account for this transformation from ‘‘private’’ to ‘‘public’’ and it is just as difficult to
distinguish clearly between ‘‘private individual worship,’’ ‘‘publicly regulated indi-
vidual worship,’’ and entirely ‘‘public worship’’ once this had happened. While many
parameters of the individual’s participation in cult would now be spelled out by civic
institutions, private interest in the life of the sanctuary would not be diminished and
could even be enhanced. Vice versa, when one of the most famous sanctuaries of
Asclepius, that in Pergamum, was again ‘‘privatized’’ (see above,IvPergamon251)
during the second century BC, the interest and participation of the polis in the well-
being and opportunities of the sanctuary did not cease but, on the contrary, were the
main reason for the move. Inevitably, the categories of ‘‘life in the sanctuary’’ and
‘‘life outside’’ merge.
Finally, one may reflect again on how useful the initial ‘‘sacred journal’’ from
Epidaurus is. Was the balance between a public and a private sphere untypical when
it came to healing sanctuaries? Individuals approached Asclepius for a cure, individ-
uals continued to express their gratitude to the god by offering more sacrifices and
thank-offerings, individuals may also have had special ties with the god independent
of any current or past ailment. Theocritus (Epigrams8) gives us an example in which
the dedicant of a statue proclaims that he sacrifices to the god every day forever (hos
min ep’ e ̄mar aei thueessin hikneitai). However, while there was an exceptionally close
personal relationship between Asclepius and his worshiper, the activities accounted
for in the worship of this and other healing gods were not alien to the atmosphere and
daily life of other sanctuaries. The specific rites and proceedings in healing sanctuaries
have yielded testimonies that give us valuable insight into perspectives of Greek
religion that are under-represented in the evidence derived from other sanctuaries.
These insights allow us to understand and ‘‘animate’’ the organizational framework
attested for many other sanctuaries beyond festival days and special sacrifices held on
sparse occasions during the year.
GUIDE TO FURTHER READINGAmong the extensive scholarly literature on Greek sanctuaries, it is difficult to choose an
‘‘ideal’’ introduction to the topic. If one looks for a focus on the everyday activities in
sanctuaries, one is harder pressed to find works at all. Tomlinson 1976 is, however, excellent
on both counts. Pedley 2005 is informative about a number of central topics and examples,
which can be further explored through a concise thematic bibliography. Dillon 1997, exam-
ining many practical aspects of Greek pilgrimage, has much to say on the required infrastruc-
ture of well-frequented sanctuaries. Unfortunately, articles such as Corbett 1970, which
concentrates on and stresses the active use of temples by the Greek worshiper, are rare.
Marinatos and Ha ̈gg 1993 includes a wide range of contributions, of which Sinn’s chapter
(also in Buxton 2000) is the most relevant, reconstructing the lively atmosphere of ‘‘Greek
sanctuaries as places of refuge.’’ Ø ́stby’s bibliography in the same volume is arranged geo-
graphically. Dignas 2002 explores the economic dimension of sanctuaries and focuses on their
interaction with the poleis that hosted them as well as external rulers.
Schachter 1992 is relevant throughout. Here, the chapters by Graf and Van Straten set the
scene for the worship of Asclepius. Because of the immense breadth both of its collection of
testimonies and of its interpretation, Edelstein and Edelstein 1945 (reprinted 1998 with a new
176 Beate Dignas