sign in sign up
<<
Home , Delos

chapter 2 Greek Temple Treasures and the Invention of Collecting

Josephine Shaya

The sanctuary of at Lindos is the third most - long history; the wealth of Athena testified to hundreds ited tourist site in (Papadopoulos, 1997: 100; Agence of years of ritual interactions. Indeed, by the Hellenistic France-Presse, April 12, 2010). Its setting is spectacular; sit- period, the Lindians were bemoaning the many treasures uated on a cliff, it crowns the Akropolis and looks out over that had been lost over time. A remarkable inscription a deep blue grotto and the . Its ruins dated to 99 bce commemorated Athena’s lost treasures, are also arresting. A series of Hellenistic terraces and stair- many of which were likely to have been destroyed in a fire ways lead dramatically to the ancient temple. Their mod- that took place in 391/2 bce (ILindos 2 C.30–31). Just as the ern restoration, initiated under the Italian occupation, stele sought to reconstruct the most renowned contents of has made Lindos one of the most sensational archaeo- the temple, we can benefit from our own reconstructions. logical sites in the world (Laurenzi, 1938a; Laurenzi, 1938b; The empty shell at Lindos and the inscription of lost Papadimitriou, 1988: 169–170). But this reconstruction of treasures lead to a set of questions: What did Greek tem- sweeping terraces, steps, columns, and walls presents only ples contain? How were their contents understood? What an empty shell of a once living sanctuary [fig. 2.1]. were the practices surrounding the care of votive offer- In antiquity, the temple’s contents were much more pre- ings? A second set of questions follows: How did these cious than the architectural pieces that we admire today. understandings and practices change over time? Home to Athena Lindia, the temple was filled with signs A full reckoning of these questions is beyond the scope of her divinity: her cult statue, ritual equipment and trea- of this short essay, but we may make an initial effort at sures dedicated by Lindians and foreigners alike. These answering them by turning our attention to Greek temple treasures grew in number every year by a process of accre- treasures and their ancient documentary evidence. Part tion. New votive offerings, new treasures, new ornaments of the difficulty that we have in studying temple treasures added to the wealth of the . This process had a is reconstructing them. Certainly countless individual

figure 2.1 Temple of Athena Lindia, Lindos, (photo: J. Shaya).

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���� | doi ��.��63/9789004283480_��4 Greek Temple Treasures and the Invention of Collecting 25 offerings survive, but not the treasures massed on temple Many surviving inventories are connected with Athenai or walls, on shelves and covering cult statues nor the rituals of places where Athenai held power; they frequently began which they were a part. My aim in this paper is figuratively with a copy of the decree that showed the machinery of to fill the temple by examining the recording of treasures democracy at work (e.g. ig ii2 1534 A.1–5). in inventories, the display of the objects, and their repre- The regular (as opposed to occasional) inscription of sentation in antiquarian catalogues and texts. I examine annual inventories seems to have occurred at just a few the sources for Greek sacred collections, the meanings of sanctuaries, most notably those in Athenai, Delos, and these collections, and the evolution of ways in which they . There are, however, many examples of single were viewed and understood in the . inventories, especially from Asia Minor, Attike, Boiotia Greek temples were sites of collection. Temple trea- and the Kyklades that mainly date to the Hellenistic sures framed the divine. They played a dynamic role in period (e.g. Ilion: Ilion 151; : ig xii 8 51; Mylasa: the construction of religious experience, helping to gener- Maiuri, 1921–1922: nos. 3–4; Halikarnassos: Şahin, 1976: ate sacred environments that were essential to the ritual no. 4; : ig xii 6 1.261; the Rhodian Peraea: Fraser & experience of the gods. More to the point, the treasures Bean, 1954: no. 11a; Perge: IPerge 11: 99.2; Attike: ig ii2 839; themselves were produced through ritual acts of devo- Aigina: ig iv 39 and ig i3 1456; Tanagra: seg 43: 212 B; Thebai: tion. Stashed in the temple, the objects were displayed ig vii 2420–2425; Thespiai: IThesp 38; Plataiai: Richardson, in the gods’ rites. While the history of temple treasures 1891; Oropos ig vii 303; : ig xii 5 1.134). A few examples runs deep, perceptions of treasures were neither timeless are found from the Roman period (e.g.: inventory from nor uniform. New cultures of viewing developed in the Cirta: cil viii 6981; from Thebai: ig vii 2425a). Hellenistic period, characterized by intellectualized and The inscriptions most often recorded precious dedica- antiquarian ways of seeing ancient gifts to the gods, by the tions – objects made of gold, silver, jewellery, gemstones, conscious selection of particular objects to tell a story or coins – but some also included nails, wood, textiles, bas- witness an event, and by the cataloguing and displaying kets, even meat hooks and anvils. They were typically of collected objects: in brief, the invention of collecting. organized by type of objects, by material, or topographi- cally, that is, by location in the temple. Despite the great length of many, they were spare on detail about individual Ritual Record-Keeping and Sacred Collections objects, most often simply listing dedications, weights and donors. The great bulk of the gifts were modest and most Sacred collections have a deep history in the of the donors are otherwise unknown. world. They were fundamental to rituals that dramatized The particular form and content of inventories and affirmed the power of the gods. Temple inventories, depended on their specific purpose. A paradosis, or or inscribed records of sacred offerings, are among our “handing over,” was the most typical procedure. This type best sources for these collections. They offer insight into of inventory registered the change of responsibility for the management of sacred collections. These documents, the god’s treasures, when it was passed from the care of far from being simple catalogues of temple holdings, were an outgoing priest or board of treasurers to an incoming religious texts displayed in sanctuaries on monumental one. An exetasmos, or “special inventory”, was drawn up stone stelai. The inventories, which were themselves gifts when a problem arose in the administration of the trea- to the gods, were part of the rituals of exchange and inter- sure and objects needed to be identified. A kathairesis, action between devotees and . or “removal”, recorded the withdrawal of items from the Let me offer a brief and general overview of these treasure, usually to be melted down and recast into new inscriptions, with the caveat that, as with almost all types cult equipment (Aleshire, 1989: 104–108). Such “removals” of inscriptions, one finds wide variety within the genre were particularly characteristic of sanctuaries of healing ( for an introduction to inventories: Linders, 1975; Linders, gods, where there were many small donations. 1988; Aleshire, 1989; Linders, 1992; Harris, 1995; Hamilton, While recognizing these broad categories, scholars 2000; Dignas, 2002; Brosius, 2003; Cleland, 2005). The puzzle over how exactly inventories worked, with what earliest inventories are lists from Athenian temples that interests they were constructed, who consulted them date to the latter half of the 5th century bce (ig i3 292– and why. Oversight of the administration of the treasure 362). The practice of inscribing lists of temple treasures was surely the main purpose of most. A mid-4th-century on stone seems to have been originally Athenian and to Delian inventory began by declaring that the items were have arisen out of a democratic concern for accountabil- handed over by weight and number from one group of ity and openness (Harris, 1994: 214–15; Thomas, 1996: 45). officials to another by the authority of the Council of the