In Addition, Parke and Wormell argue for the oracle establishing something of a moral code by this time: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 382–84. Despite its religious conservatism, the oracle by this time seems also to have been responsible for directing the foundation of the Apollo Pythios cult in other places (like Athens: Parke and Wormell 541); regulating the occasion of sacrifice for other divinities (Aphrodite around Attica: Parke and Wormell 212); and even authorizing the worship of new divinities to the Epidaurians: Damia and Auxesis: Parke and Wormell 10, 11.

42. Le Roy 1967: 21–28, Morgan 1990: 132. See de La Coste-Messelière 1936, Dinsmoor 1950. For the latest excavation, and suggestion of an early sixth century date: Luce 1992: 704, Luce 2008: 95–117. There is also evidence for an early temple in the Athena sanctuary at roughly the same time, although its dimensions and form are uncertain: Demangel and Daux 1923: 38–39. Some scholars have seen a Corinthian influence in the design of this early temple: Østby 2000: 241.

43. Luce 1992: 697, 700–701, Luce 2008: 51–60, 61–78.

44. Morgan 1990: 16, 137, 183.

45. Scott 2010: 45.

46. Luce 2008: 412.

47. Thessaly may have offered a life-size statue at Delphi in the first half of the seventh century (Paus. 10.16.8): Jacquemin 333; Scott 1. Cypselus’s treasury: Scott 2; Jacquemin 124. It was in Cypselus’s treasury that the offerings of King Gyges of Lydia were kept.

48. Jacquemin 1999: 32, Scott 2010: 42.

49. Items found include a bronze horse from northern Greece in the Corycian cave 700–650 BC, rings and buttons near the Athena sanctuary from the Balkans. For Olympia finds: Kilian-Dirlmeier 1985, Luce 2008: 413–15.

50. Vatin 1977, Luce 2008: 411–26, Scott 2010: 41–45. For discussion of their identification as Cleobis and Biton: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 378–80.

51. See Pouilloux 1976, Lerat 1980: 102.

52. Luce 2008: 418. Pind., Pyth. 5, talks of a “treasury of the Cretans,” which has never been found and was increasingly thought to have been made up. But the collected nature of their offerings in the eighth and seventh centuries BC may possibly open the debate again over the existence of some kind of early treasury structure: Roux 1962, Jacquemin 1999: 289. For further discussion of Cretans at Delphi: Perdrizet 1908: 2, Guarducci 1946.

53. Scott 10. For discussion, see Courby 1927: 186–87, de La Coste-Messelière 1936: 63–78, Bommelaer 1991: 229.

54. See Luce 2008: 429–36. Equally note the convergence between the oracle’s minimal role in new foundations around the Black Sea and the lack of offerings from that area.

55. No Cretan tripods at Olympia: Rolley 1977: 103. Indeed at Olympia, Cretan weapons appear that seem to have been dedicated by Crete’s enemies. Delphi may have been the sanctuary for Cretans to dedicate in, Olympia for its enemies: Rolley 1977: 146. As well, Sparta seems to have dedicated more often at Olympia in the seventh century than at Delphi, despite its close relationship with the oracle: Picard 1991: 161. For more on the differences between Olympia and Delphi down to the seventh century BC, see Morgan 1990. For the archaic and classical periods, see Scott 2010.

56. See Roux 1979: 3, Morgan 1990: 185, Luce 2008: 434. Unless you count a story in Plut. Mor. 492A–B that the Thessalians used an early form of lot oracle at Delphi when selecting their King Aleuas the Red (and even then it is noticeable that it is not the Pythian oracle they are interacting with). Pausanias also later claimed the first monumental dedication at Delphi was from Larissa in Thessaly in the late eighth century BC (Paus. 10.16.8; Jacquemin 333; Scott 1), but this may have been dedicated only in the sixth century BC: Jacquemin 1999: 51.

CHAPTER 4. REBIRTH

1. Crisa was powerful enough for the sea gulf to the south to have been known as the Crisaean Gulf (Thuc. 1.107.3). Strabo (6.1.15) believed Crisa had also established a colony at Metapontum in southern Italy. Where was Crisa? It has never been identified archaeologically: some suggest it’s the settlement of Moulki on the plain near the coast (see map 3): Morgan 1990: 136. See also Dor, Jannoray, van Effenterre, and van Effenterre 1960. Crisa as the town hampering Delphi should not be confused with Cirrha (although the name is sometimes used in the ancient sources for Crisa), which was the port town where ancient pilgrims arrived en route to Delphi throughout its history, or with the name Castri which was given to the modern village built on top of Delphi in the medieval period after Delphi’s abandonment in the seventh century AD. See Rousset 2002b: 218.

2. Oracle response: Aeschin. In Ctes. 3.108 (Parke and Wormell 17). See also the version in Diod. Sic. 9.16 (Parke and Wormell 18). Length of war: Callisthenes FGrHist 124 f1. Leaders of expedition: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 103. Introduction of hellebore: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 104–105.

3. For a recent résumé of the details, along with discussion of the existence of an earlier festival at Delphi, which the Pythian games superseded: Weir 2004: 11–16.

4. Robertson 1978. For previous scholarly discussion of the war, see in particular Forrest 1956. See also Jannoray 1937, Sordi 1953, Defradas 1954. The surviving evidence for the war is best catalogued in Davies 1994. See “the fantasy of the Crisa war cannot be exorcised, instead it will continue to haunt the dreams of historians”: Càssola 1980: 422.

5. Although some have argued for involvement of the Amphictyony from the mid-seventh century BC: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 103.

6. See Mosshammer 1982. Pausanias (10.7.2–5) also reports that the oldest competition was for the singing of hymns to Apollo, with harp, flute, and athletic competitions added in 586 BC.

7. See Strabo 9.3.10; Paus. 10.7.2. For discussion of the difficulties in ascertaining the origins and precise development of the games from the ancient sources: Morgan 1990: 136. Davies in particular argues that the origins of Delphi’s local games were later elaborated in order not only to compete with, but also to ally the increasing number of polis and sanctuary games in the first half of the sixth century BC, and particularly those of the periodos circuit: Olympia, Delphi, Isthmia, and Nemea: Davies 2007: 56–65.

8. See McInerney 1999. Indeed McInerney argues that the Sacred War may have been provoked by Delphi as part of an intentional land grab: McInerney 1999: 105. See Rousset 2002a: 281.

9. Bandit stories: Robertson 1978: 44. Change in favoritism of the oracle: See Forrest 1956. Cretan influence: Guarducci 1946, Davies 1994: 204. Heracles and tripod images: Parke and Boardman 1957.

10. First perimeter wall: Luce 1992: 694, Luce 2008: 79–81, Bommelaer 2011: 14–19. Temple dated to same period: Luce 2008: 98–104. Major elaboration of the roof in 575 BC of a preexisting temple: Billot 1977, Jacquemin 1999: 30, 222.

11. Scott 2010: 52. See also Bommelaer 1991: 19, Morgan 2003: 113, Hall 2007: 276–90. The war may have been encouraged by rival factions within Delphi itself: Dovatour 1933. Provoked by Delphi: McInerney 1999: 105. The war as the result of regional rather than “interregional” tensions and interests: Morgan 1990: 136.

12. For the importance of the Thessalian-Isthmus corridor to Thessalian policy: Kase and Szemler 1984.

13. The tyrants of Corinth are said to have plotted actively against the Sicyonian tyrant: Forrest 1956: 37. Sicyon may have later been attacked for its role in the war at Delphi by Corinth’s ally Miletus: Salmon 1984: 227.

14. The Alcmaeonids had been significantly tainted by the Cylon affair in Athens: Cylon, was the would-be tyrant of Athens in the late seventh century, whom the oracle had supposedly supported, but whom the Alcmaeonids had taken upon themselves to kill. In doing so they committed religious sacrilege, and so subsequently had to be punished for their crime: Forrest 1956: 39–42.

15. Luce 1992: 704. The annexation of this vast stretch of land (150–200 sq km) as sacred land was a game changer in Delphi’s history. The degree to which this vast area was controlled by the city from the sixth century BC through to the Hellenistic period has no real likeness in the Greek world. The control can be demonstrated archaeologically: the area of Cirphis extending down from Delphi toward the sea has revealed no surviving remains indicating any kind of settlement from this period, in striking contrast to the rest of the region, a fact only plausible if the entire area had been off limits at that time as sacred land: Rousset 2002b: 239. As a result, control over the sacred land made Delphi something of a unique case in the ancient world, and enabled this small city to punchsignificantly above its weight in comparison to other Greek cities; see Rousset 1996. The inclusion of Delphi under the auspices of the Amphictyony also put Delphi on a different track from other regional sanctuaries in Phocis, some of which demonstrate strong degrees of anti-Thessalian activity at exactly this time, e.g., Kalapodi: McInerney 2011: 101–102.

16. Importance of symbolic capital in sixth century: Osborne 2009: 231. Prizes at games: see Valavanis 2004. At Delphi, it was a wreath made out of laurel branches.

17. Development of cultural homogeneity: see Snodgrass 1986. For the use of Corinthian pottery at Delphi in this period: Luce 2008: 421. For sculpture and coinage: Osborne 2009: 234–54.

18. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 99–100.

19. Original focus around sanctuary of Demeter Anthela: Sanchez 2001: 44. Change in composition after annexation of Delphi: Lefèvre 1998: 16. See Tausend 1992.

20. Range of purpose: see Sanchez 2001: 44–50. Prototype European Union: see Tenekides 1931, Daux 1957a, Daux 1957b, Sordi 1957, Tenekides 1958, Amandry 1979. Old boys’ club: Hammond and Griffith 1979: 452. Recent consensus: Sanchez 2001: 44–51, 468–77, Lefèvre 2011. See Daux 1975: 350–54. Of varying interest to Greeks over time: see Lefèvre 1996. Absence in the fifth century BC (and from Herodotus): Sanchez 2001: 27, Hornblower 2007. For discussion of its existence and purpose in late Hellenistic and Roman times: Daux 1975.

21. Convincing rest of Amphictyony: Sanchez 2001: 488. New range of raw materials: Jacquemin 1993.

22. Difficulties in knowing: see Lefèvre 1998: 51. No permanent secretariat: Davies 1998: 11, Lefèvre 1998: 193. Reality: Davies 1998: 10–11.

23. The primary bodies in the administration of the city of Delphi were its ekklesia (assembly), its boule (council), and its prytaneis (magistrates), among whom was the eponymous archon (chief magistrate) of the city. It is thought that it was primarily the prytaneis who liaised with the Amphictyony and handled sanctuary management: Arnush 1991: 11–45. All three bodies had places to meet within the city, with many scholars arguing that the bouleuterion (meeting place of the boule) was within the Apollo sanctuary, and the prytaneion very close to it. In later centuries (Hellenistic and Roman times), the theater within the sanctuary was used for meetings of the city’s assembly, and the council of damiourgoi (a particular class of citizen) came to have considerable influence: Heliod. Aeth. 4.19; Vatin 1965: 227, Weir 2004: 51.

24. Tension between Delphic city and Amphictyony: Lefèvre 1998: 51, Weir 2004: 53–55. On the responsibility of the city for particular events, and on its constitution (Aristotle wrote a treaty on the constitution of the Delphic polis, which is now lost): Roux 1970, Roux 1979: 61, Bommelaer 1991: 24, Jacquemin 1995b, Lefèvre 1998: 44–45.

25. New cults may also have begun at this time at Delphi, like that of Neoptolemus. The stories associating the death of Neoptolemus with Delphi are varied, evoked perhaps to explain the emergence of a cult place in his honor within the Apollo sanctuary that is well known by the fourth century BC: Downie 2004: 152–217.

26. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 108–109.

27. Questions about plague: Diog. Laert. 1.110; Parke and Wormell 13. See Bowden 2005: 110–11. Solon’s consultations: Parke and Wormell 15 and 16. For Solon’s (later) popularity and sources, see: Osborne 2009: 204–11. For more on Solon, see: Blok and Lardinois 2006, Lewis 2006.

28. Golden statues at Delphi: Plut. Vit. Sol. 25. Exegetai pythochrestoi: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 110–11.

29. Parke and Wormell 326. See Bowden 2005: 114.

30. Early Athenian treasury Jacquemin 85; Scott 7; see Scott 2010: 49.

31. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 110.

32. Cypselus, tyrant of Corinth, had offered the sanctuary’s first treasury (see the last chapter), as well as numerous other dedications, and been heavily involved with the oracle. His tyrant son, Periander, continued to follow in his father’s footsteps, perhaps with the dedication of a delicate and exquisitely carved ivory chest, fragments of which have been found buried in the sanctuary: Carter 1989.

33. Jacquemin 435, 434; Scott 19, 20.

34. Scott 2010: 53–54. For more on the tholos and monopteros: de La Coste-Messelière and Picard 1928: 191–92, de La Coste-Messelière 1936: 52–54, 79, Partida 2000: 90.

35. Paus. 10.7.7. The chariot may even have been displayed inside the monopteros: de La Coste-Messelière 1936: 79 n.3. The chariot and stadium races in this period would have taken place in the plain below the sanctuary, as there was no room for them on the steep hillside. While the stadium races would later take place in the stadium built into the hillside, the chariot races for the games, throughout the sanctuary’s history, took place on the plain below: Bommelaer 1991: 10.

36. Although there are some notable Corinthian dedications during this period, including one of the chryselephantine statues found in the burial underneath the sacred way (now on display in the museum): Luce 2008: 412.

37. Pausanias 5.16.5. See Salmon 1984: 227, Carter 1989: 374, Arafat 1995, Snodgrass 2001.

38. Oracle responses concerning Adrastus: Parke and Wormell 24. Using spoils on games: Schol. Pind. Nem. 9.20. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 121.

39. For the tendency of the ancient sources concerning Delphi’s interactions with tyrants increasingly to rebrand the sanctuary as antityrannical in periods when tyranny was no longer a positive political option, as noted in the last chapter, see: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 121, Malkin 1989: 149. Some tyrants, though, in the period 600–550 BC, received more useful responses, especially when they were portrayed as seeking atonement for their sins, e.g., Pythagoras, tyrant at Ephesus, who sought a method of alleviating famine brought on his city by is own impiety: Parke and Wormell27.

40. This story too is argued to be a later creation, perhaps from the fifth century, given that all the rival competitors to Delphi in Croesus’s competition were Delphi’s real-life competitors for oracular consultation in the fifth century BC (Abar, Dodona, Amphiarius at Oropus, Lebadeia, Didyma, Ammon at Siwa), when a story underlining Delphi’s preeminence would have been welcome: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 132. Although Herodotus notes that other sanctuaries received dedications following this process as well (e.g., the oracle of Amphiarius at Oropus: Hdt. 1.49–52), perhaps indicating that Delphi was not the only one to get the question right, but simply the one Croesus chose to use.

41. For discussion of Croesus’s offerings: Parke 1984, Flower 1991.

42. See Flower 1991: 67–68. Croesus may even have named one of his grandchildren Pythios after the oracle: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 139.

43. Parke and Wormell 53. Croesus went on to make Sparta his allies, an introduction possibly made by Delphi itself as the oracle told the Spartans to go to Croesus when they needed gold: Parke and Wormell 56. Croesus asked several other questions as well: Would he rule for a long time (Parke and Wormell 54), which received an equally ambiguous answer: “Till a mule becomes king of Persia.” He is also said to have asked about how to cure his dumb son (Parke and Wormell 55).

44. Further gifts to and from Delphi: Hdt. 1.54. See Kurke 2011: 58. For discussion of Croesus’s actions: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 135.

45. Glaucus: Parke and Wormell 35, 36. Aesop: Parke and Wormell 58. For discussion of Aesop as a test case of Delphic greed: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 398, Kurke 2011: 59–74.

46. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 331–39.

47. Prevalence of Dionysus in oracular accounts: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 331. Importance of Dionysiac cult and activity at Delphi: Roux 1976: 176. E.g., consultation of the oracle in the Hellenistic period by various guilds of Dionysiac actors: Parke and Wormell 349. See subsequent chapters for detailed discussion of Dionysus’s role at Delphi.

48. See Malkin 1987: 79.

49. Heracleia Pontice: Malkin 1987: 73–76. Chersonesus: Bowden 2005: 120.

50. Scott 22; Le Roy 1967: 70–76. In a site on a steep hillside, and in which over 80 percent of the roofs were of yellow Corinthian clay, the presence of a different roofing clay and style would have been very noticeable: Scott 2010: 51. In addition, in the 540sBC, Cyrene, founded thanks to an oracle from Delphi, would turn back to the oracle to ask for help during a period of political turmoil and for which the oracle helped appoint a mediator, Demonax of Mantinea: Malkin 1989: 139, Scott 2012: 14–44.

51. Scott 11, 12, 17. For discussion: Scott 2010: 49.

52. Scott 23 and 32. For discussion: Scott 2010: 50.

53. Bouleuterion: Scott 2010: 48–49. Cnidian Treasury: Scott 33. Scott 2010: 47. Naxian Sphinx: Scott 21; Scott 2010: 46.

54. Hdt. 2.134–35; Scott 9. Plutarch, in the first century AD, recounts how his friends were outraged that a dedication from a courtesan could have been accepted in a sanctuary like Delphi: Plut. Mor. 401A.

55. The discovery and initial report of the burial: Amandry 1939b, Amandry 1977, Picard 1991: 191–226, Luce 2008: 415.

CHAPTER 5. FIRE

1. Also to be included in the Delphic “portfolio” is the 150–200 km of “sacred land”—the territory around Delphi declared sacred following the “First Sacred War”—which Delphi administered. In the second half of the sixth century BC, there seems to have been a specific magistrate in charge of it, who may also have had a role in running the Pythian games: Rousset 2002a: 212, 285 and inscription 33 (550–25 BC).

2. For the ancient sources on the fire, see Hdt. 2.180; 5.62.2–3; Paus. 10.5.13. For the melting of Croesus’s dedications: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 143.

3. Hdt. 2.180. Herodotus chooses to use the word “automatos.”

4. Scott 2010: 56–60. For a recent discussion of the new boundary walls, see: Bommelaer 2011: 19–25.

5. For the stone quarries that fed the building programs at Delphi, see: Amandry 1981a: 714–21, Bommelaer 1991: 245–47.

6. Davies 2001a: 213.

7. Cost of temple rebuilding: the daily pay for an Athenian juryman was approximately half a drachma (by the end of the fifth century BC), whereas a skilled hoplite could expect a drachma. There were 6,000 drachmas in a talent. See Burford 1969: 109. Contribution from Egypt: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 143–44.

8. De La Coste-Messelière 1946: 285.

9. Schachter 1994: 295–98.

10. Polycrates of Samos: Parke and Wormell 67. Archesilaus III of Cyrene: Hdt. 4.163; Parke and Wormell 69 and 70. See also Malkin 1989: 139, Parker 2000: 92.

11. Pactyes: Hdt. 1.157.2–160; Parker 2000: 92–93. Cnidians: Hdt. 1.174.4; Parke and Wormell 63.

12. Parke and Wormell 75, 76, 77, 78.

13. Murder of Cylon: Hdt. 5.71; Thuc. 1.126; Osborne 2009: 202. Alcmaeon: see Hdt. 6.125. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 144. For the Alcmaeonids and Delphi: Daux 1940: 42–44.

14. Factions in Athens: Osborne 2009: 268. Peisistratus achieving power in Athens: Hdt. 1.59–64; Arist. Ath. Pol. 13–17.

15. Claiming exile the entire time: Hdt. 6.123. Cleisthenes as archon: Lewis 2009: 53, Osborne 2009: 269.

16. Miltiades the Elder: Parke and Wormell 60, 61. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 145. Megacles and Apollo Ptoios: IG I3 1469; Schachter 1994: 291, Athanassaki 2011: 263. Schachter argues that this sanctuary was chosen in order to gain Theban support for the Alcmaeonids, who had traditionally supported Peisistratus: Schachter 1994: 293.

17. No dedications at Delphi, see Osborne 2009: 269. Cult of Apollo Pythios in Athens: Colin 1905. Later dedication of an altar to Apollo Pythios and the twelve gods: Meiggs and Lewis 1988: No. 11. Peisistratus responsible for burning the temple of Apollo: Schol. Pind. Pyth. 7.9b (FGrHist628 F 115).

18. Contractors unable to finish: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 144–46. It is suggested that the Alcmaeonids may have used the money from the contract to bolster their campaign to overthrow the Peisistratids in Athens, and subsequently returned with their own cash to complete the temple: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 146.

19. Hdt. 5.61. They may also have been responsible for designing the theme of the pedimental sculpture (which was without doubt completed by Athenian sculptors): Knell 1998: 50–51, Athanassaki 2011: 250.

20. Hdt. 5.63.1; 5.90; 6.123; Parke and Wormell 79; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 147.

21. Part of wider negotiations: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 147. Attractive to Sparta: Osborne 2009: 277. Four separate campaigns: Hdt. 5.63–76.

22. Hansen 1992: 146–49.

23. As argued by Boëthius 1918. See Zahrnt 1989, Athanassaki 2011: 250. It also reflected the established of a permanent sacred way for visitors to Delphi from Athens: a processional route, which, especially at the time of the Pythian games, the Athenians knew as the Pythais: Roux 1976: 174.

24. Reuse of stones: Jacquemin 1999: 232. Boundary walls: Levi 1988. Sacred Way: Roesch 1984: 187–88, Jacquemin 1999: 32–33, Scott 2010: 24.

25. Area later to be occupied by stadium as work and living area for craftsmen: de La Coste-Messelière 1946: 283, Aupert 1977: 243, Aupert 1979: 17–20. Area of later theater established for worship of Dionysus?: de La Coste-Messelière 1969: 747. Area above temple terrace used for worship of Poseidon: Scott 2010: 61.

26. Expansion: Demangel and Daux 1923: 65, Jacquemin 1999: 28. Temple sculpture: Poulsen 1908: 337–41, Demangel and Daux 1923: 15. Another structure was also built at this time in the Athena sanctuary, possibly celebrating the worship of Athena and Artemis: Roux 1989: 62–63.

27. See Roux 1976: 184–95. See also the map with some of the sanctuaries to these divinities and heroes, which we can pinpoint in Jacquemin 1999: Planche 1.

28. See Roux 1976: 196–206.

29. Roux 1976: 165. See also: Maass 1997: 76–88, Amandry 2000. The Labyadai, a phratry (civic unit of the polis) at Delphi, known through an inscription dating to the fourth century BC, had to participate in fifteen sacred banquets a year, in addition to rituals for their own cults, as well as those of the city as a whole and those of the Amphictyony celebrated at Delphi: Rhodes and Osborne 2003: No. 1.

30. Scott 57. See Thuc. 1.13.6; Daux 1958b: 252, 285, Jacquemin 1999: 72, 85, 142, 248, 252.

31. Reuse of old boundary walls: Structures Scott 42, 43, 47, 49. See Partida 2000: 119, 129–30, 195. New Sicyonian treasury: Scott 50. See Laroche and Nenna 1990. Compare the more desultory treasury built at Olympia by the Sicyonians in the same period: Scott 2010: 163–69.

32. Siphnian story: Hdt. 3.57; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 150–51. The Gigantomachy relief: de La Coste-Messelière and Picard 1928: 126, 143. For discussion of the decisions taken regarding the Siphnian treasury in the context of the wider issues surrounding the degree of control dedicators at Delphi had over where their dedications were placed and what they looked like, see Scott 2007, Scott 2010: 62–65.

33. New treasuries: Scott 2010: 68–69. For the importance of Croton in the West in this period: Dunbabin 1948: 355–63. For Etruscan desire to link itself more closely with the Greek world (a goal now achievable through a presence at Delphi): Briquel 1984: 218, 220–21. Name change of Corinthian treasury: Plut. Mor. 400D-F for Delphi agreeing, but Olympia refusing; FD III 3 153–54 (inscription 153 is dated to 540 BC and confirms the name change to “Corinthian treasury,” and 154 is a promanteia inscription from mid-fifth century BC confirming it is the Corinthians who have the right to skip the oracle queue).

34. Siphnian question to oracle: Parke and Wormell 65 and 66. Outcomes: Hdt. 3.57.3; Paus. 10.11.2.

35. Hdt. 5.66.2. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 147.

36. Cleomenes’s interventions in Athens: see Hdt. 6.106–107; Lewis 2009: 54. Cleisthenes’s reforms: see Hdt. 5. 63–76; Osborne 2009: 278–79.

37. Pythia picking ten heroes: Parke and Wormell 80; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 148, Bowden 2005: 95. See also Hdt. 5.66, 6.131; Arist. Ath. Pol. 21.6. Fighting against the Boeotians and Chalcidians: Meiggs and Lewis 1988: No. 15. Sanctioning a fighting force: Bowden 2005: 98–99.

38. Thebes: Parke and Wormell 81; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 148–9. Aeginetans: Parke and Wormell 82; Hdt. 5.89.2.

39. See Scott 2010: 68–69. For the craftsmen dedication: Homolle 1909: 54. For the Chian altar: Amandry 1986: 209, 218. It had a dedicating inscription along its top edge facing visitors as they approached the temple (FD III 3 212) carved into a layer of black Chian stone. For the Phocian oracular consultation and subsequent dedication of shields (they dedicated half their booty at Delphi and half at the sanctuary of Apollo at Abae): Hdt. 8.37; Parke and Wormell 68; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 157.

40. The Athenians in particular seem to have dedicated a particular kind of figurine at the cave, which, while similar to those dedicated at and near the Acropolis in Athens, are different to those found in the Apollo and Athena sanctuaries below. Athenians it seems were making dedications specifically tailored to their intended location of dedication within the Delphic complex: Picard 1991: 245, Luce 2008: 413.

41. See Hdt. 5.74–75; Osborne 2009: 278.

42. In contrast, the dedication of the Chian altar is often interpreted as a strong statement by Chios that it intended to defy Persia: it was tying its trousers to the Greek mast by dedicating at Delphi: Hdt. 6.8, 15–16, 20, 31.

43. Hdt. 6.49.

44. Hdt. 6.66; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 94–98, 160–61. Demaratus would return to Greece as an advisor to King Xerxes of Persia, in particular advising him not to underestimate the Spartans at Thermopylae.

45. Consultation after the battle: Parke and Wormell 90. Treasury: Amandry 1998, Neer 2004, Scott 2010: 78–79. Statue group alongside the treasury and inscription: FD III 2 1; Audiat 1930, Audiat 1933: 61. Shields and inscription on the temple: FD III 4 190; Paus. 10.19.4.

46. See Osborne 2009: 312.

47. Pind. Pyth. 7. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 150. For the conciliatory tone: Athanassaki 2011: 236–45. The “learning curve” for the Alcmaeonids is clear. In Pind. Pyth. 8, also probably commissioned by the Alcmaeonids, but written sometime in the decade before Megacles’s win (and Pind. Pyth. 7), the Alcmaeonids’ own role in constructing the Apollo temple at Delphi is made clear: Hubbard 2011: 362.

48. Debates in Athens: Thuc. 1.93.3. Argos: Parke and Wormell 92. Crete: Parke and Wormell 93. Spartans: Parke and Wormell 100. Delphians: Parke and Wormell 96. This is the explanation for the cult of the winds worshiped at Delphi: Roux 1976: 200. The altar for the cult was situated inside the sanctuary of Thyia, location of the latter uncertain, but probably near the Castalian fountain: Jacquemin 1992b.

49. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 165.

50. Hdt. 8.3; Xen. Hell. 6.4.30; Diod. Sic. 11.14.2; Paus. 10.8.7; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 172. These heroes subsequently became the focus of cult practice at Delphi: Roux 1976: 196–67.

51. Hdt. 7.163.2.

52. Hdt. 9.42.2; Parke and Wormell 98; Bowden 2005: 35.

53. Original response: Parke and Wormell 94. Second question and response: Parke and Wormell 95; Hdt. 7.139.5–144; Parker 2000: 87. See Bowden 2005: 100–103.

54. Thucydides’ argument: Hdt. 8.51.2. The decree: Meiggs and Lewis 1988: 23, Bowden 2005: 104–105, Lagogianni-Georgakarakos and Buraselis 2009: 74–77.

55. The historian Robert Parker argues that Delphi’s prestige was never higher than in the immediate aftermath of the Persian Wars: Parker 2000: 98.

56. Hdt. 7.132; Rhodes 2007: 34. A fourth century BC copy survives: Rhodes and Osborne 2003: No. 88.21–51.

57. Parke and Wormell 102.

58. Osborne 2009: 312.

CHAPTER 6. DOMINATION

1. Oracle’s response: Parke and Wormell 104. Euchidas’ run: it is about a 125-mile round trip: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 176.

2. Oath to dedicate at Delphi, see Hdt. 7.132. Amphictyonic statue group at Delphi: Paus. 10.19.1. Price on Ephialtes’ head: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 178.

3. Statue: Hdt. 8.151; Paus. 10.14.5. Statue base: Block inv. 1198 (formerly FD III 1 2). See Laroche and Jacquemin 1988, Bommelaer 1991: 169.

4. Asking Pythia if Apollo was satisfied: Hdt. 8.121–22; Parke and Wormell 105. In an effort to deny the accusation of Medism, show off their pro-Greek credentials, and retell history in the process, the Aeginetans also seem to have put up a monument at Marathon to commemorate that victory, even though they had had no role in the battle: Jacquemin 1999: 251.

5. E.g., the Preparethians and the Epidaurians: Scott 2010: 83–84.

6. Commemoration at other sanctuaries: Hdt. 9.81. Pausanias hijacking column: Thuc. 1.132; Bonner and Smith 1943: 2. Punishment of Pausanias: the Plataeans demanded that Sparta should be fined one thousand talents for Pausanias’s misdemeanor, and that Pausanias should remove the inscriptions: Thuc. 1.132; Diod. Sic. 11.33; Plut. Mor. 873C; Roux 1979: 54. Serpent column inscription: Meiggs and Lewis 1988: No. 27.

7. Carystians: Hdt. 9.30–31; Jacquemin 1999: 261. Alexander’s pro-Persian role?: Hdt. 8.142 and 9.44–45. The style of his offering (a large statue of himself) would, without doubt, have looked particularly inappropriate to the antityrannical city-states of Greece: Hammond and Griffith 1979: 103. For a wider discussion of the relationship between Macedon and Delphi: Miller 2000.

8. Refusing Themistocles’ dedications was later explained by way of the fact that Themistocles would soon find himself chased out of Athens and into the Persian court, whose acceptance of him might have been more difficult if he had been allowed by the Pythia to dedicate victory offerings from a Persian defeat. In reality, however, the Pythia’s choice is still not fully understood: Paus. 10.14.5; Parke and Wormell 106; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 177. Arguing against Sparta’s proposal: Plut. Vit. Them. 20.3.

9. The attachment between the Western Greek world and Delphi (and Olympia) in this period is striking: the other periodos sanctuaries—Isthmia and Nemea—do not receive any Western dedications in this period: Jacquemin 1999: 252. Gelon’s offerings: Scott 2010: 88–91.

10. Croton’s tripod: Jacquemin 1999: 173. Hieron’s victory dedications: Hieron offered a victory column next to Gelon’s for his victory at the battle of Cumae (474 BC), a statue of himself on the temple terrace, and a statue base in the southern half of the sanctuary: Bommelaer 1991: 188, Rougement 1991. Charioteer dedication: FD III 4 452. Reinscription by Polyzalus: Rolley 1990, Adornato 2008. Cyrene dedication: Valavanis 2004: 202.

11. See Fontenrose 1988: 128. We have a surviving inscription from the mid-fifth century BC with a list of those who gave hospitality to the theoroi on their journeys: Daux 1968: 629–30. It is interesting to note the balance of responsibility between the city and the Amphictyony for the organization. The city sent out the theoroi: CID 10.45–46; Sourvinou-Inwood 2000: 16. But the Amphictyony were responsible for getting the sanctuary in order (CID IV 1: 380 BC), and both groups could create new events in the Pythian games.

12. Hoplitodromoi race: Fontenrose 1988: 126. Painting: Plin. HN 35.9.58. In the first competition a man called Timagoras apparently beat Panainus, the brother of the famous sculptor Pheidias. Mime and pantomime: Valavanis 2004: 194–95.

13. Pind. Pyth. 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 (alongside Pyth. 2 and 3 also most probably for chariot races). Also commemorated by Pindar were winners in the wrestling, the hoplite race, running races, and flute-playing competition. The iron chair in which Pindar sat and sang his hymns when he visited Delphi was dedicated inside the temple of Apollo after his death: Paus. 10.24.5. A religious cult was established in 442 BC to Pindar after his death, at the behest of the Delphic oracle, and the choice portion of sacrifice was set aside for the spirit of the poet and could be claimed by his descendants: Paus. 9.23.3; Parke and Wormell 119; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 399, Johnston 2005: 284.

14. For the various versions of Neoptolemos’s death and their discrepancies, see Parke and Wormell 1956a: 315–18. The Aenianes at Delphi: Paus. 10.24.4, 6. The cult tomb of Neoptolemus at Delphi: Pouilloux and Roux 1963: 102–23, Pouilloux 1984. Neoptolemus fighting to protect Delphi: Roux 1976: 197.

15. The oracle was involved in this period in setting up honors for historical individuals, such as Orrhippus of Megara, the athlete who had been the first to run naked at the Olympics (720 BC). His tomb in his home city carried an inscription saying the monument had been set up with Delphic approval: Parke and Wormell 89. Several other such instances of Delphic involvement with the establishment of honors are known: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 352–57.

16. Parke and Wormell 114.

17. Parke and Wormell 113: the sources also explain this consultation as the Athenians seeking relief from plague. The oracle was also involved c. 460 BC in the affairs of the Praxiergidae, an Attic genos: IG I3 7.

18. Vogt 1998, Bowden 2005: 52–56.

19. See “even if the practical influence of the Pythia in Greek politics had begun to wane, the accumulated fame of Delphi had a momentum which carried it triumphantly through the 5th century BC”: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 180.

20. Bousquet 1943, Colonna 1984, Jacquemin 1999: 121–22. The dedication in this case was associated with an oracular consultation that had guided them to victory: Parke and Wormell 128.

21. Jacquemin 1999: 192–93.

22. New layout of the north section of the sanctuary at this time: Pouilloux 1960, Bommelaer 1992b. Pausanias’s description of the paintings: Paus. 10.25.1–29. For discussion: Kebric 1983. For discussion of the lesche: Pouilloux 1960: 123, Scott 2010: 94.

23. Treasury in Athena sanctuary: Amandry 1984b: 191. Stoa: for dating see Walsh 1986. For discussion of purpose: Kuhn 1985, Hansen 1989. Athenian palm tree and Athena: Amandry 1954: 300, Miller 1997: 39. New statue group at entrance to sanctuary: Jacquemin 1999: 190–91. This collection was added to with monuments also from individual Athenians: a horse statue, for example, from the Athenian general Callias: Scott 2010: 96. At the Corycian cave, too, there was a massive influx of Athenian pottery in this period, making up 50 percent of the material found there: Luce 2008: 413. For a recent study of worship and dedication at the cave in the period 500–450 BC: Volioti 2011.

24. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 184.

25. Parke and Wormell 121 and 154. Why did the Amphictyony allow such domination, or were they powerless to prevent it? For discussion of the Amphictyony in the fifth century BC, including the possibility that it was largely inactive: Bowden 2003. For the assertion that the Amphictyony continued to be active: Daux 1975, Sanchez 2001: 27, 80–110. It is curious, that, at some point around the mid-fifth century, we know from surviving inscriptions that Athens actually made an alliance with the Amphictyony, as if they were another city-state: IG I3 9; Roux 1979: 45.

26. “Spartan” approach to monument building: Thuc. 1.10; Cartledge 2002: 194, Low 2006. Spartan action at Delphi: Thuc. 1.112.5.

27. Hdt. 1.51–53; Prontera 1981: 256.

28. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 186.

29. The Apollo “Sitalcas” statue, standing fifteen and a half meters high: Diod. Sic. 16.33.1; Paus. 10.15.1–2. Its date of dedication is, however, disputed. For its dedication now in the fifth century BC: Jacquemin 1999: 15, 47. For its dedication in the fourth century BC: Bommelaer 1991: 187.

30. This monument is associated with Thessalian victory over Athens at the battle of Tanagra (Thuc. 1.107): Daux 1958a.

31. Scott 2010: 101. Gaia and Themis statues: de La Coste-Messelière and Flacelière 1930.

32. Thurii: Parke and Wormell 131, 132; Schol Ar. Nub. 332. Amphipolis: Thuc. 4.102; Polyaenus Strat. 6.53; Parke and Wormell 133; Malkin 1987: 81–84.

33. Religious officials: IG I3 131.9–11 and IG I3 137.3–5; First Fruits decree: IG I3 78; Plut. Mor. 408C; Plut. Vit. Nic. 13.5–6; Hdt. 5.63.1, 5.66.2–3; Thuc. 5.16.2; Paus. 3.4.3–4; Mylonas 1961: 127, Cavanaugh 1996: 62. See Parke and Wormell 164, 165.

34. Thuc. 1.25; Parke and Wormell 136. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 188, Parker 2000: 89.

35. Bommelaer 1992a: 293, Scott 2010: 101–103.

36. Des Courtils 1992: 244–51. For this idea that Delphi was an incubator, or laboratory, for sculptural styles and ideas (as well as a conservator of styles and ideas): Croissant 2000: 347.

37. Thuc. 1.118; Parke and Wormell 137.

38. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 190. Corinth suggests using Delphi to bankroll Sparta’s campaigns: Thuc. 1.121.3, 1.143.1. A new Spartan base at Heraclea in Trachis banned to outsiders: Thuc. 3.92; Parke and Wormell 159.

39. Bribery by King Pleistonax of Sparta: Thuc. 5.16.2; Parke and Wormell 160.

40. E.g., Eur. Andr. 1085ff, 1161ff. Ar. Eq. 197, 999. See also Soph. OT 711.

41. Fontenrose 1978: 95–117, Moret 1982, Shapiro 1996: 110–12, Bowden 2005: 59–60.

42. Agreement of 423 BC: Thuc. 4.118.1. Agreement of 421 BC: Thuc. 5.18.2.

43. Arcadia: Parke and Wormell 163. Thasos and Neapolis: Thuc. 1.28.2.2; Pouilloux 1954: 178–92. Delian exiles: Thuc. 5.32.1; Parke and Wormell 161, 162; Parker 2000: 95. Recovery from plague: Parke and Wormell 125; Paus. 1.3.4; Bowden 2005: 111. Note that the oracle also advised Cleonae on how to save themselves from the plague in this period: Parke and Wormell 158.

44. Traveling to Delphi through Boeotia territory: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 197–98. Aristophanes’ lament: Ar. Av. 188. Euripides: E.g., Eur. Ion 369ff, 436ff, 859ff. See Dougherty 1996. See also the parody of Delphic oracles in Ar. Vesp. 158–60; Plut. 1–55.

45. Possible consultation leading up to Sicilian expedition: Parke and Wormell 166 (Plut. Mor. 403B). Supporting Sparta: Parke and Wormell 169 and 170.

46. One possible dedication by an Athenian supporter (Corcyra) at this time: Scott 2010: 109. Spartan dedications: Bommelaer 1981: 22, Scott 2010: 104–108. For discussion of the problems of the archaeology of this area: Pouilloux and Roux 1963: 3–68.

47. Plut. Vit. Nic. 13.3. This was, according to Plutarch, dismissed at the time by the Athenians as a story invented by the Syracusans.

48. Parker 2000: 93.

49. Pl. Chrm. 164e–165a; see Bowden 2005: 70. See the relation of these maxims to Socrates’ claim that the oracle had told his pupil no one was wiser than Socrates, a response Socrates attributed to the fact that he knew nothing in comparison to most people who thought they knew it all: Parke and Wormell 134 (see also a later version: 420). Pl. Ap. 20e–21a; Xen. Ap. 14. For the date of the pupil’s consultation: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 402–404.

50. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 387–89.

CHAPTER 7. RENEWAL

1. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 404.

2. Xen. An. 3.1.5–7. Half-tithe of spoils: Xen. An. 5.3.5. Note that Xenophon later described the oracle as an “advisor,” through which “we learn what we ought to do and what not” Xen. Cyr. 1.6.46; Mem. 1.4.15.

3. The classicist Michael Arnush argues that a series of events from the Peloponnesian War through to Alexander the Great contributed to diminishing the importance of international political pilgrimage to the oracle specifically at Delphi (rather than oracles altogether): Arnush 2005: 105–106. Ceasing consultation over arbitration: Parker 2000: 89, 101, Arnush 2005: 105. Arbitration over Leuke: Parke and Wormell 178. Even earlier end: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 188.

4. King Agis: FD III 4 196; Diod. Sic. 15.54.1; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 203. Lysander: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 204–207.

5. Julian. Or. 5.159b (written c. 360 AD); Parke and Wormell 572; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 324, Bowden 2005: 205.

6. Phaselis: CID I 8. Skiathos: CID I 13.

7. Ascelpiads: CID I 11. Asclepiads of Cos and Cnidus highlighting their special honors: CID I 12. It was said that an Asclepiad from Cos was buried in the area of Delphi’s hippodrome and had been involved in the Amphictyony’s efforts to free Delphi from Crisa during the First Sacred War in the sixth century BC: Bousquet 1956: 579–93, Roux 1976: 197. Honors to individuals: the Athenian Callias claimed in the inscription accompanying his Pythian victory statue that he had secured a full spread of wins at all the periodos games—those of Olympia, Delphi, Isthmia, Nemea—even though the Olympic victory was actually achieved by another member of his family: FD III 1 510; Bousquet 1992. For Gorgias: Scott 2010: 111.

8. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 209.

9. Delphi population: Homolle 1926, Rousset 2002a. Population cramped into Delphi: Rousset 2002a: 50. Isolated and yet powerful: Rousset 2002a: 46.

10. Paus. 10.23.9; Rousset 2002a: 205.

11. Roux 1979: 70–77, Bommelaer 1991: 24.

12. Delphi in Plato’s ideal state: Pl. Resp. 427b–c. It should be noted that Plato thus envisages a role for Delphi that is more religious than political, see Parker 2000: 82–85. Delphi in Plato’s later work: Pl. Leg. 759c6-d1, 759d1–e1, 828a1–5, 856d2–e3, 865a3–b2, 913d4–914a5. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 405, Bowden 2005: 84–86.

13. Labyadai: CID I 9 (fourth century BC Labyadai text); CID I 9bis (older Labyadai text). See also Rhodes and Osborne 2003: No. 1. Amphictyonic statement of responsibility for Pythian games: CID I 10 and CID IV 1. For discussion, see Roux 1979, Lefèvre 2002b: 5, 36. Number of other Amphictyonic laws: CID IV 2, 3, 4.

14. Narrative of First Sacred War, see Davies 1994: 201. Dionysius of Syracuse: Diod. Sic. 15.13.1. Iphicrates: Diod. Sic. 16.57.2. Earthquake: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 214, Amandry and Hansen 2010: 147–51, Scott 2010: 114. Jason of Pherai: Xen. Hell.6.4.30 Parke and Wormell 1956a: 210–12.

15. Later oracles: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 220. Oracles prophesying Spartan downfall at Leuctra: Parke and Wormell 254. Wall rebuilding: Hansen 1960, Amandry 1981a: 691, Jacquemin 1991b. The massive polygonal terracing wall of the temple was probably also deformed as a result of the earthquake and rockslide: Amandry and Hansen 2010: 151.

16. Amphictyony from the start: Roux 1979: 137–49, Lefèvre 1996: 121–26. Discussions pre-Leuctra whether Sparta should engage Thebes or play the Panhellenic “card” and lead the reconstruction at Delphi: Xen. Hell. 6.4.2; at the peace conference in summer 371 BC before Leuctra, participants decided to set up bureaucratic body, the naopoioi, to lead the reconstruction and a fund-raising scheme: Bourguet 1903: 9, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 214–16. See also Sordi 1957: 41–48, 67. Note that in 368 BC, Dionysius of Syracuse wrote to Athens rather than Delphi asking how the temple rebuilding was progressing: Syll3 159; Rhodes and Osborne 2003: No. 33.

17. Argive monument: Bommelaer 1971a, Bommelaer 1971b. For the monument, see also Salviat 1965. Dedications crumbling: Plut. Mor. 397F.

18. This dedication was perhaps the first monumental articulation of the new confederacy: Delphi had once again acted as a petri dish for the creation of identity: Scott 2008. The inscription: FD III 1 6. This is despite the fact that the actual role of the Arkadians at Leuctra was minimal at best. The Arkadians may have later decided to attach themselves to this victory as the clearest way of announcing the Confederacy’s anti-Spartan credentials: Scott 2008.

19. Theban treasury: Partida 2000: 196–98. Thessalian monument: Jacquemin 1999: 128.

20. Jacquemin 1999: 220.

21. The Theban general Epaminondas was later said to have received a warning from the oracle about how his life would end: Parke and Wormell 258. As well, the Athenian general Callistratus consulted the oracle on his chance of returning from exile to Athens, but was killed following his return (later said to have been because he misunderstood the oracle’s response): Parke and Wormell 259.

22. The Tarentines, Lipareans, and Corcyrians all reinscribed their dedications: Jacquemin 1999: 76, Scott 2010: 122. This was not only happening at Delphi. In Athens, the Athenians chose to reinscribe the oath of Plataea at this point, which included the promise to dedicate a tithe of booty from those who had sided with the Persians during the Persian Wars (which included Thebes) at a time when Athens was vying with Thebes for supremacy in Greece: Rhodes and Osborne 2003: No. 88.21–51, Rhodes 2007.

23. Naxians: Amandry 1940/1: 60–63. Siphnians: Valavanis 2004: 210.

24. Xen. Hell. 7.1.27. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 220, Parker 2000: 88, Bowden 2005: 79.

25. For the initial work carried out in preparation for the rebuilding (the establishment of foundations, the decision about reusing stone blocks, the cutting of new stone in local quarries: Amandry and Hansen 2010: 157–82.

26. Lowering of interest: the “Law of Cadys”: Homolle 1926. Astycrates: FD III 5 15–18. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 221–22, Buckler 1985, Bommelaer 1991: 24. Theban promanteia: Syll3 176.

27. The affair of Crates and Orsilaus: Arist. Pol. 1303b.37; Plut. Mor. 825B; Ael. VH 11.5; Homolle 1926: 95–96, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 221, Roux 1976: 192. See also the legislation from this period for murder at Delphi: CID IV 4. The tholos in the Athena sanctuary: Lerat 1985, Laroche 1992.

28. For a recent discussion of the dating of the Third Sacred War: Deltenne 2010.

29. Parke and Wormell 261. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 223–25.

30. Temporary set up for oracle: in 352 BC, surviving inscriptions relate that a contractor was paid to build a “shelter” for those consulting the oracle: Syll3 247. Destruction of inscriptions: Sanchez 2001: 173–76. Building defensive walls: Diod. Sic. 16.25.1; Amandry 1981a: 741, Maass 1997: 68–79.

31. Phocians going back on their promises: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 227. Melting down of objects: Jacquemin 1999: 238, Scott 2010: 124–25. Total value: Diod. Sic. 16.56.6.

32. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 227.

33. Changes in ritual practice at Athens: IG II2 4969.1–3; SEG 21 519.4–10; IG II2 333.24–26; IG II2 1933.1–3. See Bowden 2005: 123. The consultation over sacred land at Eleusis: Parke and Wormell 262; Rhodes and Osborne 2003. No. 58; IG II2 204. Delphi’s response: FGrHist 328 F 115. See Bowden 2005: 88.

34. The festival: Roux 1976: 178. Safely making it home: Plut. Mor. 249E.

35. Dionysus worship attested in fourth century BC, see Roux 1976: 176. The Dionysion: Jacquemin 1999: 29. One inscribed dedication speaks of the “mania” of Dionysus: Daux and Bousquet 1942–43: 26. Paean: Croissant 1996: 128. Statue: Paus. 10.32.1; Bommelaer 1991: 210.

36. Athenian sculptors: Paus. 10.19.4; Croissant 2003: 144–46, 176. Macedonian influence: Croissant 1996: 128. Athenian influence: Croissant 1996: 136. See Stewart 1982. Breadth of worship at Delphi: see Parke and Wormell 1956a: 330–38, Scott 2010: 142.

37. Diod. Sic. 16.57; Strabo 9.3.8.

38. Syll3 633; Parker 2000: 89.

39. See Diod. Sic. 16.23–60; Paus. 3.10.2, 10.2.2.

40. Breakup of cities: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 229–33. Curse on those who touched the money: Aeschin. In Ctes. 114. Removal of sculpture: CID II 34

II.56–62.

41. Philip’s representatives on the lists: Daux 1957b: 100. Promanteia and statue: Jacquemin 1999: 39. Common Peace: Diod. Sic. 16.60.3.

42. Athens’s disillusionment with Delphi: cf. Dem. 5.25; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 233–35. Hated of Philip: see Dem. 19.327; 9.32.

43. E.g., Dem. 21.51–52; 43.66. See Bowden 2005: 56–58.

44. No contractors or suppliers for the rebuilding came from Thessaly, even though the Thessalians presided over the Amphictyonic council. But the Peloponnesians contributed the largest sum to the rebuilding, were involved on the commission for reconstruction and as suppliers and contractors, even though they had meager representation on the Amphictyonic council: de La Coste-Messelière 1974: 208, Roux 1979: 105–11, Davies 2001a. Thanks to the preserved accounts, we also get a feeling for the way in which the Delphian authorities liked the construction processes to proceed and how they negotiated with their contractors: Feyel 1993, Feyel 2006, Amandry and Hansen 2010: 461–94. For discussion of the accounts, see Roux 1979, Bousquet 1988, Bousquet 1989, Davies 1998, Davies 2001b, Bommelaer 2008. In turn, the collaboration of skilled workmen at Delphi from different arenas has recently been argued to have aided innovative creation of architectural features and the resulting spread of those innovations back into different communities around Greece: Partida 2011.

45. Small donations: Anaxis of Phocaea gave just one obol (and it cost four obols to inscribe one hundred letters): CID II. 4 col. III.13; Weir 2004: 77. Clearistus of Carystus: CID II 1 col II.26–30; Weir 2004: 77.

46. Although from the start, Phocis was not always able to meet their annual quota: in 344 BC, almost immediately after reparation payments began, the Phocians only managed to pay thirty talents rather than the full sixty: FD III 5 14, II.12–14; Arnush 1991: 20. Rearrangement of sanctuary: Courby 1927: 202, Pouilloux 1960: 17–32, 49–60, 109–20, 153, Amandry 1981a: 688, 692, Amandry and Hansen 2010, Scott 2010: 118.

47. Remaking of dedications: CID II 79 A 1; 81A; 93; 102 II A; 107; 108. The stadium inscription: CID I 3; Fontenrose 1988: 128.

48. Odysseus’s mishap: Paus. 10.8.8. The gymnasium: Jannoray 1953, Pentazos 1992a. Honors for Artistotle: FD III 1 400 (335 BC); Fontenrose 1988: 137. List of victors: FD III 5 59B. Aristotle was also said to have consulted the oracle about whether to become a philosopher, to have dedicated a monument at the sanctuary to his friend Hermias, and to have written a study (now sadly lost) of the constitution of the city of Delphi: Bowden 2005: 86. Parke and Wormell do not believe that Aristotle consulted the oracle: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 406.

49. Demeter at Anthela: CID II 80; 82 Currency: CID II 75; Raven 1950, Bommelaer 1991: 35. The Athena sanctuary: Le Roy 1977: 271.

50. Cyrenean contribution to temple rebuild: CID II 4 III.11; 26.4–12; Cyrenean and Rhodian dedications: Scott 2010: 127–29.

51. Roux 1979: 30–33, Croissant 1996: 134, Croissant 2003: 180.

52. Aeschines’ speech: Aeschin. In Ctes. 115–23. Turning to Philip: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 235–37.

53. Consultation: Parke and Wormell 265. Demosthenes’ comment: recounted by his rival Aesch. In Ctes. 130. See Parker 2000: 96. For the commemoration by Philip of his victory at Chaeroneia, and the violence of the battle as revealed by the skeletons buried at the site: Ma 2008.

54. Daux 1949a: 259–60, Jacquemin 1999: 60.

CHAPTER 8. TRANSITION

1. Daochos dedication: Jacquemin and Laroche 2001. For Thessalian associations with Neoptolemus: Downie 2004: 217. Tamiai: CID IV 9; Roux 1979: 55, Davies 2001a: 213. Soon after their creation, the Amphictyony seems to have delegated financial decisions also entirely to the treasurers not just for the rebuilding but for all the Amphictyony’s business: Roux 1979: 191. Philip’s Hellenic league: Miller 2000: 271. Philip returning to oracle: Parke and Wormell 266–67.

2. Response to Philip: Parke and Wormell 266–67. See Parker 2000: 88. Olympias’s involvement: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 238. The knife: Just. Epit. 9.7.13. Para Alexandrou: CID II 77; Lefèvre 2002a: 73–74.

3. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 240.

4. Parke and Wormell 270. See also another later story of a Delphic oracle concerning Alexander: Parke and Wormell 269.

5. Alexander’s dealing with embassies from sanctuaries: Alexander also did not make any efforts to revive the use of the oracle at Delphi for mainstream political consultations, which had ceased after the middle of the century, in contrast to his efforts to revive dormant oracles at other sites, like Didyma: Morgan 1989: 29, Arnush 2005: 105–106. New temple at Delphi: Diod. Sic. 17.103.4, 18.4.5; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 242. Theban treasury: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 241–42.

6. For a study of the use of the civic honor of proxenia as a political tool by Boeotia and Athens in diplomatic relations: Gerolymatos 1986. Collective promanteia for the Aetolians: SEG 17.230; Arnush 2000: 300–301. This is in the context of a substantial growth in the numbers of such awards during the fourth century BC: only four honorific decrees are known from the city of Delphi before 373 BC, but between 373 and 300 BC, there are ninety-nine: Empereur 1981. Delph’s risk taking: Arnush 2000: 307.

7. There seems to have also been a certain degree of tension within the city: inscriptions dating to 330–27 BC detail the sums collected from the rental of a number of properties (eleven houses, a farm, a garden, and nineteen plots of land) that had previously been confiscated from members of the city, a number of whom had been exiled from Delphi following the Third Sacred War and many of whom were confirmed as still in exile and living in Athens in 363 BC: CID II 67–72; Rousset 2002b: 230, Rousset 2002a: 205–10.

8. Representatives “not seated”: CID II 102 col. I A.4–17; col. II A.24–33. The crown: FD III 5 58.4–8 (money set aside), CID II 97.5–6 (money redistributed); Marchetti 1977, Arnush 2000: 302–303, Marchetti 2011: 144–49.

9. In 321–20BC five proxeny decrees were issued, one for Patron of Elateia in Phocis: Daux 1933: 69–70, Arnush 2000: 297–300, 307. Phocis stopped paying its fine circa 322–21 BC: Arnush 1991: 20.

10. Acanthus column: FD III 4 462 (attribution to Athens is debated): Pouilloux and Roux 1963: 122–49.

11. Parke and Wormell 274; See Bowden 2005: 133.

12. For the towers: Skorda 1992b: 54–56, Maass 1997: 27, 70, Weir 2004: 77. Diod. Sic. (2.136) tells the story of a philosopher from Eretria who was attacked en route to Delphi in the late fourth/early third century BC. Rousset has argued that these towers were probably constructed for the surveillance of isolated pieces of territory and the exploitation of land rather than for safeguarding against attack: Rousset 2002b: 236.

13. For the inscriptions: Empereur 1984. Ambryssian inscription: Roux 1976: 184. For the cult of Pan and the Nymphs at the cave: Pasquier 1977, Amandry 1984a. For the incredible collection of offerings (including 25,000 knuckle bones) found at the cave from the sixth through the beginning of the second century BC: BCH Suppl. 9 (1984); Picard 1991: 241–61.

14. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 244. Indeed one of those local questions at the end of the fourth century—on the issue of childlessness—shows how active the mythology surrounding Delphi must have been. The children begotten following the consultation were named Delphis and Pytho: Parke and Wormell 334. More widely, Parke and Wormell also argue that no private individual inquiries from outside the local region are known (with the exception of Cicero) between the end of the fourth century BC and the first centuryBC: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 407.

15. See Paus. 10.18.5; Plut. Mor. 401D.

16. “Sanctimonious humbug”: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 252. Oracle’s decline in the Hellenistic period: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 244, Parker 2000: 87, 102. Oracles for Hellenistic kings as rehashings of older responses: e.g., Parke and Wormell 431 (to Attalus I of Pergamon rehashing that given to Cypselus). Demetrios Poliorcetes as an oracle: Plut. Vit. Demetr. 11–13; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 245.

17. Oracle helping create a long-term and more glorious history of Messenia to cover over its centuries under Spartan domination: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 248–53. Hellenistic cities also continued to use the oracle for moral leverage, particularly in securing recognized rights of asylia (sacred protection) e.g., Syll3 635b. Foundation of new sanctuaries: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 371–74.

18. Parke and Wormell 331, 332. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 326.

19. Tarquinius Superbus: Parke and Wormell 438, 439. Rome consulting before the fall of the city of Veii, fourth century BC: Parke and Wormell 440. Camillus’s dedication at Delphi (a gold mixing bowl, placed in the treasury of the Massalians in the Athena sanctuary, and melted down by Phocians in Third Sacred War): Diod. Sic. 14.93.2; Livy 5.21.2. Consultation during the Samnite War: Parke and Wormell 352. Involvement in process of Magna Mater transfer: Parke and Wormell 356; and Asclepius: Parke and Wormell 353.

20. Aetolians: Flacelière 1937: 41–42, 49–50, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 254. Power over Delphi: see Plut. Vit. Demetr. 40.7–8. Flacelière argues that their occupation of Delphi took place soon after the battle of Ipsus in 301 BC, which created a power vacuum in mainland Greece: Flacelière 1937: 57. Later, the text of a treaty between the Aetolians and Boeotians seems to have been erected at Delphi: Flacelière 1937: 58–59, 67.

21. Control over council: Flacelière 1937: 49–50. The Amphictony council was still functioning (it recognized the games in Alexandria in honor of Ptolemy Soter in 279 BC), as was the city of Delphi (it established a convention with Pellana during the 280s: FDIII 1 486). Indeed the third century BC would be the city’s most diplomatically active century: 326 honorific decrees were given out between 279–200 BC compared to 141 in the period 400–279 BC: Jacquemin 1999: 78. Failure of war to “free” Delphi: Just. Epit.24.1.1; Paus. 10.37.5. See Bourguet 1911: 488. Aetolian victory dedication: Jacquemin 1999: 63.

22. See Paus. 10.22–24; Just. Epit. 24.6–8. See also reference to Gauls in Callim. Hymn 4.183–85. For numbers: Flacelière 1937: 103.

23. Leave things as they are: Parke and Wormell 329. Successful defeat of the invasion: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 255. For more on the Gaulish invasion and later celebration by the Aetolians of its defeat: Nachtergael 1977.

24. Diod. Sic. 5.32.5; Strabo relates that the gold taken from Delphi supposedly traveled as far as Toulouse: Strabo 4.1.13.

25. Sources for war: Segre 1929. Delight at Delphi’s survival: Cos: Syll3 398 1.1–25; Honors for helping with return of the money: Syll3 405, 406, 416, 417, 418, and FD III 1 189 (all 275–71 BC). Gaulish shields on the temple: Paus. 10.19.4. The Gaulish invasion became a mental marker in history: Polybius used it as a point around which to date less important events (e.g., Polyb. 1.6.5, 2.20.6), and Cicero refers to it as the moment when the Gauls set out to “plunder Pythian Apollo and the oracle of the whole world” Cic. Font. 14.30.

26. Phocian statue: Jacquemin 402. Aetolians as saviors: Flacelière 1937: 93, 98, 112, 258, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 258–59, Jacquemin 1999: 256. Place in Amphictyonic records: Flacelière 1937: 113.

27. The Aetolians erected a monument to their victory at the other sanctuary around which their koinon was based, at Thermon, but their commemoration at Delphi was, understandably, more vocal than anywhere else: Flacelière 1937: 107–108. For discussion of the west stoa: Amandry 1978: 751–81, Amandry 1981a: 729–32, Bousquet 1985, Bommelaer 1991: 218–19, Perrier 2011.

28. Female Aetolia: Courby 1927: 288–91, Bommelaer 1991: 223, Partida 2009: 296. The placement of this monument on the west end of the temple terrace (as opposed to the east end, which had been popular since the time of the Persian Wars) suggests that the west stoa (which opened onto the west end of the temple terrace) also performed the function of some kind of major (ceremonial?) access point to the sanctuary from the city, rather than being simply a dead-end annex to the sanctuary as it often appears on modern maps: Perrier 2011: 48. Statue base on temple terrace: Courby 1927: 291–99. Statues of chiefs: Paus. 10.15.2; Statue of general: Paus. 10.16.4.

29. The same picture holds true for Delphian awards of promanteia as well: Pouilloux 1952, Arnush 2005: 108–109.

30. Athenians: Jacquemin 1999: 229. Chians: Amandry 1986: 205–18, Bommelaer 1991: 173–75. Later stele erected around the altar: Jacquemin 1999: 223. Rearrangement of sanctuary: Bommelaer 1991: 146.

31. Soteria: Flacelière 1937: 107, Roux 1976: 201, Fontenrose 1988: 137, Bommelaer 1991: 29. New popularity for Delphi: Fontenrose 1988: 137, Valavanis 2004: 222. Lists of those giving hospitality to the Delphic theoroi sent out to announce the games are substantial in this period: Plassart 1921, Daux 1980: 120–122. At some point in the third century BC, new powers were endorsed for the protection of people at Amphictyonic meetings, Pythian or Soterian festivals, giving magistrates full powers to prosecute anyone committing an offence: CID IV 51.

32. Hellenistic kings’ focus on Delos and Samos: Bommelaer 1991: 22, Jacquemin 1999: 78. Although Sostratus of Cnidus did put up statues of Ptolemy II and Arsinoe II at Delphi 275–70 BC: Jacquemin 120, and a statue of Seleucius II (246–26 BC) was erected by an unknown dedicator near the statue of Aetolia at the west end of the temple terrace: Jacquemin 515; Bommelaer 1991: 225. Absences of Western Mediterranean: Jacquemin 1999: 74–78.

33. For the same argument regarding the attraction of Delphi and Delos during the archaic period (but in reverse), see: Roux 1984. See Jacquemin 1999: 256.

34. Jacquemin 386, 386. See Bousquet 1952a.

35. FD III 4 178; Paus. 10.16.6; Courby 1927: 312.

36. Grants from the Amphictyony: CID IV 12; Flacelière 1937: 120–22. Symbiosis of Apollo Patroos and Apollo Pythios in Athens: Daux 1940: 262, Parke and Wormell 1956a.

37. Plut. Vit. Marc. 8; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 270.

38. Flacelière 1937: 179–89. Possible alliance with Athens: IG IX 12 176—date disputed, see discussion in Flacelière 1937: 190. For a broader view of the complex military and political maneuvers of this period: Walbank 1981, Malcolm Errington 2008.

39. See Flacelière 1937: 208, 227, 228.

40. One large festival: the Aetolian invitation to the world to come and celebrate their Soteria: IG IX I2 194a. Their declaration of its isoPythian status: Fontenrose 1988: 137. See Bommelaer 1991: 29. Stadium refitting: Bommelaer 1991: 215. See Valavanis 2004: 190. See also to records of works before the Pythia in c. 250 BC (for discussion on date see CID IV p. 24): CID II 139; CID IV 57; Pouilloux 1977, Le Graff 2010.

41. Athens: Syll3 408; Chios: Syll3 402; Tenos: FD III 1 482; Cycladic city: FD III 1 481; Smryna FD III 1 483. For discussion of the dating, which is argued to be either from original institution of the Soteria c. 274 BC, or from its reorganization c. 242 BC: Flacelière 1937: 125, 135–48, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 259. The lists of Soteria participants and winners were also now being inscribed and publicized in the sanctuary: e.g., CID IV 31, 42, 45, 47, 48, 53, 55 (participants) and CID IV 61, 67, 73, 75, 79, 84, 89 (winners) during the period 270–20 BC (participants come from mostly before 242 BC and winners mostly after). One of these victor lists was inscribed on the reverse side of a stele originally placed inscribed and placed in the sanctuary in the fifth century BC: Jacquemin 1999: 226.

42. Individual Aetolian dedications all date from after the middle of the century: Jacquemin 1999: 64. Invention of two column monument: Flacelière 1937: 266, Partida 2009: 274–96. Aristaineta: Jacquemin 297; Charixenus: Jacquemin 298. The Aetolian Lycus also dedicated in the sanctuary 250–25 BC, alongside other anonymous Aetolians: Jacquemin 299, 300; Bommelaer 1991: 235–36.

43. Lamius: Jacquemin 296.

44. Jacquemin 388.

45. CID IV 85 (Syll 3 523). This inscription also banned campfires in the sanctuary and was accompanied by another inscription banning visitors from bathing in the small fountain in the southwest corner of the temple terrace: Maass 1997: 29. For discussion of the Attalid stoa: Flacelière 1937: 270, Roux 1952, Roux 1987.

46. See Jacquemin 1999: 256.

47. Aetolian dominance at Delphi: See Flacelière 1937: 245–56. Statue of Aetolian general: Jacquemin 187. Granting of asylia: Thebes: CID IV 70. Apollo Ptoios: CID IV 76; Boiotian sanctuary: CID IV 77.

48. Interaction Athens and Delphi: Flacelière 1937: 272. Athenian monument update: statues were added for Antigonus I of Macedon, Ptolemy III of Egypt, and Athens’s own Demetrius Poliorcetes. The tribes of Antigonids and Demetriads were suppressed by 200 BC (another example of how Athens sought to keep pace with events, although its statues at Delphi do not seem to have been removed): Jacquemin 1999: 228.

49. Achaean league: see Polyb. 4.25.8; Flacelière 1937: 294, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 260. Aratus buried as a hero: Parke and Wormell 358. Men from Sardia: Syll3 548; Arnush 2005: 108.

50. Response to Romans requesting gifts: Parke and Wormell 354. Response indicating greater victory: Parke and Wormell 355.

51. Parke and Wormell 1956a: 275.

52. FD III 4 21–24; Flacelière 1937: 298–304.

53. Flacelière 1937: 309–40. The Delphians set up a statue of an anonymous Aetolian at this time as well: Jacquemin 207.

CHAPTER 9. A NEW WORLD

1. The role of the Aetolian governor at Delphi: see IG IX 12 174; Roussel 1926, Daux 1936a: 215–20, Pouilloux 1980: 282. For their rights to keep herds on public land: Syll3 553A; FD III 4 175.

2. Decline in visitors to Corycian cave: Empereur 1984: 340. Proxenia: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 261. Proxenia: Syll3 585; Arnush 2005: 110.

3. Territory: Rousset 2002b: 240. Theoroi: about thirty Delphians are sent away as theoroi in the middle of the second century BC: Daux 1949b: 27–30. Satyrus of Samos: FD III 3 128; Weir 2004: 108. He was given an honorary statue by the Amphictyony in the sanctuary as well: Jacquemin053. Ai Khanoum: Taplin 1989: 2. Statues: CID IV 99 (statues of Antiocheia and Antiochus III). Equestrian statue: Jacquemin 494. The statue personifying the people of Antiocheia is argued to have been in a new style—youthful and energetic—to complement a renewed era of civic iconography: Biard 2010.

4. Declaration of freedom: Polyb. 18.46.5. Dedications by Flaminius: Plut. Vit. Flam. 12.11–12. Delphic statue: Syll3 616. Delphi’s honoring of Flaminius: Jacquemin 191. A portrait head of Flamininus has been tentatively identified in the sanctuary excavations at Delphi: FD IV Album p. 40; Chamoux 1965, Picard 1991: 111. There are, however, some notes of not outright approval for the Roman victory over Philip, detected by some scholars in oracular responses said to be from the period e.g., Parke and Wormell 357; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 276.

5. Proxeny decrees for those in Flaminius’s army e.g., Syll3 585.

6. Antiochus’s forces: Livy 26.11.5. His declaration of freedom: Flacelière 1937: 356–59.

7. Daux 1936a: 225–26.

8. There are a series of oracles from this period that threaten Rome with all manner of misfortunes if does not retire from Greece. Only one is attributed to the Delphic oracle, and all seem to have been composed by supporters of Antiochus in the short period between his triumphant arrival in Delphi and his eventual defeat in 189 BC: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 276–77.

9. Glabrio confiscating properties: seventy properties were taken belonging to fifty-nine different owners, forty-six of which were Aetolian, and they were in turn given to “the god and the city”: Daux 1936a: 10, 229, Michaud 1977, Rousset 2002a: 250–69, Rousset 2002b: 232. Changes to sacred land: Rousset 2002a: 226. Letter to Delphians: Roussel 1932: 7–10.

10. CID IV 103. Statue: Jacquemin 143; See Michaud 1977. The Amphictyony were also quick to put up a statue of Glabrio in the sanctuary: Jacquemin 019.

11. Problems with Amphissa: Daux 1936a: 257. Tussle for power within Delphi: see Syll3 613A; Habicht 1987.

12. Another Roman general, P. Cornelius Scipion (Scipio Africanus) was tasked with dealing with the Aetolians and seems to have, with Athenian help, ensured a truce at this point, leaving Glabrio free to deal with Antiochus: Daux 1936a: 257. Scipio himself also seems to have dedicated an offering in the sanctuary at Delphi at this time: Jacquemin 420. Defeat of Antiochus: Eckstein 2008: 344.

13. Albinus’s reply: CID IV 104. Reform of Amphictyony: see Holleaux 1930: 39, Habicht 1987: 61. Some of the leading families in Athens, acting as ambassadors for the Amphictyony, were prominent in this reorganization. One of the Amphictyonic ambassadors, Nicostratus, was even honored with a statue and inscription in the sanctuary by the Amphictyony (much, probably, to the chagrin of the city of Delphi, whose plan to achieve complete control over the sanctuary, Habicht argues, he had thwarted): Syll3613 A; Habicht 1987: 62.

14. For the Romaia festival, which included processions, sacrifices, a banquet, and gymnastic competitions: Roux 1976: 205. Glabrio’s statues base and its inscriptions: Daux 1936a: 262. The letter of Livius Salinator: CID IV 105 (Syll3 611); Daux 1936a: 231.

15. Delphians dependent on Aetolian business: Daux 1936a: 269. The Delphians even erected a statue to the Aetolian general Pantaleon in the period 186–72 BC: Jacquemin 187. Rome leaving: Eckstein 2008: 346. For more detail on the complicated politics of this period down through to the 170s BC at Delphi: Reinach 1910, Habicht 1987.

16. FD III 3 237, 299. For discussion of the building of the theater, which was not finished until the Imperial period: Daux 1936a: 686–95, Roux 1976: 165–75, Bommelaer 1991: 206–10. In fact nearly all major construction at Delphi in this period is related to the musical and athletic festivals: Bommelaer 1991: 22.

17. Asylia for Eumenes: CID IV 107. Statue by Aetolians: FD III 3 230; Courby 1927: 275–89, Jacquemin and Laroche 1986: 785. Statue by the Amphictyony: Jacquemin 035. A little later, the Aetolians placed a statue of King Prusias II of Bithynia atop a monumental column, also on the temple terrace: FD III 4 76; Courby 1927: 262–65, Jacquemin and Laroche 1986: 786–88. The statue seems to have been surrounded by a ring of bronze “spikes,” perhaps to keep birds from landing and defecating on it and the plinth: Perrier 2008. Jacquemin characterizes these statue dedications as the last acts of a dying koinon: Jacquemin 1999: 64. In the following century, the Delphians would continue the relationship with Bithynia by honoring King Nicomedes III with a statue (94BC), the decision to erect it inscribed on the column of Prusias: FD III 4 77.

18. Syll3 631.4–6. The festival took place in October, and included a procession from the sacred aire to the temple: Roux 1976: 203. There were probably many more such “mini” festivals for which evidence has not survived: Amandry 2000: 17.

19. Rousset 1996: 46. During the second century BC, the bringing-in of outsiders to settle Delphic disputes, not just with neighbors, but also within their own polis, would become a common feature of the political scene: Daux 1936a: 473–82, Gauthier 2000.

20. End of Aetolian use of the sanctuary: Daux 1936a: 276. Amphictyony’s jibe: Habicht 1987: 60.

21. Colonisation by Paros: Parke and Wormell 429; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 243, 246, 277. Eudocus’s statue: Jacquemin 250bis.

22. Daux 1936a: 301.

23. Careful diplomatic line, see Polyb. 25.3. Use of Delphi: Polyb. 27.1–2.

24. Sacrificing at Delphi: FD III 4 75; Livy 42.40.8; Polyb. 25.3.1; Daux 1936a: 315. Perseus using Delphi as a center of propaganda: Polyb. 25.3.2; Plut. Vit. Aem. 28, 36. He also asserted his right to two Macedonian votes on the Amphictyonic council, first given to Philip after the Third Sacred War in the fourth century BC: CID IV 108.

25. Parke and Wormell 430. A statue was also erected in the sanctuary in his honor: Jacquemin 349; Jacquemin, Laroche, and Lefèvre 1995.

26. Eumenes’ embassy to Rome: Daux 1936a: 317. His attempted murder by Perseus: Polyb. 22.18.4; Livy 42.15–17; Plut. Mor. 489E.

27. Rome’s grievances against Perseus: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 260. Their inscription at Delphi: Syll3 643 (FD III 4 75); Livy 42.40; Daux 1936a: 320–25. The details of the inscription tallies with what the literary sources tell us Eumenes II reported to the Roman Senate: Livy 42.13.5, 9.

28. See Bousquet 1981.

29. Jacquemin 418; FD III 4 36; Plut. Vit. Aem. 28.2; Laroche and Jacquemin 1982: 207–12, 15–18. For the frieze: Kähler 1965, Picard 1991: 124–26. For the monument: Bommelaer 1991: 235, Jacquemin 1999: 239.

30. Eckstein 2008: 342, 349, 365, 381.

31. That close relationship between Pergamon and Rome continued. In 133 BC, Attalus III would, on his death without an heir, gift Pergamon and its territories to Rome.

32. Syll3 671–72/FD III 3 328. Eumenes II gave one talent for his festival, and Attalus II gave 18,000 drachmas (three talents) for his. The rituals involved a torchlight procession from the gymnasium, and the victors of competitions were awarded money rather than laurel wreaths: Roux 1976: 205, Bommelaer 1991: 216, Rousset 2002a: 226.

33. Erecting a statue of Attalus at Delphi: FD III 3 121; Jacquemin 149. Other statues of Eumenes II and Attalus II were erected in the sanctuary by unknown dedicators at this time (e.g., Jacquemin 505) and placed within the stoa of Attalus complex; Jacquemin and Laroche 1986: 788–89. Delphi honoring Attalus’s artists: Syll3 682.

34. Definite action by Amphictyony in this period: Daux 1936a: 350. Arbitration over Lamia: CID IV 110. Honoring Hegesandros of Athens 150 BC: CID IV 112, who was also honored by the Delphians: Jacquemin 170. Rearrangement of Amphictyony: Daux 1936a: 352.

35. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 261.

36. Mummius celebrates at Delphi: Polyb. 39.6.1. Shrinking world of Delphi: Daux 1936a: 483.

37. Arbiters of land dispute: FD III 2 130 col. II; Rousset 1996: 46. Revival of Pythaïs: Daux 1936a: 532–40, Mikalson 1998: 269–70. See Strabo 9.2.11. Celebration of 138/7 BC: Syll3 696. Celebration of 128/7 BC: Syll3 697–99. Celebration of 106/5 BC: Syll3771. Celebration of 98/7 BC: Syll3728. See Daux 1940: 37, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 262–63. Hymns: Bélis 1992: 131–35.

38. CID IV 114 (completed with help of copy of the decree inscribed in Athens: IG II2 1132.94; Spawforth 2012: 152). See also Additional letters inscribed in Athens, which accompanied this decree: CID IV 115, 116.

39. The Delphians honored them for their performance in 128 BC: FD III 2 47. Amphictyony honors in 125 BC: FD III 2 69, CID IV 117. The date of 125 has been disputed and some argue for a date of 117 BC: Spawforth 2012: 152. Restatement in 112 BC?: CIDIV 120 (FD III 2 70). The Roman Senate became involved because there was a dispute between the guild members of Athens and those of Isthmia, which was finally resolved by the Roman Senate in favor of Athens: Daux 1936a: 355–69. It seems the guild members of Isthmia and Nemea, perhaps as a last attempt at gaining favor, or perhaps in recognition of the Roman decision, put up a statue at Delphi in 112 BC of the Roman P. Cornelius Lentulus: Jacquemin 474; Pomtow 1914: 302–303. The Amphictyony also put a statue up for Antipatrus of Athens in 130 BC (CID IV 113), and the Delphians honored the guild members of Athens in 106 BC and again in 97 BC with statues as well: FD III 2 48 and FD III 2 48.

40. CID IV 117.11–14. See Daux 1936a: 369, Spawforth 2012: 152.

41. Dating to 117 BC: Rousset 2002a: 131–32. Inscribing Amphictyonic attendance: Daux 1936a: 372. The account: CID IV 119: contains the letter to the Amphictyony from the Roman proconsul, the lists of attendance at the emergency Amphictyonic session, the report of the Amphictyony, the accounts of moneys lost, the redefining of the sacred land of Apollo, the reparations made to the Delphian whistle-blowers, and the accounts of restitution made to the god.

42. These inscriptions make clear first that the sacred land could be used for the grazing of animals belonging to Pythian Apollo, and second, that there was a distinction between the sacred land controlled by Delphi (which could not be used except for the god’s benefit) and land controlled by the city, which could be apportioned to, and cultivated by, its residents. In turn this land was split into public territory run by the city, and private plots: CID IV 108, 119; Rousset 2002b: 227–28, 230. The territory of Delphi was “a mosaic, composed of private properties, public territories and sacred domains” (my translation): Rousset 2002b: 234.

43. See Daux 1936a: 372–84, 699–707, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 278, Rousset 2002a: 131.

44. Daux 1936a: 386.

45. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 278.

46. Jacquemin 183, 184. Inscription in Greek: FD III 1 526. Inscription in Latin: Syll3 710B. Unusual use of bilingual honors: Vatin 1967. Rufus in turn made an offering in the sanctuary (Jacquemin 421), as did a family relation: Jacquemin 422.

47. Roman law copied at Delphi: FD III 4 37; Daux 1936a: 601. A copy of this law has also been found in Cnidus: Hassall, Crawford and Reynolds 1974: 195–209. During this period, 91–89 BC, Rome was also beset with its own social war, see Crawford 1978. Kidnappers near Delphi: FD III 1 457; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 278.

48. Stadium refitting: Bommelaer 1991: 215. Alexandros: FD III 2 48. Eastern Locrians: Jacquemin 340. Antipatros: Syll3 737; Weir 2004: 109. He also received a statue in the sanctuary put up and paid for by the Delphians: Jacquemin 146.

49. Daux and Bousquet 1942–43: 113–25, Roux 1976: 181, Partida 2009: 302.

50. For Sulla’s difficult position and need for military funds: Diod. Sic. 38.7;

Plut. Vit. Sull. 12, 19; Paus. 9.7.5; App. Mith. 54, 122. See Daux 1936a: 398. Sulla and the consultation of the oracle: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 280. Sulla and the gold statue of Apollo: Plut. Vit. Sull. 29; Stat. Silv. 5.3.293. For discussion of the degree to which Romans thought of plundering sanctuaries outside their own territory as religious sacrilege, see Pape 1975: 37, Jacquemin 1999: 239.

51. The silver bowl appears several times in Delphic inscriptions between the sixth and first centuries BC e.g., FD III 5 63 and FD III 3 224; Bourguet 1897: 489. Sulla reapportioning Theban land: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 279.

52. For the impact of Sulla on the way Rome related to Greece: Kallet-Marx 1995. The Soteria festival, started by the Aetolians in 279 BC, may also have fallen by the way side by this time: Nachtergael 1977: 376–78. Delphi was, however, also used by the pro-Sulla camp. The nearby city of Chaeronea, for example, put up honors in the sanctuary at Delphi in this period for a Thracian chief who had been sent to fight for Sulla against Mithridates: Daux 1936a: 401.

53. Parke and Wormell 434 (see 154). Sulla executed all Athenians, even those who sought refuge in Athens’s main sanctuary on the acropolis: Paus. 1.20.7

54. Polygnota: FD III 3 249–50; Daux 1936a: 405–406, Weir 2004: 81. Flaccus in Greece: Daux 1936a: 406.

55. Damage visible on the remains of the temple: Reinach 1910, Courby 1927: 116. The fire seems to have taken place in the same year as the one that consumed the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus in Rome (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 4.62).

56. See App. Ill. 4; Plut. Vit. Num. 9; Daux 1936a: 392, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 278–79.

57. Amphictyony active: CID IV 127 (dated to end second century BC/beginning first century BC); Giovanni 1978: 64–72. For the picture of Amphictyonic activity in this period: Sanchez 2001: 420. Repairs to temple earlier: Weir 2004: 93. Spartan consultation:FD III 1 487. Other Greek cities seem to have been similarly indebted to this individual, as the same monument carries other inscribed thanks: FD III 1 488–96; Spawforth 2012: 191. See Diod. Sic. 16.57.4 “the Spartans, even today, continued to consult Delphi on matters of great weight.” Cicero: Parke and Wormell 435; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 283, 407–408, Flacelière 1977. No more oracles in verse form: Cic. Div. 1.19.37.

58. E.g., FD III 3 11: The sale to Pythian Apollo of a slave called Heraclea for the price of two mines of silver, guaranteeing Heraclea’s right to be free and independent. Each of these manumissions mentions the archon at Delphi in the year it was inscribed, as well as the parties and a series of witnesses to the contract. See Daux 1936a: 15–60, Parke and Wormell 1956a: 261–62. The manumissions will be published as a collection in the fifth volume of the Corpus des Inscriptions de Delphes. At present, see: Lejeune 1939.

59. Down to 190 BC: Daux 1936a: 220. After 167 BC: Daux 1936a: 269, 491–95, McInerney 2011: 98. We should not understand these manumissions as a statement of the rejection of slavery, in fact they were the “motor” of enslavement, because a slave had to buy his or her freedom, providing the master with money to purchase another slave. As well, the master could impose conditions on the soon-to-be-freed slave, for example, that they return each year to put a fresh crown on their master’s statue in the sanctuary.

60. Caesar: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 283. Caes. B Civ. 3.56. Calenus is also mentioned in a surviving Delphic inscription: FD III 1 318. Consultation by Censorinus: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 408. He was clearly a religious enthusiast: he was also initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries: Beard, Price, and North 1998: 152–53, Spawforth 2012: 144. Response to Censorinus: Parke and Wormell 436; Val. Max. De Miraculis 1.8.10. Anthony and Delphi: Plut. Vit. Ant. 23; Daux 1936a: 409. Offer to repair the temple: Plut.Vit. Ant. 23.4; Pelling 1988: 176. Dispatch of sacred embassy and renewal of friendship: Spawforth 2012: 148, 149.

CHAPTER 10. RENAISSANCE

1. Nicopolis: Strabo 7.7.6. In later years, Nicopolis would dedicate a statue in the Apollo sanctuary at Delphi: FD III 1 542 (end first century AD). The first attested epimeletai (under Tiberius), and their immediate successors, would also happen to be from the city: Pouilloux 1980: 284–87. Augustus and the Amphictyony: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 283. Epimeletai: Sanchez 2001: 529, Weir 2004: 56. There had been informal epimeletai appointments under the Aetolians. The surviving inscriptions record epimeletai from the time of Tiberius to the end of second century AD: Pouilloux 1980: 282. For discussion of the reorganization of the Amphictyony, see Daux 1975: 354–55, 9.

2. Discussion over the letter E: Plut. Mor. 384–394. Livia’s offering: Plut. Mor. 385F; Jacquemin 1999: 75.

3. Spawforth 2012: 147. See Agora XVI 337.7–8.

4. “Lively interest” in Olympia: see Spawforth 2012: 164. No need for oracles: see Strabo’s description of Delphi and its current poor state in the early first century AD: 9.3.6–8. Chryselephantine statue: e.g., Langenfeld 1975: 247–48. Strabo’s description of Zeus at Olympia: Strabo 8.3.30.

5. Privileged position of Greece in Roman world: Barrow 1967: 2. Roman misunderstanding of the Amphictyony: Plin. HN 35.35.59. See Spawforth 2012: 160–61.

6. Robert 1929: 37, Weir 2004: 109.

7. Only Delphi and Amphictyony dedications: Jacquemin 1999: 79. Athens honoring Augustus: Jacquemin 079.

8. Barrow 1967: 2–3.

9. Tiberius: Amphictyony: CID IV 136. City of Delphi: Jacquemin 200. Agripinna Major: CID IV 133.

10. Statue of Poppaeus: Jacquemin 189. For discussion of the accompanying inscription and the “saving” referred to, see Eilers 2001. Statue of Theocles: Jacquemin 197 (while in post); Jacquemin 198 (when retired). Epimeletai from Nicopolis: Pouilloux 1980: 293.

11. Amphictyony: Jacquemin 031 (Caligula), CID IV 137 (Drusilla). Koinon: Jacquemin 008, IG VII 2711.

12. Measures of L. Iunius Gallio: FD III 4 286 (AD 52); Pouilloux 1971: 377. Unbroken chain of Imperial communication: see Jacquemin 1999: 274, Weir 2004: 88. Publicly inscribing Claudius’s letter on the temple: Weir 2004: 89.

13. Claudius statues: Jacquemin 155, 156. Statue of Claudius erected in the third century AD by the city of Delphi (reusing a base originally set up in the sanctuary by Pharselis): Jacquemin 157. Claudius as magistrate at Delphi: SEG 51.607; Spawforth 2012: 235. The eponymous archon was a member of the city of Delphi’s prytaneis, a board of nine magistrates tasked with overseeing the city’s role in administering the Delphic sanctuaries, as well as the money given to the sanctuary by the Amphictyony and ruling as judicial magistrates over the city: Arnush 1991: 11–15.

14. Secretary of the Archives: Weir 2004: 51, 55. Stars of stadium and theater: Jacquemin 1999: 79. Theater refurbishment: Picard 1991: 129, Partida 2009: 306. All this during a time, when, as has been recently highlighted, most cities in Greece were cobbling together both private and public funds to continue hosting their festivals: Camia 2011: 73. Competitions for Maidens: FD III 1 534; Weir 2004: 138.

15. Musical competitions had to be inserted into the games at Olympia for him: Spawforth 2012: 236. Declaring freedom of Greece: Barrow 1967: 2–3.

16. Reorganizing the Amphictyony: Jacquemin 1999: 229. Statue of Nero: CID IV 138 (end AD 54). Agrippina Minor (AD 54–55): Jacquemin 144. Nero’s consultation of the oracle: Parke and Wormell 461; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 283.

17. Settling soldiers on sacred land: Dio Cass. 62.14.2; Dio Chrys. 31.148; Paus. 10.7.1; Rousset 2002a: 275. Removing statues: Plin. HN 34.36. Pliny is at pains to point out that this still left over three thousand statues at Delphi. For descriptions of Nero’s collection in the Domus Aurea (Golden House) in Rome: Tac. Ann. 15.45, 16.23. Removing a statue from Amphictyonic dedication: Jacquemin 1999: 228.

18. Parke and Wormell 597, 243. This story also signifies how prevalent, by the time of Nero, the understanding that the Pythia was inspired by vapors must have been (even though the first time it is mentioned in the sources is the first century BC in Diodorus Siculus: see chapter 1).

19. Weir 2004: 133.

20. Titus/Domitian statue: Syll3 817; Spawforth 2012: 238. Statue: Jacquemin 201 Domitian inscription: Syll3 821A; FD III 4 120; Haussoullier 1882: 451, Jacquemin 1999: 75.Where it was placed, see Weir 2004: 153, Spawforth 2012: 238. What Domitian was repairing: Weir 2004: 93. Plaque from the Cnidian treasury: Courby 1927: 219.

21. Difficult times for Rome: Weir 2004: 151. Domitian’s involvement in procession between Athens and Delphi: Weir 2004: 149–50. Letter from Domitian to Delphi: Syll3 821C.2–3; Sanchez 2001: 450–51, Spawforth 2012: 238. Publication and copying of the games: Weir 2004: 166.

22. Agonothetes: these officials had been part of the Soteria festival in the third century BC, but not the Pythian: FD III 4 125–28. Return to local control: Sanchez 2001: 529, Spawforth 2012: 56–58.

23. Statue of Domitian by temple: FD III 4 444. Thought originally to be for Augustus, this has now been disproved: Jacquemin and Laroche 1986: 785–88. For discussion, see Courby 1927: 277–81. For the niche, Guide de Delphes 528; Bommelaer 1991: 171. See Weir 2004: 94, 153.

24. Additions to the gymnasium: Pouilloux 1980: 289, Bommelaer 1991: 73, 76, Weir 2004: 101–103. New library and dining room: Weir 2004: 101. The new colonnade more likely belonged to the Hadriannic period (AD 117–38). Peristyle house: Guide de Delphes 299. Rebuild of Pythia’s house: Syll3 823A. Discussion: Bousquet 1952b: 28–29.

25. Dio Chrysostom: Parke and Wormell 462. Nerva: Jacquemin 185; Trajan: CID IV 149. A citizen of Delphi even erected a statue to Matidia Minor, half-sister of the Empress Sabina and wife of the Emperor Hadrian: Jacquemin 256. Amphictyony honors proconsul of Asia: CID IV 143; City of Delphi honors proconsul: Jacquemin 154.

26. Amphictyony honoring an agonothetes: Jacquemin 055; wife of the epimelete: Jacquemin 174; Agonothetes: Jacquemin 175; Grammarian Jacquemin 179. Gortyn: Jacquemin 304. Hypata: Syll3 925B. Sophists: Jacquemin 470–71. Memmia Lupa: Bommelaer 1991: 101, 210. Statue: Jacquemin 258.

27. Letters: FD III 4 287–88; FD III 4 301. This was perhaps a Delphic initiative to draw the emperor into communication with the sanctuary: Flacelière 1976. Balancing the books: Barrow 1967: 4.

28. FD III 4 290–99; Rousset 2002a: 145, Rousset 2002b: 219, Weir 2004: 50. It is interesting that in these inscriptions the land in question—the sacred land that for centuries could not be cultivated on pain of displeasing Apollo—is referred to simply as the territory of Delphi. It seems that parts of Delphi’s sacred history—by the Roman corrector, at least—are being forgotten: Rousset 1996: 47. As a result, the city of Delphi now has full control over a vast area of land it could exploit, divide, and sublet, allowing it much more financial muscle in comparison to most major central Greek cities: Rousset 2002b: 241.

29. Dio Cass. 69.2.5. The status of a corrector, established first under Trajan, evolves over the course of the second and third centuries AD. Established first as a position to help (and control) free cities over which the proconsul of a province had no authority (like Delphi), by the third centuryAD, the same individual could be proconsul and corrector (e.g., Cn. Claudius Leonticus who is known at Delphi), suggesting the evolution of a greater degree of control over free cities during this time: Vatin 1965: 136–43.

30. Lamprias: SEG 1.181; Jones 1971: 10. Homonoia: Syll3 843. In the late second century AD, citizens of Chaeronea would be made citizens of Delphi: Syll3 824. Plutarch’s Roman citizenship: Syll3 829A; Barrow 1967: 12. Traveling and education: Plutarch was asked when in Sardis for his advice on how to carry out public duties, for which he wrote a treatise on the precepts of government: Plut. Mor. 798A–825F; Barrow 1967: 132. Friends with Sosius: Plut. Vit. Thes.; Barrow 1967: 41. His brother’s son: Apul. Met. 1.2.

31. First visit to Delphi: Barrow 1967: 30. Roles at Delphi: Barrow 1967: 31. See also Syll 3 829A (as epimelete supervising the erection of a statue in honor of the Emperor Hadrian). Procurator: Jones 1971: 33–34. Plutarch also held a series of offices in his home town of Chaeronea, and was aboeotarch for Boeotia: Barrow 1967: 13. Friendship with Nigrinus: Barrow 1967: 36–40, Jacquemin 1991a: 217. Portrait bust: Jacquemin 106; CID IV 151. There is also a surviving bust (on display at the museum at Delphi), which has been identified with Plutarch: Picard 1991: 135.

32. See Mossman 1997, Pelling 2002.

33. Plut. Mor. 384D. See Barrow 1967: 32.

34. Plut. Mor. 384D–394C.

35. Ibid., 394D–409D.

36. Ibid.,. 409E–438E.

37. Particularly in comparison to the claim of Juvenal that the oracle had fallen silent, and rival claims in other Roman literature: Juv. 6.555. Contrast Mart. 9.42 and Stat. Theb. 3.474.

38. Ignorant guides: e.g., Plut. Mor. 386B, 400D. See Jacquemin 1999: 263–64; 269–70. Rhodopis: Plut. Mor. 401A. For confusion and discussion over the meaning of dedications, such as the frogs and water snakes of the Corinthians and Axes of Tenedus: Plut.Mor. 399F–400D.

39. Memory at Delphi: Jacquemin 1991a: 218–20. Treatises on dedications: Jacquemin 1991a: 221–22. Corycian cave: Jacquemin 1984b, Jacquemin 1999: 270.

40. Division of year between Apollo and Dionysus: Plut. Mor. 388E; Roux 1976: 175. Pythia: see Roux 1976: 171–73. The traditional laurel wreath prize for victors would be swapped, probably in the time of Hadrian, for a prize of apples (which were supposed to be a special kind of Delphic apple—obtained by mixing an apple and quince tree) to evoke Delphi’s Cretan ancestry: Perrot 2009.

41. Another festival seems only to have been begun by the Hypatians in the second century AD, in honor of Neoptolemus at Delphi: Heliod. Aeth. 2.34; Pouilloux 1983: 274–76.

42. Roux 1976: 206, Bommelaer 1991: 23.

43. Theoxenia: Paus. 9.23.3. See the calendar in Bommelaer 1991: 29. For discussion of the Theoxenia: Hoyle 1967: 84. For the involvement of the worship of Neoptolemus as part of the Theoxenia: Downie 2004: 155. Worship of Dionysus: Plut. Mor. 365A; Hoyle 1967: 84–85, Roux 1976: 180.

44. Thyades of Delphi and Athens: Plut. Mor. 249E; Hoyle 1967: 91–92, Roux 1976: 178. Herois: Roux 1976: 168–69. Charila: Plut. Mor. 293D–F; Hoyle 1967: 86–87, Roux 1976: 169–71.

45. Septerion: Roux 1976: 166–68. Dispute over festivals: Bommelaer 1991: 30, 146. Plut. Mor. 417F–418D.

46. Only one priestess: Plut. Mor. 414B. The banality of questions now asked of the oracle: Plut. Mor. 386C, 407D, 408C (whether to purchase a slave, about one’s job, whether to get married, go on a journey, risk a loan, etc.), see Parke and Wormell 1956a: 393–94. But, there seem to have been people, known as exegetai, on hand in the sanctuary whose role was to instruct those not familiar with the consultation or sacrificial procedure on how to do it (suggesting that people were coming to consult). And even at the end of the third century AD, jokes circulated in Athenaeus’s writings about how Delphians always had a sacrificial knife in their hands ready to perform ritual (at a price) at any moment: Ath. Deipnosophists 173D–E; Jacquemin 1991a: 221.

47. The families: the Memmii, Babbii, and Gellii occupied key positions in the Delphic polis: Jacquemin 1991a: 217. Dramatis personae list, which includes members of the Memmii and Mestrii families: Inv. 3569 (unpublished); Weir 2004: 54.

CHAPTER 11. FINAL GLORY?

1. Letters from Hadrian: FD III 4 300; 301. See Flacelière 1971, Weir 2004: 168–73. Statue of Hadrian from Amphictyony: Syll3 829 A (CID IV 150). The city of Delphi’s statue: Syll3 829 B.

2. Honors for Memmius: Vatin 1965: 65–73. Hadrian putting Prudens in charge: Syll3 830. Archon of city: See Syll3 836: Delphic honors for a Catillius Macer Nicaieus, whose inscription proclaims that Hadrian was archon in that year. Questions for oracle: Parke and Wormell 465; Anth. Pal.14.102. This is despite the fact that some biting texts survive from this period complaining about the uselessness of oracles, e.g., Oenomaus of Gadara complaining about the oracle of Apollo at Clarus in Asia Minor: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 286. Statue for Hadrian: Syll3 835B.

3. Jacquemin 252; Jacquemin 1991a: 229.

4. Coins: Bommelaer 1991: 36. Coins with Corycian cave: Weir 2004: 104.

5. For the series of Delphic coins with Antinous: Blum 1913, Roux 1976: 200, Jacquemin 1991a: 229. The cult statue: indeed the incredibly good condition of the statue on its discovery during the major excavation of Delphi at the end of the nineteenth century has prompted scholars to think the cult was not left to fail after the death of Hadrian in AD 138, but continued to be cared for (and thus function) for a long time afterward. See Picard 1991: 133.

6. Columns for running track: Bommelaer 1991: 76. It’s uncertain whether new baths were also added to the gymnasium precinct in this period or slightly later: Bommelaer 1991: 73. Roman agora: Weir 2004: 95–96. One of the workshops in this area—a glass manufacturer—dates to the second and third centuries AD. Asclepieion: Bommelaer 1991: 233.

7. Changes to tradition: CID IV 152; see Vatin 1965: 7–21, Jacquemin 1999: 275. For reorganization of the territory belonging to Delphi, see: Vatin 1965: 74–127, 157–95, Ferrary and Rousset 1998, Rousset 2002a: 231. For discussion of the damiourgoi, and the degree to which this constituted a new part of the civic system at Delphi: Vatin 1965: 232–40. Correspondence between Hadrian and Delphi: FD III 4 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308. For the “peace of the universe” letter (FD III 4 307) see Flacelière 1971: 175.

8. FD III 4 302 (CID IV 152), col. II.3–6. For Nero’s rearrangement, see the previous chapter and Jacquemin 1991a: 229.

9. See Jacquemin 1991a: 230. The comparison between the Amphictyony and modern international organizations will be discussed in the conclusion.

10. Aim of the Panhellenion: see Spawforth and Walker 1986: 104. Requirement for membership: Spawforth and Walker 1985: 81–82, Romeo 2002: 21, 31. Delphi original heart of Panhellenion: Romeo 2002: 24–25. Report of Senate: FD III 4 78 col II.1–6; Daux 1975: 355–58, Sanchez 2001: 434–35, Spawforth 2012: 252. Panhellenion at Athens: Spawforth and Walker 1985: 82–100.

11. Syll3 835 A; Jacquemin 311.

12. Coins: Bommelaer 1991: 36, Weir 2004: 173–75. Statue of Antoninus Pius: CID IV 161; Jacquemin 1999: 75.

13. See Weir 2004: 113. The philosophical maxims of Delphi (“know thyself,” etc.) were visible at Delphi from the fifth century BC. But the earliest mention of the story in which the Seven Sages were said to have been responsible for inscribing the Delphic them onto the temple is in Diodorus Siculus, writing in the first century BC (Diod. Sic. 9.10.4). See also Dio Chrys. 72.12; Paus. 10.24.1. Once again, Delphi’s Roman world audience seems to be augmenting and rearticulating Delphi’s history and as a result its place and role within the Mediterranean world.

14. Aulus Gellius: Aul. Gell. 12.5.1. For the full list of attested philosophers at Delphi during this period, see Weir 2004: 115–16. The city of Delphi erected a statue in honor of a sophist from Byblus (in Lebanon) at the end of the second century AD: FD III 3 244; Ephesus put up a statue of the Sophist Soterus circa AD 150: FD III 4 265; Hypata erected a statue of a Sophist at around the same time: CID IV 158; and a group of disciples erected a monument for T. Flavius Phoinix of Hypata during the second century AD: Jacquemin 471. Some statues from this period of individuals rendered in “philosopher-like” style, yet without identification as such through an inscribed base, were also found during the excavation of the site: Picard 1991: 135.

15. E.g., Amphictyony honoring agonothetes with statues in the second century AD: Jacquemin 023, 027. Argos erected a statue in AD 176 to M. Aurelius Ptolemaius, a victorious poet, which they placed in their centuries’-old dedication, the Argive semicircle at the southeast corner of the Apollo sanctuary: FD III 1 89; Bommelaer 1991: 115. Nicomedia (in Bithynia in Asia Minor) erected a statue to one of its Pythian musical victors during the Antonine period: Jacquemin 375.

16. Ancyra: Jacquemin 064. Myra: FD III 1 548. Sardis: Jacquemin 429, 430, 431.

17. A well-known tradition in the Roman world was to make copies of classical Greek works of art in order to export them around the empire. This seems to have been going on at Delphi, too, in this period: some remains of casts (particularly heads) have been found at the site: Picard 1991: 131.

18. Herodes Atticus: Graindor 1930. Building at Delphi: Weir 2004: 110–11. Stadium: Aupert 1979, Amandry 1981a: 720–21, Bommelaer 1991: 215–17. Statues of Herodes Atticus, his wife, and Polydeucion put up by the city of Delphi: FD III 3 66; 71; Jacquemin 188. Statues set up by Herodes Atticus and his family: Jacquemin 088, 89, 90, 91, 92, 95.

19. Confirming independence of the sanctuary: FD III 4 313. Lengthy correspondence, e.g., FD III 4 328. For further discussion: Pouilloux 1971: 380.

20. For general discussion of these burial areas: Maass 1997: 70–73. Underground crypt: Bommelaer 1991: 221. Sarcophagus: Zagdoun 1977: 107–32, Bommelaer 1991: 41, Picard 1991: 130.

21. Spartan theopropos: FD III 1 215; Galen: Parke and Wormell 463; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 409.

22. Lucian J. Conf. 12; J. Trag. 6, 28; Philopat. 5; Phal. 1, I–II, 2, 9. See Parke and Wormell 1956a: 286–87.

23. Pausanias saw Antinous: Juul 2010: 15. Age: Habicht 1988: 12–13. His genre of writing: Habicht 1988: 2.

24. On the debate around the nonsurvival of an original eleventh book: Juul 2010: 16.

25. Indeed they decided to excavate in the same order as Pausanias recounted his visit to Delphi so that they could make the best use of the text in identifying the many monuments Pausanias described: Amandry 1992a: 75, Radet 1992: 144.

26. Criticism of von Wilamovitz Moellendorff: Juul 2010: 17. Difficulties of using Pausanias for archaeology: see Lacroix 1992, Jacquemin 2001.

27. Goal of Pausanias’s narrative: Habicht 1988, Elsner 2001: 18, Elsner 2004: 262, Hutton 2005b, Hutton 2005a. Pausanias’s focus: Daux 1936b: 179, Heer 1979: 288, Alcock 1996: 250. Nothing after 260 BC: Daux 1936b: 173, Habicht 1988: 23, 134–35, Weir 2004: 105. For discussion of the implications of his agenda for his description of different sites: Heer 1979: 280–300; Bommelaer 2001; Pretzler 2007: 8; Scott 2010: 229–33.

28. Not read in antiquity: Habicht 1988: 1. See “it is indeed a blessing that what this loner achieved can still be read today”: Habicht 1988: 27. Spluttering Hellenism: Habicht 1988: 25.

29. Stadium: Bommelaer 1991: 216–17. Sacred land: Paus. 10.37.5

30. Response of Septimius: FD III 4 329; Pouilloux 1971: 380. Restoration of temple: FD III 4 269, 270, 271; Weir 2004: 93. Archaeological evidence for restoration of the temple at this time: Bommelaer 1991: 101, 181. They may also date to the period of Emperor Julian the Apostate well over a century later: Amandry 1989. See also Rousset 2002a: 280.

31. M. Junius Mnaseas: FD III 1 553; Jacquemin 1991a: 218. Statues by Delphians of family members: Jacquemin 259, 260. Important officials: M. Aurelius Niciades (the last of the epimeletai known in the surviving records although the position certainly continued) Syll3 874B (also honored by the Amphictyony FD III 6 96), see Pouilloux 1980: 293. Tib. Claudius Callippianus (proconsul of Achaea): Jacquemin 160; and G. Publius Proculeianus: FD III 4 473. The proconsul of Asia would also be honored jointly by the Amphictyony and the city of Delphi in AD 225–50: Jacquemin058.

32. Statues of Leonticus: Jacquemin 244, 245, 246, 247, 248. See FD III 4 269–71. On Leonticus and his status, see: Vatin 1965: 143, 153–56. Roman agora: this is an area not yet fully published or understood, with a mix of Roman and early Christian period housing: Bommelaer 1991: 89, 236–37.

33. Clement of Alexandria: Clem. Al. Protr. l.c.; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 288. Origen: Origen C. Cels. 3.25, 7.3. Indeed Porphery, writing in the third century AD, now credits Delphi with being the first oracle to sanction sacrifice using ox, pig, and sheep in the earliest days of Greek civilization, strengthening Delphi’s claim to historic and cultic significance: Parke and Wormell 536; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 364.

34. Hypatians: Heliod. Aeth. 2.34; Pouilloux 1983: 274–76, Weir 2004: 59. Expansion of Pythian games: for the full list of new games, see Weir 2004: 179–80. Wide variations in the games at different places, e.g., the Pythian festival at Perinthus copied Delphi in having no cash prizes, but the games at Ancyra made financial awards to its victors: Weir 2004: 176. Expansion not known at Delphi: Weir 2004: 176.

35. Publicity through the minting of coins in host cities: Weir 2004: 194. Wider change in emperor worship: Mitchell 1990, Mitchell 1993: 221, Weir 2004: 177. Pythian festival at Thessalonike: Weir 2004: 198. For a description of the atmosphere in the mid-to late second century AD at the games: Weir 2004: 124–29. Decline in numbers AD 217–59: Weir 2004: 130.

36. Rise of Apollo Helios: Weir 2004: 89, 210. “Third century crisis” for the empire, see Mennen 2011.

37. Gordian III: FD III 4 274. Gallienus: Jacquemin 168. Valerian: Jacquemin 204. Gallienus seems to have engaged in correspondence with the sanctuary (although only fragments of the inscribed letter survived (to do with Pythian games): Vatin 1965: 250. Claudius Gothicus: Jacquemin 167.Carus: Jacquemin 153, Syll3 897. This statue base was seen by Cyriac of Ancona in the fifteenth century; Jannoray 1946: 259–61.

38. Eastern baths: Bommelaer 1991: 196. Sinope: Jacquemin 440. Mercenaries: Jacquemin 472.

39. Last dual Amphictyonic and Delphic statue: Jacquemin 1991a: 231. Last Amphictyonic statue of Philiscus: Jacquemin 051; FD III 4 273. Last known record: FD III 2 161; Jacquemin 1991a: 231, Jacquemin 1999: 79. Debate over ability to act: see Daux 1975, Weir 2004: 59.

40. Claudius: Syll3 801 A (Jacquemin 157); Pharsalians: Jacquemin 389. See Jacquemin 1999: 230. Athenian treasury: FD III 2 142; Bousquet 1942–43: 124–26, Weir 2004: 90. For a wider assessment of this period of Roman history: Mitchell 2007.

41. Meetings of damiourgoi: Weir 2004: 54. Statues of philosophers: Picard 1991: 138.

42. For the wider history of this period, see Harries 2012.

43. Last major building project: Bousquet 1952c: 660. Inscription from AD 319: SEG 12.266; Weir 2004: 54. Menogenes’ role in Athens: Bousquet 1952c: 653–57. This donation is accepted officially by the damiourgoi; the Amphictyony are not even mentioned: Bousquet 1952c: 657, Ginouvés 1955. Donation used for: Bousquet 1952c: 660, Bommelaer 1991: 196. It is perhaps at this time (or slightly later) that the stoa and terrace of Attalus is completely reconstructed so as to serve as a massive cistern for the baths: Bommelaer 1991: 191–92, Etienne 1996: 183.

44. Vatin 1962: 229. The remains of the serpent column from Delphi still stand today in the middle of Constantine’s hippodrome in Istanbul, flanked by obelisks taken from Egypt, one in the fourth century AD and one in the tenth century AD. One of the golden serpent heads from the Plataean column is on display in the Istanbul Archaeology Museum. Constantine may have chosen this monument in particular because of its ongoing memorialization of the clash between East and West: Jung 2006: 378–81, Spawforth 2012: 273.

45. Syll3 903A; Syll3 903B.

46. Roman agora: Bommelaer 1991: 89. The stylobate of the north portico is composed entirely of reused material: Weir 2004: 94. Place for Imperial statues: Weir 2004: 94.

47. Dalmatius: Jacquemin 165. Hadrian: Jacquemin 169.

48. Statue for Flavius Constantius: Vatin 1962: 232–35. Reuse of base: Jacquemin 1999: 230.

49. See Freeman 2009: 215.

50. Reassurance of Delphic cult liberty, following complaint received: Vatin 1965: 253–64, Pouilloux 1980: 294.

51. Euseb. Praep. Evang. 5,16; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 287.

52. Parke and Wormell 475; Barrow 1967: 36.

53. See Prudent. Apotheosis 438; Parke and Wormell 518; Parke and Wormell 1956a: 288–89.

54. For Julian’s defense of Delphi: Julian Or. 6.188a; Gal. 198c. The irony is that not a single inscription from Delphi survives praising Julian: Vatin 1962: 235. Julian’s inquiry of the oracle: Parke and Wormell 1956a: 290. The last response: Parke and Wormell476. Consultation not at Delphi but Daphne: Vatin 1962: 236–37.

55. Amandry and Hansen 2010: 145–47.

56. Jacquemin 203; Jacquemin 1999: 79.

57. Meritt 1947, Vatin 1962: 240–41.

58. Vatin 1962: 240.

59. Ibid., 241.

CHAPTER 12. THE JOURNEY CONTINUES

1. Claud. 4.2.5; IV Cons. Hon. 144 (AD 398); Parke and Wormell 1956a: 290. The city was well-known enough to catch the attention of the Emperor Theodosius II in 424 AD: Cod. Theod. 15.5.4; Vatin 1962: 229. For a discussion of the image of Delphi in Christian texts: Déroche 1986: 153–59. Discussion of slow absorption of pagan beliefs, see Spieser 1976.

2. Gymnasium: Pentazos 1992a. Habitation around Apollo sanctuary: Déroche 1986: 143–45. Perimeter of Apollo sanctuary: in particular the buildings to the south of the Apollo sanctuary employed parts of the Sicyonian treasury in their masonry. The number of baths is also high, perhaps due to the ease of accessing water sources at the site: Déroche 1986: 143–45, Déroche 1996: 184–86.

3. Redevelopment of northern sector of Apollo sanctuary: Laurent 1899: 271, Bommelaer 1991: 101, Déroche 1996: 183. Development of Apollo sanctuary into commercial center: Bommelaer 1991: 92. For the development of habitation around the south of the Apollo sanctuary: Bommelaer 1991: 237, Maass 1997: 74–75. For the Roman agora: Daux 1965: 1049, Amandry 1981a: 724. Sacred way: Déroche 1986: 130–37, Picard 1991: 192. And indeed the name “sacred way” has no ancient precedent at all. It was probably constructed in order to allow access for wagons to the heart of the site: Déroche 1996: 183.

4. Pagan motifs in fifth-century Christian architectural fragments: Laurent 1899: 207, 269–71. See Déroche 1992. Delphians trying to attract Christian worshipers, see Dyggve 1948.

5. Organic growth of Christian worship at Delphi: Spieser 1976: 317. No basilica before AD 450: Déroche 1986: 115.

6. Basilica to the west: Daux 1960: 752–55, Déroche 1986: 15–33. Basilica in the gymnasium: Déroche 1986: 34–57, Bommelaer 1991: 73–4. Basilica in the sanctuary: Déroche 1986: 58–91. For the basilica to the west (basilica “of the new village”): the ornate mosaic floor was discovered and excavated in 1959–60. Its foundations had been partly ruined when the new village of Castri was constructed in the nineteenth century. The structure seems to have originally employed reused blocks from the Apollo sanctuary, including parts of a monument dedicated by the Boeotians in the fourth century BC. The mosaic is now on display outside the museum at Delphi: Daux 1960: 752–55, Bommelaer 1991: 237–38.

7. Position of basilica inside Apollo sanctuary: Déroche 1986: 89. Rich and ornate style: Déroche 1986: 91. See Spieser 1976: 316–17, Taplin 1989: 16, Bommelaer 1991: 24. Basilica for the bishop is located on the spot of the later church of Saint-Nicholas (which survived in the modern village of Castri until the excavations in the later nineteenth century): Bommelaer 1991: 44. Mosaic underneath chapel of St George: Goffinet 1962, Bommelaer 1991: 237.

8. There are also a large number of tombs from this period in the area around Delphi: Déroche 1986: 145. For the Christianization of Olympia (the workshop of Pheidias became the Christian basilica rather than the temple of Zeus): Spieser 1976: 324. Nondestruction of temple of Apollo: Déroche 1986: 127, 146.

9. Déroche 1986: 135–37, 143, Bommelaer 1991: 101–102.

10. Lamp with Christ and snake: Dyggve 1948: 9–28, Goffinet 1962: 260. St. George mosaic: Goffinet 1962, Bommelaer 1991: 237.

11. Contraction of area covered by inhabitants: Déroche 1996: 186–88. Plague of Justinian and invasion: Déroche 1986: 147, Déroche 1996: 186.

12. Defensive wall across the gymnasium: Bommelaer 1991: 44. Final layer showing abandonment: Déroche 1986: 149–50, Déroche 1996: 187.

13. Colin 1981: 531, Hellmann 1992: 20. For this period of Delphic rediscovery, see also: Déroche 1986: 163–67, Maass 1997: 232–36.

14. Taplin argues the name Castri to have come from the Latin castra, echoing the village’s survival within the ancient “fortification” walls surviving from the old settlement and sanctuary of Delphi. From the time of the Fourth Crusade through to 1460, Castri belonged to the Dukes of Salona (old Amphissa): Taplin 1989: 16–17.

15. While the physical location of Delphi had been forgotten, the legend of Delphi’s oracle had not. In Shakespeare’s A Winter’s Tale the oracle of Delphos is an island—often thought to have been Delos: Taplin 1989: 18.

16. Humanist movement: Stonemann 2010: 25. Suspicion of Eastern Orthodox church: according to Pope Innocent III (AD 1160–1216), the Greeks were “worse than Saracens”: Etienne and Etienne 1992: 23.

17. Best sellers: Stonemann 2010: 22–23. For Cyriac’s goals, see the surviving fragments of Cyriac’s Commentary on Ancient Things; Etienne and Etienne 1992: 26. Cyriac’s task: as observed by Francesco Filelfo (AD 1398–1481); Stonemann 2010: 27.

18. Hellmann 1992: 15, 20, Mulliez 2007: 134–35.

19. Stonemann 2010: 36.

20. Important period for interest in ancient Greece, see Stonemann 2010: 38–80, Constantine 2011: 3–6. Use of the term “archaeology”: see the preface to Spon’s work on epigraphy Miscellanae eruditae antiquitatis; Etienne and Etienne 1992: 38, Constantine 2011: 7–33. Reflections on the gymnasium: volume II, 51, in J. Spon 1678 Voyage d’Italie, de Dalmatie, de Grèce et du Levant, fait aux années 1675 et 1676 (three volumes), G. Wheler 1682 A Journey into Greece; Mulliez 2007: 135.

21. Society of Dilettanti: Letter to Horace Mann, 14th April 1783; Stonemann 2010: 120–21. Use of inscriptions: Stonemann 2010: 108.

22. The call: J. Stuart and N. Revett 1762–1816 The Antiquities of Athens (four volumes); Stonemann 2010: 122. See Soros 2006. Stones of the temple terrace wall: Stuart and Revett The Antiquities of Athens (volume IV, 7); Hellmann 1992: 21.

23. For examples of the scornful reaction to the gusto Greco, see Sir William Chambers 1759 Treatise of Civil Architecture; Stonemann 2010: 116, 121. For the English translation of Winckelmann’s key text by H. Fusseli and published in 1765, see Reflections on the Painting and Sculpture of the Greeks: With Instructions for the Connoisseur, and an Essay on Grace in Works of Art. See Schnapp 1996: 260–64, Constantine 2011: 106–42. Richard Chandler 1776 Travels in Greece or an Account of a Tour Made at the Expense of the Society of Dilettanti (pp. 264–71); Hellmann 1992: 21.

24. Hellmann 1992: 20. See also Jacob Spon in the epigraph to this chapter.

25. See Edward Clarke 1818 Travels I–VIII; Otter 1825, Stonemann 2010: 154. Painting: see Tsigakou 1981: 29. Mapping Greece: W. M. Leake 1821 The Topography of Athens; 1824 Journals of a Tour in Asia Minor; 1830 Travels in the Morea I–III; 1835Travels in Northern Greece; 1846Peloponnesiaca.

26. See, “Antiquity is a garden that belongs by natural right to those who cultivate its fruits,” Captain de Verninac Saint Maur, commander of expedition to bring the Luxor obelisk to Paris; Stonemann 2010: 165.

27. William Gell 1827 The Itinerary of Greece, Containing One Hundred Routes in Attica, Boeotia, Phocis, Locris and Thessaly (his drawings are in the British Museum). George Hamilton and Henry Raikes: Amandry 1981b, Hellmann 1992: 25–31. Sir William Hamilton and Lord Nelson: Dyson 2006: 160, Stonemann 2010: 169.

28. Argument between Elgin and the Dilettanti: Stonemann 2010: 177. See St. Claire 1984. Byron at Delphi: Hellmann 1992: 31.

29. Borst 1948, Eliot 1967, Hellmann 1992: 31–35.

30. Pierre Augustin Guys 1771 Voyage litteraire de la Grèce ou lettres sur les Grecs anciens et moderns, avec un parallèle de leurs moeurs; see Constantine 2011: 151–87. War of Independence: see Etienne and Etienne 1992: 85.

31. Sarcophagus of Meleager: Pentazos 1992b: 55. First complete description of site: Hellmann 1992: 16, 36. F. Thiersch 1840 Über die Topographie von Delphi in Abb. Der philo.-philolog. Classe der königl. Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften III, I, 1–74. Visit of King Otto and Queen Amelie: Hellmann 1992: 36, Stonemann 2010: 244. See also L. Ross 1851 Wanderungen in Griechenland im Gefolge des Königs Otto und der Königin Amalie, mit besonderer Rücksicht auf Topographie und Geschichte. Petition for small museum: Pentazos 1992b: 55. Illegal to give as a dowry: Mulliez 2007: 138.

32. Andréas Moustoxydis: Pentazos 1992b: 55. See also A. Moustoxydis 1834 Ionios Anthologia I, 151–78. Prince Hermann: Mulliez 2007: 136. See also Prince de Pukler Muskau 1840 Entre l’Europe et l’Asie. Voyage dans l’Archipel, traduit de l’Allemand par Jean Cohen I, 50–64.

33. Stoll 1979: 229–33, Hellmann 1992: 16, 40, Mulliez 2007: 137.

34. The call to repair the village: Pentazos 1992b: 56–58. Dimos Frangos: Mulliez 2007: 138.

35. Curtius 1843, Hellmann 1992: 16.

36. Interest in Olympia: see Kyrieleis 2007. Lecture by Curtius: Stonemann 2010: 253–64.

37. Kyriakos Pittakos: Pentazos 1992b: 60. French school in Athens: its aims, at its foundation, was to provide an opportunity for scholars to read ancient texts in situ, but also to provide a broader base for humanist, philhellenic, artistic, archaeological, philological, and political interaction between France and Greece: Stonemann 2010: 251. Committee of Antiquaries: Skorda 1992a: 61–64.

38. Skorda 1992a: 64–67.

39. The 1870s, see Hellmann 1992: 50. Dealing with Dimos Frangos: Amandry 1992a: 106, Skorda 1992a: 68. In essence, they paid for one house one-tenth of the money raised by the Greek Archaeological Society for the expropriation of the whole site in 1872. The property’s real value was more like one hundred drachmas.

40. Request at the Congress of Berlin: Skorda 1992a: 68. 1880 excavation: Amandry 1992a: 78. 1881 agreement: Amandry 1992a: 81, Mulliez 2007: 138.

41. American and British Schools: see Thomas 1988: 174. Greek Archaeological Society: Amandry 1992a: 141, Dassios 1992: 129.

42. Amandry 1992a: 82–93, 112.

43. Greek enthusiasm for the deal: see Hellmann 1992: 52. French, German, and American enthusiasm for Delphi: Amandry 1992a: 95–102, Hellmann 1992: 53, see also Constantine 2011: 133.

44. Amandry 1992a: 104–109.

45. Ibid., 1992a: 110–16, Kolonia 1992: 194.

46. Etienne and Etienne 1992: 105.

47. Homolle 1893: 185; Amandry 1992: 118–22; Jacquemin 1992: 178; Mulliez 2007: 141.

48. Amandry 1992a: 122.

EPILOGUE

1. Delphi as important part of wider investigation into ancient world, see Mulliez 2007. Among many other claims to fame, the site has been particularly important for our understanding of the development of archaic sculpture: Croissant 2000: 338–41.See For the journal of the big dig, see Jacquemin 1992a. To see the original journals online: http://www.efa.gr/Documentation/Arch_man/doc_arch_man_ligne.htm.

2. Construction and destruction: see Bommelaer 1991: 24, Amandry 1992a: 140. Use of church as school: Kolonia 1992: 195, Mulliez 2007: 141.

3. Jacquemin 1992a: 163, Radet 1992: 144–46.

4. Pre-excavation finds: Hellmann 1992: 42, 49. Initial inscriptions: now Rhodes and Osborne 2003: No. 1. Sculptural finds: Jacquemin 1992; Kolonia 1992: 196; Mulliez 2007: 145–47.

5. Radet 1992.

6. Bommelaer, Pentazos and Picard 1992: 205–207, Jacquemin 1999: 281.

7. Bommelaer, Pentazos, and Picard 1992: 205. In reality, the excavations reports have continued unabated right into the twenty-first century: The archaeological excavation of Delphi has been published in the Fouilles de Delphes series (still in separate tomes: I. History of the City of Delphi (nothing has yet appeared in this one); II. Topography and Architecture; III. Epigraphy; IV. Sculpture; V. Small objects), with inscriptions republished in the Corpus d’inscriptions de Delphes (4 volumes), alongside countless journal articles and several edited volumes (including BCH Supplement volumes), combined with a larger number of monographs focusing on different aspects of the sanctuary, its architecture, inscriptions, and art. For a general (but now out-of-date) overview, see: Bommelaer 1991: 9–11.The original Olympia publication series (Olympia) has also been greatly expanded by two new series of excavation reports Olympia Bericht and Olympia Forschungen, alongside an equal number of articles, edited volumes, and monographs.

8. See Croissant 2000: 333.

9. Kolonia 1992: 201. The excavators grumbled “that not even the little finger of any fourth century BC temple sculpture had been found”: Radet 1992: 147, Croissant 2000: 334.

10. Archives of the Ephoria of Delphi; Kolonia 1992: 201.

11. Bommelaer, Pentazos, and Picard 1992: 210–11.

12. Keramopoullos 1912.

13. See also Emilie Bourguet’s magisterial early synthesis of the sanctuary: Bourguet 1914. See also Bommelaer, Pentazos and Picard 1992: 205–10, 213, 219. For Pomtow’s continuing publications, see, for example: Pomtow 1909, Pomtow 1918.

14. Bommelaer, Pentazos, and Picard 1992: 219, 226–27. Perhaps the most crucial of de La Coste-Messelière’s publications are: de La Coste-Messelière and Picard 1928; de La Coste-Messelière 1931; de La Coste-Messelière 1936; de La Coste-Messelière 1957. He was also responsible for one of the first attempts to create maps for different chronological periods of the sanctuary’s life: de La Coste-Messelière 1969.

15. See Replat 1920, Amandry 1986.

16. Precious moments of the performance of Aeschylus’s Prometheus Unbound from the festival survive on film: Taplin 1989: 18. This festival led in turn to the foundation of the Greek National Theatre and to the first performances at the ancient theater of Epidaurus.

17. Bommelaer, Pentazos, and Picard 1992: 222, 227, 229.

18. Ibid., 227, 231, Jacquemin 1999: 294.

19. Amandry 1939b, Amandry 1945, Bommelaer, Pentazos, and Picard 1992: 233–41.

20. For a wonderful sense of the site and its local inhabitants in the 1930s, see the picture book of Delphi created by Pierre de la Coste Messelière and George de Miré published in 1943: de Miré and de la Coste-Messelière 1943.

21. Jacquemin 1999: 293 note 75.

22. Demangel 1944–45, Bommelaer, Pentazos and Picard 1992: 244.

23. Bommelaer, Pentazos, and Picard 1992: 245–46.

24. P. Amandry in ibid., 1992: 244–47.

25. See accounts of Lucien Lerat, George Roux, and Jean Pouilloux in Bommelaer, Pentazos, and Picard 1992: 249–51.

26. Personal account of Eric Hansen, in Bommelaer, Pentazos, and Picard 1992: 253.

27. Hellmann 1992: 18–19.

28. Bommelaer, Pentazos, and Picard 1992: 264.

29. See Mulliez 2007: 153.

30. Bommelaer, Pentazos, and Picard 1992: 256, 264.

31. Amandry 1981b, Jacquemin 1984a, Picard 1991: 241–61.

32. Luce 1992: 693.

33. As noted by Bommelaer in the 2008 edition of the French journal BCH, in relation to the inscriptions of the fourth century BC temple rebuilding, very little of our understanding of these accounts is fixed. Instead, our understanding of them is changing all the time: Bommelaer 2008: 223.

34. In the 1996 showcase volume of the work of the French School in Athens, it is indicative of the developing interest in the town’s Christian era that a section was dedicated to Delphi at the end of antiquity: Déroche 1996. There is still no published volume in the excavation reports on this time in Delphi’s history, although the first Fouilles de Delphes volume is expected soon: Déroche, Pétridis, and Badie (forthcoming).

35. Equally indicative is that in the same showcase volume (Etienne 1996), Delphi was not mentioned as an example in the section “The Space of the City.” This is soon to be in part rectified with the anticipated publication of N. Kyriakidis Delphon politeia: Etude d’une communauté politique (VI–I. siècle avant J.C.).

36. This area has been the focus of recent work, particularly by Rousset 2002a. But we still only have a basic understanding of how the landscape around Delphi was used, perceived, and experienced. See the recent work on different aspects of this experience in Kyriakidis 2011, McInerney 2011, McInerney (forthcoming).

37. For a recent consideration of the issues regarding display at the museum of Delphi: Partida 2009. For recent publications utilizing new digital technologies to produce three-dimensional computer graphics of the site: Bommelaer 1997. For a recent consideration of what a Christian and Byzantine tour of Delphi might look like: Dimou and Pétridis 2011.

CONCLUSION

1. “Delphi became a bank of social capital,” McInerney 2011: 96.

2. E.g., for modern politics: Tsoukalis and Emmanoulidis 2009.

3. See Delphi’s confirmation (quoted in the introduction to this book) as a World Heritage Site thanks to its “enduring mission to bring together men and women who otherwise remain divided by material interests.” Full text can be viewed online:http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/393/documents/(1987 Advisory Body Evaluation)—last accessed 17.6.13. The literature on comparisons between Delphi, its Amphictyony, and modern-day international organizations like the European Union and United Nations continues to increase, despite a number of calls (including in this book) for caution over such comparisons: Tenekides 1931; Daux 1957; Tenekides 1958; Amandry 1979; Zepos 1979. “Delphi was also the centre of meetings of the Amphictyonic league (the nearest equivalent to the UN for the isolated ancient Greek city-state)”: Toubis 2007: 58–59.

4. http://www.eccd.gr/: last accessed 17.6.13

5. http://www.era-ewv-ferp.com/index.php?page_id=29: last accessed 17.6.13.

6. See also Taplin 1989: 33.

If you find an error please notify us in the comments. Thank you!