0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 265

THE MULTIPLE STAGES IN THE PLACEMENT AND USAGE OF VOTIVES IN CYRENE’S EXTRAMURAL DEMETER AND PERSEPHONE SANCTUARY1

par Donald WHITE University of Pennsylvania

The sparseness of ancient written source material for how votive objects were intended to func- tion in sanctuaries is paralleled by the absence of much in the way of hard archaeological evidence – the latter probably because so few votives has been resuscitated from contexts that assist in explaining how they were offered as votives as distinct from how they were ultimately disposed of. As far as the ancient writers go, despite the fact that Pausanias remains our best source, what he can tell us about the Archaic and Classical period cult practices that took place in the sanctuaries he is otherwise at considerable pains to describe is perfunctory at best2. This notwith- standing, Pausanias is filled with references to patently ancient statues still on view in temples and sanctuaries in his own day3. Their retention on display for more than three-quarters of a mil- lennium, along with various other types of individually unique or one-of-a-kind votives, makes it evident that votive sculptures larger than, say, medium-sized statuette scale were handed differently than the masses of humbler votives which were routinely and presumably rather quickly rotated off display to make way for their stereotyped replacements. The latter entail stone statuettes, terracotta, bronze and faience figurines, metal, ceramic and glass dining and cooking vessels, scarabs, amulets and seals, monetary contributions, and bronze, silver and gold jewelry and other articles for personal use that on occasion included textiles and articles of

1 I am indebted throughout to B. ALROTH’s study «The Positioning of Greek Votive Figurines», in Early Greek Cult Practice, Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium at the Swedish Institute at , 26-29 June, 1986 (Stockholm 1988), 195-203, henceforth ALROTH, Votive Figurines. In addition to the general abbreviations of the pre- sent volume, the following will also be used: White, Decade of Excavation for D. WHITE, «Cyrene’s Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone: a Summary of a Decade of Excavation», AJA 85 (1981), 13-30; White, Reverberations for D. WHITE, «Fresh Reverberations from Cyrene’s Later Antique Earthquakes», Studi Stucchi, 317-325. 2 To repeat the point already made by ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 195. 3 See for example the wood statues in the Sanctuary of the Furies, Keryneia: VII.25.4; «ancient wood idol» of Aphrodite-Hera at Sparta: III.13.9; wood statue of Aphrodite at Thebes: IX.16.2; wood idol of Aphrodite at Kythera in Laconia in the «most ancient of all sanctuaries of Aphrodite in Greece»: III.23.1; wood idols of Karneian Apollo at Leuktra in Laconia: III.26.6; ancient bronze of Athena at Amphissa in Phokis: X.38.3. For an apparently old statue which received a new face in the Sanctuary of Hilaeira and Phoebe see III.16.1. The list is not complete but instead merely representative. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 266

266 DONALD WHITE

clothing – just to name some, but in no sense all of the commonplace items dedicated in such seemingly limitless quantities in Greek sanctuaries all over the ancien world4. Through no great coincidence these items coincide with the bulk of the votives recovered from Cyrene’s Extramural Demeter and Persephone Sanctuary5, although it is fair to say that one can only guess at the offering of actual textiles and clothes from what took place in other sanc- tuaries including Demeter’s6 as well as on the basis of the indirect evidence of the Sicilian busti and their presumptive analogy with modern practices (fig. 1)7. I am omitting here any discussion of the handling of the site’s dedicatory inscriptions and placement of its large-scale statues8, both of which would require a separate examination. Various published attempts have been made to pinpoint the contexts in which the votives were recorded across the sanctuary’s upper and middle grounds9, and one may hope that Uhlen- brock’s and Kane’s forthcoming studies of the terracotta figurines and stone sculptures will add further information.

4 It does not, for example, include the prize tripods and cauldrons that constitute such signature dedications at Olympia nor the captured weaponry and armour that were offered in nearly every Greek sanctuary of any consequence (apart from those consecrated to Demeter and Persephone). 5 To whose basic bibliography as well as that of Demeter’s cult elsewhere at Cyrene now add J.-J. CALLOT, Recherches sur les cultes, 56, 82, 94, 190, 200, 256, 292-293. I thank G.R.H. Wright for directing me to this important contribution and join my colleagues in expressing my sorrow at Prof. Callot’s premature death. 6 Pausanias’ statement (VII.25.5) that the statue of Demeter «has clothes» in her shrine at Boura in Achaia is corroborated by an archaic inscription from Sparta mentioning the dedication of clothes to Demeter. See A.J. BEATTIE, CIQ 45 (1951) 46-58. An inscription of the first half of the third century B.C. inventories gifts of clothing to Demeter and the Kore in Tanagra; see TH. REINACH, «Un temple élevé par les femmes de Tanagra», REG 12 (1899) 72-115. W. GÜNTHER cites both in his «Un inventaire inédit de Milet», in Actes du colloque international d’épigraphie tenu à Neuchâtel du 23 au 26 septembre 1986: Comptes et inventaires dans la cité grecque (Geneva 1988) 232, ns. 94 and 96. See also ibid. ns. 95, 97-102, for a startlingly broad array of other deities for whom gifts of clothes and textiles are epigraphically attested. But the two most informative are inventories for the Apollo’s late 4th to 2nd c. B.C. cult at Didyma (GÜNTHER, 220-237, whose reference I owe to Catherine Dobias) and for Artemis Brauronia’s 4th c. B.C. cult (T. LINDERS, Studies in the Treasure Records of Artemis Brauronia Found in Athens: Acta Instituti Atheniensis Regni Sueciae 4, XIX, 1972, 3, 9-20; I owe the reference to Elfriede Knauer). Whether these inventories refer to garments for wear by statues or simply allude to textiles and personal clothes offered as objects of value to remind the deities of their owners is not always clear. In the case of Artemis, as many as six garments were used to wrap around the goddess’s statue. I do not see this as constituting ‘dressing a statue’. See LINDERS, 11. 7 I. ROMANO believes that only cult statues, as distinct from votives, wore real clothing. See «Early Greek Cult Statues and Cult Practices», in Early Greek Cult Practice (cited above, n. 1) 130. But while the familiar Sicilian terra- cotta busti often have fully modeled and draped torsos (similar in this respect to the Cyrenean series of stone ‘faceless goddesses’), many were provided with plain, unmodelled bodies. In some instances these were covered with painted panels that bear no obvious relationship to actual clothes, while others were painted to imitate drapery. The frequent piercing of ear-lobes for the insertions of ‘real’ earrings suggest that the unpainted plain versions may have been cov- ered with real clothes as is the case in cult images of the holy family still widely found in Hispano-American churches. For the Sicilian busts in general see G. ZUNTZ, Persephone (Oxford 1971), 150-157 and more recently M. BELL, Morgantina Studies I: The Terracottas (Princeton 1981), 27-33 for pertinent bibl. For busti with pierced ears see P. MARCONI, , topografia ed arte (Florence 1929), 181, fig. 114. B. BERNABO-BREA, Musei e monumenti in (Novara 1958), 47, pl. opp. p. 56. BELL, ibid. 28, pl. 25, nos. 102, XXX, pl. 29, no. 107 (in which survives the bronze wire), pl. 30, no. 110, pl. 31, no. 112, pl. 32, no. 113a, pl. 33, no. 117. For painted scenes on unmodelled busts see BELL, ibid. 29-33, figs. a and b. 8 For the latter see Extramural Sanctuary I, 106-109. J. Reynolds’ final analysis of the inscriptions is pending. 9 Extramural Sanctuary I, 76-116; Extramural Sanctuary II, editor’s preface, XXI-XXII; Extramural Sanctuary III, editor’s preface, X-XII and P. KENRICK, «Hellenistic and Roman Fine Wares», 11; Extramural Sanctuary V, 91-92, 104-106, 162-163; Extramural Sanctuary VII, 11-12. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 267

THE MULTIPLE STAGES IN THE PLACEMENT AND USAGE OF VOTIVES 267

Fig. 1: Author’s photo of a clothed statue in a church in Mexico’s northern Yucatan, 1992. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 268

268 DONALD WHITE

In the meantime I would like to trace the multiple stages in usage that the Cyrene votives underwent prior to their final disposal in antiquity. The first has to do with their manufacture, sale and theoretical use before their introduction into the sanctuary. The second covers their time as dedicated objects set out on active display. The third deals with their initial disposal follow- ing their scheduled deactivation. The fourth their further dispersal as constructional back fills. The fifth the establishment of dump deposits to dispose of votives displaced by later building. The sixth their reburial as part of the post-A.D. 262 earthquake clean-up. And the seventh and last phase the stone statues’ exposure to iconoclastic injury and final dispersal. In other words, what all this adds up to is that, once the votives were taken from active display, a variety of possible trajectories still lay ahead for them.

I: PRE-SANCTUARY HISTORY

We may begin with the votives’ pre-sanctuary history. For obvious reasons the question of where the votives were made varies according to type. While most of the stone statuettes could have been products of local ateliers, the fact remains that some imitate external prototypes so closely as to suggest that they were imported10. And while the pottery imports speak for themselves, the site also produced local coarse and fine wares dating from the 6th to 1st centuries B.C., but to the best of my knowledge their kilns have not been traced. Glass is harder to pin down, but many of the early cored vessels probably originated from Rhodes11. Articles for personal use, including jewelry, pendants, amulets, gems, scarabs and engraved finger rings, are probably composed of a large percentage of imports mixed with some locally manufactured items12. Most of the site’s numerous 6th and 5th centuries terracotta figurines seem local. J. Uhlen- brock has been thus far unable to isolate where the local kilns were located in respect to the sanc- tuary site13, but on analogy with Pausanias’ description of the Isis Sanctuary at Phocean Tithorea14 one can readily enough imagine how temporary booths were set up near the bridge (S28) crossing the wadi drain and on the grounds outside the Upper Sanctuary Propylaeum (S20) to sell figurine to worshippers entering the sanctuary from the walled city and outlying country- side (fig. 2). If the locally made drinking and eating wares used for ceremonial dining were not in fact recycled from earlier use in the home, they too may have been sold by vendors stationed near the

10 An example is the statuette group composed of a mature Persephone seating in Demeter’s lap, with parallels from Eleusis and the Athenian . See S. KANE’s «Sculpture Appendix» in Demeter, Preliminary Report V, 329- 330, pl. XCVI, 329 c; EAD., «Votive and Portrait Sculpture from the Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone at Wadi Bel Gadir, Cyrene (Shahat)», SLS 8 (1976-77), 16; EAD., «Sculpture from the Cyrene Sanctuary in its Mediterranean Context», in Cyrenaica in Antiquity, 241, pl. 20.1. 11 A. OLIVER, «Glass», Extramural Sanctuary IV, 89. 12 See Extramural Sanctuary III and IV, passim. 13 See J. UHLENBROCK in Nymphai chthoniai, 41. For our figurines in general, see ibid. 116-118; EAD., «Terra- cotta Figurines from the Demeter Sanctuary at Cyrene: Models for Trade», in Cyrenaica in Antiquity, 297-304; EAD., «History, Trade and the Terracottas», Expedition 34, Nos. 1-2 (1992), 16-23. 14 PAUS. V.32.9. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 269

THE MULTIPLE STAGES IN THE PLACEMENT AND USAGE OF VOTIVES 269

Fig. 2: Map of the region south of Cyrene’s Agora-Forum hill and the Extramural Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone.

principal entrances. I assume, perhaps wrongly, that personal items such as jewelry, pendants, seals, amulets, clothes15 and the like had to be owned, if not actually worn, long enough to imbue them with the identity of their owners before dedication to the goddesses. Since the cored glass- wares probably owe their presence more for what they contained than for any intrinsic value they possessed by themselves, they were probably brought to the sanctuary soon after their purchase. Although many of our Archaic and Classical period imported fine ware pots may have dedicated as gifts in their own right or for consuming on-site ritual meals, Schaus has rightly pointed out that some must have been used primarily as containers for wine, grain, oil and other commodities16. How long they were kept by their owners before being brought to the sanctuary is impossible to estimate.

15 If not specifically destined to be worn by statues. 16 Extramural Sanctuary II, 94-95. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 270

270 DONALD WHITE

II: INITIAL PLACEMENT

The second, and from the perspective of illustrating ancient cult practice, most arresting phase has to do with the initial dedication of the votives once they have been brought to the sanctuary. From other sites17 it can be determined that votives were routinely set out on offering benches and tables18 (as well as long-since vanished wooden shelves)19, stuck or hung on walls20, ceil- ings21 and the branches of trees22, displayed in or in front of niches23, placed on or near altars24, piled near25 or wrapped around the statues of the gods26, deposited into bothroi27, and even con- sumed in fire as part of sacrifices28. Whether depositing votives in waterproofed stone under- ground cells and pits represents another form of votive consecration or simply ritual disposal depends on how one interprets the sketchy but hugely interesting evidence unearthed by Newton at Cnidus a century and a half ago29.

17 G.R.H.WRIGHT has quite properly drawn my attention to the potential wealth of information that the Cypriot monuments, beginning as early as 2000 B.C., could play in this discussion. Time and space will not permit more than pointing the reader to his Ancient Building in Cyprus, Vols. 1, 2 (Leiden 1992) 256-273 for the essential references. 18 ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 199-201. 19 ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 201, n. 23. 20 ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 199. 21 PAUS. II.10.3. ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 195, n. 2. 22 B. PACE, Arte e civiltà della Sicilia antica III (Milan 1946) 457 ff., fig. 105 for the oscilla or terracotta masks which were regularly suspended from trees to honor Demeter. The type is especially well represented in . See G. LIBERTINI, ( 1926) 117, pl. XXXVII. For Geloan examples, see P. ORSI, MonAnt 32 (1927), 271; NSc. 1956, fig. 3. Also ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 201-202, ns. 25-30. 23 ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 201, n. 22. Close to the area in question see Nymphai chthoniai, 120-128. 24 D. RUPP, «Altars as Funerary Monuments on Attic White Lekythoi», AJA 84 (1980), 524-527, pl. 64.1. ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 201-202, ns. 25-30. 25 ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 203. 26 I.e. in the case of the garments dedicated to Artemis Brauronia cited in n. 6. 27 ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 199. 28 ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 202-203, ns. 31-32, 34. 29 C.T. NEWTON, R.P. PULLEN, A History of Discoveries at Halicarnassus, Cnidus and Branchidae, I (Plates), pls. LIII-LX; I. LOVE, «Excavations at Cnidus», AJA 76 (1972), 399-401, ill. 5. Since Newton’s discoveries are not com- monly referenced, they may be summarized as follows: along the eastern edge or the Cnidian Demeter Sanctuary’s walled temenos he found a series of small underground walled cells or compartments. Their walls were made of lime- stone rubble mixed with reused squared blocks; their sides and bottom were lined with «a fine cement», elsewhere described as «stucco» and probably serving as waterproofing. Each cell appears to have measured ca 12’ by 4’. Their depths varied from 2’ to 4’. All the cells held blacked glazed lamps, while two contained terracotta figurines (female hydrophorai), assigned to the years 340-300 B.C. by R. HIGGINS, Greek Terracottas (London 1967), 109-110; see D.M. BAILEY, A Catalogue of Lamps in the British Museum. III: Roman Provincial Lamps (London 1988), 325, 333- 337. The presence of unbroken rooftiles suggests that the cells were roofed and therefore purposefully left partially vis- ible, perhaps not unlike Paestum’s «hypogeum shrine» for which see P. SESTIERI, Paestum ( 1958), 63. To the west of the underground cells Newton cleared an elliptical pit, 9’ long, 6’ 3” wide and 7’ deep. Made of limestone ashlars laid up without cement, its top surviving course was level with the ground in Newton’s day; a mass of fallen rubble in its interior was interpreted by him as the remains of «Egyptian vaulting» by which I assume he means a corbel vault. Its upper levels contained seven inscribed statue bases, 3 stone pigs, 14 pairs of votive breasts, and the parts of various broken statues. These rested on a layer of Roman lamps and marble tablets mixed with ox, goat, pig and bird bones. The bottom layer was composed of glass vessels «deposited in the bottom of the chamber in regu- lar layers». The excavator suggests that the contents were set out on wooden shelves that gave way when the vault collapsed. He then quite sensibly recalls Hesychios’ and Pausanias’ use of megaron to refer to underground chambers in connection with Demeter’s rites (for which see L. FARNELL, Cults of the Greek States III [reprint New York 1977], 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 271

THE MULTIPLE STAGES IN THE PLACEMENT AND USAGE OF VOTIVES 271

The underlying purpose behind this activity was to employ a gift offering to seal a contrac- tual vow made to a god or to acknowledge the god’s positive response to the dedicant’s previ- ously uttered vow30. And beyond that, to reinforce the effectiveness of the gift by setting it in as close physical contact to the divine presence as circumstances permit. The Cyrene sanctuary does not offer any ground-breaking new data on this phase but does have its own story to tell with which this paper will conclude.

III: INITIAL DISPOSAL

The third phase centered on disposing votives after their removal from active display. As was done nearly universally elsewhere31, the procedure here led to burying the transportable votives in the ground inside or just outside the sanctuary’s walled limits where many remained in effect undis- turbed until excavated by us. The lowest levels of fill in and around walls P3 through P6 were espe- cially rich in Island, East Greek and Corinthian wares, particularly Corinthian miniatures32, along with incised gems33, scarabs and bronze animal figurines and pendants34. The ground due-west of the Late Archaic\Early Classic S4 building also produced many of the site’s Archaic sherds, as did the SE corner of the later Archaic, early Classical peribolos35. Most of our nearly 460 bronze votive rings were buried south of the Later Archaic\Early Classic S6 Shrine House36 and between the S14 Porch Building and the Later Archaic\Early Classic S4 room37. The majority of the early silver coins were either buried in the area of the Early Archaic P3-P6 shrine building38 or in a corner of the Later Archaic\Early Classical S6 Sacred House, the latter perhaps dedicated as parakataqßkj

65-66) and to Pausanias’ description of the practice of throwing burning lamps into a pit to honor the Kore at Corinth (PAUS. 2.22.4). Obviously these singular components could benefit from more discussion than present circumstances allow, but the bulk of the pit’s contents sound like the contents of a standard dump. If so, what then of the carefully layered glass: could these have been deposited as an act of consecration? The series of cells also sound like conventional votive dumps, but then why leave their roofs visible? 30 W. BURKERT, Greek Religion (Cambridge 1985), 68-69; I. MALKIN, «Votive offerings», OCD 3, 1612-1613; H.S. VERSNEL, «Votum», ibid. 1613. 31 While it would seem otiose to assemble specific citations, the immense deposit of ex-votos, many of them ter- racotta figurines found neatly stacked in rows beneath the ground of Syracuse’s Piazza Vittoria, would seem to provide a particularly spectacular example. See M.W. FREDERICKSEN, «Archaeology in Sicily 1976-77», AR 23 (1977), 65-66, fig. 31. On the other hand, the singular neatness with which the Vittoria figurines are packed into the ground strongly contrasts with the apparently haphazard way in which, for example, the terracotta figurines are jumbled together with vases in the case of the Malophoros sanctuary at Selinus: E. GABRICI, «Il santuario della Malophoros a », MonAnt XXXII (1927), pl. XXI. As in the case with the Cnidian sanctuary, supra n. 25, this raises the possibility that the deposit here was carried out as part of an initial act of consecration as opposed to disposal. 32 In trenches D13/13, A, B, and R. See Extramural Sanctuary I, 78-79; V, 29-30, pl. 24, plan A. 33 Extramural Sanctuary III, xi. 34 Extramural Sanctuary IV, xxviii. 35 Extramural Sanctuary III, xii. 36 In D15/16, 1. Extramural Sanctuary IV, xxix. 37 In D12/13, F. Extramural Sanctuary IV, xxix. 38 Extramural Sanctuary I, 79. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 272

272 DONALD WHITE

or temple deposit39. The site’s later Hellenistic incense burners and local cooking and dining wares, along with many of its 5th to 2nd century B.C. lamps, were dumped en masse in an extramural pit (S18) surrounded with a wall around the time of Augustus (fig. 3); we do not know how or if they were deposited elsewhere before this time40. And of the site’s more than 250 recorded stone stat- uettes 15% were found between the S1 Sacred House and Early Imperial S8 Sacred House, 7% close by the Early Imperial S6a Sacred House, and finally another 7% associated with the 2nd/3rd century A.D. S23 chamber41. Whether the statuettes were intentionally buried in these contexts or were dislodged by earthquakes from their locations inside the nearby buildings cannot be deter- mined with any real certainty. Finally, there are two votive pits or dumps whose contents appear to be homogeneously early but which appear to have nothing to do with their nearest structures: the first to the SW of the S8 Sacred House42, the second in D1243.

IV: DISPERSAL AS BUILDERS’ BACKFILL

By no means all of the sanctuary’s votives were allowed to lie permanently undisturbed where they were first discarded. A significant percentage ended up as part of constructional backfills that com- monly post-date their dedication and initial storage burial by many centuries. Examples of this pro- cedure are documented for wall W3 inside the S20 Roman propylaeum44, the figurine-saturated earth floor of the later Hellenistic S12 Chamber45, the foundations for the R2 steps that connected the Middle with the Upper Sanctuary during the Hellenistic period46, and, most dramatically of all, the T10 retaining wall constructed to face the forward edge of the Middle Sanctuary in the early imper- ial period47. Test probes have demonstrated how the natural bedrock pavement began to sheer away just south of the line of the expedition’s light railway line to create en irregular V-shaped gap between the later Archaic T4 retaining wall facing and the sloping bedrock scarp. This measured 5 m. deep where tested and may have extended across most of the forward edge of the terrace. The gap’s fill contained a staggering array of discarded votive material: pottery, lamps, stone and terra- cotta figurines, gems, seals, pendants, glass, faience, iron tools, alabaster, shells and animal bones48. The sherds and figurines for the most part date to the 6th and 5th centuries49, while of the small number (relative to what was found elsewhere) of stone statue, statuette fragments and

39 Demeter, Preliminary Report VI, 166. Extramural Sanctuary I, 79; V, 96. 40 Demeter, Perliminary Report III, xi, 43-46. Extramural Sanctuary I, 76, 92-93, figs. 75-77. 41 Extramural Sanctuary I, 105-106. 42 Extramural Sanctuary I, 89, fig. 59. 43 Extramural Sanctuary I, 88, figs. 59, 88. 44 Extramural Sanctuary I, 81-82, figs. 83-84. 45 Extramural Sanctuary I, 80. 46 Extramural Sanctuary I, 81, fig. 80. 47 Demeter, Preliminary Report V, 300-305; VI, 177-181; Decade of Excavation, 25-26, ill. 7. Extramural Sanc- tuary I, 78-79, 83-88, figs. 83-86. 48 Decade of Excavation, 26-27. Extramural Sanctuary I, 88. 49 In a written communication Uhlenbrock informs me that of the 470 figurines found in this locus 84% date of the mid-6th through the early 5th c. B.C. Ten out of the site’s total of 11 7th c. figurines come from the same trenches, while only 6% date after the early 5th. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 273

THE MULTIPLE STAGES IN THE PLACEMENT AND USAGE OF VOTIVES 273

Fig. 3: The lamp and pottery dump (S18).

votive relief plaques from this fill all curiously date to the post-Classical period with the solitary exception of the lower half of the site’s one Archaic kore50. The creation of the backfill and simultaneous erection of wall T10 appear on the evidence of coins and pottery to be mid-first 1st century A.D. events51.

V: SECONDARY DUMPS WITH NO STRUCTURAL PURPOSE

In addition to the builders’ backfills, the Middle Sanctuary grounds have left us with several additional pits or dumps that held important accumulations of Archaic and Classical period

50 Inv. 76-810. Demeter, Preliminary Report V, 303, 327, pl. XCVI, a-b. S. KANE, «Votive and Portrait Sculp- ture from the Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone at Wadi Bel Gadir, Cyrene (Shahat)», SLS 8 (1976-77), 17-18. EADEM, «An Archaic Kore from Cyrene», AJA 84 (1980), 182-183. EADEM, «Kore’s Return», Expedition 34, nos. 1-2 (1992), 70-711, fig. 2. Extramural Sanctuary I, 78, n. 33. 51 With final publication pending, the backfill’s date appears to rest on an uncatalogued Italian sigillate sherd (Extramural Sanctuary III, 18), a bronze coin of the 2nd half of the 2nd c. B.C. (Extramural Sanctuary VI, 21, no. 301 = Inv. 78-206), and a Claudian-Neronian glass bowl with wheel-cut decoration (Extramural Sanctuary IV, 97, no. 106 = Inv. 77-545). 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 274

274 DONALD WHITE

votives, together with lesser numbers of objects that are significantly later in date. The latter show that the pits or dumps were established long after the 5th century, in some cases as late as the 3rd century A.D. What separates them from the previous category is that they serve no obvi- ous purpose other than to dispose of unwanted votives displaced by later building activity. They include a small pit sunk in the SE corner of the Middle Sanctuary in front of the G7 entrance52, two irregularly shaped pits beneath the S14 Porch Building53, and finally the fill dumped in the SW corner of the Middle Sanctuary inside the so-called S11 Storage Chamber. The latter is perhaps the most instructive54: the actual corner is still mostly hidden beneath the earthquake- collapsed T15 wall. The zone’s, deep hard-packed clay St. 3 fill was again saturated with early terracotta figurines, miniature amphoras and hydrias, and cored glass, but the actual period of its establishment is indicated by the inclusion of Ptolemaic bronze coins and a few fragmentary lamps that may be as late as the 3rd century A.D.

VI: POST A.D. 262 EARTHQUAKE CLEANUP

The Sanctuary, along with the intramural city and the rest of the region, was drastically affected by two ruinous earthquakes, the first occurring in A.D. 262 and the second in 36555. We believe that the first event triggered a limited cleanup throughout the sanctuary grounds56. The most con- spicuous traces of this activity turn up in the western half of the Middle Sanctuary in the shape of a sprawling oblong earth mound (S29) west of the S5 Sacred House (fig. 4)57. Early in the 4th century A.D. the mound’s northern and southern edges were framed by roughly laid-up masonry ring-walls, in each of which the builders deliberately (but for reasons unknown) immured a headless female statue58. The mound proper held six additional statues, including two that had been previously unearthed by Ghislanzoni in 191459. It also contained many elements of

52 Extramural Sanctuary I, 88. 53 Extramural Sanctuary I, 88-89. 54 Extramural Sanctuary I, 89-92, figs. 90-91; V, 170-172, figs. 9, 69, pls. 36-37. 55 D. ROQUES has adopted as revisionary position on the earthquakes. See his Cyrénaïque du Bas-Empire, 41 ff. and my cautionary note, WHITE, Reverberations, 317-325. 56 Extramural Sanctuary I, 93-99. WHITE, Reverberations, 321, ns. 27-29. 57 The so-called E14 Mound (S29) and its contents are to be published as part of a volume on the sanctuary’s final 250 years of architectural development. In the meantime see Demeter, Preliminary Report VI, 169-172, pl. LII, a and b, LIII, a. Decade of Excavation, 28-30, ill. 8, figs. 3, 4. Extramural Sanctuary I, 96-103, figs. 103-108. Owing to its sprawling character it is hard to estimate the mound’s total area, but 75 sq. m. is probably not far from the mark. 58 Both were of Severan date. For the north wall’s inv. 76-1307 see Demeter, Preliminary Report I, 299, 326- 327, pl. XCV, a-b. For the south wall’s Helvia Teimareta, inv. 77-940, see Demeter, Preliminary Report VI, 170, ns. 44-45, pl. LI, c. S. KANE, J. REYNOLDS, «“The Kore who Looks After the Grain”: a Copy of the Torlonia-Hierapytna Type in Cyrene», AJA 89 (1985), 455-463. S. KANE, «Kore’s Return», Expedition 34, nos. 1-2 (1992), 71-73, fig. 1. 59 The pieces found by the Pennsylvania Expedition are: Inv. 74-1065, 76-1308, 78-699, and 78-700. See Extra- mural Sanctuary I, 97, figs. 103-108. Of the pieces found by Ghislanzoni one was subsequently published by E. PARIBENI, Catalogo, 44, no 112, pl. 73. The other by G. TRAVERSARI, Statue iconiche femminili cirenaiche (Rome 1960), 52, no. 15, pls. X, 1 and XXIII, 5. See also Extramural Sanctuary I, 11, ns. 53, 54, fig. 12. All six are headless, and again all represent draped female subjects. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 275

THE MULTIPLE STAGES IN THE PLACEMENT AND USAGE OF VOTIVES 275

Fig. 4: Plan of the S29 mound.

stone statuettes, reliefs60, inscriptions, together with substantial quantities of broken building material. Its contents in terms of Archaic and Classical pottery and terracotta have yet to be ana- lyzed but may prove to be significant. The advanced date for its assemblage is underscored by the presence of corrugated coarse ware pottery in the mound-proper and two early 4th century A.D. coins in the fill underlying its north wall61. Whether the creation of the mound and the interment of its numerous ex-votos sprang from religious or from purely practical considerations is extremely hard to say at this time. It is equally difficult to plot the sanctuary history of the individual votives before their mound burial.

60 Including the mission’s largest relief depicting the two goddesses, Inv. 74-931, for which see D. WHITE, Deme- ter, Preliminary Report IV, 279, pl. LXXVII (LA) and also 175-176, pl. 37 (AJA). See also I. ROMANO, «A Marble Relief of Demeter and Persephone», Expedition 18, no. 2 (1976), 17-19, figs. 1-3. S. KANE, «Kore’s Return», Expedi- tion 34, nos. 1-2 (1992), 73, fig. 3. 61 Extramural Sanctuary I, 97, n. 59. WHITE, Reverberations, 323, nos. 794 (= inv. 76-1283), 795 (= inv. 76- 933). T. BUTTREY, I. MAC PHEE, Extramural Sanctuary VI, 31, nos. 794, 795. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 276

276 DONALD WHITE

VII: ICONOCLASM AND FINAL DISPERSAL

Some time between the A.D. 262 and the 365 earthquakes the damaged site was entered by members of the Christian community who systematically desecrated the marble statues lying across its surface62. The expedition recovered 264 mostly complete statuettes and major pieces of over a 100 more large-scale statues. With the exception of two insignificant limestone stat- uettes63 not one piece was found with its head attached to its body. After analyzing all of the surviving fragments S. Kane was able to rejoin only one of the site’s 51 stone heads to a body, in this case a statuette64. Of the heads 18, or 35% of the total found, display clear evidence of deliberate damage, particularly to the facial organs of expression and perception: nose, eyes, and mouth (fig. 5). Given the steepness of the hillside setting65, it is impossible to say whether the earthquakes or the iconoclasts were responsible for separating the statue heads from their bodies as well as reducing the bodies to the 800-plus fragments we were eventually able to inventory. What is known for certain is that after the iconoclastic damage to the statues the A.D. 365 earthquake blanketed the site with debris a second time, this time marking the final phase in the displace- ment of the statues.

INITIAL DISPLAY REVISITED

By way of conclusion let us return to the second phase in the usage of our votives: elsewhere, the Iron Age sanctuaries revealing the most complete information for how their small votives were actively displayed are the Phocean Kalapodi66, Cretan Dreros67, Kommos on Crete68, Agia Irini on Cyprus69, on the SE coast of Sicily70, and, generally less well known, Morgantina at the

62 D. WHITE, «Statue Breakers and Spirit Exorcists», Expedition 34, nos. 1-2 (1992), 76-85. 63 See Demeter, Preliminary Report II, 191, n. 94, pl. LXXXI, b where a Cypriot origin is attributed to the small seated limestone figure, 71-717. The other piece, 74-51, is the unpublished head and intact draped bust broken away just below the breast. 64 The marble head of a female subject, 74-335, from E12/13, E, I, was joined to the draped upper torso, 78-698, from E 13/14, 1, 1. 65 The total rise from the bottom of the Lower Sanctuary to the stylobate of the Upper Sanctuary Propylaeum represents a 45% gradient. Extramural Sanctuary I, 48, fig. 26. 66 R.C.S. FALSCH, J. KIENAST, H. SCHULER, «Apollon und Artemis oder Artemis und Apollon? Bericht von den Grabungen im neu entedekten Heiligtum bei Kalapodi 1973-1977», AA (1980), 38-112, esp. 85-96, figs. 66, 69-80. ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 199, figs. 4-5. D. RUPP, «Altars as Funerary Monuments on Attic White Lekythoi», AJA 84 (1980), 525. 67 S. MARINATOS, «Le temple géométrique de Dréros», BCH 60 (1936), 214-285, esp. 220, 224, 241-244, figs. 6-7, 17, pls. xxvi-xxvii, xxxi. I. BEYER, Die Tempel von Dreros und Prinias A und die Chronologie der kretischen Kunst des 8. und 7. Jhs. v. Chr. (Freiburg 1976), 18, n. 40. ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 200, fig. 7. 68 J.W. SHAW, «Excavations at Kommos (Crete) during 1977», Hesperia 47 (1978), 142-145, fig. 9, pl. 40 c, f. 69 SCE II, 799, fig. 277. ALROTH, Votive Figurines, 201-202, n. 24. 70 G. VOZA, s.v. «Eloro», in EAA suppl. vol. (1970), 297-301, fig. 313. IDEM, «Heloros», PESC, 382-383. A.W.VAN BUREN, «Newsletter from Rome», AJA 70 (1966), 357-359, pls. 86-87, figs. 13-6. M.W. FREDIRICKSEN, «Archaeology in South and Sicily 1973-77», AR 23 (1977), 67-68, fig. 37. R.J.A. WILSON, «Archaeology in Sicily 1977-81», AR 28 (1982), 87-88. ALROTH, Votive Figurines, n. 10, fig. 3. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 277

THE MULTIPLE STAGES IN THE PLACEMENT AND USAGE OF VOTIVES 277

Fig. 5: Lifesize marble head of a middle-aged man (inv. 71-700) with moustache and muttonchops whiskers; first half of the 2nd c. A.D. Note how the eyes have been gouged out, the nose broken away, and the lips chipped. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 278

278 DONALD WHITE

island’s center71. What all six share in common are votives that were found where (or at least close to where) they were consecrated on display. The display mechanisms are 1) votive benches (Helorus [fig. 6]; Morgantina [fig. 7])72, 2) altars or altar-like tables (Kalapodi; Dreros; Kommos; Agia Irini)73, the interior linings of bothroi (Helorus [fig. 8]; Morgantina), and the outer walls of shrine buildings (Helorus). It may be noted that two features of the Helorus koreion set it apart from the rest: the use of stucco to stick votive terracottas to the outer walls of the easternmost room B74 and its lining of the inner surfaces of bothroi with figurines, dishes and bronze pins. Along with Kalopodi, it also provides our only example of votive figurines still resting in situ on their votive benches. It appears that the core of the Cyrene sanctuary’s cultic activities lay in its series of Middle Sanctuary sacred houses75 and poorly understood Upper Sanctuary mid-6th century B.C. shrine building surviving in walls P3 through P676. The latter are too badly preserved to indicate much beyond the fact that the earth surrounding its walls was saturated with discarded votives of all kinds. On the other hand, two of the later Sacred Houses – the later Archaic/early Classical S577 and the Hellenistic S778– were equipped with stone benches across their back walls (figs. 9-12); in the case of the latter both bench and wall were coated with painted plaster. Curiously, neither house left any trace whatsoever of a permanent stone or pounded earth flooring over their slop- ing bedrock interiors. While this could be explained by the fact that both had effectively passed out of active use well before the A.D. 262 earthquake, it also raises the possibility that they had

71 For Morgantina’s intramural Demeter sanctuaries see E. SJÖQVIST, «Excavations at Serra Orlando (Morgan- tina)», AJA 62 (1958), 158-160, pl. 31, fig. 18; IDEM, «Timoleonte e Morgantina», Kokalos IV (1958), 7-12; R. STILL- WELL, «Excavations at Serra Orlando 1958», AJA 63 (1959), 169, pl. 41, figs.9-11; IDEM, «Excavations at Morgantina 1962», AJA 67 (1963), pl. 35, figs. 14-15; E. SJÖQVIST, «Excavations at Morgantina 1959», AJA 64 (1960), 133. D. WHITE, AGNJ QEA: A Study of Sicilian Demeter (doctoral dissertation submitted to 1963), 195-247, figs. 46-58. IDEM, «Demeter’s Sicilian Cult as a Political Instrument», GRBS 5, no. 4 (1964), 273-277, plan p. 274, pls. 1-2. M. BELL, supra n. 6, 249-56, figs. d-e. IDEM, «A Stamp with the Monogram of Morgantina and the Sign of Tanit», Damarato, Studi di antichità classica offerti a Paola Pelagatti (Milan 2000), 248. For extramural sacella in the contrada S. Francesco Bisconti area V, one with benches along the wall, another with a circular altar in its center, and a third with a circular stone bothros containing figurines of votaries holding a pig, see E. SJÖQVIST, «Excavations at Morgantina 1961», AJA 66 (1962), 142, pl. 35, fig. 31. R.J.A. WILSON, «Archaeol- ogy in Sicily, 1977-81», AR 28 (1981-82), 98-99; IDEM, «Archaeology in Sicily, 1982-87», AR 34 (1987-88), 136. Sounding more and more like parts of what was perhaps Morgantina’s principal Demeter sanctuary, all of the contrada S. Francisco buildings are associated with votive figurines, lamps and plain pottery. 72 According to STILLWELL, three terracotta busti were found broken on the floor in front of the cultic bench in the Northern Sanctuary Annex’s Room 5. See his «Excavations at Serra Orlando 1958», AJA 63 (1959), 169. For other examples of cult benches from eastern Sicilian sanctuaries see V. HINZ, «Der Kult von Demeter und Persephone auf Sizilien und in der », DAI Rome Palilia 4 (1998), 52, whose reference I owe to Malcolm Bell. 73 ALROTH cites additional sites where the association of figurines with altars seem quite secure, the Artemis altar at Olympia, the hero shrine at Kastraki at Ptoion, the Dymaion wall at Araxos. See Votive Figurines, 201-202, ns. 26- 27, 30. 74 To judge from the rather sparse information that has been published to date the plaster in places partially covers from view some of the overlapping figurines that are closest to the wall’s surface. It is unclear to me whether the intention was to leave the outer rank of votives visible (and therefore theoretically replaceable) or permanently covered. See VAN BUREN, supra n. 70, fig. 15. 75 Decade of Excavation, 18-21. Extramural Sanctuary V, 181-85. 76 Extramural Sanctuary V, 29-30, fig. 13. 77 Cf. Extramural Sanctuary V, 86-94, figs. 54-57, pls. 66-68, plan B. 78 Cf. Extramural Sanctuary V, 151-67, figs. 85-92, pls. 89-92, plan D. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 279

THE MULTIPLE STAGES IN THE PLACEMENT AND USAGE OF VOTIVES 279

Fig. 6: Heloran votives placed on a votive bench reassembled for display.

wooden floors with trap doors that were designed to provide access to the bare bedrock, remi- niscent of Pausanias’ description of the consecrated space beneath the floor in the temple of Athena at Pellene in Achaia79. In addition, the S7 Sacred House had three natural pits in its bedrock pavement, two of which seem to have remained at least partially open until the 3rd cen- tury earthquake. This last observation perhaps provides some additional reason for positing the existence of a wooden floor. Regrettably the finds from S5 can tell us nothing about the use of its bench, but the S7 inte- rior contained a substantial number of stone objects, including a marble relief, several animal figures, a lifesize togate torso, our marble head of a Libyan man, and a limestone altar80. On the other hand, none of these was found actually on the cultic bench or in the pits in the floor, dash- ing any hope one might have had for a repetition of Helorus with its benches and terracotta-lined bothroi. That said, what the Cyrene Sanctuary does contribute helps throw into sharper relief the wide band of possible uses to which the votives, and thus by extension the votives found in other sanctuaries, were put over a roughly 850 year interval of time.

79 Described as a holy place under the statue plinth and «stretching down a long way underground… Damp air comes out of it» (implying that it was kept accessible?). PAUS., 7.27.1. 80 Extramural Sanctuary V, 159-160, ns. 86-87. For the togate torso, Inv. 73-1255, and the head of the Libyan, Inv. 73-1288, cf WHITE, Demeter, Preliminary Report, 37, pl. 4, fig. 5, pl. 5, figs. 6-7 (AJA). G. SCHAUS, «Head of a Libyan Man» in «Seven Recently Discovered Sculptures from Cyrene, Eastern Libya», Expedition 18, no. 2 (1976), 27-28, figs. 2-4. S. KANE, supra n. 9, pl. 20.II, 1 and pl. 20.III, 2. This important piece is among the fifteen heads stolen in late 1999 or early 2000 from our Cyrene storerooms; notice of its theft was removed from the expedition’s website [http://www.cyrenethefts.org] after its relocation by the police authorities in 2001. I am pleased to report that Dr. Mohamed Ali FAKROUN, director of the National Museum at Tripoli, reports that the Libyan authorities are making progress on the retrieval of the stolen heads and that some heads stolen from other sites are back in Libyan custody. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 280

280 DONALD WHITE

Fig. 7: Plan of the Sanctuary Annex at Morgantina (from M. Bell, Morgantina Studies I: The Terracottas, Princeton 1981, fig. d). Room 5 contained a raised circular altar, a terracotta figurine of perhaps Hades, and a bench against its north wall in front of which were found three smashed busti. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 281

THE MULTIPLE STAGES IN THE PLACEMENT AND USAGE OF VOTIVES 281

Fig. 8: Figurine-lined interior of one of the Heloran bothroi, reassembled for display.

Fig. 9: Interior of the Classical period S5 Sacred House, showing its votive bench. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 282

282 DONALD WHITE

Fig. 10: Plan of the S5 Sacred House. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 283

THE MULTIPLE STAGES IN THE PLACEMENT AND USAGE OF VOTIVES 283

Fig. 11: Interior of the S7 Sacred House, showing its painted votive bench and floor pits. 0317-07_Karthago_XXVII_16 06-12-2007 13:46 Pagina 284

284 DONALD WHITE

Fig. 12: Plan of the S7 Sacred House.