Departamento de medicina

498 _{Wickkiser stresses this interpretation. Wickkiser, ‘Asklepios’, p. 61. See the discussions below for}

the relevance of the identification of Asclepius with Augustus.

499 _{Roebuck, Asklepieion, p. 38, n. 16. From the fact that the coins discovered can be dated to the}

period between the sack and the refoundation of Corinth by the Romans (146 BCE to 44 BCE), it may be possible to suggest the continuity of the cult during this period.

500 _{Roebuck, Asklepieion, p. 38, n. 16.} 501 _{Roebuck, Asklepieion, p. 39.}

Peloponnese.502 In other words, there was a need for a change in the patron of the colony where the majority of the people were freedpersons. In this sense, the resumption of the cult may have been intended to advance his rule over the people of Corinth. Thus, the social context does account for the need for the early reconstruction of the cult.503

Furthermore, the renewed cult may have celebrated the deity brought from Rome, i.e. Aesculapius on Tiber Island.504 The immigrants from Rome were familiar with the cult, and this was particularly important for the increasing numbers of Romans who migrated to Corinth after 27 BCE when the city became a senatorial colony. They possibly identified the cult as that of Rome, feeling reassured by having the god who was their familiar ‘practitioner’ who cured the people of Rome. However, it is most likely that those who were of Greek origin, possibly a large portion of the first immigrants,505 _{regarded the cult as belonging to the same Asclepius who was a Greek deity, since the} Romans did not build a completely new temple but restored the sanctuary in its original location. This is also consistent with the situation of the cult of Demeter and Kore in Corinth which was restored by the Romans. Jorunn Økland, in her investigation of the cult, highlights that the Greeks and Romans worshipped the same cult, and from her reading of Pausanias, notes that as he prefers the old Greek names (Demeter and Kore) instead of the Roman names of the cult (Ceres, Liber and Liberta), this may show that the identity of the ‘personality’ of the gods may have been culturally complex.506 _That is, the gods being worshipped at the sanctuary were called by different names according to different cultures. The Latin speakers and Greek speakers may have understood the same cult in different ways:

502 _{A Corinthian coin which has the design of the head of Antony (39-36 BCE) testifies to his rule.}

(E.g., A.M. Burnett, M. Amandry and P.P. Ripollès, Roman Provincial Coinage (Vol. 1; London: British Museum Press, 1992), no. 1124). Furthermore, the onomastic evidence from Corinth demonstrates Antony’s rule: Marcus Insteius was a duovir who fought for Mark Antony at Actium (Plut., Ant., 65, 1). Cf. Kent,

Inscriptions, p. 67, no. 149; M. Antonius Theophilus was a manager (dioikhth/j) of Antony at Corinth. Plutarch

states that Theophilus and his son Hipparchus had significant influence on Antony (Plut., Ant., 68, 3). Cf. Edwards, Coins, p. 5.

503 _{Wickkiser argues for the identification of Asclepius with Augustus on the basis of the literary}

evidence. See the discussion in 4.2.2 for details. Wickkiser, ‘Asklepios’, p. 60.

504 _{Cf. Wickkiser, ‘Asklepios’, p.59 (although Wickkiser is of a neutral opinion).} 505 _{See 2.1.2 for details, especially the ‘rebuilding period’ and the ‘stabilization period’.}

506 _{Jorunn Økland, ‘Ceres, !"&#$, and Cultural Complexity: Divine Personality Definitions and Human}

Worshippers in Roman Corinth’, in Corinth in Context: Comparative Studies on Religion and Society (eds. Steven Friesen, Dan Schowalter, and James Walters; Leiden: Brill, 2010), pp. 199-230 (224-5).

the former worshipped the Roman deities that were in effect different from those of the old Greek period, whereas the latter still worshipped their ‘real’ deities. The Romans may have thought their deities equivalent to those of the Greeks, but for Greek-speaking people this was a matter of their cultural identity in which they had great pride. The time of Pausanias (second century CE), was the era when the Greek cultural sentiment among the people became stronger; hence, the tension between the two cultures may have been more overt than in the first century. Nonetheless, the Greek cults that were resumed by the Romans in the colony must have possessed such complexities from the

beginning of the renewal.

4.1.2. The Roman re-modelling of the cult of Asclepius

After the overview of the cult of Asclepius in Corinth, and the account of the resumption of the cult within its social and political context, it is important to investigate further how the Romans

re-modelled the cult. The Roman programme for the re-founding of Corinth was carried out according to a careful plan, and the resumption of the cult must have played an important part in their social planning of the colony. The following part will explore the changes they applied to the Greek cult, with a particular focus on the question of sacral manumission. One of the difficulties in exploring the issue is that, although sacral manumission is a crucial theme for the purpose of this study, there is little extant evidence from Corinth itself. Thus, the study will explore the evidence from Buthrotum, which was colonized by the Romans in the same year as Corinth, as a heuristic tool. The evidence of the cult of Asclepius in Buthrotum also shows the strong influence of Roman rule. Thus, it is hoped that the exploration will shed light on the ways in which the Romans utilized the cult of Asclepius as a social programme during the Augustan era, and on the question of sacral manumission in Corinth.

Evidence from the cult of Asclepius in Buthrotum

The historical context of Buthrotum (modern Butrint in Albania) offers insights into the cult of Asclepius in Corinth since the cult in Buthrotum was also renovated by the Romans during the foundation period of the colony. The conditions in both cities have similarities, and their close

relationship has been noted by many scholars.507 The similar social context enables us to explore the analogous element of the cult, especially in terms of the Roman influence on the cult.

In 44 BCE, the same year in which the first immigrants were sent to Corinth, the city of Buthrotum was confiscated and made a colony of Rome by Julius Caesar. In addition to the economic reasons, it is said that this was a punishment on the inhabitants, since the people in Buthrotum refused to pay tax to Rome. It is known that Atticus, a close friend of Cicero who would lose his considerable interests in the city, asked Cicero to intercede, but the decision made by the emperor was firm.508 _As in Corinth, the colony was administered by duoviri and magistrates, of whom onomastic information is known from the extant coinage. One piece of evidence from the Augustan period is worth

mentioning. The coin has a design of the symbol of Asclepius, that is, a snake coiled around a staff; the names show Graecinu[s], who is known to be the duovir, and Milesius, a magistrate.509 _{If they} were the elected municipal officers, and the cult of Asclepius had a significant place in the city of Buthrotum to the extent that it would be shown on the minted coinage, it is natural to consider that they made benefactions to the city, including a contribution to the development of the cult centre. At the same time, the name Milesius brings to mind the donor of the temple of Asclepius in Corinth, Marcus Antonius Milesius, whose name is inscribed on the epistyle of the temple, as mentioned above. Considering the fact that the name Milesius is rare,510 _{and that each Milesius has a strong association} with the cult of Asclepius, it may be possible that these individuals have a family link.511 _{In any event,} it is worth exploring the evidence of the cult in Buthrotum, especially in terms of its social function during its period of Roman rule.