of the daily life in the Heraeon. Allowing for a ‘‘business life’’ within the precinct was
not only a matter of providing religious personnel and visitors with goods that were
needed for the religious life of a cult; it was also a matter of providing long-term and
stable income for the sanctuary. Cult finances feature most prominently in our
sources (Dignas 2002). Over and over again, cult regulations spell out guarantees
and warnings to do with revenues from sacred land, sacred loans, priestly perquisites,
obligations and fines of worshipers, costs of sacrificial victims, the expenses incurred
by the upkeep of religious buildings, and so forth. This economic dimension of
sanctuaries generated a number of activities and could require a multitude of people
to administer them. Pausanias claims that those living in the neighborhood of the
sanctuary of Asclepius in Titane (Sicyon) were mostly servants of the god (2.11.5:
perioikousi... to polu oiketai tou theou). How many ‘‘servants’’ would have been
needed, and what were they engaged in doing? As the ‘‘perspective of visitors’’ has
shown, one important duty of those employed in sanctuaries was to supervise the
behavior of visitors to the precinct and to facilitate their interaction with the deity. It
looks as if priests (hiereis) were overseers of the process. When, during the second
century BC, the Pergamenes decided to assign the priesthood of Asclepius to a
certain Asclepiades and his descendants on a hereditary basis, this came with ‘‘charge
of the general good conduct within the sanctuary’’ (IvPergamon 251 ¼LSAM13,
lines 24–5) and ‘‘power over the sacred slaves’’ (line 26).
Given the large number of sacrifices that were offered on behalf of all those
approaching the healing god, much effort would have been directed towards the
provision of firewood, the slaughter and carving of sacrificial animals, and the prepa-
ration and cleansing of the altars, as well as looking after the typical sacred tables
filled with cakes and fruits. If we trust Herodas’ scenario, each worshiper received
immediate feedback on a thank-offering from the available religious official, in this
case the temple warden, who engaged in a personal conversation with Cynno.
In contrast to what we learn from Herodas’ mime, Pausanias tells us that at
Epidaurus and Titane all sacrifices, whether offered by locals or foreigners, had to
be consumed within the sanctuary (2.27.1), a requirement that we find also in the
context of non-healing sanctuaries. Cult attendants were needed to direct the visitors
towards cooking facilities and suitable eating space, to maintain these facilities, and to
clean them for new visitors. Although the required preliminary purification could
often have taken place by way of a bath in the sea (as was the case with Aristophanes’
Wealth), cult officials must have assisted the worshipers and supervised their use of
bathing facilities. A fragmentary inscription from imperial Pergamum specifies that
worshipers, after purification, were to enter the sanctuary dressed in white and
wearing a laurel wreath. Most likely the text included further specifics. Such instruc-
tions generated the need for a sale of the required garments and objects (see again the
Samiandiagraphe ̄for the shopkeepers in the Heraeon and also the references to a
‘‘market’’ of such goods in the Andanian mystery inscription;LSCG65 lines 99–
103). At Epidaurus, the priest of Asclepius had to provide those who failed to bring
with them the necessary implements for the preliminary sacrifices with what they
needed: grain, garlands, and firewood. Each had its exact price, and the priest received
a total sum of three obols for his service and expense (LSCG22).
The cult regulation from Oropus, Herodas’ mime, the miracle inscriptions from
Epidaurus, and other testimonies all refer to a fee paid by worshipers before or after
A Day in the Life of a Greek Sanctuary 173