Ritual Practice between the Late Bronze Age and Protogeometric Periods of Greece 9781407306865, 9781407336879

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
LIST OF TABLES
ABBREVIATIONS
1. PREFACE
2. CRITERIA FOR SHRINE IDENTIFICATION
3. SITE GAZETTEER
4. SANCTUARY SURROUNDINGS: SPACE AND INCLUSIVENESS
5. OFFERINGS: WHAT AND WHERE?
6. RITUALISTIC ACTIONS
7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Citation preview

BAR S2145 2010 MARAKAS RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS

B A R

Ritual Practice between the Late Bronze Age and Protogeometric Periods of Greece

Gemma Marakas

BAR International Series 2145 2010

Ritual Practice between the Late Bronze Age and Protogeometric Periods of Greece

Gemma Marakas

BAR International Series 2145 2010

ISBN 9781407306865 paperback ISBN 9781407336879 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407306865 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR

PUBLISHING

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This publication constitutes the entirety of my doctoral thesis, only slightly adjusted and updated since my viva voce in 2009. I therefore acknowledge all those who assisted me through my postgraduate studies. I begin by thanking my supervisor Dr Ken Wardle for his helpful comments throughout my studies, they are very much appreciated. In addition, the useful comments by Paul Garwood on early drafts of my work as well as continued mentoring until I submitted. I also thank Bob Arnott for his constant support and encouragement throughout my academic career. My gratitude must also go to Gisela Walberg for permitting me to see a draft of her paper on the finds from Midea before it was published, allowing me to use the data within my thesis. Most importantly, I would like to thank my family, who have not only helped fund my doctoral research, but have also provided invaluable assistance and encouragement throughout my studies, Janice, Nick, Zoe and Arnold. To the entire Harris family, who have supported and encouraged me throughout my student years, Marion, Reggie, Vanessa, Yolanda and Natasha. To the many friends who stood by me patiently throughout my studies providing me with words of wisdom, welcomed distractions and much needed refreshments, especially Faith, Sally, Chappy, and Alison it was very much appreciated. Most unforgettably, to the friendly environment of the study room and the familiar faces which kept my spirits high and my sanity in tact; and Lisa, you are invaluable. And, finally, to the patient and helpful advice of the publishing staff while I prepared my thesis for publication as a monograph; these things always take longer than first expected!

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS LIST OF TABLES ABBREVIATIONS

1.

PREFACE ...................................................................................................... - 1 -

1.1. 1.2. 1.3. 1.4. 1.5.

BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................. - 1 THE CHARACTER OF SETTLEMENT FROM THE LATE BRONZE AGE TO PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS....................................................................................................................... - 2 CHRONOLOGICAL SCOPE .............................................................................................. - 4 GEOGRAPHICAL LIMITS ................................................................................................. - 5 STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................... - 5 -

2.

CRITERIA FOR SHRINE IDENTIFICATION ........................................ - 8 -

2.1. 2.2. 2.3.

2.5.

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. - 8 A FRAMEWORK FOR CULT IDENTIFICATION ................................................................... - 8 PRINCIPAL CRITERIA: ARTEFACTS ............................................................................... - 11 VOTIVE OFFERINGS .............................................................................................. - 11 FIGURINES ........................................................................................................... - 11 PRODUCE /FOODSTUFFS....................................................................................... - 12 CULT STATUES OR IMAGES .................................................................................... - 13 RELIGIOUS ICONOGRAPHY .................................................................................... - 13 EVIDENCE FOR RITUAL DINING ............................................................................. - 13 MINOR CRITERIA: FEATURES ...................................................................................... - 14 BUILT FURNISHINGS FOR CULT PRACTICE ............................................................. - 14 HEARTHS AND HEARTH AREAS............................................................................... - 14 FEATURES FOR LIBATION PRACTICES..................................................................... - 15 IDENTIFYING DOMESTIC CULT PRACTICE .................................................................... - 15 -

3.

SITE GAZETTEER .................................................................................... - 17 -

3.0. 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4. 3.5. 3.6. 3.7. 3.8. 3.9. 3.10. 3.11.

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... - 17 AETOS - ITHAKA .......................................................................................................... - 20 AGIA IRINI .................................................................................................................. - 22 AGIA TRIADA .............................................................................................................. - 24 AGIOS KONSTANTINOS – METHANA.............................................................................. - 25 AMYKLAI .................................................................................................................... - 27 APHAIA SANCTUARY - AEGINA ..................................................................................... - 29 APOLLO MALEATAS ..................................................................................................... - 31 ASINE – HOUSE G ....................................................................................................... - 33 BERBATI ..................................................................................................................... - 35 DELPHI ...................................................................................................................... - 37 ELEUSIS...................................................................................................................... - 38 -

2.4.

ii

3.12. 3.13. 3.14. 3.15. 3.16. 3.17. 3.18. 3.19. 3.20. 3.21. 3.22. 3.23. 3.24. 3.25. 3.26. 3.27.

ISTHMIAN SHRINE ....................................................................................................... - 41 KALAPODI .................................................................................................................. - 42 KALAUREIA - SANCTUARY OF POSEIDON ...................................................................... - 44 LEFKANDI................................................................................................................... - 46 MIDEA........................................................................................................................ - 47 MOUNT HYMETTUS ..................................................................................................... - 52 MYCENAE – THE CULT CENTRE................................................................................... - 54 NICHORIA ................................................................................................................... - 61 OLYMPIA .................................................................................................................... - 63 PALACE OF NESTOR ................................................................................................... - 64 PHYLAKOPI................................................................................................................. - 67 POLIS CAVE - ITHAKA ................................................................................................. - 70 POSEIDI...................................................................................................................... - 72 PROFITIS ELIAS CAVE ................................................................................................. - 74 THERMON ................................................................................................................... - 76 TIRYNS ....................................................................................................................... - 77 -

4.

SANCTUARY SURROUNDINGS: SPACE AND INCLUSIVENESS .. - 80 -

4.1. 4.2.

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... - 80 LATE HELLADIC IIIB SANCTUARIES ............................................................................. - 80 PALATIAL SHRINES ................................................................................................ - 82 SETTLEMENT SHRINES ........................................................................................... - 84 ACCESS AND INCLUSION .............................................................................. - 85 ISOLATED SHRINES................................................................................................ - 85 LH III C – PROTOGEOMETRIC SHRINES ....................................................................... - 88 PALATIAL SHRINES ................................................................................................ - 88 SETTLEMENT SHRINES ........................................................................................... - 89 ISOLATED SHRINES................................................................................................ - 89 SPACE AND SURROUNDINGS THROUGH TIME ............................................................... - 93 STATUS IN RITUAL PRACTICE: ‘OFFICIAL’ AND ‘POPULAR’ ? ....................................... - 94 ‘STATE PRACTICED’ RELIGION .............................................................................. - 95 THE MEGARON AND OPEN-COURTS: FUNCTION, FOCUS & STATUS .............. - 96 ‘OFFICIAL’ RELIGION ........................................................................................... - 97 ‘POPULAR’ RELIGION ........................................................................................... - 97 -

4.3.

4.4. 4.5.

5.

OFFERINGS: WHAT AND WHERE?..................................................... - 99 -

5.1. 5.2.

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... - 99 PRINCIPAL CRITERIA ................................................................................................... - 99 VOTIVE OFFERINGS .............................................................................................. - 99 FIGURINES ........................................................................................................... - 99 PRODUCE /FOODSTUFFS..................................................................................... - 101 FINE OBJECTS AND JEWELLERY ........................................................................... - 102 CULT STATUES: FIGURES .................................................................................... - 102 RELIGIOUS ICONOGRAPHY .................................................................................. - 103 EVIDENCE FOR RITUAL DINING ........................................................................... - 104 MINOR CRITERIA ...................................................................................................... - 105 BUILT FURNISHINGS FOR RITUAL PRACTICE ........................................................ - 105 FIXED FEATURES: PLATFORMS, BENCHES, DAIS OR ALTARS? ............................... - 105 -

5.3.

iii

PALATIAL SHRINES ................................................................................. - 105 SETTLEMENT SHRINES ............................................................................ - 106 ISOLATED SHRINES ................................................................................. - 106 HEARTHS AND HEARTH AREAS............................................................................. - 106 LIBATIONS .......................................................................................................... - 107 INSTALLATIONS FOR LIBATION ............................................................................. - 108 APPARATUS FOR LIBATION .................................................................................. - 111 RHYTA ..................................................................................................... - 112 STIRRUP JARS AND NARROW-NECKED JUGS? .......................................... - 114 -

6.

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS ....................................................................... - 116 -

6.1. 6.2. 6.3.

6.4. 6.5.

INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... - 116 RITUAL AND RELIGION? UNDERSTANDING THE TERMINOLOGY ................................... - 116 THE FEAST ............................................................................................................... - 117 WHAT IS FEASTING AND WHY DO IT? ................................................................... - 117 ANIMAL SACRIFICE ............................................................................................. - 118 ANIMAL BONE REMAINS AT SITES OF RELIGIOUS CHARACTER ............................... - 119 PALATIAL SHRINES ................................................................................. - 119 SETTLEMENT SHRINES ............................................................................ - 123 ISOLATED SHRINES .................................................................................. - 124 ANIMAL SACRIFICE THROUGHOUT THE PERIOD ................................................... - 125 FRESCO EVIDENCE FOR FEASTING ...................................................................... - 126 LINEAR B EVIDENCE FOR FEASTING .................................................................... - 128 DRINKING........................................................................................................... - 129 POTTERY ................................................................................................. - 129 PALATIAL SHRINES ................................................................................. - 131 SETTLEMENT AND ISOLATED SHRINES.................................................... - 135 PURIFICATION RITUALS ............................................................................................. - 135 PROCESSIONS ........................................................................................................... - 137 -

7.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION .......................................................... - 140 -

7.1. 7.2. 7.3. 7.4.

A SYSTEMATIC METHODOLOGY ................................................................................. - 140 SHRINE SURROUNDINGS THROUGH TIME .................................................................... - 140 RITUAL PRACTICE THROUGH TIME ............................................................................ - 141 FINAL THOUGHTS ..................................................................................................... - 143 CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIETY THROUGH TIME ................................................... - 143 CONCLUDING REMARKS ...................................................................................... - 144 -

8.

BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................................................................. I

iv

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURE 1: CRITERIA FOR SHRINE IDENTIFICATION ............................................................ - 10 FIGURE 2: MAP OF SITES TO BE DISCUSSED IN THIS STUDY ........................................... - 19 FIGURE 3: AGIA IRINI - PLAN OF THE SETTLEMENT .......................................................... - 22 FIGURE 4: AGIA IRINI - THE TEMPLE IN THE LH III C PERIOD ........................................... - 23 FIGURE 5: AGIOS KONSTANTINOS - PLAN OF THE SETTLEMENT ................................... - 25 FIGURE 6: AGIOS KONSTANTINOS - ROOM A AND ITS FIXED FEATURES ..................... - 26 FIGURE 7: AMYKLAI - VIEW FROM THE SHRINE AREA ..................................................... - 27 FIGURE 8: APHAIA - VIEW FROM THE SHRINE AREA .......................................................... - 29 FIGURE 9: APOLLO MALEATAS - VIEW FROM THE ALTAR COMPLEX ........................... - 31 FIGURE 10: APOLLO MALEATAS - VIEW OF THE HEARTH AREA ..................................... - 32 FIGURE 11: ASINE - PLAN OF ROOM XXXII ............................................................................ - 33 FIGURE 12: BERBATI - PLAN OF POTTER’S QUARTER ........................................................ - 35 FIGURE 13: BERBATI - THE ALTAR FEATURE FROM ROOM B .......................................... - 36 FIGURE 14: ELEUSIS - PLAN OF THE MEGARON ................................................................... - 39 FIGURE 15: KALAPODI – VIEW FROM THE SHRINE AREA .................................................. - 42 FIGURE 16: KALAUREIA - SKETCH OF TRENCH FEATURES .............................................. - 44 FIGURE 17: MIDEA - PLAN OF TERRACES 9 AND 10 ............................................................ - 47 FIGURE 18: MOUNT HYMETTUS - VIEW TO THE HOLLOW LOOKING NORTH .............. - 52 FIGURE 19: MYCENAE CULT CENTRE - PLAN ....................................................................... - 55 FIGURE 20: NICHORIA - UNIT 1-IV ........................................................................................... - 61 FIGURE 21: THE PALACE OF NESTOR ..................................................................................... - 65 FIGURE 22: PHYLAKOPI - PLAN OF THE SHRINE COMPLEX .............................................. - 67 FIGURE 23: POLIS CAVE - PLAN OF SITE ................................................................................ - 70 FIGURE 24: PROFITIS ELIAS - VIEW TOWARDS THE GULF OF NAUPLION ..................... - 74 FIGURE 25: PROFITIS ELIAS - PLAN OF FEATURES ON THE SUMMIT ............................. - 74 FIGURE 26: TIRYNS - THE CITADEL IN THE LH III B2 PERIOD .......................................... - 77 FIGURE 27: TIRYNS - THE CITADEL IN THE LH III C PERIOD ............................................ - 77 FIGURE 28: A BOVINE FIGURINE FROM APHAIA ................................................................ - 100 FIGURE 29: EXAMPLES OF FEMALE FIGURINES FROM APHAIA ..................................... - 100 FIGURE 30: ANTHROPOMORPHIC FIGURE FROM ROOM 19 (TEMPLE AT MYCENAE) - 103 FIGURE 31: FRESCO FROM ROOM WITH THE FRESCO ....................................................... - 104 FIGURE 32: THE RAISED ALABASTER SLAB IN THE PORCH TO THE MEGARON AT MYCENAE .............................................................................................................. - 108 FIGURE 33: THE OVAL DEPRESSION ...................................................................................... - 108 FIGURE 34: THE LIBATION ALTAR FROM TSOUNTAS SHRINE ....................................... - 109 FIGURE 35: LIBATION CHANNEL IN THE MEGARON FROM THE PALACE OF NESTOR ..... 109 FIGURE 36: AGIOS KONSTANTINOS – AREA F ..................................................................... - 110 FIGURE 37: AGIOS KONSTANTINOS – .................................................................................... - 111 FIGURE 38: ANIMAL HEAD RHYTON FROM ROOM A, AGIOS KONSTANTINOS........... - 113 FIGURE 39: FRESCO FROM THE PALACE OF NESTOR – MEN FROM THE HUNT ......... - 126 FIGURE 40: FRESCO FROM THE MEGARON AT PYLOS ..................................................... - 127 FIGURE 41: PROCESSION FRESCO FROM PYLOS ................................................................ - 127 FIGURE 42: PURIFICATION (?) FEATURE IN THE PORCH OF THE MEGARON AT MYCENAE .............................................................................................................. - 135 FIGURE 43: FEATURE IN THE COURTYARD AT PHYLAKOPI ........................................... - 136 -

v

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1: ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY OF THE LATE BRONZE AGE & THE TRANSITION TO THE PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIOD ................................. - 4 TABLE 2: SCORING SYSTEM FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF SHRINE SITES ..... - 18 TABLE 3: FINDS FROM THE TEMPLE COMPLEX ( PHASE VII) ............................. - 59 TABLE 4: TERRACOTTAS & POTTERY FROM PHYLAKOPI LH IIIA – LH IIIC ... - 68 TABLE 5 : RELIGIOUS SITES IN USE OR ESTABLISHED IN THE LH III B PERIOD AND A SUMMARY OF THEIR SETTING ................................................... - 81 TABLE 6: SHRINES ESTABLISHED IN THE LH III C AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS WITH A SUMMARY OF THEIR SURROUNDINGS .................. - 91 TABLE 7: SITES UNDER CONSIDERATION TOGETHER WITH THEIR ANIMAL BONE ASSEMBLAGE .................................................................................. - 122 TABLE 8: POTTERY ASSOCIATED WITH RITUAL PRACTICE AT THE SITES UNDER CONSIDERATION ........................................................................................ - 130 -

vi

ABBREVIATIONS JOURNALS AJA

American Journal of Archaeology

AR

Archaeological Reports

BAR

British Archaeological Reports

BICS

Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies of the University of London

BSA

Annual of the British School at Athens

JHS

Journal of Hellenic Studies

OJA

Oxford Journal of Archaeology

OpAth

Opuscula Atheniensia

SIMA

Studies In Mediterranean Archaeology

OTHER ABBREVIATIONS LBA

Late Bronze Age

EIA

Early Iron Age

EH

Early Helladic

MH

Middle Helladic

LH

Late Helladic

EM

Early Minoan

MM

Middle Minoan

LM

Late Minoan

SM

Sub-Mycenaean

PG

Protogeometric

EPG

Early Protogeometric

MPG

Middle Protogeometric

LPG

Late Protogeometric

vii

1. PREFACE

1.1.

which he applied to studies of animal sacrifice at Agios Konstantinos;3 Wright who has recently

BACKGROUND

focused on Mycenaean feasting;4 and French who has become an authority on the identification of Mycenaean figurine types.5

Ritual and religion have long been topics which incite great interest, irrespective of a person’s upbringing or cultural background. The likelihood of finding someone in the western world who has no knowledge of Greek mythical stories, the mysteries of the pyramids and temples of Ancient Egypt or the wrath of the Roman authorities against early Christians, is highly unlikely, even if this only comes in the form of Hollywood films.

Similarly, the Classical period of Greek religion has also long been a major topic of discussion, which is not surprising when one considers the stunning monuments which still remain above ground scattered throughout the Greek world. These remains have intrigued not only early travellers but have also become the focus of much scholarly work in Greece.6

When one delves deeper into these ancient civilisations, in an attempt to better understand their societies, it becomes apparent that religion played a significant role in the everyday lives of people, to a point where the separation of secular and sacred activities is a difficult task.

Therefore, the combination of where it is believed recent research is lacking and a desire to follow religion through a changing Aegean society, determined the period of history this study addresses. For this period of mainland Greece between the fall of the Mycenaean Palatial system and the rise of the city states c.700/600 BC an ever growing corpus of information is becoming available.

The focus for this study stemmed from this realisation, therefore, ritual practice throughout the Late Helladic (LH) III B to Protogeometric periods of Greece was chosen. In previous Undergraduate studies, the religion of Minoan Crete was addressed with an emphasis on isolated shrines during the transition from the Prepalatial to Old Palace periods. This set in motion an interest as to how changing societies might effect, or be affected by religious practices.

At present, evidence is increasing dramatically for the continuation of habitation in and around the palace citadels after their collapse. For an example of this, one can refer to the most recent work at Midea by Gisela Walberg and Katie Demakopoulou who are continually unearthing new material for the long history of this site throughout the Bronze Age period, including a very active community presence in the LH III C period.7 The palatial sites at Midea, Mycenae, Tiryns and Pylos will be considered within this study as they provide the most clear and continuous evidence throughout the period under discussion. The Palatial sites at Gla,8 Orchomenos and Thebes will not be referred to, due to the severe lack of published evidence available for the topic under consideration. (Ongoing research on Salamis may reveal another palatial centre, but for the same reason will not be included in this discussion.9)

After some preliminary research it transpired that although the subject was in no way exhausted, many scholars were already addressing to some extent the subject of Late Bronze Age religion, focusing on the ritual practice taking place within Mycenaean society. Robin Hagg has made significant contributions to research which include studies on ritual practice, status in religion, the role of religion and also analysis of excavation material discovered at shrine areas.1 Also, a study conducted by Colin Renfrew has considered sanctuaries of the Late Bronze Age period with the aim of understanding features that are common within Mycenaean shrines. He developed a methodological approach to religious interpretation which has influenced many studies which followed.2 In addition, specialised areas of study have been considered; Hamilakis addressing ‘consumption’,

3 Hamilakis 2000, 2003a, 2003b; Agios Konstantinos is a settlement site / shrine of the LBA, see gazetteer entry 3.4 4 Wright 2004a, 2004b 5 French 1971, 1981a, 2003 6 This study will not touch on the Classical Greek world however further reading and references can be found in Osborne 2000; Price 1999; and Thomas 2000 7 Demakopoulou et al: 2001(b), 2004, 2006; Walberg: 1998, 2007. 8 A site very different in design and character from the palatial sites of the Mycenaean World; Gla, although fortified in the Cyclopean fashion, and containing some features reminiscent of the palace centres, is said to have its central function as a part of the undertaking to drain lake kopais. See Iakovidis 2001. 9 See Lolos 1996

1 For further reading on LBA religion see; Hagg 1983, 1995, 1996a, 2001 (see bibliography for further Hagg); Schofield 2007:144-169; Nilsson 1950 ; Mylonas 1966 are to name but a few 2 Especially Renfrew 1985 : 11-26, the whole study follows his methodological approach; also Renfrew 1999, 2007 follow structured theoretical approaches

-1-

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE Catherine Morgan18 with the publication of the Early Iron Age sanctuary at Isthmia, where she also considers shrines of the same period. Morgan has also contributed research on society and religion supplementary to the Isthmian study. These have provided some understanding of the few shrines which existed in the Protogeometric period, and a wider knowledge for the period which witnessed the rise of the polis state.19

The other side of the spectrum is the current understanding of the rise of the Greek states, which until quite recently was considered to be in the eighth century BC. Formerly, the eighth century BC was termed a time of ‘renaissance’ by scholars such as Robin Hagg10 and Snodgrass,11 which for a while was not proved otherwise. However, studies continue to show that many of the developments thought to belong to the eighth century, can actually be traced back to the tenth and ninth centuries BC.12 Papers by Antonaccio and Sourvinou-Inwood both agree that what occurred in Early Iron Age religion was in no way a ‘Renaissance’ (a relatively sudden re-use of old forgotten ideas and practices in a newly revised fashion) but instead, a continuous and intensifying development from the Dark Age (so termed by those authors).13 To complement these works, the publication by Mazarakis-Ainian which addresses rulers dwellings, architecture and religion between 1100 – 700 BC, has also brought together many recent publications and accounts of excavated material which enlighten this period.14 This study addresses the lack of research by considering ritual practice from the LH III B period, through the LH III C until the developments which bring about the end of the Protogeometric period.15 Research on sacred sites and ritual practice to date either considers the Late Bronze Age stopping at the destruction of the palaces (or the LH III C period at the latest), or, on the other hand, is focused on the origins of Greek religion which stretch back into the Protogeometric period, from known Archaic and Classical sacred sites.

Therefore, the results of the research from this study will explore the continuity of the sacred shrine and the ritual actions which were practiced from the established civilisation of the Mycenaean period, through a period of social change which ultimately led to the development of the city states of mainland Greece. It will cover all activities of the religious sphere which are of the living world, but excludes rituals associated with funerary practice and the dead. (This is, unfortunately due to limitations of space available within this study.20)

1.2.

THE CHARACTER OF SETTLEMENT FROM THE LATE BRONZE AGE TO PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS

It was not possible within the scope of this study to complete detailed research and construct a fresh narrative for all settlements in the Aegean throughout this period. However, the basic characteristics from the Late Bronze Age to Protogeometric periods are outlined so as to avoid segregating the sacred world from the secular, acknowledging social change and development. Mycenaean material culture during its apogee (LH III A - LH III B periods, the 14th and 13th centuries BC) was characterised by Palace centres dispersed around mainland Greece: at Mycenae, Tiryns and Midea in the Argolid;21 Pylos in Messenia;22 and Thebes and Gla in Boeotia.23 In addition, it is most probable a Mycenaean citadel existed on the Athenian Acropolis.24 The palaces are generally considered to have accommodated the residences of important officials, the wanaktes, and the administrative centres of the territories over which they presided.25 Contemporary to the citadel sites were smaller settlements. Some of these were most probably

The work by Mazarakis-Ainian touches upon this issue, choosing however to focus on architecture and structures; which of course neglects the numerous open-air shrines which have been discovered and leaves analysis of the sacred sphere as a whole, quite impossible. In addition to this, there have been some comprehensive publications of excavated shrines which include an outline of comparative sacred sites of the same period. The main examples being Katie Demakopoulou16 with her results from the shrine at Amyklai, combined with a summary of the Lakonian situation during the LH III C period, PilafidisWilliams17 on the sanctuary of Aphaia on Aegina, and

18

Morgan : 1999 Morgan 1990, 1996, 1998, 2003 One can find discussions of burial and funeral rites in Cavanagh and Mee 1998; Gallou 2005; Hagg and Nordquist 1990, with their accompanying bibliographies. 21 For Mycenae see French 2002; Shelmerdine 1997: 541-542; Taylour, French and Wardle 1981. For Tiryns see Kilian 1998; Shelmerdine 1997: 543. For Midea see Shelmerdine 1997: 543-547; Walberg 1998; Demakopoulou et al 2004, 2006 22 Blegen, Rawson, Taylor and Donovan 1973; Shelmerdine 1997: 545-547 23 Shelmerdine 1997: 548 24 Shelmerdine 1997: 547-548 25 Dickinson 2006: 35 19

10

20

Hagg 1983 : 208-210, A general discussion addresses the notion of an eighth century BC Renaissance 11 Snodgrass 2000 : 416-436 12 For recent studies and extensive bibliographical links see; Lemos 2002; Morgan 1999. 13 Antonaccio 1994 : 79-104; Sourvinou-Inwood 1995: 1-17. 14 Mazarakis-Ainian 1997 15 See section 1.2 and 1.3 below for a discussion on settlement changes through this period, and the evidence which marks chronological developments. 16 Demakopoulou 1982 17 Pilafidis – Williams : 1998

-2-

PREFACE produced by the excavator and later publications, to conclude the contents to be a collection of antiques and ancestral possessions which were kept by the elite families of the post-palatial period.34 As Maran has shown, this evidence once again testifies to an elite class still residing in the old palace area at Tiryns.

subject to their closest palace, such as the settlement of Nichoria to the palatial centre at Pylos, whilst others not clearly so.26 It is likely that during the palatial period many major and minor principalities were linked by networks of alliance and interdependency, and may have been ruled by inter-related families.27

Re-settlement can also be identified at Mycenae, both on the upper citadel in layers above the Mycenaean Megaron, and on the lower terraces of the Citadel House Area. The re-building in the Citadel House Area was limited, making use of the citadel wall as a terrace support, some debris was cleared as well as making use of the old (well built) walls, however this occupation only lasted a short time before another destruction took place.35 Of interest, in depicting the general trend which appears in settlement activity within the LH III C period, is that Mycenae also provides evidence for a new large structure above the ruined levels of the Mycenaean Megaron. The dating of this structure is not completely clear; however French believes it more than likely belongs to this era due to some of the pottery finds, but mainly its comparison to Building T at Tiryns.36

The destruction of the palaces c.1200 BC changed the character of settlement; this may be observed in the LH III C period.28 At Nichoria the settlement remained inhabited and grew significantly, with burial and house architecture suggesting growth in elite power.29 The finds from areas marginal to the palace centres, such as Lefkandi, also demonstrate an increase in settlement activity.30 The scene created of the LH III C period following further investigation is increasingly one of repair and re-occupation. Continuing work on the sequences from Mycenae, Tiryns and Midea have shown settlement, and in all three cases even a restyling and reuse of the megaron complexes and adjoining courts. (Although at Midea the known restyling is of the megaron on the lower terraces, not the upper citadel, see gazetteer entry 3.16.)

In addition, excavations which are currently ongoing at Midea have revealed a large megaron complex on the lower terraces of the site. The detail is presented in Gazetteer entry 3.16, but of interest is that this megaron unit was restyled and re-built in the LH III C period,37 resulting in a layout which also closely resembled Building T at Tiryns.

At Tiryns the Mycenaean Megaron was rebuilt (named Building T) with a slightly narrower long axis which was divided down the centre by a row of columns. The central hearth, a feature of the previous structure, was by now out of use and instead, there was a smooth slab of dark grey limestone situated in front of the throne.31 The function of this slab is far from certain, however, it is noted that it would not serve well as a column base, so it is quite possible it was utilised as a stand for either a portable hearth or some other artefact. In addition, the court giving access to the new megaron was cleared and the previously round altar transformed into a square platform structure. This is dated contemporarily with the rebuild of the megaron as some of the curved blocks which were removed from the altar were found reused in the building work of Building T.32

While the general impression created by material culture in the LH III C period suggests some modest prosperity, Snodgrass believes that during the course of the period even this declines, with many settlements gradually diminishing until finally being abandoned.38 He notes characteristics of the Early Iron Age, are settlements of significantly smaller proportions than those of the earlier palatial period. Dickinson concurs, whilst acknowledging the ability of the populace to withstand the actual palatial collapse of 1200 BC and the situation immediately following, believing that an overwhelming instability would have effected the surviving population in the initial stages of the Protogeometric period.39

The situation of the lower citadel and lower town at Tiryns however, did not follow the plan of the preceding period. These lower areas as noted by Maran, depict a more village like occupation, with houses surrounding courtyards.33 It was in these lower areas that the ‘Tiryns Treasure’ was discovered, in turn fuelling debate as to the true origins and chronology of the hoard. Maran has convincingly reevaluated the material remains alongside reports 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

Lemos on the other hand suggests that the archaeology points towards a situation of stability from the Submycenaean to Protogeometric periods. She states that many settlements had continuous occupation, and in addition many had no fortification

34

For Pylos see Foxhall 1995: 244 Dickinson 2006: 29 Dickinson 2006: 23 Foxhall 1995: 244-245 Foxhall 1995: 248 Maran 2001 : 114 Maran 2001 : 115 Maran 2008 : 125

For a full account of the find context and surrounding discussion, including references to the excavators notes and following publications, see Maran 2008 : 129-142 35 French 2002 : 135 36 French 2002 : 136 37 Walberg forthcoming : 7 38 Snodgrass 2000: 363 39 Dickinson 2006: 71

-3-

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE walls, both of which confirm her suggestion.40 Lemos builds upon this theory, suggesting that in the LH III C period many regions shared similar characteristics; in particular, Euboea, Boeotia, Phokis, east Lokris, and Thessaly shared more than the standard Protogeometric features evidenced elsewhere. Her basis for this is drawn from the pottery remains which formed a ‘ceramic koine’ in which specific vase types were found to define its regional limits.41

TABLE 1: ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY OF THE LATE BRONZE AGE43 & THE TRANSITION TO THE PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIOD44

It must be acknowledged that evidence is constantly being unearthed in association with the settlement pattern of this period, and as new material is published, the situation for this early stage of the Protogeometric period will slowly become more informed.

1.3.

CHRONOLOGICAL SCOPE

The table below presents the absolute chronology of the Aegean Bronze Age as laid out by Warren & Hankey and Dickinson. The LH III B period (around 1340 - 1180 BC) will be the focus of material discussed in connection with the Mycenaean period and so mark the chronological era in which this study will begin. Dickinson notes that the end of the Late LH III B period around 1200-1180 BC, is almost uniformly agreed upon as it combines radiocarbon dates and Egyptian Synchronisms, however, scientific forms of dating are far fewer for the following periods of Aegean history.42 After the main palatial destruction at the end of the LH III B period, understandable changes can be witnessed both within and outside the palatial centres; briefly discussed above as part of section 1.2. The initial phase after the demise of palatial grandeur is known as the LH III C period, which rather than being a period of abandonment and dispersion, actually witnessed many successful attempts at re-building and re-settlement alongside continued activity at many cult sites.

41 42

1390+ - 1370/1360

LH III A2

1370/1360 – 1340/1330

LH III B

1340/1330 – 1185/1180

LHIIIC Early/Middle/late & Submycenaean

1190/1200 – 1050/1025

Protogeometric

1050/1025 - 900

It must also be mentioned here that evidence has become available from Assiros, which adds to the discussion of dating the LH III B and beginning of the Protogeometric periods. The case uses evidence of Group I amphorae which are said to represent an influence from Attic Protogeometric. This suggestion brought to the foreground by Newton and Wardle,45 is of interest and could raise all dates accepted for the LH III C and Protogeometric periods by 50-75 years. However, following Dickinson’s caution, it is probably best to await the comments of other experts and continue using the ‘standard’ chronology.46

This study begins with the situation as it existed within the established civilisation of the Mycenaean period. By researching this first period, it is not intended to give a full account of religion through the whole Mycenaean era, but to offer instead an understanding of the ritual actions that were developed and became apparent in the final years before the palatial destruction.

40

LH III A1

Although the dates provided above by Warren & Hankey and Dickinson are to be followed as the structural boundaries for this study, it must be understood that subsequent to the destruction of the palaces, if not before, it is impossible to use ‘absolute’ chronology with any certainty. Many of the divisions between phases of the Late Bronze Age and Protogeometric periods have been created using the stylistic development of pottery alongside estimated family generations. Although these methods can be used as an account of the progression of time, how long each phase would take is merely estimation. This leaves the academic study of this period more to a matter of a ’sequence of events’ rather than absolute dates of named artefacts or events. The end of the Protogeometric period brings with it further developments which can be seen especially in the new pottery style which is said to have first been witnessed in Athenian cemeteries.47 It is at this point, with the transition into the Geometric period, where this study concludes.

43 Warren and Hankey (table 3.1) 1989 : 169 for the LH III A-B periods 44 Dickinson 2006 : 23 for the LH III C and Protogeometric periods 45 Newton et al 2005 : 173-174 46 Dickinson 2006 : 20 47 Coldstream 1977 : 25

Lemos 2002 : 195 Lemos 2002 : 213 Dickinson 2006 : 20

-4-

PREFACE

1.4.

GEOGRAPHICAL LIMITS

Chapter Three, Site Gazetteer begins firstly, by introducing a scoring system which allows each site to be placed in one of the categories of ‘possible’, ‘probable’ or ‘proposed’ cult sites. Each of the criteria which was introduced and defined in chapter two, is weighted and reflected by a symbol. This system is then applied to all the sites in the Gazetteer. The symbols thus enable the cumulative weight of the criteria at any one site to be assessed, and an informed judgement made about the presence of cult practice.

This study seeks primarily to address the area of mainland Greece. Ithaka, Aegina and Kea, islands in close proximity to the mainland, will also be considered in addition to Melos due to the evidence available to assist with this study. With the exception of parallels to be seen in the peak sanctuaries, Crete is omitted from the scope of this study. The island of Crete is without doubt distinctive. The long and successful civilisation of the Minoans which predates any comparable prosperity on the mainland has produced a plentiful array of evidence which paints a picture of a wealthy, far reaching and complex society. The cult sites and ritual practice of Crete are only a part of this complexity; however the topic has abundant archaeological evidence at the disposal of current researchers. Peatfield48 characterises Minoan peak and cave cults with their general prominence and visibility in association with nearby settlements, and their relatively close proximity, only a few hours walking distance from inhabited areas.49 These sites will be briefly mentioned in later chapters; but for comparison only.

1.5.

For ease of access to details, sites are presented in alphabetical order, regardless of the chronological period to which they may belong. Each site has an account of evidence existing in association with the criteria for shrine identification. A plan of the site and/or photographs will accompany each account where possible, to assist with the understanding of the site in question. Further illustrations of particular finds or features are part of following chapters where appropriate. This will not however, be the place where the significance of the material is discussed in any detail. Any opinions or hypotheses within the gazetteer are those of the referenced authors who published evidence about the sites. My only supplements are 1) the addition of symbols in accordance with the proposed list of criteria, and a brief statement and justification as to why a site has been placed in a particular category (possible, probable, or proposed). 2) A statement as to whether the shrine is considered to be palatial, settlement or isolated; this will be deduced from the sites location and surroundings. For each site, details of location, date, architecture and finds are provided as the basis for classification as a place of cult activity.

STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY

The study of ritual practice throughout the LH III B to Protogeometric periods is the central theme of this research and the ritual actions themselves will be presented in Chapters Five and Six, however the preceding three Chapters present information about the shrines in which the ritual actions were performed. Chapter Two, Criteria for Shrine Identification; acknowledges the work of previous Aegean archaeologists and their methods for classification of the features which should be present, in order for a site to be categorised as cultic in nature. The chapter goes one step further with the creation of new criteria specifically adapted to be relevant to all types of sanctuaries, be they palatial cult centres, settlement shrines, or isolated open-air shrines throughout the period. Since existing ‘Correlates’ (so named by those authors) had a focus on shrines of the Bronze Age period, expansion and refinements were essential for the purpose of this study, to include the necessary criteria which are present in shrines of both the LH III C and Protogeometric periods. The chapter then moves on to consider each criterion and explain why specific features were chosen for inclusion in the process of identification, justifying their use to identify a shrine.

It must be noted that excavation work at many of these sites is ongoing, with publications continuing to update and change our knowledge of this period. Therefore, the site information in this study should be up-to-date as of January 2010. Chapter Four, Sanctuary Surroundings: Space and Inclusiveness, considers both the allocation of space immediately within and outside the shrine buildings, as well as taking into account the location and setting of the shrine within its wider surroundings and environment. The sanctuary sites are considered in two groups, firstly that of the LH III B period and secondly the LH III C and Protogeometric periods. It can be demonstrated not only that a ‘lack of space’ is common in built shrines of the LH III B period (both palatial and settlement), but also that isolated sanctuaries are actually a widespread occurrence in both groups considered. One key difference which can be identified however, is the topographical location of the ‘isolated sanctuaries’; which move from a highland, to a lowland position as time passes.

48

Peatfield 1983 : 275 For discussions of Peak Sanctuaries in general see: Peatfield 1983, 1987, 2001; Rutkowski 1986; for specific sites, Jouktas: Karetsou 1981; Petsopha: Rutkowski 1991; Psychro Cave: Watrous 1996. 49

-5-

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE either of these activities. Research has highlighted that whilst shrines of the LH III B period associated to settlements and palaces, generally displayed sacrificial practice; those of an isolated nature did not. However, all shrines that were founded in or after the LH IIIC period, provided evidence for the cooking of animals, and burning of bone remains.

This in turn leads on to the topic of ‘status’ in ritual practice. Decades previous to this study, scholars had already begun to address the topic concerning possible social divides and status of participants in Aegean religion. Hagg has more recently paid this topic significant attention,50though it is of course, a topic which any study of ritual practice, culture and worship addresses to a certain extent, especially when considering the Late Bronze Age period. Due to the existence in the Late Bronze Age period of established shrines in various locations, be they Palatial, settlement, or isolated open-air shrines, there is an instant desire to categorise these sanctuaries according to the status of those who frequented them.

In addition, drinking practices are considered with evidence from the pottery assemblages providing the majority of the information. Evidence for drinking remains constant; the use of cups or kylikes is evident from all religious sites throughout the entire period under consideration, demonstrating their importance within the sacred sphere.

This section considers the terminology that has been used in the past, and, following the study of sanctuary’s surroundings, attempts to better understand the possible status divide in religion. A final definition will not be attempted, as it is felt that the constant flow of evidence adding to our current knowledge may well altar our views. However, this section will address the difficulties associated with terms such as ‘official’ and ‘popular’ cult practice, and in doing so attempt to set out some parameters for which ritual participation and status can be considered.

Thereafter, purification rituals and processions are considered. The section on purification aims to address the neglected possibility that some of the artefacts and fixed furnishings in ritual settings which have generally been considered as associated with libation (or features and artefacts not discussed at all), may actually constitute installations for purification rituals to cleanse before worship. The latter, is once again best attested in the LH III B period, however, this is unfortunately due to the majority of the evidence coming from frescos which are generally only found in a palatial context. This results in any theories of procession from the Protogeometric period being very speculative.

Chapter five, Offerings: What and Where, examines the type of votive offerings that are dedicated at shrines throughout the period in question. In addition, the areas at which the offerings are found along with their built features are identified and discussed. It has become apparent that offerings, which are most commonly figurines of animal and female form, are found in association with platforms for display, whether long narrow benches against side walls or central raised altars. At isolated shrines of all periods, the offerings are generally concentrated in an open-air location. Other offerings, such as miniature pottery vessels, jewellery and food can also be evidenced at shrines throughout the periods under consideration.

The closing chapter is initially separated into three sections to clearly highlight the main findings which the research has achieved. These fall into the categories of A Systematic Methodology, Shrine Surroundings through time, and Ritual Practice through time. After which a short section is dedicated to the Characteristics of Society through time, to compare the sacred and secular spheres alongside, and attempt to understand what changes may have occurred in society, by the analysis of the shrine areas.

This chapter also considers the practice of libation (liquid offerings), by consulting two types of evidence; the fixed features or Installations for libation, such as channels to accept liquid offerings; as well as objects such as rhyta and pottery forms or Apparatus for libation, conducive to the pouring of liquids. Chapter six is reserved for Ritual Actions throughout the period of study. The first part of this chapter is concerned mainly with activities of consumption, beginning with evidence for feasting and sacrifice, initially in the palatial LH III B period. This is the only era in which secure evidence can be found for the practice of actions on a large scale, although only attested at the Palace of Nestor and Midea, whilst the other palatial sites show little or no evidence at all for 50

Hagg 1981b : 35-39

-6-

2. 2.1.

CRITERIA FOR SHRINE IDENTIFICATION

INTRODUCTION

For this reason, the more recent publication by Pilafidis – Williams,52 expands upon Renfrew’s original account with some significant adaptations. She has re-organised many of the correlates to be more concise and also removed any bias which Renfrew’s model showed towards built shrines. This work has provided a framework which also fully encompassed open-air shrines, which was much needed.53 Moreover, Pilafidis – Williams mentions another aspect necessary when identifying isolated non-built shrines, where an assemblage of probable cult objects have been found.

Before individual sites can be identified as places of cult activity and classified by their relationship to settlements etc., a methodological framework is needed to provide a clear and considered basis for identification. Each of the relevant criteria is set out below, with illustrative examples provided.

2.2.

A FRAMEWORK FOR CULT IDENTIFICATION

“The recognition of a non-built shrine, on the other hand, is based much more on negative, circumstantial evidence, such as the lack of tombs and the lack of buildings, which would have indicated a settlement.” 54 (The underlining is my own.)

In previous studies a framework for discussion has been created in respect of the largely built shrines of the late Mycenaean period (LH III B / C periods) in order to place them securely within the sacred sphere. The first authoritative ‘list of correlates’ (so termed by the author) for shrine identification, was stated by Renfrew (1985:19-20). Renfrew stated the recognition of cult must be based on “context: single indications are rarely sufficient in themselves”,51 in other words, one single find alone should never be taken as evidence for the practice of religious ritual. This point is one which has with good reason, been widely accepted and has resulted in the study of not only finds which appear to be of religious significance but also takes into account the setting in which they were found, along with the associated architecture (if any) and the collective sum of artefacts, as the basis for firm conclusions. Although Renfrew’s correlates cover many issues which must be considered when identifying a cult area, they also reflect the stage research of religious areas was then at. That is to say, his correlates concerning the ‘location’ of a shrine, correspond very well with the features of sites known at that time, such as Peak and Cave sanctuaries of Minoan Crete (Renfrew’s correlate 1), and the built sanctuary areas such as the Cult Centre at Mycenae, and his own excavation of the two shrine buildings at Phylakopi (correlate 2 and possibly 18).

This statement is not only valid, but essential for the identification of isolated shrines. It does not mean that where a settlement or burial site cannot be detected, the finds must be cultic; however, it does make a classification as sacred, much more likely. When the find context is ‘open-air’, as is the case with the sanctuary of Aphaia on Aegina, a negative identification of settlement or burial is considered alongside the artefacts; which together indicate a much stronger likelihood the finds are actually associated with a cult context. Although the criteria initially set down by Renfrew were and still are very relevant for the purpose of this study, and the model provided by Pilafidis-Williams suits the variety of shrine types which appear throughout the Late Bronze Age period, neither model also provides the scope for shrine classification throughout the LH III C and Protogeometric periods. Therefore, the Pilafidis-Williams model has been taken as a template and modifications have been made which are necessary for the purpose of identifying all sanctuary types from the LH III B to Protogeometric periods.

These correlates could enable the identification of both isolated sites of the Late Bronze Age (correlate 1, due to their elevated setting), and the built shrines of the same period (correlate 2), to be presented in the gazetteer below. Further correlates relate to finds and features which are still very valid today for criteria to recognise and classify religious sites. However, as will be seen within the Gazetteer below, many religious sites existed in the LH III C and Protogeometric periods which were isolated open-air shrines, these varieties of religious sites are not sufficiently covered by Renfrew’s correlates. 51

The majority of Pilafidis-Williams ‘B: Secondary’ correlates are better suited in other areas of shrine analysis. For example “ 10) Investment of wealth in the equipment and offerings.”;55 would be more helpful to ascertain the possible status of worshiper’s 52

Pilafidis – Williams 1998, especially pages 124-125 Cathy Morgan chose to follow Pilafidis-Williams list of correlates in her publication of the EIA sanctuary at Isthmia, finding Renfrew’s model less appropriate for the same reasons; Morgan 1999 : 303 54 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 124 55 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 124 53

Renfrew 1985 : 15

-7-

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE religious, but simply adds to the story of who was worshipping at the sites. These aspects are considered as part of the discussion regarding shrine status in section 4.5.

at the shrines, rather than the identification of a site as religious. In the list below I have set-out the correlates as stated by Pilafidis-Williams, with my critique (in bold) of their applicability to the sites of this period and cross references to further discussion as appropriate.

The criteria to be used in this study have been divided into three sections; Principal criteria: Artefacts, Minor criteria: Features and finally Categorisation of Shrine Type. The reason for the division of the first two sections is due to the belief that the second group (minor), although of importance, cannot stand alone to provide definitive shrine identification. Whilst structural and architectural features can increase the probability that a given assemblage reflects the presence of a shrine when other criteria have already been identified, the mere existence of for example, a structure with a central platform, cannot indicate the presence of a cult building with any certainty, unless cult artefacts are found in association with it.

A: Primary 1) Special facilities for ritual practice: altars, benches, pools or basins of water. Should be a ‘minor criteria’ – see my criterion 2.4.1 2) Special portable equipment employed in the cult practice: special receptacles, lamps etc. Not clearly used for identification of a shrine, if libation receptacles; see my criterion 2.4.3 3) Attention focusing devices reflected in the architecture or movable equipment. Duplication: considered within Correlate 1. 4) Use of a cult image or aniconic representation. My criterion 2.3.2 5) Special movements of prayer and adoration reflected in the images. Duplication: considered within Correlate 7. 6) Votive offerings My criterion 2.3.1 7) Repeated Symbols a) Symbolism also used in funerary rites b) Iconographic relationship to the deity worshipped My criterion 2.3.3

On the other hand, it is suggested that the ‘principal criteria’ can stand alone in the process of shrine identification and that at least one principal criterion must be present to support acceptance of any site as sacred. When more criteria are recognisable, the higher the probability of a site’s sacred nature. The following section will briefly address each of the chosen criterion listed below to define exactly what is to be understood by their definition, function and justification within the criteria of shrine identification.

B: Secondary 8) Bones indicating blood sacrifice My criterion 2.3.4 as a ‘principal criterion’ ritual dining 9) Offerings of prepared foodstuffs Duplication: considered within Correlate 6. 10) Investment of wealth in the equipment and offerings Not clearly for shrine identification, better suited to identify shrine status, see section 4.6 11) Various devices inducing religious experience Not clear how this is identified and not clearly for shrine identification.

Although I am confident of the criteria chosen to identify a shrine, whilst acknowledging that this is partly based on previously published studies by Renfrew and Pilafidis-Williams, justification for each criterion could not be easily referenced to previous authors, as their correlates were not fully discussed, or their validity ascertained. Some of the criterion used have been considered for their cult significance by previous studies; others have not. Whilst writing this section it became apparent that many academics use the correlates provided by Renfrew or Pilafidis-Williams for justifying each feature or artefact as cultic; and so deserving its place within the ‘list’. Even the original (Renfrew) provides a detailed explanation of only some of the correlates (which are referenced below where available), the others are accepted automatically for their cult significance and assistance in shrine identification.

C: Type Of Cult 12) Type of cult: non-built or built a) non built / cave b) built i) Primary: reflection in the architecture of conspicuous display or hidden exclusive mysteries. ii) Secondary: investment of wealth reflected in the architecture.

Religious structures from the period of this study as a rule were not constructed with any kind of monumentality; in addition, finds and offerings were mostly of clay (such as small figurines and pottery). The instances where these were of a much finer design and standard, as well as when offerings signified greater wealth, such as jewellery or fine ivory carvings, do not assist with identifying a site as -8-

This seems to have been a point very easily overlooked, especially when one is accustomed to the types of features and finds expected of an Aegean shrine assemblage. Even Morgan chose to discuss the identification of the shrine at Isthmia using PilafidisWilliams correlates without them first being fully justified as cultic.56

56

Morgan 1999 : 303

CRITERIA FOR SHRINE IDENTIFICATION

FIGURE 1: CRITERIA FOR SHRINE IDENTIFICATION57

2.3 Principal Criteria : Artefacts 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 a. b.

Assemblage of votive offerings Presence of cult statue or image Religious iconography Evidence for ritual dining. Pottery for drinking & dining Concentrations of animal bone / fatty deposits

2.4 Minor Criteria : Features 2.4.1 2.4.2 2.4.3 a. b.

Built furnishings for ritual practice Hearth or hearth area (including ash altars) Features for libation practices. Installations for libation Apparatus for libation

Categorisation of Shrine type Built Shrine a. A built structure b. Temenos Area / recognisable open-air space c. Lack of evidence for multiple functions Non-built Shrine a. Focal area. E.g cave, mountain peak/plateau, burnt area b. Association with abandoned ancestral settlement c. Lack of contemporary settlement or burials.

Therefore, the justification of my criteria below is a first attempt to explain fully each chosen criterion. Where previous studies have been published which help with these justifications, they have been referenced; all other rationalisations for their use as factors to identify a shrine are my own.

57 Adapted and modified from Pilafidis-Williams correlates, Pilafidis-Williams 1998: 124-125

-9-

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

2.3.

PRINCIPAL CRITERIA: ARTEFACTS

No true ‘Temple’ form (such as those of Classical Greece) can be recognised within the period under consideration; therefore, artefacts are suggested to be the ‘principal criteria’ when identifying a cult site. That is to say, although certain architectural features can generally be observed; building structures are not monumentalised or unique in plan, resulting in the associated finds being the key to a shrine’s sacred classification.

VOTIVE OFFERINGS Defining what is meant by the term ‘votive’ must first be clarified. In the words of Burkert a votive offering is “the gift made to the god in consequence of a vow”.58 The offering or dedication of an item, by man to a god, establishes a connection between the two parties. The reason or meaning behind this act could take many forms, likely to include Requests; for good harvest, well-being, fertility etc. and Thanks; when such requests are granted. In addition, offerings are likely to have been made on a regular basis purely for the daily pleasure of the gods, putting the worshippers mind to rest that they are keeping the gods aware of their constant loyalty and so deserving of the gods protection One of the first problems to arise with any discussion regarding votive offerings is: how can we recognise a collection or single artefact as votive rather than secular artefacts or discarded refuse? This question has been addressed over the years by a number of scholars to differing degrees, regarding offerings both to the dead and to the gods. The 1985 Symposium in Uppsala was dedicated solely to the very topic of ‘Gifts to Gods’59 and more recently Bradley60 considered the importance of votive deposition. However, it is a study by Osborne which directly assists the definition; he suggests that the majority of votive deposits can be identified on the basis of association with at least one of the following traits: “1) Religious imagery, 2) precious or exotic material, 3) distinctive architectural context, 4) concentration of non-functional items.”61 In terms of assemblages that are found at shrines of the LH III B to Protogeometric periods, I believe three of these traits can be used to aid our identification of 58 59 60 61

Burkert 1985 : 68 Linders and Nordquist 1987 Bradley 1990 Osborne 2004 : 4

votive items; 1) Religious imagery; if a religious scene, mythical creature, or image of a deity are depicted on an artefact. 2) Concentration of nonfunctional items, such as miniature vessels, animal head rhyta, or figurines. 3) Distinctive architectural context; although not monumental, the architecture at shrines of the LH III B period is distinctive as it is simple, small, enclosed, and includes some type of display platform (e.g altar, bench, raised dais). ‘Precious or exotic material’ cannot be used to clearly classify an object as votive when taken as a sole criterion; it is however a better indicator of the ‘status’ of the worshippers. For this reason, although jewellery is often found within shrines, it will not be considered within this chapter as part of the criteria to identify a shrine; instead it will be discussed in Chapter five: Offerings. Therefore when an item or collection of items is present and their nature as being votive is in question, the above traits should be considered. Primarily, careful consideration of the find location is key, whether it be within a built structure or the open-air. If the artefacts are found with no connection to functional items of a domestic nature, a votive category is more likely. Mentioned above was the suggestion by PilafidisWilliams that when identifying isolated open-air sanctuaries, one must find a negative answer to the question: Is there evidence for settlement or funerary practice? In a similar way, one should apply the same method in the discussion of votive offerings. FIGURINES The difference between figurines and figures must be defined to save confusion. Figurines are “the ordinary small handmade Mycenaean terracottas”,62 whereas figures are of a larger form and will be discussed below under the criterion for ‘cult statue or image’. Terracotta figurines, fragmentary or less often complete, are found in abundance at many locations from the Late Bronze Age period, including settlements, cemeteries and shrines. Female figurines especially, can be present in such large quantities at these various locations that it makes it difficult to ascertain their exact purpose in any assemblage. For example, French notes that over 1100 figurines came from habitation areas outside the citadel wall at Mycenae; however, “the evidence for figurines in religious contexts is uneven”. 63 In her early publications, French stated that out of the many interpretations of figurines, she chose to follow the belief they were divine; and in some cases that they represented the worshipper.64 In later publications 62 63 64

- 10 -

French 1981(a) : 173 French 1971 : 107 French 1971 : 108

CRITERIA FOR SHRINE IDENTIFICATION however, she acknowledged that figurines take their function from their context, and not vice-versa.65 The question as to what female figurines represent is a topic beyond the scope of my study. As French has stated in her later publications, since these artefacts are found in a variety of locations; settlements, burials and shrine contexts, interpretation is especially complicated and it is prudent to consider the figurine’s function separately in each type of find location. Indeed, figurines from each type of context can still have a sacred function, even though the context is not even partly if at all religious in character. Those found within settlement contexts may be offerings or cult paraphernalia of domestic style worship; those in shrines are part of communal worship; and those found in burial contexts could be associated with the funerary ceremony. Female figurines representing either the worshipper or divine personage, would account for their use in each of the find locations. It is between these two roles where the find context may affect which representation is correct. For instance, at isolated open-air shrines where examples of larger figures are found in addition to smaller figurines; it may be suggested that the divine personage is represented by the large figure and the worshipper by the smaller figurine. In domestic style worship, where the cult paraphernalia is much more limited, and figures are not in evidence; the figurines could represent a divine personages. Since female figurines are found in such a variety of locations, caution must be taken when classifying these artefacts as votive offerings and so their presence should not instantly be an indicator of a shrine for communal cult practice. However, what has been noted is;66 fragmentary figurines found scattered were being discussed, rather than figurines found assembled or in situ. Unfortunately, it seems the detail as to how many fragments (which may lead to speculation as to quantities of complete figurines) were found in ‘close proximity’, or within structures; is often unavailable. If this information were available it could at least give an idea as to the kind of quantities which might generally be found either in the home, or small domestic shrines. So we are left to speculate about quantities which might be present within different settings (i.e home, domestic shrine, street). It must also be noted, that the expected quantity of figurines in a votive assemblage would vary slightly depending on whether it is an open-air or built shrine location. In a built structure it must be recognised that if this were not a shrine, any figurines present would

be serving either a home-based domestic cult function, or some other non-practical use; that is to say, you cannot cook, eat, drink or build with a figurine, so it must either be a cultic or luxury item. Of course, within the category of ‘luxury’, many functions could be placed; such as toys and display items. However, it is unlikely either of these functions would result in large quantities being present. Due to this any (largely intact) figurines present in more than a few examples should be seen as likely votives. On the other hand, if figurines have been found outside the confines of a built area, such as an isolated openair location; the situation must be considered differently. Above, Pilafidis-Williams idea of ‘negative evidence’ for settlement or tomb deposits was presented. It was agreed that where an assemblage is found which has no connection to either settlements or burials; it is much more likely to hold ritual significance. For this reason, if largely intact figurines are found as an assemblage then as long as three examples are present, in the absence of settlement or burial evidence, this should also be considered a votive assemblage. PRODUCE /FOODSTUFFS Of course figurines would not be the only type of votive offering dedicated at shrines of the period in question. It has to be considered quite possible, that varieties of food, grain and liquids would have been offered. The majority of these however, would leave little material evidence. It cannot be expected that actual food remains will be found in shrine locations; but the pottery vessels which may have contained such consumables can be sought. Research organised by Tzedakis and Martlew (2002) has been undertaken to analyse residues in pottery vessels used for cooking or in storage wares, including some pieces discovered within shrine contexts. The results have provided an insight into the contents of vessels from the areas selected. For example, residues from a number of pots found within the Room with the Fresco Complex (Mycenae), gave results such as: a stemmed bowl containing olive oil, and a shallow angular bowl (from the shrine store behind Room 31) containing honey.67 As there are a number of reasons why this complex is securely identified as a shrine,68 these consumables and accompanying pottery forms are most likely to be offerings. It is suggested therefore, that the find context of food offerings must be considered in order to define their votive basis. This however, leaves the category of votive ‘produce and foodstuffs’ as less suited to assist in shrine identification, although helpful in the

65

French 1981(a) : 173 French 1971 : 107, which was cited and agreed upon by Renfrew 1985 : 417 66

67 68

- 11 -

Tzedakis and Martlew 2002 : 190 See Gazetteer entry 3.18

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE understanding of ritual actions. Further results from the research of Tzedakis and Martlew will be presented in Chapter six, as they make a significant contribution to the topic of ritual drinking and dining.

CULT STATUES OR IMAGES Unlike the figurines discussed above, examples of figures are far less common. Figures differ from figurines as they have, ‘coil or wheelmade stems/bodies and [are] of distinctly large size’.69 Since figures are less frequent and generally display a greater level of design and detail compared to their smaller more simply made counterparts; their significance must be noted. Figures are often connected with the role of cult image or representations of deities. French has noted two groups of female figures: “ a) small ones with painted decoration; b) large ones with monochrome bodies, though hair and facial features are often plastically rendered and painted.”70 ‘Group b’ has to date only been found at Mycenae. These figures have been studied by Andrew Moore in an attempt to interpret the symbolism of the different poses they hold. He has come up with two hypotheses. The first, suggesting that the figures are depictions of a deity: the second, figures served as formalised iconographic representations of cult practice.71 Whether ‘group b’ anthropomorphic figures actually represent deities is unclear, however, both ‘group a’ and ‘b’ must be seen as an indication of cult activity. Whichever interpretation is followed, these figures still find their use and interpretation securely within cult practice, be it as the divinity or the worshipper. Moreover, the rarity of these artefacts from nonsacred areas, places them more securely within the realms of cult practice.

“the same symbol is used again and again, and a careful analysis of its associations may help to indicate the internal structure of the context”.72 It is by using such a method of recording and analysing symbols, icons and images, discovered at sites of the Late Bronze Age period, that a basis for religious iconography has been recognised. Including depictions of seated goddesses accompanied by mythical creatures (often griffins), lines of females carrying offerings in processions, sacrificial scenes such as that on the Agia Triada sarcophagus, and so on.73 With such depictions having been ascertained as holding religious connotations, it can be said that this is a criterion worth adding for the identification of a shrine area.

EVIDENCE FOR RITUAL DINING The final principal criterion addresses evidence for ritual dining, be it concentrations of pottery for drinking, eating and/or a collection of burnt animal bone testifying to sacrifice or the consumption of meat. As these activities, objects and artefacts are dealt with entirely in Chapter Six, for the part they played in ritual actions of the period, they will not be discussed in detail here other than to give a brief account in order to justify the criterion. As will be seen at many of the sites presented in the Gazetteer below, pottery associated with drinking and dining is often found in contexts where vessels for other functions are not present. A recent study by Wright centred on the Mycenaean Feast and addressed the topic of ‘feasting equipment’. In discussing the types of vessels which are usual in association with this activity, he lists items such as tripods, conical and spouted bowls, basins, cups, pans, hydrias and amphoras.74 It is from this basis along with the regularity of occurrence at the sites in question, that this criterion has been chosen.

RELIGIOUS ICONOGRAPHY The third principal criterion for the identification of a shrine is religious iconography. The development of a recognised iconography and symbolism is not something which can be constructed overnight. Instead, meaning is gained from symbols, gestures, or depictions, when repetition of expression is witnessed. Renfrew states that especially in the field of religion;

2.4.

Secondly, minor criteria are considered since they make a less significant contribution to the identification of a cult location. These ‘minor’ features must be accompanied by additional finds

72

Renfrew 1985 : 14 For discussion and references to studies in Aegean Iconography, see Laffineur 1992; Rehak 1999 and forthcoming (in Moore and Taylor forthcoming); Cain 2001; Alberti 2002;. 74 Wright 2004(a) : 146 73

69 70 71

French 1981(a) : 173 French 1981(a) : 173 Moore 1988 : 221

MINOR CRITERIA: FEATURES

- 12 -

CRITERIA FOR SHRINE IDENTIFICATION which serve as principal criteria in order to confirm their function as associated with cult practice.

for display are found in contexts which are of a solely open-air focus.

BUILT FURNISHINGS FOR CULT PRACTICE: PLATFORMS, BENCHES, DAIS OR ALTARS

HEARTHS AND HEARTH AREAS

In the first instance one must understand what is meant when using the terminology: platform, bench, dais or altar, as all are used in excavation reports of sanctuary sites for this period. The former two features could exist in any context, as in essence, each term describes a simple feature generally stone built. There is no reason why such a feature could not have many functions of both the secular and sacred sphere. When the term bench is used, it refers to a feature set against a wall; never free-standing and occurring both within a shrine and in external courtyards. An altar, or features which are termed as such in site reports, is essentially no different from a ‘platform’. An altar is still generally built of stone, is freestanding and can be located either within a shrine or in a courtyard. However, an altar gains the differing terminology either because it has been found associated with cult artefacts, or the excavators suppose its involvement directly with cult practice. The same can be said for the term dais; again a freestanding stone raised platform, however, this term is more often used for a low raised feature rather than a high standing alternative, and generally central to the room it serves. On their own, these features are essentially ‘built platforms’ of slightly varying designs, it is their associations which make them cultic; be it their location or in conjunction with supplementary finds. Their presence therefore, only contributes to, not justifies, the identification of a shrine. Fixed features appear in a variety of shapes and sizes in the period under consideration. Specimens exist which are made of collected small stones, natural boulders, mud bricks or simply an area of flat stones standing just above ground level. Of the sites under consideration, the majority have some form of fixed structure for the display of cult artefacts. At some sites these features are clearly an integral part of the shrine; such as Agios Konstantinos, where a bench is evident against the inner wall, and a stepped platform in the corner, with a raised central platform. At other sites, such as the shrine at the Palace of Nestor; the shrine itself has none of these features, but the courtyard outside has a stone altar. Clearly, the importance and centrality of these features, differed slightly from site to site, but they were always present at built shrine complexes. The only sites which have no evidence of platforms

Areas of concentrated burning, be they built or unbuilt hearths contribute to the identification of a cult area. The hearth, as is the case with built furnishings discussed above, can take many forms. Examples exist that are built, slightly raised from floor level with stones and pebbles, an area surrounded by stones, or simply a pit containing a deposit of burnt ash. Within a built shrine context, hearths are often found in the corner of rooms, but this can not be taken as a rule. One factor all these forms have in common and an aspect which is of importance is that fixed hearths show provision and allocation of a permanent space. Meaning, those who made use of the shrine, choose a location for the hearth; whether built or non-built, and re-used the exact same location time and time again. This displays a connection with the ‘place’ the ritual actions were to be practiced, evidenced both at openair and built shrines. Hearths can have many possible functions, serving to heat a room, cook food, or have a role in ritual acts. In order to suggest a ritual function, it is once again necessary to take into account the location of the hearth, and the assemblage of objects found within (burnt) and around the feature. Minoan hearths, both portable and fixed, have been given some attention;75 however, it seems that the majority of specialised studies on Mycenaean hearths have concentrated on Palatial examples from the Central Megarons. For the purpose of this study the hearth is considered (and so termed) to be an area of concentrated burning which is man made and for use by man. That is to say, it has clearly been associated with a location, and with finds which make it more than a coincidence or destructive fire damage. If an area is built or structured in form, be it with a stone lining or raised surrounding it will be considered a hearth, whereas, an area of concentrated burning which seems to have no structural elements will be termed a hearth area. For the purpose of this criterion, hearths which are involved in cult practice rather than simple domestic examples are to be sought. In order to do this, the burnt ashes should show inclusions which justify the identification of such a specialised function. For instance fatty ash, would testify to the presence of meat directly in the fire; selective bone remains; votives; or pottery vessels, all invite the identification of cult practice. 75

- 13 -

Muhly 1984 : 107-122

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE styles of worship. The content of this book concentrates on communal cult practice

FEATURES FOR LIBATION PRACTICES The practice of libation involves the pouring of a liquid offering. As with other forms of ‘votive offering’ mentioned above, this activity could result from a number of issues, all of which hold their central meaning of a gift to the gods. Both the installations and apparatus which can be associated with libation practices will be considered in detail as part of Chapter Five, Offerings. The reason for libation to be used as a criterion for shrine identification is this activity cannot be explained to be within the realms of secular activity. Installations for the practice of libation often come in the form of channels, either dug out of the natural ground, or constructed with stones. These channels do not lead from an internal to external location, which would possibly suggest some form of drainage; but instead, connect very small distances from one manmade feature to another. For instance, a carved depression in the floor (small basin), is connected by a channel to another small depression in the floor; only approx 2m in length. This feature, present in the Palace of Nestor would have no secular function; with its location being next to the throne, it was most likely used for libation practices of a sacred nature. Any features which are man-made, or adapted by man, and serve the purpose of transporting liquids from one point to another, whether the final destination is the ground, or a vessel, should be considered as installations for libation. Where this cannot be seen to have any possible function within the secular world, it is treated as a criterion for shrine identification. In addition, vessels such as Rhyta76 made with an opening and those of which it is clear have been intentionally pierced on the underside after manufacture, as well as having the standard opening at the top, will be considered as apparatus for the practice of libation, and used as a criterion for shrine identification. Even though other vessel types are considered for their role in libation in section 5.3 (such as stirrup jars and narrow-necked jugs); their interpretation is more speculative than rhyta and so will not be used to help identify a shrine.

2.5.

It is however acknowledged that the separation of domestic worship from small scale communal practices can often be difficult. In Renfrew’s words “… the location of ritual does not in itself define it as domestic or communal, but the degree of communal participation, and the presence of a communally recognised officiating celebrant.”77 Renfrew continues by stating that in order to identify domestic cult; two aspects should be identified: a specific ‘place’, as well as, well ‘defined forms’ which either have symbolic focus or can be used as apparatus in offering. Therefore for the purpose of separating communal and domestic practice within this study, a number of factors will be considered. Firstly, the ‘place’ of the ritual act; is there only a part of a room which seems to be allocated to (domestic) small scale cult functions, or can a whole building or room be associated with (possibly communal) cult practice? Secondly, the ‘degree of communal participation’ will be assessed by considering the quantity of votives and associated pottery in order to establish the potential number of worshippers involved. It has already been noted in the criteria above, that in cases such as votive figurines, a quantity of 3 or more should be recognised (within a built shrine) ‘largely intact and as part of an assemblage’. This not only indicates that the figurines are votive, but also makes it more likely the worship includes more than just the family unit. Any sites which are presented within the gazetteer for discussion, and, on the basis of the criteria found to be domestic, will be classified as such within the entry and only used within the main body of the study for comparative purposes.

IDENTIFYING DOMESTIC CULT PRACTICE

In addition to the omission of cults of the dead and funerary rites, which are mentioned in the Preface, this study does not consider domestic and private

76 Different styles of rhyta will be discussed and considered further in section 5.3, for the possibility of their differing functions.

77

- 14 -

Renfrew 1985 : 22

3.

3.0.

SITE GAZETTEER

INTRODUCTION

In this section a Gazetteer of the sites to be discussed within the body of the study will be presented. This section is not a space for discussion of the finds; it simply seeks to present the facts which have thus far been published and which will be used in following sections to contribute to the discussion of ritual practice throughout the Late Bronze Age and Protogeometric periods of Greece. A map is provided below, which shows the location of all sites to be considered within this study. The points are not precise as they were plotted by hand; therefore it should be used for the sites approximate whereabouts and to gain some understanding of the shrines proximity to one another. The sites are organised alphabetically, without division between chronological periods. This is for the ease of the reader, as many of the sites under discussion fall within the transitional period after the fall of the Mycenaean palaces, often making strict chorological boundaries difficult to adhere too. A plan of the site and/or photographs will accompany each account where possible, to assist with the understanding of the site in question. In the case of open air sites, a picture of the environmental setting is included where possible. It is understood that the scene, especially woodland and farm areas, would have changed over the course of time. The site height and opportunity to view open vistas, however, will not have changed. It is for this purpose that panoramic photographs are included where possible. Further illustrations of particular finds or features are part of following chapters where appropriate. A brief explanation of the sites location, date, architecture and finds will be laid out in addition to a short statement which will use the key below to justify the site’s identification as a shrine. After a brief description of a site’s location and

surroundings, it will be allocated to a ‘shrine setting’ category which will be used to separate discussions throughout the body of the study. The terms used for these categories are ‘palatial shrine’, ‘settlement shrine’ and ‘isolated shrine’. These have been devised from the knowledge of their immediate surroundings; not the site’s find assemblage or status. Therefore, a palatial shrine is one which must be associated to a palace centre due to its location and proximity. The only palatial shrine which might be contested as directly associated with its palace centre is the Cult Centre of Mycenae; owing to its location outside the citadel walls when established (see entry 3.18). However, it is my belief that as the Cult Centre is located in very close proximity to the palace, and some distance from the much lower lying settlement; it is a ‘palatial shrine’. With the same approach, ‘settlement shrines’ are those found in or very close to a contemporary settlement. ‘Isolated shrines’ are those which are separated from habited areas; resulting in their complete isolation from other (noncultic) activity. The key system that follows (Table 2) will be applied to each site in order to have a more consistent method for the identification of sacred sites. Two symbols will be used, a solid cross h which represents ‘principal criteria’; and an outlined cross ╬ which represents ‘minor criteria’. One solid cross (h) denotes a ‘possible’ sacred site; two symbols, which must include one solid cross, denotes a ‘probable’ sacred site; three or more symbols, which must include one solid cross, denotes a ‘proposed’ sacred site. For example: Classification

Proposed

hx1

Due to at least one ‘principal criterion’ (h) and two ‘minor criterion’ (╬) being evidenced from the site, it has been classified as a shrine.

╬x2

- 15 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE TABLE 2: SCORING SYSTEM FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF SHRINE SITES

Principal Criteria : Artefacts Assemblage of votive offerings

h

Presence of cult statue or image

h

Religious Iconography

h

Evidence for ritual dining

h

Minor Criteria : Features

Built furnishings for ritual practice

╬

Concentrated area of repeated burning. E.g ‘ash altar’ or hearth

Features for libation practices.

╬

╬

Categorisation of Shrine Type

Built Shrine a)

A built structure

b) Temenos Area / Recognisable open-air space c)

Lack of evidence for multiple functions

Non-built a)

Focal area. E.g Cave, mountain peak/plateau

b) Association with abandoned ancestral settlement c)

Lack of contemporary settlement or burials.

- 16 -

╬

SITE GAZETTEER FIGURE 2: MAP OF SITES TO BE DISCUSSED IN THIS STUDY 78

78

This is a modern map of Greece with points plotted by hand: Author.

- 17 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

3.1.

AETOS - ITHAKA

Location

Isolated The site is found at the highest point of the saddle which connects Mt. Aetos on the West with Mt. Merovigli on the East. It is said that a spring was located there, which led to streams running into the valleys on either side, they have now dried up.79 As publications kept re-analysing the material from Aetos, many suggestions were put forward for its interpretation; burial cairns, industry, settlement, and shrine; which complicated final categorisation of the shrine ‘setting’. Although, since the last interpretation seems to now be more widely accepted, all the evidence points to a shrine without contemporary settlement activity.

Date

Protogeometric Although some Late Bronze Age material has been found at the site, the early evidence is not clear enough to suggest cult activity from that period.

Architecture

The ‘cairns’ (so named by Lorimer) were found in an area clearly identified as standing out from the surrounding hillside due to the accumulation of stones and potsherds. Each separate area was associated with a stratum of dense black earth.80

╬

Although a good deal of tile remnants were found81 (most probably signifying later activity); no other evidence for house structures, foundations or household implements were found. Later excavations at the site however, have revealed further architectural developments. Building B (LBA) is said to be the earliest structure on the site; constructed in the LBA it is believed to have served as a water collecting device. Building C (PG), was constructed in the Protogeometric; the building is badly preserved, but has been reconstructed as orientated north-south, with an apse on the south end. A hearth was located on its central axis, and a paved circle was placed in the middle of the building. Storage pits also existed at the apse end of the building 82

Finds Terracottas

No terracottas are identifiable from the finds of the PG period.

Pottery

Within the cairns the sherds have been reported as almost entirely of Protogeometric coarse ware.83 Of the LH III wares; kylikes, stirrup-vases, and loop-handled bowls are present. Pottery of the Protogeometric period assemblage are shallow cups with flat bases, plastic rings on kraters, and high conical feet.84 Cairn 2 has been reported to contain two miniature vessels, numerous decorated sherds from drinking vessels, pithoi, jugs, oinochoai and kraters; all ranging in date from early to late Protogeometric.85 Cairn 3 also evidenced pottery remains for use within drinking and dining activities; cups, skyphoi, kantharoi, kraters, oinochoai, a tripod leg and two complete juglets. These are all reported to be early Protogeometric in date; however, two sherds from stirrup jars, a kylix base and a terracotta figurine, all belong to the LH III.86

79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86

Heurtley and Lorimer 1935 : 25 Heurtley and Lorimer 1935 : 27 Heurtley and Lorimer 1935 : 33 Symeonoglou 2002 : 49 Heurtley and Lorimer 1935 : 27 Heurtley et al 1935 : 63 Symeonoglou 2002 : 26 Symeonoglou 2002 : 27

- 18 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.1.

AETOS - ITHAKA Building B (LBA) A krater with a perforated base. Building C (PG) large storage jars, cooking vessels, cups, kraters and oinochoai. In addition, five kernos attachments and two tripod sherds were reported.87

h

Other Finds

Classification hx1 ╬x1

87 88 89 90

44 catalogued drinking vessels date from the Protogeometric period of Aetos.88 Closed shapes from Aetos include, amphoriskos, oinochoai (best represented closed shape), and single examples of lekythos and pithos.89 Fragments of bone were found in all the cairns and in the general area; although it is stated some are certainly from animals and birds, many are too fragmentary for confirmation.90 Probable This site has proved difficult to interpret due to the number of separate excavation investigations which have taken place. As publications progressed, interpretations of the site changed; however, it is now possible to note the hearth and circular paved area in association with one another, in addition to the quantity of drinking vessels. These features of the Protogeometric period make it probable this is a shrine area. Whether Building C, is actually a built roofed structure should await further academic scrutiny, however, it is clear the hearth and paved feature are associated and dated together with the pottery finds. Moreover, the presence of the kernos fragments is significant in the identification of ritual practice. The kernos is rare on mainland Greece during this period, so was not part of the criteria, however, its presence at this site heightens the probability of shrine identification.

Symeonoglou 2002 : 49 Symeonoglou 2002 : 68 Symeonoglou 2002 : 94 Heurtley et al 1935 : 35

- 19 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

3.2.

AGIA IRINI Built Sanctuary as part of a settlement

Location

The sanctuary is located within the large settlement of Agia Irini on the island of Kea. FIGURE 3: AGIA IRINI - PLAN OF THE SETTLEMENT 91

LH III B - LH III C

Date

The Temple was initially built in the Middle Helladic Period (this study will not be addressing the finds from this early date). In the LH IIIA period, about 1400 BC, the Temple was destroyed by an earthquake, possibly leaving it out of use for a short time. A new temple was built in the LH IIIC period, between 1200 and 1100BC.92 Although there may have been activity in the LH III B period, this is in no way clear, and the LH III B pottery is mixed with that of the LH III A and C periods with no clear levels existing.93 Architecture

A large rectangular platform which was built of stones and clay, occupied the centre of the room.

╬

After which another destruction phase occurred, when only a small enclosure was built in one corner, Room BB. 94 Room BB, with a small doorway facing the sea, had a long bench along one side. 95

Finds Terracottas

h 91 92 93 94 95 96

Mycenaean figurines included a polos head, two naturalistic figurines, part of a psi figurine, fragmentary thrones occupied and unoccupied, parts of three chariot groups, and various animal figurine fragments.96

After Caskey 1971 : 360 Rutkowski 1986 : 169 Caskey 1981 : 128 Caskey 1971 : 386 Caskey 1962 : 281 Caskey 1981 : 132

- 20 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.2.

AGIA IRINI Pottery

h

Pottery of an LH III C style, which suggests drinking and dining includes, a neckhandled amphorae and jugs with long hollow rims, conical kylikes, one-handled bowls, kraters with straight sides and square rims, and deep semi-globular cups and bowls. Two kylikes found in Room BB also date to LH IIIC. 97 In addition, a large LH III C krater was found on the floor near the west corner of the central platform in Room V. 98

Other finds ╬

An animal rhyton and ring kernos of LH III C style.

FIGURE 4: AGIA IRINI - THE TEMPLE IN THE LH III C PERIOD99

Classification

hx2 ╬x2

97 98 99

Proposed Use of this site during the LH III C period (and most probably the LH III B period) is reflected by pottery forms for drinking and dining, as well as vessels for libation. The architectural features and votive figurines all combine to indicate its classification.

Mountjoy 1999(b) : 867 Caskey 1971 : 386 After Caskey 1962 : 282

- 21 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

3.3.

AGIA TRIADA

Open-air and isolated from settlement

Location ╬

Agia Triada can be found on the south slopes of the Daphnias ridge, 4km southeast of Agios Vasilios railway station and immediately southeast of the chapel. LH III B

Date

The figurines have been placed stylistically in the middle LH IIIB period.100 Architecture No built structures, features or enclosure walls have been found associated with this sacred area. Finds Terracottas

h

123 normal-sized female idols of Phi-type were found in the open-air, in addition to a male figure reported, although it has been noted that this figure has since been misplaced, and was possibly never present.101

Pottery

h

Pottery found at the site consists of: Five plain kylikes (stems and base rim), A body sherd of a linear goblet, and a handle of a hydria made of Yellow Minyan (possibly from a different context as it has a much better state of preservation). 102

Other finds ╬

In the same area as the figurines, a large asymmetrical foot of an animal rhyton decorated in a vertical band style was found.

Classification

hx2 ╬x2

3.4.

Proposed Due to this area showing no settlement or funerary evidence in the vicinity, it is identified as completely isolated. In addition, the existence of a great number of votive idols, some drinking vessels as well as a rhyta for libation practice, this is a ‘proposed’ cult site.

AGIOS KONSTANTINOS – METHANA Cult Room within a settlement

Location

The shrine room is located within the settlement of Agios Konstantinos on the peninsula of Methana, Eastern Peloponnesus. 103 FIGURE 5: AGIOS KONSTANTINOS - PLAN OF THE SETTLEMENT 104

100 101 102 103 104

Kilian 1990 : 190 Kilian 1990 : 185 Kilian 1990 : 185 - 190 Konsolaki 2002 : 25 - 28 After Konsolaki 2001 : Plate LXVII

- 22 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.3.

AGIA TRIADA

LH III B

Date

Cult practice thrived alongside the settlement during the LH III A – B periods, for approximately 200 years between the early 14th and late 13th centuries BC. Architecture

╬

Room A has been identified as the principal shrine at this stage in the excavations. The doorway is at the north end of the east wall. Directly opposite in the north-west corner is a stepped platform. The construction is roughly square, with stone slabs at its sides and three low steps made of rubble and earth. In addition, a low bench lines the south wall. The majority of the floor is a beaten layer of earth mixed with pebbles, however, roughly in the centre of the room is a small slightly raised paved area, forming a small podium / platform.

╬

In the south east corner of the room there is a stone bordered hearth. In addition, Area F is a small courtyard, extending between Room G and building O. On the southern side of the courtyard there was a low, stone-built bench (Fig. 39), which had a roughly rounded boulder at its end. This boulder had a deep conical hollow cut into it which was vertically pierced through, resulting in a narrow channel passing from the conical hollow to the ground (Fig. 40). The boulder sat directly on the courtyard floor, resulting in any liquid poured into it, passing straight through into the earth.105 These features are not part of the shrine (so not scored), however, must be considered as part of the ritual actions taking place at this settlement.

Finds Terracottas

h

Pottery

105

The majority of figurines found within Room A were bovids, in addition to driven ridden oxen, two single horses, horses belonging to chariot groups and horses with helmeted riders. Also clay models of three tripod tables, two thrones with latticed back, one bird and one fragmentary boat. Only one female figurine of hollow Psi type. No pottery of cultic nature was reported.

Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2001 : 216; and see section 5.6 for full discussion and illustrations of the features.

- 23 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.3.

AGIA TRIADA Other finds ╬

An animal-head rhyton of good quality displaying mixed features of pig and fox.

h

Remains of burnt bone were evidenced within room A, with the majority being of young pig, but also goat/sheep remains were present. FIGURE 6: AGIOS KONSTANTINOS - ROOM A AND ITS FIXED FEATURES 106

Classification

hx2 ╬x3

106

Proposed This site is classified due to the numerous architectural features and hearth found in this room, associated to terracotta votive offerings and rhyta (for libation practices) as well as the evidence for ritual meals (animal bone remains).

Photograph : Author 2007

- 24 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.5.

AMYKLAI Isolated open-air

Location ╬

In the region of Lakonia, this shrine is situated in the middle of the Spartan plain, on a hill above the west bank of the Eurotas. 107 This site is un-associated to settlement or burial activity.108

FIGURE 7: AMYKLAI - VIEW FROM THE SHRINE AREA 109

Date LH III B / LH IIIC and Protogeometric The religious activity at this site began at the end of the 13th century BC and continued until the middle of the 11th century BC.110 A gap (most probably of about 100 years) then followed until approximately the middle of the 10th century BC,111 the first phase of this re-establishment can be placed in the Protogeometric period, so its character will also be mentioned below. Finds Terracottas

h

Of the clay figurines found at the site, females are in the majority with 71 examples. In addition to this there are 32 small handmade animals, 28 wheelmade bulls, 2 horse riders and 1 bird.112 A large wheelmade item which is barrel shaped could be the body of a large bull figure.113

h

Also parts of two large figures: the upper part of a female head with polos, and a hand holding a kylix. 114

107

Morgan 1996 : 49 Whittaker 1997 : 12 109 Photograph : Author 2007. It is acknowledged that this scene represents the modern, not ancient vista. It is hoped however, that the reader will understand the exposed panorama offered from the shrine location. 110 Demakopoulou 1982 : 174 111 Demakopoulou 1982 : 175 112 Demakopoulou 1982 : 43 113 Demakopoulou 1982 : 85 114 Demakopoulou 1982 : 173 108

- 25 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.5.

AMYKLAI Pottery

h

Pottery suggestive of drinking and dining activities comes in the form of a sherd from a deep bowl decorated in the close style (suggested as an Argive import), and some examples of ribbed kylix stems which belong to the end of the LH III C period.115 Early LH III C is also represented by Group A deep bowls with monochrome carinated cups and collar-necked jars. 116

Other finds ╬

A sherd possibly from a rhyton, decorated in the pictorial style with representations of male figures taking part in a battle scene was also found.117 The Protogeometric assemblage is very different from that of the Mycenaean and transitional period, with the new custom of offering metallic objects, amongst them weapons like swords and a spear head.118

Classification

hx3 ╬x1

115 116 117 118

Proposed Due to this site’s isolated location without connection to settlement or burial remains, as well as the collection of votive figurines, examples of cult images (figures), and the practice of drinking and dining, this site gained its classification.

Demakopoulou 1982 : 174 Demakopoulou 1982 : 176 Demakopoulou 1982 : 174 Demakopoulou 1982 : 93

- 26 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.6.

APHAIA SANCTUARY - AEGINA Isolated open-air

Location ╬

The sanctuary holds a position on a mountain ridge in the north-east of the island, isolated from settlement remains. Via the southern slope which is less steep, the small harbour of Agia Marina can be reached on foot.119 FIGURE 8: APHAIA - VIEW FROM THE SHRINE AREA120

Late Bronze Age to LH IIIC

Date

The dating of this site is purely from the chronological placement of the figurines, which indicates first use at the end of LH III B until the LH IIIC period. Architecture

There are no architectural features for this period of the sanctuary.

Finds Terracottas In total there are 698 terracotta’s represented by a variety of forms.

h

Human figurines: 47 phi type, 7 hollow psi,121 22 high waisted psi, figurines, 22 late psi figurines, 13 Kourotrophoi. 123

122

61 psi

The most common animal represented is the bovid, however, these figurines do demonstrate different stylistic patterns. Animal figurines: 5 wavy animal figurines, 75 linear animals,124 23 spine type animals.125 Other forms include chariots, ridden horses, oxen, thrones, seated figurines and two boats.126 Pottery

The open shape was more common in comparison to the closed, having a ratio of 209 : 88. Of the closed shapes stirrup-jars are most frequent, with jugs in second place.127 This site has provided pottery examples which can be dated between the LH III A –

119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127

Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 1 Photograph : Author 2007. As above, the reader can witness the exposed panoramic view from the shrine area. Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 15 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 16 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 30 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 49 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 56 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 64-80 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 83-84

- 27 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.6.

APHAIA SANCTUARY - AEGINA C periods. It has been noted this could mean the use of heirlooms.

h

Pottery associated to drinking and dining included, deep bowls: 10 examples stylistically from the LH III B period, 3 from LH III B/C, and 3 from the LH III C period. Stemmed bowls: 3 of LH III B style.128 Painted Kylikes: 9 of LH III B:1 style, 19 of LH III B, and 12 of LH III A – B style. Unpainted kylikes: 3 of LH III B-C, 4 of LH IIIC.130

129

In addition, Handmade miniature wares all stylistically LH III B: 4 cups, 1 jug, 1 bowl/basket, 1 kylix.131 Other finds An LH III B conical shaped rhyton with decoration of antithetic whorlshells. 132 ╬

In addition, five other rhyta representing animal heads: two bovine and three hedgehog forms were found. 133

Classification

hx2 ╬x2

128 129 130 131 132 133

Proposed The classification is given due to this sites isolated location along with its numerous forms of pottery associated with drinking and dining, votive figurines and rhyta for the practice of libation.

Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 105-106 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 98-104 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 112-115 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 107-108 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 91 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 110

- 28 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.7.

APOLLO MALEATAS Open-air in association with settlement

Location

Near the summit of the Kynortion hill this open-air altar was located together with rooms thought to be associated with the sacred area. A few meters to the south at the very summit, were five phases of habitation, two of these from the Early Helladic and three from the Mycenaean period. 134

FIGURE 9: APOLLO MALEATAS - VIEW FROM THE ALTAR COMPLEX 135

Late Bronze Age

Date

The foundations of the altar terrace have been dated to the early Mycenaean period due to sherds found within its construction.136 Architecture ╬

Underneath the place where the Classical altar would have stood, two successive altar constructions were uncovered. A Mycenaean foundation wall which has been interpreted as a retaining terrace to the ash altar (hearth area) was found, with a small area of burnt hard crust, which included soft rock chips, ashes and sherds.137 Immediately to the west of the altar, traces of walls and a pavement were located, partly covered by the Classical temple. In this place three rooms were uncovered, one of them was paved and the excavators believe all three belong to a sacred building due to the finds within; see below.138 The majority of the finds were located within the black fatty ashes of the open-air ash altar.

Finds Terracottas

h

Clay figurines are represented by pieces of large or smaller bovines of the hollow type, small compact bovines and horses, and human figurines of the naturalistic phi and psi types are also said to be common. The head of a wheel-made man is noted as providing a rare form.139

h

134 135 136 137 138 139 140

Also in the area around the altar were fragments of a larger horse of a rare type, and a figurine of a goddess on her throne. 140

Lambrinudakis 1981 : 63 Photograph : Author 2007. As above, the reader can witness the panoramic view from the shrine area. Lambrinudakis 1981 : 59 Lambrinudakis 1981 : 59 Lambrinudakis 1981 : 63 Lambrinudakis 1981 : 61-62 Lambrinudakis 1983 : 159

- 29 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.7.

APOLLO MALEATAS Pottery

h Other finds ╬

The majority of pottery came from vases which were thrown into the ashes and consequently broken in small pieces. Coarse ware is in abundance and of the fine ware the early types of Vapheio and stemmed cups are typical.141 Within two of the built rooms to the side of the ash altar were found Vapheio and stemmed cups in abundance, signifying drinking activities. A roughly carved shallow basin (from soft stone) with a lip was also found in the infill of the old altar. 142 In addition, fragments of a steatite rhyton were found in the ashes, indicating libation practices. A number of weapons were discovered. These included real bronze swords or votive imitations, daggers, spearheads, and a sword handle which ended in a stone button.143 FIGURE 10: APOLLO MALEATAS - VIEW OF THE HEARTH AREA144

Classification

hx3 ╬x2

141 142 143 144

Proposed The classification is due to this site having its focus on a large hearth altar which contained numerous votive offerings as well as larger figures. In addition, the rhyton and finds of cups within the accompanying rooms are testament to both libation and drinking activities.

Lambrinudakis 1981 : 61-62 Lambrinudakis (b) 1980 : 119 Lambrinudakis 1981 : 61-62 Photo : author 2007

- 30 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.8.

ASINE – HOUSE G Shrine within a settlement

Location

The Lower city is part of the promontory of Asine and lies on a terrace west of the modern Panagia Chapel. It is uncertain whether the entirety of House G (which lies below the later structure of House H) is a religious structure, or just Room XXXII. FIGURE 11: ASINE - PLAN OF ROOM XXXII145

LH III C

Date

The habitation of the lower town at Asine is noted especially in the Middle and Late LH III C period. 146 Architecture ╬

House G in which Room XXXII was located has been identified as a large dwelling consisting of nine rooms. The largest room is rectangular with two supports dividing it into two with an altar in one corner. 147 Room XXXII when viewed from the south, has a bench in the right corner, and benches along the long walls. 148

Finds Terracottas

h

h

145 146 147 148 149 150 151

Close to the corner bench in Room XXXII, five terracotta figurines were found in addition to the head of a large figure. Throughout the excavations numerous fragmentary animal and idol figurines came to light.149 The large head was 12cm high depicting a man with a beard, and has since been named ‘the Lord of Asine’. 150 It is now understood that this figure is actually female.151

After Hagg 1981(b) : 92 Sjoberg 2004 : 39 Styrenius 1998 : 58 Hagg 1981(b) : 91 Westholm 1938 : 309-310 Styrenius 1998 : 58 Shelmerdine 1997 : 574

- 31 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.8.

ASINE – HOUSE G Pottery ╬

In Room XXXII a jug was found with its neck facing downwards, wedged between the stones of the bench. Its bottom was missing, and it has been noted that it most likely stood in situ. This can be interpreted as a libation feature. A triple bowl, consisting of three small cylindrical bowls all joined together, a splayed bowl with a wide mouth and narrow base and the sides tapering in a hollow curve, as well as a kylix were all found.152 In addition, a stemmed goblet, a cup with three handles, a bowl with two handles, an amphora and a stirrup vase all came from House G.153

Other finds ╬

Close to the stone bench a thick layer of charcoal, ashes, sherds and bones were found on the floor. 154

Classification

hx2 ╬x3

152 153 154

Proposed Due to the architectural features, votive figurines, libation feature and burnt bones, in addition to, the cult image of the ‘Lord of Asine’, Room XXXII at Asine is a proposed shrine.

Westholm 1938 : 298 Westholm 1938 : 300 Hagg 1981(b) : 95

- 32 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.9.

BERBATI Domestic shrine room within a settlement

Location

Berbati is a settlement located on the Argolid Plateau. The rooms to be discussed are situated within the settlement. FIGURE 12: BERBATI - PLAN OF POTTER’S QUARTER 155

LH III B

Date

Rooms A and B are part of the Potter’s Quarter at Berbati and were in use during the LH III B period. Architecture ╬

╬

In the corner of the back wall a bench structure of un-worked stones has been reported with finds associated to it (discussed below). These remains were then built-over and replaced by Room B, which also contained a feature interpreted by the excavators as an altar, comprising a shelf cut into the back wall.156 Akerstrom also reports a feature which is likely to testify to the practice of libations. Two rows of stones formed a channel, closed at the right end by two smaller stones. Placed firmly underneath the two stones was the base and part of the stem of a large stemmed cup.157

Finds Terracottas Still in association with the bench structure of Room A, although located slightly higher were two fragmentary figurines of the psi-type.158 In Room B, the filling above the altar and libation channel contained a fragmentary figurine, however it is not certain whether the two are connected.

155 156 157 158

After Akerstrom 1988 : 206 Akerstrom 1988 : 201 Akerstrom 1988 : 201 Akerstrom 1988 : 201

- 33 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.9.

BERBATI Pottery

In association with the bench like feature in Room A, a large amphora in fragments was found, alongside a spoon and a fragmentary clay plaque. In addition, Room C which was located some distance from the other two rooms mentioned, contained a large krater which was half sunken into the ground with a deliberate piercing in the bottom of it.159

Other finds FIGURE 13: BERBATI - THE ALTAR FEATURE FROM ROOM B 160

House / Domestic Cult ?

Classification

hx0 ╬x2

159 160 161

The excavators believe all these rooms to have the components of modest house shrines due to the room assemblages also comprising course cooking ware, and in room A an area of fired clay said to indicate cooking.161 There are not enough figurines present to justify a votive assemblage of communal cult status. Although the libation features do testify to cult practice; this is not sufficient to suggest public (communal) ritual practice.

Akerstrom 1988 : 201-202 After Akerstrom 1988 : Plate 8 Akerstrom 1988 : 205 (footnote 2)

- 34 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.10.

DELPHI Isolated open-air

Location

Located in the Marmaria area at Delphi, high in the hills of Phocis. LH III B

Date Architecture

No walls or buildings were found in association with cult activity at this site, however, a flat stone on which the figurines were found could possibly, though not certainly, have been used for an offering platform or focal point.

Finds Terracottas

h

Approximately 175 figurines of phi and psi type were found. Nine figurines can be assigned to LH III B types, the rest are of late psi types; over thirty of which are group B.162

Pottery

Some pot sherds were found with the assemblage, but the report is not specific as to which styles.

Other finds

Some small objects of obsidian, steatite and amber were found.163

Classification

hx1 ╬x0

162 163

Possible Due to the large number of figurines in this collection, it must be taken as a votive assemblage, however, the flat stone which the finds were located on cannot be securely associated with the finds.

French 1971 : 141 Hagg 1981(a) : 38

- 35 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

3.11.

ELEUSIS Free-standing building within settlement

Location

The site of Eleusis lies fourteen miles to the west of Athens, on the Aegean coast line. There was continuing settlement at the site throughout the Middle and Late Helladic periods. The building was placed on the south slope of the hill, in an area which was later used for the Temple of Demeter.164 LH III A to LH III C

Date

Sherds which were found in the building and around the platform structure place the construction near the end of the LH III A or beginning of LH III B and use continues until the end of the Mycenaean period.165 Architecture

╬

Within the enclosure of the peribolos wall were the remains of a large construction of ‘megaron type’ which was divided into an inner chamber and an open porch. The central part of the porch projects almost two meters beyond the ends of the antae, thus forming a large platform which had a stairway on either side leading down to an open court.166 In the middle of the room a single column base stood which would have held a column for support of a roof. In addition, a three-roomed building adjoins the original Megaron B. In room D3 many potsherds of LH III C style were discovered, displaying the use of this area into the final phase of the Bronze Age.167 A building has been identified on the hill summit as the likely residence of the local ruler. In addition, this building is said to be unlike other Mycenaean dwellings, therefore, its architecture suggests some other function.168 FIGURE 14: ELEUSIS - PLAN OF THE MEGARON 169

164 165 166 167 168 169

Mylonas 1977 : 91 Mylonas 1933 : 285 Mylonas 1933 : 274-275 Rutkowski 1986 : 191 Mylonas 1977 : 90 After Mylonas 1933 : 277

- 36 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.11.

ELEUSIS

Finds Terracottas

h

Pottery

Originally unpublished details of terracotta remains are noted by Cosmopoulous from the Excavation Notebooks. Two groups of figurines were found in the vicinity of megaron B, close to the exit of the drain. One group has five figurines, two fragmentary and three intact, another group found at a lower level are of an undisclosed number of figurines. In addition a third group of figurines was found in a mixed layer within the courtyard to the south of megaron B (Notebook 1931, 24, 31, 39).170 A drain travelled across the open court from the raised platform towards the peribolos wall, within this, underneath a slab and fragments of mudbrick, carbonized remains mixed with Late Helladic sherds were found. At a depth of 1.15m under a layer of pebbles and large stones, a concentration of ashes mixed with animal bones and fragments from Late Helladic flat round vases were found. (Excavation Notebook 1931, 15-16) Cosmopoulous located the collection in the Eleusis museum and identified fragments of flat round alabastra, goblet stems and rims, and course jar fragments dating to LH III A1 period. 171

Other finds

Within the collection found in the drain, now located in the Eleusis museum (see above), Cosmopoulos notes the collection also contained 18 burned bones of sheep, goats or pigs, suggesting possible animal sacrifice on the platform. 172

Classification

hx1 ╬x1

Probable (date ?) The finds from this site of figurines and a feature which must be understood as a platform for display or performance, result in a ‘probable’ classification. However, the stratigraphy and dating of these finds is not easy. The bones and carbonised matter were found together with pottery of the LH III A1 period, so cannot testify to sacrificial offerings in the LH III B period (and so were not counted within the score). In addition, although the figurines which were previously unpublished, have been brought to the fore by Cosmopoulos, the typology and date of the votive finds were not specified, so this once again leaves difficulty in understanding the LH III B finds. Although uncontested for its later cult, scholars hold different opinions as to the early beginnings of the site’s religious nature. Therefore, although this site has been classified as a ‘probable’ shrine, its placement securely in the period between LH III B to PG is unclear.

170 171 172

Cosmopoulos 2003 : 17 Cosmopoulos 2003 : 11 Cosmopoulos 2003 : 17

- 37 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

ISTHMIAN SHRINE

3.12.

Isolated Open-Air

Location ╬

The site was founded on the Isthmus of Corinth, at a location which had been a recently abandoned Mycenaean settlement.173 Protogeometric

Date

The shrine was established at the beginning of the early Protogeometric period. 174 Architecture No Architecture has been found in association with the sacred area. Finds Terracottas

Morgan states that 33 Early Iron Age figurines survive of which most are handmade, however, notes that these could date as late as the 8th century BC. Although she also notes, if analogies are made to the early assemblage at Olympia, the Isthmian collection could date to the Protogeometric.175

Pottery Nine vessels have been identified from the earliest stage of ritual activity dating to the Submycenaean / early Protogeometric phases, followed by forty nine early Protogeometric open vessels.176

h

The excavators note the apparent preference towards pottery for drinking and dining, with some 80% consisting of open forms, and 50% being of the standard range of drinking cups. The early period shows a tendency towards high-footed skyphoi, and as the period moves on high-footed cups are more common.177

Other finds ╬

Within the ashy layer of the eastern terrace where the majority of pottery mentioned above was found, which at some point must have constituted a hearth area; bone deposits were also identified. 398 bones were found, 94% of which were burnt so leading the excavators to the conclusion of their association with sacrifices. 178

Classification

hx1 ╬x2

173 174 175 176 177 178

Proposed This site has gained its classification due to the great abundance of pottery forms associated with drinking and dining, the burnt area and bones which testify to the practice of sacrificial activities, and the isolated location.

Morgan 1996 : 46 Morgan 1998 : 73 Morgan 1999 : 333 Morgan 1999 : 373 Gebherd et al 1992 : 19 Gebherd et al 1992: 15

- 38 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.13.

KALAPODI Isolated Open-Air

Location ╬

Kalapodi is found a few km west of Atalanti in the south-west district of Phokis. The sanctuary lies just outside the modern village of the same name, in the open-air and separated from any settlement or burial evidence.

FIGURE 15: KALAPODI – VIEW FROM THE SHRINE AREA179

LH III A2 to Protogeometric

Date

Deep soundings at this site which began in 2005 in the east area of the south temple have found layers beneath the LH III C horizon, revealing possible cult finds from the LH III A2 and LH III B periods.180 Architecture ╬

The early phase of this sanctuary had features which belong to an altar complex. A rectangular structure measuring 3.80m x 3.50m and a stretch of wall further east has so far been identified. 181

Finds Terracottas

h

A few early figurines were found in the area. These included bulls and some examples of females.182 In addition, new investigations have also brought LH IIIA2 ladder type animal figurines to light.183

179 After Whitely 2005 : 55 (Niemeier’s entry). Note that the structures visable in this picture constitue later phases than those under discussion. Once again the open and panoramic surroundings are being highlighted. 180 Whitely 2007 : 43 (Niemeier’s entry) 181 Mazarakis-Ainian 1997 : 137 182 Morgan 1996 : 47 183 Whitley 2007 : 43 (Niemeier’s entry)

- 39 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.13.

KALAPODI Within the layer of the LH III C period, a terracotta bird figurine containing seeds was also found. 184 Pottery

h

The same investigations mentioned above located fragments of pottery associated with drinking and dining. These included LH III A and LH III B style kylikes and deep bowls,185 in addition to fragments from the LH III C period, including deep bowls, cups, and several pictorial kraters with warriors and combat scenes. Another krater fragment has been said to show a pair holding hands in a ritual dance. 186

Other finds ╬

An ashy deposit also relates to the early altar, indicating the use of a hearth area. Further votive offerings have also been found in the LH III C layers near the northeast corner of the Late Archaic temple. Stone pendants, sea shells, the claw of a bird of prey, a flat bead of blue glass with depictions of a sphinx and an amulet of green stone in the shape of a frog (this latter object is early Neolithic in date), are among the votives found.187

Classification

hx2 ╬x3

184 185 186 187

Proposed (LH III B/C) The origins of this shrine in the LH III A period are more than likely, however, it is the assemblage of the LH III B / C phase which is classified. The sites isolated location and pottery for drinking and dining, as well as the dedication of votive figurines in association with the built altar and hearth area, all testify to the ‘proposed’ shrine category.

Whitley 2006 : 69 (Niemeier’s entry) Whitley 2007 : 43 (Niemeier’s entry) Whitley 2007 : 42 (Niemeier’s entry) Morgan 2008 : 48

- 40 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.14.

KALAUREIA - SANCTUARY OF POSEIDON Settlement shrine(?)

Location

On the island of Poros, the building stands at a prominent part of the saddle between the mountain of Agios Elias to the west and the Vigla to the east, providing a good view of the Saronic gulf. The rooms uncovered stood at the edge of a rocky plateau, west of the later Peribolos.188 The excavators believe the room (which housed the possible cult finds) was part of a house with a number of rooms.189 Knowledge of the greater settlement is currently far from clear. The excavators believe that more houses may exist further west, due to the results from geophysical survey, however this cannot be confirmed without further excavation. LH III C

Date

Excavations west of the later temple Peribolos revealed a building which was most probably constructed in the latter part of the Mycenaean era. 190 Architecture Three walls were uncovered which are said to have constituted part of the same building for they were all bonding and all were double faced and built from limestone boulders. 191 At present no roof remains have been observed. ╬ ╬

Within this building a boulder placed directly on the bedrock was found, likely to be used as an offering or display platform. The surrounding soil contained ashy matter, which was fattier closer to the boulder,192 signifying a hearth area.

FIGURE 16: KALAUREIA - SKETCH OF TRENCH FEATURES 193

188 189 190 191 192 193

Wells 2003 : 339 Wells 2003 : 339 Wells 2003 : 339 Wells et al 2003 : 42 Wells et al 2003 : 43 After Wells 2003 : 346

- 41 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.14.

KALAUREIA - SANCTUARY OF POSEIDON

Finds Terracottas

No terracotta artefacts were found for this period of use.

Pottery

h

Other finds

Underneath the floor of the room almost all the pottery was of Mycenaean forms, 12 of which were coarse ware, and 43 of fine wares. From the latter, both closed and open shapes are represented with six of the open forms catalogued, 4 deep bowls of mid-late LH III C, 1 deep bowl of middle LH III C, and 1 carinated cup from the LH III C middle periods.194 All the pottery associated with the boulder was of late Mycenaean date. Seventeen fragments were coarse ware and 110 of fine ware. The latter included a carinated cup, narrow-necked jug, deep bowl and possibly a kalathos, all of LH III C middle or late period.195 The finds associated with this room also included part of a loaf-shaped saddle quern, 2 smooth and rounded stones, bone fragments of which one was burnt, a tooth and molluscs. (At the time of writing, the bone and molluscs had not yet been studied in detail by the excavators).196 Also, a number of objects suggested to be votive offerings have been found, a carnelian scaraboid, spindle-whorls and a small group of circular pieces of gold foil.197

Classification

hx1 ╬x2

194 195 196 197

Proposed The evidence for the ritual meal including large quantities of pottery and some bone remains, associated with the boulder feature and burnt area, result in Kalaureia being a proposed shrine. It has been suggested that the room and boulder may be a ‘house shrine’; however, I believe that the quantities of specialised pottery are far too high for this to be a domestic shrine.

Wells et al 2003 : 43 Wells et al 2003 : 43-44 Wells et al 2003 : 43 Hagg 2003 : 335

- 42 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.15.

LEFKANDI

Location

Funerary Building (?) In south west Euboea on the summit of a low hill named Toumba, stands a large building. The location has good views to the surrounding areas of the fertile river valley, the Lelantine plain and the sea to the west. Protogeometric

Date

The finds within the building at Lefkandi include some sherd fragments of the Mycenaean and LH III C periods. However, the majority of the finds testify to both construction and destruction of the building in the Middle Protogeometric period.198 Architecture

The building faced east with an apse on the opposite end to the porch-way entrance. It was roughly divided into three sections, with the central compartment being much larger than the others. This central room had direct access to the open veranda via a doorway.199

Finds Pottery

In the publication it is noted that a great deal of the finds from within the building, derive from the fill which was brought in from an unknown location not on the Toumba hill; 200 therefore unhelpful here.

Other finds

Although the inside of the building did demonstrate a number of features, in addition to the burials of the central room; these will not be discussed here as they cannot be clearly connected to communal cult practice.

Classification

Not a shrine None of the criteria for shine identification can clearly be noted from this building. Moreover, Popham draws the conclusion this building was meant as a funerary building imitating a house design,201 and Lemos also believes this structure was solely associated with the burials, erected after the bodies were interned and used very little if at all.202 The inability to connect the finds from this building securely with my criteria, results in agreement to the classification by Popham and Lemos.

198 199 200 201 202

Mazarakis-Ainian 1997 : 53 Popham et al 1993: 35 Popham et al 1993 : 73 Popham et al 1993: 49 Lemos 2008 : 523

- 43 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

3.16.

MIDEA Buildings within palace

Location

The fortified citadel at Midea was built at the top of a hill which dominates the eastern edge of the Argolid plain, approximately half way between Tiryns and Mycenae. Recent investigation has located the principal Shrine Area within the Citadel. Located on Terrace 9 directly abutting the fortification wall on its northeast stretch are Rooms II, VIII and XXXII grouped together.203 In addition to these rooms a megaron complex is located on Terrace 10 just west of the Shrine Area mentioned above. This complex also shows evidence of ritual practice. LH III B and LH III C

Date

Vessels and terracottas found in stratified deposits can be found throughout the LH III A1 to LH III B2 periods until the great destructions hit Midea. In addition, the rebuild during the LH III C period of the ‘megaron’ on the lower north-west terrace and the high quality pottery associated with this period, testify to the continuing use of the site. 204 FIGURE 17: MIDEA - PLAN OF TERRACES 9 AND 10 205

MIDEA - SHRINE AREA (TERRACE 9) Architecture

203 204 205

Area XXXIII may have been an open courtyard. This area has a wide opening on the east where access to Room II and the street/corridor is possible. Along the base of

Walberg 2007 : 61 Katie Demakopoulou unpublished paper (Nottingham University 13/3/2008) ‘The excavations at Midea in the Argolid’ After Walberg 2007 : Plate A

- 44 -

SITE GAZETTEER

MIDEA - SHRINE AREA (TERRACE 9) the citadel wall, a shelf-like feature of bedrock stood at a height of ca.30cm. The excavators suggest this could either be as a support to the wall, or as the foundation to a bench.206 Room II had an entrance at the south opposite the citadel wall with a threshold block. The Room measured 2.40 x 4.20m.207 Room VIII was of small proportions measuring just 2.40 x 1.00m, the excavators comment on its similarity to the cult room of the LH III C period at Tiryns.208 ╬

Room XXXII could not be completely excavated due to safety reasons, however, a hearth feature was clearly recognised.

Finds

As there are a number of finds from the different rooms of the shrine area, they will be present as an assemblage of the room they were found in; rather than dividing them into terracottas, pottery and other, as has been done for other sites. It is felt this will save confusion and assist in the understanding of each room’s possible function.

Room XXXIII

From the floor debris. An amphoriskos, three globular stirrup jars of typical LH III B decoration, two plainware stemmed cups of LH III B style, six deep bowls (A type) sherds, and five deep bowl (B type) sherds, representing drinking and dining activities. In addition, 1 miniature deep bowl.

h

An undisturbed intermediate floor provides ceramic evidence from no later than the LH III B period. A shoulder fragment of a globular stirrup jar, a dipper rim and part of a kylix with band decoration. Nine fragments of deep bowl A style, four deep bowl B style, four rosette bowls and part of a stemmed bowl.209 Finds for the earlier LH III B period and previous periods do exist but these are omitted here.210 Room II

h

Room VIII

h

The assemblage can be divided into two: a collection of luxury (votive) items including glass paste jewellery, beads, figurines, and ivory. And a domestic assemblage consisting of cooking ware, chipped and ground stone tools, lead vessels and carbonised food remains.211 The neck of a large female terracotta figure and a fragment of a bovine figure. Also fragments of a stirrup jar decorated with double axes, horns of consecration, flowers, and birds. From a disturbed floor level of the LH III B period (due to later LH IIIC and Roman reworking) of Terrace 9, there is a pottery assemblage which is worth mention to understand the general purpose of the area. An amphora base with exterior bands, two krater fragments, one ring-based krater rim, two deep bowl B fragments and a linear basin rim.212

Other Finds

Bone remains Animal bones, some of which were butchered were found throughout the excavated areas of terrace 9, including Rooms II, VIII, XXXII and XXXIII, with Rooms XXXII and XXXIII of the shrine area having a particular concentration. Room II had an LH III B floor level which was covered with a layer of ash. It has

206 207 208 209 210 211 212

Walberg 2007 : 63 Walberg 2007 : 62 Walberg 2007 : 63 Walberg 2007 : 128 Due to the chronological boundaries used in this study, details from earlier periods are omitted, see Walberg 2007 : 128-129. Walberg 2007 : 62 Walberg 2007 : 127

- 45 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

MIDEA - SHRINE AREA (TERRACE 9) been found that cooking was definitely taking place in this room as items such as a baking pan, a bridge-spouted jar and a cooking jar all revealed contents of food preparation including meat and chick peas. Walberg suggests that due to the quantities of both food and bone remains within this room, it is more than likely the space was used for food preparation rather than consumption.213 Rooms VIII and XXXII provided evidence for a much larger number of bone remains. Two hundred and forty six bone fragments (41.2% sheep/goat, 32.2% pig and 28.9% cattle) were found in the LH III B and LH III C strata.214 The western part of terrace 9, which included Rooms XXXII and XXXIII, contained burnt and butchered bones amounting to 185 fragments (50% sheep/goat, 14.3% pig and 35.7% cattle). In addition twenty-nine fragments of bone were found inside and outside the surrounding stones of the large hearth which occupied this room.215 Classification

hx3 ╬x1

Proposed This collection of rooms located in direct association with each other on terrace 9, constitute a proposed shrine area due to the pottery associated with drinking and dining, and the large quantity of bone remains testifying to the ritual meal. In addition the presence of a number of varying votive offerings and the female and animal figures.

MIDEA – THE MEGARON COMPLEX (TERRACE 10) Architecture

In its first phase, the megaron complex consisted of a courtyard, porch, a large room and back rooms. Two rooms just to the north of the megaron, Rooms VII (4.00 x 3.30m) and XVI (the latter contained a bench feature) are said to belong to the complex during this phase.216 The second LH III B phase witnessed a few alterations resulting in making the large central room more spacious. In the centre of this large room, a central hearth circled by four columns existed in the later LH III B phase, but it is uncertain whether this was in place from the previous period or a new feature. The single back room was divided into two, Rooms X and XI. Two new walls were constructed, 9 and 16 (see plan above) which have been suggested to create a new entrance and vestibule area. Within this new vestibule the excavators note two features, one a simple platform structure and the other standing directly next to it is an irregular block.217 Continuing to the west, new rooms were constructed in what was the porch and courtyard of the previous phase. It is suggested that Rooms XVIII and XX may have been part of another sanctuary due to the finds associated with them. The northwest corner of Room XX also contained a circular platform with a small flat slab in front, said to be similar to the feature from the vestibule of the megaron.218 After the destructions, the LH III C period displayed many changes to the architectural features of the megaron area. Firstly the building was made more

213 Walberg forthcoming : 2 (this is the page number for the document passed to me pre-publication, and may change when the final version becomes public) 214 Walberg forthcoming : 3 215 Walberg forthcoming : 4 216 Walberg 2007 : 197 217 Walberg 2007 : 197 218 Walberg 2007 : 197

- 46 -

SITE GAZETTEER

MIDEA – THE MEGARON COMPLEX (TERRACE 10) stable, and in doing so a niche was created in the southeast corner of the megaron room which contained a possible religious assemblage.219 In addition, changes included the removal of the central hearth feature and the inclusion of a central row of columns along the main axis. In Room XVIII (LH III C period), a bench was constructed next to a shaft which led to the water cistern.220 Finds ╬

h Other Finds

h

In Rooms XX and XVIII of the LH III B 2 phase, a rhyton, spouted conical bowls, miniature vessels and the head of a terracotta snake were found.221 Within the Niche of the LH III C megaron, three early Mycenaean sword pommels and a faience necklace were found; 222 which due to their location and assemblage should be considered as votive. Bone Remains 392 bones were found in the LH III B levels of Room XI, one of the rooms behind the main megaron building, which were found to be 33.3% were sheep/goat, 33.3% pig and 33.3% cattle bones.223 These bones were not found in association with ceramics suggestive of feasting, however, some millstones, pounders, pestles and a whetstone were discovered in this room. Walberg suggests this room could have served as a panty with the food being prepared and consumed elsewhere. The main megaron room also contained remains of animal bone. The LH III B/C strata contained 372 bones, 40% sheep/goat, 40% pig and 20% cattle. It is noted that the meat could have either been prepared on the large central hearth, or elsewhere if this feature was reserved for ceremonial purposes.224 The LH III C stratum of this main room also contained remains of the same species which testifies to the continued practice of consumption even though the hearth was not in existence in this later period. Bone remains were also found near the entrance to the megaron, as well as further to the west in the LH III B/C strata of the courtyard where 471 bones were found (33.3% sheep/goat, 38.9% pig and 27.8% cattle).225 To the north of the megaron, still on terrace 10, were located Rooms XXVI, XVI and VII which also provided evidence for very large quantities of animal bones.226

Classification

hx2 ╬x1

219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226

Proposed This building complex must be considered as having a sacred function. It is uncharacteristic of built shrines, as comparisons show, however, it clearly includes many of the finds and features which classify a site as sacred and so deserves attention.

Walberg 2007 : 198 Walberg 2007 : 198 Walberg 2007 : 197 Walberg 2007 : 198 Walberg forthcoming : 5 Walberg forthcoming : 6 Walberg forthcoming : 7 Walberg forthcoming : 8

- 47 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.17.

MOUNT HYMETTUS Isolated Open-Air

Location

Focus centres on a natural hollow situated less than half a mile north of the mountains highest point. This feature is deep and well sheltered resulting in vision from within being limited to the sky. When standing just above it, however, the entire Athenian plain is visible.227 No settlement or burial evidence has been reported in the vicinity.

╬

LH III B / C and Protogeometric

Date

The pottery from the site has been dated on stylistic terms only, but the excavators believe the sanctuary was established in the latter half of the 10th century.228 However, the pottery assemblage from the LH III B period may also indicate beginnings in that period. The hollow which was the focus on this hillside, had inside it a curved foundation, which is said to most probably be a stone lined pit. Unfortunately this cannot be dated accurately due to the mixture of pottery surrounding it.229 Therefore, this feature cannot be considered with any certainty to belong to the period under consideration.

Architecture

FIGURE 18: MOUNT HYMETTUS - VIEW TO THE HOLLOW LOOKING NORTH 230

Finds Terracottas

No terracottas are mentioned in the report for the period under consideration.

Pottery

The pottery assemblage was very large, but unfortunately the excavators state it is un-datable by context. Therefore the publication catalogues only a selection of the vessels and provides broad chronological boundaries from their stylistic parallels. The majority of the pottery from the LH III B period consists of kylikes, mugs and

227 228 229 230

Langdon 1976: 1 Langdon 1976 : 74 Langdon 1976 : 51 After Langdon 1976 : PLATE 2

- 48 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.17.

MOUNT HYMETTUS deep bowls, with the LH III C period also providing examples of deep bowls.

h Other finds

The Protogeometric pottery includes examples of Oinochoe (190,191), and giant skyphoid kraters (192, 193, 194).231 The excavation report states that; 27 Oinochoai and jugs, 34 kraters and 8 kanthroi232 were found of the Protogeometric style. The hollowed pit also provided evidence for sacrifice, as the field notebooks mentioned that the depression had burned animal bones and a large quantity of ash mixed with the pottery.233 None of this material has been kept and due to the long history of this site (BA to Roman periods) without stratigraphical separations, it cannot be known with any certainty which period these practices occurred.

Classification

hx1 ╬x1

231 232 233 234

Probable The pottery associated to both drinking and dining in both the LH III B and Protogeometric periods, alongside the lack of settlement and burial evidence, resulting in its isolated location, make it ‘probable’ that this site is of a sacred nature. Langden’s report doubts its early origins, as no other ‘Mycenaean Peak Sanctuaries’ (his terminology) had then been discovered.234 However, many studies have shown since and indeed this gazetteer is presenting, the current situation is quite the opposite. A number of isolated hill top shrines exist in the Mycenaean period, therefore this cannot be used as a reason for a non-sacred function.

Langdon 1976 : 54-56 Langden 1976 : 75 Langden 1976 : 77 Langden 1976 : 86-87

- 49 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

3.18.

MYCENAE – THE CULT CENTRE Buildings associated to Palace

Location

The Cult Centre is found on the lower southwest terraces of the citadel at Mycenae, overlooking the Argolid plateau. It has now been argued that this area stood outside the fortification walls for the majority of its lifespan.235 However, due to its proximity to the palatial citadel and finds to be discussed below I believe it should still be considered in association with the palace. Date LH III B The construction and destruction of both the Room with the Fresco and Temple complexes to be discussed below, falls within the LH IIIB period. Destruction debris covered the whole of this area at the end of Phase VIII, LH III B2 period. 236 Tsountas House Shrine was the first to be constructed, in the LH III A period. All of the buildings were in use at one time in the LH III B period when they stood outside the walls. The ‘processional way’ is a feature of the LH III B2 period.237 As the Cult Centre has a number of different buildings and rooms which have a large amount of evidence for cult practice; three of these complexes will be considered separately so that their different provisions can be highlighted: The Room with the Fresco; The Temple Complex; Tsountas House Shrine.

Surroundings of the sacred complexes in the Cult Centre Although the three areas to be presented below are those which are considered as the principal areas of ritual practice, recent study and re-evaluation of the area of the Cult Centre has brought to light finds which should be briefly summarised, in order to understand the area as a whole. Area 36 which is directly north of Room 31 (Room with the Fresco Complex) is thought to have been either open air, or partly covered by reed/brush roofing. It can be approached by the passage 34 which leads from the courtyard outside the Temple Complex. However, it is thought that originally access would have also been possible directly from the Room with the Fresco Complex. The material recovered is extremely diverse, including vessels for storage, pouring, drinking, eating and miniature forms. The greatest quantity of any one pottery type is the Kylix, with 13 examples, the next being deep bowls and dippers with 6 examples each.238 All the finds from this area were found in situ on Floor 2 and preserved by the catastrophe which marks the end of Phase VII.239

235 236 237 238 239

Wardle 2003 : 323 Moore and Taylor 1999: vii Shelton 2004 : 7-8 Taylor, French and Wardle 2007 : 18-19 Taylor, French and Wardle 2007 : 23

- 50 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.18.

MYCENAE – THE CULT CENTRE FIGURE 19: MYCENAE CULT CENTRE - PLAN 240

240

After Taylour, French, Wardle and Krzyszkoska 2007 : CD ROM Plan 6. (Acknowledge copyright Mycenae Archive by Diana Wardle)

- 51 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

MYCENAE – THE ROOM WITH FRESCO Architecture

╬

╬

The complex was entered from the northwest over a fine threshold of conglomerate, then passing through Room 38 (most likely a type of ante-room), before crossing a doorway with postholes241 which led directly into the Room with the Fresco (Room 31). Another room led off to the southwest (Room 33) which could(?) have been a storeroom. In the centre of the Room with the Fresco (Room 31) stood a hearth with plesia features at both ends, both providing a place for wooden posts. Also in this Room, a larnax was placed against the North wall.242 In the southeast corner of this central room also stood a low platform which was overlooked on one side by a large Fresco, which is mentioned below (in other finds). Directly off Room 31 to the east was the Shrine (Room 32), it was a small simple room which only had a rough platform of plesia in the southwest corner.

Finds Terracottas

h

One figure has been found which takes the form of a Type A anthropomorphic figure of Phase VII and was located in Room 32 standing on a rough platform. It has been named the ‘Lozenge Lady’ due to the patterns on the checks and body. Other than this, it is possible one piece belonging to a psi figurine could belong to the Phase VIII deposit in Room 31, however, the publishers note that this may just be destruction debris. 243

Pottery

h

From the Phase VII use. Kylikes - 18 examples: 10 from Room 31, and 8 from Room 32.244 Stirrup jars - 9 examples: 7 globular, 2 piriform jar. Cups: 6 shallow cups with one handle. Jugs: 4 common shaped forms, 1 unusual wide mouthed piriform shape. Miniatures: 4 miniature handmade Hydria (Room 31), 2 simple jugs Small piriform jars - 5 examples. Small Alabastra - 3 examples.245 Also 2 Stemmed bowls, 2 dippers, 2 shallow angular bowls, a fine ware amphora, 1 conical spouted bowl, 1 spouted cup, 1 askos. Heavy ware 2 large ‘domestic’ stirrup jars, 2 large coarse storage jars,246 a large amphora, a larnax. Cooking Ware 1 tripod cauldron, 1 jug, 1 dipper/ladle, 1 cooking pot.247

Other finds

h

241 242 243 244 245 246 247

The Fresco associated with the platform at the east corner of Room 31 was divided into two registers, that which was depicted beside the platform on its north side, and that which was above the platform. The lower register showed a female figure facing the altar while holding two bunches of wheat and being accompanied by an animal. The upper register has two women facing one another, the left hand figure is dressed

Taylour, French and Wardle 1981 : 53 Taylour, French and Wardle 1981 : 52 Moore and Taylour forthcoming : 27 Moore and Taylour forthcoming : 12 Moore and Taylour forthcoming : 13 Moore and Taylour forthcoming : 14 Moore and Taylour forthcoming : 15

- 52 -

SITE GAZETTEER

MYCENAE – THE ROOM WITH FRESCO in a long cloak, where as the right wears a bodice and tiered skirt typical of Mycenaean representations of women.248 See Fig. 34 below for detail. Classification

hx3 ╬x2

Proposed This building complex contains built features for display, a central hearth and also votive miniature pottery, a female figure, and the inclusion of religious iconography in the form of the fresco in the main room.

MYCENAE – THE TEMPLE COMPLEX Architecture

The Temple Complex comprises a vestibule (XI) into which one would enter, the main room (18), an alcove off the north west corner of this room (18 alcove) and a small room entered by a staircase on the east side of Room 18 (19). Room XI which is the first entered has many fixed features, including a low bench covered with plesia along the east wall, a rectangular stone block possibly acting as a bench or stand to the west of the entrance, and hearth with a fixed boarder other than on the east side, which contained a great deal of ash.249 This Room also had a plaster floor in the initial Phase VII. Also, in the north-west corner of the room by the entrance to room 18, was a basin type feature made of white clay mixed with earth.250 The Main room of the Temple (18) has a plaster floor which was most likely laid at the time of the Temples construction in Phase VII (LH III B1 period). 251

╬

The doorway from XI led directly into Room 18, where opposite against the back (north) wall stood three low platforms, stepped upwards from West to East where they meet with the stairs. Moreover, the northwest corner also contained three platforms of varying heights, in addition to the low dais placed just to the east of the Rooms centre.252 The east wall of Room 18 also has a stone ledge running along its base which abuts the southern end of the room and continues until the third step of the staircase leading to Room 19.253 Room 18 also has three columns running along its north-south axis on the eastern side of the room parallel to the edge of the staircase. Room ‘18 Alcove’ was triangular in plan and was reached through a window from the northwest corner of Room 18. Much of this space is taken up by the natural outcrop of rock in its eastern half and the rest of the floor is of beaten earth.254 At the end of Phase VII (mid LH III B2 period) destructions which were probably earthquake associated caused some refurbishments to take place in the Temple Complex. These were quite minor, the floor of Room 18 was re-laid with plesia and earth, and the central dais was given its final form, or perhaps laid for the first time. This, the staircase and the platforms were all coated (or re-coated) in plesia.255

248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255

Wardle 2006 (University of Birmingham Webpage) Moore and Taylor 1999 : 11 Moore and Taylor 1999 : 12 Moore and Taylor 1999 : 1 Moore and Taylor 1999 : 13 Moore and Taylor 1999 : 12 Moore and Taylor 1999 : 13 Moore and Taylor 1999 : 22-23

- 53 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

MYCENAE – THE TEMPLE COMPLEX The sealed off finds from Room 19 and 18 Alcove were tabulated in the publication, so this is reproduced below.

Finds

TABLE 3: FINDS FROM THE TEMPLE COMPLEX IN USE DURING PHASE VII 256 Room 19 Deposit Terracottas - h (figures)

Metal

1 Female figurine, phi

1 bronze finger ring

2 Type A anthropomorphic figures 12

Complete or restorable anthropomorphic figures

5 Fragmentary Type B anthropomorphic 1 Axe-hammer model

1 Small bronze strip Type

B

figures

1 Bronze and lead lump 1 bronze pin head 1 Lead pot mend

7 Complete or restorable snake figures 1 Fragmentary snake figure 1 Pierced disk-shaped object Unfired Clay 3 Tripods tables, large

Organic * 1 Ivory comb

1 Clay vat

* 1 Ivory arm / cosmetic spoon

6 Small disks / counters 1 Large clay disk

* 1 Ivory figurine, ? male * 1 Ivory head

2 Sealings

1 Ivory conulus 1 Ivory box

Glass - h (votive offerings)

1 bone pin

*137 Beads (94 in 68-1402) * 30 + Plaques (22+ in 68-1402) * 1 Seal 1 Inlay 1 Faience Scarab

1 bone point * 2 Cowrie shells, 1 pierced (from 68-1402) and 1 unpierced 1 Shell ring

Room 18 Alcove Pottery – fine ware 3 vessels Terracottas 1 Small amphora 1 Female figurine, proto-phi 1 Kylix 2 Restorable Type A anthropomorphic figures 1 Conical bowl with horizontal handles 6 Complete or restorable snake figures Organic 1 Worked fragment of antler 1 Fragmentary snake figure 2 samples of seed-like material (* denotes found in bowl 68-1402)257 As was noted above, the Temple complex suffered destructions at the end of Phase VII but went on to be refurbished and so establishing Phase VIII. The published material admits to possible confusion between the finds being of Phase VII or Phase VIII,258 however, this shall not be painstakingly analysed here, as both these Phases stand within the LH III 256 257 258

Moore and Taylor 1999 : 31 After Moore and Taylor 1999: 18 Moore and Taylor 1999: 17

- 54 -

SITE GAZETTEER

MYCENAE – THE TEMPLE COMPLEX B period. Classification

Proposed

hx2 ╬x1

This building complex has a number of features associated with cultic display (platforms / dais), in addition to the large number of fine votive offerings (not just glass jewellery, but also ivory and metal objects) and terracotta figures.

MYCENAE – TSOUNTAS HOUSE SHRINE Architecture

╬ Phase 1

╬ Phase 2

As with most of the buildings within the Cult Centre at Mycenae, Tsountas House Shrine can also be noted to have two phases: The earlier with a single room containing the bolster-shaped altar, and the later phase which included an extension to the north, so that a porch containing an altar/bench could be added, at which point the bolster-altar was completely covered.259 One enters directly into a room with stuccoed floor, where benches line the east and south walls. The bolster shaped altar-hearth had at its southwest angle a depression which could have held the pointed end of a rhyton or libation vessel. From its side a shallow runlet in the stucco led into a two handled jar sunk in the floor.260 The porch most probably had a wooden superstructure, including a (column) base of poros blocks. In addition an ‘L shaped’ altar and plaster platform existed in this area (LH III B period). It has also been noted that the processional way dates to the later phase of use when the porch was present, but not the internal libation feature.261

Finds Terracottas

No terracottas have been reported from this room.

Pottery

For the first phase, evidence has been found of a cooking pot (which French suggests is a receptacle for libation ), a flat tray/dish with three handles, and a miniature kylix. The later phase revealed a Vat in the northeast corner.262 Near the altar-hearth was also found a shallow dish which is suggested to have been intended for offerings, in addition, in or near this room, three small vases not much larger than thimbles were found.

Other finds

h

Artefacts found within the room included fragmentary objects of glass, bone, ivory and amber, in addition to a scarab of Queen Tiy. In Room Gamma was also found the painted plaster plaque, noted as depicting a divine figure wearing a large figureof-eight shield and flanked by two women in flounced skirts.263

Classification

hx1 ╬x1

259 260 261 262 263

Probable Due to this building having a built feature clearly for the practice of libation in its first period, and an altar feature in its second; the features fulfil the minor criteria. In addition, the variety of objects found in the room must constitute votive offerings.

French 1981(b) : 44 Wace 1951 : 254 Shelton 2004 : 5 French 1981(b) : 45 Shelton 2004 : 2

- 55 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

3.19.

NICHORIA Building associated with settlement.

Location

Located in the South West of the Messenia valley was the settlement of Nichoria. Two important buildings of the Early Iron Age have been found in area IV of the excavation, Units IV-1 and IV-5. 264 Protogeometric

Date

Area IV has been identified as the main area of settlement for the Early Iron Age (Dark Age as the publication terms it). The chronology of this period has been divided into phases; DA I : ca. 1075-965 B.C DA II: ca. 975 – 850 B.C DA II/III: ca. 850 – 800 B.C DA III: ca. 800 – 750 B.C Late Geometric ca. 750 – 700 B.C.265 Architecture

The area and exact space at which Unit IV-1 was constructed was previously settled in the Mycenaean period, and the building itself stood on some levelled terrace and house walls from the previous period.266 The main entrance is at the east side of the building where the excavators also identified warn threshold blocks and evidence for posts in the corners, which testify to both a doorway and a roof covering.267 Coulson believed the building was rectangular in its initial phase then later made larger as well as transforming it to an apsidal form. However, Mazarikis-Ainian & Fagerstrom believe Unit IV-1 was an apsidal building from its first construction.268 The building has two areas, a shallow porch to the east and the rest as one area being named Room 1. There are two entrances, the main one seems to be south of the central axis, however, in addition a narrow doorway has been found in the east extremity of the north wall. FIGURE 20: NICHORIA - UNIT 1-IV 269

Approximately central to Room 1 is a circular pit which is suggested as being a 264 265 266 267 268 269

Mazarakis-Ainian 1997 : 74 McDonald et al 1983 : 319 McDonald et al 1983 : 19 McDonald et al 1983 : 23 Mazarikis-Ainian 1997 : 75 After Mazarikis-Ainian 1997 : fig.264

- 56 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.19.

NICHORIA ╬

hearth due to the black soil and charcoal which fills it. East of this hearth, a flat circular stone is most probably the base of a wooden column. Another feature took the form of a circular stone platform against the middle of the rear wall; this was found with a thin layer of carbonised material covering it.270 There is a possibility that a bench existed along the west part of the east wall. From Phase one, which constituted the earlier building and the finds from DA II (10th century BC) not much can be identified of what has been considered a ritual nature. The excavators mention that the lack of finds could be due to the fact that the building was cleared of debris before the restructure of phase two.

Finds

Terracottas

No terracottas have been reported from this period.

Pottery

The publication does not clearly note what belongs to which phase.

Other finds

Two Clay Spindle Whorls, One bronze needle, a Bronze open ring, a Bronze finger ring and an Iron Knife were recorded from within and just outside the building.271

Classification

hx0 ╬x1

270 271 272

Not a Shrine Only finds from DA I and DA II phases were considered, as they represent the assemblage for the period under consideration. The evidence in line with the criteria set-out above (section 2.2), could not be found to suggest this building was of a cultic nature.272

McDonald et al 1983 : 27-28 McDonald et al 1983 : 32 See section 4.3 for further discussion.

- 57 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

3.20.

OLYMPIA Isolated open-air

Location ╬

West Peloponnese. A nearby Mycenaean settlement existed, however, no clear evidence shows this continued into the Protogeometric period,273 therefore, the shrine was isolated. Protogeometric

Date

It is thought that cult practice at this site began in the early Protogeometric period.274 However, it has been said the combination of evidence from figurines, pottery and jewellery could mean the establishment of the shine is as early as the LH III C period. 275 Architecture

There is no architecture associated with the cult for this period.

Finds Terracottas

h Pottery

h

Other finds ╬

The bull has been noted as the most common type of votive with eight published examples from the first half of the century, and another five from the next period. 276 Found within the same context was some pottery, which by stylistic grounds can date the assemblage. The forms are said to represent predominately small open shapes, including fragments of drinking vessels. Many different styles are mentioned; ring and conical feet from medium and high sized vessels, with some showing signs of monochrome interior painting. The fragments collected have been said to indicate cups, skyhoi and kantharoi are also forms present. Eder has compared these vessels with ones of similar style to examples from Aetos and Polis of the Protogeometric period. She therefore dates this assemblage as spanning the Submycenaean – Late Geometric periods.277 At least two exceptionally large Kylix sherd fragments were found among the late or Submycenaean levels, and although large kylikes are not unparalleled, it has been suggested they testify to cult practice.278 A small number of Submycenaean pins and fibulae were also discovered. In addition, a black stratum revealed an accumulation of ash and animal bones, as well as jewellery and some other bronze objects. These were interpreted by Eder as the remains of animal sacrifice and a votive deposit. 279

Classification

hx2 ╬x2

273 274 275 276 277 278 279

Proposed The principle criteria noted were the votive offerings of figurines and jewellery, as well as the pottery associated to drinking activities. These were associated with a black fatty stratum, providing evidence for both a hearth area and animal sacrifice. Additionally, the shrine area was isolated from any contemporary settlement.

Morgan 1996 : 53 Eder 2008 : 566 Morgan 1999 : 380 Morgan 1999 : 379 Eder 2001 : 204 Morgan 1999 : 380 Eder 2001 : 203

- 58 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.21.

PALACE OF NESTOR Building associated with Palace

Location

The Palace of Nestor is located on the low hill of Ano Englianos in western Messenia, close to the southwest coast of the Peloponnese. The area which contains a concentration of cult features and finds is found in the north-eastern building, although a great deal of evidence also comes from the Palace proper for ritual actions, as will be shown below. LH III B

Date Architecture

The north eastern building could either be reached via ramp 91 from the main building, or directly from the south where this area was most likely accessible by the same approach as the main building. Court 92 would be the area first entered, the remains of what could be two column foundations have been suggested to indicate this court would have been bordered by a colonnade. At the northwest side of this court, the focus is on a small building which has since been identified as the Palaces principal shrine.280

╬

The main feature of this court is the square block of poros (raised platform) which stands 3m southeast of the shrine, covered in painted plaster with a design of wavy lines forming scallops and curving bands. 281 Room 93 (the shrine) has one side completely open to court 92, and is framed by antae blocks. The Room stood at a higher level than the Court, so steps led into it. Room 93 and court 92 will be termed the shrine area of the Palace of Nestor in this study.

Finds Terracottas

No terracottas were found in the shrine area.

Pottery

From ramp 91 which leads into the north-eastern building, 445 kylix stems & bases were counted, and 239 flat base bowls or cups. There were many other pottery finds including, dippers, conical cups, a stirrup-vase, a krater bowl, a tripod vessel, a brazier, and more. 282 Pottery from Court 92 included course ware – pithoi of varying sizes having high necks, a cooking pot on three legs, an amphora and jug with high necks, a stirrupvase and a basin.283 Of Fine ware – 275 kylix stems and bases, a bowl or basin with pinched-out handles, dippers, bowls, cups etc. with flat bases; 67 were noted.284

h

In Room 93 course wares found included a pithos, a brazier or scoop, a cooking pot with a thin splaying rim, and a small tripod vessel. Also in red ware a jug or jar. Fine wares found were, 32 stems and bases of kylikes, diminutive votive kylikes, 16 flat bases of bowls or cups, and a basin.285 Other rooms within the north-eastern building produced interesting and similar pottery finds, so are also mentioned below. Room 99 revealed a one-handled course jug, an amphora, a pedestaled krater, 3 stirrup-vases, a krater, a wide mouthed jar. Course ware shapes – a pithos, a lid, a tripod vessel, a cooking pot, a brazier and a

280 281 282 283 284 285

Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 301 Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 302 Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 301 For further detail see references Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 303 Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 305

- 59 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.21.

PALACE OF NESTOR scoop. Fine ware – a diminutive votive kylix, 352 kylix stems, 150 cups / bowls with flat bases, also a basin, bowl, and a tankard.286 Room 100 contained many sherds in very poor condition. Course ware – a pithos, a large storage jar, a cooking pot, a large and small tripod-vessel, and a baking pan. In Red ware – a jug or jar and a globular jar. Fine ware - 53 kylix stems, 40 flat bases of cups / bowls, a conical cup, a bowl and basin with pinched-out handles. In decorated ware – a tankard and a Vapheio cup with vertical rippling.287 FIGURE 21: THE PALACE OF NESTOR 288

Other finds Classification

hx1 ╬x1

286 287 288

Probable Room 93 and court 92 contained a very large quantity of pottery which demonstrates drinking and dining, in addition to the altar feature in the open court, resulting in a probable shrine classification.

Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 323 Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 325 After Palaima et al 1985 : 253

- 60 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.22.

PHYLAKOPI Built shrine within settlement

Location

The settlement of Phylakopi is located on the island of Melos in the Cyclades. The shine complex was located at the edge of the settlement, within the fortifications. FIGURE 22: PHYLAKOPI - PLAN OF THE SHRINE COMPLEX 289

Date

LH III B – LH III C The sanctuary at Phylakopi has two shrines, which have slightly differing sequences. The West Shrine was constructed during the LH III A period (initiating Phase 1), the East Shrine in the LH III B1 period, at the same time as the Mycenaean fortification wall (initiating phase 2). Both these shrines collapsed in the early LH III C period. However, following this, the East Shrine was re-used, and modifications were made to the West Shrine (Phase 3).290

Architecture

An open paved courtyard which was closed off on its south side by a wall had to be crossed before entering either of the shrine buildings. This courtyard had a low bench against the wall, and in front of the doorway to the West Shrine was a prominent rounded stone. This rounded stone has recently been knocked over, and has been noted as being a roughly carved out basin. It is believed to have originally stood the opposite way up to that generally accepted today (and photographed in publications).291 A different interpretation must now be provided for this feature, although its ritual use is still very likely, if not more so than with its previous understanding.292

╬

The West Shrine This building had three rooms, the largest was entered first through a doorway in its east wall. This room contained altar structures in the north-west and south-west corners at either side of a doorway in the west wall which led to the inner rooms. The first room in turn had a doorway through into another room. The largest room had a pair of piercings in the west wall either side of the doorway above where the altars 289 290 291 292

After Renfrew 1981 : 68 (fig 1) Renfrew 1981 : 67 Renfrew, personal communication: 04 January 2010 See sections below on purification, where this feature will be discussed further.

- 61 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.22.

PHYLAKOPI stood. The back rooms A & B also contained platforms. The East Shrine This building only constitutes one room, which in the north-east corner had a low platform. 293 Due to the quantity of finds excavated in association with the shrine at Phylakopi, I will present only the types which will be used as part of the discussion within this study. For the entire catalogue one should refer back to its full publication in Renfrew 1985. Any material recovered from Renfrew’s Phase D & S has been omitted in this study as they come from the fill level above the stratified sequence which ends in Phase 3c; the LH III C period.294 Also Phase 0 has not been considered, as this pre-dates the establishment of the Sanctuary, and most likely belongs to the Late Bronze I date.295

Finds

Terracottas TABLE 4: TERRACOTTAS & POTTERY FROM PHYLAKOPI LH IIIA – LH IIIC 296

Pedestal Vase Double Vase Kylix Stirrup Jar Other Vessel

293 294 295 296

1

Courtyard

2

2

1

3

B

2

A

1?

Main 1

3 2?

3+2? 1 1 1? 1 1 5

1 2 1 2 7

East Shrine

Terracottas: h - Figures and h - votive figurines Male Figure 3 Male Figure 1? 1? Fragment Female Figure 5 Female Figure 2 1? Frag. Female Figurine 2 Bovine Figurine 1 5 3 Bovine Figurine 2 1 4 Frag. Chariot 2 1 Chariot Fragment 3 Driven Ox 1 1 Driven Ox Frag. Furniture etc Animal Figurine 2 12 Animal Figurine 3 10 Frag. Pottery

Courtyard

East Shrine

Phase 2b/3c, 3b & 3c West Shrine

B

A

Main

Phase 2a & 2b West Shrine

2 3

13 10

1 1

1

6 1 11

23

Renfrew 1999 : 403 Renfrew 1985 : 143 Renfrew 1985 : 299 After Renfrew 1985 : Table 9.4

- 62 -

10

2

2 5

2 1 5

SITE GAZETTEER

3.22.

PHYLAKOPI

Pottery cont.

h Other finds

╬

Mountjoy has studied the pottery from Phylakopi in further detail, mentioning that much of the pottery found in both the Shrines and the street was very fragmentary, however, it was noticed that the material within the Shrines constituted mainly deep bowls and monochrome kylikes of poor quality.297 In addition to those finds tabulated above, much more material was brought to light including a head in sheet gold, which was found in the East Shrine from the last period of use, the LH III C period / Phase 3c.298 Numerous fragments of Ostrich eggshell were found in the East shrine, which Renfrew is quite certain, represent one rhyton.299 Many other finds came to light from this sanctuary, which are of great interest, however, there is not the space here to present them all.300

Classification

hx3 ╬x2

297 298 299 300

Proposed The shrine area at Phylakopi fulfils a number of the criteria needed to identify a shrine, including; figures and votive figurines, pottery vessels associated with drinking and dining, a rhyton for libation practices, as well as built platforms for display.

Renfrew 1985 : 151 Renfrew 1985 : 302 Renfrew 1985 : 324 See Renfrew’s publication for a full catalogue 1985 : 299-360

- 63 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

3.23.

POLIS CAVE - ITHAKA Isolated Cave

Location ╬

The cave is located on the island of Ithaca, on the north-west side of the Bay of Polis. LH III B - LH III C

Date Architecture

Two features have been noted from Benton’s excavations at the Polis Cave. One being a low wall which held a curved shape across the entire width of the cave. On its external side near the entrance to the Cave, was a projection which provided a step onto the wall.301 The other feature which was located deeper into the cave past the wall, was a roughly constructed pavement of irregular undressed stones which were set in clay. This feature is said to be Mycenaean in date, due to the deposit which surrounded it.302

Finds Terracottas

No Terracottas were found at the site for this period of use.

FIGURE 23: POLIS CAVE - PLAN OF SITE 303

301 302 303

Benton 1938 : 48 Benton 1938 : 49 After Benton 1938 : 49

- 64 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.23.

POLIS CAVE - ITHAKA

Pottery

The excavators found it difficult to divide the stratigraphy of this period, however on stylistic grounds, a great deal of pottery from the LH III B and LH III C periods was recognised. It is suggested the pottery could be associated with the paved area.304 LH III B period

h

A large number of Kylikes, small and large Jugs, bowls with low feet, bowls of uncertain shape, a child’s feeding cup and 2 stirrup vases. LH III C period

h Other finds

Approximately (reconstructed) 19 Kylikes, small and large Jugs, kantharoi on high feet and bowls of uncertain shape.305 A series of bronze tripods in Geometric style show similarities to those found at Olympia and Delphi.306

Classification hx1 ╬x1

304 305 306

Probable Due to the finds from within the cave at Polis being separated from settlement or burial evidence in addition to the pottery assemblage suggesting drinking and dining from both the LH III B and LH III C periods, this is a probable shrine spanning those periods.

Benton 1938 : 52 Benton 1942 : 9-16 Myres 1938 : 122

- 65 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

3.24.

POSEIDI Isolated building

Location

Located in northern Greece on the Promontory of Poseidi. Protogeometric

Date

The Apsidal building is dated to the early Protogeometric period. Pottery found dates the beginning of the cult to the end of LH III C/SM period.307 Architecture

╬

The building itself faces south and from the preserved lower parts of the walls it can be seen that large rounded stones were used in their construction.308 During excavations of the area immediately south of building Γ, two cone shaped holes β and δ were found. Hole β was full of black greasy soil, ash and other finds. Hole δ which was placed in the centre of structure E has a diameter of 2.5m. Around the centre of the base of this cone, stones were placed to stop the spread of the ashes.309 Dated to this same period of use, the area surrounding the Apsidal building was an open air cobbled yard. 310

Finds Terracottas

No terracottas were found at the site.

Pottery

From the ground of the building, sherds of Mycenaean type skyphoi, in addition to closed and open vessels with wavy lines or single centre circles were found, belonging to the post Mycenaean and Protogeometric phases. Also cups of the LH III C period, skyphoi and other sherds were found alongside other Protogeometric style finds.311 From Hole β, handmade sherds and plenty of wheelmade skyphoi and kraters of the submycenaean and Protogeometric periods were found. Also large amphoras with dense concentric circles.

h

Hole δ contained handmade open vessels (including drinking and eating forms) representing 90% of the entire assemblage.312

Other finds

h

Hole δ contained black soil with a lot of ash and remains of bones from cattle and other animals, including many large oysters. 313

Classification

hx2 ╬x1

307 308 309 310 311 312 313

Proposed Due to the contained hearth area providing a central focus to the building and the quantities of bone and pottery clearly suggesting ritual meals, this site has gained its classification. The surrounding area of the building at Poseidi is not made clear in the publication. If the site was completely isolated, which seems likely due to the complete lack of settlement information provided, this site would gain an additional ╬, so further justifying its ‘Proposed’ classification.

Lemos 2002:221 Vokotopoulou 1994 : 271 Vokotopoulou 1992 : 445 Vokotopoulou 1994 : 270 Vokotopoulou 1994 : 272 Vokotopoulou 1992 : 445 Vokotopoulou 1992 : 445

- 66 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.25.

PROFITIS ELIAS CAVE Isolated open air

Location ╬

In the hinterland of Tiryns near Agios Andrianos a high outcrop of rock named Profitis Elias is the location for activity centred on the summit and a small natural cave.

FIGURE 24: PROFITIS ELIAS - VIEW TOWARDS THE GULF OF NAUPLION 314

LH III B

Date Architecture

The summit of the Profitis Elias hill has evidence of a large building belonging to the LH III B period, with storage areas on its south side. This building was also surrounded by a stone paved area. The northern part of this court which is near the edge of the plateau has a fissure in the bedrock which drops down to a natural cave underneath.315

FIGURE 25: PROFITIS ELIAS - PLAN OF FEATURES ON THE SUMMIT 316

Finds

314 315 316

Photograph : Author 2007. As above, the reader can witness the exposed panoramic view from the shrine area. Kilian 1990 : 190 After Kilian 1990 : 194

- 67 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.25.

PROFITIS ELIAS CAVE Terracottas

No terracottas are evident in this period.

Pottery

On the floor of the small cave were found some kylikes and a cup which demonstrate drinking activities. In addition a few cooking pots were also found.

h Other finds ╬

When this cave was investigated, many layers became apparent which displayed cult use in following periods, including Archaic and Roman eras. The lowest level contained remains of fire and ash in which were found a considerable number of sherds.317

Classification

Proposed

hx1 ╬x2

317

Due to this sites isolated location in connection with a hill summit and natural cave, the pottery evidence suggestive of drinking, in addition to a burnt area, this site achieves its classification.

Protonotariou-Deilaki 1963 : 65

- 68 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.26.

THERMON Isolated shrine (?)

Location

The site of Thermon is located on a wide plateau in the hills of Aetolia-Acarnania. The publications are as yet, not detailed enough to understand the contemporary surrounding area. Whether this site was isolated or settlement associated is unsure, however, the lack of information provided about possible settlement activity lends to the current suggestion it may be isolated. LH III C (possibly LH III B)

Date

The site at Thermon existed some years, with two destruction phases being recognised. One with ceramic evidence from the LH IIA, the second of the LH IIIB and LH IIIC periods.318 Megaron B is said to have been constructed in the 11th century BC and abandoned in around 800 BC.319 Architecture

The architecture is not detailed in the publication

Finds Terracottas

No terracottas are reported for this period.

Pottery

h

At the lowest level under structures A5 and A6, sitting on the natural ground, many sherds from vessels which were predominantly kylikes of the LH III B period were found.320 In addition, when the area between wall Θ and the south-west corner of megaron B were investigated, thick sherds were discovered including part of a kylix leg of the LH III C style, and a painted skyfos, probably of the same period.321 Also, at a depth of 1.94 m beneath the southwest corner of megaron B, was found the base of a colourful skyfos of the LH IIIC period, and slightly deeper still, the handle of a krater from the same period.322

Other finds Also, after the destruction of Megaron B in the late 9th century remains of ashes, bones and iron weapons in the area most probably belong to a sacrificial deposit. 323 However, this post-dates the period under consideration. Classification

hx1 ╬x0

318 319 320 321 322 323

Possible The finds from the LH III C period, do suggest that some drinking and dining was taking place at this site. Also, the kylikes of LH III B style could testify to earlier practices. However, further excavation, analysis and publication are needed to be more certain about this constituting a shrine area.

Papapostolou 2003(b) : 136 Whitely et al 2007 : 35 Papapostolou 2003(b) : 137 Papapostolou 2003(a) : 56 Papapostolou 2003(a) : 59 Eder 2008 : 15

- 69 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

3.27.

TIRYNS

Location

Built shrines in association with palace The Palatial citadel of Tiryns is located in the Argolid plateau. Within the fortification walls, cult finds have been identified both on the upper citadel area, and the lower terrace along the fortification wall. LH III B – LH III C

Date

FIGURE 26: TIRYNS - THE CITADEL IN THE LH III B2 PERIOD 324

FIGURE 27: TIRYNS - THE CITADEL IN THE LH III C PERIOD 325

Architecture

324 325

The evidence for cult on the upper citadel appears un-associated with a cult building or fixed features, therefore the upper citadel evidence will be presented below. However, the lower citadel provides a more complete picture for cult practice and the suggested Shrine Area. Against the fortification wall there was a succession of structures identified along with their paraphernalia.

After Kilian 1988 : 132 After Kilian 1988 : 132

- 70 -

SITE GAZETTEER

3.27.

TIRYNS LH III B period Casement Room 7 is the earliest identified (LH III B2), with the nearby Room VI said to date from the same period.326

╬

╬

LH III C Period Room 117 which also stands against the fortification wall dates from the LH III C early, and has just one small room. The Room has a bench against the rear wall and a column in the centre, in addition to three columns outside the entrance. This Room was built-over in the LH IIIC-developed period by Room 110 which has no columns. Subsequently, Room 110 was then covered by a two-room structure Room 110a. This final structure had a hearth in the centre of the main room. Throughout the phases of this building a bench was always located against the rear wall where figurines were found.327

Finds Terracottas Upper citadel: An assemblage reported as coming from pits 10 and 17 of the Geometric bothros, south of court XXX, produced not only psi-figurines but also a rounded miniature throne and a figurine which has been said could depict a person in bed.328

h

The largest collection from the upper citadel comes from the epichosis-complex, in the southern part of the palace quarters. Here the group included five models of thrones, and 56 female figurines. Lower Citadel:

h

Room 7 (LH III B2) - 239 psi-figurines; votive offerings.

h

2 large figures (30cm +), and a few examples of thrones and chariots.

h

Room 117 / 110 / 110a (LH III C) – Female figures with upraised arms with headdresses preserved in some cases, some also have applied and painted jewellery and other painted decoration.

Pottery

Upper Citadel: Epichosis-complex - 126 miniature vessels. Lower Citadel: Room 117 / 110 / 110a ( LH III C) – miniature and regular sized vessels.

Other finds

Upper Citadel: Geometric bothros (LH III B2) - two animal rhyta

╬

326 327 328

Epichosis-complex - several rhyta

Kilian 1990 : 196 Shelmerdine 1997 : 573 Kilian 1990 : 193

- 71 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.27.

TIRYNS Lower Citadel: ╬

Room 7 (LH III B2) - Two animal rhyta. Room VI (LH III B2) - Animal rhyton and Linear B tablets.

╬

Classification

329

Room 117 / 110 / 110a (LH III C) – Rhyta as testament to the practice of libation and animal bones found within ash layers, which suggests sacrifice and possibly the ritual meal.329

LH III B – Proposed

LH III C – Proposed

hx2

hx1

╬x1

╬x3

Room 7 displays large quantities of votive figurines, female figures and rhyta for the practice of libation.

The successive structures of Room 117 contain built features for display, terracotta figures, vessels for libation and bones signifying the ritual meal.

Shelmerdine 1997 : 573

- 72 -

4. 4.1.

SANCTUARY SURROUNDINGS: SPACE AND INCLUSIVENESS INTRODUCTION

This chapter considers the environment of the shrine locales. Aspects of the shrine settings, the proximity to settlement and the sacred (and non-sacred) surroundings are important to better understand the shrine’s natural and constructed environment. The concept of ‘space’, i.e. the provision for space within a sanctuary and directly outside it for the participation of worshippers; could be more accurately described as a non-existent feature, in light of evidence collected at built shrines of the LH III B period. This is to be used in conjunction with a sanctuary’s immediate surroundings to enable discussion on the ‘inclusiveness of ritual practice’. The sanctuary sites are grouped according to their chronological and, thus, social setting. Those established before the destruction of the palatial citadels (i.e. before the end of the LH III B period) are part of a highly structured hierarchical society (as was briefly discussed in section 1.2) and will be considered first. After which, the shrines established in the LH III C or Protogeometric periods are considered. Evidence for some physical rejuvenation at sites in the LH III C period does exist, however, this was short-lived and may not reflect any social reconstruction. Therefore, the second group of shrines belong to periods with a very different social order. Some shrines which were established in the LH III B period continue after the palatial destructions into the LH III C period; however, the discussion of their surroundings is most relevant to their time of establishment and thus considered in the first section.

a shrine’s location, evidence provided by the site assemblages is also considered. In addition it is important to consider, if briefly, the role of the palatial Megaron. This chapter will demonstrate not only the lack of ‘space’, internal or external, that is common to built shrines of the LH III B period, but also how isolated sanctuaries are a widespread occurrence throughout the entire period under consideration. These comprise the only clear shrine type which continues into the Protogeometric period. One key difference which can be identified, however, is the topographical location of isolated sanctuaries. Shrine foundation moves from highland, to lowland positions as time passes.

4.2.

This section will deal with sites that were established either before or during the Mycenaean palatial (LH III B) period, and so were in use around the time of the palace destruction. The established Mycenaean practice regarding space and surroundings at sacred sites will be illustrated. That is to say, their choice of certain characteristics such as shrine size, open courtyards or ease of access will be considered in detail. Sanctuaries associated with palace centres are discussed first, followed by settlement sites, and lastly isolated shrines.

Once the information concerning a shrine’s surroundings has been assembled, it will be applied to the discussion at the end of the chapter about the ‘status’ of ritual practice. That is to say, the location, access and space which constitute a shrine’s environment will be used to consider the ‘inclusiveness’ or ‘exclusiveness’ apparent in the sacred sphere. I have employed terminology which has previously330 been suggested for defining status divisions within the religious sphere. These are however, areas where I believe more caution is necessary. Moreover, I suggest, where as previous discussions proposed divisions between ‘official’ (or ‘state’) and ‘popular’ religion, that a further division is essential (whilst accepting the likelihood many more divisions would have been present in the LH III B period). I thus distinguish between ‘state practiced’, ‘official’ and ‘popular’ religion (see section 4.5). To supplement the discussion which stems initially from 330

LATE HELLADIC IIIB SANCTUARIES

Hagg 1981b and 1995; Kilian 1992

- 73 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE TABLE 5 : RELIGIOUS SETTING 331

Site

SITES IN USE OR ESTABLISHED IN THE

Date

Location

LH III B PERIOD

Position Near Gate against fortification wall Open-air hill top Centrally located Open-air hill top Open-air hill top

AND A

SUMMARY

Building

Courtyard

Free-standing

None

None

-

Single Room

Uncertain332

None

-

None

Paved area between rooms and altar Courtyard with perimeter wall

Agia Irini

LH III B-C

Settlement

Agia Triada

LH III B

Isolated

Agios Konstantinos

LH III B

Settlement

Amyklai

LH III B2 – III C333

Isolated

Aphaia

LH III B – III C

Isolated

Apollo Maleatas

LH – Mycenaean

Settlement

Open-air 10m from settlement

Delphi

LH III B

Isolated

Open-air

Built terrace and associated storerooms None

Eleusis

LH III A – C 334

Settlement

Unsure

Free-standing

Kalapodi

LH III B PG335

Isolated

Midea: Shrine area

LH III A – B2

Palatial

Midea: Megaron Complex

LH III B-C

Palatial

Mt Hymettus

LH III B and PG

Isolated

Mycenae: Room with the Fresco complex

LH III B

Palatial

Mycenae: The Temple

LH III B (phase VII & VIII)

Palatial

Mycenae: Tsountas House Shrine

LH III B

Palatial

Palace of Nestor: Room 93 and Court 92

LH III B

Palatial

Open-air lowlands Against fortification wall, lower terraces Near fortification wall, lower terraces Open-air hill top Originally just outside the fortifications, near main gate Originally just outside the fortifications, near main gate Originally just outside the fortifications, near main gate North-eastern periphery of palace

OF THEIR

None

-

Two built shrine Rooms

Small yard alongside shrine room.

Built complex

Courtyard directly outside

None

-

Complex of rooms.

Open space to the area below

Complex of rooms.

Courtyard directly outside with built altar

Built Single room

Open space outside room.

Small built room

Courtyard directly in front of shrine.

331 All information provided in the table is a summary of the detail provided in the Gazetteer; see individual Gazetteer entries for full referencing. 332 See the following discussion for detail 333 The Protogeometric phase will be discussed below in section 4.3 334 See gazetteer entry 3.11 for discussion on shrine date. 335 The Protogeometric phase will be discussed below in section 4.3

- 74 -

SANCTUARY SURROUNDINGS: SPACE AND INCLUSIVENESS

Phylakopi

LH III B – C

Settlement

Polis Cave

LH III B - PG

Isolated

Profitis Elias

LH III B

Isolated

Tiryns Unterberg

LH III B

Palatial

Against fortification wall Cave at sea level Open-air hill top Lower citadel against fortifications

PALATIAL SHRINES The Cult Centre at Mycenae dates from the LH III B period336 and contains at least three free-standing building complexes which have been identified in association with ritual practices of the sacred sphere. The Temple Complex, The Room with the Fresco Complex, and Tsountas House Shrine are all located on the lower west slope of the citadel, as part of a clearly segregated set of rooms. ‘The Megaron’ is also part of the Cult Centre and due to its proximity to the other shrine buildings, might be expected to have some cult function. The role and function of The Megaron however, is uncertain. It has been suggested that part of the building had the role of a work-shop or store-room, due to finds of ivory, beads, boar’s tusks and broken pottery in its basement.337 Nonetheless, due to the lack of detailed publication it is impossible for this building to be considered in any further detail within this study. Past and current investigations suggest that, at the time these buildings were constructed and during the main period of use, the fortification wall was located further up the slope, thus placing the complexes outside the citadel boundary. After the wall was rebuilt to encompass the Cult Centre, probably during the mid-LH III B and possibly as late as the LH III B2 period, any re-use of the temple was significantly limited.338 The central room of the Temple itself is rather small at approximately 4 x 4m339 internally, providing space for no more than ten people comfortably at any one time. On entering the Temple, the first area is Room XI, which is smaller than the main room but would have increased the number of people that could be accommodated within the building. Located directly outside is an open space with a large round stone altar roughly at its centre. Although not a particularly large space, this area could possibly have accommodated a limited

Free-standing built rooms None Built storerooms Built Room

Courtyard joining the two shrine rooms. Paved area within the cave Paved open courtyard Small external courtyard

assembly of people. However, as has been noted, when the building was constructed and in use, thecitadel wall did not occupy its current location.340 Consequently, direct access from the large local settlement on the lower hill would have been unhindered and in theory, the number of people who could have participated in rituals or merely observe them, could have been larger. The Room with the Fresco has similar small internal dimensions. Its central Room 31 is roughly 4 x 4.5m, with two rooms entered directly from Room 31; Room 32 to the north-east is much smaller (roughly 3 x 1m); and Room 33 (noted by the publication as possibly being a storeroom341) is roughly 3.50 x 3m. Tsountas Shrine measures 6.45 x 4.50m internally,342 making it the largest single room of all three complexes. In the following chapters (sections 5.3 and Chapter 6), the ritual practices which were associated with these shrines are discussed, and it is mentioned that due to the finds and location of Tsountas Shrine, it is quite possible that the shrine’s main function was for purification before entering the rest of the Cult Centre. The location, access and surroundings of Tsountas Shrine must be noted. As the processional way descends the hill from the upper citadel, Tsountas Shrine is the first building of the lower tiers that one meets, after which the path continues its descent into the Cult Centre (by a rather inconvenient route). The entrance to the shrine faces quite a large open space, 7m wide at the nearest point to the shrine, and could be termed as a large ‘Congregational Area’ alongside the processional way. The Congregational Area (so termed by the author) stands out from the rest of the processional way, as it is significantly wider than the path at its higher and lower levels. In addition an ‘L shaped’ altar feature stood in this area.343 This contributes to the likelihood of this area and shrine being used for specialised activities, as space was available for people to congregate and wait to

336

For a complete chronology see Moore and Taylour 1999: 1-3 Taylor, French and Wardle 1981 : 19 338 Wardle 2003: 320-323 339 The dimensions for the Temple and the Room with the Fresco presented below, are measured by hand, from ‘plan 2’ in the backcover of Taylour, French and Wardle 1981. 337

340

For detail on the chronology associated with the positioning of the citadel wall, see Wardle 2003: 320-321 341 Taylour, French and Wardle 1981 : 53 342 Mylonas 1972 : 38 343 Shelton 2004 : 5

- 75 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE participate in any ritual purification, see section 6.4).

activities

(possibly

The Cult Centre’s location high on the western slope, beyond Grave Circle B and the tombs of Clytemnestra and Aegisthus, results in the cult buildings being closer to the palace than the habitation area that lies at a much lower level. In addition, the area has yielded precious artefacts such as an ivory lion and an ivory head, which could have belonged to a cult statue, as well as an antique Egyptian faience plaque of Amenhotep III, most probably the result of diplomatic contact.344 These factors suggest that wealthy worshippers frequented the cult centre at Mycenae. Independent of discussions concerning which chronological phase the re-location of the citadel wall belongs, it is clear that this sacred area was in some way closely associated with the palace. At Tiryns, the cult rooms which exist as part of the lower citadel have both an earlier and later phase. The initial LH III B2 period will be discussed here, with the LH III C material to follow in the next section. Shrine Room 7 is once again a small room, with the addition of a small open courtyard directly in front. Building VI is very nearby and dates from the same period as Room 7.345 However the latter room has an unclear function, resulting in the likelihood that only one cult room, with small adjoining courtyard, was in use during the LH III B2 period. In comparison to the Cult Centre of Mycenae, the single shrine room at Tiryns displays considerably less provision for independent shrine buildings and open space. Taken alone, this could suggest a comparative ‘lack of interest’ in the allocation of space to the sacred sphere. However, at Tiryns additional finds associated with cult practice have been found in abundance at locations on the upper citadel. It could therefore be suggested that in the LH III B2 period, cult practice at Tiryns was more focused on activities which centred on the central Megaron complex. This would account for the great number of figurines and rhyta346 found in the upper citadel, and the lack of shrine space in the lower citadel. The palace centre at Midea shows similarities, and yet interesting additions to the allocation of space in its areas of cult function. Two small shrine rooms divided by a small open courtyard have been identified against the fortification wall. In addition to this complex, located just to the east on a lower terrace, is a megaron complex with adjoining rooms; some of which have been found to contain finds of a cultic nature. This additional area provides a much larger space for participation and for ritual activities

344 Wardle 2003: 32; ‘cult complex’ area see, Taylor, French, and Wardle 1981, 1999; French 2002: 84-92 345 Kilian 1990 : 196 346 See gazetteer entry 3.27 for detail and references.

to take place. As will be seen in the following Chapter on ritual actions, the megaron complex at Midea provides a great deal of evidence for dining and the consumption of meat, testament to its use by numerous participants. Therefore, the shrine rooms and courtyard on terrace 9 provide the familiar combination of small enclosed rooms with an adjoining courtyard, but in addition to this, Midea has the megaron complex for the inclusion of a larger number of participants. As with Tiryns, the palatial site of Midea is set within a fortification wall. Therefore both these complexes, although making provision for a greater number of people, could still regulate those wishing to approach the area. The situation at the Palace of Nestor is slightly different, where due to the quantity of cooking pots, kylikes and animal bone deposits found throughout the whole palace complex, it is clear ritual practice was not confined to one location. The principal shrine area has been identified in the North-East building of the complex. Room 93 is accepted as the shrine, which has an open courtyard (92) containing a raised altar, directly in front.347 Just as at Tiryns, only one shrine room has been identified for the LH III B period at the Palace of Nestor, again with the allocation of space for an open courtyard. This allows people to gather outside the shrine and at least ‘view’ the ritual activities practiced on and around the raised altar. A significant difference between the other three palace centres mentioned above, and the Palace of Nestor is its lack of a fortification wall. The Palace of Nestor is located on a low and easily approachable acropolis, which provides the only boundary between the palace and its surrounding area. The NorthEastern building, which contains room 93 and court 92 mentioned above, can be approached without first passing through the palace itself. However, although this implies a straightforward approach, it is almost certain guards would have been placed at entry points to the acropolis, resulting in the selection and control of persons who could approach the palace area. Once entry is gained however, it would seem that the shrine area of the North-Eastern building would be open to those on the acropolis. In turn this results in court 92 being visible to any persons in the area, without walled obstructions. In theory, the number of people who could potentially view the courtyard and its activities would be very large, as the court itself is of a reasonable size, with the addition of persons viewing from outside it.

347 Blegen, Rawson, Taylor and Donovan 1973: 302-305; Whittaker 1997: 31

- 76 -

SANCTUARY SURROUNDINGS: SPACE AND INCLUSIVENESS Therefore, all internal features of the palatial shrine areas have in common, small confined spaces in which worship or ritual practice could take place with exclusivity and restricted access. It is likely that it is within these small areas that the most sacred of acts would take place, as at every palatial location one consistently finds at least one small enclosed shrine room with limited visibility from the outside area. This provides a strong case for some parts of ritual practice always being confined to the inner most sanctum, where only the chosen few can participate and observe. On the other hand, in every case of palatial cult practice, evidence exists of open courts which can be accessed by many people (Mycenae, Pylos), the extra facility of a specialised megaron complex (and open courtyard) close to the shrine rooms (Midea), or cult practice taking place in the main palatial courtyard (Tiryns).348 Each palatial site has the provision for a large number of people to be part of ritual practice, while at the same time keeping some aspects more exclusive.

SETTLEMENT SHRINES Among the settlement-associated shrines, Agios Konstantinos on Methana dates from the LH III A-B period.349 Room A has been identified as the main shrine, which is rectangular in plan and consists of only one room. It is located within a large Mycenaean hilltop settlement. Due to the site having been only partially excavated, it is unclear whether Room A occupied a central or peripheral location; however it is clearly not at the very edge of the settlement. Room A is very similar to the above mentioned palace associated shrines, in the sense that it could not accommodate many people internally. A modern church stands directly in front of the room, so it cannot be determined whether this shrine had external space for worshippers to gather. It is possible therefore that an open courtyard did exist, but not certain. This shrine maintains the practice of modest votive display, testified by the existence of numerous internal features such as platforms and benches, which are located within the small room. Phase VIII of the shrine at Agia Irini on Kea (LH III B phase) includes a rectangular building comprising six small rooms. The shrine is located just inside the gateway of a large settlement.350 Although the building has a number of rooms in comparison to often only one at other sites of both palatial and settlement shrines, all the rooms are small. One room 348 See section 5.2. for discussion of the finds and why they suggest more participants than just the ruling elite would be included in this 349 See Konsolaki 2002 : 25 – 31 or the gazetteer for the finds at this site. 350 For the previous and current definition of the chronological phases at Ayia Irini see Caskey 1979: 412; for details concerning the cult furniture see Caskey 1981: 128

is slightly larger than the other five. All however are modest in size. In addition, the shrine completely lacks any sign of an open courtyard. This suggests an element of exclusivity, only a restricted number of people would be able to access the shrine at any one time, in addition to the lack of any external space for larger numbers of worshippers to gather. Phylakopi,351 located on the island of Melos some distance from the mainland, shows evidence of a shrine constructed against the fortification wall. It must be briefly mentioned, that the settlement at Phylakopi stands out as a site of some importance. Features here, not often present at non-palatial settlements of the Mycenaean period, are large fortification walls and a megaron complex. This suggests that this was not a poor settlement, but may have had greater palatial contacts than would be expected bearing in mind its distance from the nearest mainland palace. However, even though it may show some similarities to the mainland palatial sites, there is not sufficient evidence to class it as such; therefore, it is considered together with the settlement shrines. This sanctuary complex differs slightly from the settlement-associated sites mentioned above, in that there are two separate free-standing cult buildings which both join onto a communal courtyard. The courtyard itself is also small and surrounded by a high wall which would considerably restrict the view from outside. This results in the courtyard being more exclusive than those evident at the palace centres, where no high standing boundary walls enclosed the shrine courtyards. The final site to be considered from a settlementassociated locale is Apollo Maleatas. The shrine is located on the Kynortion hill above Epidauros and comprises of a large open-air ash altar along with a laid pavement and associated cult buildings which were most probably for the storage of cult paraphernalia. What must be noted is that Apollo Maleatas is not completely isolated on the Kynortion hill, since a contemporary settlement exists approximately 10 meters further up the slope. Although this shrine is not a built room inside the settlement area, as other examples associated directly with settlements of this period are, its close proximity to the settlement leaves no doubt that the two are associated. This being the case, Apollo Maleatas stands out as the only LH III B settlement sanctuary which has been recorded as incorporating a large open-air ash altar for cult practice. The ridge where the altar, buildings and paved area stand, is a few meters below the site of the settled area. It seems that this lower level was completely dedicated to sacred practices. Due to finds discovered within the buildings (see Gazetteer entry 351

- 77 -

Renfrew 1981; Renfrew 1999; Renfrew 1985

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE 3.7), the excavators suggest they were used for storage, resulting in the focus for ritual practice being outside either on the paved area or the ash altar. This demonstrates the complete reverse to other settlementshrines, as this shrine is in no way exclusive to small numbers of participants. The Kynortion hill top has shown no signs of being fortified or walled in any way, only the natural obstacle of the steep slope which drops away in front of the altar terrace would make approach from that direction difficult. Moreover, it could be said that anyone wishing to visit the altar complex would have to pass by the settlement in order to reach it. This perhaps resulted in some regulation of access, but even this is doubtful. It therefore seems there was no exclusion of participants entering the sacred area. When one considers the assemblage of fine votive offerings showing Minoan and elite connections,352 this site becomes all the more interesting. At present the settlement has not been published in any detail. Five phases of habitation have been mentioned: two from the Early Helladic period and three from the Mycenaean period.353 Until more detail is known as to the status of this settlement, it would be difficult to make assumptions as to how or why the shrine of Apollo Maleatas was so distinctive. The site is not very close to the coast, so traders or Minoan travellers would have had to make a lengthy journey inland (and into the highlands) in order to reach the shrine. Therefore, it must be suggested that the settlement on the Kynortion hill was of some standing, possibly even comprising Minoan migrants who had brought with them heirlooms and customs from Crete. This however, does not explain why such a shrine would be placed so close to a settlement, as Minoan Peak sanctuary sites, with which Apollo Maleatas has often been compared, were always located at some distance from settled areas.354 Apollo Maleatas will not be considered within the ‘access and inclusion’ section below, as it has few similarities with sites discussed above, therefore it would be unwise to include it in a general discussion.

ACCESS AND INCLUSION The material provided above has demonstrated that the sanctuary sites associated with palace centres and settlements (‘urban shrines’) are characterised by a lack of internal space. The palatial shrines have some provision for outside space, often being an area which can be entered by 352

See gazetteer entry 3.7 for full detail and further references Lambrinudakis 1981 : 63 354 See Peatfield 1938; 1987 for Peak Sanctuaries.

large numbers of participants. In cases where all participants could not stand ‘in’ the courtyard (if such a large number of worshippers were present), there were no built walls bordering the courtyards to stop the view from its surrounding areas. Although I suggested that these outside spaces would make any activities more inclusive, it must be remembered that they would only be inclusive to those people who were already part of palace society, or invited to become part of it on special occasions. The division of access to sacred areas can be witnessed at a number of stages; initially a participant must be a part of palatial society. Secondly, only the ritual actions in the open courtyards can be viewed by the many. Thirdly, as part of a select few, a participant could enter the small shrine rooms in which the most sacred of ritual actions would take place. On the other hand, settlement-associated shrines do not generally allocate outdoor space. Where it is present (Phylakopi on the island of Melos), the view is completely restricted from those who are not actually within the courtyard, resulting in the inability to view activities from afar by the many. This observation within the settlement shrines, suggests either that the people using the shrines did not gather in large numbers at any one time, or that only a limited number of people actually made use of the ‘urban’ sacred structures. It is possible that, during the LH III B period large-scale gatherings were uncommon within cult practice outside the palace centres. Thus, there would have been no need for such a space within the sacred areas. This however is not always the case. The information which has been discovered for isolated shrines of the LH III B period is testament to gatherings on a largescale for the purpose of ritual practice at non-palatial locations. This results in the reason for the lack of open space at settlement shrines, being due to a decisive method of exclusion of the masses.

ISOLATED SHRINES The site of Agia Triada is located near a pathway which leads from Mycenae to Cleonae and Corinth, crossing a ridge at about 700m above sea level.355 This site has no built structures, walls or architectural features. Not even the remains of an enclosure wall have been identified, which not only results in the ritual activities being completely open to the elements and onlookers, but leaves the sacred area with no structured boundary between it and the secular world. Therefore, this site displays the complete opposite use of ‘space’ to the urban shrines presented above. As

353

355 See Gazetteer and Hagg 1981b: 39 ; Kilian 1990: 185 – 190 for reference to complete site detail.

- 78 -

SANCTUARY SURROUNDINGS: SPACE AND INCLUSIVENESS there are no boundaries at all, access would be completely open to any persons wishing to approach the area. In addition to the inclusive and open nature of the sacred area, all votive offerings and ritual actions which were carried out, would be visible to all who stood in the surrounding area and maybe even open to their participation.

The last three sites to be considered; Amyklai, Aphaia and Kalapodi were all established in the LH III B or B2 period. However, unlike all the sites mentioned above, also continue through the era of palatial destruction to remain active in the LH III C period. In the case of Kalapodi, this activity continues and the site has a long prosperity into the Classical period.

Similarly, the shrine on the summit of Mt Hymettus has no buildings or enclosed spaces to segregate the sacred from the secular. The area is sheltered slightly by a natural depression formed in the land, and when standing within it, the view to the plain below is obscured. However, in essence this site once again displays the open access and inclusive aspect to worship practiced on the summit.

The site of Amyklai located in the region of Lakonia, is situated in the middle of the Spartan plain, on a hill above the west bank of the Eurotas. The hill is not particularly steep or elevated. There is however, a good view from the flat plateau of the surrounding region. As with other isolated shrines established in the LH III B period, this site has no architectural or boundary structures. As a result access was unhindered and the site was inclusive of any worshippers.

The Profitis Elias cave near Tiryns is also in isolation from settlement. Due to the current lack of publication detail the site is still poorly understood. At the summit of a high outcrop of land, a large building stood on a levelled area. Its south side has rock-cut storage areas and on at least three sides, the building is surrounded by a stone-paved area. From this level a 2.35m deep fissure in the bedrock drops beneath the paved area and ends on the floor of a cave. It is within this feature and the cave floor beneath where many items of cult significance were found.356 The Profitis Elias cave is the only isolated sacred site of the LH III B period which includes a building as well as an openair area for ritual practice. It has to be said that although the existence of the open-air paved court and fissure through to the cave beneath most likely provide the focus for cult practice; the function of the building is far from clear. The publication merely mentions that a large building exists, which has storage areas on its south side. The layout of the internal space of this building is not mentioned, or if it was used for storage, or whether there were internal finds or features. This results in some uncertainty as to its use. One would expect that if any interesting finds or features had been discovered, they would have been reported. The point remains that the existence of this room could point towards some activities being more exclusive. It is thought however, that the other open-air features and location of the known finds, indicates that practice at this site was open and accessible to all. The approach to the summit is somewhat precarious; the modern road which clings to the hill side must be taken with some caution, so it would be expected that the path used in the LH III B period was very steep indeed. Although it may have been a precarious ascent, there is no evidence to suggest any form of boundary markers or walls for the exclusion of either participation or visibility.

356 See gazetteer entry 3.25 for detail and references, as well as Chapters 5 and 6 for discussion

The sanctuary of Aphaia is situated on a mountain ridge to the north-east of the island of Aegina. The southern slope is less steep than the other approaches and after fifteen minutes walk the small harbour of Agia Marina can be reached.357 As with the site of Amyklai, it is free of any structures and has an open approach; both sites continued into the LH III C period. These two sites are completely isolated from any settlement. Moreover, both sites have produced a significantly higher number of votive figurines than any settlement or citadel shrines frequented during the LH III B period. Their location on isolated hilltops suggests that the ‘cult area’ or most definitely the ‘cult place’, would have been visible from the surrounding area. The total absence of architecture would suggest that the worshippers connect the ‘cult place’ with the landscape setting. Thus, rather than a sacred cult building, there would be a ‘sacred landscape’ where rituals were performed and dedications offered. The fact that these isolated sites prospered after the palatial collapse shows they must have been free of palatial control, and able to continue religious practice in the same way they had whilst the palaces were functioning. In addition to the two sites discussed above, one other is to be considered alongside them due to recent excavated finds. Kalapodi was established in the LH III B period and continued in use past the palatial destruction into the LH III C, Protogeometric periods and beyond. The site is located a few kilometres to the west of Atalanti, in the south–western district of Phokis.358 Situated in a location between the Corinthian Gulf, Lokris and Thessaly, Morgan believes it was most probably accessible by a number

357

358

- 79 -

Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 1 Morgan 1996: 47

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE of different settlement groups due to its central location. 359 Excavation is ongoing and currently it appears cult activity was focused on an open rectangular terrace, identified as an altar providing a fixed and focal space for cult practice. This site is slightly different from the great majority mentioned above in that it is not located at the top of a hill or mountain. It is situated on a hill side not far above the valley floor, and is in no way comparable to the altitude at which most of the LH III B isolated shrines were established. This is the only shrine discovered from the area of central eastern Greece (Phokis), therefore it could be a matter of regional variation in the choice of shrine location. However, other isolated shrines considered are situated in a wide range of locations, the Saronic Gulf, Laconia, Argolis and Attica; making it less likely that this was due to regional differences. Kalapodi was most definitely of great importance in later years, made apparent by the large Archaic and Classical Temples which were constructed on the site in following periods. Its importance is also apparent in this early phase, as a terrace altar was constructed of stone, which was not a common feature of isolated shrines for this period. These three sites therefore, provide evidence for the practice of rituals at isolated sacred sites which were established and remained active throughout the palatial and post-palatial period on the mainland. Their existence in different regions (Aegina in the Saronic Gulf, Laconia and Phokis) demonstrates that prosperity was not a regional occurrence, but more likely a relatively common phenomenon for this period, now awaiting further discoveries to make this point more than a confident suggestion. Comparisons for the isolated sanctuaries of the LH III B period can be sought in Minoan Crete, where the peak-sanctuaries and cultic caves were located on hills or mountains above low-lying settlements. Peatfield360 characterises Minoan peak and cave cults by their general prominence and visibility from nearby settlements, along with always being in relatively close proximity to these settlements, only a few hours walking distance away.361 At present on the mainland, it is not possible to match every isolated sanctuary site to a settlement, or vice versa, as is the case for Minoan Crete. The only case is that of the open-air altar complex of Apollo Maleatas,362 but as mentioned above, this site is considered a settlement associated shrine rather than isolated due to its proximity. However, it must be

acknowledged that continuing research through both survey and excavation could change this situation, so providing each settlement with a connected isolated open-air sanctuary. Even without knowing which communities the openair sanctuaries served, it is clear that there were worshippers attending the shrines. They dedicated votives and took part in ritual acts such as drinking and eating (to be discussed in Chapter Six), and this participation was taking place unhindered by boundaries or structures which would restrict vision in any way. An issue which arises from the discussion of sacred sites from the LH III B period, is whether there is any indication of exploitation, or lack of exploitation of religion by the rulers of the Palace centres. During previous research of the transition from the Prepalatial to Old Palace Periods on Minoan Crete, it became apparent that in the initial phases of Peak and Cave sanctuaries on the island, dedications were simple and architecture where evident was also simple. Whereas the following phases saw the palatial elite realising what use could be made of these sacred sites. New architecture was put into place, not only monumentalising the sites but also creating boundaries and visual frontiers by the addition of built structures and rooms for internal rituals.363 The result was that the sites which were originally established and mainly for use by the general populace for an open and accessible style of worship, were now controlled by the elites. The sanctuaries would provide another forum for the elite to show their wealth and power and exercise control over the populace. However, none of the sacred sites of the Mycenaean Period known to date suggest a similar level of exploitation. Segregation of worshippers can be observed due to the lack of space associated within settlement shrines. There is however, no sign that the elite took control of, or even frequented the open-air isolated shrines. Does this mean the rulers were content with their influence over the population by other means? The combination of the lack of exploitation at isolated shrines, and the fact that at palatial shrines, access was not necessarily completely cut-off 364 suggests that the ruling class did not use aspects of religious rituals or areas as tools for power.

359

Morgan 1999: 382. Peatfield 1983: 275 For discussions of Peak Sanctuaries in general see: Peatfield 1983, 1987, 2001; Rutkowski 1986; for specific sites, Jouktas: Karetsou 1981; Petsopha: Rutkowski 1991; Psychro Cave: Watrous 1996. 362 Wright 1996: 68; Lambrinudakis 1981 360 361

363

364

Haggis 1999 : 79

the open courts were visible and accessible by those in the palace areas; see section 4.2

- 80 -

SANCTUARY SURROUNDINGS: SPACE AND INCLUSIVENESS

4.3.

LH III C – PROTOGEOMETRIC SHRINES

The remaining sites to be discussed were established in or after the LH III C period. Some were in use during the period which followed the collapse of the Mycenaean palaces, whilst others belong exclusively to the Protogeometric period. In the table below (table 6) and within the study as a whole, it should be made clear that although the term ‘Palatial’ is not strictly correct for sites of the LH III C period which had experienced the destructions leading to their demise, the term is used in order to separate the previous palace centres from other settlement evidence of this later period. It is only sites which were classed as palace centres in the LH III B period, which are placed in such a category for the LH III C period. As will be seen, the evidence shows that many of the palace centres were partly re-built in the LH III C period, and displayed some continuity of their short-term practices. Of course, this does not mean that the former palatial organisation and grandeur continued or for that matter, that I am suggesting they are still ‘palatial centres’, however it is believed that the material is better managed and understood if presented separately from the other settlement evidence.

PALATIAL SHRINES At Tiryns, the Mycenaean Megaron was built over by the so called Building T, it stands on the upper citadel directly on top of the eastern half of the previous structure and was more than likely surrounded by the levelled debris of the former palace.365 The newly constructed Building T once again takes the form of a megaron structure, however this later structure is narrower than its predecessor. The building consists of two rooms: an almost square porch to the south with benches along its inner walls and an elongated room to the north, divided into two aisles by a central row of columns. No central hearth existed in this building.366 In addition to the re-building which was undertaken on the upper citadel, the lower citadel also witnessed some reconstruction. A small shrine was constructed against the fortification wall with an outdoor courtyard which was a place of cult practice in this period, as demonstrated by the finds (see gazetteer entry 3.27). As with the previous period at Tiryns, evidence once again suggests that ritual practice was taking place in both the upper and lower citadel areas. The renovations which saw the construction of Building T, 365 366

Maran 2001: 119. Maran 2001: 113-115; Ainian 1997: 159.

also included alterations to the altar in the open courtyard which stood directly in front of the building. Such modifications to the altar suggest that open-air practices must be accounted for. Therefore, the evidence for the LH III C period at Tiryns, continues to show that some practices were confined within small built shrines. Open spaces however, were in use both on the upper citadel and in association with the shrine of the lower citadel. This signifies the continued provision for open-air spaces, visible and inclusive of worshippers in the area. Similar alterations were made to the megaron complex on the lower terraces of the citadel at Midea. The old megaron of the LH III B period was divided in two along the central axis by a row of columns.367 This space was then used for what appears to be feasting activities, possibly the closest in scale to those taking place at the Palace of Nestor of the previous LH III B period. A central hearth was found within the megaron, and rooms in front of the structure were also remodelled and re-used.368 In this period the shrine area on the terrace above was not re-used, so it seems cult practice would have centred on the megaron complex which included the courtyard and, in addition, some rooms to the west. The situation in the LH III B and LH III C periods at Midea were therefore, very similar: in both periods cult rooms and the megaron complex functioned contemporarily. The shrine rooms which were used in each period were different, but both groups of rooms were in close proximity to the megaron complex. As mentioned for the previous period, the practice at Midea must have included some rituals which utilised the small enclosed rooms and were not meant to be viewed by everyone. Other ritual practices however, could be witnessed and participated in by a larger ‘congregation’ as indicated by the size of the megaron complex and its open air courtyard.

SETTLEMENT SHRINES The hill of Nichoria is located in the south-western extremity of the Messenia valley. Two important Early Iron Age buildings have been identified in area IV within the settlement: Units IV-1 and its successor IV-5.369 Unit IV-1 at Nichoria was constructed in an area which was previously settled in the Mycenaean period, the building itself stands on the levelled terrace and house walls from the previous era.370 This suggests those who chose the location retained a connection with their ancestral past, in addition to appreciating the advantages of the high ridge.

367

Demakopoulou unpublished paper (Nottingham University 13/3/2008) ‘The excavations at Midea in the Argolid’ 368 Walberg 2007 : 198 369 Mazarakis-Ainian 1997: 74-76. 370 McDonald et al 1983 : 19

- 81 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE The building is in two sections, a shallow porch to the east and the main Room One to the west. The principal entrance is at the east end on the central axis, however, in addition a narrow doorway has been found in the eastern extremity of the north wall. Inside were a hearth and a circular paved platform.371 Unit IV-1 however, causes some difficulty in classification and the role it may have played in the religious worship of the habitants.372 This building at Nichoria is one of the largest within the settlement of the Dark Age period (as the excavators term it), and the area in which it was situated is said to be the most densely populated. The main room of phase 1 is quite large, measuring 8m x 6m373 which is sizeable in comparison to many of the shrine rooms or buildings of the LH III B period, for example the main room of the Temple at Mycenae (c. 4.5 x 4.1m). The latter structure has been securely identified solely as a building for cult purpose, whereas the former is suggested by the excavators to be the chieftain’s dwelling where possibly the villagers would go to make ritual offerings.374 Although it is very possible that such practices took place within the residence of the chief or village elite, it may be a little hasty to suggest that this would be the principal location for the inhabitants worship, or for that matter, a location for any communal worship.375 The LH III B period provides evidence for cult practice in specialised buildings or rooms in urban settings specifically constructed for the purpose of ritual practice,376 in addition to isolated open-air shrines clearly also for cultic functions. Therefore, both urban and isolated communal shrine types are clearly present. As will be seen below, the Protogeometric period produces evidence for open-air shrines, but are urban shrines present? It has to be questioned whether the identification of Unit IV-1 at Nichoria as the location for settlement cult practice is justifiable? Or should such a classification be seen as a very speculative attempt to identify the location of communal worship, in the attempt to recognise a precursor of the Classical Temple within Protogeometric society? The situation at Nichoria is further complicated as the publication does not give the exact find location of the pottery assemblages for this early phase. Instead the data is only classified chronologically and

typologically on a settlement wide basis. This is not helpful when seeking to isolate the pottery solely from Unit IV-1 which would assist our understanding of whether the activity within the building was specialised. It may be that unit IV-1 at Nichoria should only be considered as an elite residence with, if any, a domestic style of worship, but not considered alongside the shrines which served solely a communal cult function. If this distinction is made however, it is interesting that this Early Iron Age settlement (and maybe others) does not seem to accommodate a cult building within the central habitation area. Could this mean that the main focus of ritual activity is solely practiced in isolated locations? Or could it be that the cult buildings, have escaped the excavator; perhaps located at the very edges of the settlement as was sometimes the case at urban shrines of the LH III B period? Only further field work will answer these questions.

ISOLATED SHRINES The Apsidal Building ΣΤ at Poseidi is the most northerly site under consideration, located on the Kassandra peninsula of Chalkidiki. As will be noticed when the other isolated Protogeometric cult sites are presented, Poseidi is distinctive since it has a large free-standing building, where the finds indicate that its sole purpose was ritual practice. Building ΣΤ which is 14.27m x 5.4m, faces south and is surrounded by a cobbled yard. The only internal features reported are a pit which, due to the finds, has been interpreted as an ash altar (hole δ) and a structure which is said to act as its retaining wall (Building E).377 The yard provides an allocated space where people could gather outside and view any rituals taking place, or perhaps witness a procession entering or leaving the area. The fact this building is so large is fascinating, not only when compared with shrine buildings of the previous LH III B period (section 4.2), but also due to the building in its entirety being reserved for ritual practice.

371

McDonald et al 1983 : 27-28 This was mentioned in the gazetteer entry 3.19, but will be expanded upon here. 373 McDonald et al 1983 : 25 374 McDonald et al 1983 : 328 375 The gazetteer entry presents the finds from the Protogeometric phase of use, and concludes this building was not a communal shrine; entry 3.19. 376 See shrine detail within the gazetteer, and discussion of cult assemblages and ritual practice from the sites in Chapter Five. 372

377

- 82 -

Gazetteer entry 3.24 has detail and references

SANCTUARY SURROUNDINGS: SPACE AND INCLUSIVENESS TABLE 6: SHRINES ESTABLISHED 378 THEIR SURROUNDINGS Site

IN THE

Date

LH III C

PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS

AND

Location

Position

WITH A

Building

SUMMARY

OF

Courtyard

Possible Aetos

Protogeometric

Isolated

Hilltop

Apsidal

Unsure

building Asine

LH III C

Settlement

Isthmia

Protogeometric

Isolated

Kalaureia

Midea: Megaron

Nichoria

LH III C

Central Open-air, lowland

No outdoor

large building

space

None

-

Group of rooms

Built

at edge of

room/walled

plateau

courtyard

Settlement

Re-built freeLH III C

Palatial

Lower citadel

standing structure

Protogeometric

Settlement

High ridge,

Large free-

central to

standing

settlement

building

Lowland open-

Olympia

Protogeometric

Isolated

Poseidi

Protogeometric

Isolated

Not mentioned

Thermon

Protogeometric

Isolated

Plateau ridge

Unclear

LH III C

Palatial

Against

Single room

fortifications.

building

Tiryns: Lower Citadel

air

The central focus of activities would most certainly have been the ash altar (hole δ) on which sacrifice has been attested through the presence of animal bones (see section 6.3). With this feature being situated within such a large room/building, it is possible that the worshippers could gather within to witness the rituals, and possibly offer dedications directly into the ash altar. Not only does the size of the building suggest this, but also its location. Building ΣΤ was not associated with a settlement nor was there any form of boundary wall and therefore, access was open to all who wished to participate.

378

Room within

None Free-standing building

Unknown

Open courtyard directly outside

X

Paved courtyard Small courtyard

The existence of this large building must have meant that an individual or a group of people provided both the labour and materials for its construction. This is a significant investment of resources when compared to the other isolated shrines to be considered below. None of these have any built features during this early period. Whomever this investment came from, the desire to exclude people is not evident; it would seem inclusion is more important at this shrine.

See individual gazetteer entries for detailed chronology. Here the sites are put into wider phases for simplicity.

- 83 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE The other possibility is that those who invested the materials and labour to construct building ΣΤ, did seek to exclude worshippers, and the reason behind such a large construction was for a show of wealth rather than for the inclusion of more worshippers. However, the finds which came from the site do not indicate any rich or extravagant offerings, which one would expect if wealthy elites were attempting to display their riches.379 Therefore, when all the evidence is considered, I believe this shrine was constructed to be inclusive; but that is not to say that those who built it would not play a major role in ritual actions in order to reinforce the significance of their investment of resources and indicate their wealth. In section 4.2 above, the site of Mt. Hymettus was presented together with finds of the LH III B period, the date of the shrine’s establishment. This shrine also produced finds from the Protogeometric period. Its surroundings, of course, did not change and no structures were added in the later phase. Therefore, it continued to be a site open and accessible by anyone approaching the summit. The finds will be considered in the following two chapters. The continued use of exactly the same location for cult practice in both the LH III B / C and Protogeometric periods is of particular importance. The Isthmia shrine was a sanctuary founded in an area which in earlier years had a number of small scattered settlements of the Mycenaean Late Bronze Age.380 In a similar way to Kalapodi, it is located in the vicinity of many important routes, near both the Corinthian and Saronic gulfs, on the road to Kenchreai and the main route from Athens to Corinth.381 The absence of architectural remains once again leaves the sacred area open to the passing populace. It is clear from the ashy remains, bones and ceramic finds that there was a focal area,382 with a hearth area or bonfire for cooking which would have been the centre of ritual activity. Once again, as with other shrines without architecture located in isolation, a connection would have been made to the sacred landscape, rather than a built environment. The location would then be passed on by word of mouth or come across by chance due to its location on an inter-regional route. Moreover, it is possible that those responsible for establishing the shrine at Isthmia were seeking a location in connection with their Mycenaean ancestors. A precursor to the shrine was a settlement of the Mycenaean period.

379

See Gazetteer entry 3.24 for details of offerings which came in the form of pottery vessels and animal sacrifice. 380 Morgan 1995: 109; Morgan 1999: 375. 381 Morgan 1996 : 47 382 See Gazetteer entry 3.12 for details and further references.

The sanctuary at Olympia in the west Peloponnese, was established in the late 11th century BC (although the pinnacle of sacred activity was in the 5th century BC). As with Isthmia, Olympia is also located in isolation, away from any contemporary settlement.383 When considering the location of Olympia alongside that of the shrine area at Isthmia, of interest is the existence of Mycenaean chamber tombs cut into the hillside adjacent to the Kronos hill, and pottery scatters in the surrounding hills. This evidence testifies to a Mycenaean settlement somewhere in the vicinity. It has been reported that the pottery from the tombs suggests settlement continued into the LH III C period.384 By the time the shrine was established in the late eleventh century, the settlement had apparently already been abandoned. Were those responsible for choosing the site of Olympia as a centre for ritual practice influenced by remains of their ancestors? How significant is the presence of Mycenaean remains near the shrine at Isthmia and the Sanctuary at Olympia? Mentioned above was the shrine at Isthmia, where it was suggested that the establishment of the Protogeometric shrine may be connected with settlement of the previous Mycenaean period; the site at Olympia provides a second example. If a pattern does begin to emerge of such an occurrence, the location of these sanctuaries would not be so problematic to justify. It has been noted that many of these isolated Protogeometric shrines are located in lowland areas, places easily accessible by travellers passing through regions and by locals using the main routes when moving from village to village or farm to market. These are rational motives for the choice of a shrine location, though not particularly reminiscent of other isolated sacred sites from either the mainland or Crete of the previous period. On the mainland, during the LH III B period, shrines which were isolated from settlement are found in upland settings.385 They are not strictly found on peak tops, however, it has been noted that even if this is not the case, they are found on hills which overlook the surrounding area. The shrine at Aphaia is located on a mountain top; Amyklai on a hilltop; Agia Triada on a mountain top plateau; Profitis Elias on high outcrop summit and Mt Hymettus is located on mountain top. It can be said therefore, that the natural setting chosen for isolated shrines of the LH III B period was

383 For detail on other finds from this period at Olympia, Eder 2001 : 203; Morgan 1999 : 380 384 Eder 2001 : 203 385 See Gazetteer with scoring for shrine identification and classification, as well as section 4.2 for discussion.

- 84 -

SANCTUARY SURROUNDINGS: SPACE AND INCLUSIVENESS normally elevated. What could be the reason for the change in shrine location seen by the Protogeometric period? Should one seek a non-sacred motive or have the beliefs or practice of religion changed significantly enough to warrant the re-location of shrines in new natural surroundings? There is no easy answer to this question. It seems unlikely that the reason was a change in belief and worship, since the material evidence which remains (which will be discussed in the next chapters) indicates the continuation of many of the rituals performed and of the types of votives offered (though not necessarily the gods and ideology worshipped). However, when considering non-sacred motives, whether political or social, there could be some explanation. In the Protogeometric period, emphasis may well have been placed on shrines being in a location not only centrally placed to the surrounding settlements, but also on trade and communication routes between regions. In addition it has been suggested, that there may have been a desire to place newly established shrines in the vicinity of abandoned Mycenaean habitation; providing a connection to their ancestral past. It is possible therefore that the criteria for shrine location in the Protogeometric period, relate to the position of abandoned settlements, which in essence makes the choice of shrine environment a ‘byproduct’ of the wish to place the new shines at locations connected with the Mycenaean past. This results in the populace deciding not to continue their worship at isolated sites high up in the hills, but instead bring them down to the lowlands, to areas directly connected with their ancestral past which in addition provide an easily accessible location for both passers by and locals. The fact that isolated shrines of the LH III B period were placed in highland areas; far from settlements or inter-regional routes, must have been of some significance to the founders. As mentioned, most of the isolated shrines of the LH III B period had little or no architectural features, the worshippers would have associated the sacred area and the natural surroundings as one entity. Some importance must have been placed on the dramatic height of these mountain tops, or the possibility of an un-interrupted view to the surrounding lowlands; otherwise why would the shrine not be in lowland surroundings? It was certainly not essential for shrines of the LH III B period to be noticed by passers-by, or easily reached from the inter-regional routes. This latter factor was however, important to the founders of shrines of the Protogeometric period. The

requirement for visibility of the shrines high above the lowlands, and the connection of the shrines with a dramatic and completely isolated landscape were unimportant in comparison with the need to be close and accessible to inter-regional routes. Populations of the Protogeometric period who used these shrines, obviously wanted to be even more inclusive than their predecessors. As chapter six will demonstrate, this also includes evidence of sacrifice and ritual meals at public gathering places accessible to all.

4.4.

SPACE AND SURROUNDINGS THROUGH TIME

Throughout the entire period in question, the landscape was utilized for the placing of open-air isolated sacred shrines accessible to the masses. The LH III B period also displayed smaller more confined shrines located within settlements and palace centres, functioning alongside the open-air shrines. During the LH III B period the ‘space’ dedicated to sanctuaries or the lack of it was a noticeable factor. Sanctuaries of both palatial and settlement locales were small, with very limited internal space for people to gather. The palatial shrines counter-acted this internal exclusion, by having open-air courtyards. These were not particularly large, but generally without walls or visual obstructions, so that worshippers could view the ritual actions taking place. The settlement-associated shrines did not make provision for open courtyards outside their shrines and therefore, participation at settlement shrines cannot have been encouraged en masse. Although this is the case for sanctuaries within palace centres and settlements, there were also isolated cult centres of the LH III B period characterised by a focus on open space, offerings and ritual practice. These sacred centres had no restriction of access, boundaries or visual obstructions. The existence of these two forms of sacred centres (urban and isolated) functioning alongside each other in contemporary society suggests that there was division either in the type of ritual and worship that was practiced at each shrine, or that a division existed in who could use the shrines. The evidence points towards the latter, and will be considered below. It may be the urban shrines of the LH III B period did not need space to accommodate the majority of the worshipping population, due to open-air shrines isolated from habitation being designated as the sacred space for the masses. The open-air shrines were located on high peaks, or hill sides, thereby providing a sacred landscape visible by everyone at all times.

- 85 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE After the destruction of the palatial centres, ritual activity in the LH III C period can be seen to have continued within the re-built palace centres, in parallel with that at isolated shrines which continued regardless of the palatial demise. As time progressed into the Protogeometric period however, all the current evidence indicates ritual practice shifted entirely to the isolated open-air shrines. Perhaps the need for a contained and exclusive cult building within settlements became unimportant. In the countryside of the Protogeometric period, isolated sanctuaries began to appear in newly established locations; no longer situated in elevated surroundings. The newly founded sanctuaries were situated in lowland areas, consequently more closely associated with routes between regions and easily accessible by all. Moreover, a trend can be noted which suggests the newly established shrines were located in the vicinity of abandoned Mycenaean settlements of the previous period, perhaps reflecting a desire to connect with their ancestral past. Although the topographical position changed from the elevated sanctuaries of the LH III B period to lowland settings in the following period, the isolated shrines were still very much open and inclusive. By placing new sanctuaries at easily achievable distances on regional routes, they were ideally located for gatherings at an inter-community level. This development thus adapted old ideas to facilitate the transition into the Iron Age, no doubt with the shrines playing a role in the formation of new community relations and elite evolution. The relationship between isolated sanctuaries and settlement sites should become more apparent with future research. The concept of ‘space’ outlined in this chapter in relation to small-scale worship within settlements, and larger scale worship at open-air sites used by the general populace, may become more convincing with the excavation and publication of more sites. In addition, this will allow more certainty or new theories concerning the reason why the openair sanctuaries in the LH III B period were placed in elevated locations, whilst in the Protogeometric period they were in lowland settings. Currently, the isolated sites of the Protogeometric period under discussion are very few in number and sites so far excavated are those which later develop into large Pan-Hellenic sanctuaries. Sites such as Olympia, Isthmia and Poseidi later developed monumental architecture, which made the identification of the sacred site much easier. Once excavation began at these sites, the archaeology revealed earlier origins than those visible, including remains from the Protogeometric period. It is very possible that many more isolated Protogeometric sites are still to be discovered, which did not continue into

the Classical era, so making them more easily identifiable. It must be hoped future survey and excavation projects will enlighten the situation.

4.5.

STATUS IN RITUAL PRACTICE: ‘OFFICIAL’ AND ‘POPULAR’ ?

Decades previous to this study, scholars had already begun to address the question of a possible social divide and of the ‘status’ of worshippers at Aegean shrines. It is of course a topic which any study of ritual practice, culture and worship addresses to a certain extent, especially when considering the Late Bronze Age. Due to the existence in the Late Bronze Age of established shrines in a variety of locations, be they Palatial, settlement, or isolated nature shrines, there is often a desire to also place these sanctuaries within a status category. Before any attempt can be made to define the shrines and those who participated in ritual practice at specific sanctuaries, it is important to decide what categories might be applicable. Robin Hagg has given this topic some recent attention,386 and although admitting that his hypothesis was oversimplified, he began his discussion of this topic by dividing religious practice into two categories, ‘official’ and ‘popular’. He noted that official could also be termed ‘state’ cult.387 He acknowledges that there must be many levels between these two categories, but suggests that it is only the two extremes in which an attempt at categorisation can be successful. Subsequently, Hagg developed upon the classification of state cult defining it as “the cults conducted by the elite”.388 This definition does not however come without its own problematic terminology. By using the term conduct, one gets the idea the elites themselves would be participating in the cult in question, if not actually being the characters that were performing and leading the proceedings. The evidence available at present for cult practice on an official level cannot prove that this was the role of the elites if indeed they were involved at all. It seems that even Hagg’s upper sphere of ‘state’ religion is a category which can be easily confused or oversimplified. The issue concerning social division within the sacred sphere is much more complex than is often initially apparent. This section will identify some guidelines by which one can begin to understand the divisions in cult practice and its relation to society’s status divide. 386 387 388

- 86 -

Hagg 1981b; 1995 Hagg 1981b : 36 Hagg 1995 : 387

SANCTUARY SURROUNDINGS: SPACE AND INCLUSIVENESS

Although evidence is in no way abundant, it should be considered that two categories can be formed from Hagg’s original ‘state’ religion. One of these would represent the cult practiced and led by the rulers or officials, i.e. ‘state practiced’ religion. The other would be that in which the elites and rulers may have at times participated in, making occasional offerings and dedications, but the rituals would not solely be focused on them, their offerings, or led by them, i.e. ‘official’ religion. This division could be seen as insignificant; however, when considering the material remains witnessed in association with ritual practice in and around palace centres, the reasoning becomes apparent and necessary.

‘STATE PRACTICED’ RELIGION In Hagg’s analysis of ‘official’ cult practice he uses characteristic assemblages listed by Kilian:389 “anthropomorphic and theriomorphic figurines, chariot models, miniature furniture, miniature vessels, large animal figures, rhyta and large-size terracotta figures”, and in addition to this Hagg adds frescoes.390 Moreover, Hagg believes the ruler would preside over rituals in the Megaron area, as well as organising and conducting major festivals at outlying sanctuaries such as Pakijana.391 It is from this list of characteristics where the difference between ‘state practiced’ and ‘official’ religious practices can be identified. Many of the artefacts listed above are found at all types of shrine sites of the LH III B period: isolated, settlement and palatial. This can hardly make all these shrine’s part of Hagg’s ‘official’ category, defined by his assemblage content? As demonstrated in the Gazetteer either, or more often both, human and animal figurines are present at the great majority of LH III B shrines. Also rhyta are found at a number of LH III B sites of all types, isolated, settlement or palatial (and domestic settings dependant on the rhyta form, see section 5.3). Moreover, figures are found at a wide variety of sites such as the isolated shrine at Amyklai, the palace centres at Midea and Mycenae, and the settlement shrine at Asine.392 In the case of these artefacts therefore, caution must be taken when considering them as characteristic of state practiced or official religion. The site at Amyklai for instance, is isolated 389

This is originally K. Kilian ‘Mykenische Helgiumer der Peloponnes’ Kotinos. Festchrift fur Erika Simon (1992) However, due to the authors present standard of German, Hagg 1995 : 389 reproduction is used. 390 Hagg 1995 : 389 391 Hagg 1995 : 390 392 See gazetteer for full references and other sites which have figures within their assemblages.

and seemingly has no direct contact with a palatial centre. It does however, demonstrate many of the criteria Hagg and Kilian connect with official cult practice. It is generally agreed that frescoes within palace buildings which depict scenes of ritual practice such as procession, sacrifice and feasting should be considered as part of the ‘state practiced’ religion, due mainly to their location within the central focal areas of palaces (such as the Megaron and corridors by which it was approached). In addition it could be said that the skills and materials needed to create such pieces of work were likely to be connected with, or funded by the wealthy elite. It must be said, that evidence for the ruler’s involvement in religion is very scant to say the least. As mentioned above, Hagg believes the ruler may have played a central role in state religion. The current evidence hardly justifies this theory with any certainty, since there are only a very few pieces of evidence that could be used in its support. Moreover, the evidence which can be put forward to clearly identify Hagg’s ‘state’ religion generally comes from the Palace of Nestor. Evidence from the Palace of Nestor should be taken as an exceptional case, or at least with great caution when using it as a template for palatial practice. It is the only palatial site which shows evidence for large scale feasting and sacrifice practiced throughout the palace.393 In addition it is the only palatial site which has no figurines present in the cult assemblage of its shrine area, the only site where a fixed installation for libation is positioned in direct association with the throne,394 and the only site (under consideration395) where Linear B evidence can be found which testifies to contributions of animals for sacrifice.396 In short, there are very significant differences between the ritual practice which is seen at Pylos, compared to other sites of the LH III B period. That is not to say however, the evidence from this site cannot be used, but quite the opposite. It is reasonable to suggest that evidence such as that from Pylos, clearly defines ‘state practiced’ religion. Frescoes of a cultic nature, installations for the practice of rituals in or closely associated to the Megaron, Linear B tablets stating dedications, and extensive bone remains evidencing large scale sacrifice in the central palace areas, should

393

The only site at all similar would be Midea, however, feasting is not on such a large scale until the LH IIIC period, and is concentrated around the megaron complex of the lower terraces, not the palace centre. 394 See Gazetteer entry 3.21; also chapter six for a discussion of feasting and sacrifice; chapter five, section 5.2 for the figurines, section 5.3 for the libation feature. 395 The palatial sites at Knossos and Thebes may also testify to sacrificial gifts in their Linear B tablets, however, these sites are not under consideration, see Bendall 2004 : 108 396 Bendall 2004 : 106

- 87 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE all be considered at the highest social level; ‘state practiced’ religion. These factors emphasise that, it is the proximity to, and involvement with the central areas of the palace (i.e. the Megaron and adjoining rooms) that identify ‘state practiced’ religion. THE MEGARON AND OPEN-COURTS: FUNCTION, FOCUS & STATUS The central courts and Megaron complexes of the Mycenaean palace centres have long been considered in discussions of ritual practice and the role they may have played. It seems reasonable to try and place such connotations on these areas due to two main reasons. Recalling the use of the courts within Minoan palaces on Crete,397 and as we have seen above the fact that the shrines associated with the palaces had little internal space allocated for participation, visualisation or performance on what could be thought a palatial scale. The main problem encountered when trying to justify the identification of these spaces as part of the sacred sphere stems from the lack of cult related finds in these areas. Many fixed features are generally present in these areas, a large central hearth in the Megaron, benches often found against the walls of the entrance porches, open courts and the Megarons themselves. Some of these features could be said to have some significance, since they constitute ‘minor criteria’ for a shrine’s identification.398 However, such features can only be placed securely within the realm of ritual practice when cultic finds are associated with them. Some evidence exists which could suggest ‘state practiced’ religion. Material remains from the area of the central courts and Megaron within the Palace of Nestor, together with fresco evidence from this and other palatial sites can be recognised. In Chapter five and six the details concerning the Palace of Nestor are fully discussed. To summarise, there is a large amount of evidence in the form of drinking vessels found in the open courts and Megaron, in addition to a libation channel placed directly next to the throne itself. All of which as discussed in the following Chapters strongly suggest ritual practice carried out in these areas. However, it is also noted that the finds from the Palace of Nestor form a very different picture to that of the other palace centres. Another factor to consider is that of the fresco evidence. Once again this is considered in greater detail in Chapter six. It must however, also be mentioned here to illuminate the function of the Megaron area. Part of the evidence comes from the

actions depicted which, in many instances, are of processional scenes. The act of procession itself would mean that participants are passing through more areas of the citadel than just the inner sanctums of the shrines, however processions do not necessitate large open spaces such as a Megaron and its adjoining courtyard. Such processions may of course culminate in a performance of sacred character held in a space large enough to allow visual participation. If one brings to mind the religious processions on Good Friday in the modern Greek Orthodox tradition, the priest leads a procession which includes precious items from the church, such as the επιτάφιος, around the village, passing the houses of all the inhabitants. Any person can follow this procession and any number of people can stand at the side to watch the spectacle, before it then re-enters the confines of the church. If such a scenario is considered, the need for a large open space to accommodate a large ‘congregation’ is not absolutely necessary. Research by Cavanagh399 has mentioned the importance of the procession rather than a fixed location for ritual practice. He also comments on the existence of roadways passing through the lower town at Mycenae. The possibility cannot be overlooked that state processions could have passed out of the citadel gates and through the town, thereby including the populace in the ritual procession. The procession could then continue along the roadway into the countryside where a rural shrine might be located at which the participants may dedicate votive offerings. In addition, and contributing to this topic is work by Jansen on Mycenaean road works. A great deal of research has taken place to map and track roads which were in use on the mainland, including the areas which the routes encompassed. Jansen notes roads passing by clay beds and quarries which he associates with the palatial interest in economic and agricultural development within their region.400 However, of greater significance to this study are the furthermost limits to which these roads have been identified. The northern most road reaches the foothills of Mt Profitis Elias, and the southern most road reaches the Argive Heraion. Jansen notes these highways could act as a delineating factor for the Mycenaean territory.401 But, it should also be considered whether the existence of sacred sites in the areas where these roads led, could increase the likelihood that shrines were placed on the boundaries between regions. Moreover, the roads could be used to make circular processions between town / palace and isolated shrine.

397

399

398

400

Gesell 1987; Marinatos 1987; Platon 1983 See section 2.2 for the list of criteria used to identify a shrine, and the following explanation as justification

401

- 88 -

Cavanagh 2001: 132 Jansen 2002 : 3 Jansen 2002 : 4

SANCTUARY SURROUNDINGS: SPACE AND INCLUSIVENESS The Megaron areas are characterised by monumentalisation which included the propylaea and facades. In the words of Cavanagh “there was a conscious aim to overawe”.402 This is apparent due to the time and effort that must have gone into the construction of these features, which must indeed be understood in terms of the desire to display the wealth of the rulers to any persons who entered this area.

Although the main focus at Apollo Maleatas is on an open-air terrace, there are structures as well as offerings of fine quality. The investment of building materials, labour and fine offerings suggest the patronage of elite members of the community, which perhaps indicates that worship here, too, was ‘official’ in character.

It is thought overall, that due to many of the palace centres providing fresco evidence and also the central hearth being larger than is necessarily practical, may strongly suggest some role within ritual practice. These points are noted and with cautious use, such evidence could be considered as part of ‘state practiced’ religion, with the location being the principal justification. In cases such as the Palace of Nestor, where a prominent libation feature is located within the Megaron, and also at Mycenae where the libation/purification feature is located in the Megaron porch; ‘state practiced’ religion should be assigned.403

‘POPULAR’ RELIGION

‘OFFICIAL’ RELIGION The Megaron complexes at the palace centres of the LH III B period were considered for their role in ‘state practiced’ religion. As was noted above, Official religion can tentatively be described as that in which the elites and rulers may have participated at times, making occasional offerings and dedications, but the rituals would not be solely focused on them or their offerings. The reason for this segregation is due to sites such as the subsidiary cult areas of the palace centres; the Cult Centre at Mycenae, the Shrine Area of terrace 9 at Midea, and the shrine rooms of the lower citadel at Tiryns. These shrines have been considered above for their location and allocation of space both inside and outside the shrine rooms. It was noted that there must have been some segregation of worshippers due to the small size of the shrine buildings. However, provision was also made for the inclusion of a greater number of worshippers, since there were courts associated with them. In addition, and importantly, these shrines included a variety of offerings, both from wealthy and poorer worshippers (considered in detail in Chapter Five). This evidence can be best explained by members of the elite making occasional offerings, with members of the poorer class (of the citadel community) being part of the worship as well; ‘official’ cult practice. Shrines which would more than likely also come into this category are many of those which are located within settlements. These would be built examples, demonstrating investment of resources by the wealthier members (the elite rulers) of the settlement.

402 403

Cavanagh 2001 : 124 See chapter 6 for detail and discussion of these features.

Although it is accepted that many tiers of society and religious practice would have existed, the two divisions mentioned above are most easily identifiable in association with the upper levels of society. All other shrines can be categorised as popular, although it must equally be acknowledged that further divisions may be present which are not so easy to identify. All shrines which are completely isolated from settlement without any structures or boundary walls, in essence, unguarded and uncontrolled by any elite authorities, would result in them being inclusive of the greater population. Other areas where it is possible to identify the practice of popular religion, are those surrounding the palace centres, but not within their built shrine areas. The evidence for this will be presented briefly below. Since the evidence was found outside the palace shrine buildings/courts and so not directly associated with the shrines, it is presented here as comparative evidence to the shrine assemblages. The citadel sites of the Argolid at Midea and Tiryns include dedications of small figurines, and in the case of Midea these occur in great abundance throughout the lower terrace area. A complex of shrine rooms at Midea has been identified, located against the north-eastern part of the fortification wall. Within these rooms both a female and bovine ‘figure’ have been found. Conversely, the entire area of the West Gate terraces has revealed approximately 175 pieces of predominantly female terracotta figurines, and also a large number of animal figurines. This area is believed to have been both a living and working area, with finds of tools, ivories, storage vessels as well as a probable ‘household’ shrine.404 It could be suggested therefore, that the general populace who worked and in some cases lived in the West Gate area, generally practiced their religion privately. This resulted in a lack of simple votive figurines at the Shrine complex, but alternatively, a great abundance of figurines in the general West gate area. If this suggestion is correct, it would not necessarily mean the workers were completely excluded from the rituals practiced in the main shrine, 404

- 89 -

Demakopoulou & Divari-Valakou 2001: 182-187

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE but more likely their role would be secondary, possibly viewing any rituals taking place from outside the shrine, or by joining in or viewing processions. These latter spectacles would include them within ‘official’ religious practices. However, the large quantities of figurines which testify to the workers’ offerings were made at simple, more private shrines constituting the evidence for a ‘popular’ religious practice. This scenario could also be applied to Mycenae. The large quantities of figurines coming from the habitation area below the citadel, and the larger figures evidenced in the Temple, indicate such a separation between domestic or simple public cult practice in the settlement below, and ‘official’ practices in the Cult Centre. The fact that Midea shows both practices occurring contemporarily within the fortification walls could be explained simply in terms of the topography of the sites. The citadel of Mycenae stands on a smaller steeper outcrop of land than that of Midea. At Midea it is possible to utilise much of the area on the lower terraces which are still inside the cyclopean walls. Also, the current evidence available suggests that the population surrounding Mycenae was much larger than that at Midea, making habitation within the walls impossible for the majority of the local populace. Hagg’s suggestion that smaller terracotta figurines are associated with popular religion and the larger figures to official religion,405 could therefore be valid in these cases.

participation by others, probably in the form of viewing processions. Official religion: Located within palace and settlement shrines, displaying investment of resources in a built structure. Participation would have included both elite/town rulers and the poorer classes on a more segregated level. Popular religion: This category encompassed all other shrines, essentially those which were open and accessible to all, such as the isolated open-air shrines. As there is substantially less evidence available for shrines of the Protogeometric period, their status categorisation is not so straight forward. It is suggested however, that since all shrines of the Protogeometric period are isolated and open-air, they can best be placed in the ‘popular’ category. That is not to say there would have been no participation by higher status individuals. It is suggested however that during this period the aim was for the shrines to be as inclusive as possible.

Although this section has discussed some of the reasons why shrines should be placed in different status categories, I do not seek to allocate every shrine a specific ‘tag’ corresponding to the likely status of its worshippers. This has however, been done with some shrines discussed above, in order to illustrate and give examples of the type of requirements which might inform us as to ‘who’ was worshipping. The first part of this chapter addressed the space and surroundings of the shrines. Included within the discussion was ‘who’ would be able to access the shrines. It is the question of ‘access’ which initially is most informative when considering who worshipped at any particular shrine, which in turn enables us to consider the shrines status. Secondly, the quality of the offerings may also assist with understanding status and who worshipped at a shrine, which will be discussed in the following chapter. Therefore, a three-tiered hierarchy of shrines is tentatively suggested as the outline for what is more than likely a very complex structure of status levels in religious practices of the Late Bronze Age period. State Practiced religion: Focused on the rulers and elite and practiced in the main palace areas such as the Megaron with only very minimal levels of 405

Hagg 1995 : 389

- 90 -

5. 5.1.

OFFERINGS: WHAT AND WHERE? discussed separately below for their possible use as cult statues or images.

INTRODUCTION

In Chapter Two the criteria were presented by which sites should be classified as sacred. The previous chapter investigated the space and surroundings in which the shrines were situated, taking into account aspects of landscape and inclusiveness. This chapter will consider the features and artefacts which are suggested to directly identify a shrine. Although the criteria were set out, discussion was intentionally limited as concerns how these criteria appear in the archaeological record. Therefore, each criterion will be discussed below in the order they were set-out within the criteria in section 2.2, figure 1. An account of every offering from every shrine throughout the LH III B, LH III C and Protogeometric periods will not be attempted. Instead, the chapter will use examples from sites on the mainland to: a) identify the types of offerings which were evidenced in each period under consideration; b) discuss how the shrine types (palatial, settlement, isolated) differ in their assemblage of offerings, and c) to note the changes that can be seen between the periods. A continuing theme in the study of Aegean religion is the attempt to recreate ‘what’ and ‘who’ the Mycenaeans and early Greeks were worshiping. Scholars continue to discuss the votives, imagery and iconographic symbolism in order to try piecing together a pantheon for this early period. However, there is simply not enough space within the scope of this study to address that issue in addition to the attention given to the ritual actions practiced throughout the period in question (Chapter Six).

5.2.

PRINCIPAL CRITERIA

VOTIVE OFFERINGS Although research into the greater ‘ideology’ of these votive objects is not a topic which this study addresses, it is essential to identify and account for these artefacts alongside the role they play in ritual practice at sacred sites. FIGURINES

Figurines were introduced in the criteria (section 2.3 of Chapter Two), where the reasons for their votive classification were discussed. This section will consider which types of shrine site have evidence for the dedication of these votives? Small terracotta figurines occur at all shrine types from this period in Greek history; isolated, settlement and palace associated, in varying quantities. The relationship between sites where figurines have not been discovered in the LH III B period is particularly interesting. These include Profits Elias, the Cult Centre at Mycenae, and the shrine area of Midea in the Argolid; Mt Hymettus in Attica; the shrine area of the Palace of Nestor in Messenia; and the Polis Cave on Ithaka. The palatial sites represent opposite sides of the Peloponnese, and the three isolated shrines are from different regions, located a great distance from one another. Therefore the practice of dedicating figurines cannot easily be explained by regional trends. Certainly in the Argolid there are other sites which display offerings of figurines, which will be discussed below. However, from Attica, Messenia and Ithaka, the sites mentioned are currently the only ones which have produced evidence of a ritual nature in the LH III B period.406 It cannot be said with any certainty that this evidence is testament to a theory that the offering of figurines is absent in these regions, as only one site from each region is available for discussion; however, it is tempting to speculate. To add to the caution in labelling this a ‘regional practice’ is the evidence of votive figurines also coming from Laconia and Aegina. These regions can be classed as neighbouring the Argolid, however the two sites of the LH III B period in question (Amyklai and Aphaia) are located at a distance which would suggest only sporadic contact, if at all. Evidence for figurines at palatial sites was presented in the previous chapter as part of the ‘shrine status’ section 4.5. This was due to the fact at Mycenae and Midea, figurines were not found in a communal shrine location, but instead scattered over a large area which might bear witness to a ‘popular’ strand of worship (such as domestic shines) in the subsidiary areas of the palaces.

Terracotta ‘figures’ are different in style, size and role within cult practice. For this reason, they are 406 Note that Ithaka includes another cult site of the Protogeometric period; Aetos, however, cult practice cannot be clearly identified for the LH III B period

- 91 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE However, Tiryns has examples both of female and animal figurines in the Unterburg area around the shrine and at locations on the upper citadel. Consequently, if the figurines are a sign that the general populace are using the sacred site, then Tiryns is the only palace centre which has the general populace frequenting its shrine.

shrines of the LH III B period, with the female often being the most common offering. FIGURE 29: EXAMPLES OF 410 FROM APHAIA

FEMALE FIGURINES

FIGURE 28: A BOVINE FIGURINE FROM APHAIA407

Room 7 which belongs to the LH III B2 period has over 230 examples408 of Psi type female figurines, in addition to two larger figures more than 30cm in height. The appearance of such large quantities of figurines is testament to the offering of such objects playing a significant role in ritual practice at the shrine. Room 7 is small, suggesting a limited number of worshippers could gain access to the inner sanctum. The quantity of figurines, however, must indicate large numbers of worshippers were more than likely dedicating their offerings at a designated place outside, where cult personnel would periodically collect the votives and move them within the shrine building. As mentioned above the Palace of Nestor, Mycenae and Midea, do not provide any evidence for the offering of figurines within their shrine areas. This results in the shrine area at Tiryns being the only palace centre to display the practice of offering these votives. Outside the palace centres, the sites of Amyklai in Laconia, Aphaia on Aegina, Agia Triada near Agios Vasilios in the Argolid, and Delphi all displayed the greatest quantities of figurines with over 100 examples present.409 Each of these sites has no structures or furnishings of any kind found in association with them. At Amyklai the female figurine was the most popular form with over 70 examples, however, animal forms were also present, represented by 32 examples. Both animal and female forms are present at the majority of

All the sites where figurines were offered in great numbers mentioned above, are from an isolated shrine setting, with the exception of the shrine area at the palace of Tiryns. It has been highlighted that their preference is for female forms, but animal forms are also plentiful; signifying that the act of offering figurines is very much an aspect of open-air worship. In addition, two settlement associated shrines of the LH III B period display the offering of figurines; the Shrines at Agios Konstantinos and Apollo Maleatas. The latter site has provided evidence for a variety of figurines both in female and animal form; however, the shrine at Agios Konstantinos is quite distinctive as it shows a clear preference to the bovid form. Only one female figurine is present within the shrine. However, other forms such as horses, driven oxen and helmeted riders, provide an interesting assemblage that stands out from the more common female and animal forms usually dedicated.411 This type of assemblage, which is clearly votive and found in association with a stepped platform in the corner of the shrine, must relate to concerns of the worshippers. In section 2.3 it was mentioned that female figurines most likely represent either the worshipper or the deity. In a similar way, we may speculate that animal forms represent either herds or animals owned by the worshipper or possibly a deity who protects the herds. The figurines can therefore be said to display the issues which are most important to them: themselves, their family, and their livestock. In which case, the existence of helmeted riders (warriors, soldiers, guardsmen?) would suggest this community experiences the concerns of combat or at least there

407

Photograph : Author 2007 (Aegina Museum) See Gazetteer for detail, however, note in Shelmerdine’s account, no mention is made to whether the figurines are whole or fragmentary. 409 See Gazetteer entries for detail and further references 408

410

Photograph : Author 2007 (Aegina Museum) See Gazetteer entry 3.4 for Agios Konstantinos detail and further references 411

- 92 -

OFFERINGS: WHAT AND WHERE was a class of warriors who face danger, resulting in the need to be protected by the gods.

of meat which most likely represents a ritual meal (discussed further in Chapter Six).

The sites of Amyklai and Aphaia both displayed numerous figurines, with examples evidenced in the LH III B and into the LH III C period, surviving the destruction of the palatial sites. However, it must be noted with these sites that, although the use of figurines is evidenced in the LH III C period, these shrines were already established in the LH III B, therefore, the practice of offering figurines was well established at the sites by the LH III C period.

There was therefore, no need to replace the act of sacrifice with animal figurines. Although, in the cases where mainly sheep/goat or pig were the animals sacrificed, perhaps there was still a desire to dedicate offerings of the bovid in terracotta form as it was too great an outlay in the flesh. However, as will be discussed in the following chapter, outside the palace centres these smaller animal species were common as sacrifices throughout all periods being considered. In addition, the bovine figurine was not new in the Protogeometric period; but was already very much a part of the offerings made at numerous shrines of the LH III B period.

At Asine, there is also an example of a large figure and five smaller figurines present in the same context all dating to the LH IIIC period. As this site dates to a later period than those contemporary to the palace centres, the evidence may show that practices are already beginning to change. The following Protogeometric period shows a predominance of isolated open-air shrines. This period demonstrates a change in popularity of terracottas, so that the inclusion of figurines in a shrine’s votive assemblage is very much reduced. At Kalapodi and Olympia there are examples of bovine figurines and possibly other animals not so easily identifiable. Of interest, however, is that Kalapodi is the only site of this period which has produced examples of female figurines. This site must be seen as quite unusual for this period due to its built feature, resulting in it being the only open-air shrine which includes a built altar alongside the deposit from a hearth area. In addition, it seems the cult practice at this site originated much earlier than at the other open-air sites of the Protogeometric period. The first use has been securely placed within the LH III C period, but new evidence could move this date back into the LH III A/B period.412 This is the only shrine (so far known) to survive the destruction of the palace centres and continue through the Protogeometric period with no break in activity. This factor would be the simplest (though not necessarily the correct) explanation for the appearance of female figurines here but not at any other shrines of the period. It has been suggested that this move towards the favouring of bovines and the almost complete absence of female figurines (other than at Kalapodi) could reflect a change in local economies or represent a substitution for animal sacrifice.413 It is very plausible that the general abandonment of female figurines represents some change in the focus and concerns of the worshippers. However, it must be noted that at all shrines of the Protogeometric period, both open-air and built, where female figurines are absent, there is plenty of evidence for the cooking, burning and eating

412 413

What is witnessed is not a new concern for votive animal dedications, as this practice was already established. Instead, other than at Kalapodi, the female figurine is completely absent in the votive assemblages, whereas in the previous period it was common. Considering the evidence above for the offering of figurines; the importance and role of these votives is far from clear. Although finds from shrines of the Protogeometric period hint at the decline of this practice, figurines are still present at some of the sites, though in significantly smaller quantities. It must be acknowledged that at a number of isolated shrines of the LH III B period (Mt. Hymettus, Profitis Elias and the Polis Cave) no figurines were found at all. Therefore, the offering of figurines was not an essential practice at all sites of the LH III B period. PRODUCE /FOODSTUFFS A problem which occurs with the topic of foodstuffs as offerings and cannot be easily answered is: How can the differences between ‘food offerings’ and the remains of a ritual meal be ascertained? This question, easily leads to another: Is there a significant difference between the two practices and do they need to be analysed or separated? It could be said that they are one and the same. On the one hand there is a direct food offering, prepared and left at the shrine area in honour of whichever supernatural being is worshipped. On the other hand, there are foodstuffs prepared to honour the god/s and then eaten by those worshipping whilst in the sacred area. Perhaps the importance rests in the ritual surrounding the preparation of the offering, which may have been accompanied by other ritual practices, or prayers, common to both.

Whitely 2007 : 43 (Niemeier’s entry) Morgan 1996 : 56

- 93 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE When addressing the topic of food offerings to the gods, one can also consider the literary sources available which enlighten the situation. In section 6.3 when the practice of sacrifice is addressed, comparison is made with a passage from the Odyssey, which describes a scene of cooking meat and the allocation of some parts as offerings to the gods. Food and drink offerings will be discussed further as part of the following chapter for the association with feasting and sacrifice. FINE OBJECTS AND JEWELLERY If the collection of fine objects from the Temple at Mycenae is taken as an example, many exotic artefacts were found in Room 19, including a fine ivory pin and comb, over 100 glass beads, a bronze finger ring as well as other items of obsidian, rock crystal and lapis lazuli. All these were found in a context together with, amongst other artefacts, human terracotta figures and pottery for drinking and dining.414 When considering this assemblage of finds as a whole and understanding the context and setting which it was found, this collection of fine items matches at least two of Osborne’ traits which define votive offerings (see above, section 2.3). 2) precious or exotic material – the collection from Room 19 definitely constitutes fine items and precious materials. 3) distinctive architectural context – although Room 19 is small and reached by a staircase from the main Temple room itself, no architectural features of this building could be reminiscent of any tradition other than a shrine (classification in gazetteer entry 3.18). That is to say the building and features within, do not lend themselves to a homestead or workshop; therefore, the architecture is distinctive in so far as it is clearly of sacred function. Room 19 is a small area in which the artefacts were placed before being closed off, testament to being associated with the building.

Mycenae, bringing together the traditions of ritual dining (which will be considered in detail in Chapter Six), and the dedications of precious items; testament to at least some of the worshippers being wealthy enough to offer such valuable objects to the gods. The discovery of valuable objects at shrines within the palace centres of the Late Bronze Age period, was not particularly surprising. However, the presence of similar evidence at a small open-air shrine of the Protogeometric period was unexpected. At the site of Olympia a small number of sub-Mycenaean pins and fibulae were found, and a separate assemblage which included ash and animal bones, jewellery and other bronze objects.416 This is of interest due to the fact that as far as current published evidence stands, it is the only site of the Protogeometric period to produce such finds. Since the only sites which produced fine items and jewellery in the Late Bronze Age period were the palatial shrines, it is very tempting to suggest that Olympia, despite the limited evidence, was one of the first shrines of the Protogeometric period to show signs of wealthy dedications possibly by the upper classes. At present there is not a great deal of evidence for cult practice within settlements of the Protogeometric period, other than what is most likely domestic or private worship within elite residences (such as Nichoria, see gazetteer entry 3.19). It would be interesting if further evidence of fine votive items were to appear at the isolated open-air shrines, which would lay testament to the general populace as well as the upper classes frequenting these shrines. Maybe these early shrines were not simply area’s for ritual practice and festivities; but already an arena to display personal wealth.

CULT STATUES: FIGURES As mentioned above, the larger figures are less common than the smaller varieties of Mycenaean figurines, and where present they tend to be in the minority among other votives and finds.

As well as the collection of jewellery which was found in the Temple Complex at the Cult Centre of Mycenae presented above, another citadel site provided a similar collection of fine artefacts within its shrine. Room II within the shrine area at Midea revealed an assemblage which encompassed two very different categories of finds. Luxury items which included beads, glass jewellery, ivory and figurines and a collection of cooking ware, lead vessels and burnt food remains.415 This combination of fine items and cooking ware was also seen within the shrine at

It has been noted from the Cult Centre at Mycenae that the preference was for larger figures. The Temple complex contained numerous large figures and lifesized snakes whilst The Room with the Fresco complex contained only one single decorated figure.417 This was in sharp contrast to the apparent complete lack of contemporary figurines. A couple of examples of figurines exist in the Temple alcove, and one in the Room with the Fresco. However, French notes that these were all of types much earlier than the

414

416

415

Moore and Taylor 1999 : 18 Walberg 2007 : 62

417

- 94 -

Eder 2001 : 203 French 2003 : 311

OFFERINGS: WHAT AND WHERE context in which they were found, therefore, likely to belong to a much earlier period of use.418 FIGURE 30: ANTHROPOMORPHIC FIGURE FROM ROOM 19 (TEMPLE AT MYCENAE)419

After the LH III B period, the only shrines which display the use of a figure within their cult paraphernalia is the LH III C shrine at Asine and the Unterburg of Tiryns. No shrines of the Protogeometric period have been found to include figures in their assemblages. The majority of the finds from these later sites display a tendency to focus on the ritual meal (section 6.3), rather than the dedication of votive offerings. It therefore does not seem unusual that figures are also absent.

RELIGIOUS ICONOGRAPHY Although depictions of religious iconography, such as frescoes, do not immediately spring to mind when one is discussing the topic of ‘Offerings’, frescoes are painted for a reason. When a fresco portrays religious activities it is quite likely that the scenes were painted either as a dedication to the gods, or to continuously represent ritual actions for the gods.

When considering the sites at which figures are found, it becomes apparent they are not limited to palatial centres, but are evidenced in all three shrine types of the LH III B period. The shrine areas of the palace centres at Mycenae, Tiryns and Midea all provide examples of large figures. Most often these take the form of female figures (with the exceptions from Mycenae mentioned above), however, a bovine figure is present as well as the female form in the shrine area at Midea. Once again the Palace of Nestor is the exception, due to it having no figures (or figurines as mentioned above) present within the shrine area of the NorthEastern building at all. This displays a significant difference in the style of worship that must have been practiced at this shrine. In addition to the palace cult centres, the only other shrines of the LH III B period which evidenced figures are from Amyklai and Apollo Maleatas; both of which had an example in human form and bovine. As this only constitutes one isolated and one settlement associated shrine; figures cannot be claimed as common at these shrine types. It has already been mentioned that the shrine at Apollo Maleatas is likely to have the patronage of an elite class (section 4.5), therefore, the addition of figures to the assemblage is not out of place.

Fresco evidence comes from a number of contexts in the Prehistoric Aegean, such as the Neopalatial villas of Minoan Crete, settlements from the Aegean islands, and the Mycenaean palaces of the Greek mainland. Moreover, scholarly work on this topic reveals that this form of wall painting was a palatial art which depended on the patronage of the palaces and died out when they ceased to exist as palaces.420 This is strictly the case for the mainland, and although the villas of Minoan Crete are not classed as palaces themselves, it is understood with reasonable certainty that they played a central role in the administration of the island in association with the palace centres, and were the residence of wealthy elites.421 Although palatial patronage may be the general case on Minoan Crete and the Mycenaean mainland, there are also fine examples of wall painting on some of the Greek islands, with notable instances coming from Akrotiri on Thera, and Agia Irini on Keos.422 Frescos on the Mycenaean mainland represent a number of different motifs, including some naturalistic scenes and animals. The large majority however, represent female processions and many scenes have been identified as sacrifice and feasting. Therefore where such wall paintings are present it is plausible to suggest that the activity shown is something which is actually practiced within that community. These frescoes will be considered as part of Chapter Six which addresses all the ritual activities depicted in such frescoes. 420

Immeerwahr 1990 : 106 See Hagg 1997 and Watrous 1984 for studies on Minoan Villas and further references. 422 Thera see: Warren 1979; Raban 1984; Morris 1989. Keos see: Coleman 1973; Abramouitz 1980. For general discussion and further references for the above sites see: Immerwahr 1990 421

418 419

See gazetteer entry 3.18 for detail. Photograph : Author 2007 (Mycenae Museum)

- 95 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

In addition to frescoes of a ritual practice theme, there are also examples which have been clearly identified as of a religious nature due to the presence of deities and or priestesses. One of the best examples of such a scene comes from the Cult Centre at Mycenae. Room 31 within the Room with the Fresco complex houses a number of fixed furnishings which will be discussed below, in addition to a large Fresco on the wall above and to the side of a large platform. The upper register which rises above the man-made platform has two almost life-sized females facing each other; the one on the left holds a sword, on the right a spear or sceptre.423 Between the females, two diminutive nude males float facing with their arms extended towards the female with the sword. On the lower register, a smaller female with a headdress holds out handfuls of grain. This scene also includes an animal which Rehak 424 believes to be a lion, whereas Marinatos 425 suggests to be a flying griffin. Whichever of these characters are gods or priestesses, and if the animals are mythical or not, it remains that this wall painting is of great significance. It is clear that its position on the wall behind a large platform within this sacred room must be the main focus of activity, with any votives or foodstuffs more than likely being left as an offering to these worshipped beings. FIGURE 31: FRESCO FRESCO426

FROM

ROOM

WITH THE

discussed in Chapter Six. In addition there were fresco fragments found within fills, which hinted at depictions of goddesses and mythical creatures, such as the fragments with the head and shoulders of a woman wearing a boar’s tusk helmet, carrying a griffin.427 However, neither of these fresco contexts are an aid to the identification of a shrine building, that is not to say they are not greatly significant in the identification of the worshipped and their associations. In order to use the imagery provided by fresco remains in the identification of a shrine or sacred area, it is important that they be considered alongside other artefacts and features. Understanding the importance the Mycenaeans placed on religion, and how much it was a part of their everyday life and practices will always be a speculative matter. If for instance a fresco of a sacrificial nature is discovered lining the walls of a passage which approaches a palatial Megaron, one would not assume that this passage is a shrine passage. This scenario would be much more likely to represent the importance the palace residents placed in the act of sacrifice; so choosing to adorn commonly walked routes with ritual scenes of importance.

EVIDENCE FOR RITUAL DINING Ritual dining can be evidenced primarily by pottery and bone remains. This has been introduced in Chapter Two, as a ‘principal criterion’ for shrine identification. As this act is considered to make a large contribution to our knowledge of the ritual actions performed throughout the Mycenaean and Protogeometric periods, it will be fully addressed in the following chapter which focuses on ritual practice (section 6.3).

5.3.

MINOR CRITERIA

BUILT FURNISHINGS FOR RITUAL PRACTICE

In so far as other similar examples found within shrines to aid the identification of sacred areas; evidence is lacking. As mentioned above, many of the Palatial centres had central rooms and corridors which were decorated with ritual scenes; these will be

423 424 425 426

Rehak 1999 : 228 Rehak 1999 : 228 Forthcoming Moore and Taylor (no page numbers) Acknowledge copyright Diana Wardle

Evidence shows that sacred sites which are associated with palace centres and settlements of the LH III B period do have buildings dedicated to cult practice. These are, without exception small and of modest construction technique, not displaying any signs of grandeur or monumentality. In no way were they constructed so as to make them stand out in appearance from any other structures. In the case of settlement shrines, they are most often a single room either adjoining other buildings or a specialised room within a building.

427

- 96 -

Rehak 1999 : 229

OFFERINGS: WHAT AND WHERE Examples from the Protogeometric period differ greatly, in that the majority of sanctuaries from this period have no cult building, and very few have any built features at all. Some material remains of cult within residences of the upper classes have previously been considered as evidence that these buildings had a role within religion. However, in the previous chapter (Sanctuary Surroundings, section 4.3) these cases were discussed more fully, and it is my belief that they cannot be considered as buildings of public worship, though it is possible that aspects of domestic cult may have taken place. In only one case, that of building ΣΤ at Poseidi, is there evidence for a cult building in the Protogeometric period. All other shrines of the period were open-air; with some examples having simple stone features (to be discussed further below). Therefore, grand temple architecture cannot be something to search for when attempting to identify sacred structures throughout the period under consideration; this comes much later in Greek history. It is the furnishings, offerings and ritual actions that must be used to differentiate the sacred from the secular. FIXED FEATURES: PLATFORMS, BENCHES, DAIS OR ALTARS? As was mentioned within the criteria in Chapter Two, the existence of certain built features can be taken as ‘minor criteria’ for the identification of a shrine. The sites which provide evidence for such features will now be presented and discussed. Agia Triada in the Argolid, Amyklai in Laconia, Aphaia on Aegina, the Isthmian Shrine in Corinthia, and Olympia in Elis, are all open-air sanctuaries of the Late Bronze or Protogeometric periods, which to-date have no architectural features.428 Due to this, they will be discussed further in the next chapter together with evidence for ritual practice. Of the sites which do have architectural elements, the position of the fixed feature/s can be noted as one of the main structural focuses on entering the building or room. In some cases platforms would be visible from outside (if there was no door or it was open) and in many cases raised platforms are also located outside shrine rooms in the open-air.

Palatial Shrines The palatial sites of Mycenae, Tiryns and Pylos, all have open-air platforms (which may reasonably be termed altars due to their association with cult objects). At these three palatial sites, the altar is found in a small courtyard in front of the shrine building(s) and the former two palace shrines additionally have platforms for the display of votives within the shrine confines. In these cases it seems very likely that one of the main reasons for placing these altars outside the cult edifice was in order to allow worshippers to view and possibly participate in the ritual actions taking place. The Cult Centre at Mycenae, although having a number of separate sacred buildings containing all the usual architectural cult furniture, also has a round stone altar roughly central to the courtyard in front of the ‘Temple’. The inclusion of fixed features within the sacred buildings and outside in an open area, suggests that certain rituals would have been selected for performance in private; others in view of worshippers. Shrine room 93 at the Palace of Nestor, has a similar arrangement. Though the room itself is small, situated in front is an open court with a stone altar covered in decorated painted plaster. It could be said that this outside space had to be created as the shrine rooms were too small to admit many participants. However, the building of the sacred rooms is contemporary with the main building phase of the site. This demonstrates that it was planned for the space and structures to be set-up in this fashion. (The segregation of space and worshippers has already been discussed in section 4.4 above.) Similarly to the other palatial sites, the shrine at Tiryns (throughout structural changes of the LH III B and LH III C periods) had built platforms in the open air and within the shrine building itself. Settlement Shrines When comparing settlement shrines and palatial shrines, no significant differences can be noted in the use of fixed features, as they are still a common component of shrine furniture. At Apollo Maleatas the altar is in the form of a large stone built terrace which encompasses an area of localised burning. Due to the quantity and span of the

428

See gazetteer and Chapter Three for full details and references.

- 97 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE ashy deposit it can be envisaged this would have been a large and unsafe size to have within a building. Buildings are located nearby which are thought to have served as storage for cult paraphernalia. Therefore, although the construction of buildings was possible, the chief desire was for focus to be on the rituals at the open-air altar. At sites which do not have an easily identifiable outdoor space for ritual practice, fixed features still figure very strongly, and are often the first thing one would see on entering the shrine building. At Agios Konstantinos on Methana, the main shrine consists of just one room which is entered from the east. The view from the doorway focuses directly on a structure in the centre of the room which is constructed from flat stones, slightly raised and distinctive from the rest of the floor. At the north-west corner is a stone platform, with three steps leading up; resulting in a stepped altar of multiple levels, at which a number of votive offering were found on and around. In addition, the room has a hearth and a bench. It can be said with some certainty, that due to these fixed features, the display of votives was of great importance to the worshippers using this shrine. Unfortunately a modern church occupies the space just in front of this room, so it is unknown whether there were further associated features, such as an additional altar in the open air. However, the evidence from the room alone shows that there was overwhelming provision for the display of votives, confined within a room out-of-sight of any worshippers outside. The situation witnessed at Agios Konstantinos, although more plentiful in varying styles of fixed features than other sites, is reasonably representative of built shrines of the LH III B period. Many of the built shrines reviewed in the Gazetteer displayed similar characteristics. Some have additional rooms, or porches which would have served to more greatly inhibit the visibility from outside, but the existence of built platforms, whether altars, benches or dais (see section 2.4 for discussion of these terms) within the sacred rooms are a constant and resounding feature. Fewer built shrines are known from the following LH III C period, however the shine room at Asine provides comparative evidence. Room XXXII contains an altar in the corner opposite the entrance and benches along both of the long walls. No outside space is allocated to a courtyard and altar, resulting in the features within the room being the main focus.

Isolated Shrines As was mentioned above, the majority of isolated shrines throughout the period in question, do not have built features. A few isolated shrines however, do provide evidence of built features. The shrine of Profitis Elias (LH III B period) has built rooms and a paved courtyard, from the edge of which a crevice provides a link to a small cave below. Although no built platforms or altars are present, the paved courtyard and cave provide built and fixed natural spaces which have been utilized for ritual practice. These areas once again provide a focal point for activities and a pre-defined place to dedicate votive offerings. The isolated shrine at Kalapodi has an open air built altar, around which numerous votive offerings were found. The votives from this site span periods through the LH III A2 to Protogeometric periods, however it is not clear at which phase the altar was constructed. It does testify however, to the allocation of a fixed built feature, for use in ritual practice. Therefore, it can be noted that built platforms are clearly present at a variety of sites in the LH III B period. In the LH III C period they can still be evidenced at both settlement and palace shrines, however, Kalapodi is the only known shrine of the Protogeometric period to include a built altar.

HEARTHS AND HEARTH AREAS The archaeological evidence under consderation, testifies to the widespread use of the fixed hearth throughout Greece in this period. In fact, in the LH III B period, built shrines which are located either within palatial or settlement contexts all have a hearth, with only one exception, the Palace of Nestor. That is to say, within the cult area of this palace there is no provision for a hearth whilst there is, as is usual, a hearth as the central feature to the central Megaron. On the other hand, isolated open air shrines of the LH III B period do not include hearths or hearth areas as part of their cult features. When considering the palatial citadels, it is prudent whilst discussing ritual and cult practice to be aware from which areas the evidence was collected. Although it is still a greatly discussed topic as to the role the Megaron and central areas of the Palace played in the religious life of its inhabitants, it is clear from all the citadels that an area was set aside specifically for communal worship. Who frequented the cult rooms and / or the central palace areas was fully discussed in the previous chapter, especially section 4.5. A distinction must be made between features present in the ‘Cult Area/Centre’ as opposed to part of the general palace assemblage. It is believed

- 98 -

OFFERINGS: WHAT AND WHERE that this acknowledgment is necessary to understand the assemblages and structures which are truly associated with communal cult practice. As mentioned above, the built shrine at the Palace of Nestor (Room 93 within the North Eastern Building) of the LH III B period does not have a hearth as part of its fixed furniture. This exception is especially interesting. All palatial sites have large hearths central to the Megaron; in addition, with the exception of the Palace of Nestor, they have smaller hearths within their cult areas. The Palace of Nestor, however, by far outweighs all other palatial sites with its overwhelming collection of both pottery and osteological evidence which points towards large scale feasting throughout the entire palace (section 6.3). Therefore, the practice of cooking or offering parts of animals/meat and bones into the fire which is evident at many other shrine sites, is completely absent at this shrine, and instead; present on a much larger scale throughout the palace proper.

isolated shrines will be discussed further below in conjunction with the associated finds. It has been noted that throughout the period in question, the hearth takes a central role as one of the fixed furnishings in sacred areas. The complementary evidence of material remains for feasting and often animal sacrifice will follow in the next chapter (6.3).

LIBATIONS Two aspects of the practice of Libation: ‘the pouring of a liquid as a drink-offering to a divine recipient’431 can be identified on the basis of the evidence. Firstly these are fixed installations for the action of libation, and secondly the type of apparatus and equipment that could be used for the pouring of libations. It was initially planned to include a section on blood offering from the sacrifice. Drawing on depictions such as the famous iconographic images of the bull sacrifice on the Ayia Triada Sarcophagus, where a bull is depicted bound to an altar, with blood dripping into a rhyton which is stuck in the ground.432 Moreover, features such as the large sacrificial altar (including a channel for blood to flow off the surface in a controlled direction) from the open court at Gournia; a Minoan settlement in Crete, came to mind. However as my research progressed it appeared there was not satisfactory evidence to address the topic with any rigor. No archaeological features have been noted from mainland sites which could clearly or even speculatively lead to discussions of blood offerings.

In the LH III C period, after the major destruction of the palace centres, hearths can be noted at the re-built palatial centres and settlement shrines (such as Asine, Midea, Tiryns) but not at the isolated open-air shrines.429 Hearth areas are also prevalent in the Protogeometric period. The transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Protogeometric period demonstrates a continuation of isolated open-air sacred sites, however, communal shrine evidence associated with settlements is completely lacking. That is to say, no free-standing buildings or specialised rooms have been identified for the sole purpose of cult practice within settlements of this period. The hearth (or hearth area) is still very much in evidence in association with ritual practice of the Protogeometric period. At the site of Poseidi the hearth area has a central position in the main room. This is a simple feature consisting of a circular ash filled pit in the ground enclosed by stones. The majority of the evidence from the Protogeometric period comes from isolated sacred sites clearly separated from settlement and structures. However, whereas this category of shrine in the LH III B period generally has no evidence for a hearth or hearth area,430 in the Protogeometric period nearly all openair sites have been confirmed as having hearth areas in association with the remains of ritual meals. The reasoning for such a change in the sacred features of 429

The one exception is possibly Kalapodi, however the details of the shrine’s early phases (LH III B2/C) are still being investigated, so the existence of a hearth area at that time is not certain. 430 At the shrine of Mt Hymettus the excavators mention a burnt deposit. This cannot be dated due to the lack of stratigraphy, and so could belong to any period from LBA to Roman. Since this is the only isolated site of the LBA which would have evidence for a hearth area, I suspect that this deposit belong to a later period.

INSTALLATIONS FOR LIBATION As in previous sections the discussion will begin with Palace associated evidence, then settlements and finally religious sites which are isolated nature shrines. At Mycenae, Papadimitriou observed pieces of a large square table which had a raised circular area at its centre, in the porch of the Palace Megaron. (See figure 45 below, within the section on purification rituals). He reported that the sides of the table were covered with a spiral sculpted decoration. The following year research also located an alabaster slab with a basin like hollow, and to the right of this feature a square area (1.10 x 1.10 meters) was covered with asbestos (lime) powder and alabaster pieces which he suggested were the remains of a seating for a throne.433

431 432 433

- 99 -

Hagg et al 1990 : 178 Suter 2008 : 79 Papadimitriou 1955 : 230

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE This combination of features, though surely significant, poses difficulty in identifying function and purpose. The existence of a raised circular alabaster slab, as Hagg suggested434 could be a ‘seat’ for a vessel (containing precious liquid), especially given that next to this feature is a depression in the floor which could have received liquid offerings. However, something is not convincing with this sequence of events; the pouring of a liquid offering into a depression in the Megaron porch. If this act was indeed correct, not only would it mean guests brought their precious offering as a gift to the gods, owing to the pouring of the liquid into the ground, but also as a gift and sign of respect to the ruling elite of Mycenae. Once the offering was made, the vessel was placed on the alabaster slab, and left there, in the porch, out of sight from those within the Megaron? Conversely, the vessel could already be on the slab, and those individuals who were in a position to do so, may have poured an offering into the ground before passing on into the Megaron? One would think however, that if these features were indeed to do with libation, a prestigious offering to the gods, the dedication would have taken place in view of those seated within the Megaron, and even more so, been a central feature, similar to the libation channel at the Palace of Nestor (to be considered below).

FIGURE 32: THE RAISED ALABASTER SLAB 436 PORCH TO THE MEGARON AT MYCENAE

IN THE

FIGURE 33: THE OVAL DEPRESSION LOCATED BEHIND THE SLAB.

If as Papadimitriou suggests, the area to the right of the basin is a base for a throne, it could be possible that the porch of the Megaron was used for certain ritual activities when it was not desirable that people enter the Megaron itself. Conversely, Hagg suggested435 that this space could have been a sentry post. It does not seem unlikely that a sentry would have been placed in the porch, guarding the entrance to the Megaron, however, once again the point must be made that the practice of libation offerings to the gods seems unlikely in a porch. Another suggestion for these features is, to associate them with purification and cleansing rituals, practiced before entering the Megaron. This will be considered in the next chapter, section 6.4.

It is unknown how much importance was placed in the act of pouring a liquid offering to the gods. However, it could be said, that an installation in a place such as this, which is not a shrine or obvious cultic location and out of view from those seated in the Megaron, would have less religious or ritual significance than similar acts performed in more sacred or prestigious locations. This suggestion does not diminish the significance of ritual practice at this installation, but simply highlights that the process of libation may have had different meanings and purposes depending on where it was performed.

The function of this feature is far from clear, it seems more likely that acts of ritual libation should either take place as part of a ceremony within the Megaron, in view of those present, or within clearly defined religious areas and shrines.

Within the Cult Centre at Mycenae, Tsountas Shrine provides some similarities to the feature from the Megaron on the Citadel summit. On entering the building, there is a stuccoed floor and benches which line the east and south walls. A bolster shaped altar in the centre of the floor has at its southwest angle a depression, which could have held the pointed end of a rhyton or libation vessel. At its side a shallow channel in the stucco leads to a two handled jar sunk in the floor, with its mouth at floor level.437

434

436

435

Hagg et al 1990 : 180 Hagg et al 1990 : 180

437

- 100 -

After Papadimitriou 1960 : Plate 79 Wace 1951 : 254

OFFERINGS: WHAT AND WHERE The connection of the built feature with a channel culminating in a jar set into the ground, paired with its central location in the shrine, encompasses all the elements needed for the practice of liquid offerings. The flat part of the altar surface could have provided a place to rest a vessel which contained the liquid offering, the depression at the side could either have held a vessel with a pointed end as suggested by Wace, or on the other hand could provide a secondary location to receive the offering. The presence of benches against the walls of the shrine would suggest that selected participants could sit and involve themselves in the ritual event, or they could be used for the display of votives. Very few votives were found in the room438 however, the benches could have been used to temporarily rest vessels, which would then be removed after the libation was made.

FIGURE 35: LIBATION CHANNEL IN 441 FROM THE PALACE OF NESTOR

THE

MEGARON

FIGURE 34: THE LIBATION ALTAR FROM TSOUNTAS SHRINE 439 It would be interesting to know if this ‘dark matter’ that Blegen mentions is still available for investigation. The analysis could provide an intriguing insight into the offerings made as part of the libation ritual. However, this feature does illustrate the importance placed either in the ritual act performed here, or the substance being poured. Unlike the feature found outside the Megaron at Mycenae, the feature at Pylos is not only within the Megaron, but directly next to the throne, and of a size which would make it clearly visible from all sides of the room. One could say it would be the second most prominent feature to the central hearth. It can therefore be said with certainty that this feature and the act of libation was of importance to the elites who resided at Pylos. Further evidence from a palatial setting comes from the Palace of Nestor. In the Megaron the throne stands against the north-eastern wall facing the large hearth in the centre of the room. Directly beside the throne and sunk into the stucco floor on the right hand of the throne emplacement, is an almost circular basin-like hollow with a diameter of 0.32m. and a depth of 0.06m. From this, a narrow channel 0.04m wide at the top and 0.04m deep, heads 2.01m north-westward in a slightly curved line, leading to a similar hollow at a lower level.440 Blegen notes that in the latest phase of use, the hollows and channel were uniformly coated with some dark matter which he could not identify.

Unfortunately the upper citadel and the main Megaron area at Midea is in a very ruined state, and as yet not enough information has been discovered in order to give an account of its features. Evidence for libation installations at Tiryns is completely lacking. The remains of a large altar in the great court which marks the final approach to the Megaron, is of interest as this is not a common feature of Mycenaean palatial courts. However, to assume that ritual activities were performed here would be purely speculative, and libation practices cannot be assumed. Installations for the practice of libations cannot be assumed to be a standard feature of the Mycenaean palaces. Only Mycenae and Pylos have provided evidence, with the latter site clearly including this activity as part of its central focus and of great

438 439 440

See gazetteer for find detail and reference After Mylonas 1972 : Plate IV Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 88

441

- 101 -

Photo : author 2007

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE importance due to the location. At Mycenae however, the three stage feature of the circular altar, oval depression and square base placement, testify to some form of libation. The location of the feature though, supports the theory it is of less importance than the feature at Pylos, and as mentioned before, it will be considered further below (section 6.4). Installations at settlement associated cult sites are best represented at the site of Agios Konstantinos thanks to the great detail in which it has been published. Although Room A is at present considered the principal location of ritual activity, there appears to be no fixed installation for the practice of libation. Room A does however, provide ample examples for libation apparatus and associated pottery (further detail below). Konsolaki-Yannopoulou has presented an argument for the practice of libation within specific areas of the Methana site. In Area F and Room G, lying immediately to the north of the modern church442 the libation apparatus were discovered in connection with a stone-built bench, suggesting their use in cultic practices. FIGURE 36: AGIOS KONSTANTINOS – AREA F443

Yannopoulou’s proposed interpretation of the fixed installations described above from Area F gains support from the finds made, including the lower end of a conical rhyton and two fragmentary Psi figurines.444 Konsolaki-Yannopoulou also mentions Room G, which has two stone bases for wooden columns placed symmetrically on the main axis. At the eastern end of the northern wall is a secondary entrance, with two steps of dressed stone serving as a threshold. Next to the steps, at the northeast corner of the room, a low rectangular bench-like structure was found, made out of rough stones packed with earth (fig. 37 below). Next to the outer corner of the structure is a deep conical depression, cut into a small outcrop of the native rock.445 The components of these features may be paralleled to those of the bolster-shaped altar in Tsountas House Shrine, and also the feature from the Megaron porch at Mycenae. All examples show a pattern of similar features comprising a connection between a depression in the ground or carved stone, together with a platform, flat stone, or bench on which to stand objects. The feature from Room G at Agios Konstantinos could be said to have even closer parallels to that mentioned from the porch at Mycenae, due to the position being directly by an entrance way, as well as the style of the hollowed basin. In contrast to the feature from Area F (Agios Konstantinos) where the carved basin feature has a hole drilled through the bottom, leaving it incapable of containing liquid; the features from Room G and the porch at Mycenae could contain liquid. This difference is integral to the function of the feature. One is designed to hold liquid; the other to allow liquid to pass directly through and then into the ground. FIGURE 37: AGIOS KONSTANTINOS – ROOM G 446

Area F seems to have been a small courtyard, extending between Room G and the oblong building O, which was most probably a storeroom. On the southern side of the courtyard there is a low, stonebuilt bench (fig. 36 above), which has a roughly rounded boulder at its end. Placed in the corner space between the western end of the bench and the northern wall of Room O, this boulder has a deep conical hollow cut into it from which there is a vertical piercing through to the lower side. The boulder sits directly on the courtyard floor, which would result in any liquid poured into the hollow, passing straight through into the earth. Konsolaki444 442 443

See gazetteer entry 3.4 for a plan of the site After Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2001 : Plate LXVIII

445 446

- 102 -

Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2001 : 216 Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2001 : 216 After Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2001 : Plate LXIX

OFFERINGS: WHAT AND WHERE Rhyta As previously introduced above, this could mark the difference between a feature which was designed for libation, and one which was designed for purification. Refer to section 6.4 below for further discussion on this topic. The site of Eleusis provides evidence which dates to the final phases of the Bronze Age period. Additional buildings reveal pottery dated stylistically to the LH IIIC period,447 including a platform feature. This platform, attached to the side of Megaron B, has an open court laid out in front of it, with a drain leading away from the corner of the platform to beyond the enclosure wall (see Gazetteer entry 3.11 for the site plan and detail).448 Although this is not a feature which can be securely attributed to the practice of libation with any certainty, the finds within the drain (animal bones, goblets etc., to be discussed below) strongly suggest cult practice in this area. This being the case, it is possible, the drain which runs away from the corner of the platform, was positioned in order to carry away any liquid, and / or animal blood offerings and so gradually soak into the ground as it flowed across the open court towards the perimeter wall. Before making any kind of summary or conclusion for libation practices during the period under consideration, the material evidence available for the apparatus used in libation must also be addressed. APPARATUS FOR LIBATION

Above, the archaeological evidence for fixed installations were considered, in some cases the installations left no doubt that they would be used as part of a ritual action involving liquid offerings, however, others were left open to speculation, and the need of associated artefacts to complete possible hypotheses remains. The same situation arises with vessels associated with libation, some, such as the animal head rhyton, are accepted as specialised vessels for use in ritual practice, whilst others could have many functions, one possibly being libation. These difficulties will be considered below.

Due to rhyta being found in a number of locations (houses, palaces, graves and shrines) in association with a variety of objects, it has been said they would have been used for both domestic (i.e as funnels) and cult activities.449 In Koehl’s study of Aegean Bronze Age Rhyta, he uses the existence of two openings, a larger primary, and smaller secondary to define a vessel as a rhyton.450 The secondary opening is not an added feature, but a perforation through part of the vessel. Koehl also notes that from the earliest EM IIIII rhyta to the latest specimens from the LM/LH IIIC period, the diameter of the secondary opening remains consistently 0.5cm. Rhyta can take many different stylistic forms; common styles evidenced in the Mycenaean period are conical and animal head rhyta. A study by Paul Rehak on Minoan stone animal head rhyta noted that these vessels would be highly impractical for one person to hold, owing to their weight and design and so unlikely to ever be used as functional items.451 Although stone rhyta are not in the majority (most are made from clay) in the LH III B period of mainland Greece, it can still be said that animal head forms would be impractical for use as a domestic funnel. On the other hand, it is possible that the more simplistic conical rhyta may equally well have functions in the domestic sphere. Therefore, these items must still be considered in the context of the complete assemblage when suggesting cult function. To consider the artefacts discovered, the Cult Centre at Mycenae provides some examples, however some difficulty in the interpretation exists as the rhyta form is not specified. From Room 18 alcove of the Temple Complex, two rhyton fragments were noted, without mention of design (for instance conical or animal head). One was located in the deposit of the alcove and the second smaller fragment from passage 34, just outside the alcove.452 The Room with the Fresco also provided evidence for what may possibly have been used as a rhyton. It seems vessels clearly designed and produced as rhyta are absent from the assemblage, however, there is one vessel which may have been modified to serve in a specialised (ritual?) way. This was an angular bowl, which may have previously been employed as a lamp. It has a hole drilled in its base, resulting in the possibility it served as a rhyton for the pouring of

449 447 448

Rutkowski 1986 : 191 Cosmopoulos 2003 : 11-17

450 451 452

- 103 -

Koehl 1981 : 179 Koehl 2006 : 5 Rehak 1995 : 444 Moore and Taylor 1999: 34

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE libations. It has been sensibly noted that this action would be more easily performed using other vessels,453 for which the stirrup jars to be discussed below would have been much better suited. The evidence from the two cult buildings in the Cult Centre at Mycenae is not overwhelming. As the Temple has two vessels which are clearly identified as rhyta (although potentially conical and so possibly not of a ritual nature) it could be speculated the Temple would be a location for acts of liquid offering. In addition to the vessels considered above for their association with libation practices, it must also be considered, that other artefacts may also have been used as a means of offering liquids. From Room 19 of the Temple Complex within the Cult Centre at Mycenae, two lids were found with apparently no matching vessels. A number of possibilities were suggested to explain this; a bowl for dry substances, fruit or jewellery; or as lids to vessels which have been lost; or, perhaps, that the lids were used as some kind of rhyta, or libation vessel.454 The Palace of Nestor seems to provide very scanty evidence indeed for this category of find. From the South-Western Building, outside the north western exterior wall, masses of pottery fragments were found dumped and within this deposit, one of the shapes observed was the rhyton.455 In addition, the Palace Wine Magazines revealed many shapes amongst the burnt debris filling Room 105, of these one was a rhyton.456 In the excavation report, neither of these rhyta were noted together with their form. Therefore, as with the rhyta from the Temple at Mycenae, little can be deduced as to the ritual practice without speculation. The existence of rhyta even though they may be fragmentary and within large pottery deposits, could testify to the practice of liquid offerings at some location within the Palace. Of particular significance however, in the area of the principal shrine, Room 93, there is no evidence for the presence of rhyta as a specialised form. The fact that the fragment from one rhyton was found in a dump outside the palace, would suggest that it was no longer in use during the final phase of the palace. In which case, only one example from the Wine Magazines remains, which would seem a strange location for a ritual vessel. As the type of rhyton is not specified in the publication, it is difficult to speculate about its function. However, if it was a simple conical rhyton, it may have been used as a functional vessel, to move liquid from one container to the other; implying no cult significance. In essence,

453 454 455 456

Forthcoming Moore and Taylor : 27 Moore and Taylor 1999 : 85 Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 285 Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 349

the evidence leads to the interpretation that rhyta were not part of the cult paraphernalia at the Palace of Nestor; and most definitely not within its shrine area. Evidence from Tiryns on the other hand is available from the cult area in the lower citadel. Just north of Room 117, an altar standing on a stone foundation comes from the early phase when the temple had just been built. Part of an animal-shaped rhyton was discovered within an ashy layer, together with a fragment of a large idol with hands upraised.457 The rhyton and idol found within a cult context, testify to the existence of libation rituals within the shrine area of the citadel. Moreover, many examples of rhyta were found at different locations of the Upper Citadel, which testify to the practice of libation being a part of palatial activities as a whole. Although excavations still continue at Midea, the evidence uncovered thus far is more than adequate to enable discussion of the possible rituals and practices taking place. From the West Gate Area a number of fragments of rhyta and askoi have been found. The back room of the megaron complex on the lower terraces also provided an example of a rhyton, once again confirming a role within ritual practice. 458 Therefore, the palatial sites under discussion all show some evidence of rhyta. As the forms are not always noted, it cannot be said whether this suggests ritual acts by the practice of libation. Again it is apparent, the Palace of Nestor stands out from other palace locations; this time due to very scanty evidence for rhyta throughout the palace, and the complete lack of these items within the shrine area. To now consider rhyta in the context of settlement associated shrines, Agios Konstantinos is once again considered first. It was noted above that the site provided ample evidence for the performance of libations at areas outside the shrine, which was demonstrated in the installations for libation, however, the finds provide further evidence. In shrine Room A, two miniature vessels found in the area of the bench were a conical rhyton, decorated with a symmetrically arranged octopus, and a plain dipper. Konsolaki believes these two may have constituted a set, as the dipper was of an appropriate size for pouring liquids into the rhyton, and it would be rather too small for any other practical use.459

457 458 459

- 104 -

Rutkowski 1986 : 187 Demakopoulou & Divari-Valakou 2001: 188 Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2001 : 213

OFFERINGS: WHAT AND WHERE In addition to these artefacts, a triton shell was discovered with the apex deliberately cut off. Konsolaki suggests this object could have been used in libations, perhaps performed with sea water alluding to fruitfulness and regeneration.

Apollo Maleatas has produced evidence within the ashes of its large ash altar, of fragments from a steatite rhyton. Lambrinudakis notes that it was decorated like the silver rhyton of Mycenae with an army attacking a town from land and sea.463

In the south west corner of Room A, an upper segment of a large coarse ware jar was found resting on the floor with the neck turned to the ground. Konsolaki suggests the jar may be viewed as a receptacle for liquid offerings channelled into the earth, on the basis of the parallels provided by similar fragmentary pots, presumed to have been used as libation devices, in the Tsountas House Shrine, and Room XXXII of House G at Asine.

Finds from the LH III C Room XXXII at Asine also indicate that libation was most probably part of the practice there. A jug which had a deliberately broken bottom, and was found turned upside down between the platform and the wall seemed to indicate a cultic function which was not purely domestic.464 Other pottery found in this room, such as a single kylix and other small cups and bowls, would once again suggest that drinking and the pouring of liquid offerings may have been part of the ritual actions taking place there.

This Room also evidenced an animal-head rhyton, said to be of outstanding quality. It is noted that the rhyton had mixed features, but the overall appearance of the head recalls a young pig.460 Konsolaki draws attention to the extremely narrow neck of the rhyton, suggesting it would be rather impractical for receiving liquids. However, she did not come to a final conclusion as to the most practical way of filling it. FIGURE 38: ANIMAL HEAD RHYTON FROM ROOM A, AGIOS KONSTANTINOS461

A large dipper and a two-handled cup were found near the animal-head rhyton. These may also be interpreted as libation equipment. Konsolaki suggests that the dipper would be suitable for transferring liquid offerings from one vase to another and the cup could have been used for pouring some of the liquid and then drinking the rest.462 The variety of rhyta forms which are present at Agios Konstantinos are testament to the act of libation playing a significant role in the ritual practiced within the shrine.

This find from Asine is a modified household vessel adapted to allow liquids to be poured into the broken base, and flow directly into the ground through its mouth. There was provision for the practice of libation, though not a desire to have vessels specifically made for this function. It seems odd they did not have the means to produce such a specialised vessel, so it is possible they chose to use a modified household vessel, so to enhance the meaning of the offering. This may suggest that issues of the home and domestic produce were of great importance to participants worshipping at this shrine. The suggestions which have been made that Room XXXII has similarities to Minoan Household shrines465 are supported by artefacts such as this. Evidence for libation practice also comes from the island of Melos, within the East Shrine of the complex at Phylakopi numerous fragments of ostrich shell were found which Renfrew believes to be the remains of one rhyton.466 In addition, the bovine is depicted in the form of a rhyton from the shrine. Within the West Shrine Niche a bovine figure which had an open vessel as part of its back, and a hole pierced near the tail where any liquid would drain; once again provided the apparatus needed for the practice of liquid offerings Finally, the isolated open-air shrines of Agia Triada and Aphaia both provided examples of rhyta that were in use at the end of the Late Bronze Age. From Agia Triada a large asymmetrical foot of an animal rhyton, decorated in a vertical band style was found.467 The latter site revealed a typical conical shape rhyton, decorated with antithetic whorlshells.468

463 464 465 466 460 461 462

Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2001 : 214 After Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2001 : Plate LXVIII Konsolaki-Yannopoulou 2001 : 215

467 468

- 105 -

Lambrinudakis 1980 : 61-62 Westholm 1938 : 298 Styrenius 1998 : 68 Renfrew 1985 : 324 Kilian 1990 : 190 Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 84-93

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE To summarise, rhyta as specialised vessels used in the ritual pouring of liquid offerings, appear in all categories of religious site in the LH III B period. It should also be emphasised that all the sites which have evidence for cult forms of rhyta, are part of the Argolid and south east mainland, with the exception of the sanctuaries at Aphaia on Aegina and Phylakopi on Melos. Moreover, the chronological divide should also be considered. The only sites which evidence specialised rhyta, are from contexts of the LH III B/C period, with no such vessels of the Protogeometric period yet being found. Stirrup jars and Narrow-necked jugs? It must also be accepted as highly likely that, other vessels were used in the practice of liquid offerings in a cult setting. This possibility is especially likely at smaller or less wealthy shrines, where there may not have been the resources for such specialised items, but still a wish to initiate such acts. Moreover, it must be considered that in certain cases, there may have been a desire to make offerings using vessels associated with everyday life, such as objects for storage, eating and drinking. Thus, by using standard pottery types for the act of libation, they achieved a specialised ritual act and also reflected their daily habits. One pottery form which, due to its design, could be well suited for the slow pouring of liquid offerings is the Stirrup jar. The off-centre spout which facilitates pouring, indicates a specialised function. The user would have had to grasp the jar by the false neck with one hand over the centre of gravity, and then tilt the pot from below with the other hand. Tournavitou highlights the existence of the tall, narrow spouts, characteristic of the LH III B period, allowing only a small quantity of liquid to pass through at a time. This would be ideal for substances such as oil, scented oil, and possibly wine, of which only controlled amounts might be required.469 In Nilsson’s early work, he suggested that if one considered the iconographical evidence provided by Minoan-Mycenaean artefacts, it could be thought that one single type of vessel should be considered with special cult functionality; namely, the high-necked and high-handled libation jug.470 He emphasised a few examples: above the altar on the Hagia Triada sarcophagus; on a gem from Vaphio where two ‘genii’ are using such vessels to water the sacred boughs placed between the horns of consecration; on the glass plaques from Mycenae ‘genii’ are pouring libations from similar jugs over pillars or altars. In addition, the gold ring from Tiryns shows four ‘genii’

469 470

Tournavitou 1992 : 190 Nilsson 1950 : 147

approaching a seated figure, all carrying such vessels.471 All these examples, especially those from the Mycenaean mainland, support the theory that high and narrow necked jugs were of some ritual importance. Equally, the depictions being alongside mythological creatures, cannot stem from actions of a normal secular activity and therefore demands some kind of explanation. Koehl expands upon Nilsson’s earlier remarks, proposing that the definition of the libation jug be expanded to include other kinds of narrow-necked jugs. Furthermore he suggests that rhyta, especially conical ones, were used to filter fluids and fill the jugs, from which libations were poured.472 Therefore, if this is indeed the case, these vessels should be considered as apparatus for the dedication of liquid offerings, and must be considered for the role they play in ritual actions. Table Eight below has collected together information from the Gazetteer for stirrup jars and narrow-necked jugs. This information suggests the use of the two vessel types are apparent both at settlement and palace associated shrines, still the only isolated shrine which revealed their use was the Polis Cave. However, it must be noted, that some of the excavations which have been published describe pottery assemblages only as open or closed forms; this obviously limits further interpretation. Shrine areas at the Palace of Nestor, Midea and Mycenae have left examples of these two pottery forms which are suggested to be used for libation practices. Of interest from the Cult Centre at Mycenae is the Room with the Fresco, providing seven examples of the stirrup jar;473 yet the Temple has no remains of either vessel type. This once again highlights the likelihood the separate shrine buildings within this Cult Centre did indeed have different roles to play within ritual practice. Tsountas House Shrine also provided some interesting pottery examples in the form of a miniature kylix and three vases as small as thimbles.474 Although these shapes have not been discussed for their connection with libation practices, the location of the finds within a room which has a fixed feature for libation, in addition to the tiny size and general impracticality of these objects; suggest they could have been part of a libation act.

471

Nilsson 1950: 146-147 Koehl 1996 : 403 473 of which not all were necessarily from the same phase of use, but all were from the LH III B period 474 See gazetteer entry 3.18 for details 472

- 106 -

OFFERINGS: WHAT AND WHERE Moreover, the appearance of these pottery forms at settlement shrines, such as Asine, Kalaureia and Phylakopi, indicates the use of these vessels are in no way limited to palatial shrines, or a regionally specific trend. Clearly, shrines of the Protogeometric period either did not practice libation rituals or, they found some other vessel form or procedure to execute the offering of liquids. The excavation records concerning narrow-necked and stirrup jars are inconsistent to say the least. There is often no mention as to the exact context where they were found, and so interpretation of their use cannot be taken much further.475

475 The use of these vessels has only been touched upon by scholars in the field, which is reflected in this section. It is however an area in need of future research.

- 107 -

6. 6.1.

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this chapter is to set out and discuss information that is available for the practice of ritual actions throughout the Late Bronze Age and Protogeometric periods of Greece. Initially, the material evidence for the ritual meal is presented due to its direct connection with shrine identification as a ‘principal criterion’. The ritual meal encompasses a number of activities; sacrifice, eating and drinking, therefore they will all be considered below. Thereafter, purification and processions are considered individually for their role within ritual practice throughout the LH III B, LH III C and transition into the Protogeometric periods. All ritual practice to be considered in this chapter firstly presents the information for palatial shrines, then settlement shrines and finally isolated shrines.

6.2.

RITUAL AND RELIGION? UNDERSTANDING THE TERMINOLOGY

‘Religion’ is not a straight forward term to define even with the simplest of attempts. To strive for an unpretentious phrase using my own primitive knowledge of ‘Religion’s’ origins and theoretical background; a religion would develop over a number of years to eventually become a structured set of beliefs, adopted by a group of people who practice rituals in association with their belief. This would include recognised ceremonies, festivals and an accepted way to worship. However, is this an adequate description? The aim is not to find a definitive terminology, or to choose one of the many expressed by anthropologists, sociologists or theologians. However, a point which must be emphasised is the sheer complexity of such an undertaking; in agreement with Renfrew’s statement ‘religion also includes the intangible, the irrational and the indefinable’.476 Therefore, it is with great caution that the practices of such early periods in history with which this study deals can be paired with a term such as ‘religion’. No extensive evidence exists that can enable us to recreate a ‘Religion’ for the Late Bronze Age or Protogeometric periods of Greece. However, the style of worship and parts of ritual actions which must

476

Renfrew et al 2005 : 45

constitute the framework of a complete religion (as yet not fully understood) can be considered. From this information it will be feasible to ascertain the nature of their worship: which acts, performances or offerings were commonly practiced, and by whom. For these reasons the term ‘religion’ is used rarely within this study. Although caution is adopted when using the term ‘religion’, this does not result in an easily identifiable alternative for the evidence under consideration. ‘Ritual’ must also be used with care. As stated above, the society under consideration does not provide us with enough evidence to create a complete religion, however, is adequate information available to create complete rituals. Catherine Bell notes that ‘Ritual’, “is a cultural and historical construction that has been heavily used to help differentiate various styles and degrees or religiosity, rationality, and cultural determinism”.477 How ritual is understood and what constitutes ritual activity however, is difficult to explain, especially when addressing such early periods of history. By definition, a ritual is “a religious or solemn ceremony involving a series of actions performed according to a set order”.478 (The underlining is my own.) Unfortunately, piecing together all component parts of a ritual to make a complete and structured ‘order of events’ is not possible for these periods of Greek history. Moreover, literature is not available to assist with the understanding of these rituals. It has to be accepted that ‘rituals’ are complex structured acts which would have followed a set order. As Insoll also notes, “it is both the context and the act which are crucial in understanding ritual…No ritual stands by itself-it sits within a ‘thick’ context.”479 Evidence therefore, is lacking for the key features of a ritual: place, time, personnel, structure and completeness of the action. It would be more accurate to consider the practices to be addressed within this study, as ‘ritualistic actions’.480 The research therefore, deals with distinct ‘aspects’ and ‘actions’ of ritual which if fully understood as a combined whole, would constitute a Ritual.

477 Bell 1997 : ix; see also bell 1992 for a full discussion of ritual and further references. 478 The Oxford English Dictionary Online : http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/ritual?view=uk 479 Insoll 2004: 12 480 Personal discussion with Dr Martin Bommas.

- 108 -

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS In a similar fashion, one must question whether the existence of ‘ritual’ (or the evidence available for ritualistic actions) directly signifies a connection with the sacred sphere. Rituals can incorporate many types of acts and meanings. Of these one can expect a common feature to be “structured and repeated performative action”.481 In order to place rituals within the sacred sphere, it is essential they are considered together with the artefacts and areas which support the interpretation of a possible sacred connection. Discussion of the shrines and their assemblages in terms of the criteria I have proposed in Chapter Two, has provided an understanding of the sacred arena in which the ritual actions are performed. Each ritualistic action must be considered in the context of its location and associated assemblage in order to place the ritual securely within the sacred sphere.

6.3.

THE FEAST

In the first instance when feasting is mentioned, it is easy to visualize large gatherings of people around tables with food and wine in abundance, very much like the Greek weddings and festivals of today. However, this activity is more complex and varied than these visions allow for. Alongside feasting itself, are many related issues which must be considered. Why has a feast been planned, and who takes part in the festivities? Is this event only for the higher ranking members of society? And in particular, is feasting organised and sponsored only by elites and high ranking members of society, or is it a practice shared by all levels of society on differing scales of participation and ceremony? Feasting and animal sacrifice in the Greek Late Bronze Age has in recent years been a topic of great interest and discussion. Moreover, work on the Linear B tablets, and scientific approaches to the analysis of bone deposits, have resulted in the possibility of a wider and more accurate understanding of this aspect of ritual activity. Notable research can be found in Hesperia volume 73(2), which includes papers by Wright on Mycenaean feasting, and Palaima who considered evidence provided by the Linear B tablets for sacrifice and feasting.482 In addition, Isaakidou et al (2002), and Halstead and Barrett (2004) have looked at

archaeozoological evidence for the feast in this period of Greek history. Unfortunately however, far less attention has been given to non-palatial sites with evidence for this practice. The site of Agios Konstantinos which is being studied and published by Hamilakis and Konsolaki,483 is one example of detailed work which has been undertaken at a settlement shrine, and will hopefully lead the way to other such in-depth analyses of the archaeological material. These scientific studies of excavated bone samples have greatly helped the understanding of exactly which species and which parts of the body were consumed compared to those which were most likely wholly sacrificed.484 However, to fully understand the practice of feasting in these early societies, other types of evidence must be used in conjunction with that of the animal bone. Frescoes, pottery assemblages and Linear B will be considered in order to understand better the extent to which this activity was practiced throughout the period. Unfortunately, at present the evidence available is, at the very least, patchy. For example, only in recent years have bone assemblages been so closely scrutinised. Studies of those sites which were excavated earlier, lack in needed detail. Although this study aims to consider evidence from all sites to allow analysis of this practice at different locations and all spheres of society, it relies on the published material. Therefore, until every site is fully published to a high level of detail it must be accepted that results and hypotheses can only be tentative.

WHAT IS FEASTING AND WHY DO IT? Feasting, whether on a large or small scale, frequent or for a special occasion, is part of a ritual process: the bringing together of people to participate in eating and drinking activities. The question of whether the participating group of people had been specifically selected, can perhaps be answered by considering the location of the ritual meals and the quantities of associated pottery. As Wright emphasises485 the feast must be seen as a formal ceremonial practice which differentiates host from guest, and youth from elder, and which affirms other distinctions of status. This may especially be the case, when considering feasting in a palatial setting, as Wright has done with

483

481

Renfrew 2007 : 115 482 Hesperia 73(2) 2004 not only provides recent research on this topic, but each paper also includes helpful bibliographies and further references.

Especially Hamilakis and Konsolaki 2004, see the Gazetteer for full references to the publications of this site. 484 Further discussion of the terminology understood by ‘sacrifice’ can be found below. 485 Wright 2004 : 134

- 109 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE the majority of his work on feasting. However, this study aims to consider the act of feasting, or the ‘ritual meal’ across the full spectrum of sites, not neglecting those of smaller or more humble appearance. Although many authors differ in their definition of feasting, common to all is the idea that “feasts are events essentially constituted by the communal consumption of food and / or drink”.486 Dietler and Hayden487 note that one of the main reasons for exploring the subject of feasting was their suspicion of its role in the processes of social change. Their case studies have shown this can be readily demonstrated in a variety of societies across time and space.488 Throughout this chapter it is demonstrated, that in Greece during the transition into the Protogeometric period, a similar deduction is valid. It will be shown that the act of feasting, although at a much simpler level, is not only a continuing factor from the previous LH III B period, but feasting or the ‘communal ritual meal’ is often the main focus of ritual practice at shrines of the Protogeometric period. How the ‘ritual meal’ is detected throughout the period at hand does not differ greatly. In section 2.3 concerning the ritual meal as a principle criterion for shrine identification, the pottery forms used for drinking and dining were noted. Although, as can be expected, the pottery assemblages from the LH III B period, provide a greater variety of shapes and designs than those of the following LH III C and Protogeometric periods, the later periods still provide vessels for these functions (discussed further below). Detection of the ritual meal throughout the LH III B/C and Protogeometric periods, is made by the presence of pottery for drinking and dining where these forms constitute the majority of the assemblage. Also, the presence of animal bone which suggests the consumption of meat or possibly animal sacrifice, in addition to, a hearth area where food could be cooked, contributes to the identification.

ANIMAL SACRIFICE The first question which must be addressed before any discussion of animal sacrifice is attempted must be: What is animal sacrifice and how is it identified? The act of animal sacrifice can be defined as an animal’s life being offered to a deity, so making it sacred or part of a sacred act. The identification of animal sacrifice however, is not so straight forward.

486 487 488

When considering sacrifice, two points can be noted as possible scenarios: A) Sacrifice as a self contained destructive act, or B) as a preliminary to a feast. Scenario A would in fact constitute the offering of a whole animal which would be completely burnt leaving no meat for human consumption (Holocaust). Scenario B would constitute the sacrificial slaughter of the animal which would then be cooked for human consumption, perhaps with some parts being completely burned (offered) for the deity. Although both these scenarios result in a different use of the meat, the act of slaughter, the sacrifice, is still present. Of importance therefore, is ascertaining whether an animal has been ‘ritually slaughtered’, sacrificed, or just slaughtered and cooked as part of a secular meal. Two factors should be considered when ascertaining ‘sacrifice’: The location of the act and the deposition of the bone remains. If a shrine has been identified using the criteria as presented in Chapter Two, then any animal bone found within the shrine area should be considered as sacred in association with its surroundings. These bones could also show signs of burning, which would testify to the association with cooking and/or offering. On the other hand, if bones are not found in a shrine setting but are deposited in a selective and contained manor (such as the pits to be considered below from the Palace of Nestor), this would also signify the important (likely sacred) nature of the remains. Although sacrifice could be considered a separate act to the feast itself, it will be considered alongside feasting due to the evidence showing so far that these two activities are generally entwined and constitute a combined activity. At present there is no clear evidence for sacrificial acts taking place without feasting. However, judging the time scale for the connection of the two events is not straight forward. That is to say, at some of the sites to be discussed there is evidence for both sacrifice and feasting, but obviously we cannot guarantee both these acts were happening in conjunction, as part of the same ritual act. However, whilst considering this, it may be wise to think in terms of product wastage as well as time and labour that would have gone towards rearing animals, and preparing them as an offering. Once the sacrifice had taken place, the proprietors of the festivities having made the appropriate offering to the gods, would surely have wished to cook and eat the remaining meat so as not to waste anything. Therefore, it can be presumed that where there was sacrifice there was also an accompanying ritual meal. Before the archaeological evidence is discussed below, a passage from the Odyssey (iii, 447-63) which presents an example for the treatment of a sacrifice provides an evocative image to carry forward. The passage describes how after Nestor’s

Dietler and Hayden 2001 : 3 Dietler and Hayden 2001 : 16 Hayden 2001 : 23-64

- 110 -

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS son had taken an axe to cut a heifer’s neck, the blood gushed out, leaving the body lifeless; “they swiftly dismembered the carcass, cut out the thigh bones in the usual way, wrapped them in folds of fat and laid raw meat above them”. 489 The passage goes on to mention how the king burnt the meat on firewood, and once they were burnt up, they carved the rest into small pieces, pierced them with skewers and held them to the fire till all was roasted. This passage highlights (through the mind of Homer) how the act of sacrifice was carried out by the king and his family, and there appeared to be an accepted practice of how to deal with the sacrificial carcass. The following passage (470-73) offers an insight for the practice of the ritual meal “once it is roasted, they remove it from the skewers, sit down and dine, where they are served with cups of wine.” This demonstrates the Homeric connection between the sacrifice and the feast, when meat left after the offering to the gods, was consumed by the rest of the participants together with wine, and presumably additional foodstuffs. Although it is said that the Homeric epics describe an age that roughly equates to the Mycenaean Late Bronze Age, many of the practices and motifs could also be describing habits from later periods, even as late as the eighth century BC. Therefore, the epics can only be used along side archaeological evidence to give us a fuller picture of these ritual acts.

ANIMAL BONE REMAINS AT SITES OF RELIGIOUS CHARACTER Recent studies of evidence from Archaic and Classical sanctuaries have shown burnt bones from selected parts of a skeleton can be identified. It has been noted that typically, the gods received specific parts of the carcass (the tail, thigh bone), while most of the animal, including the principal meat-cuts, were consumed (cooked rather than burnt) by human participants at the sacrifice in the ritual meal that followed. 490 Palatial Shrines Excavations by Blegen at the Palace of Nestor at Pylos491 yielded a large faunal assemblage. During a reorganisation of the Blegen store rooms, Stocker and

Davies located a much larger body of material than was initially published. Through careful study of Blegen’s excavation notebooks, they have clarified the date and provenance of individual bone lots.492 The entire assemblage has now been investigated by Halstead and Isaakidou.493 Six groups of bone discovered in specially dug pits, stood out from other material excavated at the site and were dated to the final palace destruction ca 1200 BC. The body parts represented in the four largest groups of burnt bone were mandible, humerus and femur, which included both left and right specimens. Halstead and Isaakidou note that this combination of body parts is not easily explicable in terms of either the ‘practicalities of carcass processing or biases of preservation’. Instead they suggest it may be interpreted as a deliberate cultural statement, albeit of unclear meaning.494 It has been noted butchery marks suggest the carcass was dismembered and the bones stripped of meat. The animals from which these body parts were selected to be burnt were cattle and deer and additionally an apparent gender selection of sacrificial offerings. Halstead and Isaakidou have noted that bones of adult steers or bulls predominately made up the burnt assemblages, whilst those of smaller female cattle were not burnt.495 In addition, the number of bones found in each deposit was large, and ranging between two cattle in pit WK6, and 19 cattle from Room 7/West Chasm.496 Halstead and Isaakidou cannot be far wrong when suggesting this quantity of meat could have fed between several hundred and several thousand guests (if one considers each pit deposit as a separate event.) The evidence above is taken from the main palace areas, not the shrine. No animal bones were found within the shrine area at the Palace of Nestor. The reason however, that the bone deposits mentioned above have been placed within the discussion of ritual activities, even though the find locations were ambiguous, is due to the style of the deposits. As was mentioned above, specially dug pits only contained assemblages of selective animal bones, showing considerable attention to both gender and body parts. This evidence emphasises the special circumstances of these finds, allowing the bones to be considered as remains from ritual meals. In contrast, when looking at the evidence for sacrifice from other palatial settings, the picture from Pylos

492 493 489 490 491

Rieu 1991 : 43-44 Isaakidou, Halstead, Davies & Stocker 2002 : 86 Blegen and Rawson 1966

494 495 496

- 111 -

Stocker and Davies 2004 Halstead and Isaakidou 2004 :143 Halstead and Isaakidou 2004 :145 Halstead and Isaakidou 2004 :146 Halstead and Isaakidou 2004 :147

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE seems almost unique; with only one other similar case coming from the palace at Midea, which will be considered below. From the palatial sites at Mycenae and Tiryns, the excavations to date have revealed no evidence within the palatial courts or from specially dug pits for the deposition of sacrificial remains. For that matter, within these two citadels in general there are no signs of large scale deposits of bone remains which could testify to sacrifice and feasting of any great size. The citadel at Midea however, is different from other centres of the Argolid plain as the site has produced plentiful evidence of bone remains in both the shrine area and the megaron complex of the lower terraces. In the shrine area of terrace 9, animal bones were discovered in all the rooms although a particularly large concentration was evidenced in Rooms VIII and XXXII where two hundred and forty six bone fragments (41.2% sheep/goat, 32.2% pig and 28.9% cattle) were found in the strata of both LH III B and LH III C periods.497 The western part of terrace 9, which included Rooms XXXII and XXXIII, also contained burnt and butchered bones amounting to 185 fragments (50% sheep/goat, 14.3% pig and 35.7% cattle). In addition twenty-nine fragments of bone were found both inside and outside the surrounding stones of the large hearth which occupied this room.498

stirrup jars, and abundant examples of the kylix (being the most common fine ware form present), spread around the terrace of the West Gate Area.500 These items are often associated with their use in shrines and within cult practice, which was noted in the criteria in association with two factors; ‘pottery for ritual dining’ (section 2.3) and vessels for ‘libation’ (section 5.3). Therefore, as these vessels of cult function were found un-associated directly with a room (or shrine), it could be that ritual activities were also practiced at Midea in the open-air on certain occasions, to allow for more people to participate. Moreover, the citadel at Midea has another addition not discovered at any other palatial site; a megaron complex on the lower terraces which also has abundant evidence for animal bone remains. The difference between the central or main Megaron unit and the subsidiary complex must be noted here. At Midea the palatial Megaron occupied the highest point of the citadel, with the subsidiary megaron complex occupying terrace 10 of the lower citadel.

Midea is the only palatial site which has large amounts of bone remains within its shrine rooms. The quantity of bone witnessed in the shrine area signifies the existence of animal sacrifice, and the appearance of butchery marks on the bones is likely due to the allocation of meat for human consumption: i.e. a ritual meal. The rooms where the bone assemblages were discovered were not large, so it is unlikely these activities would be open to all residents or workers in the citadel. It would seem much more likely that a chosen few would participate, with the ritual meal possibly taking place in the small open-air courtyard directly next to the shrine room (Area XXXIII).

Three hundred and ninety two bones were found in LH III B levels of Room XI, one of the rooms behind the megaron building. Of these remains, 33.3% were sheep/goat, 33.3% pig and 33.3% cattle bones.501 The bones were not found in association with pottery suggesting feasting, however, some millstones, pounders, pestles and a whetstone were discovered. Walberg suggests this room could have served as a pantry with the food being prepared and consumed elsewhere. It must be noted however, that if this room were a pantry, it would be an odd occurrence to find such large quantities of animal bone in storage. More likely, is that the consumption and dining activities were practiced in the adjoining main megaron room, after which the bones were collected and stored in Room XI. Room XI, then has a function which surrounds the activities of the megaron complex, with artifacts for the preparation of food (as mentioned above), in addition to animal bone remains from the feast. That the bones were collected and placed in this small side room, must indicate a desire to keep the bones, not simply dispose and disregard the remains.

Another possibility could be that on certain occasions, the sacrifice itself took place within the sanctity of the shrine area however, following the offerings to the gods (into the fire), the rest of the animal would be distributed to worshippers outside. The reason for this suggestion derives from the discovery of large numbers of rhyta, askoi and miniature vessels;499 as well as many examples of fine pottery forms such as deep bowls, stemmed bowls, narrow-necked and

The main megaron room also contained remains of animal bones. Strata of the LH III B/C periods contained 372 bones, 40% sheep/goat, 40% pig and 20% cattle. It is noted that the meat could have either been cooked on the large central hearth, or elsewhere if this feature was reserved for ceremonial purposes.502 Bone remains were also found near the entrance to the megaron, as well as further to the west in the LH III B/C strata of the courtyard where 471

497

500

498 499

Walberg forthcoming : 3 Walberg forthcoming : 4 Demakopoulou & Divari-Valakou 2001: 188

501 502

- 112 -

Demakopoulou et al 2004 : 10 Walberg forthcoming : 5 Walberg forthcoming : 6

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS bones were found (33.3% sheep/goat, 38.9% pig and 27.8% cattle).503 In short, the bone remains from the megaron and adjoining courtyard were very numerous indeed, for which there can be no explanation other than the consumption of a meal or meals, which included large amounts of meat. Each site provides a significantly different range of evidence, suggesting a major difference in the type of ritual event occurring at each of the palatial centres. If the circumstances are correct as excavations have so far shown, then for some reason, at Pylos the elites who controlled the palace centre were inclined to organise large-scale feasts, which included a large number of participants. The participants would all dine in a relatively grand manner, with the feast taking place throughout the palace proper. Midea also has evidence for the large scale consumption of meat and possibly animal sacrifice (the ‘sit-down’ ritual meal will be discussed further when pottery is considered below). However, it is not clear if this practice is evidenced in the central areas and rooms of the upper citadel at Midea, as the surface erosion is too severe. Conversely, the other two palace centres of the Argolid (Mycenae and Tiryns) do not seem to have found large-scale feasting a necessary activity; as large quantities of animal bone remains are severely lacking. Although the central areas of the palatial sites other than Pylos and Midea show no sign of large scale feasting, the subsidiary cult areas must also be considered. It is these cult areas which display the majority of religious activity at the palace centres; however, the osteological evidence within the cult centres is far from illuminating, and where available fails to provide confirmation of sacrifice.

“a number of bones of young pig - some teeth, a metapodial and the epiphysis of a 1st phalange, as well as bits of skull and rib.”505 There is no comment as to whether these bones were burned, so it cannot be said with any certainty whether they were the remains of a complete sacrificial act or ritual meal. However, we may speculate that the finds further testify to the habit of animal sacrifice, whether it be sacrificial slaughter alone, or sacrifice followed by a ritual meal. Evidence collected for drinking will be discussed below which complements this evidence. When considering evidence for sacrifice and meat consumption at Tiryns the situation is once again slightly different. The palace proper has not produced the number of bone remains which could be interpreted as a large scale activity similar to that of the Palace of Nestor. However, the shine area in the lower citadel (the Unterberg) produced some remains of the later LH III C period. Within shrine Room 117 a layer of ash was found which contained animal bones;506 testifying to some level of animal sacrifice. Unfortunately, no more detail is provided to allow further discussion. Therefore, both Mycenae and Tiryns provide only a very small amount of evidence for sacrifice and the consumption of meat within their shrine areas. The quantity of bones as well as their find locations can in no way be suggested to show signs of large scale sacrifice, but the evidence does suggest the possibility, the inhabitants of these sites practiced sacrificial rites on a small scale.

From the Cult Centre at Mycenae no detailed evidence is available to comment on sacrificial practice. The published material notes that at the time this area was excavated, techniques did not extend to the meticulous gathering of environmental data, or if such things were indeed noticed, it is unlikely they would have been recorded. 504 However, although this may be the case for the most part, in Room ‘18’ of the Temple a deposit of bones was found in the fill of a post-hole in the north-east corner of the room against the stairs leading to Room ‘19’. According to the trench supervisor this deposit comprised;

505 503 504

Walberg forthcoming : 7 Moore and Taylor 1999 : 83

506

- 113 -

Moore and Taylour 1999 : 13 Shelmerdine 1997 : 573

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE TABLE 7: SITES UNDER CONSIDERATION TOGETHER WITH THEIR ANIMAL BONE ASSEMBLAGE 507 KEY FOR TABLE : X 9 9 9

+

= Definitely not present = Publication details unclear (possibly not present) = Present = Present in large quantity Sheep/ goat

Site

Location/ Association

Date

Aetos

Isolated

Protogeometric

Agia Irini

Settlement

LH IIIC

-

-

-

-

Agia Triada

Isolated

LH III B

-

-

-

-

Agios Konstantinos

Settlement

LH IIIA-B

x

x

Amyklai

Isolated

LH IIIB2 IIIC

-

-

Aphaia

Isolated

LH III B – IIIC

Apollo Maleatas

Settlement

LH III B

Asine

Settlement

LH III C

Delphi

Isolated

LH III B

Eleusis

Settlement

LH III B-C

Fragments present but no stratigraphy

x

Isthmia

Isolated

1050BC -

9

Fowl

Kalapodi

Isolated

LH IIIC -

9

Kalaureia

Settlement

LH III C

9

Palace

LH III B

9

+

9

+

9

+

x

Palace

LH III B & C

9

+

9

+

9

+

x

Isolated

LH III B – PG

Palatial

LH III B

-

Palatial

LH III B

9

Palatial

LH III B

-

Midea: Shrine Area Midea: Megaron complex Mt. Hymettus Mycenae: Room with the Fresco Mycenae: The Temple Mycenae: Tsountas Shrine

507

Pig 9

9

-

Other

Bone fragments present. No detail published

9 –

Bovine

-

Bones from Aphaia were not kept during the excavations; therefore they cannot be

commented on, either as being absent or present, see Pilafidis-Williams 1998 : 127

9

x 9

9

x

No deatil published to indicate species

x

x

x

9

x

x

Not clear which species molluscs

Animal bone present – unstratified and unidentified species

See gazetteer for individual site references.

- 114 -

x

x

-

x

-

-

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS Sheep/ goat

Site

Location/ Association

Date

Olympia

Isolated

Late 10th Cent.

Palace

LH III B

x

x

Palace

LH III B

x

x

x

x

Phylakopi

Settlement

LH III B – C

-

-

-

-

Polis Cave

Isolated

LH III B-C

-

Poseidi

Isolated ?

11th Cent

9

Profitis Elias

Isolated

LH III B

Thermon

Isolated

LH III C

Tiryns

Palace

LH III C

Palace of Nestor Palace of Nestor: Shrine Area

Pig 9

His results showed that the anatomical representation of pig bones in Room A (the principal shrine) is more or less even, with most parts of the animal being represented; so indicating the whole carcass was brought into the room and made use of. However, they found that from sheep/goat the representation was uneven with mostly meaty parts present (humerus, femur, tibia, scapula, pelvis), with the addition of some metapodials and one phalanx. Features such as mandibles and teeth, calcaneum, astragalus and phalanges which were well represented in pigs, were markedly under-represented in sheep/goat, indicating that the pattern is a reflection of human choice, and not recovery procedures. Hamilakis and Konsolaki go on to mention that the majority of material from Room A came from very young (some newborn) animals and that most of the pig bones were burnt. Some of the other bones belonging to sheep/goat were also burnt. The majority of burnt bones came from an ashy deposit within a structural feature which has been identified as a hearth.

508

Hamilakis and Konsolaki 2004 :138

9

-

-

Cattle & other (?) -

A well published example of animal sacrifice comes from the cult room within the Mycenaean settlement of Agios Konstantinos on Methana. The analysis of zooarchaeological material was carried out by Hamilakis during 1994 at the Wiener Laboratory of the American School of Classical Studies, Athens.508

Other

Species not mentioned

-

Settlement Shrines

Bovine

+

Deer

Oysters

-

-

9

Species not mentioned

9

Animal bones present in LH III C shrine, species not mentioned

The evidence collected from this site testifies to the sacrifice of pig and sheep/goat within the shrine room. Unlike the situation illustrated by finds from the Palace of Nestor and Midea where adult bulls were offered, the animals here were much smaller, often newborn. As has already been stated in the Gazetteer (entry 3.4) Room A was found to contain many bovine clay figurines. This preference indicates that the bovid was still an animal offered at this site, but most probably since pigs and goats were available in greater abundance, these species were the chosen animals used at ritual meals. It must be acknowledged, that although certain species such as the male bovid may have been highly revered, this did not result in it being the only species that could be offered as a religious sacrifice. Bovines, especially large male adults such as those reported from Pylos, would not only be a massive offering of labour due to the time and resources it would take to rear such an animal, but also, once slaughtered the animal would make available a large amount of meat, enough to provide for a substantial feast. Smaller animals such as pigs and goats would have been a much more practical dedication for communities catering for feasts and celebrations with substantially less participants. Moreover, in cases such as the sacrifice of a newborn piglet, when a very small amount of meat would be available, the likelihood that the main focus and intention of the process was sacrifice alone, rather than feasting, is even more apparent. It could therefore be presumed,

- 115 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE that bovine remains would be found in palatial contexts for the elite strata of the population, whereas pigs and goats would be discovered in contexts accessible to the rest of the community. The osteological evidence for sacrifice at other settlement shrines, such as Apollo Maleatas also provides rich evidence. Black, fatty ashes surrounding the open-air altar were full of burnt animal remains, potsherds and other offerings. The excavators have noted that the skulls, horns and other bones prove the animals most usually sacrificed on this altar were bulls and goats.509 This being the case, Apollo Maleatas stands out as the only other site of the LH III B period, alongside the Palace of Nestor and Midea where bulls were sacrificed. As already mentioned in the Gazetteer (entry 3.7) the form and location of this shrine is quite distinctive when compared to its contemporaries. That is to say, shrines can roughly be described as being small built structures within citadels or settlements, or on the other hand, open-air shrines isolated from habitation. Apollo Maleatas, is neither of the above, the shrine is open-air with a settlement at the summit of the hill, only a few meters away. This distinction increases with evidence for the sacrifice of bovids, which are usually a palatial offering. In section 4.5.2 it was noted that this shrine should be placed in the ‘official’ sphere of religious practice; the evidence for bovine sacrifice supports this suggestion. In addition, the shrine at Kalaureia has some evidence for animal remains although research is still in its early stages. Found in a room together with other pottery and features were bone fragments of which one was burnt, alongside a tooth and molluscs.510 This evidence is far from secure testament for the practice of sacrifice within this shrine, however even without the complete analysis of the bone remains, the presence of molluscs within this mixed deposit is of interest. The evidence for sacrifice at shrines mentioned above suggests a preference for pigs and sheep/goat at non-palatial sites, and bovids at palatial sites. However, Poseidi (to be considered below) is distinctive for the presence of oysters within sacrificial pits, while at Kalaureia molluscs were found within the shrine assemblage. This does not seem out-of-place at all when one considers the proximity to the sea of these two sites. The shrine at Kalaureia therefore should not be considered as lacking the expected finds associated with sacrifice, when it is acknowledged that regional differences may characterise the choice of the sacrificial offering to the gods. In the least, it is likely that sea food would be an accompaniment to any ritual meals, due to the shrine’s proximity to the sea.

Isolated shrines Not one shrine from the LH III B period in an isolated location has provided evidence of animal bone remains. The apparent complete lack of animal sacrifice and consumption at these sites is discussed below. The sanctuary at Isthmia established in the Protogeometric period includes an area that formed part of the eastern terraces where a thick layer of ash and burnt animal bones were discovered. The excavators only cleared a small portion of the ash, which formed a continuous stratum across the surface of terrace five and continued down into the fill of the early stadium embankment. Within this stratum 398 bones were found, 94 % of which were burnt. 511 Given that the bones were heavily charred, the excavators concluded this was due to sacrifice. The species represented were of sheep, goat, pig and fowl, together with small fragments of unburned pottery.512 The pottery found within this deposit provided the date range for which sacrifice can be attested: from the Protogeometric through to the Archaic period. As at the settlement shrine of Agios Konstantinos, sheep, goat and pig were the animals chosen for sacrifice, once again suggesting that the slaughter of a bull was not commonplace outside the palatial setting. Of course, the sacrificial evidence from Isthmia dates to the Protogeometric period rather than the much earlier evidence from Agios Konstantinos of the LH III B period. However, this makes it all the more interesting when comparing later shrines of a time supposedly poorer, where animals of similar species were sacrificed but in much larger numbers than were found at shrines of the LH III B period outside the palatial setting. In addition, at Isthmia one should consider the different environmental setting of the shrine itself. The excavators have agreed that evidence clearly indicates Isthmia was not a settlement site therefore, the animals had been transported be it from near or far specifically for the purpose of the sacrifice. This indicates that, the act of sacrifice was of enough importance to expend the time and labour needed to entertain and accommodate participants at an isolated open-air sanctuary. Getting to these isolated sanctuaries would not have been as simple and quick as it is today, for we have the modern luxury of transport. It can be assumed that the majority of people frequenting the sanctuary at Isthmia would have been travelling by foot. Therefore, adding all the

509

Lambrinudakis 1981 : 61-62 Wells et al 2003 : 43 It was noted that the bone and molluscs had not yet been studied in detail by the excavators at the time of publication. 510

511 512

- 116 -

Gebherd & Hemans 1992 : 15 Gebherd 1987 : 475

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS equipment, apparatus, and animals needed to bring about a sacrifice and accompanying ritual meal, would have been a substantial addition to their load in comparison to the small objects dedicated at the site. Deposits containing burnt animal bones were also reported at Kalapodi. The site has yielded a sequence of well-dated and studied animal bone remains which range from the LH III C to the Classical period.513 This site is of great interest not only for the evidence of animal sacrifice / consumption discovered there, but its uniqueness as being the only shrine to have shown such continuity of ritual practice. As mentioned above, the shrine of the Protogeometric period at Poseidi, provides substantial evidence for sacrificial practice within building ΣΤ. Inside the building was a large hearth area where a build up of fatty ash had occurred from successive events. Within pit δ remains from cattle and other animals were recovered, together with oyster shells.514 The remains clearly indicate the practice of sacrifice, however, of added interest is the species which were offered. The presence of oysters was mentioned above and at the shrine of Kalaureia, molluscs were found. The sites proximity to the sea was noted as an explanation, testifying to the desire to dedicate such species. In addition, the dedication of cattle, which has been noted as an indicator of much wealthier dedications than the general settlement shrines, is of interest. As was noted above (section 4.3) Poseidi is the only shrine of the Protogeometric period which includes a large built structure, to also testify to the sacrifice of cattle, surely suggests this shrine is frequented by wealthy members of society.

ANIMAL SACRIFICE THROUGHOUT THE PERIOD To consider the corpus of evidence for bone remains which may testify to occurrences of animal sacrifice, identification of some trends must be attempted. Table 7 above, as well as the following discussion, have showed that the practice of sacrifice most definitely followed a pattern through the periods under consideration in this study. In the LH III B period cult sites existed both in Palatial, settlement and isolated sites, as shown by a collection of material including pottery, votives and architectural features presented in the Gazetteer. In this period however, large scale sacrifice was only evidenced at the palatial centres of Pylos and Midea, located at the Western and Eastern extremities of the Peloponnese; with small scale sacrifice at shrines closely associated to settlements. Not one of the

513 514

isolated shrines of the LH III B period provided evidence for sacrifice or meat consumption. It must be emphasised, that at both Mycenae and Tiryns there has been no material evidence recovered within the greater palace, that is, in or surrounding the Megaron areas, or in any courts or rooms of the upper citadel which would suggest large scale sacrificial practices. This shows a vast contrast to the information for sacrifice at both the Palace of Nestor and Midea. The Palace of Nestor and Midea are not identical by any stretch of the imagination; in fact, both sites have features which are distinctive. Moreover, the Palace of Nestor is located on the far west of the Peloponnese, and Midea is about as far east as is practical before reaching the mountain range east of the Argolid. It must be wondered whether their locations enhance the attraction for holding large sacrificial ceremonies. Bearing in mind the event of a sacrifice and the following feast could bring together a great number of participants, potentially from other regions beyond their own. The discovery of the Midea megaron complex (of the lower terrace) and the ample evidence for feasting; alongside the lack of such evidence from the neighbouring Argolid palatial sites at Mycenae and Tiryns are intriguing observations. This can be justified by suggesting a division of roles and duties existed between neighbouring citadels. This would be particularly likely within the scenario of the Argolid centres, as having three palatial sites existing in such close proximity is highly unlikely unless they were allied. As for the isolated nature sanctuaries, throughout the LH III B and LH IIIC periods, no sites provide evidence for animal sacrifice in the form of bone remains. However, sanctuaries associated to settlements all show signs of sacrifice, all be it on a much smaller scale than that at the Palace of Nestor or Midea. With the transition into the Protogeometric period, the situation is completely reversed, with every identified shrine, providing evidence for the sacrifice of animals. The isolated sanctuaries took on a larger role in ritual practice, including sacrifice and often the ritual meal. Where as, in the LH III B period these sites were mainly for the dedication of small manmade offerings. In the LH III B period, it can be said that chosen palatial centres which were widely dispersed throughout the mainland regions, ‘held court’; which provided a space and the means to feast and sacrifice. In the Protogeometric period however, the palace centres had become abandoned, and settlements were often small, which left the most ‘inclusive’ place to hold such festivities to the isolated nature shrines.

Halstead and Issakidou 2004 : 143 See gazetteer entry 3.24 for detail and references

- 117 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

FRESCO EVIDENCE FOR FEASTING Frescoes illustrating feasting or the preparation for feasts appear from the beginning to the end of the Late Bronze Age (LM I period on Crete through LH III B period on the mainland).515

FIGURE 39: FRESCO FROM THE PALACE OF NESTOR – MEN FROM THE HUNT 519

The Palace of Nestor at Pylos, in addition to the large amount of evidence for sacrifice and feasting which has been discussed above, and further evidence for drinking practices which will be considered below, has also produced fragmentary frescos that were found on, or fallen from the walls of the Palace itself. Fragments from a second-story room have been combined to show what is understood to be men and dogs from the hunt accompanying other men carrying tripods, presumably to cook meat516 (figure 42 below). Also from the northwest fresco dump, a fragment shows a robed man apparently holding a dead animal by the legs. Of course these two depictions cannot be assumed without question as cultic or sacred in character, however the choice of decoration for the walls of a palatial site must be significant in some way. Hunting and the providing of meat for one’s family or social group would no doubt be considered as a sign of adulthood, strength and ability. Such scenes, which chose to depict not only the hunt but also cooking paraphernalia; suggest preparation for a meal of some importance. It is possible that rituals concerning ‘coming of age’ may have followed such hunts, but there is no necessary connection between these rituals and the sacred sphere. The discussion of which is beyond the scope of this study.

The placing of such a depiction within the Megaron unit at Pylos; the seat of the wanax and central focus of the palace, emphasises the importance the rulers at Pylos placed in procession, sacrifice and the feast. It is therefore more than likely these scenes represent the activities of special festivities, depicting the parts of ritual practice which they see as significant enough to wish them immortalised on the palace walls.

Two additional frescoes can be used more specifically in the discussion of feasting: The fresco from the Megaron unit at Pylos (figure 43 above) and the Campstool Fresco from Knossos, both of which show figures thought to be eating and drinking, seated in chairs with X-shaped cross pieces. 517 The series of frescos on the approach to the central area at the Palace of Nestor include scenes of procession, from the vestibule (figure 44), sacrifice and feasting (both within the Megaron). A bull sacrifice and banquet scene including a lyre player were found decorating the wall at the far right of the Megaron.518

515 516 517 518

Wright 2004 : 155 Wright 2004 : 160 Wright 2004 : 162 McCallum 1987 : 96

519

- 118 -

Photograph : Author 2007 (Chora museum)

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS

FIGURE 40: FRESCO FROM THE MEGARON AT PYLOS 520

FIGURE 41: PROCESSION FRESCO FROM PYLOS 521

520 521

After Wright 2004a : 163 After Wright 2004a : 162

- 119 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

LINEAR B EVIDENCE FOR FEASTING In addition to all the material from the archaeological records considered above, there is also scope to include evidence provided by the Linear B tablets for a better understanding of the practice of feasting. Many Linear B texts specify the purpose for which animals were kept (shearing, breeding, work, slaughter).522 The faunal information was taken into account above, and in some cases, such as the deposits within pits from the Palace of Nestor, we have this in conjunction with their find context. However, often, when bone samples are discovered, they are not found in situ but instead scattered across an archaeological layer, therefore making it difficult to fully analyse the activities and context which led to the bone deposit. Bendall has studied the topic regarding Mycenaean feasting and what the Linear B tablets can highlight concerning social structure. Her research has identified numerous examples of Linear B tablets, providing lists of foodstuffs and sacrificed animals for feasts. For instance, tablet Cn418 from Pylos records a contribution of animals for sacrifice (carefully selected for colour and other physical attributes) by a man named we-u-da-ne-u.523 Similar contributions are seen at Pylos tablet Un 718; recording wine, animals for sacrifice, and foodstuffs such as cheese and wheat contributed in the context of land tenure obligations connected with Poseidon.524 All of which can be identified alongside the person supplying such goods. The list goes further; with contributions of banqueting provisions by persons of high status stated in tablets form Knossos and Thebes: Wu 60 & 65; Wu 50 52.525 These numerous tablets, coming from several different sites, though at present the majority appear to originate from Pylos, Thebes and Knossos; all suggest that the practice of making contributions to palatial banqueting by high status individuals was a common feature of Mycenaean society. What should be noted here, as will be done when considering the evidence for pottery associated to drinking and eating, is that information is once again lacking for the palatial sites of the Argolid. Mycenae, although having some examples of Linear B tablets, has not been noted as providing examples such as those above which may suggest large scale banquets.

This is in fact a reflection of what has been evidenced with the bone remains from Mycenae and Tiryns, so if anything the picture portrayed by the Linear B tablets, agrees with the archaeological evidence; so adding to its accuracy. The situation of ‘gift giving’ by officials or high ranking craftsmen to the palace centres, also appears in reverse, with records of the palace giving gifts to regional centres. The main example provided by Bendall’s research is Vn 20 from Pylos,526 to which Cn 608 might possibly be added. Vn 20 shows wine being distributed to the nine major towns of the Hither Province, while Cn 608 records pigs being fattened at these places. Bendall suggests that these two occurrences could in fact be part of a joint venture: the pigs may have been intended to accompany the wine as part of a regional feast. These two tablets are an interesting source of evidence, and it is indeed quite plausible as Bendall suggests, that these tablets lay witness to regional centres actually rearing and providing meat for a large palatial feast. For this to be proved, not only would more tablets with similar accounts need to be identified, but also within the archaeological context itself; evidence such as large amounts of cooking, eating and drinking vessels of a stylistic standard demonstrating large scale feasting on a social level equal to the palace centres, will need to be found. Although the Linear B tablets can provide more contextual, detailed evidence, they do however, have many limitations. The majority of limitations stem from the fact the tablets come from just three locations: the palatial centres of Knossos, Pylos and Thebes. Due to this, we only have information of the situation within a palatial context, but in addition, the tablets only enlighten a chronological period roughly covering the two years preceding the major destruction of the palace centres in 1200 BC. Moreover, it has been noted the tablets show livestock records (and thus the animal texts as a whole) were overwhelmingly concerned with sheep, especially male sheep, in terms of numbers of animals and attention to monitoring. The prominence of woollen cloth and weavers in the texts, dealing with craft production and dependant personnel has been said to indicate with little doubt, that the biased nature of the animal records reflect the administrative concerns of the palaces with wool collection.527 These biases in recording are quite possible, though very difficult to detect with any certainty. When one considers the evidence from bone assemblages in the

522

Ventris and Chadwick 1973 : 131-133 Bendall 2004 : 105 524 Bendall 2004 : 107 525 Bendall makes reference to Piteros et al BCH 144 (1990) :17184, however the original was not read by the author due to an insufficient understanding of French. 523

526 527

- 120 -

Bendall 2004 : 109 Halstead 2003 : 258

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS context of ‘palatial’ feasting, especially from the Palace of Nestor, the evidence points towards bovines generally being the chosen animal for sacrifice and feasting. However, this is not apparent from the texts. Therefore, can we rely on the texts to understand quantities and varieties of animals reared for sacrifice and festivities? It would be wise to be very cautious with the information the tablets provide, although it is interesting and of some use to enlighten the last years of palatial administration, it would be best to focus on the archaeological evidence and use Linear B as an additional source.

DRINKING By studying the archaeological evidence available for the period spanning the LH III B and Protogeometric periods of Greece it is hoped to gather some meaning and cultic significance for the act of drinking. Determining whether an act is secular or sacred, especially concerning the topic of drinking in prehistoric societies, has complications. Firstly, in societies such as those under consideration, it could be suggested that many of their activities were a mixture of both secular and sacred. There may not have been the divide then which is so apparent today between people who are participating in religious activities, usually within a church or similar sacred building, and those going about non-sacred everyday activities.

celebration is not performed strictly within a religious area, the reason for people to gather and participate in these festivities is due to the Panagia. Therefore, all the activities surrounding this event should be connected with religious connotations. Pottery By the height of Mycenaean palatial society, ritual practice involving drinking had achieved a standard form of expression with the use of certain vessel types. The Vapheio cup and shallow cup, have been noted as popular ceramic shapes during the earlier Late Helladic periods, however, these were then replaced by the kylix during the LH IIIA period.528 It is suggested that the Mycenaean Kylix was made specially to contain wine, and Saflaud believes its ritual use is clearly indicated. 529 Saflaud notes that the majority of kylikes are made of plain, earthen ware material, but some shapes occur in gold, for example, in the deposit close to Grave Circle A at Mycenae. It is now largely accepted, and there are ample examples provided below, which testify to a connection between the use of the kylix (and cups generally) with cult places and buildings of the Mycenaean period and through into the Protogeometric period.

The act of drinking within the current social sphere can be seen to have segregated use. For example, one could say that wine taken with communion is purely religious. But how should wine taken at other celebrations be considered? For example, the Greek Orthodox celebration for the Panagia; festivities on Assumption Day, when the mother of Christ went to Heaven; takes place every year on the 15th August. Although the celebration varies on a regional scale, it consists of fasting for fourteen days, after which a church ceremony with wine is used for communion (purely a religious act). This is followed by a large meal or banquet, and the consumption of wine, which especially in villages involves the majority of the local population. Even though consumption of alcohol in the latter phases of the celebration is not inside a holy place, or part of the structured holy ceremony, it is part of the celebrations for the Panagia. Is this enough to consider it within the sacred sphere, or must this be considered simply as secular drinking? In such a situation as this, it is more than acceptable to consider drinking and dining as closely associated to the sacred sphere. Although the latter part of the

528 529

- 121 -

Wright 2004 : 145 Saflund 1980 : 237

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE TABLE 8: POTTERY ASSOCIATED WITH RITUAL PRACTICE AT THE SITES UNDER CONSIDERATION 530 KEY FOR TABLE : X 9 9 9

= Definitely not present = Publication details unclear = Present + = Present in great quantity No. = Present in the quantity stated

Site

Date

Kylikes

Cups

PG

Aetos Agia Irini Agia Triada Agios Konstantinos Amyklai Aphaia Apollo Maleatas

9

LH III B

9

9

1

9 9 21-from LH IIIA-C

9

-

Oinochoe -

9 Animal head

-

9 Pig(?) head

-

9 9 1 conical; 5 animal head 9 Steatite

9 Stirrup jars -

9

-

9 Stirup vase

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

x

9

-

x

LH III B-

9

9

9

x

x

LH III C

x

9

+

9

x

9 Narrow-necked jug

LH III B

9

9

2

9 29

9

Delphi

LH III B

-

Eleusis

LH III B

-

Isthmia

1050BC -

Kalapodi Kalaureia

Mt Hymettus

9

1

9 Vapheio

-

-

x

9

LH III C

Mt Hymettus

x 9

Narrow-necked / Stirrup -

9

9

9 132-From LH IIIA-C

Rhyta -

9 5

Asine

Midea Shrine area Midea Megaron Complex

9

-

LH IIIC

LH IIIA-B LH IIIB2 – III C LH III B – III C LH III B

Bowls

LH III B-C LH IIIB PG

-

1

x

-

x

9

9

9

9

9

x

-

-

9

-

x

9 Stirrup jar x

x Oinochoe x 27

530 The data for this table comes from the Gazetteer where references can be found relating to each site. It must be noted that the quantities used here are brought together from a number of different phases and locations within the shrines/areas. Therefore this table is not meant as a direct indication of exact pottery forms and quantities that were in use at the same time; the aim is just to get an idea of which sites had greater quantities and so ‘use’ of particular forms.

- 122 -

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS

Site

Date

Mycenae Room with the Fresco complex

LH III B

Mycenae The Temple

LH III B (phase VII & VIII)

Kylikes

Cups

9

22

9 18 (17=R19)

Mycenae Tsountas House Shrine

-

miniature

Olympia

PG

9 2 Exception-ally large

Palace of Nestor Palace of Nestor Shrine Area

LH III B LH IIIB

Phylakopi

LH III B–C

Polis Cave

LH IIIB - PG

9 9 287 9 10

Bowls

9

Rhyta

9

11

9 9 (all = R19)

17

9 6 (4=R19)

Narrow-necked / Stirrup

9

9

7 stirrup jars

-

-

-

-

-

miniature

9

-

-

-

9

9

9

9

83

-

x

9 Stirrup vases

9 Ostrich egg

9

4

-

-

9

9

9

-

9 Stirrup jar

11th Cent

-

9

-

-

-

Profitis Elias

LH III B

9 A few!

9

-

-

-

Thermon

LH III C

-

9

-

-

-

Tiryns

LH III B

-

-

-

9 Animal shaped

Posiedi

1

-

thus making ‘drinking vessels’ clearly the most common pottery type evident in the shrines.

Palatial Shrines To first consider the Cult Centre at Mycenae, both the Room with the Fresco and the Temple Complex have a number of drinking and eating vessels, although the Room with the Fresco has a greater quantity of all examples. These items being present suggest that drinking and eating of some kind of fashion was certainly a part of each shrine’s activities. In both cases the kylix is found in larger quantities than any other single type of pottery, however, if vessels are grouped together, not by their particular style, but by their designated ‘use & function’ the situation expands even further. That is to say, both cups and kylikes are generally considered principally to function as drinking vessels, so can be grouped together accordingly;

In addition, the pottery assemblage indicates that the Room with the Fresco complex must have had a significantly higher degree of cooking taking place, since eight cooking pots (6 jars, 1 jug, and 1 uncertain form)531 as well as two tripod cooking vessels were found within. Conversely, only one ‘cooking pot jar’ was found just above the floor level of room XI in the Temple complex.532 This is also reflected by the bowls found within the Room with the Fresco, being almost three times the quantity of that found in the Temple complex. Research carried out as part of a wider survey on food and drink in the Minoan and Mycenaean period, has 531 532

- 123 -

See Gazetteer entry 3.18. Moore and Taylor 1999 : 35

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE produced results which provide information for the commodities which were being held within vessels, therefore shedding light on what they were being used for. One of the cooking jars (EUM-156), and a large ‘tripod pot’ (EUM-152) found in the fill of the Room with the Fresco mentioned above, were both found to contain residues of meat, olive oil and possibly lentils.533 Another cooking jar which was heavily burnt from use, found in room 31 (Room with the Fresco) contained olive oil and wine.534 This information therefore, benefits this study, as these scientific results can further justify that food was indeed cooked and served within this area, and also that alcohol was present and consumed. The combination of wine and oil found within the cooking jar of Room 31 is also of peculiar interest. It has been suggested that the oil found within the vessel was used to seal the wine;535 therefore this could mean wine was not only being consumed within the area, but also stored. However, the practice of sealing wine with oil seems slightly odd. It is assumed that the oil would float on top of the wine providing a glutinous layer, possibly protecting it from small insects. However, as the room temperature of this Southern Mediterranean shrine was likely to be quite warm; the oil would not have set. Therefore, the layer of protection would not have been good enough for transportation or to guard against interference other than insect curiosity. In addition, this vessel was heavily burned, which would suggest heating or cooking. It is impossible to understand fully the exact use for which each vessel was intended, however, it would seem logical that each vessel would be designed and used for a specific function; the storage of wine, consumption of wine or food; and another specifically for heating or cooking. Of interest is also, why was the wine being heated and would it have been consumed hot? If so, could vessels such as the cooking jar from room 31 have been used to store and heat the wine, to then be poured into the cups and kylikes for consumption? On the other hand, maybe there was some other purpose. Could the oil within the vessel have thickened the wine when heated, making it more controllable when poured as a liquid libation? Both these suggestions are speculative so far as practices or functions are concerned however, the knowledge of vessel content at least opens the possibility for a scientifically based discussion.

533 534 535

Tzedakis and Martlew 2002 : 128 Tzedakis and Martlew 2002 : 131 Tzedakis and Martlew 2002 : 196

In keeping with the practice of alcohol consumption in this area, are the amphora and stirrup jars (M.M 24347/EUM-153; M.M 24345/ EUM-157) from the fill in and around the shrine store behind the Room with the Fresco, both of which provided results for containing wine. Wine was also found in the kylix (M.M 24329/EUM-159) which came from the same store.536 Other vessels studied from in and around the Room with the Fresco complex which gave results of containing wine, came in the form of; small stirrup jars, large amphora, small decorated amphora, and cooking jars. Those vessels which contained foodstuffs including meat, oil, or honey, came in the form of cooking jars, a stemmed bowl and an angular bowl.537 The information provided by scientific analysis of vessels found in the Cult Centre, creates a much better understanding for the use of pottery. However, as for the miniature vessels found within the collection from the Room with the Fresco complex, speculation is still necessary as no scientific results were produced during the survey. Due to these items (3 miniature handmade jugs, 4 miniature handmade Hydria, 1 miniature alabastron, 1 miniature amphora) all being of miniature size it is generally accepted that their use as part of everyday life would be very impractical, leaving it more than likely these vessels were involved in cult practice. It has previously been suggested that the miniature jugs found in room 32 could possibly have been used to pour liquids, maybe scented oils, as an offering to the image of the Lozenge Lady.538 In addition, it could be that these vessels were left as offerings themselves, to represent the usage of the larger standard form vessels. All four of the miniature pottery forms mentioned above were also found in this area of a standard size. Therefore, producing them in miniature form would suggest that their function was associated in some way. However, a very different function could be assumed for the standard size vessels. If a practice existed here, of storing, eating and drinking consumables, it is likely the vessels themselves would be worthy of dedication, as a representation of the activities partaken in worship. The miniature form may have also contained a sample of the commodities often consumed as part of rituals within the area. It can be said with absolute certainty that within the Room with the Fresco Complex, cooking, eating and the drinking of wine was taking place. Although we do not have the scientific analysis for the pottery from 536 537 538

- 124 -

Tzedakis and Martlew 2002 : 152 Tzedakis and Martlew 2002 : 189 - 190 Moore and Taylor forthcoming : 27

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS the Temple, it can be speculated that at least, the cups and kylikes would be used for the consumption of wine, and the bowls, in the majority, would have been used for eating. Although a difference between the two complexes is present, what must be considered is the quantity of vessels and what this suggests as to the number of participants who worshipped at the shrines. Later in this section, pottery evidence from the Palace of Nestor will be considered in detail, where it will be shown that a considerable number (thousands) of kylikes and bowls were excavated within the palace. Even in and around room 93, which is considered the principal religious shrine of the palace, a great number were found, 275 kylix stems & bases539 in court 92, and 32 kylix stems & bases in room 93.540 Therefore, the quantity of drinking vessels within the combined rooms of the Cult Centre at Mycenae, do not even come fractionally close to the quantities from the cult area of the Palace of Nestor. Consequently, there must be some difference either in the way participants were included within the actions involved in these religious areas, or there was some other importance placed in the act of drinking at these two separate palatial sites. This discussion will follow once all the information for each site has been provided. The Palace of Nestor, for the sheer quantity of material evidence it provides in its pottery assemblage, combined with the evidence for sacrifice, leaves no doubt as to the scale of all that encompasses the idea of a Feast at this palatial site. Scattered throughout the courts of the palace buildings, thousands of kylix sherds were found, signalling scenes of drinking which must have included a considerable number of participants. The North-Eastern building, which houses the shrine, provides an annex to the main Palace building (Rooms 93-100), and has revealed obvious signs of drinking and eating activities. This building comprises a number of rooms which are approached after first passing across Court 92. If entering from the main Palace building, one would first pass through the ramp passage 91 before once again reaching court 92. Although this collection of rooms is not generally termed a Cult Centre, as those found at the other palatial sites, it is worth suggesting, that essentially this area is similar enough to class it as such. Although slightly separated, it is surely associated with the activities of the main palace. Also, this area contains what is generally accepted as the principal

539 540

Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 303 Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 305

shrine room of the Palace (Room 93), an outside open court incorporating a raised altar, as well as other rooms which could have associated ritual use. Therefore, it is reasonable to directly compare this area of the North-Eastern building with other Cult Centres of the Mycenaean mainland. From ramp 91, 445 kylix stems & bases were counted and 239 flat bases of bowls or cups. Many other pottery forms came from 91 including: dippers, conical cups, a stirrup-vase, krater bowl, tripod vessel, and a brazier. 541 From the open Court 92, many examples of course ware pottery were found; such as pithoi of varying sizes with high necks, a cooking pot on three legs, amphora and jug with high necks, stirrup-vase, and a basin. Of fine ware 275 kylix stems and bases, and 67 flat bases of cups or bowls were recorded. 542 Room 93, had a very similar assemblage consisting of some course ware examples: pithos, brazier or scoop, cooking pot, small tripod vessel, red ware- jug or jar. Also 32 kylix stems, a diminutive votive kylix, and 16 bases of cups or bowls, all of fine ware.543 The neighbouring rooms of the shrine area also provided numerous pottery forms. Room 99 544 and Room 100 545 included pottery for cooking, eating and drinking, with the stems of 405 kylix bases found between the two. Unlike the Cult Centre at Mycenae, the pottery found within the North-Eastern Building suggests that large numbers of people were permitted to participate in the rituals there; taking into account the considerations of access and a likely guarded palatial entrance, as discussed in Chapter Four concerning sanctuary surroundings. The sheer quantity of the pottery vessels found throughout the area, leaves no doubt as to whether drinking activities were carried out there, the more pertinent question is the reasoning behind these quantities. Why is it the Palace of Nestor appears to be the only location in Mycenaean Greece (known today!) for such large scale activities to be taking place?546 The main building of the Palace of Nestor also has a significant amount of pottery evidence which testifies to the importance placed in large scale drinking and eating festivities throughout the Palace.

541

Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 301 Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 303 543 Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 305 544 Blegen and Rawson 1966 : 323 545 Blegen and Rwason 1966 : 325 546 Although the citadel at Midea has produced large quantities of animal bone signifying the ritual meal, there is not nearly such large quantities of pottery; suggesting that the participation level at any one sitting, is much lower. 542

- 125 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE Saflund547 has noted the types of vessels stored in the two palaces (the Main Building includes the North Eastern and South-Western Building) had certain differences: whilst the five pantries of the Main Building contained almost exclusively dishes for eating and vessels for drinking and pouring, pantry 60, which flanked the entrance of the South-Western Building, contained among other vessels, coarse ware for storage and cooking, as well as incense burners.

It is possible therefore, to speculate that in conjunction with large scale feasting taking place, there was division of class or status to some extent, which would account for the South-Western building accommodating the lower classes, and so using the plain ware pottery, and housing areas where the cooking would be done. Whereas the main building and North-Eastern building, were used by the elite classes which would account for the use of fine ware.

In addition he notes, Pantries 67 and 68 in the SouthWestern building contained numerous storage vessels and small cooking pots standing on three legs, as well as other items, that evidently had some connection with cooking, for example, small braziers for carrying coals from one place to another. Therefore, Saflund has suggested the food was prepared and eaten close to, and within, the South-Western building (the older palace), partly in court 63 and partly in Hall 64 and in the hypostyle hall 65, which he plausibly interprets as a banqueting hall.548

The Palace of Nestor not only has an out-of-theordinary quantity of pottery associated with feasting, but also unusual is the absence of fortifications. One must question whether being situated on the far western coast of the Peloponnese, was greatly dissimilar to that of the Argolid, resulting in these significant differences. These two occurrences could easily be combined; the existence of a vast quantity of feasting pottery, and as mentioned above, burnt animal bones, testifies to large scale festivities which surely many of the local and maybe quite distant connections would participate in. The absence of fortification walls, surely reiterates the point of a much more harmonious community than the appearance given by the Argolid citadels. Even if the fortification walls evident in the Argolid were seen as not solely for the protection of those within, but also as a show of power and ability, the Palace of Nestor seemed concerned with neither of these potential aids.

The North-East wing (of the Main building) shows clear evidence of banqueting. A great number of kylix fragments were found in the courts, 183 stems counted from court 42 and 255 from court 47, together with numerous bases of cups and bowls, cooking pots, braziers and votive kylikes.549 Saflund notes that these drinking vessels are of fine ware, not the plain ware of the pantries in the left wing. Further banqueting and drinking is apparent in the Main building, Court (3), as well as the adjacent porches (2, 4, 44). In these areas the usual combination of cooking pots, tripod vessels, mixing bowls, drinking cups etc. were present, as before, the predominant shape was the kylix.550 Once again Saflund notes that the kylikes from porch (4), and the vestibule (5) of the Megaron unit were made of fine ware, like those found in the units in the right wing. To summarise Saflund’s research, the locations and quality of the pottery found at Pylos can be separated; the fine kylikes were located only in the central court areas of the main building, the shrine areas of the North-Eastern building, and the two courts (42 and 47) which stand between the Main Building and the shrine area. The majority of the cooking, storage and plain ware kylikes and cups were found in the SouthWestern building, along with pantries 18 to 22 of the Main building, which are all situated at the far southwest corner, close by and with access to the SouthWestern building.

547 548 549 550

One would think that the situation evident at Pylos is almost a textbook case for a civilized, stable community ruled by elite powers. Without some kind of respect, outlay of wealth and display of power, how were the elites meant to communicate and continue to control the region, if not by these large scale feasts. Settlement and Isolated Shrines When one considers the pottery evidence for drinking at non-palatial sites, it seems clear that through the ages, people from all walks of life participated in this practice. Drinking practices are represented at each of the shrine categories; palatial, settlement and isolated shrines in the LH III B period, and continue at the isolated shrines of the Protogeometric period. Many of the publications for settlement and isolated shrines do not specify exact numbers of each pottery form; where they have, the detail has been provided in the Gazetteer. However, in general the evidence suggests that outside the palatial sphere, vessels for drinking and eating are common place, but only in smaller quantities, with often only a few examples.

Saflund 1980 : 239 Saflund 1980 : 239 Saflund 1980 : 242 Saflund 1980 : 243

- 126 -

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS This confirms that drinking and dining were still activities participated in at the shrines, however, the events were confined to a few select people. It could even be speculated that the few people who did participate in these rituals, shared a cup, therefore fewer cups were needed as the wine was passed between those present. If one imagines what an archaeologist would make of churches, left with only the remains of a few cups for the delivery of the blessed ‘wine’. In most churches the whole congregation shares the same cup, and the fact that only a few cups are part of a modern churches assemblage says very little about the number of people who actively take part in the drinking of Christ’s blood.

Some of these artefacts, such as the stone features outside the Megaron at Mycenae, and within the Tsountas House Shrine have been highlighted for the possible cross interpretation that can be offered. In essence, features such as carved boulders creating depressions, or stone platforms with pits in the ground beside them, must be considered as fixtures with purpose, but the exact function or ritual is debatable. FIGURE 42: PURIFICATION (?) FEATURE PORCH OF THE MEGARON AT MYCENAE553

IN THE

With this in mind, it must be assumed that even if only a few vessels are present to indicate drinking and dining, it still implies that these activities were taking place, albeit on a more exclusive or modest scale than the events witnessed at the palatial site of Pylos.

6.4.

PURIFICATION RITUALS551

The topic of ablution or purification rituals on the Mycenaean and Protogeometric mainland is a subject which has received far less attention than its Minoan predecessor on Crete. It has been widely acknowledged that Minoan palaces set-aside areas, often in prominent positions near the main entrances, for the use of ‘Lustral Basins’ where it is said purification rituals would take place before entering the main palace.552 This is suggested to be connected to the belief the Minoans placed on the whole area of the main palace as being sacred, so increasing the need to be purified before proceeding. The purpose of a Lustral area or Basin, was not to literally bathe, or submerge oneself, but more likely, to anoint the body or extremities with perfumed oil which would act to cleanse and purify the skin. When looking for signs of purification acts as part of Mycenaean ritual activity, it instantly becomes apparent that the apparatus or installations for ritual libations mentioned above (Section 5.3) could also be interpreted as associated with purification.

551 It must be noted that the information for purification rituals only began to come to my attention within the latter part of my research, therefore the time needed to be spent on the detail for this section was no longer available to me. Hopefully the opportunity will arise for further research in this subject area in the future. 552 Evans 1921 especially : 218; Gesell 1985 on Lustral basins at Mallia, especially : 10

For example, features in the porch of the Megaron at Mycenae consist of a raised stone circular platform and an oval stone depression. Could it be possible that this joint feature was more useful within a cleansing process? Not that these small features do the job of cleaning men who have journeyed far to meet with the elites. However, on the slab may have been a vessel, filled with perfumed oil to cleanse the skin, in order to be in an acceptable state to proceed into the Megaron, after pouring the excess over the hollow in the ground. As this basin like hollow was found within an alabaster slab, liquid poured into it would not sink through into the ground. In addition, the location of this feature being within the porch of the Megaron would make it protected from direct sunlight, so fluid within the hollow would not evaporate easily. For these reasons, as well as those laid down when the feature was initially introduced as being in a rather discrete location ( libation section 5.3 above), not in full view of those within the Megaron, it seems unlikely it would be used for the practice of liquid offerings as dedications to the gods.

553

- 127 -

After Papadimtriou 1960 : Plate 78

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE It is suggested instead, that this feature would be much better suited for the use of purification and cleansing. This is not the only example which is thought to be more likely associated with purification than with libation rituals. In this section, all the features which cannot be clearly associated with the pouring of liquid offerings, libation, but do however show some importance due to their form and location, will be considered. It must be recognized that in many cases there may be a significant cross-over between the rituals of libation, and purification, especially in those cases where features outside of buildings and rooms were considered. After all, when purifying oneself before entering a place of higher prestige or sanctum, who are you purifying yourself for?

possibly but not necessarily water.556 The discovery of this further detail on the underside (most likely upper side) of the stone feature, allows comparison with other features of basin type form this period. It again provides a receptacle for liquids which would not pass directly into the ground but would instead be contained in the feature. FIGURE 43: FEATURE PHYLAKOPI 557

IN THE COURTYARD AT

At the site of Apollo Maleatas, Lambrinoudakis mentions a find of special interest, a roughly stone carved shallow basin with a lip, found inside the infill of the ash altar.554 Unfortunately, no other detail was mentioned and no picture was provided in the publication, which makes further analysis of this artefact quite difficult. However, it must be wondered what such an artefact could be used for? Until a time when further publication may reveal the dimensions of this item, it is difficult to speculate as to the possibility of its mobility and capacity. The Shrine at Apollo Maleatas included some built rooms suggested to be store rooms associated with an altar, as well as an altar itself which was a built platform area. Therefore, there were a number of locations where this item could have originally been placed so as to act as a receptacle for oils left over from the cleansing of ones skin. The shrine area at Phylakopi also has a feature which could likely be suited to the role of purification. Just in front of the entrance to the West shrine is a stone carved feature which has till recently, been understood as an object with a flattish surface which curves to make a round boulder (figure 43).555 This is placed at the end of a low bench structure which runs against the courtyard wall. However, this feature must be reconsidered owing to new evidence of its form. Some years previous to this publication the feature was knocked over, and proved to be hollowed out, so giving the appearance of a rough basin (now located in the museum). Renfrew very plausibly notes that this feature would have originally stood the other way up, possibly functioning as a basin. As this feature is rather large, Renfrew notes it may have had a special purpose - presumably to contain a liquid,

554 555

Lambrinoudakis 1980 : 119 Renfrew 1985 : 354

As with the feature from the Porch to the Megaron at Mycenae, the Phylakopi example was placed outside the doorway to the more mysterious, prestigious, inner sanctum. One could purify the skin before entering the shrine itself, using ointment which could be placed on the bench beside it. This combination of the stone feature and bench is reminiscent of the feature from Room G at Agios Konstantinos mentioned above. Not only do both have a similar combination of features, but in addition the fact that any liquid poured into the stone features, would not pass through directly into the ground, but be contained there until it either evaporates with time or is removed. As mentioned before, it is believed this would be unsatisfactory if one wanted to offer the precious liquid to the gods as part of a ritual act. Another occurrence which could be considered to signify purification rituals comes from the Temple at Mycenae. The reason for the likely cross-over between roles of purification or libation, is due to the fact the stone basin stands just inside the doorway of Room 18.558 This results in one entering the shrine itself via the vestibule area (XI) then entering into the main Room 18 to then find the basin. Although the 556 Personal email communication with Colin Renfrew: 4th January 2010. 557 After Renfrew 1985 : Plate 7 558 Moore and Taylor 1999 : 115

- 128 -

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS fact the basin is within the shrine does not necessarily retract from possible purification rites, it does seem slightly strange that one would enter before cleansing. It is suggested however, more likely that an area for purification would lie outside the sacred room or area, therefore being that many of the rooms in this area are of a sacred nature; should the search for a purification area be sought on the approach to the Cult Centre? It could be possible that the small Room of Tsountas Shrine with its many features generally connected with libation, could actually act as a specialised location for purification before entering the Cult Centre (see section 5.3 and figure 36 above for detail). The lack of finds in this room of a more standard shrine assemblage, clearly suggests practices such as libation or a function associated with purification are more likely. The evidence collected in connection with purification and cleansing rituals is clearly substantial enough to warrant interest and further investigation into this field. It is believed that many such simple stone artefacts could possibly have been overlooked from some site publications, therefore a re-evaluation of old excavation material could greatly enhance this understudied topic.

6.5.

PROCESSIONS

Hagg suggests that, the procession is often, if not always, the ritual that comes first in the sequence of events in Mycenaean religious festivals.559 Hagg also believes that figures and figurines may have been carried in processions, noting the term; teo-po-ri-ja, theophoria, “carrying of gods”, on two linear B texts from Knossos and which may also be depicted on two very fragmentary frescoes from the Argolid.560 In Minoan Crete, the causeways which connect the palaces with different major buildings in the town have been suggested as processional ways. Sacrificial processions are also attested iconographically in the form of wall paintings.561 The importance of the procession as a major contributor to Mycenaean religion cannot be doubted. The size and limited space associated with the majority of shrines accredited to this period lend themselves to being just a part of a ceremony with many stages. Not to say on every occasion where ritual acts were being conducted at the shrines, a procession would also take place, however, it is very

559 560 561

Hagg 2001 : 175 Hagg 2001 : 175 Marinatos 1986 : 34

possible that when festivities or special ceremonies were taking place, this was a method of extending both participation and the areas involved. Even in its most simplistic form, the procession demonstrates the moving of participants from one location to another, therefore, it is possible for more people to be involved in the festivities, maybe even two separate groups of religious participants, from different religious locations, along with all those able to watch (and so passively participate) en route. The use of iconographical evidence such as from frescoes, seals and rings can enlighten the subject of processions. However it is also prudent to look at the sites themselves and what can be noted as possible routes for the procession. Where would they begin and end, what major features would they pass by, do the processional routes have limited access? When considering the palace centres of the Greek mainland, it is possible to notice the existence of potential processional routes. The Cult Centre at Mycenae has already been noted for its numerous religious buildings, all more likely than not having a slightly different ritualistic function. Moreover, the Megaron which stands much higher within the citadel, although greatly lacking in signs of religious practice (other than the purification area in the porch, see section 6.4), is known to be the seat of the ruler (wanak) and any associated elites. Therefore, it is likely that processions would start or culminate at the Megaron. A path clearly passes from the upper levels of the citadel down to the Cult Centre.562 Although a relatively small path if its purpose is to accommodate large numbers of viewing participants, it would be possible for a limited number of people to gather at intervals along the route. The size of this path however, is more than satisfactory if the aim of the procession is merely to pass by the important areas of the citadel performing a kind of blessing and protecting ritual, as is still practiced in Greek villages and homes today where participants follow on behind the procession led by the Papas. Supporting, and in many cases justifying any suggestion of procession at Mycenae, is the evidence provided by frescoes.

562 Although it must be acknowledged that the chronology of the routes between each part of the Cult Centre which connect the upper level (megaron and Tsountas Shrine) to the lower level (Temple and Room with the Fresco) are not absolutely clear. However, the procession would at least lead to the upper level of the Cult Centre, even if one believes the lower levels were inaccessible from above.

- 129 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE It has been noted a frequent theme in Mycenaean wall painting is of processions of life-sized women in Minoan dress (a tight bodice with exposed breasts and flounced skirt), each bearing an offering and proceeding towards an unspecified goal.563 At Mycenae, Immerwahr has noted the fresco evidence testifies to as many as five female processional scenes, although their precise original location is unknown, with the exception of the fragments from the Cult Centre (My Nos. 3-5). The frescoes of women from the Citadel House area and Cult Centre, some of which belong to the processional class, are highlighted by Immerwahr as being important in suggesting the goal of the procession.564 Immerwahr goes on to note that, the fresco evidence from Pylos differs from the other palatial sites as it also has male processional figures. From the vestibule came fragments of a procession of bearers carrying small offerings, about 30cm in height (Py NO.8). Some of the men wore kilts (or drawers?), but others wore long ceremonial bordered robes, and they carried various objects, including a wicker tray. 565 Lang has noted close similarities between Minoan and Mycenaean Palatial art only seem apparent in that of human processions rather than any other depictions. 566 The topic of shared and continuing beliefs between the two civilizations continues to be a topic of interest, and the extent to which the Mycenaeans absorbed Minoan culture is unknown, if accepted at all. The existence at Pylos of frescoes depicting procession, including similarities in dress must suggest a possible connection with the Minoan practice. That is not to say, simply because females dressed in the Minoan style and processing in a similar fashion to their Cretan predecessors, it is to be believed what we have at Pylos is a directly corresponding ceremony. However, it does indicate that in some form, whether it is from trade or elite society connections, this imagery has come into the Mycenaean arena. The existence of the fresco (mentioned above Py NO.8) in the Vestibule of the main palace also indicates the importance placed in the scene. All high officials, elites, and honoured guests visiting the palace and entering the Megaron would have passed by these frescos. Moreover, it could be said that due to the positioning of these frescos this could further justify the role of the Megaron as being part of religious ceremonies within the palace, becoming a central feature of ritual processions. The existence of the libation channel next to the throne, discussed above (section 5.3), supports this for the case of the Palace of Nestor. 563 564 565 566

Immerwahr 1990 : 114 Immerwahr 1990 : 117 Immerwahr 1990 : 117 Lang 1969 : 28

The palace at Tiryns also provides fresco evidence for grand processions which consists of at least eight and probably many more, life-size women moving in both directions. The women are shown in exaggerated profile (with the exception of their skirts), and walking in bare feet along a dado simulating a wooden beam.567 Unfortunately, the frescoes had been stripped from the palace walls and thrown into the rubbish deposit on the west slope, therefore their original location is unknown. The obvious limitations of the fresco evidence in the Mycenaean world, is the fact that only the situations within palatial contexts are highlighted. From a chronological standpoint the fresco evidence has a terminus of approximately 1200BC when the main destruction of the palatial centres took place. Another factor to be taken into account when trying to identify processions is the location where artefacts and objects to be used in ceremonies are stored. That is to say, if items which are generally accepted as being of ritual use, such as rhyta and deity images (figures) are found in storage rooms near access routes or main paths of settlements, rather than in a shrine context, the reasoning should be considered. This idea was put forward recently by Demakopoulou in relation to the finds from Midea. A large wheel-made female figure of fine quality, (which she believes could be a representation of a deity), was found which had most probably fallen from a high shelf in one of the store rooms running along the south stretch of the fortification walls, very close to the West Gate. Due to the clearly sacred function of this object, being found in such a location she suggests that it could be explained by the ceremony starting from this area where, someone would be given the deity (representation), to then become part of the procession.568 Therefore, the palatial evidence shows clearly that procession was a standard part of Mycenaean ceremonial activity; however, the situation is much more doubtful elsewhere, as there is no fresco evidence from the lesser settlement sites of the mainland. Unfortunately, the same must be said for evidence available at isolated shrines of any phase from the LH III B to Protogeometric periods. Fresco work is obviously unavailable from shrines which have no built structures; and the same applies with any attempt to recreate processional paths. The only speculative comment that can be made, associates the journey from a settled area to the isolated shrine.

567

Immerwahr 1990 : 114 Demakopoulou unpublished paper ‘Excavations at Midea’ Nottingham University 13/3/2008 568

- 130 -

RITUALISTIC ACTIONS If this were on the day of a special celebration where a ritual meal may commence; one can assume a number of people would travel together, carrying the food, animals, offerings and other paraphernalia which were needed for the festivities. This journey could in essence become part of the festivities, with the items to be offered making their journey from their place of manufacture / growth, to their place of dedication.

- 131 -

7.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

In the above chapters the religious sites of mainland Greece and the nearby islands have been presented with their cult assemblages, location and features in order to classify them as sacred sites in accordance with the criteria set out in Chapter Two. The shrines have then been considered alongside their surroundings to ascertain the provision for space and inclusion. Finally, the offerings and ritual practices which would have been performed and participated in throughout the periods in question were considered.

7.2.

TIME

The research into shrine surroundings (the space which can be evidenced internally and in its associated environment) proved interesting on a number of levels: ™

limited space both inside and outside of settlement shrines in the LH III B period, ™ a ‘lack of exploitation’ at the isolated shrines of all periods under consideration, ™ the changed topographical location of isolated shrines of the Protogeometric period, ™ a likely connection between abandoned Mycenaean settlements and newly established Protogeometric shrines (see Chapter Four, and below).

By addressing the broad topics mentioned above this study has successfully followed a methodological approach to assess ritual practice from the LH III B through to the end of the Protogeometric periods. In order to summarise the main findings of the study, this chapter will be divided into four sections, three of which represent the integral themes followed; A Systematic Methodology, Shrine Surroundings through time and Ritual Practice through time. The study will conclude with some final thoughts, including the use of data gathered to consider the main characteristics of society throughout the period.

7.1.

A SYSTEMATIC METHODOLOGY

The aim of this study was to consider shrine sites from a number of different periods; LH III B, LH III C and the transition into the Protogeometric period. A systematic method to identify sacred sites was thought essential for this research to be achieved. The criteria created (Chapter Two, figure 1) enabled each site under consideration to be treated with the same procedure in order to ascertain its categorisation as a shrine site. Equally, the criteria enabled an accurate account for why sites might not be able to be classified as communal shrines. This proved particularly successful as a basis to understand shrine sites throughout the period at hand; noting any differences they may possess with ease due to the standardised layout of the Gazetteer. Once the sites within the Gazetteer (Chapter Three) had been fully investigated and presented, the chapter became a source of reference for any site detail when required and will continue to provide such assistance for future research.

SHRINE SURROUNDINGS THROUGH

It was found that built shrines of the LH III B period were without exception small in internal dimensions, which would result in only a very limited number of people being able to enter the shrine at any one time. The Palatial shrines tend to have open courtyards directly outside, which although not very large in size, were not walled or purposefully restricted from vision. This would have resulted in more people, with potentially the majority of the palatial workers, being able to congregate and view ritual actions taking place in the shrine courtyards. (See section 4.2) After the palatial destruction of ca. 1200 BC many of the palatial sites evidenced the instigation of rebuilding projects, which included their shrine areas of the LH III C period. This demonstrated a desire to connect with the past, by re-establishing the shrines in the same areas which were previously utilized. On the other hand, settlement shrines of the LH III B period either had no open-air courtyard, or when evident, they were walled off. Consequently anyone standing outside the enclosed area would have been completely excluded. In the LH III C period many of the settlements which had shown cult practice in the previous period, had gone out of use. However, different settlement shrines have been noted as containing built shrines, which suggest a continuing desire to include a space for cult practice within the settled area. As with the LH III B period, internal space was still limited, without provision for external open courts in which worshippers could gather. This lack of allocated external space showed a marked difference to the palatial shrines which encouraged participation with open-air courtyards and altar features.

- 132 -

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION Evidence for the transition between the LH III C and Protogeometric periods is severely lacking. No secure evidence for built urban shrines can be found in the transitional post-LH III C period, or the Protogeometric period itself. Worship practiced at open-air isolated shrines which were accessible and inclusive to all was evidenced in the LH III B, LH III C and the Protogeometric periods. Although the settlement shrines of the LH III B period were restrictive in terms of space and possible participants; the contemporary isolated shrines are the complete opposite. These open-air shrines would provide the location for ritual activities en masse, in addition to a space which the local population could frequent and dedicate votive offerings to the gods as and when they please. An interesting theme associated with isolated shrines throughout the entire period at hand, is the ‘lack of exploitation’ employed at the shrines. It is clear that although the shrines were frequented by the general populace, the ruling elite did not attempt to take control of the sites; either to exclude participation, or display their wealth and power. Consequently, the material from shrines of the LH III B period in association with space and surroundings, leads to the belief that the ruling class did not attempt to either control, impose, or sell themselves to the general populace. The isolated open-air shrines, at which the great majority of the populace would have worshipped, were ideally located. Being that these shrines were accessible to all who chose to attend, visible from the surrounding regions, and potentially land with no ownership (due to the lack of boundaries or structures), the shrine area would have been available as an arena for the ruling class to impress the general public with displays of wealth, and also reaffirm themselves as rulers of the land. This however, did not seem of importance to the Mycenaean ruling class; they did not construct imposing architecture at the shrines which segregated worshippers, or leave any signs that they were attempting to emphasize their ‘ruling’ power. This sets them aside from other ancient civilisations, such as the Minoans and Egyptians, who readily used Religious structures as domains for the display of wealth. By considering the isolated shrines, reflections on the changing ethos of contemporary society can also be drawn. The populace chose to change the topographical location of newly established (Protogeometric) open-air shrines. In the previous LH III B period, isolated shrines were located in the highlands, often on mountain or hill tops; accessible in so far as the shrines had no approach boundaries, but on the other hand not easily accessible due to their elevated locations. In the Protogeometric period,

isolated shrines were established in lowland areas, near routes used for travelling from one region to the next. There must have been a reason for this change, as it was not a single or regional occurrence, but was true of all newly established shrines. Morgan has suggested that the newly chosen locations would have assisted with communication links enabling festivities to be hosted at these sites; therefore making it easier for participants to join from neighbouring regions, resulting in the gradual development of a new social structure (see section 4.3). This suggestion is indeed a practical and likely scenario in a society which was attempting once again to create a prosperous civilisation after their ancestors had experienced palatial collapse. I suggest however, that the founders of these chosen lowland locations sought a connection with the past; their Mycenaean ancestors. Many shrines of the Protogeometric period were established very close to or exactly on, the sites of abandoned Mycenaean settlements. I believe this was the main criteria for the newly chosen sites, alongside the desire to relocate the shrines in a more accessible lowland location. The combination of both these factors resulted in a practical location for inter-regional communication, as well as remembrance and connection to the successes of the Mycenaean era (section 4.3).

7.3.

RITUAL PRACTICE THROUGH TIME

The discussion of offerings dedicated at shrines noted that terracotta figurines were the most common votive to be evidenced. It was found that in the LH III B period, figurines were quite common amongst settlement and isolated shrines, although, not always present. Examples were found both in the female and animal (mainly bovid) form, whereas the Protogeometric period favoured the bovid; with only female figurines present at Kalapodi. It is clear that the practice of dedicating votive figurines was constant at shrines of the LH III B, LH III C and Protogeometric periods; however the latter period displayed significantly fewer quantities per shrine. In fact, many of the shrines of the Protogeometric period only evidenced a few examples, where evident at all. Therefore although the practice of dedicating animal figurines was a continuation through the periods, it was much reduced. The practice of libation was also considered, resulting in a better understanding of the widespread role the offering of liquids held at shrines of the LH III B period. Although all categories of shrine from the LH III B period (Palatial, settlement and isolated) provided evidence for this ritual action, it was completely absent at shrines of the Protogeometric period. It must be acknowledged however, that it is

- 133 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE quite likely the practice could still have been in action; but with the use of different paraphernalia and vessels. That is to say, to date, a fair amount of research has been carried out on rhyta and other pottery forms which would most likely suit the practice of libation. However, this topic has not been explored within the context of Protogeometric shrines and their pottery assemblages. Therefore, it must be considered whether further research may change the current belief of the apparent abandonment of libation practices, in favour of an adaptation of the practice with the use of different vessels. After all, liquids can be poured (into the ground) from any vessel type! The ritual action which provides the best evidence throughout the period at hand is the ‘ritual meal’. A number of activities are considered as constituting this activity; feasting, sacrifice and drinking. From the corpus of information which exists, it can be said with all certainty that the ritual meal encompassing all three of these activities was present within a shrine setting, throughout the LH III B, LH III C and into the Protogeometric period. An interesting deduction is the Palatial ‘role division’ of these ritual practices. That is to say, large scale sacrifice and feasting was evidenced at both the Palace of Nestor and the citadel of Midea; located on opposite sides of the Peloponnese. However, the evidence for these practices at both Tiryns and Mycenae; both located in the Argolid very close to Midea, is very scant indeed. I suggest that the Palace of Nestor would have served the Western Peloponnese, Midea the Eastern Peloponnese; where celebrations and ceremonies would have taken place, to which regional and possibly inter-regional guests would have been invited. The fact neither Tiryns nor Mycenae have left any material remains of such events, could mean the residence chose not to participate in sacrifice or feasting rituals. However, I think it much more likely the residents of the palace centres and elites of the surrounding region would have joined together at centres such as Midea and Pylos for communal celebrations.569 (see section 6.3 for full discussion). The act of animal sacrifice, and the species selected also provided some insight. It was noted that at settlement associated shines, sacrifice was very common and small species such as pig and sheep/goat were mostly used in the ritual action. The Palace of Nestor evidenced sacrificial remains from large quantities of bovids; where as Midea included both bovid and small species. An important division must be made however, although large quantities of bovid remains were found at locations around the Palace of 569

That is not to say other such centres did not exist in other areas of Greece where regional festivities would take place, but no such sites have so far been discovered.

Nestor; no bone remains were found in the shrine area of Room 93 and court 92. This testifies to the deliberate movement of this ritual action outside the shrine enclosure and into the arena of the entire palace centre. At Midea on the other hand, sacrifice of bovids (and other species) was evidenced on a large scale within the megaron complex of the lower terraces, as well as within the shrine rooms; testifying to the practice both as a revered exclusive ritual action, in addition to an activity for large scale participation. It is also believed that these events accommodated many roles within the secular and sacred sphere. In cases such as the palatial sacrifice and feasting at Midea and the Palace of Nestor it is likely the event carried with it some social meaning and consequences, whether it was the entertainment of elites and rulers from other regions and countries, or the celebration of a young mans rite of passage. These events were large affairs with the opportunity for those in power to share and display the power and wealth they controlled, although it must be remembered that although this may have been part of the reasoning, the heart of the event still found a sacred connection via the offering of animals to the gods. On the other hand, the more modest offerings and meals found at settlement shrines were less likely to find any principal motivation in a wish to display power and wealth. Small animal species being offered in humble quantities reflected a desire to carry out a ritual action within their chosen sacred setting, purely in honour of the gods. The only shrine outside the palatial sphere which has produced remains of bovine sacrifice in the LH III B period is that of Apollo Maleatas. Although the altar complex where the bovine remains were found is open-air, this shrine is in very close proximity to a settlement which it must be considered to be associated with. In addition to the rich offerings made at this site, it is suggested the settlement on the hill was actually of some wealth and standing. Isolated shrines of the LH III B period do not show any evidence for animal sacrifice; this must mean that the great majority of the populace were not participating in this ritual action in the context of a communal shrine. Obviously those who ruled over the palace centres and the settlements were more interested in the practice, as it is evidenced within their shrines. As Chapter Four highlighted, the settlement shrines were very restricting, both in access and surrounding space; this results in two realisations, the general populace were not initiating the practice of animal sacrifice (at a communal level), and they had little chance to join in such activities. This situation changed considerably in the Protogeometric period with every isolated shrine

- 134 -

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION having evidence for animal sacrifice on a considerable scale; thus making this ritual action accessible to the entire populace (section 6.3). It is not easy to assume who initiated and funded these events and dedications, however, as the offering of animals for sacrifice would not be a practical venture for the poorer members of society, it can be suggested that the wealthier classes, which were evidenced in the Protogeometric period at sites such as Nichoria, would sponsor such events. This scenario could find a connection to the past, in that the same class of people were initiating sacrificial practice; however in the later period the event was moved from the confines of small built shrines, to the open-air sites at which more people could participate. A wise move in a society which was regaining hierarchy as it grew towards the era of the Polis State. Drinking as part of ritual practice was also considered and found to be common practice throughout the LH III B to Protogeometric periods. Where evident at palatial and settlement associated shrines, the pottery forms were few in numbers, suggesting that participation levels were low. The only exception to the rule, being the Palace of Nestor, with drinking cups evident in abundance signifying drinking activities on a large scale throughout the palace and shrine area. However, the appearance of drinking at isolated shrines of all periods is testament to this ritual action being practiced by all levels of society. A section was also dedicated to the possibility that many features often classified as libation installations, or for that matter, features hardly discussed when published; could be Purification features. It became apparent that a certain number of features could be seen to accommodate the movement of liquid from a higher place, directly into the ground; where as other features were designed to hold liquid, with no provision for it to pass to the floor/ground or a receiving vessel. In addition, another difference was noted in the positioning of these features. In some cases a feature would form a central feature of the room (the libation channel in the Megaron at Pylos for instance), in others the feature would be found outside or in a porch way (the feature in the Mycenae Megaron Porch for instance). I believe that this as well as a features ability to hold or channel liquid can be used to assist in classifying either libation or purification practices. This being the case, quite a number of features were identified which could have been for the practice of purification rituals before entering a shrine or sacred area. The final ritual action to be considered was that of the sacred Procession. The available evidence comes mainly in the form of frescoes and depictions on smaller artefacts such as gold rings, and also from the possible palatial processional routes visible at sites.

Due to the size of the palace shrines, the numerous fresco depictions and often the stored location of cult statues, it is accepted that the procession was very likely an integral part of palatial ritual practice. Whether this was also the case at settlements of the LH III B or following periods is difficult to tell, due to the material remains.

7.4.

FINAL THOUGHTS

CHARACTERISTICS OF SOCIETY THROUGH TIME One can attempt to recreate the contemporary characteristics of society from the evidence provided by ritual practices. In the LH III B period, a hierarchical society is easily identifiable from the settlement pattern (section 1.2). Those in power were accommodating and inclusive concerning the open-air spaces of their shrine areas. Two of the palatial centres have been noted for their large scale festivities, which would have accommodated large numbers of participants, possibly from inter-regional locations. In addition, they chose not to exploit the isolated shrines to their own ends; instead leaving them for use by the general populace. These factors signify that ruling classes in the LH III B period did not aim to control every aspect of society. Instead, they realised the benefits of holding large scale festivities to encourage inter-regional communication, in addition to allowing the lower levels of society to view rituals in their shrine courtyards so not to create absolute exclusion or division. In the LH III C period the situation continued much the same (after a phase of destruction and reestablishment) with evidence testifying to large scale sacrificial meals (Midea, section 6.3), alongside worship at each of the shrine types (palatial, settlement and isolated). This period not only signified the continued attempts at communication links, but also the continued use of the same variety of sacred sites from the previous period. This is testament to the existence of numerous spheres of society, living and worshipping relatively harmoniously as in the previous period. In the Protogeometric period interesting developments can be witnessed which clearly suggest a desire to connect with the ancestral past. Settlement evidence has testified to the existence of societies which display the presence of higher and lower levels of society, represented in the domestic architecture. However, all securely identifiable shrines of the period are located isolated from settlements in the open-air. As was mentioned above (section 7.2), these isolated shrines were not manipulated in any way by the ruling class.

- 135 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

Moreover, the practices surrounding large feasts at palatial centres of the LH III B / LH III C periods, for the purpose of regional communication, are now relocated to the open-air shrines. The isolated shrines of this period, show quantities of animal remains which would have to come from the patronage of wealthy members of society (see section 4.3). Once again demonstrating a community where displays of wealth were made via dedications for sacrifice, however, in a location completely open and accessible to all members of society. The newly established location of the isolated shrines in lowland locations emphasises the desire to encourage participation. Being placed in such areas would have attracted groups or individuals who were not necessarily part of nearby settlements, thus potentially adopting new persons into nearby settlements and so facilitating community growth. This is all the more apparent when noting the newly established shrines are in close proximity to abandoned ancestral Mycenaean settlements. Reiterating the principal concern for the re-building of a society which remembers and is connected with the successes of the civilised past.

no archaeological remains, and libation could have been performed using simple pottery forms of dining use. Purification possibly did not continue, being that it could not be found to exist at open-air shrines of the previous LH III B / LH III C periods; it is less likely it would be evident in the later period. The body of information which has been collected in this study speaks for itself, as testament to the continuation of many of the ritual actions which were practiced at the end of the Mycenaean Palatial period, and carried forward into the following Protogeometric period. What can be witnessed is a society which needed to make certain adaptations to their practice in order to become more inclusive. However, new methods of cult practice cannot be identified; the populace merely simplified the practices of their religion, from the numerous shrine types of the LH III B period, into one isolated open-air form accessible by all in the Protogeometric period.

CONCLUDING REMARKS A simplistic explanation such as ‘cult continuity’, seems unjust and far too blinkered an opinion to use on the corpus of archaeological evidence which has been gathered here to access the situation surrounding, Ritual Practice throughout the Late Bronze Age and Protogeometric periods of Greece. I believe however, that this is the core phrase which should be used in place of what could become a pretentious attempt not to use it. This study has focused on Ritual Practice; the actions which constitute aspects of a ritual and parts of a sacred ceremony or festival. It has not considered the ideology which lies behind these ritual actions, or what gods, goddess, pantheon of gods or goddesses, were worshipped. The ideology is a separate topic, and I am not suggesting that just because the ritual actions continue; then the ideologies do in turn. However, it has been shown that those ritual actions which were present in the LH III B period were also mainly present in the Protogeometric period. Sacrifice and the ‘ritual meal’ which constituted eating and drinking, as well as the dedication of terracotta figurines were all activities which traversed the palatial collapse and transitional period. Those that were not present in the Protogeometric period; Procession, purification and libation are not easily identifiable in the archaeological record. Therefore, it is very possible those activities were also present in the Protogeometric period. Procession would have left - 136 -

8.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abramovitz, K (1980) ‘Frescos from Ayia Irini, Keos. Parts II-IV’, Hesperia 49(1), pp:57-85. Athens. Akerstrom, A (1988) ‘Cultic Installations in Mycenaean Rooms and Tombs’, in E.B. French and K.A.Wardle, Problems in Greek Prehistory, pp:201-210. Bristol. Alberti, B (2002) ‘Gender and the Figurative Art of Late Bronze Age Knossos’, in Y. Hamilakis (ed.), Labyrinth Revisited: Rethinking Minoan Archaeology, pp: 98-117. Oxford. Albers, G (1996) ‘Comparative Aspects of Regional Cult Structures of the Late Bronze and Early Iron Ages in the East Mediterranean (Aegean, Cyprus, Levant-Palestine)’, in Atti E Memorie Del Secondo Congresso Internazionale Di Micenologia [Incunabula Graeca Vol. XCVIII, 2], pp:647-662. Roma. (2001) ‘Rethinking Mycenaean sanctuaries’, in R. Laffineur and R.Hagg, Potnia : Dieties & Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age, [Aegaeum 22] pp:131-141. Liège. Alcock, S and R, Osborne (1994) Placing the Gods. Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in Ancient Greece. Oxford. Antonaccio, C. M. (1994) ‘Placing the Past: The Bronze Age in the Cultic Topography of Early Greece’, in S.E. Alcock and R. Osborne, Placing the Gods. Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in Ancient Greece, pp:79-104. Oxford. (1995). An Archaeology of Ancestors. Tomb cult and Hero cult in the Early Iron Age. Maryland; London. Åström, P and K. Demakopoulou (1986) ‘New Excavations in the Citadel of Midea 1983-1984’, Opuscula Atheniensia 16, pp:19-25. Stockholm Beard, M. and J.North (1990) Pagan Priests. Religion & power in the Ancient World. London. Bell, C (1992) Ritual theory. Ritual practice. Oxford (1997) Ritual. Perspectives and Dimensions. Oxford. Bendall, L.M (2004) ‘Fit for a King? Hierarchy, Exclusion, Aspiration and Desire in the Social Structure of Mycenaean Banqueting’, in P, Halstead and J.C, Barrett. Food, Cuisine and Society in Prehistoric Greece, pp:105135. Oxford. Bennet, J and C.W. Shelmerdine (2001) ‘Not the Place of Nestor: The Development of the ‘Lower Town’ and other Non-Palatial Settlements in LBA Messenia’, in K, Branigan, Urbanism in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:135-140. Sheffield. Benton, S (1938) ‘Excavations in Ithaca, III’ BSA 35, pp:45-73. London. (1942) ‘Excavations in Ithaca, III; The Cave at Polis, II’ BSA 39, pp1-51. London. (1953) ‘Further Excavations at Aetos’ BSA 48, pp:255-362. London. Bergman, J (1987) ‘Religio-Phenomenological Reflections on the Multi-Level Process of Giving to the Gods’ in T, Linders and G, Nordquist, Gifts to the Gods, pp: 31-42. Uppsala.

- 137 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE Bergquist, B (1988) ‘The Archaeology of Sacrifice: Minoan-Mycenaean versus Greek’, in R.Hagg, N.Marinatos and G.C Nordquist, Early Greek Cult Practice, pp:21-34. Goteborg. Blegen, C.W and M. Rawson (1966a) The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Messenia. Vol I Part 1. Princeton. (1966b) The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Messenia. Vol I Part 3. Princeton. Blegen, C.W, M. Rawson, W.D Taylor and W.P Donovan. (1973) The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Messenia III. Cincinnati. Bonnefoy, Y (1991) Greek and Egyptian Mythologies. Chicago. Bookidis, N and R. S. Stroud. (1997) Corinth. The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore. Topography and Architecture. Vol XVIII Part III. Athens. Bradley, R (1998) The Passage of Arms. An archaeological analysis of prehistoric hoard and votive deposits. Oxford. (2000) An Archaeology of Natural Places. London and New York. Bremmer, J.N (1994) ’Greek Religion’, Greece & Rome 24. Oxford. (1998) ‘‘Religion’, ‘Ritual’ and the Opposition ‘Sacred vs Profane’, in Burkert, W Ansichten griechischer Rituale Geburtstag – Symposium fur Walter Burkert. Walter de Gruyter Burdajewicz, Mariusz (1990) ‘The Aegean Sea Peoples and Religious Architecture in the Eastern Mediterranean at the Close of the Late Bronze Age’, BAR International Series 558. Oxford. Burkert, Walter (1985) Greek Religion: Archaic and Classical. Oxford. (1987) ‘Offerings in Perspective: Surrender, Distribution, Exchange’, in T, Linders and the Gods, pp:43-50. Uppsala.

G, Nordquist, Gifts to

Buxton, R (2000) Oxford Readings in Greek Religion. Oxford. Cain, C, D (2001) ‘Dancing in the Dark: Deconstructing a Narrative of Epiphany on the Isopata Ring’, AJA 105(1), pp:27-49. Archaeological Institute of America. Caskey, J.L (1962) ‘Excavations in Keos, 1960-1961’ in Hesperia 31(3), pp:263-283. Athens. (1971) ‘Investigations in Keos: Part I: Excavations and Expeditions, 1966-1970’, in Hesperia 40(4), pp:359-396. Athens. (1979) ‘Ayia Irini, Keos: The successive periods of occupation’, in American Journal of Archaeology pp:412. Archaeological Institute of America.

83(4),

Casky, M. E (1981) ‘Ayia Irini, Kea: The terracotta statues and the cult in the temple’, in R, Hagg and N.Marinatos, Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:127-135. Stockholm Catling, W (1982) ‘Archaeology in Greece 1981 – 1982’ AR 28. London.

- 138 -

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Catling, H.W (1955) ‘A Mycenaean terracotta figure from the Menelaion’, BSA 90, pp:183-194. London. Cavanagh, W (2001) ‘Empty Space? Courts and Squares in Mycenaean Towns’ in K, Branigan, Urbanism in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:119-134. Sheffield. Cavanagh, W.G and J.H Crouwel. (1992). ‘Melathria: A Small Mycenaean Rural Settlement’, in J. M, Sanders Philolakon: Lakonian Studies in honour of Hector Catling, pp: 77-86. Athens Cavanagh, W and C, Mee (1998) ‘A Private Place: Death in Prehistoric Greece’, Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology CXXV. Jonsered Chadwick, J (1984) ‘What do we know about Mycenaean Religion’, in A. Morpurges Davies. & Y. Duhoux, Linear B: A 1984 Survey, pp:191-202. Louvain-la-Neuve. Cherry, J.F and J.LDavies (2001) ‘Under the Sceptre of Agamemnon’: The View from the Hinterlands of Mycenae’, in K, Branigan Urbanism in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:141-160. Sheffield. Coldstream, J.N (1977) Geometric Greece. London. Coleman, K, J, Lawrence and Majewski and Marjorie Reich (1973) ‘Frescoes from Ayia Irini, Keos. Part I’, Hesperia 42(3), pp:284-300. Athens. Cosmopoulos, M.B. (2003) ‘Mycenaean Religion at Eleusis: The Architecture & Stratigraphy of Megaron B’, in M.B Cosmopoulos Greek Mysteries. The Archaeology and Ritual of Ancient Greek Secret Cults, pp:1-24. London & New York Crowley, J (1992) ‘The Icon Imperative: Rules of Composition in Aegean Art’ in R. Laffineur and J. L. Crowley (eds.), EIKON: Aegean Bronze Age Iconography: Shaping a Methodology [Aegaeum 8] pp: 23-36. Liège. De Polignac, F (1995) Cults, Territory, and the Origins of the Greek City-State. Chicago. Deger-Jalkotzy, S and I.S Lemos (2008) Ancient Greece: From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer. Edinburgh. Demakopoulou, K. (1982) Το Μυκηναικο ιερο στο Αμυκλαιο και η ΥΕ ΙΙΙ Γ περιοδοσ στν Λακωνια. Athens. (1999) ‘A Mycenaean Terracotta Figure from Midea’, in P, Betancourt, V, Karageorghis, R, Laffineur and W-D, Niemeier. MELETEMATA I. [Aegaeum 20], pp:197-206. Liège. Demakopoulou, K and N, Divari-Valakou (2001a) ‘Evidence for Cult Practice at Midea: Figures, Figurines and Ritual Objects’, in R. Laffineur, and R.Hagg. Potnia : Dieties & Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age. [Aegaeum 22] pp:181-191. Liège Demakopoulou, K, N. Divari-Valakou, P. Astrom and G. Walberg (2001b) ‘Work in Midea 1997-1999: Excavation, Conservation, Restoration’, Opuscula Atheniensia 2000-2001 25-26, pp: 35-52. Stockholm. Demakopoulou, K. N Divari-Valakou, and A, Schallin. (2004) ‘Excavations in Midea 2002’ Opuscula Atheniensia 28 2003, pp:7-28. Stockholm

- 139 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

Demakopoulou, K. N Divari-Valakou, A, Schallin. L.Sjogren and M.Nilsson. (2006) ‘Excavations in Midea 2004’ Opuscula Atheniensia 30 2005, pp:7-34. Stockholm. Desborough, V. R. ‘A. (1964) The Last Mycenaeans and their Successors. An Archaeological Survey. Oxford. Dickinson, O.T.P.K (1992) ‘Reflections on Bronze Age Laconia’, in J.M Sanders. Philolakon: Lakonian Studies in honour of Hector Catling, pp109-114. Athens. (2006) The Aegean from Bronze Age to Iron Age. Continuity and change between the twelfth and eighth centuries BC. London and New York. (2008) ‘The Mycenaean heritage of Early Iron Age Greece’, in S Deger-Jalkotzy and I.S, Lemos. Greece. From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer, pp:115-122. Edinburgh.

Ancient

Dietler, M and Hayden B (2001) ‘Digesting the Feast: Good to eat, good to drink, good to think. An Introduction’, in M. Dietler and B, Hayden, Feasts. Archaeological and Ethnographic perspectives on food, politics, and power, pp:1-22. London. Eder, B (1999) ‘Ancient Elis in the Dark Ages’ in ΠΡΑΤΙΚΑ: Η Περιφερεια του Μυκηναικου Κοσμου, pp:263-268. Lamia. (2001) ‘Continuity of Bronze Age Cult at Olympia? The Evidence of the Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Pottery’, in R. Laffineur and R.Hagg. Potnia: Dieties & Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age. [Aegaeum 22] pp:201-209. Liège (2008) ‘The World of Telemachus: Western Greece 1200-700 BC.’ in S Deger-Jalkotzy and I.S, Lemos. Ancient Greece. From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer, pp:549-580. Edinburgh. Evely, D, I.S.Lemos, and S.Sherratt (eds.). (1996) Minotaur and Centaur: Studies in the Archaeology of Crete and Euboea Presented to Mervyn Popham. Oxford. Forstenpointner, G (2003) ‘Promethean legacy: investigations into the ritual procedure of ‘Olympian’ sacrifice’ in E, Kotjabopoulou Y. Hamilakis, P. Halstead, C. Gamble, and P. Elefanti. Zooarchaeology in Greece: Recent advances. [British School at Athens Studies 9], pp:203-213. Athens. Foxhall, L (1995) ‘Bronze to Iron: Agricultural systems and Political structures in Late Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Greece’, in BSA 90, pp:239-250. London French, E. (1971) ‘The Development of Mycenaean Terracotta Figurines’, BSA 66, pp:101-188. London (1981a) ‘Mycenaean figures and figurines: their typology and function’, in R, Hagg and N, Marinatos, Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:173-177. Stockholm. (1981b) ‘Cult Places at Mycenae’, in R, Hagg and N, Marinatos, Sanctuaries and Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:41-48. Stockholm (1998) ‘The Ups and Downs of Mycenae: 1250-1150 BCE’, in S, Gitin, A, Mazar and E, Stern Mediterranean peoples in transition: thirteenth to early tenth centuries BCE, pp:2-5. Jerusalem. (2001) ‘The Mycenae Figures’, in R. Laffineur and R.Hagg, Potnia: Dieties & Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age. [Aegaeum 22] pp:275-276. Liège

- 140 -

BIBLIOGRAPHY (2002) Mycenae : Agamemnon's capital : the site and its setting. Stroud. (2003) ‘ “Horses for Courses”: Differentiation in the usage of Figures and Figurines’ in KonsolakiYiannopoulou (ed.), Argosaronikos: Praktika 1ou Diethnous Synedriou Istorias kai Archaiologias touj Argosaronikou Tomos A’, pp:311-316. Athens. French, E. B and K.A.Wardle (1988) Problems in Greek Prehistory. Bristol. Frizell, B.S (1986) Asine II. Results of the Excavations East of the Acropolis 1970-1974. Fasc.3 The Late and Final Mycenaean Periods. Stockholm. Gadolou, A (2002) ‘The formation of the sacred landscapes of the Eastern Argolid, 900-700 BC. A religious, social and political survey’, in R, Hagg. Peloponnesian Sanctuaries and Cults. Stockholm. Galaty, M.L. and W.A Parkinson. (1999) Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces, New interpretations of an old idea. Los Angeles. Gallou, Chrysanthi (2005) ‘The Mycenaean cult of the dead’ BAR International Series 1372. Oxford. Gebhard, E.R and F.P. Hemans. (1992) ‘University of Chicago Excavations at Isthmia, 1989: I.’ Hesperia 61(1) pp:1-77. Athens Gebhard, E.R. (1987) ‘The Early Sanctuary of Poseidon at Isthmia’ AJA 91(3) pp:475-476. Archaeological Institute of America (1999a) ‘The Topography of the Central Isthmian Plateau’ in C, Morgan The Late Bronze Age Settlement & Early Iron Age Sanctuary. Isthmia VIII. The American School of Classical Studies at Athens. (1999b) ‘The location of the Early Iron Age Activity’, in C, Morgan The Late Bronze Age Settlement & Early Iron Age Sanctuary. Isthmia VIII. The American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Gesell, G (1987) ‘The Minoan Palace and Public Cult’, in R. Hägg and N. Marinatos (eds.), The Function of the Minoan Palaces, pp:123-127. Stockholm Gitin, Symour, A, Mazar and E, Stern (1998) Mediterranean peoples in transition: thirteenth to early tenth centuries BCE. Jerusalem. Hagg, R (1981a) ‘Official and Popular cults in Mycenaean Greece’. in. R, Hagg and N, Marinatos Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:35-39. Stockholm (1981b) ‘The House Sanctuary at Asine Revisited’. in. R, Hagg and N, Marinatos Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:91-94. Stockholm (1983) The Greek Renaissance of the Eighth Century B.C.: Tradition and Innovation. Stockholm (1990) ‘The Role of libations in Mycenaean ceremony and cult’ in R, Hagg and G.C. Nordquist, Celebrations of Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid, pp:177-184. Stockholm (1992) ‘Sanctuaries and Workshops in the Bronze age Aegean’ in T Linders & B. Alroth. Economics of cult in the Greek world. Uppsala. (1995) ‘State and Religion in Mycenaean Greece’ in R.Laffineur and W.D Niemeier Politeia: Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age. Vol II [Aegaeum 12] pp:387-391. Leige

- 141 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE (1996a) ‘The Religion of the Mycenaeans Twenty-Four Years after the 1967 Mycenological Congress in Rome’. In E. De Miro, L. Godart, and A. Sacconi, Atti e memorie del secondo Congresso internazionale di micenologia, Roma-Napoli 2: Storia (Incunabula graeca 98) pp: 599-612. Rome (1998) Ancient Greek Cult Practice from the Archaeological Evidence. Stockholm (1996b) The Role of Religion in the Early Greek Polis. Stockholm. (1997) The Function of the ‘Minoan Villa’. Proceedings of the Eight International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens. Stockholm (2001) ‘Ritual action in Mycenaean Religion’ BICS 45 pp:175-176. London. (2002) Peloponnesian Sanctuaries and Cults. Stockholm (2003) ‘Some reflections on the sanctuary of Poseidon at Kalaureia in the Bronze Age. in ΑΡΓΟΣΑΡΩΝΙΚΟΣ: ΤΟΜΑΣ Α, pp:333-336. Athens. Hägg, R and N. Marinatos (1981) Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean Bronze Age. Stockholm. (1987) The Function of the Minoan Palaces. Stockholm Hagg, R. N, Marinatos and G, C Nordquist. (1988) Early Greek Cult Practice. Stockholm Hagg, R and G.C. Nordquist. (1990) Celebrations of Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid. Stockholm. Haggis, D.C (1999) ‘Some problems in defining Dark Age society in the Aegean’ in P.Betancourt, V.Karageorghis, R.Laffineur and W-D Niemeier MELETEMATA vol: I [Aegaeum 20]. Liège (1999) ‘Staple Finance, Peak Sanctuaries, and Economic Complexity in Late Prepalatial Crete’ in A, Chaniotis (eds) From Minoan Farmers to Roman Traders, pp:53-86. Stuttgart Halstead, P (2003) ‘Texts and bones: contrasting Linear B and archaeozoological evidence for animal exploitation in Mycenaean southern Greece’ in Kotjabopoulou, E, Y. Hamilakis, P. Halstead, C. Gamble, and P. Elefanti. Zooarchaeology in Greece: Recent advances. [British School at Athens Studies 9]. Athens Halstead, P and J.C, Barrett (2004) Food, Cuisine and Society in Prehistoric Greece. Oxford. Halstead, P and V, Isaakidou (2004) ‘Faunal Evidence for Feasting: Burnt Offerings from the Palace of Nestor at Pylos’ in P, Halstead and J.C, Barrett. 2004. Food, Cuisine and Society in Prehistoric Greece pp:136-154. Oxford. Hamilakis, Y (2000) ‘The Anthropology of Food and Drink Consumption and Aegean Archaeology’ in S.J. Vaughan and W.D.E Coulson Palaeodiet in the Aegean [Wiener Laboratory Monograph 1] pp:55-64 Oxford. (2002) Labyrinth Revisited: Rethinking Minoan Archaeology. Oxford. (2003a) ‘Animal Sacrifice and Mycenaean societies: Preliminary thoughts on the zooarchaeological evidence from the sanctuary at Ag. Konstantinos, Methana’ in E. Konsolaki-Yiannopulou. ARGOSARONIKOS. ΤΟΜΟΣ Α’ Η Τροιστορικη Περιοδοσ. pp:249-256. Athens. (2003b) ‘The sacred geography of hunting: wild animals, social power and gender in early farming societies’ in Kotjabopoulou, E, Y. Hamilakis, P. Halstead, C. Gamble, and P. Elefanti. Zooarchaeology in Greece: Recent advances. [British School at Athens Studies 9]. Athens.

- 142 -

BIBLIOGRAPHY Hamilakis, Y and E.Konsolaki (2004) ‘Pigs for the Gods: burnt animal sacrifices as embodied rituals at a Mycenaean sanctuary.’ OJA 23(2) pp:135-151. Oxford. Hayden, B (2001) ‘Fabulous Feasts. A prolegomenon to the importance of feasting’ in M. Dietler and Hayden B. Feasts. Archaeological and Ethnographic perspectives on food, politics, and power, pp:23-64. London. Hellstrom.P and B.Alroth. (1996) Religion and Power in the Ancient Greek World. Uppsala Hiller, Stefan (1983) ‘Possible Historical Reasons for the Rediscovery of the Mycenaean Past in the Age of Homer’ in R, Hagg The Greek Renaissance of the Eighth Century B.C.: Tradition and Innovation, pp:9-15. Stockholm Hooker, J. (1990) ‘Cult – Personnel in the Linear B texts from Pylos’ in. M, Beard and J.North. Pagan Priests. Religion & power in the Ancient World, pp:159-174. London. Hope Simpson, R (2002) ‘The Mycenae roads and Mycenaean Chariots’ Mouseion XLVI – series III. Vol 2, pp:125-135. Journal of the Classical Association of America. Hope Simpson, R and O.T.P.K Dickinson (1979) A Gazetteer of Aegean Civilisation in the Bronze Age, Vol. I: The Mainland and islands. Goteborg. Heurtley, W, A (1943) ‘Excavations in Ithaca, IV. A summary of the Work, BSA 40, pp:1-13. London. Heurtley, W, A and H, L, Lorimer (1935) ‘Excavations in Ithaca, I’ BSA XXXIII, pp:22-66. London Iakovidis, Spyros, E (2001) Gla and the Kopais in the 13th Century B.C. Athens. Immerwahr, S.A (1990) Aegean painting in the Bronze Age. Pennsylvania. Insoll, T (2004) Archaeology, Ritual, religion. London Isaakidou, V, P, Halstead, J, Davies and S, Stocker. (2002) ‘Burnt animal sacrifice at the Mycenaean Palace of Nestor, Pylos’ Antiquity 76 (291), pp:86-92. Oxford. Jansen, A.G (2002) A Study of the Remains of Mycenaean Roads and Stations of Bronze Age Greece. Lewiston; Lampeter. Karetsou, A (1981) ‘The Peak sanctuary of Mt. Joutkas’ in R. Hagg & N. Marinatos Sanctuaries and cults of the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:137-153. Stockholm. Kilian-Dirlmeier,I. (1990) ‘Remarks on the Non-military Functions of Swords in the Mycenaean Argolid’ in R.Hagg and G,C. Nordquist Celebrations of Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid, pp:157-166. Stockholm. Killen, J.T (1994) ‘Thebes Sealings, Knossos Tablets and Mycenaean State Banquets’ in Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, pp:67-84. London Kilian, K.

- 143 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE (1981) ‘Zeugnisse mykenische kultausubung in Tiryns’ in R, Hagg and N, Marinatos Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:49-58. Stockholm (1988) ‘Mycenaeans Up to Date: Trends and Changes in Recent Research,’ in E. B. French and K. A. Wardle (eds.), Problems in Greek Prehistory. pp:115-152. Bristol, (1990) ‘Patterns in the cult Activity in the Mycenaean Argolid’ in R, Hagg and G.C. Nordquist. Celebrations of Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid. pp:185-197. Stockholm Koehl, R (1981) ‘The function of Aegean Bronze Age Rhyta’ in R, Hagg and N, Marinatos Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:179-187. Stockholm (1996) ‘Rhyta, Libation Jugs and Priests’ in AJA (The 97th Annual Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America pp:337-407 ) 100(2) pp:403. Konsolaki-Yannopoulou. (2001) ‘New evidence for the practice of libations in the Aegean Bronze Age. in R. Laffineur and R.Hagg. Potnia : Dieties & religion in the Aegean Bronze Age. [Aegaeum 22], pp:213-220. Liège Konsolaki, E (2002) ‘A Mycenaean sanctuary on Methana’ in R, Hagg. Peloponnesian Sanctuaries and Cults, pp:25-36. Stockholm. Kontorli-Papadopoulou, L (1996) ‘Aegean Frescoes of Religious Character’, Studies in Mediterranean

Archaeology 117. Goteborg

Kotjabopoulou, E, Y, Hamilakis, P, Halstead, C, Gamble and P. Elefanti. (2003) Zooarchaeology in Greece: Recent advances. [British School at Athens Studies 9]. Athens. Krzyszkowska, O and L. Nixon (eds.) (1983) Minoan Society. Bristol. Kyriakidis, Evangelos (2007) The Archaeology of Ritual. Los Angeles. Kyrieleis, Helmut (2006) Anfange und Frühzeit des Heiligtums von Olympia. Berlin Laffineur, R (2001) ‘Seeing is believing: Reflections on Devine Imagery in the Aegean Bronze Age’ in R, Laffineur and R.Hagg Potnia : Dieties & religion in the Aegean Bronze Age. [Aegaeum 22] pp:387-392. Liège Laffineur, R and J. L. Crowley (eds.), (1992) EIKON: Aegean Bronze Age Iconography: Shaping a Methodology [Aegaeum 8] Liège Laffineur, R and R.Hagg (2001) Potnia : Dieties & religion in the Aegean Bronze Age. [Aegaeum 22]. Liège Laffineur, R and W-D. Niemeier. (1995) Politeia. Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 12) Liège. Lambrinoudakis, B.K (1980a) ‘Ανασκαφη στο ιερο του Απολλωνοσ Μαλεατα’ Ιn ΠΡΑΚΤΙΚΑ (Του ετουσ 1977 Α’,) 194. Athens.

pp:187-

(1980b) ‘Ανασκαφη στο ιερο του Απολλωνοσ Μαλεατα’ Ιn ΠΡΑΚΤΙΚΑ (Του ετουσ 1978), pp:111-121. Athens. (1981) ‘Remains of the Mycenaean Period in the Sanctuary of Apollon Maleatus’ in. R, Hagg and N, Marinatos Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:59-65. Stockholm

- 144 -

BIBLIOGRAPHY (1983) ‘Ανασκαφη Επιδαυρου: ιερο Απολλωνοσ Μαλεατα’ in ΠΡΑΚΤΙΚΑ (Του ετουσ 1981 Α’), pp:157181. Athens. Lang, M.L (1969) The Palace of Nestor at Pylos in Western Messenia: Volume II The Frescoes. Princeton. Langdon, Merle, K (1976) ‘A Sanctuary of Zeus on Mount Hymettus’ Hesperia: Supplement XVI. Princeton. Lebessi, A. (1996) ‘The relations of Crete and Euboea in the tenth and ninth centuries B.C. The Lefkandi Centaur and his predecessors.’ in D. Evely, I. S. Lemos, and S. Sherratt (eds.), Minotaur and Centaur: Studies in the Archaeology of Crete and Euboea Presented to Mervyn Popham (BAR International 638) Oxford Lemos, I.S. (1999) ‘Some Aspects of the transition from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age in Central Greece’ in ΠΡΑΤΙΚΑ: Η Περιφερεια του Μυκηναικου Κοσμου. pp:21-26. Lamia. (2002) The Protogeometric Aegean. The Archaeology of the Late Eleventh and Tenth Centuries BC. Oxford. (2008) ‘Athens and Lefkandi: A Tale of Two Cities’ in S Deger-Jalkotzy and I.S, Lemos. Ancient Greece. From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer, pp:505-530. Edinburgh. Linders T and Nordquist, G (1987) Gifts to the Gods. Proceedings of the Uppsala Symposium 1985. Uppsala. Linders T (1987) ‘Gods, gifts society’ in T, Linders and G, Nordquist Gifts to the Gods. Proceedings of the Uppsala Symposium 1985, pp:115-122. Uppsala. Livieratou, Antonia (2003) ‘Religious Continuity from the Late Bronze to Early Iron Age: a Contradictory Picture’ BAR International Series 1142, pp:63-70. Oxford. Lolos,Y. (1996) ‘Aiantos Polis: New Evidence for Mycenaean Presence on the Island of Salamis’ in E. De Miro, L. Godart, and A. Sacconi (eds.), Atti e memorie del secondo congresso internazionale di micenologia. (Incunabula Graeca 98). Vol 3 pp:1239-1247. Rome Lupack, S (1999) ‘Palace, Sanctuaries and workshops: The role of the religious sector in Mycenaean Economics’ in M. L Galatey & W.A Parkinson Rethinking Mycenaean Palaces, New interpretations of an old idea, pp:25-34. Los Angeles. Maran, J (2001) ‘Political and Religious Aspects of Architectural Change on the Upper Citadel of Tiryns. The Case of Building T’ in R, Laffineur and R.Hagg Potnia : Dieties & Religion in the Aegean Bronze Age [Aegaeum 22], pp:113-122. Liège (2003 ) ‘The Town of Tiryns after the fall of the Palace : Some new insights’. BICS 46 pp:223–224. London. (2004) ‘The Spreading of Objects and Ideas in the Late Bronze Age Eastern Mediterranean: Two Case Examples from the Argolid of the 13th and 12th Centuries B.C.’ Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 336, pp:11-30. The American Schools of Oriental Research, (2008) ‘Coming to terms with the past: Ideology and power in the Late Helladic IIIC’ in S. Deger-Jalkotzy and I.S.Lemos Ancient Greece: From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer, pp:123-150. Edinburgh. Marinatos, N (1986) Minoan Sacrificial Ritual: Cult Practice and Symbolism. Stockholm

- 145 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE

Marinatos, N (1987) ‘Public Festivals in the West Courts of the Palaces’ in R. Hägg and N. Marinatos (eds.), The Function of the Minoan Palaces, pp:135-142. Stockholm (1988) ‘The imagery of Sacrifice: Minoan and Greek’ in R.Hagg, N.Marinatos and G.C Nordquist Early Greek Cult Practice. Stockholm. Marinatos, N and R, Hagg. (1993) Greek Sanctuaries: New Approaches London. Mazarakis-Ainian , A (1988). ‘Early Greek Temples: Their origin and Function’ in R.Hagg, N.Marinatos, & Nordquist. Early Greek Cult Practice. London (1992) ‘Nichoria in the South – Western Peloponnese: Units IV-1 and IV-5 reconsidered.’ Opuscula Atheniensia XIX.: pp 75-84. Stockholm. (1997) From Rulers' Dwellings to Temples: Architecture, Religion and Society in Early Iron Age Greece (1100700 B.C.) [Studies in Mediterranean archaeology 121], Jonsered. (1999) ‘Reflections on Hero Cults in Early Iron Age Greece’ in R.Hagg, Ancient Greek Hero Cults. Stockholm. (2007) Oropos and Euboea in the early Iron Age: acts of an international round table, University of Thessaly, June 18-20, 2004 . Thessaly. McCallum, L, R (1987) ‘Frescoes from the Throne Room at Pylos: A New Interpretation’ in ‘The 88th General Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America’ American Journal of Archaeology 91 (2) pp:267-328. Archaeological Institute of America. McDonald, W.A, W.D.E, Coulson, J, Rosser (1983) Excavations at Nichoria in Southwest Greece. Volume III: Dark Age and Byzantine Occupation. Minneapolis. McDonald, W.A, and Nancy C Wilkie (1992) Excavations at Nichoria in Southwest Greece. Volume II: The Bronze Age Occupation, Minneapolis. McGovern, P.E (2003) Ancient Wine. The search for the origins of Viniculture. Princeton and Oxford. Mee, C and H, Forbes (1997) A Rough and Rocky Place: The Landscape and settlement history of the Methana Peninsula, Greece. Liverpool Moore, Andrew (1988) ‘The Large Monochrome Terracotta figures from Mycenae: the Problem of Interpretation’ in E. B. French and K.A.Wardle Problems in Greek Prehistory. pp:219-228. Bristol. Moore, A and W,D Taylour (1999). Well Built Mycenae: Fasc 10. The Temple Complex. Mycenae. (forthcoming). The Room with the Fresco Complex. (Well Built Mycenae Fasc. 11). Morgan, C (1990) Athletes and Oracles. The Transformation of Olympia and Delphi in the Eighth Century BC. Cambridge. (1996) ‘From Palace to Polis? Religious Developments on the Greek Mainland during the Bronze Age / Iron Age Transition’ in P. Hellstrom and B, Alroth Religion and power in the ancient Greek world pp:41-58. Uppsala

- 146 -

BIBLIOGRAPHY (1998) ‘Ritual and Society in the Early Iron Age Corinthia’ in R. Hagg Ancient Greek Cult Practice from the Archaeological Evidence, pp73-90. Stockholm (1999) The Late Bronze Age Settlement & Early Iron Age Sanctuary. Isthmia VIII. The American School of Classical Studies at Athens. (2003) Early Greek states beyond the Polis. London. (2008) ‘Archaeology in Greece 2007-2008’ Archaeology reports 54. pp:1-113. London. Morpurges Davies. A. and Y. Duhoux. (1985) Linear B : A 1984 Survey. Louvain-la-Neuve . Morris, Sarah, P. (1989) ‘A Tale of Two Cities: The Miniature Frescoes from Thera and the Origins of Greek Poetry’ American Journal of Archaeology 93(4) pp:511-535. Archaeological Institute of America. Mountjoy, P.A (1999a) Regional Mycenaean decorated pottery. Vol I, Rahden/Westf. : Leidorf (1999b) Regional Mycenaean decorated pottery. Vol II, Rahden/Westf. : Leidorf Muhly, P.M. (1984) ‘Minoan Hearths’ AJA 88(2) pp:107-122. Archaeological Institute of America Mylonas, G.E (1932) ‘Eleusis in the Bronze Age’ AJA 36(2) pp:104-117. Archaeological Institute of America. (1947) ‘Eleusis and the Eleusinian Mysteries’ the Classical Journal 43(3) pp:131-146. The Classical Association of the Middle West and South, Inc. (1966) Mycenae and the Mycenaean Age. Princeton (1972) The Cult Centre of Mycenae. Athens (1977) Mycenaean Religion. Temples Altars and Temenea. Athens. Mylonas, G.E. and K. Kourouaiotas (1933) ‘Excavations at Eleusis, 1932. Preliminary Report.’ AJA 37(2) pp:271-286 Archaeological Institute of America Myres, J.L (1938) ‘Thirty-Ninth general Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America: Recent Discoveries in Ithaca by Members of the British School of Archaeology at Athens’ AJA 42(1), pp121-129. Archaeological Institute of America. Newton, M. W., Wardle, K. A. & Kuniholm, P. I. (2005) ‘Dendrochronology and Radiocarbon Determinations from Assiros and the Beginning of the Greek Iron Age’ ΤΟ ΑΡΧΑΙΟΛΟΓΙΚΟ ΕΡΓΟ ΣΤΗ ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΙΑ ΚΑΙ ΣΤΗ ΘΡΑΚΗ 17 2003, pp: 173-190 [the AETΘ Conference; Thessaloniki]. Niemeier, W.D. (1990) ‘Cult Scenes on Gold Rings from the Argolid’ In R.Hagg and G.C Nordquist Celebrations of Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid, pp:165-170. Stockholm Nilsson, M, P (1950) The Minoan-Mycenaean religion and its survival in Greek religion. Lund Osborne, Robin (2000) Classical Greece Oxford.

- 147 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE (2004) ‘Hoards, votives, offerings: The Archaeology of the Dedicated Object’ World Archaeology 36(1) pp: 110. Oxfordshire. Palaima, Thomas G, and James C. Wright (1985) ‘Ins and Outs of the Archives Rooms at Pylos: Form and Function in a Mycenaean Palace’ American Journal of Archaeology 89(2) pp:251-262. Archaeological Institute of America. Papadopoulos, N.G, A. Sarris, E. Kokkinou, B. Wells, A. Penttinen, E. Savini, G. N. Tsokas, P. Tsourlos. (2006) ‘Contribution of multiplexed electrical resistance and magnetic techniques to the archaeological investigations at Poros, Greece’’ Archaeological Perspection 13(2) pp:75-90. Papadimitriou, A (2008) ‘The Early Iron Age in the Argolid: Some new aspects’ in S. Deger-Jalkotzy and I.S.Lemos Ancient Greece: From the Mycenaean Palaces to the Age of Homer, pp:531-548. Edinburgh. Papadimitriou, I (1960) ‘Ανασκαφαι εν Μυκηναισ’ Πρακτικα τησ Αρχαιολογικησ Εταιρειασ 1955, pp:217-232. Athens. Papapostolou, I.A (1998) 'Ανασκαφη Θερμου’ In Πρακτικα Αρχαιολογικησ Εταιρειασ. Του ετουσ 1998 pp:129−139. Athens. (2003) ‘Το Τελοσ Τησ Μυκηναικησ Εποχησ Στον Θερμο’ in 2nd international interdisciplinary colloquium: The Periphery of the Mycenaean world, 26-30 September, Lamia, 1999 : Praktika/proceedings, pp:135146. (2006) 'Ανασκαφη Θερμου’ In Πρακτικα Αρχαιολογικησ Εταιρειασ. (Του ετουσ 2003), pp:51-60.Athens. Peatfield, A (1983) ‘The topography of Minoan Peak Sanctuaries’ BSA 78. London. (1987) ‘Palace & Peak: the political & religious relationship between palaces and peak sanctuaries’ in R. Hagg and N. Marinatos The function of the Minoan Palaces. Stockholm. (2001) ‘Divinity & Performance on Minoan Peak Sanctuaries’ in R. Laffineur & R. Hagg Potnia : Deities & Religion in the Aegean bronze age. [Aegeaum 22] Liège Pilafidis – Williams. K. (1998) The Sanctuary Of Aphaia on Aegina in the Bronze Age. Munich Platon, N (1983) ‘The Minoan Palaces: Centres of Organization of a Theocratic Social and Political System’ in O. Krzyszkowska and L. Nixon (eds.), Minoan Society, pp: 273-276. Bristol. Popham,M. E. Touloupa and L.H. Sackett. (1982) ‘The Hero of Lefkandi’ Antiquity 56 pp:169-174. Cambridge Popham, M.R, P.G.Calligas and L.H Sackett. (1993) Lefkandi II. The Protogeometric building at Toumba. Part 2: The Excavation, Architecture and Finds. The British School of Archaeology at Athens. Price, S (1999) Religions of the Ancient Greeks. Cambridge. Protonotariou-Deilaki, E (1963) ‘Ανασκαφη εισ Προφητην Ηλιαν τησ Κοινοτητοσ Αδριανου’ Arch Delton 18, pp:65-66. Athens. Raban, Avner (1984) ‘The Thera Ships: Another Interpretation’ American Journal of Archaeology 88(1) pp:11-19. Archaeological Institute of America

- 148 -

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Rehak, P (1995) ‘The Use and Destruction of Minoan Stone Bull's Head Rhyta’ R, Laffineur and Niemeier, W.D. Politeia. Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:435-460. Liège (1999) ‘The Mycenaean ‘Warrior Goddess’ revisited’ in R.Laffineur POLEMOS: VOL I [AEGAEUM pp:227-239. Liege

19],

Renfrew, C (1981) ‘The Sanctuary at Phylakopi’ in. R, Hagg and N, Marinatos Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:67-79. Stockholm (1985) The archaeology of cult : The sanctuary at Phylakopi. [BSA Suppl. 18]. London. (1999) ‘The Phylakopi sanctuary and cult practice in the Aegean.’ BSA 93. London (2007) ‘The Archaeology of Ritual, of Cult, and of Religion’ in Kyriakidis, E The Archaeology of Ritual, pp:109-123. Los Angeles, Renfrew, C and P.G Bahn. (2005) Archaeology: The Key Concepts. London. Rieu, D.C.H (1991) The Odyssey London. Rutkowski, B (1986) Cult places of the Aegean. Yale. (1991) Petsophas : a Cretan peak sanctuary. Warsaw. Rystedt, E (1999) ‘No words, only pictures. Iconography in the transition between the Bronze Age and Iron Age in Greece. Opuscula Atheniensia 24. pp:89-98. Stockholm. Saflund. G (1980) ‘Sacrificial banquets in the ‘Palace of Nestor’’ in Opuscula Atheniensia 13, pp:237-245. Stockholm. Sakellarakis, Y. (1996) ‘Minoan religious influence in the Aegean: The case of Kythera’ BSA 91 pp:81-100. London. Sanders, J.M (1992) Philolakon: Lakonian Studies in honour of Hector Catling. Athens Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E (1996) ‘Mycenaean Kerinthos’ in D. Evely, I. S. Lemos, and S. Sherratt (eds.), Minotaur and Centaur: Studies in the Archaeology of Crete and Euboea Presented to Mervyn Popham. BAR International 638, pp:106110. Oxford Schofield, L (2007) The Mycenaeans. London. Shelton, Kim, S (2004) ‘The Tsountas House Shrine and the Origin of the Cult Centre at Mycenae’ in AIA Annual Meeting: Session 1B – Mycenaean Greece. Shemerdine, Cynthia. W. (1981) ‘Nichoria in Context: A Major Town in the Pylos Kingdom’ AJA 85(3), pp:319-325. Archaeological Institute of America, (1997) ‘Review of Aegean Prehistory VI: The Palatial Bronze Age of the Southern and Central Greek Mainland’ American Journal of Archaeology 101(3) pp: 537-585. Archaeological Institute of America.

- 149 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE Sjoberg, B.L (2004) ‘Asine and the Argolid in the Late Helladic III Period. A Socio-economic study.’ BAR International Series 1225. Oxford Snodgrass, A.M (2000) The Dark Age of Greece. Edinburgh Soren, D (1987) The Sanctuary of Apollo Hylates at Kourion, Cyprus. Tucson

Sourvinou-Inwood, C (1995) ‘Early sanctuaries, the eighth century and ritual space: fragments of discourse’ in N, Marinatos and R.Hagg. Greek Sanctuaries: New Approaches, pp:1-17. London. Souyoudzoglou-Haywood, C (1999) The Ionian Islands in the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age. Liverpool. Stocker, S, R and J, L, Davies (2004) ‘Animal Sacrifice, Archives and Feasting in Mycenaean Society’ Hesperia 73(2), pp:133-178. Athens Styrenius, C-G (1998) Asine. A Swedish excavation site in Greece. The Museum of Mediterranean and Near Eastern Antiquities. Stockholm. Suter, Ann (2008) Lament: Studies in the Ancient Mediterranean and Beyond. Oxford. Symeonoglou, N, E, W (2002) The early Iron Age pottery and development of the sanctuary at Aetos, Ithaka (Greece) PhD thesis, Washington. Tartaon, T.F (2004) ‘Bronze Age Landscape and Society in Southern Epirus, Greece.’ Bar International Series 1290. Oxford Taylour, W. D, E.B French, K.A.Wardle. (1981) Well Built Mycenae: Fasc 1. The Helleno-British Excavations within the citadel at Mycenae. Mycenae. (2007) Well Built Mycenae: the Helleno-British excavations within the citadel at Mycenae, 1959-1969 Fasc. 13, The service areas of the cult. Oxford. Taylour, W. D, E.B French, K.A.Wardle and O.H. Krzyszkoska. (2007) Well built Mycenae : the Helleno-British excavations within the citadel at Mycenae, 1959-1969. Fasc. 24, The ivories and objects of bone, antler and boar's tusk. Oxford. Tegyey, I. (1984) ‘ The Northeast workshop at Pylos’ in C.W Shelmerdine and T.G. Palaima. Pylos comes alive, Industry & admin in a Mycenaean Palace. New York Thomatos, M (2006) ‘The final Revival of the Aegean Bronze Age. A case study of the Argolid, Corinthia, Attica, Euboea. The Cyclades and the Dodecanese during the LH III C. BAR International Series 1498. Oxford Thomas, C.G (1999) Citadel to City-State. Indiana. Thomas, R (2000) ‘The Classical City: Religious activity and the polis’ in R, Osborne, Classical Greece, pp:74-80. Oxford. Tournavitou, I.

- 150 -

BIBLIOGRAPHY (1986) ‘Towards an indentification of a Workshop Space’. in. E.B. French & K.A. Wardle Problems in Greek Prehistory. Bristol. (1992) ‘Practical use and social function: A neglected aspect of Mycenaean Pottery’ BSA 87, pp:181-210. London. Tzedakis, Y and H. Martlew (2002) Minoan and Mycenaeans. Flavours of their time. Athens Van Leuven, J. C. (1978) ‘The Mainland Tradition of Sanctuaries in Prehistoric Greece’ World Archaeology, 10(2) pp:139-148. Oxfordshire. (1981) ‘Problems and methods of Prehellenic naology’ in R, Hagg and N.Marinatos Sanctuaries and cults in the Aegean Bronze Age, pp:11-25. Stockholm Vaughan, S.J and W.D.E Coulson. (2000) Palaeodiet in the Aegean. [Wiener Laboratory Monograph 1] Oxford. Ventris, M & Chadwick, J (1973) Documents in Mycenaean Greek. Cambridge. Vokotopoulou, J (1995) ’Ποσειδι‘ Το Αρχαιολογικο εργο στη Μακεδονια και θρακη 6, 1992 pp:443-448. Thessaloniki (1997) ‘Ποσειδι’ Το Αρχαιολογικο εργο στη Μακεδονια και θρακη 7, 1993 pp:401-412. Thessaloniki (1998) ’Ποσειδι’. Το Αρχαιολογικο εργο στη Μακεδονια και θρακη 8, 1994, pp:269-274. Thessaloniki Voutsaki, S and Killen, J (2001) ‘Economy and politics in the Mycenaean palace states’ Cambridge Philological society. Supplementary 27. Cambridge. Voutsaki, S. (2001) ‘Economic control, power and prestige in the Mycenaean world: The Archaeological evidence’ in Voutsaki, S and J, Killen, ‘Economy and politics in the Mycenaean palace states’. Cambridge Philological society. Supplementary 27, pp: 195-213. Cambridge. Wace, A.J.B (1951) ‘Mycenae 1950’. The Journal of Hellenic Studies 71, pp:254-257. London. Walberg, G (1998) Excavations on the Acropolis of Midea. Stockholm (2007) Midea: The Megaron Complex and Shrine Area. Excavations of the Lower Terraces 1994-1997 [Prehistoric Monographs 20] Pennsylvania. Walberg, G and D, Reese (forthcoming) ‘Feasting at Midea’ in DAIS. The Aegean Feast. [Aegaeum 29]. Liège Wardle, K.A (2003) ‘The ‘Cult Centre’ at Mycenae and other sanctuaries in the Argo-Saronic Gulf and the NE Peloponnese: Location and status’ in K, Konsolaki-Yiannopoulou ΑΡΓΟΣΑΡΩΝΙΚΟΣ : ΤΟΜΟΣ Α’ pp:317-327. Athens. (2006) Mycenae: Research and Publication The Room with the Fresco Complex. Available online: http://artsweb.bham.ac.uk/aha/kaw/Mycenae/mycenaerwfresco.htm (Downloaded July 2008) Warren, Peter

- 151 -

RITUAL PRACTICE BETWEEN THE LATE BRONZE AGE AND PROTOGEOMETRIC PERIODS OF GREECE (1979) ‘The Miniature Fresco from the West House at Akrotiri, Thera and Its Aegean Setting’ The Journal of Hellenic Studies 99 pp:115-129. London. Warren, P and V, Hankey (1989) Aegean Bronze Age Chronology Bristol. Watrous, L. V (1984) ‘Ayia Triada: A New Perspective on the Minoan Villa’ American Journal of Archaeology 88(2) pp: 123134. American Institute of America. (1996) The cave sanctuary of Zeus at Psychro: A study of Extra Urban sanctuaries in Minoan & early iron age Crete. [Aegeam 15]. Liège Weber-Hiden, I (1990) ‘Die Mykenischen Terrakottafigurinen aus den Syringes von Tiryns’ TIRYNS Band XI, pp:35-84. Verlag Philipp von Zabern. Wells, B.A (2003) ‘The

sanctuary

of

Poseidon

at

Kalaureia.

ΑΡΓΟΣΑΡΩΝΙΚΟΣ: ΤΟΜΑΣ Α, pp:337-347. Athens.

The

new

investigations

of

1997’

in

Wells. B, A, Penttinen and M.F Billot (2003) ‘Investigations in the sanctuary of Poseidon on Kalaureia, 1997-2001.’ Opuscula Atheniensia 28, pp:2988. Stockholm. Wells. B, A, Penttinen, J Hjohlman and E Savini. (2005) ‘The Kalaureia excavation project: The 2003 season.’ Opuscula Atheniensia 30, pp:127-215. Stockholm Westholm, A (1938) Asine. Results of the Swedish Excavations. Stockholm Whitely et al. (2005) ‘Archaeology in Greece 2004-2005’ Archaeological Reports 51. London. (2007) ‘Archaeology in Greece 2006-2007’ Archaeological Reports 53. London Whittaker. H (1997) Mycenaean cult buildings. A study of their architecture and function in the context of the Aegean and the Eastern Mediterranean, The Norwegian Institute at Athens, Bergen. Wright. J, C (1982) ‘The old Temple terrace at the Argive Heraeum and the Early cult of Hera in the Argolid. JHS 102, pp:186-201. London. (1994) ‘The Spatial Configuration of Belief’ in S.E Alcok and R.Osborne. Placing the Gods. Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in Ancient Greece, pp:37-78. Oxford (1995) ‘The archaeological correlates of religion: case studies in the Aegean’ in Greece’ in R.Laffineur and W.D Niemeier Politeia: Society and State in the Aegean Bronze Age. Vol II [Aegaeum 12] pp:341-48. Leige (2004a) ‘A survey of evidence for feasting in Mycenaean society’ in HESPERIA 73, pp:133-178. Athens. (2004b) ‘Mycenaean Drinking Services and standards of Etiquette’ in P, Halstead and J.C, Barrett. 2004. Food, Cuisine and Society in Prehistoric Greece pp:90-104. Oxford. (2004c) ‘Comparative Settlement Patterns during the Bronze Age in the Northern Peloponnesus, Greece’. In S.A. Alcock & J.F Cherry Side-by-side Survey. Comparative Regional Studies in the Mediterranean World. Oxford.

- 152 -