<i>The Mysteries of Artemis of Ephesos: Cult, Polis, and Change in the Graeco-Roman World</i>, by Guy Maclean Rogers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Mysteries of Artemis of Ephesos: Cult, Polis, and Change in the Graeco-Roman World, by Guy Maclean Rogers. Synkrisis. New Havem, Connecticut, Yale University Press, 2012. xxvi, 499 pp. $45.00 US (cloth). Guy Rogers reveals in his book, The Mysteries of Artemis of Ephesos: Cult, Polis, and Change in the Graeco-Roman World, how the cult of Artemis at Ephesos endured and inspired Ephesians for half a millennium. He argues that the ability of the Ephesians to adapt the theology and ritual practices of the cult to changing political, social, and economic situations was central to the cult's popularity and success. Rogers effectively gathers, incorporates, and interprets epigraphic, archaeological, and literary evidence in an insightful, innovative, and convincing recreation of the cult and mysteries of Artemis at Ephesos. The book is divided into three major sections. Part I (Chapters One through Three) deals with Initiation, Part II (Chapters Four through Nine) focuses on Rites, while Part III (Chapter Ten) covers Viewing. Also included in the book are six maps, twenty-seven black and white photos, three colour plates, four indices, notes, a glossary, an extensive bibliography, a general index, indices of ancient authors, and inscriptions. Information pertinent for understanding the book is addressed in Chapter One. For instance, the importance of Artemis Ephesia and the goddess's special relationship with the polis is explored. Next an overview of the evidence and methodology is presented, followed by an explanation of the crucial relationship between ancient votive religion and mystery cults. Here the author emphasizes the non-contractual relationship between humans and gods. Vows were made to achieve short-term goals, and man's interaction with the divine was ongoing and subject to negotiation. Finally, Rogers provides a thorough overview of ancient mysteries cults for those who are not experts. The second chapter offers a clear presentation of the epigraphic evidence for the celebration of the mysteries within the context of the struggle between Lysimachos and Demetrios Poliorketes for control of Ephesos. First a topographical association for the celebration is established. Next important epigraphic evidence is considered. For example, the Gerousia Decree is significant because it contains the first substantial evidence for the celebration of the mysteries. Additionally, a citizenship decree from 302 includes the first epigraphic reference to the Kouretes, who formed an essential part of the celebration according to Strabo. However, the Kouretes acted as functionaries of the temple at this time. The epigraphic evidence reveals that between 302 and 294, the major institutions of Ephesos supported Demetrios Poliorketes. His eventual defeat by Lysimachos led to significant changes in the celebration of the mysteries. Chapter Three addresses the consequences of Lysimachos' victory. Lysimachos forced the inhabitants of Ephesos to move to a new city, Arsinoeia, which was physically separated from the Artemision. According to Rogers, the forced resettling of the Ephesians was not unique and was done for military, political, and climatic reasons. Lysimachos rearranged the celebration of the mysteries based on Artemis's assistance in his military victory of 294 BCE. A more ominous change was the transfer of responsibility for the celebration of the mysteries from the Artemision to the polis. Ephesians oversaw the celebration of the mysteries of Artemis until the demise of the cult in the third century CE. Chapter Four includes much detail about the successive Roman contenders for control of Ephesos and the cult of Artemis, while at the same time, clearly explains how humans and gods were an interdependent community and how the Kouretes, as protectors of Artemis, were crucial to divine order. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".