Artemis beyond the polis of Thasos: the cult of the goddess in the Archaic north-eastern Aegean

Introduction

The Thasos Artemision has been excavated and studied (primarily by the French School at Athens) since the early 20th century and has proven to be a major landmark of the Thasos archaeological landscape.1 Its lifetime stretches from as early as the 7th century2 to as far down as the imperial times; during that time, and as the city grew, it developed from a sanctuary placed near the city gates to what appears to have been a centrally-placed, monumental, urban cult centre. Although the study of the finds recovered from the site is still ongoing, the material that has been published up to this point indicates that the Artemision rivalled or surpassed the sanctuaries of the Thasian acropolis in importance. The deity appears to have been worshiped in her Pōlō (child-rearing / Kourotrophos-like)3 aspect and perhaps also in the aspect of Eileithyia, the goddess of childbirth.

Material evidence for cults of Artemis (or, more specifically, of deities which bear a great similarity to the Thasian Artemis regarding aspects, purview and/or cult practices) has also been discovered in sites near Thasos, along the coast of the modern-day Gulf of Kavala. These sanctuaries provide us with a wider regional context in which to place the Thasian cult and alternative viewpoints from which to approach it.

In this paper, I shall first discuss the late-7th and 6th-century Thasian cult: the material from the site, the emergence of the cult, the ritual practices and the importance of the Artemis cult in early Thasos. I shall then proceed to review the material evidence and previous scholarly discussion regarding nearby sanctuaries of Artemis and Artemis-like deities. I will focus on two mainland sanctuaries: the ‘Parthenos’ sanctuary in Neapolis and the acropolis sanctuary in

1 For the first major excavation report from the site, see Macridy 1912, 1-19; for the subsequent Salviat and Weill excavation see Daux 1958, 808-814; 1959 (i), 775-781; 1960 (i), 856-862 and 1961, 919-930. For the Maffre and Salviat investigations, see Maffre & Salviat 1976, 774-784; 1977, 687-692; 1978, 821-829; 1980, 726-730; 1981, 932-941; Jacquemin 1980, 717-720; 1982, 660-669; 1983, 867-875; Maffre & Queyrel 1984, 869-872; Maffre 1986, 790-792 and Perreault 1986, 793-797. See also Grandjean & Salviat 2000, 89-91 for an overview of the finds from the Artemision and Maffre & Tichit 2014, 137-164 for a re-examination of the votive offerings from the Artemision and their significance. 2 All dates are BC unless indicated otherwise. 3 For the purposes of this paper, the term ‘Kourotrophos’ will be used descriptively, to refer to any goddess whose purviews extend to include the raising of children. It will not refer to specific deities such as the Classical Athenian ‘Kourotrophos’ (see e.g. Pirenne-Delforge 2004, 171-185). Oisyme. I shall then compare and contrast the above material with the evidence from Thasos. My goal is, firstly, to determine the extent to which the Thasian cult influenced the founding of the other sanctuaries and, secondly, to identify the most significant similarities and differences in cult practices between the mainland sanctuaries and Thasos. Finally, I aim to investigate the impact of the above cults in the developing political environment of the 6th century: how do they compare to the Thasian cult regarding the development of their poleis’ cultural and political identity? Might Thasos have had a direct hand in their establishment and apparent popularity?

The Thasian Artemision

The sanctuary remains The sanctuary of Artemis in Thasos is located east of the agora and to the immediate south- east of the ‘Passage of the Theoroi’ [Plan 1, Plan 2]. Recent archaeological soundings near the latter have shown that a 6th-century fortification wall ran through the area.4 The 6th-century Artemision, therefore, lay near the early settlement fortifications and, in all likelihood, one of the city gates. As the settlement expanded toward the south and west during the 5th and subsequent centuries, the Artemision’s location became more central with regards to the developing asty of Thasos

The sanctuary temenos extends over two artificial terraces at different levels; a low one to the north-west and a higher one to the south-east [Plan 2]. On the latter, the excavators uncovered a Hellenistic square enclosure wall (‘péribole carré’), with an earlier (Late Archaic or Early Classical) phase, the remains of which are visible in its south-eastern side.5 Under subsequent Hellenistic structures in the enclosure’s interior, the excavators also brought to light the marble foundation of an early-6th-century building (possibly an early oikos or temple), with a wealth of contemporary roof-tiles and architectural terracottas in its immediate vicinity. This building’s destruction layer dates to the late 6th / early 5th century.6

On the lower, north-western terrace, a monumental rectangular altar was discovered. Its foundation lies in a late 6th-century fill layer and is primarily built with large marble slabs; its krepis is preserved to a height of two steps, followed by a partially preserved orthostate base.

4 Blondé, Muller & Mulliez 1999, 56-57. 5 Macridy 1912, 1-7; Daux 1959 (i), 775-776; Maffre & Salviat 1976, 774-781; Grandjean & Salviat 2000, 90-91. 6 Daux 1959 (i), 776; Grandjean & Salviat 2000, 91. The altar’s table lay on its western side, with stairs leading up to it from the east; a small channel in its northern corner probably served to evacuate water, blood or liquid offerings.7

The Artemision yielded extensive Archaic contexts, containing mostly pottery, clay figurines and jewellery. Archaic finds were mostly concentrated in the south-eastern side of the square enclosure (near the remains of the earlier wall), immediately outside of its north-western side (under a subsequent road surface) and, finally, near the ‘Passage of the Theoroi’ and the (built with polygonal masonry) ‘Wall H’ [Plan 2, sector O16].8

The Archaic figurines from the site have been published in detail by Weill and Huysecom- Haxhi. They are a major part of a larger corpus that extends from the 7th century to the Late Hellenistic and Roman times; a limited number of Daedalic figurines with elaborate painted decoration document ritual activity on-site since the earliest phases of the island’s colonisation. Several Archaic figurine sub-types, characteristic of the Thasian Artemision, have been identified: their vast majority consists of female figurines, either standing (in a kore-like stance) or seated in a cubic ‘throne’ [Figure 1]. 9

In addition to the above, a number of Archaic clay protomae (studied by Croissant) have been found on-site;10 they are part of a tradition stretching from the 6th to the 4th centuries. Furthermore, Archaic contexts also yielded bronze and ivory jewellery (a golden diadem, dress pins, brooches, garment decorative elements), currently on display in the Museum of Thasos.11

Unfortunately, no pottery corpus from the sanctuary has been published at the time of writing.12 However, yearly excavation reports have provided several examples of Archaic Cycladic (primarily Parian) and Attic pottery from the site, accompanied by local imitations. Representing the 7th century, ‘East Aegean’ pottery and ‘G2-3 Ware’ (a pottery type highly characteristic of the north-eastern Aegean of the period) have also been discovered.13

7 Weill 1985, 9. 8 For a compilation of previous bibliography on the pottery and other finds from the 1950s to the early 21st century, see Maffre & Tichit 2014, 141 (ftn. 7-8). 9 See Huysecom-Haxhi 2009 and Weill 1985 for the publication monographs and figurine catalogues. 10 See Croissant 1983, 37-38, 69-83, 88-91, 116-124, 126-133, 141-142, 156-157, 212-219; Weill 1985, 140-146. 11 Maffre & Tichit 2014, 145-148; also see Prêtre 2016. 12 The pottery from the site is currently being studied and prepared for publication by Prof. J. J. Maffre (Sorbonne), Dr. A. Tichit (Sorbonne) and Dr. C. Walter (Louvre). 13 Maffre & Tichit 2014, 141 (ftn. 7) provide an exhaustive compilation of previous bibliography on imported pottery and local production; for the ‘G2-3 Ware’ from the Artemision and a review of the discussion on its significance, see Ilieva 2009, 111-112. In summation, we can easily trace human presence on site back to at least the first half of the 7th century, as evidenced by the early ‘G2-3 Wares’ (usually dated to ca. 710-650 BCE).14 Dating the appearance of ritual activity is considerably less safe: it is possible that an early sanctuary existed on-site before the arrival of the Parian colonists (as was probably the case in the nearby sanctuary of Heracles),15 but there is insufficient evidence for us to reach that conclusion safely. On the other hand, the sanctuary had definitely been founded by the mid-7th century, as evidenced by the earliest Daedalic figurines and clay statues recovered from the site.

The goddess and her purview The earliest textual evidence regarding the attributes of Thasian Artemis date to the 2nd century BCE:16 two statue bases found near the northern enclosure wall bear dedicatory inscriptions to Artemis Pōlō (ΠΩΛΩ).17 Furthermore an inscription of uncertain date (most likely 2nd to 1st century) renders honours to Epie, daughter of Dionysius, for “restoring and building the propylon as an offering to Artemis Eileithyie (ΕΙΛΕΙΘΥΙΗ[Ι]) and the demos”.18 In addition to the above, two 5th-century inscriptions from Thasos mention Artemis Hekate; notably, however, none of the two can be safely linked to the Artemision itself, and one of them was found near the harbour. It is possible that the cult of this aspect was hosted in the ‘Thesmophorion’ of the polis, which has been identified on the northernmost end of the settlement, near the ancient harbour installations.19

The epithets Pōlō (lit. ‘of the youths’ from pōlos, ‘foal’) and Eileithyie (known as the goddess of childbirth) closely link the cult of Artemis with the birth and raising of children. Both epithets are also encountered in Paros, so an argument could be made for the cult(s) being introduced by the Parian apoikoi.20 As for Artemis Hekate, her purview is wide and diverse, but it is known to have included the protection of women and childbirth.21 However, this textual

14 Ilieva 2009, 109; Aslan 2002, 87. 15 Launey 1944, 191-219 16 Note that these are not necessarily the earliest epigraphical or literary references to the cult in general, but the earliest sources that link the goddess worshipped in the Artemision to a specific epithet and attribute. Hippocrates (Epid. III.17, ed. by Jones W.H.S. 1868) mentions the Thasian Artemision, but offers no insight into the aspect(s) of the worshipped goddess. Artemis is also mentioned without an epithet in at least two inscriptions (tentatively dated to the 4th century) from the site of the Artemision itself and the ‘Passage of the Theoroi’ (Salviat 1958, 231, ftn. 6) 17 Macridy 1912, 8-9. 18 Salviat 1959, 363-364, 367. 19 Duchêne 1992, 71-74, IG XII 8.359. 20 Maffre & Tichit 2014, 159-160, 162. 21 See Prêtre 2011, 234-235, with previous bibliography. evidence dates so much later than the founding of the sanctuary (at least two centuries) that it would be fallacious to consider it representative of the 7th- and 6th-century Thasian cult without supporting material. A closer look at the types of votive artefacts and at the early depictions of the goddess would provide some insight on this matter:

Firstly, we need to shortly mention the known, safely identifiable depictions of the goddess. As Weil (and, more recently, Maffre and Tichit) have pointed out, they are relatively rare in a pottery corpus that, otherwise, presents an extensive variety of pictorial themes.22 In Thasos, Artemis is either shown as a standing, winged ‘Potnia Theron’ (strangling beasts and/or snakes) or seated on a throne, holding a flower and flanked by a doe. The former depiction indicates the goddess’ power over the wild and the protection she extends to her worshippers; the latter may reference an aspect of the goddess that lies closer to a ‘fertility’ deity, linked to flora and the crops (represented by the flower) as well as animals and children (represented by the doe).23 Interestingly, there is only one Archaic depiction of Artemis as an archer: a black- figure amphora (ca. 560 BCE), decorated with the scene of the murder of Tityos by Apollo and Artemis. Notably, in this example, the goddess is shown wearing a cylindrical polos headdress.24

This is by no means exceptional for Archaic depictions of Artemis25 (or other goddesses, for that matter), but it does evoke a close link to the figurine corpus from the sanctuary. Two noteworthy figurine types (characteristically described as ‘déeses matronales’ by Grandjean and Salviat),26 must be mentioned at this point. The first (and most characteristic to the Thasian sphere) has been named ‘Dame au Polos’ (‘Lady with Polos’) by Huysecom-Haxhi. It dates primarily to the second half of the 6th century and depicts a female figure, seated on a cubic ‘throne’ or diphros seat, with a high, cylindrical polos crown / headdress.27 The second type is the more widely distributed ‘kore’ type with several subcategories, i.e. a standing clothed woman, often holding a pomegranate or flower bud. Of the two types, the latter is more likely to depict worshippers than the goddess herself. The seated, polos-wearing type, on the other hand, almost certainly depicted Artemis as she was perceived in the 6th century; it has even

22 Surprisingly, depictions of other deities are encountered more often than depictions of Artemis; see Maffre & Tichit 2014, 155-158. 23 See Klinger 2009, 104-105. See also Rolley 1965, 456-457, fig. 20 for a figurine of Artemis holding a deer from the Thasos ‘Thesmophorion’. 24 Maffre & Tichit 2014, Fig. 22. 25 See e.g. LIMC II, v: ‘Artemis’, No. 78 for a 6th-century parallel ‘possibly from Boeotia’ and No. 1298 for a similar depiction on a Lycomedes Painter hydria. 26 Grandjean & Salviat 2000, 91. 27 Weill 1985, 147-220; Huysecom 1997, 155-180; Huysecom-Haxhi 2009, 342-356. been suggested that it served as a miniature copy of a cult statue, which must have been similar in style to e.g. the Prinias goddess [Figure 1].28 Stylistically, the type is a direct call-back to earlier periods: Weil characteristically identifies ‘deliberately accentuated Daedalic elements’.29 This stylistic conservatism seems to be quite important, as it hints towards the deliberate adoption of specific, early iconographic elements by the 6th-century Thasian craftsmen. When this is considered in conjunction with the finds from Neapolis,30 we are given the impression that continuity in style and iconographic elements characterises the cults of female deities in the Thasian sphere well into the Classical period.

Is this sufficient to safely argue for an early cult of an Artemis Pōlō, Eileithyie and/or Hekate? In my opinion, there is minimal to no evidence to suggest an early Artemis Eileithyie cult, but a case could be made for the Pōlō protective/child-rearing aspect. The kore-type figurines may well have been ex-voto on behalf of young women at the cusp of adulthood. Furthermore, in Thasos, the seated goddess is closely linked to the deer/doe symbol, which has been interpreted as representative of youths in other sanctuaries.31 As for the Hekate aspect, that is even more problematic. The iconography of the ‘Dame au Polos’ figurines has been tentatively linked to early depictions of Hekate and other goddesses of Asia Minor,32 but the sanctuary itself has provided us with no cult focus that could safely be identified as hosting ‘chthonian’ worship (e.g. a bothros pit or an eschara hearth).

It is worth taking a closer look at the types of votive offerings recovered from the Artemision. There is a relatively small but notable corpus of richly decorated Archaic black-figure epinetra and a -still unpublished but massive- number of clay loom weights ‘of various types and periods’ found on-site.33 These are votive offerings that could easily link to rites de passage for girls, such as reaching adulthood and/or marriage. Jewellery and dress ornaments in bronze and ivory could also have been dedicated in the same context by more affluent worshippers.34

This does not mean that the purview of the Thasian Artemis extended solely over the female population. While we have no ‘rich’ offerings comparable to the dress ornaments, diadems etc

28 It could be the case that what is depicted is a priestess or similar high-ranking personage, but given a) the consistent polos iconography, b) the depictions of Artemis as a seated goddess in pottery from the Artemision itself and c) the aforementioned seated-goddess parallels from e.g. Crete, I consider that unlikely. 29 Weill 1985, 192 30 Infra, n. 47. 31 Supra, n. 23. 32 Weill 1985, 193-195; Prêtre 2011, 234-235. 33 Maffre & Tichit 2014, 145-147. 34 Grandjean & Salviat 2000, 91, 297-299; Maffre & Tichit 2014, 117-148; Prêtre 2016, 25-123. that could be safely linked to male worshipers, the many fine drinking vessels from the site are noteworthy. The vessels themselves remain unpublished but we have a general overview of the material thanks to Maffre and Tichit. Most of the pottery is 6th-century black-figure, with a massive number of attic kylix cups (more than three thousand fragments of Comast cups, Siana cups, Lip cups, Droop cups, Cassel cups, Eye cups and Prolongation-style cups) and black- figure skyphoi (more than two thousand fragments) [Figure 2]. This assemblage is joined by a considerable number of Thasian plates.35

Were these cups ex voto or were they in use in the sanctuary for feasting during worship? If the former, might they have served as rite de passage offerings for men who reach adulthood (e.g. by participating in their first symposium)? Maffre and Tichit rightly indicate that we cannot be sure. Very few amphorae, kraters, oinochoae and other vessel types that would be used in a ritual symposium have been preserved, but these vessels might have been in bronze and destroyed at some point. There are several cup fragments which bear dedicatory inscriptions: this shows that the practice of dedicating vessels existed in the Artemision, but extrapolating for the entirety of the pottery corpus is problematic. Interestingly, Maffre and Tichit point out one of the inscriptions on a Siana cup, which indicates that the dedicator might have been a woman.36

In addition to the above pottery corpus, a recent publication by Prêtre has also brought forward several bronze arrowheads and very few early spearheads from the Archaic sanctuary.37 The scholar has linked these finds with Artemis’ aspect as a huntress / ‘Potnia’ and interprets them as dedications by local élites: hunting being an indication of adulthood and social status among the male population.

In summary, in Archaic Thasos, the worship of Artemis Eileithyie is not evidenced by the material recovered from the sanctuary and may have been introduced later, up to the Hellenistic times. In addition, while we certainly cannot rule out the worship of the ‘chthonian’ aspect of Artemis Hekate in the sanctuary, there is little evidence for a ‘chthonian’ cult, even in later periods. On the other hand, the worship of Artemis Pōlō (or of a similar aspect of the goddess) may well have taken place since the founding of the sanctuary. There are indications that the

35 Maffre & Tichit 2014, 151-153; see also supra, n. 13. 36 Maffre & Tichit 2014, 144, fig. 4; the preserved part of the inscription reads […]EAN[…], which might be reconstructed as the final letter (epsilon / eta) of a female name, followed by AN[ΕΘΕΚΕ]. I find the alternative interpretations by Maffre & Tichit ( 2014, 144, ftn. 19) (i.e. [M]E AN[EΘΕΚΕ] or part of a male name e.g. [KΛ]ΕΑΝ[ΔΡΟΣ]) considerably more likely. 37 Prêtre 2016, 103-104. cult was closely linked to the transition from childhood to adulthood and to marriage, at least for the female population of the polis. What remains less clear is whether the protection of the goddess extended over young men as well. The extensive corpus of drinking vessels, which were, apparently, dedicated to the goddess seem to argue in favour of it, as does the fact that there are suggested instances of Artemis cults elsewhere in the Aegean where her ‘Kourotrophos’ aspect encompasses children of both sexes.38

Such a cult must have been very significant during the formative years of the new polis of Thasos and only grew more important during subsequent periods. This is also indicated by the location of the sanctuary: during the 6th century, it lay in the interior of the walled settlement, but very close to a city gate. It was, therefore, placed as close to the limit of the asty as possible, without actually being extra-urban. This is a fitting location for a sanctuary which played a major part in the transition from childhood to adulthood (and citizenship). In addition to this, it lay to the immediate east of the agora, the political ‘heart’ of the polis: a further underlining of the sanctuary’s civic function.39

Notably, there are at least two sanctuaries in Thasos where the material corpus is surprisingly similar to that of the 7th- and 6th-century Artemision. The sanctuary of Athena (henceforth ‘Athenaion’, based on the French excavation reports) on the Thasos acropolis and the ‘Thesmophorion’, on the northernmost end of the settlement have yielded finds such as ‘Lady with Polos’ figurines, clay statues, large amounts of imported pottery, drinking vessels and Thasian plates [Figure 3].40 Interestingly, both of the above sanctuaries had important civic functions, being linked to the laws and thesmoi of Thasos in later years.41 Furthermore, the types of common offerings in the three sanctuaries might indicate some overlap among the purview of the worshiped deities, especially in matters of reaching adulthood and assuming the responsibilities of a member of the community. One can argue that the three cults influenced each other considerably during the years after the founding of Thasos; it is not unlikely that the Thasian Artemis and Athena evolved from the same original ‘Kourotrophos’ / ‘Potnia’ archetype. At the time of writing, the Artemision seems to provide us with the best impression of this original archetype: while characteristic elements such as e.g. varied imported drinking

38 See, e.g. Brauron: Lundgreen 2009, 120-124. 39 Guettel Cole 2004, 178-197 and particularly 183-184. 40 See Grandjean & Salviat 2000, 102-105 with previous bibliography for the ‘Thesmophorion’ and 114-116 with previous bibliography for the ‘Athenaion’. 41 See, for instance, SEG 36:790 and IG XII,8 267, where the Athena Poliouchos sanctuary hosts legal documents and decisions of the polis. See also Rolley 1965, 441-477 for the deities worshiped in the ‘Thesmophorion’ in the 5th century BCE: interestingly, they include Artemis Ὀρθωσίη. pottery, large-scale clay statues and ‘Lady with Polos’ figurines are found in all three aforementioned sanctuaries, the Artemision provides a considerably more extensive corpus than its contemporaries and seems to introduce most of the elements that the other sanctuaries adopted.

Beyond Thasos: Goddesses of the Peraea Having established a basic impression of the Artemis cult in Archaic Thasos, we can now look beyond the polis of Thasos itself and toward the opposite Macedonian coastline. There, we can identify two sanctuaries which bear notable similarities to the Thasian Artemision. Specifically:

The Neapolis Parthenos The sanctuary of the Parthenos in ancient Neapolis (modern-day Kavala) was first excavated during the 1930s by Bakalakis and revisited by Lazaridis in the 1960s.42 It lies on the western slope of the coastal hill on which the Old Quarter of Kavala is built.

Architectural fragments of a late 6th-/ early 5th-century monumental building were discovered in secondary use in Old Quarter buildings, including the nearby church of St. Nikolaos. More architectural fragments were brought to light during the Bakalakis excavations under the modern-day Poulidou Str. These include several Ionic order capitals, in Thasian marble, and parts of a building’s entablature; it is almost certain that they belonged to the sanctuary’s temple. Unfortunately, the sanctuary extended under the nearby Turkish imaret building, which prevented its full excavation. Therefore, the precise location of the temple, its size and even the size of the sanctuary temenos itself remained unclear. Only part of its (probably Early Classical) enclosure was discovered and tracing it beyond its visible 4.5 metres would require the demolishing of several surrounding modern buildings.43 Thirty years later, Lazaridis encountered similar difficulties but excavated a wider area under the street. He uncovered more of the sanctuary enclosure and part of a terrace wall in its interior but couldn’t locate the foundations of the temple itself [Plan 3].44

The excavations also yielded considerable amounts of pottery. Unfortunately, the uppermost stratigraphic layers appear to have been scraped away at some point during antiquity or the Middle Ages. Both Bakalakis and Lazaridis note that the ‘exclusivity of Archaic pottery sherds

42 Bakalakis 1936, 1-48; Bakalakis 1938 (i), 75-102; Bakalakis 1938 (ii); Lazaridis 1961/2, 235-238; 1965, 443- 446; Koukouli 1967, 417-434. 43 Bakalakis 1936, 29-31. 44 Lazaridis 1961/2, 237. is remarkable’ and that very little earth separated the bedrock from the modern layers.45 Most of the pottery corpus consists of 6th-century imported pottery from Athens, Corinth, the Cyclades (Paros in particular) and the East Aegean; it bears distinct similarities to what has been recovered from the Thasian Artemision.

Both excavations brought to light several Classical votive inscriptions and stelae. One such inscription, originally dedicated by Apollophanes to the ‘Parthenos’, had been visible in secondary use in one of the nearby buildings since the 1860s; the newer inscriptions found in the excavations confirmed the location of the sanctuary and established the name of the worshiped goddess: ‘Parthenos’. 46 This is not an epithet (e.g. Athena Parthenos) but the name of the goddess itself. This can be seen in the 5th- and 4th-century inscriptions IG I3 101 and IG II2 128 where the goddess is mentioned or depicted. In the relief decoration of the latter, Athena (depicted in Pheidian style) is shown holding the right hand of the smaller Parthenos. The Neapolitan goddess is depicted in a jarringly archaising style, in a stance highly reminiscent of the korae figurines from the Thasian Artemision and with a cylindrical polos headdress. Her name (ΠΑΡΘΕΝΟΣ) is carved both on the background, above her head, and on the bottom frame of the relief.47

As is the case in Thasos, the only textual evidence we possess for Neapolis dates more than a century after the sanctuary’s most likely founding date. Based on the textual evidence alone, it is impossible to determine whether ‘Parthenos’ served as the name of the goddess since the founding of the sanctuary in the late 7th / early 6th century or whether it originally served as an epithet. It is also impossible to determine the purview of the goddess and how they compare to the Thasian Artemis. However, the early finds from the sanctuary may shed some light on these matters. Specifically:

Several small clay figurines have been recovered from the site.48 They are very much comparable to those found in the Thasian Artemision and, significantly, they include at least two confirmed examples of the ‘Lady with Polos’ type. Huysecom places both examples relatively late in the typological sequence of the type.49 The sanctuary also, critically, provides us with several 6th-century depictions of ‘Kourotropic’ pregnant figures, as well as several

45 Bakalakis 1938 (i), 77; Lazaridis 1961/2, 237. 46 Bakalakis 1936, 32-34. 47 Bakalakis 1936, Fig. 51; Lazaridis 1969, Pl. 25. 48 Prokova 2014, 132-416. 49 A third example from Neapolis is noted, but Huysecom ( 1997, 160) claims that it is ‘unknown to her’. Prokova ( 2014, 184-188) presents us with at least six fragments. examples of the kore type, with parallels in the Artemision corpus [Figure 4].50 Two points need to be underlined:

Firstly, the worshippers in Neapolis either procured these figurines from Thasian workshops, or they produced their own moulds from Thasian examples, rather than develop their own distinct figurine types.51 This indicates that the Thasian Artemis and the Neapolitan Parthenos were of sufficiently similar aspects and purview that ex voto artefacts developed for the former were considered appropriate offerings for both.

Secondly, the ‘Lady with Polos’ figurines in Neapolis date after the earliest subtypes encountered in Thasos.52 They represent a Thasian element of material culture, introduced in the Neapolis cult. This indicates a close cultural link between Neapolis and Thasos; it also hints that the characteristic elements of the Parthenos cult are likely to have been considerably influenced by the Thasian Artemis cult. Notably, it is not individual iconographic elements (e.g. the polos headdress, the seated figure) that document this link between the two cults; none of these elements is sufficient by itself to distinguish the goddesses of the Thasian region from their contemporaries throughout the rest of the Archaic Greek world. However, the ‘Lady with Polos’ type overall, as it was first produced in Thasos and then copied in the cults of the Thasian peraea, is stylistically distinct from all contemporary parallels and near-exclusive to the region.53

The pottery corpus remains unpublished but some information on specific vessels has been made available. A massive Parian pithamphora (ca. 650-625 BCE), decorated with a depiction of Peleus’ and Thetis’ wedding [Figure 5],54 traces a link from Neapolis to Thasos and, from there, to the metropolis of Paros: the same population group that colonised Thasos makes its presence known in the sanctuary of Neapolis.55 The wedding scene that decorates the vessel echoes the themes and purview linked to the Thasian Artemis; furthermore, Verdan has proposed that vessels of this type may have served a function similar to that of the lebes gamikos, in other regions of the Aegean.56 Several other vases from the sanctuary can be

50 Bakalakis 1938 (i), 80; Lazaridis 1961/2, Pl. 284; Prokova 2014, 279-289. 51 See Huysecom 1997, 161-167 for an analysis of different ‘generations’ of moulds for the ‘Lady with Polos’ figurine type. 52 Huysecom 1997, 162-164. 53 Only one example is known from outside the region: it was found in Histria (Weill 1985, 164). 54 Lazaridis 1961/2, 238. 55 Vessels of this type (originally thought to be Melian) have been shown to be Parian in origin. See Zaphiropoulou 2004, 418. 56 Verdan 2015, 131-134. identified as products of Cycladic workshops; they further evidence the close cultural links between Neapolis, Thasos and the Cyclades (at least during the 6th century).

Attic and Corinthian pottery are also very common. The vast majority of the recovered sherds are 6th-century black-figure. As in the Thasos Artemision, most of the pottery fragments seem to have belonged to drinking vessels (primarily Attic and Laconian kylix cups). In contrast to the Artemision, however, a substantial number of fine, black-figure kraters has also been uncovered [Figure 6]. Several of these vessels bear dedicatory inscriptions, which reveal, firstly, that they were ex voto artefacts and not likely to have been made for continuous use in ritual feasting and, secondly, that the sanctuary received offerings from both women and men.57

In fact, by the end of the 5th century, the Parthenos had developed into Neapolis’ patron deity: her profile appears on the obverse side of the city coinage from 411 BCE onwards and she even appears as a ‘representative’ of the city in the IG II2 128 stele. It is very important to note that, in all depictions, she is shown in Archaic style, wearing a cylindrical polos: an archaising convention.58

This is especially important, both for the Neapolis cult and for the Thasian region in general, as it provides us with evidence of deliberate continuity between Archaic iconography and depictions of the goddesses in later periods. The adoption of an archaising style in all late depictions of the goddess, cannot be interpreted as the result of a general stylistic fashion or trend, especially since the Parthenos appears, on occasion, in the company of more conventionally rendered figures. Her depiction as an Archaic, polos-bearing kore is almost certainly a deliberate choice: it may have been inspired by the goddess’ extant early cult statue59 and/or deliberately adopted to stress the continuity and age of the cult, back to the original goddess archetype. In any case, while not impossible, it would still be very difficult to convincingly argue for significant changes in the cult and the purview of the goddess, well into the Classical period.

What conclusions can we reach, based on the above? Bakalakis proposes that the Parthenos’ purview extended over nature (‘ἀγροτέρα’ lit. ‘of the fields’) and that she may have been worshiped ‘as a chthonian goddess’, similarly to the ‘Tauropolos’ goddess of Amphipolis.60 His view of the Parthenos, therefore, is very much that of the archetypical fertility goddess

57 Bakalakis 1938 (i), 78-81; Lazaridis 1961/2, 238 and Pl. 281-283. 58 Bakalakis 1936, 35-36. 59 Bakalakis 1936, 36, Fig. 52. 60 Bakalakis 1936, 36. concept, not dissimilar to e.g. Demeter. However, there is very little evidence (either written or material) that would support such an interpretation. Prokova, on the other hand, bases her conclusions on the iconography of the extensive figurine corpus from the sanctuary site, and proposes a deity that presided primarily over the household and the coming of age of women.61 Indeed, the Parthenos appears to me very similar to the Thasian Artemis: a ‘Kourotrophos’ deity, which protected the youths of the polis and presided over their coming of age. This may have been marked by their first symposion for the boys (evidenced by the votive drinking vessels and kraters) or their marriage, for the girls (evidenced by the Parian pithamphora and the kore figurines). It would not be unreasonable for such a deity to eventually become the patron of a polis, as her civic role would be of the highest importance.

The Oisyme Sanctuary The polis of Oisyme was located in the westernmost end of the Kavala gulf, to the south-east of the modern-day settlement of Nea Peramos. An oval hill has been identified as the acropolis of the settlement, with still-visible and impressive Classical fortifications; to its south, near the coast, the cemetery of Oisyme has been located and excavated.

During excavations in the late 1980s, a sanctuary was brought to light on the hilltop.62 A small, 5th-century temple had been constructed over an earlier building that is now completely lost; said building was probably erected in the late 7th century and its destruction layer dates to the turn of the 6th century. The 5th century temple remained in use well into the Hellenistic period, having been repeatedly repaired: it appears to have been tripartite, with a small pronaos, a cella and a possible opisthodomos. An eschara hearth, flanked by stone column bases, occupied the centre of the cella [Plan 4].

Most of the material associated with the Archaic early phase of the sanctuary was recovered from a destruction layer, to the immediate north of the 5th-century building. Regarding pottery, Oisyme is similar to Neapolis and Thasos. Among the 7th-century material, Cycladic and ‘East Aegean’ pottery are reported as the most common fine wares, accompanied by so-called ‘Pseudo-Chian’ wares: Thasian imitations of ‘East Greek’ vessels. For the 6th-century material,

61 Prokova 2014, 87-115. 62 Giouri & Koukouli 1987, 363-387; Koukouli 1987, 444; 1988, 424-427; 1989, 375-376; Koukouli & Papanikolaou 1990, 487-502. Attic black-figure pottery (mostly kylix cups and skyphoi) is the most common, but Thasian- produced cups of the Phari type and Corinthian wares are also encountered.63

The same destruction layer also yielded several fragments of marble and clay statues, clay figurines and a substantial corpus of metal objects, including weapons, a bronze ‘Argive’-type shield, as well as a single silver stater of Ennea Hodoi.64

In contrast to Thasos and Neapolis, Oisyme does not provide us with any textual evidence that would allow us to identify the worshiped deity. The excavators have suggested Athena as the most likely candidate and have drawn parallels between Oisyme and the sanctuary of Athena in Thasos. Specifically, they have pointed out that both sanctuaries are located on the acropolis of their respective settlements; that the same types of votive artefacts (pottery types, figurines, statues) are present in both sanctuaries and that both sanctuaries were destroyed at the same time, around the turn of the 6th century and subsequently rebuilt.65

The above arguments, are only partly sufficient for a safe conclusion. The placement of the sanctuary on the acropolis is, in itself, inconclusive, as is the similarity of offerings between the two sanctuaries: the Thasian ‘Athenaion’ has yielded a corpus of material that is remarkably similar to that of the Thasian Artemision and ‘Thesmophorion’. Finally, regarding the time of destruction, the Thasian Artemision also appears to have been destroyed during the turn of the 6th century, as mentioned above.

Can the material itself provide any useful information on the matter? In contrast to Neapolis and the Thasian Artemision (where the early cult buildings are insufficiently preserved or remain undiscovered), Oisyme provides us with some architectural remains, even if they are dated to the early years of the 5th century. The cult building, with its tripartite design, central hearth and surrounding pillars recalls the ‘Polygonal Masonry Building’ in the Thasian sanctuary of Heracles;66 it might tentatively be said that Oisyme follows Thasian architectural examples. The interior hearth is an interesting element and may indicate a cult with chthonian elements. No exterior altar has been found in Oisyme. The Thasos ‘Athenaion’, on the other hand, preserves traces of the foundation of a late-6th / early 5th-century altar to the immediate

63 Giouri & Koukouli 1987, 371-372; Koukouli & Papanikolaou 1990, 492; Koukouli-Chrysanthaki & Marangou 2012, 321-338; Manakidou 2012, 359-369. For the Phari workshop, see Blondé, Perreault & Péristéri 1992, 11- 40. 64 Giouri & Koukouli 1987, 371. 65 Giouri & Koukouli 1987, 372-373. 66 Launey 1944, 36. west of the temple.67 The area has also yielded an ash layer with burnt animal remains, possibly from animal sacrifices. 68 This might imply differences in cult practice between the two sanctuaries.

Based on the recovered pottery alone, Oisyme appears quite similar to the Thasos Artemision and to Neapolis. It has yielded a large corpus of drinking vessels, ranging from 7th-century Thasian productions to 6th-century Athenian kylix cups (Siana cups, Eye cups, Palmette cups, C-cups) and to the characteristic cups with ‘Sub-Protogeometric’ decoration produced in Phari. No dedicatory inscriptions are reported;69 similarities with Neapolis and the Thasian sanctuaries make it almost certain that the sanctuary attracted male worshipers [Figure 7].70

This is further evidenced by the unique (among all the sanctuaries of the region) appearance of at least one dedicatory shield in the sanctuary, alongside several other offensive weapons, including spear- and arrowheads.71 [Figure 8, Figure 9]. The Thasos ‘Athenaion’ offers some examples of spear- and arrowheads, from the burnt earth and ash layer to the Archaic temple’s north-west; the same is the case for the Thasos Artemision, but none of the two Thasian sanctuaries have yielded shields.72 It is possible that this is an extension of the Kourotrophos aspect, given that military service was the duty of a citizen and a mark of adulthood for young men: the Oisyme goddess might have developed a more martial / protective aspect compared to the Neapolis Parthenos or the Thasian Artemis. However, it must be noted that Larson, in her statistical study of weapons in sanctuaries of female deities and Baitinger, in his holistic study of weapon dedications, have shown that weapons could be offered to poliad goddesses even if their purview did not directly involve war.73

Furthermore, it is highly likely that the sanctuary attracted female worshippers as well. Several fragments of large clay statues have been found in the 6th-century deposit layer. They are of the kore type, with parallels found in the Thasian Artemision and ‘Athenaion’; the excavators are confident that ‘the Thasian provenance (of the statues) is certain’. They are joined by a larger corpus of small clay figurines, including known ‘kore’ types and, more significantly, several examples of ‘Lady with Polos’ figurines [Figure 10, Figure 11].74 Even more

67 Grandjean & Salviat 2000, 115. 68 Daux 1960 (ii), 864. 69 Koukouli-Chrysanthaki & Marangou 2012, 323-335 70 Giouri & Koukouli 1987, 371-372; Koukouli & Papanikolaou 1990, 492. 71 Giouri & Koukouli 1987, 371. 72 Daux 1960 (ii), 864; see also supra, n. 37. 73 See Larson 2009; Baitinger 2011, 146 and 154-155. 74 Giouri & Koukouli 1987, 370; Koukouli & Papanikolaou 1990, 492. importantly, a figurine of a pregnant woman or daemon is also included in the figurine corpus; arguing for at least some kourotrophic aspects in the cult and drawing a direct parallel to similar finds in Neapolis.75

In addition, a considerable number of loom weights of varying shapes were recovered from the deposit layer; even if the kore-type figurines were not dedicated by female worshipers and were only meant to depict the goddess, these loom weights can be safely linked to female everyday activities and seem to argue for a goddess of the Ergane type (i.e. a goddess that oversees the workings of the household). The Thasos Artemision has yielded a wealth of similar weights; none are yet reported from the Thasos ‘Athenaion’, although this might be due to the incomplete publication of the finds from the latter site.76

In conclusion, while there is some evidence that might link the Oisyme sanctuary to the Thasian ‘Athenaion’ (most notably the weaponry recovered from both sites), there are also evident differences in cult practices between the two sanctuaries. The most significant difference lies in the type of cult focus: both the Thasian Athenaion and the Artemision provide examples of exterior, monumental altars, while the cult in Oisyme was almost certainly centred on the interior hearth / eschara. Therefore, the Oisyme cult cannot be considered a perfect duplicate of either Thasian cult.

That said, Thasian cult and cultural elements are evident in Oisyme. The presence of Thasos- produced clay kore statues in the sanctuary; the pottery corpus that is overwhelmingly similar to what we have come to expect from sanctuaries of the Thasian cultural sphere; and the figurines which include characteristic Thasian types, such as the ‘Lady with Polos’ all serve as evidence that the Oisyme cult was formed under some degree of Thasian influence. Perhaps it is here that we may find some early traces of Artemis Hekate; the hypothesised ‘chthonian’ elements of the Oisyme sanctuary certainly fit what we would expect from such a cult better than the surviving cult installations in Thasos itself.

Can we include the Oisyme goddess in the ‘Kourotrophos’ / protective deity archetype of the Thasian cultural sphere? In my opinion, the answer is a tentative yes. Even if the worshiped goddess was not a perfect duplicate of Thasian Artemis (or Athena), she must have been, at the time, perceived as a highly similar deity. The types of votive artefacts recovered from Oisyme

75 Koukouli-Chrysanthaki pers. comm. February 2018; see also supra, n. 50. 76 Giouri & Koukouli 1987, 373; Maffre & Tichit 2014, 145-146. (especially the drinking vessels, shields, clay figurines and statues) argue for a goddess the purview of which were very much aligned to her Thasian and Neapolitan contemporaries.

Population Interactions and the Evolution of the Artemis Cult In both Oisyme and Neapolis the earliest material which can be safely linked to ritual activity dates to the second half of the 7th century and is accompanied by finds which include Cycladic and East Greek pottery. This seems to indicate that the cults in both mainland sites were established under the direct influence of the apoikoi from the central Aegean, who had established their presence in Thasos at the time. It also matches with the earliest finds from the Thasos Artemision, which date a few decades before the apparent establishment of the Neapolis and Oisyme sanctuaries.

However, both Neapolis and Oisyme have yielded material which corresponds to a habitation phase dating before the first ritual contexts. This includes handmade, ‘Thracian’ Early Iron Age pottery with grooved decoration, early 7th-century ‘G2-3 Ware’ and, in the case of Neapolis, several fragments of pottery with PG decoration. Unfortunately, stratigraphic information regarding the context of those finds is available only for Oisyme. The excavation reports mention a layer of ash, which contained most of the aforementioned material, to the immediate east of the early cult building. This layer also contained several fragments of what the excavators identified as burnt clay coating, originally meant to waterproof building walls and roofs. 77

Both sanctuaries were, therefore, established in sites that were already occupied by ‘Thracian’ populations before the arrival of the Parian / Thasian settlers. What remains uncertain are the circumstances under which these sanctuaries were founded and the extent to which each population group influenced the development of the cult characteristics.

There is evidence from Thasos to suggest a peaceful coexistence of the newly-arrived settlers and the previous inhabitants: the sanctuary of Heracles seems to exhibit signs of ritual activity on a large rock altar since at least the first half of the 7th century, before the arrival of the settlers. Furthermore, studies of the cult have pointed out considerable differences between

77 For Neapolis, see Koukouli-Chrysanthaki 1993, 686-687 and Ilieva 2009, 112; for Oisyme, see Giouri & Koukouli 1987, 374-375 and Koukouli & Papanikolaou 1990, 492-493. various worshiped aspects of Heracles; these differences are usually attributed to the gradual merging of the pre-colonisation cult with the cult of Heracles, as instituted by the settlers.78

Could the cults of Artemis in Thasos, of ‘Parthenos’ in Neapolis and of the unnamed goddess in Oisyme have developed in a similar manner, i.e. via close interactions between the newly arrived settlers and the previous inhabitants? It is tempting to suggest that the sanctuaries of the Thasian region were founded in sites where the cult of similar ‘Thracian’ deities had previously been established. Furthermore, this scenario would easily explain the apparent differences between sanctuaries, as the cults would have developed to incorporate elements of local deities in a site-by-site basis.

Unfortunately, the supporting evidence for such an argument is insufficient for a confident statement. Firstly, unlike the aforementioned sanctuary of Heracles, no ritual activity dating back to the pre-colonisation phase can be identified in the Thasos Artemision, in Neapolis or in Oisyme: there are no indications of a cult that would predate the appearance of the ‘Greek’ population element. In addition, pre-colonisation stratigraphy has been explored in detail only in Oisyme, where early destruction layers came to light.79 The apparent founding of the cult around the mid-late 7th century immediately follows the destruction of earlier buildings in a fire. This is circumstantial evidence, easily explained by e.g. a natural disaster, but it might also correspond to military conflict between the Greek settlers and the ‘Thracian’ locals. Interestingly, neither the Neapolis nor the Thasos sanctuaries seem to provide evidence of a similar destruction phase.

It is relatively safe to argue that Thasos had a major part to play in the founding of the Neapolis and Oisyme cults. The purview of the worshiped deities and the most characteristic votive offerings reflect contemporary sanctuaries in Thasos. Furthermore, a significant part of the recovered material was either produced in Thasos (e.g. Thasian black-figure plates, ‘Phari’- style cups, ‘Lady with Polos’ figurines) or highly likely to have been introduced to the north- eastern Aegean sphere via Thasos (e.g. Cycladic pottery, Parian pithamphora in Neapolis).

It is also more than likely that aspects of the Thasian Artemis were included in the mainland cults. This might have been the result of a planned Thasian effort to link Thasos and her peraea settlements in a religious and cultural Koine, with the intention of better affirming its control

78 Launey 1944, 191-219. See van Berchen 1967, 94-95 for a counter-argument, mostly discredited by recent discoveries by des Courtils and Pariente ( 1985, 882-884; 1986, 802-805). 79 See supra, n. 77. over the mainland region.80 Alternatively (or additionally), elements of the Artemis cult may have been intuitively introduced in Oisyme and Neapolis by the settlers themselves: the centripetal civic function of a poliad deity with a Kourotrophos-like character would greatly contribute in forming a collective identity among the members of the newly-founded apoikiae.81 The Thasian Artemis would have been the obvious candidate for such a role, given the settlers’ familiarity with it and its previously discussed significance in the Thasos civic and social landscape.

However, even if the mainland sanctuaries were founded in the image of the Thasian Artemis, the local cults quickly introduced local variations in ritual practices. In addition, the worshiped deities appear to have developed into entities which were similar but distinct from the original archetype, possibly as a result of the mainland cults adapting to the changing needs and circumstances of each community. Beyond Thasos, the offshoots of the goddess’ cult evolved independently (under the initiative of the communities of the peraea) but their origins remain visible in the archaeological record.

Conclusions It is impossible to determine precisely when the Pōlō, Eileithyie and Hekate epithets were first introduced in the cult of the Thasian Artemis. What we do know is that the cult of the goddess was one of the first (if not the first) to be established in Thasos, at least as early as the mid-7th century BCE. The early finds from the sanctuary match what is expected of a Potnia / Kourotrophos goddess, not unlike her subsequent Pōlō aspect. Her purview would have extended over the protection of the city’s youths and, more significantly, over the transition from childhood to adulthood (certainly for girls but probably for boys as well). The cult of Artemis must have played a very important civic role in ancient Thasos, partly evidenced by the sanctuary’s topography: the Artemision lies immediately next to the city agora and to a 6th- century city wall gate.82 Furthermore, there are indications that cults of other female goddesses

80 Interestingly, if Thasos intended to unite the modern-day Kavala Gulf under its control, it failed; Neapolis and part of the Thasian peraea became detached from the island’s control at some point before the mid-5th century. In 454 BCE Neapolis was independent and a member of the Delian League, while in 411 BCE it sided with the Athenians against the revolting Thasians ( Bakalakis 1936, 44; Loukopoulou 2004, No. 634). 81 For a discussion of the civic importance of Kourotrophos-type cults, see e.g. Guettel Cole 1984, 233-244 for the Koureion and Arkteia in Athens. 82 The location of the Artemision places it somewhere between de Polignac’s ( 2004, 21-22) urban and peri-urban sanctuary categories during the 7th and 6th-century; as the settlement expanded, the Artemision belongs firmly within the former category. See also Pokova’s ( 2014, 45-53) comparative topographical analysis of the Neapolis sanctuary and the Thasian Artemision. in the city adopted elements of the Artemis cult from at least the mid-6th century onwards (see e.g. the figurine corpus from the ‘Athenaion’ and the ‘Thesmophorion’).83

Shortly after the founding of the Thasos Artemision (definitely before the end of the 7th century), the sanctuaries of Neapolis and Oisyme were established, most likely by settlers from Thasos. The mainland cults were seemingly linked to the Thasian Artemis: the material from the early sanctuary contexts appears to be directly comparable to the Thasos cult and the purview and aspects of the worshiped deities must have been similar. It is almost certain that the Thasian Artemis served as an archetype for the mainland cults; the discovery of Thasian imagery and techniques (e.g. ‘Lady with Polos’ figurines, large clay statues) in Neapolis and Oisyme leaves very little doubt on the matter.

The cults in Neapolis and Oisyme evolved in tandem with the Thasian cult of Artemis to a certain extent; however, they quickly exhibited distinctive elements which set them apart. In Neapolis, the Parthenos (not ‘Artemis’!) becomes the patron deity of the city and, eventually, is depicted shaking the hand of Athena when Neapolis turns against Thasos; however, she still wears her archaising polos when doing so, harkening back to her origins. In Oisyme, the acropolis goddess receives the same types of clay statues, figurines and loom weights that her Thasian counterpart does as votive offerings. However, in addition, she receives weapons and shields, which might argue for a subtly different aspect than the Thasian ‘Kourotrophos’. The Oisyme sanctuary also presents us with a more ‘chthonian’ cult focus (the interior eschara), possibly, but not necessarily, hosting an early incarnation of the 5th-century Thasian Artemis Hekate.

Can we reach a conclusion on whether this dissemination of the Artemis cult was a policy decision on the part of Thasos? Were the settlers of Neapolis and Oisyme actively encouraged to establish sanctuaries to the goddess? There is little to no evidence to support this, beyond the immediate founding of the sanctuaries after the establishment of the Greek settlements: this speaks for good organization on behalf of the colonists which, in turn, might hint toward Thasian backing. Furthermore, given Thasos’ interest in securing control over the metal-rich Mt. Pangaion and Mt. Symbolon region and the Kavala gulf, it is evident that close religious and cultural bonds with their apoikiae and emporia in the mainland coast would only benefit the Thasians. However, developments during the 5th century (including the apparent distancing of Neapolis from Thasos) indicate that any such bonds were temporary. It is, therefore, equally

83 See Muller 1996, 483-489 for votive offerings and other finds from the ‘Thesmophorion’; also supra, n. 40. likely that the initiative lay with the colonists of Neapolis and Oisyme, who established the cults of their poliad deities in imitation of one of the most important cults of their metropolis (just as the newly established community of Thasos had previously introduced elements of Parian cults into local worship).

Whether by design or circumstance, the cult of ‘Artemis’ developed into a distinctive cultural element in the island’s sphere of influence during the late 7th and 6th centuries BCE. It served as a social centripetal factor during the early years of the Greek colonization and can be reconstructed as a major element of the Thasian social and civic identity. Interestingly, once brought beyond the polis of Thasos itself, it appears to have served a similar role for the communities of Neapolis and Oisyme. The mainland cults evolved further, adapting to the needs of the local communities and providing the necessary social centripetal factors, often to the detriment of Thasos itself (as seen in the case of Neapolis).

As a final note, I would like to underline the apparent lack of pre-colonisation, ‘Thracian’ material culture elements in the context of the post-colonisation cults. Both Neapolis and Oisyme were inhabited before the arrival of the Greek settlers, but the ‘Thracian’ element is not apparent in late 7th and 6th century sanctuary contexts (at least going by the information available at the time of writing). This is a research gap that requires further investigation, both in the field and by re-visiting the recovered material: studying the influence that the non-Greek inhabitants had on the development of the mainland cults would provide considerable insight on the extent and nature of the interactions between the two population groups.

Acknowledgments I would like to thank Prof. Irene Lemos and Prof. Athena Tsingarida for their kind invitation to participate in this publication. My most sincere thanks also go to the French School at Athens (Ms. Christophi and Dr. Tichit in particular), and the ΤΑΠΑ publications for their permission to reproduce archive images. Finally, I am very grateful to Drs. Dimitra Malamidou and Chaido Koukouli-Chrysanthaki of the Kavala Ephorate of Antiquities for their exceptionally helpful comments and advice.

Works Cited Aslan, C. 2002, 'Ilion before Alexander: Protogeometric, Geometric, and Archaic pottery from D9', Studia Troica 12, pp. 81-127.

Baitinger, H. 2011, Waffenweihungen in griechischen Heiligtümern, Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Meinz.

Bakalakis, G. 1936, 'Νεάπολις – Χριστούπολις – Καβάλα', ArchEph, pp. 1-48.

Bakalakis, G. 1938 (i), 'Ἀνασκαφή ἐν Καβάλᾳ καί τοῖς πέριξ', Prakt, pp. 75-102.

Bakalakis, G. 1938 (ii), 'Ἐκ τοῦ Ἱεροῦ τῆς Παρθένου ἐν Νεαπόλει', ArchEph, pp. 106-154.

Blondé, F., Muller, A. & Mulliez, D. 1999, 'Thasos, de la ville d'Archiloque à la ville de Théagénès : questions de topographie et d'urbanisme à l'èpoque archaïque', Το Αρχαιολογικό Έργο στη Μακεδονία και τη Θράκη 13, pp. 49-62.

Blondé, F., Perreault, J.Y. & Péristéri, C. 1992, 'Un atelier de potier archaïque à Phari (Thasos)', Les ateliers de potiers dans le monde grec aux époques géométrique, archaïque et classique, de Boccard, Paris.

Croissant, F. 1983, Les protomés féminines archaïques. Recherches sur les représentations du visage dans la plastique grecque de 550 à 480 av. J.-C., de Boccard, Athens / Paris.

Daux, G. 1958, 'Artémision', BCH 82, pp. 808-814.

Daux, G. 1959 (i), 'Artémision', BCH 83, pp. 775-781.

Daux, G. 1959 (ii), 'Acropole, sanctuaire d' Athéna', BCH 83, pp. 781-783.

Daux, G. 1960 (i), 'Artémision', BCH 84, pp. 856-862.

Daux, G. 1960 (ii), 'Acropole: Sanctuaire d' Athéna', BCH 84, pp. 864-866.

Daux, G. 1961, 'Artémision', BCH 85, pp. 919-930. de Polignac, F. 2004, Cults, Territory and the Origins of the Greek City-State, University of Chicago Press, Chocago & London. des Courtils, J. & Pariente, A. 1985, 'Herakleion', BCH 109, pp. 881-884. des Courtils, J. & Pariente, A. 1986, 'Heracleion', BCH 110, pp. 802-806. Duchêne, H. 1992, La stèle du port. Fouilles du port 1. Recherches sur une nouvelle inscription thasienne. Études Thasiennes 14, EFA, Athens.

Giouri, E. & Koukouli, C. 1987, 'Ανασκαφή στην Αρχαία Οισύμη', Το Αρχαιολογικό Έργο στη Μακεδονία και τη Θράκη 1, 1987p. :pp., 363-387.

Grandjean, Y. & Salviat, F. 2000, Guide de Thasos, EFA, Athens.

Guettel Cole, S. 1984, 'The Social Function of Rituals of Maturation: The Koureion and the Arkteia', ZPE 55, pp. 233-244.

Guettel Cole, S. 2004, Landscapes, Gender and Ritual Space, University of California Press, London.

Huysecom, S. 1997, 'La Dame au Polos thasienne : établissement d’une série', Le moulage de terre cuite dans l’Antiquité : création et production dérivée, fabrication et diffusion, Presses Universitaires du Septentrion, Lille.

Huysecom-Haxhi, S. 2009, Les figurines en terre cuite de l’Artémision de Thasos: artisanat et piété populaire à l’époque de l’Archaïsme mûr et recent. Études Thasiennes 21., EFA, Athens.

Ilieva, P. 2009, '“G2-3 Ware” and the Non-Greek Populations on the North Aegean Coast (some preliminary notes on its distribution, pattern and contextual characteristics)', Έλληνες και Θράκες (Greeks and Thracians): Έλληνες και Θράκες στην παράλια ζώνη και την ενδοχώρα της Θράκης στα χρόνια πριν και μετά τον μεγάλο αποικισμό. Πρακτικά του διεθνούς Συμποσίου, Θάσος, 26-27 Σεπτεμβρίου 2008, Thasos.

Jacquemin, A. 1980, 'Artemision: secteur occidental', BCH 104, pp. 717-720.

Jacquemin, A. 1982, 'Artemision: secteur occidental', BCH 106, pp. 660-669.

Jacquemin, A. 1983, 'Artemision: secteur occidental', BCH 107, pp. 867-875.

Klinger, S. 2009, 'Women and Deer: from Athens to Corinth and Back', in JH Oakley, O Palagia (eds), Athenian Potters and Painters II, Oxbow, Oxford.

Koukouli, C. 1967, 'Αρχαιότητες και Μνημεία Ανατολικής Μακεδονίας', ArchDelt 22 (Χρονικά), pp. 417-434.

Koukouli, C. 1987, 'Νέα Πέραμος (Αρχαία Οισύμη)', ArchDelt 42 (Χρονικά), p. 444.

Koukouli, C. 1988, 'Νέα Πέραμος (Αρχαία Οισύμη)', ArchDelt 43 (Χρονικά), pp. 424-427. Koukouli, C. 1989, 'Νέα Πέραμος (Αρχαία Οισύμη)', ArchDelt 44 (Χρονικά), pp. 375-376.

Koukouli-Chrysanthaki, C. 1993, 'Η Πρώιμη Εποχή του Σιδήρου στην Ανατολική Μακεδονία', Αρχαία Μακεδονία V: ανακοινώσεις κατά το πέμπτο Διεθνές Συμπόσιο, Θεσσαλονίκη, 10-15 Οκτωβρίου 1989, Thessaloniki.

Koukouli-Chrysanthaki, C. & Marangou, A. 2012, 'Αρχαϊκή κεραμική από τη θασιακή αποικία Οισύμη', Η κεραμεική της αρχαϊκής εποχής στο βόρειο Αιγαίο και την περιφέρειά του (700-480 π.Χ.), Archaeological Institute of Macedonian and Thracian Studies, Thessaloniki.

Koukouli, C. & Papanikolaou, A. 1990, 'Ανασκαφές στην Οισύμη 1988-1990', Το Αρχαιολογικό Έργο στη Μακεδονία και τη Θράκη 4, pp. 487-502.

Larson, J. 2009, 'Arms and Armor in the Sanctuaries of Goddesses: a quantitative approach', in C Prêtre (ed.), Le donateur, l’offrande et la déesse. Systèmes votifs des sanctuaires de déesses dans le monde grec. Actes du 31e Colloque international, Université Charles-de-Gaulle/Lille 3, 13-15 décembre 2007, CIERGA, Liège.

Launey, M. 1944, Le sanctuaire et le culte d’Héraklès à Thasos. Études Thasiennes 1, de Boccard, Paris.

Lazaridis, D. 1961/2, 'Νεάπολις (Καβάλα)', ArchDelt 17 (Χρονικά), pp. 235-238.

Lazaridis, D. 1965, 'Αμφίπολις - Νεαπολις', ArchDelt 20 (Χρονικά), pp. 443-446.

Lazaridis, D. 1969, Νεάπολις, Χριστούπολις, Καβάλα: οδηγός Μουσείου Καβάλας, Constantinidis & Michalas, Athens.

Loukopoulou, L. 2004, 'Thrace from Strymon to Nestos', in MH Hansen, TH Nielsen (eds), An Inventory of Archaic and Classical Poleis, OUP, Oxford & New York.

Lundgreen, B. 2009, 'Boys at Brauron', From Artemis to Diana, Museum Tusculanum Press, Copenhagen.

Macridy, T. 1912, 'Un Hieron d’ Artemis ΠΩΛΩ à Thasos', Jahrbuch des Kaiserlich Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts 27, pp. 1-19.

Maffre, J.-J. 1986, 'Artémision: péribole carré', BCH 110, pp. 790-792.

Maffre, J.-J. & Queyrel, A. 1984, 'Artémision: péribole carré', BCH 108, pp. 867-872.

Maffre, J.-J. & Salviat, F. 1976, 'Artémision', BCH 100, pp. 774-784. Maffre, J.-J. & Salviat, F. 1977, 'Artémision', BCH 101, pp. 687-692.

Maffre, J.-J. & Salviat, F. 1978, 'Artémision', BCH 102, pp. 821-829.

Maffre, J.-J. & Salviat, F. 1980, 'Artémision: secteur proche de l' autel monumental et péribole carré', BCH 104, pp. 726-730.

Maffre, J.-J. & Salviat, F. 1981, 'Artemision: secteur proche de l' autel monumental et péribole carré', BCH 105, pp. 932-941.

Maffre, J.-J. & Tichit, A. 2014, 'Quelles offrandes faisait-on à Artémis dans son sanctuaire de Thasos ?', Kernos 27, pp. 137-164.

Manakidou, E. 2012, 'Εισηγμένη κυκλαδική, κορινθιακή και αττική κεραμική αρχαϊκών χρόνων στην αρχαία Οισύμη', Η κεραμεική της αρχαϊκής εποχής στο βόρειο Αιγαίο και την περιφέρειά του (700-480 π.Χ.), Thessaloniki.

Muller, A. 1996, Les terres cuites votives du Thesmophorion: de l’ atelier au sanctuaire: Études Thasiennes 17, EFA, Athens.

Perreault, J.-Y. 1986, 'Abords orientaux de l' Artémision', BCH 110, pp. 793-797.

Pirenne-Delforge, V. 2004, 'Qui est la Kourotrophos Athenienne?', Naissance et petite enfance dans l' antiquité, Academic Press Fribourg, Fribourg.

Prêtre, C. 2011, 'Offrandes et dédicants dans les sanctuaires de Thasos', REG 142.2, pp. 227- 237.

Prêtre, C. 2016, La fibule et le clou: Ex-voto et instrumentum de l’Artémision. Études Thasiennes 23, EFA, Athens.

Prokova, A. 2014, Die figürlichen Tonvotive aus dem Heiligtum der Parthenos in der antiken Stadt Neapolis. Zu Kult und materieller Kultur einer griechischen Stadt an der nordägäischen thrakischen Küste (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, University of Köln), viewed 1 February 2018, .

Rolley, C. 1965, 'Le sanctuaire des Dieux Patrôoi et le Thesmophorion de Thasos.', BCH 89, pp. 441-483.

Salviat, F. 1958, 'Une nouvelle loi thasienne : institutions judiciaires et fêtes religieuses à la fin du IVe siècle av. J.-C.', BCH 82, pp. 193-267. Salviat, F. 1959, 'Décrets pour Épié, fille de Dionysios: Déesses et Sanctuaires Thasiens', BCH 83, pp. 362-397. van Berchen, D. 1967, 'Sanctuaires d'Hercule-Melqart. Contribution a l'étude de l'expansion phénicienne en Méditerranée', Syria 44, pp. 73-109.

Verdan, S. 2015, 'Images, supports et contextes : sur quelques « amphores funéraires » érétriennes', Pots, Workshops and Early Iron Age Society, CRéA Patrimoine, Brussels.

Weill, N. 1985, La plastique archaïque de Thasos: figurines et statues de terre cuite de l’Artémision. 1: Le haut archaïsme. Études Thasiennes 11, EFA, Athens.

Zaphiropoulou, F. 2004, 'Οι Κυκλάδες στην Πρώιμη Εποχή του Σιδήρου ως την Ύστερη Αρχαϊκή Εποχή', Το Αιγαίο στην Πρώιμη Εποχή του Σιδήρου: πρακτικά του Διεθνούς Συμποσίου, Ρόδος, 1-4 Νοεμβρίου 2002, Greek Ministry of Culture; Archaeological Institute of Aegean Studies, Athens.

Maps

Map 1: The Kavala Gulf, with the studied sanctuaries. (Map based on ASTER DEM - ASTER is a product of METIS and NASA) Plans Plan 1: Topographical drawing of Thasos. (Plan by T. Koželj, courtesy of EFA. Select site labels translated by author). Plan 2: Plan of the Artemision. (Plan by T. Koželj, courtesy of EFA. Labels translated and edited by author). Plan 3: Plan of the 1961 Lazaridis excavation in Neapolis. (Courtesy of ΤΑΠΑ; after Lazaridis 1961/2, Fig 3). Plan 4: Plan of the Oisyme sanctuary. The early 5th-century building shown in red by the author. (Courtesy of ΤΑΠΑ; after Koukouli & Papanikolaou 1990, Fig. 1). Images Figure 1: Daedalic, ‘Lady with Polos’ and kore-type Archaic figurines from the Thasos Artemision. (Courtesy of EFA; originally after Weill 1985, Pl. 88 and 133; Huysecom-Haxhi 2009, Pl. 66, 68 and 71). Figure 2: Archaic Kylix cups from the Thasos Artemision. (Courtesy of EFA; originally after Daux 1958, Figs. 13-15; Maffre & Salviat 1976, Figs. 19- 20 and 27). Figure 3: Attic, Corinthian and Thasian pottery from the Thasos ‘Athenaion’. (Courtesy of EFA; originally after Daux 1959 (ii), Figs. 12-13; Daux 1960 (ii), Fig. 12). Figure 4: ‘Lady with Polos’ and kore-type figurines from the Parthenos sanctuary. (Courtesy of ΤΑΠΑ; after Lazaridis 1961/2, Pl. 284). Figure 5: Parian amphora from the Parthenos sanctuary. (Courtesy of ΤΑΠΑ; after Lazaridis 1961/2, Pl. 280). Figure 6: Cycladic and Corinthian kraters from the Parthenos sanctuary. (Courtesy of ΤΑΠΑ; αfter Lazaridis 1961/2, Pl. 281). Figure 7: Thasian and imported (Attic) pottery from the Oisyme sanctuary. (Courtesy of ΤΑΠΑ; αfter Giouri & Koukouli 1987, Figs. 24, 26 and 28; Koukouli & Papanikolaou 1990, Fig. 20). Figure 8: Bronze shield in the sanctuary of Oisyme. (Courtesy of ΤΑΠΑ; αfter Giouri & Koukouli 1987, Fig. 23). Figure 9: Bronze ornaments and arrowhead from the Oisyme sanctuary. (Courtesy of ΤΑΠΑ; αfter Giouri & Koukouli 1987, Fig. 22). Figure 10: ‘Lady with Polos’ and other seated figurines from the Oisyme sanctuary. (Courtesy of ΤΑΠΑ; αfter Giouri & Koukouli 1987, Figs. 14-15). Figure 11: Fragments of clay statues from the Oisyme sanctuary. (Courtesy of ΤΑΠΑ; αfter Giouri & Koukouli 1987, Figs. 16-18; Koukouli & Papanikolaou 1990, Fig. 21-22).