DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4679#0162
136 IV. MOSSYNA, MOTELLA, DIONYSOPOLIS, ETC.
The character of the service imposed regularly on women who were
hierai has been described in the chapter on Hierapolis (Ch. Ill § 6).
Outside of their term of service they might conform to the ordinary
life of society and marry, but during their service, they had to leave
their husbands and live the free life of nature, in honour of the
goddess. The conditions of the service of male Upoi are unknown;
but perhaps they included various menial duties, for we find a case of
marked reluctance to come to the temple at the proper time, no. 42.
Those persons who voluntarily took on them the divine service for
a time seem to be the class named OeocpoprjTOL by Strabo p. 535 1.
They were under the divine influence. The commands of the god
were given directly to them, and they might be of various kinds.
One kind is described in no. 18; but according to the interpretation
which I have proposed of the romance of Thekla2, she was understood
by the pagan inhabitants of Antioch to be under a service of absolute
chastity. The widespread conception of the goddess as rrapOevos
(which really implied only that she was unmarried) rendered this
interpretation easy and natural.
(d) Ceremonial Purity. The inscriptions lay great stress on the
necessity (Foucart p. 147) of purity (ayvela) when entering the temple,
or even the settlement round the temple (ya>ptov, K&iirj). The question
cannot be definitely answered whether the causes of impurity are all
purely ceremonial, or whether moral guilt is the reason in any case.
The cases which approach nearest to the latter category are nos. 41,
44, where an oath has been broken. But it is probable that the oath
was one binding members of a society; and as societies in ancient
times united under the religious forms, the offence would in that case
be against the religious sanction. Another offence is approaching the
god in a dirty garment: cleansing the garments therefore was one
of the rules of service3 (no. 52). Akin to this is the obscure, but
evidently gross, case of personal impurity mentioned no. 50. A third
offence is eating the flesh of the sacred animal, the goat (no. 42).
But the commonest cause of impurity is a sexual offence, nos. 45 ff.,
and the usual form is intercourse between husband and wife.
Mr. Hogarth has explained this by the supposition that ' possibly
the women of the neighbourhood served for short periods in turn,
and during such periods were expected to keep free from' all sexual
pollution. But this does not fully meet the case. In no. 46 the
1 He expressly distinguished them 3 Asceticism, with unwashed, and
from the hierodouloi. doubtless bare, feet was a rule of ser-
2 Church in Emp. Ch. XVI. vice at Tralleis, no. 18.
The character of the service imposed regularly on women who were
hierai has been described in the chapter on Hierapolis (Ch. Ill § 6).
Outside of their term of service they might conform to the ordinary
life of society and marry, but during their service, they had to leave
their husbands and live the free life of nature, in honour of the
goddess. The conditions of the service of male Upoi are unknown;
but perhaps they included various menial duties, for we find a case of
marked reluctance to come to the temple at the proper time, no. 42.
Those persons who voluntarily took on them the divine service for
a time seem to be the class named OeocpoprjTOL by Strabo p. 535 1.
They were under the divine influence. The commands of the god
were given directly to them, and they might be of various kinds.
One kind is described in no. 18; but according to the interpretation
which I have proposed of the romance of Thekla2, she was understood
by the pagan inhabitants of Antioch to be under a service of absolute
chastity. The widespread conception of the goddess as rrapOevos
(which really implied only that she was unmarried) rendered this
interpretation easy and natural.
(d) Ceremonial Purity. The inscriptions lay great stress on the
necessity (Foucart p. 147) of purity (ayvela) when entering the temple,
or even the settlement round the temple (ya>ptov, K&iirj). The question
cannot be definitely answered whether the causes of impurity are all
purely ceremonial, or whether moral guilt is the reason in any case.
The cases which approach nearest to the latter category are nos. 41,
44, where an oath has been broken. But it is probable that the oath
was one binding members of a society; and as societies in ancient
times united under the religious forms, the offence would in that case
be against the religious sanction. Another offence is approaching the
god in a dirty garment: cleansing the garments therefore was one
of the rules of service3 (no. 52). Akin to this is the obscure, but
evidently gross, case of personal impurity mentioned no. 50. A third
offence is eating the flesh of the sacred animal, the goat (no. 42).
But the commonest cause of impurity is a sexual offence, nos. 45 ff.,
and the usual form is intercourse between husband and wife.
Mr. Hogarth has explained this by the supposition that ' possibly
the women of the neighbourhood served for short periods in turn,
and during such periods were expected to keep free from' all sexual
pollution. But this does not fully meet the case. In no. 46 the
1 He expressly distinguished them 3 Asceticism, with unwashed, and
from the hierodouloi. doubtless bare, feet was a rule of ser-
2 Church in Emp. Ch. XVI. vice at Tralleis, no. 18.