This pdf is a digital offprint of your contribution in

E. Alram-Stern, F. Blakolmer, S. Deger-Jalkotzy, R.

Laffineur & J. Weilhartner (eds), Metaphysis. Ritual, Myth

and Symbolism in the Aegean Bronze Age (Aegaeum 39),

ISBN 978-90-429-3366-8.

The copyright on this publication belongs to Peeters

Publishers.

As author you are licensed to make printed copies of the

pdf or to send the unaltered pdf file to up to 50 relations.

You may not publish this pdf on the World Wide Web –

including websites such as academia.edu and open-access

repositories – until three years after publication. Please

ensure that anyone receiving an offprint from you

observes these rules as well.

If you wish to publish your article immediately on open-

access sites, please contact the publisher with regard to

the payment of the article processing fee.

For queries about offprints, copyright and republication

of your article, please contact the publisher via

peeters@peeters-leuven.be

AEGAEUM 39Annales liégeoises et PASPiennes d’archéologie égéenne

METAPHYSISRITUAL, MYTH AND SYMBOLISM

IN THE AEGEAN BRONZE AGE

Proceedings of the 15th International Aegean Conference, Vienna, Institute for Oriental and European Archaeology,

Aegean and Anatolia Department, Austrian Academy of Sciences and Institute of Classical Archaeology, University of Vienna,

22-25 April 2014

Edited by Eva ALRAM-STERN, Fritz BLAKOLMER, Sigrid DEGER-JALKOTZY, Robert LAFFINEUR and Jörg WEILHARTNER

PEETERSLEUVEN - LIEGE

2016

98738_Aegaeum 39 vwk.indd 1 25/03/16 08:06

CONTENTS Obituaries ix Preface xiii Abbreviations xv KEYNOTE LECTURE Nanno MARINATOS

Myth, Ritual, Symbolism and the Solar Goddess in Thera 3

A. FIGURINES

Eva ALRAM-STERN Men with Caps: Chalcolithic Figurines from Aegina-Kolonna and their Ritual Use 15

Florence GAIGNEROT-DRIESSEN

The Lady of the House: Trying to Define the Meaning and Role of Ritual Figures with Upraised Arms in Late Minoan III Crete 21

Reinhard JUNG and Marco PACCIARELLI

A Minoan Statuette from Punta di Zambrone in Southern Calabria (Italy) 29

Melissa VETTERS All the Same yet not Identical? Mycenaean Terracotta Figurines in Context 37

Eleni KONSOLAKI-YANNOPOULOU

The Symbolic Significance of the Terracottas from the Mycenaean Sanctuary at Ayios Konstantinos, Methana 49 B. HYBRID AND MYTHICAL CREATURES

Fritz BLAKOLMER

Hierarchy and Symbolism of Animals and Mythical Creatures in the Aegean Bronze Age: A Statistical and Contextual Approach 61

Karen Polinger FOSTER Animal Hybrids, Masks, and Masques in Aegean Ritual 69

Maria ANASTASIADOU Wings, Heads, Tails: Small Puzzles at LM I Zakros 77 C. SYMBOLISM

Janice L. CROWLEY

In the Air Here or from the World Beyond? Enigmatic Symbols of the Late Bronze Age Aegean 89

Marianna NIKOLAIDOU Materialised Myth and Ritualised Realities: Religious Symbolism on Minoan Pottery 97

Helène WHITTAKER Horns and Axes 109

98738_Aegaeum 39 vwk.indd 3 25/03/16 08:06

iv CONTENTS

Olga KRZYSZKOWSKA Warding off Evil: Apotropaic Practice and Imagery in Minoan Crete 115

Emilia BANOU and Brent DAVIS The Symbolism of the Scorpion in Minoan Religion: A Cosmological Approach on the Basis of Votive Offerings from the Peak Sanctuary at Ayios Yeoryios Sto Vouno, Kythera 123

Nancy R. THOMAS “Hair Stars” and “Sun Disks” on Bulls and Lions. A Reality Check on Movements of Aegean Symbolic Motifs to Egypt, with Special Reference to the Palace at Malkata 129

Malcolm H. WIENER Aegean Warfare at the Opening of the Late Bronze Age in Image and Reality 139 D. SPACE / LANDSCAPE

Santo PRIVITERA The Tomb, the House, and the Double Axes: Late Minoan IIIA2 Hagia Triada as a Ritual and ‘Mythical’ Place 149

Sam CROOKS, Caroline J. TULLY and Louise A. HITCHCOCK Numinous Tree and Stone: Re-Animating the Minoan Landscape 157

Barbara MONTECCHI The Labyrinth: Building, Myth, and Symbol 165

Birgitta EDER Ideology in Space: Mycenaean Symbols in Action 175

Lyvia MORGAN The Transformative Power of Mural Art: Ritual Space, Symbolism, and the Mythic Imagination 187 E. FUNERALS

Luca GIRELLA Aspects of Ritual and Changes in Funerary Practices Between MM II and LM I on Crete 201

Anna Lucia D’AGATA and Sara DE ANGELIS Funerals of Late Minoan III Crete: Ritual Acts, Special Vessels and Political Affiliations in the 14th and 13th Centuries BC 213

Ann-Louise SCHALLIN The Liminal Zone – The Evidence from the Late Bronze Age Dendra Cemetery 223

Mary K. DABNEY Mycenaean Funerary Processions as Shared Ritual Experiences 229

Michael LINDBLOM and Gunnel EKROTH Heroes, Ancestors or Just any Old Bones? Contextualizing the Consecration of Human Remains from the Mycenaean Shaft Graves at Lerna in the Argolid 235 F. RELIGION / DEITIES

Jeffrey S. SOLES Hero, Goddess, Priestess: New Evidence for Minoan Religion and Social Organization 247

98738_Aegaeum 39 vwk.indd 4 25/03/16 08:06

CONTENTS v

Ute GÜNKEL-MASCHEK Establishing the Minoan ‘Enthroned Goddess’ in the Neopalatial Period: Images, Architecture, and Elitist Ambition 255

Veronika DUBCOVÁ Divine Power from Abroad. Some New Thoughts about the Foreign Influences on the Aegean Bronze Age Religious Iconography 263

Cynthia W. SHELMERDINE Poseidon, pa-ki-ja-na and Horse-Taming Nestor 275

Irene SERRANO LAGUNA di-u-ja 285 G. SANCTUARIES

Mercourios GEORGIADIS Metaphysical Beliefs and Leska 295

Wolf-Dietrich NIEMEIER Ritual in the Mycenaean Sanctuary at Abai (Kalapodi) 303

Olga PSYCHOYOS and Yannis KARATZIKOS The Mycenaean Sanctuary at Prophitis Ilias on Mount Arachnaio within the Religious Context of the 2nd Millennium B.C. 311 H. RITUALS / OFFERINGS

Barbara HOREJS and Alfred GALIK Hunting the Beast. A Reconstructed Ritual in an EBA Metal Production Centre in Western Anatolia 323

Philip P. BETANCOURT, Thomas M. BROGAN and Vili APOSTOLAKOU Rituals at Pefka 329

Alessandro SANAVIA and Judith WEINGARTEN The Transformation of Tritons: Some Decorated Middle Minoan Triton Shells and an Anatolian Counterpart 335

Artemis KARNAVA On Sacred Vocabulary and Religious Dedications: The Minoan ‘Libation Formula’ 345

Monica NILSSON Minoan Stairs as Ritual Scenes. The Monumental Staircases of Phaistos “66” and Knossos “Theatral Area” under the Magnifying Glass 357

Bernice R. JONES A New Reading of the Fresco Program and the Ritual in Xeste 3, Thera 365

Andreas G. VLACHOPOULOS Images of Physis or Perceptions of Metaphysis? Some Thoughts on the Iconography of the Xeste 3 Building at Akrotiri, Thera 375

Fanouria DAKORONIA Sacrifice on Board 387

98738_Aegaeum 39 vwk.indd 5 25/03/16 08:06

vi CONTENTS

Jörg WEILHARTNER Textual Evidence for Burnt Animal Sacrifice and Other Rituals Involving the Use of Fire in Mycenaean Greece 393

Chrysanthi GALLOU Mycenaean Skulls: “ἀμενηνά κάρηνα” or Social Actors in Late Helladic Metaphysics and Society? 405

Assaf YASUR-LANDAU The Baetyl and the Stele: Contact and Tradition in Levantine and Aegean Cult 415 I. MYTH / HEROES / ANCESTORS

Magda PIENIĄŻEK and Carolyn C. ASLAN Heroic Past, Memory and Ritual at Troy 423

John G. YOUNGER Identifying Myth in Minoan Art 433

Joanne M.A. MURPHY The Power of the Ancestors at Pylos 439

Elisabetta BORGNA and Andreas G. VORDOS Construction of Memory and the Making of a Ritual Landscape: the Role of Gods and Ancestors at the Trapeza of Aigion, Achaea, at the LBA-EIA Transition 447

Anne P. CHAPIN Mycenaean Mythologies in the Making: the Frescoes of Pylos Hall 64 and the Mycenae Megaron 459 J. METAPHYSIS

Robert B. KOEHL The Ambiguity of the Minoan Mind 469

Thomas G. PALAIMA The Metaphysical Mind in Mycenaean Times and in Homer 479

Alan PEATFIELD A Metaphysical History of Minoan Religion 485 POSTERS

Eva ALRAM-STERN A New Mycenaean Female Figure from Kynos, Locris 497

Katrin BERNHARDT Absent Mycenaeans? On Mycenaean Figurines and their Imitations on Crete in LM IIIA–IIIB 501

Tina BOLOTI

A “Knot”-Bearing (?) Minoan Genius from Pylos. Contribution to the Cloth/Clothing Offering Imagery of the Aegean Late Bronze Age 505

Dora CONSTANTINIDIS Proximity Analysis of Metaphysical Aegean Ritual Spaces During the Bronze Age 511

98738_Aegaeum 39 vwk.indd 6 25/03/16 08:06

CONTENTS vii

Stefanos GIMATZIDIS The Tree of Life: The Materiality of a Ritual Symbol in Space and Time 515

Louise A. HITCHCOCK, Aren M. MAEIR and Amit DAGAN Entangling Aegean Ritual in Philistine Culture 519

Petros KOUNOUKLAS Griffin at Kynos. How, Why, and When? 527

Tobias KRAPF Symbolic Value and Magical Power: Examples of Prehistoric Objects Reused in Later Contexts in Euboea 531

Susan LUPACK pu-ro, pa-ki-ja-ne, and the Worship of an Ancestral Wana x 537

Madelaine MILLER The Boat – A Sacred Border-Crosser in Between Land and the Sea 543

Sylvie MÜLLER CELKA Caring for the Dead in Minoan Crete: a Reassessment of the Evidence from Anemospilia 547

Marcia NUGENT

Portals to the Other: Stepping through a Botanic Door 557

Marco PIETROVITO Beyond the Earthly Shell: the Minoan Pitcher Bearers. Anthropomorphic Rhyta of the Pre- and Protopalatial Periods (Differentiating the Sacred from the Divine) 563

Jörg RAMBACH Early Helladic Romanos/Messenia: Filling a Well 567

Caroline THURSTON New Approaches to Mycenaean Figurines in LH IIIC 571

Michaela ZAVADIL Souvenirs from Afar – Star Disk Pendants Reconsidered 575 ENDNOTE

Joseph MARAN Towards an Anthropology of Religion in Minoan and Mycenaean Greece 581 TO CONCLUDE …

Thomas G. PALAIMA WI Fc 2014: When is an Inscribed Cigar Just a Cigar? 595

98738_Aegaeum 39 vwk.indd 7 25/03/16 08:06

IDEOLOGY IN SPACE: MYCENAEAN SYMBOLS IN ACTION An ideology is a set of beliefs and ideas and the product of social practices; its normative

character affecting the way things are perceived. However, as Castillo, DeMarrais and Earle argue “(…) ideology is as much the material means to communicate and manipulate ideas as it is the ideas themselves. Ideology has, therefore, both a material and a symbolic component. Because symbols are material objects, their distributions and associations, preserved in the archaeological record, reflect broader patterns of social, political, and economic activity. These patterns inform archaeologists about unequal access to symbols of status or authority, the efforts of one social segment to promote its ideology over others, and the effects of these strategic activities on the dynamics of social power.”1

Materialised ideology

With the beginning of the Greek Late Bronze Age a large variety of foreign materials and

objects of Minoan workmanship arrived on the Greek mainland and were buried in the Shaft Graves of Mycenae and comparable burials sites in the Argolid, Laconia, Messenia, Thessaly and probably Boeotia. The predominantly aniconic world of the Middle Bronze Age Mainland2 was more or less suddenly enlivened with figurative representations of plants and flowers, land and sea animals, women and men and of cultic equipment such as altars, horns and double axes. Religious symbols and iconography were taken over from Minoan Crete where they were associated with palatial rule. The appropriation of Minoan goods involved the integration of the figurative repertoire of religious symbols of Minoan Crete3 into the social practices of mortuary display and social representation of a 1 J.L. CASTILLO, E. DEMARRAIS and T.K. EARLE, “Ideology, Materialization and Power Strategies,”

Current Anthropology 37 (1996) 15-31, esp. 16. 2 S. VOUTSAKI, “Mortuary Display, Prestige and Identity in the Shaft Grave Era,” in I. KILIAN-

DIRLMEIER (ed.), Eliten in der Bronzezeit: Ergebnisse zweier Kolloquien in Mainz und Athen, Vol. 1 (1999) 103-118, esp. 114. Exceptions to the rule have been pointed out by F. BLAKOLMER, “The Iconography of the Shaft Grave Period as Evidence for a Middle Helladic Tradition of Figurative Arts?” in A. PHILIPPA-TOUCHAIS, G. TOUCHAIS, S. VOUTSAKI, and J. WRIGHT (eds), Mesohelladika. La

Grèce continentale au Bronze Moyen. Actes du colloque international organisé par l’École française d'Athènes, en

collaboration avec l’American School of Classical Studies at Athens et le Netherlands Institute in Athens, Athènes, 8-12 mars

2006 (2010) 509-519. 3 Minoan influence on the formation of Mycenaean religion/ideology: J.C. WRIGHT, “The Spatial

Configuration of Belief: The Archaeology of Mycenaean Religion,” in S.E. ALCOCK and R. OSBORNE (eds), Placing the Gods. Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in Ancient Greece (1994) 37-78, esp. 51, 54; ID., “From Chief to King in Mycenaean Greece,” in P. REHAK (ed.), The Role of the Ruler in the Prehistoric

Aegean. Proceedings of a Panel Discussion presented at the Annual Meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America, New

Orleans, Louisiana, 28 December 1992. With Additions (1995) 63-80; H. WHITTAKER, “Reflections on the Socio-Political Function of Mycenaean Religion,” in POTNIA, 355-360; EAD., “Religion and Power: The Nature of Minoan Influence on Early Mycenaean Religion,” OpAth 27 (2002) 151-157; EAD., Religion and

Society in Middle Bronze Age Greece (2014) 153-158; J. MARAN and E. STAVRIANOPOULOU, “ - Reflections on the Ideology of Mycenaean Kingship,” in E. ALRAM-STERN and G.

NIGHTINGALE (eds), Keimelion: Elitenbildung und Elitärer Konsum von der Mykenischen Palastzeit bis zur

Homerischen Epoche. The Formation of Elites and Elitist Lifestyles from Mycenaean Palatial Times to the Homeric Period.

Akten des internationalen Kongresses vom 3. bis 5. Februar 2005 in Salzburg (2007) 285-298; Chr. HEITZ, Burying

the Palaces? Ideologies in the Shaft Grave Period (2008) [http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/propylaeumdok/ 89/1/Heitz.pdf; 8.8.2014]. Iconography of power: F. BLAKOLMER, “Vom Thronraum in Knossos zum Löwentor von Mykene: Kontinuitäten in Bildkunst und Palastideologie,” in F. BLAKOLMER, C. REINHOLDT, J. WEILHARTNER, and G. NIGHTINGALE (eds), Österreichische Forschungen zur

Ägäischen Bronzezeit 2009: Akten der Tagung vom 6. bis 7. März 2009 am Fachbereich Altertumswissenschaften der

Universität Salzburg (2011) 63-80. Minoan symbols: A.P. CHAPIN, “Power, Privilege, and Landscape in Minoan Art,” in A.P. CHAPIN (ed.), : Essays in Honor of Sara A. Immerwahr (2004) 47-64 (landscape

Birgitta EDER 176

distinguished segment of early Mycenaean society. “(…) in order to be an effective source of power, ideology must be ‘materialized’ in distinct and

tangible forms, including symbolic objects, ceremonies, monuments, and writing. Materialized ideology, like materialized culture, can achieve the status of shared values and beliefs. Materialization makes it possible to extend ideologies beyond the local group and to communicate the power of a central authority to the broader population. (…) The critical conception of ideology also adopts the perspective that ideology is a system of beliefs and ideas. However, in this view, ideologies are created and manipulated by the ruling elite to establish and maintain their social power. The critical view, more than its neutral counterpart, contributes several important points for the analysis of power relations in society. Ideology is a mechanism used by certain social segments to manipulate, control, suppress, or exploit populations to fulfill their own interests. Not all ideology is, therefore, spontaneously generated through human interaction; a significant part is intentionally created and transformed to direct the thoughts and the actions of subject peoples. Ideology is, in essence, a source of social power.”4

One can understand how religious symbols on ceramic and metal vessels, weapons, seals and jewelry were employed in the process of the self-definition of early Mycenaean chiefs and rulers.5 New figurative symbols of religious meaning carried metaphysical messages, and the newly acquired riches will have helped to support the idea that their owners were favored by metaphysical powers. The entertainment of special relations with these metaphysical powers may have been one of the means to develop and sustain a new social hierarchy.

“The materialization of ideology confers social power in two basic senses. First, an elite with the resources to extend its ideology through materialization promotes its objectives and legitimacy at the expense of competing groups who lack those resources. Because elements of materialized ideology have the characteristics of other manufactured goods while retaining their symbolic character, we can understand how control of the economy or of labor extends to control of ideology. The costs of hosting a feast, constructing a monument, or manufacturing paraphernalia and costumes for events ground ideology in the economy. An ideology rooted in a material medium can be controlled in much the same way that other utilitarian and wealth goods may be owned, restricted, and transferred through the institutions of political economy. Second, materialization makes ideology a significant element of political strategy. Because ideas and meaning are difficult to control, it is impossible to prevent individuals who oppose the dominant group from generating their own ideas about the world and then attempting to convince others of their validity. The manipulation of meaning can be as much a means to resist as to legitimate authority (…) - However, an ideology composed solely of elements freely accessible to the populace has little efficacy as an instrument of power; it may easily be copied, and its capacity to restructure power relationships or to effect organizational change will therefore be limited. Materialization makes it possible, through the production and transmission of ideas, traditions, and meanings, to establish and reinforce the legitimacy and rights of the group that controls their material forms.”6

During the Late Bronze Age raw materials such as ivory, blue glass and semi-precious stones were imported from the Near East and were carved and cast in palatial workshops to become Mycenaean type seals, furniture inlays, cosmetic objects, ornaments and jewelry. Apart from the qualities of foreign materials with a distant origin, it was important that these were not available locally and could not be produced from local sources.7 The palatial centers seem to have controlled the access

frescoes). Minoan motifs and their replication in Mycenaean glass relief beads: H. HUGHES-BROCK, “Close Encounters of Interesting Kinds. Relief Beads and Glass Seals: Design and Craftsmen,” in C.M. JACKSON and E.C. WAGER (eds), Vitreous Materials in the Late Bronze Age Aegean (2008) 126-150, esp. 129-134.

4 CASTILLO, DEMARRAIS and EARLE (supra n. 1) 16. 5 VOUTSAKI (supra n. 2) 115; on the role of religion: WHITTAKER 2001 (supra n. 3) 357-358;

WHITTAKER 2002 (supra n. 3); S. LUPACK, “Mycenaean Religion,” in E.H. CLINE (ed.), The Oxford

Handbook of the Bronze Age Aegean (2010) 263-276, esp. 264, 270-271. 6 CASTILLO, DEMARRAIS and EARLE (supra n. 1) 17. 7 B.E. BURNS, Mycenaean Greece, Mediterranean Commerce, and the Formation of Identity (2010) 30, 104-106; J.

IDEOLOGY IN SPACE: MYCENAEAN SYMBOLS IN ACTION

177

to these materials, as evidence for processing and working of imported raw materials comes mainly from the palaces. While much of the production seems to have remained in or near the palaces, Mycenaean jewelry relief beads, seals and some utensils made of ivory such as combs and pyxides traveled far beyond the palaces.

Mycenaean glass (and to a lesser extent gold) relief beads have been found in the thousands all over Greece and in the Aegean and probably arrived at all levels of society, although in varying quantities. They come in a variety of motifs, drawing however on a common and apparently repetitive repertoire of designs known also from figurative illustrations on wall-paintings, ivory reliefs, signet rings and seals. These motifs include altars, libation jugs and figure-eight shields with clear religious connotations as well as floral designs, which can be identified with flowers used during festivals and ritual ceremonies. I follow H. Hughes-Brock’s suggestion that all these motifs were not merely decorative, but meaningful and intended to convey an ideologically charged message.8

Glass and gold could be designed, cast, and by this process charged with messages. As the palaces were responsible for the production of glass and gold jewelry they will have exercised an influence on the range of messages conveyed. As jewelry was small, light and therefore highly mobile, it offered the possibility to reach a large group of the population far beyond the immediate palatial environment. Jewelry designed by the palaces was one of the means by which Mycenaean palaces could transport palatial ideology to people at a distance. The distribution of these attractive items with figurative designs offered the opportunity to exercise palatial influence on people within the wider geography of Mycenaean palatial territories and ask for benefits and tributes in return.

I have argued elsewhere in detail that Mycenaean relief beads materialized ideology and allowed the distribution of cognitive messages via the jewelry’s motifs. 9 Although the specific components of the Mycenaean messages may elude us forever, they would have unfolded through acts of performance on various levels of Mycenaean society. These may include political ceremonies and religious practices as well as burial rituals connected with death and the afterlife.

While the mobility of the emblems of a palatial ideology played a significant part in the dissemination of ideas into the geography of Mycenaean Greece, the creation of Mycenaean type figurines from LH IIB/IIIA1 represents something like a complementary palatial strategy to promote a designed religious ideology and thus exercise ideological influence over larger parts of the population. As Melissa Vetters has pointed out in her recent work, the ubiquitous and standardized Mycenaean figurines (mainly female Phi- and Psi- types, although many other types are also present) were mass-produced in specialized pottery workshops of fine-ware painted pottery. Rather than being the humble tokens of a “popular” religion, they were designed products linked to the development of the Mycenaean palace system. They were representatives of an overarching religious ideology, which was already conceived in the formative stages of the Mycenaean palace system in LH IIB/IIIA1.10 Like

BENNET, “PalaceTM: Speculations on Palatial Production in Mycenaean Greece with (some) Reference to Glass,” in C.M. JACKSON and E.C. WAGER (eds), Vitreous Materials in the Late Bronze Age Aegean (2008) 151-172, esp. 160-163; cf. B. EDER, “Stone and Glass: The Ideological Transformation of Imported Materials and their Geographic Distribution in Mycenaean Greece,” in B. EDER and R. PRUZSINSZKY (eds), Policies of Exchange. Political Systems and Modes of Interaction in the Aegean and the Near East in the 2nd Millennium B.C.E.”, Proceedings of the International Symposion, 30th May-2nd June 2012 in Freiburg

(2015) 221-242. 8 HUGHES-BROCK (supra n. 3) 130-134; cf. EDER (supra n. 7). See now EAD., “The Waz-lily and the

Priest’s Axe: Can Relief-beads Tell us Something?” in Y. GALANAKIS, T. WILKINSON, and J. BENNET (eds), : Critical Essays on the Archaeology of the Eastern Mediterranean in Honour of E. Susan

Sherratt (2014) 105-116. 9 EDER (supra n. 7). 10 M. VETTERS, “Eingrenzen, abgrenzen, ausgrenzen – Interpretationsansätze mykenischer Terrakotta-

Figurinen,” in Th. DOPPLER, B. RAMMINGER, and D. SCHIMMELPFENNIG (eds), Grenzen und

Grenzräume? Beispiele aus Neolithikum und Bronzezeit (2011) 277-296; EAD., “Seats of Power? Making the Most of Miniatures – The Role of Terracotta Throne Models in Disseminating Mycenaean Religious Ideology,” in W. GAUSS, M. LINDBLOM, R.A.K. SMITH, and J.C. WRIGHT (eds), Our Cups Are Full:

Pottery and Society in the Aegean Bronze Age, Papers Presented to Jeremy B. Rutter on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday (2011) 319-330; EAD., “Thou Shalt Make Many Images of Thy Gods – a Chaîne Opératoire Approach

Birgitta EDER 178

glass ornaments and other media of figurative design, they had the advantage of being mobile and could carry metaphysical messages to places and people beyond the restricted ambit of the Mycenaean palaces.

This brings us to consider the possible local settings of performances beyond the Mycenaean palaces.

Performative space: tombs and isolated sanctuaries

Chamber tombs start to become an overall widespread phenomenon from LH IIB/IIIA1

onwards across the Greek mainland, and are thus closely linked to the rise of the palatial system. Long dromoi, pronounced entrance passages and earth cut chambers formed the setting of actions before, during and after the funerary process, which involved the classical prothesis and ekphora of the corpse as well as drinking ceremonies.11 The recurrent architectural features and recurrent types of burial gifts (including jewelry and figurines) indicate the emergence of recurrent practices performed by the living in the mortuary arena and the development of common mortuary rituals and overall socially accepted forms of burial during the palatial period.

In the context of performative space, the main perspective of the present paper is dedicated to the growing evidence for Mycenaean sanctuaries, which were located in the countryside beyond the palaces.12

I have mapped all twelve places I could identify as cases of and possible candidates for Mycenaean sanctuaries outside of settlements and palaces (Pl. LIXa). Broadly speaking, I could distinguish between two types of locations. 1. Mycenaean sanctuaries on mountain summits with panoramic views of the surrounding countryside, frequently associated with a later cult of Zeus, who was succeeded in many cases by the Christian saint Profitis Ilias in his responsibility for assembling the rain clouds. 2. Mycenaean sanctuaries on crossroads or mountain passes. In both cases open-air shrines seem to form the majority; however there are a few cases of cult places with built structures. I review them here in a brief survey of the sites in question, by starting with the mountain top shrines of later Zeus sanctuaries.

1. Mount Lykaion is a prominent peak (1382 masl) in the central Peloponnese and can be seen from many locations (Pl. LIXb and LXa). In antiquity it was famous for its open-air sanctuary with an ash altar of Zeus Lykaios, venerated there as a weather god. Recent excavations by the Universities of Arizona and Pennsylvania and the Greek Archaeological Service suggests that ritual activity at the ash altar goes back at least to LH IIIA (and probably earlier) and went on continuously through to the Classical and Hellenistic periods. Directly on the bedrock hundreds of broken Mycenaean kylikes, deep bowls and cups had been deposited together with several Mycenaean terracotta animal and human figurines, and a rock crystal lentoid seal with the illustration a bull13 was found as well in the ash deposit above. A considerable amount of animal bone was discovered at every level of the altar. Most (close to 98%) of the bones are from sheep and goat, and most of them are burnt.14

to Mycenaean Religious Rituals Based on Iconographic and Contextual Analyses of Plaster and Terracotta Figures,” in A. BRYSBAERT (ed.), Tracing Prehistoric Social Networks through Technology. A

Diachronic Perspective on the Aegean (2011) 30-47. 11 Cf. e.g. M.K. DABNEY, “Mycenaean Funerary Processions as Shared Ritual Experiences”, this volume;

M. BOYD, “The Materiality of Performance in Mycenaean Funerary Practices,” World Archaeology 46 (2014) 1-14. I thank the author for supplying me with an electronic file of this article.

12 Cf. WRIGHT 1994 (supra n. 3) 63-72; LUPACK (supra n. 5) 269. 13 J. YOUNGER (pers. comm.) stresses the point that this seal is abraded like a river pebble, and was thus

probably deposited in its secondary use at the ash altar. The lack of seals otherwise confirms this perspective.

14 Mount Lykaion: I would like to thank M. Voyatzis for showing me the Mycenaean and Early Iron Age material from the recent excavations. Reports on the 2007/2008/2009 seasons of excavation: M. PETROPOULOS, M.E. VOYATZIS and D.G. ROMANO, “Mt Lykaion, Sanctuary of Zeus,” Archaeology in Greece Online (http://chronique.efa.gr/index.php/fiches/voir/305/ – /869/ – /1464/; 8.8.2014); B.M. STARKOVICH, G.W.L. HODGINS, M.E. VOYATZIS and D.G. ROMANO,

IDEOLOGY IN SPACE: MYCENAEAN SYMBOLS IN ACTION

179

2. The peak of Profitis Ilias on Mount Arachnaion (+1199 masl), which runs in an east-west direction through the eastern Argolid, is known as the place of a historical sanctuary of Zeus and Hera with a magnificent view of the Argive plain.15 Recent archaeological investigations brought to light Mycenaean evidence for cultic practices. Olga Psychoyou summarizes the results: “The Mycenaean material includes also over 120 fragments of terracotta figurines, a couple of steatite seals, stone conuli, beads and a bronze knife. Most of these objects were found on the rather flat eastern half of the plateau. It is postulated that this material constitutes evidence that the site was also used for rituals during the Mycenaean period, while it features characteristics usually associated with Minoan peak sanctuaries: it is visible from a long distance, and from it the view is panoramic.”16

3. The summit of Mount Oros at 531 masl is the highest elevation on the island of Aegina (Pl. LXb) and carried a later altar of Zeus and a small LBA fortified site, excavated early in the 20ieth century. It allows a perfect view across the island and to the Saronic Gulf (Pl. LXc), however does not appear very suitable for the location of a settlement. K. Pilafidis-Williams published the completely preserved wheel-made female figure of LH IIIA-B date, which proves the existence of a cult at the site. In addition, Walter Gauss published the finds which are still available in the museums stores and which include several bronze sickles, knives, razors and swords, as well as spindle whorls and a stone tripod mortar. The available pottery dates to LH IIIB and IIIC Early, however nothing is known about earlier periods. In addition, gold jewelry and seals are mentioned in the find entries, all of which make it seem possible that the Oros site functioned as a Mycenaean peak sanctuary.17

4. A historically well attested sanctuary of Zeus published in 1976 by Merle Langdon – possibly of Zeus Ombrios, the rain bringer – lies on Mount Hymettos in Attica. The mountain range extends 16 km from north to south and almost bisects Attica into an eastern and western half. The sanctuary site lies just below the peak (1026 masl), and allows an unobstructed view of the entire Athenian plain. However, the view of eastern Attica is completely cut off by the ridge which rises to the east.18 A natural depression just below the crest offers shelter from wind and rain. It contained burned animal bones, and a considerable amount of ash was found along with pottery of the Protogeometric-Archaic and Late Roman periods. Mycenaean pottery, which was found during the excavation, covers at least the LH II to LH IIIC periods.19 However, in his publication Merle Langdon did not connect the Mycenaean sherds with religious practice at the site, due to the small quantity of material (more than 70 fragments) involved. “A further consideration leading us to doubt any connection between the Mycenaean material and the sanctuary is the fact that there are no known peak sanctuaries of the Mycenaean period in Greece. In sharp contrast to Crete, whose mountain peaks yield abundant evidence of the vital role they played in Minoan religion, the mountains of mainland Greece have produced hardly any Bronze Age material. With the exceptions of Hymettos, Oros, and Ayios Elias at Mycenae, there are almost no Mycenaean remains of any sort known to me on Greek peaks. Yet even more dramatic argumenta e silentio have in the past been shown to be merely the result of inadequate

“Dating Gods: Radiocarbon Dates from the Sanctuary of Zeus on Mt. Lykaion (Arcadia, Greece),” Radiocarbon 55 (2013) 501-551; D.G. ROMANO and M.E. VOYATZIS, “Mt. Lykaion Excavation and Survey Project, Part 1: The Upper Sanctuary,” Hesperia 83 (2014) 569-652.

15 Arachnaion: D.W. RUPP, “The Altars of Zeus and Hera on Mt. Arachnaion in the Argeia, Greece,” Journal of Field Archaeology 3 (1976) 261-268.

16 O. PSYCHOYOU, “A Mycenaean Sanctuary on Proph. Ilias at Mt Arachnaion in the Argolid,” Mycenaean Seminar at the University of Athens, 18th January 2013 (http://www.archaiologia.gr/ en/blog/2013/01/18/a-mycenaean-sanctuary-on-proph-ilias-at-mt-arachnaion-in-the-argolid/8.8.2014); O. PSYCHOYOS and Y. KARATZIKOS, “The Mycenaean Sanctuary at Proph. Ilias on Mount Arachnaio within the Religious Context of the 2nd Millennium BC,” this volume.

17 Oros/Aigina: K. PILAFIDIS-WILLIAMS, “A Mycenaean Terracotta Figure from Mount Oros on Aigina,” in Chr. MORRIS (ed.), Klados: Essays in Honour of J. N. Coldstream (1995) 229-234; W. GAUSS, “Prähistorische Funde vom Gipfel des Oros auf Ägina,” in F. LANG, C. REINHOLDT and J. WEILHARTNER (eds), . Archäologische Forschungen zwischen Nil und Istros: Festschrift für Stefan

Hiller zum 65. Geburtstag (2007) 125-142. 18 M.K. LANGDON, A Sanctuary of Zeus on Mount Hymettos (1976) 1. 19 LANGDON (supra n. 18) 53-55 nos. 177-188, 74-75 with table 2.

Birgitta EDER 180

exploration, so we must avoid a categorical statement on the matter. There may have existed Mycenaean mountain-top sanctuaries, and the Mycenaean sherds from Hymettos may in fact have had some religious significance. But in view of the strength of the negative evidence and the vast differences separating Mycenaean from later Greek religion, we are safer in assuming no religious activity on the top of Mount Hymettos in the Bronze Age.”20 The recent evidence I have presented in this paper suffices to eliminate the argumenta e silentio. In addition, Florian Ruppenstein has pointed out that there is hardly any alternative to an interpretation as sanctuary conceivable in order to explain the presence of groups of drinking vessels in this kind of context at this altitude.21 Neither figurines nor jewelry help to confirm this perspective, but the site was probably a sacred place of rather humble character and visited by farmers of the Attic plain to ask for rainfall in cases of drought at all times.

There are three other sites with varying degrees of evidence of Mycenaean cultic practice on mountain peaks:

5. The Mycenaean sanctuary on Mount Kynortion near Epidauros is rather a hilltop shrine, which was occupied by the later Classical sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas, and is well known for its evidence for cultic rituals from the MH period onwards throughout the Mycenaean era. Layers of ash contained not only burnt bones from bulls and goats, but miniature bronze double axes, swords, seals, and a mixture of figurine types including female, animal, horse and rider. Whether or not it is associated with a nearby settlement, it seems to be a sanctuary separated from the habitation site. Among the Mycenaean sanctuaries the one on Mt. Kynortion is the earliest example where the dedications of weapons demonstrate elite involvement in the cult.22

6. The southern Argolid survey located an interesting site on the peak of the steep and conical hill of Mount Profitis Ilias (320 masl) north of Kranidhi (Pl. LXIa-b). Here, within a massive rubble fortification, there are traces of structures and substantial quantities of sherds: some are LH IIIB, many apparently LH IIIC, and some of the sherds show signs of burning. Two steatite buttons or beads, an andesite tripod mortar, and a hollow Psi figurine were found. Taken together the finds have suggested to the team of the southern Argolid survey to interpret the site as a shrine.23 The location of the site on a steep hill rather supports this interpretation, while it is rather uncomfortable for a settlement. From the top of the hill, which today carries a chapel of Profitis Ilias and is accessible only by a winding footpath, one enjoys a view across the whole southern Argolid, from Koilada to Porto Cheli and Spetses to Hermione and Hydra.

7. Klaus Kilian has also grouped the hill site of Profitis Ilias near Ayios Adrianos among the 20 LANGDON (supra n. 18) 86-87. 21 F. RUPPENSTEIN, “Early Helladic Peak Sanctuaries in Attica?” in GAUSS, LINDBLOM, R.A.K.

SMITH, and WRIGHT eds (supra n. 10) 227-230. 22 Apollon Maleatas sanctuary/Epidauros: V.K. LAMBRINOUDAKIS, “Remains of the Mycenaean

Period in the Sanctuary of Apollo Maleatas,” in R. HÄGG and N. MARINATOS (eds), Sanctuaries and

Cults in the Aegean Bronze Age. Proceedings of the First International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 12-13

May 1980 (1981) 59-65; A. THEODOROU-MAVROMMATIDI, “Defining Ritual Action. A Middle Helladic Pit at the Site of Apollo Maleatas in Epidauros,” in PHILIPPA-TOUCHAIS, TOUCHAIS, VOUTSAKI, and WRIGHT eds (supra n. 2) 521-533 (French and Greek abstracts, p. 521). Expression of power through the dedication of weapons and the use of Minoan symbols: WHITTAKER 2001 (supra n. 3) 357; WHITTAKER 2002 (supra n. 3) 153-155; WHITTAKER 2014 (supra n. 3) 189-194. Seals: cf. O. KRZYSZKOWSKA, Aegean Seals. An Introduction (2005) 277 with n. 21. Figurines (including horsemen): E. PEPPA-PAPAIOANNOU, , unpubl. Diss., Univ. Athens (1985) 25-40, Pls 1-22; cf. M. CULTRARO, “Hunter and Horseman: Glimpses into an Unknown Mycenaean Iconography,” in A. GARDEISEN (ed.), Les équidés dans le monde méditerranéen antique. Actes du

colloque organisé par l’École française d’Athènes, le Centre Camille Jullian, et l’UMR 5140 du CNRS, Athènes, 26-28

novembre 2003 (2005) 289-298, esp. 290. 23 Profitis Ilias/Kranidhi: M.H. JAMESON, C.N. RUNNELS, and T.H. VAN ANDEL, A Greek Countryside:

The Southern Argolid from Prehistory to the Present Day (1994) 368-369, 444-446 (site B 21); cf. also C. N. RUNNELS, D.J. PULLEN, and S. LANGDON (eds), Artifact and Assemblage: The Finds from a Regional Survey

of the Southern Argolid, Greece, Vol. 1: The Prehistoric and Early Iron Age Pottery and the Lithic Artifacts (1995) 242-243 (pottery found at B21). Cf. however S. WALLACE, Ancient Crete from Successful Collapse to Democracy’s

Alternatives, Twelfth to Fifth Centuries BC (2010) 97-100.

IDEOLOGY IN SPACE: MYCENAEAN SYMBOLS IN ACTION

181

religious locales, where a natural cleft in the rock led to a small cave underneath. Some ash and broken drinking vessels on the floor above the cleft and in the cave seems to suggest a local place of cultic activity.24

Descending from the Mycenaean peak sanctuaries we arrive at the sacred places guarding passes and crossroads:

8. In 1990 Klaus Kilian published fragments of 123 terracotta figurines of both Phi and Psi type together with some animal figurines, which were found in 1913 near the chapel of Ayia Triada. The site lies four kilometers south of the village Ayios Vasilios on a small plateau between mounts Daphnias and Gkalgouni where an ancient path from Mycenae to Kleonai and Corinth crossed a ridge of about 700 m in height. No building remains were recorded. The assemblage consists of figurines of LH IIIB date, some kylikes and the fragment of an animal rhyton conforming to the evidence of roadside shrines.25

9. Korinna Pilafidis-Williams has published almost 700 fragments of figurines from the site of the later Aphaia temple on Aigina. These figurines form the remains of a Late Bronze Age open-air sanctuary, which seems to start in MH and continues into LH IIIC Middle. They comprise a wide variety of female Phi, Psi and Tau-types, hollow Psis, kourotrophoi, animal figurines and larger figures in addition to a few zoomorphic rhyta. Together with drinking vessels and in particular kylikes, 33 seals, steatite buttons and six beads offer evidence for LBA cult practice at the site.26 The location of the sanctuary provides a view of the entire island, especially of Mount Oros as well as the surrounding valleys and further afield.

10. The sanctuary of Apollo at Kalapodi in Central Greece lies at the crossroads of important ancient north-south and east-west routes which lead from Thessaly to Boeotia and from the Euboean Gulf to the Kephisos valley and the Corinthian Gulf. Here, the recent excavations by W.-D. Niemeier have shown that cultic activity at this important site is continuous from the historical periods down to LH IIIC and goes back to the palatial period. Finds also include seals and Mycenaean jewelry beads.27 Until now, no remains of a Mycenaean settlement have been identified in the immediate neighbourhood, although chamber tombs are known from the yicinity.

11. In view of the recent series of open-air sanctuaries, I suggest to re-group the old and well known assemblage of Mycenaean figurines found at Delphi Marmaria in the Athena Pronoia sanctuary among this group of open-air shrines outside (although close to) a settlement (in the area of the Apollon sanctuary at Delphi). Evidence consists not only of 175 figurines of types of Psi and Phi (LH III A/B-C), but also a few seals,28 Mycenaean beads and spindle whorls. In the most recent discussion S. Müller Celka suggested that the figurines actually had been collected from Mycenaean 24 Profitis Ilias Cave/Ay. Adrianos: K. KILIAN, “Patterns in the Cult Activity in the Mycenaean Argolid:

Haghia Triada (Klenies), the Profitis Elias Cave (Haghios Hadrianos) and the Citadel of Tiryns,” in R. HÄGG and G.C. NORDQUIST (eds), Celebrations of Death and Divinity in the Bronze Age Argolid, Proceedings of

the Sixth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens, 11-13 June, 1988 (1990) 185-197, esp. 190-193.

25 Ay. Triada/Ay. Vasilios: KILIAN (supra n. 24) 185-190. Path: J. LAVERY, “Some Aspects of Mycenaean Topography,” BullInstClSt 37 (1990) 165-171, esp. 168 and map on p. 171; location: G. KOUTSOUKOS, I 2600 . . (2014) 45, 156 n. 202: latitude and longitude coordinates 37.777098, 22.80921.

26 K. PILAFIDIS-WILLIAMS, The Sanctuary of Aphaia on Aigina in the Bronze Age (1998). Seals: cf. KRZYSZKOWSKA (supra n. 22) 275.

27 Kalapodi: R.C.S. FELSCH, “Mykenischer Kult im Heiligtum bei Kalapodi?” in HÄGG and MARINATOS eds (supra n. 22) 81-89; ID., “Opferhandlungen des Alltagslebens im Heiligtum der Artemis Elaphebolos von Hyampolis in den Phasen SH IIIC – Spätgeometrisch,” in POTNIA, 193-199. Seals: KRZYSZKOWSKA (supra n. 22) 278. Reports on the 2010/2011/2012 seasons of excavation, when the LH IIIA-B levels were revealed, with illustrations of steatite seals of the Mainland Popular Group, pressed and engraved glass seals, fluorite seal and Mycenaean type beads, see W.-D. NIEMEIER, “Kalapodi,” Archaeology in Greece Online (http://chronique.efa.gr/index.php/fiches/voir/1031/ – /2625/ – /3056/; 8.8.2014); I. LEMOS, “Euboea and Central Greece in in the Post-palatial and Early Greek Periods,” Archaeological Reports 58 (2012) 19-27, esp. 19-20.

28 CMS V Suppl. 3 nos. 157-159.

Birgitta EDER 182

tombs and were deposited only later in the precincts of the Athena sanctuary.29 However, they were found together with Mycenaean pottery in a compact layer of black earth of 50-80 cms inside the Archaic sanctuary of Athena, although mixed with Geometric and Archaic pottery30: “C’est d’abord une grande pierre plate, située au Sud et à environ 1m80 en contrebas de l’autel occidental, sur laquelle furent trouvées une trentaine d’idoles des différents types “mycéniens”, un éclat d’obsidienne, de petits objets en pâte de verre, en écaille, en ambre. Au-dessus de cette sorte de favissa, entre 1m20 et 1m50 environ de profondeur, passe une couche épaisse de terre noire et de cendres, farcie de fragments d’idoles et de tessons brûlés datant de la même période. Ce stratum, qui apparaît au Sud de l’autel occidental, se poursuit vers l’Ouest jusqu’aux soubassements du deuxième temple en tuf : entre les fondations méridionales de la cella et celles du péristyle de ce temple, – et c’est, avec la pierre aux idoles, le deuxième point très notable, – la couche atteint une épaisseur de 0m50 à 0m80. Les énormes blocs des substructions du temple ne permettent pas de la suivre ailleurs, et le remblayage de la terrasse, nécessité par la construction de l’édifice, l’a en maint endroit bouleversée. Quoi qu’il en soit, l’ensemble des objets découverts de cette région suffit à prouver l’importance du sanctuaire “mycénien” de Marmaria; il est d’autre part évident que le centre du culte fut un point compris entre le grand autel et la cella du temple en tuf. On peut même affirmer qu’il ne dépassa point ces limites.”31

For various reasons, it appears quite unlikely that the Mycenaean figurines had been collected from tombs. a. In general, Mycenaean tombs only contain few figurines, and are therefore most probably not the source of such a large number of figurines. b. Seals, pieces of jewelry and spindle whorls could have come from tombs, but nonetheless conform to the evidence from other sanctuary sites.32 c. Furthermore, it seems inconceivable that (sherds of) Mycenaean pottery would also have been transferred to the Athena sanctuary. Instead, the deposit of Mycenaean pottery must have been generated on the spot as the later Geometric and Archaic pottery. d. Deposits of votives and sacrifices in Greek sanctuaries usually contain remains of earlier and later periods, and the mixed character of the Delphi-Marmaria finds cannot be used to argue against the existence of a Mycenaean sanctuary at the site. The location on the main road from Delphi to Central Greece suggests the existence of a roadside shrine in the neighborhood of the settlement site at Delphi where another sanctuary existed in the area of the later sanctuary of Apollo.33

12. The sanctuary of Apollo Hyakinthos on the hilltop of Ay. Kyriaki south of Sparta in the Eurotas plain of Lakonia was a famous ancient place of worship. Among the finds recovered in the old excavations, a series of wheel-made bulls and Psi-type figurines prove the existence of a sanctuary site in LH IIIC. They illustrate the continuous power of Mycenaean palatial ideology in the period following palatial collapse. The presence of Protogeometric material suggests continuity of site use, although no stratigraphy can presently help to support a definitive answer on this point.34 The site is certainly not integrated into a contemporary settlement, although tombs have been discovered in the neighborhood. It is thus possible that it served a group of sites in the Eurotas valley in postpalatial times.35

Eleni Konsolaki-Yannopoulou has presented material from her excavation of the sanctuary at Ayios Konstantinos, on the Methana peninsula in various publications, and it suffices to remind the

29 S. MÜLLER CELKA, “Delphes et sa région à l’époque mycénienne,” BCH 116 (1992) 445-496, esp.

481-486. 30 R. DEMANGEL, Fouilles de Delphes II: Le sanctuaire d’Athéna Pronaia (Marmaria): Topographie du Sanctuaire : Le

sanctuaire «mycénien (1926) 5-36; L. LERAT, “Chroniques des fouilles en 1956,” BCH 81 (1957) 708-710. 31 DEMANGEL (supra n. 30) 13. 32 MÜLLER (supra n. 29) 485; KRZYSZKOWSKA (supra n. 22) 278. 33 MÜLLER (supra n. 29) 475-481. 34 K. DIMAKOPOULOU, To ó ó o A o E III o o (1982); EAD., The

Homer Encyclopedia s.v. Amyclae, 44-45. 35 WRIGHT 1994 (supra n. 3) 65; K. DIMAKOPOULOU, “ :

,” in W.G. CAVANAGH, C. GALLOU and M. GEORGIADIS (eds), Sparta and Laconia: From

Prehistory to Pre-Modern. Proceedings of the Conference held in Sparta, organised by the British School at Athens, the

University of Nottingham, the 5th Ephoreia of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities and the 5th Ephoreia of Byzantine

Antiquities 17-20 March 2005 (2009) 95-104, esp. 102-103.

IDEOLOGY IN SPACE: MYCENAEAN SYMBOLS IN ACTION

183

reader that it forms part of a large architectural complex, with many rooms, including a megaron (Pl. LXIc). Activity comprises the LH III A-B periods. Room A is full of material related to religious

-leapers, one single female, and clay models of th

36 site, whose character needs further investigation. For this reason is seems not to qualify for an isolated sanctuary site.

of open-than my first survey may indic

1. Placement on or close to the summit of a mountain (altitude range 200-1,400 masl); 2.

site; 5. Proximity

sanctuaries.37

of settlements and pIron Age. “They were topographic and religious focal points for groups of settlements.”38

da south of Ay. Vasilios (no. 8) or the one in the Marmaria area of Delphi (no. 11) to the practice of “popular” religion.39 as such a dichotomy does not do justi

strands of Mycenaean religious practice derived. As Jim Wright argues, the creation of the highly popular Psi figurines and the large wheel-made female figures associated with palatial cult sites

36 Methana: E. KONSOLAKI-

the Mycenaean Sanctuary at Ayios Konstantinos, Methana,” this volume; EAD., “Mycenaean Religious Architecture: The Archaeological Evidence from Ayios Konstantinos, Methana,” in M. WEDDE (ed.), Celebrations: Selected Papers and Discussions from the Tenth Anniversary Symposion of the Norwegian Institute at Athens,

12-16 May 1999 (2004) 61-94; EAD., “A Mycenaean Sanctuary on Methana,” in R. HÄGG (ed.), Peloponnesian Sanctuaries and Cults: Proceedings of the Ninth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at Athens,

11-13 June 1994 (2002) 25-36; EAD., “ ,” in EAD. (ed.), : 1 , , 26-

29 1998, Volume ´: (2003) 375-406; EAD., “A Group of New Mycenaean Horsemen from Methana,” in MELETEMATA, 427-433; Y. HAMILAKIS and E.

Sanctuary,” Oxford Journal of Archaeology 23 (2004) 135-151. For illustrations of the varied types of clay figurines: G. STEINHAUER, The Archaeological Museum of Piraeus (2001) 64-71 figs. 35-66 (http://www.latsis- CMS V Suppl. 3 nos. 311-316. FSHELMERDINE, “Poseidon, pa- -ja-na and Horse-taming Nestor,” this volume.

37 D’AGATA and A. VAN DE MOORTEL (eds), Essays on Ritual and Cult in Crete in Honor of Geraldine C. Gesell (2009) 251-259, esp. 253.

38 Sanctuaries,” in R. HÄGG and N. MARINATOS (eds), The Function of the Minoan Palaces. Proceedings of the

Fourth International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 10-16 June, 1984 (1987) 89-93, esp. 90. 39 R. HÄGG, “Official and Popular Cults in Mycenaean Greece,” in HÄGG and MARINATOS eds (supra

n. 22) 35-39, esp. 38-39.

Birgitta EDER 184

thereby provided a symbolic link to the seat of cult at the citadel centres.”40 However, the investment of the Mycenaean palaces into cultic installations and furnishings as well as religious festivals was certainly more extensive in some sites than in more remote places and dependent on the social levels of participation.41

Only future research can help to clarify details of potential palatial interference with these shrines and sanctuaries and address questions, whether palatial elites appropriated the already established cult of sacred places to maintain their hierarchical position.42 The presence of seals and Mycenaean relief jewelry may offer a starting point: These categories of finds are related to palatial production and administration and not found in every case of a sanctuary site. The lack of such finds in places of high altitudes such as on Mt. Lykaion and Mt. Hymettos or in sites of local importance such as at Profitis Ilias near Ay. Adrianos may indicate only indirect palatial influence on the cultic performance.

With the collapse of the Mycenaean palace system around 1200 B.C.E. the ideological system disintegrated. The last Mycenaean jewels and seals almost entirely disappeared within the following four generations of over 150 years in the tombs and hoards of the post-palatial period of the 12th and 11th c. B.C.E. Mycenaean figurines, relief beads and many memories of Mycenaean religious ideas and practices were gone with them. However, some members of the religious pantheon as well as some cultic practices and the idea of the isolated sanctuary survived into the Early Iron Age, when it experienced its heyday as arena of political, social and religious communication.43 The question of continuity or discontinuity of religious sites between the Late Bronze Age and the Early Iron Age has once again become more complex …

Birgitta EDER

40 WRIGHT 1994 (supra n. 3) 75. This accords with the arguments of M. VETTERS (supra n. 10). 41 Cf. WRIGHT 1994 (supra n. 3) 73. 42 WHITTAKER 2002 (supra n. 3) 155 argues that the local MH sanctuary at Epidauros on Mt. Kynortion

was appropriated in the early Mycenaean period by the elite at Mycenae, who used Minoan symbols and emphasised ritual activity as a means of legitimizing their status and power. Similiarly EAD. 2014 (supra n. 3) 192-199.

43 Cf. B. EDER, “Götter – Mythen – Rituale. Zur Religion in den Dunklen Jahrhunderten,” in Zeit der

Helden: Die “dunklen Jahrhunderte” Griechenlands 1200-700 v.Chr. Katalog zur Ausstellung im Badischen

Landesmuseum Schloss Karlsruhe, 25.10.2008-15.2.2009 (2008) 190-191, 193-194, 196-198, and 200-209.

IDEOLOGY IN SPACE: MYCENAEAN SYMBOLS IN ACTION

185

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Pl. LIXa Distribution map of Mycenaean sanctuaries outside palaces and settlements. Pl. LIXb The peak of Mount Lykaion. Pl. LXa Mount Lykaion seen from northern Messenia. Pl. LXb Mount Oros on Aegina seen from the west (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:20090608_

Perdika_Aegina_panoramic_image_from_Moni_island_Greece.jpg). Pl. LXc View from Mount Oros / Aegina towards the west (http://breechstudentsgreecesm13.files.wordpress.

com/2013/05/img_0930.jpg). Pl. LXIa Prof. Ilias near Kranidi seen from Koilada bay (peak to the right) (http://commons.wikimedia.

org/wiki/ File: Koilada_Argolidas_roadstead.jpg). Pl. LXIa View from Prof. Ilias near Kranidi towards the bay of Koilada (http://static.panoramio.com/photos/

large/1637470.jpg). Pl. LXIc The sanctuary site at Ay. Konstantinos and Eleni on the Methana peninsula from above (©Tobias

Schorr 2008, http://www.methana.com).

LIX

a

b

LX

c

b

a

LXI

c

b

a