Sources, Volume IX
The Edges of Empire
How to weigh the evidence for this room, where to read the texts, and what survives for each of its six bays.
How to read the evidence
Evidence for the fragmentary Thracian, Illyrian, Iberian, Caucasian, Ossetian, and Amazigh traditions at and beyond the classical empires’ frontiers should be read in a hierarchy: dated and provenanced primary objects first; critically edited literary or ritual texts second; ancient reception and interpretation third; modern synthesis last.
Read the texts online
Further reading
- Colarusso, John, trans. Nart Sagas from the Caucasus. Princeton University Press, 2002.
- Fol, Alexander. Thracian Orphism. Sofia Press, 1991.
- Olivares Pedreño, Juan Carlos. Los dioses de la Hispania céltica. Real Academia de la Historia, 2002.
- Ustinova, Yulia. The Supreme Gods of the Bosporan Kingdom. Brill, 1999.
- West, M. L. The East Face of Helicon. Clarendon Press, 1997.
- Brett, Michael, and Elizabeth Fentress. The Berbers. Blackwell, 1996.
- Chaker, Salem. Berbères aujourd’hui. L’Harmattan, 1989.
- Tuite, Kevin. An Anthology of Georgian Folk Poetry. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1994.
- Almagro-Gorbea, Martín. Celtas y vettones. Diputación Provincial de Ávila, 2001.
- Wilkes, J. J. The Illyrians. Blackwell, 1992.
The Thracian Pantheon
What survives
- Local inscriptions
- Theonym, language, findspot, date, and dedicant are the secure core; expansion into narrative requires independent evidence.
- Greek and Roman ethnography
- External description and interpretatio preserve otherwise lost information but carry political and literary framing.
- Coins and reliefs
- These date public iconography and civic identity, though visual resemblance alone cannot name an unlabeled god.
- Archaeology and landscape
- Sanctuaries, deposits, tombs, springs, peaks, and domestic contexts establish practice without guaranteeing mythology.
- Medieval chronicles and epics
- These are primary evidence for their own periods and possible reception, not automatic transcripts of the Iron Age.
- Modern oral collection
- Recorded performance is invaluable; collectors, translation, nationalism, and time depth must remain part of the apparatus.
- Herodotus and classical authors
- Early but external witnesses whose ethnographic framing must remain visible.
- Inscriptions and reliefs
- Primary for local names, epithets, dedicants, and the Rider tradition.
- Royal tomb archaeology
- Elite ritual and iconography without automatic named identification.
Entry by entry (6)
- Bendis §1.1 Bendis is documented chiefly through the Athenian Bendideia (Plato, Republic 327a-328a; Xenophon, Hellenica 2.4.11; numerous Athenian inscriptions, particularly IG II² 1283 and 1284, which preserve the regulations of the cult-association), through Thracian coins (the standard reference is the Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum series), and through votive reliefs from the Greek-Thracian frontier zone.
- Zalmoxis §1.2 The principal sources are Herodotus 4.94-96 (the foundational passage), Plato's Charmides 156d-157c (the Thracian doctor), Strabo 7.3.5 (the historiographical tradition), and Diogenes Laertius 8.2 (the Pythagorean connection).
- Kotys §1.3 The principal sources are Aeschylus, Edonians (TrGF F57); Strabo (10.3.16); Eupolis, Baptai (fragments preserved in the Suda and elsewhere); Synesius's references in his Encomium of Baldness.
- Derzelas §1.4 Derzelas is documented chiefly through Odessan inscriptions and coinage; the standard reference is Dimitar Detschew's Die thrakischen Sprachreste (1957) and the various Bulgarian-language scholarship on Odessan religion.
- Pleistoros §1.5 The principal source is Herodotus 9.119 (the Oeobazus sacrifice).
- The Thracian Horseman §1.6 The Thracian Horseman corpus comprises some three thousand reliefs catalogued in the Corpus Cultus Equitis Thracii (G. I. Kazarow and others, 1938 onwards).
The Illyrian Pantheon
What survives
- Local inscriptions
- Theonym, language, findspot, date, and dedicant are the secure core; expansion into narrative requires independent evidence.
- Greek and Roman ethnography
- External description and interpretatio preserve otherwise lost information but carry political and literary framing.
- Coins and reliefs
- These date public iconography and civic identity, though visual resemblance alone cannot name an unlabeled god.
- Archaeology and landscape
- Sanctuaries, deposits, tombs, springs, peaks, and domestic contexts establish practice without guaranteeing mythology.
- Medieval chronicles and epics
- These are primary evidence for their own periods and possible reception, not automatic transcripts of the Iron Age.
- Modern oral collection
- Recorded performance is invaluable; collectors, translation, nationalism, and time depth must remain part of the apparatus.
- Latin and Greek dedications
- Findspot and dedicant identity are often the only secure cult data.
- Archaeology
- Sanctuaries and votives must not be named without inscriptional support.
- Classical geography
- Ethnic labels are external and often broader than local religious identity.
Entry by entry (5)
- Bindus §2.1 Bindus is documented in the corpus of inscriptions from Privlika (now in the museum at Bihac); the standard reference is the Inscriptiones Daciae et Pannoniae (CIL III, the relevant volumes).
- Medauros §2.2 Medauros is documented in inscriptions from Risinium and from the Lambaesis inscription of Quintus Plautius Sabinus (CIL VIII 2581, 18086, with the elegiac dedication).
- Vidasus §2.3 Vidasus is documented in numerous inscriptions from Dalmatia and Pannonia (CIL III 4099, 4100, 8369, 10460, and others); the standard collection is the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum III.
- Thana §2.4 Thana is documented in inscriptions from across Dalmatia and Pannonia, often paired with Vidasus and with the Latin name 'Diana.' The standard references are the same as for Vidasus.
- Eia §2.5 Eia is documented in Histrian-Roman inscriptions; the standard reference is the Inscriptiones Italiae X (the volume covering Histria) and the supplementary volumes.
The Iberian Pantheon
What survives
- Local inscriptions
- Theonym, language, findspot, date, and dedicant are the secure core; expansion into narrative requires independent evidence.
- Greek and Roman ethnography
- External description and interpretatio preserve otherwise lost information but carry political and literary framing.
- Coins and reliefs
- These date public iconography and civic identity, though visual resemblance alone cannot name an unlabeled god.
- Archaeology and landscape
- Sanctuaries, deposits, tombs, springs, peaks, and domestic contexts establish practice without guaranteeing mythology.
- Medieval chronicles and epics
- These are primary evidence for their own periods and possible reception, not automatic transcripts of the Iron Age.
- Modern oral collection
- Recorded performance is invaluable; collectors, translation, nationalism, and time depth must remain part of the apparatus.
- Latin votive inscriptions
- Primary for theonyms, epithets, and worshipper communities.
- Indigenous inscriptions
- Linguistic interpretation remains developing and often uncertain.
- Sanctuary archaeology
- Distribution and votive type provide the context needed to evaluate divine function.
Entry by entry (6)
- Endovelicus §3.1 Endovelicus is documented chiefly through the inscriptions from Sao Miguel da Mota; the standard reference is José Cardim Ribeiro's various publications and the Hispania Epigraphica catalogue.
- Ataecina §3.2 The curse-tablet tradition is treated in John Gager's Curse Tablets and Binding Spells from the Ancient World (1992) and in the various corpora of the Mediterranean defixio material.
- Bandua §3.3 Bandua is documented in scores of inscriptions across the Lusitanian-Celtiberian region; the standard reference is the Hispania Epigraphica catalogue and José d'Encarnação's various publications.
- Reue §3.4 Reue is documented in numerous Lusitanian-Roman inscriptions; the standard references are the same as for Bandua.
- Nabia §3.5 Nabia is documented in inscriptions across northwestern Iberia.
- Cariocecus §3.6 Cariocecus is documented in Lusitanian-Roman inscriptions; the standard reference is José d'Encarnação's Divindades indígenas sob o domínio romano em Portugal.
The Caucasian Georgian Pantheon
What survives
- Local inscriptions
- Theonym, language, findspot, date, and dedicant are the secure core; expansion into narrative requires independent evidence.
- Greek and Roman ethnography
- External description and interpretatio preserve otherwise lost information but carry political and literary framing.
- Coins and reliefs
- These date public iconography and civic identity, though visual resemblance alone cannot name an unlabeled god.
- Archaeology and landscape
- Sanctuaries, deposits, tombs, springs, peaks, and domestic contexts establish practice without guaranteeing mythology.
- Medieval chronicles and epics
- These are primary evidence for their own periods and possible reception, not automatic transcripts of the Iron Age.
- Modern oral collection
- Recorded performance is invaluable; collectors, translation, nationalism, and time depth must remain part of the apparatus.
- Georgian chronicles
- Primary for medieval memory of royal pre-Christian cult, not direct Iron Age transcription.
- Highland oral traditions
- Recorded performance and regional language are essential context.
- Archaeology and comparative linguistics
- Useful constraints where literary genealogy is absent.
Entry by entry (4)
- Ghmerti §4.1 Ghmerti is documented in the medieval Georgian Christian sources (the Conversion of Kartli, the lives of the Georgian saints) and in the modern ethnographic record from the highland regions.
- Kviria §4.2 Kviria is documented in the medieval Georgian sources and in the modern ethnographic record.
- Armazi §4.3 Armazi is documented in the medieval Georgian sources (especially the Conversion of Kartli) and in the archaeological remains at Armaztsikhe.
- Dali §4.4 Dali is documented chiefly through the modern ethnographic record from Svaneti and the other Georgian highland regions.
The Ossetian Nart Pantheon
What survives
- Local inscriptions
- Theonym, language, findspot, date, and dedicant are the secure core; expansion into narrative requires independent evidence.
- Greek and Roman ethnography
- External description and interpretatio preserve otherwise lost information but carry political and literary framing.
- Coins and reliefs
- These date public iconography and civic identity, though visual resemblance alone cannot name an unlabeled god.
- Archaeology and landscape
- Sanctuaries, deposits, tombs, springs, peaks, and domestic contexts establish practice without guaranteeing mythology.
- Medieval chronicles and epics
- These are primary evidence for their own periods and possible reception, not automatic transcripts of the Iron Age.
- Modern oral collection
- Recorded performance is invaluable; collectors, translation, nationalism, and time depth must remain part of the apparatus.
- Recorded Ossetian performances
- Collector, dialect, performer, and variant are primary metadata.
- Comparative Nart corpora
- Circassian, Abkhazian, and other versions prevent one ethnic recension from becoming universal.
- Iranian comparative study
- Sound correspondences and motif history are stronger than free analogies to ancient Scythians.
Entry by entry (7)
- Donbettyr §5.1 Abaev's Iz osetinskogo eposa (1939, 'From the Ossetian Epic') and his Skifo-evropeiskie izoglossy (1965, 'Scythian-European Isoglosses') are foundational.
- Satana §5.2 The recent feminist-mythological scholarship has paid considerable attention to Satana as a major divine-female figure of Indo-European epic; the various contributions to The Concept of the Goddess (Sandra Billington and Miranda Green, eds., 1996) treat her among other figures.
- Uastyrdzhi §5.3 Uastyrdzhi is the chief male divinity of the Ossetian folk-religious calendar.
- Wærhag §5.4 Wærhag is documented in the Nart corpus.
- Batraz §5.5 Batraz is documented in the Nart corpus, where his narratives form one of the major cycles.
- Soslan §5.6 Soslan is documented in the Nart corpus.
- Sosryko §5.7 Sosryko is documented in the Nart corpus.
The Berber Amazigh Pantheon
What survives
- Local inscriptions
- Theonym, language, findspot, date, and dedicant are the secure core; expansion into narrative requires independent evidence.
- Greek and Roman ethnography
- External description and interpretatio preserve otherwise lost information but carry political and literary framing.
- Coins and reliefs
- These date public iconography and civic identity, though visual resemblance alone cannot name an unlabeled god.
- Archaeology and landscape
- Sanctuaries, deposits, tombs, springs, peaks, and domestic contexts establish practice without guaranteeing mythology.
- Medieval chronicles and epics
- These are primary evidence for their own periods and possible reception, not automatic transcripts of the Iron Age.
- Modern oral collection
- Recorded performance is invaluable; collectors, translation, nationalism, and time depth must remain part of the apparatus.
- Libyan and Latin inscriptions
- Names and findspots are primary; vocalization and language interpretation may remain uncertain.
- Siwa archaeology and classical reports
- Anchor Amun’s oasis cult and oracular reputation.
- North African ethnography
- Useful for later tradition only when colonial framing and chronological distance are explicit.
Entry by entry (5)
- Anzar §6.1 Anzar is documented in modern ethnographic studies of Berber folk-religion; the standard references are Edmond Doutté's Magie et religion dans l'Afrique du Nord (1908), Émile Laoust's Mots et choses berbères (1920), and the more recent works of Mohamed Tilmatine and others.
- Gurzil §6.2 The standard text is the Cambridge edition (Diggle and Goodyear, 1970); the standard scholarly study is Andrew H.
- Ifri §6.3 Ifri is documented chiefly in modern ethnographic studies of Berber religion and through the Latin and Punic inscriptions of the Roman provincial period (where divine names with the Ifri- element appear in some dedications).
- Bonchor §6.4 Bonchor is documented in Latin inscriptions from Numidia; the standard collection is the CIL VIII volumes.
- Aulisua §6.5 Aulisua is documented in Latin inscriptions from Mauretania; the standard collection is the CIL VIII volumes and the Inscriptions Antiques du Maroc.