chapter vii
] appeared as long ago as the spring of 1890. Unpropitious circumstances have delayed the completion of the remainder till the present moment. The two parts could easily be kept separate (as they have been): in the main they fall apart and correspond to the two sides of the question indicated in the title of the book--Cult of Souls and Belief in Immortality. The Cult of Souls and the faith in immortality may eventually come together at some points, but they have a different origin and travel most of the way on separate paths. The conception of immortality in particular arises from a spiritual intuition which reveals the souls of men as standing in close relationship, and indeed as being of like substance, with the everlasting gods. And simultaneously the gods are regarded as being in their nature like the soul of man, i.e. as free spirits needing no material or visible body. (It is this spiritualized view of the gods--not the belief in gods itself as Aristotle supposes in the remarkable statement quoted by Sextus Empiricus Adv. Mathematicos, iii, 20 ff.--which arises from the vision of its own divine nature achieved by the soul ~kath' heautê/n~ relieved of the body, in ~enthousiasmoi/~ and ~mantei=ai~.) And this conception leads far away from the ideas on which the Cult of Souls was based.
The publication of the book in two parts has brought with it a regrettable circumstance for which I must ask the indulgence of well-disposed readers (that the first half found so many of them is a fact which I must gratefully acknowledge). As the dimensions of the whole work grew beyond expectation and almost overstepped the ~me/tron au/tarkes~, the sixteen excursuses which were promised in {x} the first volume have had to be dropped: the book would otherwise have been overloaded. So far as they possess independent interest they will find a place elsewhere. They are real excursuses and were intended as such, and the proper understanding of the book will not be affected by their absence.
ERWIN ROHDE.
HEIDELBERG. _November 1st, 1893._
{{xi}}
PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION
THE publication of a second edition of this book affords me a welcome opportunity of making my account more exact and to the point in certain places; of adding some points that had been overlooked or omitted; and of noticing with approval or disapproval some divergent opinions that had obtained currency in the interval. Controversy is, however, confined within the narrowest limits and to points of minor importance (and only then in answer to more serious and significant objections). The plan and--if I may say so--the style of the whole
## book demanded throughout, and more especially in the great points at
issue, a purely positive statement of my own views and the results of my own studies. Such a statement, it may well be imagined, was not arrived at without being preceded in the mind of the author by a controversial reckoning with the manifold views and doctrines of others upon the subjects here dealt with--views which in some cases he felt obliged to reject. Controversy in this sense lies behind every page of the book, though as a rule only in a latent condition. In this condition I have been content to let it remain in this revised edition of the book. My opinions were not arrived at without toil and much careful reflection; one view being made to reinforce another till they were all bound together in a single closely-knitted whole. Neither further reflection on my part nor the criticisms of others have shaken my belief in the tenability of opinions reached in this way. I have therefore ventured to leave my account unaltered in all its main points. I hope that it contains its own justification and defence in itself without further vindication on my part.
Nothing in the plan or execution of the whole or its parts has been altered; neither have I taken anything away. The book contained nothing that was superfluous to the attainment of the object that I had in view. This object, it will be apparent, was not in the least to provide a brief and compendious statement of the most indispensable facts about the cult of Souls and the belief in immortality among the Greeks for the benefit of those who wished to take a hasty {xii} glance over the subject. Such a hasty picker-up of knowledge who regards himself--I cannot imagine why--as peculiarly fitted to criticise my book, has ingenuously besought me, in view of a second edition which he was kind enough to think probable, to throw overboard most of what he considered the superfluous parts of the book. With this request I have not felt myself able to comply. My book was written for maturer readers who have passed beyond the school stage and look for something more than an elementary handbook, and who would be able to understand and appreciate the plan and intention which led me to draw my material so widely from many departments of literary and cultural history. The first edition of the book found many such readers: I may hope and expect that the second will do the same.
In its revised form the book has been divided for the convenience of those who use it into two volumes (which correspond with the two parts in which it was first published). I was urged to take away the notes that stand at the foot of the text and relegate them to a place by themselves in a separate appendix. I found, however, that I could not bring myself to adopt this fashionable modern practice, which so far as I have experience of it in books published in recent years seems to me to be inconvenient and to hinder rather than help that undisturbed appreciation of the text which such an arrangement is intended to serve. Independent readers who in using the book are working out the subject for themselves would certainly not desire the separation of the documentary evidence from the statement of the author's view. The book has also, to my peculiar satisfaction, attracted a large number of readers from outside the immediate circle of professional philologists. Such readers have evidently not been seriously disturbed by the elaborate and perhaps rather pedantic aspect of the mysterious disquisitions at the foot of the page, and have been able to fix their attention upon the clearer language of the text above. I have therefore decided to remove a few only of the notes which had grown to independent dimensions to an appendix at the end of each of the two volumes.
ERWIN ROHDE.
HEIDELBERG. _November 27th, 1897._
{{xiii}}
PRELIMINARY NOTE TO THE SEVENTH AND EIGHTH EDITIONS
IN supervising together this reprint of "Psyche" we have found ourselves faced with the question which Schöll and Dieterich had to decide in bringing out the third edition--whether changes or additions would be admissible. It went without saying that the text must remain untouched in the form last given to it by Rohde's own hand. Nor was it possible to make any additions to the notes without seriously disturbing the carefully considered architecture of the whole book. It would have been more possible to add an appendix or supplementary pamphlet recording the literature of the subject which has appeared since 1898 and giving an account of the present state of the questions dealt with by Rohde: as has been done with the "Griechische Roman" by W. Schmid. But on making the attempt we soon found that the problem was a different one in the case of "Psyche" with which (much more than in the other case) all subsequent study of the history of religion as pursued by all nations has had to reckon, and from which such study has in no small degree taken its starting point. We have therefore refrained; and we have also refrained from remodelling the citations to make them correspond with critical editions that have since appeared. This process could not be carried through without, in some places, introducing contradictions with Rohde's interpretation that would have necessitated more detailed discussion. Rohde's own method of citation was only seriously inconvenient in the case of Euripides: here he evidently, as we observed from about the middle of the first volume onwards, made use of more than one edition at the same time, and has consequently quoted lines in accordance with different enumerations. For the greater assurance and convenience of the reader the lines are uniformly referred to according to the numbering of Nauck. This task has been undertaken by our devoted helper Frl. Emilie Boer, who has also verified, with a very few exceptions, the whole of the references to ancient writers and inscriptions; {xiv} a considerable number of errors missed by the author or later editors have thus been corrected. The minor changes introduced in the third and following editions--the recording on the margin of the pagination of the first edition and the valuable enlargement of the index due to W. Nestle with the assistance of O. Crusius--have all naturally been retained.
F. BOLL. O. WEINREICH.
HEIDELBERG. _November, 1920._
{{xv}}
TRANSLATOR'S NOTE
ROHDE is very unsystematic in his mode of quoting from ancient authorities: he has, for example, four different ways of referring to the Iliad and the Odyssey, two of referring to Demosthenes and the Orators, etc. In quoting from the lesser authorities he sometimes used editions which have since become antiquated. (He even goes so far as to quote Clem. Alex. by the page and letter of Heinsius' re-edition of Sylburg.) I have made an attempt to reduce the number of inconsistencies and to give references where possible to modern editions. In these and other small ways I have tried to make the notes--the text I hope is intelligible enough--more accessible to English readers. I have given references to English translations of German works (where I have been able to find them); but I have refrained from adding references to the modern literature of the subject: most readers of the book will prefer to do that for themselves. In order to save space I have used abbreviation pretty freely in quoting names of authors and titles of books. The abbreviated forms agree generally with those given in Liddell and Scott (supplemented by the list drawn up for the new edition of the Lexicon): most of the following may be noted:--
A. (or Aesch.) = Aeschylus. Amm. = Ammonius. _AP._ = _Anthologia Palatina_. Apollod. = Ps.-Apollodorus, _Bibiotheca_ (unless _Epit._ is added). A. R. = Apollonius Rhodius. _Ath. Mitth._ = _Mittheilungen d. deutsch. arch. Inst. zu Athen_. Aug. = Augustine. D. (or Dem.) = Demosthenes. D. C. = Dio Cassius. D. Chr. = Dio Chrysostom. D. H. = Dionysius of Halicarnassus (i.e. _Rom. Antiq._ unless otherwise indicated) D. L. = Diogenes Laertius. D. P. = Dionysius Periegetes. D. S. = Diodorus Siculus. E. (or Eur.) = Euripides. _Epigr. Gr._ = Kaibel, _Epigrammata Graeca_. Eun. = Eunapius _Vitae Sophistarum_. {xvi} Gal. = Galen (vol. and page of Kühn). _GDI._ = Collitz, _Griechische Dialektinschriften_. **_Gp._ = _Geoponica_. Grimm = Grimm, _Deutsche Mythologie_ transl. as _Teutonic Mythology_, by J. S. Stallybrass, Lond., 1880. Heraclid. _Pol._ = Heraclides Ponticus, _Politica_. Him. = Himerius. Hipp. = Hippolytus. Hp. = Hippokrates. Hsch. = Hesychius. H. Smyrn. = Hermippus of Smyrna. Homer is quoted by the majuscules of the Greek alphabet for the books of the Iliad, by the minuscules for the Odyssey. _Inscr. Perg._ = _Inschriften von Pergamon_ ed. Fraenkel. _IPE._ = _Inscriptiones Ponti Euxini_ ed. Latyschev. Is. = Isaeus. J. M. = Justin Martyr. _Leg. Sacr._ = von Prott and Ziehen, _Leges Graecorum Sacrae_. Pall. = Palladius, _de Re Rustica_. Phld. = Philodemus. Pi. = Pindar. Pl. = Plato. _PLG._ = Bergk, _Poetae Lyrici Graeci_ ed. 4. Plot. = Plotinus. Plu. = Plutarch. _PMagPar._ = Paris Magical Papyrus ed. Wessely. _Rh. Mus._ = _**Rheinisches Museum_. S. (or Soph.) = Sophokles. S. E. = Sextus Empiricus. _SIG._ = Dittenberger, _Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum_ ed. 2 (unless otherwise stated). Str. = Strabo (Casaubon's page). _Tab. Defix._ = _Tabellae Defixionum_ ed. Wünsch (Appendix to _CIA_.). Thphr. = Theophrastus (_Ch._ = _Characters_ ed. Jebb). Tylor = E. B. Tylor, _Primitive Culture_ ed. 4. Tz. = Tzetzes. Vg. = Vergil. _Vors._ = Diels, _Fragmente der Vorsokratiker_ ed. 4 (vol. 1 unless otherwise indicated). X. (or Xen.) = Xenophon historicus. Znb. = Zenobius.
I take this opportunity of thanking my friend Mr. R. Burn, of Glasgow University, for his invaluable help in these matters.
W. B. HILLIS.
## PART I
{{3}}
##