Proceedings ofthe Danish Institute at Athens •I

Edited by Soren Dietz © Copyright The Danish Institute at Athens, Athens 1995

The publication was sponsored by: Consul General Gosta Enboms Foundation. The Danish Research Council for the Humanities. Konsul George Jorck og Hustru Emma Jorck's Fond.

Proceedings ofthe Danish Institute at Athens

General Editor: Seren Dietz Graphic design and Production by: Freddy Pedersen

Printed in Denmark on permanent paper

ISBN 87 7288 721 4

Distributed by AARHUS UNIVERSITY PRESS University ofAarhus DK-8000 Arhus C Fax (+45) 8619 8433

73 Lime Walk Headington, Oxford OX3 7AD Fax (+44) 865 750 079

Box 511 Oakville, Conn. 06779 Fax (+1)203 945 94 9468

The cover illustration depicts a Bronze Statuette of a Horse found at the Argive Heraion. NM 13943. Drawing by Niels Levinsen. See p. 55, Fig. 19. The Early Sanctuary ofthe Argive Heraion and its External Relations (8th.- Early 6th. Cent. BC.)

The Greek Geometric Bronzes Ingrid Strom Abstract small Hera sanctuary are similar to those of the Heraion; the contemporary deposits in the sur The Geometric bronzes from the Argive Hera rounding Mycenaean tombs, however, are only ion and Argos, primarilyfrom the sanctuaries, similar inpart, perhaps because they were made are compared to clarify relations between the primarily by male visitors. two sites. The bronze statuettes, quadrupeds and A. Introduction birds, from the Heraion are of Thessalian, Central Greek, Peloponnesian, primarily Arca In an earlier paper on the same general dian, or local origin, the local qudrupeds being subject I discussed the monumental archi influenced by Arcadia. Of three known figures tecture ofthe Early Argive Heraion from from Argos, a local warrrior shows Laconian re the late 8th to the early 6th Cent. BC, lations and a Central Greek bird differs from comparing it with that ofcontemporary the Heraion types. The personal ornaments Argos. I reached the conclusion that the from the Heraion comefrom the same regions as building program ofthe sanctuary seemed well as Macedonia, the ornaments found at Ar to be organized separately from the con gosfrom Arcadia, in addition to insularfibulae temporary settlement.1 However, the ar of types unknown at the Heraion. EPC vases chitectural remains at both sites are too andpins local to the Corinthia and the Argive scarce for definite results concerning the Heraion (Geometric IC and III) are absent in relations between sanctuary and settlement Argos, the Argos "Kalotten-schale" and pins of during this period of early urban develop Geometric XVIIIA and XX at the Heraion. ment and the study material needs to be The EG/MG bronzes (in Argos known expanded. onlyfrom tombs) differ at the two sites. Al Our basic information ofthe period in though both show connections with Arcadia, the question is archaeological, but since only a LG Heraion is more closely related to Corinthia small selection ofthe total pottery and than to Argos, which has ties to Laconia. terracotta finds from the Argive Heraion Bronze tripods are unknown at Argos, but are published,2 I have chosen the bronzes develop at the Heraion from MG II to Subgeo- as supplementary study material.Those metric, presumably locally produced by itinerant from the Argive Heraion are, to a large artisans, connected especially with the eastern extent, published3 and those from Argos Mainland regions. are well-known4 and they may inform us According to the evidence of the bronzes (the ofinterrelations between the two sites as only Geometric material adequately published), well as ofpossible differences regarding the Argive Heraion developed slowlyfrom production centres and foreign contacts, around 900 BC orearlier, independently of economic and cultural aspects. Argos. From MG II onwards, inhabitants of The bronzes from the Argive Heraion Argos increasingly visited the Heraion, but nev will form the fundamental basis ofmy er outnumbered other Mainland Greek visitors; studies which after a few introductory sec apparently they were mainly women, not in tions will be divided chronologically. This fluential and wealthy men. The LGII/Subgeo- paper examines the Greek Geomeric metric votive bronzesfrom the neighbouring bronzes.3

37 The studies ofeach main group of well as of Classical or later date,12 but the bronzes from the Argive Heraion will be majority are Geometric or Archaic, the followed first by those ofthe two nearby periods which concern us here. The votive deposits ofLate Geometric/Early bronzes were found all over the area ofthe Archaic date, the small Hera sanctuary Classical sanctuary as well as immediately close to the Early Mycenaean tholos tomb outside.13 The three primary in situ find and the offerings in the Mycenaean cham spots are the following: ber tombs in the surrounding hills,6 and I. The Old Temple Terrace, where the second by those from Argos, primarily the monumental bronzes appear to domi bronze votives from the sanctuaries.7 nate.14 There may have been several bronze II. The hill above with its votives of workshops in the Argolid during the Geo mainly miniature character.'5 metric and Early Archaic Periods and there III. The area east ofthe Classical Tem are, ofcourse, bronze votives at other ple, the supposed site ofthe Altar, where sanctuaries in the region as well.8 How phialai and smaller votives were mingled ever, since the principal purpose ofmy with fragments ofmonumental bronzes.16 studies is a deeper understanding ofthe About 20 bronzes were found at the relations between the Argive Heraion and Northeast Stoa and the area east ofthat the settlement ofArgos at the time ofthe stoa. As their find spots thus border the emergent city-states, I shall confine myself Altar area to the north, it is possible that chiefly to the bronzes from the two sites. they were lying close to their original po sition.17 The same observation may apply B. Distribution of Finds in to the bronzes stated to have come from the Argive Heraion the foundations ofthe Second Temple, bordering the Altar area to the west.18 The bronzes from the Argive Heraion, Most ofthe votive bronzes from the known today to number about 3.000, are sanctuary were found in a secondary posi nearly all in the National Museum ofAthens. tion. The large fill west of the Classical The greater part ofthe bronzes come from Temple was presumably brought mainly Ch. Waldstein's excavations, supplemented from the Altar area. by smaller collections from the investiga However, the fill also contained build tions ofBlegen and Caskey and Amandry.9 ing material belonging to the Archaic Very few bronzes in other museums seem Temple and its Terrace, and therefore pos to have the Argive Heraion as their prove sibly other objects as well,19 which may nance.10 The present whereabouts of the have been thrown in after the destruction bronzes found before Wald-stein's excava ofthe Temple in 423 BC. The bronzes of tions are not known to me. This applies, this fill2" were generally ofthe same types e.g., to a lion figure discovered in 1836 by as the numerous bronzes from the West General Gordon on the site ofthe Classi Building, which comprised mirrors, phia cal Temple, to some bronzes, not further lai, miniature vases, personal ornaments specified, from General Kallergis' excava such as rings, fibulae, pins etc. as well as a tions in the 1840's, as well as to the finds of few figured bronzes21, and which presum Rangabe and Bursian in 1854 east ofthe ably are also mainly altar refuse. The de Classical Temple. They comprised:"... posit ofthe same general character, found mehrere verbrannte und verrostete Frag- at the Eastern Retaining Wall, is identified mente von Bronze-gerathen wie Nagel, as an altar discard from around 550 BC.22 Nadeln, Ringe, Stiicke, wahrscheinlich The many bronzes from the Back of von Opferschalen, und unter anderen South Stoa23 and the Southern Slope24 are einen kleinen Stierkopf... der als Weihge- ofa similar appearance, although the latter schenk an der Wand angenagelt zu sein find spot, in particular, yielded a consider scheint."11 able proportion ofthe Archaic bronze fig There are bronzes of Mycenaean as ures known from the Argive Heraion. As

38 Fig. I(A - B). Athens. National Museum. NM 14004. Casting waste with lion's paw. AH 2829. Museum photos.

both areas were situated outside the Ar bronzes do not necessarily imply manu chaic sanctuary,25 the bronzes may chiefly facture nearby.30 Nor does a small terra represent votives fallen down from above. cotta mould for casting miniature orna The bronzes from the Northwest ments; it may have served for votives in Building are few, consisting ofone seal e.g. gold or silver.31 However, at the Ar Fig. 2. Athens. National ring, four Geometric or Archaic bronze give Heraion we have examples ofround Museum. NM 14004. figures, and one fragment of an Archaic copper or bronze ingots, the raw material Casting waste with lion's paw. support with a lion's paw; it thus differs in for bronze working32; ofshapeless pieces AH 2829. Drawing of detail. character from the above-mentioned large ofspill, the superfluous material from the discards from the altar with their many melting process33; as well as of bronze miniature votives.26 As regards the North scraps collected for remelting.34 Stoa I have no information at all ofany In all, these finds indicate the existence bronze votives.27 This remarkable lacuna ofbronze working in the immediate vi may perhaps indicate that the early bronze cinity ofthe sanctuary. The exact find votives placed in the Altar area did not ex spots are in most cases unknown and al tend west ofthe Ramp which led to the though some may point to a position to Old Temple Terrace between the North the west or south of the original sanctuary3''', and the Northeast Stoai.28 In fact, the the workshops cannot be located today. original placing ofthe Geometric/Archaic Further proofofbronze working is bronzes was apparently limited to the provided by miscasts,36 in particular a cast three primary find spots, the Old Temple ing waste with a lion's paw, measuring 15.4 Terrace, the Upper Hill, and the Altar cm. in length. On the upper side ofthe area. The last-mentioned site would now paw is a deep crack, possibly the reason and then be cleared ofits accumulation of for rejecting this unidentified bronze ob votives which were then used as fill ject, which may have been meant as part wherever a levelling ofthe slope was re ofa vase or an implement, AH 2829 (NM quired for building activity. 14004)(Figs. 1-2). Preserved are the fun nel with its filling ofbronze and the waste ofthe pouring cup with a jet (1.7 cm. C. Technology long). The fragmentary object consisted of Like several other Greek sanctuaries,29 the a "bowl-like" part, to which is attached Argive Heraion also gives evidence of lo the lion's paw (7 cm. in length). On one cal bronze production. The faulty or un side ofthe "bowl-like" part, near the paw, finished bronze objects and the repaired are two raised curved parts. On the other

39 side is a series ofirregular, semicircular main groups, into which the tripods from cavities. On the underside ofthe paw a the largest known collection, that of cylindrical dowel is preserved. Except for Olympia, are usually classified: Solid Cast the lion's paw, the surface is rough and the Tripods (Dreifusse mit massiv geformten "bowl-like" part shows several cracks. The Beinen und Henkeln), ReliefTripods inner surface ofthe paw is blurred and the (Relifierte Dreifusse), Tripods with toes are damaged. Nevertheless, the ren Fanned Grooves (Gratbein Dreifusse), and dering ofdetail of the outside ofthe paw Hammered Tripods (Gehammerte is precise; three ofits four toes are disting Dreifusse). The four groups seem in gen uishable and there is a raised line along the eral to represent a relative chronological heel and sole, giving it a sandal-like development, in most cases with a techni appearance. The schematic rendering of cal improvement in relation to the preced the details ofthe lion's paw indicates a ing group and at the same time gradually date in the Early Archaic Period.37 increasing in actual as well as proportional Often, the centre ofproduction ofthe height. Except for the hammered caul Geometric and Early Archaic Argive drons, the three first-mentioned groups are bronze votives is assigned to Argos,38 a set made entirely ofcast bronze, the hammered tlement which definitely yielded bronze tripods are essentially ofhammered bronze objects ofspecific types and presumably of plate.47 In size, the Olympia tripods in local manufacture as well as giving evi creased from a height ofabout 60 - 70 cm., dence ofvery early metal working.39 On with a cauldron ofalmost the same diame the other hand, the so-called Argive Geo ter, for the earliestknown examples, to an metric figure style was first distinguished estimated height ofabout 3.50 m., handles on bronzes found at the Argive Heraion40. included, for the largest hammered tripods, Since a local bronze production has been the cauldron diameter ofwhich measured recognized here, the origin ofits local about half the height oftheir legs.48 bronze votives should be restudied. For Most tripod fragments from the Argive every group ofGreek bronzes, I shall try Heraion are so small that neither their to determine their most probable place of original height nor their proportions can origin, taking into account the criteria of be determined today. A few were definite style, provenance as well as, to a certain ly ofminiature size, though of normal tri degree, technique.41 pod types.49 The specific miniature tri pods, which were either cast in one piece or formed ofsheet bronze and which are Greek Geometric Bronzes known from Olympia as well as from other sanctuaries,'10 do not appear to be D. Tripods represented here. The Argive Heraion Although iron was not infrequently used Solid Cast Tripods at the Argive Heraion,42 there are no re The Solid Cast Tripods have solid cast legs corded finds ofiron tripods here.43 The as well as handles. The Olympia tripod Geometric tripods, the earliest known vo legs develop from an early polygonal form tives ofmonumental size, are all of to one roughly rectangular in section, the bronze.44 Only four fragments have an ex latest examples ofwhich have a hollow act provenance, two ofwhich indicate an back. The handles have a raised pattern original position near the Altar and on the which seems to imitate ropes. In some Old Temple Terrace, respectively.45 cases, the whole cauldron or parts ofall its There is no sign ofany tripod in the separate elements are preserved, giving us Argive Heraion belonging to the initial a good idea ofthe general appearance of phase of Geometric production.46 Never this class oftripods.31 theless, we have representatives ofall four Willemsen divided the Solid Cast Tri-

40 Fig. 3 (A - B). Athens. National Museum. NM 16551. Solid Cast Tripod handlefigure. Argive Heraion. Photo American School of Classical Studies, Athens. pods from Olympia into several sub the two last-mentioned types recalling the groups, basing his classification on differ decoration ofthe Cypriot rod tripods - ences in the sections and ornamentation may decorate the top ofthe handles.55 We ofthe handles.32 In my opinion, it seems have a few examples of whole tripods or possible to divide Willemsen's classes of ofcauldron fragments with both handles Solid Cast Tripod handles in two main and legs attached, showing a vertical rope subgroups. Willemsen's "Strickhenkeln", pattern as decoration ofthe leg, the upper "Kerbenhenkeln" and "Wulsthenkeln" part ofwhich might also have applied or have the same general characteristics. The naments like those ofthe handles and handles show a rounded triangular section, handle straps.M Solid Cast Tripods with as the ropes ofthe raised pattern are the above characteristics, I shall call Sub placed so close together that those in group I, to which subgroup belong the Willemsen's first two classes give the im early tripods ofpolygonal section.''7 pression ofa herring-bone pattern, in the Willemsen's remaining Solid Cast han last ofa wavy surface, the ropes having dle groups are more varied and do not all been replaced by simple relief lines.53 Ap appear to be closely related. However, his plied ornamentation offalse spirals or vo "Doppelkranzhenkeln" and "Schnurrhen- lutes sometimes decorate the handles or keln" as well as some examples ofhis very the handle straps.54 The handle figures are heterogeneous groups of "Kranzhenkeln" soldered to the tripods; horses may be and "Treppenhenkeln" correspond as to placed inside the handles on the handle technical and decorative details. The han straps, while horses, bulls' heads or birds - dles have a pointed triangular section and

41 Fig. 4. Athens. National Museum. NM 20629 B. Solid Cast Tripod, Fig. 5. Athens. National Museum. NM 20629 B. Solid Cast Tripod. fragment of leg. AH 2220. Museum photo. Fragment of leg. AH 2220. Drawing.

their rope imitations or relieflines are dis ure and two fragments oflegs. tinctly separated by plain parts.58 Applied NM 16551 (Fig. 3) is a solid cast male ornamentation is rare and spirals apparent statuette, representing a nude horse leader ly absent; in Olympia there is one exam cast in one piece with a flat handle plate ple with applied volutes on the handle with two large, vertically placed nail holes. strap.59 The handle figures which may be Including the handle plate, the figure either soldered or nailed to the tripod are measures 10.8 cm. in height. The lower always placed on top ofthe handle, and part ofthe man's right arm is broken off, consist chiefly ofhorses and an occasional the left hand ends in a point, but is intact. horse leader. There seem to be no exam There is no trace ofthe penis which must ples ofbulls' heads or birds.60 Again we be broken off. The figure is long and slen have a few tripods with both handles and der with a pinched-in waist and a rather legs attached to the cauldron; the legs lack loose, curving outline. There is little the characteristics ofthe former subgroup, modelling and there does not appear to be and appear to be decorated with vertical any intentional engraving of the details of relief lines only.61 I shall call the tripods the figure. The man is standing with his with the above characteristics Subgroup II.62 legs apart, his right arm stretched forward The manufacture ofthe tripods which and the left one bent downwards, the I have called Subgroup I apparently started hand barely indicated. His neck is long earlier than Subgroup II, but as shown by and his head extremely small; on top ofit Maass both continued until the transition is a pointed, vertical depression. While al phase to the ReliefTripods.63 During the line of the neck is vertical, that ofthe the later phase ofthe production ofSolid forehead is oblique. He has short hair, the Cast Tripods there thus seem to be two eye hollows are two small round depres main contemporaneous classes. sions and there is no ear rendering. The Not all Solid Cast Tripod fragments at only feature which is distinctly marked is Olympia can be connected with either of the mouth, a large horizontal opening that the two subgroups and they do not in all gives the impression of protruding lips.65 details conform with tripod collections at Willemsen observed that the vertically other sites.64 However, the Argive Her placed nail holes were characteristic ofthe aion fragments are closely related to the few known handles ofthe Solid Cast Tri Olympia examples. pods with nailed figures and referred to an At the Argive Heraion, the Solid Cast exactly corresponding handle fragment of Tripods are represented by one handle fig a "Schnurrhenkel" from Olympia, ofa

42 Fig. 6.(A - C). Athens. National Museum. NM 14008. Solid Cast Tripod. Fragment of leg. AH 2218. fig. 7. Athens. NationalMuseum. ( A - B) Photos Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Athen. Neg. nos. 12/355 and 72/356. (C) Museum photo. NM 14008. Solid Cast Tripod. Fragment of leg. AH 2218. Drawing and section.

comparatively late date within the group forms the lower part ofa tripod leg with ofSolid Cast Tripods66 almost rectangular section, but hollowed AH 2220 (NM 20629 6) (Figs. 4 - 5) out at the back, about 1.5 cm. in depth. forms the upper termination ofa tripod The fragment which is broken above leg, where it bends round the cauldron. It measures 18.1 cm. in height. It is very ir is decorated with vertical relief lines. The regularly cast, varying in width from 4.6 fragment measures 10.2 x 7.7 cm. Al cm. above to 4.9 cm. below and in depth though the actual upper edge is not pre from 3.7 cm. above to 3.3 cm. below. It served,there are remains ofthe upper cen has an extra coating ofbronze at the bot tral nail hole for fastening the leg to the tom ofthe leg, due to an overflowing of cauldron as well as parts ofthree more nail liquid bronze during the casting process. holes. The plate is thin here, measuring Like AH 2220, the leg is decorated with only 0.4 cm. as compared with 1.1 cm. at vertical relieflines only; they are rendered the lower break.67 on all three sides, but at the area ofcoat AH 2220 has several close counterparts ing only in front.69 among the Olympia tripod legs, two of The tripod leg seems to be most close which are still connected with their han ly related to the same subgroup as AH dles ofWillemsen's "Doppelkranzhen- 2220. Judging from its hollow back, it keln" and "Schnurrhenkeln" types.68 should be placed in a late phase ofthe AH 2218 (NM 14008) (Figs. 6-7) Solid Cast Tripods, but according to

43 Maass' definition before the actual trans ition to the Relief Tripods.70 The three Argive Heraion examples of Solid Cast Tripods all find their closest counterparts among the Olympia tripods which I have classified as Subgroup II, e'Z> whereas they do not show any ofthe characteristics ofSubgroup I.

Relief Tripods. The Relief Tripods, named after the dec oration of their legs, signify a technical improvement over the preceding group of cast tripods, their legs forming a hollow rectangle like the letter tt.71 On technical criteria, Maass divided the Relief Tripods at Olympia into two main subgroups, the Application Tripods and the Matrice Tri pods.72 The decoration ofthe legs ofthe Ap plication Tripods was applied to the wax mould ofthe whole leg, false spirals and multiple semicircles being the favourite ornaments.73 Maass assigned handles with an upper open part as well as rib handles to the Application Tripods. The former handles have either two rows ofsmall and rather closely set zigzags or one row may be replaced by spirals. Out ofcontext these handles, especially the rib handles, are difficult to distinguish from those of Fig. 8.(A - B). Athens. National Museum. NM the Matrice Tripods; however, the sol 14007. Relief Tripod. Fragment of leg. AH 2221. Pho dered handle figures, placed on top ofthe tos Deutschcs Archaologisches Institut, Athen. Neg. nos. 72/682 and 72/683. rim, rather thick-set horses, in one case a lion and in a few others a bird, are similar to those ofthe above-mentioned open technique and thus definitely belong to work handles.74 this subgroup.76 The handles are either For the Matrice Tripods, separate ma partially open work handles or rib han trices were used for each ofthe three sides dles. The open work part ofthe former ofthe leg, which were then joined in the usually shows rather large, elegant zigzags, mould. Unlike the Application Tripods, while the solid lower part is divided by they have no spiral ornamentation or rows double, sometimes triple lines, distinctly ofsemicircles. Their chiefdecorative rep separated by plain parts. Found out of ertory comprises zigzags and a dog-tooth context, the handles, especially the rib pattern, combined in the more spectacular type, can be difficult to classify, but both pieces with an upper and lower metope types ofthe Matrice Tripods have similar which may have either a figure motifor handle figures ofa horse and often a horse an ornament: a rosette, a wheel or a Mal leader, placed on top ofthe rim, the hors tese cross.75 Some handles are seen in con es usually ofa rather light appearance with nection with either legs or handle straps a long trailing tail.77 with zigzag ornamentation in matrice At the Argive Heraion, the Relief Tri-

44 Fig. 9.(A - B) Athens. National Museum. NM 20629 y). ReliefTripod. Fragment of rib handle. AH 2222. Museum photo.

Fig. 10. Athens. National Museum. NM 20629 y). ReliefTripod. Fig. 11. Athens. National Museum. NM 13992. ReliefTripod. Fragment of rib handle. AH 2222. Drawing andsection. Two joiningfragments of open work handle. AH 2223 - 2224. Photo Deutsches Archaologisches Institut. Neg. no. 72/357.

pods are represented by fragments ofone there is a deep fracture which seems to be tripod leg and three handles. secondary just above the lower break and Most impressive is the fragmentary tri there is some damage to the surface. The pod leg AH 2221 (NM 14007) (Fig. 8). It leg has the normal decoration ofa Ma is the upper part ofa tripod leg which is trice Tripod: front and sides are decorated broken above as well as below. The frag with a zigzag pattern, longitudinally ment measures 33 cm. in length, 6.1 cm. framed at the front by a dog-tooth pat in width and 4.3 cm. in depth. Each side tern. All three parts ofthe leg have an plate measures 3.7 cm. and the thickness upper metope with a Maltese cross in a of the plates varies between 0.6 and 0.7 double circle and, in between the circles, a cm. There is a heavy filling between the dog-tooth pattern, which also forms the side pieces which are slightly bent towards upper and lower frame ofthe metope.78 each other. The filling measures in depth According to Maass, the same matrice was 2.3 cm. and in it are half embedded the used for a tripod from Delphi, also with a two extant supports for fastening the caul heavy filling.79 In several other instances, dron. At the right-hand side ofthe front, identical matrices were used for tripods in

45 the same sanctuary as well as for tripods As pointed out by Maass, some tripods in from different sites.80 application technique have the front of AH 2222 (NM 20629 y) (Figs. 9-10) their legs decorated with zigzag or dog is a fragment ofa rib handle with five ribs tooth patterns, otherwise prevalent in the (including that ofthe rim). It measures Matrice Tripods.84 However, the same or 10.4 cm. in length and 3.7 cm. in width; namentation, together with applied spirals, its diameter is 23 cm. Found out ofcon is observable also on one ofthe tripod legs text, it cannot be definitely connected from Delos, the section ofwhich indicates with either ofthe two subgroups.81 a transitional phase from the Solid Cast AH 2223 - 2224 (NM 13992) (Fig. 11) Tripods.85 are two joining fragments ofthe open Moreover, some Application Tripods work part ofone ofthe largest and most definitely imitate the metope decoration elegant handles of the ReliefTripods, 30 ofMatrice Tripods, while, on the other cm. in diameter. The fragments measure hand, one Matrice tripod from Olympia in length 11.1 and 11.3 cm. and in width adopted the ornament ofmultiple semi 2.8 and 2.5 cm., respectively. The greatest circles, characteristic ofthe Application thickness, at the rim, is 0.8 cm. The hand Tripods; however, here it is used in a very le definitely forms part ofthe Matrice Tri restricted form, only as a horizontal bor pods, its open zigzag sections ofa very der for the upper metope on the front of light appearance comparing well with the the leg.86 finest open work handles ofthis subgroup. As shown by Maass, at least three tri A slight mutilation ofthe rim (AH 2223) pods from Olympia are ofmixed style and suggests that originally one or more fig technique. A supplementary plate was ures were soldered here, presumably a added to the front of their matrice legs at horse and possibly also a horse leader.82 each side, in application technique and AH 2784 (NM 20817) (Figs 12 - 13) is a with the favoured spiral ornamentation of fragment ofthe lower solid part ofa hand that style.87 In my opinion, the above ex le ofthe same type and belongs to the amples are indications ofmutual influenc same subgroup. Only its lowest part is pre es and are to be interpreted as evidence served; relief lines frame the plain part, for contemporaneity rather than as phases double relief lines above and a single line ofdevelopment. It would be reasonable to below. At its front, there are still traces of view these tripods in the light ofour evi the fastening ofthe handle strap and a dence for Geometric bronze tripods hav small part ofthe fastening plate for the ing been cast close to the sanctuaries, cauldron is preserved at the back. There is where they were set up.88 Most ofthe also a stump ofone of the handle sup above examples come from Panhellenic ports, measuring 0.6 cm. in diameter. sanctuaries and all the tripods ofmixed The handle fragment measures 13.5 cm. in style come from Olympia. Bronze workers length; its outer diameter is ca. 29 cm.83 from different Greek regions met at the For most fragments ofthe ReliefTri Panhellenic Festivals, presumably working pods at the Argive Heraion, a definite closely together and were thus exposed to classification is possible: they belong to the influences from artisans with different tra Matrice Group. Only AH 2222, the frag ditions. The tripods ofmixed style, in par ment ofa rib handle, cannot with certain ticular, actually seem to contradict Maass' ty be connected with either ofthe two theory, since the original tripod was in the subgroups. suggested new style, the matrice tech According to Maass, the two subgroups nique, whereas the additions are in the ofthe Relief Tripods form a continuous suggested old-fashioned style, the applica development from the earlier Application tion technique. Tripods to the later Matrice Tripods over According to Maass, Application Tri a transitional phase which combined tech pods represent an intermediary phase nical and stylistic characteristics ofboth. between Solid Cast Tripods and Matrice

46 Fig. 12. Athens. National Museum. NM 20817. ReliefTripod. Fragment of open work handle. AH 2784. Museum photo.

Tripods, in stylistic as well as in technical Cast Tripods, Subgroup II and Matrice respects. If this observation were correct, Tripods, although they are less striking, one should also expect to find a similar e.g. handle types ofthe former also have development ofthe tripods in local or re relief lines separated by plain parts and the gional sanctuaries. However, Application handle figures ofboth groups consist Tripods are not represented at the Argive chiefly ofhorses and horse leaders, where Heraion at all. Although the tripods here as the handle figures ofbirds seem to be are limited in number, we have fragments absent in both groups as well as the ap ofseven, forming a continuous develop plied spiral ornamentation. Since both ment from a comparatively late phase of main subgroups ofSolid Cast Tripods as Solid Cast Tripods to Matrice Tripods, well as ofRelief Tripods show signs of but not one fragment ofan Application contemporaneity, I find it reasonable to Tripod. suggest that the two main subgroups of Maass observed a transitional stage each category were contemporary, the between Solid Cast Tripods, which I have Application Tripods probably having de classified as Subgroup I, and Application veloped out ofthe Solid Cast Tripods of Tripods. These two subgroups may well Subgroup I, the Matrice Tripods out of form a continuous development. Both are Subgroup II.89 Fig. 13. (A-B). Athens. also characterized by their favouring of As stated above, the Geometric bronze National Museum. NM applied spiral ornamentation and the han tripods found at the Argive Heraion ap 20817. Relief Tripod. Fragment of open work dle figures ofboth comprise single animals pear to form a continuous development handle. AH 2784. (a horse and a bird). However, I also see from the Solid Cast Tripods ofSubgroup Drawingand section. connections between the tripods ofSolid II to the Matrice Tripods, the Application

Forside Bagside

47 Fig. 14. (A - B). Athens. National Museum. NM 20629 a. Fanned Grooved Tripod. Fragment of leg. AH 2219. Museum photos.

Tripods being conspicuous by their ab in a cylindrical support. The fragment sence. measures 7.7 cm. in length, 4.8 cm. in maximum width and 3 cm. in width at Tripods with Fanned the lower break.91 Judging from its dimen Grooves. sions, it must be regarded as a miniature tripod, as Maass observed.92 Tripods with Fanned Grooves have legs of the same construction and form as Relief Hammered Tripods Tripods, but differ in decoration as well as in handle types. The vertical grooves of The hammered tripods are made almost the legs show an upper fan-like termina entirely of hammered bronze plate, both tion and the handles are either open work handles and legs showing the same handles with flat triangles or solid step stamped ornamentation ofrunning dogs, handles, to which figures ofhorses and concentric circles, false spirals, etc. Only horse leaders or, in one case, a rider, are the supports for the cauldron and handles either soldered or nailed.90 - the latter often in the form ofstanding Only one fragment from the Argive male figures - as well as the handle figures Heraion belongs here, AH 2219 (20629 a) of horses and horse leaders, which were (Fig. 14). It is the upper part ofa leg with nailed to the upper rim ofthe handles, are the edge preserved. Along the edge are solid cast.93 three nail holes for the fastening ofthe leg At the Argive Heraion were found to the cauldron and one nail hole at each three fragments ofhammered tripods. The side projection. At the back, the projec largest came from Blegen's excavations be tions join the cauldron support which low the NE angle ofthe Upper Hill, the consists ofa doubly curving plate, ending so-called Acropolis. It is a side piece of a

48 2©€f*£>a 1748

Fig. 15.(A - B). Athens. National Museum. NM 20676 a. Hammered Tripod. Fragment of leg. AH 1748. Fig. 15 Afrom AH II,pi. CII. Fig. 15 B Museum photo. hammered leg, ordinary in form as well as in decoration (NM 16555).94 AH 1748 (NM 20676 a) (Fig. 15) is a small, very worn and incrusted fragment ofa rectangular flat bronze plate, ofwhich both long sides are preserved. It is almost broken in two and has several holes. At 1749 one ofits long sides, a single tenon is still preserved, identifying the fragment as a side piece ofa hammered tripod. Al Fig. 16. Athens. National Museum. NM 20676 B. though its decoration is almost worn away, National Museum. Hammered Tripod. Fragment of there are remains of engraved lines along support. AH 1749. Drawing andsection. its sides and, in between, ofdiagonal strokes, slightly curving at the ends; there the Old Temple Terrace.97 The three frag are also traces ofat least one circle. The ments may well represent three separate stamped decoration obviously consisted of hammered tripods at the Argive Heraion. false spirals framed by vertical lines. The fragment measures 7.9 cm. in length, 0.8 cm. in width and is 0.4 cm. thick. Judging Chronology from its width, it must come from a ham The dating criteria for the Greek Geo mered tripod leg ofminiature size.95 metric bronze tripods are few. Judging AH 1749 (NM 20676 fi) (Fig. 16) is a from the style ofthe figured handle sup small fragment ofa rectangular bar ofsolid ports ofAttic hammered tripods, the cast bronze, broken at both ends. The greater part ofthis group should be dated fragment measures 4 cm. in length, 0.8 to the late 8th and early 7th Cent. BC.98 cm. in width and 0.4 cm. in depth. The This seems a reasonable chronology also bar is slightly curved at one end and shows for the fragments ofhammered tripods an irregularly stamped decoration offalse from the Argive Heraion, one ofwhich spirals between two engraved vertical lines presumably had its original place on the with two outer rows ofsemicircles. In di Old Temple Terrace built around 700 BC.99 mensions as well as in form and decora As regards cast tripods, only E. Kunze's tion, the bar so closely resembles the cast dating to the last quarter ofthe 8th Cent. handle supports for hammered tripods BC ofthe well-known leg ofa Tripod from Olympia that I interpret it as a small with Fanned Grooves, depicting the fight fragment ofsuch a support.96 over the Delphic tripod and with an As AH 1749 was found in the West Orientalizing motifofantithetic lions over Building, there seems to be no particular a plant ornament, is accepted by most reason for connecting it with the above scholars.100 This date must apply to the fragment ofa hammered tripod ofnor comparatively small group as a whole. mal size, which most likely was placed on The chronology ofthe two earlier

49 groups ofbronze tripods is less certain. In sum, the Geometric bronze tripods Judging from the preliminary reports of at the Argive Heraion, representing all the excavations at Kalapodi, this site may four main groups from Olympia, were pre eventually contribute a new and strati- sumably set up at the sanctuary through graphically determined absolute chronolo out a period covering the greater part of gy. The one published representative ofa the 8th Cent. BC and lasting into the ear Solid Cast Tripod ofmy Subgroup I, a ly 7th Cent. BC. handle fragment, is securely dated to the 9th Cent. BC. 1()1 Function Most scholars agree to an absolute chronology for Relief Tripods in the third The two known find spots offragments of quarter ofthe 8th Cent. BC. Coldstream Geometric bronze tripods which may in dates the whole group accordingly, but form us about their original position several German scholars place the initial probably illustrate the situation at the phase in the first half ofthe century, an sanctuary quite well. The early tripods early chronology for which there does not were likely to have been placed in the Al appear to be any proof.102 An even later tar area only, while one monumental date may be contemplated. There is a hammered tripod seems to have been close connection between Relief Tripods placed on the Old Temple Terrace soon and Tripods with Fanned Grooves, as re after its construction around 700 BC and gards technical as well as decorative fea thus in close connection with the Tem tures.103 Furthermore, Maass observed that ple.106 the same moulds were used for the zigzag The function attributed to the tripods, ornamentation oftripods ofthe Matrice which were originally kitchen utensils, in Group and the zigzag ornamented base Greek Geometric sanctuaries is usually plates ofthe LG horse figures from the that ofvotive offerings, in particular, of Argive Heraion, the production ofwhich prizes for victors at athletic contests. Un should most likely be placed towards the doubtedly, this is the correct interpreta end ofthe 8th Cent, and the early 7th tion for most bronze tripods, especially Cent. BC.104 These observations indicate those found at the Panhellenic sanctuaries that the Matrice Group at least, the only ofDelphi and Olympia. However, in the subgroup represented at the Argive Hera Isthmia publication it is suggested that the ion, lasted until the very end ofthe 8th iron tripod in the Pronaos ofthe Temple Cent. BC. If I am correct in my sugges preceded the nearby perirrhanterion not tion of contemporaneity between Matrice only in date, but also in function. It might Tripods and Application Tripods, the lat be worth contemplating a similar cultic ter subgroup should have a similar chro function for other Geometric tripods, i.e. nology, i.e. I suggest a production period holding water for the ritual purification for the Relief Tripods throughout the sec which was connected with the entrances ond half ofthe 8th Cent. BC. to the sanctuaries and to the temple as Although the initial phase of Geome well as with the altar.107 It would agree tric Solid Cast Tripods must be placed in well not only with the above-mentioned the 9th Cent. BC, this date may not apply find spots in the Argive Heraion, but also to the tripods of Subgroup II which ap with those at Corinth, where the bronze parently started later. As the Argive Her tripod fragments were found in close aion fragments ofSolid Cast Tripods all proximity to the Apollo Temple. How seem to belong to a comparatively late ever, our information to date is too re phase ofproduction, one even to its very stricted to allow a general interpretation. end,105 I find a date in the first half ofthe 8th Cent. BC reasonable for the fragments ofSolid Cast Tripods from the Argive Heraion.

50 Neighbouring Votive Above I have argued for a division into Deposits and Argos two main subgroups, not only ofthe Re liefTripods, as stated by Maass, but also of There is no trace of a Geometric bronze the Solid Cast Tripods, observing a con tripod in any ofthe votive deposits near tinuation from Subgroup I ofSolid Cast the Argive Heraion, nor, for that matter, Tripods to Application Tripods and from in any other sanctuary in the Argolid. Subgroup II ofthe former class to Matrice None are known from the town ofArgos, Tripods.117 from which site I know of only one Geo For a discussion ofpossible production metric tripod, in terracotta.108 centres,118 I should like to look at the dis tribution pattern ofthe provenances of these four groups: Production Centres All four subgroups are represented at Apart from Crete,109 hardly any ofthe the Panhellenic sanctuaries ofDelphi and production centres ofthe Geometric cast Olympia. The finds from Delos are un tripods are securely localized. The Tripods usual, but apparently comprise examples with Fanned Grooves are often attributed ofall subgroups in question except the to Corinth.110 However, in my opinion, Matrice Tripods. Subgroup I of Solid Cast their handle figures ofhorses do not show Tripods are known also from Aigeira in the normal Corinthian stylistic character Achaia, Ithaca, Kalapodi in Phocis, Philia istics 1U. Nor are there any known exam in Thessaly and Thermon in Aitolia.119 ples from the Corinthia. They are found Application Tripods were found at Do- at the two Panhellenic sanctuaries ofDel done, at Ithome in Messenia, on Ithaca phi and Olympia and two local sanctuar and in Laconia, in which last-mentioned ies, the Argive Heraion and the Polis Cave region there are also terracotta imitations on Ithaca, each ofwhich has only one ex which may have had Application Tripods ample.112 The tripods stand apart at both as models. A small fragment from Mon ofthe last two sites, where several exam Repos on Corfu may belong here, but its ples of Geometric bronze tripods form a subgroup is difficult to decide with cer continuous development. The metal anal tainty.120 ysis ofAH 2219 shows a considerably There are no discrepancies between the higher tin percentage than that of any provenances ofthe two subgroups and in other tripod analyzed from the Argive neither case do they favour a Northeast Heraion, in accordance with the analyzes Peloponnesian origin. The Solid Cast Tri of these tripods from both Delphi and pods ofSubgroup I may well have been Olympia.113 AH 2219 is ofminiature size manufactured over the greater part of and thus easily transported. It is most like Greece, whereas for the Application Tri ly a dedication at the Argive Heraion that pods a connection with Northwestern was manufactured elsewhere. On the ex Greece, the Western or Central Pelopon- isting, slight evidence and restricted distri nese appears more likely, i.e. in the west bution pattern, one can hardly expect to ern part ofMainland Greece. At any rate, solve the problem oflocalizing the work as far as regards these two subgroups of shops ofTripods with Fanned Grooves Solid Cast Tripods and Relief Tripods a and I prefer to leave the question open. Northeast Peloponnesian production cen There seems to be a general agreement tre seems to be out of the question. about a Northeast Peloponnesian manu Apart from the Panhellenic sanctuaries facture ofthe Relief Tripods, either Ar ofDelphi, Olympia and Delos, Subgroup give or Corinthian, the former having the II of Solid Cast Tripods are known today most supporters.114 As regards Solid Cast only from the Argive Heraion and Kala Tripods, several production centres are podi.121 Matrice Tripods were found in usually advocated,113 although some schol the same Panhellenic sanctuaries, with the ars regard the greater part as Argive.116 exception ofDelos, as well as at the Ar-

51 give Heraion, Corinth, Isthmia and Kala- the more important sanctuaries situated in podi. The classification ofthe above-men the larger geographical areas to which tioned small fragment from Mon Repos they belonged, either the western or the outside the Corinthian colony of Corcyra eastern part of the Greek Mainland. is uncertain.122 Moreover, we have a close As regards the monumental cast bronze imitation in terracotta from the Heraion tripods found at the Argive Heraion, there of Perachora.123 seems no reason to doubt their local man These two subgroups, Subgroup II of ufacture; but in my opinion, they were Solid Cast Tripods and Matrice Tripods, made by teams ofartisans who also worked are, in particular, connected with the east at other sanctuaries in the eastern part of ern part ofMainland Greece, the North Mainland Greece, especially in the Corin east Peloponnese and the eastern part of thia and Phocis, without being perma Phocis, and only for these two subgroups nently connected with any. It is likely that does a Northeast Peloponnesian produc such teams comprised bronze workers of tion centre seem worth considering. As the Argolid and possibly workers trained the material presents itself today, an Argive in the workshops at the Argive Heraion. workshop would perhaps appear more One should expect a degree of collabora likely than a Corinthian one, considering tion during the working season between the long line ofdevelopment of the tri the bronze workers permanently attached pods in question at the Argive Heraion, to the sanctuary and the itinerant artisans; compared with the few and comparatively i. e. in a work-shop which would pro late finds in the Corinthia.124 Furthermore, mote reciprocal stylistic influences. at the Argive Heraion we have the zigzag- An important centre for Hammered ornamented bases of the bronze statuettes Tripods was located at Athens.129 However, which used parts ofthe same matrices as there are signs ofmore than one Greek the Matrice Tripods,125 and a detail in the workshop130 and Hammered Tripods were figure decoration ofone ofthe metope found in many sanctuaries.131 At the Ar panels finds its parallels only in Argive pot give Heraion, there are a few published tery, as observed by Coldstream.126 examples ofLate Geometric/Early Ar On the other hand, at Kalapodi, we chaic Attic vases, but no evidence for Attic find exactly the same line ofdevelopment Geometric bronze votives.132 Taking into respecting the relevant subgroups, Sub account the continuous development of group II ofSolid Cast Tripods and Ma monumental bronze tripods ofpresumably trice Tripods, and this site likewise gives local manufacture at the Argive Heraion evidence oflocal bronze work and even of for about a century, I see no reason why production of Geometric bronze tripods, Hammered Tripods at the Argive Heraion although ofhammered type.127 should not likewise be considered locally The evidence for manufacture of Geo made, although the few preserved frag metric cast bronze tripods at Olympia, ments do not permit definite conclusions. proving that cast tripods ofmonumental As Geometric bronze tripods are con size were manufactured at or close to the spicuous by their absence in the nearby site where they were erected, and the use settlement ofArgos and till now not re ofthe same matrices for tripods at Isthmia corded from any other sanctuary in the and Olympia, at Kalapodi and Olympia as Argolid, the Argive Heraion may have well as at the Argive Heraion and Delphi, been the only Geometric sanctuary in the should be taken as signs ofitinerant arti Argolid where monumental bronze tri sans.128 Nevertheless, the above distribu pods were manufactured and set up. tion pattern indicates specific geographical relations and one should perhaps imagine E. Statuettes that as well as frequenting the Panhellenic sanctuaries at their festivals, teams ofsuch When in 1964 H.- V. Herrmann first de artisans had temporary connections with fined the main regional styles of Greek

52 Fig. 17 (A - B). Athens. National Museum. NM 13947. Bronze statuette. Horse. AH 12. Museum photos.

Geometric bronze figures, he based his trying to distinguish bronzes oflocal man definition ofthe Argive Geometric style ufacture and origin in Greek Geometric primarily on the bronze figures from the sanctuaries from those oflocal manufac Argive Heraion133 In broad outline his re ture under foreign influences, from im sults are still valid. However, the greatest ports, etc.137 One ofthe horses said to have contributions since his pioneer work, the been found at the Argive Heraion is Cen detailed studies ofArcadian bronzes, not tral Greek and, according to Herrmann's distinguished by him as a regional style, criteria, there are examples ofCorinthian have altered our conception of other as well as Laconian animals. 138 Although schools as well.134 Thus it seems appropri there are still unsolved problems regarding ate to re-evaluate the Argive Geometric the Arcadian bronzes, it is obvious that style on the basis of our present knowl this region had a well established produc edge. tion of Geometric bronze figures and at more than one site.139 Some ofthe Arca The Argive Heraion dian bronzes show such close stylistic affi nities to the Argive Heraion animal figures Apart from the horse leader ofa Solid that a strict division between them, which Cast Tripod (NM 16551) (Fig. 3), there has often proved difficult,140 will require are no human figures among the Geome separate studies of each ofthe remaining tric bronzes at the Argive Heraion.135 Argive Heraion statuettes. Most ofthe quadruped figures are votive As the few Argive Heraion animal stat statuettes, whereas the birds often form uettes ofpresumably local manufacture are part ofpendants or other objects and will ofheterogeneous appearance and, in gen be studied separately. eral, ofmediocre quality, Herrmann ex panded his study material for the Argive Geometric style to horse statuettes from Quadrupeds Olympia as well as to handle figures from The quadrupeds, which are known to cast tripods. Since Herrmann's publica number about 15, were found all over the tion, the two last-mentioned groups have sanctuary.136 They consist chiefly ofhorses dominated as starting points for attribu and a few deer; bulls and cows are absent, tions to the Argive Geometric style.141 As other animals rare. a Panhellenic sanctuary, Olympia was a K. Kilian has stressed the importance of meeting place for bronze works and

53 ,kJ>i

Fig. 18 (A - B). Athens. National Museum. NM 13943. Bronze statuette. Horse. AH 13. Museum photos.

bronze workers from different parts of namentation. (Figs. 17 B, 18 B and 21 Greece. Only two subgroups of cast B).147 bronze tripods at Olympia have a distribu The two horses, AH 12 (NM 13947) tion pattern which makes an Argive pro and AH 13 (NM 13943) (Figs.17 -19), duction centre appear at all possible.142 In have figured reliefs on the undersides of my opinion, we are treading on very thin their base plates, in the former statuette ground in most current attributions to the framed by a single relief line, in the latter Argive Geometric style,143 and I advise a by a double, and in both divided into two return to Herrmann's original study mate metopes by a cross line. In each metope a rial. Only in the local collections can we standing quadruped faces the centre. AH hope to find criteria for the local style, as 13 has the most easily discernible decora Herrmann was the first to realize. tion. In the left-hand metope, a horse According to Rolley, the Argive Her stands tied to a trough with an upper ring, aion animal statuettes are too varied to be and above it is an indistinct animal, pos used in a definition ofan Argive Geomet sibly a crouching quadruped with upward ric style. 144 I should be inclined to agree, curving tail. The quadruped with a highly were it not for one constant trait which curving, bushy tail in the right-hand me may form a starting point. In contrast tope seems to be correctly interpreted as a with the very varied base plates ofArca lion; it has a long, narrow snout with dian bronze figures,14"' the base plates of open jaws, triangular, forward pointing the Argive Heraion Geometric bronze ears, a round knob-like eye and feline statuettes are almost all of one type and paws. On the hindquarters ofthe rather with the same few forms ofdecoration. damaged horse in the right-hand metope All base plates are solid and, with one pe ofAH 12 is placed an elongated wading culiar exception,146 rectangular; they have bird, facing right; its neck and the upper no projection and the decoration oftheir part ofits body form an almost horizontal undersides is primarily in matrice tech line (there is no serpent as suggested in nique, either figured reliefs or zigzag or the AH publication). The wild animal in

54 w3 I'D

Fig. 19. Athens. NationalMuseum. NM 13943. Bronze statuette. Fig. 20. Athens. National Museum. AH 13945. Bronze statuette. Horse. AH 13. Drawing. Horse. AH 11. Museum photo.

\ C#- 3 O i"

Fig. 21 (A -B). Athens. National Museum. NM 13964. Bronze statuette. Lion ?AH 16. Museum photo.

the left-hand metope ofAH 12 has an up hindquarters broad. The hind legs have an ward curving tail; its head is damaged, but accentuated outline and their tails a the strokes along the neck may be intend straight vertical fall. Both have slender, ed for the bristles of a wild boar. The de curving necks, but their heads differ: one tails ofthe relief are difficult to under is horizontal, the other bent and the only stand, as the mould was apparently dam detail rendering appears to be the mane aged. The figures of both reliefs are rather locks ofthe horse ofAH 13. blurred and, apart from the horses, the A similar relief decoration is found on above interpretation cannot be said to be two base plates in Tegea, one ofwhich is conclusive.148 even made with the same matrice as AH Both relief horses have a slender body 13. They must all have the same origin. and thin legs; the horse ofAH 13 is in a However, at Tegea, in contrast with the resting position, while that of AH 12 is Argive Heraion, they are just two exam walking. The upper line of their bodies is ples of a wide variety of types.149 Further straight, almost horizontal, the lower one more, the relief horses of the base plates of curving. Their rumps are high, fore- and AH 12 and 13 seem to correspond stylisti-

55 cally with horses on Argive LG II vases as doe. Its clumsy body, flat muzzle and al well as with intaglio horses on some stone most complete lack ofdetails are features seals of a series which, with a few excep which are repeated in AH 20 (NM tions, come from the Argive Heraion.150 13968). This is a stag, with one ofits AH 12 and 13 were most likely local horns broken. The two deer are related products at the Argive Heraion and the stylistically; but I do not believe that the two Tegea statuettes brought from this latter can be local; it is a much finer work sanctuary. than any other AH animal statuette and its The base plates ofAH 11 (NM 13945), smooth surface has an unusual, light yel AH 14 (NM 13965 + 13994) and AH 16 lowish patina. The underside ofits base (13964) (Fig. 21 B) have zigzag ornamen plate shows an incuse decoration which is tation which, according to Maass, formed not paralleled in those of the local AH an part ofthe matrices used for Matrice Tri imal statuettes.155 With their flat muzzles, pods; this observation can, however, hard both animals are reminiscent ofsome Te- ly apply to the detached base plate ofAH gean deer, although they have no exact 14 which shows a complete design, not counterparts at Tegea either.156 In my part of a larger decoration. Apparently opinion, AH 14 has the essential charac two more, detached base plates had zigzag teristics ofthe above Argive Heraion ani ornamentation; they were recorded as mals and I am inclined to regard it as a lo coming from the fill west ofthe Classical cal work, imitating a Tegean deer. AH 20 Temple, but cannot be identified today151 may be Arcadian. Very few base plates recorded elsewhere The second exception is AH 16 (NM have similardecoration and apparently 13964)(Fig. 21). Although conforming none are identical.152 Except perhaps for well to the horses in its bodily characteris the base plate ofAH 14, I see no reason tics, it has several peculiar features. E.g., its to doubt local manufacture of the Argive position is almost crouching and its long Heraion examples. tail, broken at the tip, does not rest on the The animal statuettes AH 11-14 and base plate, but trails backward, even curv 16 (Figs. 17 - 21)153are all solid cast; in ing slightly upward at the break. Its neck most cases the upper part oftheir legs are is thrust forward and is almost cylindrical. flat, although they do not exhibit the ex The head has a long, narrow, open mouth treme flatness of Corinthian animal fig with indentation forming two rows oftri ures. In contrast to the accentuated out angular teeth; the eyes which are placed so line and cylindrical bodies of Corinthian closely together as to be separated by a and Laconian animals, the Argive Heraion mere foil ofbronze are two circular holes; figures have a gently curving outline with it has forward pointing, triangular ears and out any angularity or accentuation ofde the nostrils are indicated. The animal tails; their broad fore- and hindquarters looks more like a fierce dog than a horse gradually slant into the curving upper and and shares some of the features ofthe re lower lines of the body. They have a high lief lion on the base plate of AH 13 (Fig. rump and there is no indication ofsex. 18 B), e.g., as to form and position of Their forelegs are slightly bent, sometimes ears, position ofeyes, form ofsnout and in a "pulling back" position and, except neck and the free waving of the tail. I sug for AH 12, the protrusions of the legs are gest that it is also an attempt to render a not articulated. The horses have round lion and not much more successful.137 hoofs and their tails are long and round The remaining bronze figures on local and rest on the base plate. Herrmann base plates are horses, AH 11-13 (Figs. especially stressed their general impression 17 - 20).158 All three horses are rendered ofvivid movement.1"'4 with broad necks, slightly bent heads and Two ofthe figures do not represent manes raised above their foreheads. The horses but deer with short tails. AH 14 heads are more diversified in detail than (NM 13965 + 13994); is presumably a their bodies. Both AH 11 and AH 12

56 have cylindrical muzzles and a slight indi to be discussed, both presentingspecific cation in relief of their ears; the latter problems. The base plate ofAH 10 differs horse shows hardly any details, whereas from that ofthe definitely local animals, the former has a groove round the end of its underside being decorated with a single its muzzle and engraved details on the wavy relief line. The head ofthe horse is forehead. On the other hand, AH 13 is missing. At first sight, the conception of rich in details; its mane locks are en its body seems to conform well with that graved; its vertical ears are rendered in re ofthe local horses, but one characteristic lief, the tips now broken; its mouth is feature is lacking: the sense ofvivid move open and its right eye is formed oftwo ment. The posture ofthis horse is static. stamped concentric circles, an ornament Although the figure evidently represents a which is repeated on both sides ofthe horse, its tail does not rest on the base as is neck. On its neck and forequarters is an the case with local Argive Heraion horses. engraved and stamped decoration, indicat AH 10 is so closely related to one ofthe ing the harness ofa chariot horse; pre Tegea horses (Voyatzis B 13), the base of sumably all three horses were meant as which has the same decoration, that I am chariot horses, not riding horses (Fig. inclined to see a common origin.162 Al 19).159 though the latter does not actually form As observed by other scholars, the Ar part ofthe most characteristic group of give Heraion bronze statuettes are very Tegean horses,163 I think that an Arcadian varied and the same observation may be origin is more likely for both statuettes applied even to horses ofthe same stat than an Argive one. uette, e.g. those rendered in relief on the One small quadruped, AH 22 (NM underside ofthe base plate and those 13966), is a pendant in the form ofa standing on the same plate. Although the standing ram or sheep. Its base has the closest stylistic counterparts ofthe former same incuse lines as a group ofpendants are found in LG II Argive vase-painting, with reclining oxen, most ofwhich come those ofthe latter are rather Subgeometric from Tegea, although one example is from than genuinely Geometric in style.160 Sparta and a ram pendant is from Olym Some features were shared by all Argive pia.164 However, in contrast with these an Heraion animal figures, such as the gentle imals, the Argive Heraion sheep does not curves of their bodies with an almost turn its head. In this feature it has a par complete lack ofvertical or horizontal allel in a small stone seal from Philia in lines,their slightly bent heads and the re Thessaly, which is related to others from straint in detail rendering or any accentua the Argive Heraion l65 The bronze pen tion of angularity. Most ofthese traits may dant, AH 22, may well be a local product also characterize Arcadian bronze figures. at the Argive Heraion, with affinities to Only the sense ofvivid movement noted local stone cutting as well as to Tegean by Herrmann is specific to the Argive bronze pendants. Heraion animals. Another peculiarity of The Argive Heraion bronze figures the latter group is the distinct, horizontal were not found in stratified contexts, but division of the mouth ofseveral ofthe an are for various reasons usually dated to the imals, a large, horizontal opening which 8th Cent. BC.166 On the whole, we have reminds one ofthe rendering ofthe very few datable contexts with Greek mouth ofthe horse leader ofSolid Cast Geometric bronze quadrupeds, and they Tripod, NM 16551 (Fig 3). The same trait point, in general, towards the second half is observable on the curious little sheep or of the 8th Cent. BC or the years around sheep-like horse on the flat-iron shaped 700 BC.167 The stylistic affinities between base plate with scratched decoration on its the Argive Heraion bronze horses and the underside, AH 15 (NM 13962), presum horses ofthe Argive LGII/Subgeometric ably also a local product.161 vases indicate an absolute chronology for Two Geometric animal figures remain the production of Geometric bronze fig-

57 ures at the Argive Heraion in the late 8th figures.172 There is a difference concerning and early 7th Cent. BC.168 If the lion Laconian traits, so often observable in Ar identifications made above are correct, cadian animal statuettes, which are not they provide one more reason for a date seen in the local Argive Heraion bronze late in the 8th Cent. BC, when lion rep figures.173 It is customary to talk ofArgive resentations became numerous. Apparent stylistic traits in Arcadian Geometric fig ly, the need for votive dedications of ure style.174 Taking into account, on the bronze figures was not felt at the Argive one hand, the late date and rather insecure Heraion until very late in the Geometric style ofthe Argive Heraion bronze stat period. uettes and, on the other, the well-estab The stylistic characteristics ofthe Geo lished Arcadian Geometric production of metric Argive Heraion bronze horses are bronze figures with independent work immediately continued in two horses, the shops ofhigh quality at several sites, I am fuller bodies ofwhich mark an Early Ar more inclined to reach the opposite con chaic date, AH 17 (NM 13984 + 13986) clusion and see the Argive Heraion Geo and AH 18 (NM 13944). Only AH 17 metric bronze figures as primarily mod preserves a base plate with Geometric zig elled on Arcadian bronze statuary, with a zag ornamentation in matrice technique, particularly close relationship with Te although no longer ofthe same design as gea.175 the Matrice Tripods. AH 18 with its One more characteristic trait separates more gentle posture and its definitely Ar the two workshops. The life and vivid chaic body is younger. It seems to be movement ofthe Argive Heraion Geo closely connected to a group of horses metric bronzes are absent in the Arcadian from Olympia ofthe first half ofthe 7th figures and one must look elsewhere for Cent. BC. and both figures should prob such an inspiration. I find the horse fig ably be dated to that period.169 ures of the cast monumental bronze tri The local Argive Heraion Geometric pods ofthe groups represented at the Ar bronze statuettes (AH 11-16 and 22) are give Heraion a possible candidate. The few and late and display a great variety of Argive Heraion was, as far as we know, animal types. It is worth noting that, in the only sanctuary in the Argolid with spite ofthe role known to have been Geometric cast bronze tripods, all the played by cows and oxen in the cult ofthe monumental examples ofwhich belong to sanctuary, these animals are completely Subgroup II of the Solid Cast Tripods or absent in the Geometric bronze statuary the Matrice Tripods. The horse figures are of the site.170 The bronze figures are also best known from the latter group and varied in style. Actually, stylistic consisten their stylistic features are in no way in cy is observable only in the reliefs, where compatible with those ofthe Geometric the bronze workers were influenced by horse statuettes ofthe Argive Heraion. well-known local media, such as vase- They have predominantly softly curving painting and stone seal cutting.171 Consid lines, bent heads, often with a distinctly ering the unsteady figure style of the stat horizontal division ofthe mouth; their uettes, one would imagine that the bronze forelegs are slightly bent, they have a high workers were also exposed to outside in rump and long trailing tail; also they show fluences. a similar restraint in detail rendering. The Contacts with Arcadian bronze work Argive Heraion horse leader (Fig. 3), a were particularly close. Although the sty handle figure ofa Solid Cast Tripod of listic characteristics separating Argive and Subgroup II, also displays some ofthese Arcadian bronze figures are few and al characteristics, e.g. the gently curving most intangible, the many studies ofthe lines and the prominent, horizontally di Lusoi-Mantineia bronzes make a distinc vided mouth.176 The essential stylistic dif tion possible in most ofthese cases and the ferences in the figure style ofthe two same applies to the typical Tegean animal schools of Geometric bronze statuettes in

y Fig. 22. Argos. Mus. Inv. B. 75. Athena Sanctuary. Larissa. Bronzestatuette. Horse. PhotoEcoleFrancaise d'Archeologie, Athenes. Neg. no. 29320. question, the Argive and the Arcadian, Herrmann's primary definition ofthe Ar may well be based on differences in their give Geometric style), there seem to be contacts with the bronze workers ofmon very few possibilities ofattributing Geo umental tripods. At least Geometric metric bronze figures from other sanctuar bronze tripods seem to be lacking in the ies to this workshop. The earlier attribu Arcadian sanctuaries.177 Nevertheless, I do tions of Geometric bronze figures from not find the stylistic affinities between the the Athenian Acropolis for example are above-mentioned tripod handle figures now recognized as local works, the horses and the Argive Heraion Geometric from Sparta are placed on non-Argive base bronze statuettes so close that a general at plates and the same applies to the so-called tribution ofthe Matrice Tripods to the Argive horse from Perachora.180 Argolid, where they are represented only Olympia presents a special problem. at the Argive Heraion, would be worth More than 50 % ofall imported Geome reconsidering. The arguments for itinerant tric animal bronze figures at this site are artisans are, in my opinion, too weighty classified as Argive.181 Most Argive attri and I should prefer to think in terms of butions were based on the handle figures reciprocal stylistic influences.178 ofthe central groups ofthe Solid Cast The Argive bronze figures are generally Tripods and the Relief Tripods, neither of supposed to have a large distribution area. which were definitely localized to the Ar However, apart from the few base plates golid at the time ofpublication. The rele from the Athena Alea sanctuary at Tegea, vant groups comprise the Application Tri no base plates ofArgive Heraion statuette pods as well as my Subgroup I ofSolid types have been published from any other Cast Tripods, two subgroups which are sanctuary, a fact which should be contrast not represented in the Argolid at all nor in ed with the many finds at Olympia for ex the Northeast Peloponnese.182 From stylis ample ofCorinthian, Laconian and Arca tic comparisons with these tripods, includ dian statuette base plates.179 Keeping to ing the two last-mentioned subgroups, a the stylistic criteria ofthe Argive Heraion large Argive regional school has been con statuettes (and thus in accordance with structed. It comprises bronze figures from

59 Fig. 23. Delphi. Inv. no. 3649. Bronze Statuette. Warrior. Photo Ecole Francaise d'Archeologie. Athenes. Neg. nos. 33118 - 33120.

the 9th and the first half ofthe 8th Cent. Neighbouring BC, when such votive dedications are un Votive Deposits known at the Argive Heraion. Almost 50 % are cows or bulls, animals which are There are no Geometric bronze figures conspicuous by their absence among the from the votive deposits in the neighbour bronze figures of the Geometric Argive hood ofthe Argive Heraion. Heraion.183 In general, comparative mate rial from the Argolid is completely lacking Argos for the groups of the so-called Argive bronze figures from Olympia (whether I know ofonly one Geometric bronze considered original Argive products or statuette found in a sanctuary in Argos, manufactured by Argive workers in the horse in the Argos Museum, Inv. no Olympia). An Argive Geometric figure B75, from the Athena Sanctuary on the style constructed on groups ofbronzes Larissa (Fig. 22),187 a rather incrusted and which have no counterparts in either of damaged statuette. The horse is standing the two main sites ofthe Argolid (Argos on a solid, rectangular base plate which and the Argive Heraion) is apt to cause measures 3 x 1.5 cm and 0.2 cm in height. confusion184 and is hardly a suitable basis The underside ofthe base has a raised rim, for theories about the homeland ofthe inside which are two raised lines forming visitors to the sanctuary of Olympia.18:> an irregular, diagonal cross motif; near one Our only hope for obtaining a reliable end is a transverse raised line and along insight into the Argive Geometric figure the long sides two raised triangles; it may style and an expansion ofthe present very possibly be a very schematic figure motif. limited groups ofArgive bronze figures of The horse itself is 3.8 cm. in height. It has the 8th/Early 7th Cent. BC is in studies a brown patina with greenish spots. Its ofbasically local material.186 body is cylindrical and it has a high rump. The legs are round and straight, both fore-

60 Fig. 24. Terracotta warrior statuette. Argos. Inv. no. C 7830. PhotoEcole Francaise d'Archeologie. Athenes. Neg. nos. 60397 and 60416. and hindlegs giving the impression ofbe This is not the only representative of ing firmly planted on the ground, the fore local Geometric bronze figure production legs in a "pulling back" position. The tail at Argos. H. Sarian has convincingly at is broken off, but originally rested on the tributed to Argos a Late Geometric stat base. The head, which is slightly bent, is uette ofa warrior from a chariot group, almost cylindrical, the mane rises high found at Delphi, because ofits close stylis above the forehead; the ears are rendered tic affinities with similar Late Geometric in relief, turned backward and almost hor terracotta groups from Argos (Fig. 23). izontal; the eyes are round and protruding The bronze warrior is naked, the terracot and the mouth is distinctly horizontally ta warriors clad in short tunics; but all divided. Because of the incrustration, the wear a large conical helmet and are strik details are rather difficult to observe, but ingly similar in the very accentuated out the general impression ofthe horse is one line oftheir muscular bodies with broad not incompatible with horses from the buttocks, as well as in their large heads Argive Heraion, although it is more com with large ears, prominent noses and very pact in build, more firm in posture and small mouths (Fig. 24). As the terracotta more static. It definitely lacks the charac figures are definitely local, there seems to teristic feature ofvivid movement of the be no doubt that the bronze warrior is Heraion animals. Nor is it related to the correctly attributed to Argos.189 horses ofthe Matrice Tripods which have The main theme as well as some details much more in common with the Argive connect the terracotta groups to Cyprus.190 Heraion horse statuettes. I have not found However, the motif of a warrior on a any exact parallel, either for the decora horse-drawn chariot is also known from tion ofits base plate, or for the style ofthe some Geometric bronzes from Olympia horse and I am inclined to see it as a local to which the Argos bronze warrior is sty product ofthe site where it was found, the listically related; they are presumably of settlement ofArgos.188 Laconian origin.191

6i The Delphic warrior differs consider Birds ably from the Argive Heraion horse leader from a cast tripod handle (Fig. 3), where just the opposite physical and facial fea The Argive Heraion tures are stressed: a slender body and a di The Argive Heraion bird figures number minutive face, the only conspicuous fea about the same as the quadrupeds but ture ofwhich is the large, horizontal were apparently not so widely distributed mouth. Nor is the theme of a warrior in the sanctuary. Apart from one bird on mounted on a horse-drawn chariot the "Upper Hill", they seem to be chiefly known from the bronzes or the published connected with the Altar area.194 terracottas found at the Argive Heraion.192 The basic studies of Greek Geometric bird figures are those ofJ. Bouzek, whose Apparently we have at least two main cen regional classifications, however, do not tres ofmanufacture ofArgive Late Geo always hold true.195 metric bronze statuettes, at Argos and at Few ofthe Argive Heraion bronze the Argive Heraion, though there pre birds are separate figures, most form part sumably were others. It is worth noting ofpersonal ornaments or other objects.196 that the preserved examples ofthe two The plate fibula, AH 881 (NM 14033) schools differ considerably in motifas well (Fig. 25) is ofisland type with triangular as in style and that we have no evidence of bow and has a seated bird on the bow as Argos statuettes having been dedicated at well as on top ofthe plate. The latter set the Argive Heraion. The one definitely ting is unusual for genuinely island fibulae local Geometric bronze statuette manu and I know ofonly a few similar examples, factured at Argos shows stylistic affinities one from Lusoi in Arcadia which, how with Laconia, whereas the local bronze ever, is a different type ofplate fibula.197 statuettes of the Argive Heraion do not The birds ofAH 881 are related to the have any visible ties with Laconia, but ap most common bird type at the Argive pear to be influenced partly by Arcadian Heraion, Bouzek's so-called "Corinthian" bronzes, partly by specific handle figures bird, a light and elegant small bird with ofcast tripods which are not known from highly swung neck and tail. Its distribu Argos. At both sites, the stylistic charac tion area covers the greater part ofMain teristics continued into the 7th Cent. land Greece south ofMacedonia, with the BC.193 Corinthia as a conspicuous exception. There is a preponderance offinds in Thessaly and Central Greece. In the for mer region they are connected with sanc-

Fig. 25. Athens. National Museum. NM 14003. Fig. 26. Athens. National Museum. AH 13953. Plate fibula. AH 881. From AH II, pi. LXXXVII. Bird pendant. AH 40. Museum photo.

62 Fig. 27. Athens. National Museum. Bronze lid,pins and miniature double axependant. Argive Heraion. Photo American Schoolof Classical Studies, Athens. tuaries, in the latter with settlements; an incised linear ornamentation on its therefore it seems most reasonable to con body. AH 40 is very close to some Kala sider Central Greece as the main produc podi birds and both are presumably Cen tion area.198 tral Greek works.200 As, however, the mis Four examples are recorded from the cast, AH 2837 (NM 20831/2), may have Argive Heraion. On the small, rectangular been intended for such a bird on a prism, plate, AH 39 (NM 13960), two birds are this Central Greek bird type was possibly seated so close together that their tails also manufactured at the Argive Heraion.201 form an upper, undulating plate. They To a figure-of-eight shaped object, ap differ from the other birds of the group parently a lid, is soldered an open work especally in their flat bodies. The nail hole vertical element with an upper horizontal ofthe plate presumably indicates the fasten bar, decorated with stamped concentric ing to another object, possibly some kind circles (NM 16562) (Fig. 27). With its ofpendant.199 AH 40 and AH 41 (NM seated row ofthree birds, originally four, 13953 and 13955 )(Fig. 26) are birds of it may best be compared to two stands the normal "Corinthian", i.e. Central with several birds, one from Anavra in Lo- Greek type, forming the upper terminals cris, the other ofunknown provenance. In ofprism-shaped stamps; both have an spite oftheir slightly protruding eyes and a oblique hole through the lower part ofthe sharp angle along their backs, the birds are neck and AH 40, the best preserved, has related to the Central Greek birds and the

63 Fig. 28. Athens. National Museum. NM 16971. Bird pendant. Argive Heraion. Photo American School of Classical Studies, Athens.

object may be ofCentral Greek origin.202 AH 44 is a hollow cast duck with in The small, badly preserved bird, AH cised wings and modelled flippers. Judging 38, on a broken cylindrical standard, has from the square hole on its underside and stylistic features that are typically Thessal- the traces ofwear around the hole, AH 44 ian: protruding round eyes and a promi was apparently placed on a separate verti nent breast. Its closest parallels are found cal bar. It has counterparts among Thes in Pherai and Philia.203 The same general salian birds, but because of its lack ofsus characteristics are shared by AH 42 (NM pension ring, it was presumably produced 13956), a bird on a circular open-work elsewhere and may be a local variety. As base, horizontally pierced through its the Argive Heraion bird is comparatively neck, presumably likewise ofThessalian naturalistic, it should be dated after 700 origin.204 BC.205 NM 16971 (Fig. 28) is a bird on a ver tical stem; with its plump body and short beak it is related to a bird type with rather long legs, especially known from Laconia.

Fig. 29. Athens. National Museum. NM 13958 and 13959. Bird pendants. AH 36 - 37. Museum photos

64 ^^ir

Fig. 30 (A - B). Athens. National Museum. NM 13952. Bird pendant. AH 47. Museum photos

However, the closest parallels for the cross only the tip ofits beak is missing, has a decoration on the underside ofits circular, central hollow cylinder between its legs; solid base plate are found in some stamp since the underside ofits body shows trac pendants from Tegea. Perhaps it is actually es ofwear, the bird was apparently meant an Arcadian figure under Laconian influ for insertion into another object, just like ence, a category into which several Arca AH 44. It is comparatively light and pre dian birds as well as quadrupeds fall.206 In sumably hollow cast.208 The two birds the irregularity ofits vertical stem, it also have been compared to Thessalian as well resembles another Central Peloponnesian as to Laconian birds, whereas Bouzek rec bird type with a horizontally pierced body ognized them as Argive, in my opinion and an open work, circular base. Although correctly. One oftheir two counterparts these birds usually have legs, not a stem, it in the sanctuary ofTegea was placed on a seems to be within this latter group that base with a relief decoration on its under the bird, AH 43, (NM 139611) with its side, comparable with the horses on the long tail finds its closest parallels. The bases ofthe Argive Heraion horse stat birds ofthis group have been found at uettes, AH 12 - 13. Most likely all four Olympia, in Arcadia and Laconia and re birds were produced in the same work cently a production at Lusoi has been sug shop, i.e. at the Argive Heraion.209 gested for a very similar type. AH 43 The remaining birds, AH 45 - 48, seems to be the only bird figure at the Ar (without Inv. no.; NM 13979, 13952 and give Heraion of possibly Laconian origin, 13954) are all cocks, each with identical but like NM 16971 it should perhaps be ornamentation on both sides, a variety of regarded as an Arcadian bird with Laco incised and stamped decoration oflines nian influence.207 and concentric circles.210 AH 36 - 37 (NM 13958 - 59) (Fig. 29) The badly preserved and incrusted bird, are likewise long-legged birds. They have AH 45, seems to be ofthe same type as long necks, hardly any detailed rendering, AH 46, a solid cast, small cock with flat and bodies with flat, horizontal under crest and tail. AH 46 was vertically pierced sides. AH 36 has a horizontally pierced and definitely served as a pendant. neck. One ofits legs is broken. As the The cock AH 47 is hollow cast, larger foot ofits one well-preserved leg shows a and with two profiled rings at the neck as rough underside, it probably was original well as at the base ofthe tail. Its eyes are ly placed on a base plate. AH 37, ofwhich round and raised and it has large triangular

65 feet. Originally functioning as a pendant amples of which were found at Tegea. with a suspension ring on top ofits back, There are no certain Macedonian imports it was turned into a fibula when the ring and the apparent influences from Laconia was broken. At the side ofits body is an may well be indirect, via Arcadia. Geo irregular, oblong hole; soldered to the in metric bronze bird dedications seem to side ofthe undamaged side was a bronze represent a secondary tradition in the plate with a long vertical pin, preserved to a Northeast Peloponnese; in the sanctuaries length of5.3 cm.; its tip is broken (Fig. 30). of the Corinthia, we have even fewer such The body ofAH 48 is likewise hollow dedications and, as far as I know, no evi cast. The bird has protruding, round eyes and dence for a local manufacture of Geome long flat feet; its crest is broken off aswell as tric birds.215 the top ofthe suspension ring on its back. The small, solid cast cocks, AH 46 Neighbouring (and presumably also AH 45), must be re Votive Deposits garded as Thessalian imports, whereas AH 47 -48 are Arcadian, probably ofTegean There are no finds of Geometric bronze manufacture.211 birds in any ofthe neighbouring votive The function ofthe Argive Heraion deposits. bird figures varies. There are a few stat Argos uettes and a few fibulae but most birds were pendants, presumably worn as breast I know ofno Geometric bronze birds ornaments. At least one ofthe cocks, AH from any ofthe sanctuaries ofArgos and 47, was a dedication ofa used article of ofonly one from a cemetery. It was found dress and also AH 37 and 44 may have in the earth above a Protogeometric tomb. been in use before being offered, but here It is of Central Greek bird type, but its as in many other cases, the exact function base is four-legged in cross-form, a type is not easy to determine.212 Like the quad which I. Kilian - Dirlmeier has recorded rupeds, the bronze birds found at the Ar in only five examples. Two are without give Heraion are ofvaried types and not provenance, one is said to have come from particularly connected with Hera.213 Thessaly and one was found in a LG con Presumably the chronology ofthe Ar text at Amphikleia in Phocis.216 This spe give Heraion bronze bird figures is about cific type is not known at the Argive Her the same as that ofthe quadrupeds, i.e. a aion; but although it may indicate outside LG date, most likely the last quarter ofthe connections different from those ofthe 8th Cent. BC. and the early 7th. Cent. Argive Heraion, these connections also BC. Judging from the few certain find con extended to Central Greece. texts ofchronological importance, the gen There is no reason to suppose the exis eral chronology ofGreek Geometric bronze tence ofa local production ofbronze bird birds seems to be Late Geometric. One of figures at Geometric Argos, nor at any the closest parallels to the Central Greek other site in the Argolid apart from the birds at the Argive Heraion was found in a very limited one at the Argive Heraion.217 stratified context at Kalapodi, dating to the last quarter of the 8th Cent. BC.214 F. Personal Ornaments The Argive Heraion had apparently an even more limited manufacture of Geo In some cases personal ornaments of metric bronze birds than of quadrupeds, bronze which formed part of the dress the majority having been brought from were dedicated in a sanctuary together outside. While there are birds ofdefinitely with the whole dress, although separate Thessalian origin, the closest ties were offerings also occurred.218 As regards per with Central Greece and Arcadia. There sonal ornaments ofbronze at the Argive existed also a local manufacture ofbird Heraion, we have no evidence for any figures at the Argive Heraion, a few ex specific manner ofdedication and only a

66 Fig. 31 (A- C). Athens. National Museum. AH 1557 - 1558 and2753. (NM 13987 and20909 a). Stamp pendants andpomegranate pendant. Fig. 31 A - B Museum photos. Fig. 31 C from AH II, pi. CXXXIV

few objects are certain to have been in ac dress ornaments and although counter tual use before dedication.219 parts to the wheel ornament have been Comparative studies ofthis very large seen in tombs as decoration ofthe neck or group ofobjects must be based on detailed breast and one wheel ornament from Kala examinations by other scholars, especially podi was found fastened to a fibula, the in the German publications of"Prahisto- Argive Heraion ornament is probably too rische Bronzefunde".220 large to have been used as a dress orna ment. As isolated objects at the Argive Heraion, both pendants were most likely Pendants manufactured outside the Argolid. They may be ofLG date, but in both cases the The Argive Heraion type continues. 222 Apart from the bird pendants, very few The rest ofthe bronze pendants at the pendants were found in situ at the Argive Argive Heraion are imports and connect Heraion, the known find spots almost al ed to two regions, Arcadia and Macedo ways being the secondary location ofthe nia. Two stamp pendants, AH 1557 - Southern Slope.221 1558 (NM 13987) are ofArcadian, pre Some ofthe pendants are of rather sumably Tegean, manufacture; the former common types as e.g. miniature double is a pyramidal stamp, the quadrangular axes and wheel ornaments, both ofwhich base ofwhich shows a cross design, the are known from a single example at the latter has a circular base plate with a wheel Argive Heraion. The double axe (Fig. 27) design. The same origin must be ascribed measures 6.3 cm. in width and 0.2 cm. in to the only pomegranate pendant known thickness; it has curved sides and to its from the Argive Heraion, AH 2763 (NM central part was attached a separate, pre 20809 a)(Fig. 31). According to I. Kilian- sumably wooden, handle, the rivet for the Dirlmeier, stamp pendants may have had a fastening ofwhich is preserved. According double function: as ornaments, possibly to I. Kilian-Dirlmeier, this type of double amulets, and as signets. Their chronology is axe was widespread over the greater part chiefly LG, but like the pomegranate pen ofthe Greek Mainland. The same obser dants they lasted into the Archaic Period.223 vation applies to the wheel ornament The Macedonian type pendants at the which measures 20 cm. in diameter; each Argive Heraion are partly Macedonian ofits four circular holes, cut out of2 mm. imports, partly Greek imitations. The for thin bronze plate, measures 6.6 cm. in di mer group comprises the lower part ofa ameter. Both ornaments may well be sep cast pyxis pendant, AH 2019 (NM 2079), arate votives. Only miniature double axes a bell pendant, AH 1556 (NM 20672 y) with a fixed stem seem to be known as and different kinds ofbeads, AH 1548 -

67 ?

rl T 1 I

1 J I' 1 j*****S^ # h T Ooooo O 0 <3 p

Fi# 32. Ar^os. Museum. Fibulae, pendants, pins and rings. Athena Sanctuary. Larissa. Photo Ecole Francaise d'Archeologie. Athenes. Neg. no. 53768.

1550 and 1552;224 among the beads are being cast in one piece with its stem pos also Greek imitations, AH 1547 and 1551, sessing a suspension loop. It has tremolo with counterparts in many Greek sanctu decoration. This type ofdouble axe is aries.22"' Whereas the Macedonian imports connected, in particular, with sanctuaries seem to be dated to the 8th or early 7th in Sparta and Arcadia.228 A flat ring pen Cent. BC, the Greek imitations may be as dant with protuberances, also from the late as the end ofthe 7th Cent. BC.226 Athena Sanctuary (Fig. 32), is presumably an import from Tegea where an exact Neighbouring counterpart was found. A fragment ofa Votive Deposits similar pendant decorated with small knobs from the Aphrodision (70/1553) There are no certain Geometric pendants seems closer to a ring pendant from Phe- from any of the neighbouring votive de rai. A pyramidal stamp pendant from the posits, as a fragmentary wheel in lead from Aphrodision (69/592) is probably Arca Tomb L at Prosymna presumably does not dian.229 Judging from their location, the form part ofa pendant.227 two last-mentioned pendants should pre sumably be dated to the late 7th Cent. Argos BC, at the earliest.230 As they are ofthe same types as the Geometric pendants, a The one known miniature axe from a later date is possible also for the corre sanctuary in Argos, the Athena Sanctuary sponding ring pendant from the Larissa on top ofthe Larissa, B 76 (Fig. 32), dif sanctuary and the stamp pendants from fers from the Argive Heraion example in the Argive Heraion.

68 ing in knobs. The type has a wide distri bution in the Greek Mainland, Eastern Greece and the islands, and may be of Near Eastern origin. The loop ofAH 1554 ends in flat disks. There are several counterparts in terracotta from the Argive Heraion, at least some ofwhich have disks with painted cross division. They are known in gold from the Hera Akraia and the so-called Hera Limenia deposits at Perachora as well as from two Geometric tomb contexts said to have come from Corinth. All of these have disks with in cised cross decoration. Both this type and a variant with the disks formed into cones Fig. 33. Athens. National Museum. Armrings. Argive Heraion. Photo American School of have a wider distribution area, but they Classical Studies, Athens. seem to be especially favoured in the As regards non-figurative bronze pen Northeast Peloponnese. The latter variant dants, the Argive Heraion and the sanctu is represented in terracotta at Tiryns, also aries ofArgos all had their strongest ties with painted cross division. From its with Arcadia, in particular Tegea. How counterparts in the Corinthia, AH 1554 ever, pendants from the two sites show should most probably be dated to the 8th differences in types as well as in details; for - 7th Cent. BC and a corresponding date example, the ring pendant with protuber may be given to AH 1553 233 ances is not found at the Argive Heraion There are a few arm rings at the Argive and the two miniature double axes had Heraion which may be Geometric. Most different stems. In the sanctuaries ofArgos ly they are plain rings. Some have overlap there are no certain Thessalian or Mace ping ends such as AH 1359 or the slightly donian Geometric bronze pendants.231 elliptical AH 971. Other rings were closed, The Argive Heraion shows a wider variety as the rings with angular section, AH ofnon-figurative pendants, but both sites 1361 and 1362. The latter has tremolo give the impression that bronze pendants decoration. Like the Macedonian ring never played such an important role as to with rhomboid section found by Blegen promote a local production and, apart (Fig. 33), the type indicates relations with from the Northern Greek connections Thessaly/Macedonia; but, although they observable only for the Argive Heraion, have earlier northern counterparts, they imported pendants indicate contacts with should presumably be dated to the 8th or the same Greek regions, although not al 7th Cent BC.234 There seem to be a few ways with the same workshops. fragments offlat arm rings with rolled ends, AH 816 and possibly AH 815, dated to the 8th - 7th Cent. BC. To the same Rings period belong the Boiotian arm rings; their flat central parts have ornamental The Argive Heraion tremolo decoration and their rounded ends have raised rings, AH 1597 - 1599 The different types ofrings were found all (NM NM 210531a, fi and y)(Fig. 34). over the sanctuary. There are only two They are found in 8th - 7th Cent, con ear- rings which may be Geometric, AH texts, in particular, in and around Thebes, 1553 (NM NM 20672 a) and AH 1554 and are known also from Attica, Aegina, (NM 20672 B), the latter ofwhich was Locris and Olympia, as well as in a varied found near the Altar.232 Both are hoop ear form from Thessaly. The examples outside rings. AH 1553 is formed as a spiral end Boiotia are too few for any theories ofa

69 ,.„ .-...:.—%""*'"xsiV*" "',:TV";' ^ - ^~vi?<

\:Z£ M2K: 2^ 1599?

Fig. 34. Arm rings. AH 1597 - 1599. NM210531fi, y. Drawings. From AH II, pi. XCIX.

possibly secondary production in another Cent, date (AH 1480 - 1482, AH 1495 Greek region. Two arm rings have pro and AH 1505-06). 236 filed rings at their ends, AH 972 (NM 20914) which is a wire decorated plain Neighbouring arm ring, and AH 972 a, possibly a child's Votive Deposits arm ring. Both are presumably of Geo metric or Early Archaic date and their The Hera sanctuary west ofthe Argive types are widely distributed in Greece.23"1 Heraion has one example ofthe same type The Argive Heraion has a large collec ofear ring as AH 1553 as well as two tion ofplain finger rings (AH 950 - 960 plain arm rings and several plain finger and 975 - 1356), the date ofwhich is of rings (Fig. 35). The latter type was discov ten difficult to determine but presumably ered also in some Prosymna Tombs several belong to the Geometric Period. (Tombs II, X and L) and here there are Like the other personal ornaments, they several band finger rings, one ofwhich, must be regarded as dedications to Hera, from Tomb IX, has an incised decoration although we have only one example with along the edge (Fig. 36).237 such a dedicatory inscription, an Archaic gold ring which possibly came from the Argive Heraion. There are a few wire Argos rings, as e.g. AH 1464, which are also dif Plain bronze finger rings, sometimes in ficult to date. Finger rings with an angular the form ofband rings and often with tre section, as AH 1363 - 1380, are known in molo decoration, are found both in sanc the Geometric Period from many Greek tuaries (Fig. 32) and tombs in Argos and regions. One finger ring, AH 1509 (NM in the former contexts there are also wire 20671), is made ofa flat piece ofbronze finger rings (Fig. 43) as well as finger rings ending in spirals, a type which is common ofangular section. The chronology of all all over Greece from the Submycenaean these types offinger rings seems to cover Period until well into the 7th Cent. BC. the greater part ofthe Geometric Period Its spiral is rather small and the ring prob lasting into the 7th Cent. BC and they are ably belongs to the later production peri found all over the Argolid. 238 od, the 8th or 7th Cent. BC. There are several band rings made ofa plain piece of The ordinary finger rings, presumably lo sheet bronze, sometimes with a central cally made at both main sites, do not dif ridge and often with tremolo decoration fer noticeably and are represented also in that secures their Geometric or early 7th the votive deposits near the Argive Hera-

70 Fig 35. Athens. National Museum. Ear ring, fibulae andfinger rings. Hera Sanctuary west ofArgive Heraion. Photo American School ofClassical Studies, Athens.

ion. The other ring types known from the The Argive Heraion Argive Heraion seem to be absent in Ar gos. The hoop earrings with disks indicate The fibulae at the Argive Heraion form a participation in a common tradition over a comparatively large group ofpersonal or large part ofthe Northeast Peloponese, naments, in all about 110 examples, in including the Corinthia. The Argive Her cluding Near Eastern and Italic fibulae as aion arm rings, not paralleled in Argos, well as close imitations ofboth categories. are in several cases ofeither Central Greek They were found all over the sanctuary or Northern Greek types. but with a preponderance offinds in the West Building and on the Southern Slope.240 Fibulae Ofthe Greek Geometric fibulae, the The pioneer studies of Greek fibulae pub arched fibulae, chiefly Blinkenberg's lished in 1926 by the Danish scholar Chr. Groups II and III, are well represented at Blinkenberg have been followed by de the Argive Heraion.241 Although the type tailed studies by many scholars; in particu originated in the Sub-Mycenaean/Proto- lar, some ofthe PBF publications have geometric Periods, there is no secure evi contributed new information on chrono dence for Blinkenberg's early date for e.g. logy and regional attributions.23' AH 831, as its type continued into the Archaic Period.242 AH 844 - 845, both

7i Bfc~£l*

Fig. 36. Athens. National Museum. Bronzefibula, rings and pins. Prosymna Tombs. Photo American School ofClassical Studies, Athens. with a twisted bow which Blinkenberg as well as at Perachora, in the so-called considered intermediary betwen Submy- Hera Limenia deposit, but is well-known cenaean and Advanced Geometric, may also in Thessaly. Their date is late 8th - date to the late 8th or the 7th Cent. BC. 7th Cent. BC. and so is that ofthe Thes The fibulae are ofa variety especially salian fibula AH 833, a large number of known in the Central Peloponnese: Spar which type were found in Pherai, while ta, Lusoi and Tegea, but found also else there are representatives also from Philia, where in the Peloponnese, e.g. in Pera- Perachora, Amyklaion and Lindos. AH chora, as well as on Ithaca. There are a 843, with a rhombic arch bordered by few well-preserved simple arched fibulae, double incised lines, is ofan island type as e.g. AH 829, AH 839 and the mini which continues into the Archaic Peri ature fibula, AH 830243, but most are too od.245 fragmentary for classification and some are Ring fibulae, AH 919 - 934, consisting definitely remnants of Italic type fibulae, ofa solid ring, a few cm. in diameter, originally decorated with disks ofbone or with a pin attached to the back, reach other material.244 back at least as far as the LG Period/Early The more specific forms ofGreek 7th Cent. BC, but their exact chronology arched fibulae at the Argive Heraion are is not easy to establish.246 to a great extent either insular types or of Spectacle fibulae from the Argive Her Thessalian origin. AH 838 and 841 have aion, Blinkenberg's type XIV, are known an arch ofslightly swollen form, a type mostly in small fragments with only one which is also found in Exochi on Rhodes fully preserved example, AH 818 (NM

72 Fig. 37. Athens. National Museum. Spectaclefibula. AH 818. Fig. 38. Athens. NationalMuseum. AH 880. NM 20888. NM 14035. Museum photo. Arched Fibula. Museum photo.

14035) (Fig. 37). It is ofthe type normally lar, swollen arch bordered by two rings, found in the Peloponnese, made ofone and decorated on the top with a small piece ofwire, quadrangular in section, ex round projection (Fig. 38) is presumably a cept for pin and hook, and with a double Thessalian variant, both dated to the late central loop in a so-called "Achter- 8th or early 7th Cent. BC.249 Schleife". Spectacle fibulae which origi The very fragmentary fibulae, AH 869 nated in Central Europe and the North - 870 (NM 14032), with a central globe ern Balkans apparently reached Southern on the arch and probably a small catch Greece via Macedonia and Thessaly. They plate are definitely island fibulae. They are found in Macedonian and other have a large distribution area over almost Northern Greek tombs in the 9th Cent. all Greek islands. Having developed from BC and there are Central Greek and Pelo an older type known in Euboea and Sky- ponnesian contexts ofthe late MG and ros, they continue into the 7th Cent. BC. LG periods indicating an 8th - early 7th They are also well-known at Pherai, but Cent, date as also likely for the Argive apparently not north ofThessaly, and Heraion specimens. Double spectacle fib there are examples on the West Coast of ulae with four spirals are not represented Asia Minor, at Artemis Orthia at Sparta at the Argive Heraion, while there are and in Central Greece.250 some examples ofrelated spectacle fibulae The large plate fibulae, the arches of ofbone or ivory, Blinkenberg's type XV247 which are decorated with large pearls and A violin fibula type with a rectangular globes, AH 871 - 875 and 877 - 879 (NM plate where two small rivets, as suggested 20889, and 14032 - 33) (Fig. 39), Blin- by Blegen, may have fastened a decorative kenberg Type VII, are basically ofThessal oblong piece ofivory, bone or wood is ian type, a large percentage ofwhich common at the Argive Heraion. Their come from Pherai. However, as shown by distribution area covers many Greek is B. Philipp, who bases her conclusions on lands as well as the Peloponnese and their earlier studies by Payne and Schweitzer, chronology extends from LG until some the fibulae found outside Thessaly form time in the 6th Cent. BC.248 two different subgroups. AH 873, one of Among the plate fibulae at the Argive the Artemis Orthia fibulae, two from An- Heraion are one arched fibula with a very dritsena and the Olympia fibulae, Ol 1009 small catch plate, AH 836, and two island and 1011, are considered genuinely Thes type fibulae, AH 881 and AH 880. AH salian, whereas the bulk ofthe Argive 881, with birds both on the catch and on Heraion fibulae as well as most ofthe other the bow (Fig. 25), is possibly an Arcadian fibulae from outside Thessaly are con variety, whereas AH 880, with a triangu sidered variants ofthe Thessalian type. A

73 Fig. 39 (A - C). Athens. National Museum. Plate fibula. NM 14033. AH 879. Fig. 39 A - B Museum photos. Fig. 39 C Drawing.

(868)

Fig. 39 C Fig. 40. Athens. National Museum. Fragmentary platefibuale. AH 867 - 868. Drawings. From AH II, pi. LXXXV

Central Greek as well as a Peloponnesian found on the other Thessalian or Thessal workshop are possibilities. B. Philipp does ian type fibulae, it may be an indication not localize the place ofmanufacture, that AH 879 was actually manufactured at whereas other scholars advocate an Arca the sanctuary.231 dian origin for most fibulae found in the Among the plate fibulae at the Argive Peloponnese. The arch fragments, of Heraion are also examples ofBlinkenberg which most ofthe Argive Heraion fibulae Type VIII, the so-called Attic-Boiotian consist, cannot contribute to the discus fibulae which developed in MG Attica sion. Their chronology is late 8th - early and had their main LG production in 7th Cent. BC. Boiotia. There is one fragment ofa bow Only AH 879 (NM 14033) is well pre with three disks, AH 858, six stems, AH served, although badly worn (Fig. 39). It 859 - 860 and 862 - 865, and two uncer measures 8.7 cm. in length and 5.2 cm. in tain stem fragments, AH 861 and 866, as height. Along the border ofthe inside of well as two fragments which comprise the the fibula, the decoration is still observ lower part ofthe stem and the corner of able, a rather crudely engraved cross-pat the plate, AH 867 - 868 (Fig. 40). Most tern which leaves a central square open fragments have incised decoration, on the and apparently undecorated. A possible stems ofGeometric ornaments, on the engraved ornamentation ofthe outside of plates ofanimal figures, only one ofwhich the fibula cannot be observed. As this spe is definitely a horse (Fig. 40 b). The fig cific kind oflinear ornamentation is not ures are framed by zigzags between double

74 ^^Sf If

to 1 —f£» *Sh t ~ . - -*• -H31

Fig. 41. Athens. NationalMuseum. Platefibula. Argive Heraion. Fig. 42. Athens. NationalMuseum. Platefibula. Argive Heraion. From Hampe 1936, pi. 17. Drawing. From Blegen 1939, 441, fig. 28 B.

lines and the corner decoration consists of ofthe men are disproportionately large horizontal lines nearest the stem, chequer and point towards a date some time after pattern (AH 867) or diagonal lines (AH 700 BC. (Figs. 41 and 42).253 868) and near the figure decoration a se The earliest Boiotian plate fibulae are ries oftriangles.252 MG II; plate fibulae with figure decora One fragmentary Boiotian plate fibula tion ofmore than one figure began short was found in Blegen's excavations. Almost ly after 725 BC, a date which is provided the whole catch-plate ofa very large fibu by one ofthe latest fibulae with a single la is preserved, measuring 14.5 cm. in figure from a securely dated tomb context length and 8.5 cm. in width. The figure at Lerna.2"'4 Most likely all the examples scene is framed on both sides by a double from the Argive Heraion belong to the zigzag line and it has the same corner dec two quarter centuries on either side of oration as AH 867. Two apparently un 700 BC. armed men stand facing each other; they K. DeVries considers the Lerna fibula a are drawn in outline with the normal zig Boiotian import, but B. Philipp compares zag filling oftheir bodies. In the field are it with AH 867 and 868 and a Tegean fib scattered rosettes and stars and in the cen ula and shows that about 40 ofthe then tre a strange curved object, also in outline, known LG fibulae came from the Pelo with a filling ofzigzags. Hampe identified ponnese, compared to 70 from Boiotia it as a bird; it differs considerably from the and 30 from other regions outside Central normal bird representations ofthese fibu Greece. She considers the existence of a lae in being thin and distorted. The heads Peloponnesian production quite possible.

75 The remaining Argive Heraion fibulae of Neighbouring the type are badly preserved but may, as votive deposits suggested by Phillip, be connected with the Lerna fibula and several other fibulae The few fibulae from neighbouring de from the Peloponnese which include a posits are, with one exception, oftypes considerable number from Arcadia. I agree known from the Argive Heraion. In the with Philipp in her attribution ofthese Hera sanctuary west ofthe Heraion was fibulae to a Peloponnesian workshop.255 found a fibula with a leaf-shaped bow and The Blegen fibula is isolated stylistically incised decoration of crossed lines (Fig. but it may be just a late example ofthe 35). The fibula type had its origin in the same class as the other AH fibulae. Submycenaean Period, but lasted into the However, I cannot accept the attribu Archaic Period with a large distribution tion to the Argolid, advanced by Kilian, area, including Thessaly, Epirus and the Philipp and other scholars, ofthe greater Peloponnese as well as Southern Italy.258 part ofthe above fibulae as well as oftwo At the same sanctuary were two simple other bronzes with stylistically related en arched fibulae besides a large one oftwist graved decoration. One is the Tegea disk ed rectangular wire ofthe same type as where a goddess holding poppies is stand AH 844 - 845.(Fig. 35).259 ing on the back ofan animal and with a A violin fibula type with two small riv large bird to her right. The other is the ets for a decorative addition in another bronze horse in Bonn with an engraved material is known from the votive deposit bird on its neck. For the former object I ofProsymna Tomb XXVI and the leaf- follow Voyatzis in regarding the disk as a shaped bow with incised decoration ofa local Tegean work and the stylistically re large Boiotian plate fibula from Tomb IX lated engraved fibulae as Arcadian; the (Fig. 36). It has incised lines along the horse statuette I cannot see as an Argive edge and six such lines follow the longitu work, although I fully agree with the view dinal axis.260 that its engraved decoration is stylistically related to that of the above bronzes.236 Considering that the very varied Arcadian Argos Geometric bronze work found inspiration In the Late Geometric/Early Archaic in many Greek regions, I regard an Arca sanctuaries ofArgos there are several ex dian workshop for the fibulae and the amples ofthe same Greek Geometric fib other objects with similar engraved deco ula types represented at the Argive Hera ration as much more likely than an Argive ion. one.257 In the Athena sanctuary on top ofthe Most Argive Heraion fibulae were im Larissa hill were several arched fibulae, e.g. ports, which like several other groups of VollgraffBr.1855, without specific charac Greek Geometric bronzes at this sanctuary, teristics, and B 67 and B 68, the former showed connections in particular with with a triangular catch, the latter with a Thessaly, Central Greece and Arcadia. twisted arch (Figs. 32 and 43) and one The insular types offibulae have been with twisted arch and triangular catch like mostly shown to be either Thessalian or AH 844 - 845 (Fig. 43).261 One more Arcadian variants, apart from a few fibulae arched fibula comes from the Aphrodi with a wide distribution area.Judging sion, No. 72/1013; thus its absolute date from the plate fibula ofspecific character, is presumably Archaic.262 AH 879 ofThessalian type, there may Also the violin type fibula with rivets have been a limited local fibula production for fastening an ivory or bone plate is rep at the Argive Heraion around the year 700 resented at the Athena sanctuary, B 22 BC and, if so, it presumably also produced (Fig. 43) and in the same sanctuary were simpler fibula forms as e.g. some ofthe two fragmentary spectacle fibulae of arched fibulae. bronze, VollgraffBr. 1855.263

76 Fig. 43. Argos. Museum. Athena Sanctuary. Larissa. Fibulae andpins. Photo Ecole Francaise d'Archeologie, Athenes. Neg. no. 22649.

From Vollgraff's excavations ofthe rings. OfBr. 1854, only a fragment ofthe Athena sanctuary come an Thessalian type centre ofthe arch is preserved, ofa trian plate fibula and two insular plate fibulae. gular, almost pyramidal form with two Vollgraff Br. 1854 is well preserved; the rings originally on either side; it is closely arch has a central globe with a rather large related to a fibula from Crete of double-conical globe on either side and its Blinkenberg's Group IV 2, as well as to plate ends above in a small cylindrical one ofthe two fibulae ofthis type found knob. Its closest counterparts are found in at Olympia. This type ofinsular plate fib Blinkenberg Group VII 8; presumably it is ulae is rare in Mainland Greece. All the a Peloponnesian variant ofa Thessalian above plate fibulae from Argos may be fibula. The two insular plate fibulae are Late Geometric or Early Archaic.264 without counterparts at the Argive Her There are MG/LG fibulae in Argive aion. They both belong to Blinkenberg, Geometric tombs, including Boiotian Group IV One, Br. 1855, is very close to plate fibulae (of which there possibly also some fibulae from Schiff s tomb on Thera was a small fragment in the Athena sanc ofBlinkenberg Type IV 11 and has coun tuary), and there are a few fibulae at other terparts also at Tegea. It is well preserved, sites in the Argolid.26'' only the end ofits plate is broken; it has a As regards the fibulae, there seems to central globe between two double-conical be some correspondence in finds between

77 the Argive Heraion and Argos. Neverthe togeometric pins offered at the Argive less, among the few fibulae from sanctuar Heraion were both of Kilian-Dirlmeier's ies at Argos, two are ofan insular type not Type B, decorated with a large globe and represented in the large body ofmaterial an upper end disk, in one case partly of from the Argive Heraion and rare in the iron.271 It is this pin type which develops Greek Mainland with the exception of into the earliest Geometric pins, classified Arcadia and Olympia. by Kilian-Dirlmeier as Geometric I.272 The Geometric pins which Jacobsthal divided into three main groups were clas Pins sified by Kilian-Dirlmeier into more than This part ofmy work can hardly be more 20 groups, ofwhich several again were di than a summary ofthe results ofthe ex vided into subgroups, Geometric I thus tremely thorough study of Greek bronze into I A - I D273 Like Protogeometric B, pins in the Peloponnese by I. Kilian-Dirl- Geometric I is decorated with a globe and 266 meier. an end disk and it has a small decorative The bronze pins which fastened the part above the disk. woman's peplos in Attica as well as in the Geometric I A is simple without any Peloponnese from the Submycenaean Pe rings on either side ofthe globe; both riod onwards and which were also used shaft and stem (between globe and disk) for male dress, were rare outside the are round. The type is known all over Greek Mainland.267 In the tombs they Central Greece and the Peloponnese with were found singly, in pairs or in rather examples also at the Argive Heraion. As large numbers, but we know very little of immediate typological development of the way in which they were offered in the Protogeometric pins, it reaches back into sanctuaries.268 EG; it is well known in MG and lasts into LG.274 Geometric I B is characterized by dif The Argive Heraion ferences in the sections ofthe upper part There are offerings ofpins in hero cults as ofthe shaft and stem; when one part is well as in sanctuaries ofmale gods, but round in section, the other is quadrangu they are most abundant in sanctuaries of lar. There are closed EG tomb contexts at goddesses. As pointed out by K. Kilian, Mycenae and the type apparently does not pin offerings greatly outnumber fibulae in continue after MG. There are relatively four Greek sanctuaries, all ofwhich are few examples known, four ofwhich were Peloponnesian: the Artemis Orthia Sanct found at the Argive Heraion; of these, uary at Sparta, the Athena Alea Sanctuary three have tremolo decoration at the at Tegea, the Heraion of Perachora and upper part ofthe shaft. Geometric I B is the Argive Heraion. At the lastmentioned known also from other sites in the Argolid site, 110 bronze fibulae were found as as well as from Corinth and Perachora, compared with between 700 and 800 pins Delphi, Olympia, Sparta and Tegea.275 ofordinary size and more than 2.000 of Geometric I C has a quadrangular or the so-called "spits". Only in one case do hectagonal section ofthe stem. It covers we know that the pin was made as a spe both the MG and the LG periods and, cific dedication to Hera. Probably some of judging from its distribution area, it seems the pins had actually been in use before to be essentially a Corinthian type, al being offered.269 The pins were found all though it is also represented in Central over the sanctuary. Greece. There are a few examples in the I. Kilian - Dirlmeier observed that the Argolid, one pin at Tiryns and three at the earliest pins at the Argive Heraion were of Argive Heraion.276 Protogeometric types and might be taken On the other hand, Geometric ID as evidence ofvotive offerings in the early with a quadrangular stem and a round Post-Mycenaean Period.270 The two Pro shaft which changes just below the globe

78 pins. This distribution pattern suggests an Arcadian production.278 Geometric III with three globes has a wide distribution area. Geometric III A 1 consists ofonly one pin from Olympia, whereas pins of Geometric III A 2 were found almost over the whole ofthe Pelo ponnese, although with only a few pins at most sites except for the Corinthia and the Argive Heraion. There is only one fragment at another site in the Argolid, Tiryns, and a few examples outside the Peloponnese. The chronology of Geome tric III is MG and LG, lasting into the 7th Cent. BC. By far, the greatest number of Geometric III pins come from the Argive Heraion which, as observed by Rolley, is also the only certain provenance for two ofthe subgroups, Geometric III A 3 ( Fig. Fig. 44. Athens. National into a rhombic or quadrangular section, 46, AH 2623) and III B. Kilian-Dirlmeier Museum. Pins. Geometric I. often with tremolo decoration, is ex localizes the production of Geometric III Argive Heraion. tremely favoured at the Argive Heraion to the Corinthia where there are five ex Photo American School of (with about 350 examples) as well as else amples of III A 2 at Perachora as well as Classical Studies, Athens. where in the Argolid and the Corinthia. about a dozen from Corinth, including There are datable contexts in the EG Peri three tombs with two or more pins. For od, and the type continues into LG, with subgroups III A 3 and III B, I consider a an overwhelming majority of finds in the local production at the Argive Heraion as Northeast Peloponnese where it must most likely, possibly influenced by the have been locally manufactured, probably Corinthian production of III A 2.279 at several sites. However, there are finds in The following four groups, Geometric the sanctuaries ofArcadia and Laconia, as IV, V, VI and VII, are decorated with sev well as one specimen from Messenia and eral globes, the first with four, the second one from the island ofAigina. It is pos with five and the last two with one large sible that a corresponding production central globe and either three (Geometric took place on Rhodes (LG finds at Lindos VI) or four (Geometric VII) smaller and Ialysos). It is worth noting that it does globes both above and below it. All four not appear to be found at Olympia. (Fig. types have a very limited production. 27 (Geometric I D, Centre) and Fig. 44 Geometric IV is represented by only one (Geometric I A, C and D)277 pin in each ofthe sanctuaries: Athena Geometric II has two globes separated Alea at Tegea, Artemis Orthia at Sparta, by plain elements, the upper globe as a the Heraion ofPerachora and the Argive rule larger than the lower one. Kilian- Heraion.280 Geometric V was apparently Dirlmeier sees her pin class Geometric II, produced throughout the 8th Cent. BO, for which she also has several subgroups, but in limited numbers. The largest group as an intermediary between Geometric I (11 pins) is at the Argive Heraion, several and III; but there are no datable contexts. ofwhich have tremolo decoration (Fig. 46, Less than 20 examples were found at the AH 2631 and AH 2633). There are only a Argive Heraion and a few others at other few examples at Corinth, Perachora, Olym sites in the Argolid, the Corinthia and on pia, Sparta, Tegea, Delphi and Samos281 Aigina. There are some Geometric II pins Ofthe known six examples of Geometric from Laconia and many from Arcadia, in VI, one comes from the Argive Heraion particular Tegea with between 20 and 30 and one from the Hera sanctuary west of

79 Fig.45. Athens. National Museum. "Mehrkopfnadeln". Argive Heraion. Photo American School of Classical Studies, Athens. it, two from Olympia and two from Per achora. Like Geometric IV - V , they are not found outside the Peloponnese. They are dated to LG and the 7th Cent. BC.282 Geometric VII consists ofonly two pins, both from Perachora.283 A great number offragments which cannot be exactly clas sified within the groups Geometric II - VII were found at the Argive Heraion (Fig. 46).284 Fig. 46. So-called "Spits". Drawings. From AH II, In Geometric VIII - XI, the elements pi. CXXXII. ofconstruction do not form separate parts, but only differentiated details of head and shaft, and the same applies to except for Geometric X, each group is Geometric XII which also has a reduced also represented at the Argive Heraion.28"' disk ( Fig. 27 above, Geometric XI, and Geometric XIII - XV, of the same general right, Geometric XII). They are chiefly type and also with reduced disks, must be found in Laconia and Arcadia and must be Central Peloponnesian, too. Only Geo ofCentral Peloponnesian manufacture. metric XIII is represented at the Argive Most pin types are dated to the second Heraion (with two pins), while there is half ofthe 8th Cent. BC. and the 7th one fragment of Geometric XV at Tiryns. Cent. BC There are limited finds outside Ofthe LG Geometric XVI , also Central the Central Peloponnese, in the Corin Peloponnesian, there are about 15 exam thia, including Perachora, at Tiryns, ples at the Argive Heraion. Geometric Olympia and Delphi and on Samos and, XVII is, apart from a single find at Tiryns,

80 known only from Arcadia where its centre Heraion (Figs. 27 and 45) and Sparta. Her ofproduction must have been.286 One pin variants B and E - G were found only at fragment from the Argive Heraion cannot Sparta, H and I almost exclusively there with certainty be attributed to either of except for a few examples in other Cen the classes, Geometric XII - XVII.287 tral and Western Peloponnesian sanctuar Hammer pins, Geometric XVIII, some ies. Type K comprised different pin types, ofwhich had iron heads, were found in which were mostly found in Laconia but tombs ofArgos in a gradual development were represented also at the Argive Hera from EG to LG and presumably continued ion, Perachora and in Arcadia, while vari into the 7th Cent. BC. The later pins ant L, mostly found in Laconia and at were decorated with larger side disks. Un Olympia, is represented by only one find doubtedly, they are products ofArgos. at the Argive Heraion and one in Achaia. There are several examples at Tiryns, one The more widely distributed groups (A at Corinth and some at Tegea, but they and C - D) may have been manufactured seem to be absent at many Peloponnesian at the Argive Heraion as well as at other sanctuaries, as e.g. Olympia, Artemis Or sites; the variants ofpresumably Laconian thia at Sparta and the Heraion ofPeracho manufacture (B and E - I), however, were ra.288 There are about 30 hammer pins at not represented at the Argive Heraion, at the Argive Heraion, although not ofthe all.293 type XVIII A which is found only at Ar The so-called "Pilzkopf-Nadeln", pre gos and possibly was the earliest ofthis sumably also a Laconian product ofthe type. Most examples at the Argive Hera Late Geometric and Early Archaic Peri ion belong to XVIII C (Fig. 27, left).289 ods, are among the few Geometric pin On the other hand, the following types not represented at the sanctuary of groups are rare at the Argive Heraion. Of the Argive Heraion.294 Geometric XIX with a conical head, pre Not all roll pins, were recorded by sumably Arcadian and also lasting into the Kilian-Dirlmeier, apparently because of 7th Cent. BC, there are only a few finds the difficulty in distinguishing Geome at the Argive Heraion and one at Tiryns.290 tric/Archaic pins from earlier and later Neither Geometric XX, the so-called flat ones.295 However, roll pins are known head pin, nor Geometric XXI are repre from Greek sites without any Mycenaean sented at the Argive Heraion. The latter is connections and there are a few roll pins a West Peloponnesian type, not known at the Argive Heraion.296 from the Argolid at all.291 Some pins at the Argive Heraion are oftypes not immedi Neighbouring ately classifiable in the above groups. 292 Votive Deposits Ofthe remaining Geometric pin types, the so-called "Mehrkopf-Nadeln" (Jacobs- At the Hera sanctuary west ofthe Her thai Group III) with a vertical row of aion, there are examples ofthe following beads were found in almost all Peloponne classes of Geometric pins: Geometric I D, sian regions as well as in Northwest Geometric VI, a hammer pin Geometric Greece including Ithaca, at Delphi, on XVIII and three "Mehrkopf-Nadeln" Aegina and in the Western Greek colo (Types A and C), all types represented also nies. Their date seems to be the second at the Argive Heraion.29' half ofthe 8th - 7th Cent. BC. They were Ofthe few pins from votive deposits in found in most Peloponnesian sanctuaries the Mycenaean tombs around the Heraion and were especially popular at the Argive only two are of Geometric type; one of Heraion where they number more than the so-called "Mehrkopf- Nadeln" (Type 200, as well as at Sparta. According to I. C) was found in Tomb XL and a so-called Kilian-Dirlmeyer, her types A and C -D "Pilzkopf-Nadel" in Tomb IX (Fig. 36). had a widespread distribution, including Apart from this pin, one in Olympia and a both major finding places, the Argive few in Messenia, all pins ofthe type come

8i from Laconia. According to Kilian-Dirl longs to Central Peloponnesian, possibly meier the first two are not Laconian; Arcadian Group Geometric II, which also however, she offers no evidence for her had a limited presence at the Argive Hera conclusions, and at any rate, their manu ion.301 facture must be under Laconian influences. Geometric III, of Northeast Pelopon This pin type is not represented in the nesian, primarily Corinthian manufacture large collection ofpins at the Argive Her with one, possibly two subgroups presum aion.298 In contrast with the many pin of ably having been produced at the Argive ferings in the Argive Heraion, the votive Heraion, is as far as I know not represent deposits in neighbouring Mycenaean ed in Argos,302 nor are the rather limited tombs give the impression ofa different groups of Geometric IV - VI, with a few tradition with only two Geometric pins, finds at the Argive Heraion.303 one ofwhich is a type foreign to the col The Central Peloponnesian groups, lection at the Hera sanctuary. Geometric VIII - XII, ofwhich a few were found at the Argive Heraion are not Argos known from Argos, nor is Geometric XIII, also not well represented at the Ar In the sanctuaries ofArgos, pins do not give Heraion.304 Geometric XIV - XV appear in such overwhelming numbers as and Geometric XVII were found neither at the Heraion ofArgos. Apart from a few in the Argive Heraion nor in the sanctuar examples from Vollgraff s excavations of ies ofArgos,3lb whereas at both sites there the Athena Sanctuary on top ofthe Laris are a few examples ofCentral Peloponne sa hill and some fragments of Geometric sian Geometric XVI pins. Two ofthe type, but presumably oflater date, in the three Geometric XVI pins from Argos Aphrodision, they are all listed in Kilian- come from the Athena sanctuary on top Dirlmeier's publication. As the bronzes ofthe Larissa (Fig. 32) and there seems to from the sanctuaries in Argos do not pre be another fragment in the Aphrodi cede the Late Geometric Period, insight sion.306 into the pin material from Geometric Ar On the other hand, as regards Geome gos must be sought also from the tomb tric XVIII, the hammer pins, it is in Argos finds. In the Geometric tombs ofArgos, that we see their gradual development pins continue from Submycenaean - Pro throughout the Geometric Period and togeometric types. To a certain degree down into the 7th Cent BC and, from the pins ofboth sanctuaries and tombs at this LG Period, in the sanctuaries (Fig. 32 left). site represent the same classes as at the Ar The production ofpins, Geometric. give Heraion. There are, however, also XVIII, must be located in Argos, whereas differences.299 one ofthe subgroups, Geometric XVIII OfGeometric pins, there are examples A, probably the earliest, is not represented ofGeometric I A as well as I B in Argos at the Argive Heraion at all.307 tombs, but not of Geometric I C, which Of Geometric XIX, with three exam is basically a Corinthian type with a few ples at the Argive Heraion, there are five examples in the Argolid, one at Tiryns pins from tombs in Argos and possibly a and three at the Argive Heraion. By far few fragments from the Aphrodision.308 the most common Geometric I pins in Geometric XX, the flat-head pin, was not the tombs ofArgos were Geometric I D, represented at the Argive Heraion, but also well represented at the Argive Hera there are several finds elsewhere in the Ar ion. Definitely a Northeast Peloponnesian golid (Mycenae, Tiryns) as well as in Ar product, it may well have been manufact gos itself (tomb finds from MG II on ured at both sites, Argos and the Argive wards). According to Kilian-Dirlmeier Heraion.300 there was a production centre in Argos as According to Kilian-Dirlmeier, one well as in Arcadia.309 fragment ofan iron pin from a tomb be The so-called "Mehrkopf-Nadeln"

82 which were found in large numbers at the XX, which were apparently manufactured Argive Heraion are also frequent in Argos, in Argos as well as in Arcadia.312 in tombs as well as in sanctuaries, and in From the Geometric pin finds, espe general comprise the same subtypes (Types cially the local Northeast Pelopponesian A, C and K) (Figs. 32 and 43).310 manufacture ofmore specific types, one Both at the Argive Heraion and at Ar gets a clear impression ofdifferences gos we have a continuous development of between the two sites chiefly studied here bronze pins throughout the Geometric as well as of closer connections between period and lasting into the following cen the Argive Heraion and the Corinthia turies. Foley's observation ofdifferences than between that sanctuary and Argos. between pin types in the tombs and sanc In other respects, both sites seem to be tuaries ofArgos in the 7th Cent. BC do part ofsome ofthe same traditions com not apply to the Argolid in LG, the only mon in the Peloponnese, although partic Geometric phase where we have compar ularly favoured in the Northeast Pelopon ative material from the Argos sanctuaries. nese. In Peloponnesian sanctuaries as well In several cases pin types known at the Ar as tombs were found very long pins, give Heraion were included in the burial which may be undecorated simple pins, equipment at other Northeast Peloponne pointed at both ends, or may belong to sian sites and this explanation cannot be the above pin types, primarily Geometric used for differences between the pin types IA and ID and Geometric III - VI, the at the Argive Heraion and Argos.311 so-called "spits", often showing tremolo Comparing the pin types found at the decoration (Fig. 46).313 They generally Argive Heraion and in Argos - for the measure 30 - 40 cm. or more, the longest earlier part ofthe Geometric period in known examples from the Argive Heraion tombs only, from LG onwards also in the even in their fragmentary state, measuring Argos sanctuaries - one observes a certain around 80 cm.314 Although definitely of correspondence in the material ofthe two ordinary pin types, such very long pins sites, as regards the more general Pelopon could probably not be used for the custo nesian types such as Geometric I A and mary fastening ofthe peplos on each the so-called "Mehrkopf-Nadeln" as well shoulder. In the tombs ofthe Argolid they as some Northeast Peloponnesian pin are sometimes placed crosswise in tubes types, e.g. Geometric I D. It is no wonder and in the Corinthia they were in a few that the large body ofmaterial at the Ar instances found alongside the body, per give Heraion is so much more varied, haps as a separate offering. A few such while some types represented here are ab tubes were found at the Argive Hera sent in Argos, as e.g. Geometric IV - VI ion.31'' As suggested by Courbin, the pins with a very limited production or the placed in tubes may in the tombs have Central Peloponnesian types of Geometric been used for the shroud and, in the sanc VIII - XII. However, when it comes to tuaries, were perhaps sometimes offered in some Northeast Peloponnesian types, an analogous way.316 For long pins in the there are striking differences. For example, sanctuaries, Jacobsthal suggests a ritual the MG/LG Corinthian pin types, Geo character, Kilian-Dirlmeier a representa metric I C and Geometric III (presum tional one, whereas Foley distinguishes ably manufactured in the Argive Heraion between long pins oftype Geometric III as well as in the Corinthia) both appear to for which she re-introduces the term be absent in Argos. On the other hand, "spits" and the actual function ofroasting early hammer pins, Geometric XVIII A, meat, and Geometric ID which she be were found in Argos only, not in either lieves were meant especially for the cult the Argive Heraion or the Corinthia, and statue.317 I am inclined to agree with in the very large collection of pins at the Jacobsthal or Kilian-Dirlmeier and do not Argive Heraion there is not a single frag find either of Foley's suggestions convin ment ofthe flat-head pins, Geometric cing. Jacobsthal had already given good

83 arguments against the former theory and is very common at the Argive Heraion as regards the latter there is no evidence (AH 1779 - 1793). It varies in length that the find spots ofthe long pins include from 4.5 - 6.6 cm. and may have a raised the Old Temple Terrace, where the cult central axis; in many cases, the sheet has statue was placed in the Archaic Temple. been bent along the edges, thus presum Apart from a few long pins in the Altar ably serving as a coating for objects in a Area, the majority come from the West different material. Two more objects show Building and the Southern Slope or the tremolo decoration (AH 1847 - 1848). In Back ofSouth Stoa.318 the publication they are described as Although present in tombs, I do not leaves. They have a raised central axis and know ofany certain finds oflong pins in a small tang and were decorated on both the sanctuaries ofArgos. However, another sides; apparently, they were cast and after tradition connected with the offering of wards hammered.32"' pins seems to characterize the sanctuaries ofArgos as well as the Argive Heraion and Neighbouring other Peloponnesian sanctuaries: often the Votive Deposits pins were bent, not just in the wellknown single bend ofthe shaft meant for hinder The Hera sanctuary west ofthe Heraion ing further use (Figs. 27, 32 and 44 - 46),319 as well as some ofthe votive deposits of but into various complicated ornaments the Prosymna tombs yielded examples of such as loops and spirals. For example, one Protocorinthian skyphos and pyxis types. ofthe pins from the Athena sanctuary on One kind ofbronze vase not represented the Larissa formed a double loop, another at the Argive Heraion or the neighbour a quadrangle with small spirals along the ing small Hera sanctuary was found in the edges, a specific type not found at the Ar votive deposit of Prosymna Tomb XL, the give Heraion but which apparently had so-called "Kalotten-Schale"(Fig. 47). Pre close parallels in Arcadia.320 sumably of Cypriot origin, the bowl has a very early development in Greece having G. Other Objects been found throughout the Geometric Period in tombs ofArgos.326 The Argive Heraion

Among the Argive Heraion bronzes there Argos are no vases ofsecure Geometric date, al I do not know ofany Geometric bronze though it is possible that the Protocorin- vases from the Argos sanctuaries, but the thian pyxis and skyphos fragments reach Argos tomb finds differ from those ofthe back into the late 8th Cent. BC.321 Argive Heraion and the neighbouring There are a few remnants ofMacedo small votive deposits in the apparent ab nian horse trappings and fragments ofcar sence ofthe Protocorinthian skyphos and riages, but like most implements and in pyxis types. The most common bronze struments, they are presumably to be dated bowl is the so-called "Kalotten-Schale", after 700 BC322 and the same probably applies unknown at the Argive Heraion although to the few fragments ofspears.323 There are found in one ofthe Prosymna votive de- no Geometric votive finds ofdefinitely posits. military character, although one fragmen There are examples ofthe use oftre tary object, AH 2737 (NM 13990), is very molo decoration at Argos; but apparently close to the Geometric shield or belt buck no bronze sheet with this ornamentation les, well known, in particular, from Olym was found in the Geometric sanctuaries of pia. It shows, however, no trace ofan inter Argos. I do not know ofexact parallels for nal ring fastening nor any circle ornamen one large flat bronze ornament (Fig. 32, tation like the Geometric buckles.324 Upper Row, Centre), but it somewhat re Bronze sheet with tremolo decoration sembles an ornament from Thermon -

84 Fig. 47. Prosymna. Tomb XL. "Kalottenschale". Photo American School ofClassical Studies, Athens.

which Kilian connects with votive swords hand, not only votive arrow heads, but from Tegea and Sparta.328 In the Athena also miniature weapons and shields are sanctuary on top ofthe Larissa as well as at known from Arcadian sanctuaries, includ the Aphrodision were found votive arrow ing the Artemis sanctuary at Lusoi and the heads, a type which is also known from Athena sanctuary at Tegea.331 It is worth Tegea, but not parallelled at the Argive noticing, however, the differences in vase Heraion or neighbouring votive depos types; Corinthian vase forms apparently its.329 Although it is a well known fact that were not being produced or imported in local bronze manufacture at Geometric bronze to Argos and there seems to be a Argos specialized in weapons and armour, complete absence at the Argive Heraion as a bronze cuirass and several helmets hav well as at the neighbouring small Hera ing been found in Geometric tombs of sanctuary ofthe favoured Argos bronze Argos,330 there are no such votive dedica bowl, the so-called "Kalotten-Schale". Its tions in the sanctuaries of Argos apart appearance in one ofthe votive deposits of from the above-mentioned bronze arrows. the Prosymna tombs cannot be used to in For this group ofvaried objects, the fer dedications to Hera. differences between the Argive Heraion and Argos appear chiefly to be connected H. Conclusions with the divergent specialization oflocal Geometric bronze production at the two In concluding my study of Greek Geo sites. It is not surprising that objects of metric bronzes at the Argive Heraion, a military character were not considered ap chronological division into three main propriate dedications at the specifically fe phases seems appropriate. The first covers male sanctuary ofthe Argive Heraion and, the initial Post-Mycenaean phase, not ac apart from votive arrow heads, such dedi tually included in this study, until about cations were apparently absent also in the 800 BC (PG/EG/MG I); the second is, in local sanctuaries ofArgos. On the other general, equivalent to MG II, lasting until

85 ca. 750 BC, and the third extends into the tion; the pins of specific Corinthian origin early 7th Cent. BC (LG/Subgeometric).332 reach only the Argive Heraion, not Argos, For the first two phases, the study material whereas the typical Argos pins in the be is very restricted and since the Argos ginning seem to be restricted to that site sanctuaries have not yielded any bronzes alone, not finding their way to the Argive definitely earlier than the LG Period,33' Heraion or other sites in the Northeast the tomb contexts ofArgos must supply Peloponnese. Neither at the Argive Hera the comparative material. ion nor at Argos do the bronze finds indi Only two bronze pins at the Argive cate relations outside this region. Heraion are of PG types, but it is suggested In the course ofMG II, the first half of that they may be later dedications,334 and the 8th Cent. BC, the above pin types definite evidence ofa possible Post-Myce continue, while Geometric III and pos naean cultic activity at the site before 900 sibly also the Central Peloponnesian pin BC will presumably have to wait for the type, Geometric II, make their first ap publication ofthe early Post-Mycenaean pearance. Ofthe latter group which has a pottery.33'' comparatively good representation at the During the 9th Cent. BC (EG/MG I), Argive Heraion, there may be one frag pin offerings continue in increasing num ment from Argos. Ofthe former, how bers and still constitute the only certain ever, the production ofwhich is primarily bronze remnants at the site. Pin types, Corinthian with a probable secondary Geometric I and XVIII, all begin in this production at the Argive Heraion, there is period, Geometric IC during MG I, the not a single example elsewhere in the Ar others already in EG. Geometric I A pins golid, including Argos. As Geometric III were found all over the Peloponnese, A pins were found in the Corinthia in while Geometric IB and the much favou tombs as well as in sanctuaries, the differ red type, Geometric I D, are of Northeast ence in their distribution pattern in the Peloponnesian manufacture, found in the Argolid cannot be due to different tradi Corinthia as well as in the Argolid, in tions for votive dedications and burial cluding the settlement ofArgos. On the equipment.338 other hand, both Geometric IC and Geo During MG II, there is definitely one metric XVIII, the hammer pins, have a tomb in Argos with Geometric XVIII B limited distribution area. Only four exam pins, a type which is also found in the ples ofthe former type, which seems to Athena sanctuary on top ofthe Larissa as be ofCorinthian manufacture, were found well as at the Argive Heraion. Whether in the Argolid, three at the Argive Hera the examples in the sanctuaries are MG II ion and one at Tiryns; it is not recorded or LG is difficult to tell.339 from Argos. The hammer pins were defi The flat-head pins, Geometric XX, nitely manufactured at Argos. One ofits which were produced in Argos as well as types, Geometric XVIII A, possibly the in Arcadia, begin in MG II. Because of earliest, has been found only in tombs of their lance-shaped head, their function has that settlement, while Geometric XVIII been disputed; but Kilian -Dirlmeier B - C are found at the Argive Heraion as regards them as pins. At any rate, in spite well as at Tegea and Geometric XVIII C ofa local manufacture at Argos and finds also at Tiryns and in the Corinthia.336 also in Tiryns and Mycenae, they are not With the presence at the Argive Hera among the pins offered at the Argive Her- 340 ion ofPG as well as EG pins, I see no rea aion. son to doubt that the sanctuary existed at The bronzes at the Argive Heraion least as early as the first half ofthe 9th now show more variation than formerly, Cent. BC and possibly, although not defi possibly including other kinds ofpersonal nitely, even earlier.337 In spite ofits limit ornaments as well, e.g. some arm rings ed character, the material from this period and fibula types, but certainly the earliest shows a definite tendency in its distribu tripods, the Solid Cast Tripods, Subgroup

86 II, which were not dedicated in any other with an Arcadian parallel at the Larissa Northeast Peloponnesian sanctuary.341 sanctuary does not have direct counter The differences in the distribution pat parts at the Argive Heraion.343 tern ofthe bronze pins, noted for the 9th Visitors to the Argive Heraion appar Cent. BC, are still observable in the first ently came from many Greek regions. half of the 8th Cent BC. The Argive Her There are Laconian horse figures, a few aion continues its rather close relations Laconian pin types and possibly also Laco with the Corinthia, relations which are nian bird pendants, although they are not observable for Argos, and although more likely imitations ofArcadian origin. both main sites, the Argive Heraion and Connections further west in the Pelopon Argos, have examples of Central Pelopon nese are slighter; West Peloponnesian pin nesian pin types, the specific types differ. types, as e.g. Geometric XXI, are not rep At this time, the Argive Heraion appears resented in the Argolid at all. From Arca to be the only Northeast Peloponnesian dia there are horses and bird figures as well sanctuary ofsuch importance that it has as pendants, pins and fibulae. A few insu monumental tripods. lar type fibulae may in fact also be of Ar During the LG/Subgeometric Period, cadian origin. By far the closest relations from around 750 BC until shortly after with Arcadia seem to be with Tegea, 700 BC, the Greek bronzes from the Ar where even bronze statuettes manufac give Heraion reflect a rich and varied ac tured at the Argive Heraion were dedi tivity at the sanctuary: the types represent cated. Some pin types are of Corinthian all kinds ofpersonal ornaments, as well as origin as well as some animal figures and vessels and animal figures; their origins the most characteristic vase forms. From give evidence ofrelations with many Central Greece come several bird figures, Greek regions; and the monumental tri at least one horse figure, arm rings and pods indicate the accelerating importance possibly fibulae. The connections are par of the sanctuary. ticularly close with Kalapodi, while there The pins still constitute by far the larg is no certain presence ofAthenian bronz est group ofitems, surpassing in numbers es. It is not always possible to distinguish those of all other sanctuaries. Most ofthe definitely between Central Greek and above pin types continue and with the Thessalian bronzes, but there are undoub same differences in distribution pattern. tedly Thessalian fibulae and bird figures New types begin to appear, in particular, and the Argive Heraion also has a large Jacobsthal's Group III, the Geometric so- variety ofMacedonian personal orna called "Mehrkopf-Nadeln", the produc ments, arm rings, pendants and beads, and tion ofwhich lasts well into the 7th Cent. possibly also harnesses and carriages of BC. The two main sites, Argos and the Macedonian workmanship, although the Argive Heraion, have almost the same pin fragments ofthese finds are probably of types, Laconian types B and E - H are Post-Geometric date. Connections outside found at neither site, the more common the Greek Mainland are few. The genu types ofA and C at both. Only type D, inely insular fibulae are oftypes which which was primarily found at Sparta, is have parallels elsewhere in the Pelopon represented at the Argive Heraion as well nese and Central Greece and may not in as at Mycenae and Perachora, but not at dicate direct relations with the Greek is Argos.342 lands.344 The very long pins apparently form a The imported Greek Geometric Peloponnesian, in particular, a Northeast bronzes found at Argos are considerably Peloponnesian tradition, including the more sparse, and although in general they Corinthia as well as the Argolid and both represent almost the same external con main sites. Both sites also display examples nections, there are noticable differences. ofpins or wires bent into ornaments with Found in Argos are Central Peloponne loops, although the specific ornament sian, in particular, Arcadian pins and Area-

87 dian pendants, in both cases also showing during the LG Period, in particular, local particularly close connections with Tegea. bronze workshops do not appear to have Nevertheless the Arcadian pin types are been restricted to their original types, but not always the same at the two Argive sites invariably imitated and were subject to in and even pendants ofpresumably Tegean fluences from other regions as well, mak origin may differ in type. There are in Ar ing the general picture rather complex. gos Thessalian and Central Greek fibulae As far as the Argive Heraion is con types corresponding with those in the Ar cerned, the manufacture ofbronze stat give Heraion, but they are all ofPelopon uettes ofanimals apparently did not start nesian origin: original Thessalian fibulae until late in the 8th Cent. BC, under vari are not present in the Argos sanctuaries. ous stylistic influences, ofwhich those In the necropolis was found a Central from Arcadian bronze workshops were not Greek bird pendant ofa type different the least important. In spite ofthe finds of from those at the Argive Heraion. Neither Laconian bronzes at this sanctuary, Laco Thessalian nor Macedonian bronzes were nian influences on the bronze figure pro among the bronze imports in Argos. Al duction seem minimal; most Laconian though several finds show the same gener type birds display Arcadian details. Al al lines ofexternal relations, the differenc though there was a Geometric production es in detail suggest that the two sites did of human bronze figures at Argos, there is not have ties with the same bronze work no evidence for such a manufacture at the shops or the same groups of people in the Geometric Argive Heraion. Local pen various Greek regions.34'' dants, fibulae and arm rings at the Argive Apart from the above-mentioned Heraion are influenced by Macedonia, bronzes there are in Argos also insular fib Thessaly, Central Greece and the Central ulae oftypes rare in the Peloponnese and Peloponnese, in particular Arcadia. On not known from the Argive Heraion.346 the other hand, apart from a single pin It is no wonder that the Geometric type, produced both in Argos and Arcadia, bronzes at the Argive Heraion were so at Argos there are few examples ofactual much more varied than those at Argos, imitations in bronze ofpersonal orna but it seems worth noticing that the com ments from other Greek regions. Most paratively few Geometric bronzes known items seem to be imports.348 from the sanctuaries and the LG tombs in Some of the differences between the Argos comprise types not seen at the Ar Geometric bronzes at the Argive Heraion give Heraion, in spite ofthe overwhelm and Argos concern the relations with two ingly rich material at the latter. important Greek regions, Laconia and the From the bronzes characteristic ofthe Corinthia. During the LG Period, the dif various Greek Geometric sanctuaries, one ferences are observable not only in pin gets the impression ofa high degree of types as earlier, but more generally in the specialization. Most Peloponnesian re locally produced objects under external gions had a production of specific pin influences. While the Argive Heraion types and Arcadia, for example, seems to continues its close relations with the Co have specialized also in pendants and ani rinthia, seen at this date for example in ear mal figures, while to a large degree imitat rings and vase forms, Argos appears to be ing other regions in the production of more in touch with Laconia. It is difficult bird figures and fibulae. The sites and not to see the Argos warrior from Delphi sanctuaries of Corinthia had an indepen as influenced by Laconian bronzes, in dent production ofpins, vessels and ani theme as well as style.349 That Corinthian mal figures, but apparently did not pro influence never reached Geometric duce bird figures. In Central Greece and bronze work at Argos may be deduced Thessaly we find a considerable number of from the absence ofProtocorinthian vase local fibulae and bird figures as well as forms among the Argos bronzes and it is horse figures and arm rings.347 However, presumably more than a coincidence that

88 the preferred Argos Geometric bronze apparently the work ofitinerant artisans bowl, the so-called "Kalottenschale" was who probably included local bronze found neither at the two Hera sanctuaries workers trained at the Argive Heraion. nor in the Corinthia.3''0 Judging from the classification by German Also, as regards more specific objects scholars, the tripods made at the sanctuary locally produced at either site, there are ofthe Argive Heraion were apparently the dissimilarities. The Argos bronze weapons works of artisans connected with the east and defence armour were apparently not ern regions ofthe Greek Mainland, who dedicated at the Argive Heraion, nor such naturally also frequented Panhellenic sanc votive weapons as bronze arrows ofwhich tuaries. Apart from the tripods in Delphi we have examples in the Argos sanctuar and Olympia, the closest counterparts to ies.351 Although the LG horse figures at the Argive Heraion LG bronze tripods the Argive Heraion can be interpreted as were found in the Corinthia and Central chariot horses and thus a kind ofstatus Greece, especially Kalapodi.3''4 With the symbol, they are local works not symbol exception ofArcadia, from which region izing the status ofthe visitors from Argos we still have no examples ofmonumental and their types differ from that ofthe one bronze tripods, this is a distribution pat bronze horse figure known from Argos.332 tern which corresponds well with that of One gets the general impression that other Geometric bronzes in the Argive although the LG period was one of closer Heraion. This sanctuary was very open contacts between Argos and the Argive to the east, the Corinthia and the eastern Heraion than the earlier phases, the two part of Central Greece, and not so much sites were still to a certain degree separated towards the south. Only during the LG culturally. Not all inhabitants ofArgos vis Period do we find signs of continuous re ited the Heraion and perhaps, in particu lations with Argos, however, judging from lar, not the upper class warriors and other the bronze finds, associated with the more wealthy males, whose burial equipment is humble inhabitants. And although there is well known today. a certain similarity between the finds from There remains the problem ofthe both the Argive Heraion and Argos and monumental bronze tripods. We see a those from Tiryns and Mycenae, the set continuous development ofthe type at the tlement ofArgos apparently did not have Argive Heraion throughout the greater much connection to areas over land to the part ofthe 8th Cent, and the early 7th east. This impression corresponds to that Cent. BC, but we have not the least trace obtained from the pottery ofArgos, which ofit at the settlement ofArgos. Whether, throughout the greater part ofthe Geo as suggested above, the monumental metric Period was subject to influences bronze tripods were acquired by order for from Attica; only at a late date and reluc use as perirrhanteria3''3 or were dedications tantly was influence felt from Corinth.355 by wealthy and powerful citizens or both, Although the interrelations between one should expect some remnants also in Argos and the Argive Heraion are consid Argos, ifthe upper class inhabitants ofthis erably stronger during the LG Period than settlement were involved in their acquisi in previous centuries, one still gets the tion. One might perhaps argue that the impression oftwo separate communities Argive Heraion was considered the primary with different external connections, al sanctuary ofthe Argolid, thus solely receiv most turning their backs on each other. ing such spectacular monuments. However, Apart from Arcadia, Argos was open to in neighbouring Corinth an LG bronze tri wards regions which might best be pod was erected at the local Apollo Temple reached across the sea to the south, the is and ifsuch a tradition were prevalent at Ar lands, Laconia and Attica, and possibly via gos, one might expect it to include also lo the last-mentioned region to other parts cal sanctuaries ofthe settlement. of Central Greece. The Argive Heraion The monumental bronze tripods were was open landwards toward Arcadia in the

89 west and definitely over land to the Co Both the two last-mentioned studies rinthia and Phocis in the east as well as to make use to a large degree ofmuch later the north, Thessaly and Macedonia. In information about cult life at the Argive spite oftheir geographical proximity, the Heraion. But we have no evidence that similarities in the votive bronzes ofthe such information reflects the situation at two Argive sites are not very great and the Geometric sanctuary359 More impor comparisons between the bronzes from tant to me are the results ofthe above in Argos tombs and the Argive Heraion vestigations which do not support these seem even to stress different traditions. theories: the bronze finds at the Argive The definitely military aspect ofthe Geo Heraion indicate a very slow development metric bronzes in the upper class male of the sanctuary, from the early 9th Cent. tombs at Argos has no counterpart at the BC, or even earlier, onwards. Its early Heraion; probably its visitors from Argos contacts with Argos are remarkably slight, were not generally included in this group almost non-existent, and although increas ofpeople. During the LG Period there ing toward the end ofthe Geometric Pe were definitely many visitors from Argos riod, they never surpass those ofseveral to the Argive Heraion, but apparently not other Greek sites. Throughout the Geo more than from other Mainland Greek re metric Period, when the sanctuary gradu gions and their votive offerings were for ally expands its outside relations, its closest the greater part articles ofwomen's dress contacts are with the Corinthia, not with oflocal and often rather humble manufac Argos, whose own relations with the Co ture. Dedications by those leading figures rinthia during the same period are negli ofArgos society whose burial equipment gible. The evidence ofthe Geometric we are acquainted with are not easy to bronzes, the only contemporary archaeo point out. logical evidence from the Argive Heraion In recent decades, several scholars have which is extensively published, excludes advocated the theory that the Argive Her the possibility ofthe sanctuary ofthe Ar aion was founded as a sanctuary by Argos give Heraion having been founded as late in the 8th Cent. BC. T Kelly, who dates as the 8th Cent. BC, and contradicts the the foundation to the third quarter ofthe theory ofits having been either founded century sees such an event as political and or significantly influenced and controlled religious, demonstrating the power ofAr by Argos during the Geometric Period. In gos over the Argive Plain and neighbour my opinion, it even calls into question the ing cities.356 F. de Polignac stresses the im idea of the Argive Heraion having been portance ofsecuring farming land and ter deliberately founded. The religious mo ritorial rights, but also the military aspects tives for beginning cultic activity at a site ofthe deity. De Polignac's argumentation will not always be tangible and in its initial is complex and subtle, allowing for the phases the Argive Heraion gives the im possibility ofArgos having raised an al pression ofbeing a sanctuary ofhumble ready existing sanctuary to importance character, not ofan organized foundation. and cultural significance; however, it can Whether the annexation ofthe Argive not apply to the period studied here, i.e. Heraion by Argos, which is a fact, took before the early 7th Cent. BC.357 A recent place in a military action or by other article by two American scholars, C. Mor means, the event must be placed after the gan and T Whitelaw ascribes to Argos "the period studied here, i.e. after the early 7th construction ofthe Argive Heraion ca. Cent. BC.360 725". Their theories are based largely on Another theory advocated by some the Argive Geometric pottery. In my opin scholars sees the origin ofthe Argive Her ion, the Geometric pottery from the Argive aion cult as closely connected with the Heraion cannot be used for general conclu LG hero cults ofthe votive deposits in the sions until at least a fair amount has been neighbouring tombs, in one case even in published.358 corporating the small Hera shrine in the

90 argument.361 The material from the two which contained bronze finds. Tomb XIX groups of neighbouring votive deposits, had actually been broken into, while en the Hera sanctuary west of the Argive trance in most ofthe others occurred after Heraion and the deposits in the Mycenae the roof had collapsed or the lintel brok an tombs surrounding the sanctuary be en. In Tomb XXXIV was found a goat's long to the period covering the last quar skeleton together with two human skulls, ter ofthe 8th Cent. BC and the early part but as stated by Hagg, there were no cer ofthe 7th Cent. BC.362, i.e. several centu tain indications ofsacrifices, drinking cer ries after the first signs of votive offerings emonies or meals.369 The deposits were at the Argive Heraion and about half a placed either on the floor ofthe tomb or century after the Argive Heraion had giv in the filljust above. Presumably most de en evidence ofwealth and ofmany and posits were accumulated over a period of varied external relations.363 The interest in some time.370 the Mycenaean tombs, therefore, cannot Apart from one terracotta figurine in have been the cause of either the founda Tomb XIX and seven terracotta spools tion or the rise ofthe Argive Heraion. from Tombs VIII - IX, the deposits com More likely, the growing importance of prised mostly pottery and bronze objects. the wealthy and long established sanctuary In general, the offerings differ from those at the Argive Heraion drew attention to ofknown hero cults, but correspond with the neighbouring Mycenaean tombs, the finds at the Argive Heraion and the which then became subject to hero cults, small Hera sanctuary and are ofdefinite a widely known phenomenon in the LG votive character.371 However, Hagg con period. 364 cludes his study by observing that the pot The sanctuary west ofthe Argive Her tery consists of"such objects that could aion with a small terrace and presumably equally well have been given as burial an altar is identified with a Hera cult from gifts, kterismata, in a contemporary buri an Archaic inscription.365 It is situated 75 al."372 Although the bronzes, in general, m. from the tholos tomb and 25 m. from are oftypes known from the two Hera the nearest chamber tomb, a position sanctuaries, there are differences. Pins are which in itself does not suggest that its or definitely in the minority and there are igin was a hero cult. The bronzes are, in two objects which have no parallels in the general, ofthe same types as in the nearby two above-mentioned sanctuaries. One is Heraion and also the terracottas and the a Laconian type pin, a so-called "Pilzkopf- pottery have counterparts in the published Nadel" from Tomb IX and the other the material from the Heraion.366 Presumably, so-called "Kalotten-Schale" from Tomb this small Hera sanctuary was founded XL. According to Kilian-Dirlmeier, the around 725 BC from the Argive Heraion former is not genuinely Laconian. Nor is for religous reasons which we cannot de it likely to be a local product, as its type is termine today. not recorded among the thousands ofpins The Post-Mycenaean finds in the My at the Argive Heraion. The bowl is defi cenaean chamber tombs in the neighbour nitely an Argos type, common in tombs of hood ofthe Argive Heraion vary in char Argos throughout the Geometric Period, acter as stated by Blegen, and cannot all be but not recorded from either ofthe two considered Geometric/Early Archaic vo nearby Hera sanctuaries.373 The peculiar tive deposits. Some are definitely later and ities ofthe vases as well as ofsome of the without actual votive character, while bronzes ofthe votive deposits in question, others only consist ofscattered fragments, may indicate that the deposits in the My presumably having filtered into the tomb cenaean tombs near the Argive Heraion by chance.367 Genuine Geometric/Archaic were chiefly placed by male persons in votive deposits were apparently placed contrast with the offerings at the two only in Tombs VIII, IX, XIX, XXVI, Hera sanctuaries. XXXIV, XXXVII, XL, and L,368 most of The interest in the Mycenaean tombs

9i in the LG Period which was possibly significant. If the administrative body of shown mainly by the male inhabitants of the sanctuary were situated in Argos dur Argos, does not alter the above conclu ing the Middle and Late Geometric Peri sions concerning the relations between the ods, if the cult life at the sanctuary were Argive Heraion and Argos during the organized from Argos, one should expect Geometric Period. The impression ofa that such prestige objects as the monu sanctuary independent ofthe neighbour mental tripods also would be found in the ing settlement given by the early monu settlement itself. Whether the bronze tri mental architecture ofthe Argive Heraion pods were ordered for cultic use or dedi is strengthened by the study ofthe Geo cated by wealthy and influential persons, metric bronzes from the Argive Heraion. one should expect evidence ofthem in The Greek bronzes at the Argive Hera the settlement where they were ordered or ion during the Geometric Period and the manufactured. On the contrary, it seems early 7th Cent. BC differ in so many re that the itinerant artisans who manufac spects from the bronzes in contemporary tured the monumental Geometric bronze sanctuaries and tombs ofthe settlement of tripods set up at the Argive Heraion, Argos, in regard to outside connections as passed Argos by, concentrating their ef well as local bronze manufacture, that they forts on this and other Greek sanctuaries give the impression oftwo sites indepen in the eastern part of the Greek Mainland. dent of each other. In spite ofsome con In my opinion, studies ofthe Greek nections, which increased throughout the Geometric bronzes from the Argive Her Geometric Period, the differences in the aion support my previous conclusions bronze finds at the two sites are more concerning the early monumental archi striking than the similarities, taking into tecture from that site. During the period account the fact that they were only ca. 8 studied here, the available archaeological km. from each other. material indicates the Argive Heraion as If the Geometric sanctuary ofthe Ar independent ofthe contemporary settle give Heraion was under direct control of ment of Argos.374 In order to attempt to the settlement ofArgos during the Geo determine more precisely the period metric Period, as is generally assumed, when the bronze artefacts ofArgos and one should expect evidence ofmuch clos the Argive Heraion became inseparable, er relations regarding both the more hum the Archaic Greek bronzes should be ble local bronze products and the monu studied in the same way.375 However, the mental prestige objects. In the former, one 8th - early 6th Cent. BC is the time of should expect indications for identical tra the emergent Greek city-states and many ditions and stylistic influences, whereas aspects ofcultural, religious and economic the fact is that the two sites give evidence character are ofimportance for defining ofdifferent ways oflife as well as different the role played by the Argive Heraion, in connections to and influences from other particular, and the Greek sanctuaries, in Greek regions. In the latter group, the general, in this crucial development.376 monumental bronze tripods are especially

92 Notes

NOTE 1 coming paper, even though some ofthe large fills ofvotives as at the Argive Hera IS I, in particular, Conclusions, 199 - 200. bronzes may be dated before 700 B.C. ion, the main reason for the large quantities ofbronzes preserved at that site. As regards NOTE 2 NOTE 6 e.g. the Kourtaki sanctuary, situated ca. 4 Cf. IS I, 173 - 175, notes 6 - 7 and 21. Blegen 1939, 410- 427 and Blegen 1937, km. NE ofArgos, only pottery and terra 377 - 390. Cf. Hagg 1987 b, 98 -99 and cottas are mentioned among its thousands NOTE 3 Foley 1988, 66. ofvotives, cf. ADelt 22, 1967, B, 178 sq., In all, 5.738 bronzes were found in C. 23, 1968, B, 13 - 14 and ADelt 25. 1970, Waldstein's excavations, many ofwhich NOTE 7 B, 155 - 156; Protonotariou-Deilaki 1984, were discarded (cf. below notes 33 - 34) In the 8th - 7th Cent. BC votive deposits 40; Foley 1988, 150 and 185, no. 60 (pos and 2.841 ofwhich were catalogued (H. ofthe Mycenaean tombs in Argos, bronzes sibly a workshop), Morgan - Whitelaw deCoum AH II, 191 -339). are rare, consisting ofonly a few pins, cf. 1991, 84 and note 24 and Hagg 1992, 13. The finds from the later excavations are Deshayes 1966, 231 - 232; Hagg 1974, 32; more limited in numbers, cf. in particular: Foley 1988, 151 - 152 and Hagg 1992, 12. NOTE 9 Blegen 1939, 430 - 432 and 437 - 442 and The relevant Argos sanctuaries, cf. Foley Cf. note 3 above. Caskey - Amandry 1952, 176 - 183. 1988, 139 - 142, IS I, 198 - 199 and Hagg, All these bronzes are in the National Mu op. cit. 9-13. NOTE 10 seum ofAthens. I have handled most ob Although there are a few PG and EG Alleged Bronze Finds from the Argive jects in the magazines and the most impor sherds and more finds from MG II onwards Heraion. tant ones in the showcases. on the Larissa, cf. Courbin 1974, 565, note Boston. Museum of Fine Arts Catalogue numbers ofthe bronzes from 2, the votive deposit with the bronzes is Comstock - Vermeule 1971, nos. 257 - Waldstein's excavations will be given as AH not dated earlier than LG, cf. Courbin 258 (Spirals), 279 - 282 (Rings), 284 + no., those ofother finds as AH II + cate 1955,314. (Ring) and 647 ( Buckle). Inv. nos. 94.42 - gory + no. The inventory nos. of the Na I have been allowed to study the bronze 94,49. tional Museums ofAthens will be given as finds from the Athena Sanctuary from both Cambridge. The Fitzwilliam Museum NM + no. Courbin's and Vollgraff's excavations and Inv. nos. Gr. 12. 1970 (Archaic Bronze Pin) For possible Argive Heraion bronzes in shall refer to most objects in this article, as and Gr. 13 - 14. 1970 (Bronze Rings.) other museums,cf. below note 10. well as the bronzes from the Aphrodision Bought from Sale ofCharles Waldstein's in the Agora, from which I shall refer to CoUection. AR 1970 -71, 69 - 70, no. 2 q NOTE 4 some bronzes of types beginning in the and fig. 2 (The pin). Cf. esp. Foley 1988, chpt. IV, 80 - 101 Geometric Period. Hannover. Kestner Museum with earlier references. I have not seen the material from three Inv. no. 1928. 264. Geometric horse. possible sanctuaries in Argos excavated by Bought from Charles Seltman and said to NOTE 5 E. Deilaki, but still unpublished, Hiigg, op. have been found in 1927 near the Argive A second paper will be divided into two cit. 12 - 13, cf. pi. II, fig. 2, d - f. Heraion. main parts. I. Imported Bronzes and their Zimmermann, 27 and 47, no. ARC 123, Close Greek Imitations and II. Archaic NOTE 8 pis. 9 and 73. Greek Bronzes. In a final paper I intend to My definition ofthe Argolid is the Argive I do not find this horse stylistically related look at more general aspects concerning Plain, in accordance with Morgan - to the certain Argive Geometric horses (cf. the relations between Greek sanctuaries and Whitelaw 1991, 80, fig. 1 and not the pp. 54-57), but rather with a group of Co- settlements during the period in question. broader definition by Hagg 1992, fig. 1. rinthianizing horses which have the same It will not always be possible to distinguish Apart from Tiryns (Cf. Tiryns I, 107 and beak-like muzzle, sharp-edged mane, high clearly between Geometric bronzes and Jantzen 1975, 97 -99), the bronze votives rump and flat legs with pronounced details early 7th Cent, bronzes. In some cases, es are not numerous in the sanctuaries ofthe as well as the same thin, solid base. The pecially where the 7th Cent, material Argolid during the periods in question, cf. production ofthis group is localized to forms a direct continuation of the Geomet Foley 1988, 153 - 154. However, as regards Central Greece, the most secure prove ric bronzes, I shall carry the studies on di Tiryns in particular, Foley does not take nance being that ofAnavra, cf. Zimmer rectly. In others, especially where influ into account the different conditions of mann, 218 - 229, Locride, esp. nos. LOC. ences from the Near East can be observed, preservation at the sanctuaries. At Tiryns 15, 18- 19, 20 and 23. I postpone the examination until the forth there was not the same need to level with The Hannover horse differs from the Ar-

93 give Heraion types also in the relief decora 20805/5 - 6 and 20806) (ornamental door NOTE 18 tion of the underside ofthe base, cf. pp. nails, 4th Cent. B.C. - Hellenistic, AH II, Foundations of Classical Temple 54-56 and notes 104, 148 and 151 below. p. 326 and pi. CXXXIII sq., cf.Jdl 1911, Cf. Brownson 1893, 221:"... pins and Oxford. Ashmolean Museum 204, fig. 16 (Langaza Tumulus); and M clasps ofbronze, a bronze cock (presumably The fibula, Inv. no. 1893. 262, for which 49.99, Hesperia 1952 , 182, no. 113, pi. 46 identical with AH 47 or 48, cf. IS I, 201), Blinkenberg, 80, III, 3 b, gave the Argive (decorative attachment plate to door. 4th several scarabs,one ofthem threaded so to Heraion as a possible, but doubtful prove Cent. BC - Hellenistic). Found in loose speak, on a bronze pin..." nance, is one ofseveral objects given to the earth immediately above the archaeologi The find contexts ofthe 1892 excavations museum by J.L. Myres (Inv. nos. 1893. 261 cal deposit. Besides the reference loc. cit. to were not given in the final publication, cf. - 272). Its provenance is not certain, al Olynthos, cf. also Ol. IV, no. 940, pi. LIII IS I, 174 and note 7. though possibly Mycenae. and p. 149 with ref. to Ol. Inv. nos. 5612 Inv. nos. 1894. 120 and 121, Geometric and 12041; Jdl 1911, 199, fig. 8 (Langaza NOTE 19 horses. Tumulus); Carapanos 1878, pi. XLVII, No. Cf. IS I, 174, 184 - 186 and 195 - 196. In the Accessions Register the provenance 10 ( = NM Carapanos Collection, no. 335) is given as "from Argos." In red is added and the Heroon. Kalydon. Poulsen - Rho- NOTE 20 "Heraeum". maios 1927, pi. LXXXVI and Dyggve - Cf. IS I, App. 201 - 202. 1894. 120 = Zimmermann., 131 and 154 - Poulsen - Rhomaios 1934, 337 and Fig. 155, no. LAC 117, pis. 33 and 77. Unlike 44. However, the attachment plate ofthe NOTE 21 Argive statuettes (cf. pp. 54-56) its base Kalydon door , in the Museum ofAgri- West Building plate is perforated and has a projection. I nion, has four lotus buds and that ofthe AH II, 191 - 192. am inclined to agree with Zimmermann Dodone Bouleuterion in the Museum of Although the excavations ofthe West that it is Laconian. It may, however, belong Joannina has a different type ofpalmette. Building began in 1892, cf. Brownson to an Arcadian school with strong Laco The arm rings with hollow hemispherical 1893, 223 - 224, the bronze objects la nian influences, as it stylistically is very beads, AH 973 - 974 (NM 20916), AH II, belled West Building, about 150 in num close to LAC 118 from Bassai which is 251, pi. LXXXIX, are presumably Roman ber, were all found in later seasons, due to considered Arcadian by Voyatzis, 1990, 138. or later, cf. Philipp 1981, 259, Nos. 981 - the lack ofregistration ofbronzes in the 1894. 121 = Zimmermann, 134 and 164, 983, pi. 59. first season. Cf. IS I, 174. Ofparticular nos. LAC 159, pis. 37 and 78. Laconian as interest are the following objects: AH 19 classified by Zimmermann; stylistically it is NOTE 13 (NM 13951) (Geometric deer), note 138 closely related to the group ofhorses, Zim For the find spots, in general, cf. AH II, below; AH 23 (NM 13972) (bull's head mermann LAC 157 -163, the last ofwhich 191-192, Blegen 1939, 427 - 428, 430 - attachment) ,cf. note 170 below; AH 30 was found in Sparta (Zimmermann. LAC 432 and 437 and Caskey-Amandry 1952, (NM 13951) (mouse on human hand on 163). 168- 169. top of iron bar), AH 36 (NM 13958) (bird The results ofCraddock's technical analyses Brownson 1893, 210, mentions early pendant), cf. p. 65 below, Fig. 29 and note to which Zimmermann refers under nos. bronzes found as far west as the Gymna 208; AH 51 (NM 20468) (feather), AH LAC 117 and 159 differ for the two horses, sium, including a Geometric horse and a 1749 (NM 20676 13) (fragment ofcast sup 1894. 120 and 121. Cf. Craddock 1976, long pin ("spit"). port for hammered tripod (cf. p. 49 and esp. 103 -108. Inv. no. 1894. 120 = no. Fig. 16 and note 96 below) and scraps and 421, p. 108, has 90.0% Cu and 9.3 % SN note 14 spills, cf. notes 33 - 34 below. and Inv. no. 1894. 121 = no. 1170, p. 107, Cf. IS I, 191 - 193 and notes 131 - 135, cf. has 97.0 % Cu and 2.0 % SN. notes 137 -139 and cf. note 136 below. NOTE 22 Eastern Retaining Wall NOTE 1 1 NOTE 1 5 Caskey - Amandry 1952, 176 - 183, Cf. AH I, 65 and 67 (Gordon); Rangabe Cf. IS I, 192 and note 136. bronzes; 210 - 212, summary and absolute 1855, 9 (Kallergis) and 20 and 23; Bursian chronology. The deposit contained many 1854, XVI; and AH I, 67- 69 (Rangabe NOTE 16 lotus phialai and fragments ofother bronze and Bursian). Cf. IS I, 176, note 33. vases as well as a fragmentary Archaic The museums authorities in Argos, Athens bronze statuette, NM 16357. and Nauplion do not appear to have any NOTE 17 information about these early finds. Northeast Stoa and Area E of Stoa NOTE 23 AH 14 (NM 13965 and 13994) and AH 17 Back of South Stoa NOTE 12 (NM 13984 and 13946), (two Geometric- The bronzes - about 200 in number - are Mycenaean Bronzes horses with separate bases), cf. pp. 56-58 mainly ofthe same types as from the fills Cf. AH II, 193, cf. AH 2263 (sickle), AH and notes 155 and 169 below; AH 37 (NM above, also containing several lotus phialai 2265 -67 (NM 14029) chisels, AH 2730 - 13959) and AH 39 (NM 13960) (two bird and other fragments ofbronze vases. Of 2732 (NM 20471) (nails), AH II, 299 - pendants), cf. pp. 63 and 65, Fig. 29 and particular interest are the following objects: 300 and 325, pis. CXXVII and CXXXIII. notes 208 and 199 below; AH 2074 (NM AH 8 (NM 13985) (Geometric horse), cf. Classical or Later Bronzes 20602 a) and AH 2172 (NM 20618 J3) (two note 138 below; AH 33 (NM 14000) (han AH 1829-30 (NM 20696/2 - 3) (cut - out vase handles), AH 2254 (NM 14025) dle ending in a serpent's head), AH 970 ornaments), AH II, 274 and pi. CV; AH (a fragmentary wheel) as well as five pins, (NM 20917) (seal ring), AH 1783 and 2262 (NM 13978)(Roman key), AH II, five fibulae and a seal ring, AH 966 (NM 1786 (NM 20685/1 and 4) (Geometric 299 and pi. CXXVI; AH 2748 - 50 (NM 20919). sheet with tremolo decoration), cf. p. 84

94 and note 325 below; AH 2784 (NM matrices for parts of Geometric tripods, as NOTE 32 20817) (fragment ofGeometric tripod), cf. Inv. T 859, Maass, 26 and pi. 27 and Beil. Ingots p. 46 and Figs. 12-13 and note 83 below. 11, for a Matrice Tripod leg and Born - AH 2834 and 2835 (NM 20830/4 and 5), Cf. also bronze scraps, note 34 below. Moustaka 1982, esp. pis. 3 - 5, a male stat cf. AH II, 331 and pi. CXXXVI. The se uette in form ofa handle support for a cond ingot is best preserved. Diam. 25.3 NOTE 24 hammered tripod, cf. Zimmer 1990, fig. 2 cm. H. 5.3 cm. Its top is curved, the Southern Slope and pi. I, respectively. underside flat. Green patina. The patina of The bronzes - also about 200 in number - To Kilian's list can be added: Akovitika in AH 2834 is black. (Cf. Heilmeier, 1969, 6 are of the same types as those mentioned Messenia (Geometric), cf. Zimmer 1990 , - 7 and Fig. 10 and Heilmeyer 1981, 442 - above, but include some ofthe best Archaic 21; the Acropolis ofAthens (NM 6984), 443, figs. 2 - 3 and Bnze 1991, 322 - 323, figures: AH 3 (NM 13974) (rider), AH 5 funnel and runners from casting ofstatue, fig. 2 (Heraion ofSamos) and Athens NM (NM 13975) (mirror support), AH 25 on exhibition in Athens NM, Room 37, 20251. In exhibition Room 37. (NM 13973) (bull's head attachment) and the South Slope of the Acropolis, Zimmer AH 27 (NM 13950) (bull, cf. note 170 be 1990, 62-71, and the Hephaisteion, Zim NOTE 33 low); AH 28 (foot of ox or cow); AH 1556 mer 1990, 60 -62; Nemea, Miller 1977, 19 Spills (NM 20672 y) (bell pendant) and AH 2019 - 20; Birge - Kraynak - Miller 1992, 149 AH 2840 - 2841 (NM 20831/4 - 5). AH (NM20590) (pyxis pendant), cf. pp. 67-68 and 177 and Zimmer 1990, 50 - 57 (Clas II, 331, pi. CXXXVI. and note 224 below. The bronzes from sical); the Heraion ofSamos, Heilmeyer Loc. cit. are mentioned six similar, but dis Blegen's excavations, Blegen 1939, 437 - 1981, 442 and 452 and Zimmer 1990, 30 carded pieces, one ofwhich was found in 442, figs. 23 - 29 comprise also the Egyp - 32 (Late Geometric/ Archaic); Tegea, the West Building. For similar spills, cf. tian statuette (NM 16554) and a lid with AJA 1994, 313 (Late Geometric to Classi Hesperia 1980, 351, pi. 104 b. seated birds (NM 16562), cf. p. 63 and Fig. cal) and Thasos, Artemision, Rolley 1984, 27 and note 202 below. 226, fig. 201. NOTE 34 A mould for a pendant in Perachora, Pe Bronze scraps NOTE 25 rachora I, 177 and pi. 79, 12, cf. Perachora AH 1845 (NM 20699 J3) AH II, 274 and Cf. Lauter 1973. figs. 3-4. II, 528, may suggest bronze work at the site pi. CVIII (folded bronze sheet with at or gold and silver work like the AH mould, tached foot) (cf. Hesperia 1980, 351 and NOTE 26 note 31 below. pi. 105 a - b); AH 2250 (NM 20632), AH Northwest Building The subject has recently been restudied by II, 297 - 298 and pi. CXXVI and AH 2839 AH 12 (NM 13947) (Geometric horse), cf. Risberg 1993, who adds Aigina, Bassai, (NM 20831/6), AH II, 331 and pi. pp. 54-57 and note 148 below and Fig. 17, Delos and Aetos on Ithaca. CXXXVI (fragmentary objects showing and AH 16 (NM 13964) (Geometric lion?), chisel cuts, the last-mentioned one appar cf. p. 56 and note 157 below and Fig. 21; note 30 ently unfinished); and possibly AH 2038, AH 22 (NM 13466) (Geometric small ani Faulty bronzes at AH: AH 2218 (NM AH II, 287 and pi. CXVIII, fragments of mal), cf. p. 57 and note 164 below; AH 24 14008) and AH 2221 (NM 14007) (Geo lead and bronze which have been bent and (NM 13942) (Archaic bull), cf. note 170 metric tripod legs), cf. pp. 43-45 and show traces ofhaving been melted. below, and AH 965 (seal ring). Also a frag notes 69 and 78 below and Figs. 6-8, AH Cf. AH II, 331: "... a number ofpieces, mentary support with a lion's paw, AH 2837 (NM 20832/2) bird pendant, cf. p. partly castings, partly pieces ofsheet 2230, AH II, 296, pi. CXXV 63 and note 201 below. bronze, which have been partly melted and Bronze repairs: AH 47 (NM 13952) bird fused together, or mixed with substances as NOTE 27 pendant, cf. p. 65 and note 210 below and lead, rock, sand. Most ofthem show traces North Stoa Fig. 30; AH 87 (NM 20472), AH II, 208 offire. Uncleaned, seventy-eight, of which It is not listed as provenance in the Bronze and pi. LXXVIII, AH 2585, AH II, 314, two from back ofSouth Building near re Catalogue ofAH II, nor does Brownson pi. CXXXI and AH 2602, AH II, 317 taining wall". 1893, 221 - 222, mention any bronze finds (pins, cf. K.-D. Nadeln, nos. 880, 1088 and The many other mentions of discarded here. 1029); AH 877 (plate fibula, cf. note 251 bronzes, among which are small fragments below); AH 881 (NM 14033) (plate fibula, ofsheet bronze, cannot be regarded as NOTE 28 cf. p. 62 and note 197 below and Fig. 25); scraps collected for remelting without fur Cf. Lauter 1973, fig. 4 and IS I, 177. AH 1750 (NM 20676 ) (repair piece from ther information, cf. e.g. AH II, 274. cast tripod ? cf. Maass, 131 and pi. 56, Br. However, these find spots are all in the NOTE 29 8675). West Building or the Back ofSouth Build Kilian 1983, 145 and notes 37-41, refers ing. to the following sanctuaries with evidence note 31 ofbronze workshops: Asea, Delphi. Isth Terracotta mould: (NM 14218), AH II, Tc NOTE 35 mia, Kalapodi and Olympia. For Kalapodi, 277, p. 43, fig. 84 and p. 498. The mould Cf. notes 33 - 34 above, West Building and cf. also note 127 below; for Isthmia, cf. is broken; seven ofits cavities for orna Back ofSouth Building. These two find Rostoker - Gebhard 1980 (Classical) and ments are preserved. spots have, however, mostly secondary for Delphi op. cit. p. 361. For Olympia, cf. Also for AH 2832 (NM 20831/3) the finds, cf. pp. 38-39 above. Zimmer 1990, 21-24 (Geometric), 39 - identification with a mould is suggested, 50 (Archaic) and 57 - 60 (Classical) with AH II, 331. The bronze plate, the back note 36 earlier references. Especially important for side ofwhich is left unfinished, has remains AH 2830 -2831 (NM 20830/1 - 2), AH II, the present study are the fragments of clay of four cavities ofdifferent sizes. 331 and pi. CXXXVI; the former is pre-

95 sumably part ofa vase with an Archaic cific types ofobjects, cf. Rolley et. al. NOTE 44 tongue pattern, the latter may be part ofa 1983, 127 and Antonaccio Sanpaolo 1990, The basic studies ofthe Greek Geometric bronze funnel, cf. Hesperia 1980, 355, esp. 104 - 106 and 118 - 123 for the rele tripods are Furtwangler 1890 and Benton pi.106 d; AH 2043 may possibly also be vant periods. 1938 a and b. part of a funnel, cf. AH II, 288 and pi. As regards the patina ofthe Argive Heraion Of the more recent studies, I have espe CXIX. bronzes, one should remember that the cially used the following: bronzes from Waldstein's excavations were Karouzos 1952; Willemsen (cf. reviews, note 37 treated in a bath ofzinc, hydrochloride and AJA 1959, 94 - 95 (S. Benton) and Gno AH 2829 (NM 14004), AH II, 330 pi. water; from this treatment they acquired an mon 1960, 459 - 463 (P. Amandry); CXXXVI. Casting waste. artificial reddish-brown colour, cf. AH II, Gehrig 1964; Schweitzer 1969, 176 - 198; The funnel measures 8.7 cm. in Diam. and 192, note 2. Weber 1971; Touloupa 1972; Rolley 1973; 3.8 cm. in visible height, the pouring cup Weber 1974; Coldstream 1977, 334 - 339; 3.9 cm. in Diam. and 4 - 4.5 cm. in visible NOTE 42 Maass 1977; Rolley 1977; Maass (cf. re height, the Diam. ofthe "bowl-like" part Iron was more common at the Argive Her view, Rolley C. 1983, 329 - 330); Maass varies between 8.9 and 9.1 cm. and ca. 3.5 aion than stated by Foley 1988, 96. Apart 1981; Bol 1985 b, 30 - 38; Floren 1987, 31 cm. in height. One ofthe small, raised, from the iron obeloi and iron bar men -51; Foley 1988, 88 - 89 and 92; Rolley curved parts measures 2.4 x 1.8 cm. and tioned by her (cf. IS III, 41 and 45), there 1992, 39 - 43. 0.9 cm. in height, the other 1.2 cm. in are several bronzes catalogued, parts of Cf. also notes 10 and 41 above, references Diam. and 0.4 cm. in height. which are made ofiron, e.g. bronze figures to metal analyses by Craddock, Rolley et. The schematic rendering ofdetails ofthe on iron bars, AH 29 (NM 13968) and AH al. and Antonaccio Sanpaolo. lion's paw, with raised lines, reminds one of 30 ( cf. note 21 above) or pins ofiron with that ofearly 6th Cent, lions, as e.g. the an original bronze head, cf. AH II, Index, NOTE 45 Loutraki lions in the Ny Carlsberg Glypto- Pins, as well as iron used for many other Cf. note 21 above and note 96 below (AH tek, Inv. nos. 1296 - 1297, Poulsen 1951, objects, e.g. AH 871, AH 2231 - 2234, and 1749. West Building) and note 23 above Cat. nos. 5-6, illustrations, e.g. Gabel- AH 2712. For finds ofmolten iron on the and note 83 below (AH 2784. Back of mann 1965, No. 58, pi. 8, andjohansen Old Temple Terrace, cf. Brownson 1893, South Stoa) and IS I, 176 - 177, note 33, 1994, 36 - 39, Cat. nos. 2 - 3. 213 and IS I, App., for quantities ofiron and note 65 below (NM 16551. Altar site) rings in the western fill, cf. Brownson, op. and IS I, 192 - 193, note 139 (NM 16555. NOTE 38 cit., 224 and for iron implements in the NE of Old Temple Terrace). Cf. e.g. Coldstream 1977, 149 - 150, Au- Gymnasium, op. cit., 210 -211. pert 1984, 25 and Foley 1988, 96. Waldstein mentions iron finds several times, NOTE 46 e.g. AH I, 61, 77 and 79. For iron finds The question ofthe Protogeometric NOTE 39 from the earlier excavations, cf. Rangabe bronze tripod production, to which I refer Cf. pp. 84-85 below and cf. Daux 1959, 1855, 9 (Kallergis) and 23 ( Rangabe - the Lefkandi moulds (cf. Popham -Sackett 768 and fig. 24; Courbin 1963, 71 - 73, Bursian) and from later ones, Prosymna, 1979, 95 - 96 and pis. 12 - 13 a and Zim 79, 98 - 100 and fig. 8; Desborough 1972, 18; Blegen 1939, 442 and fig. 26 and Cas- mer 1990, 19 -20), is still under debate, cf. 162 and pi. 31 A and Hagg 1982, 305, no. key - Amandry 1952, 183 and pi. 47 A - K. note 108 below, but I shall not discuss it as 14 (Submycenaean/Early Protogeometric Also the sanctuaries in Argos seem to have it has no relevance for the finds from the oven for extracting silver from lead ore). used more iron than assumed by Foley loc. Argive Heraion. The earliest geometric cit.; Courbin found several iron imple bronze tripods with legs of polygonal sec NOTE 40 ments in the Athena sanctuary on the La tion found at Olympia are not represented Herrmann 1964, 24 - 28, cf. pp. 52-53. rissa, cf. note 328 below and there are also at the Argive Heraion. iron fragments in the Aphrodision material. NOTE 41 NOTE 47 Technical criteria should, in my opinion, NOTE 43 Furtwangler 1890 classified the Olympia be used with some caution, taking into ac Geometric iron tripods are best known bronze tripods into three main groups count also the evidence for itinerant arti from Olympia, apparently chiefly found which in later studies of Olympia tripods sans, cf. p. 52 below. underneath the Hera Temple and in its im were changed to four groups (Willemsen Craddock's analytical results show varia mediate neighbourhood (cf. Furtwangler and Maass). Schweitzer and Coldstream tions in the metal compositions of, for ex 1890, 75 - 76 and Maass, 126 - 130 and classified five groups by dividing the Solid ample, Geometric horses ofpresumably the 225 - 227 [Catalogue]). However, there are Cast Tripods into two. Cf. Rolley 1977, 15 same site and the same origin, cf. note 10 separate finds in other sanctuaries, e.g. De - 23, for a thorough and clear outline of above (Oxford), and in some cases even the los (Delos XVIII, 65, notes 13 - 15), Do- the studies of the Geometric tripods until metal analyses ofjoining fragments may done (Carapanos 1878, 108, no. 2, pi. 1977. show variations, cf. e.g. AH 2223 - 2224, XLVIII, 6 and Maass, 129, note 4), Isthmia Rolley et al. 1986, 127 and 134, cf. note (Isthmia IV, 1987, 27 and pi. 80 d) and NOTE 48 82 below. However, metal analyses have possibly also Perachora (cf. Perachora I, 75). The development of height and propor proved that some differences may be Apparently the iron tripods follow the de tions of Geometric tripods was studied by chronological. For example, the percent velopment of the bronze tripods, cf. Maass Willemsen and Maass. For the early tri age oftin in Near Eastern and Greek 127-128 and Matthaus 1980, 121. pods, cf. especially the complete Olympia bronzes differs until about 750 B.C. and For iron votives in Greek sanctuaries in tripod B 1240, Willemsen, 17 and pis. 1 - there are also differences related to the spe general, cf. Kilian 1983, esp. notes 5-12. 2, and Maass, 6 - 7, pi. 1 below and for the

96 later tripods, the hammered examples, and Maass, pi. I below and Maass, no. 2, pi. Willemsen, 59, also suggests that a bull Maass, 76 -77. 3. The legs are decorated with twisted ver served as a handle figure, B 12, pi. 42; but tical relief lines, forming a rope pattern. the statuette was not found in context and note 49 For tripod legs with applied spiral decora bulls or bulls' heads are not usually con Cf. p. 48 and notes 91-,92 (AH 2219) and tion, cf. Willemsen, pi. 14 (B 1241) and nected with this type ofhandles. p. 48 and note 95 (AH 1748) below. pis. 19 - 20 (B 1250) and Maass, nos. 36 - 37, pi. 16 = Willemsen, pis. 13 and 20. NOTE 61 note 50 Br. 5897. Willemsen, pi. 23 below ("Dop- For miniature tripods in Olympia, cf. NOTE 57 pelkranzhenkel") and Maass, no. 5, pi. 6 Maass, 117 - 125 and 212 - 225 (Cata Olympia. Solid Cast Tripods. and Beil. 1 = Willemsen, pi. 2 below right logue) and pis. 54 - 62, and in other sanc Subgroup I and pi. 39 right ("Schnurrhenkel"). Maass, tuaries, cf. Sakellarakis 1988, 174 - 177, For the handles and handle straps ofSub 18, regards Br 5897 (which he callsa "Trep- notes 19-33 and figs. 1-3. group I, cf. notes 53 - 55 above. penhenkel") as early, Maass, no. 5 as late. Judging from the decoration oflegs at NOTE 51 tached to cauldrons with such handles (cf. NOTE 62 Maass, 7-9. note 56) I regard the following legs as be Olympia. Solid Cast Tripods. longing to Subgroup I, Maass, nos. 7-16, Subgroup II NOTE 52 18 - 25, 27 - 28, 35 - 38, 45 and 47, Beil. For the handles, cf. note 58; for legs attached Willemsen, 28 - 53. Willemsen's classifica 1 - 2 and pis. 7-17 and 67 right and Wil to cauldrons with handles, cf. note 61 above. tion is essentially accepted by Maass, 3, lemsen, pis. 3-5, pi. 6 below right, pis. 11 I regard the following legs as probably be whereas Rolley 1977, 60, does not agree. and 12 above, pi. 13 below, pi. 14 above longing to Subgroup II: Maass nos. 17, 26, and right, pi. 15 right, pi. 16 above left, pi. 29 - 34, 46 and 48 - 49, Beil. 1 - 2 , pis. NOTE 53 17 left, pis. 19 - 20. (Among which are 10, 12 - 14, 16 and 18, cf. Willemsen pi. 2 Willemsen, 28 - 38, figs. 6-7, pis. 1 - 2 Maass, nos. 35 - 38). right below (= Maass no. 5), pi. 12 below left, 6 above, 7 - 10, 23 above and 28 - 34 For some leg fragments a definite classifica and right, pi. 13 above, pis. 15 left (= and Maass, nos. 1-4 and 50 - 63, Beil. 1 tion does not seem possible and the open Maass no. 30), pis. 16right and 17 right, pi. and 3 and pis. 1-5 and 19 - 23. Also one work handles may belong elsewhere, cf. 18 above (= Maass, No. 46), pis. 21 right, ofthe so-called "Kranzhenkeln" seems to notes 63 - 64 below. 22 above and 23 below (= Br.5897, cf. belong with this group, because ofits han note 61). dle section as well as its decoration, Br. note 58 Some ofthe legs cannot be definitely 7872, cf. Willemsen, 38 - 39, fig. 8 and pis. Willemsen, 39 - 44, figs. 8-9 (upper placed in either ofthe two main subgroups. 34 and 40. row), and pis. 23 below, pis. 35 - 39 (ex Both Willemsen, 37, and Maass, 15, regard cept for pi. 37 below right, pi. 38 right and NOTE 63 the handles decorated with relieflines as pi. 39 left), pi. 40 (the three central frag Cf. Maass, 9-10 for the legs, nos. 36 - 38 late, cf. Willemsen, pi. 30 right and Maass, ments and above right) and Maass, nos. 5 - ofSubgroup I, which are regarded as no. 62, pi. 22. These handles seem to form 6 and 64 - 66, Beil. 1 and 3, pis. 6 and 24 - closely connected chronologically to the a natural transition to the rib handles of 25. Application Tripods ofthe Relief Group Relief Tripods. For exceptions to Willemsen's "Kranzhen and cf. Maass, 20, for handles transitional keln", see notes 53 and 60; from Willem between the two groups. Cf. Maass 19 - 20 NOTE 54 sen's "Treppenhenkeln" are generally ex for the transition from Subgroup II to Re Cf. Willemsen, pis. 7, 9, 23, 26 and 30 - cluded the handles which Maass, 19, iden lief Tripods, esp. Maass, no. 5. 31 and Maass, no. 1, pis. 2 and 4 and nos. tified with the step handles ofthe Fan 55 and 62, pis. 21 - 22. Grooved Tripods. NOTE 64 Like the latest handles ofSubgroup I, cf. Open work handles are especially difficult NOTE 55 note 53 above, these handles could easily to place. The handles with radiating trian For the figures placed on the handle straps, develop into the rib handles ofthe follow gles presumably do not belong to these cf. Willemsen, pis. 31 - 32. Inside one of ing group. groups, cf. Maass, 16; and cf. Maass, 20, the Ithaca handles there may have been a where he sees some ofthe open work han bull, Benton 1929 a, nos. 6 and 18, but the NOTE 59 dles as forming a transition to the Relief Ithaca tripods are not reliable in details due Maass, no. 64, pi. 24. Tripods. to their many repairs, cf. note 119 below. As to tripod collections from other sanctu For the decoration on top ofthe handles, note 60 aries, the Delphi tripods especially are diffi cf. Willemsen, 56 - 61, pis. 8, 29 - 30, 34, Cf. Willemsen, 53-61. cult to classify according to the above cri 40 and 41 and Maass, nos. 59 - 60, pi. 19 The handles of "Kranzhenkeln" type with teria, cf. e.g. Rolley 1977, 62, no. 442, pis. and p. 16 sqq. where he also observes the birds, Willemsen, 59 - 60, do not belong VII and XLI and cf. notes 119 and 121 be connection to the decoration ofCypriot with this subgroup. For Br. 7872, cf. note low. To a certain degree this applies also to rod tripods and dates the birds later than 53 above. The Idaean cave example is Cre subgroups of the Relief Tripods, cf. notes the bull's heads. tan, cf. Maass, M. 1971, 58, no. 37, pis. 24 120 and 122 below. - 25, whereas Br. 2582, Ol. IV, no. 638, Nor can I place with certainty the terra NOTE 56 pi. 29 is an open work handle which seems cotta mould fragments from Akovitikia, For cauldrons with both legs and handles close to the Salonika handles, cf. note 62 Zimmer 1990, 21, cf. Themelis 1969, Fig. 5. attached, cf. B 1240, Willemsen, 1, pi. 2 below. The tripod collections from Ithaca and Sa-

97 mos present special problems. For Ithaca cf. NOTE 68 43, nos. 124 - 144 ((Except no. 137, open below notes 119 and 120. Not one ofthe Cf. Br. 5897, Willemsen, pi. 23 below work handle with radiating triangels) and Samos fragments seems to conform fully ("Doppelkranzhenkel") and Maass, no. 5, possibly nos. 145 -146 and 150), Beil 12 - with the Olympia series. In most cases, pi. 6 and Beil. 1. ("Schnurrhenkel"). 14 (with drawings of handle figures) and they are so specific that they pre Cf. note 61 above. pis. 35 - 39. No. 132 has decoration of sumably should be regarded as local. Cf. birds and no. 140 of a lion. Some ofthe Gehrig 1964, 98 -101, nos. 55 - 58. Nos. NOTE 69 Relief Tripod handles cannot be placed in 56 and 58 are open work handles in thin AH 2218 (NM 14008) either group with certainty. bronze plate, see AM 1968, p. 286 and AH II, 294 and pi. CXXIV. The section For Delphi, cf. below notes 120 and 122. 295, nos. 106 and 132, pis. 116 and 128; a here must come from the very bottom of third one ofthe same type, B 2184, is on the leg as it does not show the hollow of NOTE 75 exhibition in the Samos Museum. Gehrig the back. Maass, 34 - 39 and 156 - 162, nos. 105 - no. 55 is apparently a normal Relief Tripod The extra coating of bronze forms a slant 123, Beil. 7-11 and pis. 29-34. rib handle, but the specific feature noted by ing line, starting at the left-hand corner of For Nos. 105 - 107, cf. p. 46 and note 87 Gehrig, a greater distance between the in the front about 3.2 cm. above the bottom below. ner rim and the first rib than between the and reaching only 0.4 cm. above the bot No. 121 is unique, as the rows ofstylized others, seems to be unique in bronze tri tom at the back corner of the left side, 0.2 birds enlarging the legs, are not found in pods; it is repeated in a local terracotta cm. at the back corner ofthe right side. other Matrice Tripods; apparently the piece handle (Willemsen, pi. 61). Gehrig no. 57, Rolley 1992, 42-43. is a repair, cf. Maass, 162. p. 100, and Maass, 4, note 24 (= AM 1972, For the tripod with a limited use ofsemi p. 138 and pi. 54) are Archaic miniature NOTE 70 circles. Maass, no. 115, cf. note 86 below. tripods. Maass 1977, 44, note 37, refers to Maass, 21, gives a definition of Relief Tri a tripod leg ofhammered bronze plate in a pods based on the form oftheir legs: "... NOTE 76 lead covering, possibly with an original wo sich im Querschnitt ... eine Ausrich- Maass, nos. 111, 115, 164 and 165, Beil. 9 wooden core, B 579. tung auf die geschmiickte Vorderseite be- - 10 and 16-17 and pis. 31 and 38. merkbar macht". The trapezoidal form of Cf. also note 122 below, Kalapodi. note 65 the section ofAH 2218 shows that the NM 16551 transition to ReliefTripods is imminent, NOTE 77 Blegen 1939, 430 - 432, fig. 17. All meas but not accomplished. For corresponding Olympia. Matrice Technique Tripods urements are given here. sections, cf. esp. Willemsen, 17, Ohne No. Maass' later phases ofReliefTripod han For the provenance at the Altar site, cf. also pi. 21 right, fig. 4, Reihe 5 and Br. 1251, dles, Maass, 44 - 46. Prosymna, p. 17 and IS I, p. 176, note 33. p. 24, pi. 24 right and fig. 5. For legs and connected handle straps, cf. Willemsen, 61 and pi. 43; Herrmann 1964, notes 75 and 76 above. 44 - 45, figs. 28 -29; Herrmann 1966, 98; NOTE 71 Unconnected handle straps, Maass nos. 120 Kunze 1967, 215 and 223 - 224; Schweit Willemsen, 62 - 99 and Maass, 21-47. and 166 - 169, pis. 34 and 42. zer 1969, 135, 139, 154 and pi. 25; Rolley For the distinction between the legs of For handles and handle figures, Maass, nos. 1969, 23, note 6 and p. 30. Weber 1971, p. early ReliefTripods and Solid Cast Tri 111,115, possibly 145 and 149, 151 - 154, 18 and note 41 (who, however, regards the pods, cf. note 70 above. 157 (Kassel), possibly 158 -160, 161, 163 - figure as decoration ofa hammered tripod 173, Beil. 9 - 10 and 15 - 17 (with draw handle); Maass, 44 - 45. Hiller 1979, p. 24 NOTE 72 ings ofhandle figures) and pis. 40 - 42. note 16, (who considers it LG on stylistic Maass, 21 and 24 - 27. Rolley 1983 b, criteria); Paleologou 1980, 77 - 78; 331, disagrees with his observations which NOTE 78 Schmaltz 1980 p. 31 (who apparently also I basically follow. AH 2221 (NM 14007) regards the figure as decoration ofa ham AH II, 295, pi. CXXIV. mered tripod handle); Langdon 1984, 326, NOTE 73 Willemsen, 69 - 70, fig. 12. no. 33; Floren 1987, 46 -47, pi. 4,1. Maass, 28 - 32 and and 150 - 156, nos. 69 Schweitzer 1969, 187, fig. 103. Foley 1988, 93 - 94, pi. 18 b; Bosshard - 104, Beil. 4 -7 and pis. 26 - 28. For nos. Maass, 25, note 30, cf. p. 36, note 67. 1990, 16; Croissant 1992, 75, pi. 24, fig. 11. 105 - 107,. cf. p. 46 and note 87 below. Rolley et. al. 1986, 127 and 134, no. 106 (Cu 92.5 % (-Sn), Pb 1.00%.Fe 2.15%). note 66 NOTE 74 Foley 1988, 99, note 93. Willemsen, 61, ref. to Br 7157, cf. pp. 42 Olympia. Application Technique Zimmermann, 45, note 190. and 60 - 61, pi. 40 and fig. 8. Maass, 18 Tripods Rolley 1992, 42, connects it with other and 22, places the whole Olympia tripod For the legs, cf. note 73 above. Matrice Tripods with a wheel-formed or with a "Schnurrhenkel", no. 5, among the As the ornamentation ofthe legs is the cri nament ("a roue") in the metope, ascribing late Solid Cast Tripods, cf. also note 61 terion for the classification ofRelief Tri the whole group to Corinth. above. pods, the grouping ofthe handles is less certain. One starting point for the identifi NOTE 79 note 67 cation ofhandles ofthese tripods is the spi AH 2221 and Rolley 1977, 54, no. 391, AH 2220 (NM 20629 fi) ral ornamentation ofsome open work han pis. VI and XXVI = Inv. No.2441. Cf. AH II, 295, pi. CXXXIII. dles, cf. Maass, 42 - 43. Maass, 25 and note 30. Rolley 1992, 42. The handles are the two first phases of Maass' Relief Tripod handles, Maass, 40 -

98 NOTE 80 NOTE 86 Mass, 48, shows that the rib handles for Cf. Maass, 25, notes 28 - 30. Examples ofdirect imitation in application merly connected with these tripods belong Several Olympia tripods use the same ma technique of Matrice Tripods with metope to the ReliefTripods, whereas the step trices, in one case comprising a tripod in decoration are Rolley 1977, 53, no. 189, handles which formed part ofWillemsen's mixed technique, Maass nos. 106 and 108, pis. VI and XXXIV and the unpublished "Treppenhenkeln" are actually the handles and Maas also gives several examples from tripod leg fragment from Dodone in the ofthe Tripods with Fanned Grooves. For Olympia and Delphi of the use ofthe same Carapanos collection in the National Mu the handle figures, cf. Maass, 58-61 and matrices for two or more tripods, cf. in seum ofAthens, no. 415 , cf. Rolley, op. nos. 198 - 200. One Delphi handle has particular: cit. p. 99, note 7. The fragment ofthe traces ofsoldered handle figures, cf. note Isthmia 2826 used the same matrice as upper part ofa leg shows three metopes 112 below, Rolley 1977, no. 456. Olympia, Maass no. 110 and possibly also placed vertically, of which only the central Delphi, Inv. No. 8956. one is decorated with a wheel motif. NOTE 91 The tripod leg from Kalapodi, B 643, used On the Matrice Tripod, Maassno. 115, mul AH 2219 (NM 20629 a). AH II, 294 - the same matrice as Maass no. 109, cf. tiple semicircles compose a horizontal border 295 and pi. CXXIII. Felsch 1980, 62 and fig.35. for the upper metope at the front ofthe leg. Maass, 53 with note 11. Cf. also Rolley 1977, no. 390, pi. XXXV Rolley et. al. 1986, 126-127 and 134, no. NOTE 81 105. It differs considerably from the other AH 2222 (NM 20629 y). AH II, 295, pi. NOTE 87 AH metal analyses in having only 84.43% CXXIII. Maass, 33 - 34, nos. 105 - 107, pis. 29 and Cu, but 8.97% Sn. Pb is 1.71 % and Fe 0. Gehrig 1964, 99, note 48. 33. For the secondary join ofthe plate to 22% Rolley et. al. 1986, 127 and 134, no. 109 the front of the leg ofthe Matrice Tripod, Rolley C. 1992, 42. (Cu 86.08 %, Sn 1.17 %, Pb 1.55 % and cf. Maass loc. cit. and Beil. 7-8. The largest depth ofthe tripod is 2.8 cm. Fe 4.37 %). For Maass, no. 121, cf. note 75 above. and the thickness ofthe plate varies Rolley 1992, 42. between 0.3 - 0.4 cm. NOTE 88 NOTE 82 This observation was already made by S. NOTE 92 AH 2223 - 2224 (NM 13992), AH II, Benton in AJA 1959, 95. Morgan 1990, 36 Cf. Maass loc. cit. 295, pi. CXXIV. - 37, and Morgan 1993, 24, questions the Willemsen, 98, here compared with Maass, conclusion. However, the evidence for NOTE 93 no. 173. Geometric bronze tripod manufacture at Willemsen, 110 - 156 and Maass, 63 - 104 Maass, 23 and note 16, here compared Olympia is certain and there is more than and most studies in note 44 above. with nos. 154 and 165. one example, cf. note 29 above. Morgan's Rolley et. al. 1986, 127 and 134, nos. 107 demand for "evidence in quantity" does NOTE 94 - 108, the former fragment: Cu 92.70% not seem reasonable today when the evi NM 16555. Blegen 1939, 427 - 428 and and Sn.2.19 % and the latter Cu 92.53 % dence for early bronze working is still lim fig. 16, cf. IS I, 192 - 193, fig. 16 and note and Sn 1.70%, Both Pb around 0.70 % and ited, although rapidly increasing. Also the 139. Presumably originally placed on the Fe 1.7- 1.8%. manufacture ofsuch large objects may have Old Temple Terrace. Foley 1988, 92 and note 116. taken place immediately outside the sanc In my opinion, the handle also compares tuaries rather than inside (cf. e.g. the cast NOTE 95 well with Maass no. 115 and the Kalapodi ing ofthe large Classicalbronze statue on AH 1748 (NM 20676 a). AH II, 270, pi. tripod B 642, cf. note 122 below. the South Slope of the Acropolis ofAth CII. ens, note 29 above). According to Maass, note 83 105 - 106, only Olympia gives evidence of NOTE 96 AH 2784 (NM 20817), AH II, 328, pl.- working artisans. However, at most of the AH 1749 (NM 20676 fi). AH II, 270, pi. CXXXIV. sanctuaries with Geometric tripods, there CII. Found at Back ofSouth Stoa, cf. note 23 are signs of early bronze working on the From West Building, cf. note 21 above. above. site, cf. note 29 above, and at Kalapodi also For supports in Olympia, cf. Willemsen, The width ofthe fragment is 4 cm., its evidence of local manufacture ofham 135 - 136 and Maass, 66 and 200 - 201, depth 2 cm. at the handle strap and 0.9 cm. mered tripods, cf. note 127 below. esp. no. 227 b, pi. 48, no. 203 f and g , pi. at the relief lines ofthe handle itself. 49 and 203 h (= Ol. IV, pi. 36, no. 675), NOTE 89 no. 275 (= Willemsen, pi. 72), nos. 274 note 84 Cf. p. 42 and notes63 and 64 aboveand note and 277, pi. 56 and no. 292 a ( = Willem Maass, 27-39. For the transitional phase, 119 below, Ithaca no. 6, for a handle which sen Br. 10535, pi. 84). cf. esp. 33 - 34 with special reference to apparently is transitional between the two the leg from Ithome, pi. 67 (note 120 be subgroups and note 120below for a handle at NOTE 97 low) and to Maass, nos. 98 - 102 and 104. Delphi which seems to combine Matrice Tri Cf. note 94 above. For the tripods in mixed style and tech pod features with a handlefigure of a bird. nique, cf. p. 46 and note 87 below. NOTE 98 NOTE 90 Cf. references IS I, 193, note 139. NOTE 85 Willemsen, 99 - 105 and Maass, 48 - 62 Cf. note 119 below, Rolley 1973, no. 3. and 172 - 178, nos. 174 - 200, pis. 44 - 46 note 99 and Beil. 19. Cf. references note 94 above.

99 NOTE 100 hammered tripod may havebeen placed NOTE 1 10 Kunze 1952, 6-7, figs. 4-5, cf. Maass, here asa votiveoffering but it may also Weber 1971, 19; Willemsen, 179; Cold 55 - 58 and p. 174, no. 179 with other ref have had a function in the cult of the Tem stream 1977, 337; Maass, 59 - 60 and erences. Cf. also Rolley 1983 a, 55, fig. 31. ple. For the proposed cultic function of Maass 1981, 18. Although Rolley 1977, some ofthe early monumental bronzes, cf. 104, note 1, apparently disagrees with the note 101 also IS II, 55 - 57. attribution, he has later accepted it, Rolley, Felsch 1987, 11-12, B. 2600, fig. 17; the 1983 a, 55 and 60, and Rolley 1992, 40, handle was found in a context dated to NOTE 107 where he advocates a Corinthian origin es shortly after 850 BC, but no tripod finds For the function ofGeometric bronze tri pecially because oftechnical criteria regard are mentioned in the securely dated, later pods in the sanctuaries, cf. e.g. Herrmann ing the horses ofthe handles. strata, 12. Cf. also note 214 below for the 1966, 1 and Coldstream 1977, 181 and 334 Kalapodi stratigraphical results. -335. NOTE 1 1 1 From the 5th Cent. BC, there is an exam The handle figures are identified by Maas, NOTE 102 ple ofa bronze tripod among the bronze nos. 198 -200, cf. note 90 above. Although Coldstream 1977, 336 and Schweitzer vases given as prizes at the Argive Hera these horses have some Corinth- 1969, 198, Maass, 110 - 111 and Maass contests, cf. Amandry 1980, 212 with note ianizing traits, e.g. the angular outline of 1981, 17. 7 and p. 251, and Andronikos 1984, 165 - their legs, I cannot agree with Maass, 59 - Against the dating by Maass, 112, ofthe 166, figs. 133- 134. 60, in his view oftheir genuinely Corin terracotta leg from Perachora which imi For the iron tripod in Isthmia, cf. note 43 thian style, such as it was identified by tates a Matrice Tripod (cf. p. 52 and note above and for the Corinth tripod, note 122 Herrmann 1964, 28 - 29. Their necks and 123 below) to not later than the third quar below. legs are not flat and the outline ofthe neck ter ofthe 8th Cent. BC, based on its con For ritual purification with water in the does not continue into the lines ofthe ears text in the Hera Akraia votive deposit, cf. sanctuaries, cf. Isthmia IV, 1987, 27, with which do not have the ordinary Corinthian Felsch 1980, 62 - 63 note 103. Felsch is references, note 47. For ritual purification high, forward curve. Their bodies are not definitely correct in his observation that at the altars, cf. Nilsson 1941, 92 - 93. cylindrical, their muzzles differ from the the deposit contains Egyptian fayence scar Corinthian trumpet-like ones and they abs and Phrygian-type fibulae which rule note 108 have an open horizontal mouth. out such an early date. The tripod finds from Tiryns and Mycenae are usually regarded as Mycenaean, al NOTE 1 12 NOTE 103 though their possible Protogeometric date Tripods with Fanned Grooves. For identical construction ofthe legs of the is also discussed, cf. Matthaus 1980, 118 - Argive Heraion two groups oftripods cf. pp. 43 and 47 and 121, cf. pp. 56 - 59 and 110 - 113. Cf. AH 2219, cf. p. 48, Fig. 14 and note 91 references note 90 above . Both groups also note 46 above. above. have figured metope decoration, compare The hammered tripod fragments in the Delphi. e.g. Maass nos. 116 - 117 with no. 179, cf. Nauplion Museum, cf. note 131 below , Rolley 1977, 56 - 57 and 65 - 66, nos. Maass, 55 - 56. have no certain provenance. 405 - 410 and 456 - 457 ( pis. VI - VII, The terracotta tripod from Argos, Courbin XXXVI, XLII and XLIV) and Perdrizet note 104 1966, 250, no. AR 263, Larissa. The other 1908, 62, no. 208, fig. 191 ( "verschol- Cf. Maass 1977, 34, note 14 and Maass, terracotta fragments mentioned here are ei len", according to Maass, 53, note 9.) 105 with references to AH 11, 14 and 16 ther miniature or not certain tripod frag Rolley, no. 456 shows remains ofsoldered and cf. p. 56 and note 151 below. I exclu ments. handle figures ofa horse and horse leader. ded AH 14. For the chronology ofthe Ithaca. Geometric quadruped bronzes at the Ar NOTE 109 Benton 1938 a, 62, nos. 10 (fragment of give Heraion, cf. pp. 55-56 and 57-58 and Cf. Maass 1977. Outside Crete, the Cretan leg) and 12 (fragment ofhandle), pis. 10 e notes 150, 160 and 167 below. tripods have been found at the sanctuary of and 17 f. Athena Lindia on Rhodes, at Amyclae and Olympia. note 105 at Delphi, cf. op. cit. p. 34, notes 7-9; Cf. note 90 above. For the relative chronology of Solid Cast Maass, 4, note 24, and Rolley 1977, 42 - Tripods, Subgroup II, cf. p. 42 and notes 43, nos.336 - 345 and possibly 333 (legs) note 1 13 61 and 63 above. Handle figure NM 16551 and pp. 65 - 66 nos. 458 - 63 (handles), Cf. note 91 above and Rolley et. al. 1986, is relatively the earliest of the finds from the pis. Ill - IV, VIII, XXVI - XXVII and 126 - 127 with references to metal analy Argive Heraion and the type of handle to XLV In his discussion, p. 103 - 104, Rol ses ofthe examples at Delphi and Olympia which it belongs is late in its class, cf. p. 42 ley notes that there do not seem to be cer andcf. Rolley, 1992, 42. and notes 65 - 66 above and the leg, AH tain Cretan tripods at Olympia. 2218, is at the point oftransition to the Athens NM 8008, from Amyclae, is con NOTE 1 1 4 Relief Tripods, cf. p. 43 and notes 69 - 70 sidered a Cretan tripod by the above scho Weber 1971, 18; Willemsen, 179; Maass, above. lars. Also, NM 8009 seems related to Cre 105; Coldstream 1977, 335 - 336 and tan tripods. It is a relief tripod fragment Heilmeyer 1979, 27 - 28 and 54. NOTE 106 with a central vertical zigzag framed by Rolley 1977, 103 - 104, does not give a The two tripod fragments are NM 16551 vertical relief lines. It certainly does not more specific attribution than "Peloponne and 16555, cf. notes 65 and 94 above and belong among the Olympia classes. Calligas sian". However, Rolley 1992, 40-41, now IS I, 193 - 194. As suggested loc. cit. the 1992, 35 and 42 and fig. 13 a. assigns the main part ofthe ReliefTripods

100 (aswell as of the Solid Cast Tripods) to Ar possibly 464, pis. I - III, VII - VIII, XVIII, Olympia. gos, but assigns part of the Matrice Tri XXI, XXV, XXXIX - XLI, XLIII and Cf. notes 54 - 57 above. pods, those with wheel-formed ornaments XLV (No. 454 is an exceptional piece, the Philia. in the metopes, to Corinth, cf. note 78 handle figures of which are secondary, Athena Ithonia. Unpublished. Cf. Maass, above and, in fact, attributing most cast tri placed there in connection with a repair, 16, note 27 a, handle fragment like no. 53. pods from the Argive Heraion to Corinth. cf. op. cit. pp. 64 - 65 and 80 - 81, fig. 11). Thermon. The open work handles nos. 460 and 465 - Inv. No. 61. Handle, cf. Maass, 18, note NOTE 1 1 5 466 are - just like the open work handles 46, counterpart to Maass, no. 63, pi. 23. Cf. Weber 1971, 17; Willemsen, 180 and from Olympia - difficult to place, cf. above Maass 106. note 62. NOTE 120 Ithaca. Application Tripods. NOTE 1 16 Benton 1938 a, 56 - 66. Delos. Heilmeyer 1979, 12, 27 and 54, and Kilian - Nos. 1,1a and 2 were found together and Rolley 1973, 494 and 501, nos. 6 - 7 and Dirlmeier 1985, 230 - 236. Kilian-Dirl form one group (pp. 57 - 58, figs. 8 and 14 figs. 6-7. Cf. also note 119 above, Delos, meier does not give detailed references but and pi. 10 a - d.). Nos. 2-3. her text shows that she accepts only Athens No. 3 (pp. 58 - 59, figs. 6, 9, 15 and 18, Delphi. (Hammered Tripods), Corinth (Tripods pis. 11 a, 13 a, 14 d - e and 15 a). How Rolley 1977, 46 - 69, nos. 359 - 389, (no. with Fanned Grooves) and Argos as produc ever, only the leg originally belongs to this 389 imitating Matrice Tripods with wheel tion centres ofGeometric bronze tripods. tripod. The handle is a Relief Tripod rib ornaments), 393, 467 and 470 and the han Also, Rolley 1992, 41, now attributes the handle. The cauldron was found with both dle straps nos. 471 - 475 and 479, pis. IV - Solid Cast tripods to Argos. leg and handle attached (cf op. cit. p. 93). VI, XXIX -XXXIV and XLVI - XLVIII. Benton observed, pp. 58 - 59, that " The For no. 454, cf. note 119 above. NOTE 117 caps ofthe rivets are enormous, and there Apart from its bird figure, handle no. 468, Cf. pp. 40 - 42 and 46-47. are layers of thin bronze between them and with its rather large zigzags might be con the plate. This probably indicates a succes sidered a Matrice Tripod handle; but also NOTE 1 18 sion ofnew vessels each leaving a skin be its handle straps differ in ornamentation Provenances as a criterion for production hind". Presumably the leg ofa Solid Cast from those ofthe Matrice Tripods. Perhaps centres was first advocated by Weber 1971, Tripod was at some later date fastened to a this tripod, like the tripods from Olympia, 17. cauldron with rib handles. The rivet holes is a result ofthe meeting ofbronze workers of the handles are also secondary. Nailed from different regions at the Panhellenic NOTE 119 figures from rib handles are not known in sanctuaries, Maass, nos. 105 - 107, cf. p. Solid Cast Tripods. Subgroup I. either of the ReliefTripod groups, cf. pp. and notes 87 - 88 above. Aigeira. 44-45 and notes 74 and 77 above. Appar Dodone. Alzinger 1978, 151-152, fig. 4. ently, horse figure no. 16 was riveted to the Cf. note 86 above. Alzinger 1981 - 82, 12, fig. 4, cf. handle, pi. 15 d, and Benton , p. 63, also Ithaca. Klio. 67. 1985, 449 - 450, fig. 43 ( Recon connects the second horse, no. 17, pi. 15 d Benton 1938 a, 60 - 62 and 66 - 67, no. struction). Fragments oflegs and handles. with the tripod. However, I fail to see how 7. (Fig. 11 and pi. 11 b and 12 a and c), p. They are compared with Maass no. 1 and the male statuette on a base, Benton, no. 61, no. 8 (fig. 16 c) and No. 9 (figs. 17 - Ithaca, nos. 1 and 2, cf. below, this note. 15, Fig. 12 and pi. 16, can be attached to 18, pi. 11 c, 12 d, 13 b and 14 c (handle Only a few fragments seem to be pre the rib handle, as suggested by Benton, pp. and legs found attached to cauldron, cf. served, but apparently without decoration; 62 - 63. note 119 above) 15 c and 17 e (cf. JHS traces ofan element inside the handle are No. 6 (Benton, pp. 59 - 60, figs. 16 and 1950, pi. IV b) and p. 62 no. 11 (pi. 17 a - reminisent ofthe handle figures ofsome 18, pis. 12 b, 13 c and 15 b) and possibly b). (According to Maass, 35 and Benton, Subgroup I tripods cf. p. 41 and note 55 also the bull, no. 18 (p. 66, pi. 13 c and 14 loc.cit., the tripod leg, no. 11 is in matrice above. Found in a LG/Early Archaic con a). On top of the handle is a horse and in technique. Benton compares it with AH text, inside a pot. side the handle a bull. Although solid, the 2221 (cf. pp. 44-45, Fig. 8 and note 78 Delos. handle with applied zigzag decoration above), apparently because of its metope Rolley 1973, 491 - 493 and 500 - 504, seems to belong to a transitional stage to decoration. However, the side ofthe leg nos. 2-3, figs 3-5 and 7. According to open work handles of Application Tripods. has multiple semicircles along its whole Maass' definition, cf. note 70 above, nos. 2 Several of the cauldrons were found to length, a decorative feature which is not - 3 should be regarded as ReliefTripod gether with both handles and legs, Benton, paralled in any Matrice Tripod, except for legs, but technically they are still solid cast, p. 93, nos. 3 and 9 have certain find con a very restricted use and metope decoration cf. sections, fig. 7. texts, nos. 6 and 7 probable ones, as well as is also sometimes found on Application Delphi. the group nos. 1, la and 2. Cf. also Rolley Tripods cf. p. 46 and note 86 above. Only very few tripod legs from Delphi 1977, 16, with notes 5 and 6. However, The rib handle of no. 3, cf. note 118 have the above ornamental characteristics the many repairs of the tripods present a above, presumably originally belonged with of Subgroup I and the fragments are, in serious difficulty in reconstructing the an Application Tripod, as there are no cer general, badly preserved. Cf. Rolley 1977, original appearance of the tripods from tain finds ofMatrice Tripods on Ithaca. 31 - 42 and 60 - 64, nos. 275, 298, 307, Ithaca. Ithome in Messenia. 314 and 330 (both the last two fragments Kalapodi. Athens. Mus. Benaki, no. 760. Unpub have sections transitional to ReliefTri B 2600. Felsch 1987, 11-12, fig. 17. For lished, cf. Maass, 33, note 57 and pi. 67. pods), the handles, 429 - 437 and 454 and chronology, cf. note 101 above.

IOI Laconia. trice Technique with an upper metope No. IM 2224, Hesperia 1959, p. 327, no. Athena Chalkioikos. Sparta. decorated with an inner circle, below 1, pi. 67 a. (Handle support from a ham Benton 1929 b, 128 - 129, fig. 17 d, han which is a horizontal zigzag pattern and mered tripod, presumably Attic). dle fragment. remnants of the vertical frame of the deco Perachora cf. the terracotta imitation ofa Op. cit. 129, fig. 17 a, terracotta imitation ration. The fragment measures 5.7 x 2 cm. tripod leg, note 123 above. ofa leg, probably in application technique, MF 72 - 165 is a small fragment ofthe from Amyclae. solid middle section ofan open work han note 125 Mon Repos. Corfou ? dle with large zigzags, measuring 4.2 x 1.6 Cf. p. 50 and note 104 above.

M 517. ADelt 19 1964, 324 and pi. 364 d. cm. It is a very small fragment with zigzag or Both fragments have the same reddish note 126 namentation and dog-tooth pattern and brown patina. Maass. no. 117, cf. Coldstream 1977, 336. may come from either a Matrice Tripod or Cf. Rolley 1983 b, 332 and Rolley 1992, Horses tied to throughs with an object an Application Tripod, cf. e.g. Maass nos. 41. above their backs or horses with riders 99 - 100 or 104 and Delos, no. 3, p. 46 and Delphi. standing on their backs, throwing spears, notes 85 and 119 above. Maass, 33 - 34 Rolley 1977, 54 - 58 and 68 - 69, nos. are known from other Greek regions, cf. notes the difficulty in distinguishing the 390 - 392, 394 - 404, 453, 469 and 480, e.g. the Boiotian vase, Copenhagen NM two subgroups with only a small fragment. pis. VI, VIII, XXXV - XXXVII, XLII 5371, Coldstream 1968 pi. 45 a, for the Olympia. andXLVII - XLVIII. former motif and the Boiotian fibula, Ber Cf. notes 73 - 74 above. For Rolley, no. 468, cf. note 121 above. lin 8396, for the latter, Hampe 1931, 11 Unknown Provenance. Isthmia. and fig. 1; (detail = Wiesner 1968, F 121 Maass, 32, Beil. 20. Inv. No. 2826. Maass, 25 and note 30 (tri and fig. 23 b). However, the rectangle pod leg with the same matrice as Maass, above the back ofthe horse is definitely an NOTE 121 no. 110, cf. note 80 above. Argive detail, as observed by Coldstream. Solid Cast Tripods. Subgroup II. Kalapodi. Argive Heraion. B 9, Felsch -Kienast 1975, 19 and 12, fig. note 127 NM 16551, AH 2218 and 2220, cf. pp. 42 19 (handle); B 472 and B 642, Felsch 1980, Cf. note 29 above and the fragmentary - 43 and notes 65, 67 and 69. 60 - 62, figs. 33 - 34 (handles, the former handle support for a hammered tripod, B above. compared with Willemsen, pi. 57, the lat 1550, which is a rejected miscast, Felsch Delos ? ter an open-work handle with handle strap 1983, 123 - 124 and fig. 1. Rolley 1973, no. 1, pp. 491 - 492 and 500 in matrice technique with zigzag orna - 501 and 522 - 523, figs. 1 - 2 and 7. and ments and on top ofthe rim remains ofa NOTE 128 no. 4, pp. 493 and 501, figs. 3 and 7. soldered horse with long tail and a horse Cf. pp. 45 - 46 and notes 80 and 88 above. Delphi. leader) and B 643 ( tripod leg), loc.cit. fig. Most ofthe Solid Cast Tripod legs at Del 35. Same matrice as Maass, no. 109, cf. note 129 phi are too fragmentary and too battered note 80 above. For Athenian production ofhammered tri for definite classification but many recorded Mon Repos. Corfou ? pods, cf. almost all papers, note 44 above, by Rolley 1977, 33, 40 - 47, 62 and 150, Possibly Application Tripod fragment, cf. but especially Karouzos 1952, Touloupa nos. 274 -358 may belong here. For the note 120 above. 1972 and Weber 1974. handles, cf. Nos. 438 - 41 (For no. 442 cf. Olympia. A very good summary ofthe evidence is note 64 above) and no. 518, pis. I - IV, VII, Cf. notes.75 - 77 above. given by Rolley 1977, 100 - 102. XIX, XXIII -XXVIII and fig. 65. The tripod from Ithaca which is often Also cast tripod fragments were found at The leg fragments are, in general, uncon mentioned as being in matrice technique, I the Athenian Acropolis, cf. op. cit. 135, nected with other parts ofthe tripod. regard as definitely an Application Tripod, note 7. According to verbal communica Kalapodi. cf. note 120 above. tion by P. Kalligas, they are too fragmen B 26. Felsch - Kienast 1975, 19 and p. 12, tary for classification. fig. 18 and BCH 1975, p. 637 and 639, fig. NOTE 123 105. Perachora I, 55 and pi. 14, 6 and 124, 1. NOTE 130 Olympia. Miniature terracotta tripod. One leg and According to Rolley, loc. cit., the greater Cf. notes 58 and 62 above. part ofadjoining bowl preserved. H. 18.5 part ofthe hammered tripods from Delos, cm. Cf. note 102 above, for absolute chro Delphi and Olympia are Attic, whereas NOTE 122 nology. some ofthe finds at Delphi, as well as the Matrice Technique Tripods. Dodone tripods differ and presumably Argive Heraion. note 124 come from other workshops. AH 2221 - 2224 and 2784, cf. pp. 45 - 46, Corinth Cf. also the evidence for manufacture of Figs. 8-12 and notes 80 - 83. Cf. note 122 above. hammered tripods at Kalapodi, note 126 Corinth. (The handle figure from a hammered tri above. Unpublished. Two fragments were found pod, Athens NM 7729, the provenance of on the N side of the Apollo Temple, MF which is often given as Corinth, has no NOTE 1 31 72-163 and MF 72 - 165, presumably certain provenance, cf. Rolley 1969, 26, Hammered Tripods. from the same tripod. note 6 and Rolley 1977, 104, note 2). Amyclae. MF 72 - 163 is a small fragment ofthe Isthmia. Buschor - v. Massow 1927, 15 and 36, upper part ofa ReliefTripod leg in Ma The Matrice Tripod leg, cf. note 122 above. Beil. VII, 3. (Fragment oftripod leg.) Cf.

102 Calligas 1992, 42 and note 78. and presumably Peloponnesian, cf. pp. 74 - West Building: AH 19 (cf. note 21 above). Zimmermann, 135, 166 and 168, LAC 76 and notes 252 - 256 below. Northwest Building: AH 12, 16 and 22 (cf. 172, NM 7774 and Calligas 1992, 42 and note 24 above). fig. 13 c. Horse figure from hammered tri note 133 Back ofSouth Stoa: AH 8 (cf. note 23 pod handle. Zimmermann regards it as Herrmann 1964. For the Argive Geome above). probably local; apart from its lack of incised tric style see esp. 24-28. details, it appears close to Zimmermann NOTE 137 ATT 1 from Olympia, although it is more NOTE 134 Kilian 1979. slender and has a different rendering of the Ofthe many studies since Herrmann's ear. ATT 1 differs considerably from the work, I have used the following in particu NOTE 138 other horses ofhammered tripods in lar: Central Greek cf. note 10 above. Zimmermann's Attic group. Gehrig 1964, esp. pp. 48 - 57; Himmel- Hannover. Kestner Museum. Inv. No. Cf. Calligas 1992, 34 and 42, for several mann 1964; Rolley 1969; 1928. 264. other fragments of hammered tripods at Schweitzer 1969, esp. 133-173; Cold Corinthian-Laconian. Amyclae: five fragments of legs (X 17550 stream 1977 passim, Argive bronzes, esp. For Herrmann's criteria of Corinthian style and 17554 - 17557) and one small rod 149 - 152; Rolley 1977, 5 - 7 (Addenda to (based on the finds from Perachora and from the fastening of a hammered handle Rolley 1969); Heilmeier 1979 (esp. chpt. from Ithaca) and ofLaconian style (based (X 17541) as well as fragments of several IV, 54 - 72, Tierfiguren aus argivischen on the finds from the Artemis Orthia sanc hammered cauldrons. Werkstatten in Olympia. and chpt. V, pp. tuary) cf. Herrmann 1964, 28 - 32 and Argive Heraion. 73 - 86, Argivisch - olympische Tierfig 21 - 24, respectively. As regardsthe rectan NM 16555 and AH 1748 - 49, cf. pp. 48 - uren) (Cf. reviews, Herrmann 1982 and gular statuette base plates from the two re 49 and notes 94 - 96 above. Rolley 1983 b); Schmaltz 1980 a, esp. 22 - gions, both differ from the Argive Heraion Argolid. Museum of Nauplion. 36; base plates in being pierced; the Laconian (without certain provenance). Floren 1987, esp. 44 - 51; Foley 1988, 89 - ones have a projection. Willemsen, 140 with note 1 and pi. 72 94; Corinthian. above ( fragment of leg) and pi. 81 above Zimmermann, esp. 18-59. Argolid. In my AH 19. (NM 13951), deer, AH II, 200 - (fragment ofhandle). notes of the relevant statuettes from the Ar 201, pi. LXII, cf. Herrmann 1964, 29, Athens. giveHeraion I shall give references only to note 52; Heilmeyer 1979, 65, note 18 and Cf. references note 129 above. AH and to Zimmermann who gives all Rolley 1969, 75; Rolley et. al. 1986, 128 Delos. earlier references). and note 11 and Rolley 1992, 46. Rolley 1973, 496 - 500, nos. 8-14, figs. Voyatzis 1990, esp. 103 - 174; Vogt 1991, AH 8 (NM 13985) and AH 9 (NM 8- 11. 60 - 64; 13977), horses, AH II, 197 - 198 and pi. Delphi. Croissant 1992. LXXII; Zimmermann, nos. ARG 100 and Rolley 1977, 71 - 75, nos. 481 - 502, pis. See also Arcadian bronzes note 139 below. ARG 96, pp. 25 and 44 - 45 and pi. 7, XLIX - LI. with their cylindrical bodies and flat legs, Dodone. NOTE 135 in the former figure with distinct protru Cf. references, Maass, 231. In the National Cf. p. 42 and note 65, Fig. 3 above. sions ofthe legs, are also Corinthian. In Museum of Athens and the Museum of Langdon 1984, 264, observes that several spite of the information, AH II, 197, that Joannma. Cf. Rolley 1977, 102. Hera sanctuaries show a preference for ani the non - Corinthian base plate ofAH 8 The handle figures are definitely not Attic. mal over human bronze statuettes in the broke off during cleaning, the figure of AH Isthmia. Geometric Period. (I owe the reference to 8 cannot belong to this plate, on which the Cf. note 124 above. Blanche Menadier). traces ofthe hooves are circular and even Kalapodi. rather incrusted on top. Cf. note 127 above. note 136 Laconian. Olympia. AH 8 - 20 and NM 16970 and the three The horse NM 16970 cf. note 136 above Willemsen, 110 - 156, pis. 68 - 88. horse statuettes said to have been found at and Zimmermann LAC 158, p. 134 and Maass, 63 - 104, nos. 201 - 322, pis. 47 - the Argive Heraion, note 10 above. 163 is Laconian in style and has a Laconian 56. The Altar site: NM 16551 (cf. ref. note 14 base plate. I do not follow Zimmermann's Philia.? above). views, loc. cit., ofArgive influences. Handle figure of horse. The Old TempleTerrace: AH 20 (cf. ref. The two horses in the Ashmolean Museum Christiansen. 1992, 64 - 65 no. 30. note 15 above) and presumably also NM Inv. Nos. 1894,120 and 121, are presu 16970, as it was found in a trial trench mably both Laconian, although one may be NOTE 132 along the western facade of the Terrace Arcadian under Laconian influence, cf. For fragments of Geometric/Early Archaic (Blegen 1939, 432 and fig. 18 and Anto note 10 above. Attic vases at the Argive Heraion, cf. e.g. naccio 1993, pi. 24 a, cf. note 138 below). AH II, pi. LVII, nos. 13 and 22 and pi. The fill west ofthe Classical Temple: AH note 139 LVIII, no. 4 and p. 161 and pi. LXVII; 15 and unidentifiable horses and bases (cf. Arcadian Bronze Figures. however, no. 4, a conical stand, is attrib IS I, 201). Weber 1967 (the first definition of the so- uted to an Aeginetan workshop by Morris The Gymnasium: unidentifiedhorse (cf. called Lusoi -Mantineia Group); Heilmeyer 1984, 12, 19 - 20, 70 - 72 and pi. 17. note 13 above). 1979, 99 - 107 (Heilmeyer, however, does The Attic-Boiotian plate fibulae at the Ar Northeast Stoa: AH 14 and 17 (cf. note 17 not consider his Olympia - Lusoi Group as give Heraion are of the LG Boiotian type above). Arcadian and calls it: Argivisch - Arkadis-

103 che Arbeiten. In his reviewof Heilmeyer were used as stamps or seals, cf. Zimmer 130, esp. 119, Nos. C 3 and 8 and Zazoff 1979, Herrmann considers the group Ar mann, 316 - 317 with earlier references, 1969, 185 and Zazoff 1983, 58, with note give. Herrmann 1982, 616). Sinn 1980 cannot easily be applied to the Argive 45, and pp. 59-61. (here Mantineia asa certain provenance Heraion material. I agree with Himmel- One more tie to the Argive Heraion is seen besides Lusoi); Bol 1985 a; Floren 1987, 57 mann 1964, 27, that in most cases, the sim in a local seal ring ofsilver from Prosymna - 58; Zimmermann, 91 - 113. Zimmer plicity ofthe design or the size ofthe base Tomb IX, the intaglio decoration ofwhich mann, however, places most horses ofthe plate make sucha function appearunlikely. repeats the motifoftwo animals face-to- Lusoi - Mantineia Group in his Argive face, divided by a crossline, Blegen 1937, school, nos. ARG 66 - 90, and a few under note 148 378- 379 and fig. 1. It is a cartouche ring Laconia, e.g. LAC 149; AH 12 (NM 13947) and AH 13 ( NM with an oval bezel, the diameter of the ring Voyatzis 1990, 103 - 174, the Lusoi - Man 13943), AH II, 198 -199, pis. LXXII - measures 2.5 cm., the bezel 1.8 cm. in tineia Group esp. 133 - 139. Conclusions, LXXIII.= Zimmermann nos. ARG 128 - length. According to Blegen, it is crudely 138. 129, p. 27 and 49 and pi. 10. Cf. also Foley made and its intaglio decoration shows a The studies of M. Weber and U Sinn espe 1988, 90 and pi. 16 and Vogt 1991, 62 and horned animal to the left, a dog or lion to cially give evidence ofa large and stylisti 64 and figs. 35 (AH 13) and 40 (AH 12). the right. (I have not seen the ring in the cally well defined group ofbronze stat AH 12 H. 7.65 cm, L. 6.9 cm, L. ofbase National Museum of Athens). The ring uettes, having only Lusoi, Mantineia and 4.8 cm. type is Egyptian and is supposed to have Olympia as their finding places and with Forelegs broken and partly missing. Surface reached Greece around 600 BC via the particularly rich finds at the first site. For worn. Phoenician Mainland or Cyprus. (Board- bronzes from Tegea, cf. esp. Voyatzis, 127 - For technical reasons Rolley suggests that man 1967, 5 - 7, fig. 4, Group A; Board- 133 and p. 57 and note 163 below. AH 12 is Corinthian, Rolley 1969, 75; man 1970, 155 - 156 and fig. 198 A; Culi- Rolley et.al. 1986, 126, note 11, and Rol can 1978, 139, no. 10 and figs. 14-16, cf. note 140 ley 1992, 46, a theory which the base alone Holbl 1979, 287 - 289 and Holbl 1986, Cf. Voyatzis loc. cit. and p. 58 and note rules out. Cf. also note 154 below. 339). However, the votive deposits ofthe 172 below. AH 13 H. 6.6 cm, L. ofbase 4.85 cm. Tail Prosymna Tombs are dated to the late 8th missing. For its engraved decoration, cf. and early 7th Centuries BC, cf. p. 91 and NOTE 141 note 159 below. note 362 below, and for Tomb IX, also Herrmann 1964, 26 - 28 and p. 33 - 39. note 370, i.e. almost a century earlier than Cf. esp. Heilmeyer 1979, 54 - 55, Floren note 149 the suggested Phoenician or Cypriot mod 1987, 44 and Zimmermann, 19. Dugas 1921, 353, no.46, fig. 13 (Ref. from els. The intaglio decoration of the ring is Herrmann 1964, 25, note 37). The stat not Egyptianizing but genuinely Greek NOTE 142 uette is missing. The figure relief ofthe Geometric. Cf. pp. 51-52 above , the Solid Cast Tri base is from the same matrice as AH 13, al I would suggest that in form this local ring pods, Subgroup II and the Matrice Tripods. though the left end has been cut off is a direct imitation of an Egyptian ring. through the hind-quarters ofthe horse. During the period in question, there seem note 143 A similar horse relief occurs on the base of to have been relations between Greek Hera E.g. Zimmermann's Argive school, pis. 1 - a bird, Voyatzis 1990, B 53, pp. 152 - 153 sanctuaries and Egypt. Cf. in particular, the 11, includes horses which represent almost and 315 and pi. 88 ( Cf. Rolley 1969, 88). bronze mirrors with inscriptions to the all regional styles, cf. note 10 above for the Voyatzis, 153, refers to a similar decoration Egyptian goddess Mut from the Hera sanct- Central Greek style and note 139 for the ofB 47; this, however, shows a horned aries of Perachora and Samos which may Arcadian style and, in general, note 184 quadruped in intaglio, cf. the illustration, indicate an identification of the two god below. K.-D. Anhanger, pi. 57, No. 1091. Also in desses already at this time. The former mir intaglio is the striding man on the under ror is dated to the early 7th Cent. BC (Cf. note 144 side ofthe bronze scarab, Voyatzis B 185, Munro 1969; Trolle 1979, 147-148 and Rolley 1969, 75. pp. 197 and 337, fig. 27, as well as figures IS II, 57). At the Argive Heraion, there is a on several other Tegea pendants. Cf. K. D 7th Cent. Egyptian Horus statuette in NOTE 1 45 Anhanger, nos. 165 and 167, 217 - 218, bronze (Blegen 1939, 437 and fig. 24). Cf. Heilmeyer 1979, 104, fig. 6 and Voyat 236 - 237 and 244, pis. 11 and 14-15.1 zis 1990, fig. 27 for different Arcadian have not noted any other bases with figure note 151 types ofornamentally decorated solid base decoration in relief in the museum of Te Cf. p. 50 and note 104 above and notes plates and the latter, pis. 69 - 70, B 21, L 4 gea. 153, 155 and 157 below. and 5, for presumably Arcadian horses with For Arcadian base plates, cf. note 145 For the two statuette bases from the west pierced base plates, as well as note 149 be above. ern fill, cf. IS I, App. 201. low for pendant plates with incuse decora tion. NOTE 150 note 152 For corresponding horse figures on Argive Cf. e.g. Zimmermann. ARG 80, pp. 24, NOTE 146 vases, cf. e.g. Coldstream 1968, pis. 28 - and 40, pis. 5 and 73 and ARG 84, p. 24 AH 15, cf. p. 57 and note 161 below. 29, C 1 and Athens 231 and 877 (all LGII) (= Heilmeyer, no. 457, pi.59). In both and on stone seals, AH II, 346 and pi. cases, the rather similar design is complete NOTE 147 CXXXVIII, 28 and Blegen 1939, 432. fig. and seems to have been made for the spe The suggestion that the undersides ofthe 19 (= Foley 1988, 116 and 273, fig. 15). cific base. Both horses belong to the Lusoi base plates ofGeometric bronze statuettes Cf. Boardman 1963, 116 - 121 and 129 - - Mantinea group, cf. note 139 above.

104 NOTE 1 53 note 157 I do not quite see why Heilmeyer 1979, AH 11 (NM13945), AH II, 198 and pi. AH 16 (NM 13964), AH II, 200 and pi. 65, note 118; Foley 1988, 90 and Zimmer LXXII = Zimmermann. ARG 105, pp. 26 LXXIII =Zimmermann ARG 97, pp. 25 mann, 45 and 49, all regard AH 11 as not and 45 and pi. 8; Foley 1988, 90 and pi. 16 c. and 44, pi. 7. ably earlier than AH 12 - 13. In my opin H. 4.45 cm, L. 4. 6 cm, L. ofbase 4. cm. H. 3 cm, L. 5.5 cm. Base plate L. 3.2 cm., ion, its posture is very close to that of the Part ofright hind leg missing. For the en Th. 0.2 cm. Tip of tail missing. painted horses ofAthens C 201. graved decoration, cf. note 159 below. Coldstream 1977, 330, gives his absolute For AH 12-13, cf. note 148 above and NOTE 1 58 dates ofArgive LG II as between ca. 730 note 159 below. Cf. notes 148 and 153 above and 159 below. and 690 BC. My dates around 700 BC are For AH 14 and 16, cf. notes 155 and 157 slightly earlier, cf. IS I, 178, note 46. below. NOTE 1 59 The decoration of AH 13 is best preserved note 161 note 154 on the left side of the figure, but also partly AH 15 (NM 13962). AH II, 199, pis. Cf. Herrmann 1964, 24:"Der spannungs- visible on the right side, from a photograph LXXIII and CXXXVIII. voll bewegte Ruckenkontur ... die eigent- of which the drawing fig. 19 was made. The mane and the ears are indicated. The umliche Beweglichkeit vor allem der Just below the ears are two oblique, parallel head is turned slightly to the right. Beine". lines ofdiminutive circles and on the fore- H. 2. 9 cm, L. 4. 2 cm, L. ofbase 3. 1 cm. Statuette and base plate ofthe Argive Her quarters the outline ofa broad band is ren Zimmermann, ARG 156, pp. 28 and 51, aion animals were made ofseparate ma dered in the same way with - in its centre pi. 11. trices joined in the mould. I have not ob - two parallel lines meeting in a small cir served traces ofthe very complicated tech cle. (There are some chance lines and NOTE 162 nique used for Corinthian figures described much damage, but no other certain traces AH 10 (NM 13949). AH II, 198 and pi. by Heilmeyer (Heilmeyer 1979, 37; cf. ofdecoration). It is possible that AH 12 LXXII =Zimmermann. ARG 95, pp. 25 Zimmer, 197 and cf. note 148 above, ref. had a similar decoration as there seem to be and 43 - 44, pi. 7. to Rolley). Judging from traces on the faint traces on the neck and forequarters, H. 4 cm, L. ofbase 3.55 cm. front part ofAH 16, cf. note 157 below, but its surface is too worn to be sure. Ac The base is similar to the detached base of this may have been the place of the funnel cording to AH II, 198, AH 11 had an en AH 8, cf. note 138 above. (cf. Zimmermann, p. 51). graved line from ear to nose on either side Voyatzis 1990, B 13, pp. 128 - 129, pi. 66 ofthe head. Cf. especially Bohen 1988, 10 and fig. 27 = Zimmermann. ARC 70, pp. note 155 - 11 for similar painted rendering ofbridles 94 and 103-104 and pi. 20. Voyatzis re AH 14 (NM13565 + 13994), AH II, 199 and broad protection band on the forequar gards it, together with B 15, p. 129, pi. 66 and pi. LXXIII= Zimmermann no. ARG ters ofhorses ofAttic Geometric pyxides = Zimmermann ARC 71, as possibly an 106, pp. 26 and 45 and pi. 8. The base and cf. e.g. op. cit. II 4, pi. 23. Cf. also Argive import, cf. note 163 below. plate is said to have broken off in cleaning. Himmelmann 1992, 10-11 Textabb. 2 The same information was incorrectly and fig. 3 = Zimmermann ATT No. 40, note 163 given about AH 8 (cf. note 138 above). As (cf. note 180 below). A rather heavy type ofhorse is represented the lower parts ofthe legs are missing, I do For illustrations of Geometric riding in several examples at Tegea. Voyatzis 1990, not see, how they could have broken off horses, cf. Wiesner 1968, esp. p. F 119 - 123. 129 and 131 - 132, B 14, B 18 and B 19 during cleaning. The circular ornament on the neck ofAH (and Dugas 1921, 345, no. 9, fig. 6) pis. H. 4.1 cm. Base plate, L. 4.4 cm, Th. 0.2 13 may possibly be a brand, although it was 66 - 68. = Zimmermann, ARC 53, 59, 73 cm. usually placed on the shoulders or the and 112. Voyatzis loc. cit. also connects B For Arcadian counterparts to decoration of hindquarters, cf. Bohen, loc. cit. and 16 (pi. 67 and fig. 27) from the Artemis base, cf. note 152 above. Stubbe Ostergard. 1991, 173 - 175, fig. 76. Sanctuary near Mavriki with these horses. AH 20 (NM 13968), AH II, 201 and pi. In my opinion, Voyatzis B 15, cf. note 162 LXXIII; Heilmeyer 1979, 65, note 118 and NOTE 160 above, belongs to the same group. 66, fig. 2; Zimmermann, 43, note 175. Cf. Rolley, note 144 above. These animal figures form one group H. 4.1 cm. L. 4.5 cm. Base plate L. 2.9 cm. For painted LG parallels to the horses on within a rather large variation ofanimal Th. 0.35 cm. the bases, cf. note 150 above. types in Tegea, some ofwhich show Laco Apparently the treatment ofthe Argive For parallels to the horse statuettes, esp. nian influences, cf. Voyatzis 1990, 129 - Heraion bronzes, cf. note 41 above, did not their gently curving outline, cf. the refer 130, B 19 - 21, pis. 68 - 69; however, B 20 influence the patina in the same way as that ence by Herrmann 1964, 25, to the Tiryns is, in my opinion, correctly attributed to ofthe other bronzes from the Argive Hera sherd, fig. 5, and cf. e.g. Coldstream 1968, Laconia by Zimmermann, pp. 131 and ion. The incuse decoration ofthe under pi. 30 (Athens C 201), p. 145, dated to the 134, LAC 114, pi. 33. (B 17 mentioned by side of the base is essentially an Arcadian very end ofArgive LG, contemporary with Voyatzis together with the above horse fig feature, but there is no exact Arcadian par Early Orientalizing elsewhere. On both ures was actually found in Sparta = Zim allel for this large motif, possibly ofa re these horses, the sex is rendered, but there mermann, LAC 163). clining ox. are many Argive painted horses without this feature, in LG II as well as in Subgeo note 164 note 156 metric and Early Orientalizing vase-paint AH 22 (NM 13466). AH II, 201, pi. Cf. Voyatzis 1990, 140 - 142, pis. 74 -76, ing, cf. e.g. Courbin 1968, pis. 8, 32 - 33 LXXIV; Heilmeyer 1979, 65, note 118, esp. B 23, 27 and 28. and 48, the first-mentioned vase coming here identified as a stamp or seal. K.-D. from the Argive Heraion. Anhanger, 187, No. 1137 A.

105 H. 1.4 cm, L. 2.35 cm, L. ofbase 1.45 cm. BC, cf. AO, 197: " Geometric...The well- note 169 I do not follow I. Kilian - Dirlmeier in her known type of animal statuette... in the AH 17 (NM 13984 + 13986), AH II, classification ofthis pendant, seeing instead lowest layers of Geometric pottery, there 200 and pi. LXXIV= Zimmermann, ARG its counterparts in the following group: K.- were very few specimens... some lay 133, pp. 27 and 50, pi. 10. It is badly cast D. Anhanger, nos. 1157 - 1162, pp. 193 - among pottery ofLaconian I only, while with a somewhat bubbled surface and a 194 and pi. 61 and p. 194, note 45, ref. to the bulk of them, as indeed of all the double mouth, presumably due to a casting Dugas 1921, 342 - 345 and figs. 2 and 4, bronzes... lay in those layers which were failure. However, its mouth was definitely nos. 1 and 5 (two more bronze oxen of the marked by the presence of Proto-Corin- divided horizontally like that ofother ani same type, although without bored holes thian pottery." By the revision ofLaconian mals from the Argive Heraion. Its eyes and thus not pendants). For the Tegea ex chronology from the chronology ofthe were bored holes. H. with base 6.8 cm, L. amples, cf. also Voyatzis 1990, 144 - 147, B Menelaion, the excavators' absolute chro ofbase 5.15 cm. Base plate detached, but 34 - B 37, pis. 78 - 80 and for the Olym nology for Lac. I is now only slightly low belonging; on its top engraved ornamental pia example, Philipp 1981, no. 1250, p. ered, cf. Cavanagh - Laxton 1984, 34 - 35 decoration. 351 and pi. 77. and Carter 1987,358. AH 18 (NM 13944), AH II, 200 and pi. S. Benton published two important con LXXIV. Foley 1988, 92 and pi. 17. Vogt NOTE 165 texts, one Tomb 20 in Bari ofa horse fig 1991, 157 and fig. 96 (Cat. no. 431). Christiansen 1992, no. 68. I.N. 3356, pp. ure with an EPC aryballos, Benton 1950, H. 5.7 cm, L. 8 cm. Lower parts oflegs 88 - 89. Ref. loc. cit. to stone seals AH II, 21 and pi. IV d (cf. ASAtene n.s. 21 - 22, and tails missing as well as base. Herrmann 349, nos. 39 - 41, pi. CXXXVIII, and to 1959-60, 10-12, fig. 2) and the other on 1964, 28, note 42, dated it as late as the stone seals from East Greece, especially Ithaca of a Geometric horse found inside a second half ofthe 7th Cent. BC and so Ephesos and Lindos. Protocorinthian kyathos from around 700 does Vogt, loc. cit. BC, Benton 1953, 348, E 194, pi. 65 and In my opinion, it is closely related to the note 166 the kyathos, no. 782, p. 294 and fig. 10. group oflarger horse statuettes published E.g. Heilmeyer 1979, 65, note 118, dates OfLangdon's references, only the follow by Schilbach 1984, pis. 1 - 4, although AH 11 to the 730's and AH 12 - 13 to the ing seem to have importance in the present Schilbach's chronology ofthis group within 720 s. Rolley 1969, 72, dates the bronze context: the Geometric or Subgeometric periods figures from the Argive Heraion, in gen Langdon, loc.cit. note 5. seems a little early to me. eral, to the second half ofthe 8th Cent. Chamilavrisi near Thebes. Cf. Schmaltz BC, whereas Vogt 1991, 61 - 64, stretches 1980 b, 41 - 42, note 80 and pi. 24. A rich note 170 the production over the whole of the 8th female burial with four bronze figures of Bevan 1986, 319 - 337, esp. 335 - 336, Cent. BC, even separating AH 12 and AH deer and dogs, bronze pins and LG pottery emphasizes in her conclusions the variety 13 for about a century, in spite oftheir from shortly after 750 BC. (ADelt, 26, ofanimal statuettes offered to each deity; closely related base reliefs. AH 13 (Cat. no. 1971, B, 215- 216 and pi. 188 ( LG pot however, although there is not always an 225) is dated to the first quarter ofthe 8th tery) (Th. Spyropoulos). obvious connection between the animal Cent. BC, 62, and AH 12 (Cat. no. 243) to Langdon, loc. cit. note 6. Tomb near types offered and the individuality ofthe shortly before 700 BC, p. 64. Thebes. (Mem.Soc.Ant. 55, 1894,Ser. 6, particular deity, she states that certain types Vol. 5, pp. 160 - 161) with a deer/fawn ofanimals were discovered more frequently NOTE 167 group and a lyre-player seal, (cf. Boardman in sanctuaries ofsome deities than in others, Zimmermann, 10, refers to some contexts 1966, 28, no. 53. Boardman 1990, 9, the a tendency which became more clearly of chronological importance, Langdon whole group ofLyre Player Seals to the marked during the Archaic Period. 1984, 43 - 47, with notes 4-8. pp. 78 - middle years of the second half of the 8th The earliest known Greek representations 79 to others. Cent. BC) in bronze ofcows or bulls at the Argive The sanctuaries are not informative in this Langdon, loc. cit. note 8. Kalamata. Heraion are AH 23 and 25, imitations of connection. The find context ofthe Kala (ADelt 20. 1965, B, 207 and pi. 213 B) Near Eastern cauldrons with bulls' heads, podi horse, B 200, apparently does not yet (PG. Themelis) A female burial in a pithos, from the early 7th Cent. BC. Cf. most re allow an exact chronology (cf. Felsch 1980, a bronze horse found together with LG cently Muscarella 1993, 33. Presumably, 60 and fig. 31) and the two lion figures, pins (Cf. K.-D. Nadeln, 130 sq., nos. 1459 the bull's head found by Rangabe and Bur Felsch - Kienast 1975, 19 and fig. 20 (B - 60, pi. 50 (Geometric X) and p. 139, nos. sian, cf. p. 38 and note 11 above, also be 39) and Felsch 1980, 59 and figs. 29 - 30 1612 - 13, pi. 54 (Geometric XV) In her longs to such a cauldron. The earliest (B 125) are surface finds. discussion of the chronology ofthe former bronze statuettes are the Archaic bulls, AH The Geometric bronze horses from Pe pin type, p. 131, I. Kilian-Dirlmeyer refers 24 and 26. AH II, 202 and pi. LXXV For rachora were found only in the later so- to the statuette for the absolute chronology the latter, cf. IS I, 185, note 75. called Hera Limenia deposit which lasted ofthe tomb, but she also states that the pins into the Archaic Period (cf. Coldstream of Geometric XV are definitely LG. NOTE 1 71 1977, 174). For a re-valuation ofthe Per Langdon, loc. cit. Bari. Cf. above. Cf. notes 150, 160 and 165 above. achora sanctuary, dating the so-called Hera The Anavra finds, Langdon, loc. cit. note Limenia building and the activities con 8, are not a certain closed context. note 172 nected with it to the 7th Cent. BC, cf. For contexts with bird figures, cf. note 214 The one certain Arcadian bronze statuette Tomlinson 1990, 330 - 333. below, esp. Amphikleia and Tiryns. at the Argive Heraion is, in my opinion, In the Artemis Orthia Sanctuary , the AH 10, cf. p. 57 and note 162 above. AH bronze figures were found in contexts from note 168 20 is possibly Arcadian, cf. p. 56 and note around 700 BC. and during the 7th Cent. Cf. notes 150 and 160 above. 155 above. Probably also the missing stat-

106 uettes ofthe base plates ofAH 8, cf. note count for the definitely Argive stylistic detail Bonn. Inv. No. C 74. Himmelmann- 138 above, and AH 14, cf. note 151 above, on one of the metope reliefs of an Olympia Wildschiitz 1974, figs. 1 - 7 = Zimmer were Arcadian. But the similarities between Matrice Tripod, cf. note 126 above. mann 40, pp. 273 and 283 and pi. 66. Cf. the two groups ofbronze statuettes are Himmelmann 1992, 10-11, Textabb. 2 great, as stated p. 53 cf. notes 139, 156, NOTE 179 and figs. 3 and 9. Cat. no. 3, pp. 46 - 48. 162 -164 above and note 174 below. Cf. note 149 above for finds at Tegea of Its base plate is not Argiveand, although Argive Heraion types ofbase plates. not identical, it is reminiscent ofsome Ar note 173 For the base plates ofGeometric bronze cadian base plates, e.g. Voyatzis 1990, B 29, Voyatzis often stresses the presence of Laco figures found at Olympia, cf. Heilmeyer fig. 27. In general, Arcadian base plates are nian traits in Arcadian Geometric bronze 1979, pi. 59 below (Lusoi - Mantinea very varied, cf. p. 54 and note 145 above. figures, cf. e.g. Voyatzis 1990, 129 - 133 Group), pis. 51 and 56 (Corinth) and pis. Its detailed features, such as the circular (Tegea), 138 (Lusoi and Bassai/Phigaleia) 66 - 67(Laconia) and at Delphi, cf. Rolley hollow eyes and the angular outline ofits and 139 and 261 (Conclusions). 1969, pl.XVII. legs, do not find counterparts among the The Laconian influences are impressive, in Argive Heraion horses and stylisticallyit particular in the groups from Lusoi and NOTE 180 seems closer to some Arcadian figures, cf. Bassai/Phigaleia. The evidence from Tegea For earlier attributions, cf. e.g. Herrmann e.g. Voyatzis 1990, L 4, p. 134 and pi. 64. seems less convincing. Voyatzis 1990, B 20 1964, 25, notes 36 - 39. (Apart from the Nor are there any certain examples offig and B 21, pp. 130 - 131, pis. 68 - 69 are Olympia and Tegea finds, Heilmeyer 1979, ured tremolo decoration on Argive bronzes acquisitions by the Ashmolean Museum at 65, note 118, does not find Herrmann's statuettes. I am inclined to consider it Ar a time when there were no excavations at contributions convincing) and Floren 1987, cadian, cf. p. 76 and note 256 below. Tegea and their provenance may not be re 45, notes 125 - 132. Only the horse in Frankfurt. Liebighaus. liable, whereas B 17 was actually found in The Lusoi figures form part ofthe Lusoi - Bol - Weber 1985, 12, Cat. no. 13 = Zim Sparta = Zimmermann, LAC 163. Mantinea group, cf. note 139 above. mermann. ARC 86, p. 96 and pi. 22 is, in For the Athenian Acropolis figures, cf. my opinion, related to the Argive Heraion NOTE 174 Zimmermann, ATT 34-35, pp. 272 and horses, although the hind legs have more Cf. most recently, Voyatzis 1990, esp. 128 - 282, pis. 65 - 66. The Sparta horses, cf. pronounced details than usual. 139, with conclusions p. 132 and 138-139 Zimmermann, LAC 173 - 174, pp. 135 Christiansen 1993, 64 - 65, no. 31, a horse and cf. note 139 above references to Heil and 166, pis. 38 and 78, have non Argive from Philia with its legs rounded under meyer (and review by Herrmann) and base plates and the Perachora horse even neath and thus neither a tripod horse nor a Zimmermann. has a pierced baseplate (cf. Zimmermann, statuette with base plate, has many detailed COR 50, pi. 44 and Heilmeyer 1979, 99). features in common with the Argive Hera NOTE 175 The horse from Kalaureia = Zimmer ion statuettes, esp. its horizontally divided Voyatzis 1990, p. 260 Conclusions:"The mann ARG 134, pp. 27 and 50, is a very mouth. It seems to be one ofthe best can bronze objects... indicate the existence of static and plump figure and has, in contrast didates for an Argive horse. Arcadian originality, creativity and a con with the Argive Heraion horses, rendering As regards the human figures, our knowl siderable distinction in style". of the sex. edge from the Argive Heraion is too vague For Herrmann's suggestion ofArgive ori for secure attributions. Except for the Ar NOTE 176 gin ofthe Tegea horse, Dugas no. 9, cf. gos warrior (cf. p. 61, Fig. 23 and note 189 Cf. references in note 77 above for the note 163 above. below), I do not find the attributions of horse figures in question. For the Nemea horse cf. and note 193 be Geometric human bronze figures to the low. Argolid convincing. NOTE 177 Ofthe horses in private collections, I Until now there do not seem to have been see no stylistic relations at all, regarding NOTE 181 found fragments of Geometric bronze tri most ofthe attributions given by Floren, Cf. Heilmeyer 1979, 137: 55.3 % ofall im pods in Arcadian sanctuaries. They are not loc. cit. and find it worth while discussing ported early animal bronze figures in published from the old excavations and ac only the following attributions: Olympia are Argive. cording to verbal communication by Veron Basel Schefold 1960, Cat. no. 59 = Zim ica Mitsopoulos-Leon and Erik Ostby, they mermann. ARG 131, pp. 27 and 49 with NOTE 182 have not been found in either ofthe cur note 235. This horse figure has an Archaic Cf. Heilmeyer 1979, 54 and Herrmann, rent excavations at Lusoi and Athena Alea Argive inscription, but the inscription must 1982, 614. For the distribution area of the at Tegea, except for a recent find ofa frag be a secondary feature and does not neces two subgroups oftripods, cf. p. 51 and ment ofa miniature tripod at the latter site. sarily indicate Argive origin. The detail notes 119-120 above. Voyatzis 1990, 102, concludes her discus rendering of its legs is much more pro sion ofthe Tegea rim, B 203, pi. 145, by nounced than in the Argive Heraion NOTE 183 stating that it is a rim fragment ofan ordi horses. Stylistically, it seems to me to be Heilmeyer 1979, chpts. IV and V nary bronze pot. closely related to the horses ofthe Tripods For the chronology ofthe Argive Heraion with Fanned Grooves, cf. note 90 above, bronzes, cf. p. 57 above. NOTE 178 for which group of tripods I do not see any Heilmeyer's own dates for the Argive Her Reciprocal stylistic influences would cer reason for connection with the Argolid, cf. aion bronzes are in no case earlier than the tainly take place if the idea ofitinerant p. 51 above. Also Schefold, loc. cit. No. 58 740's, cf. Heilmeyer, 65, note 118. bronze tripod workers is correct, cf. pp. 46 may be a horse from a Tripod with Fanned According to Heilmeyer, 137, about 50% and 52 and note 88 above. They might ac Grooves. ofthe published Geometric animal bronze

107 figures from Olympia attributed to the H. Sarian and F Croissant have contributed Although the engraved decoration ofthe Argolid are oxen. decisively with their studies based on early bronze horses from the Argive Heraion, cf. Argive terracottas and vase-painting, cf. pp. Fig. 19 and note 159 above, appears to il NOTE 184 61-62 and note 189 and 193 below. lustrate the harness ofchariot horses, the Although Zimmermann's book is certainly statuettes were offered as separate figures, an impressive contribution to the studies of NOTE 187 and do not form a part ofchariot groups. Greek Geometric sculpture and his conclu Argos Mus. B 75. Courbin 1955, p. 314. sions, in general, appear convincing, his Gehrig 1964, 49. Zimmermann, ARG 94, note 193 Argive school is, in my opinion, rather pp. 25 and 43 and pi. 7. For LG bronze statuettes at other sites in confused, representing almost all Greek Apart from its incrustation, it is also slightly the Argolid, cf. a horse from Nemea, Br Geometric regional styles. His ARG nos. damaged and there are scratches on the legs. 20. Zimmermann, ARG 127, p. 237 and 1-23 are attributions based on handle fig pi. 10, and Miller 1990, 51-52 and fig. ures ofSolid Cast Tripods, Subgroup I and NOTE 188 16, and a woman's figure from Asine, Pro- stylistically differ considerably from the Ar It is difficult to find comparative material tonotariou - Deilaki 1961, 318 - 319, cf. give Heraion figures; most ofhis ARG nos. from Argos itself; e.g. the fragment ofa ter Langdon 1984, 178, C 138; Floren 1987, 24 - 36 and 136-155 are very inferior racotta horse from the Geometric terra 51 and 72 and Foley 1988, 90 and pi. 18 d. animals, presumably not always horses, for cotta groups mentioned in note 190 below, The Nemea horse is without exact parallels which I find any attribution doubtful; is too small to give any useful information, and is presumably a local product, whereas ARG nos. 39 - 40 have Laconian traits and cf. Sarian 1969, 656, nos. 10 - 11, fig. 26. the Asine statuette may be Cretan. the latter is placed on a pierced base; his The nearest parallel to the decoration of For Early 7th Cent, bronze statuettes at the ARG nos. 66 - 90 and possibly 91, cf. note the base plate is seen on Zimmermann, Argive Heraion, cf. AH 17 - 18, p. 58 and 139 above; ARG nos. 108 - 114 and ARG 119, pi.73; but the two diagonal mo note 169 above, and at Argos Croissant 119 - 126 are related to Central Greek tives are not identical. 1992, who also, 72, cf. pi. 22, figs. 1 - 2, horses cf. note 10, Hannover, above, and stresses the stylistic continuity ofthe figure probably have the same origin. note 189 style ofArgos, by pointing out - as earlier The group ARG 46 - 58 has points ofsim Delphi. Inv. No. 3649. Rolley 1969, no. noted by other scholars - the similarity in ilarity to the Argive Heraion animals and 28, pp. 45 - 46 , pi. IX (H. 12 cm); Sarian the thorax renderings ofthe LG cuirass are regarded as Argive by most scholars. 1969, 661 - 664, figs. 14-16; (The Geo from Argos and the statue of Cleobis. They are centred round ARG 46 = Ol. Br. metric terracotta groups from Argos, cf. 1308, Heilmeyer 1979, no. 147, pi. 21. BCH 1967, 844 and Sarian, op. cit. nos. 1 NOTE 194 Heilmeyer, 64, discusses the group and its - 6, figs. 1-11, pis. XV - XVI;(only no. 1 There are 16 bronze bird figures from the characteristics, underlining the interest in has the head preserved). For their chronol Argive Heraion: AH 36 - 48 and AH 881, surface finishing and detail rendering, cri ogy, cf. their LG context BCH 1967, p NM 16562 and 16971. teria which do not apply to the Argive 844). Cf. Foley 1988, 102 - 103 and Crois AH 44 comes from the "Upper Hill", cf. Heraion horses. Although I see some stylis sant 1992, 78 - 79, pi. 27, figs. 23 and 25. IS I, 192, note 136; NM 16971 from the tic similarity I am not convinced ofthe at (The terracotta warriors, pi. 27, figs. 22, 24 Altar site, cf. IS I, 176, note 33; a cock tributions. and 32). pendant, either AH 47 or AH 48, from the foundations ofthe Second Temple and AH NOTE 185 note 190 37 and 39 from around the Northeast Stoa, Kilian - Dirlmeier 1985, 230 - 231, fig. Cf. Sarian 1969, 661 and Rolley 1969, 46 both buildings situated close to the Altar 13, concludes that 32,8 % ofall outside with note 4, pp. 26 and 30. area, cf. p 38. and notes 18 and 17 above, Geometric/ early 7th Cent. BC votives in respectively. AH 46 or AH 48 was found in Olympia are Argive (as compared with e.g. note 191 the western fill, cf. IS I, App. 201 and AH 0.5 % ofArcadian votives). Except for the Heilmeyer 1981, 68 - 71, considers the fig 36 in the West Building, cf. note 21 above, limited group ofTripods with Fanned ure groups Laconian based on the criteria i.e. presumably originally from altar fills, cf. Grooves, she considers all cast Geometric for the Laconian Geometric horses. p. 38 above. Finally NM 16554 comes tripods at Olympia as Argive and she According to Felsch 1983, 26 - 27 and from the Southern Slope, cf. note 24 strictly follows Heilmeyer's attributions of fig.12 these bronze groups may be dated above. the Olympia bronze statuettes. before 750 BC judging from the chronol In general, the certain Argive Geometric ogy ofa seated male figure in Kalapodi. note 195 bronzes are rare at Olympia, cf. also notes This date cannot, however, apply to the Bouzek 1967, and Bouzek 1971. 277 and 289 below, for the absence in this Argive bronze figure from Delphi, the ter For later studies, cf. esp.: sanctuary some Northeast Peloponnesian racotta counterparts ofwhich are Late K.-D. Anhanger; Kilian 1975 a; Sapouna - pin types which were produced only or Geometric, cf. note 189 above. Sakellarakis 1978; partly in Argos or the Argive Heraion. Rolley 1969, esp. 84 - 93; Rolley 1977, note 192 esp. 7; Heilmeyer 1979, 185 - 190; Philipp note 186 Among the published early terracotta 1981, 362 - 366, nos. 1282 -89, pis. 24 and A publication ofthe Argive Heraion Geo figurines at the Argive Heraion are riding 79 - 80; Foley 1988 esp. 92 - 93; Voyatzis metric terracottas and vases would expand warriors, but there are no chariots and fig 1990, esp. p. 147 - 157. the comparative material as will, ofcourse, ures which can be connected to a theme For criticism ofBouzek's regional attribu excavations at other Argive sites, cf. note corresponding with that ofthe terracotta tions, cf. esp. Rolley 1969, 90 - 92 and 193 below. However, archaeologists such as groups from Argos. notes 198 and 203 below.

io8 NOTE 196 gas 1921, 349, no. 22, fig. 9, and for two - 1051, pis. 54 - 56, chiefly from Pherai, I have handled only a few ofthe figures birds on such a plate, decorating the top of (Conclusion: Thessalian, 175) and Chris and most measurements are taken from AH a conical pendant from Philia, cf. Chris tiansen 1993, 66 - 69 nos. 34 -36, Philia. and the other relevant publications. tiansen 1993, 74 -75 no. 44. As the holes of AH 39 are in the plate not through the NOTE 204 NOTE 197 birds, they cannot have been meant for sus AH 42 (NM 13956). AH II, 205, pi. AH 881 (NM 14033), AH II, 244, pi. pension. LXXXVII. LXXXVII. Bouzek 1967, 121 and fig. 3, 4 (Argive). H. 4.8 cm, W 2.8 cm. The fastening pin is NOTE 200 K.-D. Anhanger. no. 1019, p. 172 and pi. missing but had once been reinserted. AH 40 (NM 13953) and AH 41 (NM 55, cf. note 203 above. Blinkenberg, 146, No. VII 14 c; Bouzek 13955). AH II, 205, and pi. LXXVI. Heilmeyer 1979, 187, compares this bird as 1967, 122 and fig. 4, 13; Kilian 1975 a, AH 40, H. 3.5 cm. AH 41. H. 3.2 cm. well as AH 43 and NM 16971 with his no. 135; Bouzek 1967, 119 and fig. 2, 10 - 11. 942 (= K.-D. Anhanger no. 952 and Phi Sapouna - Sakellarakis 1978, 99, with note AH 40 = K.-D. Anhanger. no. 974; Rolley lipp 1981, no. 1283). In my opinion, his 7 (Type VI lb); 1969, 84 and Philipp 1981, 365. observations are valid only for AH 43 and, Philipp 1981, 271, note 258, cf. note 250 AH 41 = K.-D. Anhanger. no. 913. as to its stem, for NM 16971, cf. notes 206 below; Loc. cit., Kilian Dirlmeier placed the latter - 207 below. Both Heilmeyer, loc. cit., and Foley 1988, 84. bird among the birds on vertical disks, a Foley 1988, 93 and note 124, seem to re The heads ofboth birds are missing as well type which otherwise is not represented at gard the Argive Heraion birds as local. as the tip ofthe tail ofthe bird on the the Argive Heraion. The bird is badly pre Considering the types ofbase plates of plate. The plate is very worn, but there are served and broken just below the stem, bronze quadrupeds from the Argive Hera traces ofa horizontal tremolo line, ca. 0.3 with no trace ofa disk. I find it difficult to ion, locally produced pierced base plates cm. above the lower rim. The vertical determine its exact type, but on the whole such as those ofAH 42 - 43 do not appear catch has a trapezoid section and there are I find a prism pendant more likely than a likely to me, cf. pp. 54 - 56 above. two profiled rings above, four below. disk pendant. Bouzek 1967, 122, note 22, notes that on For the parallels in Kalapodi, cf. Felsch NOTE 205 genuinely island fibulae, the bird is never 1983, 127 - 128, figs 14-16, and esp. AH 44 (NM 13947).AH II, 205, pi. placed on top ofthe plate, only on the bow Felsch 1980, 56 - 57, figs. 26 - 28. Esp. LXXVII. (cf. Sapouna - Sakellarakis 1978, 97 - 99, close to AH 40 is the prism pendant, B H. 1.9 cm, L. 4.5 cm. Inside partly filled Type VII b, pis. 38 -40) to which observa 602, op. cit. p. 52 and fig. 28. For its abso with some dark substance, probably the tion, however, there is one exception, Sa lute chronology, cf. note 214 below. clay core. pouna - Sakellarakis, no. 1444, pi. 40, from It is related to K.-D. Anhanger, nos. 775 - Ialysos. The fibulae ofa hoard in the Ar NOTE 201 777, Thessalian birds, cf. p. 140 - 141, pi 43. chaeological Museum of Istanbul, said to AH 2837 (NM 20831/2). AH II, 331 and have been found near Smyrna, op. cit. 99, pl.CXXXVI. H. 4 cm. NOTE 206 note 7, do not have this trait. For the Lusoi NM 16971. Blegen 1939, 433, fig. 18. fibula, cf. Mitsopoulos - Leon 1990, 35 - NOTE 202 H. 4.3 cm. 36, fig. 6, ofthe type Blinkenberg VIII 8. NM 16562. Blegen 1939, 438 and fig. 25. Heilmeyer 1979, 187, cf. note 204 above. Bouzek attributes the birds ofAH 881 to According to Blegen the object measures For the bird type, cf. AO, pi. LXXVI, g, h his Argive type. 12 cm. in total length and 6.5 cm. in total and n, and Bouzek 1967, 116, fig. 1,1-3. height; the birds measure 2.5 cm. in length For the stamp pendants from Tegea, cf. K.- NOTE 198 and 1.9 cm. in height. One ofthe stems of D. Anhanger, nos. 171, 183 and 241 = Bouzek 1967, 119 - 121 and fig. 2. the vertical element is bent; in their ring Voyatzis 1990, B 68, 75 and 109. For the distribution area, cf. K-D. profiles they resemble the stems ofthe For Laconian influence on Arcadian bronze Anhanger, pi. 104 B (birds on vertically Thessalian - Central Greek arm rings, cf. statuettes, cf. p. 58 and note 173 above and placed disks) and pi. 105 A (birds on prism pp. 69 - 70 and note 235 below, AH 1597 Voyatzis 1990, 150- 152. formed stamps). Cf. op. cit. 157 -158 and - 1599 (Fig. 34). 167 for a Central Greek origin. Cf. also Compare with K.-D. Anhanger, 184, nos. NOTE 207 Felsch 1983, 128, and Felsch 1980, 57 - 58 1112 - 1112 A, pi. 58. The former object AH 43 (NM 13961). AH II, 208, pi. who states that with one exception all of comes from Anavra in Locris, the latter is LXXVII. the 20 Geometric birds found at Kalapodi ofunknown provenance in a private collec K.-DAnhanger, no. 1081, p. 178 and pi. 57. are ofBouzek's Corinthian type and, with tion. The birds on a third stand, no. 1113 Bouzek 1967, 121 and fig. 3.7 (Argive). two exceptions, both from Delphi, from Sparta, are of a different type. Heilmeyer 1979, 187 (Argive, cf. note 204 Bouzek's Central Greek type is not repre above). sented in Central Greece at all. note 203 Foley 1988, 93 and note 124. AH 38, AH II, 204 and pi. LXXVI. Voyatzis 1990, 56, accepts the suggestion, note 199 The base plate is broken off and the bird is Sinn 1980, 30, ofa Lusoi production cen AH 39 (NM 13960). AH II, 205, pi. badly preserved to a height of3.6 cm. tre, because ofthe base plate ofher no. L LXXVI. Bouzek 1967, 121 and fig. 3.3. (Argive). 17, pi. 90. Her no. L 16, pi. 91, is related H. 3.6 cm, L ofbase 2.8 cm. For the type ofbird, cf. Kilian 1975 a, pi. to Heilmeyer 1979, no. 942, cf. note 204 For a corresponding fastening plate with an 83, 18 - 20 and pi. 84, 1 - 19 from Pherai above. upper undulating plate from Tegea, cf. Du- and K.-D. Anhanger, 171 - 175 nos. 1015 AH 43 is definitely related to this group, cf.

109 K.-D. Anhanger, 161 - 164, nos. 952 - 954 H. 4.45 cm. Greek type came from stratigraphical con and 956. Just as for AH 42, I find an Argive Bouzek 1967, 129 and fig. 10, 3. texts. In and immediately above an ash production unlikely, cf. note 204 above. K.-D. Anhanger, 132, no. 726 and pi. 39. layer, presumably from an altar, were found Foley 1988, fig. 10. two bird figures. The ash layer was dated to NOTE 208 the second half ofthe eighth Cent. BC AH 36 - 37 (NM 13958 - 59). AH II, note 211 from a local skyphos fragment, imitating 204 and pi. LXXVI. Cf. Bouzek 1967, 125 - 133. Attic LG I pottery, which was found im AH 36, H. 5.25 cm.; AH 37, H. 3.7 cm. For the Thessalian type, cf. K.-D. Anhan mediately below the layer. In an overlying Bouzek 1967, 120 and fig. 3, 1 - 2 (Argive) ger, 149 - 150, nos. 840 - 847, pis. 47 - 48, clay layer, containing also an EPC kotyle AH 36 = K.-D. Anhanger, no. 961, p. 162 and for the Arcadian type, esp. op. cit. pp. fragment and thus datable to the late 8th and pi. 52. Cf. Philipp 1981, 364 and note 128- 129, nos. 712-719, 37. Cent. BC, were two more bird figures, in 689. Rolley 1969, 88 and 90. cluding the prism pendant B 602, cf. note For AH 37 cf. K.-D. Anhanger, 162 and For AH 46, cf. in particular, K.-D. 200 above. (Felsch 1980, 50 - 52) note 104. Anhanger, No. 842 = Christiansen, p. 77, On the second pavement ofthe altar in the No. 50, from Philia. Another close parallel, Temple lay several fibulae (cf. note 247 be NOTE 209 although with horizontally bored hole, low). Through the pavement and its over Bouzek loc.cit. comes from Lusoi, Mitsopoulos - Leon - lying fill two bothroi which contained sev Cf. Voyatzis 1990, B 51 and B 53, pp. 152 - 1990, 35 - 36, fig. 5, possibly a sign that eral Boiotian plate fibulae of iron were dug 153, pis. 87 and 88: For the relief decora these cock types were also locally manufac at the same time. In one ofthe bothroi tion ofthe base of the latter bird, cf. note tured in Arcadia. were found two Central Greek birds to 149 above. However, I see no relation to AH 47 belongs with the group, Voyatzis gether with fragments ofan LG Thapsos Dugas 1921, no. 33, p. 351 and fig. 6, to 1990, B 38 - 42, p. 148 and pis. 83 - 84, bowl and immediately above the bothros which Voyatzis also refers. and AH 48 is close to this type, but a vari lay two more bronze birds. The bothroi I do not understand the comparison, Rol ant, the relief lines bordering the neck hav and the fill above were covered by a pave ley 1969, 85, ofAH 36 - 37 with the Del ing been replaced by incised lines, cf. Voy ment dated to the late 8th Cent. BC by an phi birds, his Nos. 135 - 136, pi. XXII; atzis, B 42, p.148 and pi. 85. They all be EPC fragment. Above this pavement was both are small, compact Thessalian birds of long to Kilian-Dirlmeier and Voyatzis, Var another fill with a local imitation ofa the same type as AH 38, cf. p. 64 and note iant I, presumably ofTegean manufacture, Thessalian plate fibula. (Felsch 1983, 124 - 203 above; cf. also Voyatzis 1990, 152- cf. K.-D. Anhanger, 129, and Voyatzis 127; the birds, figs. 14 - 16, cf. Felsch 153. A better comparison might be Rol 1990, 148-149 for conclusions. 1987, 11 - 12). ley, loc. cit., no. 140, which may have the The following grave contexts are relevant: same origin as AH 36-37. note 212 Amphikleia. There are also Laconian or Laconian influ For bird pendants used together with a Unpublished female burial with very rich enced Peloponnesian birds with a flat necklace as the breast ornament ofa dead grave goods ofbronze, including a necklace underside; in some cases they have pierced woman, cf. the Amphikleia tomb (note with three birds, seven birds on disks and base plates, cf. Heilmeyer 1979, 186 - 187, 214 below). For other used and repaired three Boiotian plate fibulae with incised nos. 931 - 937; Droop 1907, 111, Fig. 2 b personal ornaments at the Argive Heraion, decoration offish, birds and centaurs. from the Artemis Orthia Sanctuary, K.-D. cf. note 30 above. BCH 1954, 132; andJHS 1954, 157 - 158; Anhanger, no. 963, p. 162 and pi. 52, from Cf. K.-D. Anhanger, esp. p. 17, no. 73 and Lusoi and Voyatzis 1990, 155 - 156, nos. note 213 p. 18. On exhibition in Athens NM, Room L 15 - 16, pi. 91. The Lusoi examples may The birds which later were specifically 37. be local. connected with Hera such as the cuckoo, The grave goods do not contain datable the peacock and the crane, cf. Bevan 1986, pottery, but the bronzes are, in general, not note 210 35 - 39, are not among the Geometric bird earlier than late MG, cf. in particular, the AH 45. AH II, 205 and pi. LXXVII. figures at the Argive Heraion, nor are wa plate fibulae, p. 75 and note 254 below. H. 1.4 cm. It is badly preserved but very ter birds which Bevan, 38, suggests may be The birds are K.-D. Anhanger, Nos. 978 similar to AH 46. reflected in the later association with the and 989; the last-mentioned bird is placed AH 46 (NM 13979). AH II, 205 - 206, crane. For the quadrupeds, cf. p. 58 and on a four-legged base, cf. note 216 below, pi. LXXVII. note 170 above. the others are chiefly Central Greek birds H. 2.3 cm. on vertical disks or prisms. Bouzek 1967, 127 and fig. 10, 2. NOTE 214 Tiryns. Tomb 30. K -D. Anhanger, 149, no. 843 and pi. 47. Cf. note 167 above for the chronology of Tiryns I, p. 132, Fig. 6. Photo ofunderside AH 47. (NM 13952). AH II, 206 and pi. the bronze quadrupeds. The stratigraphical ofbase plate. (The bird, H. 3 cm. is com LXXVII. evidence from the Artemis Orthia Sanctu pared to the bird from Artemis Orthia, H. 5.5 cm. ary applies also to the bird figures. BSA XIII, p. Ill, Fig. 2 b, cf. note 209 Bouzek 1967, 127 and fig. 10, 1. Delphi. above). K.-D. Anhanger, no. 712, pp. 128 and 131 The two bronze birds, Rolley 1969, nos. K-D Anhanger, 166, note 122 (LG). and pi. 37. 145 - 146, pp. 86 and 88 - 89, pi. XXIII, Foley 1988, 93 (MG II). Foley 1988, fig. 10. were found in LG contexts, cf. Lerat 1938, The tomb Tiryns I, 132, contained two Voyatzis 1990, 148 and note 274. 217-218. bronze and two iron finger rings as well as AH 48. (NM 13954). AH II, 206, pi. Kalapodi. pottery, pi. XVII, 2, 3, 7 and 9 and pi. LXXVII. Several Geometric bronze birds ofCentral XVIII, 2, 5 and 9. According to Cold-

IIO stream 1968, 120, the tomb is MG II. Other studies of specialimportance are K.-D. Anhanger, Type D 1, no. 695, p. 125 However, it is a child's burial and all the Philipp 1981; Courbin 1974, 129 - 141 ; and pi. 36. vases are miniatures which may just as well and Foley 1988, 80 - 86. Both stamp pendants and pomegranate be dated in LG. Foley, loc. cit., follows In some cases, I shalljust refer to these ear pendants are most likely Tegean products, Coldstream's chronology ofthe tomb, al lier studies, in other cases where necessary, cf. Voyatzis, 186-187. though she, p. 65 and pi. 9 d, illustrates one because they do not distinguish the finds of For discussion ofthe function ofthe stamp ofthe vases as a representative ofLG. I fol the Argive Heraion from those ofArgos, I pendants cf. K.-D. Anhanger, 40 - 41 and low Kilian -Dirlmeier in an LG date and shall examine the objects in detail. for their distribution pattern, pi. 101. For also find that the figure relief ofthe under their chronology, cf. also p. 68 and note side ofthe base plate is rather advanced for note 221 229 below. an MG date. Cf. p. 62 and note 194 above for the bird pendants and their find spots and notes 222 NOTE 224 NOTE 215 and 224 below for various pendants from For Macedonian or Macedonian type The two Geometric bronze birds from Pera the Southern Slope. Apparently only AH bronzes at the Argive Heraion, cf., in par chora are presumably Macedonian or Thes 1551 has a different find spot, cf. note 225 ticular, Bouzek 1974 b, 303, The Argive salian imports, cf. Perachora I, pi. 37, 1 and below. Heraion; Bouzek 1974 a, passim; Kilian 3 = K.-D. Anhanger, no. 720, pp. 129 - 1975 b. 130, pi. 37 and no. 789, pp. 141 - 142, pi. NOTE 222 Pyxis pendant. AH 2019 (NM 20590), 44. I do not know of Geometric bronze NM 16561. Miniature axe. Blegen 1939, AH II, 286, pl.CXVII. birds from other Corinthian sanctuaries as 438 and fig. 25, no. 8. Here Fig. 27. Diam. 3.95 cm. (Found on Southern e.g. Corinth and Isthmia. K.-D. Anhanger, 247, no. 1594, pi. 93. Slope) = K.-D. Anhanger, 234, no. 1508, TypeB = nos. 1588-1595. pi. 84. (op. cit. p. 236, dated to the Period note 216 Wheel ornament. Blegen 1939, 438 and Mac. II A. For Mac. II A, cf. Kilian, op. K.-D. Anhanger. no. 988 A, p. 168 and pi. fig. 26. cit., 104 - 105 and pi. 102 = Early 7th 54, cf. ADelt. 16 B, 1960, p. 93, no. 4, K.-D. Anhanger, 17 - 18, no. 74 and pi. 5., Cent. BC; Kilian, op. cit. 113 and note Tomb 5. Both ornaments were found on the South 1151, pi. 194, Type 3.). Bouzek 1974 a, The group is collected by I. Kilian-Dirl ern Slope, cf. Blegen, loc. cit. 28, Cat. no. A 2, 6, fig. 6, 5. (Early meier, op. cit. nos. 986 - 989, the last be I. Kilian - Dirlmeier regards all wheel or Group), cf. Bouzek 1974 b, 307 and 332. ing the Amphikleia bird, cf. note 214 naments as dress ornaments in disagree Bell pendant. AH 1556 (NM 20672y), above. ment with Furtwangler's theory ofvotive AH II, 264 and pi. XCII. H. 5.25 cm. Christiansen 1993, no. 51, p. 78, ill. p. 80, wheels. K.-D. Anhanger, loc. cit. reference (Found on Southern Slope). Bouzek, op. a pendant with three legs in the form of to the Amphikleia tomb context, cf. note cit. 87 - 91, no. C 2, 1 = fig. 26. 2, cf. bird's heads from Philia, is reminiscent of 214 above. For the context ofwheel orna Bouzek 1974 b, 309. Date ca. 650 - early this type ofbase. ment and fibula from Kalapodi, cf. Felsch 6th Cent. BC. 1983, 126 and fig. 6; found in the LG Beads. AH 1548, 1549 and 1550 (NM note 217 bothros (cf. note 214 above). 13993), AH II, 264 and pi. XCII. The Apart from the Argos bird figure in note Both ornament types are known from measurements are L. 5.1 cm. and Diam. 2 216 and the lost Tiryns bird note 214 Geometric contexts, but continue, cf. K.- cm.; L. 6.1 cm. and Diam. 3.25 cm. and L. above, only K.-D. Anhanger no. 724, in D Anhanger, 253 - 254 and p. 18. 6.6 cm. and Diam. 3.55 cm., respectively. the Metropolitan Museum is, as far as I AH 1550 is damaged. Macedonian, cf. know, said to have come from the Argolid; NOTE 223 Bouzek 1974 a, 112. Group F, no, 21, fig,. no. 724 has no certain provenance. Stamp pendants. AH 1557 - 1558 (NM 34: 3, 7 and 10, cf. Bouzek 1974 b, 311. 13987). AH II, 264, pi. XCII. Date Late 8th - Early 7th Cent. BC. NOTE 218 AH 1557 = H. 3.85 cm. and AH 1558 = AH 1552, AH II, 264 and pi. XCII. Bou Cf. esp. Philipp 1981, 19-20; Kilian 1975 H. 3.65 cm. = K.-D. Anhanger. no. 248, p. zek, op. cit. p. 106, Group C, no. 23. a, 166; Kilian 1975 b, esp. pp. 105 - 106; 39 and pi. 15 and No. 170, p. 33 and pi. Kilian (-Dirlmeier) 1978, 219; and Linders II. Cf. Voyatzis 1990, 178 - 179. note 225 1972, 69-70. For AH 1557, Variant I, cf. Voyatzis, 183, Both: AH II, 264 and pi. XCII. For both types of offerings, cf. Felsch 1980, from Tegea, B 106 -112, 108 a and 119, AH 1547 (NM 13997), L. 4 cm. Diam. 56, note 66 and Felsch 1983, 124 (Kala 124 - 125, and from Lusoi, F 1997. 1.65 cm. Bouzek 1974 a, 119 - 121, podi). For AH 1558, Variant II, K.-D. Anhanger, Group L, 4, fig, 37, 2. 32 - 33, nos. 169 -174, cf. Voyatzis, 178 - AH 1551 (NM 13995 a) L. 2.45 cm, NOTE 219 179 and note 19; apart from the AH exam Diam. 2.2 cm. Found behind Stoa (not Cf. e.g. note 30 above, AH 47, AH 87, ple seven come from Tegea and three from certain which stoa). Bouzek, op. cit. p. AH 877 and AH 881. Lusoi. 118. J I, 2, fig. 3, 10. Pomegranate pendant. AH 2763 (NM Both Greek imitations. NOTE 220 20809 a). AH II, 327 and pi. CXXXIV. Ofspecial importance for my studies are L. 4.6 cm, Max. W. 1.9 cm. Hollow with, NOTE 226 the following volumes of PBF: XI, 2; XIII, open bottom, Diam. ofhole 0.45 cm. For the absolute chronology of the Mace 8; XIV, 2 and XIV, 4 =K.-D Anhanger; Around bottom hole, circular disk with rad donian beads, cf. Bouzek 1974 a, 107, K.-D. Nadeln; Kilian 1975 a; and Sapouna iating grooves. Its closest parallel seems to Group F. Late 8th - early 7th Cent. BC, -Sakellarakis 1978. be Voyatzis 1990, B 142, p. 184, pi. 113 = for the Greek imitations, cf. Bouzek 1974

III a, 119 (Group J), probably 7th Cent. BC, (1961 - 62), pi. 57 B; Courbin 1966, 245 - The type is known also from Anavra, Del and 119 - 121 (Group L), late 7th Cent. 246 and pi. 99; Courbin 1974, 75 -78 and phi, Dodone, Olympia, Perachora, Pherai, BC. pi. 48 (From Tomb 176/2, LG). Cf. K.-D. Philia and Vergina. Anhanger, 236 and pi. 110; Reber 1991, NOTE 227 125, note 25. Reber refrains from studying NOTE 235 Blegen 1937, 382. the Argive pyxides because oflack ofpub Arm Rings. lished examples. AH 816 and possibly 815, AH II, p. 240 note 228 and pi. LXXXIV, cf. Kilian 1975 a, 173 Argos. NOTE 232 with note 8, and Philipp 1981, nos. 810 - Axe pendant. Larissa. The Athena Sanc Earrings 812, pp. 219-220 and pis. 13 and 51. tuary, B 76. K.-D. Anhanger, 248, no. AH 1553 (NM 20672 y), L 2 cm., and AH AH 1597 - 99 (NM 20531 a, fl+y), AH II, 1597, pi. 93. 1554 (NM 20672 B), L 3 cm., Diam. of 266 - 267 and pi. XCIX. Cf. Philipp 1981, For the type, cf. op.cit. pp. 248 - 254 and disks, 0.9 cm. AH II, 264 and pi., XCII. 205, also for general information and dis Voyatzis 1990, 194-195. For AH 1554, cf. IS I, 176, note 33. cussion ofthe Boeotian arm rings which Another double axe in bone is mentioned are rare in the Peloponnese. Among the by A. Roes, BCH 1953,? 94, note 2. For a note 233 bronzes in Tragana, pithos %9, there are simple miniature axe in iron, cf. note 328 Cf. Phihpp 1991, 112 - 116, nos. 398 - some examples ofBoiotian arm rings, cf. below. 399, for counterparts to AH 1553 and no. Onasoglou 1989, 20, nos. 35 - 38 and 41 - 394 for one of the type ofAH 1554, al 42 and pis. 18 - 19. Tragana pithos n 9 is note 229 though with conical disks. dated to ca. 750, cf. below note 247. Ac Argos. For AH 1553, cf. esp. Lindos I, 114 - 119, cording to Philipp loc. cit. the Boeotian Ring pendants. Larissa. The Athena nos. 271 - 274, pi. 12. List ofprovenances, arm rings are dated until ca. 650 BC. Sanctuary. B 80. = K-D. Anhanger. 12, no. p. 115 (Chr. Blinkenberg). Blinkenberg, AH 972 and 972 a (NM 20914), AH II, 35, pi. 2. L. 4.4 cm. Cf. Voyatzis 1990, loc. cit. suggests a Cypriot origin. Higgins 251 and pi. LXXXIX, Diam. 8 cm. and 187 - 188, B 148, pi. 115. She considers 1980, 102 - 103 suggests a Syrian origin. 4.2 cm., respectively. (The latter arm ring the Argos example a Tegean import. Cf. also Kilian 1975 a, pi. 70, 2 - 9 (Pherai). comes from the Back ofthe South The Aphrodision, 70/1553. Diam. ofring For AH 1554, op. cit. 103 with reference Stoa).For the types, cf. Philipp 1981, 208 - (without knobs) 2.5 cm, Th. ofring 0.4 to Perachora (Perachora I, 74 - 75, pi. 18, 215, nos. 768-797. cm, Diam. of knobs 0.3 cm. Flat underside, 4 and pi. 84, 26 - 29) and to Geometric (For AH 973 and 974 (NM 20916) cf. note rounded top; about half preserved. Al tomb finds from Corinth. Philipp 1981, 12 above). though the eye is not preserved, I consider loc. cit. refers to the terracotta earrings, it a pendant not a ring because ofits flat AH II, 43, no. Tc 281, fig. 88. There are note 236 underside. Cf. K.-D. Anhanger, p. 12, no. 22 fragments of such disks, some solid Finger rings. 38, pi. 3, however with an oval section. painted; the illustrated, complete example Cf. Verdelis 1963, 7 with note 5 and fig. 3; From Pherai. An example in lead comes has flat disks with painted cross decoration. Courbin 1974, 118 - 119, 132 - 133; Foley from the so-called Hera Limenia deposit, The terracotta earrings from Tiryns, some 1988, 85 - 86 and Philipp 1981, 138 - 152. Perachora. Perachora I, p. 187, and pi. 85, also with cross decoration, have conical The plain finger rings, AH II, 250 - 262, 29. disks (Tiryns I, 85, no. 157). Although ap pis. LXXXVIII - XCI. Cf. Phihpp 1981, Philipp 1981, 189 and pi. 144 from Olym parently particularly connected with the 138 - 142 and references note 335. pia is considered a ring; loc. cit. ref. to a Northeast Peloponnese, the type with flat The angular finger rings, AH II, 258 - 259, similar unpublished ring from Delphi. disks is also known in East Greece, cf. pis XC - XCI, cf. Philipp 1981, 142 - 145. Stamp pendants. Blinkenberg, loc. cit. no. 275. AH 1509 (NM 20671), AH II, 262, pi. The pyramidal stamp from the Aphrodi XCI, cf. Phihpp 1981, 146 - 148, nos. 538 - sion, 69/592 bis, L. 3. 8 cm, is close to NOTE 234 541, pis. 7 and 42. Voytazis, B 113, p. 183, pi. 107 = K.-D. Arm Rings. Band finger rings, AH II, 261 - 262 and pi. Anhanger, no. 264, p. 39 and pi. 16, but AH 971, AH II, 251, pi. LXXXIX. Diam. XCI, cf. Foley 1988, 85. without the circular ornamentation of this 6.4 cm. According to Philipp 1981, 197, Tracy 1986, 196, pi. VIII. (Malibu. The J. stamp. note 392, there are dated examples ofplain Paul Getty Museum. 85. AM 264). Its dedi arm rings as early as PG and EG. catory inscription to Hera, which was in note 230 AH 1359, AH II, 258 and pi. XC. Diam. scribed after the ring had been worn for The Aphrodision was founded at the end 5.9 cm. some time, is dated to between 600 and of the 7th Cent. BC, cf. ref. IS I, 199 and AH 1361 - 62, AH II, loc. cit. Diam. 8 550 BC. The ring is said to have been note 173. cm. and 7.1 cm., respectively. Cf. Philipp bought at Mycenae and it is suggested that 1981, 196 -199, nos. 721 - 730 and 731 it came from the Argive Heraion. Cf. note 231 and 740. Johnston 1990, 444, no. A. The apparent correspondence in form The Thessalian - Macedonian rhombic For the chronology oftremolo decoration, between a local, hand-made ceramic pyxis arm ring, Blegen 1939, 442 and fig. 29, cf. Jacobsthal 1956, Appendix III, pp. 209 - from a LG tomb at Argos, Argos C 2437, above left, here fig. 33 (Diam. 8.5 - 9.1 212, and for the instrument used, a and Macedonian pyxis pendants may be cm.); Philipp 1981, 199 with note 393. For scorper, and for the tremolo technique, p. fortuituous, since the Argive vase continues the type cf. Kilian 1975 a, pi. 66, nos. 25 - 211, with ref. to AJA 1949, pp. 416-417 an earlier tradition ofhand-made pointed 31 and pi. 67 and Kilian 1975 b, 109 and and fig. 20, pyxides known also from Attica. ADelt. 17 131, pi. 86.3 and Philipp 1981, 199 - 200.

112 NOTE 237 cf. IS I, 176, note 33. In the area east of NOTE 247 Blegen 1939, 414 and fig. 4. = Here, Fig. the Northeastern Stoa (cf. above note 17) Spectacle fibulae. 35. The ear ring second from left below were found the fibulae AH 887, 901, 925 AH 818 (NM 14035), AH II, 240 and pi. and the arm rings above right. and 937 and at the Eastern Retaining Wall LXXXV = Blinkenberg, XIV 2 1, p. 258. Blegen 1937, 380 and Fig. 2 = Here Fig. 36. was found one, Caskey - Amandry 1952, L. 2.5 cm. Cf. Kilian 1975 a, 145, note 8. 182, no. 108, (M 49.76), pi. 46. A few Fragments ofspiral fibulae, AH 817 a - b, NOTE 238 were found west of the Second Temple: 819-823 and possibly 824 (NM 20901), As the hair spiral rings known from the Ar AH 834 and AH 880. AH II, 240 - 241 and pis. LXXXIV - gos tombs, but not from sanctuaries, are LXXXV. PG or EG, at the latest, they are not in NOTE 241 Studies ofspectacle fibulae: cluded in this study, cf. Courbin 1974, p. Arched fibulae. AH 827 - 847, AH II, Blinkenberg, type XIV, pp. 253 - 262; Al 119 and 133 and Higgins, 102. 241 - 242 and pi. LXXXV. Cf. the follow exander 1965; Andronikos 1969, 227 - The Northeast Peloponnesian earrings ing notes. 230; Kilian 1975 a, 142 - 150 and Kilian with cross-ornamented disks were appar 1975 b, 107; Philipp 1981, 295 - 304; Voy ently not found in Argos. NOTE 242 atzis 1990, 213. For the finger rings ofArgos, cf. references, Cf. IS I, 174, note 17. For the tomb contexts ofthe spectacle fib esp. to Courbin and Foley, above note 236. ulae, cf. Kilian 1975 a, 145 and cf. also The band finger rings in the Geometric NOTE 243 Vitsa, Tomb 46, fig. 109, pp. 133 -135, pi. Argos tombs are of two main types, one AH 829 - 830 and 839, AH II, loc. cit. 211 b; Tomb 103, pp. 149 - 150, pi. 240, flat and one with a central ridge; they AH 830 = Blinkenberg, XI c, p. 195; sev and Tomb 113, pp. 151 - 157, pis. 247 b - mostly come from 8th Cent. BC tombs, eral fibulae ofthis type come from Arcadia, and 248 b, all tombs dated by Vokotopou- but also in a varied form from earlier cf. Blinkenberg, XI d - e, p. 196 from Te lou to the 9th Cent. BC. Cf. K.-D. tombs. gea and Lusoi. For the Lusoi fibula, cf. Anhanger, 229, who dates Tomb 113 to ca. Different kinds of gold rings are found in Voyatzis 1990, L 46, p. 217, pi. 169. 800 BC. EG tombs and are rare after ca. 850 BC, cf. AH 844 = Blinkenberg III 1 b, p. 79 and Tragana in Locris, a pithos burial ofa Foley 1988, 95. AH 845 = Blinkenberg III 3 e, p. 80, cf. young woman, n 9, Onasoglou 1989, esp. Kilian 1975 a, 22, note 3, who calls the 14 - 21, 35 - 51 and 229, pis. 11 - 21. The NOTE 239 type "wohl protokorinthisch" and cf. Voy pottery dates the burial to shortly before or Blinkenberg; Schweitzer 1969, 215 - 230; atzis 1990, 210 - 211 and 216 - 217 with around 750 BC (pp. 15 - 16, 37 - 38, figs. Kilian 1975 a; Sapouna-Sakellarakis 1978; reference to the AH examples, note 231. 7-8 and pi. 11). The bronze finds com Courbin 1974, 132; Philipp 1981, esp. 260 - prise two bronze phialai, ofwhich one was 304; Foley 1988, esp. 84 - 85, studies the NOTE 244 a North Syrian import with a neo-Hittite fibulae from the Argolid, especially the E.g. AH 827 - 828, cf. Sapouna-Sakellara inscription (nos. 58 - 59, p. 10, 21 and 47 - grave finds, many ofwhich are earlier than kis, p. 117- 118 with note 5; AH 834- 51, figs. 14-15 and pis. 10 and 21); 12 the 8th Cent. BC. However, her observa 835 (Blinkenberg, XI k - 1, p. 203), AH arm rings, including Boiotian arm rings tions on the Argive Heraion material are 837 and 847 (for the last-mentioned one, (cf. above note 235), 20 finger rings ofdif not very detailed and she is apparently not cf. Kilian 1975 a, 101 and note 1, parallels ferent Geometric types; one necklace of acquainted with the unpublished fibulae in in Pherai). Cf. Blegen 1939, 440 and fig. 23. 375 small bronze pearls; eight pins (nos. 48 - the sanctuaries ofArgos. 55, pp. 21 and 43 - 44 and pi. 20) includ note 245 ing examples ofK.-D. Nadeln, Geometric NOTE 240 AH 833 = Blinkenberg VI 3 e, pp. 113 - I A (cf p. 79 and note 274 below) and eight For the number offibulae (compared with 114 and Kilian 1975 a, 29, note 5. Op. cit. fibulae, ofwhich two were spectacle fibulae that ofpins) from the Argive Heraion, cf. pp. 26-29, 117 examples in all from Phe (nos. 12 - 13, pp. 18 - 19 and 43 and pi. Kilian 1975 a, 168- 169. rai. Date late 8th - 7th Cent. BC, known 17) and six were Boiotian plate fibulae From the West Building (cf. note 21 above) also from Philia, Perachora, Amyklaion and (nos. 6 - 11, pp. 16 - 19 and 38 - 42, figs. 9 - come the following fibulae: AH 820 - 821, Lindos. 13 and pis. 12- 17). 823, 829, 865, 877, 897, 905, 922, 928 and For AH 838 and 841, cf. Kilian 1975 a, 70 A spectacle fibula comes from the LG Am 948. and note 2. phikleia Tomb, cf. note 214 above. From either the Southern Slope or the For AH 843, cf. IS I, 174, note 17. For the Kalapodi find, cf. Felsch 1983, 124 Back of South Stoa (cf. notes 23 - 24 - 126; the spectacle fibula was offered to above), come AH 817, 826, 838, 855, 875, note 246 gether with a pair ofBoiotian plate fibulae 876, 890, 907, 915, 924, 926, 939, 941 and AH 919 - 934 (NM 20903 - 20906), AH ofiron, loc. cit. fig. 5. which Felsch be 944 _ 946 as well as Blegen 1939, 440, figs. II, 248 - 249, pi. LXXXVIII. cause ofthe form ofits plate dates to 23 and 27 - 28. The example from Prosymna tomb VIII, shortly after 750 BC, cf. also note 214 Two ofthe best preserved fibulae were cf. note 260 below, is dated from its con above and note 254 below. found on the Upper Hill, the spectacle fib text in LG/Early 7th Cent. BC. The spectacle fibulae at Artemis Orthia in ula, AH 818, and the plate fibula, AH 879 The type continues into the Archaic per Sparta were found in the same strata as the (Figs. 37 and 39), cf. IS I, 192, note 136. iod, cf. AH 935 - 944, many ofwhich have bronze statuettes, cf. note 167 above. There may be a small fragment ofa specta stamped tongue pattern. For the suggestion that AH 813 - 814 are cle fibula from the Old Temple Terrace, fragments ofdouble spectacle fibulae, cf. AH 822, but it is too fragmentary for a note 248 below. certain identification. For the Altar Area, For ivory or bone spectacle fibulae at the

113 Argive Heraion, cf. AH II, 353, nos. 32 - 875 and ref. here. p. 137 to AH 871 - 872), NOTE 254 35, pi. 140 = Blinkenberg, XV, 1 b, p. 265 VII 8 h (AH 877), VII 9 d (AH 878). The For the context ofthe Lerna fibula and its and NM 14054 (Fragment) = Blinkenberg, arch fragment AH 877 has traces ofthe re chronology, cf. DeVries 1974, 80-92. p. 268, no. XV 5 c. insertion ofa new pin. The only fully pre The earliest Boiotian plate fibulae are dated Cf. Phihpp 1981, 298: the type which is served fibula is AH 879; the others are to MG II, cf. Felsch 1983, 124 - 125 with particularly favoured in Perachora and fragments, mostly ofthe arch. It is impos notes 16-17 with references to an MG II Sparta lasts into the 6th Cent. BC. sible to decide whether the small fragment context in Corinth, North Cemetery, of a globe, AH 876, belongs here. grave 17 (Corinth XIII, 1964, 24 - 26 and note 248 Kilian 1975 a, 115 - 137 and pis. 48 - 55. pi. 17 (the fibula, no. 17-8) and to the Violin type fibulae. For references to the above AH finds, cf. p. Chamilavrisi find from shortly after 750 AH 813 - 814 (NM 14031), AH II, 240 116, note 3 (AH 872), p. 118, note 6 (AH BC, cf. note 167 above. Cf. also note 247 and pi. LXXXIV and Caskey - Amandry 879), p. 120, note 1 (AH 875), p. 127, note above for a Kalapodi find dated to shortly 1952, 182, no. M 49.76, pi. 46, no. 108, 6 (AH 873), p. 128, note 3 (AH 878) and after 750 BC and for the Tragana fibulae and Blegen 1939, 440 and fig. 27, below p. 133, note 2 (AH 877). For chronology, dated to shortly before or around 750 BC. centre. A disk has been attached to the pin. op. cit. passim and Philip 1981, 273 and cf. For the type and its distribution, cf. Sa also the local imitation from Kalapodi, note note 255 pouna - Sakellarakis 1978, 39 - 40, Typ I f, 214 above. Cf. DeVries, 1974, esp. 102. Philipp 1981, pi. 2. Besides from several islands, the fibula Philipp 1981, 270 - 276, esp. pp. 272 - 273 276 - 277 and 280, connects the fibulae type is known also from Lusoi, cf. Voyatzis with note 459, classifies AH 873 as Thes from the Argive Heraion with a group in 1990, L 38, p. 279 and pi. 169 and Artemis salian, and, note 458, the AH finds in gen cluding the Lerna fibula, but sets the Ble Orthia, Sparta, AO, 198 and pis. 82 and 91. eral, AH 871 - 872, 874 - 875 and 877 - gen fibula apart. Cf. loc. cit. note 487, for I see no evidence for connecting these fib 879, as a possibly Peloponnesian variant, al the Peloponnesian finds and Voyatzis 1990, ulae, which certainly had a decorative top though she does not exclude a Central 211 for the finds in Arcadia. piece, with the double spectacle fibulae, as Greek origin and points to Phocis as an suggested by Kilian 1975 a, 145, note 8, or intermediary. A Peloponnesian production note 256 with spectacle fibulae ofbone or ivory, as was advocated by Payne (Perachora I, 169), For the suggestion ofArgive production, suggested by Philipp 1981, 295, note 504, a Central Peloponnesian one by Schweitzer Kilian 1979, 36 - 37; Philipp 1981, 277 and since these types were fastened with either (Schweitzer 1969, 217) and an Arcadian Foley 1988, 84. one or more than two rivets, cf. Philipp production centre by Coldstream 1977, For the Bonn horse cf. note 180 above and 1981, 297 and Cat. nos. 1087 and 1100. 157 and Voyatzis 1990, 211 - 212. for the disk from Tegea, Voyatzis 1990, 214 - The decoration of AH 879 might perhaps 216 with earlier references and fig. 128. NOTE 249 be considered secondary and made at the Voyatzis, loc. cit., advocates an Arcadian AH 836 = Blinkenberg, 82, no. Ill 7 a. request ofthe dedicator. However, the fib production ofthe disk as well as ofthe Pelo For AH 881 cf. p. 62, Fig 25 and note 197 ula is very well preserved and presumably ponnesian group ofAttic-Boiotian fibulae. above. not used before dedication and if its deco Also Herrmann 1982 a, 259, suggested an AH 880 (NM 20888). Pres. L. 4.5 cm. W. ration were secondary, the fibula was origi Arcadian or Central Peloponnesian produc 1.7 cm. AH II, 244 and pi. LXXXVI = nally undecorated for which feature I do tion ofthe Peloponnesian fibulae. Blinkenberg, VI, 15 d, p. 118. A variant is not know ofany parallels. The engraved decoration ofthe Bonn known from Chios, cf. Sapouna-Sakellara- horse differs from that ofthe horse AH 13, kis 1978, 97, but the AH example is appar NOTE 252 cf. above Fig. 19, pp. 56 - 57 and note 159, ently Thessalian, cf. Kilian 1975 a, 68. Boiotian plate fibulae. which imitates the harness ofa chariot Chronology Late 8th - Early 7th Cent. BC. AH 858 - 868, AH II, 242 - 243 and pl.- horse, but does not have engraved figure LXXXVI. decoration or tremolo decoration. I find note 250 Blinkenberg, VIII 8 g, p. 180 (AH 858) the engraved birds on the neck ofthe AH 869 - 870 (NM 14032 and 20895/2), and 12 g, p. 184 ( AH 864 - 865 and 867 - Bonn horse very close to those ofthe Pelo AH II, 243 and pi. LXXXVI = Blinken 868). ponnesian examples of Boiotian fibulae and berg, IV, 10 k, p. 99, cf. Sapouna - Sakel DeVnes 1974, 92 - 104, the Lerna fibula, see an Arcadian origin as most likely. larakis 1978, 90, note 4; for the type, cf. pis. 15 - 16; Kilian 1979; Phihpp 1981, 276 op. cit., Type V pp. 85 -90 and Kilian 1975 - 286; Herrmann 1982 a; Foley. 1988, 84; note 257 a, 137 - 139, pis. 56 -57, nos. 1543 -1560. Voyatzis 1990, 215-216. Cf. pp. 53 - 58 and notes 139 and notes Besides these references, cf. also Felsch 163 sqq. above for Arcadian Geometric 1983, 124 and figs. 3 - 4 and Felsch 1987, NOTE 253 bronze statuary and pp. 65 and 67 and 12 and fig. 16 (Kalapodi). Blegen 1939, 440 - 442 (with ref. to notes 206 - 207 and 223 above for Arca Hampe's observation) and figs. 27 - 28. dian bronze pendants. NOTE 251 Hampe 1936, no. 33, pi. 17; DeVries Thessalian plate fibulae. 1974, 103: Philipp 1981, 277 and 280, note 258 AH 871 - 875 and 877 - 879 (AH 875 = note 487 Blegen 1939, 412 - 413, fig. 4; Foley 1988, 84. NM 20889, AH 879 = NM 14033, the Cf. references in note 252 above. Cf. Kilian 1975 a, 19 and note 14, and, for other fibula fragments = NM 14032). AH Olympia, cf. Philipp 1981, 264, nos. 993 - II, 243 -244 and pi. LXXXVI. 995, pi. 59. A counterpart from the Hera Blinkenberg, nos. VII, 6 - VII 9, 135 - Limenia deposit dates the type into the 7th 142. No. VII 6 e (AH 879), VII 7 c (AH Cent. BC.

114 NOTE 259 esp. the former fibula, with ref. to Blinken NOTE 271 Blegen 1939, 414, fig. 4, cf. note 243 berg IV 11 f and h for LG contexts, note K.-D. Nadeln, nos. 202 and 226, cf. ref. above, AH 844 -845. 451, and for new finds in Chios, note 452, note 270 above. cf. Sapouna-Sakellarakis 1978, 54 - 68, Typ NOTE 260 III. NOTE 272 Tomb XXXVII, Blegen 1937, 379 and With the number VollgraffBr. 1855 is also K.-D. Nadeln, 85. Prosymna, fig. 301, cf. note 248 above. a small fragment of a fibula bow (1.2 x 2.6 Tomb IX, Blegen 1937, 379 - 380, fig. 2. cm.) which possibly is a fragment ofa tri NOTE 273 Only the bow is preserved, 4.8 x 2 cm. partite bow of a Boiotian plate fibula. Jacobsthal 1956, 3-13 and K.-D. Nadeln, Philipp 1981,280, note 487. 85 - 208, cf. also summary by Voyatzis For the absolute chronology ofthe Pro note 265 1990, 204 - 208. symna tomb deposits, cf. p. 91 and note For fibulae in Geometric Argos tombs, in 362 below. general, cf. Courbin 1974, 132 and Foley NOTE 274 1988, 84 (here also reference to other Geometric I A, K.-D. Nadeln, 86 - 90 NOTE 261 fibula finds at other sites in the Argolid). and pi. 14. From AH come Nos. 370, 372 Argos Museum. Vollgraff Br.1855. Simple For Boiotian plate fibulae in the Argolid, and 380 - 381 = Caskey - Amandry 1952, arch fibula. L. 7. 7 cm. cf. Philipp 1981, 280, note 487 and cf. end 181, M 49.104 and AH 89, 725 and 2533. B 67 and B 68, the catch ofthe latter is not ofnote 264 above. preserved. Cf. p. 72 and note 244 above, NOTE 275 AH 844 - 845. note 266 Geometric I B, cf. K.-D. Nadeln, 90 - 92 K.-D. Nadeln. and pis. 14 -16. The tomb contexts from NOTE 262 The pioneer work isJacobsthal 1956. Argos and Corinth, nos. 391 - 392, 398 - Aphrodision, no. 72/1013, Simple arch Cf. also Courbin 1974, 130-131; Philipp 399 and 403 are dated to EG on p. 92 but fibula. Fragmentary. Preserved L. 5 cm. 1981, 30 - 54; Rolley 1988, 345 - 347 to MG in the list, pp. 90 - 91. For the AH (Review ofK.-D. Nadeln) and Foley 1988, finds, cf. IS I, 174 - 175 and note 19. note 263 80 - 84. Argos Museum. Violin type fibula, B 88, NOTE 276 fig. 43, cf. p. 73 and note 248 above. NOTE 267 Geometric I C, K.-D. Nadeln, 92 - 93 Spectacle fibulae, Vollgraff, Br.1855. Two Cf. K.-D. Nadeln, 77 - 78 and 80 - 83 and pis. 16 - 17. nos. 430 and 435 - 436 = fragmentary fibulae with part ofthe pin (Submycenaean/Protogeometric) and 158 - AH 733 and 735 and Caskey - Amandry preserved in an "Acfherschleife". Max. 163 (Geometric). 1952, 181, no. 102, M 49.105. Diam. ofspirals, 3.4 cm. and 2.9 cm., re Cf. also Foley 1988, 81. The Tiryns example = K.-D. Nadeln, 92, spectively. Cf. pp. 72 - 73 and note 247 no. 429. above. NOTE 268 Cf. K.-D. Nadeln, 158 - 161. As many as NOTE 277 note 264 12 pins might be placed in one tomb. Geometric I D, K.-D. Nadeln, 93 - 105, Argos. Museum. Vollgraff, Br. 1854. It is For the so-called "spits" and the tubes in pis. 17 - 27. From AH Nos. 451 - 927 pas not possible to see whether it had engraved which the pair ofpins might be placed, cf. sim, many ofwhich have tremolo decora decoration. L. 7.6 cm., Preserved H. of pp. 83 - 84 and notes 313 - 317 below. tion, cf. AH II, pi. LXXXIV. plate 5.6 cm., W ofplate 3 cm., Diam. of For the chronology and distribution area, central globe 1. 7 cm., ofside globes 1.3 note 269 cf. K.-D. Nadeln, 104- 105. cm. Cf. Blinkenberg, VII 8, esp. 8 a, b and Cf. Kilian 1975 a, 168 for the numbers of Considering the large number of Geome h (the last-mentioned fibula = AH 877), pins at the sanctuaries in question and K.- tric I D pins at the Argive Heraion, I do pp. 139 - 140 and cf. pp. 73 - 74 and note D Nadeln, 162 - 163. More pins are now not quite understand I. Kilian-Dirlmeyer's 251 above. registrered at Tegea, cf. Voyatzis 1990, 203. observation, op. cit. p. 162, that Geometric Vollgraff, Br. 1855. L. 3.5 cm., H. 2.8 cm., The only pin from the Argive Heraion I pins are comparatively rare in sanctuaries. H. ofplate 1.8 cm., Diam.of central globe with an inscription to Hera is the silver pin The absence in Olympia ofthis very large 0. 7 cm. Cf. Blinkenberg IV 11 d = Thera in the British Museum, K.-D. Nadeln, No. group ofNortheast Peloponnesian pins 11, p. 299 - 301, fig. 489 h - k (Schiff's 4373, p. 249 and pi. 103. may be another warning against over- Tomb, dated to LG/ Early 7th Cent. BC , For repaired pins, cf. note 30 above. stressing the Argive - Olympia connection cf. Sapouna- Sakellarakis 1978, 38, no. 19) in regard to Geometric bronzes, cf. pp. 59 and cf. Voyatzis 1990, 212, pi. 165, B 249 NOTE 270 - 60 and notes 181 - 182 and 185 above b - 250 with ref. to Kilian 1979, 37, fig. 9. K.-D. Nadeln, 75, cf. IS I, 176 - 177, note and cf. p. 81 and note 289 below for ap 12, who mentions one more example of 18. However, Rolley 1988, 346 ( with ref parently the same phenomenon regarding the type at Mavriki. erence to K.-D. Nadeln, 84 - 85) and Rol the Argos hammer pins, Geometric XVIII. Vollgraff, Br. 1854. Only the centre ofthe ley 1992, 39, refersto finds of PG pin types arch is preserved with two rings on one in the Geometric tombs in the Argolid as NOTE 278 side and one on the other. Preserved L. well as in Achaia. There is thus a possibility Geometric II. K.-D. Nadeln, 105 - 109, 2.8 cm., H. of centre 1 cm. Cf. esp. Blin that the two pins of PG type were offered nos. 937, 940, 942, 944, 946, 973 and 975 kenberg, 91 and fig. 92, IV 2 d from the at a later date at the Argive Heraion. Cf. - 985 = AH 789 - 791, 973, 975 -985, Ida Cave, Crete, and Philipp 1981, nos. also p. 86 and note 334 below. 2551 - 2552, 2555, 2560 - 2561, 2567 - 1002 - 1003, p. 267 and pis. 18 and 60, 2568, 2572 and 2580 -2582 and Caskey -

ii5 Amandry 1952, M. 49.79 and M 49. 113, Geometric XII = AH 334 - 335. note 292 p. 181, no. 103, pi. 46 and before no. 103. As there is also a fragment of this type, K.-D. Nadeln, no. 1987, pi. 64 = AH 195 probably ofGeometric IX, in the Aphrodi and no. 2012 = AH 336 note 279 sion, cf. p. 82 and note 304 below, the Geometric III, K.-D. Nadeln, 109 - 114, types apparently continued at least into the note 293 pis. 32 - 37. late 7th Cent. BC. "Mehrkopf-Nadeln", K.-D. Nadeln, 163 Geometric III A. From the Argive Heraion - 203. Conclusions, p. 200 - 203, pis. 65 - come Nos. 990 - 1038 passim (III A 2), note 286 83. Nos. 2017 - 2963 passim (A and C -D) 1039 - 1048, i.e. the whole subgroup, III A Geometric XIII - XV, K.-D. Nadeln, p. = AH 95 - 579 passim, Inv. No. 14037 a; 3 and 1049 - 1052, i.e. the whole subgroup 135 - 139, pis. 53 -54. Blegen 1939, 440, figs. 25 and 27 (two III B. = AH 2589 -2594, 2596 - 2598, Geometric XIII, nos. 1587 - 88 = AH 347 - pins), Caskey - Amandry 1952, 181, nos. 2600 - 2602, 2604 - 2605, 2607 - 2610, 348. 94 - 95, M. 49.107 and 49.108 and ADelt 2612 - 2613 and 2613 a, 2619 - 2620, (Geometric XV, no. 1611 A comes from 1960, p. 42 (4 pins). 2622 - 2624, one pin without AH No. and Tiryns). The finds at the Argive Heraion oftype K Blegen 1939, fig. 26. 2 and ADelt. 16, Geometric XVI op. cit. p. 139 - 144, pis. are K.-D. Nadeln, nos. 3184, 3186, 3195, 1960, B, 82. 55 - 60. From the Argive Heraion, nos. 3203 and 3205 = AH 136, 152, 164, 183 The Tiryns fragment is K.-D. Nadeln, no. 1676 - 78, 1689 - 1698, 1732 = AH 321 - and 311. 1035. The finds in Perachora are nos. 1020 333 and Delt. XVI, 1960, p. 82. Kilian - Dirlmeier's variant K is a collection and 1025 - 1028, those from tombs in Co Geometric XVII, K.-D. Nadeln, 145 - of different subtypes, cf. K.-D. Nadeln, rinth are nos. 994 - 995 and 1006 - 1014. 146, pi. 60, no. 1793 from Tiryns. 195. For the absolute chronology and the sug The fragment ofvariant L is K.-D. Nadeln, gestion of Corinthian production, cf. K.-D. NOTE 287 no. 3314 = AH 184 A. Nadeln, 112-113 and for Argive produc K - D. Nadeln, 146, no. 1809 = AH 350. Cf. Foley 1988, 83. tion ofGeometric III B, p. 114. For Rolley's observations, cf. Rolley 1988, NOTE 288 note 294 347, and Rolley 1992,39. Geometric XVIII. Hammer pins, K - D "Pilzkopf-Nadeln", K.-D Nadeln, 203 - Nadeln, 147 - 150 and pis. 61 - 62, and 206, pis. 83 - 84. Cf. pp. 81 - 82 and note NOTE 280 Foley 1988, 83. 298 below. Geometric IV, K.-D. Nadeln, 114, pi. 38. The AH example is no. 1054 = AH 2625. note 289 note 295 K - D. Nadeln, 148 - 150, Geometric Roll pins, cf. K.-D. Nadeln. 206 - 207, pi. note 281 XVIII B - C, XVIII B = op. cit. nos. 1850 84; the listed examples mostly from Olym Geometric V, K.-D. Nadeln, 115-116, and 1859 - 1861 = AH 352 and 354 - 356. pia. pis. 38 - 39. From the Argive Heraion, nos. XVIII C = op. cit. nos. 1866, 1870 - 1873 1057 - 1074 passim = AH 2627 - 2634 A, 1875 -1880, 1883 - 1886, 1890 - 1897 note 296 and 2639 and one without AH No. and 1900 - 1904 = AH 353, 357 -379, 381 AH 811 - 812 and NM 20732, with flat - 382 and Inv. no. 3325. Cf. also here Fig. heads. Cf. AH II, 240, pi. LXXXIV. note 282 27 left, apparently not included in Kilian - See also Tegea, Voyatzis 1990, 207 and Geometric VI. K.-D. Nadeln, 116, pi. Dirlmeier's list. notes 200 - 201 and Vitsa, pi. 126 d - e 39. No. 1080 = AH 2644. For the Hera The Corinth example is K.-D. Nadeln, no. and drawings, pi. 115, c - d. From Tomb Sanctuary west of the Heraion, cf. note 1865 (XVIII C). 35, p. 85 - 86 (8th Cent. BC). 297 below. The Tiryns examples, op. cit. nos. 1868- 69,1874, 1881 -1883, 1888 - 1889, 1898 - note 297 NOTE 283 99 and 1905 are all XVIII C. whereas the Pins at the Hera Sanctuary west ofthe K.-D. Nadeln, 117. Tegea examples represent XVIII B as well Heraion: as XVIII C. Geometric I D, Blegen 1939, fig. 9, 5, NM NOTE 284 The hammer pins seem to be absent in Inv. no. 16603 = K.-D. Nadeln, no. 577, Op. cit., p. 117 - 122. About 135 pin frag Olympia, cf. also note 277 above, Geomet cf. p. 79 and note 277 above. ments come from the Argive Heraion. ric ID Geometric VI, Blegen 1939, fig. 9. 6, NM Inv. No. 16618 = K.-D. Nadeln no. 1079 , note 285 NOTE 290 cf. pp. 79-80 and note 282 above. Geometric VIII - XII, K.-D. Nadeln, Geometric XIX, K.-D. Nadeln. 151 - Geometric XVIII. Hammer Pins. I suppose 122- 135, pis. 44-52. 152, pis. 62 - 63, nos. 1926 and 1926 A - that the hammer pin K.-D. Nadeln, no. From the Argive Heraion, nos. 1327 - B = AH 318-320. 1883, which, according to AH II, 215, 1332, 1409 - 1412, 1432 and 1445, 1470, The Tiryns pin, K.-D. Nadeln, no. 1929. note 2, was found at the "Heraeum tomb" 1477 - 1483, 1494 and 1561 - 1562. = should actually be seen in connection with Geometric VIII (LG), AH 342 - 344 note 291 the Hera sanctuary near the tholos tomb Geometric IX, AH 338 - 41 and AH 345 - Geometric XX, K.-D. Nadeln, 152 - excavated later by Blegen. 346. 155, pis. 63 - 64, cf. Voyatzis 1990, 206. "Mehrkopf-Nadeln", cf. Blegen 1939, 412 Geometric XI, Blegen 1939, 439 - 440, Cf. p. 82 and note 309 below. and fig. 3, NM Inv. nos. 16582, 16583 and Fig. 27. Geometric XXI, K.-D. Nadeln, 155 - 16586 = K.-D. Nadeln nos. 2057, 2120 Fragments ofGroups VIII - XI, = AH 351. 156, pi. 64. and 2260. (Types A and C).

n6 NOTE 298 note 305 NOTE 311 For pins from the votive deposits of the For Geometric XIV - XV and XVII, cf. Foley 1988, 83 - 84 and cf. pp. 78 - 79 and Mycenaean tombs, cf. the list by Blegen K.-D. Nadeln, 138 - 139 and 145. Cf. pp. notes 276 and 279 above for the pin types 1937, 379 and fig. 2; the pin from Tomb 80-81 and note 286 above. Geometric IC and Geometric III known XLIX is without its head and not classifi from tombs in Mycenae, Tiryns or the Co able and three are ofArchaic types. note 306 rinthia as well as from sanctuaries. Geometric "Mehrkopf-Nadeln", K.-D. Geometric XVI Nadeln, no. 2331, p. 172, pi. 70, (Type C) Cf. K.-D. Nadeln, nos. 1710, 1726 and NOTE 312 from Tomb XL, cf. Prosymna, fig. 323. Cf. 1774; the first from a tomb at the Deiras, Cf. pp. 79-80 and notes 280 - 282 and p. 81 and note 293 above. the others from the Athena sanctuary (B 69 285 above for Geometric I and pp. 81 - 83 "Pilzkopf-Nadeln", K - D. Nadeln, no. and 70). Among the Aphrodision material and notes 293 and 311 above for the 3331, p. 203 and 206, pi. 83, from Tomb is a pin head, 74/31, L. 10 cm., the closest "Mehrkopf-Nadeln". Cf. pp. 78 - 79 and IX , cf. Blegen 1937, 379, fig. 2, 3. Here parallel for which seems to be K.-D. Na notes 276 and 279 above for Geometric I Fig. 36. Cf. p. 81 and note 294 above. deln, No. 1705. It is broken below the head, C and Geometric III, esp. Ill A 3 and B, where a hole indicates an ancient repair. both with a possible production at the Ar note 299 For the AH finds, cf. note 286 above. give Heraion; and cf. pp. 81 - 82 and notes For the Geometric pins in the Argos 289 and 308 above for Geometric XVIII, tombs, cf. in particular, Courbin 1974, 130 note 307 the hammer pins; and pp. 81 - 82 and -131 and Foley 1988 80-83. Geometric XVIII, Hammer pins, cf. K.- notes 291 and 309 above and note 340 be D Nadeln, 147 -150. The majority of low for Geometric XX, the flat-head pins. NOTE 300 these pins come from the Argos tombs and Argos. Geometric I. Geometric I A pins, Geometric XVIII A are found here only. NOTE 313 K.-D. Nadeln, nos. 338 - 339 and 368 - Cf. Foley 1988, 83. On the Larissa sanctu The long pins which De Cou called spits 369. For AH cf. p. 78 and note 274 above. ary, B 72 = K.D Nadeln, no. 1862, p. 149 are AH 2273 -2711, AH II, 300 - 323, pis. Geometric I B, K.-D. Nadeln, nos. 398 - and pi. 6,1, here Fig. 32. (Geometric XVIII CXXVII -CXXXIII, as well as about 399. For AH, cf. p. 78 and note 275 above. B). From the Aphrodision a possible frag 2.000 discarded items. (Geometric I C cf. K.-D. Nadeln, 92 - 93 ment ofthe cross of a hammer pin. no. I. Kilian - Dirlmeier's Geometric I A, I D, and p. 78 and note 276 above for the AH 70/561. L. 4.3 cm. and a certain ofa large III and IV - VI are mostly of Northeast and Tiryns finds). conical disk, 73/594. Diam. 3.5 cm. Peloponnsian manufacture. The greater part ofthe Argos pins are Geo For hammered pins at the Argive Heraion, Jacobsthal 1956, 13 - 15 and 114 - 115. In metric I D, cf. K.-D. Nadeln, 93 - 103. cf. p. 81 and note 289 above and for the my opinion, Jacobsthal is correct in not In Argos, Geometric I D, nos. 441 - 450, small Hera sanctuary, p. 81 and note 297 distinguishing between pins and so-called 469 - 474, 478 - 479, 483 - 484, 509, 522, above. Cf. also p. 86 and note 339 below. "spits", i. e. long pins, which on p. 15 he 524, 529 - 530, 533, 541 - 542, 550 -551, interprets as ritual pins made not for mor 573, 578,585 - 586, 592 - 593, 599 - 600, note 308 tals, but for Hera. 679, 681,683, 687 and 929 - 935. Geometric XIX, K.-D. Nadeln, nos. On p. 14 he gives a list ofthe provenances For AH Geometric I D, cf. pp. 78 - 79 and 1910 - 1911, 1923 -1924 and 1928 from known in 1956, which apart from the note 277 above. Argos Tombs and possibly the Aphrodision. Northeast Peloponnesian sites include a no. 74/54, a conical pin head, L. 1.5 cm. few "spits" from each of the following note 301 and a head with part ofthe pin, like K.-D. places: Athena Aphaia on Aigina, the Geometric II. K.-D. Nadeln, no. 974, p. Nadeln, no. 1921, preserved L. 4.5 cm. Amyklaion, the Athenian Acropolis, Del 108, pi. 30. For AH, cf. p. 79 and note 278 Diam. ofhead, 0.5 cm. phi, Dodone and Tegea. Since then they above. have been found also in Argos tombs, cf. NOTE 309 Courbin 1974, Tombs 175 and 176, 2, p. NOTE 302 Geometric XX, the flat-head pins, cf. 118 and pp. 72 - 84, pis. 46 and 48. (Both For Geometric III, cf. p. 79 and note K.-D. Nadeln, nos. 1946 - 1948 from LG II). 279 above with reference to Rolley. tombs in Argos and nos. 1936 and 1939 - The second largest find after the Argive K.-D. Nadeln, 109 - 114, does not list a 40 from Tiryns and no. 1945 from Myce Heraion is apparently Perachora, cf. Pera single example from Argos. nae. Cf. note 340 below. chora I, 71 - 72, pi. 17 (Hera Akraia) and 175, pi. 77 (Hera Limenia). NOTE 303 NOTE 310 K.-D. Nadeln, 162. Geometric IV - VI, cf. K.-D. Nadeln, p. "Mehrkopf-Nadeln", K.-D. Nadeln, nos. Foley 1988, 82-83 and 138. 114- 116 and p. 81 and notes 280 - 282 2026 and 2052 (Athena Sanctuary. Larissa, and 297 above for finds in and around the both B 83), 2053 - 54, 2075 - 77 (Tombs NOTE 314 Argive Heraion. (Geometric VII is seen in in Argos), 2166 = Vollgraff 1956, 49, fig. The longest pin fragments at the Argive only two examples in Perachora, cf. p. 80 38 (Apollon Pythaeus Sanctuary), all type Heraion are AH 2287, measuring 68. 2 and note 283 above). A, and 2418 and 2423 and 2504 as well as cm.; AH 2477, 77. 2 cm. and AH 2581, Vollgraff, Br. 1866, (L. 11 cm)(Athena 82. 7 cm. At Perachora the largest fragment note 304 Sanctuary. Larissa), all Type C. One in the measures about 60 cm., cf. Perachora I, 175. For Geometric VIII - XIII, cf. K.-D. Na Aphrodision, OBC 34 (L. 11.8 cm.), Type In the Argos tombs, Courbin, loc. cit., the deln, p. 122 - 138 and for AH finds, cf. p. C. Cf. also Foley 1988, 83. pins measure between 30 and 40 cm. and 80 and notes 285 - 286 above. the same applies to Tiryns Tomb XXV,

117 Verdehs 1963, 42 - 43 and fig. 14. In Co the Tegea example = Blinkenberg III 6 c, rings on the lower outer part; its inside is rinth, Tombs F - G, they measure 60 cm, p. 82. finished. Jacobsthal 1956, 14 and fig. 23. A few fragmentary wires in the Aphrodi For shield or belt bosses , cf. Snodgrass sion were apparently bent into similar or 1964, 37 - 51; Snodgrass 1973; Fellmann note 315 naments, 73/547 and 73/596. 1984; Vitsa, 304 - 305, Fig. 84 a -b and pi. For the tubes, cf. ref. Foley 1988, 82 and, From the Argive Heraion, cf. e.g., AH 195 123, from Tombs 34 and 79. (MGII). in particular, Tiryns Tomb XXV, 2, Verde- = K.-D. Nadeln, no. 1987; AH 746, AH lis, loc. cit. and Argos, Tombs 175 and 176, II, pi. LXXXIV and AH 826, AH II, pi. NOTE 325 Courbin loc.cit. LXXXV. AH 1779 - 1793, AH II, 271 and pis. CIII For tubes from the Argive Heraion, Foley, - CIV. They were found mostly in the loc. cit., and note 22 gives references to NOTE 321 West Building, on the Southern Slope or AH 1496 and 1498, AH II, 262 and pi. AH 2007 (NM 20591), AH II, 285 and pi. behind the Back ofSouth Stoa. About 50 XCI; also AH 1497, AH 1513 - 1518 and CXVII. A Protocorinthian skyphos rim pieces were discarded. 1524, loc. cit., are ofthe same types and fragment with a small fragment ofhandle I cannot tell their function. (The sheet presumably tubes. and possibly the skyphos handle, AH 2048 with punched decoration will be treated in For offerings of long pins in pairs in the (NM 20661), AH II, 285 and pi. CXIX. the following article.) Corinthian tombs cf. Jacobsthal 1956, 15 AH 2044 (Diam. 2.2 cm.) and AH 2082 The two leaves, AH 1847 - 1848, AH II, and K.-D. Nadeln, 161 - 162. (Diam. ofbutton 1. 65 cm., AH II, 288, pi. 274 and pi. CVIII. CXIX and 289 - 290, pi. CXXI, may per AH 1847. L. 7.15 cm. and AH 1848 L. NOTE 316 haps be fragmentary buttons ofpyxis lids, 1 1.3 cm. Cf. Courbin, loc. cit. cf. Perachora I, 156, pi. 60, 9 and 10. Both types are better represented in the note 326 NOTE 317 neighbouring votive deposits, cf. note 326 The Hera sanctuary west ofthe Heraion: A Cf. note 313 above, ref. to Jacobsthal, K.- below. fragmentary PC skyphos and several pyxis D. Nadeln and Foley. AsJacobsthal pointed The production ofminiature vases and fragments are mentioned, Blegen 1939, out, p. 13, the long pins are extremely un- other miniature objects as for example 420, cf. fig. 9, 1, which Blegen 1937, 381, suited as meat spits; they are very thin and mirrrors, presumably began before 700 BC, said were exactly like the pyxis from Pro furnished with knobs, and they differ a but as shown by one ofthe most common symna Tomb VIII, cf. below. great deal from the iron spits which defi forms, the lotus phiale, they belong for the The Prosymna deposits: Blegen 1937, 381, nitely were used as such. greater part in the Archaic Period. Tomb IX, crushed skyphos of PC type. (I cannot, as Foley sems to do, take Prosymna Tombs VIII and IX, Blegen Verdelis' suggestion ofknitting needles, NOTE 322 1937, 381, fig. 4, No. 2. Pyxis fragments, Verdelis 1963, 43, seriously.) Cf. e.g. the parts ofhorse trappings, AH cf. Perachora I, 156 and pi. 60. 1555 and AH 2783, AH II, 328 and pi. "Kalotten-Schale", cf. Blegen 1937, 380 note 318 CXXXIV; Bouzek 1974 a, 157 - 160 and and fig. 6,2. Tomb XL. Here Fig. 47. For Jacobsthal s arguments, cf. note 317 fig. 46, 5, B 1 (AH 2783) and C 2 (AH For "Kalotten-Schalen", Mathaus 1985, 71 above. For the long pins from the Altar 1555) p. 158, dated to presumably not earlier - 108, esp. 100 and note 59 with ref. to Area, cf. IS I, 176, note 33 (AH 2301 and than about 650 BC, cf. Bouzek 1974 b, 311, Geometric finds in Greece and cf. for 2704) as well as AH 2492 from the NE and Bouzek 1982, 56 - 57, Nos. 16 B - C. finds in Argos tombs, Courbin 1974, 129 - corner of the Second Terrace (AH II, 310). For fragments ofcarriages and ofwheels, 130, pis. 36 and 48. From the West Building come ca. 20 pins cf. AH 2253 - 2255 AH II, 298 - 299, pi. and from either the Southern Slope or the CXXVI. note 327 Back ofthe South Stoa, likewise secondary For "Kalotten-Schalen" in Geometric Ar find spots, ca. 25 pins. The bronze rods note 323 gos tombs, cf. ref. note 326 above. mentioned by Waldstein as found in the Cf. e.g. the spear head mentioned in Archaic Temple are, judging from the con Brownson 1893, 210, which was found at note 328 text, presumably not pins, cf. IS I, 201. the Gymnasium. A spear butt, AH 2712, B 78. Bronze ornament ca 10 cm. in cf. AH II, 213 and pi. CXXXIII. length, somewhat resembling an ornament NOTE 319 from Thermon which Kilian 1979, fig. 4, 7 Cf. Jacobsthal 1956, 114-115 and several NOTE 324 - 9 and p. 38 connects with votive swords examples AH II, pis. CXXVIII - CXXXI. AH 2757 (NM 13990), AH II, 326 and pi. from Tegea and Sparta. CXXXIV. Another large ornament from Vollgraffs ex NOTE 320 Conical boss, cast in one piece with the cavations on top ofthe Larissa, Br.1865, is Two ofthe pins, Vollgraff Br. 1855, are bronze plate from which it is hewn off, apparently an ornamental nail, measuring in twisted in the said forms; one, is formed leaving sharp cuts along the edges. H. 10 length 10.4 cm.; it is fragmentary, with a into a double loop (its L. is 4 cm., W 2.5 cm., lower diameter 6.7 cm.; the actual shaft ofquadrangular section, each side cm.); the other is made into a quadrangular boss measures in height 6 cm. Its inside is measuring 1.3 cm. and a globular head, ornament with several loops or spirals hollow to a length of2.6 cm. The tip of measuring 2,5 cm. in diameter, above which along two ofthe edges, in the present form the buckle which has a diameter of0.7 cm. is a break, cf. Perachora I, 181, pi. 82, 11. measuring 4.5 x 2.5 cm.; it is similar to shows traces ofblows. The plate measures Among the Larissa finds as well as in the Voyatzis 1990, B 255, p. 213 and pi. 166, 0.3 cm. in thickness; its outside is well pol Aphrodision were also several implements but apparently not made into a fibula like ished and has a series ofconcentric relief ofiron, including at both sites a miniature

n8 axe. Larissa: F 59, cf. Courbin 1974, 135. NOTE 334 cenaean water reservoir used until the Aphrodision, 74/31. L. 6.2 cm. K.-D. Nadeln, nos. 202 and 226, cf. notes Geometric and Orientalizing Periods. 270 - 271 above with ref. to Rolley. How For the differences in detailed decoration NOTE 329 ever, I see no reason for R. Hagg's sugges ofthe Argos and Tegea pins, cf. K.-D. Na Vollgraf Br. 1857. Cast bronze arrow head tion, Hagg 1992, 15 and 20, that the ordi deln, 154. with a small tang. Length with tang, 4.2 nary bronze pins of PG type at the Argive cm., without 3.7 cm. Heraion are heirlooms; nor like the PG NOTE 341 Aphrodision, 71/62 bis and 73/562, the material at Amyklaion (cf. Calligas 1992, For the chronology ofthe Solid Cast Tri latter measures 3.5 cm. 41 and 43 -44) can they be considered a pods found at the Argive Heraion, cf. p. Cf. Voyatzis 1990, 201 for an example from sign of early Post-Mycenaean habitation, of 50, all dated towards the end ofthe pro the Athena Alea sanctuary at Tegea, with which we have no trace at or near the Ar duction phase which presumably stops ref. in notes 131 - 132 to other sanctuaries give Heraion. The only vague mention of around 750 BC. The bronze tripod finds at with votive arrow heads and to Dugas such in the Prosymna area is ADelt. 37, Mycenae and Tiryns are all considered 1921, 389, Nos. 178 - 180, Fig. 41. 1982 (1990), B 94, cf. AR 1990/91, 22, a Mycenaean or Protogeometric, cf. note Cf. also Snodgrass 1964, 144 - 156, Greek plundered cist grave, Geometric or earlier, 108 above. arrow heads ofbronze, in general. The near the church of Agios Nicolaos, a few For the chronology ofthe Boiotian arm stone arrow head, Simon 1986, 288, no. km. from the Heraion. At any rate, the two rings, spectacle fibulae and plate fibulae, cf. 14, from the Argive Heraion, AH II, 354, PG bronze pins initiate a long and continu pp. 70, 72 - 73 and 75 and notes 235, 247 is presumably Prehistoric. ous development of such votive dedications and 254 above, and for the simple arched at the Argive Heraion, gradually increasing fibulae, cf. note 337 above. NOTE 330 in number ofpreserved examples. Al Argos, Tombs 45, Courbin 1957, (helmet though we have only one pin with a dedi note 342 and cuirass, pis. I - IV and figs. 19 - 45), catory inscription to Hera at this site, cf. Cf. pp. 81 and 83 and notes 293 and 310 Snodgrass 1964, 13-16 (helmet) and 72 - note 269 above, the general votive charac above. 84 (cuirass) and Courbin 1974, 135 note 7, ter ofthe pins at the Argive Heraion has 40 - 41 and frontispiece, and for helmets, never been doubted. note 343 cf. also Protonotariou-Deilaki 1984, 43 - Cf. pp. 83 - 84 and notes 313 - 314 and 45, figs. 2-4 and 6-7; cf. also Foley NOTE 335 320 above. 1988, 86 - 88. Cf. IS I, 175 - 176, for unpublished pot For bronze weapons in Argos tombs, in tery finds earlier than MG II. NOTE 344 general, cf. Courbin 1974, 133 - 135. Argive Heraion. note 336 For Laconia, cf. pp. 53, 64 - 65 and notes note 331 Cf. pp. 78-79 and 81 and notes 274 - 277 138, 204 and 207 above. Cf. Voyatzis 1990, 198 - 200, pis. 135 - and 288 - 289 and p. 82 and notes 300 and Ofthe Laconian type pins, only one ofthe 141 for miniature votive shields and swords 307 above. "Mehrkopfnadeln" types which also were in Arcadian sanctuaries and references to found elsewhere in Northeast Peloponnese such finds in Olympia and the Dipylon. note 337 comes from the Argive Heraion, cf. p. 81 There are not any certain finds ofmini Cf. IS I, 175 and note 19 and ref. notes and note 293 above. ature shields at the Argive Heraion and we 334 - 335 above. Although some ofthe For Arcadia, cf. pp. 55 - 57, 62 - 67, 72 - have no information, as stated by Aupert simple arched fibulae may be early, their 76, 79 - 81 and notes 149, 155 (AH 20), 1984, 25, that the shield was a prize at the date is not certain, cf. IS I, 174, note 17. 156, 162 -164, 197, 204 - 209, 211, 223, contests for the Argive Hera before the 4th 243, 249, 251, 255 - 256, 278 and possibly Cent. BC, cf. note 359 below (Amandry). note 338 285 - 287 above (either Central Pelopon Nor is there any evidence that the Archaic Cf. pp. 79 and 82 and notes 278 - 279 and nesian or Arcadian). Argive Heraion received dediations ofarms 301 - 302 above. For the Corinthia, cf. pp. 53, 78 - 79 and and armour like other important Archaic 84 and notes 138, 276, 279 and 321 above. sanctuaries; cf. Snodgrass 1967, 48 for the NOTE 339 For Central Greece, cf. pp. 53, 62 - 64, 69 change in custom from burying men with Geometric XVIII B. K.-D. Nadeln, nos. - 70, 73 - 76, and notes 138, 198 - 200, their arms in the Geometric Period to ded 1852 - 54, from Argos, Tomb 6, nos. F 7 - 202, 235 and 251 - 256 (for which, how icating arms in the sanctuaries in the Ar 8, cf. Courbin 1974, 14 - 22, pi. 22 (MG ever, a Peloponnesian production is more chaic Period. II). For AH finds, cf. note 289 above. For likely). the Larissa find, cf. note 307 above. For Thessaly, cf. pp. 64 - 66, 69, 72 - 74 NOTE 332 and notes 203, 205, 211, 234 (Thessahan- For the chronology ofthe Argive ceramic NOTE 340 Macedonian arm ring), 245, 247 and 251 phases, cf. Coldstream, 1968, 330, and end Cf. notes 291 and 309 above. K-D. Nadeln, above. of note 160 above. pp. 152 - 155. Kilian-Dirlmeier sees a dif For Macedonia, cf. pp. 67 - 69, 73 and 84 ference in the distribution pattern in Arca and notes 224 - 226, 234, 247 and 322 note 333 dia and the Argolid, in the former region above. Cf. the Argos sanctuaries, note 7 above. coming from sanctuaries, in the latter from And for the West Peloponnese, cf. p. 81 For the possible MG II date ofthe hammer tombs. However, the find from the Perseia and note 291 above. pins on the Larissa, cf. p. 86 and note 339 at Mycenae need not come from a tomb For the genuinely insular fibulae, cf. p. 73 below. context, cf. Wace 1953, but possibly a My and note 250 above.

119 NOTE 345 note 352 bronze manufacture at the Argive Heraion, Argos. Cf. AH 11 - 13, chariot horses, pp. 56 - 57 I find the suggestion by Foley 1988, 66, of For the Central Peloponnesian pins and and Figs. 17-20 and notes 148, 153 and local potteries at the Heraion quite pos pendants, cf. pp. 68 and 82 and notes 228 - 159 and for the Argos horse, pp. 60 - 61 sible, unlike the authors. 229, 301, 304 - 306 and 309 above. For and Fig. 22 and note 187, and for the com differences in types represented at Argos parison between them, cf. p. 61 note 359 and the Argive Heraion, cf. especially the For the significance ofvotive statuettes of E.g. we have no evidence for the military ring pendants, p. 68 and note 229 above, horses, in general, cf. Bevan 1986, 322. aspect ofthe early Argive Hera as stated by the double axe pendants, pp. 67 - 68 and de Polignac 1984, 59 - 60, cf. 54. Her cult notes 222 and 228 above and the flat-head note 353 statue was unarmed (cf. the many terracot pins with production in both Argos and Cf. p. 50 ta figures ofseated unarmed women at the Arcadia, pp. 82 and 86 and notes 309 and site, AH II, pis. XLII - XLV), and we have 340 above. NOTE 354 no information ofthe shield having been For a Thessalian type fibula, cf. p. 77 and Cf. p. 51 -52 introduced as an athletic prize until the 4th note 264 above and for the Boiotian fibu Cent. BC. The prizes in the 5th Cent. BC lae, both types presumably of Peloponne NOTE 355 were bronze hydriai and other vessels, cf. sian origin, p. 77 and note 265 above. The Argive Geometric pottery is strongly Amandry 1980, 211-217, and for the For the Central Greek bird type, p. 66 and influenced by Attica throughout its whole shield as a prize in the 4th Cent. BC and note 216 above. line ofdevelopment, as shown by Cold Imperial Roman Times, 231 - 233. stream 1968, chpt. IV, 112 - 146, cf. Cour We have no information about the proces note 346 bin 1966, 510-515, and only in the LG sion from Argos to the Heraion earlier than Cf. in particular, the insular fibulae, p. 77 period, when also Attic pottery is influ Herodotus' story about Kleobis and Biton, and note 264 above. enced from Corinth, shows Corinthian in in itself not securely dated, and the situa fluences, cf. esp. Coldstream 1968, 130 - tion ofthe Kourtaki sanctuary (for both cf. note 347 131, but never to the same extent as from Morgan - Whitelaw 1991, 84) is not a cer Cf. for Arcadia pp. 53 - 59, 62 - 68, 73 - Attica. Cf. also Courbin 1966, 515 - 520. tain indication of connection with such an 76, 79-81 and 82; for Corinthia pp. 53, early processional road (cf. op. cit. p. 80, 78 - 79 and 84 and for Central Greece and NOTE 356 fig. 1). Its Geometric votives comprised Thessaly pp. 53, 62 - 66, 69 - 76. Kelly 1976, chpt. IV, esp. pp. 60 - 64. only pottery and terracottas. Cf. note 8 Kelly connects his theories with the de above. note 348 struction ofAsine by Argos in the late 8th However, the flat head pins may not be Cent. BC and discusses the possibility ofa note 360 taken as Argove imitations ofTegea religious-political league with Argos as the A thorough discussion ofthe problem pre bronzes, the similar pin types at the two leading power. supposes a more general background con sites, may be due to similar traditions. cerning the emergence ofthe Greek city- NOTE 357 states and cannot take place here; it belongs note 349 Polignac 1984, chpt. 2, pp. 41 - 92, esp. pp. in my final and more general paper on the Cf, pp. 86 - 87 and references note 344, 59 - 60. questions concerning the Early Argive for the Argive Heraion relations with the For objections of a chronological and relig Heraion. Corinthia. For the Northeast Peloponne ious character, cf. below. sian earrings, cf. pp. 69-71 and notes 232 In his article, Polignac 1990, he differen NOTE 361 - 233 and 238 above. For Laconian influ tiates his theories more. I have not seen his Cf, in particular, Wright 1982, esp. Hera ence on the Argos warrior's statuette, Fig. article in Argos et l'Argolide. Topographie and the Hero Cult pp. 193 - 194 and p. 23, cf. p. 61 and notes 189-191 above. et Urbanisme. Actes du Colloque Intern, 200: "...the tombs... may have been the de l'Ecole Francaised'Athenes (May 1990). catalyst for Hera worship on this spot..." note 350 A detailed discussion ofde Polignac's theo and cf. Whitley 1988, esp. p. 179: "...the Cf. p. 84 and notes 321 and 326 - 327 ries will be postponed until my concluding appearance of offerings in these tombs above. article. must be intimately related to the construc Although the Protocorinthian vase frag tion and foundation ofthe Argive He- ments ofbronze at the Argive Heraion are note 358 raeum itself... the motivation... must have so few and small, they correspond with Morgan - Whitelaw, 1991, esp. pp. 84 - 86. been largely the same." those at the neighbouring Hera sanctuary Until the early pottery from the Argive For the small Hera sanctuary, cf. note 366 and bronze vases are, in general, so well Heraion is published (cf. IS I, 173 - 174), it below. represented at both sanctuaries that the ap is not possible to compare the Geometric parent absence ofthe so-called "Kalotten- pottery ofArgos with that ofthe Argive note 362 Schale" is presumably real. From Corinth, Heraion and the authors' personal observa The Hera Sanctuary, cf. Blegen 1939, 410 we have no record of a "Kalotten-Schale". tion on this point, op. cit. p. 84, with note - 427. The votives continue into the Clas 22, is undocumented. Nor do I find the sical Hellenistic Periods, cf. op. cit. p. 42. note 351 Geometric pottery ofthe site actually in The Prosymna Tombs, cf. Blegen 1937, pp. Cf. pp. 84 - 85 and notes 328 - 330 above. corporated in the study (e.g. the Argive 377 - 390 (the end of the 8th Cent. BC Heraion is not included in the four maps of and the early part ofthe 7th); Coldstream fig. 6.) Considering the evidence for early 1968, 406. Coldstream 1976, in particular,

120 p. 9 ("the offerings... begin in the late Both Tomb II and Tomb XLIII have note 369 eighth century"); Wright 1982, 193 - 194; later fills in the dromos consisting of Geo Cf. Blegen 1937, 378, where another goat's Whitley 1988, 179 and Hagg, 1987 b, esp. metric/Archaic sherds as well as Classical or skeleton is mentioned from Tomb XLVIII, conclusions, 98 - 99. Antonaccio 1992, Hellenistic finds. As regards Tomb II (and a tomb which, however, did not have any esp. p. 99. I am not convinced of her MG possibly both tombs), these finds may be Post-Mycenaean deposit, cf. Prosymna, II date of the skyphos, pi. 214 b = Blegen viewed in connection with the kiln in 216. The finds of a few animal bones and 1937, fig.13; in form and decoration it may neighbouring Tomb III, cf. Prosymna, 174 dogs' teeth in Tomb XL (Prosymna, 133) just as well be LG, cf. Coldstream 1968, and 180 and fig. 440 (Tomb II) and p. 186 are probably fortuituous. 125 - 129 and e.g., Courbin 1966, pis. 60 and figs. 467 and 487 (Tomb XLIII). Cf. Hagg, 1987 b, 98 - 99. and 64. Tomb XLIX, Prosymna, 136, had numer ous Geometric ceramic fragments and NOTE 370 note 363 bronze bits, but apparently not a genuine In K.-D. Nadeln, 201, Kilian-Dirlmeier Cf. pp. 86 - 87 (EG/MG) and esp. the deposit. suggests that the deposit ofTomb XL with summary ofMG II. All the above tombs were situated north of only two bronze objects and three Proto and near the Argive Heraion, a bit further corinthian vases is a closed deposit. The NOTE 364 away from the Heraion, but in the same same suggestion, p. 205, for Tomb IX with Cf. the references in note 362 above. area as Blegen's finds ofthree large frag a large and varied deposit, cf. Blegen 1937, For LG hero-cults in the Mycenaean mentary early bronzes, Blegen 1939, 427 - 378, does not appear convincing to me, al chamber tombs in Argos, cf. note 7 above. 430, fig. 16, cf. IS I, 192 - 193, fig. 16. though the ceramic material is homogene The tombs are indicated on the detail of ous and not later than the early 7th Cent. note 365 the plan, op. cit. fig. 15. There may well BC. Blegen 1939, 412 and fig. 11. have been fragments ofpottery and metal lying around in the area. NOTE 371 NOTE 366 Tomb XXV, mentioned by Blegen 1937, Cf. Hagg 1987 b, 99 and note 59, with ref Cf. ref. in note 362 above. The only 377, did not contain Post-Mycenaean finds erence to an observation by Coldstream bronze object which does not have parallels according to Prosymna, 86 - 92. Perhaps that one ofthe vases was painted by a man in the Argive Heraion is the fibula, p. 76 the skyphos, Blegen 1937, 386 - 387 and who specialized in votive ware. and Fig. 35 and note 258 above which , fig. 13, cf. note 362 above, is erroneously however, does not indicate a different tradi attributed and should belong with neigh NOTE 372 tion. For the terracottas, cf. esp. Blegen bouring Tomb XXVI which included "a Hagg, op. cit. 99. 1939, 420 - 423 and for the pottery, op. nest ofGeometric pots", cf. Prosymna, 93. cit., p. 423-427. Antonaccio 1992, 99, note 42, refers to a note 373 For the suggestion that the Hera cult grew burial in Tomb XXV, mentioned in Cf. pp. 81 - 82 and note 298 and p. 84 and ofa hero-cult, cf. Wright 1982, 194. Blegen's 1927 note book. A Geometric bu Figs 36 and 47 and note 326 above. rial is without parallel in the Mycenaean NOTE 367 Prosymna tombs. NOTE 374 Cf. Blegen 1937, 377 - 8 and Prosymna, For my conclusions regarding the monu 262 - 263. The deposits in Tomb III, Pro note 368 mental architecture ofthe Early Argive symna, 180, and Tomb XIII, Prosymna, Blegen 1937, loc. cit. For the Geometric Heraion, cf. IS I, 198-200. 194, are of4th Cent./Hellenistic date, deposit in each tomb, cf. Prosymna, 161 coming from a potter's kiln and a child's (Tomb VIII), 165 (Tomb IX), 60 (Tomb NOTE 375 burial, respectively, while a large shaft or XIX), 93 (Tomb XXVI), 111-112 (Tomb In a following article, the Archaic Greek pit in Tomb X, Prosymna, 197 - 198, was XXXIV), 124 (Tomb XXXVII), and 133 bronzes will be studied. dug around 600 BC or later, filled with de and fig. 319 (Tomb XL). These aspects which could not be entered bris which contained Corinthian and ear Tomb L had the outer end of its dromos into in this article will be studied in a final lier pottery as well as a fragment ofa terra cut away in Geometric times, but in the article. Two previously published articles cotta figurine. chamber was a Geometric fill with pot have dealt with separate aspects of the for sherds and bronze bits and at the back a eign relations and the economy of the large heap ofstones which may have Early Argive Heraion, cf. IS II and IS 111. formed a construction, cf. Prosymna, 140.

121 Bibliography

Alexander, J. 1965 Benton, S. 1953 Bol, PC. 1985 b. The Spectacle Fibulae of Southern Europe. Further Excavations at Aetos. BSA XLVIII, Antike Bronzetechnik. Miinchen. AJA 69, 17-23. 255 - 358. Bol, PC. - Weber, T. 1985 Alzinger, W 1978 Bevan, C. 1986 Bildwerke aus Bronze und Bein aus mi- Aigeira 1976/77. AAA 11, 147-156. Representations ofAnimals in Sanctuaries noischer bis byzantinischer Zeit. Liebighaus ofArtemis. Oxford. (BAR 315). Museum Alter Plastik. Antike Bildwerke II. Alzinger, W 1981-82 Melsungen. Aigeira - Achaia. OJh 53, Beiblatt. Gra- Birge, DE. - Kraynak, L.H. - Miller, S.G. bungen 1978-81, 8-15. 1992 Born, H. - Moustaka. A. 1982 Excavations at Nemea I. Berkeley - Los Eine geometrische Bronzestatuette im Alzinger, W. 1985 Angeles/ Oxford. originalen Gussmantel aus Olympia. AM Aigeira - Hyperesia und der Siedlung 97, 17 - 23. Phelloe in Achaia, 1. Akropolis. Klio 67, Blegen, C.W. 1937 426 - 450. Post-Mycenaean Deposits in Chamber- Bosshard, F. 1990 Tombs. AEphem 1937 I, 377 - 390. Protogeometrische Bronzefiguren in Basel. Amandry, P. 1980 Zu Stil und Proportion friiher griechischer Sur les concours Argiens. BCH Suppl. VI, Blegen, C.W. 1939 Statuetten. AntK. 33, 3 - 19. 211 -253. Prosymna: Remains of Post-Mycenaean Date. AJA XLIII, 410 - 444. Bouzek, J. 1967 Andromkos, M. 1969 Die griechisch-geometrischen Vergina I. Athens. Boardman, J. 1963 Bronzevogel. Eirene VI. 1967, 115 139. Island Gems. JHS Supplementary Paper. 10. Andronikos, M. 1984 London. Bouzek, J. 1971 Vergina. The Royal Tombs and the An Die griechisch-geometrischen cient City. Athens. Boardman, J. - Buchner, G. 1966 Bronzevogel. Ein Nachtrag. Eirene IX., Seals from Ischia and the Lyre-Player 89 - 93. Antonaccio, CM. 1992 Group. Jdl 81, 1 -62. Terraces, Tombs, and the Early Argive Bouzek, J. 1974 a Heraion. Hesperia 61, 84 - 105. Boardman, J. 1967 Graeco-Macedonian Bronzes. (Analysis and Archaic Finger Rings. AntK. 10, 3 - 28. Chronology). Prag. Antonaccio Sanpaolo, E. 1990 Le leghe bronzee greche ed il progetto Boardman, J. 1970 Bouzek, J. 1974 b "Cupnum". RdA XIV, 104 - 126. Greek Gems and Finger Rings. London. Macedonian Bronzes. Their Origin, Distri bution and Relation to Other Cultural Aupert, P. 1984 Boardman, J. 1990 Groups ofthe Early Iron Age. Pamatky Ar- Argos aus VHIe - Vile siecles: bourgade ou The Lyre Player Group ofSeals. An En cheologicke, 278 - 341. Prag. metropole? ASAtene LX (1982), 21-31. core. AA 1990, 1-17. Bouzek, J. 1982 Benton, S. 1938 a Bohen, B. 1988 Addenda to Macedonian Bronzes. Eirene Excavations in Ithaca III, BSA XXXV Die geometrischen Pyxiden. Kerameikos 18,35-59. (1934-35), 45-73. XIII. Berlin. Brize, Ph. 1991 Benton, S. 1938 b Bol, PC. 1985 a. Archaische Bronzevotive aus dem Heraion Evolution ofthe Tripod-Lebes, BSA Zur Unterseite einer geometrischen von Samos. Scienze dell' Antichita, 3-4 XXXV (1934-35), 74- 130. Bronzegruppe im Liebighaus. Stadeljb 10, (1989-1990), 317 - 326. 7- 12. Benton, S. 1950 Brownson, C.L. 1893 The Dating of Horses on Stands and Specta OL. Brownson. Excavations at the He- cle Fibulae in Greece. JHS LXVIII, 16 - 22. raeum ofArgos. AJA 1893, 205 - 225.

122 Bursian, C. 1854 Courbin, P. 1974 Felsch, R.C.S. et. al. 1987 Scavi dell'Heraion Argivo. Bull. 1st. 1854, Les Tombes Geometriques d'Argolide. I Bericht iiber die Grabungen der Artemis XIII - XVII. (1952 - 1958). Et. Pel. VII. Elaphebolosund des Apollon von Hyam- pohs 1978 - 1982, AA 1987, 1 - 99. Buschor, E. - v. Massow, W 1927 Craddock, RT 1976. Vom Amyklaion. AM LII, 1 - 85. The Composition ofthe Copper Alloys Floren, J. 1987 used by the Greek, Etruscan and Roman Die geometrische und archaische Plastik. Calligas, PG. 1992 Civilisations, 1. The Greeks before the Handbuch der Archaologie. Die griechi- From the Amyklaion. J.M. Sanders (Ed.). Archaic Period. JAScien. 3, 93 -113. sche Plastik. Band I. Miinchen. Argolis, 1. Boreas 7, 1. Carlsberg Glyptothek. Kobenhavn. Deshayes, J. 1966 Argos, les Fouilles de la Deiras. Et. Pel. IV Hagg, R. 1987 a Coldstream, J.N. 1968 Zur Stadtwerdung des dorischen Argos. Greek Geometric Pottery. London. Droop, J. P. 1907 Papenfuss, D - Strocka, V.M. (Eds.). Palast Laconia I. Excavations at Sparta 1907. BSA und Hiitte. (Berlin 1979). Mainz a.R. Coldstream, J.N. 1976 XIII, 1906 - 07, 109 - 136. 1982, 297 - 307. Hero-cults in the Age of Homer, JHS XCVI, 8-17. Dugas, C. 1921 Hagg. R. 1987 b Le Sanctuaire d'Alea Athena a Tegee. BCH Gifts to the Heroes in Geometric and Ar Coldstream, J.N. 1977 1921,335-435. chaic Greece. Gifts to Gods, 93 - 99. Geometric Greece. London. Dyggve, E. - Poulsen, E - Rhomaios, K. Hagg, R. 1992 Comstock, M. - Vermeule, C. 1971 1934. Das Heroon von Kalydon. Geometric Sanctuaries in the Argolid. Greek, Etruscan and Roman Bronzes in Kobenhavn. Polydipsion Argos, 9 -23. the Museum of Fine Arts. Boston. Boston. Fellman, B. 1984 Hampe, R. 1936 Courbin, P. 1955 Fruhe olympische Giirtelschmuckscheiben Fruhe griechische Sagenbilder in Bootien. Chronique des Fouilles de 1954, II. Argos. aus Bronze. Ol. Forsch. XVI. Berlin. Athen. BCH 79, 312-314. Felsch, R. - Kienast, H. 1975 Heilmeyer, W.-D 1969 Ein Heihgtum in Phokis. AAA VIII, 1 - 24. Giessereibetriebe in Olympia. Jdl 84, 6 - 28. Courbin, P. 1957 Une tombe geometrique d'Argos. BCH Felsch, R.C.S. - Kienast, H.J. - Schuler, H. Heilmeyer, W-D. 1979 81, 322-386. 1980. Friihe olympische Bronzefiguren. Die Apollon und Artemis oder Artemis und Tiervotiven. Ol. Forsch. XII. Berlin. Courbin, P. 1963 Apollon? Bericht von den Grabungen im Etudes Archeologiques . Recueil de tra- neu entdeckten Heihgtum bei Kalapodi Heilmeyer, W.-D. 1981 a vaux, publ. sous la direction de P. Courbin. 1973 -1977. AA 1980, 38 - 123. Antike Werkstattenfunde in Griechenland. Paris. AA 1981, 442-453. Felsch. R.C.S. 1983, Courbin, P. 1966 Zur Chronologie und zum Stil geometris- Heilmeyer, W.-D. 1981 b La Ceramique Geometrique de l'Argolide. cher Bronzen aus Kalapodi. Renaissance, Wagenvotive. Ol. Ber. X, 59 - 71. Paris 123 - 129.

123 Herrmann, H.- V. 1964 Johnston, A. 1990 Lerat, L. 1938 Werkstatten geometrischer Plastik. Jdl 79, L.H. Jeffery. Local Scripts ofArchaic Fouilles de Delphes. Rapport preliminaire. 17-71. Greece. 2nd. Ed. Supplement 1961 - 1987, RA6. Serie 12, 183-227. 423-481. Oxford. Herrmann, H.-V. 1966 Linders, T. 1972 Die Kessel der Orientalisierenden Zeit, 1. Karouzos, S.R 1952 Studies in the Treasury Records of Kesselattachen und Reliefuntersatse. Ol. ApxaiKCt uvqueiatou E6viko0 Artemis Brauronia found in Athens. Forsch. VI. Berlin. Mouoetou Stockholm. AEphem. 1952 (1955), 137 - 166. Herrmann, H.-V. 1982 a Maass, M. 1977 Geometrische Fibeln der Tiibinger Kelly, T 1976 Kretische Votivdreifusse. AM 92, 33 - 59. Universitatssammlung. Freytag geb. A History ofArgos to 500 B.C. Loringhof, B. von, Mannsberger, D. and Minneapolis. Maass M. 1981 Prayon, F. (Hrsg.). Praestant Interna. Fest Die geometrischen Dreifiisse von Olympia. schrift fur Ulrich Hausmann. Tubingen, Kilian, K. 1975 a AntK. 24, 6 - 20. 248 - 260. Fibeln in Thessalien von der mykenischen bis zur archaischen Zeit. PBF XIV, 2. Marinatos, N- Hagg, R. 1993 Herrmann, H.-W. 1982 b Munchen. 1975. Greek Sanctuaries. London/New York. Rezension Heilmeyer, W-D 1979. Bonnjb, 182, 613 - 619. Kilian, K. 1975 b Matthaus, H. 1980 Trachtzubehor der Eisenzeit zwischen Die Bronzegefasse der kretisch-mykenis- Higgins, R. 1980 Agais und Adna. PZ 50, 9-140. chen Kultur. PBF II 1. Munchen. Greek and Roman Jewellery. 2nd Ed. Berkeley/Los Angeles. Kilian, K. 1979. Matthaus, H. 1985. ApK.a5iK.8s Kcu AaKtoviKEs i5iouop

Himmelmann-Wildschutz, N. 1964 Kilian, K. 1983 Miller, S.G. 1977 Bemerkungen zur geometrischen Plastik. Weihungen aus Eisen und Eisenverarbei- Excavations at Nemea, 1976. Hesperia 46, Berlin. tung im Heiligtum zu Philia (Thessalien). 1 -26. Renaissance, 131 - 146. Himmelmann-Wildschutz, N. 1974 Miller, S.G. 1990. Geometrisches Bronzepferdchen in Bonn. Kilian(-Dirlmeier), I. 1978 Nemea. A Guide to the Site and Museum. AA 1974, 544-554. Weihungen an Eileythyia und Artemis Berkeley - Los Angeles/ Oxford. Orthia. ZPE 31, 219-222. Himmelmann, N. 1992 Mitsopoulos - Leon, V 1990 Archaologische Forschungen in Akademis- Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. 1985 Lusoi. OJh 60. Beiblatt. Grabungen, 31 - ches Museum. Bonn. Die griechisch- Fremde Weihungen in griechischen 36. agyptische Beziehungen. Bonn. Heiligtiimern vom 8. bis zum Beginn des 7. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. JbZMuzMainz 32, Morgan, C. 1990 Holbl, G. 1979 215-254. Athletes and Oracles. The Transformation Beziehungen der agyptischen Kultur zu of Olympia and Delphi in the Eighth Cen Altitalien 1-2. Leiden. Kunze, E. 1952 tury BC. Cambridge. Neue Meisterwerke griechischer Kunst aus Holbl, G. 1986 Olympia. Munchen. Morgan, C- Whitelaw, T 1991 Agyptisches Kulturgut in Phonikischen Pots and Politics: Ceramic Evidence for the und Punischen Sardinien. 1-2. Leiden. Kunze, E. 1967 Rise ofthe Argive State. AJA 95, 79 - 108. Kleinplastik aus Bronze. Ol. Ber. VIII, Jacobsthal, P. 1956 213-250. Morgan, C. 1993 Greek Pins. Oxford. The origins ofpan-Hellenism. Marinatos - Langdon, S.H. 1984 Hagg 1993, 18-44. Jantzen, U 1975 Art, Religion and Society in the Greek U. Jantzen. Fiihrer durch Tiryns. Athen. Geometric Period. Bronze Anthropomor Morris, S.R 1984 phic Votive Figurines. Diss. Indiana 1984. The Black and White Style. Athens and Johansen, F. 1994 Ann Arbour 1985. Aigina in the Orientalizing Period. Lon Graekenland i arkaisk tid. Katalog Ny don. Carlsberg Glyptotek. Kobenhavn. Lauter, H. 1973 Zur friihklassischen Neuplanung des Hera- Munro, P. 1969 ions von Argos. AM 88, 175 - 187. Eine G.ruppe spatagyptischer Bronzespie- gel. ZAS 95, 92 - 109.

124 Muscarella, O.W. Ausgrabung beim Tempel der Hera unweit Sapouna - Sakellarakis, E. 1978 Greek and Oriental Cauldron Attachments: Argos. Die Fibeln der griechischen Inseln. PBF A Review. Greece Between East and West, XIV 4. Munchen. 16 - 45. Reber, K. 1991 Untersuchungen zur handgemachten Kera- Sarian, H. 1969 Nilsson, M.P. 1941 mik Griechenlands in der submykenischen, Terres cuites geometriques. BCH 93, Geschichte der griechischen Religion I. protogeometrischen un der geometrischen 651 - 678 Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft. V, 2, Zeit. Goteborg. 1. Munchen. Schefold, K. 1960 Risberg, C. 1993 Meisterwerke griechischer Kunst. Basel. Onasoglou, A. 1989 Metal working in Greek Sanctuaries. Eco Oi yecopeTpiKot xoxpot iqc, Tpaydvac, nomics ofCult, 33 -40. Schilbach, J. 1984 oxrjv avcaoAiKr]AoKpOa Eine Gruppe grosser protoarchaischer Pfer- ADelt. 36 A 1981 (1989), 1 - 57. Roes, A. 1953 destatuetten aus Olympia. AM 99, 5-15. Fragments de poterie geometrique trouves Paleologou, H. 1980 sur les citadelles d'Argos. BCH 77, Schmaltz, B. 1980 a Un vase geometrique figuratif d'Argos. 90 - 104. Volumen und Schwerkraft in der Kunst BCH. Suppl. VI, 75 -84. geometrischer Zeit. MarbWPr 1980, Rolley, C. 1969 p. 3 - 36. Perdrizet, P. 1908 Monuments Figures: Les Statuettes de Monuments figures, petits bronzes, terres- Bronze. FdD V, 1. Schmaltz, B. 1980 b cuites, antiquites diverses. FdD V Paris. Metallfiguren aus dem Kabirenheiligtum Rolley, C. 1973 bei Theben. Die Statuetten aus Bronze und Phihpp, H. 1981 Bronzes Geometriques et Orientaux a Blei. Das Kabirenheiligtum bei Theben. Bronzeschmuck aus Olympia. Ol. Forsch. Delos. BCH Suppl. I, 491 -524. VI. Berlin. XIII. Berlin. Rolley, C. 1977 Schweitzer, B. 1969 Polignac, F. de. 1984 Monuments Figures: Les Trepieds a Cuve Die geometrische Kunst Griechenlands. La naissance de la cite grecque. Paris. Cloue. FdD V, 3. Koln.

Polignac, F de. 1991 Rolley, C. (et. al.) 1983 a Simon, C. 1986 Convergence et competition: aux origins Bronzes grecs et orientaux. Influences et The Archaic Votive Offerings and Cults of des sanctuaires de souverainite territoriale apprentissages. BCH 107, 111 - 130. Ionia. (Diss.) Berkeley. dans le Monde Grec. (Ed. Brunaux, J.-L. Les Sanctuaires Celtiques et le Monde Rolley, C. 1983 b Mediterraneen. Actes du Colloque de Saint Les bronzes grecs. Recherches recentes. Sinn, U 1980. Riquier (1990). Paris, 97 - 105. RA 1983, 325 - 336. Ein Fundkomplex aus dem Artemis-Hei- ligtum von Lusoi im Badischem Landes- Popham, M. - Sackett, L. H. 1979 Rolley, C. 1984 museum. JbKuSammlBadWurt. 17, 25 - 40. Lefkandi I: The Iron Age. London. Die griechischen Bronzen. Munchen. Snodgrass, A.M. 1964 Poulsen, E- Rhomaios, K. 1927 Rolley, C. (et. al.) 1986 Early Greek Armour and Weapons from Erster vorlaufiger Bericht fiber die danisch- Trepieds geometriques de bronzes. BCH the end ofthe Bronze Age to 600 B.C. griechischen Ausgrabungen von Kalydon. 110, 121 - 136 Edinburgh. Det kgl. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab. Historisk-filologiske Meddelelser. XIV 3. Rolley, C. 1988 Snodgrass, A.M. 1967. Kobenhavn. Les bronzes grecs: Recherches recentes. Arms and Armour ofthe Greeks. New York. RA 1988, 341 - 355. Poulsen, E 1951 Stubbe-Ostergaard, J. 1991 Catalogue ofthe ancient Sculpture. The RoUey, C. 1992 Terracotta Horses and Horsemen of Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek. Copenhagen. Argos, Corinthe, Athenes. Identite culturelle Archaic Boiotia. Acta Hyperborea 3, et modes de developmment (IX - VHIe s.) 111 - 189. Protonotariou - Dei'laki, E. 1961 Polydipsion Argos, 37-49. XccAkoOv yeoouexpiKov el5o5Aiov 'eF, Themehs, PG. 1969 Aofvqc,. Rostoker, W- Gebhardt, E.R. 1980 Sanctuary of Poseidon at Akovitika near The Sanctuary ofPoseidon at Isthmia: Kalamata, AAA II, 352 - 357. AEphem 1953/54 111,318-320. Techniques of Metal Manufacture. Hesperia 49, 347 - 363. Tomlinson, R. 1992 Protonotariou-Dei'laki, E. 1984 Perachora. O Revardin - B. Grange (Edts.) And to 'Apyoqto0 8ov kcu 7"v cu. n.X. Sakellarakis, J.A. 1988 Entretiens sur L'Antiquite Classique Some Geometric and Archaic Votives from XXXVIII. Le Sanctuaire Grec. VIII, ASAtene LX (1982), 33-48. the Idaean Cave. Cult Practice, 173 - 193. 321 -351. Rangabe, A. Rizo. 1855,

125 Touloupa, E. 1972. Zazoff, P. 1983 Gifts to Gods. Bronzebleche von der Akropolis in Athen. Die antiken Gemmen. Handbuch der Linders, T. - Nordquist, G. (Eds.). Gifts to Gehammerte geometrische Dreifusse. AM Archaologie. Munchen. the Gods. (Uppsala 1985). Uppsala 1987. 87, 57 - 76. Boreas 15. Zimmer, G. 1990. Tracy, S. V 1986 Griechische Bronzewerkstatten. Zur Tech- Greece between East and West. An early inscribed gold ring from the nologieentwicklung eines antiken Kunst- Kopcke, G. - Tokumara, I. (Eds.). Greece Argolid, JHS CVI, 196. handwerkes. Mainz. Between East and West. 10th - 8th Centu ries BC. (New York. 1990). Mainz a.R. Trolle, S. 1979 1993. An Egyptian Head from Camiros. ActArch Abbreviations 49, 139- 150. IS I. AH. Strom, I. The Early Sanctuary ofthe Ar Vogt, I. 1991 Waldstein, C. The Argive Heraeum. I - II. give Heraion and Its External Relations Studien zur Pferd und Reiter in der 1902 - 1905. Boston/New York. (8th - Early 6th Cent. BC), The Monu fruhgriechischen Kunst. (Diss.) Bonn. mental Architecture. ActArch. 59, 1988 AO (1989), 173 - 203. Vollgraff, W 1956 Dawkins, R.M. The Sanctuary ofArtemis Le Sanctuarie d'Apollon Pytheen a Argos. Orthia at Sparta. JHS. Supplementary IS II. Et. Pel. I. Paper, 5. 1929. Strom, I. Evidence from the Sanctuaries. Greece Between East and West, 46 - 60. Voyatzis, M. E. 1990 Arch. Horn. The Early Sanctuary ofAthena Alea at Matz, E- Buchholz, H.-G. (Hrsg.) Ar- IS III. Tegea. Goteborg. chaeologia Homerica. I -IV 1968 - . Strom, I. Obeloi ofPre- and Proto-Mone- Gottingen. tary Value in the Greek Sanctuaries. Eco Wace, A.J.B. 1953 nomics of Cult, 41 - 51. Mycenae 1939 - 1952. Part II. The Perseia Athens NM. Fountain House, 5. History, p. 29. The National Museum ofAthens. Isthmia. Isthmia Excavations by the University of Weber, M. 1967 Blinkenberg. Chicago under the Auspices ofthe Ameri Eine arkadisch-geometrische Bronze- Blinkenberg Chr. Les Fibules Grecques et can School of Classical Studies at Athens. gruppe. Stadeljb I, 7 - 18. Orientales. Det Kgl. Danske Videnska- I-. 1971 - .Princeton. bernes Selskab. Historisk - filologiske Weber, M. 1971 Meddelelser XIII, 1. (Lindiaka V). K-D. Anhanger. Die geometrischen Dreifusskessel. AM 86, Kobenhavn. 1926. Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. Anhanger in Grie- 13-30. chenland von der mykenischen bis zur Corinth spatgeometrischen Zeit. PBF XI, 2. Weber, M. 1974 Corinth. Results of Excavations conducted Munchen. 1979. Zu friihen attischen Geratfiguren. AM 89, by the American School of Classical Stud 27 - 46. ies at Athens. I- 1932 - Princeton. K-D. Nadeln. Kilian-Dirlmeier, I. Nadeln der Whitley, J. 1988 Cult Practice. fruhhelladischen bis archaischen Zeit von Early States and Hero Cults: A Re-Apprai Hagg, R. - Marinatos, N. - Nordquist. der Peloponnes. PBF XIII, 8. Munchen. sal.JHS CVIII, 186-192. G.C. (Eds.). Early Greek Cult Practice. 1984. Stockholm 1988. WiesnerJ. 1968. Kerameikos Fahren und Reiten. Arch. Horn. F. Delos. Kerameikos. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen Exploration Archeologique de Delos. I- 1939 -. Berlin. Woodhead, A.G. 1953 Ecole Francaise d'Athenes. I- 1909- Paris. Mycenae 1939 - 1952 Part II, 4. The Lindos I. Boundary Stone from the Perseia Fountain Economics ofCult. Blinkenberg, Chr. Lindos. Fouilles de House. BSA XLVIII, 27 - 29. Linders, T- Alroth, B. (Eds.) Economics l'Acropole 1902 - 1914, I. Berlin 1931. of Cult in the Ancient World. (Uppsala Wright, J.C. 1982, 1990). Uppsala 1993. Boreas 21. Maass. The Old Temple Terrace at the Argive Maass M. Die geometrischen Dreifusse von Heraeum and the Early Cult of Hera in the Et.Pel. Olympia. Ol. Forsch. X. Berlin. 1978. Argolid. JHS CII, 186 -201. Etudes Peloponnesiennes I - 1956 -. Paris. Ol. Zazoff, P. 1969 FdD E. Curtius - F Adler. Olympia. Die Ergeb Zur geometrischen Glyptik. P. Zazoff (Ed.) Fouilles de Delphes. I - 1908 -. Paris. nisse der von dem Deutschen Reich veran- Opus Nobile. Festschrift U Jantzen, stalteten Ausgrabung. I - IV 1890 -1897. 181 - 187. Wiesbaden.

126 PBF. Prosymna. Tiryns I. Prahistorische Bronzefunde I- 1969 - .- Blegen, C.W. Prosymna. The Helladic Set Frickenhaus, A.- Miiller, W- Oelmann, E Munchen. tlement Preceding the Argive Heraeum. Tiryns. Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen London 1937. des Instituts. Deutsches Archaologisches Perachora I. Institut. Athen. Band I. 1912. Payne, H. Perachora: The Sanctuaries of Renaissance. Hera Akraia and Limenia, I. Oxford 1940. Hagg, R. The Greek Renaissance of the Vitsa. Eighth Century BC: Tradition and Innova Bokotopoulou, I. Bitoa I -III. 1986. Athen. Polydipsion Argos. tion. (Athens 1981). Stockholm. 1983. M. Pierart (Ed.). Polydipsion Argos. Argos Willemsen. de la fin des palais myceniens a la constitu Thera II. Willemsen, F. Dreifusskessel von Olympia. tion de l'Etat classique. (Fribourg Hiller von Gaertringen, F. Frhr. Thera. Ol. Forsch. III. Berlin. 1957. 1987).BCH Supplement. XXII. Fri- Untersuchungen, Vermessungen und Aus- bourg/Paris 1992. grabungen in denjahren 1895 - 1902. II. Zimmermann. Dragendorff, H. Theraeische Graber. Ber Zimmermann, J.-L. Les Chevaux de lin. 1903. Bronze dans L'Art Geometrique Grecque. Mainz/Geneve. 1989.

127 Acknowledgements: An earlier version ofthis article forms part ofmy Ph.D. thesis, Buried Virtues. Death Rituals in Kerameikos, Athens, 700-400 B.C., Copenhagen 1993. I would like to take this opportunity to thank warmly my supervisor Annette Rathje for constant support across all borders while I was writing my thesis. I also thank cor dially Henrik Jacobsen for the laborious undertaking ofhelping me to use SPSS PC+, Bengt Petterson for his patient redrawing ofmy figures and valuable suggestions. The present article also profited greatly from the criticism applied to my earlier manuscript by Lone Wriedt Sorensen, Berit Wells, Mogens Herman Hansen and Anthony Snod grass - but of course no one except myself should be held responsible for the result. I also heartily thank the Faculty of Classics in Cambridge for housing me as a visiting scholar for half a year and the Danish Research Academy for financing this stay. I owe a very special thanks to Now Nordisk Fonden for having financed my participa tion in conferences and the re-drawing ofmy figures and also to the State Research Council for the Humanities for financing the English revision ofthis article. And I thank Peter Crabb for having revised my English. However, I am unable to describe the gratitude I feel towards Anders not only for his constant readiness to discuss, criticize and furnish ideas on this article, but also to take over so many ofthose roles which I often failed to fulfil.