Jacobs 2021, The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene – The Greek-Persian Religious Concept of Antiochos I and the Ethnicity of the Local Population

Common Dwelling Place of all the Gods Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Commagene in its Local, Regional and Global Hellenistic Context Edited by Michael Blömer, Stefan Riedel, Miguel John Versluys and Engelbert Winter ORIENS E T OCCIDENS Studien zu antiken Kulturkontakten und ihrem Nachleben | 34 Geschichte Franz Steiner Verlag Franz Steiner Verlag 88 contubernium Tübinger Beiträge zur Universitäts- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Franz Steiner Verlag Oriens et Occidens Studien zu antiken Kulturkontakten und ihrem Nachleben Herausgegeben von Josef Wiesehöfer Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr in Zusammenarbeit mit Pierre Briant, Geoffrey Greatrex, Amélie Kuhrt und Robert Rollinger Band 34 Franz Steiner Verlag Common Dwelling Place of all the Gods Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Commagene in its Local, Regional and Global Hellenistic Context Edited by Michael Blömer, Stefan Riedel, Miguel John Versluys and Engelbert Winter Franz Steiner Verlag Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Germany’s Excellence Strategy – EXC 2060 “Religion and Politics. Dynamics of Tradition and Innovation” – 390726036 as well as the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) under VICI project 277-61-001 Dieses Buch ist eine Open-Access-Publikation. Dieses Werk ist lizenziert unter einer Creative Commons Namensnennung – Nicht kommerziell – Keine Bearbeitungen 4.0 International Lizenz. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.de Umschlagabbildung: Nemrud Dağ, view of the statues on the east terrace taken during the campaign of 1953 (Photo: Friedrich Karl Dörner, © Forschungsstelle Asia Minor, Dörner archive) Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek: Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über <http://dnb.d-nb.de> abrufbar. Dieses Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist unzulässig und strafbar. © Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart 2021 Layout und Herstellung durch den Verlag Druck: Memminger MedienCentrum, Memmingen Gedruckt auf säurefreiem, alterungsbeständigem Papier. Printed in Germany. ISBN 978-3-515-12925-1 (Print) ISBN 978-3-515-12926-8 (E-Book) https://doi.org/10.25162/9783515129268 Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Table of Contents Foreword & Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Miguel John Versluys & Stefan Riedel Beyond East & West Hellenistic Commagene between Particularism and Universalism 11 Part I: Theoretical and Conceptual Introductions Rachel Mairs ‘Ai Khanoum God with Feet of Marble’ Reading Ai Khanoum through Commagene 33 Stefan R Hauser ‘Hellenized Iranians?’ Antiochos I and the Power of Image 45 Matthew P Canepa Commagene Before and Beyond Antiochos I Dynastic Identity, Topographies of Power and Persian Spectacular Religion 71 Helen Fragaki Reversing Points of Reference Commagene and the Anfushy Necropolis from Alexandria in Modern Scholarship Franz Steiner Verlag 103 6 Table of Contents Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Part II (Within): Archaeology and History of Hellenistic Commagene – The Local Context Margherita Facella Sovereignty and Autonomy in the Hellenistic Coins of Commagene 139 Werner Oenbrink The Late-Hellenistic Architecture of Commagene 163 Lennart Kruijer & Stefan Riedel Transforming Objectscapes in Samosata The Impact of the Palatial Complex 185 Bruno Jacobs The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene The Greek-Persian Religious Concept of Antiochos I and the Ethnicity of the Local Population 231 Albert de Jong Dynastic Zoroastrianism in Commagene The Religion of King Antiochos 253 Rolf Strootman Orontid Kingship in its Hellenistic Context The Seleucid Connections of Antiochos I of Commagene 295 Anna Collar Time, Echoes and Experience Perceiving the Landscape in Commagene 319 Part III (Between): Comparative Studies on Hellenistic Commagene – The Regional and Global Context Looking East Giusto Traina Armenia and the ‘Orontid Connection’ Some Remarks on Strabo, Geography 11,14,15 Franz Steiner Verlag 345 Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Table of Contents 7 Lara Fabian Beyond and Yet In-between The Caucasus and the Hellenistic Oikoumene 357 Vito Messina Beyond Greece and Babylonia Global and Local at Seleucia on the Tigris 381 Looking South Orit Peleg-Barkat Herodian Art and Architecture as Reflections of King Herod’s Many Faces 409 Stephan G Schmid Was There a Nabataean Identity – And If Yes, How Many? 439 Looking West Christoph Michels ‘Achaemenid’ and ‘Hellenistic’ Strands of Representation in the Minor Kingdoms of Asia Minor 475 Monika Trümper Delos Beyond East and West Cultural Choices in Domestic Architecture 497 Annette Haug Decoscapes in Hellenistic Italy Figurative Polychrome Mosaics between Local and Global 541 Concluding Remarks Achim Lichtenberger Hellenistic Commagene in Context Is ‘Global’ the Answer and Do We Have to Overcome Cultural ‘Containers’? 579 Index 589 Franz Steiner Verlag The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene* The Greek-Persian Religious Concept of Antiochos I and the Ethnicity of the Local Population Bruno Jacobs The End of the Episode The so-called Laodike inscription on the capital of a column at the Karakuş tumulus (Kb) reads1: “The Great King Mithradates, son of the Great King Antiochos and Queen Isias, consecrated the monument in eternal memory of Queen Laodike, sister of the King and wife of the King of Kings Orodes, and in his own honour ” These lines are obviously related to the relief on the capital (fig 1) It shows Mithradates II in handshake with the deceased Laodike is depicted in chiton and cloak, Mithradates II in long shirt gathered between the legs, with trousers, long cloak and Armenian tiara2 While Laodike could hardly have found her last resting place on the spot, since she probably died in Parthia, three other female relatives of the king were buried here3, as can be seen from the so-called Isias inscription (Ka), another text found at Karakuş: Isias, the mother of Mithradates II and wife of Antiochos I, Mithradates’ sister Antiochis, and his daughter Aka 4 * 1 2 3 4 The author is much indebted to Michael Blömer and Stephan G Schmid for valuable hints and discussions, and he is very grateful to Wouter F M Henkelman for his assistance with the English version of this article For the first time the wording of the inscription was presented by Wagner 1983, 208–212 Wagner 1983, 210 pl 52,3; Riedel 2018, 121–122; cf Brijder 2014, fig 126a–b Wagner 1983, 212 Waldmann 1991, 200–201 232 Bruno Jacobs Fig. 1 Karakuş: Relief showing Mithradates II in handshake with his deceased sister Laodike, photo and © B Jacobs For his wife Isias and probably for one of his daughters, be it Laodike or Antiochis, Antiochos I had – probably not long before his death – two stelae erected at the end of the row of his maternal ancestors on Nemrud Dağ 5 This connection brings the sites of Nemrud Dağ and Karakuş chronologically closer The creation of the latter may have been started jointly by Antiochos I and Mithradates II during their synarchy, but was completed only under the sole government of Mithradates II, since the inscriptions Ka and Kb both name him alone as consecrator 6 In both aforementioned inscriptions Mithradates II calls himself βασιλεὺς μέγας – “Great King” – and thus follows in his father’s footsteps; similarly he adopts his father’s Armenian Tiara as insignia of power 7 5 6 7 The identification of Isias, the wife of Antiochos I, mentioned in the Isias inscription with Isias Philostorgos seems almost certain ( Jacobs 2000, 301–306) With regard to the person depicted on the last ancestor stele, the assumption that a daughter of the king was represented here could be made plausible ( Jacobs 2000, 304–306), but it can hardly be decided whether Laodike ( Jacobs 2000, 305–306) or Antiochis (Facella 2006, 272–275) was depicted here Cf Jacobs 2000, 303–304 Wagner 1983, 210 Humann – Puchstein 1890, 222; Sullivan 1977, 775–776, and Jacobs 2009, 55 assumed that Mithradates was depicted with the conical tiara, the headdress also worn by the predecessors of Antiochos I The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene 233 Apart from these two connecting factors, however, there is essentially no continuity between father and son The motif of the dexiosis, in which, during the last decades, Antiochos I was shown dozens of times in a handshake with the Greco-Persian theokrasiai Zeus-Oromasdes, Apollon-Mithras-Helios-Hermes, Herakles-Artagnes-Ares, and with another female deity8, now returns to being an evocation of the farewell to a deceased, as it had been known from grave reliefs of the classical period 9 The quartet of three male gods and one female deity, which had dominated the inscriptions and monuments of Antiochos I since 62 BCE, is no longer mentioned; the then omnipresent combination of Greek and ‘Persian’ elements has disappeared The riding costume in which Mithradates is dressed on the relief at Karakuş does not invalidate this statement Although it is sometimes called Persian in written sources10, the costume has always been worn by the Commagenian rulers and therefore cannot be interpreted as a component of the Greco-Persian mixed concept designed by Antiochos I From the fact that the sanctuary on Nemrud Dağ, a project initiated by Antiochos only in the later years of his rule, remained unfinished11, it follows that Mithradates II after his father’s death quickly abandoned the programme The explanation for this is simple: Antiochos I was, on the one hand, the son of Mithradates I, who referred via his ancestors to the Armenian satrap Orontes and via him, a son-in-law of Artaxerxes II, to the Persian Achaemenid house; on the other hand, his mother Laodike had been a daughter of the Seleucid ruler Antiochos VIII Grypos These lines of descent from Persians and Hellenes, ἐμοῦ γένους εὐτυχεστάτη ῥίζα (“the most fortunate roots of my ancestry”), as Antiochos says, just came together in his person, but not in a comparably descriptive and convincing way in that of his son – a good reason for Mithradates II to cease the programme An idea of the pantheon, to which Mithradates II paid homage from then on, can be gleaned from the rock inscription of Ariaramnes, located on the right bank of the Euphrates at Damlıca 12 According to the reading of the damaged text by Sencer Şahin, Ariaramnes, son of Pallaios, possibly an architect of Mithradates II, had unfinished statues finished and erected in a sanctuary Also, he had himself installed a statue of Zeus Soter and possibly another one of a second deity, which Şahin supposed to have been Apollon Epekoos 13 The naming of Zeus with the epithet Soter, but without an Iranian name counterpart, indicates that the venerated gods were now reduced to their Greek component again, and the renunciation of the reference to a Greco-Persian descent and to all ‘Per8 9 10 11 12 13 For the interpretation of the handshake motif on reliefs of Antiochos I see Jacobs – Rollinger 2005, 150–151 Cremer 1995 Jacobs 2017, 245–247 Şahin 1991b; Jacobs 1991 Şahin 1991a, 101–105 Şahin 1991a, 105; Versluys 2017, 98 234 Bruno Jacobs sian’ details, as practiced on Karakuş, brings Mithradates II close to the beginnings of his father’s reign By abdicating the handshake with the gods and the demonstration of his own divinity, he even fell short of the pretensions his predecessor enunciated in his early years of reign, as illustrated by the stele from Sofraz Köy (fig 2)14 and by another one from Seleukeia on the Euphrates/Zeugma15, whose older inscription on the back of the stele (BEe) also dates from this early period 16 The inscription was later etched and replaced by a new one (BEc), which already presupposes Antiochos’ turn to a Greco-Persian pantheon 17 Fig. 2 Gaziantep, Arch Mus : Stele of Antiochos I from Sofraz Köy, from Wagner 2000, 16 fig 21 The Dating of the Sofraz Köy Stele Meaning and dating of the stele from Sofraz Köy have been discussed in detail by Jörg Wagner He argues that this stele does not only belong to the early years of Antiochos, but also marks the beginning of representative large-scale sculpture in Hellenistic 14 15 16 17 Wagner – Petzl 1976 Crowther – Facella 2003 Crowther – Facella 2003, 45–53 Crowther – Facella 2003, 57–61 The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene 235 Commagene Previously, reliefs had repeatedly been dated to the time of Antiochos’ predecessor Mithradates I In view of the fact that Antiochos I notes in the introductory text of the stele that he was “the first who adopted the kitaris” (πρῶτος ἀναλαβὼν τὴν κίταριν), these earlier approaches can be rejected, for all stelae, which show a ruler wearing the Armenian tiara, cannot have come into being before Antiochos’ accession to power In the end, there were no monuments left that could, with sufficient reason, be dated earlier than 70/69 BCE, the time when Antiochos should have ascended the Commagenian throne 18 Now the year 62 BCE, more precisely July 7, 62 BCE, means a terminus ante quem for the origin of the stele from Sofraz Köy That date marks a celestial event, observed and meaningfully interpreted by Antiochos’ astrologers: the planets Jupiter, Mercury and Mars simultaneously stood in the constellation Leo, whose main star is Regulus, the king’s star; the moon was also involved 19 The event is illustrated by the so-called Lion Horoscope (fig 3) It depicts the impressive figure of a lion, whose character as a constellation is illustrated by 19 eight-pointed stars The moon is introduced into the picture as a crescent hanging in front of the lion’s chest like a piece of jewellery Above the back of the lion, in the form of sixteen-pointed stars, Fig. 3 Berlin, Staatliche Museen: The so-called Lion-Horoscope from the western terrace of the sanctuary on Nemrud Dağ, plaster cast, photo and © H R Goette 18 19 Wagner 1983, 202–203 Neugebauer – van Hoesen 1959, 14–16; cf Heilen 2005 on the difficulties of fixing the date of the celestial event, if there is no time frame determined by other sources This is, however, as the present author is convinced, meanwhile given and the time frame limited to the early years of the reign of Antiochos ( Jacobs 2015, 235 n 5) 236 Bruno Jacobs Fig. 4 Nemrud Dağ, western terrace: Symbols of planets on the so-called Lion-Horoscope, photo and © B Jacobs (photo-inv 88-09-19) the three planets are indicated (fig 4), equated with Zeus, Apollo and Heracles (see below), those gods who, together with a female partner, dominated the imagery of the sanctuaries erected after this date The date of the adoption of the kitaris, as a matter of course, means a terminus post quem for the origin of the stele from Sofraz Köy Wagner has identified two possible dates within the period between 70 and 62 BCE for the adoption of this headgear: In the primary publication of the stele in 1976 he favoured 66/65 BCE, the year of the capitulation of Tigranes the Great to Pompeius20, in a later article 69/68 BCE, the year of Tigranes’ withdrawal from the areas west of the Euphrates and his defeat by Lucullus 21 Wagner connects the acceptance of the attribute μέγας – “Great” –, which Antiochos does not yet use on the stele from Sofraz Köy, with the territorial gains the Commagenian king was awarded with at the congress of Amisos in the winter of 65/64 BCE At that time Commagene was enlarged by territories in the south of the ancestral dominion including Seleukeia on the Euphrates 22 The stele from Sofraz Köy would thus have originated between 69 and 65/64 BCE The initiative to use large-scale pictorial art as a means of representation often, however, tells a success story associated with territorial gains The beginnings of Achae- 20 21 22 Wagner – Petzl 1976, 206–207 Wagner 1983, 200–203 For circumstances and duration of the affiliation of Seleukeia on the Euphrates/Zeugma to the kingdom of Commagene see Wagner 1976, 56–64; cf Wagner 1983, 203–204; French 1991 For the temporal relationship of the denominations Seleukeia on the Euphrates and Zeugma see Wagner 1976, 65–70 The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene 237 menid and Sasanid court art provide examples of this, as do the reigns of those Assyrian rulers under whom pictorial reports of deeds were created on orthostat reliefs, murals or bronze bands used to decorate city and temple gates From this point of view a dating of the stele from Sofraz Köy between 64 and 62 BCE would even be preferable 23 The previously mentioned stele from Seleukeia on the Euphrates/Zeugma, whose original text on the back corresponds to that of the stele from Sofraz Köy, can only have originated in this period The Genesis of the theokrasiai Compared with the stele from Sofraz Köy and the inscription BEe texts from the time after 62 BCE show, as is well known, the following essential changes: 1 The circle of deities distinguished by nomination evolves On the Sofraz Köy stele these are Apollon Epekoos and Artemis Diktynna, later they are Zeus-Oromasdes, Apollon-Mithras-Helios-Hermes and Herakles-Artagnes-Ares with Hera Teleia or the goddess of the home country Commagene as the single female deity 2 The male deities no longer bear purely Greek names, but theokrasiai are formed by adding an Iranian name to each of the Greek names or name combinations The canonization of the pantheon and the introduction of Greco-Iranian theokrasiai did not necessarily take place at the same time On the other hand, the preserved monuments do not give any hint that the two steps were actually chronologically separated The privilege of being mentioned by name in inscriptions since 62 BCE was given to gods who could be associated with the planets involved in the celestial event mentioned previously: Jupiter, Mercury and Mars On the lion horoscope the celestial bodies are called by epithets, which, scientifically speaking, point to their colour effect:24 from left to right these are The Fiery (Πυρόειϛ), The Glistening (Στίλβων) and The Shining (Φαέθων) 25 On the one hand, the constellation was probably perceived as so important because the celestial bodies passing Regulus were that numerous; more than half of the planets known at that time were involved On the other hand, the constellation offered possibilities of association with extraordinarily prominent representatives of the celestial sphere: Antiochos and his astrologers chose the connection of Phaëthon with Zeus (Φαέθων Διός), of Stilbon with Apollo (Στίλβων Ἀπόλλωνος) and of Pyroeis with Heracles (Πυρόειϛ Ἡρακλέ[ους]) (fig 4) 23 24 25 The assumption of the title μέγας would then not be linked to the territorial expansion Boll 1916, 19–26; Cumont 1935, 12; Hübner 2000, 1073 with fig 6 A very good reproduction is depicted in Wagner 2000, 20 fig 26 238 Bruno Jacobs Of these, only the first equating, Phaëton = Zeus, was common 26 For the other cases alternative equatings were known and apparently more popular Thus, Plutarchus gives the identifications Phaëthon = Zeus, Stilbon = Hermes and Pyroeis = Ares and traces them back to Plato 27 Particularly the equating of Stilbon with Hermes was more common than that with Apollo and can be found, for example, in Eratosthenes and Cicero 28 The Antiochian identification is occasionally cited as an alternative 29 For Pyroeis, the name Ares was the more common one, found again in Cicero 30 Pliny and others, however, mention Heracles as an alternative association31 and some trace this back to the Chaldeans and attribute the association with Ares to the Greeks 32 The more common equatings, Hermes with Stilbon and Ares with Pyroeis, were appropriated by Antiochos I in the relevant inscriptions for his theokrasiai, so that the names of the gods became composite A passage in Ps -Aristotle’s de mundo sounds like a summary of the identification possibilities considered by Antiochos: “The position nearest to this sphere is occupied by the so-called circle of the ‘Shining star’, which also bears the name of Zeus; then follows the circle of the ‘Fiery star’, called by the names both of Heracles and of Ares; next comes the ‘Glistening star’, which some call sacred to Hermes, others sacred to Apollo ”33 Up to this point only the naming of Helios in the theokrasia Apollon-MithrasHelios-Hermes remains unexplained, but the solar aspects of Apollon which are mentioned for example by Plutarch34 should be responsible for this 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 Of the numerous references only Cic Nat D 2,20,52; Apul de mundo 2; Iohannes Lydus, de mensibus 2,10, should be mentioned Occasionally Phaënon, actually Saturn, and Phaëthon were confused, for example in Eratosth Catasterismi 43; Hyg Astr 2,42 (Robert 1878, 194–195) and in Sch Germ , BP 102,10 On the problem of denomination see generally Merkelbach 1984, 55 n 13 Plut Mor 889b (= De Placitis Philosophorum 2,15,4): Πλάτων μετὰ τὴν τῶν ἀπλανῶν θέσιν πρῶτον Φαίνοντα λεγόμενον τὸν τοῦ Κρόνου, δεύτερον Φαέθοντα τὸν τοῦ Διός, τρίτον Πυρόεντα τὸν τοῦ Ἄρεος, τέταρτον Ἑωσφόρον τὸν τῆς Ἀφροδίτης, πέμπτον Στίλβοντα τὸν τοῦ Ἑρμοῦ, ἕκτον Ἥλιον, ἕβδομον Σελήνην Cf Pl epin 986a–987d Eratosth Catasterismi 43; Cic Nat D 2,20,53; Hyg Astr 2,42 (Robert 1878, 196–197); Iohannes Lydus, de mensibus 2,9; Sch Germ , BP 103,8 Apul de mundo 2 Cic Nat D 2,20,53; Plut Mor 1029B (= Compendium libri de animae procreatione in Timaeo 32 B); Plut frg 157, 5 (= Περὶ τῶν ἐν Πλαταίαις δαιδάλων 5): … ὁ δὲ πυροειδὴς Ἄρης ἐπωνόμασται; cf Iohannes Lydus, de mensibus 2,8 Eratosth Catasterismi 43; Plin HN 2,34: Tertium Martis, quod quidam Herculis vocant […]; Hyg Astr 2,42 (Robert 1878, 194–195); Apul de mundo 2; Sch Germ , BP 102,10 Macrob Sat 3,12,6: Chaldaei quoque stellam Herculis vocant, quam reliqui omnes Martis appellant; Sch Apoll Rhod 3,1377 Ps -Aristot Mund 392a: … ἐφεξῆς δὲ ὁ τοῦ Φαέθοντος καὶ Διὸς λεγόμενος, εἰθ᾽ ὁ Πυρόεις, Ἡρακλέους τε καὶ Ἄρεος προσαγορευόμενος, ἐξῆς δὲ Στίλβων, ὃν ἱερὸν Ἐρμοῦ καλοῦσιν ἔνιοι, τινὲς δὲ Ἀπόλλωνος· […] Plut mor frg 157, 5 (= Περὶ τῶν ἐν Πλαταίαις δαιδάλων 5): […] ὁ μὲν ἥλιος Ἀπόλλων κέκληται […] The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene 239 For the equating with the moon one fell back on Hera, although some other identifications would have been possible 35 The choice for Hera may have been informed mainly by the fact that at the latest with the integration of that female figure into the community of privileged gods and into the row of colossal statues at Arsameia on the Nymphaios mythological associations came to mind The appearance of the spouse of Zeus doubtlessly served to recall the kinship among the immortals, a role that must later have been taken over by the personification of Commagene 36 The fact that the supplementation of the names of the male gods by one Iranian name element each occurred in the course of this new concept is not strictly provable, but likely For the choice of the Iranian names Antiochos and his advisors could draw on discourse knowledge accessible at their time Still the 3rd c CE author Diogenes Laertius claims that already Eudoxos (of Knidos, 4th c BCE), Theopompos (of Chios, 4th c BCE) and Hermippos (of Smyrna, 3rd c BCE) equated Zeus with Oromasdes 37 Strabo, an approximate contemporary of Antiochos, announces in a well-known passage that the Persians worshipped the sun and called it Mithras 38 Both, Oromasdes and Mithras, are also documented in primary sources of Achaemenid times 39 To Heracles all this does not apply But the equating of a certain, mostly unnamed god with Heracles was popular in the Arsacid Empire, as is attested by numerous illustrations 40 In the Greek-Parthian bilingue on the thighs of the Heracles from Mesene, a well-known 35 36 37 38 39 40 Roscher, MLII,2 (1894–1897) 3182–3189 s v Mondgöttin; on Hera as moon goddess see Roscher, ML I,2 (1886–1890) 2087–2098 s v Hera Harry Falk has recently proposed August 6, 62 BCE as the date represented by the Lion relief (Falk 2015, 276–279) But as he is inclined to identify the crescent on the breast of the Lion as representing the planet Venus, albeit its divine counterpart Aphrodite is not mentioned in any inscription, the proposal seems hardly convincing Cf on this Jacobs 1998, 44–45 Diog Laert 1,8: […]· καὶ δύο κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς εἶναι ἀρχάς, ἀγαθὸν δαίμονα καὶ κακὸν δαίμονα· καὶ τῷ μὲν ὄνομα εἶναι Ζεὺς καὶ Ὠρομάσδης, τῷ δὲ Ἄρης καὶ Ἀρειμάνιος φησὶ δὲ τοῦτο καὶ Ἑρμίππος ἐν τῷ πρώτῳ περὶ Μάγων και Εὔδοξος ἐν τῇ Περιόδῳ καὶ Θεόπομπος ἐν τῇ ογδόῃ τῶν Φιλιππικῶν· – “[…]; and further that they believe in two principles, the good spirit and the evil spirit, the one called Zeus or Oromasdes, the other Hades or Arimanius This is confirmed by Hermippus in his first book about the Magi, Eudoxus in his Voyage round the World, and Theopompus in the eighth book of his Philippica” (transl R D Hicks) Also Plutarch mentions this god (Plut Alexander 30; Plut Mor 1026B = Compendium libri de animae procreatione in Timaeo 27): […] Ζωροάστρης δὲ θεὸν καὶ δαίμονα, τὸν μὲν Ὠρομάσδην καλῶν τὸν δ᾽ Ἀρειμάνιον Str 15,3,13 Auramazdā- [Oromasdes] is omnipresent in Achaemenid royal inscriptions; Miṯ/tra- [Mithras] is mentioned only in some later ones: A2Ha, A2Hb(?), A2Sa § 2, A2Sd § 2, A3Pa § 4 See, e g , rock relief at Tang-e Butān: Vanden Berghe – Schippmann 1985, 46–53 fig 4 pls 11–15; Mathiesen 1992, 125–130 figs 7–11; rock relief at Tang-e Sarvāk: Vanden Berghe – Schippmann 1985, 62–64 fig 7 pl 23; Mathiesen 1992, fig 15; von Gall 2000, 320–322 fig 1; statue and relief from Masjid-e Solaiman: Ghirshman 1976, pl LXX & 23–24; LXXXVI 1 & 25; relief from Assur: Mathiesen 1992, 193–194 no 165 fig 46; reliefs from Dura-Europos: Mathiesen 1992, 195 nos 168–169 figs 48–49 240 Bruno Jacobs bronze statuette from Seleukeia on the Tigris, the Greek version calls the depicted deity Heracles, the Parthian Vǝrǝθragna (wrtrgn) 41 Greco-Persian Gods and Ethnicity in Late-Hellenistic Commagene The recipe of the programmes for the furnishing of sanctuaries commissioned by Antiochos I since 62 BCE shows a versatile integration into the Hellenistic world and an eclectic access to very different elements, which seemed suitable to him as devices for self-presentation and for the representative design of his sanctuaries One of these elements was the Armenian tiara, the kitaris, which he adopted after the defeat of Tigranes the Great In the inscription from Sofraz Köy, the claim that he was the first to accept this headgear is in a certain way presented as one among the royal titles: ὁ κτίστης καὶ εὐεργέτης καὶ πρῶτος ἀναλαβὼν τὴν κίταριν […] The acceptance of this headgear was certainly associated with the claim to henceforth represent the central power in the middle Euphrates region 42 With the decision to take the heavenly constellation from July 7, 62 BCE as a cause to privilege Zeus as well as Apollon and Herakles and to address them by name in his inscriptions and visualise them as statues and on reliefs, Antiochos created a particularly illustrious college for himself Zeus, after all, was the highest of the gods and the two others were progenitors of important Hellenistic royal houses, for instance of the Seleucids and Attalids The information used for the design of the Iranian element within the syncretistic programme was based on knowledge that is also reflected in the work of contemporary authors like Strabo and is still found in younger authors such as Curtius Rufus or Diogenes Laertius The ‘globalization’ that is revealed here demonstrably includes direct contacts with the Parthian Empire and its ruling dynasty In the depiction of the paternal ancestors, especially in those of the Achaemenid rulers, various elements can be identified that are far closer to contemporary Parthian fashion than to that of Achaemenid times 43 Finally, the question may be posed what the intentions of the programme were Recurring in various ways to Greek traditions and to traditions called Persian it was, in the past, often understood as a means of the Commagenian ruler to make himself understandable to the powerful neighbours in the West and East, the Roman and the Parthian Empires 44 This interpretation took the imagery as a defensive strategy At the same time, it revealed a somewhat orientalist view, since it was easily assumed that the Arsacids could be addressed by references to the chronologically distant Achae- 41 42 43 44 Invernizzi 1985, 423–425, no 231 ills on p 340–341 424; Thommen 2010, 461–462; Weber 2010, 569–571 Wagner – Petzl 1976, 207; Wagner 1983, 200–201 Jacobs 2017, 237–247 Cf Jacobs 2003, 118–119 The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene 241 menids Since both great powers – in the long run particularly Rome – actually posed a threat to the sovereignty of Commagene, the idea of a defensive strategy that was to prevent a faction within the country from calling on one of its powerful neighbours to help it achieve its own goals and thus offer a pretext for military interference was actually obvious The present author connected the dividing line between possible factions with population groups that saw themselves in Greek or Iranian tradition 45 He assumed that the affinity of parts of the population to one or the other group had its roots on the one hand in an immigration of Greeks and Macedonians in the aftermath of Alexander’s conquest and of events thereafter, and on the other hand in that of Iranians during the Achaemenid period This assumption may seem obvious46, but is difficult to prove Be that as it may, the proposal cannot be invalidated by pointing out that the language spoken in the region was Aramaic – an assumption that, in itself, is not undisputed – and that the population therefore was Semitic 47 In this sense Andreas Kropp argued that Antiochos had ignored the religious traditions of his kingdom and that the Greek and Persian gods were equally alien to the native population 48 This statement inadmissibly postulates a direct correlation between language and ethnicity Beyond this it not only contradicts the present author’s assumption that there were antagonisms between groups of different ethnic origin, but also denies the existence of such groups The argumentation of Miguel John Versluys essentially postulates that ‘Greek’ and ‘Persian’ were not ethnic but exclusively social definitions As an example for this view he adduces the rulers of Egypt, who were to play a role as new pharaohs and another one as Hellenistic kings It was not by chance that the first role fell to them during the enthronement ritual in the old capital Memphis, the latter in the new foundation Alexandria 49 So their respective identities were certainly socially defined, but nevertheless not independent from the historically conditioned ethnic realities as a whole50 Versluys refers in this context to the rich name material, which shows that individuals could bear both a Greek and an Egyptian name and could assume one or another 45 46 47 48 49 50 Such a self-positioning of the inhabitants of Commagene had not necessarily to be equated with corresponding ethnic affiliation; see also the explanations of van der Spek 2009, 102–105 on “multiple ethnic identities” Cf the corresponding considerations of Joannès and Clarke and Jackson on Hellenistic Mesopotamia and Syria ( Joannès 2014, 111–112; Clarke – Jackson 2014, 98) Kropp 2013, 23 with n 116 358 with n 94 According to Millar 1993, 452–456 there is, however, no proof that the indigenous population spoke Aramaic Kropp 2013, 314–315 Versluys 2017, 142–143 Cf Landvatter 2018 who understands the burial practice of cremation in the cemetery of Shatby in Alexandria, as opposed to inhumation, as a rejection of Egyptian practice Regarding the identity of those who chose this form of burial the aim was, as Landvatter explains, a demonstration of being an ‘immigrant’ rather than decidedly ‘Macedonian’ or ‘Greek’ 242 Bruno Jacobs identity depending on the situation, for which the author adopts the linguistic term code-switching 51 The limits of the viability of such a comparison become apparent when one looks at the situation in Babylonia, where also Greeks and an old-established population lived together Here, too, name material is available, albeit to a lesser extent Gagik Sarkisian argued for Southern Mesopotamian Uruk that the Greeks, most of whom were domiciled there by Seleukos I Nikator, formed their own colony and became involved in the business life of the city only from the third quarter of the 3rd c BCE, because only from this time onwards did their names appear in the cuneiform documents From this time onwards there are occasional mixed marriages, some Babylonian inhabitants of Uruk adopted a second, Greek name and sometimes give Greek names to their children 52 In the time of Antiochos IV there was a further influx of Greeks 53 Susan Sherwin-White and Tom Boiy have both dealt with the Akkadian-Greek and Greek-Akkadian double names The first scholar confirms that the bearers of double names usually came from Babylonian families 54 Boiy lists 17 Akkadian-Greek personal names; they mostly originate from the first half of the 2nd c BCE and concentrate strongly on Uruk 55 Boiy explains this with the fact that here – in contrast to Babylon, for example – most of the documents that came to us originate from family archives 56 The assumption of a Greek name may have been an expression of a certain Hellenization 57 Despite this, the site of Uruk has not yielded archaeological traces of cultural Hellenization The presence of Greeks in Babylonia was widespread 58 Thus, under Seleukos III (225–223 BCE) they are attested at Larsa and a clay-tablet, which Bernard Haussoullier showed to have originated from the German excavations in Babylon, lists a number of epheboi and neoi who won victories in sporting competitions, all of whom bear Greek names 59 In the material from Babylon there are, at best, two Akkadian-Greek double names: Marduk-erība = Heliodoros and Aristeas = Ardi-Belīt 60 Like the persons with double 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Versluys 2017, 147 Sarkisian 1974; Boiy 2005, 57 Sarkisian 1974 Sherwin-White 1983, esp 211 Boiy 2005, 49–50 54 Boiy 2005, 56; cf Sherwin-White 1983, 216 In the case of Uruk, the holders of double names are members of the Aḫûtu family (Boiy 2005, 57) Sherwin-White 1983, 212 218; Boiy 2005, 290 McEwan 1982, 66, no 26; Sherwin-White 1983, 217 Haussoullier 1909, 352 Boiy 2004, 290; cf Sherwin-White 1983 The latter notes that the provenance of a clay vessel lid with the Greek inscription ΑΡΙΣΤΕΑΣ ΩΙ ΑΛΛΟ ΟΝΟΜΑ ΑΡΔΙΒΗΛΤΕΙΟΣ in the Yale Babylonian Collection (MLC 2632) is uncertain The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene 243 names from Uruk, they may have had a double identity, and they may have acted on one occasion under the Babylonian, on another under the Greek name A Greek name could, Sherwin-White supposes, help to achieve or to defend a political position 61 In Babylon the Hellenization, suggested by the choice of names, manifests itself also in the archaeological record: a theatre and a palaestra are known, and two private houses with peristyles came to light in the district of Merkes Diodorus also mentions an agora 62 Several other finds of Greek character have come to light 63 These observations about the different places cast an iridescent light on the relationships between the natives and the immigrated Greeks Robartus van der Spek has dealt with this topic in several articles 64 As others did in relation to Uruk, van der Spek believes that under Antiochos IV a (renewed) influx of Greeks could be observed in Babylon 65 The Greek community appears in the sources as puliṭe or puliṭāni and had its centre in the theatre, called bīt tamarti, “house of observation”, a calque translation of the Greek theatron It was subject to the pāhāt Bābili, which may have corresponded to an epistates, while the group of long-established Babylonians had its center in the bīt milki, the “house of deliberation”, and followed a šatammu, the administrative head (of the temple), and the kiništu, the council (of the temple) 66 On a clay tablet in the British Museum, the so-called Greek Community Chronicle, Greeks in Babylon occur as those “who anoint with oil just like the pol[itai] who are in Seleukeia, the royal city, on the Tigris and the King’s Canal ” The Greeks were thus perceived as those who practiced sport in the palaestra and oiled themselves for it 67 The result is a picture of urban communities that are politically and socially clearly separated from each other The same Chronicle also makes it clear that the coexistence of the various groups, even if marriages were possible, did not take place without conflict, but rather led to confrontations and even violence 68 In the examples quoted it appears that the coexistence of Greeks and natives in the various places looked quite different Is there comparable information about the conditions in late-Hellenistic Commagene? Here the case of Seleukeia on the Euphrates/ Zeugma may be relevant Seleukeia was a foundation of Seleukos I Nikator and seems incipiently only to have ensured control over the Euphrates crossing, which was se- 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 Sherwin-White 1983, 218; cf Boiy 2005, 58 Diod Sic 34/35,21 Boiy 2004, 290–291; 2005, 58 On the difficulty to establish cultural and ethnic identities from material remains alone see Clarke – Jackson 2014 van der Spek 2001; van der Spek 2006; van der Spek 2009 Cf Boiy 2004, 207–209, who connects this settling with Antiochos III van der Spek 2009, 108–109 London, Brit Mus BM 33870: van der Spek 2004; van der Spek 2009, 108 On palaestrae as “being quintessentially Greek” see Clarke – Jackson 2014, 103–104 See also on this the Greek Community Chronicle which mentions an armed conflict: van der Spek 2004; Finkel et al forthcoming, 314, l 7 244 Bruno Jacobs cured here by a fortification 69 In contrast, a numerically significant Greek population was found in Apameia on the left bank of the river, which also owed its origin to Seleukos I 70 According to Catherine Abadie-Reynal the city developed typical early-Hellenistic characteristics, especially by its layout according to the Hippodamian system 71 The oldest evidence of occupation at Seleukeia dates back to the end of the 3rd c BCE The second half of the 2nd and the first half of the 1st c BCE saw a dynamic development and a considerable expansion of the settlement area This has been attributed to an influx of immigrants, most likely caused by refugees from Apameia who gave way to Parthian threats A layer of destruction testifies to violent clashes over Apameia 72 The organization of urban space in Seleukeia, however, did not develop in a similarly organized way as in Apameia, but more freely It has in the past been tried to locate a theatre, agorai, a bouleuterion, a gymnasion and a stadion as evidence of a cultural Hellenization, but, as William Aylward states, “none of these has been proven by excavation”73 After all, as he admits in the same context, there is an epigraphic hint to a bouleuterion, since an inscription refers to a boule of the people In connection with some of the seating steps excavated in 2004, he speaks cautiously of a theatre-like building, which, however, cannot be proven to have been “an arena of spectacle” Moreover, this building certainly cannot be dated to the epoch relevant in our context, but probably to only around 100 CE 74 Despite all this the question arises whether, if the above favoured dating of the stele from Sofraz Köy – and of that from Seleukeia on the Euphrates/Zeugma with the essentially same text – after the congress of Amisos is correct, the assumption of the title philhellen (φιλέλλην) could be connected with the gain of Seleukeia on the Euphrates/ Zeugma Philhellen has been widely discussed as an element of the titles of the Arsacids One view is that the title is owed to a political attention of Mithradates I (171–139/38 BCE) and his successors to the strong Greek population element within their empire 75 This notion goes against the opinion that, given the assumption of numerous institutions and practices from the Seleucids – titles and insignia of rule, institutions in administration and army as well as the coinage –, the assumption of the title philhellen also was a concession to the Greek cultural dominance 76 Antonio Invernizzi has put forward 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 Abadie-Reynal 2015, 825 Plin HN 5,33; cf App Syr 11,9 Abadie-Reynasl – Gaborit 2003, 150–153 Abadie-Reynal 2015, 825–826; cf Abadie-Reynal – Gaborit 2003, 156 The existence of a theatre on the northern slope of Belkis Tepe has been supposed by Algaze et al 1994, 34, and Kennedy – Kennedy 1998, 53 fig 3,2; excavation by Abadie-Reynal – Güllüce 2005, 357–364; Önal 2012, 198 speaks decidedly of a theatre; doubts were articulated by Aylward 2013, 15 Abadie-Reynal – Güllüce 2005, 363–364 Wolski 1983; Wolski 1989, 442; Dąbrowa 1998 Wiesehöfer 2000; Wiesehöfer 2014 The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene 245 a compromise in saying that Mithradates’ self-designation as philhellen “masks his request or pretension of the support and imperial recognition by the flourishing Greek communities of Asia, in whose hands especially was the culture of the time, in particular the culture based on images ”77 As for Antiochos, the task of integrating a new territory, and in particular a city strongly marked by a Greek-Macedonian population, into his empire might have suggested the adoption of the title philhellen For this measure a parallel can be named: It seems that the Nabataean ruler Aretas III accepted the same title on the occasion of his acquisition of Damascus in 84 BCE or a little later78, as coins of the city with the inscription βασιλέως Ἀρέτου φιλέλληνος suggest 79 An ethnically Greek part of the population as a potential addressee of the decorative programmes of Antiochos can therefore hardly be denied According to the statement of Invernizzi quoted above, one may wonder to what extent the acquisition of Seleukeia on the Euphrates facilitated the realisation of the pictorial agenda Antiochos had in mind It is more difficult to answer the question of whether the Persian elements in those decorative programmes for their part resonated with a population element that saw itself in Iranian tradition Matthew Canepa’s remarks seek a different explanation for their existence He argues that the Greek element, i e language and visual forms as well as “the half-remembered traditions of the Persian Empire […]” played an “important role as a common field in which to conceptualize royal power and contest legitimacy”80 In this context the Persian traditions served to articulate “rival claims of power, legitimacy and independence” towards the Seleucids and later the Romans 81 The question is, however, whether the recourse to the Persians of Achaemenid times, which is not quite self-evident in view of the temporal distance, is sufficiently motivated by the genealogy of the ruler alone, especially since Mithradatids, Ariarathids and Artaxiads proceeded similarly The names of the dynasties and of numerous of their representatives refer to this ancestry Unfortunately, Iranian name material from other social strata of late-Hellenistic Commagene is sparse This is regrettable, even though one must always bear in mind that it is not permissible to infer from the occurrence of an Iranian name the ethnicity of its bearer This is – despite the fact that not every member of a Commagenian military unit was recruited in Commagene – shown by the example of a horseman belonging to the cohort II Flavia Commagenor(um) named Zaccas[?], son of Pallaeus, stationed in Dacia in 123 CE Zaccas[?] had six children with his wife Iulia Florentina, 77 78 79 80 81 Invernizzi 2011, 135 Hackl et al 2003, 38–39; Keller 2003, 142–144 Meshorer 1975, 86 nos 5–6 pl 1 Canepa 2017, 202–204 Canepa 2017, 202 246 Bruno Jacobs three sons named Sabinus, Zabaeus and Achilles and three daughters named Arsama, Abisalma and Sabina 82 So two of the children had a Latin, one a Greek, two a Semitic and one an Iranian name It is not to be underestimated as an indication of the importance of Iranian tradition when, still in the 2nd c CE, parents gave one of their children the Iranian name Arsama 83 Here Mitridates,84 the name of a soldier of the cohort I Commagenorum, likewise attested by an inscription, has to be lined up Also another Mithridates is to be mentioned, named in an inscription on a funerary altar, possibly from Sofraz, dated to around the middle of the 1st c CE Finally returning to late-Hellenistic Commagene, reference should be made to the aforementioned architect Ariaramnes,85 the son of a certain Pallaios It can hardly be denied that Persian rule under the Achaemenids had an influence on the population structure in the subjugated provinces 86 Christoph Michels defined the “immigration of ‘Iranians’” as one of three aspects of Achaemenid rule; the two others are “the impact on the religious landscape” and “structural changes concerning the administration ”87 While the grandchildren of the immigrants of Greco-Macedonian origin, as the examples of Babylonia and the case of Seleukeia on the Euphrates show, were often still recognizable as a group, little can be said about the descendants of the once immigrated ‘Iranians’ in this respect and this is all the more so as the use of Iranian names in a completely altered historical landscape steadily declined 88 Nevertheless, the occurence of Iranian names, still ascertainable in the 1st c BCE and later, is in some way their legacy Examples from the late-Hellenistic period can also be cited for the impact on the religious landscape, for instance a bilingual Aramaic-Greek rock inscription at Faraşa in Cappadocia According to it, a certain Sagarios, son of Maiphernes and strategos of Ariaramneia, performed magical rites for the god Mithras 89 For Cappadocia Strabo reports that there were many sanctuaries consecrated to Persian gods 90 The Persian gods, whom Antiochos called to his pantheon, may therefore well have 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 Pferdehirt 2004, no 22: ex equite Zaccae Pallaei f(ilio) Syro et Iuliae Bithi fil(iae) F<l>orentinae uxor(i) eius Bess(ae) et Arsamae f(iliae) eius et Abisalmae f(iliae) eius et Sabino f(ilio) eius et Zabaeo f(ilio) eius et Achilleo f(ilio) eius et Sabinae fil(iae) eius Yon 2018, 175 Cf the corresponding male name in Old Persian: Tavernier 2007, 1 2 3 : Aršāma- – “having a hero’s strength” AE 1938, 6; Yon 2018, 175 Regarding the name see, Tavernier 2007, 4 2 1109 : *Miṯradāta- – “given by Mithra” Tavernier 2007, 1 2 6 : Aryāramna- – “who creates peace for the Arians” Speidel 2005, 90; on Iranian presence in Asia Minor in the Achaemenid period Jacobs 2015, 101– 102 Michels 2017, 41 See the change of character of the names that were given to the members of a family traceable over seven generations: Schmitz et al 1988, 86–89 91–95 Vermaseren 1956, 19; Donner – Röllig 1966–69, no 265; Michels 2017, 45: Σαγάριος Μαι[φά]ρνου στρατηγ[ό]ς Ἀριαραμνεί(ας) ἐμάγευσε Μίθρηι // sgr br mhyprn rb hy[l]’ mgyš [lm]trh Str 15,3,15: Ἐν δὲ τῇ Καππαδοκίᾳ – πολὺ γὰρ ἐκεῖ τὸ τῶν Μάγων φῦλον (οἳ καὶ Πύραιθοι καλοῦνται), πολλὰ δὲ καὶ τῶν Περσικῶν θεῶν ἱερά – […] The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene 247 been familiar to parts of the population That with the integration of Iranian elements into the naming of the gods worshipped by Antiochos followers of those ‘Persian’ cults were, i a , addressed and in a certain way privileged, may have been favoured by the genealogy of the ruler Bibliography Abadie-Reynal 2015: C Abadie-Reynal, Les fouilles de sauvetage de Zeugma: un bilan des résultats, JRA 28, 2015, 821–845 Abadie-Reynal – Gaborit 2003: C Abadie-Reynal – J Gaborit, Le développement urbain en Syrie du Nord: Étude des cas de Séleucie et d’Apamée de l’Euphrate, in: La Syrie hellénistique, Topoi Suppl 4, (Paris 2003) 149–169 Abadie-Reynal – Güllüce et al 2005: C Abadie-Reynal – H Güllüce et al , Zeugma: Rapport sur la campagne de 2004, Anatolia Antiqua 13, 2005, 357–364 Algaze et al 1994: G Algaze – R Breuninger – J Knudstad, The Tigris-Euphrates Archaeological Reconnaissance Project Final Report of the Birecik and Carchemish Dam Survey Areas, Anatolica 20, 1994, 1–96 Aylward 2013: W Aylward, Excavations at Zeugma Conducted by Oxford Archaeology 1 (Los Altos 2013) Boiy 2004: T Boiy, Late Achaemenid and Hellenistic Babylon, OLA 136 (Leuven 2004) Boiy 2005: T Boiy, Akkadian-Greek Double Names in Hellenistic Babylonia, in: W H van Soldt (ed ), Ethnicity in Ancient Mesopotamia Papers Read at the 48th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Leiden, 1–4 July 2002, PIHANS 102 (Leiden 2005) 47–60 Boll 1916: F Boll, Antike Beobachtungen farbiger Sterne, Abhandlungen der Königlich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften – Philosophisch-philologische und historische Klasse 30 (München 1916) Brijder 2014: H A G Brijder, Nemrud Dağı Recent Archaeological Research and Conservation Activities in the Tomb Sanctuary on Mount Nemrud (Boston 2014) Brown 2018: D Brown, The Interactions of Ancient Astral Science (Bremen 2018) Canepa 2017: M Canepa, Rival Images of Iranian Kingship and Persian Identity in Post-Achaemenid Western Asia, in: R Strootman – M J Versluys (eds ), Persianism in Antiquity, Oriens et Occidens 25 (Stuttgart 2017) 201–222 Clarke – Jackson 2014: G Clarke – H Jackson, Evaluating Cultural and Ethnic Identities from Archaeological Remains The Case of Hellenistic Jebel Khalid, in: P Leriche (ed ), Art et civilisation de l’Orient hellénisé Rencontres et échanges culturels d’Alexandre aux Sassanides Hommages à Daniel Schlumberger (Paris 2014) 97–110 Cremer 1995: M Cremer, Die Dexiosis auf hellenistischen Grabstelen, in: E Winter (ed ), Studien zum antiken Kleinasien 3, AMS 16 (Bonn 1995) 1–7 Crowther – Facella 2003: C Crowther – M Facella, New Evidence for the Ruler Cult of Antiochus of Commagene from Zeugma, in: G Heedemann – E Winter (eds ), Neue Forschungen zur Religionsgeschichte Kleinasiens Elmar Schwertheim zum 60 Geburtstag gewidmet, AMS 49 (Bonn 2003) 41–80 Cumont 1935: F Cumont, Les noms des planètes et l’astrolatrie chez les Grecs, AntCl 4, 1935, 5–43 Dąbrowa 1998: E Dąbrowa, Philhellèn – Mithridate Ier et les Grecs, in: E Dąbrowa (ed ), Ancient Iran and the Mediterranean World Proceedings of an International Conference in Honour of 248 Bruno Jacobs Professor Józef Wolski Held at the Jagiellonian University, Cracow, in September 1996, Electrum Studies in Ancient History 2 (Cracow 1998) 35–44 Donner – Röllig 1966–69: H Donner – W Röllig, Kanaanäische und aramäische Inschriften 1–3 2 (Wiesbaden 1966–1969) Facella 2006: M Facella, La dinastia degli Orontidi nella Commagene ellenistico-romana, Studi Ellenistici 17 (Pisa 2006) Falk 2015: H Falk, Kushan Rule Granted by Nana The Background of a Heavenly Legitimation, in: H Falk (ed ), Kushan Histories Literary Sources and Selected Papers from a Symposium at Berlin, December 5 to 7, 2013, Monographien zur Indischen Archäologie, Kunst und Philologie 23 (Bremen 2015) 265–299 Finkel et al forthcoming: I L Finkel – R J van der Spek – R Pirngruber, Babylonian Chronographic Texts from the Hellenistic Period 14 French 1991: D French, Commagene Territorial Definitions, in: Studien zum antiken Kleinasien Friedrich Karl Dörner zum 80 Geburtstag gewidmet, AMS 3 (Bonn 1991) 11–19 Ghirshman 1976: R Ghirshman, Terrasses sacrés de Bard-è Néchandeh et Masjid-i Solaiman L’Iran du Sud-Ouest du VIIIe s av n ère au Ve s de n ère 2, Mémoires de la Délégation Archéologique en Iran 45 (Paris 1976) Hackl et al 2003: U Hackl – H Jenni – C Schneider, Quellen zur Geschichte der Nabatäer Textsammlung mit Übersetzung und Kommentar, Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus 51 (Fribourg 2003) Haussoullier 1909: B Haussoullier, Inscriptions grecques de Babylone, Klio 9, 1909, 352–363 Heilen 2005: S Heilen, Zur Deutung und Datierung des ‘Löwenhoroskops’ auf dem Nemrud Dağı, EpigrAnat 38, 2005, 145–158 Hübner 2000: DNP IX (2000) 1063–1079 s v Planeten (W Hübner) Humann – Puchstein 1890: K Humann – O Puchstein, Reisen in Kleinasien und Nordsyrien (Berlin 1890) Invernizzi 1985: A Invernizzi, Heracles at Rest, in: E Quarantelli (ed ), The Land between Two Rivers Twenty Years of Italian Archaeology in the Middle East The Treasures of Mesopotamia (Turin 1985) 423–425, no 231 Invernizzi 2011: A Invernizzi, Parthian Art Arsacid Art, Topoi 17, 2011, 189–207 Jacobs 1991: B Jacobs, Forschungen in Kommagene 3 Archäologie, EpigrAnat 18, 1991, 133–140 Jacobs 1998: B Jacobs, Zur relativen Datierung einiger kommagenischer Heiligtümer Sofraz Köy – Samosata – Arsameia am Nymphaios – Nemrud Dağı, Veröffentlichungen der Joachim Jungius-Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften 87, 1998, 37–47 Jacobs 2000: B Jacobs, Die Reliefs der Vorfahren des Antiochos I von Kommagene auf dem Nemrud Dağı Versuch einer Neubenennung der Frauendarstellungen in den mütterlichen Ahnenreihen, IstMitt 50, 2000, 297–306 Jacobs 2003: B Jacobs, Überlegungen zur Ursachen und Gründen für die Konzeption von Heiligtumsausstattungen in der späthellenistischen Kommagene, in: K. S. Freyberger – A. Henning – H. von Hesberg (eds.), Kulturkonflikte im Vorderen Orient an der Wende vom Hellenismus zur römischen Kaiserzeit, Orient-Archäologie 11 (Rahden 2003) 117–123 Jacobs 2009: B Jacobs, Die Investiturszenen vom Nemrud Dağı, in: R Einicke – S Lehmann – H Löhr – G Mehnert – A Mehnert – A Slawisch (eds ), Zurück zum Gegenstand Festschrift für Andreas E Furtwängler 1 (Langenweißbach 2009) 51–57 Jacobs 2015: B Jacobs, Zur bildlichen Repräsentation iranischer Eliten im achämenidenzeitlichen Kleinasien, in: S Farridnejad – R Gyselen – A Joisten-Pruschke (eds ), Faszination Iran The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene 249 Beiträge zur Religion, Geschichte und Kunst des Alten Iran Gedenkschrift für Klaus Schippmann, Göttinger Orientforschungen 3 Reihe Iranica 13 (Wiesbaden 2015) 101–128 Jacobs 2017: B Jacobs, Tradition oder Fiktion? Die “persischen” Elemente in den Ausstattungsprogrammen Antiochos’ I von Kommagene, in: R Strootman – M J Versluys (eds ), Persianism in Antiquity, Oriens et Occidens 25 (Stuttgart 2017) 235–248 Jacobs – Rollinger 2005: B Jacobs – R Rollinger, Die ‘himmlischen Hände’ der Götter Zu zwei neuen Datierungsvorschlägen für die kommagenischen Reliefstelen, Parthica 7, 2005, 137–154 Joannès 2014: F Joannès, La Mésopotamie à l’époque séleucide, in: P Leriche (ed ), Art et civilisation de l’Orient hellénisé Rencontres et échanges culturels d’Alexandre aux Sassanides Hommages à Daniel Schlumberger (Paris 2014) 111–116 Keller 2003: D Keller, B 003 01 Griechisch beschriftete Münzen Aretas’ III von Damaskus, in: U Hackl – H Jenni – C Schneider, Quellen zur Geschichte der Nabatäer Textsammlung mit Übersetzung und Kommentar, Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus 51 (Fribourg 2003) 142–144 Kennedy – Kennedy 1998: D L Kennedy – J Kennedy, The Twin Towns and the Region, in: D Kennedy (ed ), The Twin Towns of Zeugma on the Euphrates Rescue Work and Historical Studies, JRA Suppl 27 (Portsmouth 1998) 31–60 Kropp 2013: A J M Kropp, Images and Monuments of Near Eastern Dynasts, 100 BC – AD 100, Oxford Studies in Ancient Culture and Representation (Oxford 2013) Landvatter 2018: T Landvatter, Identity and Cross-Cultural Interaction in Early Ptolemaic Alexandria Cremation in Context, in: P McKechnie – J A Cromwell (eds ), Ptolemy I and the Transformation of Egypt, 404–282 BCE, Mnemosyne Suppl 415 (Leiden) 199–234 Mathiesen 1992: H E Mathiesen, Sculpture in the Parthian Empire A Study in Chronology 2 Catalogue (Aarhus 1992) McEwan 1982: G J P McEwan, Texts from Hellenistic Babylonia in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford Editions of Cuneiform Texts 9 (Oxford 1982) Merkelbach 1984: R Merkelbach, Mithras (Hain 1984) Meshorer 1975: Y Meshorer, Nabataean Coins, Qedem 3 ( Jerusalem 1975) Michels 2017: C Michels, The Persian Impact on Bithynia, Commagene, Pontus, and Cappadocia, in: S Müller – T Howe – H Bowden – R Rollinger (eds ), The History of the Argeads New Perspectives, Classica er Orientalia 19 (Wiesbaden 2017) 41–56 Millar 1993: F Millar, The Roman Near East 31 BC – AD 337 (Cambridge/MA 1993) Neugebauer – van Hoesen 1959: O Neugebauer – H B van Hoesen, Greek Horoscopes, Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society 48 (Philadelphia 1959) Önal 2012: M Önal, Tonsiegel aus dem Archiv von Doliche im Archäologischen Museum von Gaziantep, in: J Wagner (ed ), Gottkönige am Euphrat Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Kommagene 2(Mainz 2012) 173–180 Pferdehirt 2004: B Pferdehirt, Römische Militärdiplome und Entlassungsurkunden in der Sammlung des Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums (Mainz 2004) Riedel 2018: S Riedel, Commagenian Glocalization and the Matter of Perception An Innovative Royal Portrait from Samosata, IstMitt 68, 2018, 87–142 Robert 1878: C Robert, Eratosthenis Catasterismorum Reliquiae (Berlin 1878) Şahin 1991a: S Şahin, Forschungen in Kommagene 1 Epigraphik, EpigrAnat 18, 1991, 99–113 Şahin 1991b: S Şahin, Forschungen in Kommagene 2 Topographie, EpigrAnat 18, 1991, 114–132 Sarkisian 1974: Greek Personal Names in Uruk and the Graeco-Babyloniaca Problem, ActaAntHung 22, 1974, 495–503 250 Bruno Jacobs Schmitz et al 1988: G Schmitz – S Şahin – J Wagner, Ein Grabaltar mit einer genealogischen Inschrift aus Kommagene, EpigrAnat 11, 1988, 81–96 Sherwin-White 1983: S Sherwin-White, Aristeas Ardibelteios Some Aspects of the Use of Double Names in Seleucid Babylonia, ZPE 50, 1983, 209–221 Speidel 2005: M A Speidel, Early Roman Rule in Commagene, ScrClIsr 24, 2005, 85–100 Sullivan 1977: R D Sullivan, The Dynasty of Commagene, in: H Temporini – W Haase (eds ), ANRW 2, 8 (Berlin 1977) 732–798 Tavernier 2007: J Tavernier, Iranica in the Achaemenid Period (ca 550–330 B C ) Lexicon of Old Iranian Proper Names and Loanwords, Attested in Non-Iranian Texts, OLA 158 (Leuven 2007) Thommen 2010: L Thommen, III 1 3 E 3 Griechisch-parthische Bilingue auf einem Bronze-Herakles von Mesene aus Seleukia am Tigris (151 n Chr ), in: U Hackl – B Jacobs – D Weber (eds ), Quellen zur Geschichte des Partherreiches Textsammlung mit Übersetzungen und Kommentaren 2, Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus 84 (Göttingen 2010) 461–462 van der Spek 2001: R J van der Spek, The Theatre of Babylon in Cuneiform, in: W H van Soldt (ed ), Veenhof Anniversary Volume Studies Presented to Klaas R Veenhof on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, PIHANS 89 (Leiden 2001) 445–456 van der Spek 2004: R J van der Spek, Greek Community Chronicle, in: I Finkel – R J van der Spek, Babylonian Chronicles of the Hellenistic Period, <http://www livius org/cg-cm/ chronicles/bchp-greeks/greeks_01 html> (last access July 2019) van der Spek 2006: R van der Spek, Grieken in de ogen van Babyloniërs, Leidschrift 21, 2006, 139–156 van der Spek 2009: R van der Spek, Multi-Ethnicity and Ethnic Segregation in Hellenistic Babylon, in: T Derks – N Roymans (eds ), Ethnic Constructs in Antiquity The Role of Power and Tradition, Amsterdam Archaeological Studies 13 (Amsterdam 2009) 101–115 Vanden Berghe – Schippmann 1985: L Vanden Berghe – K Schippmann, Les reliefs rupestres d’Elymaïde (Irān) de l’époque parthe, IrAnt Suppl 3 (Gent 1985) Vermaseren 1956: M J Vermaseren, Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum Religionis Mithriacae 1 (The Hague 1956) Versluys 2017: M J Versluys, Visual Style and Constructing Identity in the Hellenistic World Nemrud Dağ and Commagene under Antiochus I (Cambridge 2017) von Gall 2000: H von Gall, Das parthische Felsheiligtum von Tang-e Sarwak in der Elymais (Khuzestan), AMIT 32, 2000, 319–359 Wagner 1976: J Wagner, Seleukia am Euphrat/Zeugma, TAVO Beih B 10 (Wiesbaden 1976) Wagner 1983: J Wagner, Dynastie und Herrscherkult in Kommagene Forschungsgeschichte und neuere Funde, IstMitt 20, 1983, 177–224 Wagner 2000: J Wagner (ed ), Gottkönige am Euphrat – Neue Ausgrabungen und Forschungen in Kommagene, Zaberns Bildbände zur Archäologie (Mainz 2000) Wagner – Petzl 1976: J Wagner – G Petzl, Eine neue Temenos-Stele des Königs Antiochos I von Kommagene, ZPE 20, 1976, 201–223 Waldmann 1991: H Waldmann, Der kommagenische Mazdaismus, IstMitt Beih 37 (Tübingen 1991) Weber 2010: D Weber, III 2 6 Die Herakles-Bilingue (parth ), in: U Hackl – B Jacobs – D Weber (eds ), Quellen zur Geschichte des Partherreiches Textsammlung mit Übersetzungen und Kommentaren 2, Novum Testamentum et Orbis Antiquus 84 (Göttingen 2010) 569–571 Wiesehöfer 2000: J Wiesehöfer, “Denn Orodes war der griechischen Sprache und Literatur nicht unkundig …” Parther, Griechen und griechische Kultur, in: R Dittmann – B Hrouda – U The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene 251 Löw – P Matthiae – R Mayer-Opificius – S Thürwächter (eds ), Variatio Delectat Iran und der Westen Gedenkschrift für Peter Calmeyer, AOAT 272 (Münster 2000) 703–721 Wiesehöfer 2014: J Wiesehöfer, Griechenfreunde – Griechenfeinde Zum Verhältnis der Arsakiden zu ihren griechischen Untertanen, in: B Jacobs (ed ), “Parthische Kunst” – Kunst im Partherreich Akten des Internationalen Kolloquiums in Basel, 9 Oktober 2010 (Duisburg 2014) 11–32 Wolski 1983: J Wolski, Sur le “philhellénisme” des Arsacides, Gerion 1, 1985, 145–156 Wolski 1989: J Wolski, L’hellénisme et l’Iran, in: M M Mactoux – E Geny (eds ), Mélanges Pierre Lévèque 3 Anthropologie et société, Centre de recherches d’histoire ancienne 82 (Besançon 1989) Yon 2018: J -B Yon, L’histoire par les noms Histoire et onomastique de la Palmyrène à la Houte Mésopotamie romaines, Bibliothèque Archéologique et Historique 212 (Beyrouth 2018) Bruno Jacobs Professor for Ancient Near Eastern Studies University of Basel bruno jacobs@unibas ch