DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.46296#0159
158
I DAS BAUWERK AN DER KURETENSTRASSE
Michael Wörrle1114 - based on previous works by Ewan L. Bowie1115 - proposed a date for the
temple according to prosopographic studies. The temple was consecrated ander theproconsul Q.
Servaeus Innocens when Publius Vedius Antoninus, the asiarch, held the office of grammateus
tou demou for the second time. The proconsulship of Servaeus Innocens cannot be dated with
certainty, bat we know that he was consul suffectus in 101 A.D. Assuming a >regular< progression
of his career, he should have been proconsul 117/118 A.D., or, at the latest the year afterwards.
According to Michael Wörrle the name P. Vedius Antoninus would also fit. His mention has
always caused confusion for the prosopographic analysis of the inscription, because, in Ephe-
sos, several individuals with identical names are testified from different generations. The one
mentioned in the temple inscription must be the so-called adoptive father who can be dated to
the late lst and early 2nd Century A.D. He is the only one in the family who - with our current
knowledge - held the office of grammateus tou demou twice1116. This confirms Wörrle’s account
for the date of the consecration.
The finalization of the project in 117/118 A.D. clearly contradicts the interpretation of the
building as the Hadrianic neocorate temple of Ephesos. According to other sources, Hadrian did
not issue the permission to build such an imperial cult temple before 130/132 A.D. The building
inscription also confirms this idea: The city is called »Neokoros« only once, a title which refers
to the first bestowal, at the latest, under the Flavians. If the temple on Curetes Street indeed
were the new neocorate building, one would expect some mention in the inscription, or at least
the denomination big vswKÖpog.
The denomination of Ti. Claudius Lucceianus implies that construction work commenced
in 114/115 A.D. Hence we can conclude that the project was finalized within only two to four
years. Furthermore, the function of the building as a temple is confirmed from the words vaog
(»temple«) and aya/qia (»cult image«), The beginning of the text naming the emperor Hadrian
and the Ephesian demos is less informative, because it is part of a standardized formula men-
tioning the goddess Artemis. This is very common during the Roman Imperial period and does
not allow us to draw any conclusion on the function of the building. For example, a very similar
formula can be found in the inscription on Trajan’s Fountain1117.
Inscriptions also provide information on the benefactor and his family, namely P. Quintilius
Valens Varius and his daughter Varilla1118. Both held Offices in connection with the cult for the
city goddess Artemis and her temple. Varius - among others - was neopoios (»temple builder«)
of the Artemision and panegyriarchos of the Great Artemisia1119. This important festival for the
goddess included artistic and athletic competitions as well as a festive procession through the
city. Varilla was priestess of Artemis and thereby also fulfilled functions in the cult activities.
Among others, she also led the group of the young women during the processions.
Varius was not only the benefactor of the temple, but also of the large public baths that were
named after him and covered the largest part of the entire insula. Even though much of that
structure was altered in subsequent periods, we can assume that parts of the building also served
for purposes connected to Varius’ Offices1120: In the small latrina in the insula adjacent to the
baths on the west, reused blocks carry an inscription referring to OdKog and TiaibtoKsiot (pl. 31).
Probably the original location of these building members was in the baths, which implies that
the meaning of OdKog would not be »latrina«, but »seat (of an office)«. The paidiskeia might
also be rooms for an official purpose1121. This fits well into the overall picture of Curetes Street
1114 Wörrle 1973, 470-477.
1115 Bowie 1971, 137-141; Bowie 1978, 867-874.
1116 IvE 728; see Wörrle 1973, 473 f. withn. 18.
1117 IvE 424; see Quatember 2009, 49 f.
1118 See chap. 1.2.3.
1119 On the character of this office see chap. 1.2.3.
1120 See chap. 1.2.2.2.
1121 The translation of the words as »latrina« or »brothel«, which has so far been proposed several times, as an official
dedication to Artemis and the ruling emperor and presumably the demos, is in my opinion to be rejected. Cf. Lid-
I DAS BAUWERK AN DER KURETENSTRASSE
Michael Wörrle1114 - based on previous works by Ewan L. Bowie1115 - proposed a date for the
temple according to prosopographic studies. The temple was consecrated ander theproconsul Q.
Servaeus Innocens when Publius Vedius Antoninus, the asiarch, held the office of grammateus
tou demou for the second time. The proconsulship of Servaeus Innocens cannot be dated with
certainty, bat we know that he was consul suffectus in 101 A.D. Assuming a >regular< progression
of his career, he should have been proconsul 117/118 A.D., or, at the latest the year afterwards.
According to Michael Wörrle the name P. Vedius Antoninus would also fit. His mention has
always caused confusion for the prosopographic analysis of the inscription, because, in Ephe-
sos, several individuals with identical names are testified from different generations. The one
mentioned in the temple inscription must be the so-called adoptive father who can be dated to
the late lst and early 2nd Century A.D. He is the only one in the family who - with our current
knowledge - held the office of grammateus tou demou twice1116. This confirms Wörrle’s account
for the date of the consecration.
The finalization of the project in 117/118 A.D. clearly contradicts the interpretation of the
building as the Hadrianic neocorate temple of Ephesos. According to other sources, Hadrian did
not issue the permission to build such an imperial cult temple before 130/132 A.D. The building
inscription also confirms this idea: The city is called »Neokoros« only once, a title which refers
to the first bestowal, at the latest, under the Flavians. If the temple on Curetes Street indeed
were the new neocorate building, one would expect some mention in the inscription, or at least
the denomination big vswKÖpog.
The denomination of Ti. Claudius Lucceianus implies that construction work commenced
in 114/115 A.D. Hence we can conclude that the project was finalized within only two to four
years. Furthermore, the function of the building as a temple is confirmed from the words vaog
(»temple«) and aya/qia (»cult image«), The beginning of the text naming the emperor Hadrian
and the Ephesian demos is less informative, because it is part of a standardized formula men-
tioning the goddess Artemis. This is very common during the Roman Imperial period and does
not allow us to draw any conclusion on the function of the building. For example, a very similar
formula can be found in the inscription on Trajan’s Fountain1117.
Inscriptions also provide information on the benefactor and his family, namely P. Quintilius
Valens Varius and his daughter Varilla1118. Both held Offices in connection with the cult for the
city goddess Artemis and her temple. Varius - among others - was neopoios (»temple builder«)
of the Artemision and panegyriarchos of the Great Artemisia1119. This important festival for the
goddess included artistic and athletic competitions as well as a festive procession through the
city. Varilla was priestess of Artemis and thereby also fulfilled functions in the cult activities.
Among others, she also led the group of the young women during the processions.
Varius was not only the benefactor of the temple, but also of the large public baths that were
named after him and covered the largest part of the entire insula. Even though much of that
structure was altered in subsequent periods, we can assume that parts of the building also served
for purposes connected to Varius’ Offices1120: In the small latrina in the insula adjacent to the
baths on the west, reused blocks carry an inscription referring to OdKog and TiaibtoKsiot (pl. 31).
Probably the original location of these building members was in the baths, which implies that
the meaning of OdKog would not be »latrina«, but »seat (of an office)«. The paidiskeia might
also be rooms for an official purpose1121. This fits well into the overall picture of Curetes Street
1114 Wörrle 1973, 470-477.
1115 Bowie 1971, 137-141; Bowie 1978, 867-874.
1116 IvE 728; see Wörrle 1973, 473 f. withn. 18.
1117 IvE 424; see Quatember 2009, 49 f.
1118 See chap. 1.2.3.
1119 On the character of this office see chap. 1.2.3.
1120 See chap. 1.2.2.2.
1121 The translation of the words as »latrina« or »brothel«, which has so far been proposed several times, as an official
dedication to Artemis and the ruling emperor and presumably the demos, is in my opinion to be rejected. Cf. Lid-
